MEETING
RICHMOND CITY COUNCIL MEETING
(This meeting is virtual)
Tuesday, January 11, 2022, 5:00 p.m.
Community Services Building
440 Civic Center Plaza
Richmond, CA 94804
Members:
Thomas K. Butt, Mayor
Demnlus Johnson III, Vice Mayor at Large
NathanielBates, Councilmember at Large
Claudia Jimenez, Councilmember District 6
Eduardo Martinez, Councilmember at Large
Melvin Willis, Councilmember District 1
Gayle McLaughlin, Councilmember District 5
CORONAVIRUS DISEASE (COVID-19) ADVISORY
PURSUANT to the Governor of the State of California’s Assembly Bill 361 and in the interest of the public health and safety, attendance at the City of Richmond City Council meeting will be limited to Council members, essential City of Richmond staff, and members of the news media.
Public comment will be confined to items appearing on the agenda and will be limited to the methods provided below.
How to watch the meeting from home:
KCRT – Comcast Channel 28 or AT&T Uverse Channel 991.
Livestream online at http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/3178/KCRT-Live2.
Public comment may be submitted by mail, eComment, email and/or Zoom video conference in the manner that follows, provided that no member of the public may submit more than one verbal comment per agenda item.
Via mail received by 1:00 p.m. the day of the meeting, sent to 450 Civic Center Plaza, 3rd Floor, Office of the Clerk, Richmond, CA 94804.
Via eComments: eComments are available once an agenda is published. Locate the meeting in "upcoming meetings" and click the comment bubble icon. Click on the item you wish to comment on. eComments can be submitted when the agenda is published and until the conclusion of public comments for the agenda item. eComments can be viewed by the City Council and members of the public as they are submitted. Email your comment to [email protected] should you have difficulty submitting an eComment during a meeting.
Via email to [email protected] by 1:00 p.m. the day of the meeting.
Emails MUST contain in the subject line 1) public comments – Open Session prior to Closed Session; 2) public comments – Open Forum; or 3) public comments agenda item #__ [include the agenda item number]. All such email with correctly labeled subject lines will be posted on-line and emailed to the City Council before the meeting is called to order. Email received after 1:00 p.m. will be posted on-line following the meeting as part of the supplemental materials attached to the meeting minutes.
Via Zoom by video conference – for Open Session and City Council: Please click the link below to join the webinar:
https://zoom.us/j/99312205643?pwd=MDdqNnRmS2k4ZkRTOWhlUldQOUF1Zz09 Passcode: ccmeeting
By iPhone one-tap: US: +16699006833,,99312205643# or +13462487799,,99312205643# By Telephone: Dial (for higher quality, dial a number based on your current location): US: +1 669 900 6833 or +1 346 248 7799 or +1 253 215 8782 or +1 312 626 6799 or +1 929 205 6099 or +1 301 715 8592
Webinar ID: 993 1220 5643
International numbers available: https://zoom.us/u/aehrwCgISx
To comment by video conference, click on the Participants button at the bottom of your screen and select the “Raise Your Hand” button to request to speak when Public Comment is being asked for.
When called upon, press the unmute button. After the allotted time, you will then be re-muted. **
To comment by phone, you will be prompted to “Raise Your Hand” by pressing “*9” to request to speak when Public Comment is asked for. When called upon, you will be asked to unmuted by pressing *6. After the allotted time, you will then be re-muted. Instructions of how to raise your hand by phone are available at:
https://support.zoom.us/hc/en-us/articles/201362663 -Joining-a-meeting-by-phone. ** **The mayor will announce the agenda item number and open public comment when appropriate.
Open Forum for Public Comment: Individuals who would like to address the City Council on matters not listed on the agenda or on items remaining on the consent calendar may do so under Open Forum.
The City cannot guarantee that its network and/or the site will be uninterrupted. To ensure that the City Council receives your comments, you are strongly encouraged to submit your comments in writing in advance of the meeting.
AB 361 Procedures in the Event of Technical Difficulties: In the event the meeting broadcast is disrupted, or if a technical issue on the agency's end disrupts public participation, the legislative body board cannot take any further action on the agenda until the technical issue is resolved.
Properly labeled public comments will be considered a public record, put into the official meeting record, available after the meeting as supplemental materials, and will be posted as an attachment to the meeting minutes when the minutes are posted:
http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/Archive.aspx?AMID=31.
Procedures for Removing Consent Calendar Items from the Consent Calendar Councilmembers and members of the public who wish to remove an item from the consent calendar must comply with the following procedures in order to remove an item from the consent calendar:
Telephone or email a City staff member who has knowledge of the subject matter by 2:00 p.m. on the day of meeting. Any staff member shown as an author of the agenda report for the particular item has knowledge of the subject matter and may be called.
1. Inform the City Clerk’s Office by email at [email protected] or by phone at 510-620-6513, ext. 9, by 3:00 p.m. that they discussed the matter with staff with knowledge of the subject matter and that such Councilmember or member of the public, nonetheless, desires the item to be removed from the consent calendar for discussion.
1. Staff will be informed by the City Clerk’s Office as soon as reasonably practicable after notice of the request to remove the item from the consent calendar. Staff may attend the meeting remotely.
Accessibility for Individuals with Disabilities
Upon request, the City will provide for written agenda materials in appropriate alternative formats, or disability-related modification or accommodation, including auxiliary aids or services and sign language interpreters, to enable individuals with disabilities to participate in and provide comments at/related to public meetings. Please submit a request, including your name, phone number and/or email address, and a description of the modification, accommodation, auxiliary aid, service or alternative format requested at least two days before the meeting. Requests should be emailed to [email protected] or submitted by phone at 510-620-6513, ext. 9, or 510-620-6509.
Requests made by mail to City Clerk’s Office, City Council meeting, 450 Civic Center Plaza, Richmond, CA 94804 must be received at least two days before the meeting. Requests will be granted whenever possible and resolved in favor of accessibility.
Effect of Advisory on In-person public participation
During the pendency of Assembly Bill 361, the language in this Advisory portion of the agenda
supersedes any language contemplating in-person public comment.
Pages
A. OPEN SESSION TO HEAR PUBLIC COMMENT BEFORE CLOSED SESSION 5:00 p.m.
B. ROLL CALL
C. CLOSED SESSION
.
C.1. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION (paragraph (1) of Subdivision [d] of Government Code Section 54956.9) Paragraph (1) of Subdivision [d] of Government Code Section 54956.9 a. Richmond Shoreline Alliance,SPRAWLDEF, Citizens for East Shore Parks, Sunflower Alliance, and GreenActionfor Health and Environmental Justice v. City of Richmond
C.2. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION (Government Code Section 54957)
a. Title: City Attorney
C.3. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE APPOINTMENT (Government Code Section 54957.6)
a. Title: City Attorney
D. PUBLIC COMMENT BEFORE CLOSED SESSION
E. ADJOURN TO CLOSED SESSION
________________________________________________________
F. REGULAR MEETING OF THE RICHMOND CITY COUNCIL
6:30 p.m.
G. ROLL CALL
H. PUBLIC COMMENT INSTRUCTIONAL VIDEO
I. STATEMENT OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST
J. AGENDA REVIEW
K. REPORT FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY OF FINAL DECISIONS MADE
DURING CLOSED SESSION
L. REPORT FROM THE CITY MANAGER (public comment allowed under Open Forum)
M. ABATEMENT REPORT FROM THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR (public comment allowed under Open Forum)
N. OPEN FORUM FOR PUBLIC COMMENT
O. CITY COUNCIL CONSENT CALENDAR
O.1. City Clerk's Office
a. City Council Minutes 10
APPROVE the minutes of the November 23 and December 7
and 14, 2021, regular City Council meetings - City Clerk's Office (Pamela Christian 510-620-6513).
O.2. City Council
a. Condemning the horrific events of January 6, 2021, and defending democracy and the sacred right of voting.
30 ADOPT a resolution condemning the horrific events of the January 6, 2021, attack on the United States Capitol and defending democracy and the sacred right of voting –
Councilmember Gayle McLaughlin (510-620-6581).
O.3. City Manager's Office
a. Contract with Social & Public Art Resource Center (SPARC) 34 APPROVE a sole-source contract with Social & Public Art Resource Center (SPARC) for the design, fabrication,
installation, and replacement of a series of five murals on the Richmond Senior Center, 2525 Macdonald Avenue, in an
amount not to exceed $18,600, with a term from January 11, 2022, through June 30, 2023 - City Manager’s Office, Economic Development (Shasa Curl/Winifred Day 510-620-6952).
O.4. Finance Department
a. Annual review and adoption of debt policy for fiscal year 2021- 2022
59 REVIEW the Debt Policy for Fiscal Year 2021-2022; and ADOPT the resolution approving said policy – Finance Department (Belinda Brown 510-620-6740).
b. Compliance with developer fees 100
RECEIVE the annual year-end developer fee report as required pursuant to Section 66006 of the Government Code – Finance Department (Belinda Brown/Vrenesia Ward 510-621-1211).
c. Resolution approving investment policy 106
ADOPT a resolution approving the City of Richmond Investment Policy Fiscal Year 2021-2022 – Finance Department (Belinda Brown 510-620-6740).
d. Investment and Cash Balance report for the month of November 2021
125
RECEIVE the City’s Investment and Cash Balance Report for the month of November 2021 – Finance Department (Belinda Brown 510-620-6740).
e. Resolution approving Other Post-Employment Benefits (OPEB) funding policy
137
ADOPT a resolution approving the Fiscal Year 2021-2022 Other Post-Employment Benefits (OPEB) Funding Policy – Finance Department (Belinda Brown 510-620-6740).
f. Annual review and adoption of swap policy for fiscal year 2021- 2022
148
REVIEW the Swap Policy for Fiscal Year 2021-2022; and
ADOPT the resolution approving said policy – Finance Department (Belinda Brown 510-620-6740).
O.5. Human Resources
a. Adopt resolution amending the salary schedule 161
ADOPT a resolution amending the City’s Salary Schedule to reflect the new and deleted classifications; AMEND position control to add one (1) Deputy Director of Community Services – Neighborhood Safety, two (2) Field Coordinators, one (1) Accounting Assistant, one (1) Administrative Aide, and five (5) Neighborhood Change Agents to increase the total amount to eleven (11) Neighborhood Change Agents; and APPROVE
allocation of funds for the wages and salaries for these classifications and associated compensation – Human
Resources (Anil Comelo/Sharrone Taylor 510-620-6600).
O.6. Police Department
a. Justice Assistance Grant-funded Purchase Approval 167 APPROVE a purchase from TYR TACTICAL for Ballistic Plate Carriers and Level III+ Ballistic Plates (a.k.a. bullet proof vests) for the Police Department’s SWAT Team using funds provided by the Police department’s Justice Assistance Grant program, in an amount not to exceed $44,159.24 – Police Department
(Louie Tirona 510-621-1802).
O.7. Public Works
a. Veolia’s October 2021 Monthly Operating Report 178
RECEIVE the Veolia Monthly Operating Report for the month of October 2021 – Public Works Department (Joe Leach 510-620- 5478/Mary Phelps 510-621-1269).
P. PUBLIC HEARINGS
P.1. Appeal of Planning Commission’s approval of a conditional use permit and design review (PLN20-043)
192
ADOPT a Resolution Denying the Appeal and Affirming the Planning Commission’s conditional approval of a Conditional Use Permit and Design Review, to construct a single-family residence on a vacant parcel located within the -S, Shoreline Overlay district at 357 Western Avenue – Community Development Department (Lina Velasco 510-620-6706). This item was continued from the December 7, 2021, meeting. The public hearing is closed on this item; for council discussion and resolution only.
Q. NEW BUSINESS
Q.1. Police Staffing Presentation 227
RECEIVE an updated staffing presentation from the Police Department to include changes to the services provided to the community based on resource allocation due to financial and efficiency considerations – Police Department (Acting Chief Louie Tirona 510-621-1802). This item was continued from the December 7, 2021, meeting.
Q.2. Update from Chevron Refinery 248
RECEIVE an update from the Richmond Chevron Refinery on the February 9, 2021, oil spill at the Chevron Long Wharf - Councilmember Claudia Jimenez (510-620-6565). This item was continued from the December 21, 2021, meeting.
Q.3. Amendment to legal services agreement with Ellis Investigations, L.C. 253 APPROVE a first amendment to an existing legal services agreement with Ellis Investigations, L.C., to conduct personnel investigations for the City in the amount of $90,000, for a total contract amount of $100,000, for a term of December 21, 2021, through June 30, 2023 - Human Resources Department (Anil Comelo 510-620-6602). This item was continued from the December 21, 2021, meeting.
Q.4. Legal services agreements in amount of $350,000 per firm 276 ADOPT a resolution of the City Council authorizing the City to enter into legal services agreements with law firms to provide municipal law advice and to represent the City and related entities in litigation on an as-needed basis, for an amount not to exceed $350,000 per firm, for three years, beginning on January 1, 2022 through June 30, 2025, with an option to extend the agreements for two years – City Attorney’s Office (Heather McLaughlin 620-6509). This item was continued from the December, 21, 2021 meeting.
Q.5. Approval of a legal services agreement and amendments to six existing legal services agreements for municipal law litigation
313
APPROVE a legal services agreement with Edrington, Schirmer & Murphy LLP in the amount of $100,000, a first amendment to add $75,000 with Manning & Kass, Ellrod, Ramirez & Trester, LLP, a first amendment to add $75,000 with Colantuono Highsmith & Whatley, P.C., a second amendment to add $125,000 with Orbach Huff & Henderson LLP, a second amendment to add $125,000 with McNamara, Ney, Beatty, Slattery, Borges & Ambacher, LLP, a second amendment to add $50,000 with Best, Best & Krieger, LLP and a third amendment to add $210,000 with Allen, Glaessner, Hazelwood & Werth, LLP to represent the City of Richmond in pending municipal law litigation in state and federal court – City Attorney’s Office (Heather McLaughlin 510-620- 6509). This item was continued from the December 21, 2021, meeting.
Q.6. Amendment to legal services contract with Downey Brand law firm 357 APPROVE contract amendment no. 1 with Downey Brand law firm in the amount of $255,000, for an additional two (2) years, ending December 31, 2024, for the legal review of the requirements as predetermined in the existing Baykeeper Settlement Agreement and to represent the City in any future settlement agreement discussions. The total contact will not exceed $510,000 without prior council approval - Public Works (Joe Leach 620-5478). This item was continued from the December 21, 2021, meeting.
Q.7. 2021 Community Survey Results 509
RECEIVE a presentation and report on the City of Richmond's 2021 Community Survey results; and PROVIDE direction to staff as appropriate – City Manager’s Office (LaShonda White 510-620-6512).
This item was continued from the December 21, 2021, meeting.
R. REPORTS OF OFFICERS: REFERRALS TO STAFF, AND GENERAL REPORTS (INCLUDING AB 1234 REPORTS)
S. ADJOURNMENT
1355128891,,,cc23Nov2021 - DRAFT
sl/prc
RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA, November 23, 2021
The Richmond City Council Evening Open Session was
called to order at 5:00 p.m. by Mayor Thomas K. Butt via teleconference.
Due to the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, Contra
Costa County and Governor Gavin Newsom issued multiple orders requiring sheltering in place, social distancing, and reduction of person-to-person contact. Accordingly, on September 15, 2021, Governor Gavin Newsom issued Assembly Bill 361 that allowed cities to continue to hold public meetings via teleconferencing.
DUE TO THE SHELTER IN PLACE ORDERS, attendance
at the City of Richmond City Council meeting was limited to councilmembers, essential City of Richmond staff, and members of the news media. Public comment was confined to items appearing on the agenda and was limited to the methods provided below.
Consistent with Assembly Bill 361, this meeting utilized teleconferencing only. The following provides information on how the public participated in the meeting.
The public was able to view the meeting from home on
KCRT Comcast Channel 28 or AT&T Uverse Channel 99 and
livestream online at http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/3178/KCRT-Live and http://www.youtube.com/user/KCRTTV.
The methods to submit public comment were via mail,
email to [email protected], teleconference, and telephone during the meeting. Written comments received by 1:00 p.m. on November 23, 2021, were put into the record and considered before council action. Written comments received after 1:00 p.m. and up until the public comment period on the relevant agenda item closed, were also put into the record. Attached herewith all written public comments received.
ROLL CALL
Present: Councilmembers Claudia Jimenez, Eduardo
Martinez, Gayle McLaughlin, Vice Mayor Demnlus Johnson III, and Mayor Thomas K. Butt. Absent: Councilmembers Nathaniel Bates and Melvin Willis arrived after the roll was called.
CITY COUNCIL
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL -
ANTICIPATED LITIGATION (initiation of litigation pursuant to paragraph (4) of Subdivision (d) of Government Code Section 54956.9):
Number of potential cases: two
CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS
(Government Code Section 54957.6):
Unrepresented employee: Interim City Manager
Agency Representative: Acting Deputy City Manager
Internal Services
1355128891,,,cc23Nov2021 - DRAFT
sl/prc
CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY
NEGOTIATOR (Government Code Section 54956.8):
Property: Terminal One
Agency negotiators: Shasa Curl and Lina Velasco
Negotiating parties: Terminal One Development, LLC
Under negotiation: Price and terms of payment
PUBLIC EMPLOYEE APPOINTMENT (Government
Code Section 54957.6):
Interim City Attorney and City Attorney
Interim City Manager
PUBLIC COMMENT BEFORE CLOSED SESSION
There were no public speakers via teleconference.
Mayor Butt announced his recusal from one of the potential anticipated litigation cases because he was named as the defendant.
The Open Session adjourned to Closed Session at 5:03 p.m.
Closed Session adjourned at 7:30 p.m.
The Regular Meeting of the Richmond City Council was
called to order at 7:39 p.m. by Mayor Butt via teleconference.
ROLL CALL
Present: Councilmembers Bates, Jimenez, Martinez,
McLaughlin, Willis, Vice Mayor Johnson III, and Mayor Butt.
Absent: None.
STATEMENT OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST
None.
AGENDA REVIEW
None.
REPORT FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY ON FINAL
DECISIONS MADE DURING CLOSED SESSION
City Attorney Teresa Stricker reported that the labor
negotiator at the Conference with Labor Negotiators for the unrepresented employee was the interim human resources director and not the acting deputy city manager for internal services. Ms.
Stricker also reported that by a vote of 5-0-1-1, with
Councilmember Bates abstained and Mayor Butt recused, the council directed the city attorney to report the following: by a vote of 5-0-1-1, with Councilmember Bates abstained and Mayor Butt recused, the council directed the city attorney to initiate litigation against the mayor for his improper disclosure of attorney-client privileged information.
REPORT FROM THE CITY MANAGER
Interim City Manager Shasa Curl encouraged the
community to shop locally for the holiday season. Ms. Curl announced the Craneway Craft Fair on November 27-28, 2021.
Ms. Curl acknowledged the Richmond Promise organization in
1355128891,,,cc23Nov2021 - DRAFT
sl/prc
partnership with Beyond 12 and Contra Costa Community College District for awarding a Kresge Foundation grant.
RECENT CRIME REPORT BY THE DEPUTY POLICE
CHIEF
Acting Police Chief Louie Tirona reported there were a
total of 295 crimes in Richmond since the last report on October 26, 2021, with 40 classified as violent crimes primarily in the southern district, and 255 classified as property-related crimes primarily in the northern district. Mr. Tirona reported there was one murder since the last report; six firearms assaults (70 year to date); 21 robberies; five sexual assaults; 44 burglaries; and 101 vehicle thefts. Mr. Tirona stated that violent crimes in Richmond decreased by 22 percent compared to the previous month and property crimes increased by 8 percent. Mr. Tirona encouraged residents to remain vigilant especially during the upcoming holiday season.
OPEN FORUM FOR PUBLIC COMMENT
The following individuals gave comments via
teleconference:
Mark Wassberg gave comments regarding transgender
individuals.
Jamin Pursell thanked the council for supporting
transgender awareness. Mr. Pursell gave comments in support of Item H-11, declaring World AIDS Day.
Mike Parker and Yenny Garcia expressed concerns that the chair of the Community Police Review Commission was not recommended for reappointment with Item H-17. Ms. Garcia urged the council to consider the legacy that it would leave behind.
Nathaniel Bates stated that he observed a CalTrans crew cleaning and trimming trees at the Barrett Avenue freeway entrance. Mr. Bates recommended that a letter of appreciation be sent to CalTrans and the governor.
CITY COUNCIL CONSENT CALENDAR
On motion of Vice Mayor Johnson III, seconded by
Councilmember Willis, the items marked with an (*) were approved by the unanimous vote of the City Council:
*H-1. Accepted and appropriated into the Fiscal Year
2021-22 budget $7,500 received from Share the Spirit East Bay, a project of the Bay Area News Group - East Bay Times.
*H-2. Adopted Resolution No. 136-21 proclaiming a
local emergency due to the imminent failure of the North Richmond Pump Station and the urgent need to repair the pump engine and pertinent equipment in order to prevent flooding of the North Richmond community; approved an amendment to the Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement between Contra Costa County and the City of Richmond and its allocation of costs for the repair of the North Richmond Pump Station; and approved a contract with Petersen Power to provide emergency repair for an amount not to exceed $1,800,000, to be repaid to Contra Costa County with American Rescue Plan Act funding.
1355128891,,,cc23Nov2021 - DRAFT
sl/prc
*H-3. Adopted Resolution No. 137-21 approving
amendment one to agreement respecting the management,
maintenance, and control of the common properties and
improvements in the Brickyard Cove Subdivision No. 3520 to facilitate the City of Richmond's acceptance and ownership of the sewers and lift stations located within said subdivision.
*H-4. Received the City of Richmond's Investment and
Cash Balance Report for the month of September 2021.
*H-5. Adopted Resolution No. 138-21 authorizing the
Finance Department to offer the Amnesty Program for a period commencing on November 23, 2021, and ending on June 30, 2022, to businesses with unpaid business licenses.
*H-6. Approved an amendment to the contract with
Donnoe & Associates in the amount of $18,000, for a total not to exceed $44,000, to administer promotional examinations of police sergeant and police lieutenant.
*H-7. Approved a contract amendment with Allied
Universal for additional security guard services at 450 Civic Center Plaza in an amount of $65,000, with a new payment limit not to exceed $1,009,350, through December 31, 2022.
*H-8. Adopted Resolution No. 139-21 requiring the
continued use of teleconferencing for the meetings of all City of Richmond legislative bodies pursuant to the provisions of Assembly Bill 361.
*H-9. Approved a third amendment to the contract with
Colantuono, Highsmith, & Whatley, PC for legal representation, increasing the contract payment limit by $59,000, for a total contract amount of $284,000, while maintaining the term expiration date of June 30, 2022.
*H-10. Adopted Ordinance No. 14-21 N.S. (second
reading) amending Chapter 3.50 of the City of Richmond
Municipal Code entitled "Commission on Aging" to add treasurer as an officer to the Commission on Aging.
*H-11. Proclamation declaring December 1, 2021, as
World AIDS Day in the City of Richmond.
* H-12. Approved appointments to the Youth Council:
appointed Arika Ona, new appointment, seat #1, term expiration date October 1, 2022; Kevin Ruano Hernandez, new appointment, seat #2, term expiration date October 1, 2022; Anuoluwapo Olabode, new appointment, seat #3, term expiration date October 1, 2022; and Diego Castro Curry, new appointment, seat #4, term expiration date October 1, 2022.
*H-13. Approved an appointment to the Workforce
Development Board: appointed Carole Dorham-Kelly, new
appointment, seat #2, education and training representative, term expiration date September 22, 2025.
*H-14. Approved appointments to the Housing Advisory
Commission: appointed Carol Hegstrom, re-appointment, seat #5, term expiration date November 1, 2023.
1355128891,,,cc23Nov2021 - DRAFT
sl/prc
*H-15. Approved an appointment to the Economic
Development Commission: appointed Arnon Oren, new
appointment, seat #13, term expiration date March 30, 2022.
*H-16. Approved an appointment to the Urban Forest
Advisory Committee: appointed Sidonia Aguilera, new
appointment, seat #2, term expiration date November 17, 2024.
*H-17. Approved appointments to the Citizens Police
Review Commission: appointed Donnell Jones, re-appointment, seat #5, term expiration date November 1, 2024; and Oscar Garcia, re-appointment, seat #8, term expiration date November 1, 2024.
*H-18. Approved an appointment to the Recreation and
Parks Commission: appointed Aaron Rowden, new appointment, seat #6, term expiration date October 26, 2024.
*H-19. Adopted Resolution No. 140-21 amending the
City of Richmond City Council Rules of Procedure and Order (initially adopted by Resolution No. 27-06 and amended in subsequent years) to modify the Section II C. (1) of that policy to specify the individual who shall report out in public session any reportable action taken during closed session, and any other information from closed session authorized to be disclosed by a majority vote of the City Council.
STUDY/ACTION ITEMS
I-1. The matter to approve an employment agreement
with Shasa Curl as interim Richmond city manager, providing for a three-month term commencing December 2, 2021, to March 1, 2022, at an initial base salary of $21,250 per month (approximately $364,602 total compensation if calculated on an annual basis), with subsequent salary increases subject to a satisfactory performance evaluation, and other specified employment terms was introduced by Interim Human Resources Director Marc Fox. A motion made by Vice Mayor Johnson III, seconded by Councilmember Willis, approved said employment agreement by the unanimous vote of the City Council.
I-2. The matter to approve the Fiscal Year 2021-22
multi-year comparative position listing and amend the salary schedule to implement the city manager's reorganization of specific City of Richmond departments was introduced by Interim Human Resources Director Marc Fox. Discussion ensued. Interim City Manager Shasa Curl requested the council to consider the following positions: planner II, senior planner, capital projects manager, deputy public works director, housing manager, deputy director community services recreation, and deputy director community services employment and training. Discussion ensued.
The council recommended consideration for the additional positions of Rent Board general counsel and chief assistant city attorney. Tarnel Abbott gave comments via teleconference.
Further discussion ensued. A motion was made by
Councilmember Jimenez, seconded by Councilmember Willis, to approve the positions proposed by Ms. Curl and the positions of Rent Board general counsel and chief assistant city attorney.
Further discussion ensued. A friendly amendment made by Councilmember McLaughlin to add the position of deputy director community services library was accepted. The motion with the friendly amendment passed and adopted Resolution No. 141-21 by the unanimous vote of the City Council.
1355128891,,,cc23Nov2021 - DRAFT
sl/prc
I-3. The matter to direct staff to draw up a Measure U
regulation to provide for the crediting of the rent board fees paid by small landlords with four rental units or less and submit this to the City Council for approval as soon as possible was introduced by Councilmembers Martinez and Willis. Discussion ensued. A motion made by Councilmember Willis, seconded by
Councilmember Martinez, to approve said direction to staff passed by the unanimous vote of the City Council.
I-4. The matter to adopt resolutions authorizing staff to execute a Task Authorization to NHA Advisors, LLC (NHA) for Municipal Advisor services and authorizing staff to execute professional services agreements with Willdan Financial Services (special tax consultant) and Stradling Yocca Carlson & Rauth (bond counsel) for services related to land-secured financing district(s) for the Point Molate Development was introduced by Public Works Director Joe Leach. Mark Northcross of NHA presented a Powerpoint that highlighted the following: risks; “worst case” scenario; potential mitigation for risks; and an overview of Community Facilities Districts (CFDs). Discussion ensued. A motion by Councilmember Martinez to table this matter died for the lack of a second. Further discussion ensued. The following individuals gave comments via teleconference: Jim Hanson, Paul Carman, Deborah Bayer, and Tarnel Abbott. Further discussion ensued. A motion was made by Councilmember
McLaughlin, seconded by Councilmember Jimenez, to approve the item and when the matter returned to the council with a process for CFD formation, direct staff to include various costs scenarios and mitigations. A friendly amendment by Councilmember Martinez to include a table of exactly how much the Mello-Roos would cost each resident with various numbers of money in the bonds and housing was accepted. Further discussion ensued. An amended motion by Councilmember McLaughlin, seconded by
Councilmember Jimenez, to approve the item and when the matter returned to council in February 2022, direct staff to include various costs scenarios and bond risk mitigation as well as a breakdown of each homeowner's costs they would pay through the CFD passed and adopted Resolution No. 142-21 and Resolution No. 143-21 by the unanimous vote of the City Council.
I-5. The matter to receive a presentation on the
Cannabis Equity Assessment and provide input on the draft citywide Cannabis Equity Manual was introduced by Interim City Manager Shasa Curl. Kyle Tankard of SCI Consulting Group presented a Powerpoint that highlighted the following: cannabis equity grant funding (GO-Biz); Cannabis Equity Assessment; outreach and education; adopting a Cannabis Equity Program; and next steps. Discussion ensued. The council requested that a set-aside policy for storefront and non-storefront cannabis businesses be included when this matter returned to the council on December 7, 2021. The council requested the following
information: the number of cannabis businesses in Richmond, owners, demographics, who were the direct and indirect
beneficiaries, and police data. The following individuals gave comments via teleconference: Raymond Chimezie, Deborah Small, Ahmad Anderson, and Mark Wassberg. The council
requested information for current cannabis-related arrests in Richmond and how many were processed by the district attorney.
1355128891,,,cc23Nov2021 - DRAFT
sl/prc
I-6. The matter to consider whether to adopt a resolution of the City Council of the City of Richmond censuring Mayor Tom Butt for releasing confidential attorney-client privileged information and confidential information discussed during closed session, and directing the city attorney to refer the matter to the Grand Jury and Contra Costa County district attorney was introduced by City Attorney Teresa Stricker. Mark Wassberg gave comments via teleconference. Discussion ensued. On motion of Vice Mayor Johnson III, seconded by Councilmember Martinez, adopted Resolution No. 144-21 by the following vote: Ayes:
Councilmembers Jimenez, Martinez, McLaughlin, Willis, and Vice Mayor Johnson III. Noes: Councilmember Bates and Mayor Butt.
Abstentions: None. Absent: None.
(At 11:00 p.m. – a motion made by Councilmember Willis, seconded by Vice Mayor Johnson III, to adjourn the meeting passed by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Bates, Martinez, Willis, Vice Mayor Johnson III, and Mayor Butt.
Noes: Councilmembers Jimenez and McLaughlin. Abstentions:
None. Absent: None).
STUDY SESSION ITEMS
J-1. CONTINUED to the December 7, 2021, City
Council meeting – the matter to receive a report from the chair of and investigator from the Community Police Review Commission.
J-2. CONTINUED to the December 7, 2021, City
Council meeting – the matter to receive a presentation on a draft summary proposal for a new city-wide Community Benefits Policy.
REPORTS OF OFFICERS: REFERRALS TO STAFF, AND
GENERAL REPORTS (INCLUDING AB 1234 REPORTS)
None.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 11:00 p.m., to meet again on Tuesday, December 7, 2021, at 6:30 p.m.
Clerk of the City of Richmond
(SEAL)
Approved:
Mayor
1355128891,,,cc7Dec2021 - DRAFT
sl/prc
RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA, December 7, 2021
The Richmond City Council Evening Open Session was
called to order at 5:00 p.m. by Mayor Thomas K. Butt via teleconference.
Due to the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, Contra Costa County and Governor Gavin Newsom issued multiple orders requiring sheltering in place, social distancing, and reduction of person-to-person contact. Accordingly, on September 15, 2021, Governor Gavin Newsom issued Assembly Bill 361 that allowed cities to continue to hold public meetings via teleconferencing.
DUE TO THE SHELTER IN PLACE ORDERS, attendance at
the City of Richmond City Council meeting was limited to councilmembers, essential City of Richmond staff, and members of the news media. Public comment was confined to items appearing on the agenda and was limited to the methods provided below.
Consistent with Assembly Bill 361, this meeting utilized teleconferencing only. The following provides information on how the public participated in the meeting.
The public was able to view the meeting from home on KCRT Comcast Channel 28 or AT&T Uverse Channel 99 and livestream online at http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/3178/KCRT-Live and http://www.youtube.com/user/KCRTTV.
The methods to submit public comment were via mail,
email to [email protected], teleconference, and telephone during the meeting. Written comments received by 1:00 p.m. on December 7, 2021, were put into the record and considered before council action. Written comments received after 1:00 p.m. and up until the public comment period on the relevant agenda item closed, were also put into the record. Attached herewith all written public comments received.
ROLL CALL
Present: Councilmembers Nathaniel Bates, Claudia
Jimenez, Eduardo Martinez, Gayle McLaughlin, Melvin Willis, Vice Mayor Demnlus Johnson III, and Mayor Thomas K. Butt.
Absent: None.
CITY COUNCIL
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING
LITIGATION (paragraph (1) of Subdivision [d] of Government Code Section 54956.9):
SPRAWLDEF et al. v. City of Richmond
The Guidiville Rancheria of California, et al. v. The United States of America, et. al.
North Coast Rivers Alliance et al./Point Molate Alliance et al. v. City of Richmond
1355128891,,,cc7Dec2021 - DRAFT
sl/prc
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL -
ANTICIPATED LITIGATION (Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to paragraph (2) of Subdivision (d) and Subdivision(e)(3) of Government Code Section 54956.9):
In light of the California Court of Appeal's decision in Fowler v. City of Lafayette, the City Attorney's Office attached to the agenda four communications regarding the amended judgment and various agreements related to Point Molate. The letters provided the existing facts and
circumstances for going into closed session on the items pursuant to California Government Code Section
54956.9(d)(2) and (e)(3).
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL -
ANTICIPATED LITIGATION (initiation of litigation pursuant to paragraph (4) of Subdivision (d) of Government Code Section 54956.9) pursuant to California Government Code Sections 54956.9(d)(4):
In re National Prescription Opiate Litigation, United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, MDL No. 2804, Case No. 17-MD-2804 (class action).
CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS
(Government Code Section 54957.6):
Agency Representative: Jack Hughes
Employee organizations:
1. SEIU Local 1021 Full-Time Unit
2. SEIU Local 1021 Part-Time Unit
3. IFPTE Local 21 Mid-Level Management Unit
4. IFPTE Local 21 Executive Management Unit
5. Richmond Police Officers Association (RPOA)
6. Richmond Police Management Association (RPMA)
7. IAFF Local 188
8. Richmond Fire Management Association (RFMA)
Unrepresented employee: Interim City Attorney
Agency Representative: Acting City Manager and Interim Senior Assistant City Attorney
PUBLIC EMPLOYEE APPOINTMENT (Government
Code Section 54957.6):
Interim City Attorney
LIABILITY CLAIMS - (Government Code Section
54956.9):
Cheryl Odom v. City of Richmond
PUBLIC COMMENT BEFORE CLOSED SESSION
The following individuals gave comments via
teleconference regarding the Point Molate litigation: Alix Mazuet, Jeanne Kortz, Tarnel Abbott, Jim Hanson, Sally Tobin, Doria Mueller-Beilschmidt, Jessi Taran, and David Helvarg.
The Open Session adjourned to Closed Session at 5:19 p.m.
Closed Session adjourned at 6:42 p.m.
1355128891,,,cc7Dec2021 - DRAFT
sl/prc
The Regular Meeting of the Richmond City Council was
called to order at 6:48 p.m. by Mayor Butt via teleconference.
ROLL CALL
Present: Councilmembers Bates, Jimenez, Martinez,
McLaughlin, Willis, Vice Mayor Johnson III, and Mayor Butt.
Absent: None.
PUBLIC COMMENT INSTRUCTIONAL VIDEO
The Public Comment Instructional Video was shown.
STATEMENT OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST
City Attorney Teresa Stricker announced her recusal as “city attorney” from Items J-16 and J-17. Ms. Stricker advised that Heather McLaughlin was the acting city attorney for those items.
Ms. Stricker advised Mayor Butt that he needed to recuse himself from Items J-19 and J-20 because he was named as the defendant in one item. The other item was an action against the City of Richmond, brought by the mayor’s adult son on behalf of private parties, in which the mayor was named in the complaint as a witness for the petitioners. Ms. Stricker further advised Mayor Butt that he needed to recuse himself from both items under a common law conflicts doctrine. Mayor Butt declined to recuse himself from both items.
AGENDA REVIEW
Item M-4 was moved for discussion immediately following Item M-2 (and subsequently moved again during the meeting for discussion immediately following Item M-1).
Items J-17, J-18, J-19, and J-20 were removed from the
Consent Calendar for discussion at the end of the agenda.
PRESENTATIONS, PROCLAMATIONS, AND
COMMENDATIONS
E-1. Mayor Butt announced recent resignations from City of Richmond boards, commissions, and committees; and vacancies as of November 17, 2021, and asked that interested individuals send applications to the city clerk.
REPORT FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY ON FINAL
DECISIONS MADE DURING CLOSED SESSION
City Attorney Teresa Stricker reported by a 4-3 vote, with Councilmember Bates, Vice Mayor Johnson III, and Mayor Butt voting no, the City Council approved a motion directing the city attorney to submit a letter to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on December 8, 2021, informing the court and all parties that the City of Richmond would not file a brief in the SPRAWLDEF vs. City of Richmond case, and stating that the City of Richmond understands that the Guidiville Rancheria and Upstream would file an answer brief in the appeal. Ms. Stricker also reported by a 7-0 vote, the City Council authorized the city manager to sign and return participation agreements and state subdivision agreements, for both the Janssen Settlement and the Distributor Settlement, by the January 2, 2022, deadline so that the City of Richmond could
1355128891,,,cc7Dec2021 - DRAFT
sl/prc
participate in the settlement proposed as part of class actions that are part of Multidistrict Litigation No. 2804 in the United States District Court in the Northern District of Ohio entitled In re National Prescription Opiate Litigation.
REPORT FROM THE CITY MANAGER
Interim City Manager Shasa Curl thanked staff for work
accomplished over the last week and encouraged the community to review the City Manager’s Weekly Report posted on the City of Richmond’s website. Ms. Curl provided brief updates on the following three key priorities in progress: recruitment to fill 99 job positions; “I Heart Richmond” cleanup program; and Measure U (gross receipts business license tax).
ABATEMENT REPORT FROM THE PUBLIC WORKS
DIRECTOR
Public Works Director Joe Leach presented a Powerpoint
that highlighted the following: Fairmede-Hilltop and Laurel Park neighborhood clean-ups, illegal dumping; encampment abatement; property board-ups; private property abatement; graffiti removal; and partnerships. The council advised that the encampment located on 23rd Street near the Bay Area Rapid Transit tracks was on private or city property and should not be there.
OPEN FORUM FOR PUBLIC COMMENT
The following individuals gave comments via
teleconference:
Guy Corrie, Paul Butler, Ron Holthuysen, B. Fish, John
Varga, Ilona Clark, Aaron Winer, Jan Mignone, Steve Mirabito, Rob Lightner, Gonzalo Ochoa, James Lee, Ernest Lompa, Lamar Bell, and Garland Ellis gave comments regarding Item J-6, Measure U implementation.
Louis Padilla thanked Councilmember McLaughlin for
bringing attention to the need for more Richmond fire inspectors.
Mr. Padilla requested the reinstatement of the fire inspection position transferred to a police position in 2019. Mr. Padilla urged the council to consider promoting two qualified candidates to fire inspectors before the promotional list expired.
Jessi Taran gave comments against suggestions to remove encampments in Richmond. Ms. Taran advised that grant funds were not utilized to benefit the unhoused residents in Richmond as intended and there were no relocation options. Ms. Taran recommended the use of surplus land in Richmond to provide shelter to unhoused residents. Ms. Taran urged the council to value the unhoused community.
Mark Wassberg gave comments regarding unhoused
individuals. Mr. Wassberg also gave comments regarding World AIDS Day.
Richard Katz advised that the City of Richmond gave away 1,500 square feet of city land on Western Drive to a private homeowner, and the homeowner sold the land. Mr. Katz urged the council to investigate the matter.
1355128891,,,cc7Dec2021 - DRAFT
sl/prc
Leisa Johnson requested the City Council to return to
in-person meetings or adopt a hybrid model. Ms. Johnson advised that she was filing a formal request for an investigation of potential Brown Act violations. Ms. Johnson urged the council to delay the implementation of Measure U until an impact study was
completed. Ms. Johnson gave comments against moving Item M-4 for discussion before Item M-3.
Naomi Williams inquired about council redistricting public hearings scheduled for January 18 and February 1, 2022. Ms.
Williams expressed concerns that her council district was currently unrepresented.
Tarnel Abbott advised that a qualified librarian candidate was identified and recommended hiring the candidate. Ms. Abbott urged the council that the community deserved a full-service library. Ms. Abbott gave comments regarding the Point Molate litigation.
Mike Parker gave comments regarding Measure U. Mr.
Parker also gave comments in response to comments published by Mayor Butt regarding the Richmond Progressive Alliance (RPA).
Oscar Garcia expressed concerns regarding Measure U.
Mr. Garcia requested the City of Richmond to address the encampment on Castro Street and vehicle sideshows in the Iron Triangle area.
Ben Therriault gave comments against interim
appointments to City of Richmond positions. Mr. Therriault advised that part of the problem with staff retention and hiring was from not having a permanent human resources director. Mr.
Therriault urged the council to prioritize filling that position.
Nathaniel Bates gave comments (after consultation with the city attorney) regarding Point Molate litigations. Mr. Bates advised the following attorney fees to date: SPRAWLDEF
$235,000; North Coast Rivers Alliance amount not stated; and Guidville Rancheria of California $1 million. Mr. Bates advised that the public needed to be aware that there were serious litigations and potential liabilities of the City of Richmond losing large sums of money. Mr. Bates expressed concerns regarding Measure U and requested staff to review the survey of how many vacant buildings were in Richmond. Mr. Bates recommended that the Measure U implementation included input from those affected.
Tom Butt responded to public comments made against him
concerning the RPA.
CITY COUNCIL CONSENT CALENDAR
On motion of Vice Mayor Johnson III, seconded by
Councilmember Willis, the items marked with an (*) were approved by the unanimous vote of the City Council.
*J-1. Adopted Resolution No. 145-21 authorizing the
city manager or designee to submit an application for Per Capita program grant funds for Boorman Park; and accept and appropriate grant funds, if awarded.
1355128891,,,cc7Dec2021 - DRAFT
sl/prc
*J-2. Approved a sixth contract amendment with
Stommel, Inc. dba Pursuit North/Lehr for police vehicle outfitting, extending the contract term from July 1, 2016, to December 31, 2022, and increasing the payment limit by $270,000, for a total of $1,387,000.
*J-3. Approved the minutes of the regular October 19 and special November 30, 2021, meetings of the City Council.
*J-4. Approved an appointment to the
Richmond-Zhoushan Sister City Commission; appointed Bobby Winston, new appointment, seat #6, term expiration date December 31, 2023.
*J-5. Approved a second amendment to the Legal
Services Agreement with the Telecom Law Firm for representation of the City of Richmond concerning wireless communications matters, including assistance with review of wireless and wired siting applications, to increase the contract amount by $300,000, for a total not to exceed $600,000 (with funds for payment generated from fees from the wireless applications and/or from revenue collected from the leasing of city-owned property by wireless carriers), with a term ending June 30, 2024.
*J-6. Received a written report on Measure U
implementation.
*J-7. Authorized a contract with Charles River Associates in an amount not to exceed amount $40,000, to perform a peer review of the City of Richmond's municipal advisor's
recommendations regarding the Pension Obligation Bonds, for a one-year term beginning December 8, 2021, and ending December 8, 2022.
*J-8. Adopted Resolution 146-21 approving a three
percent annual cost of living increase, in addition to the two percent minimum cost of living increase, for the recipients of the General Pension Fund, for a total annual cost of living increase of five percent for the recipients.
*J-9. Approved the sole-source contract with BLD
Consulting to provide data management planning, configuration, customization, and reporting services for Fire Department's Records Management System for a total amount not to exceed $40,000, for a term through November 30, 2024.
*J-10. Approved a contract with Bode Cellmark Forensics, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $199,000, from September 7, 2021, to February 28, 2022.
*J-11. Approved a sole-source contract with Contra Costa County for Coordinated Outreach Referral and Engagement services to continue service to the City of Richmond for Fiscal Year 2021-2022, at a cost not to exceed $144,333, from July 1, 2021, to June 30, 2022.
*J-12. Approved a five-year contract with Peregrine
Technology, an analytic platform that integrates data to provide for greater case solvability, in an amount not to exceed $1,097,500 ($219,500 annually), from November 1, 2021, to October 31, 2026.
1355128891,,,cc7Dec2021 - DRAFT
sl/prc
*J-13. Approved an agreement with SF Global, LLC to
support the implementation of Richmond's Municipal
Identification Card Program through December 2024, with three, two-year extension options; and directed staff to incorporate the intake and marketing components of the program into a City of Richmond department.
*J-14. Adopted a resolution to update the 2022 solid waste collection rates.
*J-15. Adopted a resolution approving the establishment of a Cannabis Equity Program including a Cannabis Equity Assessment, and a Cannabis Equity Manual.
*J-16. Approved City Attorney Teresa Stricker's request to make December 22, 2021, her last day of employment with the City of Richmond.
J-17. CONTINUED to the December 14, 2021, City
Council special meeting – the matter to adopt a resolution commending outgoing City Attorney Teresa Stricker for her service and professionalism; and renouncing and condemning statements about the city attorney made by Mayor Tom Butt.
J-18. CONTINUED to the December 14, 2021, City
Council special meeting – the matter to approve a $40,000 amendment to the legal services agreement with the law firm of Burke Williams, & Sorensen, LLP for general municipal and personnel matters for a total amount not to exceed $140,000.
J-19. CONTINUED to the December 14, 2021, City
Council special meeting – the matter to approve (1) a $50,000 amendment to the legal services agreement with the law firm of Burke Williams, & Sorensen, LLP for general municipal and personnel matters for a total amount not to exceed $100,000 and (2) an additional appropriation of $50,000 from the general fund to pay for a portion of the second contract amendment.
J-20. CONTINUED to the December 14, 2021, City
Council special meeting – the matter to approve (1) a $75,000 amendment to the legal services agreement with the law firm of Meyers Nave, LLP for general municipal law advice and litigation for a total amount not to exceed $85,000 and (2) an additional appropriation of $75,000 from the general fund to pay for the first contract amendment.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
K-1. The city clerk announced that it was time, pursuant to public notice, to hold a public hearing to adopt a resolution denying the appeal and affirming the Planning Commission's conditional approval of a Conditional Use Permit and Design Review, to construct a single-family residence on a vacant parcel located within the -S, Shoreline Overlay district at 357 Western Avenue. Community Services Director Lina Velasco introduced the matter. Senior Planner Hector Lopez presented a Powerpoint that highlighted the following: background; proposal; key design changes requested by the Planning Commission; standard review of appeal; and summary of key issues in appeal with responses.
Discussion ensued. Mayor Butt declared the public hearing open.
The appellant, Claire Arbour, gave a statement. The principal opponent (applicant), Rudi Garbelmann, gave a statement.
1355128891,,,cc7Dec2021 - DRAFT
sl/prc
Jonathan Livingston and Ron Elson gave comments in favor of the appeal. Ms. Arbour and Mr. Garbelmann each gave comments in rebuttal. Mayor Butt closed the public hearing. Further discussion ensued. A motion made by Councilmember Willis, seconded by Vice Mayor Johnson III, to continue the matter to the January 11, 2022, City Council meeting to allow staff time to provide additional information regarding the sewer connection passed by the unanimous vote of the City Council. The council requested staff to investigate the idea of applicants being referred to work with the Design Review Board subcommittee when they are supposed to work with the entire review board; steering to certain architectural firms; and other issues surrounding personal design preferences.
ORDINANCES
L-1. The matter to introduce an ordinance (first reading) amending Chapter 9.20 of the Richmond Municipal Code entitled "Solid Wastes" in order to be compliant with state law Senate Bill (SB) 1383 Short-Lived Climate Pollutants was introduced by Interim City Manager Shasa Curl. Environmental Manager Samantha Carr presented a Powerpoint that highlighted the following: solid waste background; SB 1383 and requirements; Richmond policy synergies; ordinance amendment goals; outreach and education; compliance and enforcement; and next steps.
Discussion ensued. Mark Wassberg and Jessi Taran gave
comments via teleconference. A motion made by Councilmember Bates, seconded by Councilmember McLaughlin, to introduce the ordinance for first reading passed and said ordinance received the first reading and was laid over for two weeks for second reading by the unanimous vote of the City Council.
COUNCIL AS A WHOLE
M-1. The matter to receive a report from the chair of and investigator from the Community Police Review Commission (CPRC) was presented by CPRC Chair Randy Joseph and
Investigative Officer Jerry Threet. Mr. Joseph presented a Powerpoint that highlighted the following: CPRC overview; ordinance amendments; complaints and process; challenges; and recommendations. Mr. Threet presented CPRC investigations and findings. Discussion ensued. The following individuals gave comments via teleconference: Mark Wassberg, Ben Therriault, Yenny Garcia, Jessi Taran, Mike Parker, Deborah Small, Leisa Johnson, Naomi Williams, Cecil Anderson Jr., Jamin Pursell, Amanda Jenkins, and Tarnel Abbott.
M-2. CONTINUED to the December 14, 2021, City
Council special meeting – the matter to receive a presentation on a draft summary proposal for a new city-wide Community Benefits Policy.
M-3. CONTINUED to the December 14, 2021, City
Council special meeting – the matter to receive an updated staffing presentation from the Police Department to include changes and/or modifications to the services provided to the community based on resource allocations due to financial and efficiency considerations.
1355128891,,,cc7Dec2021 - DRAFT
sl/prc
M-4. The matter to direct staff to return with a contract amendment with Housing Consortium of the East Bay to allow additional time for unhoused vehicle dwellers at Rydin Road and at Castro Street to be relocated and provide on-site services (with month-to-month reports to the City Council on progress via the Reimagining Task Force's overall monthly updates); and approve and appropriate $50,000 for flex funds for repair, preparation for transfer or removal, registration, storage and towing for RVs and vehicles and for temporary storage of personal belongings, to assist in relocation efforts was introduced by Councilmember
McLaughlin. (At 10:58 p.m. - a motion by Vice Mayor Johnson III, seconded by Councilmember McLaughlin, to extend the meeting for public comment and the vote only for Item M-4 passed by the unanimous vote of the City Council. Mayor Butt ruled the motion improper because it did not allow for debate. A motion made by Vice Mayor Johnson III, seconded by
Councilmember Willis, to overrule the mayor and extend the meeting for public comment and the vote only for Item M-4 passed by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Bates, Jimenez, Martinez, McLaughlin, Willis, and Vice Mayor
Johnson III. Noes: Mayor Butt. Abstentions: None. Absent:
None). The following individuals gave comments via
teleconference: Terry Dunn, Lea Murray, Ramon Quintana, Amanda Jenkins, Mark Wassberg, Brenda Hector, Jessi Taran, Jean Moses, Leisa Johnson, Maeve Berman, and Payton Silket. (At 11:28 p.m. – a motion was made by Councilmember
McLaughlin, seconded by Councilmember Johnson III, to
suspend the rules and extend the meeting to hear the remaining public speakers, make a motion, and vote on Item M-4. A substitute motion made by Councilmember Martinez, seconded by Mayor Butt, to complete Item M-4 with discussion failed by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmember Martinez and Mayor Butt. Noes: Councilmembers Bates, Jimenez, McLaughlin, and Vice Mayor Johnson III. Abstentions: Councilmember Willis.
Absent: None. The main motion passed by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmembers Bates, Jimenez, McLaughlin, Willis, and Vice Mayor Johnson III. Noes: Councilmember Martinez and Mayor Butt. Abstentions: None. Absent: None). The following remaining public speakers gave comment via teleconference:
Jamin Pursell, Ben Therriault, John Springman, Cecil Anderson Jr., and Linda Grubbs. A motion was made by Councilmember McLaughlin, seconded by Councilmember Jimenez, to direct staff to return to the council on December 21, 2021, with some kind of service extension (that could have been as simple as working with Contra Costa County Coordinated Outreach Referral and
Engagement services and having a service contract to keep the port-a-potties in place with servicing of the port-a-potties); no residents at Rydin Road or Castro Street be evicted or removed from the site until they were offered places to relocate (if a vehicle dweller was offered a space in one of the church lots or safe parks, they must have accepted it, if a vehicle dweller was offered a shelter bed or motel room and an offer to store their vehicle, they must have accepted it with the understanding that if the county did not offer them permanent housing in their stay at the motel or shelter, Safe Organized Spaces would do their best to help them find a safe park or camping location afterward); and $50,000 be allocated from American Rescue Plan Act funds for flex funds for repair, preparation, registration, storage, and towing of RVs and vehicles, and for temporary storage of personal belongings to assist in relocation efforts. A substitute motion made by Councilmember Bates, seconded by Vice Mayor Johnson III, to not evict anyone and that the mayor appointed a committee that consisted of the
1355128891,,,cc7Dec2021 - DRAFT
sl/prc
individuals involved and included some of the individuals that gave public comments for the item to work with a program to come forward that would be beneficial and successful for those that were affected passed by the following vote: Ayes:
Councilmembers Bates, Martinez, Vice Mayor Johnson III, and Mayor Butt. Noes: None. Abstentions: Councilmembers Jimenez, McLaughlin, and Willis. Absent: None.
REPORTS OF OFFICERS: REFERRALS TO STAFF, AND
GENERAL REPORTS (INCLUDING AB 1234 REPORTS)
None.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 11:46 p.m., in memory of Pastor Kellis Love, Lois Jean Irving, and Steve Nadel to meet again on Tuesday, December 14, 2021, at 6:30 p.m.
Clerk of the City of Richmond
(SEAL)
Approved:
Mayor
1892478561,,,cc14Dec2021 - DRAFT(1)
ud/prc
RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA, December 14, 2021
The Richmond City Council Special Meeting was called to order at 4:02 p.m. by Mayor Thomas K. Butt via teleconference.
Due to the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, Contra Costa County and Governor Gavin Newsom issued multiple orders requiring sheltering in place, social distancing, and reduction of person-to-person contact. Accordingly, on September 15, 2021, Governor Gavin Newsom issued Assembly Bill 361 that allowed cities to continue to hold public meetings via teleconferencing.
DUE TO THE SHELTER IN PLACE ORDERS, attendance at
the City of Richmond City Council meeting was limited to councilmembers, essential City of Richmond staff, and members of the news media. Public comment was confined to items appearing on the agenda and was limited to the methods provided below.
Consistent with Assembly Bill 361, this meeting utilized teleconferencing only. The following provides information on how the public participated in the meeting.
The public was able to view the meeting from home on KCRT Comcast Channel 28 or AT&T Uverse Channel 99 and livestream online at http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/3178/KCRT-Live and http://www.youtube.com/user/KCRTTV.
The methods to submit public comment were via mail,
email to [email protected], teleconference, and telephone during the meeting. Written comments received by 1:00 p.m. on December 14, 2021, were put into the record and considered before council action. Written comments received after 1:00 p.m. and up until the public comment period on the relevant agenda item closed, were also put into the record. Attached herewith all written public comments received.
ROLL CALL
Present: Councilmembers Claudia Jimenez, Eduardo
Martinez, Gayle McLaughlin, Melvin Willis, Vice Mayor Demnlus Johnson III, and Mayor Tom Butt. Absent: Councilmember Nathaniel Bates arrived after the roll was called.
PUBLIC COMMENT INSTRUCTIONAL VIDEO
The Public Comment Instructional Video was shown.
STATEMENT OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST
City Attorney Teresa Stricker stated conflict of interest on Item E-1 because she was the involved employee.
AGENDA REVIEW
Item E-6 was continued to the January 11, 2022, City
Council meeting.
COUNCIL AS A WHOLE
E-1. The matter to adopt a resolution commending
outgoing city attorney Teresa Stricker for her service and professionalism; and renouncing and condemning statements about the city attorney made by Mayor Tom Butt was presented by
1892478561,,,cc14Dec2021 - DRAFT(1)
ud/prc
Councilmembers Jimenez and Willis. This item was continued from the December 7, 2021, meeting. Terri Hinte, Mark
Wassberg, and Lisa Cody gave comments via teleconference.
Discussion ensued. A motion was made by Councilmember Willis, seconded by Councilmember Jimenez to adopt the resolution. A substitute motion was made by Councilmember Bates to remove the phrase “renouncing and condemning of the mayor” from the resolution. The motion failed for lack of a second. The original motion passed and Resolution No. 149-21, was adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Jimenez, Martinez, McLaughlin, Willis, and Vice Mayor Johnson III. Noes:
Councilmember Bates and Mayor Butt. Absent: None. Abstain:
None.
E-2. The matter to approve a $40,000 amendment to the
legal services agreement with the law firm of Burke Williams, & Sorensen, LLP for general municipal and personnel matters for a total amount not to exceed $140,000 was presented by Attorney Heather McLaughlin. This item was continued from the
December 7, 2021, meeting. Discussion ensued. A motion made by Councilmember Willis, seconded by Councilmember Martinez, approved the amendment by the following vote: Ayes:
Councilmembers Bates, Jimenez, Martinez, McLaughlin, Willis, and Vice Mayor Johnson III. Noes: Mayor Butt. Absent: None.
Abstain: None.
E-3. The matter to approve (1) a $50,000 amendment to
the legal services agreement with the law firm of Burke Williams, & Sorensen, LLP for general municipal and personnel matters for a total amount not to exceed $100,000 and (2) an additional appropriation of $50,000 from the general fund to pay for a portion of the second contract amendment was presented by Interim City Attorney Heather McLaughlin. This item was continued from the December 7, 2021, meeting. Discussion ensued. Mark Wassberg gave comments via teleconference. A motion made by
Councilmember Martinez, seconded by Councilmember Willis, to approve the amendment, passed by the following vote: Ayes:
Councilmembers Jimenez, Martinez, McLaughlin, and Willis.
Noes: Mayor Butt. Absent: Vice Mayor Johnson III. Abstain:
Councilmember Bates.
E-4. The matter to approve (1) a $75,000 amendment to
the legal services agreement with the law firm of Meyers Nave, LLP for general municipal law advice and litigation for a total amount not to exceed $85,000 and (2) an additional appropriation of $75,000 from the general fund to pay for the first contract amendment was presented by Interim City Attorney Heather McLaughlin. This item was continued from the December 7, 2021, meeting. Discussion ensued. A motion made by
Councilmember Martinez, seconded by Councilmember Jimenez, to approve the amendment passed by the following vote: Ayes:
Councilmembers Jimenez, Martinez, McLaughlin, and Willis.
Noes: Councilmember Bates and Mayor Butt. Absent: None.
Abstain: Vice Mayor Johnson III.
E-5. The matter to receive a presentation on a draft summary proposal for a new city-wide Community Benefits Policy was presented by Interim City Manager Shasa Curl, and Julian Gross, and Taliah Mirmalek from Renne Public Law Group. This item was continued from the November 23, and December 7, 2021, meetings. The presentation included a PowerPoint, which highlighted the following:
Engagement Summary; Policy Overview; Coverage, and Requirements; Existing Laws; Enhancement and Categories of Community Benefits;
1892478561,,,cc14Dec2021 - DRAFT(1)
ud/prc
and Recommended Policy Procedures. Discussion ensued. In January 2022, the city council would receive a draft city-wide community benefits policy, enhanced procedures, and the community benefits baseline list, with the opportunity to add additional benefits.
E-6. Continued to the December 21, 2021, City Council
meeting, to receive an update staffing presentation from the Police Department to include changes and/or modifications to the services provided to the community based on resource allocations due to financial and efficiency considerations. This item was continued from the December 7, 2021, meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 6:08 p.m., to meet again on Tuesday, December 21, 2021, at 6:30 p.m.
Clerk of the City of Richmond
(SEAL)
Approved:
Mayor
January 11, 2022
City Council
DATE: January 11, 2022
TO: Mayor Butt and Members of the City Council
FROM:
(List all relevant/responsive staff
persons)
Councilmember Gayle McLaughlin
Subject:
(This will appear on the agenda)
Condemning the horrific events of January 6, 2021 , and defending democracy and the sacred right of voting.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no financial impact related to this item.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:
(List all dates items were heard or
council action took place)
Click or tap here to enter text.
STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:
On January 6, 2021, a mob of supporters of President
Donald Trump attacked the United States Capitol in
Washington, D.C. We have just experienced the first
anniversary of this hostile January 6, 202 1, attempt to prevent the peaceful transfer of power in the most recent presidential election. It is important that we remember this date in the interest of preserving democracy and the
sacred right of voting.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
(This will appear on the agenda)
ADOPT a resolution condemning the horrific events of
the January 6, 2021, attack on the United States Capitol and defending democracy and the sacred right of voting
– Councilmember Gayle McLaughlin (510-620-6581).
DISCUSSION:
AGENDA
REPORT
January 11, 2022
January 6, 2022, marks the first anniversary of the January 6, 2021, attempt by a violent mob to prevent the peaceful transfer of power to allow the will of the people to install then President-elect Joe Biden as the 46th President of the United States.
Voting is a sacred right of any democracy. It is also a Human Right. Multiple lawsuits have found no evidence of voter fraud in the 2020 Presidential election.
Official investigative work following the January 6, 2021 , events found evidence that reveals knowledge of this attack on the Capitol by then-President Trump, who did nothing to stop it for a full three hours. It also found that “[e]ven after the crowd ultimately dispersed late in the day, then -President Trump, through his legal team, continued to seek to delay or otherwise impede the electoral count.” Additional evidence was found that identified the former president’s involvement in a scheme to replace Biden’s certified electors with uncertified electors pledged to him.
Richmond is a Human Rights City with a Human Rights Human Relations (HRHR) Commission. HRHR Commissioner and former Richmond City Councilmember Jeff Ritterman wrote a resolution for the City Council to adopt. It is important that we mark this first year anniversary of such a horrific day as January 6, 2021, by adopting this resolution which showc ases our defense of the Human Right and Sacred Right of voting and reaffirms our commitment to fight against any attempt to subvert and take this right away.
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
Attachment 1 – Resolution
RESOLUTION NO. XX
RESOLUTION DEFENDING DEMOCRACY AND THE SACRED RIGHT OF VOTING AND CONDEMNING THE EVENTS OF JANUARY 6, 2021 AT THE CAPITAL BUILDING WHEREAS, voting for our elected officials is a sacred right enshrined in the US Constitution; and
WHEREAS, a violent mob attempted to prevent the peaceful transfer of power to allow the will of the people to install Joe Biden as the 46th President of the United States; and WHEREAS, the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6 insurrection found “evidence from multiple witnesses,” and “documents on file” revealing that Congressman Scott Perry (R- PA) used an encrypted texting app, documenting that “the president was watching television coverage of the attack from his private dining room adjoining the Oval Office” and that “[e]ven after the crowd ultimately dispersed late in the day, then-President Trump, through his legal team, continued to seek to delay or otherwise impede the electoral count”; and WHEREAS, there is evidence that former President Trump made phone calls in the hours before January 6, pressing his allies into a scheme to replace Biden’s certified electors with uncertified electors pledged to him; and
WHEREAS, insurrectionist Robert Palmer of Florida, who threw a fire extinguisher at police on January 6 in the worst of the fighting at the U.S. Capitol, blamed Trump for lying to supporters that the election was stolen and calling on them to “stand up to tyranny.” Palmer was sentenced to more than five years in prison. Others have likewise implicated Trump in their defense pleas; and
WHEREAS, former President Trump’s Chief of Staff Mark Meadows had encrypted material on his cell phone which included a PowerPoint outlining how to overturn the election and emails about the National Guard protecting pro-Trump protesters, as well as texts with members of Congress about undermining the election results; and
WHEREAS, text messages Mark Meadows had exchanged as the attack was ongoing with Republican lawmakers, Conservative media personalities, and the former president’s eldest son reveal that Trump and his allies were well aware of the attack on the Capitol and did nothing to stop it for a full three hours; and
WHEREAS, this raises the question of Donald Trump corruptly seeking to obstruct or impede Congress’s proceedings, which would be a dereliction of duty and his is a serious federal crime; and
WHEREAS, multiple law suits found no evidence of voter fraud, eight senators and 139 representatives voted to sustain objections to the official vote count; and
WHEREAS, preservation of democracy requires honoring the sacred right of voting, which is a basic Human Right which must be defended.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVIED that we, the members of the Richmond City Council, do hereby call on all of our fellow residents to defend this Human Right and to stand against all foes foreign and domestic that attempt to subvert or take this right away. --------------
I certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted by the Council of the City of Richmond at a regular meeting thereof held on INSERT DATE, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTENTIONS:
ABSENT:
CLERK OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND
Approved:
Mayor
Approved as to form:
City Attorney
January 11, 2022
City Manager's Office
DATE: January 11, 2022
TO: Mayor Butt and Members of the City Council
FROM:
(List all relevant/responsive staff
persons)
Shasa Curl, Interim City Manager
Winifred Day, Arts and Culture Manager
Subject:
(This will appear on the agenda)
Contract with Social & Public Art Resource Center
(SPARC)
FINANCIAL IMPACT: The funding for this contract is included in the adopted FY 2021-2022 Arts and Culture Division Budget, which
contains fees from the Percent for Art in Private
Development Ordinance 14-17 N.S. in the amount of
$18,600 using account string 13564165-400201.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:
(List all dates items were heard or
council action took place)
Click or tap here to enter text.
STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:
Staff is seeking to enter into a sole-source contract to replace the faded mural located at 2525 Macdonald
Avenue.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
(This will appear on the agenda)
APPROVE a sole-source contract with Social & Public
Art Resource Center (SPARC) for the design, fabrication, installation, and replacement of a series of five murals on the Richmond Senior Center, 2525 Macdonald Avenue,
in an amount not to exceed $18,600, with a term from
January 11, 2022, through June 30, 2023 - City
Manager’s Office, Economic Development (Shasa
Curl/Winifred Day 510-620-6952).
AGENDA
REPORT
January 11, 2022
DISCUSSION:
In 2013, renowned artist, Judy Baca, from the Social & Public Art Resource Center (SPARC) was funded by a City of Richmond Neighborhood Public Art grant to create a community-oriented mural for the exterior wall of the Richmond Senior Center at 2525 Macdonald Avenue. The mural, or series of five interrelated murals, was designed, printed on synthetic outdoor material, and installed on the wall. Since then, it has faded and is due for replacement. This contract will cover the mural replacement and installation costs.
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
Attachment 1 – SPARC Contract
Attachment 2 – Sole Source Form
CITY OF RICHMOND
STANDARD CONTRACT
Department: Project Manager:
Project Manager E-mail: Project Manager Phone No:
PR No: Vendor No: P.O./Contract No:
Description of Services:
The parties to this STANDARD CONTRACT do mutually agree and promise as follows:
1. Parties. The parties to this Contract are the City of Richmond (herein referred to as the “City”) and the following named Contractor:
Company Name:
Street Address:
City, State, Zip Code:
Contact Person:
Telephone: Email:
Business License No: / Expiration Date:
A California [ ] corporation, [ ] limited liability corporation [ ] general partnership, [ ] limited partnership, [ ] individual, [ ] non-profit corporation, [ ] individual dba as [specify:] , [ ] other [specify:]
2. Term.
The effective date of this Contract is and it
terminates unless terminated as provided herein.
3. Payment Limit. City’s total payments to Contractor under this Contract shall not exceed $ . City shall not pay for services that exceed the Contract Payment Limit unless a contract amendment has been approved by the City Council or City Manager.
4. Contractor’s Obligations. Contractor shall provide those services and carry out that work described in the Service Plan (Exhibit A) which is attached hereto and is incorporated herein by reference, subject to all the terms and conditions contained or incorporated herein.
5. City's Obligations. City shall make to the Contractor those payments described in the Payment Provisions (Exhibit B) which are attached hereto and are incorporated herein by reference, subject to all the terms and conditions contained or incorporated herein.
City Manager's Office Winifred Day
[email protected] (510) 620-6952
9637
Richmond Senior Center Social & Public Art Resource Center (SPARC) Judy Baca mural replacement, deinstallation, replace faded mural and reinstall.
Social & Public Art Resource Center (SPARC) Judy Baca
685 Venice Blvd.
Venice, CA 90291
Carlos Rogel
(310) 822-9560 [email protected]
40047990
January 11, 2022
June 30, 2023
18,600.00
6. Authorized Representatives and Notices. This Contract is subject to the Authorized Representatives and Notices Provisions (Exhibit C) which are attached hereto and are incorporated herein by reference.
7. General Conditions. This Contract is subject to the General Conditions (Exhibit D) which are attached hereto and are incorporated herein by reference, subject to all the terms and conditions contained or incorporated herein.
8. Special Conditions. This Contract is subject to the Special Conditions (Exhibit E) (if any) which are attached hereto and are incorporated herein by reference, subject to all the terms and conditions contained or incorporated herein. (Note:
other than Public Works contracts, the City will agree to Special Conditions only in unusual circumstances.)
9. Insurance Provisions. This Contract is subject to the Insurance Provisions (Exhibit F) which are attached hereto and are incorporated herein by reference.
10. Signatures. These signatures attest the parties' Contract hereto:
CITY OF RICHMOND CONTRACTOR:
a municipal corporation
By:
(* The Corporation Chairperson of the Board,
President or Vice President should sign below)
Title: By:
I hereby certify that this Contract Title:
has been approved by City Council.
Date Signed:
By:
City Clerk
(* The Corporation Chief Financial Officer,
Secretary or Assistant Secretary should sign below)
Approved as to form:
By:
By: Title:
City Attorney
Date Signed:
(NOTE: Pursuant to California Corporations
Code Section 313, if Contractor is a corporation
or nonprofit organization, this Contract (1) must
be signed by (a) the Chairperson of the Board,
President or Vice-President and (b) the
Secretary any Assistant Secretary, the Chief
Financial Officer or any Assistant Treasurer.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS:
Service Plan Exhibit A
Payment Provisions Exhibit B
Authorized Representatives and Notices Exhibit C
General Conditions Exhibit D
Special Conditions Exhibit E
Insurance Provisions Exhibit F
Standard Contract/EJ/TE 9-26-07
Social & Public Art Resource Center (SPARC) Judy
Baca
For the Contract between the City of
Richmond and
EXHIBIT A
SERVICE PLAN
Contractor shall, to the satisfaction of the , perform the following services and be compensated as outlined below:
Replace the existing and faded five murals on the exterior wall of the Richmond Senior Center at 2525 Macdonald Avenue, Richmond, CA.
Replacement of the existing murals will entail the following: The printing of five murals at scale, artwork preparation and proofing; the fabrication of five frames to hold the new murals; UV protective coating; shipping of the murals from SPARC Headquarters in Los Angeles; and installation on the Senior Center building.
The existing five murals were glued onto the wall. In order to replace them, SPARC will be fabricating frames which will attach to the wall. The five murals will be held in place through a tension system on the frames, which will make future replacement easier and less expensive.
Social & Public Art Resource Center
(SPARC) Judy Baca
For the Contract between the City of
Richmond and
EXHIBIT B
PAYMENT PROVISIONS
{PLEASE NOTE THAT THE CITY OF RICHMOND SHALL NOT PAY FOR SERVICES
THAT EXCEED THE CONTRACT PAYMENT LIMIT UNLESS A CONTRACT
AMENDMENT HAS BEEN APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OR THE CITY MANAGER}
1. Provided Contractor is not in default under this Contract, Contractor shall be compensated as provided below.
2. Any and all payments made pursuant to this Contract shall be subject to the Contract Payment Limit. The Payment Limit includes expenses (phones, photo copying, meals and travel etc). Invoices, shall be adequately detailed, based on accurate records, and be in a form reasonably satisfactory to the City. Contractor may be required to provide back-up material upon request.
3. Contractor shall submit timely invoices to the following address:
Attention: City of Richmond, Finance Department - Accounts Payable Project Manager: Department:
PO Box 4046
Richmond, CA 94804-0046
4. All invoices that are submitted by Contractor shall be subject to the approval of the City’s Project Manager, before payments shall be authorized.
5. The City will pay invoice(s) within 45 days after completion of services to the City’s satisfaction. The City shall not pay late fees or interest.
6. A Richmond business license shall be obtained before any payment under this Contract shall be authorized and the business license must be kept current during the term of this Contract for payments to continue to be authorized.
7. All insurance coverage required by this Contract shall be provided by the Contractor before this Contract shall be executed by the City. The insurance coverage must be kept current during the term of this Contract for payments to continue to be authorized.
Winifred Day
Social & Public Art Resource Center
(SPARC) Judy Baca
City Manager's Office
Winifred Day
For the Contract between the City of
Richmond and
EXHIBIT C
AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVES AND NOTICES
1. Notices. All notices, demands, statements, or communications provided for by this Contract shall be in writing and may be delivered by deposit in the United States mail, postage prepaid. Notices to the City shall be addressed to the Department Head and (as delineated below in section 1.1) to the project manager responsible for the administration of or the supervision of the scope of work under this Contract. Notices to the Contractor shall be addressed to the party designated by Contractor (as delineated below in section 1.2). Notice shall be deemed delivered (a) upon personal delivery; (b) as of the fifth business day after mailing by United States certified mail, postage prepaid, addressed to the proper party; or (c) as of 12:00 p.m. on the second business day immediately after the day it is deposited with and accepted by Federal Express, or a similar overnight courier service, addressed to the proper party and marked for next business day morning delivery. For the purposes of this Contract, a "business day" means any day Monday through Friday that is not a holiday recognized by the federal government or the State of California.
1. 1 CITY hereby designates as its Authorized Representative the Project Manager whose name and address are as follows:
City of Richmond
Richmond, CA 94804-0046
1. 2 CONTRACTOR hereby designates as its Authorized Representative the Project Manager whose name and address are as follows:
Social & Public Art Resource Center
(SPARC) Judy Baca
Social & Public Art Resource Center (SPARC) Judy Baca
Winifred Day
450 Civic Center Plaza, Suite 300
Carlos Rogel
685 Venice Blvd.
Venice, CA 90291
General Conditions/EJ/TE 01-19-11 1 of 13
EXHIBIT D
GENERAL CONDITIONS
1. Independent Contractor. Contractor acknowledges, represents and warrants that Contractor is not a regular or temporary employee, joint venturer or partner of the City, but rather an independent Contractor. This Contract shall not be construed to create an agency, servant, employee, partnership, or joint venture relationship. As an independent Contractor, Contractor shall have no authority to bind City to any obligation or to act as City's agent except as expressly provided herein. Due to the independent Contractor relationship created by this Contract, City shall not withhold state or federal income taxes, the reporting of which shall be Contractor's sole responsibility.
2. Brokers. Contractor acknowledges, represents and warrants that Contractor has not hired, retained or agreed to pay any entity or person any fee, commission, percentage, gift, or any other consideration, contingent upon or resulting from the award or making of this Contract.
3. City Property. The rights to applicable plans, drawings, reports, calculations, data, specifications, videos, graphics or other materials prepared for or obtained pursuant to this Contract, which, upon request, are to be delivered to City within a reasonable time, shall be deemed assigned to City. If applicable, Contractor shall prepare check prints upon request. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Contractor shall not be obligated to provide to City proprietary software or data which Contractor has developed or had developed for Contractor's own use; provided, however, that Contractor shall, pursuant to Section 15 below, indemnify, defend and hold harmless City from and against any discovery or Public Records Act request seeking the disclosure of such proprietary software or data.
4. Patents, Trademarks, Copyrights and Rights in Data. Contractor shall not publish or transfer any materials, discoveries, developments, concepts, designs, ideas, know how, improvements, inventions and/or original works of authorship resulting from activities supported by this Contract without the express prior written consent of the City Manager. If anything resulting from activities supported by this Contract is patentable, trademarkable, copyrightable or otherwise legally protectable, City reserves the exclusive right to seek such intellectual property rights. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Contractor may, after receiving City's prior written consent, seek patent, trademark, copyright or other intellectual property rights on anything resulting from activities supported by this Contract. However, City reserves, and Contractor irrevocably grants, a nonexclusive, fully paid-up, royalty-free, assumable, perpetual, worldwide license, with the right to transfer, sublicense, practice and exploit said license and the right to make, have made, copy, modify, make derivative works of, use, sell,
General Conditions/EJ/TE 01-19-11 2 of 13
import, and otherwise distribute under all applicable intellectual properties without restriction of any kind said license.
Contractor further agrees to assist City, at City's expense, in every proper way to secure the City’s rights in any patents, trademarks, copyrights or other intellectual property rights relating thereto, including the disclosure to City of all pertinent information and data with respect thereto. Contractor shall also assist City in the execution of all applications, specifications, oaths, assignments, recordations, and all other instruments which City shall deem necessary in order to apply for, obtain, maintain and transfer such rights, or if not transferable, to waive such rights. Contractor shall further assist City in the execution of all applications, specifications, oaths, assignments, recordations and all other instruments which City shall deem necessary in order to assign and convey to City, and any assigns and nominees the sole and exclusive right, title and interest in and to any patents, trademarks, copyrights or other intellectual property rights relating thereto. Contractor further agrees that its obligation to execute or cause to be executed, when it is in Contractor's power to do so, any such instruments or papers shall continue during and at all times after the end of Contractor's services and until the expiration of the last such intellectual property right. Contractor hereby irrevocably designates and appoints City, and its duly authorized officers, agents and servants, as its agent and attorney-in-fact, to act for and in its behalf and stead to execute and file any such applications and to do all other lawfully permitted acts to further the application for, prosecution, issuance, maintenance or transfer of letters of patents, copyright and other registrations. This power of attorney is coupled with an interest and shall not be affected by Contractor's subsequent incapacity.
5. Inspection. Contractor's performance, place of business and records pertaining to this Contract are subject to monitoring, inspection, review and audit by authorized representatives of the CITY, the State of California, and the United States Government.
If the project or services set forth in Exhibit A shall be performed on City or other public property, City shall have the right to inspect such work without notice. If such project or services shall not be performed on City or other public property, City shall have the right to inspect such work upon reasonable notice.
6. Services. The project or services set forth in Exhibit A shall be performed to the full satisfaction and approval of City. In the event that the project or services set forth in Exhibit A are also itemized by price, City, in its sole discretion, may, upon notice to Contractor, delete certain items or services set forth in Exhibit A, in which case there shall be a corresponding reduction in the amount of compensation paid to Contractor.
General Conditions/EJ/TE 01-19-11 3 of 13
Contractor shall, at its own cost and expense, furnish all facilities and equipment necessary for Contractor to complete the project or perform the services required herein, unless otherwise provided in Exhibit A.
7. Records. Contractor shall keep and make available for inspection and copying by authorized representatives of the City, the State of California, and the United States Government, the Contractor's regular business records and such additional records pertaining to this Contract as may be required by the City.
Contractor shall retain all documents pertaining to this Contract for a period of five (5) years after this Contract's termination (or for any further period that is required by law) and until all Federal or State audits are complete and exceptions resolved for this contract's funding period. Upon request, CONTRACTOR shall make these records available to authorized representatives of the CITY, the State of California, and the United States Government.
Contractor shall keep full and detailed accounts, maintain records, and exercise such controls as may be necessary for proper financial management under this Contract. The Contractor’s accounting and control systems shall be satisfactory to City. Contractor's accounting systems shall conform to generally accepted accounting principles and all records shall provide a breakdown of total costs charged under this Contract, including properly executed payrolls, time records, utility bills, invoices and vouchers. The City shall be afforded prompt access to Contractor's records, books, and Contractor shall preserve such project records for a period of at least five (5 years after the termination of this Contract , or for such longer period as may be required by law.
Contractor shall permit City and its authorized representatives and accountants to inspect, examine and copy Contractor's books, records, accounts, correspondence, instructions, drawings, receipts, subcontracts, purchase orders, vouchers, memoranda and other data relating to the project or services set forth in Exhibit A, and any and all data relevant to this Contract at any reasonable time for the purpose of auditing and verifying statements, invoices, or bills submitted by Contractor pursuant to this Contract and shall provide such assistance as may be reasonably required in the course of such inspection. Contractor shall also allow City access to the record keeping and accounting personnel of Contractor.
City further reserves the right to examine and re-examine said books, records, accounts, and data during the five (5 year period following the termination of this Contract; and Contractor shall in no event dispose of, destroy, alter, or mutilate said books, records, accounts, and data in any manner whatever for five (5 years after the termination of this Contract.
General Conditions/EJ/TE 01-19-11 4 of 13
Pursuant to California Government Code § 10527, the parties to this Contract shall be subject to the examination and audit of representatives of the Auditor General of the State of California for a period of three (3) years after final payment under this Contract. The examination and audit shall be confined to those matters connected with the performance of this Contract including, but not limited to, the cost of administering this Contract.
8. Changes and Extra Work. All changes and/or extra work under this Contract shall be performed and paid for in accordance with the following:
Only the City Council or the City Manager may authorize extra and/or changed work. Contractor expressly recognizes that other City personnel are without authorization to either order extra and/or changed work or waive contract requirements. Failure of Contractor to secure the authorization for such extra and/or changed work shall constitute a waiver of any and all right to adjustment in contract price due to such unauthorized work and Contractor thereafter shall be entitled to no compensation whatsoever for performance of such extra and/or changed work.
If Contractor is of the opinion that any work which Contractor has been directed to perform is beyond the scope of this Contract and constitutes extra work, Contractor shall promptly notify City of the fact. The City shall make a determination as to whether or not such work is, in fact, beyond the scope of this Contract and constitutes extra work. In the event that City determines that such work does constitute extra work, City shall provide extra compensation to Contractor on a fair and equitable basis. A change order or Contract Amendment providing for such compensation for extra work shall be negotiated between City and Contractor and executed by Contractor and the appropriate City official.
In the event City determines that such work does not constitute extra work, Contractor shall not be paid extra compensation above that provided herein and if such determination is made by City staff, said determination may be appealed to the City Council; provided, however, a written appeal must be submitted to the City Manager within five (5) days after the staff's determination is sent to Contractor. Said written appeal shall include a description of each and every ground upon which Contractor challenges the staff's determination.
9. Additional Assistance. If this Contract requires Contractor to prepare plans and specifications, Contractor shall provide assistance as necessary to resolve any questions regarding such plans and specifications that may arise during the period of advertising for bids, and Contractor shall issue
General Conditions/EJ/TE 01-19-11 5 of 13
any necessary addenda to the plans and specifications as requested. In the event Contractor is of the opinion that City's requests for addenda and assistance is outside the scope of normal services, the parties shall proceed in accordance with the changes and extra work provisions of Section 8 of these General Conditions.
10. Professional Ability. Contractor acknowledges, represents and warrants that Contractor and its employees are skilled and able to competently provide the services hereunder, and possess all professional licenses, certifications, and approvals necessary to engage in their occupations.
City has relied upon the professional ability and training of Contractor as a material inducement to enter into this Contract. Contractor shall perform in accordance with generally accepted professional practices and standards of Contractor's profession. In the event that City, in its sole discretion, desires the removal of any person employed or retained by Contractor to perform services hereunder, such person shall be removed immediately upon receiving notice from City.
11. Business License. Contractor shall obtain a Richmond Business License before performing any services required under this Contract. The failure to so obtain such license shall be a material breach of this Contract and grounds for immediate termination by City; provided, however, that City may waive the business license requirement in writing under unusual or extraordinary circumstances without necessitating any modification of this Contract to reflect such waiver.
12. Termination Without Default. Notwithstanding any provision herein to the contrary, City may, in its sole and absolute discretion and without cause, terminate this Contract at any time prior to completion by Contractor of the project or services hereunder, immediately upon written notice to Contractor. Contractor may terminate this Contract at any time in its sole and absolute discretion and without cause upon 30 days' written notice to City. In the event of termination by either party, Contractor shall be compensated for: (1) all authorized work satisfactorily performed prior to the effective date of termination; (2) necessary materials or services of others ordered by Contractor for this Contract, prior to receipt of notice of termination, irrespective of whether such materials or services of others have actually been delivered, provided that Contractor is not able to cancel such orders. Compensation for Contractor in such event shall be determined by City in accordance with the percentage of the project or services completed by Contractor; and all of Contractor's finished or unfinished work product through the time of the City's last payment shall be transferred and assigned to City. Additionally, in the event of such termination, the City may proceed with the work in any reasonable manner it chooses.
General Conditions/EJ/TE 01-19-11 6 of 13
13. Termination in the Event of Default. Should Contractor fail to perform any of its obligations hereunder, within the time and in the manner provided or otherwise violate any of the terms of this Contract, City may immediately terminate this Contract by giving written notice of such termination, stating the reasons for such termination. Contractor shall be compensated as provided in Section 12 of these General Conditions; provided, however, there shall be deducted from such amount the amount of damage, including attorney's fees, expert witness fees and costs, if any, sustained by City by virtue of Contractor's breach of this Contract. Additionally, in the event of such termination, the City may proceed with the work in any reasonable manner it chooses.
14. Conflict of Interest. Contractor acknowledges, represents and warrants that Contractor shall avoid all conflicts of interest (as defined under any federal, state or local statute, rule or regulation, or at common law) with respect to this Contract. Contractor further acknowledges, represents and warrants that no City official or employee has any economic interest, as defined in Title 2, California Code of Regulations §§ 18703.1 through 18703.5, with Contractor that would invalidate this Contract. Contractor acknowledges that in the event that Contractor shall be found by any judicial or administrative body to have any conflict of interest (as defined above) with respect to this Contract, all consideration received under this Contract shall be forfeited and returned to City forthwith. This provision shall survive the termination of this Contract for one (1) year.
15. Indemnification.
(a) If this Contract is a contract for design professional services subject to California Civil Code Section 2782.8(a) and Contractor is a design professional, as defined in California Civil Code Section 2782.8(b)(2), Contractor shall hold harmless, defend and indemnify the City, its officers, agents, employees, and volunteers from and against any and all claims, damages, losses, and expenses including attorneys’ fees arising out of, or pertaining to, or relating to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of the Contractor, except where caused by the active negligence, sole negligence, or willful misconduct of the City. To the fullest extent permitted by law, Contractor shall immediately defend and indemnify the City and its officers, agents, employees, and volunteers from and against any and all liabilities, regardless of nature or type, that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of the Contractor, or its employees, agents, or subcontractors.
Liabilities subject to the duties to defend and indemnify include, without limitation, any and all claims, losses, damages, penalties, fines, and judgments; associated investigation and administrative expenses; defense costs, including but not limited to reasonable attorneys’ fees; court costs; and costs of alternative dispute resolution. Contractor’s obligation to
General Conditions/EJ/TE 01-19-11 7 of 13
indemnify applies unless it is finally adjudicated that the liability was caused by the sole active negligence or sole willful misconduct of an indemnified party.
(b) If this Contract is not a contract for design professional services subject to California Civil Code Section 2782.8(a) or Contractor is not a design professional as defined in California Civil Code Section 2782.8(b)(2), Contractor shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City, its officers, agents, employees and volunteers from any and all claims, suits, or actions of every name, kind and description, brought forth on account of injuries to or death of any person or damage to property arising from or connected with the willful misconduct, negligent acts, errors or omissions, ultra-hazardous activities, activities giving rise to strict liability, or defects in design by Contractor or any person directly or indirectly employed by, or acting as, the agent for Contractor in the performance of this Contract, including the concurrent or successive passive negligence of the City, its officers, agents, employees or volunteers.
(c) It is understood that the duty of Contractor to indemnify and hold harmless includes the duty to defend as set forth in Section 2778 of the California Civil Code. Contractor shall be obligated to defend, in all legal, equitable, administrative, or special proceedings, with counsel approved by the City, the City and its officers, agents, employees, and volunteers, immediately upon tender to Contractor of the claim in any form or at any stage of an action or proceeding, whether or not liability is established. An allegation or determination that persons other than Contractor are responsible for the claim does not relieve Contractor from its separate and distinct obligation to defend under this Section 15. The obligation to defend extends through final judgment, including exhaustion of any appeals. The defense obligation includes an obligation to provide independent counsel if Contractor asserts that liability is caused in whole, or in part, by the negligence or willful misconduct of an indemnified party. (d) The review, acceptance or approval of the Contractor’s work or work product by any indemnified party shall not affect, relieve or reduce the Contractor’s indemnification or defense obligations. This Section 15 survives completion of the services or the termination of this Contract.
The provisions of this Section 15 are not limited by, and do not affect, the provisions of this Contract relating to insurance.
(e) Acceptance of insurance certificates and endorsements required under this Contract does not relieve Contractor from liability under this Section
15. This Section 15 shall apply whether or not such insurance policies are determined to be applicable to any such damages or claims for damages.
16. Safety. Contractor acknowledges that the City is committed to the highest standards of workplace safety. Contractor shall perform all work hereunder in full compliance with applicable local, state and federal safety requirements including but not limited to Occupational Safety and Health Administration requirements, and shall assume sole and complete
General Conditions/EJ/TE 01-19-11 8 of 13
responsibility for the safety of Contractor's employees and any subContractor's employees. If a death, serious personal injury or substantial property damage occurs in connection with the performance of this Contract, Contractor shall immediately notify the City by telephone.
17. Insurance. Insurance requirements are set forth in Exhibit F to this Contract. Contractor shall abide by the insurance requirements set forth in said Exhibit F.
18. Non-Liability of Officials and Employees of the City. No official or employee of the City shall be personally liable for any default or liability under this Contract.
19. Compliance with Laws. Contractor shall comply with all federal, state and local laws, statutes, ordinances, rules and regulations, and the orders and decrees of any courts or administrative bodies or tribunals, with respect to this Contract, including without limitation environmental laws, employment discrimination laws and prevailing wage laws. Compliance under this provision includes compliance with all provisions of the Richmond Municipal Code ("Municipal Code"), including Chapters 2.50, 2.52, 2.56, and 2.60, if applicable.
Contractor acknowledges that under § 2.60.070 of the Municipal Code ("Living Wage Ordinance"), Contractor shall promptly provide to City documents and information verifying its compliance with the Living Wage Ordinance. Also as prescribed in § 2.60.070, Contractor shall notify each of its affected employees with regards to the wages that are required to be paid pursuant to the Living Wage Ordinance.
Contractor shall comply with § 2.28.030 of the Municipal Code, obligating every Contractor or subcontractor under a contract or subcontract with the City for public work or for goods or for services to refrain from discriminatory employment or subcontracting practices on the basis of race, color, sex, sexual orientation, religious creed, national origin or ancestry of any employee, any applicant for employment or any potential subcontractor.
Contractor acknowledges that the City’s Drug Free Workplace Policy, Violence in the Workplace Policy and the Policy Against Workplace Harassment, are available on the City’s website at
http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/workplacepolicies . Contractor agrees to abide by the terms and conditions of said policies.
20. Limitations upon Subcontracting and Assignment. This Contract binds the heirs, successors, assigns and representatives of Contractor. The Contractor shall not enter into subcontracts for any work contemplated
General Conditions/EJ/TE 01-19-11 9 of 13
under this Contract and shall not assign this Contract, nor any portion hereof or monies due or to become due, without the prior written consent of the City Council or its designee.
Contractor acknowledges that the services which Contractor shall provide under this Contract are unique, personal services which, except as otherwise provided herein, Contractor shall not assign or sublet to any other party without the prior written approval of City, which approval may be withheld in City's sole and absolute discretion. In the event that City, in writing, approves any assignment or subletting of this Contract or the retention of subcontractors by Contractor, Contractor shall provide to City upon request copies of each and every subcontract contract prior to the execution thereof by Contractor and subcontractor. Any assignment by Contractor of any or all of its rights under this Contract without first obtaining City's prior written consent shall be a default under this Contract.
The sale, assignment, transfer or other disposition of any of the issued and outstanding capital stock of Contractor (if applicable), or of the interest of any general partner or joint venturer or syndicate member if Contractor is a partnership or joint-venture or syndicate, which shall result in a change of control of Contractor, shall be deemed an assignment. For this purpose, control shall mean fifty percent or more of the voting power or twenty-five percent or more of the assets of the corporation, partnership or joint-venture.
21. Integration. This Contract constitutes the entire agreement between the parties concerning the subject matter hereof and supersedes any previous oral or written agreement; provided, however, that correspondence or documents exchanged between Contractor and City may be used to assist in the interpretation of the Exhibits to this Contract.
22. Modifications and Amendments. This Contract may be modified or amended only by a change order or Contract Amendment executed by both parties and approved as to form by the City Attorney.
23. Conflicting Provisions. In the event of a conflict between these General Conditions and those of any Exhibit or attachment hereto, these General Conditions shall prevail; provided, however, that any Special Conditions as set forth in Exhibit E shall prevail over these General Conditions. In the event of a conflict between the terms and conditions of any two or more Exhibits or attachments hereto, those prepared by City shall prevail over those prepared by the Contractor, and the terms and conditions preferred by the City shall prevail over those preferred by the Contractor.
24. Non-exclusivity. Notwithstanding any provision herein to the contrary, the services provided by Contractor hereunder shall be non-exclusive, and
General Conditions/EJ/TE 01-19-11 10 of 13
City reserves the right to employ other Contractors in connection with the project.
25. Exhibits. All Exhibits hereto are made a part hereof and incorporated herein by reference; provided, however, that any language in Exhibit A which does not pertain to the project description, proposal, scope of services, or method of compensation (as applicable) , or any corresponding responsibilities of City, shall be deemed extraneous to, and not a part of, this Contract.
26. Force Majeure. Neither party hereto shall be considered in default in the performance of its obligations hereunder to the extent that the performance of such an obligation is prevented or delayed by reason of acts of God, strikes, boycotts, lock-outs, inability to procure materials not related to the price thereof, failure of power, restrictive governmental laws and regulations enacted after the date of this Contract, riots, civil unrest, acts of terrorism, insurrection, war, declaration of a state or national emergency or other reasons of a like nature not within the reasonable control of such party.
27. Time of the Essence. Time is of the essence of this Contract. Contractor and City agree that any time period set forth in Exhibit A represents their best estimates with respect to completion dates and both Contractor and City acknowledge that departures from the schedule may occur.
Therefore, both Contractor and City will use reasonable efforts to notify one another of changes to the schedule. Contractor shall not be responsible for performance delays caused by others, or delays beyond Contractor's control, and such delays shall extend the times for performance of Contractor's work.
28. Confidentiality. Contractor agrees to comply with, and to require its employees, agents and partners to comply with, all applicable State or Federal statutes or regulations respecting confidentially, including but not limited to, the identity of persons served under this Contract, their records, or services provided them, and assures that:
All applications and records concerning any individual made or kept by Contractor or any public officer or agency in connection with the administration of or relating to services provided under this Contract will be confidential, and will not be open to examination for any purposes not directly connected with the administration of such service.
No person will publish or disclose or permit or cause to be published or disclosed, any list of persons receiving services, except as may be required in the administration of such service.
General Conditions/EJ/TE 01-19-11 11 of 13
29. Third Parties. Nothing herein shall be interpreted as creating any rights or benefits in any third parties. For purposes hereof, transferees or assignees as permitted under this Contract shall not be considered "third parties."
30. Governing Law. This Contract shall be construed in accordance with the law of the State of California without regard to principles of conflicts of law.
This Contract is made in Contra Costa County, California, and any action relating to this Contract shall be instituted and prosecuted in the courts of Contra Costa County, California.
31. Nonrenewal. Contractor understands and agrees that there is no representation, implication, or understanding that the services provided by Contractor under this Contract will be purchased or renewed by the City under a new contract following expiration or termination of this Contract, and waives all rights or claims to notice or hearing respecting any failure by City to continue the purchase of all or any failure to continue purchase of all or any such services from Contractor.
32. Claims. Any claim by Contractor against City hereunder shall be subject to Government Code §§ 800 et seq. The claims presentation provisions of said Act are hereby modified such that the presentation of all claims hereunder to the City shall be waived if not made within six months after accrual of the cause of action.
33. Interpretation. This Contract shall be interpreted as if drafted by both parties.
34. Warranty. In the event that any product shall be provided to the City as part of this Contract, Contractor warrants as follows: Contractor possesses good title to the product and the right to transfer the product to City; the product shall be delivered to the City free from any security interest or other lien; the product meets any specifications contained herein; the product shall be free from material defects in materials and workmanship under normal use for a period of one (1) year from the date of delivery; and the product shall be fit for its intended purpose(s). Notwithstanding the foregoing, consumable and maintenance items (such as light bulbs and batteries) shall be warranted for a period of one hundred and eighty (180) days from the date of delivery. All repairs during the warranty period shall be promptly performed by Contractor, at Contractor's expense, including shipping.
35. Severability. In the event that any of the provisions or portions or applications thereof of this Contract are held to be unenforceable or invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, City and Contractor shall negotiate an equitable adjustment in the provisions of the Contract with a view
General Conditions/EJ/TE 01-19-11 12 of 13
toward effecting the purpose of this Contract, and the validity and enforceability of the remaining provisions or portions or applications thereof, shall not be affected thereby.
36. Authority. City warrants and represents that the signatory hereto (the Mayor of the City of Richmond or the City Manager) is duly authorized to enter into and execute this Contract on behalf of City. The party signing on behalf of Contractor warrants and represents that he or she is duly authorized to enter into and execute this Contract on behalf of Contractor, and shall be personally liable to City if he or she is not duly authorized to enter into and execute this Contract on behalf of Contractor.
37. Waiver. The waiver by City of any breach of any term or provision of this Contract shall not be construed as a waiver of any subsequent breach.
Inspections or approvals, or statements by any officer, agent or employee of the City relating to the Contractor’s performance, or payments therefore, or any combination of these acts, shall not relieve the Contractor’s obligation to fulfill this Contract as prescribed; nor shall the City be thereby stopped from bringing any action for damages or enforcement arising from any failure to comply with any of the terms and conditions of this Contract.
38. Possessory Interest. If this Contract results in the Contractor having possession of, claim to or right to the possession of land or improvements, but does not vest ownership of the land or improvements in the same person, or if this Contract results in the placement of taxable improvements on tax exempt land (Revenue and Taxation Code 107), such interest or improvements may represent a possessory interest subject to property tax, and Contractor may be subject to the payment of property taxes levied on such interest.
39. Performance and Final Acceptance.
Contractor represents that it is experienced, qualified, registered, licensed, equipped, organized and financed to perform the services under this Contract.
Contractor shall perform the services under this Contract with that degree of skill and judgment normally exercised by professional firms performing services of a similar nature in the State of California, and shall be responsible for the professional quality, technical accuracy and coordination of the services it performs under this Contract. In addition to the other rights and remedies which City may have, Contractor shall, at its own expense, correct any services which fail to meet the above standard.
General Conditions/EJ/TE 01-19-11 13 of 13
City shall provide Contractor an opportunity to cure errors and omission which may be disclosed during the review of submittals, with no increase in the authorized Contract Payment Limit. Should Contractor fail to make necessary corrections in a timely manner, such corrections shall be made by the City and the cost thereof shall be charged to Contractor.
If warranted, City shall determine, and Contractor may request such determination, that Contractor has satisfactorily completed performance of this Contract. Upon such determination, City shall issue to Contractor a written Notice of Final Acceptance, after which Contractor shall not incur further costs under this Contract. Contractor shall respond to such Notice of Final Acceptance by executing and submitting to City a Release and Certificate of Final Payment.
40. Survival. The rights and obligations of the parties which by their nature survive termination or completion of the services covered by this Contract shall remain in full force and effect after termination or completion.
For the Contract between the City of
Richmond and
EXHIBIT E
SPECIAL CONDITIONS
The General Conditions are hereby amended to include the following modifications and/or provisions (if applicable):
None
Social & Public Art Resource Center
(SPARC) Judy Baca
For the Contract between the City of
Richmond and
EXHIBIT F
INSURANCE PROVISIONS
During the entire term of this Contract and any extension or modification thereof, the CONTRACTOR shall keep in effect insurance policies meeting the insurance requirements specified in the insurance provisions which are attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
Social & Public Art Resource Center
(SPARC) Judy Baca
Attachment 2
January 11, 2022
Department
DATE: January 11, 2022
TO: Mayor Butt and Members of the City Council
FROM:
(List all relevant/responsive staff
persons)
Belinda Brown, Finance Director
Delmy Cuellar, Accounting Manager
Subject:
(This will appear on the agenda)
Annual review and adoption of debt policy for fiscal year 2021-2022
FINANCIAL IMPACT: The adoption of and adherence to financial policies can be measured by factors such as:
• Minimizing borrowing costs;
• Better management of the City's debt and
investment portfolios; and
• Providing fiscal security during times of
unforeseen economic downturns.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:
(List all dates items were heard or
council action took place)
N/A
STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:
Staff is requesting that City Council review and approve the City’s Debt Policy, which should be completed on an annual basis.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
(This will appear on the agenda)
REVIEW the Debt Policy for Fiscal Year 2021 -2022; and
ADOPT the resolution approving said policy – Finance
Department (Belinda Brown 510-620-6740).
AGENDA
REPORT
January 11, 2022
DISCUSSION:
Municipal governments provide a wide range of services that have an impact on public safety and quality of lif e for community members. Prudent use of resources helps determine how effectively these services are provided on an ongoing basis. In addition to managing revenues and expenditures, it is also the municipal finance official' s responsibility to focus on management practices that will enable the City to better control its financial resources on a continuing basis.
Debt Policy
The foundation of any well -managed debt program is a comprehensive debt policy. A debt policy sets fort h the parameters for issuing debt and managing the debt portfolio, including post -issuance compliance. In the credit rating process, the rating agencies believe it is appropriate to place significant value on debt policies that have been adopted by cities.
The City's Debt Policy r equires that annual commitments relating to General Fund debt not exceed ten percent (10%) of annual General Fund revenues.
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
Attachment 1 - Resolution Adopting the Fiscal Year 2021-22 Debt Policy Attachment 2 - Fiscal Year 2021-22 Debt Policy
Reso No.____
RESOLUTION NO. ____
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND,
CALIFORNIA , ADOPTING THE DEBT POLICY FOR FISCAL YEAR 202 1-2022
WHEREAS, the City of Richmond (the "City") is a charter city that operates under the Council-Manager form of government for the purposes of providing a full range of municipal services including police and fire protection; construction and maintenance of highways, streets and infrastructure; library services; storm water and municipal sewer systems; a wastewater treatment facility; and the administration of recreational activities and cultural events; and
WHEREAS, the City also operates the Richmond Memorial Convention Center and the Port of Richmond; and
WHEREAS, the City has established and maintains a well-managed debt program pursuant to a comprehensive debt policy that sets forth the parameters for issuing debt and managing the debt portfolio, including post-issuance compliance; and
WHEREAS, in the credit rating process, the rating agencies believe it is appropriate to place significant value on debt policies that have been adopted by cities; and
WHEREAS, the City established a Debt Policy that requires annual commitments relating to the General Fund debt cannot exceed ten percent (10%) of annual General Fund revenues; and
WHEREAS, the City has determined that an appropriate level of the General Fund reserves is a policy decision; and
WHEREAS, the GFOA recommends that reserve levels be directly related to the degree of uncertainty the local government faces; and
WHEREAS, the adoption of the financial policies listed in this document is consistent with "best practices" and the City's fiduciary oversight of the Fiscal Policies of FY2020-21.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby adopts the Debt Policy for the City of Richmond that is attached hereto as Exhibit A.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Reso No.____
I certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted by the Council of the City of Richmond at a regular meeting thereof held _______________, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTENTIONS:
ABSENT:
CLERK OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND
(SEAL)
Approved:
Mayor
Approved as to form:
City Attorney
State of California }
County of Contra Costa : ss.
City of Richmond }
I certify that the foregoing is a true copy of Resolution No._____, finally passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Richmond at a regular meeting held on ____________.
January 11, 2022
Finance Department
DATE: January 11, 2022
TO: Mayor Butt and Members of the City Council
FROM:
(List all relevant/responsive staff
persons)
Belinda Brown, Director of Finance
Vrenesia Ward, Senior Budget Analyst
Subject:
(This will appear on the agenda)
Compliance with developer fees
FINANCIAL IMPACT: Receipt of the annual year-end developer fee report has no financial impact on the City.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:
(List all dates items were heard or
council action took place)
N/A
STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:
Pursuant to Section 66006 of the Government Code,
every local agency is required to make public a report at a public meeting on collected developer fees within 180 days after the close of each fiscal year. Section 66001 of the Government Code requires every local agency to
spend or commit collected developer fees within five
years of collection. If fees remain unexpended or
uncommitted five years after collection, the local agency must make a finding that there remains a reasonable
relationship between the current need for the fees and
the purpose for which it was originally collected.
AGENDA
REPORT
January 11, 2022
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
(This will appear on the agenda)
RECEIVE the annual year-end developer fee report as
required pursuant to Section 66006 of the Government
Code – Finance Department (Belinda Brown/Vrenesia
Ward 510-621-1211).
DISCUSSION:
On January 1, 1989, AB1600 went into effect. AB1600 added Section 66000 et. seq. to the Government Code (Code) which added a number of requirements that local agencies must follow if they collect developer fees to pay for the cost of construction of public facilities or public services related to mitigating impacts caused by development projects.
Section 66006(b)(1) of the Code requires each local agency to make public a report on collected developer fees within 180 days after the close of each fiscal year. The City has completed its year-end report (Attachment 1). The report includes a brief description of the fee type in the fund, amount of the fee, beginning and ending balances of each fund, and any interest earned. Section 66006(b)(2) of the Code requires each local agency to review its year-end report at a public meeting. Receipt of the year-end report at this meeting is the required public meeting.
Each local agency is also required pursuant to Section 66001 of the Code to spend or commit collected developer fees within five years of collection. If fees remain unexpended or uncommitted five years after collection, the local agency must make a finding that there remains a reasonable relationship between the current need for the fees and the purpose for which it was originally collected in order to continue use of such funds for projects. All relevant fees are committed and/or are not approaching the five-year limit. Therefore, no resolution is required as part of this annual report.
Through the General Plan and fee studies the City established the required nexus between development, improvements, and services necessary to mitigate the effects of development, and approved fees to fund the mitigation measures. The funds for which fees are collected are as follows:
Fund Number Fund Description
2110 Park Land Dedication
2111 Traffic
2113 Fire
January 11, 2022
Fund Number Fund Description
2114 Police
2115 Community Aquatic
2116 Parks Open Space
2117 Library 2118 Hilltop
2119 Storm Drainage
2120 Wastewater
The City uses Uniform Building Code (UBC) regulations to factor fee amounts for developer fees the City collects. Public facilities fees pay for major infrastructure improvements and public services reasonably related to new development. Examples are off-site roads, traffic signals, parks, recreation facilities, fire facilities and services, and police facilities and services. The City’s Master Fee Schedule, which includes developer impact fees, is available at the City’s website as follows:
http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/2503/Master-Fee-Schedule
The adopted Master Fee Schedule (last updated June 2020) details fees for each of the following categories:
• Residential single-family development per dwelling unit; • Residential multi-family development, per dwelling unit; • Commercial development per 1,000 square feet;
• Office development per 1,000 square feet;
• Industrial development per 1,000 square feet; and
• Warehousing space per 1,000 square feet.
In each of the above stated categories, the following developer impact fees are specified:
• Park/open space;
• Sewer;
• Traffic;
• Community/aquatic centers;
January 11, 2022
• Storm drainage;
• Library;
• Police facilities; and
• Fire facilities;
• Subregional Transportation Mitigation Fee Program.1
Government Code Requirements
There are generally eight requirements on fees that the local agency must adhere to pursuant to the Code.
1. Create separate capital facilities funds for each improvement funded with impact fees (Section 66006(a)).
2. Remit all interest income earned by the fees to the same fund. Interest income must be spent solely on the purpose for which the fees were collected (Section 66006(a)).
3. Prepare a public report concerning each impact fee fund within 180 days after the close of each fiscal year. Such report must include the: fund’s beginning and ending balance for the fiscal year, amount of fees and interest deposited into the fund each year, and the description for each expenditure from the fund for that year, including identification of the improvement being funded (Section 66006(b)).
4. Review the report at a public meeting not less than 15 days after the report is released to the public (Section 66006(b)).
5. If fees remain unexpended or uncommitted five years after being collected, the local agency is to return the funds to the developer or make a finding that there remains a reasonable relationship between the current need for the fees and the purposes for which they were originally collected (Section 66001(d)).
6. Refund any fees with accrued interest to current owner of the lots, units or developed project for which continued need cannot be demonstrated (Section 66001(e)).
1 The Subregional Transportation Mitigation Fee Program (STMP) applies specifically to the following land use types: single family residential, multi-family residential, senior housing, hotel, retail, office, industrial, storage facility, church, and hospital categories.
January 11, 2022
7. A local agency must not commingle fees with any other revenue, except for temporary investment purposes (Section 66006(a)).
8. A local agency may not spend impact fees for maintenance or operation of improvements funded with impact fees (Section 65913.8).
Annual Report FY 2020-2021
The annual report (Attachment 1) shows revenues, expenditures and the beginning and ending fund balance for each fund. As shown in the annual report, the City is in full compliance with all of the eight requirements listed above.
The Subregional Transportation Mitigation Fee Program (STMP) fund is administered by the West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee (WCCTAC). The STMP fund is included in the annual report pursuant to Section 15.12.040(L) of the Richmond Municipal Code which provides that the STMP fee be reported on in the City’s annual report. STMP funds are only available for City projects pursuant to the 2006 Master Cooperative Agreement between the Contra Costa Transportation Authority and the Cities of El Cerrito, Hercules, Pinole, Richmond, San Pablo, County of Contra Costa and WCCTAC; STMP fees are not administered by the City.
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
Attachment 1 - Annual Report
Attachment 1
Impact Fees FY2020-21
Revenue & Expenditures Report Cost
Community Recovery
Park Land Center Park/Open Planning &
Dedication Traffic Fire Police Aquatic Space Library Hilltop Storm Drain Wastewater Building1 Fund Number 2111 2113 2114 2115 2116 2117 2118 2119 2120 1050
REVENUES
Fees 59,220 629,841 54,797 159,818 220,558 1,158,109 288,913 157,376 511,878 1,025,637 Use of money and property 547 3,717 684 1,342 2,202 8,501 6,019 135 2,565 9,952 Total Revenues 59,767 633,558 55,481 161,160 222,760 1,166,610 294,932 135 159,941 521,829 1,025,637
EXPENDITURES
JPA Sportsfield Agreement 15,000
Traffic Safety Improvement 299,476
Safety Materials and Supplies 72,992
Kennedy Swim Center Boiler 15,135
Recreation Complex Roof Repairs 38,175
Swim Center Pool Heater Repalcement 171,083
DPRC Roof Repairs 20,609
Computer Hardware 1,540
Office Supplies, and Other
Equipment 3,002
Finalize Storm Drain Master Plan 33,333
Wastewater Treatment Plant
Cogeneration Project 226,752
Transfer-out 3% Admin Fee to
Planning Department 1,777 18,895 1,644 4,795 6,617 34,743 8,667 4,631 15,356 West County Transportation
Advisory Committee (WCCTAC),
pass-through 1,025,637
Total Expenditures 16,777 318,371 74,636 4,795 251,619 34,743 13,210 - 37,964 242,108 1,025,637 EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF REVENUES OVER EXP42,991 315,187 (19,154) 156,366 (28,859) 1,131,866 281,722 135 121,977 279,721 -
LIABILITIES
Accounts Payable 22,214 37,408 160,413
TOTAL LIABILITIES - 22,214 37,408 - - - - - - 160,413 - NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCES 42,991 337,401 18,254 156,366 (28,859) 1,131,866 281,722 135 121,977 440,134 - FUND BALANCES (DEFICITS), JULY 1, 2020 123,344 821,601 171,460 269,444 529,464 1,772,774 1,332,904 31,384 565,853 2,227,263 - FUND BALANCES (DEFICITS), JUNE 30, 2021 166,335 1,159,002 189,714 425,810 500,605 2,904,640 1,614,626 31,519 687,830 2,667,397 - 2110
1In FY2020-21, the City collected and remitted pass-thru funding of $1,025,637 to West County Subregional Transportation Mitigation Program (STMP) which is managed and disbursed by West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee (WCCTAC).
January 11, 2022
Finance Department
DATE: January 11, 2022
TO: Mayor Butt and Members of the City Council
FROM:
(List all relevant/responsive staff
persons)
Belinda Brown, Finance Director
Delmy Cuellar, Accounting Manager
Subject:
(This will appear on the agenda)
Resolution approving investment policy
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no financial impact.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:
(List all dates items were heard or
council action took place)
N/A
STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:
The Finance Department is requesting that the City
Council adopt a resolution approving the City's Investment Policy.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
(This will appear on the agenda)
ADOPT a resolution approving the City of Richmond
Investment Policy Fiscal Year 20 21-2022 – Finance
Department (Belinda Brown 510-620-6740).
AGENDA
REPORT
January 11, 2022
DISCUSSION:
The City of Richmond Investment Policy is an integral part of the Finance Department, setting standards and procedures regarding how the City's funds are invested. The Investment Policy is consistent with the guidelines of the California Municipal Treasurers Association (CMTA) Certification Program. The policy addresses the 19 sections that the Association deems as critical elements, which are as follows:
1. Policy
2. Scope
3. Prudence
4. Objective
5. Delegation of Authority
6. Ethics and Conflicts of Interest
7. Authorized Financial Dealers and Institutions
8. Authorized and Suitable Investments
9. Review of Investment Portfolio
10. Investment Pools/Mutual Funds
11. Collateralization
12. Safekeeping and Custody
13. Diversification
14. Maximum Maturities
15. Internal Controls
16. Performance Standards
17. Reporting
18. Investment Policy Adoption
19. Glossary
The Investment Policy provides for the City to invest public funds in a manner which will provide the highest investment return, with maximum security, while meeting the daily cash flow demands of the City and conforming to all state and local statutes governing the investment of public funds. It further provides that the policy shall be reviewed annually and adopted by resolution of the City Council.
January 11, 2022
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
Attachment 1 - Resolution
Attachment 2 - FY2021-22 Investment Policy
Reso No.____
RESOLUTION NO. ____
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND,
CALIFORNIA REVISING THE CITY O F RICHMOND'S FINANCIAL POLICIES BY ADOPTING THE INVEST MENT POLICY FOR FISCAL YEAR 202 1-2022
WHEREAS, the City of Richmond (the "City") is required to maintain and periodically update the City's Financial Policies consistent with the standards set forth by the California Municipal Treasurers Association (the "CMTA") Certification Program; and
WHEREAS, a written investment policy is reviewed by the City's governing body annually and may be certified by the CMTA as often as needed according to relevance of importance; and
WHEREAS, the Investment Policy Certification Program (the "Program”) of the CMTA was developed in 2012; and
WHEREAS, the Program was instituted in an effort to assist state and local governments interested in drafting or improving upon an existing investment policy; and
WHEREAS, the CMTA Certification Committee is comprised of fellow CMTA members, many of whom have earned the Certified California Municipal Treasurers (CCMT) designation and who volunteer to serve as reviewers; and
WHEREAS, for the policy to receive certification, it must be approved by all reviewers in all areas spelled out in the CMTA Certification Program; and
WHEREAS, the CMTA Certification Program investment policy includes language and rationales for those 19 sections that the Association deems as critical elements; and
WHEREAS, those critical elements are:
1. Policy
2. Scope
3. Prudence
4. Objective
5. Delegation of Authority
6. Ethics and Conflicts of interest
7. Authorized Financial Dealers and Institutions
8. Authorized and Suitable Investments
9. Review of Investment Portfolio
10. Investment Pools/Mutual Funds
11. Collateralization
12. Safekeeping and Custody
13. Diversification
14. Maximum Maturities
15. Internal Controls
16. Performance Standards
17. Reporting
Reso No.____
18. Investment Policy Adoption
19. Glossary; and
WHEREAS, prior to July 1, 2021, the investment policy had not been certified by CMTA; and
WHEREAS, the investment policy is reviewed and updated by Finance annually to meet the standards set forth by CMTA.
NOW, THEREFORE , BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Richmond, California, hereby amends the City's existing investment policy to adhere to the CMTA "Certification Program" Investment Policy guidelines which will be reviewed by the City Council annually and may be certified by CMTA as often as needed according to relevance of importance.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this certification will serve to assure the City Council and the public that the City of Richmond is abiding by professional standards established to ensure prudent management of public funds.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a copy of the new City of Richmond Investment Policy is attached hereto as Exhibit A.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Reso No.____
I certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted by the Council of the City of Richmond at a regular meeting thereof held _______________, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTENTIONS:
ABSENT:
CLERK OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND
(SEAL)
Approved:
Mayor
Approved as to form:
City Attorney
State of California }
County of Contra Costa : ss.
City of Richmond }
I certify that the foregoing is a true copy of Resolution No._____, finally passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Richmond at a regular meeting held on ____________.
Page | 1
CITY OF RICHMOND
INVESTMENT POLICY
FY2021-22
I. Mission Statement
It is the policy of the City of Richmond (City) to invest public funds in a manner which will provide the highest investment return with maximum security while meeting the daily cash flow demands of the City and conforming to all state and local statutes governing the investment of public funds.
II. Scope
This Statement addresses the investment policy for the City's pooled funds. The pooled funds include the General Fund, Special Revenue, Debt Service, Capital Projects, Enterprise, Internal service, Trust & Agency, Redevelopment, and any other Funds authorized by the City Council which are accounted for in the City of Richmond Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR).
The investment policy for bond and note proceeds is contained in the bond documents approved by the City Council at the time of the issuance of the debt; provided, that to the extent not inconsistent with such bond documents, bond or note proceeds and in accordance with the Government Code, sections 53601(I) and 5922(d), may be invested in (i) Guaranteed Investment Contracts or other debt is suance proceeds with an investment provider rated in a category of "A" or better and with downgrade protection or (ii) Investment instruments described herein.
The investment policy for the Police and Fire Pension Fund and the General Pension Fund are contained in the City Charter.
III. Prudence
Investments shall be made with judgment and care - under circumstances then prevailing – which persons of prudence, discretion, and intelligence exercise in the management of their own affairs, not for speculation, but for the investment, considering the probable safety of their capital as well as the probable income to be derived. The City holds to the “prudent investor standard’ in that all investments placed shall be made with a degree of judgment and care, not for speculation, but considering the safety of the monies and acting as a fiduciary of the public trust, the prudent investor standard as set forth in Section 53600.3 of the Government Code.
IV. Objectives
1As defined in the California Debt Advisory Commission's October 1996 document: Local Agency Investment Guidelines: Recommendations for Implementing Recent Statutory Changes to the California Government Code Sections 16429.1 and 53600 through 53684 Page | 2
The City's investment activities are designed to accurately monitor and forecast expenditures and revenues to:
1. Invest up to 100% of all idle funds.
2. Guarantee that funds are always available when needed.
3. Manage the portfolio to take advantage of changing economic conditions that can aid in increasing the total return on the City's portfolio.
4. Safety. The primary duty and responsibility of the Treasurer is to protect, preserve and maintain cash and investments placed in his/her trust on behalf of the citizens of the community. To attain this objective, the City will diversify its investments by investing funds among a variety of securities offering independent returns and financial institutions.
Specifically, the City shall seek to preserve principal by mitigating credit risk and market or interest rate risk.
5. Liquidity. An adequate percentage of the portfolio should be maintained in liquid short-term securities that can be converted to cash if necessary to meet disbursement requirements. Since all cost requirements cannot be anticipated, investment in securities with active secondary or resale markets is highly recommended. Emphasis should be on marketable securities with low sensitivity market risks.
6. Yield. Yield, sometimes referred to as "rate of return," is the potential dollar earnings investment can provide. Yield should become a consideration only after the basic requirements of safety and liquidity have been met with measurement of investment risk and the cash flow needs.
V. Delegation of Authority
Management responsibility for the investment program is hereby delegated to the Director of Finance, acting in her/his capacity as Treasurer, or the Accounting Manager who shall be responsible for all transactions undertaken and shall establish a system of controls to regulate the activities of subordinate officials, and their procedures in the absence of the Director of Finance.
VI. Ethics and Guidelines
1. The City adheres to the guidance provided by the "prudent investor standard".
1 A standard of conduct where a person acts with care, skill, prudence, and diligence when investing, reinvesting, purchasing, acquiring, exchanging, selling, and managing funds. The test of whether the standard is being met is if a prudent person acting in a similar situation would engage in similar conduct to ensure that investments safeguard principal and maintain liquidity."
Page | 3
2. All participants in the investment process shall act as custodians of public trust. Investment officials shall recognize that the investment portfolio is subject to public review and evaluation. The overall program shall be designed and managed with a degree of professionalism that is worthy of the public trust.
3. In a diversified portfolio it must be recognized that occasional measured losses are inevitable and must be considered within the context of the overall portfolio investment return provided that adequate diversification has been implemented. Each issuer shall be limited in terms of their percentage of the portfolio, to minimize risk exposure.
4. In accordance with California Government Code Sections 89502 and 89503, officers and employees of the City shall refrain from any activity that could conflict with the proper execution of the investment program or that could impair their ability to make impartial investment decisions.
All investment personnel shall comply with the reporting requirements of the Political Reform Act, to include the annual filing of their Statement of Economic Interest.
VII. Authorized Broker/Dealers
The Director of Finance will maintain a list of broker/dealers authorized to provide investment services. The broker/dealers will be selected by credit worthiness that is authorized to provide investment services in the State of California. These may include "primary" dealers or "regional" dealers that qualify under Securities and Exchange Commission Rule 15C3-1 (uniform net capital rule).
VIII. Authorized Investments and Maximum Maturities
With the above objectives and criteria in mind, the City of Richmond may invest in the following instruments with a rating of “A” or higher (when applicable) that have maturities of five (5) years or less at the time of purchase, unless otherwise stated below:
1. Government Bonds and Notes- Maximum of 100% invested no longer than 5 years
i. United States Treasury Notes, B onds, Bills, or certificates of indebtedness or those for which the full faith and credit of the United States are pledged for the payment of principal and interest; and
ii. Treasury notes or bonds of the State of California; and iii. Bonds, Notes, Warrants or other evidence of indebtedness of Any local agency within California with a minimum rating threshold of an “A”.
2. Bonds and Notes of Federally Sponsored Agencies - Maximum of 100% invested no longer than 5 years, such as the Federal Farm Credit Bank,
Page | 4
Federal Home Loan Bank, Federal National Mortgage Association, Government National Mortgage Association, or any other instruments issued by a federal agency, or a United States government sponsored enterprise.
3. Negotiable Certificates of Deposit issued by a Federal and State chartered bank or a Federal and State Savings and Loan Association or by any state licensed branch of a foreign bank. Purchases are not to exceed 30% of invested idle funds.
4. Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) - maximum of $75 million The City may invest in the Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) established by the State Treasurer for the benefit of local agencies up to the maximum permitted by State law but not to exceed the aggregate limit set by the City of 100%.
5. CalTRUST a Joint Powers Authority created by public agencies to provide a convenient method for public agencies to pool their assets for investment purposes, not to exceed the aggregate limit set by the City of 100%. C alTRUST is governed by a Board of Trustees mad e up of experienced local agency treasurers and investment officers.
6. Medium Term Notes with a maximum of five years maturity issued by corporations organized and operating within the United States. Such securities must be rated in a rating category of "A" or better by a nationally recognized rating service. Purchases may not exceed 30% of invested idle funds in any single institution.
7. Commercial Paper of "prime quality" of the highest ranking or of the highest letter and numerical rating as provided for by Moody's Investor Service, Inc., or Standard & Poor's Corporation. Eligible paper is further limited to issuing corporations that are organized and operating within the United States and have total assets in excess of five hundred million dollars ($500,000,000.00) and having an "A" or higher rating for the issuer's debt, other than commercial paper, if any, as provided for by Moody's Investors Service, Inc., or Standard & Poor's. Eligible commercial paper may not exceed 270 days maturity nor represent more than 10 percent of the outstanding paper of an issuing corporation. Purchases of commercial paper may not exceed 25% of the City’s surplus money that may be invested pursuant to this section.
8. Money Market Funds are eligible for investment if the companies providing the mutual funds invest only in instruments authorized by Government Code, Sections 53601 and 53630. In order to be an eligible money market investment under this section:
Page | 5
• The money market shall have attained the highest ranking, or the highest letter and numerical rating provided by not less than two nationally recognized statistical rating organizations and shall maintain these ratings for the duration of the investment.
• Retain an investment advisor registered with the Securi ties and Exchange Commission (SEC) with not less than five (5) years' experience investing in securities and obligations.
• The fund shall have a minimum of $500 million to total asset size of portfolio at time of investment and should not drop below this threshold.
• The purchase price of the share of beneficial interest shall not include any commission that these companies charge.
• Purchases shall not exceed 20 percent of the City's idle funds
Summary of Maximum Percentage Limitations of Investments, by Investment Type
The following summary of maximum percentage limits, by instrument, is established for the City's total pooled fund's portfolio:
Investment Type: Percentage
U.S. Treasury Bills, Notes, and Bonds 0 to 100%
U.S. Government Agency Obligations 0 to 100%
Negotiable Certificates of Deposit Local 0 to 30%
Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) 0 to 100% (Max $75 million) CalTRUST 0 to 100%
Medium Term Notes 0 to 30%
Commercial Paper 0 to 25%
Money Market Funds 0 to 20%
IX. Reporting and Review of the Investment Portfolio
The Director of Finance shall report monthly on the City's pooled and Bond funds to the City Manager and City Council and shall report quarterly on other investments, such as pension funds. The following elements will be part of the investment report:
1. Type of investment
2. Institution/Issuer
3. Date of maturity
4. Cost of security (par amount) and dollar amount in all securities
5. Description of the funds, investments and programs managed by contracts
6. Current market value of securities
Page | 6
7. Rate of return
8. Statement of compliance to meet pool expenditure requirements for the next six months
9. If, in any case, pool expenditures are not met, an explanation of why sufficient monies will not be available.
X. Investment Pools
Government sponsored investment pools (Pools) are permitted under California Government Code Section 53601 et seq. and an ex cellent short-term investment option for cash management facilities. These pools can provide safety, liquidity and yield in a single diversified investment. However, thoughtful investigation and due diligence are required both initially at the time of purchase and ongoing analysis to determine that the investment pool is being managed in a manner consistent with the objectives of the Policy.
State of California's Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) is an example of a Pool. The City may invest in the LAIF established by the State Treasurer for the benefit of local agencies up to the maximum permitted by State law, but not to exceed 50% of the cost value (book value) of the total portfolio exclusive of the fiscal agent cash portfolio. Each agency is lim ited to an investment of $75 million per account currently, but subject to change.
XI. Collateralization
Collateral for Certificates of Deposit (CD) and Negotiated Certificates of Deposit (NCD) must comply with Government Code, Chapter 4, Bank Deposit law Section 16500 et seq. and the Savings and Loan and Credit Union Deposit Law Government Code Section 16600 et seq. In addition, if the CD is not FDIC insured or goes over the FDIC $250,000 limit, collateral is required to equal 100 percent of the principal of either U.S. Treasury securities or Federal Agency securities.
Collateral will always be held by an independent third party with whom the City has a current custodial agreement. A clearly marked evidence of ownership (safekeeping receipt) must be supplied to the City and retained. The right of collateral substitution is granted, within the parameters and constraints of the Policy .
XII. Safekeeping and Custody
Securities purchased from broker/dealers shall be held in third party safekeeping by the trust department of the City's bank or other designated third party, in the City's name and control. The basic premise underlying the City's investment philosophy is and will continue to be to ensure that money is always safe and available when needed. All trades executed by a dealer will settle deliver vs. payment (DVP) through the City's safekeeping agent. Securities held in custody for the City shall be independently audited on an annual
Page | 7
basis to verify investment holdings.
XIII. Diversification and Risk Tolerance
The City of Richmond recognizes diversification is an investment strategy that will mitigate risk in the investment portfolio. Portfolio diversification is employed as a way to control risk. The City's investment portfolio shall be diversified to avoid incurring unreasonable and avoidable risks regarding specific investment types. Within investment types, the City shall also maintain a mix of securities to avoid concentrations with individual financial institutions, geographic areas, industry types and maturities. No individual investment transaction shall be undertaken that jeopardizes the total capital position of the overall portfolio. The Treasurer shall periodically establish guidelines and strategies to control risks of default, market price changes, and illiquidity.
XIV. Internal Control
The Treasurer or designee shall maintain a system of internal controls designed to ensure compliance with the Investment Policy and to prevent losses due to fraud, employee error, and misrepresentations by third parties or unanticipated changes in financial markets.
All financial institutions and broker/dealers who desire to become qualified bidders for investment transactions must supply the Director of Finance with the following: audited financial statements, proof of FINRA certification, and proof of state r egistration, completed broker/dealer questionnaire, and certification of having read the City's investment policy.
An annual review of the financial condition and registrations of qualified bidders will be conducted by the Director of Finance. The bidding process shall be conducted every five years. The current audited financial statement is required to be on file for each financial institution and broker/dealer in which the City invests.
XV. Performance Standards
A. The investment portfolio shall be designed with the objective of obtaining a rate of return throughout budgetary and economic cycles, commensurate with the investment risk constraints and the cash flow needs.
B. The investment performance objective for the portfolio shall be to earn a total rate of return over a market cycle which is approximately equal to the return on a market benchmark Index of similar securities, as determined by the Director of Finance.
XVI. Investment Policy Adoption
The investment policy shall be adopted by resolution of the City Council. The policy shall
Page | 8
be reviewed annually by the Council and any modification made thereto must be approved by the City Council.
XVII. Interest Earnings
All moneys earned and collected from investments authorized in this policy shall be allocated quarterly to various fund accounts based on the daily cash balance in each fund as a percentage of the entire pooled portfolio. Should any fund not have a daily cash balance at the end of a quarter, it will receive none of t he moneys earned and collected from the pooled investments. Furthermore, should any fund have a temporary negative daily cash balance at the end of a quarter, the negative amounts will be reallocated to provide earnings to the funds with a positive daily cash balance.
XVIII. Restrictions
1. The City will not invest any funds in inverse floaters, range notes, or interest- only STRIPS (Separate Trading of Registered Interest and Principal of Securities) that are derived from a pool of mortgages.
1. The City will not invest any funds in any security that could result in zero interest accrual if held to maturity. This limitation does not apply to investments in shares of beneficial interest (money market mutual funds) that are authorized elsewhere in the Investment Policy.
3. It is the City's policy not to invest in companies involved in the manufacturing of tobacco and tobacco- related products such as cigarettes, cigars, pipe tobacco, chewing tobacco, etc.
4. In accordance with the Slavery Era Insurance Ordinance 14- 05 N.S. Section
2.29.030 Social Disclosure on Gains from Slavery effective July 1, 2005, the City will not invest any funds in international financial instruments that benefited from slavery. The City Council prohibits, by social investment policy, such investments and reserves the absolute right to divest from such investments with the cost of divestment being borne by the contracting institution.
5. In accordance with Resolution 38-13 effective May 7, 2013 the City declared it a policy of the City of Richmond to not invest in Fossil Fuel companies and urges the Board and Management of the City’s Pension funds to divest from publicly-traded Fossil Fuel Companies.
6. In accordance with the Sanctuary City Ordinance 12- 18 N.S. Section 4 Prohibition on Investments effective June 5, 2018, the City shall not make any investments in stocks, bonds, securities, or other obligations issued by any
Page | 9
provider of Data Broker or Extreme Vetting services to United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
GLOSSARY
Agencies: Federal agency securities and/or Government-sponsored enterprises.
Page | 10
Bankers' Acceptance (BA): A draft or bill of exchange accepted by a bank or trust company. The accepting institution guarantees payment of the bill, as well as the issuer.
Benchmark: A comparative base for measuring the performance or risk tolerance of the investment portfolio. A benchmark should represent a close correlation to the level of risk and the average duration of the portfolio's investments.
Bid: The price offered by a buyer of securities. (When you are selling securities, you ask for a bid.) See Offer.
Broker: A broker brings buyers and sellers together for a commission.
Certificate of deposit (CD): A time deposit with a specific maturity evidenced by a Certificate.
Large-denomination CD's are typically negotiable.
Collateral: Securities, evidence of deposit or other pro perty, which a borrower pledges to secure repayment of a loan. Also refers to securities pledged by a bank to secure deposits of public monies.
Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR): The official annual report for the government agency. It includes five combined statements for each individual fund and account group prepared in conformity with GAAP. It also includes supporting schedules necessary to demonstrate compliance with finance- related legal and contractual provisions, extensive introductory material, and a detailed Statistical Section.
Data Broker: Means either 1) the collection of information, including personal information about consumers, from a wide variety of sources for the purpose of reselling such information to their customers, which i nclude both private- sector businesses and government agencies; 2) the aggregation of data that was collected for another purpose from that for which it is ultimately used.
Dealer: A dealer, as opposed to a broker, acts as a principal in all transactions, buying and selling for his own account.
Delivery versus Payment (DVP): There are two methods of delivery of securities:
delivery versus payment and delivery versus receipt. Delivery versus payment is delivery of securities with an exchange of money for t he securities. Delivery versus receipt is delivery of securities with an exchange of a signed receipt for the securities.
Diversification: Investment contained within the portfolio will be diversified by security type, institution and maturity.
Extreme Vetting: Data mining, threat modeling, predictive risk analysis, or other similar services.
Page | 11
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC): A federal agency that insures bank deposits, currently up to $250,000 per deposit.
Federal Home Loan Banks (FHLB): Government sponsored wholesale banks (currently 12 regional banks), which lend funds and provide correspondent banking services to member commercial banks, thrift institutions, credit unions and insurance companies. The mission of the FHLBs is to liq uefy the housing related assets of its members who must purchase stock in their district Bank.
Federal National Mortgage Association (FNMA): FNMA, like GNMA was chartered under the Federal National Mortgage Association Act in 1938. FNMA is a federal corporation working under the auspices of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). It is the largest single provider of residential mortgage funds in the United States. Fannie Mae, as the corporation is called, is a private stockholder -owned corporation. The corporation's purchases include a variety of adjustable mortgages and second loans, in addition to fixed-rate mortgages. FNMA's securities are also highly liquid and are widely accepted. FNMA assumes and guarantees that all security holders will receive timely payment of principal and interest.
Federal Reserve System: The central bank of the United States created by Congress and consisting of a seven member Board of Governors in Washington, D.C., 12 regional banks and about 5,700 commercial banks that are members of the system.
Fossil Fuel: A fuel formed by natural processes, such as anaerobic decomposition of buried dead organisms, containing organic molecules originating in ancient photosynthesis that release energy in combustion such as: coal, oil, and gas reserves as measured by the gigatons of carbon dioxide that would be emitted if those reserves were extracted and burned.
Government National Mortgage Association (GNMA or Ginnie Mae): Securities influencing the volume of bank credit guarante ed by GNMA and issued by mortgage bankers, commercial banks, savings and loan associations, and other institutions. The security holder is protected by full faith and credit of the U.S. Government. Ginnie Mae securities are backed by the FHA, VA or FHA mor tgages. The term "pass -through" is often used to describe Ginnie Maes.
Liquidity: A liquid asset is one that can be converted easily and rapidly into cash without a substantial loss of value. In the money market, a security is said to be liquid if the spread between bid and asked prices is narrow and reasonable size can be done at those quotes.
Local Government Investment Pool (LGIP): The aggregate of all funds from political subdivisions that are placed in the custody of the State Treasurer for investment and reinvestment.
Market Value: The price at which a security is trading and could presumably be
Page | 12
purchased or sold.
Maturity: The date upon which the principal or stated value of an investment becomes due and payable.
Money Market: The market in which shor t-term debt instruments (bills, commercial paper, bankers' acceptances, etc.) are issued and traded.
Offer: The price asked by a seller of securities. (When you are buying securities, you ask for an offer.) See Bid.
Portfolio: Collection of securities held by an investor.
Primary Dealer: A group of government securities dealers who submit daily reports of market activity and positions and monthly financial statements to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and are subject to its informal oversight. Primary dealers include Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)-registered securities broker-dealers, banks, and a few unregulated firms.
Prudent Person Rule: An investment standard. In some states the law requires that a fiduciary, such as a trustee, may invest money only in a list of securities selected by the custody state-the so-called legal list. In other states the trustee may invest in a security if it is one which would be bought by a prudent person of discretion and intelligence who is seeking a reasonable income and preservation of capital.
Rate of Return: The yield obtainable on a security based on its purc hase price or its current market price. This interest may be amortized yield to maturity on a bond or the current income return.
Sanctuary City: A municipal jurisdiction that limits its cooperation with the national government's effort to enforce immigration law.
Safekeeping: A service to customers rendered by banks for a fee whereby securities and valuables of all types and descriptions are held in the bank's vaults for protection.
Secondary Market: A market made for the purchase and sale of outstanding is sues following the initial distribution.
Securities & Exchange Commission: Agency created by Congress to protect investors in securities transactions by administering securities legislation.
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Rule 15C3- 1: See Uniform Net Capital Rule.
Treasury Bills: A non-interest bearing discount security issued by the U.S. Treasury to finance the national debt. Most bills are issued to mature in three months, six months, or one year.
Page | 13
Treasury Notes: Medium-term coupon-bearing U.S. Treasury securities issued as direct obligations of the U.S. Government and having initial maturities from two to 10 years.
Uniform Net Capital Rule: Securities and Exchange Commission requirement that member firms as well as nonmember broker -dealers in securities maintain a maximum ratio of indebtedness to liquid capital of 15 to 1; also called net capital rule and net capital ratio. Indebtedness covers all money owed to a firm, including margin loans and commitments to purchase securities, one reason new public issues are spread among members of underwriting syndicates. Liquid capital includes cash and assets easily converted into cash.
United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE): A federal law enforcement agency under the U.S. Department of Ho meland Security. ICE's stated mission is to protect America from the cross -border crime and illegal immigration that threaten national security and public safety.
Yield: The rate of annual income return on an investment, expressed as a percentage. (a) Income Yield is obtained by dividing the current dollar income by the current market price for the security. (b) Net Yield or Yield to Maturity is the current income yield minus any premium above par or plus any discount from par in purchase price, with the adjustment spread over the period from the date of purchase to the date of maturity of the bond.
January 11, 2022
Finance Department
DATE: January 11, 2022
TO: Mayor Butt and Members of the City Council
FROM:
(List all relevant/responsive staff
persons)
Belinda Brown, Director of Finance
Delmy Cuellar, Accounting Manager
Subject:
(This will appear on the agenda)
Investment and Cash Balance report for the month of
November 2021
FINANCIAL IMPACT: None.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:
(List all dates items were heard or
council action took place)
N/A
STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:
Staff is requesting that the City Council receive the City’s Investment and Cash Balance Report for the month of
November 2021.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
(This will appear on the agenda)
RECEIVE the City’s Investment and Cash Balance Report
for the month of November 2021 – Finance Department
(Belinda Brown 510-620-6740).
AGENDA
REPORT
January 11, 2022
DISCUSSION:
The Investment and Cash Balance Report is a monthly report of the City’s pooled cash balance. The Portfolio Management Report represents the monthly bank balances, along with market balances of permitted investments according to the City’s Investment Policy.
Investment in the Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF), money market, agency bonds, certificates of deposits, and corporate notes are all allowable and permitted according to the FY2020-2021 Investment Policy.
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
Attachment 1 – Investment and Cash Balance Report for November 2021
January 11, 2022
Finance Department
DATE: January 11, 2022
TO: Mayor Butt and Members of the City Council
FROM:
(List all relevant/responsive staff
persons)
Belinda Brown, Finance Director
Delmy Cuellar, Accounting Manager
Subject:
(This will appear on the agenda)
Resolution approving Other Post -Employment Benefits
(OPEB) funding policy
FINANCIAL IMPACT: The adoption of and adherence to the OPEB Funding Policy can be measured by factors such as:
Meeting the Ci ty’s objective of placing into Trusts half of any one-time revenues;
Placing half of any year -end surplus in excess of
the City’s Minimum Reserve Policy into the Trusts;
Paying down the City’s unfunded liability annually.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:
(List all dates items were heard or
council action took place)
N/A
STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:
Staff is requesting that the City Council adopt a resolution approving the Other Post -Employment Benefits (OPEB)
Funding Policy
AGENDA
REPORT
January 11, 2022
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
(This will appear on the agenda)
ADOPT a resolution approving the Fiscal Year 2021-2022
Other Post-Employment Benefits (OPEB) Funding Policy
– Finance Department (Belinda Brown 510-620-6740).
DISCUSSION:
The City provides medical benefits to retirees. The benefit is paid monthly to the retiree, subject to proof of coverage and attestation of premium payment, and generally ceases upon death of the retiree. Unlike the expenses associated with pension benefits, the City has historically chosen to pay its OPEB expenses as they come due (the monthly reimbursements to retirees) rather than as they are earned. These annual “pay -as-you- go” benefit expenses have increased over the last five years, and are expected to continue growing at that pace as more active employees retire and as healthcare costs increase.
Payment of OPEB expenses as they come due, rather than as they are earned, results in the accumulation of unfunded liability for the future benefit. To est imate that liability, and to calculate the annual contribution required to pay down that liability over a specified amortization period (the actuarial determined contribution, ADC), the City’s actuary prepares an OPEB valuation annually.
Effective as of Ja nuary 17, 2017 the City and Richmond Police Officers Association (RPOA) agreed on separating and maintaining two separate OPEB Plans. The RPOA OPEB plan was established in June 2019 with CalPERS. All current RPOA employees and future retirees after January 17, 2017 belong to the RPOA OPEB Plan. All other City active members and Retirees belong to the City OPEB Plan with Public Agency Retirement Services (PARS).
The City’s OPEB valuation, as of July 1, 2021, estimated an unfunded actuarial accrued liability (UAAL) of $103.79M, $90.80M for City OPEB plan and $12.99M for RPOA OPEB plan. In May 2021, the City’s Actuary estimated and projected an ADC of $12.24 M consisting of $10.15M for the City Plan and $2.09M for the RPOA plan for FY2021-2022.
Based on the City’s current efforts to pay down the UAAL by contributing annually to the OPEB trusts established with PARS and CalPERS, the City has managed to have an ending balance of $32.4M in PARS and $6.3M in CalPERS as of June 30, 2021.
OPEB Funding Policy
If the City continues the current pay-as-you-go policy, the unfunded liability will increase.
Conversely, if the City adopts a policy of making pre -funding payments into an OPEB Trust, in addition to the pay-as-you-go benefit payments, the unfunded liability will decline.
Moreover, because the actuary can assume that the OPEB Trust will be held in a
January 11, 2022
diversified portfolio of long-term investment and earn a significantly higher rate of return than the City’s cash pool, the UAAL will be lower than in the pay-as-you go scenario.
Staff recommends that the City Council continue pre-funding the City’s OPEB liabilities by directing the City Manager to place half of any one-time revenues, and placing half of any year-end surplus in excess of the City’s Minimum Reserve Policy into the Trusts and to pay down the City’s unfunded liability annually.
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
Attachment 1 – Resolution for the OPEB Funding Policy
Attachment 2 – Fiscal Year 2021-22 OPEB Funding Policy
Reso No.____
RESOLUTION NO. ____
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND,
CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE OPEB FUNDING POLICY FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND OTHER POST EMPLOYMENT BENEFITS (“CITY OPEB” ) TRUST
AND RICHMOND POLICE OFFICERS ASSOCATION OTHER POST
EMPLOYMENT BENEFITS (“RPOA OPEB”) TRUST
WHEREAS, the City of Richmond (the “City”) is a charter city that operates under the Council-Manager form of government for the purposes of providing a full range of municipal services including police and fire protection; construction and maintenance of highways, streets and infrastructure; library services; storm water and municipal sewer systems; wastewater treatment facility; and the administration of recreational activities and cultural events; and
WHEREAS, the City also operates the Richmond Memorial Convention Center and the Port of Richmond; and
WHEREAS, the City has established and maintains certain employee benefit plans that provide post-employment benefits other than pensions (hereafter “other post- employment benefits” or “OPEBs”), such as, but not limited to, medical, dental, vision and prescription drug coverage, to OPEB participants who are eligible for coverage thereunder; and
WHEREAS, beginning in the fiscal year ending June 30, 2018, the City must recognize OPEB unfunded liabilities in its Comprehensive Annual Financial Report due to the implementation of Governmental Accounting Standards Board Statement Nos. 74 and 75; and
WHEREAS, as of June 2008, the City established an irrevocable OPEB trust (City OPEB) pursuant to Section 115 of the Internal Revenue Code for purposes of funding and pre-funding OPEBs provided under its retirement benefit plans with Public Agency Retirement Services (PARS); and
WHEREAS, as of June 2019, the City established an irrevocable RPOA OPEB trust with CalPERS pursuant to section 115 of the Internal Revenue Code for purposes of funding and pre-funding OPEBs provided under its retirement benefit plans due to a new Contract with RPOA effective January 17, 2017; and
WHEREAS, the City Manager is vested with the City and fiduciary responsibility for the administration, management and operation of the OPEB Trusts; and
WHEREAS, the City Manager has an obligation to provide reasonable assurance that the costs of benefits under the OPEB Trusts will be funded in an equitable and sustainable manner; and
Reso No.____
WHEREAS, a funding policy establishes guidelines for plan funding through actuarial valuations, regular contribution rates, contribution timing and actuarial assumptions; and
WHEREAS, the adoption of an OPEB Funding Policy is consistent with “best practices” and the Board’s fiduciary oversight of the OPEB Trust.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby adopts the OPEB Funding Policy for the City of Richmond Other Post-Employment Benefits Plans that is attached hereto as Exhibit A.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Reso No.____
I certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted by the Council of the City of Richmond at a regular meeting thereof held _______________, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTENTIONS:
ABSENT:
CLERK OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND
(SEAL)
Approved:
Mayor
Approved as to form:
City Attorney
State of California }
County of Contra Costa : ss.
City of Richmond }
I certify that the foregoing is a true copy of Resolution No._____, finally passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Richmond at a regular meeting held on ____________.
1 THE CITY OF RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA
OTHER POST EMPLOYMENT BENEFITS
FUNDING POLICY FY21-22
OPEB Funding Policy
A. Introduction
The purpose of this Statement of Benefits Plan Funding Policy (“Policy”) is to establish a methodology for funding benefit obligations accruing under the City of Richmond Other Post - Employment Benefit Plans (the “Plans”). It is anticipated that current assets plus future assets from employer contributions, employee contributions, and investment earnings should be sufficient to fund the Plans benefits. The Policy is intended to reflect a reasonable, conservative approach with each generation of ratepayers financing, to the greatest extent possible, the cost of retiree healthcare benefits being accrued. This Policy recognizes that there will be investment market place volatility and that actual economic and demographic exp erience will differ from assumed experience.
Accordingly, this Policy is intended to provide flexibility to smooth such volatility and experience in a reasonable, systematic, and financially sound manner. Further, it is the intent that this Policy comply with all applicable laws, rules and regulations (collectively “Laws”). In the event that this Policy conflicts with any such Law, the applicable Law shall prevail.
B. General Information
The City of Richmond (the “City”) currently manages two separate trust a ccounts in regards to Other Post Employment Benefits (“OPEB”). As of January 17, 2017 the Richmond Police Officers Association (“RPOA”) and the City implemented a new contract to create a separate OPEB trust for RPOA members and future retirees. The City O PEB plan is administered by Public A gency Retirement Services (PARS) and the RPOA OPEB plan is administered by CalPERS.
C. Policy Funding Objectives
The primary funding objectives of this Policy, in order of importance, are to:
1. Provide sufficient assets to permit the payment of all benefits under the Plans.
2. Maintain equity among generations of ratepayers by:
a. Establishing improvement, on a projected basis, in the Plan’s Funded Ratio, as defined in the Glossary, such that it approaches 100% over a given period of time;
2 b. Amortizing the Unfunded Actuarial Accrued Liability, as defined in the Glossary, over fixed periods, specified below.
3. Minimize the volatility of the employer’s annual contributions by smoothing investment gains and losses over a period of years. Smoothing investment returns over a period of years recognizes that investment performance will fluctuate, and only by coincidence will it exactly equal the assumed rate of return for any given year. It is anticipated that this approach may reduce volatility within the calculation of the Unfunded Actuarial Accrued Liability and the actuarially determined contribution rate.
D. Funding Guidelines
This Policy establishes guidelines for setting the employer contribution rate.
1. Actuarial Valuations
The Plan’s actuary shall conduct an actuarial valuation biennially , based on actual Plan s data, to determine funding progress as well as employer contributions for the following two fiscal years.
2. Actuarially Determined Contribution Rate
a. The actuarial valuation report shall include calculation of a recommended Actuarially Determined Contribut ion (ADC) rate. The ADC is intended to fund new OPEB liabilities as they are earned each year (the Normal Cost) plus an amortization of the existing Unfunded Actuarial Accrued Liability (UAAL).
b. The UAAL amortization component shall consist of:
i. The initial UAAL amortized as a level dollar amount over a fixed 20 -year period.
ii. Future unexpected changes in plan liabilities or assets at each valuation date shall each be amortized in “layers” as level dollar amounts over separate, fixed 20- year periods.
c. The ADC shall be reduced by the expected employee contributions to arrive at a net Actuarially Determined Employer Contribution (ADEC) rate. This target contribution rate may be expressed as a dollar amount or as a percent of payroll.
d. The ADEC shall be further reduced by the amount of annual retiree benefits payments (Implicit Subsidy and/or Explicit Subsidy payments) which are paid from the City’s general assets but not reimbursed by the OPEB trusts.
3. Funding Policy Contribution Rate
3 Coordination of the Plan’s Funding and Investment Policies will attempt to minimize the volatility of the employer’s contribution.
a. The City will meet the objective of placing in to Trusts half of any one -time revenues.
b. The City will place half of any year-end surplus in excess of the City’s Minimum Reserve Policy into the Trusts.
c. The City will seek to contribute the Actuarially Determined Contribution rate annually, though it maintains the flexibility to reduce contributions when fiscally necessary.
d. For the purposes of the ADC calculation, investment return assumptions will be evaluated by an independent investment advisor on a regular basis (at a minimum of every two years) , and should reflect the nature of the investments held in the Plans, and the historical and projected return rates anticipated for the investments.
E. Assumption Guidelines
1. The actuarial assumptions are adopted by the City in an effort to align the funding of the Plans with actual demographic, healthcare and economic experience, thus providing stability to the contribution rate over time. It is expected that actual experience will deviate from the actuarial assumptions and Experience Gains and Losses will occur. These gains (or losses) will reduce (or increase) future contributions.
2. Actuarial Assumptions are generally grouped into two major categories:
• Demographic assumptions -- which include withdrawal (termination), retirement, disability, and mortality rates, as well as assumptions regarding beneficiaries. • Economic assumptions -- which include inflation, healthcare inflation and investment return
3. As part of the annual OPEB valuation process, the actuary will also provide advice to the City and recommend non-pension assumptions, such as increases in healthcare costs.
F. Transparency and Reporting
Funding of the City’s OPEB should be transparent to all parties including City employees, retirees, recognized employee organizations, the City Council and Richmond residents. In order to achieve this transparency, the following information shall be available:
a. Copies of the actuarial valuations for the City’s OPEB plans shall be made available to the City Council.
4 b. The City’s Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) shall be published on its website. This report includes information on the City’s OPEB plans, contributions to the OPEB Trusts, and the funded status of the plans.
c. The City’s annual operating budget shall include appropriations for contributions to the OPEB Trusts and pay-go costs.
G. Review of Funding Policy
Funding OPEB requires a long-term plan. The City will review this policy annually and make changes as necessary. Annually checking the actuarial valuations to determine if changes to this policy are necessary to ensure adequate resources are being accumulated to fund OPEB.
All aspects of this Policy and the individual factors in the calculation of the annual employer contribution rate which is the result of the above process are subject to the review and approval of the Board and are subject to change, in whole and in part, if deemed appropriate and in the best interests of the Plan sponsor and participants.
5 Glossary
Actuarial Cost Method: The technique used to allocate costs to various time periods.
Actuarial Accrued Liability (AAL): The portion of the Present Value of Projected Benefits that is attributed to past years of service by the Actuarial Funding Method. The AAL serves as a funding target at any given point in time.
Actuarial Value of Assets : The smoothed value of assets used by the actuary in the actuarial valuation, for the purpose of reducing the impact of market fluctuations on the employer’s contribution rate.
Entry Age Method: An Actuarial Cost (or Funding) Method that determines the plan's Normal Cost as a level percentage of pay over the working lifetimes of plan members.
Experience Gains and Losses: The difference between the experience anticipated by the actuarial assumptions and the plan's actual experience during the period between valuations. If actual experience is financially mo re favorable to the Plan, it is a Gain, (e.g., higher investment return than expected). If actual experience is financially less favorable to the Plan, it is a Loss, (e.g., lower investment return than expected).
Funded Ratio: A measure of the ratio of plan assets to the Actuarial Accrued Liability (funding target) of the Plan. Plan assets can be the Market Value of Assets or the Actuarial Value of Assets.
Market Value of Assets: The total fair value of fund assets as reported in the Plan’s financial statements.
Normal Cost: The portion of the Present Value of Projected Benefits that is attributed to the current year by the Actuarial Funding Method. Also referred to as the Annual Benefit Cost.
Unfunded Actuarial Accrued Liability (UAAL): The portion of the Actuarial Accrued Liability not covered by plan assets. It is calculated by subtracting the Actuarial Value of Assets from the Actuarial Accrued Liability.
January 11, 2022
Finance Department
DATE: January 11, 2022
TO: Mayor Butt and Members of the City Council
FROM:
(List all relevant/responsive staff
persons)
Belinda Brown, Finance Director
Delmy Cuellar, Accounting Manager
Subject:
(This will appear on the agenda)
Annual review and adoption of swap policy for fiscal year 2021-2022
FINANCIAL IMPACT: The adoption of and adherence to financial policies can be measured by factors such as:
• Minimizing borrowing costs;
• Better management of the City's debt and
investment portfolios; and
• Providing fiscal security during times of unforeseen
economic downturns.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:
(List all dates items were heard or
council action took place)
N/A
STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:
Staff is requesting that City Council review and approve the City’s Swap Policy, which should be done on an annual basis.
AGENDA
REPORT
January 11, 2022
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
(This will appear on the agenda)
REVIEW the Swap Policy for Fiscal Year 2021-2022; and
ADOPT the re solution approving said policy – Finance
Department (Belinda Brown 510-620-6740).
DISCUSSION:
Municipal governments provide a wide range of services that have an impact on public safety and quality of lif e for community members. Prudent use of resources helps determine how effectively these services are provided on an ongoing basis. In addition to managing revenues and expenditures, it is also the municipal finance official's responsibility to focus on management practices that will enable the City to better control its financial resources on a continuing basis.
Swap Policy
Interest rate swap agreements have become recognized and establishe d financial tools by municipal issuers throughout the nation. The use of these products has become such a regular tool that the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) has adopted an official position, viewing swap policies governing the use and management of such swaps as a "Recommended Practice".
Since the scope of interest rate swaps is beyond that of the traditional fixed rate long term bonds covered by the Debt Policy, it is important for the City to maintain a policy that will provide guidance in selecting, implementing, and administering all swap s related to City bond issues. Standard & Poor's Rating Agency assigns Debt Derivative Profile (DDP) scores to individual swap transactions, with the lowest score of "1" equating to no risk and highest score of "4" meaning "high risk". By adhering to the guidelines established in its Swap Policy, the City has successfully achieved a DDP score of "1.5" (low risk) on all of its swap transactions.
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
Attachment 1 - Resolution Adopting Fiscal Year 2021-22 Swap Policy Attachment 2 - Fiscal Year 2021-22 Swap Policy
Reso No.____
RESOLUTION NO. ____
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND,
CALIFORNIA , ADOPTING THE SWAP POLICY FOR FISCAL YEAR 202 1-2022
WHEREAS, the City of Richmond (the "City") is a charter city that operates under the Council-Manager form of government for the purposes of providing a full range of municipal services including police and fire protection; construction and maintenance of highways, streets and infrastructure; library services; storm water and municipal sewer systems; a wastewater treatment facility; and the administration of recreational activities and cultural events; and
WHEREAS, the City also operates the Richmond Memorial Convention Center and the Port of Richmond; and
WHEREAS, the City has established and maintains a well-managed debt program pursuant to a comprehensive debt policy that sets forth the parameters for issuing debt and managing the debt portfolio, including post-issuance compliance; and
WHEREAS, in the credit rating process, the rating agencies believe it is appropriate to place significant value on debt policies that have been adopted by cities; and
WHEREAS, the City established a Debt Policy that requires annual commitments relating to the General Fund debt cannot exceed ten percent (10%) of annual General Fund revenues; and
WHEREAS, the City has established interest rate swap agreements that are recognized as financial tools by municipal issuers throughout the nation and the use of swap agreements has become a regular tool whereby the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) has adopted an official position, viewing swap policies as a governing use and management of such swaps as a "Recommended Practice"; and
WHEREAS, the City has established that the scope of interest rate swaps is beyond that of the traditional fixed rate long-term bonds covered by the Debt Policy and that it is important for the City to maintain a policy that will provide guidance in selecting, implementing, and administering all swaps related to City bond issues; and
WHEREAS, the City established a Swap Policy whereby Standard & Poor's (S&P) Rating Agency assigns a Debt Derivative Profile (DDP) in which the City has achieved a DDP score of"l.5" (low risk) on all of its swap transactions; and
WHEREAS, the City has determined that an appropriate level of the General Fund reserves is a policy decision; and
Reso No.____
WHEREAS, the GFOA recommends that reserve levels be directly related to the degree of uncertainty the local government faces; and
WHEREAS, the adoption of the financial policies listed in this document is consistent with "best practices" and the City's fiduciary oversight of the Fiscal Policies of FY2021-22.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby adopts the Swap Policy for the City of Richmond that is attached hereto as Exhibit A.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Reso No.____
I certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted by the Council of the City of Richmond at a regular meeting thereof held _______________, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTENTIONS:
ABSENT:
CLERK OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND
(SEAL)
Approved:
Mayor
Approved as to form:
City Attorney
State of California }
County of Contra Costa : ss.
City of Richmond }
I certify that the foregoing is a true copy of Resolution No._____, finally passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Richmond at a regular meeting held on ____________.
Swap Policy of the City of Richmond
1 Interest Rate Swap Policy of the City of Richmond
Established by the Finance Department
Fiscal Year 2021-22
Scope and Authority
This Interest Rate Swap Policy (the Policy), established by and for the Finance Department, is designed to provide procedural direction to the City of Richmond Finance Department, the Richmond Housing Authority, the Richmond Community Redevelopment Agency, the Richmond Joint Powers Finance Authority and the City itself regarding the utilization, execution, and management of interest rate swaps and related instruments (collectively, "interest rate swaps'). While adherence to this Policy is required in applicable circumstances, it is recognized that changes in the capital markets, agency programs, and other unforeseen circumstances may from time to time produce situations that are not covered by this Policy, and will require modifications or exceptions to achieve policy goals. In these cases, management flexibility is appropriate. Periodically, but at least annually, the City will review the Policy and shall make modifications as appropriate due to changes in the business environments or market conditions.
The City of Richmond is authorized under California Government Code Section 5922 to enter into interest rate swaps to reduce the amount and duration of rate, spread, or similar risk when used in combination with the issuance of bonds.
This Policy and any subsequent amendments hereto shall be on file with Finance Department, maintained on the City's website, with copies delivered to the City Clerk, the City Council and the Chair of the Finance Committee of the City Council.
Mission of the Finance Department Treasury Division
The Finance Department shall issue and manage short and long-term financings (bonds, TRANs, etc), both for capital improvement and operating needs, by balancing market and credit risk with satisfactory economic benefits and proper fiscal controls.
I. Interest Rate Swap Objectives
• Reduce or manage exposure to changes in interest rates on a particular financial transaction or in the context of the management of interest rate risk derived from the City's overall asset/liability balance consistent with prudent debt and risk guidelines.
• Result in a lower net cost of borrowing with respect to the City's debt or achieve a higher net rate of return on investments made in connection with, or incidental to the issuance, or carrying of the City's debt obligations or other City investments. • Manage variable interest rate exposure consistent with prudent debt practices.
Swap Policy of the City of Richmond
2 • Enhance investment returns within prudent risk guidelines. • Manage exposure to changing market conditions in advance of anticipated bond issues (through the use of anticipatory hedging instruments). • Achieve more flexibility in meeting overall financial objectives than can be achieved in conventional markets.
II. Permitted Instruments
The City may utilize the following financial products on a current, or forward basis, after identifying the objectives to be realized and assessing the attendant risks.
• Interest rate swaps, including (i) pay fixed/receive floating swaps (fixed rate swaps), (ii) receive floating/pay fixed swaps (floating rate swaps) and (iii) pay floating/receive floating swaps (basis swaps). Swaps may include option features, such as for the extension, cancellation, or index conversion of the swap. • Interest rate caps, floors, and collars.
• Stand-alone options to enter into swaps (swaptions) on a particular date, series of dates, or during a particular period of time in the future.
III. Conditions for the Use of Interest Rate Swaps
Each Agreement and Transaction will be entered into not for purpose of speculation, but solely in connection with the financing activities of the City.
A. General Usage Interest rate swaps may be used to lock-in a fixed rate or, alternatively, to create additional variable rate exposure. Interest rate swaps may be used to produce interest rate savings, limit or hedge variable rate payments, alter the pattern of debt service payments, or for asset/liability matching purposes.
B. Liquidity Considerations The impact on the cost and availability of letters of credit and liquidity support for both new and existing variable rate programs shall be considered when evaluating the issuance of new variable rate bonds which are to be swapped to a fixed rate liquidity support. Due to the limited supply of letter of credit or liquidity facility support in connection with variable rate bonds, higher overall costs may result.
C. Call Option Value Considerations When considering the relative advantage of a fixed rate swap to fixed rate bonds, the value of the call option that would typically be purchased for the fixed rate bonds shall be compared to the incremental present value of the savings from using a swap. This shall be done to ensure the benefit from use of the swap will provide sufficient compensation to offset the expected value of any foregone future refunding savings.
Swap Poficy of the City of Richmond
3 IV. Interest Rate Swap Features
A. Interest Rate Swap Agreement Each interest rate swap executed by the City shall contain terms and conditions as set forth in an International Swaps and Derivatives Association, Inc. (ISDA) Master Agreement, including any Schedules to the Master Agreement, Confirmations and Credit Support Annexes, or other comparable agreement widely used by recognized derivatives dealers. The swap agreements between the City and each qualified swap Counterparty shall include payment, term, security, collateral, default, remedy, termination, and other terms, conditions and provisions as the Finance Director deems necessary or desirable.
The City may use law firms and financial advisory firm(s) with recognized experience in derivatives transactions to assist in preparation of the swap documents.
B. Interest Rate Swap Counterparties The City will do business only with qualified swap counterparties. Qualified counterparties are institutions whose long-term credit rating or whose obligations are guaranteed by a financial institution whose long term credit rating are at the time the swap is entered into at least as high as "A" or "A2" or equivalent and that have a demonstrated record of successfully executing swap transactions. The City will structure interest rate swap agreements to protect itself from credit deterioration of counterparties, including the use of ratings-based termination events, credit support annexes or other forms of credit enhancement.
Such protection shall include any terms and conditions which the City deems necessary or appropriate to protect its interests.
C. Term and Notional Amount The City shall determine the appropriate term and size for an interest rate swap agreement on a case-by-case basis. In connection with the issuance or carrying of bonds, the outstanding notional amount of a swap agreement should relate to the amortization of the related existing or anticipated debt of the City. While entering into a swap with a term less than the associated bonds may be appropriate, if the intent is to "rollover" the swap, the City will be subject to the uncertainties of entering into a new swap at then prevailing market conditions.
D. Collateral Requirements Terms imposing collateral requirements based on credit ratings of the counterparty, requiring collateralization or other forms of credit enhancements to secure any or all swap payment obligations may be included as part of any swap agreement. The collateral requirements will be determined in consultation with counsel and the financial advisor and/or swap advisor, and may require the counterparty to post securities, surety bonds, letters of credit or other credit enhancement if the highest credit rating of the counterparty, its parent, or guarantor is or falls below a rating of "AA-" or "Aa3". Additional collateral for further decreases in credit ratings of each counterparty shall be posted in accordance with the provisions contained in the CSA or other collateral support agreement of the Agreement.
Swap Policy of the City of Richmond
4 Threshold collateral amounts shall be determined on a case-by-case basis.
Reasonable threshold limits will be established for the initial deposit and for increments of collateral posting thereafter. Collateral shall be deposited with a third party trustee or as mutually agreed upon between the City and the counterparty. A list of acceptable securities that may be posted as collateral and the valuation of such collateral will be determined and mutually agreed upon during negotiation of the swap agreement with each swap counterparty. The market value of the collateral shall be determined on a monthly basis, or more frequently if the City determines it is in its best interest given the specific nature of the swap(s) and/or collateral security.
E. Security and Source of Repayment Generally, the same security and source of repayment (pledged revenues) will secure the interest rate swaps as is used to secure the bonds that are hedged or carried by the swap, if any. The costs and benefits of subordinating the payments under the swap and/or termination payment shall be considered.
F. Cancellation Provisions The benefit of purchasing the right to cancel the interest rate swap at no cost (par call) after a specified period of time, generally 5 to 10 years shall be evaluated. If the cancellation option is cost efficient relative to the cost of obtaining a bond call option for a similar starting period, it will be purchased. A par call termination provision mitigates some risks of the swap, by allowing a no-cost termination any time after the exercise date.
G. Prohibited Interest Rate Swap Features The City will not use interest rate swaps that (i) are speculative or create extraordinary leverage or risk, (ii) lack adequate liquidity to terminate without incurring a significant bid/ask spread, (iii) provide insufficient price transparency to allow reasonable valuation, or (iv)are used as investments.
V. Evaluation of Proposed Transactions
The City's staff shall undertake an evaluation of any proposed transaction. This will include, but not be limited to, consideration of the following:
• Assessment of all inherent risks of the transaction including, but not limited to those outlined below (see Interest Rate Swap Risks)
• Alternative financing options and a comprehensive evaluation of the potential risks and expected benefits of the interest rate swap relative to such other options.
Swap Policy of the City of Richmond
5 • Security and source of payments, for both scheduled and termination payments, and the integration of the swap into the City's debt program. • Procurement process and the suitability of the contemplated counterparties to the swap, taking into account any existing exposure to such counterparties. • Impact on City's credit and liquidity profile and how other financial arrangements, existing or expected, may be impacted by the swap. • Analysis of impact on the City's net variable rate interest exposure from the contemplated transaction and any potential budgetary impact. • Cost and availability of on-going resources for the effective operations and risk management of the swap.
• Tax, accounting, or other compliance requirements relative to other options. • If the transaction includes option components, analysis of circumstances under which the option will likely, or not likely, be exercised and the consequences of each outcome.
• Volatility Exposure (as outlined herein) for each counterparty for all existing and any proposed transactions.
VI. Interest Rate Swap Risks
Before proceeding with a swap transaction, the City must reasonably conclude that the expected benefits of the transaction outweigh the expected risks, that the risks are within acceptable levels, and that the contemplated transaction does not impose risks that threaten the City's ability to perform its core functions. The transaction must be reasonable in relation to the City's overall financial condition and capitalization.
The City shall, with its advisors and legal counsel, structure swap transactions with terms and provisions that will help mitigate such risks to the extent practicable and cost-effective.
The City shall have a plan for the on-going monitoring and risk management of swap transactions.
A. Counterparty Risk The failure of the counterparty to make required payments or otherwise comply with the terms of the swap agreement. If the swap is terminated prior to its scheduled final cash flow date and the City's swap position has increased in value, the City will be owed a termination amount and therefore will have credit exposure to its counterparty for collection of any such amount.
1. Assessment The City will monitor counterparty exposure levels, ratings thresholds, and collateralization requirements.
B. Termination Risk The risk that an interest rate swap agreement must be terminated prior to its stated final cash flow date, and that the City cannot obtain a replacement transaction with substantially similar term, including because of deterioration of the City's own credit. In such a circumstance, the City could owe, or be owed, a termination payment.
Swap Policy of the City of Richmond
6 1. Assessment The City will compute, at least annually, the termination exposure for all existing and proposed swaps at market value and under an expected worse-case scenario. A contingency plan will be annually updated specifying how to finance a termination payment and/or replace the hedge.
C. Collateral Posting Risk The risk that the City will be required to secure its payment obligations under the swap. Posted collateral would not be available for the City's expenditure or reserve balance needs, potentially adversely impacting credit ratings and overall liquidity and budgetary efforts.
1. Assessment The City will review, on a case by case basis, the possible risk associated with posting collateral, taking into consideration any earnings potential on posted collateral.
D. Basis Risk The risk of a mismatch between actual variable rate debt service and variable rate indices used to determine swap payments.
1. Assessment On an annual basis the City will review historical trading differentials between the variable rate bonds and the indices.
E. Tax Risk The risk created by potential tax events that could affect sufficiency of swap payments.
1. Assessment The City will review all tax events in proposed swap agreements and evaluate the impact of potential changes in tax law on LIBOR indexed swaps.
F. Rollover Risk The risk of a mismatch of the maturity of the swap and the maturity of the underlying bonds.
1. Assessment The City will determine, in accordance with its Debt Policy, the capacity to issue variable rate bonds that may be outstanding after the maturity of a fixed rate swap.
G. Liquidity Risk In connection with a swap strategy which includes issuance of floating rate bonds that, absent the swap strategy would have been issued as fixed rate bonds, the risk that the City cannot secure a cost-effective renewal of a letter or line of credit or suffers a failed auction or remarketing with respect to the floating- rate bonds.
1. Assessment The City will evaluate the expected availability of liquidity support for hedged (swapped) and non-swapped variable rate debt.
H. Credit Risk The risk of an event occurring that modifies the credit quality or credit rating of the issuer of its counterparty.
Swap Policy of the City of Richmond
7 1. Assessment The City will monitor the ratings of counterparties, insurers, and guarantors.
VII. Counterparty Credit Exposure
The City will manage its counterparty credit exposure (i.e., amounts which would become due to the City if the swaps with a particular counterparty were to terminate early pursuant to a default or other similar event) through diversification and active trade management. In order to manage the City's exposure, the City shall annually calculate and review the current market evaluation of all outstanding swaps, subtotaled by counterparty and by security and source of payment (as applicable). In addition, for each counterparty, the City will review the then current long-term credit ratings and the ratings outlook, including the date of the last rating update. The calculation of termination exposure per counterparty will be on a net basis by taking into consideration multiple transactions, some of which may offset the overall exposure to the City.
In addition, the City shall annually estimate the interest rate volatility risk ("Volatility Exposure") of the City's swap portfolio. The purpose of the Volatility Exposure is to measure what impact a significant change in interest rates would have on the City's swap portfolio. Volatility Exposure will be calculated assuming (i) an upward shift of 150 basis points in the yield curve and (ii) a downward shift of 150 basis points in the yield curve.
The assumed shift will be reviewed periodically to ensure that they remain appropriate.
Example of Counterparty Credit Exposure Information (Illustration Purposes Only)
Counterparty
S&P (Date)
Moody's (Date)
Outlook
Market Value of
Transactions
Volatility Exposures
Market Value
Provider A
A+ (1/1/04)
A2 (1/1/05)
Stable
Negative
$3 million
VolExpup $4 million
VolExpDown -$1
million
A. Exposure Review of Existing Swaps While collateralization reduces credit risk, collateralization introduces other risks, principally legal and operational. In order to manage these other risks, the City shall limit the amount of exposure to any one counterparty, regardless of the counterparty credit ratings and threshold levels. Credit exposure may be reduced, for example, through a swap termination, in whole or in part, or a restructuring of the swap to an on-market rate with a smaller notional amount accompanied by a cash payment to the City, which could then be used to redeem underlying debt obligations. These counterparty credit risk guidelines will not mandate or otherwise force automatic termination by the City or the counterparty.
8 B. Exposure Review of Proposed Swaps Prior to entering into a new swap transaction, the City, as part of its evaluation of the proposed transaction, will compute the Volatility Exposure by treating the proposed swap transaction as an outstanding swap. Such provisions will act only as guidelines in making a determination as to whether or not a proposed transaction should be executed given certain levels of existing and projected net termination exposure to a specific counterparty. These guidelines are not intended to require retroactively additional collateral posting for existing transactions.
VIII. Ongoing Risk Management and Reporting Requirements
A. Active Management The City will seek to maximize the benefits and minimize the risks it carries by actively managing its interest rate swap program. This will entail monitoring the adequacy of posted collateral, compliance with accounting requirements, and periodic monitoring of market conditions for emergent opportunities and risks. Active management may require modifications of existing positions including, for example:
• Early Termination;
• Shortening or lengthening the term;
• Sale or purchase of options;
• Basis conversion
B. On-going Reporting A report providing the status of all interest rate swap agreements entered into by the City will be prepared no less frequently than annually and shall include the following:
• A description of all outstanding interest rate swap agreements, including project and bonds series, type of swap, rates paid and received by the City, total notional amount, average life of each swap agreement, and remaining term of each swap agreement.
• Highlights of all material changes to swap agreements or new swap agreements entered into by the City since the immediately preceding report. • Market value of each of the City's interest rate swap agreements. • The credit rating of each swap counterparty and credit enhancer insuring swap payments, if any.
• Listing of any credit enhancement, liquidity facility or reserves and accounting of all costs and expenses associated with the credit enhancement, liquidity facility or reserves.
• The market value for each transaction and the aggregate for each counterparty.
January 11, 2022
Human Resources
DATE: January 11, 2022
TO: Mayor Butt and Members of the City Council
FROM:
(List all relevant/responsive
staff persons)
Anil Comelo, Interim Deputy City Manager
Subject:
(This will appear on the
agenda)
Adopt resolution amending the salary schedule
FINANCIAL IMPACT: The annual cost of salary and benefits for the proposed positions is $983,300.40 and was part of the City
Council-approved Reimagining Public Safety Task
Force’s program proposals. The anticipated cost for the last quarter of the current fiscal year is $245,825.10 and is included in the approved fiscal year 2021-2022 budget.
The positions are expected to be filled by May 2022.
(ONS Salary Line Items 01211013-400001, 01211013-
400003, 01211013-400322-RI210)
PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:
(List all dates items were
heard or council action took
place)
June 1, 2021 - INCORPORATE $5.58 million into the
Fiscal Year 2021-2022 budget to fund much needed
programs; and DIRECT staff to continue working with the Reimagining Public Safety Community Task Force on
various program options and more detailed
implementation plans, returning to the City Council at a future date with any recommendations for program or
funding modifications - City Manager's Office (Laura
Snideman 620-6512).
AGENDA
REPORT
January 11, 2022
STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:
The City Council’s authorization is required to amend the City’s authorized staffing (i.e., position control) and establish salary ranges to include new classifications and delete an obsolete classification.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
(This will appear on the
agenda)
ADOPT a resolution amending the City’s Salary
Schedule to reflect the new and deleted classifications; AMEND position control to add one (1) Deputy Director of Community Services – Neighborhood Safety, two (2)
Field Coordinators, one (1) Accounting Assistant, one (1) Administrative Aide, and five (5) Neighborhood Change
Agents to increase the total amount to eleven (11)
Neighborhood Change Agents; and APPROVE allocation
of funds for the wages and salaries for these
classifications and associated compensation – Human
Resources (Anil Comelo/Sharrone Taylor 510-620-6600).
DISCUSSION:
The City Manager and Director of Library and Community Services requested the Human Resources Department to collaborate with staff to create a plan to reorganize the Office of Neighborhood Safety division to ensure seamless delivery of expanded services.
The reorganization of the Office of Neighborhood Safety department will increase staffing by ten (10) employees. Additionally, the reorganization will establish a Deputy Director of Community Services – Neighborhood Safety, which is consistent with the other Community Services divisions, and will eliminate the Office of Neighborhood Safety Director classification. In addition, the Field Coordinator classification will be created to reclassify the existing Recreation Coordinator, whose current job title and listed duties are not commensurate with the role and responsibility of this position. An additional Field Coordinator position will be added to oversee six (6) additional Neighborhood Change Agents. Additionally, the division’s administrative staff will be augmented to include an Accounting Assistant and Administrative Aide.
The Personnel Board approved the classification of Field Coordinator on December 16, 2021, and amended the Classification Plan. The approved classification and actions are listed below:
January 11, 2022
Department Classification Action
Office of
Neighborhood Safety
Field Coordinator Reclassification for incumbent
performing duties outside of the
current class of Recreation
Coordinator.
The Deputy Director of Community Services - Neighborhood Safety classification is Exempt and not part of t he classified service and therefore does not require Personnel Board approval.
Upon approval of the Deputy Director of Community Services – Neighborhood Safety salary and one (1) allocation, and the addition of two (2) Field Coordinators, one (1) Accounting Assistant, one (1) Administrative Aide, and amendment of five (5) Neighborhood Change Agents to eleven (11) Neighborhood Change Agents, current incumbents will be retitled/reclassified, existing employment lists will be certified to the department, and/or open/promotional recruitments will be conducted to fill the vacancies by Spring 2022.
The salary and benefits for the classifications are in the current 2021-2022 budget.
Recommendation from Personnel Board
The Personnel Board considered the staf f’s recommendation to create the Office of Neighborhood Safety Field Coordinator classification specification and approved the classification for addition to the City’s Classification Plan.
CONCLUSION:
The Deputy Director of Community Services – Neighborhood Safety is represented by the Exempt Employees Bargaining Unit, IFPTE Local 21. The Field Coordinator classification is represented by the General Employees Bargaining Unit, SEIU Local 1021. The respective Unions concur with establishing these classifications and agree to this action.
Staff recommends the amendment of the salary schedule to include the wages and salaries for these classifications and associated compensation.
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
Attachment 1 - Resolution Amending the Salary Schedule
Attachment 2 - Proposed Organizational Chart
RESOLUTION NO. _____
RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA
AMENDING THE SALARY SCHEDULE
WHEREAS, the Department of Human Resources maintains the classification and salary schedule on behalf of the City; and
WHEREAS, the City wishes to amend the salary schedule and such amendments are supported by the City Manager.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that effective January 11, 2022 the Salary Schedule is hereby revised as follows and the Director of Human Resources shall publicly post the revised Salary Schedule.
Job Classification Range Step 1,
or Min.
Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5,
or Max.
FLSA Unit
NEW Office of Neighborhood Safety
Field Coordinator
52D $6,182 $6,478 $6,804 $7,134 $7,483 Non -
Exempt
General
NEW Deputy Director of Community
Services – Neighborhood Safety
3.1 $9,024 $14,364 Exempt Executive
DELETE Neighborhood Safety Director 3.1 $9,024 $14,363 Exempt Executive -----------
I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted by the Council of the City of Richmond at a regular meeting thereof held by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTENTIONS:
ABSENT:
_____________________________
CLERK OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND
(SEAL)
Approved:
____________________
Mayor
Approved as to form:
____________________
City Attorney
Office of Neighborhood Safety
Proposed Organizational Chart
FTE = 18 /Exempt = 6-12
Deputy Director of
Community Services –
Neighborhood Safety
(1)
Project Coordinator
(1)
Neighborhood Change
Agent (5)
Peacekeepers /Exempt
(6-12)
Program Manager
(1)
Accounting Assistant
(1)
Neighborhood Change
Agent (6)
N
Administrative Aide
(1)
ONS Field
Coordinator
(1)
ONS Field
Coordinator
(1)
Police Department
DATE: January 11, 2022
TO: Mayor Butt and Members of the City Council
FROM:
(List all relevant/responsive staff
persons)
Louie Tirona, Acting Chief
John Lopez, Lieutenant
Subject:
(This will appear on the agenda)
Justice Assistance Grant-funded Purchase Approval
FINANCIAL IMPACT: Funding is provided by the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program in the Police
Department’s approved FY21/22 budget (account strings
10691021-400603-19G05 and 10691021-400603-
19G06).
PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:
(List all dates items were heard or
council action took place)
07/28/21 – Accepted a resolution (No. 101 -21) to
appropriate grant funding.
STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:
Ballistic safety equipment, including bullet proof vests and shields, do not have an infinite life. In order to
provide the best protection for our police officers, ballistic vests should be purchased before the expiration date.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
(This will appear on the agenda)
APPROVE a purchase from TYR TACTICAL for Ballistic
Plate Carriers and Level III+ Ballistic Plates (a.k.a. bullet proof vests) for the Police Department’s SWAT Team
using funds provided by the Police department’s Justice Assistance Grant program, in an amount not to exceed
$44,159.24 – Police Department (Louie Tirona 510-621-
1802).
AGENDA
REPORT
DISCUSSION:
The Police Department strives to maintain the industry standard for tactical safety equipment utilized by the SWAT Team in order to reduce injury, or death, to officers.
The Police Department issued a request for quotes for ballistic plate carriers and Level III+ ballistic plates from tactical safety equipment providers. Three prospective vendors were contacted and the three perspective vendors submitted purchase quotations.
1. TYR Tactical $44,159.24
2. Curtis Blue Line (Safariland) $48,860.10
3. First Spear $48,974.84
The vendor, TYR Tactical, was determined to be the lowest submitted purchase quotation and fully capable of undertaking the scope of the outlined request for approval of purchase.
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
Attachment 1 – SWAT Ballistic Vest Quotes
Attachment 2 - JAG 2019 CCC Budget Narrative
Attachment 3 - Resolution JAG 2019
City of Richmond – Police Department
FY 2019 JAG Application
Page | 1 Program Narrative
Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Regular Grant 2019
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Richmond Program Narrative
Contra Costa County is identified as a disparate jurisdiction. As such, one application is submitted for all eligible agencies within the county. The total allocation for our jurisdiction is $ 68,840 By M.O.U., agencies have agreed to utilize the funding for one project for each jurisdiction, plus an additional project identifying the expenditures for the administrative funds.
Program – City of Richmond
2019 JAG Project Identifier: Police Equipment-General
The City of Richmond is projected to have a budget deficit and is trying to close the shortfall through budget reductions. The Richmond Police Department is being asked to reduce its budget and the most severe cuts will be imposed on the funds to purchase policing equipment. As a result, the City of Richmond/Richmond Police Department is requesting grant funds to offset this shortage.
The City of Richmond/Richmond Police Department is applying for funds from the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance (JAG) program FY2019 Local Solicitation in order to purchase police equipment to be used by sworn employees.
Proposed Program Activities
Safety Equipment Purchases: Ballistic Body Worn Armor, Carrier Vests; Ballistic Shields, and Mobile Computers (Getac v110) and the associated hardware.
The purchase of this equipment will increase the safety of the officers while performing their duties, which is the top priority of the Department. The ballistic shields will be placed in the Sergeants vehicles for ease of access, making them immediately available in the field when the need arises. The Department currently has ballistic shields that are assigned to SWAT, by placing these additional shields in the Sergeants vehicles it will allow for broader use of the devices in a high-risk situations.
The pr ogram would utilize JAG funds to purchase Mobile Data Computers (Getac v110) and associated hardware to be placed in police patrol vehicles The Patrol and Communications Division use MDCs to access the Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD), Records Management System
City of Richmond – Police Department
FY 2019 JAG Application
Page | 2 Program Narrative
(RMS), CLETS, NCIC and ARIES to receive current dri ver license information, criminal history information and the result of wanted checks regarding subjects and vehicles.
Successful public safety operations necessitate constant preparedness and situational awareness. Both are contingent on the availability and proper utilization of real-time data during dispatch, incident respo nse, and investigations requiring a certain level of durability, connectivity, and true mobility.
The anticipated outcome of this program will be the procurement of said equipment, which will improve the Police Department’s ability to maintain public safety as well as the safety of our officers.
Grant Program Accountability Measures:
The City of Richmond – Police Department will report on the relevant General Information, Activity-Program Selection, Program Module and semi -annual Goals and Objectives in accordance with the applicable JAG Accountability Measures in the BJA Performance Measurement Tool (PMT).
Equipment TBD: $68,840
5% Admin Fee $ 3,442
3% NIBRE $ 2,065
Total JAG Fund Expenditures: $63,333
1 RESOLUTION NO. ________
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND AUTHORIZING THE ACCEPTANCE OF $68,840 AWARDED TO THE CITY THROUGH THE 2019 EDWARD BYRNE MEMORIAL JUSTICE ASSISTANCE
GRANT (JAG) PROGRAM TO SUPPLEMENT LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES
WHEREAS, the Federal government has made funds available under the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Program through the Office of Justice Programs (OJP) Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) for law enforcement purposes; and
WHEREAS, the County of Contra Costa County has been designated as a disparate jurisdiction; and
WHEREAS, the Contra Costa County Office of the Sheriff will serve as the applicant FISCAL AGENT and GRANTEE for the joint funds awarded; and
WHEREAS, under the allocation the City of Richmond is identified as a SUBGRANTEE and entitled to a maximum of $68,840 for law enforcement safety equipment purposes; and
WHEREAS, the State of California requires the City Council hold a public meeting to consider the Police Chief’s request for funding; and
WHEREAS, the Richmond Police Chief has submitted to the City Council a request that funds, which the City will receive under the allocations, be used for safety equipment costs.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Richmond that:
1. The City of Richmond shall accept the allocation of $68,840 from the Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Program.
2. The funds which the City will receive are hereby appropriated towards safety equipment costs.
3. The City Manager, or his designee, shall establish a Fund Organization/Object Code in the Munis System for the deposit of the funds which have been allocated to the City of Richmond from the 2019 JAG Grant Program.
4. The Finance Director of the City of Richmond shall submit the necessary reports and summaries which are required by State law.
2 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Council of the City of Richmond
*****************************
(This section to be completed by Clerk’s Office)
I certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Richmond at a _________ meeting held on _____________ by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTENTIONS:
ABSENT:
________________________________________
Clerk of the City of Richmond
(SEAL)
Approved:
_______________________________
Mayor
Approved as to form:
_______________________________
City Attorney
3 City of Richmond, California
Richmond Police Department
Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant
For 2019
GRANT SPEND PLAN
April 28, 2021
Amount allocated to the City of Richmond $68,840
Proposed Spending Plan:
To augment safety equipment purchase
Submitted By:
January 11, 2022
Public Works
DATE: January 11, 2022
TO: Mayor Butt and Members of the City Council
FROM:
(List all relevant/responsive staff
persons)
Joe Leach, P.E. Public Works Director
Subject:
(This will appear on the agenda)
Veolia’s October 2021 Monthly Operating Report
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no financial impact resulting from this recommendation.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:
(List all dates items were heard or
council action took place)
None
STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:
Veolia submitted its October 2021, Monthly Operating
Report
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
(This will appear on the agenda)
RECEIVE the Veolia Monthly Operating Report for the
month of October 2021 – Public Works Department (Joe
Leach 510-620-5478/Mary Phelps 510-621-1269).
AGENDA
REPORT
January 11, 2022
DISCUSSION:
At the Mayor’s direction, City staff has resumed reporting to the City Council Veolia’s Monthly Operating Report (MOR) as a regular agenda item. Please note that City staff has not accepted the accuracy of certain information presented in the MOR and cautions Council against relying on its accuracy without staff verification. Per the Mayor’s request, all Veolia Monthly Operating Reports are posted to the City’s website at:
http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/2326/Veolia-Services
The attached MOR details activities in the Richmond Municipal Sewer District for the month of October 2021, including information regarding: Baykeeper settlement matters, sewer rehabilitation projects, capacity-related sewer projects, wastewater treatment plant projects, storm water projects, collection system operations and maintenance matters, wastewater treatment plant operations, pump station facilities, task a uthorizations, wastewater treatment plant performance, and permit violations such as sanitary sewer overflows (SSOs).
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
Attachment 1 – Veolia’s October 2021, Monthly Operating Report
November 30, 2021
(Via electronic mail)
To:
City of Richmond
Joe Leach, P.E.
Director of Public Works
450 Civic Center Plaza
City of Richmond, CA 94804
Subject: October - 2021 Monthly Operations Report
From:
Thomas Bolyen, CPM
Assistant Project Manager, Veolia-Richmond
Municipal Water
VEOLIA NORTH AMERICA
601 Canal Boulevard, Richmond, CA 94804
Dear Mr. Leach,
The following Monthly Operations Report is being submitted pursuant to Section 5.11 o f the 2002 CITY OF RICHMOND
WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS, OPERATIONS, MAINTENANCE AND
MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA AND VEOLIA WATER WEST OPERATING SERVICES, INC.
I. Summary of work activities during the reporting month of October 2021 a. Safety
i. Monthly safety training was accomplished for all personnel ii. Covid-19 restrictions require mask indoors for all employees and visitors b. Capital Projects Management
i. Baykeeper Settlement Agreement Projects
1. Capacity-related sewer projects
a. First Street Design
i. V. W. Housen & Associates delivered its 100% design drawings of the First Street sewer relief in August. Veolia transmitted copies of the 100% submittal to the City for review on 8/19/20.
ii. Pursuant to City direction, two pipe segments have been identified as problematic due to operational concerns that they could contribute to SSOs (First and Bissell); these segments were separated out as a separate project in August 2020. The First and Bissell Project
Monthly Operations Report: October -2021
2 construction was completed in January 2021. Record As-Built Drawings for 1st & Bissell were transmitted to the City in September. iii. The First Street Relief Sewer and Pipeline Rehabilitation project Pre-bid meeting was conducted on December 4, 2020. Approximately 24 Contractors, subcontractors and suppliers attended the meeting.
1. The City awarded this project to the low bid contractor, D’Arcy & Harty Construction, Inc. on 2/16/21.
2. After the project was bid, Force Majeure conditions declaring shortage of C-900 PVC pipe was submitted as Change Order 1, which was approved by the City on May 24th.
3. Notification to residents and sewer line replacement commenced in July 2021.
4. NTP effective date June 14, 2021. Work commenced in Field on July 14, 2021.
5. TA for Change Order #2 to remove and replace a manhole approved by the City and returned 8/4/21.
6. TAs for Change Order #3 (differing site conditions, concrete encasement, added manhole) and Change Order #4 (replace entire line segment in lieu of point repair, added manhole) were submitted to the City 9/27/21.
7. Sewer main replacement continues utilizing open trench and pipe bursting methods. The majority of 8” and 10” lines have been installed.
8. In addition to Point Repairs and Pipe Bursting, the 12” and 18 “ diameter Pipe Material was delivered and installed during September.
9. During October alternative solutions were explored for (5) locations where actual site conditions differed from what was anticipated. Crews will re-mobilize in the near future to complete the sewer line work prior to final pavement restoration. b. Marina Bay Parkway Force Main Extension Project (aka Moody Underpass) i. V.W. Housen completed design and delivered 100% design documents to Veolia for review on 2/22/21.
ii. Four (4) bids were received on 4/23/21 ranging from $357,200 to $589,000. Veolia has recommended the City award the contract to the low bidder, W.R. Forde. A TA was sent to the City on May 6, 2021. The Resolution for this project was approved at the June 15, 2021 City Council Meeting.
iii. Pre-Construction conference was held Tuesday August 10, 2021. iv. Traffic Control Plan approved. Encroachment permit received 8/27/2021.
Monthly Operations Report: October -2021
3 v. W.R. Forde will install the new Force Main via directional drilling in lieu of open trench.
vi. Jacqueline Majors Associates started Public Outreach and vii. The Contractor started exploratory potholing 9/15/2021. On 9/22/21 the Contractor generated RFI #1 seeking resolution to existing utility conflicts in the route of the new force main.
viii. Potholing and further exploration were conducted to find a viable route. ix. On October 27th & 28th a Borehole was directionally drilled under Marina Bay Parkway and 180 lineal feet of new fused 12” HDPE Force Main sewer line pulled into place.
x. On Friday October 29th flows were bypassed from the Marina Bay Pump Station to facilitate Final Connection of the new force main into the Collection System. The tie-in was successfully completed and service put back into operation the same day.
c. 2021 Grade 5 RAA Line Replacement Project
i. Pre-Bid conference held Thursday July 8, 2021
ii. Bids received Thursday August 5, 2021
iii. Veolia has recommended the City award the contract to the low bidder W.R. Forde: $317,000.00. A TA was sent to the City. This project was on the September 28, 2021 Regular Agenda and pushed to the October 5, 2021 Agenda for Action by City Council. Approved by Council on 10/5/2021.
iv. Pre-Construction Conference scheduled for 11/23/2021. f. High Priority Sewer Line Replacement Project
i. Pre-Bid conference held Thursday July 8, 2021
ii. Bids received Thursday August 5, 2021
iii. Veolia has recommended the City award the contract to the low bidder D’Arcy & Harty $680,000.00. A TA was sent to the City. This project was on the September 28, 2021 Regular Agenda and pushed to the October 5, 2021 Agenda for Action by City Council.
Approved by City Council on 11/05/2021.
Pre-Construction Conference held October 13, 2021.
ii. Wastewater Treatment Plant Projects
1. The Grit/Screening and Aeration Upgrade Projects (as part of the Critical Improvements High Priority Project) was advertised for bidding on PlanetBids on September 15, 2020. a. Review and response to RFIs and Submittals underway. Contractor started site clearing work on 5/10/2021. Contractor began site mobilization on 5/11/21 in advance of temporary utilities for construction trailers, planned for 5/12/21-5/14/21.
Monthly Operations Report: October -2021
4 b. Shimmick continues submitting contract required documentation through EADOC.
c. Veolia, Carollo and Shimmick agreed to begin weekly site meetings to review construction progress and discuss potential u/g conflicts to facilitate work in progress. Veolia began weekly reporting to the City on Changed Conditions Extra Work on the project on 6-28-21. d. Shimmick continues to work on the PS Tank column retrofit repair. e. Shimmick began installing bypass piping in advance of tie-ins to IPS pump discharge piping 1-4 later in August/September.
f. Shimmick began working in ABs 3 & 4 in August and they will continue to work in AB 4 until November/December 2021.
g. Shimmick excavated at the new odor control and blower building facility locations.
h. Shimmick continues to investigate, repair, utilize, modify and replace inoperable utilities throughout the WWTP site.
i. Carollo issued DC001 Aeration Basin Slide Gate Modifications. This DC adds and deletes Aeration Basin Slide Gates due to configuration and operational changes in the basins.
j. Carollo issued DC004 Blower Building Louver Modification. This DC modifies the Blower Building Louvers to conform to approved louver submittal specifications.
k. Veolia provided copies of DC 2, 3 & 4 and the draft of 5 to Yader Bermudez on 9/16/21 per his request at the last Biweekly Meeting with Veolia
l. Carollo issued DC001 Aeration Basin Slide Gates. This DC adds and deletes slide gates within the basins due to revised operational conditions.
m. Carollo issued DC 2.1 Influent and ML Channel Walls. This DC adds concrete walls in the influent and mixed liquor channels to eliminate sewage backflow in these areas.
n. Shimmick completed installing blanking / stop plates within the PS Tanks influent channels in preparation for Grit Facility demolition. o. Shimmick continues to submit FA cost pricing data for Veolia review and approval, prior to submission to the City.
p. The City approved Shimmick’s Bid Alternate A cost proposal to furnish and install AB RAS piping, valving and flowmeters.
q. Shimmick completed installing the bypass piping, tie-in connections to IPS pump discharge lines and pressure testing of the bypass piping. r. Shimmick began demolition of the existing Grit Facility on 9/27/21.
Monthly Operations Report: October -2021
5 s. The City approved TAs for CO 1, 2 and 3 on October 5, 2021. Veolia and Shimmick executed CO #1-#3.
t. Veolia prepared and submitted to the City the TA for CO#4 on 10/19/21. It is still outstanding.
u. Shimmick completed installing temporary RAS piping at AB4 and 3-W piping at the ABs.
v. Shimmick continues AB demolition of the walkways and elevated column/equipment decks.
w. Shimmick removed AB4 plywood covers in preparation for pricing/ordering materials for DC002. Shimmick submitted a cost proposal for DC002 on 10/27/21.
x. Ferma completed all demolition activities and demobilized off the project site.
y. The first rain event of the wet weather season significantly impacted the WWTP and the project. Shimmick removed equipment and small tools & supplies from AB4 before the storm on 10/22/21. Veolia O&M required filling AB3 & AB4 due to the high volume of inflows to the plant. Shimmick is shutdown from working inside the ABs. Shimmick was directed to clean out AB4 on a FA work basis, due to basin flooding.
2. Cogen Project
a. Veolia submitted a TA for BAAQMD permit revisions for this project on 4/5/21 and then resubmitted a revised TA with additional proposals on 4/27/21; the TA is under review and expected to go to City Council. The existing BAAQMD ATC permit is set to expire on 12/30/21.
b. Veolia and the DB team conducted several workshops to define/clarify 75% design review comments to be incorporated into the final 100% design. c. Yorke Engineering submitted a BAAQMD permit application, which was forwarded to the City on 9/24/21 for City signature. The City returned the City signed air permit application on 10/20/21, enabling Yorke Engineering to continue the application process with the Air Resources Board.
d. Overaa/HSE is working on the 90% design drawings and a write-up for incorporating the design for new Dystor cover in the project.
3. The SCADA Conversion Upgrade Project
The SCADA (Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition) Phase I Project, which replaces the existing SCADA system and maintains the upgrade, was ongoing in August. The Phase I portion is expected to be complete by December 2021.
Monthly Operations Report: October -2021
6 a. Calcon continues to work on SCADA alarms and P&ID drawings. b. Veolia submitted and the City approved the change order request (#3) on 7-23-21 to upgrade the Wet Weather Station panel view controls and include SCADA system programming, allowing for data screen access reporting. The PSA was amended and executed on 8/12/21. c. Calcon began updating the remote site (lift station) P&IDs in mid- August. This work is anticipated to be completed by the end of October 2021.
d. Calcon continues to work on Digester and Headworks PLC upgrades (Bid Item 10). This work is anticipated to be completed in December 2021 (due to material supply constraints) Materials are currently on back order and are not expected to be delivered until late October/ early November 2021.
e. Calcon began meeting with Veolia to discuss how to close out the project by the end of the year (2021).
f. Calcon began field instrumentation tagging (Bid Item 10) and is approximately 30% complete with this Task Item work.
g. Overall SCADA project progress is 90% complete.
4. Seismic Evaluation – The City selected ZFA Structural Engineers. The project kicked off on June 30, 2020. The next month was spent gathering documentation for the project (i.e., past Plant project documentation, record drawings, etc.); a. All contract work is complete; what remains includes final invoicing. b. The City agreed to notify Veolia and ZFA on the upcoming approval of Seismic Analysis PH II project, through the City budget process, beginning 7/1/21. Veolia submitted the Seismic Analysis PH II TA to the City on 7/13/21. Phase II is scheduled to go to Council on 9/28/21 for additional funding.
c. Veolia submitted the Seismic Analysis PH II TA to the City on 7/13/21. Phase II is scheduled to go to Council on 10/16/21 for award. The Seismic Analysis PH II was not approved to calendar for City Council approval on 10/16/21.
5. Sludge Thickener Project (Design/Build) – RFQs were received on January 10, 2021, and evaluated on January 21, 2021.
a. The City, Veolia and Carollo staff interviewed the two DB firms on 3/29/21. On 4/13/2021, the City, Veolia and Carollo discussed the DB presentations, proposals and scoring criteria. The City requested Veolia not schedule additional follow-up discussions at this time, indicating they would contact Veolia when they were prepared to discuss the proposals again. The City informed Veolia on 4/26/21 that
Monthly Operations Report: October -2021
7 they chose Myers & Sons/ Lee & Ro for the Sludge Thickeners PH I design and directed Veolia to subcontract with them for this project. b. Veolia submitted the TA to the City on 5/17/21 for Design only which was approved and returned 7/1/21; TA for ESDC to follow. c. Veolia is drafting a subcontract to issue to the DB firm Myers & Sons on the project. Veolia issued the subcontract to Myers & Sons on 7- 29-21 for their review and approval. Myers & Sons returned the Subcontract with proposed revisions to Veolia during the week of 8/30/31. The subcontract agreement was returned and executed on 10/1/21.
d. The City, Veolia and the DB team from Myers & Sons and Lee & Ro met on 10/12/21 to have a project kickoff meeting. The NTP is established for 10/18/21.
e. Veolia began providing 2021 WAS, TWAS and flow data to Lee & Ro, in accordance with their request.
f. Veolia provided as-built record drawings to Myers & Sons. g. Myers & Sons began providing project submittals, including a design project schedule and a schedule of values (SOV). h. Myers & Sons tentatively scheduled a draft BODR review meeting for mid-December, following the planned draft BODR submittal.
i. The Subcontract with Meyers & Sons is executed.
6. Critical Plant Projects - SBS (Chemical Building) Facility a. West County is proceeding with design utilizing Carollo Engineers.
Construction will be done by Veolia.
b. On 7/2/21, Veolia recommended the award of this project by the City, to the apparent low bidder, Myers & Sons at the 7-20-21 City Council meeting. The City awarded the SBS Facility Improvements Project to Myers & Sons on 7-27-21.
c. Veolia prepared and submitted a (revised) TA to the City on 8/2/21 for review and approval. The TA was approved on 8/4/21.
d. Veolia has prepared a subcontract agreement for Myers & Sons; Veolia issued the revised subcontract agreement to Myers & Sons on September 13, 2021. The subcontract agreement was executed on 10/29/21.
iii. Storm Water Projects
1. Trash Capture Device –
a. Other locations are currently being considered by the City and Caltrans for additional Trash Capture Device Installations.
Monthly Operations Report: October -2021
8 b. A TA has been submitted to the City for design, equipment procurement and constructability review of a new device to be tentatively located on Bayview Avenue.
c. Collections Systems and Wastewater Treatment Plant Operations and Maintenance i. Collection Systems Operations and Maintenance
1. 4-year-out wastewater system cleaning progress
a. 2004 Service Agreement annual cleaning miles objective is 49.8 miles i. 2021 planned hotspot cleanings (altered by the BKSA) and pre-CCTV cleaning is 133.2 miles. The total cleaned year to date is 139.34 miles.
On target to be completed by Dec 31, 2021.
ii. The unplanned cleanings, e.g., service calls, post construction, etc. is
18.42 miles
2. 10-year-out wastewater system CCTV condition assessment progress a. 2004 Service Agreement annual CCTV miles objective is 19.7 miles i. Grade 4 and 5 miles planned annual condition assessments (altered by BKSA) and 70% or less is 43.3 miles. The total completed year to date is
44.51 miles. On target to be completed by Dec 31, 2021
ii. Unplanned completed post-construction CCTV is 1.34 miles b. Total gravity pipe segments in system reporting in InfoNet is 3,645 i. Pipe segments with CCTV < 10-years and > 70% complete is 3,527 ii. Pipe segments with CCTV > 10-years is 118
1. (18) are greater than 10 years
a. (5) need cleanouts changed to manholes or to be
reevaluated when the new push camera arrives
b. (4) Need Contractor to pothole and locate
c. (3) Bypass required due to pipe surcharged
d. (2) Need City to obtain Railroad Permit
e. (2) Need Contractor to excavate and locate assets
f. (2) Point Repairs required - Repairs completed. CCTV pending.
2. (78) have surveys within 10 years but are less < 70% complete and are on the inaccessible list.
3. (22) are Inaccessible due to submerged pipes - (Keller Beach) awaiting future planning from the City
4. Sanitary Sewer Overflows
a. Actual SSO’s in Sept: 0
b. 2021 Actual SSO’s, YTD: 9
i. 2021 Permissible SSOs per Baykeeper Settlement Agreement: 21
5. Customer Service Calls = 7
6. Emergency & Miscellaneous Repairs
a. Wastewater point repairs = 2
Monthly Operations Report: October -2021
9 b. Manhole cover repair = 0
c. Stormwater point repairs = 0
7. Storm water collection response calls
a. Customer service calls = 0
b. City service calls = 0
c. Catch basins cleaned = 0
d. Trash capture devices cleaned = 0
e. Pipe segment cleaned = 0
f. V-ditched cleaned = 0-Ft
ii. Wastewater Treatment Plant Operations
Permit Violations – There were no NPDES Permit variance to report for the Month of October. There is one blending event to report for October from Sunday the 24th through Tuesday 26th, due to flows encountered during the rain event of the same period.
Blending began on 10/24/2021 at 11:45 AM. A volume of 21.6 million gallons (MG) of incoming rainwater was blended with plant treated water to produce a total 70.8 MG of discharge over those three days. The discharge maximum peak flows for this event where 52.5 MGD on 10/24/2021 with 33.4 MGD experienced on 10/25, following with a
27.3 MGD as a daily maximum the last day of our blending event on 10/26. Wet Weather Storage was used to its full capacity on 10/24/2021 during this event. All quality control parameters were acceptable according to our Quality Manual.
All monitored discharge water quality parameters were met for October. a. Average effluent daily flow = 7.51 MGD
b. Maximum effluent daily flow = 33.23 MGD
c. Peak influent daily flow = 52.5 MGD
d. Influent BOD/TSS mg/l = 430 mg/l / 550 mg/l
e. Effluent BOD/TSS mg/L = 16.4 mg/l / 16.1 mg/l
i. Permit Limits for Effluent BOD/TSS mg/L = 30/30
f. Effluent Coliform = (Monthly Median) 4 MPN / 100 ml
i. Permit Limits for Effluent Coliform = (Monthly Median) 240 MPN /100 ml g. Plant Odor complaints = 6 YTD Odor Complaints = 9
Non-standard operating conditions – Plant is struggling to maintain dissolved oxygen in the aeration basins because of the age and failure rate of the mechanical aerators. This puts us a risk for exceeding the CA regulatory discharge limits for Ammonia.
Regulatory agency reporting – All standard monthly reports submitted in a timely manner with no exceptions reported back from the regulator
iii. Collection System Pump Station and Wastewater Treatment Plant Equipment/Facility Maintenance
Monthly Operations Report: October -2021
10 Total preventive maintenance work orders completed = 295 Total corrective maintenance work orders completed = 32 All wastewater treatment plant mission-critical and redundant systems and equipment were observed and/or maintained and/or repaired as scheduled and/or required All Storm and wastewater collection system pump stations were routinely checked and maintained as scheduled
a. Stormwater pumps stations monitored = 8
b. Wastewater pump stations monitored = 15
Maintenance projects
II. List of upcoming activities
a. Continue discussions with City staff regarding prioritization and procurement delivery method for various maintenance and construction projects noted previously
b. Continue planned CPM and O&M activities previously described in section I.b and I.c, respectively, above
3. List of Task Authorizations (TAs) delivered to the City:
a. CPM
I. Sludge Leachate Line Condition Assessment Update - submitted on 3/26/21; still outstanding II. Seismic II Analysis TA - submitted 7/13/21; still outstanding III. 2021 Grade 5 RAA Line Replacement - submitted 8/30/21 IV. High Priority Sewer Line Replacement - submitted 8/30/21 V. New 2021 Trash Capture Project - submitted 9/3/21
b. O&M
i. RAA/SECAP/Master Plan TA – Submitted March 27, 2020, COR responded. TA was not signed but capital work was completed and third party engineer was paid by Veolia. Payment is under dispute.
ii. Boiler Burner #2 TA – Submitted May 20th, COR responded June 3rd. New Boiler Burner was purchased and installed and the contractor was paid by Veolia. Payment is under dispute. iii. NASSCO upgrade from 6.0 to 7 TA – Submitted May 19th, Rejected by the COR on 9/23/20. This item is the July 20, 2021 City Council Agenda for approval. Was approved at City Council Agenda on July 22. Delivery has been delayed until Oct 2021 iv. Collection Camera Cable Replacement TA – Submitted on 5/22, COR requested detail on 7/15, we provided on 7/21. Rejected by the City on 9/23/20. Collections Camera Cable was replaced by Vendor and paid for by Veolia. Payment is under dispute. v. Collection Gas Detectors TA – Submitted 6/23/2020, COR asked further detail on 6/24, we provided requested detail on 6/26, COR asked further detail on 7/21, we provided on 8/10, Rejected by the COR on 9/23/20. Gas detectors were purchased by Veolia. Payment is under dispute.
Monthly Operations Report: October -2021
11 vi. Emergency Sludge Leachate Vault Repair TA - Submitted 2/26/21 - Received written approval by email from Mary/Yader on 2/23/21 to proceed with the engineers design proposal. Design for repairs was completed. Received the fully executed TA on July 1, 2021. Job is being submitted to the City’s prequalified contractors list.
vii. Replacement Mechanical Aerator TA - Submitted 4/28/21, received City Council approval on 5/18/21 and fully executed TA on 5/20/21. Provided PO to the vendor to order. Delivery has been delayed until late Oct 2021.
viii. DAFT Gear Box Drive Unit TA - Submitted 5/12/21, received signed TA on 5/13/21, provided PO to vendor begin prelim work, on 6/15/21 City Council agenda for approval, which was granted. Delivery has been delayed until November 2021. ix. Second Mechanical Aerator Gear Box Drive Unit TA - Submitted 8/4/21, purchase to establish an inventoried spare unit. Have not received approval yet.
IV. List of submittal scheduled for the following month a. To be determined
V. Listing of Permit Violations
a. There were no permit exceedances for October
VI. Updated critical path schedule
a. There are no current projects operating under a critical path method of delivery VII. Other Project Discussion
a. CPM
i. None
b. O&M
i. Rolling Stock Inventory
a. Audit completed and provided to the City on May 19, 2020. Review and recommendations provided to the City on August 24, 2020 b. Veolia is renting and/or leasing any rolling stock inventory that is needed to perform the daily operations of the system and will continue to bill the City until the City can provide the necessary Vehicles as per the contract for Veolia to perform the work c. Veolia provided the new Vactor truck specs and quote on November 25, 2020 as requested. As per previous conversations, we provided specs/quotes for a new push camera on Dec 10, 2020 and for the new Camera truck and Jetter truck on Dec 13, 2020. The new push camera was on the July 20 City Council Agenda for approval.
Push Camera was approved and ordered, it should arrive at the vendor by the end of October for initialization and testing. Delivery to Veolia and training will be scheduled thereafter. The new Vactor Trucks and Camera Truck were submitted in the City’s Proposed 21/22 Budget. The City approved the purchase of two new Vactors at September City Council Meeting. The new Camera truck is on the December City Council Meeting for approval.
Community Development
DATE: January 11, 2022
TO: Mayor Butt and Members of the City Council
FROM:
(List all relevant/responsive staff
persons)
Lina Velasco, Community Development Director
Hector Lopez, Senior Planner
Subject:
(This will appear on the agenda)
Appeal of Planning Commission’s approval of a
conditional use permit and design review (PLN20-043)
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There are no costs to the general fund associated with these actions.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:
(List all dates items were heard or
council action took place)
Click or tap here to enter text.
STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:
On October 18, 2021, an appeal was filed by Claire
Arbour, Simon Winer, and Ron Elson, property owners of
360 Western Avenue, objecting to the Planning
Commission’s conditional approval of a Conditional Use Permit and Design Review (PLN20 -043) to construct a
two-story, single-family residence on a vacant parcel , within the -S, Shoreline overlay district, at 35 7 Western Drive.
AGENDA
REPORT
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
(This will appear on the agenda)
ADOPT a Resolution Denying the Appeal and Affirming
the Planning Commission’s conditional approval of a
Conditional Use Permit and Design Review, to construct
a single-family residence on a vacant parcel located
within the -S, Shoreline Overlay district at 357 Western Avenue – Community Development Department (Lina
Velasco 510-620-6706). This item was continued from
the December 7, 2021, meeting. The public hearing is
closed on this item; for council discussion and
resolution only.
DISCUSSION:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The subject property (“project site”) is a 6,000 square foot parcel located on Western Drive, between Santa Fe Avenue and Casey Drive in the Point Richmond neighborhood.
The L-shaped parcel was created through a subdivision with the abutting parcel to the north.
The proposed project is a 2,340 square foot, two -story structure, consisting of three bedrooms, three bathrooms, and a 440 square foot, two-car garage to be constructed on a vacant 6,000 square foot parcel (see Project Plans in Exhibit B).
In 2009, the Planning Commission and City Council on appeal approved a parcel map, with conditions requiring the future residence on the subject lot be visually compatible with surrounding buildings. In addition, the parcel map was conditioned to provide two visual corridors to maintain views of the San Francisco Bay and restricting building heights and window placement (see attached Resolution No.128-09 in Attachment 2).
Zoning Analysis:
The proposed residential use requires a conditional use permit since the project site is located within the -S, Shoreline Overlay zone. In addition, a two -story structure requires major Design Review by the Design Review Board (DRB). Since the conditional use permit requires Planning Commission approval, the DRB review is in the form of a recommendation to the Planning Commission.
Design Review Board Recommendation: On November 18, 2020, the DRB held a public hearing to consider a recommendation on the project design to the Planning Commission. The DRB and staff recommended that the applicant make additional changes and return to the DRB for a recommendation at a fu ture meeting. During the DRB’s deliberation, the applicant stated that they did not want to make any additional changes to the design and instead requested that a vote be taken. Given that the Board wanted additional changes to be incorporated into the de sign to make the proposed design more compatible with surrounding structures, the DRB unanimously voted 7 -0 to recommend denial of the proposed design to the Planning Commission based on the applicant’s desire to not make additional design changes.
Planning Commission Review: On February 4, April 1, September 16, and October 7, 2021, the Planning Commission held public hearings to consider the Conditional Use Permit and Design Review for the proposed project. During the hearing, several neighbors expressed their opposition to the proposed design. The neighbors expressed SITE
that modifying the butterfly roof to be a flat roof would reduce the height and massing of the structure.
The applicant stated that the project design had already been modified to reduce t he height and address other comments provided by the DRB. During its deliberations, the Planning Commission expressed that a compromise between the desires of the applicant and the neighbors was appropriate. The Planning Commission directed staff to draft findings and conditions for approval of the Conditional Use Permit and Design Review with the following modifications:
1. The design of the roof be modified to decrease the slope of the butterfly roof and/or ceiling height to reduce the overall height.
2. The metal roofing material be coated to ensure it is non-reflective.
3. A green wall or landscaping be incorporated on the north elevation to reduce the massing and bulk of the building.
APPEAL ACTION:
Pursuant to Section 15.04.803.140.E of the Zoning Ordinance , t he City Council determines whether an underlying decision is supported by substantial evidence and/or constitutes an abuse of discretion. The same standards and evaluation criteria, including the findings required, apply as they were for the original application. The appellate body's review is limited to the issue(s) raised in the petition for the appeal.
The City Council may affirm, modify, or reverse the original decision. When a decision is modified or reversed, the City Council must state the specific reasons for modification or reversal. The City Council may also choose to refer a matter back to the Planning Commission or Design Review Board for further consideration and a decision if significant new evidence is presented in conjunction with the appeal, which may include substantial changes to the original proposal.
BASIS OF APPEAL:
The appeal letter (see Attachment 1) submitted by Claire Arbour, Simon Winer, and Ron Elson (“Appellants”) asserts the Planning Commission decision was in error because the process lacked information presented to the Design Review Board and Planning Commission to make an informed decision.
Staff’s Response to Issues Raised in the Appeal:
Pursuant to Section 15.04.803.050 of the Zoning Ordinance, when multiple applications that require public hearing are filed for the same project, all issues shall be heard together by the review authority with the most authority, and other review bodies sh all provide recommendations to that review authority. If a project requires design review, and a conditional use permit, the Design Review Board shall make a recommendation to the Planning Commission. In this case, the DRB unanimously voted 7 -0 to recommend denial of the proposed design to the Planning Commission based on the applicant’s refusal to make design changes to enable the DRB to make the required
Design Review findings. Following the DRB meeting, the applicant agreed to make additional design changes requested by the Planning Commission to address concerns and comments raised. The applicant made some modifications to the project and provided additional exhibits demonstrating the impact of proposed project on Bay views from Western Drive. Based on the new information provided at or prior to the meeting held on September 16, 2021, the Planning Commission conditionally approved the project.
With respect to the issue that the property is not adequately served by public facilities and services, such as water, sewer, and other public facilities, it is uncertain at this time.
It has been suggested that there will be a moratorium for parcels located with the tributary of the Keller Beach line; however, no moratorium has been considered by the City Council.
In staff’s opinion, there were no abused of discretion by the Planning Commission since the Design Review Board decision was only a recommendation and ultimately many of the design comments requested by the DRB were eventually integrated into the final project design.
CONCLUSION:
The proposed project complies with the RL-1, Single-family Very Low Density Residential District regulations and is consistent with the Hillside Residential land use designation under the General Plan. T he revised design repre sents a significant improvement and relates well to the surrounding buildings in the neighborhood. The revised design approved by the Planning Commission addressed many of the concerns raised by the public comments, including reducing the overall building height and slope of the butterfly roof.
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
EXHIBIT A: Resolution Denying the Appeal and Upholding the Planning Commission’s
conditional approval
EXHIBIT B: Project Plans
Attachment 1: Appeal letter from surrounding neighbor at 360 Western Drive Attachment 2: PC Resolution No.128-09
KiehjmSml
THIS SECTION TO BE COMPLETED BY THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE STWF%W£^
Lii'Y^KKSOmCE
'a-^ofwm
2021 OCT 18 PH l:^
r
FEE PAID: ^°^C^%
DATE: |0/
TO THE RICHMOND CITY COUNCIL:
The undersigned hereby appeals decision: By the Historic Preservation Commission By the Planning Commission
Approval y of: Denial of:
Variance (V)
^ Conditional Use Permit (CUP)
Design Review Permit (DRP)
Other
Tent Subd. Or Parcel Map (TM)
Rezoning (RZ)
EIR Decision (Em)
DESCRIBE ITEM AS PRINTED ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION or
HISTORIC PRESERVATION AGENDA:
PLN20-043 Garbelman Residence: PUBLIC HEARING to consider a Conditional Use Permit and Design Review toconstruct a two-story, single-family dwelling on a vacant parcel located within the — S,Shoreline Overlay District at 357 Western Dr. (APN: 558-185-006).
STATE REASONS FOR APPEAL:
There has been inadequate process in the consideration of the applicant's plans, and violation and deprivation of the neighbor's due process in the course of the applicant's proposals to the city, There has been consistent lack of information and unreliability of information presented to the Design Review Board and the Planning Commission. The P.C. lacked correct and reliable information to support necessary findings and to make an informed decision about the applicant's plans.
Please see the attached form for further reasons and explanations.
DELIVER OR MAIL TO:
City Clerk
450 Civic Center Plaza, 3rd Floor
Richmond, CA 94804
1 rd
NAME Claire Arbour, Simon Winer and Ron Elson
1360 Western Drive, Richmond, CA 94801
360 Western Drive, Richmond, CA 94801
TELEPHONE (HOME) (617) 699-2766
(WORK) (510)610-1166
Attachment 1
We are appealing the decision of the PC at its October meeting of a proposal to construct a new dwelling at 357 Western Drive, item PLN20-043 Garbelman Residence.
1. We believe that substantive design issues raised both by Design Review Board and the City Staff have not been adequately addressed and that required findings have not been met. The three conditions that the Planning Commission laid out for their conditional approval were not thoroughly or clearly met,
The DRB unanimously recommended denial when the proposal was first submitted. Since then they have not reviewed any plans or revisions submitted by the applicant. Even with the minor modifications proposed since by the applicant, the project does not meet major criteria for approval. The Commissioners relied heavily on a verbal presentation by the applicant's architect at their October meeting - without their nor city staff having the chance to review the latest written revisions submitted by the applicant.
2. We question the appropriateness or legal authority for the Planning Commission to refer back to a subcommittee of the DRB rather than to the full DRBfor review.
No transparency was shown in the selection of which members would be chosen; nor how they would proceed with their review. Their meetings with the applicant/ architect were not public and the public had no chance for input into the subcommittee's review. We aren't aware that their ideas or recommendations were then reviewed by the full DRB. 3, The applicant and his architect have not held discussions with community members and neighbors, despite their claim that they have.
While such discussions aren't required, they are a vital way of showing respect for the community. Balancing individual wishes with community well-being is a major issue these days in our country and our community. It would be reasonable to propose such meetings in an effort to arrive at compromise.
4. A requirement for approval (as per Item E of Resolution 21-17, A resolution of the planning commission of the city of Richmond approving the conditional use permit and design review with modification (PLN20-043) to construct a two-story, single family dwelling on a vacant parcel at 357 Western Drive, subject to conditions) is the demonstration that the proposed development is "adequately served by highways, streets, water, sewer, and other public facilities and services" (emphasis ours).
The present sewer system is known to be inadequate and to pose significant public health and welfare issues to the citizens of Point Richmond should it fail more than it has. A moratorium on any new connections, other than in the case of remodels of buildings that already are connected to the sewer system, appears to be de facto in place. Comments by the city council and consultants to the city have supported this moratorium. No new construction should be approved until the complex health and welfare issues are resolved.
Attachment
RESOLUTION NO. 128-09
A KESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CFTY OF RICHMOND
ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND APPROVING PARCEL MAP MS 756-08 TO CREATE ONE LOT AT 367 WESTERN DRIVE CKOWALSKI, APN 558-185-003)
WHEREAS, Stephen & Patti Kowalski (fhe "applicap.1?'), filed an application wifh the City of Richmond for approval of proposed parcel map MS 756-08 (the "Parcel Map") to subdivide fhe existing parcel (the "subdivision" or "project') at 367 Western Drive (APN: 558- 185-003) (the "project site" or "subject site") into two standard residential parcels of 10,806 Square Feet and 6,002 Square Feet, respectively; and
WHEREAS, flie Parcel Map is subject to fhe provisions of California Government Code Sections 66410-66499.58, known as fhe Subdivision Map Act, and Chapter .15.08 of the Richmond Municipal Code known, as fhe Richm.on.d Subdivision Ordinance; and WHEREAS, fhe Parcel Map is not categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) by way of CEQA Guidelines Section 15315, Class 15, Minor Land Divisions, due to the fact fhat the slope is greater fhaa 20 percent. Therefore, staff conducted an Initial Study; determiaed that the project could have potentially significant impacts m the areas ofAesfhetics, Geology and Soils, and Hydrology and Water Quality; and WHEREAS, staff prepared a Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration which includes a Preliminary Soils Investigation and Initial Geology and SoUs Analysis. Based on such iavestigation aad analysis, staff determiaed that implem.entation of specific mitigadon. measures •will reduce envirorimental impacts to less-fhan-sigmficant; and 'WHEREAS fhe Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration was circulated for public comment in accordance with fhe California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and a response to comments was prepared; and
WHEREAS, fhe Zoning District at fhe subject property is zoned SFR-2, Single Family Very Low Density Residential District, which permits residential dweUmgs on lot sizes of 6,000 SF or greater, and fhe General Plan designation of the site is 942, Very Low Density Residential (0 to 5 DU/Acre), which aUows single family residential dwellings m areas typified by relatively large lots greater than 6,000 SF; and
WHEREAS, fhe City Council has reviewed fhe Parcel Map for conformance with fhe Subdivision Map Act, Subdivision Ordinance, -Zonmg Ordmance and all ofher applicable regulations offhe Richmond Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has conducted a properly noticed public hearing pursuant to California Government Code Section 65090 and has duly considered all written and verbal testimony presented during fhe hearmg; and
WHEREAS, on the basis of the application, plans, materials, and testimony submitted at or prior to the public hearing, the City Council makes fhe following findings with statements of fact to support fhe findings as required by California Government Code Section 66474 for fhe approval of Parcel Map:
Findine 1. The proposed Map is consistent with the applicable General and Specific Plans.
Statement in Support of Finding: Criterion Satisfied. The Richmond General Plan designation for the project site is 942, Very Low Residential. The subdivision meets all . the applicable provisions of the Richmond General Plan by creating a buildable lot which is equal to or greater than 6,000 SF. The proposed Lot 2 would meet the development standards for the minimum lot size in the SPR-2 Zoniag District, with a proposed area of 6,002 SF. The proposed Lot 2 will also meet the development standards for the minimum lot width of 60 Feet in the SFR-2 Zoning District; the proposed lot width will be 69 ft.
128-09