Exhibit 2
RICHMOND TERMINAL FOUR WHARF REMOVAL PROJECT
and Minimization of Impacts to Western Burrowing Owl, would mitigate potential impacts to burrowing owls to a less-than-significant level.
Mitigation Measure BIO-1: Avoidance and Minimization of Impacts to Western Burrowing Owl. Prior to commencement ofon-shore construction activities for the project, including materials staging and/or increased vehicular traffic, SCC will implement the following measures:
• Preconstruction Surveys. Preconstruction surveys for suitable burrowing owl habitat and/or burrowing owls will be conducted no fewer than 14 days prior to the initiation of project activities (including equipment and materials staging) within the project area.
Surveys will be conducted by a qualified biologist m conformance with the most recent requirements and guidelines of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW).
The biologist will determine the number and time frame (prior to construction) of surveys to be conducted. If no burrowing owls are detected, no additional action is necessary.
• Monitoring. In areas positive for burrowing owl presence, the Lead Biologist or qualified biological monitor will 'be onsite during all construction activities in areas where burrowing owls are determined to be present.
• Passive Relocation. If burrowing owls cannot be avoided by the project, then additional measures, such as passive relocation during the nonbreeding season, would be implemented to reduce any potential impacts. Measures for successful relocation will be recommended by a qualified biologist and will be in conformance with CDFW. requirements and guidelines.
• Resumption of Construction Activities. When a qualified biologist is able to determine that burrowmg owls are no longer occupying the site^ancLpassive relocation is deemed suceessful, constructren activities may continue.
Special-Status Bats
Impacts to special-status bats could occur if building demolition were to occur during periods of winter torpor; any bats present would likely not survive the disturbance.2 Disturbance to maternity roosts could impact survival of young. These disturbances would be a significant impact. Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-2, Avoidance and Minknization of Impacts to Roosting Bats, would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level.
Mitigation Measure BIO-2: Avoidance and Minimization-of Impacts to Roosting Bats. In advance of building removal, a pre-constmction survey for special-status bats will be conducted by a qualified biologist to characterize potential bat habitat and identify active roost sites within buildings to be removed. Should potential roosting habitat or active bat roosts be found in buildings to be removed under the project, the following measures will be implemented:
2 Tuttle, M., 1991. How North America Bats are at Their Most Vulnerable During Hibernation and Migration, BA TS Magazine, Volume 9, No. 3. Fall 1991. htto://vi'VtW.batcon.org/resources/media-education/bats-magazme/bat article/492. accessed January 5. 2018.
Exhibit 2
RICHMOND TERMINAL FOUR WHARF REMOVAL PROJECT
• Removal of buildings with active roosts will occur when bats are active, approximately between the periods of March 1-April 15 and August 15-October 15; outside of bat maternity roosting season (approximately April 15-August 15) and outside of months of winter torpor (approximately October 15-February 28), to the extent feasible. • If removal of buildings during the periods when bats are active is not feasible and active bat roosts being used for maternity or hibemation purposes are found on or in the immediate vicinity of the project area where building removal is planned, a nodisturbance buffer of 100 feet will be established around these roost sites until they are determined to be no longer active by the qualified biologist.
The qualified biologist will be present during building removal if active bat roosts, which are not being used for maternity or hibemation purposes, are present. Buildings with active roosts will be removed'only when no ram is occurring or is forecast to occur for 3 days and when daytime temperatures are at least 50°F.
Removal of buildings containing or suspected to contain active bat roosts, which are not being used for maternity or hibemation purposes, will be dismantled under the supervision of the qualified biologist. Buildings will be partially dismantled to significantly change the roost conditions, causing bats to abandon and not return to the roost.
Special-Status Plants
Suisun marsh aster has not been confinned in the project area, though potential habitat that could support this species occurs on-site. Construction-related impacts to Suisun marsh aster could occur due to: vegetation removal activities within and adjacent to rip-rap; damage during removal ofraikoad remnants, steel holding tank, concrete box or utilities and pipes, which are located in or on rip-rap; or direct crushing by materials or vehicles using the potential staging areas and roads adjacent to rip-rap. Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-3, Avoidance and Minimization of Impacts to Special-Status Plants, would reduce this impact to aless- thansignificant "level.
Mitigation Measure BIO-3: Avoidance and Minimization of Impacts to Suisun Marsh Aster.
Prior to conducting demolition, the SCC will unplement the following measures:
• Prior to the start of construction, a qualified biologist will conduct a special-status plant survey for Suisun marsh aster within the species' suitable habitat within the project work limits and during a time when the plant can be identified to species. The survey will follow the CDFW Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special Status Native Plant Populations and Sensitive Natural Communities. If special-status plant species occur within the project work limits, then the biologist will establish an adequate buffer area for each plant population to exclude activities that directly remove or alter the habitat of, or result in indirect adverse impacts on, the special-status plant species. A 3 California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2018. Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special Status Native Plant Populations and Sensitive Natural Communities. Revised March 20, 2018.
Exhibit 2
RICHMOND TERMINAL FOUR WHARF REMOVAL PROJECT
qualified biologist will oversee installation of a temporary, plastic mesh-type construction fence (Tensor Polygrid or equivalent) at least 4 feet (1.2 meters) tall around any established buffer areas to prevent encroachment by construction vehicles and personnel. The qualified biologist will determine the exact location of the fencing. The fencing will be strung tightly on posts set at maximum intervals of 10 feet (3 meters) and will be checked and maintained weekly until all construction is complete. The buffer zone established by the fencing will be marked by a sigrr stating, "This is habitat of Suisun marsh aster, and must not be disturbed. No construction activity, mcluding grading, will be allowed."
If impacts to Suisun marsh aster cannot be avoided, plants within the construction impact area will be relocated to suitable habitat at similar tidal elevation as the source site, and outside of the construction impact area. Suisun marsh aster rhizomes will be transplanted immediately within the relocation site(s). Relocation site(s) will be identified by a botanist and transplant material will be replanted immediately after being removed.
Location of transplanted material will be recorded using a submeter accuracy GPS unit (e.g., Trimble GPS) to enable finding the relocation plantings for monitoring. Annual mitigation monitoring of relocated plants will be conducted during the flowering period for the Suisun marsh aster and will include information on the number of surviving plants and/or patch size, vigor dfplantings, plant associates, any observed population threats, and photographs of transplanted material. A monitoring period of at least three years or until the success criteria of 1:1 mitigation has been achieved will be required, up to a maxmium of five years.
IfSuisun marsh aster cannot be relocated, individual plants will be replaced at a 3:1 ratio within the project site, or as close to the project site as possible, in suitable habitat at similar elevation as the source site(s). The planting site(s) will be identified by a botanist.
Location of transplanted material will be recorded usinga submeter accuracy GPS unit (e.g., Trimble GPS) to enable finding the mitigation plantings for monitoring. Annual mitigation monitoring of relocated plants will be conducted during the flowering period for the Suisun marsh aster and will include information on the number of surviving plants and/or patch size, vigor ofplantmg-s, plant associates, any observed population threats, and photographs of transplanted material. A monitoring period of at least three years or until the success criteria of 3:1 mitigation has been achieved will be required, up to a maximum of five years.
If monitoring indicates the performance criteria are met or exceeded prior to the end of the five year monitoring period, then the SCC will have fulfilled its mitigation obligation for Suisun marsh aster, and will notify CDFW. If monitoring indicates the performance criteria is not being met (or is unlikely to be met), then the SCC will initiate consultation with CDFW to determine an alternative course of action, including possible additional transplants or seed collection for off-site propagation and outplanting, or donation to a seed conservation bank to preserve the population genes.
Exhibit 2
RICHMOND TERMINAL FOUR WHARF REMOVAL PROJECT
Marine IVIammals
Hydroacoustic Impacts
Vibratory hammers may be required to remove creosote-contaminated piles. Use of a vibratory hammer has the potential to generate increased underwater sound levels that are dangerous to aquatic species, marine mammals in particular.
Vibratory pile drivers work on a different principal than impact pile-driving hammers and therein produce a different sound profile. A vibratory driver works by inducting particle motion to the substrate immediately below and around the pile, causing liquefaction of the immediately adjacent sediment, allowing the pile to be removed.
While vibratory pile driving typically generates sound profiles 10-20 decibels (dB)4 lower in intensity, relative to impact hammers, noise generated from these activities can have deleterious effects on marine mammals. As such, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association enforces underwater noise thresholds to prevent such an impact.5
• Ifvibratory hammers are used to remove piles, implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-4 would ensure hydroacoustic impacts on marine mammals occur at less- thansignificant levels.
Mitigation Measure BIO-4: Use ofVibratory Pile Hammers. If use ofavibratory hammer is required for-pile removal the followmg marine mammal protection criteria will be implemented:
• The contractor will monitor marine mammal presence when vibratory hammers are used.
Marine mammal monitoring will include, at a minimum, the following conditions:
A 50-meter marine mammal monitoring zone will be established around each pile removal location.
A qualified biological monitor(s) would be located at the best vantage point(s) in order to properly see as much of the monitoring zone as possible.
During all observation periods, the monitor(s) will use binoculars an-d the naked eye to search continuously for marine mammals.
If the monitoring zone is obscured by fog or poor lighting conditions, pile r&moval at that location will not be initiated until that zone is visible. Should such conditions arise while installation is underway, the activity would be paused. 4 Noise is unwanted sound. Sound, traveling in the form of waves from a source, exerts a pressure ievel (referred to as sound level) that is measured in decibels (dB), with zero dB corresponding roughly to the threshold of human hearing and 120 to 140 dB corresponding to the threshold of pain. 5 Vibratory hammer effects appear to be less impactful to fish, therefore thresholds have not been developed for fish at this time.
Exhibit 2
RICHMOND TERMINAL FOUR WHARF REMOVAL PROJECT
The monitoring zone around the pile will be monitored for the presence of marine mammals 30 minutes before, during, and 15 minutes after any pile driving activity.
Work activities would be halted when a marine mammal enters the monitoring zone and resume only after the animal has been gone from the area for a minimum of 15 minutes.
Airborne sound levels below 90 dB when harbor seals are present, 100 dB for other pinnipeds, wilt be maintained.
"Waters of the United States/' are defined in the Code of Federal Regulations (33 CFR 328.3[a]; 40 CFR 230.3[sJ) as rivers, streams, mud flats, sand flats, wetlands, sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, playa lakes, or natural ponds, the use, degradation, or destruction of which could affect interstate or foreign commerce including any such waters. These waters fall under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA). Additionally, the Corp regulates navigable waters under Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (R&HA). Navigable waters are defined as those waters that are subjiect to the ebb and flow of the tide or that are presently used, have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce. The San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) regulates CWA Section 404 waters and R&HA Section 10 waters under Section 401 of the CWA. The RWQCB also regulates waters of the state under the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act. Waters of the state are broadly defined as "any surface water or groundwater, including saline waters, within the boundaries of the state." A wetland delineation was conducted by Environmental Science Associates on August 14, 2019.
The delineation used the "Routine Determination-Method" as described in the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual.6 The 1987 Manual was used in conjunction with the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: And West Region (Version 2.0)-.' For areas where the 1987 Manual and the Arid West Supplement differ, the Arid West Supplement was followed. Wetlands and waters were classified using commonly accepted habitat types. All areas identified in the Preliminary Delineation of Waters of the U.S. are preliminary and subject to review and verification-by ACOE.
Potentially jurisdictional features within the project study area .that could be affected by the project include a freshwater seep and tidal waters.9 The freshwater seep, (identified as FWS-1 on 6 Environmental Laboratory, Department of the Army, 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual- (Technical Report Y-87-1). U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Waterways Experimental Station. Vicksburg, Mississippi. 7 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 2008. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers W&tlancTDelineation Manual:
Arid West Region (Version 2.0) ed. J.S. Wakeley, R.W. Lichvar, and C.V. Noble. ERDC/ELTR-06-16. Vicksburg, MS:
U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center.
8 Environmental Science Associates (ESA), 2017. San Jose-Santa Clara Regional Wast&water Facility Pond-AlS South Structure Preliminary Delineation of Waters of the U.S. July, 2017. 9 The seasonal wetland swale that was identified within the wetland delineation study area, shown in Table 3-2 and identified as SWS-1 in Figure BIO-3 in Appendix C, is outside of the project area and would not be adversely affected by the project.
Exhibit 2
RICHMOND TERMINAL FOUR WHARF REMOVAL PROJECT
Figure BIO-3 in Appendix C), which is located at the eastern edge of a potential staging area in the northern portion of the site, could be adversely affected by vehicles or placement of equipment or materials; however, implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-5, Avoid Impacts to Terrestrial Wetlands, would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. Tidal waters include all open tidal waters in the project area up to the high tide line (approximately 7.59 ft NAVD88) on the shoreline. The project would remove approximately 4,150 cubic yards of pilings, approximately 5,400 cubic yards of debris from the bay floor,10 and the ERSP would remove approximately 1,950 cubic yards of material (i.e., concrete headwall and soil) along 350 feet of shoreline, for a total of approximately 11,500 cubic yards of fill removed from tidal waters in the bay. The ERSP would include installation of approximately 2,400 cubic yards of reused rock fill, backing rock fill, quarter-ton to one-ton rock boulders, and oyster reef balls.
Overall, the project would result in a net removal of approximately 9,100 cubic yards of fill from tidal waters (Table 3-3). Therefore, there would be no loss ofjurisdictional waters and no negative impacts to tidal waters.
Mitigation Measure BIO-5: Avoid Impacts to Terrestrial Wetlands. The freshwater seep identified as FWS-1 will be clearly delineated and separated from the project Iknits (i.e., staging area) through the installation of environmentally sensitive area fencing to avoid accidental incursion. Fencmg will be installed under supervision of a qualified biologist.
Cultural Resources
As a result of archival review, field survey, distribution of nearby archaeological sites, and the geologic and environmental setting, the archaeological sensitivity of the project site is considered low. While unlikely, given the general sensitivity of the project vicinity, the inadvertent discovery of redeposited archaeological resources cannot be entirely discounted, including in areas of artificial fill. Impacts to archaeological resources would be potentially significant. In the event that archaeological resources are encountered during ^ground disturbing activities, Mitigation Measure CUL-1, Inadvertent Discovery of Archaeological Resource, would reduce impacts to a less-than-sfgnificant level.
Mitigation Measure CUL-1: Inadvertent Discovery of Archaeological Resources. If prehistoric or historic-era .archaeological resources are encountered by construction personnel during project implementation, all construction activities within 100 feet shall halt until a qualified archaeologist, defined as one meeting the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualification Standards for archaeology, can assess the significance of the find.
Prehistoric archaeological materrals might include obsidian and chert flaked-stone tools (e.g., projectile points, knives, scrapers) or toolmaking debris; culturally darkened soil ("midden") containing heat-affected rocks, artifacts, or shellfish remains; and stone milling equipment (e.g., mortars, pestles, hand stones, or milling slabs); and/or battered stone tools, such as Hammer stones and pitted stones. Historic-era materials might include stone; concrete, or adobe footmgs and walls; filled wells or privies; and deposits of metal, glass, and/or ceramic refuse.
10 An estimated 2,700 tons of debris would be removed from the bay floor. This is equivalent to approximately 5,400 yd3 of debris.
Exhibit 2
RICHMOND TERMINAL FOUR WHARF REMOVAL PROJECT
The mitigation for archaeological resources shall include preservation in place, or, if preservation in place is not feasible, data recovery through excavation. If preservation in place is feasible, this may be accomplished through one of the following means: (1) modifying the construction plan to avoid the resource; (2) incorporating the resource within open space; (3) capping and covering the resource before building appropriate facilities on the resource site; or (4) deeding the resource site into a permanent conservation easement.
If preservation in place is not feasible, a qualified archaeologist shall prepare and implement a detailed treatment plan to recover the scientifically consequential information from and about the resource, prior to any excavation at the resource site. Treatment for most resources would consist of (but would not necessarily be not limited to) sample excavation, artifact collection, site documentation, and historical research, with the aim to target the recovery of important scientific data contained in the portion(s) of the significant resource to be affected by the project. The treatment plan shall include provisions for analysis of data in a regional context, reporting of results within a timely manner, curation of artifacts and data at an approved facility, and dissemination of reports to local and state repositories, libraries, and interested professionals.
There is no indication that the project site has been used-for burial purposes in the recent or distant past. While unlikely, the inadvertent discovery of redeposited human remains cannot be entirely discounted, including in areas of-artificial fill. Impacts to human remains would be potentially significant. In the event that human remains are encountered during ground disturbing activities, Mitigation Measure CUL-2, Inadvertent Discovery of Human Remains, would reduce impacts-to a less-than-significant level.
Mitigation IVIeasure CUL-2: Inadvertent Discovery of Human Remains. If potential human remains are encountered, all work will halt within 100 feet of the find and the on-site construction crew will immediately contact the City. The City will contact the Contra Costa County coroner in accordance with PRC Section 5097.98 and Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5. If the coroner-determines the remains are Native American, the coroner will contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). As provided in PRC Section 5097.98, the NAHC will identify the person or persons believed most likely to be descended from the deceased Native American. The most likely descendent will make recommendations for means of treating, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and any associated grave goods as provided in PRC Section 5097.98.
Noise
Noise Reduction Techniques for Equipment Used in Nighttime Construction Activity, would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. With mitigation, project construction would not result in the generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies. Therefore, construction-related impacts would be less than significant with mitigatiorL There would be no permanent project components added to the environment with the ability to produce noise. Therefore, no operational impact would occur.
Exhibit 2
RICHMOND TERMINAL FOUR WHARF REMOVAL PROJECT
Mitigation Measure N01-1: Noise Reduction Techniques for Equipment Used in Nighttime Construction Activity. One or a combination of the following noise reduction techniques shall be implemented to reduce noise from nighttime construction activities to below 50 dBA at the East Brother Light Station:
• Directionally position construction equipment such that the exhaust faces away from the receptors of the East Brother Light Station. This measure would be expected to reduce noise levels by 2 to 3 dBA.
Provide acoustically rated shielding around engines of construction equipment. This measure would be expected to reduce noise levels by 5 to 12 dBA depending on the proximity of shielding to the engines.
Cranes shall be operated in ECO silent mode12 during nighttime hours, as available. This measure would be expected to reduce noise levels by 3 to 5 dBA.
Tribal Cultural Resources
Tribal cultural resources are: 1) sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe that are listed, or determined to be eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources (California Register), or local register of historical resources, as defmed m Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 5020. l(k); or, 2) a resource determined by the lead CEQA agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidenc-e, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in PRC Section 5024. l(c). For a cultural landscape to be considered a tribal cultural resource, it must be geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape (PRC Section 21074(b)).
An historical resource (as defined in PRC Section 21084.1), unique archaeological resource (as defined in PRC Section 21083.2(g)), or non-unique archaeological resource (as defined in PRC Section 21083.2(h)) may also be a tribal cultural resource.
On May 9, 2018, ESA contacted the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) to request a search of their Sacred Lands files and a list of local Native Americans who might have knowledge of cultural resources in the vicinity of the project site. In a letter response on May 15, 2018, the NAHC did not identify sacred lands within or near the project site and provided a list of six contacts who might have additional information about the project location. On June 28, 2018, on behalf of the SCC, ESA sent letters, via certified mail, to the six Native American representatives identified by the NAHC. The letters provided a brief description of the project and maps of the project site, and requested that the recipients share any information regarding potential project impacts to historical resources, if they so desired. Kathy Perez from the Northern Valley Yokuts tribe responded by telephone that she would like a Native American monitor during excavation in native, undisturbed areas, if applicable.
Exhibit 2
RICHMOND TERMINAL FOUR WHARF REMOVAL PROJECT
As described in the Cultural Resources section above, ESA completed a records search at the Northwest Information Center (NWIC) on May 10, 2018 (File No. 17-2669)" and a pedestrian survey on May 10, 2018. As a result of archival review, field survey, distribution of nearby archaeological sites, and the geo logic and envu-onmental setting, the archaeological sensitivity of the project site is considered low.
Based on the results of correspondence with the NAHC and the NWIC records search, no known tribal cultural resources listed-or determined eligible for listing in the California Register, included in a local register of historical resources, or determined by the lead agency to be significant would be adversely affected-by the project. However, if any previously unrecorded- archaeological resources are identified during project implementation, particularly grounddisturbing constouction activities, and are found to qualify as a tribal cultural resource pursuant to PRC Section 21074(a)(2), any impacts to the resource resulting from the project could be potentially significant. Any such potential significant impacts would be reduced to a less-thansignificant level through implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-1, Inadvertent Discovery of Archaeological Resources, and Mitigation Measure CUL-2, Inadvertent Discovery of Human Remains.
Mitigation Measure CUL-1: Inadvertent Discovery of Archaeological Resources, (refer to Section 3.2.5, Cultural Resources)
Mitigation Measure CUL-2: Inadvertent Discovery of Human Remains, (refer to Section
3. 2.5, Cultural Resources)
Mandatory Findings of Sisnificance
a) Less than Signifkant with Mitigation. As described in Section 3.2.4, Biological Resources, with implementation of best management practices described in Section 2.5 of Chapter 2, Project Description, and Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-5, the project would not adversely affect fish or wildlife habitat, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, or reduce the number or restrict the range of an endangered, rare, or threatened species. Through implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-5, in addition to the project designs and associated environmental protection measures, including construction BMPs, avoidance and minimization, seasonal avoidance, and biological monitoring during and after construction, the brief and localized potential impacts to special-status species and their habitats would be reduced to less-than-significant levels. In the longer term, the removal of derelict structures and enhancing the subtidal and intertidal habitat in the San Francisco Bay would improve conditions 11 Northwest Information Center (NWIC)^ California Historical Resources Information System at Sonoma State University, File No. 17-2669. On file at ESA, May 10, 2018 12 ESA, Terminal 4 Wharf, Warehouse, and Pile Removal Project Point San Pablo, City of Richmond, Contra Costa County, Cultural Resources Survey Report. Prepared on behalf of California State Coastal Conservancy. October 2019.
Exhibit 2
RICHMOND TERMINAL FOUR WHARF REMOVAL PROJECT
for a range of species using the subtidal and intertidal habitats within and around the project area.
The project's potential effects on historic and archaeological resources are described in Section
3.2.5, Cultural Resources; three cultural resources were identified and recorded in the project site (Point San Pablo Terminal Four Wharf, Unnamed Sunken Hulk, Richmond Belt Railroad Segment). Archival review determined that none of the three resources are recommended eligible for listing in the California Register, due to their lack of significant associations with events (criterion 1), individuals (criterion 2), architectural distinction (-criterion 3), or information potential (criterion 4). As such, none of these resources is considered a historical resource for the purposes of CEQA. Additionally, as a result of archival review, field survey, distribution of nearby archaeological sites, and the geologic and environmental setting, the archaeological sensitivity of the project site is considered low, and there is no indication that the project site has been used for burial purposes. While unlikely, in the event that archaeological resources or human remains are encountered during ground disturbing activities, Mitigation Measures CUL-1 and CUL-2 would reduce impacts to a less-than-significant level, and the project would not eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory.
Mitigation Mleasures BIO-1: Avoidance and Minimization of Impacts to Western Burrowing Owl, BIO-2: Avoidance and Minimization of Impacts to Roosting Bats, BIO-3:
Avoidance and Minimization of Impacts to Suisun Marsh Aster, BIO-4: Use ofVibratory Pile Hammers, BIO-5: Avoid Impacts to Terrestrial Wetlands, (refer to Section 3.2.4, Biological Resources)
Mitigation Measures CUL-1: Inadvertent Discovery of Archaeological Resources, CUL-2:
Inadvertent Discovery of Human Remains. (refer to Section 3.2.5, Cultural Resources) b) Less than Significant with Mitigation. As described in the preceding sections, the project has the potential to cause significant impacts related to aesthetics, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, tribal culhiral resources, and noise. Mitigation measures have been identified that would reduce these impacts to less-than-significant levels. Overall, the project has limited impacts on the physical environment and most of the impacts associated with implementation of the project would occur durmg construction, which is anticipated to take six months or less, and thus would be short-term.
The potential for project-generated impacts to contribute to a significant cumulative impact would arise if they occur within the same geographic area. In addition to the geographic scope, cumulative impacts can be determined by the timing of the other projects relative to the project.
Schedule is particularly important for construction-related impacts. For a group of projects to generate cumulative construction impacts, they must be temporally as well as spatialiy proximate.
The Point Molate Mixed-Use Development Project (Point Molate Project) is proposed by Winehaven LLC approximately one mile south of the project-site. The Point Molate Project consists of the mixed-use development of approximately 80 acres of the approximately 413 acre Point Molate Site (of which approximately 271 acres is above water and 142 acres are submerged in the Bay) that includes a variety of residential and commercial uses, as well as supporting road and utility infrastructure. The mixed-use community would include open space, adaptive re-use of historic cottages, adaptive re-use of the historic Winehaven buildings, and
Exhibit 2
RICHMOND TERMINAL FOUR WHARF REMOVAL PROJECT
residential development. Approximately 180 acres of the Point Molate Project site would remain as open space that is enhanced with the incorporation of natural trails. Construction of the Point Molate Project is expected to take seven to nine years, starting in early 2021.13 The dates for construction of the Terminal Four Project are not yet known. Nonetheless, due to the Point Molate Project's long construction schedule, there is a potential that the construction phase for the two projects would overlap. An overlap in the construction schedule would not have significant effects on sensitive receptors related to traffic and air quality as there is a general lack of sensitive receptors present on Point San Pablo and the areas surrounding the project sites. Additionally, the project would have a relatively low number of vehicle trips (refer to Table 2-3) and a short construction schedule. The only sensitive receptor affected by noise from construction of the Terminal Four Project is the East Brother Light Station. That impact is associated with nighttime construction noise. It is unknown whether the Point Molate Project would involve nighttime construction; however, East Brother Light Station is over one mile away from the Point Molate Project site,-a distance that would attenuate construction noise impacts. Consequently, the likelihood that the two projects could create significant cumulative noise impacts is considered low. Mitigation Measure N01-1 would be implemented to reduce noise related to nighttime construction activities, further reducing the potential for cumulative noise impacts.
The project's potentially significant impacts on aesthetics, biological, cultural, and tribal cultural resources would not be exacerbated by the Point Molate Project as they do not spatially overlap. Any potentially cumulative impacts would oecur during construction as there are minimal operations and maintenance activities anticipated for the project.
Regarding cumulative air quality impacts, as stated in Section 3.2.3, Air Quality, in developing the thresholds of significance for air pollutants, the BAAQMD considered the emission levels for which a project's individual emission's would be cumulatively considerable. If a project exceeds the identified significance thresholds, its emissions would be cumulatively considerable, resulting in significant adverse air quality impacts on the region's existing air quality conditions. Project construction emissions would not be anticipated to exceed BAAQMD significance thresholds with the Implementation of air quality best management practices described in Section 2.5.1 and Mitigation Measure AQ-1. Therefore, the project would result in a less-thansignificant cumulative impact with mitigation.
Mitigation Measure AQ-1: Construction Equipment Diesel Emissions Control, (refer to Section 3.2.3, Air Quality)
Mitigation Measure N01-1: Noise Reduction Techniques for Equipment Used in Nighttime Construction Activity, (refer to Section 3.2.13, Noise) c) Less than significant with Mitigation. As described above, the project has the potential to cause signiflcant-impacts related to aesthetics, air quality, biological, cultural, tribal cultural resources. Mitigation measures have been identified to reduce these impacts to less- thansignificant levels. The project's potential to impact human beings is addressed in various sections of this Initial Study, including those that affect resources used or enjoyed by the public, 13 City of Richmond, Notice of Preparation of a Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SEFR) and Public Scoping Meeting for the Point Molate Mixed-Use Development Project, July 12,2019.
Exhibit 2
RICHMOND TERMINAL FOUR WHARF REMOVAL PROJECT
residents, and others in the project area (such as aesthetics, public services, and recreation); those that are protective of public safety and well-being (such as air quality, geology and soils, greenhouse gas emissions, hydrology and water quality, and noise); and those that address community character and essential infrastructure (such as land use and planning, population and housing, transportation, and utilities). Although the project has the potential to have adverse effects on human beings related to a new source of substantial light or glare and a cumulatively considerable net increase of criteria pollutants, these impacts could be avoided or minimized through project design features, compliance with standard regulatory requirements, and implementation of Mitigation Measures AES-1 and AQ-1. As such, project impacts to human beings would be less than significant with mitigation.
Mitigation Measure AES-1: Construction Lighting, (refer to Section 3.2.1, Aesthetics) Mitigation Measure AQ-1: Construction Equipment Diesel Emissions Control, (refer to Section 3.2.3, Air Quality)
All mitigation measures proposed by the MND are contained in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for theLProject (Exhibit 5).
Based on the foregoing. Conservancy staff recommends that the Conservancy: (1) find that the project, as mitigated, avoids, reduces, or mitigates the possible effects of the project to a level of insignificance; (2) find that there is no substantial evidence that the project, as mitigated, may have a significant effect on the environment; (3) find that the MND reflects the Conservancy's independent judgment and analysis; and (4) adopt the MND and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program pursuant to 14 Cal. Code of Regulations Section 15074(d).
If the MND is adopted and the proposed authorization approved, Conservancy staff will file a Notice of Determination.
Exhibit 3
COASTAL CONSERVANCY
Staff Recommendation March 25, 2021
TERMINAL FOUR WHARF REMOVAL PROJECT
Project No. 14-025-01 Project Manager: Marilyn Latta
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Authorization to disburse up to $1,434,400 to the City of Richmond to augment the Conservancy's November 19, 2020 grant of $3,000,000 for the final design and implementation of the Terminal Four Wharf Removal Project near Point San Pablo, Contra Costa County.
LOCATION: Point San Pablo, Richmond (Contra Costa County) PROGRAM CATEGORY: San Francisco Bay Area Conservancy
EXHIBITS
Exhibit 1: RegiQnal Map
Exhibit 2: November 19, 2021 Staff Recommendation
RESOLUTION AND FINDINGS:
Staff recommends that the State Coastal Conservancy adopt the following resolution and findings.
Resolution:
The State Coastal Conservancy hereby authorizes the disbursement of up to $1,434,400 to the City of Richmond to augment the Conservancy's November 19, 2020 grant of $3,000,000 for the final design and implementation of the Terminal Four Wharf Removal Project near Point San Pablo, Contra Costa County.
Prior to the disbursement of any funds, the City of Richmond shall submit for the review and written approval of the Conservancy's Executive Officer; a. A work program, budget, schedule, and the name? of any contractors to be employed in carrying out the work.
b. Evidence that all required permits and approvals have been obtained for the proposed project.
Exhibit 3
RICHMOND TERMINAL FOUR WHARF REMOVAL PROJECT
RICHMOND TERMINAL FOUR WHARF REMOVAL PROJECT
In carrying out the proposed project, the City of Richmond shall comply with all applicable mitigation and monitormg measures that are required by any permit or approval and with all measures that are identified in the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Terminal 4 Wharf, Warehouse and Piling Removal Project adopted by the Conservancy November 19,2020." Findings:
Based on the accompanying staff report and attached exhibits, the State Coastal Conservancy hereby finds that:
1. The proposed authorization is consistent with Chapter 4.5 of Division 21 of the Public Resources Code, regarding the resource goals of the San Francisco Bay Area Conservancy Program.
2. The proposed project is consistent with the current Conservancy Project Selection Criteria and Guidelines.
PROIECT SUMMARY
At its November 19, 2020 meeting,-the Conservancy authorized disbursement of $3,000,000 in funds for the Termmal Four Wharf Removal Project and adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the project (see Exhibit 2, "Staff Recommendation"). The "Project Financing" section of the November 19 staff recommendation noted that Conservancy staff would continue to assist the City in identifying the remaining funding needed to complete the project.
To this end, staff worked to secure a $1,200,000 Water Quality Improvement grant from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and $312,840 in mitigation funds from Koch Carbon forthe project. Staff recommends that the Conservancy authorize disbursement of up to $1,150,000 of the EPA grant and $284,400 from Koch Carbon to the City of Richmond for implementation of the Terminal Four Wharf Removal project, which consists of demolition of derelict pilings, decking, and two buildings, construction of enhanced rock slope protection, and monitoring at Terminal Four near Point San Pablo in Contra Costa County (see Exhibit 1). The remaining $50,000 ofEPA funding and $28,400 from Koch Carbon will be used to cover the Conservancy's staff costs in supporting the project. The "Project Financing" section, below, has been updated to reflect the most recent funding status and this new federal grant source. All other sections of this report remain consistent with the November 19 authorization.
PROJECT FINANCING
EPA (via a grant to the Conservancy) $1,150,000
Koch Carbon (via the Conservancy) $284,400
Coastal Conservancy previously authorized $3,000,000
San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority (unsecured) $2,300,000 Other unsecured funding $700,000
Exhibit 3
RICHMOND TERMINAL FOUR WHARF REMOVAL PROJECT
RICHMOND TERMINAL FOUR WHARF REMOVAL PROJECT
Project Total $7,434,400
Funds for the current authorization come from the EPA's San Francisco Bay Water Quality Improvement Fund. EPA notified the Conservancy of the award January 27, 2021, and mitigation funds provided by Koch Carbon related to .24 acres of shoreline impacts from their Pittsburg Bank Stabilization and Repair Project.
Funds previously authorized by the Conservancy include mitigation funds paid to the Conservancy to satisfy conditions of regulatory permits, and settlement agreement funds, both of which have been placed in accounts within the Conservancy's Coastal Trust Fund that were established expressly for the Richmond Terminal Four Wharf Removal Project. The specific fund sources and purposes are as described in Exhibit 2.
The City submitted an application for the remaining funding of approximately $3 million to the San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority in October of 2020; preliminary feedback suggests a potential recommendation at the staff level of up to $2.3 million. The Conservancy and City will continue to endeavor to raise full funding for the project.
Finally, as described in the "Project History" section in Exhibit 2, prior funds ($364,782 of BCDC Caltrans Mitigation Funds and $276,000 of the NOAA PSMFC grant funds) have already been awarded and expended on project design, permitting, and environmental review.
COMPLIANCE WITH CEQA:
Since the Conservancy's adoption of the "Terminal Four Wharf, Warehouse, and Piling Removal Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration" on November 19, 2020, the project has not changed, nor is there new information or changed circumstances that would trigger the requirement fer additional review under CEQA. Therefore, no new CEQA documentation is needed (Exhibit 2).
April 19, 2022
Public Works
DATE: April 19, 2022
TO: Mayor Butt and Members of the City Council
FROM:
Joe Leach, PE, Director of Public Works
Dee Karnes, Fleet Maintenance Superintendent
Subject:
Approve Final Payment to Municipal Maintenance
Equipment for Repairs
FINANCIAL IMPACT: The funds are available in the Public Works Fleet Maintenance Fiscal Year 2021-2022 budget –
01235031-400501
PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:
January 21, 2020
STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:
Municipal Maintenance Equipment performed repairs to a
patch truck. Additional repairs were completed beyond
the initial scope.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
APPROVE final payment to Municipal Maintenance
Equipment for repairs to a patch truck, in an amount not to exceed $12,562.48 – Public Works (Joe Leach 620-
5478).
AGENDA
REPORT
April 19, 2022
DISCUSSION:
On January 21, 2020, City Council approved a contract with Municipal Maintenance Equipment to repair a patch truck in the amount of $12,000. Two subsequent repairs were completed on the same piece of equipment for an additional $12,562.48 over the approved contract amount. The repairs were authorized by City staff that were unfamiliar with the contracting process, therefore exceeding the term and amount of the contract.
Municipal Maintenance Equipment is the sole source provider for repairs on Spaulding Mfg., Inc. equipment. A Sole Source Justification is attached.
Fleet Maintenance staff is preparing to contract with Municipal Maintenance Equipment for a term of two years to avoid this occurring again.
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
Attachment 1 – Original Contract
Attachment 2 – Approved Sole Source
Attachment 3 – Invoices
ATTACHMENT 2
April 19, 2022
Finance Department
DATE: April 19, 2022
TO: Mayor Butt and Members of the City Council
FROM:
Anil Comelo, Interim Deputy City Manager
Teresa Fairbanks, Human Resources Manager
Sue Hartman, Director of Information Technology
Delmy Cuellar, Acting Director of Finance
Mubeen Qader, Budget Administrator
Subject:
Budget presentations
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no financial impact for receiving department presentations.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:
N/A
STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:
City staff from the various City departments will provide an overview of their programs, staffing, and Fiscal Year 2022-2023 proposed Budget
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
RECEIVE budget presentations from Internal Services
Departments – Finance Department (Interim Director of
Finance Delmy Cuellar 510-620-6740).
AGENDA
REPORT
April 19, 2022
DISCUSSION:
City staff is working with all departments to develop a balanced budget for the Fiscal Year 2022-2023 and to begin budget presentations. A draft budget is planned to be presented to the City Council on May 3, 2022. Each department will describe the services they provide, what they have accomplished, plans for next fiscal year, staffing levels, and proposed draft budgets.
The proposed order of the presentations is as follows:
April 19, 2022, Internal Services (Human Resources, Finance, Information Technology)
April 26, 2022, City Attorney
City Clerk
City Manager
Economic Development (Arts & Culture, Business Development, Environmental & Health Initiatives, Port, Real Estate, Richmond Housing Authority)
May 3, 2022, City Council
Mayor
Public Works (Building Maintenance, Engineering & Capital Improvement Projects, Fleet , Maintenance & Abatement, Parks Maintenance Water Resource Recovery)
May 17, 2022, Community Services (Children and Youth, Employment & Training, Environmental and Community Investment Agreement Grant
Administration, Library, Office of Neighborhood Safety, Recreation, Transportation,)
Community Development (Building, Code Enforcement, Housing Policy, Planning, Successor Agency to the former Redevelopment Agency)
May 24, 2022, Police (Administration, Traffic, Investigations, Patrol) Fire (Administration and Support, Emergency Services, Fire Prevention, Training)
In case any updates are made to this agenda item or any attachments, please visit the City’s website at https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/1427/Presentations for the most up-to- date budget information and presentations.
NEXT STEPS:
City staff will return on April 26, 2022, with the department presentations listed above and will bring a proposed draft Fiscal Year 2022-2023 budget on May 3, 2022.
April 19, 2022
Departmental presentations will continue throughout May with budget updates provided as needed.
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
Attachment 1 – Internal Services Department Presentation
INTERNAL
SERVICES
DEPARTMENT
FY 2022-23 Budget Presentation
April 19, 2022
1 FINANC
E
HUMAN
RESOURCES
HUMAN
RESOURCES
FINAN
CE
HUMAN
RESOURCES
DEPARTMENT
FY 2022-23 Budget Presentation
April 19, 2022
2
WHAT WE DO
• Personnel Services
• Attract, train, and retain a highly skilled and diversified workforce • Maintain City’s classification and compensation
system, benefits administration, and personnel issues
• Labor Relations
• Manage contract negotiations, interpretation, grievances, investigations, and discipline in partnership with the City Attorney's Office • Risk and Safety Programs
• Administer the City’s injury and illness prevention, safety, liability, and workers’ compensation programs
3Page 621 of 669
WHAT WE DID IN FY
2021-22
• Maximized employee safety by working with dept staff to respond to and comply with COVID related regulations
• Negotiated multi-year labor MOUs with four bargaining units • Implemented an enhanced Performance Appraisal System
• Enhanced benefit and compensation information on our website • Implemented the City’s internal employee newsletter
4
WHAT WE
PLAN TO
DO IN
FY 2022-23
5 Refine
Refine, modernize, and streamline Human Resources hiring, onboarding, and off offboarding processes, procedures, and protocol to promote excellent customer service to our internal and external customers.
Create
Create influential and effective leaders by ensuring that all supervisors and/or managers are properly trained and adequately coached in personnel matters including but not limited to legal obligations and proper use of disciplinary tools to encourage independence and confidence.
Modernize
•Modernize recruitment strategies by improving our marketing and outreach techniques to attract, recruit, and retain talented, and high-quality candidates.
Employ
Employ innovative tactics by partnering with other municipalities and government agencies to share ideas and techniques to attract, recruit, and retain Police and Fire candidates.
HUMAN RESOURCES
WHO WE ARE (STAFF)
6 Positions FY21-22
Mid-Year
FY22-23
Proposed
Administrative Services Analyst 1.0 1.0
Employee Benefits Analyst I 1.0 1.0
Human Resources Manager 2.0 2.0
Human Resources Management Director 1.0 1.0
Human Resource Technician I/II/III 2.0 2.0
Personnel Analyst I/II 3.0 3.0
Principal Personnel Analyst 2.0 2.0
Senior Personnel Analyst 1.0 1.0
Total 13.0 13.0
HUMAN RESOURCES
WHAT WE PROPOSE
(FY2022-23 BUDGET)
7 FY2022-23 DRAFT BUDGET
FY2021-22
Mid-Year
FY2022-23
Proposed
Revenue Licenses, Permits, Fees
Other Revenue
Charges for Services 9,466,544 9,547,728
Total Revenue 9,466,544 9,547,728
Expenditures Salaries & Wages 1,652,879 1,740,880
Benefits 1,099,059 1,13994,031
Professional & Admin 1,746,849 1,621,100
Other Operating 62,625 72,125
Provisions for Insurance Loss 20,371,890 27,259,289
Equipment & Contract Services 150 150
Cost Pool 612,923 931,069
Asset Capital Outlay 708,530 7,000
A87 Cost Plan -214,708 -332,241
Total Expenditures 26,040,197 32,576,524
Net Impact (16,573,653) 23,028,796
Richmond Department
of Finance
FY 2022-23 Draft Budget Presentation
April 19, 2022
8
WHAT WE DO
The Finance Department is committed to providing timely, accurate, clear and complete information and support to council, city departments and the community at large. Below are the major areas of service in the Department:
• Budget develops and administers Operating and Capital Improvement Budget.
• Accounts Payable and Purchasing manage all procurement transactions and payments to vendors
• Revenue processes all the City revenue including Business Tax/Measure U
• Treasury monitors cash and banking transactions for the City daily • General Accounting maintains the City books and issues monthly, quarterly, and annual reports, also publishes Annual Comprehensive Report (ACFR) in line with governmental accounting rules • Payroll processes payroll runs twice a month and special checks in compliance with labor laws and negotiated MOUs
9Page 627 of 669
WHAT WE DID IN FY 2021-22
• Budget
• Developed and administered Annual FY2021-22 Operating Budget and five-year Capital Improvement Plan
• Revenue
• Implemented voter approved Measure U calculation
methodology for Business Tax
• Accounts Payable and Purchasing Revenue
• Processed 3,434 checks and 5,794 direct deposits
• General Accounting published the FY2020-2021 Annual
Comprehensive Financial Report
• Treasury
• Reconciled monthly bond activity and submitted Treasurer Report timely and with minimal variances
• Timely submission of the continuing disclosures
• Executed a Call of a portion of 1999-1 Limited Obligation Bonds • Payroll
• Generated 24 regular payroll runs for more than 800
temporary and permanent employees
• Implemented several bargaining units’ negotiated MOUs 10Page 628 of 669
WHAT WE PLAN TO DO IN FY 2022-23
• Implement MUNIS (system of financial records) Upgrade • Continue the implementation of Measure U by working with the local businesses
• Assist the City Manager’s Office in exploring Revenue Enhancement options
• Facilitate FY2021-22 Financial Audit and publish Annual Comprehensive Financial Report
• Update Long Term Financial Forecast by incorporating new MOUs, expenditure and revenue assumptions under current economic projections
• Increase reserve level to 15% through fiscally sustainable financial management
• Reduce negative cash in non-General Funds through various fiscal tools
• Refinance Pension Obligation Bonds
• Revisit potential investment opportunities to maximize the City’s return on investments 11Page 629 of 669
FINANCE
WHO WE ARE (STAFF)
Positions
FY21-22
Mid-Year
FY22-23
Proposed
Accountant I/II 8 8
Accounting Assistant I/II 6 6
Accounting Manager 2 2
Budget Administrator 1 1
Budget Analyst I/II 1 1
Business License Field Inspector 1 1
Business License Specialist 2 2
Buyer II 1 1
Deputy Director of Finance 1 1
Director of Finance 1 1
Executive Secretary 1 1
Payroll Coordinator 2 2
Payroll Supervisor 1 1
Senior Accountant 3 3
Senior Budget Analyst 1 1
Senior Buyer 1 1
Total Full-Time Equivalent (FTEs) 33 33
This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY
12Page 630 of 669
FINANCE
WHAT WE PROPOSE (BUDGET)
13 FY2022-23 DRAFT BUDGET
FY2021-22
Mid-Year
FY2022-23
Proposed
Revenue Licenses, Permits, Fees 68 0
Total Revenue 68 0
Expenditures Salaries & Wages 3,130,577 3,589,528
Benefits 2,267,453 2,214,947
Professional & Admin 751,942 794,722
Other Operating 68,806 65,806
Utilities 1,394 1,400
Equipment & Contract
Services 385 435
Cost Pool 171,164 309,458
A87 Cost Plan
Reimbursement (1,059,033) (1,885,015)
Total Expenditures 5,332,620 5,091,281
Net Impact
13Page 631 of 669
INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY
FY 2022-23 Draft Budget Presentation
April 19, 2022
14
WHAT WE DO
Manage IT Infrastructure
IT Manages network and communications for
47 sites including 44,000 feet of City fiber
Manage Enterprise Business systems
including GIS as well as manage the Open Data &
Performance system for City departments
Manage hardware and software
for the City -wide Network, VoIP phone system,
800 desktops, 275 laptops, and 450 mobile
devices
IT manages communications
to the public through KCRT TV, print services,
website, and social media
15Page 633 of 669
WHAT WE DID IN FY 2021-22
Enhanced Cyber Security
Including awareness training for end users
Continued replacement of aging computer equipment
Including our network infrastructure and end user
equipment
Collaborated with City Departments to Manage
Upgrade, and implement Business Systems
Measure U for the Finance Department
eSCRIBE for the City Clerk
Continued support of remote access and online
conferencing
Providing secure access
16Page 634 of 669
WHAT WE PLAN TO DO IN FY 2022-23
Continue to provide innovations for City wide efficiencies including expanded digital services Continue to collaborate interdepartmentally in support of business systems Manage and support the City of Richmond’s Enterprise Resource Planning System (ERP) Plan and execute the Implementation of an enterprise Document Management System and upgrade/replacement of the City’s Community Development System by end of fiscal year Continue to provide technical support for Measure U
Continue Revenue enhancement opportunities
Managing, and negotiating increase rent for cellular service vendors on City owned properties
Continue Implementation of expanded Wi-Fi both internally and externally Improve bandwidth for remote City facilities and distance learning locations 17Page 635 of 669
WHO WE
ARE – TEAM
AWESOME!
Positions FY21-22
Mid-Year
FY22-23
Proposed
Business Analyst I 1.0 1.0
Cable TV Manager 1.0 1.0
Cable TV Programming Coordinator 1.0 1.0
Duplicating/Mail Assistant I/II 1.0 1.0
GIS Administrator 1.0 1.0
Information Technology Assistant 1.0 1.0
Information Technology Director 1.0 1.0
Information Technology Manager 1.0 1.0
Microcomputer Support Specialist I/II 1.0 1.0
Network & Systems Security Officer 1.0 1.0
Network & Systems Specialist I/II 1.0 1.0
Senior Cable TV Production Assistant 1.0 1.0
Senior Programmer Analyst 1.0 1.0
Telecommunication Manager 1.0 1.0
Net Impact 14.0 14.0
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
WHO WE ARE (STAFF)
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
WHAT WE PROPOSE (FY 2022-23 BUDGET)
19 FINANCE STAFF WILL
COMPLETE THIS SLIDE
FY2022-23 DRAFT BUDGET
FY2021-22
Mid-Year
FY2022-23
Proposed
Revenue Licenses, Permits, Fees 1,250,000 1,250,000
Other Revenue 2,688
Total Revenue 1,352,688 1,250,000
Expenditures Salaries & Wages 1,443,889 1,429,737
Benefits 851,546 1,169,000
Professional & Admin 1,112,882 1,086,882
Other Operating 107,601 107,601
Utilities 376,879 440,827
Equipment & Contract Services 727,220 727,220
Provisions for Insurance 604 604
Cost Pool 252,852 501,527
Asset Capital Outlay 1,350,000 1,250,000
A87 Cost Plan -523,579 -712,246
Operating Transfer In -100,000 100,000
Total Expenditures 5,699,894 6,001,152
Net Impact (4,347,206) (4,651,152)
March 22, 2022
Public Works
DATE: April 19, 2022
TO: Mayor Butt and Members of the City Council
FROM:
Joe Leach, Director of Public Works
Samantha Carr, Environmental Manager
Subject:
Receive an Update from PG&E Regarding Power
Outages
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact related to this item.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:
September 28, 2021
STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:
Over the last several months, Richmond residents have
experienced numerous power outages. On September
28, 2021, PG&E gave a presentation regarding the power
outages in Richmond. It has been requested for PG&E to
give an update to City Council.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: RECEIVE a presentation from PG&E regarding power outages in Richmond – Public Works/City Manager’s
Office, Economic Development (Samantha Carr/Joe
Leach, 510-620-6512). This item was continued from
the March 22, 2022, meeting.
DISCUSSION:
Background
Over the last several months, Richmond residents have experienced numerous power outages. On September 28, 2021, PG&E gave a presentation regarding the power outages in Richmond. It has been requested for PG&E to give an update to City Council. Moving forward, PG&E will be providing quarterly updates to City Council. City AGENDA
REPORT
March 22, 2022
Council may provide suggestions on information or data they’d like to see presented at the next quarterly update from PG&E.
Resources for Residents
Preparation:
Update Contact Information - Receive outage and restoration notifications. Prepare an emergency plan including portable backup power, hotel accommodations and accessible transportation at disabilitydisasteraccess.org. Backup Power Meter Support - PG&E has developed a new meter program to help our customers safely power their homes during emergency outages.
Currently the offer is available for qualified PG&E customers who have been issued a rebate for a qualified backup generator.
Medical Baseline Program - Apply to receive energy savings and extra outreach. Explore Backup Power Options - Determine the right solution and generator rebate qualifications. Options include generator rebates for customers who rely on well water and portable batteries for Medical Baseline customers in high fire risk areas.
Self-identify for Vulnerable Customer Status - The program’s goal is to help address the needs of customers whose life or health would be at risk should their electric or gas service be disconnected. To self-certify for Vulnerable Customer status, you must download, print, and submit an application that is valid after acceptance by PG&E.
During a Power Outage:
PG&E Report It Safety Mobile App - The new “PG&E Report It” safety app allows customers to submit photos of non-emergency potential safety concerns with our electric system. Customers will also receive notifications when their concern is being reviewed and when it has been resolved.
Report or View Outages Online - View PG&E’s live map for electric outages, restoration times, or report an outage online.
Find Community Resource Centers during PSPS Events - Resources to find locations to charge devices, charge Electric Vehicle, and get basic supplies during a PSPS events.
Resources for Accessibility, Aging, Financial, and Language Needs During PSPS Events - Includes information on in-language support and replacing lost food at your local food bank during and up to three days after a PSPS outage.
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
Attachment 1 – PG&E March 22, 2022, Presentation
Pacific Gas and Electric Company
Electric Reliability
RICHMOND CITY COUNCIL
March 22, 2022
2Some of the measures included in this presentation are contemplated as additional precautionary measures intended to further reduce the risk of wildfires.
Agenda and Introductions
Today we will cover:
How PG&E manages reliability
Electric circuits serving Richmond
Your outage history
Improving reliability
Supporting customers
PG&E is committed to providing safe,
reliable and affordable service and
laying the foundation to meet
customers' future energy needs.
2
3Some of the measures included in this presentation are contemplated as additional precautionary measures intended to further reduce the risk of wildfires.
Responding to Outages and Improving Safety
Immediate Response
▪ When an outage starts, PG&E dispatches a
Troubleman to identify and isolate the issue,
restoring as many customers as possible.
▪ A crew completes emergency repairs and
upgrades and restores the remaining customers.
System Planning
▪ We review the previous day’s outages daily to
identify near-term system improvement projects.
▪ We also review trends on a weekly, monthly and
annual basis to identify near, medium, and long-
term system improvement projects.
3
4Some of the measures included in this presentation are contemplated as additional precautionary measures intended to further reduce the risk of wildfires.
Types of Outages
We identify outage trends to help focus
our safety efforts through data review.
4 To understand trends and inform future
maintenance and construction work,
our reviews largely focus on sustained,
unplanned outages.
To view outages and find up-to-date information,
visit pge.com/outages or call us at 1-800-743-5000
Momentary or Sustained
▪ Momentary outages last less than five minutes. A patrol is not usually conducted, and the cause is often not identified.
▪ Sustained outages are any interruption that lasts more than five minutes.
Planned or Unplanned
▪ Planned outages allow for safe work on the circuit. Customers are notified in advance. Reasons might include system upgrades, maintenance, or work requested by a third party.
▪ Unplanned outages are when an emergency condition needs to be addressed to restore customers and/or help ensure public safety.
5Some of the measures included in this presentation are contemplated as additional precautionary measures intended to further reduce the risk of wildfires.
Electric Circuits Serving the City of Richmond
PG&E’s El Cerrito G 1102 circuit serves communities in the cities of Richmond and El Cerrito. 8 miles of
overhead conductor
2,308 customers
are provided electric service
8 miles of
underground conductor
Outage History
A Nov. 20, 2021
Switch level outage
due to 3rd party
B Dec. 21, 2021
OCB level outage due
overhead equipment
failure – repairs completed
C Jan. 12, 2022
OCB level outage due to
underground equipment
failure – repairs completed
6Some of the measures included in this presentation are contemplated as additional precautionary measures intended to further reduce the risk of wildfires.
How Customers Are Served in the City of Richmond
El Cerrito G
CIRCUIT CUSTOMER COUNT*
SUBSTATION J 1117 1
MIRA VISTA 0401 1,858
MIRA VISTA 0403 653
SUBSTATION G 1101 2,059
SUBSTATION G 1102 1,908
SUBSTATION G 1105 50
SUBSTATION G 1106 633
SUBSTATION G 1108 1
SUBSTATION G 1109 168
SUBSTATION G 1110 1
SUBSTATION G 1111 1,344
SUBSTATION G 1112 703
SUBSTATION G 1113 5
SUBSTATION G 1114 933
SUBSTATION Q 0401 1,333
SUBSTATION Q 0402 696
FAIRMONT 0402 712
BARRETT 0401 1,785
BARRETT 0402 1,536
BROOKSIDE 0401 119
VALLEY VIEW 1105 1,072
VALLEY VIEW 1106 1,406
SAN PABLO 1105 2,990
*Customer counts are approximate
This map is for informational purposes only, is not to scale and includes additional circuits not listed on this slide.
CIRCUIT CUSTOMER COUNT*
WALDO 0401 396
RICHMOND 1118 543
RICHMOND 1119 1,401
RICHMOND 1120 144
RICHMOND 1121 1,221
RICHMOND 1122 352
RICHMOND 1123 49
RICHMOND 1124 681
RICHMOND 1125 2,294
RICHMOND 1126 440
RICHMOND 1127 2,266
RICHMOND 1128 1,672
RICHMOND 1129 394
RICHMOND 1130 2,677
WALL 0401 112
VIRGINIA 0401 852
FRANKLIN 1101 1
POINT PINOLE 1101 888
POINT PINOLE 1102 1,395
VALLEY VIEW 1103 1,339
SAN PABLO 1106 2,224
Customers in Richmond generally get their power
from 33 circuits coming from 14 substations.
7Some of the measures included in this presentation are contemplated as additional precautionary measures intended to further reduce the risk of wildfires.
Improving Reliability
We are improving reliability in your city
through short-, mid- and long-term projects.
1 2
3 4
Mid-Term
▪ New reliability project to
improve sectionalizing
capabilities in 2022
▪ Installing one line recloser
▪ Installing three overhead
fuses
5 Short-Term
▪ New overhead fuse
installed on Jan. 12, 2022
6 7
Long-Term
▪ New asset replacement
project involving overhead
reconductoring in 2023
▪ New reliability project to add
FLISR scheme to Richmond
R1125 and El Cerrito G 1102
circuits in 2023
8Some of the measures included in this presentation are contemplated as additional precautionary measures intended to further reduce the risk of wildfires.
Safety Efforts in 2022
This year, we plan to continue our Insulator Washing and Replacement Program and pro-active efforts to enhance electric equipment. 8 Crews manually washing
electric power pole insulators
Crews conducting system
hardening project
Insulator Washing and Replacement Program
poles washed*
~15,430
This work is occurring on
circuits at a higher risk of
ignitions and wildfire risk
Strengthening Electric Equipment
Replacing wood
crossarms and
ceramic insulators
This work will help to improve
public safety and reduce
customer impacts
9Some of the measures included in this presentation are contemplated as additional precautionary measures intended to further reduce the risk of wildfires.
Planned Maintenance and Construction
This year, we plan to address ~1,100
tags across PG&E’s East Bay Division
Electric tag work includes:
Equipment upgrades
Maintenance
Urgent and emergency issues, as needed
We are increasing our crew counts
to perform this work and improve customer safety.
We appreciate your continued partnership as we work
together to improve PG&E’s service to businesses and residents in the City of Richmond.
10Some of the measures included in this presentation are contemplated as additional precautionary measures intended to further reduce the risk of wildfires.
Routine Vegetation Management Work
For illustrative purposes only
Routine Vegetation Management
▪ A clearance of 4 feet around powerlines in high fire-threat areas with recommended minimum clearances of 12 feet or more at time of prune to ensure compliance year-round.
▪ The recommendation is based on maintaining the 4 feet clearance during various site and weather conditions (e.g., wind, heat) and tree growth rates in between yearly
inspections.
▪ The rate of tree growth can depend on:
Our annual vegetation management program around
electric distribution lines includes:
• Species
• Irrigation
• Proximity to water sources
▪ Our routine work also includes pruning or cutting down dead, diseased, dying and defective trees.
• Annual precipitation
• Light exposure
• Soil conditions
For illustrative purposes only
Customer Resources
12Some of the measures included in this presentation are contemplated as additional precautionary measures intended to further reduce the risk of wildfires.
Backup Power Meter Support
PG&E has developed a new meter program to
help our customers safely power their homes
during emergency outages.
The program provides a safe way for customers
to connect generator power to their homes.
The power is delivered directly to the circuit
breaker when you connect the generator to the
meter and will also eliminate any power cords
running through your home.
Be sure to start the generator at a safe location
and program to your home specifics.
This program also provides an affordable
solution for customers who are unable to afford
solar or backup battery systems.
When utility power returns:
01 Turn off your generator
02 Adjust your breaker panel to set all circuit
to the “on” position
03 Unplug the cord from the generator to
disconnect from the meterPage 651 of 669
13Some of the measures included in this presentation are contemplated as additional precautionary measures intended to further reduce the risk of wildfires.
PG&E Report It Safety Mobile App
The new “PG&E Report It” safety app allows customers to submit photos of non-emergency potential safety concerns with our electric system.
Use Report It to:
Learn about the types of issues to report
Submit photos directly to our safety team
Find safety concerns submitted by other users
Review PG&E’s findings
Customers will also receive notifications when their
concern is being reviewed and when it has been resolved.
More Information: Together, we can further reduce the
risk of wildfires and keep our communities safe. To learn more about PG&E Report It, visit
pge.com/reportit
Sample App Prototype
Access is limited: While anyone can download the app, during the pilot submitting concerns is intended only for customers in Tier 2 and Tier 3 High Fire Threat Districts. Invitations via email, postcard and bill insert have been sent. If you have not received an invitation, join the waitlist at pge.com/reportit to get notified when we add more users. Page 652 of 669
14Some of the measures included in this presentation are contemplated as additional precautionary measures intended to further reduce the risk of wildfires.
Supporting Customers with Resources and Updates
Notifying Customers of Outages
We will share updates about when you can
expect power to return. Outages are
triggered automatically due to a safety
threat, therefore we are unable to provide
advance notification.
Reducing Customer Impacts by:
▪ Providing better notifications
▪ Fine-tuning device sensitivity
▪ Reducing the length, frequency and
number of customers impacted
▪ Expanding customer resource eligibility
How Customers Can Prepare for Outages
Update Contact
Information
Receive outage and restoration
notifications
pge.com/myalerts
Explore Backup
Power Options
Determine the right solution and
generator rebate qualifications
pge.com/backuppower
Stay Up-to-Date
View outages and
restoration times
pge.com/outages
PG&E’S OUTAGE MAPDuring hot and dry summer
conditions. These conditions are most
likely from May to November.
When Are EPSS Outages Most Likely to Occur?
15Some of the measures included in this presentation are contemplated as additional precautionary measures intended to further reduce the risk of wildfires.
For more
information
To view webinar slides and recordings, visit
More Information and Tools For Customers to Prepare
BEFORE PSPS AND EPSS OUTAGES
▪ See if you qualify for backup power support at
pge.com/backuppower.
▪ Apply for the Medical Baseline Program to receive energy savings and extra outreach before a PSPS at pge.com/medicalbaseline. ▪ Self-identify for Vulnerable Customer Status if your life or health would be at risk should electric or gas service be disconnected at pge.com/vulnerable.
Generator rebates
for customers who
rely on well water
Portable batteries for
Medical Baseline customers
in high fire risk areas
▪ Find Community Resource Centers to charge devices and get basic supplies during a PSPS event at pge.com/crc.
▪ Replace lost food at your local food bank during and up to three days after an outage, visit pge.com/pspsresources.
▪ Prepare an emergency plan including portable backup power, hotel accommodations and accessible transportation at
disabilitydisasteraccess.org. *Translated support available
DURING PSPS OUTAGES
Visit PG&E’s YouTube Channel
To view more safety information, tips to be prepared
and other resources
www.youtube.com/user/pgevideo
pge.com/firesafetywebinars
Visit pge.com/wildfiresafety
Call us at 1-866-743-6589*
Email us at [email protected]
Questions?
Thank You
April 19, 2022
City Council
DATE: April 19, 2022
TO: Mayor Butt and Members of the City Council
FROM:
Councilmember Melvin Willis
Subject:
Reinstate the Issuance of Citations in the Street
Sweeping Program
FINANCIAL IMPACT: If the item is approved, there will be revenue from the collection of citations after the 90-day notification period.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:
On 01/19/2021, the City Council voted to suspend the
signage installation and ticketing components of the
program during the Shelter in Place Order.
STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:
The Street Sweeping Program should be reinstated to
the pre-pandemic level to effectively abate the streets of Richmond.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
DISCUSS and APPROVE reinstating the citation
component of the Street Sweeping Program with a 90-
day notification/warning period – (Councilmember Melvin Willis 510-412-2050).
DISCUSSION:
During the Shelter in Place Order, the City Council voted to suspend ticketing of vehicles that were not moved on Street Sweeping days. The City Council took this position because the pandemic created many hardships for residents in Richmond and residents were confined to their homes. Suspending the ticketing process provided a sense of relief for residents because they wouldn’t receive a citation on Street Sweeping days. During the Shelter in Place Order, it was appropriate to suspend components of the program; however, the Order has been lifted and the streets are extremely blighted with debris. Complaints of the unsightly condition of the streets have increased. In order AGENDA
REPORT
April 19, 2022
for the Street Sweeper to effectively clean the streets, cars need to be moved on designated streets according to the schedule. In order to prepare residents for the reinstatement of ticketing, a 90-day notification/warning period is recommended.
In addition, the City Council needs information from the Parking Enforcement Division of the Richmond Police Department regarding their capacity to provide warning notices of the reinstatement of ticketing within 90 days of reinstating this component of the program.
The City Council also needs information from the Streets Division, Public Works Department, on their ability to reinstate the Street Sweeping program to its full capacity to clean our streets and prevent debris from entering the San Francisco Bay.
The effective date of the reinstatement should be in accordance with the Parking Enforcement Division’s and the Streets Division’s capacity to do so.
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
None.
April 19, 2022
Mayor's Office
DATE: April 19, 2022
TO: Members of the City Council
FROM:
Mayor Tom Butt
Subject:
Fair access to housing
FINANCIAL IMPACT: None
PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:
Click or tap here to enter text.
STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:
Because of credit history, employment status or rental
history, persons experiencing homelessness may have
an insurmountable barrier to accessing rental housing
even if they can afford the amount of rent, perpetuating a state of homelessness.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
DIRECT staff to draft an ordinance for first reading to amend the Richmond’s Fair Chance Access to Affordable
Housing Ordinance, RMC Chapter 7.110, to eliminate
unfair barriers for rental housing applicants – Office of the Mayor (Mayor Tom Butt 510-620-6503).
DISCUSSION:
It is generally accepted that a lack of physical housing exacerbates, or even causes, conditions experienced by a large percentage of homeless persons, including drug and alcohol abuse, mental illness, physical health challenges, and unemployment or underemployment.
AGENDA
REPORT
April 19, 2022
Housing First is an approach to serving people experiencing homelessness that recognizes a homeless person must first be able to access a decent, safe place to live, that does not limit length of stay (permanent housing), before stabilizing, improving health, reducing harmful behaviors, or increasing income. Under the Housing First approach, anyone experiencing homelessness should be connected to a permanent home as quickly as possible, barriers should be removed to accessing the housing, like requirements for sobriety or absence of criminal history. It is based on the “hierarchy of need:” people must access basic necessities—like a safe place to live and food to eat— before being able to achieve quality of life or pursue personal goals.
Programs that provide funding for Rapid re-housing, which connects a family or individual to an apartment affordable through short to medium-term rental assistance, are typically designed to allow that household to increase their income sufficiently to be able to afford the apartment over the long-term.
It is a common practice in Richmond for landlords to refuse to provide rental housing to previously homeless persons, even If they can pay the rent, based on the lack of full employment documentation, positive references, poor credit history, or previous homelessness.
We must not allow illegal, discriminatory, and overzealous tenant screening to be an impediment for re-housing our homeless population.
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
Attachment 1 – Draft Fair Chance Access to Affordable Housing Ordinance language
Chapter 7.110 - FAIR CHANCE ACCESS TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING
7.110.010 - Title.
This Chapter shall be known as the "Fair Chance Access to Affordable Housing Ordinance". ( Ord. No. 20-16 N.S., § I, 12 -20-2016, eff. 6-20-2017 )
7.110.020 - Authority.
This Chapter is adopted pursuant to the powers vested in the City of Richmond u nder the laws and Constitution of the State of California and the City Charter. ( Ord. No. 20-16 N.S., § I, 12 -20-2016, eff. 6-20-2017 )
7.110.030 - Findings.
(a) The City of Richmond is committed to equity, dignity, and public health. (b) The unmet housing needs of formerly incarcerated people in Richmond are an acute challenge to the dignity, public health, and equal opportunity for this population and the broader community.
(c) A survey of 100 formerly incarcerated Richmond residents found that only fifty -three percent (53%) had stable housing three to eighteen months after their release. (d) Research has found that access to housing reduces recidivism, an d the lack of housing can be a significant barrier to successful reintegration after incarceration. (e) Several cities, including Urbana, Illinois; Madison, Wisconsin; New York, New York; San Francisco, California; Newark, New Jersey; and Seattle, Washingt on have passed policies that restore rights and remove barriers to housing for people with past criminal convictions. (f) On or about April 4, 2016, the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development issued the "Office of General Counsel Guidanc e on Application of Fair Housing Act Standards to the Use of Criminal Records by Providers of Housing and Real Estate -Related Transactions" in which it states that "Policies that exclude persons based on criminal history must be tailored to serve the housi ng provider's substantial, legitimate, nondiscriminatory interest and take into consideration such factors as the type of the crime and the length of the time since conviction."
(g) It has been documented by service providers providing assistance to former ly incarcerated residents in Richmond and national researchers that significant first source housing for people coming out of incarceration is publicly subsidized affordable housing. {See Corinne Carey, No Second Chance: People with Criminal Records Denied Access to Public Housing, 36 University of Toledo Law Review 545; Caterina Gouvis Roman and Jeremy Travis, Urban
Institute, Taking Stock: Housing, Homelessness and Prisoner Re -Entry (2004); and Every Door Closed: Barriers Facing Parents With Criminal Reco rds, CLASP and CLS Report (Chapter 3, "Criminal Records and Subsidized Housing: Families Losing the Opportunity for Decent Shelter".)
(h) Richmond service providers and national researchers have documented barriers to access to publicly subsidized affordab le housing faced by formerly incarcerated residents. {See Corinne Carey, No Second Chance: People with Criminal Records Denied Access to Public Housing, 36 University of Toledo Law Review 545; Caterina Gouvis Roman and Jeremy Travis, Urban Institute, Takin g Stock: Housing, Homelessness and Prisoner Re -Entry (2004); and Every Door Closed: Barriers Facing Parents With Criminal Records, CLASP and CLS Report (Chapter 3, "Criminal Records and Subsidized Housing: Families Losing the Opportunity for Decent Shelter".)
(i) The City of Richmond General Plan states in the Health and Wellness Element under Policy HW8.4 Inmate Re -Entry and Transition that a goal of the city is to "Support re -entry, transition and integration of former prison inmates and parolees into the community." (j) The City's Health in All Policies Strategy states that "through a targeted and concerted effort across all city departments, we can make an impact on reducing and eliminating many preventable stressors while at the same time enhancing the many assets and resources that already exist in Richmond to support human health."
(k) Homelessness is a critical issue in Richmond, and formerly incarcerated people are disproportionately affected by homelessness.
(l) Not having a home can prevent a forme rly incarcerated person from getting a job, from visiting with his or her children, and from fulfilling other needs that are fundamental to reintegrating with community after incarceration.
(m) Mass incarceration is a national crisis, and restoring the rig hts of people affected by mass incarceration is a national priority.
(n) The United States incarcerates more than twenty -five percent (25%) of the world's prisoners while the country comprises only five percent (5%) of the world's population. (o) The City of Richmond has shown a consistent interest in removing barriers faced by people coming home from incarceration, by helping establish the Reentry Success Center and adopting policies like the city's "Ban the Box" ordinance (14 -13 N.S.), which removed barri ers to employment.
(p) The City of Richmond, primarily through the Richmond Housing Authority, owns, manages, and/or subsidizes various types of publicly subsidized housing, including Project - based Section 8 units, Section 202 senior housing, Public Housin g units, tax-credit financed affordable housing, and housing rented with Section 8 vouchers. (q) Formerly incarcerated Richmond residents have done extensive research, community engagement, and program and policy development.
(r) Research and community eng agement by the Safe Return Project has identified a policy gap in the city's treatment of housing providers and their consideration of past convictions that has generated unfair and harmful barriers to housing for people with past convictions. (s) In 2016, the California Legislature passed Senate Bill 1380 that added Chapter 6.5 (commencing with Section 8255) to Division 8 of the Welfare and Institutions Code , that adopted the “housing first” model, including the core component that applicants for h ousing not be rejected on the basis of poor credit, poor or lack of rental history, criminal convictions unrelated to tenant, or behavior that indicates a lack of “housing” r eadiness. (t) The California Department of Housing and Community Developm ent recognizes Housing First as an evidence -based practice. In fact, a settled and growing body of evidence demonstrates—
1) Tenants accessing Housing First programs are able to move into housing faster than programs offering a more traditional approach. 1
2) Tenants using Housing First programs stay housed longer and more stably than other programs. 2
3) Over 90% of tenants accessing Housing First programs are able to retain housing stability. 3 4) In general, tenants using Housing First programs access services more often, have a greater sense of choice and autonomy, and are far less costly to public systems than tenants of other programs. 4
( Ord. No. 20-16 N.S., § I, 12-20-2016, eff. 6-20-2017 )
7.110.040 - Definitions.
For the purposes of this Chapter, the following words and phrases shall mean and include:
(a) "Adverse action" in the context of housing shall mean to evict, fail or refuse to rent or lease real property to an individual, or fail or refuse to continue to rent or lease real property to an individual, or fail or refuse to add a household member to an existing lease, or to reduce any tenant subsidy. The adverse action must relate to real property in Richmond. (b) "Affordable housing" means any residential building in Richmond that has received City, State, or Federal funding, tax credits, or other subsidies connected in whole or in part to developing, rehabilitating, restricting rents, subsidizing own ership, or otherwise providing
1 Gulcur, L., Stefancic, A., Shinn, M., Tsemberis, S., & Fishcer, S. Housing, Hospitalization, and Cost Outcomes for Homeless Individuals with Psychiatric Disabilities Participating in Continuum of Care and Housing First programs. 2003.
2 Tsemberis, S. & Eisenberg, R. Pathways to Housing: Supported Housing for Street-Dwelling Homeless Individuals with Psychiatric Disabilities. 2000.
3 Montgomery, A.E., Hill, L., Kane, V., & Culhane, D. Housing Chronically Homeless Veterans: Evaluating the Efficacy of a Housing First Approach to HUD -VASH. 2013. 4 Tsemberis, S., Gulcur, L., & Nakae, M. Housing First, Consumer Choice, and Harm Reduction for Homeless Individuals with a Dual Diagnosis. 2004; Perlman, J. & Parvensky, J. Denver Housing First Collaborative: Cost Benefit Analysis and Program Outcomes Report. 2006.
housing for extremely low income, very low income, low income, and moderate income households.
(c) "Appeal hearing body" shall mean a body authorized by the City Manager or City Council to receive and decide on appeals relate d to this ordinance and determine any corrective action. (d) "Arrest" shall mean a record from any jurisdiction that does not result in a conviction and includes information indicating that a person has been questioned, apprehended, taken into custody or detained, or held for investigation by a law enforcement, police, or prosecutorial agency and/or charged with, indicted, or tried and acquitted for any felony, misdemeanor or other criminal offense.
(e) "Background check report" shall mean any criminal hist ory report, including but not limited to those produced by the California Department of Justice, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, other law enforcement agencies, courts, or by any consumer reporting or tenant screening agency.
(f) "Conviction" shall me an a record from any jurisdiction that includes information indicating that a person has been convicted of a felony or misdemeanor, provided that the conviction is one for which the person has been placed on probation, fined, imprisoned or paroled. (g) "Conviction history" shall mean information regarding one or more convictions or unresolved arrests, transmitted orally or in writing or by any other means, and obtained from any source, including but not limited to the individual to whom the information pert ains and a Background Check Report.
(h) "Directly-related conviction" shall mean that the conduct for which the person was convicted has a direct and specific negative bearing on the safety of persons or property, given the nature of the housing, and inclu des one or more of the following: any conviction where state or federal law prohibits the applicant from being eligible for the public housing; any conviction for a crime carried out in the applicant's home or on the premises where the applicant lived; or any conviction that leads to the applicant becoming a lifetime registered sex offender.
(i) "Evidence of rehabilitation or other mitigating factors" may include, but is not limited to, a person's satisfactory compliance with all terms and conditions of par ole and/or probation; employer recommendations; educational attainment or vocational or professional training since the conviction; completion or active participation in rehabilitative treatment; and letters of recommendation from community organizations, counselors or case managers, teachers, community leaders or parole/probation officers who have observed the applicant since his or her conviction; and the age of person at the time of the conviction. Successful completion of parole, probation, mandatory su pervision, or post release community supervision shall create a presumption of rehabilitation.
(j) "Housing provider" shall mean any entity that owns, master leases, manages, or develops affordable housing in the City. Any agent, such as a property managem ent company, that makes tenancy decisions on behalf of the above described entities shall also be considered a "Housing Provider."
(k) "Inquire" shall mean any direct or indirect conduct intended to gather information from or about an applicant, candidate potential applicant or candidate, or employee, using any mode of communication, including but not limited to application forms, interviews, and background check reports.
( Ord. No. 20-16 N.S., § I, 12 -20-2016, eff. 6-20-2017 )
7.110.050 - Procedures for use of criminal history information in housing decisions. (a) Regarding applicants and individuals applying to be added to a lease for affordable housing, and their household members, a housing provider shall not, at any time or by any means, inquire about, require disclosure of, or if such information is received, base an adverse action in whole or in part on:
(1) An arrest not leading to a conviction;
(2) Participation in or completion of a diversion or a deferral of judgment program; (3) A conviction that has been judicially dismissed, expunged, voided, invalidated, or otherwise rendered inoperative, by way of example but not limitation, under California Penal Code §§ 1203.4 or 1203.4a, or 1203.1.
(4) A Conviction or any other determination or adjudication in the juvenile justice system, or information regarding a matter considered in or processed through the juvenile justice system; (5) A Conviction that is more than two years old, the date of the Conviction being the date of sentencing; or
(6) Information pertaining to an offense other than a felony or misdemeanor, such as an infraction.
(b) The housing provider shall not require applicants, and individua ls applying to be added to an existing lease, for affordable housing to disclose on any housing application the fact or details of any conviction history or any matter identified in subsections (a)(1) —(6) above. Nor shall the housing provider inquire on an y housing application about the fact or details of any conviction history or any matter identified in subsections (a)(1) —(6) above. (c) The housing provider shall not require applicants, and individuals applying to be added to an existing lease, for afford able housing to disclose, and shall not inquire into, conviction history until the housing provider has first:
(1) Determined that the applicant is qualified to rent the housing unit under all of the housing provider's criteria for assessing applicants exc ept for criteria related to potential past criminal convictions; and
(2) Provided to the applicant a conditional lease agreement that commits the unit to the applicant as long as the applicant passes the conviction history review.
(d) If and when the housing provider requests written consent from the applicant to obtain a background check record of conviction history, the housing provider must also request consent to share the conviction history record with the applicant and with the City of Richmond ( for the purposes of an appeal only), and must offer the applicant an opportunity to provide evidence of rehabilitation or other mitigating factors related to convictions within the previous two years. (e) In reviewing conviction history and making a decisi on related to affordable housing based on conviction history, a housing provider shall conduct an individualized assessment, considering only convictions that warrant denial based on state and federal law, and considering the time that has elapsed since th e conviction, whether it is a directly -related conviction, and any evidence of inaccuracy or evidence of rehabilitation or other mitigating factors.
(f) If a housing provider intends to base an adverse action related to affordable housing on an applicant's or household member's conviction history, prior to the adverse action, the housing provider must follow the following steps:
(1) Notify the applicant of the prospective adverse action, providing in written form the following:
(A) The type of housing sough t;
(B) A copy of the background check;
(C) For each item of criminal history relied upon, why the housing provider believes it has a direct and specific negative bearing on the landlord's ability to fulfill his or her duty to protect the public and other tenants from foreseeable harm;
(D) What bearing, if any, the time that has elapsed since the applicant's or household member's last offense has on the housing provider's decision;
(E) What evidence the housing provider has received from the applicant or household member that shows rehabilitation or mitigation;
(F) The name and telephone number of the city staff member who the applicant may contact if he or she believes the housing provider has violated this Chapter. (2) Within fourteen (14) calendar days of receiving the notice and background check r eport, the applicant can file for an appeal with the Appeal Hearing Officer. If the applicant files for an appeal, he or she must notify the housing provider during the same 14 - day period. If the applicant does not file an appeal within 14 days, the housi ng provider can carry out the adverse action.
(3) Upon receiving an appeal application, the Appeal Hearing Officer must hold a hearing and decide whether to uphold the housing provider's decision within ten (10) calendar days of receiving an appeal applica tion.
(4) The housing provider shall delay any adverse action and shall hold the unit open during the time of the appeals process.
( Ord. No. 20-16 N.S., § I, 12-20-2016, eff. 6-20-2017 )
7.110.055 - Procedures for Consideration of Credit, Employment and Rental History (a) An applicant for rental housing shall not be rejected for reasons related to credit history, employment status or rental history.
(b) If an applicant for rental housing can provide first month’s rent in advance and a security deposit that does not exceed the maximum allowed by California Civil Code Section 1950.5, an applicant shall not be denied occupancy based on credit history, employment status or rental history.
(c) If the lease is for a period in excess of six months, an advance payment of six months’ rent may be demanded in accordance with California Civil Code Section 1950.5.
7.110.060 - Notice and posting requirements for housing providers. (a) The housing provider shall state in all solicitations or advertisements for the rental or lease of affordable housing or on behalf of the housing provider that the housing provider will consider for tenancy qualified applicants with conviction history in a manner consistent with the requirements of this Chapter.
(b) It shall be unlawful for any housing provider to produce or disseminate any advertisement related to affordable housing that expresses, d irectly or indirectly, that any person with an arrest or conviction record will not be considered for the rental or lease of real property or may not apply for the rental or lease of real property, except as required by local, state, or federal law.
(c) The City shall publish and make available to housing providers, in English, Spanish, and all languages spoken by more than five percent (5%) of the City's population, a notice suitable for posting that informs applicants for affordable housing of their right s under this Chapter. (d) Housing providers shall post the notice prominently on their website and at any location under their control that is frequently visited by applicants or potential applicants for the rental or lease of Affordable Housing in Richmon d. The notice shall contain the following information:
(1) A description of those parts of a conviction history that may not be considered by the housing provider under any circumstances (e.g., convictions older than two years); (2) A description of the re strictions and requirements of this Act; (3) The definition of evidence of rehabilitation and other mitigating factors and the timeline under which the applicant or potential applicant has a right to provide such evidence; (4) How an individual may report a violation of this Chapter. ( Ord. No. 20-16 N.S., § I, 12 -20-2016, eff. 6-20-2017 )
7.110.070 - Implementation and enforcement.
(a) The Chapter will take effect six months from the date of the passage of the Ordinance. In the six month time period prior to implementation, Housing Providers are required to draft and publish written policies for implementation of the Ordinance. (b) The requirements of this o rdinance will apply to all new and existing affordable housing in the City. The terms of the ordinance will be incorporated into all new and existing contracts between the housing provider and the City, state or federal entity providing the subsidy. (c) Within six months of the Ordinance's passage, the City Manager is required to identify the Appeal Hearing Officer and staffing for the appeal process, develop notices and other implementation documents, conduct outreach to housing providers, an annual budget and funding sources, a penalty system for addressing violations of the Ordinance, and other elements of effective implementation.
(d) The appeal hearing process shall include the submission of documents from the housing provider on why housing was denied to the applicant/appellant to both the Appeal Hearing Officer and the applicant/appellant at least five (5) calendar days prior to the appeal hearing.
The housing provider shall explain the decision with enough specificity for the applicant/appellant to re but the decision. In addition, the applicant/appellant shall have the right to have an Advocate of their choosing to represent the applicant/appellant at the hearing and may present any relevant witnesses and evidence. Evidence will be considered without r egard to the admissibility under the Rules of Evidence applicable to a judicial proceeding. Both the applicant/appellant and the housing provider shall be allowed to examine the other party's evidence and to rebut and cross examine the witnesses. Both part ies shall also have the opportunity to request a translator and to request any reasonable accommodation needed to participate in the hearing process. Both parties shall also have the right to record the hearing. (e) Prior to implementation, housing provide rs are required to provide a written policy of their selection criteria, process, and the appeal process to all tenants. (f) The City is required to take appropriate steps to enforce this article and coordinate enforcement, including the investigation of any possible violations of this article. The City may find a violation of this article including that the housing provider failed to conduct the individualized assessment.
(g) The City Manager shall provide quarterly public reports to the City Council on O rdinance implementation including information for each housing provider that includes the number and demographics for applicants for available affordable housing and, for applicants that were denied, information pertaining to their race, ethnicity, gender, income level, and household type. The information provided for each housing provider shall also include the number of leases signed and the number and basis of applicant denials for denials based upon conviction history. The quarterly reports shall also i nclude information on the number of notices filed with the City regarding private court action and the outcome of the court proceedings. (h) Where the City's Appeal Hearing Officer determines that a violation of the Ordinance occurred, the City's Appeal He aring Officer may issue a determination and order any appropriate relief under this Chapter.
(i) After the conclusion of the appeal process, if the appellant retains a private attorney to pursue litigation of the matter, the private attorney who represents the appellant in litigation against the housing provider shall provide notice to the City and the Appeal Hearing Officer within ten (10) calendar days of filing court action against the housing provider, and inform the City and the Appeal Hearing Officer of the outcome of the court action within ten (10) calendar days of any final judgment.
( Ord. No. 20-16 N.S., § I, 12 -20-2016, eff. 6-20-2017 )
7.110.080 - Records to be maintained.
(a) The housing provider shall maintain all records required by federal regulations including those specified in 24 CFR §570.506 that are pertinent to the implementation and enforcement of this Ordinance.
(b) In addition, the ho using provider must maintain a record for each applicant, participant and beneficiary of their program including, any criminal background check, and determination of eligibility following the housing provider's review of the criminal background check. (c) In the case that an applicant is denied housing after receiving a conditional lease, the housing provider is required to provide access to the applicant's file upon request, including the criminal background check document, for either personal review or to file an appeal. (d) The housing provider shall maintain full and complete documentation of performance related matters such as benchmarks and deliverables associated with this Chapter. (e) The housing provider shall:
(1) Permit the City to have access to housing provider records for the purpose of making an audit, examination or review of performance data pertaining to this Chapter; and (2) Maintain such records for a period of three years.
( Ord. No. 20-16 N.S., § I, 12 -20-2016, eff. 6-20-2017 )
7.110.090 - Confidentiality.
To the fullest extent permitted by law, any information pertaining to an applicant's criminal history obtained in conjunction with the rental, lease, ownership, or sublease process (a) Shall remain confidential;
(b) Shall only be shared with the applicant, the Housing Provider, and the Appeal Hearing Officer.
( Ord. No. 20-16 N.S., § I, 12 -20-2016, eff. 6-20-2017 )