Richmond City Council
January 17, 2023

Richmond Health in All Policies Evaluation
Progress Actions
Since 2015, the program has acquired,
renovated, and sold 17 homes to first-
time home buyers. Richmond Communi-
ty Foundation (RCF) expects to be able
to fulfill the terms of the bond and repay
Mechanics Bank with the possibility of a
small additional return. There is evidence
that property values are slowly increasing
in areas where Richmond Housing Rent
Program (RHRP) has sold homes. Be-
tween 2016 and 2017, there were 1,046
single family units that enrolled to the
rent program. There was a total of 2,675
enrolled landlords; meaning 1,629 were
multi-unit developments making up 90%
of enrolled individual units.
14 Link to Health Equity
Housing and neighborhood
conditions are two key social
determinants of health:
they affect an individual and
community’s physical envi-
ronment, ability to manage
their health, and access to
economic and social op-
portunities. “Blighted areas
are associated with various
economic, social, and physi-
cal health disparities. Neigh-
borhood blight is a predictor
of premature mortality due
to diabetes, homicide, and
suicide.”

CASE STUDY

RICHMOND HOUSING RENOVATION
& RENT PROGRAMS
“These are folks that
thought that home
ownership was out of
their reach. But today
we are able to show
that it is not.”12
-- Jim Becker, President &
CEO, Richmond Community
Foundation
Through the Richmond Housing Renovation
Program, the City of Richmond funds the
Richmond Community Foundation to purchase,
renovate, and sell houses to first-time, low-
income home-buyers. RHRP has been successful
in demonstrating both cost savings and revenue
generation, making it an attractive model for
social impact investing. In addition to revenue
generation and cost savings, RCF tracks a
number of metrics to gauge success, including
local hiring and spending associated with home
renovations, property value trends over time in areas
where homes are renovated by the program, and home
improvement permit requests from neighborhoods
where the program renovates homes.

The Rent Program was established in January 2017
following approval of the Richmond Fair Rent, Just
Cause for Eviction, and Homeowner Protection
Ordinance by a majority of Richmond voters in
November 2016. The rent ordinance limits rent
increases on all multifamily properties to the change
in Consumer Price Index and protects renters from
eviction without just cause. Since its inception, the
Rent Program office has served a diverse group of
residents and community members, including tenants,
landlords, property managers, attorneys, realtors, and
process servers.
13 Background
40

Section
Founded by a Richmond resident in 2007, Pogo Park
is a community organization focused on transforming
lives and opportunities by working side by side with
neighborhood residents to create, program and
operate public spaces. The organization got its initial start as one of the first projects that emerged from
the City of Richmond’s Health Element of the General
Plan. This project was the renovation of the Elm
Playlot in Richmond’s Iron Triangle neighborhood.

The park was a common location for drug dealing,
was considered unsafe, and inaccessible to residents.

Through
a set of mixed engagement
strategies, including taking pictures, focus groups,
and participatory design, residents came up with a
new vision for Elm Playlot. The community vision
was to transform the small park into an anchor public
space in the middle of their neighborhood – the heart
of the community – and support that space to drive
broader community change efforts.

Progress Actions
In 2015, Pogo Park provided
staffing and play programming at
Harbour-8 Park to serve children
who live within walking distance of
this park. Pogo Park also submitted
a successful $6.2 million grant to
Caltrans to build the first leg of
the “Yellow Brick Road” (a project
to build safe streets in the Iron
Triangle for children to walk and
bike). As one of only 86 of 617
projects funded, the Yellow Brick
Road will connect Elm Playlot
directly to Harbour-8 Park, giving
local children a safe, clean and
green pathway to walk or bike to
and from the two parks.

Link to Health
Equity
Parks and public space can trans-
form neighborhoods and cata-
lyze healthy community building.

By creating safe spaces for com-
munity gathering, programming
for all ages, and providing jobs
for local residents, Pogo Park has
sparked an effort to preserve and
develop green spaces in Rich-
mond, and to center community
members in the planning, de-
sign, and management of public
spaces.

CASE STUDY

POGO PARK
“Elm Playlot and
Harbour 8 are safe,
culturally relevant
& always welcoming
of all people and
activities. They are true
healing spaces.”
- Resident of Richmond
Background
pogopark.org
41

42 Richmond Health in All Policies Evaluation

ENVIRONMENTAL HEAL TH
& JUSTICE
Environmental health & justice is the process
of protecting communities from the harmful
effects of contamiated air and water, noise and
other toxic pollutants. Richmond’s focus on
Environmental Health and Justice also includes
ensuring all people have access to the city’s
natural resources, like shoreline and green
space.

About 40% of Richmond respondents in the RCS
rated the overall quality of the natural envi-
ronment and the preservation of natural areas
as good or excellent, between 2015-2019. Yet,
there has been little change in perception of air
quality from 2011 through 2019, with 24-28% of
respondents rating it positively (Fig. 23).

Only 36% of Richmond’s Black population rates
the natural environment positively compared to
46% of the white population. Between 2013 and
2015, the positive perception of quality of the
natural environment increased by 17% and has
remained relatively stable through 2019 (Fig.
24).

The City and partners have made Environmen-
tal Health and Justice a commitment, which is
reflected in the following activities.

Progress & Accomplishments that pro-
mote health equity:
• 2,254 Solar permits approved since
2012, 988 since 2017 – 354 were installa-
tions for low income homes at no cost.
• Transformative Climate Communities
(TCC) grant of $140K to prepare resiliency
plan for Iron Triangle, Coronado, and Santa
Fe neighborhoods.
• Richmond’s Climate Action Plan (CAP) -
adopted in 2016, with specific components
aimed at environmental equity.
• Equal Access Charging Hubs (with EVgo)
- Richmond is the first city in Bay Area to
implement electric vehicle charging stations
that will be established in disadvantaged
neighborhoods.
• Increased Community Air Monitoring -
support for State policies, such as Assembly
Bills 1647, which enhanced fence-line and
community-level air monitoring at and near
refineries, and AB617, which established the
Community Air Protection Program.
• Inter-agency Refinery Task Force - par-
ticipation and leadership as part of city’s
broader efforts to improve the coordination
of refinery safety and compliance efforts,
Overview
5

43Environmental Health & Justice
and improve emergency response.
• Challenging the fossil fuel industry - Richmond
is party to a lawsuit seeking damages for the costs
to adapt to climate change.
• Food Census - the Mayor’s office completed an
evaluation of food availability and quality across
Richmond in 2018. Data were collected on store
interior and exterior; the acceptance of nutritional
assistance programs such as WIC and SNAP; the
quality, availability, and affordability of produce;
and the availability of other healthy foods.
• California Cap-and-Trade funds (SB 375) - used
to develop affordable senior housing & Baxter
Creek restoration as part of the Miraflores project.
• Groundwork Richmond - using a 2018 grant
from the California Air Resources Board has
deployed 50 air monitoring sensors throughout
Richmond through its “Air Rangers” project. This
project is part of the State of California AB617,
Community Air Protection Program, and includes
linking data to an emissions reduction plan.
• Community solar project - at the Port of Rich-
mond automobile processing facility, which
will provide energy cost savings to low-income
families through community solar. The project
Figure 23. Environmental & Health Justice RCS Indicators Figure 25. RCS Positive Perception of Overall Quality of the Natural Environment by Income Level
2013 2015 2017 2019
Year
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Percent
39%
51%
34%
22%
30%
27%
45%45%46%
57%
Natural Environ $
Income Category
50-100k
100k+
<50k
Figure 24. RCS Positive Perception of Overall Quality of the Natural Environment By Race/Ethnicity
2013 2015 2017 2019
Year
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Percent
38%
46%
21%
39%
36%36%
24%
37% 39%
50%50%
Natural Environment RE
Race/Ethnicity
Black
Hispanic
White
50-99k100k+ <50kAnnual IncomeBlack Hispanic WhiteRace/Ethnicity Percent Rating good/excellent
Percent rating good/excellent
Percent rating good/excellent

44 Richmond Health in All Policies Evaluation
Figure 26. Select CalEnviroscreen Indicators: City, State, County, and Iron Triangle neighborhood
is a collaboration between the City, GRID
Alternatives, and MCE.
• Solar on Multifamily Affordable Hous-
ing (SOMAH) program - provides solar
energy for multifamily affordable housing
in California. The City of Richmond is in
partnership with GRID Alternatives Bay
Area to bring this program to the city.
• Park Prescription Day - coordinated by
the Community Service Department, Con-
tra Costa Health Services and the National
Park Service. This is where healthcare pro-
viders, park agencies, community groups
and other program leaders organize
events and activities at JFK Park, encour-
aging participants to improve their health
and well-being by embracing the health
benefits of nature. Some activities include
health screenings, yoga, Walk with the
Doctor, bike rides/repairs, dance, instruc-
tion volleyball/soccer, and lunch.
• Solar One – completed in December 2017,
a Marin Clean Energy (MCE) solar power
plant feeding 10.5 MW of renewable solar
energy onto the grid. This project is now
supplying enough electricity for over 3,400
homes. The pollution-free energy elimi-
nated 3,234 metric tons of carbon dioxide
in one year and takes more than 680 fossil
fuel cars off the road annually. The solar
farm was created as part of a community
benefits agreement reached between the
City of Richmond and Chevron. Chevron
leased the former underutilized brown-
field site to MCE for 25 years. To build the
solar farm, MCE teamed with Richmond-
BUILD, the career-training program that
prepares local residents for construction
and renewable energy industries. Gradu-
ates of the program were among the 341
jobs supported by the construction of MCE
Solar One.

Source: CalEnviroscreen 3.0

45Environmental Health & Justice
Figure 27. All vs. Low Income Solar Installations, 2007 - 2017 Map 10. Fenceline & Community Air Monitoring Sites 15
North
Richmond
Atchison
Village
Point
Richmond
Air District Station Community Monitoring Station
Refinery Ground Level Monitor Meteorology
Source: BAAQMD
Source: Solar One MCE project completion 16

Richmond Health in All Policies Evaluation
Progress Actions
One component of the CAP is an
Open Data Dashboard that moni-
tors progress towards CAP goals,
informs policy, and shares data
with the community. The Open
Data system is a way to increase
transparency, track data in real
time, and more efficiently maxi-
mize resources. The dashboard,
like the CAP , was developed with
input from stakeholders through
community meetings and online
feedback opportunities.
17 Link to Health Equity
Climate change is expected to
exacerbate health problems and
cumulative stress by impacting heat,
drought, fire and weather conditions
as well as access to basic services,
such as housing and health care.

The city anticipates that the most
vulnerable residents will be the most
impacted. The CAP was developed
to ensure the Richmond communi-
ty is prepared to address & adapt
to the impacts of climate change
and continue to build health equity
through the reduction of GHG emis-
sions.

CASE STUDY

CLIMATE ACTION PLAN
“The Climate Action Plan
positions Richmond to
secure grant funding for
implementation strategies that
maximize local benefits and
build community resiliency.

It shows that we’ve done our
homework and that the City is
prepared to make investments
that achieve the most
benefits.”
- Mayor Tom Butt

Background
Richmond’s Climate Action Plan (CAP) was
adopted in October 2016. The objective of the CAP
is to “serve as a road map for the city to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions, create local jobs,
and prepare for the impacts of climate change
on public health, infrastructure, the economy,
ecosystems, and public spaces in the community. ”
The CAP builds on the goals and policies defined
in both the city’s general plan and the Health in
All Policies (HiAP) strategy, particularly through
its focus on health equity and climate justice. It
also emphasizes a commitment to community
engagement, outreach, and education.

The city hopes to achieve four overarching goals
through their climate action planning efforts, including greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reductions, a healthy
and resilient community, a prosperous local economy,
and engaged community and educated youth. To
that end, the city has developed eight objectives
that support these goals, as well as the policies and
actions of the city’s general plan and HiAP strategy. The objectives are:
• Energy efficient buildings and facilities
• Increase use and generation of renewable energy
• Sustainable transportation and land use
• Zero waste
• Water conservation
• Green infrastructure
• Green business and industry
• Resiliency to climate change
Background
46

Section
Case Study
The Richmond Community Air Monitoring program was
initiated in 2013 in part as a response to the Chevron fire.

The program is co-sponsored by the City of Richmond,
but an independent third party installed and operates 3 community monitors and 5 fence line monitors around
the refinery. The equipment is state-of-the-art and there are no other air quality monitoring systems capturing
this much real-time data that we have found anywhere
else in California. The three community monitors in
Point Richmond, Atchison Village and North Richmond
sample a wider variety of chemicals than the fence line monitors. All the monitors, locations and pollutants they measure were selected during a year long consultation
process with community based organizations, the US
Environmental Protection Agency and the Bay Area
Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). The idea
is to provide real-time, public access to air pollution information
that can inform
emergency management and on-
going air quality control. Sonoma Technologies, the
contractor that operates the monitors, prepares monthly reports on the data. The air pollutants at the fence line monitors include: Benzene; Carbon Disulfide; Hydrogen
Sulfide; Ozone; Sulfur Dioxide; Toluene, and Xylene.

At the Community Monitors, additional chemicals
being measured include: 2,2,4-Trimethylpentane;
3-Methylpentane; Ammonia; Black Carbon; Ethyl-
benzene; N-Heptane; N-Hexane; N-Octane; PM2.5;
Trimethylbenzene. AB 617, which passed in 2017,
mandates that the state improve air quality in
disadvantaged communities like Richmond & includes
grants for improving community-based monitoring and
emissions reduction plans.

From January 2016-December 2017, the com-
munity monitoring stations detected chemicals
at least 7 times more often than the nearest fence
line monitor. In the case of hydrogen sulfide
detections in North Richmond, community moni-
tors detected the chemical 113 times more often.

Between 2016-17, community monitoring stations
detected at least one chemical in the air at a mea-
surable level at least 90% of the time. In Atchison
Village, one or more pollutants were present near-
ly 100% of the time.

On average, residents of Richmond breathe
about three chemicals at a time. However,
about 27% of the time, community monitors
detected four or more chemicals in the air
simultaneously—a toxic soup. The Atchison
Village monitors consistently show greater
detection of multiple pollutants and over a
2 year time period (2016-17) the community
monitor detected at least four or more chemicals
simultaneously more than 50% of the time.

The Atchison Village community monitor most
frequently detected black carbon, hydrogen
sulfide, and PM2.5. However, this analysis
does not mean the detected chemicals were at
concentrations deemed harmful.

CASE STUDY

COMMUNITY AIR MONITORING
Background
Pollution Exposure
Link to Health Equity
47

48 Richmond Health in All Policies Evaluation

QUALITY ACCESSIBLE

HEAL TH HOMES & SERVICES
While most of the HiAP action areas focus on
improving our living, working, play and education
environments and the public decisions that influ-
ence these areas, the ordinance is also attentive
to the urgent needs for many to receive quality
and affordable health care & related services.

Richmond has one full service Hospital, Kaiser
Richmond, which primarily serves Kaiser mem-
bers. There are two County operated health
centers serving Richmond; the North Richmond
Center for Health and the West County Health
Center in San Pablo. LifeLong Medical Care also
has two locations in Richmond.

According to the State of California, Office of
Statewide Health Planning & Development,
Central and South Richmond are Medically Un-
der-served Areas (MUA) & Primary Care Health
Professional Shortage Areas (PCHPSAs) (Map 11)
meaning residents are not adequately served
by health care professionals and/or do not have
access to affordable care.
18 Richmond is also the
only Dental Health Professional Shortage Area
(DHPSA) in the County. Contra Costa Health
Services recognizes Richmond as a Mental Health
Professional Shortage Area (HPSA), meaning there
are too few practitioners based on the communi-
ty’s needs for service.

We found that in 2019, 41% of Richmond’s Black
respondents to the RCS self-rated their health
as good or excellent, while 44% of Latinx re-
spondents and 58% of white respondents rated
this positively during the same time period (Fig.
28). As we might expect, those with the highest
incomes were more likely to self rate their health
as positive (Fig. 29). For access to affordable food
and health services, there were no consistent
changes from 2007-2019, but during the same
time period, health care rated positively increased
by 11% and preventive health services increased
by 12% (Fig. 30).

Overview
6 Figure 29. RCS Positive Perception of Self-Rated Health by Income Level
Figure 28. RCS Positive Perception of Self-Rated Health by Race/Ethnicity
Percent rating good/excellent
Percent rating good/excellent
50-99k100k+ <50kAnnual IncomeBlack Hispanic WhiteRace/Ethnicity

49Quality Accessible Health Homes & Services
1 3
2 West Contra Costa
County Healthcare
District
Los Medanos
Community
Healthcare District
Concord/Pleasant Hill
Healthcare District
Medically under-
served areas
City Boundaries
1 2
3 Map 11. Medically Underserved Areas in Contra Costa County Healthcare Districts Source: Contra Costa LAFCO
Figure 30. Quality Accessible Health, Homes, & Services RCS Indicators Figure 31. RCS Positive Perception of Availability of Affordable Quality Healthcare by Race/Ethnicity 2013 2015 2017 2019
Year
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Percent
36%34%
32%32%
17%
33%
48%
23%
35%
Quality Health Care RE
Race/Ethnicity
Black
Hispanic
White
Black
Hispanic
White
Race/Ethnicity
Percent rating good/excellentPercent rating good/excellent

Richmond Health in All Policies Evaluation

Background
“Health care
affordability and
access is essential, but
the stigma associated
with mental health
care is maybe our
biggest challenge.”
- Resident of Richmond
Historically, Richmond was home to a variety
of medical institutions, but over time critical
facilities, including the only fully functioning
emergency room in the area, have closed, leaving
community clinics and hospitals with limited
services, or that are further away, to fill the gaps.

Historically, Richmond and surrounding residents
were served by Doctor’s Medical Center (DMC)
in San Pablo. DMC provided about 80 percent
of inpatient hospital care and 60 percent of
emergency-room capacity, as well as the only
certified cardiac and stroke center, in its West
Contra Costa service area of 250,000 people. In
2015, after over 60 years of operation, DMC closed its
doors. The hospital struggled financially since 2005
and over the course of the next ten years received some financial support through the passing of a series of
parcel tax measures.

Today, Kaiser Richmond is the only hospital in West
Contra Costa County. Located in downtown Richmond,
the facility is open 24 hours a day 7 days a week and
provides full hospital services including urgent care, a small emergency department, and a pharmacy. Despite
the presence of Kaiser and a variety of health clinics, gaps in healthcare service provision remain. Local
hospitals and clinics are not designated to support heart attacks or strokes, forcing patients to go to Vallejo,
Oakland, or Central Contra Costa County for those
services
Progress Actions
Richmond residents are concerned
about the potential closure of Alta
Bates Medical Center in Berkeley.

The facility will discontinue hospital
operations by 2030 due to seismic
upgrade requirements mandated by the
state, which Sutter Health, who owns
Alta Bates, says are not economically
feasible. Alta Bates is currently the
closest hospital to Richmond and the
only medical facility in the East Bay
to offer a fully-functioning emergency
room equipped to treat major injuries,
hearts attacks, and strokes.

Link to Health Equity
Compared to the rest of
Contra Costa County, local
residents, particularly low-
income people of color, have
higher child hospitalization
rates due to asthma and are
disproportionately impacted by
cancer, heart disease, stroke, and
diabetes-related death. These
critical health risks make access
to healthcare services essential
for the health and well-being of
Richmond residents.

CASE STUDY

HEALTH CARE IN RICHMOND
50

Section
Case Study
As of June 15, 2020, Richmond had 470 positive
cases, the third highest number of cases per 100,000
residents across Contra Costa County. All of Contra
Costa County had 44 deaths attributed to COVID-19,
as of June 15, 2020; 57% of deaths were people over
age 81 years; 25% of total deaths were Latinx, 5% were
Black & 67% were white. Contra Costa County did not
release location data for those who have contracted
or died from COVID-19, so it is not currently possible
to tell if certain neighborhoods or areas in Richmond
were disproportionately burdened. In Contra Costa
County, 23 homeless people were confirmed with
COVID-19 as of June 15, 2020, with no reported deaths.

The Richmond Rapid Response Fund (R3F) was
established to meet the immediate and ongoing
needs of the community during the COVID-19
pandemic and beyond. Key Partners include the
City of Richmond, The RYSE Center, EdFund West,
Richmond Promise, and Building Blocks for Kids. The
fund will: 1. Provide direct financial disbursement to
residents, 2. Expand financial assistance and support
for business and community-based organizations & 3.

Facilitate community needs assessment and ongoing
infrastructure support.
19 Progress Actions
The City of Richmond mobilized
to support its residents when the
County issued its Shelter-in-Place
order on March 16, 2020. The West
Contra Costa COVID Community Care
Coalition was created with over 90
cross-sector stakeholders including
community partners and non-profits,
the City, the West Contra Costa
Unified School District, the County,
local and regional coalitions, and
funders.

Link to Health
Equity

The closing of schools and
businesses had an immediate
economic impact on Richmond’s
families. West Contra Costa Unified
School District organized food
distribution to families at Richmond
High and other schools, and offered
three meals a day to anyone under

18. The City issued an order on April
27th, prohibiting evictions and rent
increases, The R3F fund (below)
is focused on food, education,
housing, homelessness, economic
security, and healing.

CASE STUDY
COVID-19 RESPONSE
“R3F reflects a collective
commitment to leading with
love in times of immense
crises and inequity. We are
committed to ensuring those
most impacted by COVID-19
are at the center of driving
the strategies and direction
of these resources.”20

-R3F Core Launch partner
Background

51

52 Richmond Health in All Policies Evaluation
RICHMOND HIAP:

CONCLUSIONS & NEXT STEPS
This report has highlighted some of the progress
toward Health Equity that Richmond’s HiAP Ordi-
nance and Strategy has helped support. We are not
associating all progress or challenges to the HiAP ,
but rather emphasize that HiAP acts as an import-
ant and constant presence in city decision-making
and partnership building. We found that HiAP is
supporting progress toward health equity, that
the city has only so much influence on popula-
tion health (the county, region, state and federal
governments, as well as private sector, also have a
significant influence), and that the most influential
projects and initiatives involve partnerships be-
tween the city, community organizations, residents
and service providers. Also, many of the drivers of
health inequities in Richmond have been in-place
for decades or longer, and a policy such as HiAP
implemented for six years is not going to entirely
reverse deeply entrenched institutions and struc-
tures.

In order to continue progress toward health equity,
improve community awareness and benefits from
HiAP , and to expand the scope and depth of im-
pacts on population health, we suggest that the
city explore the following:

1. Staff and give budget support to Interdepart-
mental HiAP working group, incorporate GARE
insights, and ensure regular communication to
community on progress.

2. Enforce, resource & promote equity and
inclusion ordinances and strategies to ensure
people of color, immigrants, formerly incarcer-
ated/justice impacted, LGBTQ+ and persons
with disabilities benefit from existing and new
initiatives.

3. Enhance Transparent Richmond data portal
to include select RCS data, disaggregated by
neighborhood, race/ethnicity and income level,
as well as health outcome data.

4. Promote quality economic opportunities for
people of color, including employment train-
ing, summer jobs, small business lending &
city-hiring. Work to ensure Black residents are
benefiting from employment training programs
and opportunities.

5. Continue to invest in young people, including
the Kids First and Richmond Promise pro-
grams, and work to guarantee free child care
for all youth, 0-18 years old. Ensure Black res-
idents are benefiting from pre-natal and early
childcare programs.

6. Support the Department of Children & Youth by
investing budget & decision-making power in
youth.

7. Enhance community safety by increasing
investment in trauma-informed, public health
approaches to violence reduction and healing,
such as the Office of Neighborhood Safety and
partnerships with CBOs.

8. Continue to explore ways to improve blighted
property, develop vacant parcels & permit
more affordable housing, and commit to end
homelessness.

9. Take a more aggressive stance on reducing
air pollution, improving & connecting green
spaces, & calming streets to make them safe for
pedestrians and cyclists.

10. Develop equitable and inclusive emergency
response plans to support the most vulnerable
populations in the case of a fire, earthquake,
disease outbreak or other crisis.

53Conclusion & Next Steps
Figure 32. Future Actions for Furthering the Health Equity Goals of Richmond’s HiAP Ordinance Action Description Connection to health equity Department/ Organization
Develop
ongoing training &
practice guide for
city staff and public
outreach/ commu-
nication of HiAP &
Health Equity work
- Training program
with all staff, in-
cluding assessment
& -evaluation tools
schedule/plan for
delivering training &
receiving feedback
- Public communica-
tion & engagement
plan, including but
not limited to web &
social media based
Knowledge of the determinants of
health including “Undoing Structural
Racism,” and how to connect new
knowledge to everyday action is cru-
cial for making HiAP part of systematic
change in the City. Engaging and com-
municating with the public, in numer -
ous languages and forums, is essential
for integrating local knowledge into
HiAP goals and implementation.

City Manager’s
Office. Inter-depart-
mental HiAP Team
Seek new partner -
ships with clinical
training programs
in San Francisco Bay
Area
- Partnership estab-
lished
-# of Richmond
residents enrolled in
training/mentorship
program
The goal is to recruit minority health
care workers to clinics and care facil-
ities in Richmond. These clinicians
should also be part of a mentoring and
youth training program that might be
linked to school-based clinic in the
WCCUSD.

Employment &
training
WCCUSD
CCHS
School site provid-
ers
Connect neigh-
borhoods that lack
healthy food outlets
to areas with such
stores.
- Analysis of current
transit options for
food retailers
- Develop a strategic
plan for improvement
Work with regional transit to provide
access via improvements to public
transit routes, bike routes, and pedes-
trian amenities.

Engineering
Planning
Protect neighbor -
hoods from gentri-
fication that leads
to displacement of
residents.
- Counseling Ser -
vice Referrals for
Foreclosures, Land-
lord-Tenant Disputes,
Unlawful Evictions,
and Housing Discrim-
ination
Involuntary displacement occurs when
residents are pushed to move outside
an area due to a sharp increase in
housing or median rent prices in areas
where household income declines or
remains flat. Displacement indicates
a lack of affordable housing or the
increased use of deteriorated housing,
which can have serious health impli-
cations
Housing & Commu-
nity Development
Department

GOVERNANCEED & ECONFULL SERVICE & SAFE

54 Richmond Health in All Policies Evaluation
Action Description Connection to health equity Department/ Organization
Analyze and re-
designate truck
routes away from
areas with high
asthma rates and
sensitive land
Policy HW9.1 Air
Quality (See also:

CN4.1; ED1.4;
EC5.3.); Action
HW9.H Truck Routes
Plan (See also:

CR4.B); Action CR4.A
Goods Movement
Plan; Action HW9.F
Sensitive Use
Location Guidelines
Living near busy roadways on heavy
industrial processing facilities and
the incidence of respiratory disease
symptoms, such as asthma. Diesel
particulate matter has acute short-term
impacts and a disproportionate effect
on the elderly, children, people with
illnesses or others who are sensitive to
air pollutants.

Planning
Engineering
Work with regional
regulators to enforce
regulations for
mobile sources
Action CN4.A Bay
Area Air Quality
Management District
Partnership; Action
CN4.B Air Pollution
Reduction Strategy
Also see: HW9.B
(1) Emissions standards; (2) Cleaner-
burning fuels (i.e. unleaded gasoline,
low-sulfur disease); (3) Inspection and
repair programs (i.e. Smog Check)
Planning
Commit to expanding
the training and
employment of
lay health care
workers, and
community health
workers (CHWs),
in partnership
between the City’s
employment training
programs, health
care providers, and
non-profits currently
working with CHWs.

Community health workers play
an important role in promoting
community-based health education
and prevention in a manner that
is culturally and linguistically
appropriate, particularly in
communities and for populations that
have been historically underserved
and uninsured.

City of Richmond,
Kaiser, Contra Costa
County Health
Services, and
Community Clinic
Consortium
RES & BUILT ENV.EJ & HEALTHHEALTH, HOMES, SERVICES

55References
1 City of Richmond, CA (2015). Health in
All Policies. City of Richmond, California. http://
www.ci.richmond.ca.us/2575/Health-in-All-
Policies-HiAP
2 Vital Signs (2018). Life Expectancy by
Zip Code (2000 & 2013). [Data file and code
book]. Retrieved from https://open-data-demo.
mtc.ca.gov/dataset/Vital-Signs-Life-Expectancy-
by-ZIP-Code/xym8-u3kc
3 California Office of Envir onmental
Health Hazard Assessment (2018).

CalEnviroscreen 3.0 Data. [Data file and code
book]. Retrieved from https://oehha.ca.gov/
calenviroscreen/report/calenviroscreen-30
4 City of Richmond, CA (2018).

Government Alliance on Race & Equity. City of
Richmond, California. https://www.ci.richmond.
ca.us/3701/GARE
5 Richmond Promise (2019). Ye ar 3
Progress Report May 2018-2019. Retrieved from
https://richmondpromise.org/wp-content/
uploads/2019/05/richmond-promise-2019-
annual-report-2.pdf
6 City of Richmond, CA (2019).

RichmondBUILD Academy. https://www.
ci.richmond.ca.us/1243/RichmondBUILD
7 City of Richmond, CA (2020). Richmond
Police Department- Crime Incidents. [Data file
and code book]. Retrieved from https://www.
transparentrichmond.org/Police-Department/
Richmond-Police-Department-Crime-Incidents/
t3nu-7bbq
8 City of Richmond, CA (2016). Office
of Neighborhood Safety. https://www.
ci.richmond.ca.us/271/Office-of-Neighborhood-
Safety
9 Vassey, J. (2016, November 16). Health
programs for undocumented immigrants
in Contra Costa may be threatened under
Trump. Richmond Confidential. https://
richmondconfidential.org/2016/11/16/health-
programs-for-undocumented-immigrants-in-
contra-costa-may-be-threatened-under-trump/
10 RYSE (2016). Trauma and
Healing Learning Series. Retrieved
from https://static1.squarespace.com/
static/58ece61644024383be911a95/t/5a5
e4bc09140b79e6fd40ea3/1516129217932/
RYSE+THLS+2016.pdf
11 City of Richmond Manager’ s Office
Transportation Services (2020). Richmond Ferry
to Bridge to Greenway Complete Streets Plan.
https://ferry2bridge2greenway.com/
12 Richmond Standar d (2018). Your new-
est Bay Area homeowners: a teacher and a
non-profit worker. https://richmondstandard.
com/richmond/2018/08/02/your-newest-bay-ar-
ea-homeowners-a-teacher-and-nonprofit-work-
er/
14 Richmond Community Foundation
(2020). Richmond Housing Renovation
Program. https://www.rcfconnects.
org/community-initiatives/restoring-
neighborhoods/richmond-housing-renovation-
program/
13 City of Richmond, CA (2020). Richmond
Rent Program. City of Richmond, California.
http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/3364/Richmond-
Rent-Program
15 Bay Area Air Quality Management
District (BAAQMD) (2018). Fenceline Monitoring
Plans. Retrieved from https://www.baaqmd.
gov/plans-and-climate/emission-tracking-and-
monitoring/fenceline-monitoring-plans
16 City of Richmond, CA (2020). Cumulativ e
Solar Installations Production. [Data file and
code book]. Retrieved from https://www.
transparentrichmond.org/Environmental-
and-Health-Initiatives/Cumulative-Solar-

REFERENCES

56 Richmond Health in All Policies Evaluation
Installations-Production/xrmb-nc8m
17 City of Richmond, CA (2016). Climate
Action Plan. City of Richmond, California.
https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/3313/Climate-
Action-Plan
18 Berkson Associat es & Abaris Group
(2017). Public Review Draft: Healthcare Services
Municipal Service Review & Sphere of Influence
Updates. Prepared for the Contra Costa
Local Agency Formation Commission (2017).

Retrieved from http://www.contracostalafco.
org/municipal_service_reviews/healthcare-
services/Public%20Review%20Draft%20
Appendix%2012-5-17.pdf
19 Richmond Rapid Response F und (R3F)
(2020). Richmond Rapid Response Fund. https://
www.richmondresponsefund.org/
20 Richmond Rapid Response Fund, Office
of Mayor Tom Butt (2020). News Release: City of
Richmond, community leaders announce launch
of Richmond Rapid Response Fund https://
www.ci.richmond.ca.us/DocumentCenter/
View/52924/05052020-R3F-Joint-Press-
Release?bidId=
Richmond Community Survey Data
City of Richmond, CA (2019). NCS Richmond
Community Survey 2019. [Data file and code
book]. Unpublished raw data.

City of Richmond, CA (2007). NCS Richmond
Community Survey 2007, Report of Results.

Retrieved from https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/
DocumentCenter/View/8935/Report-of-Results-
2007?bidId=
City of Richmond, CA (2009). NCS Richmond
Community Survey 2009, Report of Results.

Retrieved from https://www.ci.richmond.
ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/4843/City-of-
Richmond-2009-Final-Report?bidId=
City of Richmond, CA (2011). NCS Richmond
Community Survey 2011, Report of Results.

Retrieved from https://www.ci.richmond.
ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/7204/City-of-
Richmond-Report-of-Results-Final-2011?bidId=
City of Richmond, CA (2013). NCS Richmond
Community Survey 2013, Report of Results.

Retrieved from https://www.ci.richmond.
ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/27324/City-
of-Richmond-Report-of-Results-FINAL-
2013?bidId=
City of Richmond, CA (2015). NCS Richmond
Community Survey 2015, Report of Results.
(Dashboard Summary Findings). Retrieved
from https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/
DocumentCenter/View/31300/Att-3---The-NCS-
Dashboard-Richmond-FINAL-2015?bidId=
City of Richmond, CA (2017). NCS Richmond
Community Survey 2017, Report of Results.
(Dashboard Summary Findings). Retrieved
from https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/
DocumentCenter/View/44215/The-NCS-
Dashboard-Richmond-DRAFT-2017?bidId=
City of Richmond, CA (2019). NCS Richmond
Community Survey 2019, Report of Results.
(Dashboard Summary of Findings). Retrieved
from https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/
DocumentCenter/View/52253/The-NCS-
Dashboard---Richmond-2019
City of Richmond, CA (2007). NCS Richmond
Community Survey 2007, Report of
Demographic Subgroup Comparisons.

Retrieved from https://www.ci.richmond.
ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/8932/Report-
of-Demographic-Subgroup-Comparisons-
2007?bidId=

57References
City of Richmond, CA (2009). NCS Richmond
Community Survey 2009, Report of
Demographic Subgroup Comparisons.

Retrieved from https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/
DocumentCenter/View/4844/Demographic-
Subgoup-Comparisons--Report-Richmond-
?bidId=
City of Richmond, CA (2011). NCS Richmond
Community Survey 2011, Report of
Demographic Subgroup Comparisons.

Retrieved from https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/
DocumentCenter/View/7205/Demographic-
Subgoup-Comparisons--Report-Richmond-
?bidId=
City of Richmond, CA (2013). NCS Richmond
Community Survey 2013, Report of
Demographic Subgroup Comparisons.

Retrieved from https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/
DocumentCenter/View/27325/Demographic-
Subgroup-Comparisons--Report-Richmond-
FINAL-2013?bidId=
City of Richmond, CA (2015). NCS Richmond
Community Survey 2015, Report of
Demographic Subgroup Comparisons.

Retrieved from https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/
DocumentCenter/View/31302/Att-5---The-NCS-
Demographic-Crosstabs-Richmond-FINAL-
2015?bidId=
City of Richmond, CA (2017). NCS Richmond
Community Survey 2017, Report of
Demographic Subgroup Comparisons.

Retrieved from https://www.ci.richmond.
ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/44216/The-NCS-
Demographic-Crosstabs-Richmond-DRAFT-
2017?bidId=
City of Richmond, CA (2019). NCS Richmond
Community Survey 2019, Report of
Demographic Subgroup Comparisons.

Retrieved from https://www.ci.richmond.
ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/52254/The-NCS-
Demographic-Crosstabs---Richmond-2019
City of Richmond, CA (2007). NCS
Richmond Community Survey 2007, Report
of Geographic Subgroup Comparisons.

Retrieved from https://www.ci.richmond.
ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/8933/Report-
of-Geographic-Subgroup-Comparison-
2007?bidId=
City of Richmond, CA (2009). NCS Richmond
Community Survey 2009, Report of
Geographic Subgroup Comparisons. Retrieved
from https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/
DocumentCenter/View/4845/Geographic-
Subgroup-Comparisons-Report-Richmond-
F?bidId=
City of Richmond, CA (2011). NCS Richmond
Community Survey 2011, Report of
Geographic Subgroup Comparisons. Retrieved
from https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/
DocumentCenter/View/7206/Geographic-
Subgroup-Comparisons-Report-Richmond-
F?bidId=
City of Richmond, CA (2013). NCS Richmond
Community Survey 2013, Report of
Geographic Subgroup Comparisons. Retrieved
from https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/
DocumentCenter/View/27326/Geographic-
Subgroup-Comparisons-Report-Richmond-
FINAL-2013?bidId=
City of Richmond, CA (2015). NCS Richmond
Community Survey 2015, Report of
Geographic Subgroup Comparisons. Retrieved
from https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/
DocumentCenter/View/31303/Att-6---The-
NCS-Geographic-Crosstabs-Richmond-FINAL-
2015?bidId=
City of Richmond, CA (2017). NCS Richmond
Community Survey 2017, Report of
Geographic Subgroup Comparisons. Retrieved
from https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/
DocumentCenter/View/44217/The-NCS-
Geographic-Crosstabs-Richmond-DRAFT-
2017?bidId=
City of Richmond, CA (2019). NCS Richmond
Community Survey 2019, Report of
Geographic Subgroup Comparisons. Retrieved
from https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/
DocumentCenter/View/52255/The-NCS-
Geographic-Crosstabs---Richmond-2019

58 Richmond Health in All Policies Evaluation
U.S. Census Bureau (2010). Hispanic or Latino
Origins by Race, Table B03002 (5-year estimate),
2006-2010 American Community Survey 5-year
estimates. Retrieved from https://data.census.
gov/cedsci/
U.S. Census Bureau (2018). Hispanic or Latino
Origins by Race, Table B03002 (5-year estimate),
2014-2018 American Community Survey 5-year
estimates. Retrieved from https://data.census.
gov/cedsci/
U.S. Census Bureau (2018). Poverty Status in the
Past 12 Months, Table S1701 (5-year estimate),
2014-2018 American Community Survey 5-year
estimates. Retrieved from https://data.census.
gov/cedsci/
U.S. Census Bureau (2018). ACS Selected
Economic Characteristics, Table DP03, 2007-
2011 American Community Survey 5-year
estimates. Retrieved from https://data.census.
gov/cedsci/
U.S. Census Bureau (2018). ACS Selected
Economic Characteristics, Table DP03, 2008-
2012 American Community Survey 5-year
estimates. Retrieved from https://data.census.
gov/cedsci/
U.S. Census Bureau (2018). ACS Selected
Economic Characteristics, Table DP03, 2009-
2013 American Community Survey 5-year
estimates. Retrieved from https://data.census.
gov/cedsci/
U.S. Census Bureau (2018). ACS Selected
Economic Characteristics, Table DP03, 2010-
2014 American Community Survey 5-year
estimates. Retrieved from https://data.census.
gov/cedsci/
U.S. Census Bureau (2018). ACS Selected
Economic Characteristics, Table DP03, 2011-
2015 American Community Survey 5-year
estimates. Retrieved from https://data.census.
gov/cedsci/
U.S. Census Bureau (2018). ACS Selected
Economic Characteristics, Table DP03, 2012-
2016 American Community Survey 5-year
estimates. Retrieved from https://data.census.
gov/cedsci/
U.S. Census Bureau (2018). ACS Selected
Economic Characteristics, Table DP03, 2013-
2017 American Community Survey 5-year
estimates. Retrieved from https://data.census.
gov/cedsci/
U.S. Census Bureau (2018). ACS Selected
Economic Characteristics, Table DP03, 2014-
2018 American Community Survey 5-year
estimates. Retrieved from https://data.census.
gov/cedsci/
US Census Data

Tab 22

Climate Action Plan
(CAP)

City of Richmond
Climate Action Plan
Adopted | October 2016

INTRODUCTION

FROM CITY

MANAGER

BILL LINDSAY,

CITY OF RICHMOND
Adopted | October 2016
The Richmond community continues to engage in local climate change prevention efforts, and initiatives to better prepare the community for the future impacts of climate change. The City is committed to improving safety, sustainability and health for all Richmond residents, and recognizes that the environment is an important determinant of community health.

The Richmond Climate Action Plan provides a framework of policies and programs to achieve the City’s health and environmental goals, operationalizing the community-driven vision set forth by the Richmond General Plan 2030.

The Richmond Climate Action Plan uses community input and cross sector collaboration to prioritize action and outcomes with the greatest community benefits for the Richmond community. Many people may think of climate action solely as a means to address environmental concerns; Richmond’s plan builds on this narrative with a more comprehensive strategy. The Richmond Climate Action Plan continues the mission that the City set forth with its Community Health and Wellness Element and its Health in All Policies Strategy: to create initiatives that improve the equitable delivery of services and improve the overall quality of life in Richmond.

This Climate Action Plan strengthens Richmond’s commitment to health equity and creates a strategy to serve the interests and well-being of the entire community – the environment, economy, and residents.

Climate change is a global challenge with impacts that we feel locally here in Richmond. When these impacts are approached with thoughtful planning, we create opportunities for a significant amount of positive, local development. Addressing climate change will create a more secure future for Richmond, and presents an opportunity to overcome many challenges that the community faces today. Richmond’s health equity lens facilitates a plan with a nontraditional focus that engages all City departments to better serve the public’s needs.

There are numerous opportunities for improvement and adaptation identified in the following pages, and this plan will complement the City’s ongoing efforts to lead and innovate through local policy. With close collaboration from hundreds of residents, the University of California, Berkeley’s, Department of City and Regional Planning and School of Public Health, the Y-PLAN Center for Cities and Schools, the West Contra Costa Unified School District, and local community based organizations, the City co-developed a plan that serves the needs of the Richmond community, and allows us to become an active participant in the global effort to address climate change.

Bill Lindsay
City Manager
“Climate action and health
equity go hand in hand,
and are among the City’s
top priorities. ”

ii
City of Richmond California Climate Action Plan
Acknowledgements

CITY COUNCIL
Tom Butt, Mayor
Eduardo Martinez, Vice Mayor
Nathaniel Bates
Jovanka Beckles
Gayle McLaughlin
Jael Myrick
Vinay Pimplé

CITY STAFF
Gabino Arredondo
Shasa Curl
Adam Lenz
Bill Lindsay
Jonathan Malagon
Richard Mitchell
Patrick Phelan
Paige Roosa
Mike Uberti
Sal Vaca
Lina Velasco
LaShonda White

UC BERKELEY
Sydney Cespedes
Professor Jason Corburn
Professor Rachel Morello-Frosch
Lauren Heumann
Youth Plan Learn Act Now! (Y-PLAN)
CITY’S CONSULTANT TEAM
Environmental Science Associates (ESA)
Raimi + Associates
Fehr and Peers

COMMUNITY PARTNERS
Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG)
Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD)
Bay Area Regional Collaborative (BARC)
Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART)
Chevron
Community Civic Consortium
Community Energy Services Corporation
Contra Costa Health Services
Contra Costa Interfaith Supporting Community Organization (CCISCO)
GRID Alternatives
Groundwork Richmond
East Bay Energy Watch
East Bay Municipal Utility District
Marin Clean Energy (MCE)
Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC)
Office of Supervisor John M. Gioia
Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E)
Republic Services
Rich City Rides
Richmond Trees
Richmond High School Health Academy
Richmond Community Foundation
Rising Sun Energy Center (RYSE) Youth Center
San Francisco Bay Conservation and
Development Commission (BCDC)
Solar Richmond
The California Endowment
West Contra Costa Unified School District
YES – Nature to Neighborhoods

iii
City of Richmond California Climate Action Plan
City Accomplishments:

Taking Climate Action
5 4
3 2
1 10
9 8
7 In 2008, the Richmond City Council adopted
a resolution to commit to the GHG emissions
target established by AB 32, and the City com-
pleted our first GHG Inventory for the baseline
year 2005.

Created the Richmond Build program in 2007
to provide ‘green’ job training and employment
opportunities for local youth.

Installed solar on 175 lower income homes
through our partnership with GRID
Alternatives.

Upgraded all of our streetlights with high
efficiency LED fixtures!
Adopted our Bicycle Master Plan in 2011, and
installed 36 miles of bikeways toward a goal
of a 145 mile network of bikeways throughout
the City.
6 Updated our General Plan to include a new
Energy and Climate, and Community Health
and Wellness Elements!
Over 80% of our residents and businesses
have enrolled in MCE’s Light Green program,
which supplies 50% of their electricity from
renewable sources.

Began weekly collection of recycling and
green waste for residents in 2014.

Adopted the Health in All Policies (HiAP)
Strategy and Ordinance in 2014, to ensure the
health of Richmond residents comes first!
Approved the MCE Solar One project to build a

10.5 MW solar facility at the Chevron
Refinery in 2016, which will be the largest
municipal solar field in the Bay Area!

iv
City of Richmond California Climate Action Plan
10 1 In 2015, the City of Richmond partnered with the Y-PLAN (Youth – Plan, Learn, Act, Now) program from UC Berkeley’s Center for Cities and Schools to engage 265 students in Richmond High’s Health Academy to create adaptation and mitigation strategies to inform Climate Change Policy in Richmond. Each grade level focused on a different sector including individual/ household, schools, the City, and small businesses. Over 300 guests from the City, community organizations, parents and other stakeholders were in attendance to hear students’ findings and recommendations at the Y-PLAN Final Presentations in early May 2015. This event marked the formal launch of this Climate Action Plan.
5 4
3 2
1 10
9 8
7 6
Top Personal Actions to Support our
Climate Goals,
as Recommended by
Walk, bicycle and use public
transportation instead of driving.

Retrofit buildings with more efficient
lighting (e.g., LEDs), improved insulation
and windows, and installing solar panels.

Take advantage of local programs and
rebates to install solar panels, reducing
energy costs and our reliance on fossil
fuels.

Turn off lights and unplug electronics
when not in use.

Participate in composting and recycling
services to save money and reduce the
amount of waste sent to the landfill.

Conserve water by reducing shower
times, skipping flushes, installing cistern
displacement devices in toilets, and
retrofitting faucets with water-saving
fixtures.

Replace lawns with drought-tolerant
landscaping.

Install greywater systems to capture and
repurpose (non-toilet) domestic
wastewater for irrigation.

Install green roofs to diminish heat
island effect.

Support urban gardens and buy produce
at your local farmers markets to increase
access to fresh food and reduce the
greenhouse gases from transportation.

Quick Tips:

Richmond High School
Health Academy

Contents
v
City of Richmond California Climate Action Plan

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION FROM CITY MANAGER BILL LINDSAY

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
ii
CITY ACCOMPLISHMENTS: TAKING CLIMATE ACTION iii
QUICK TIPS: 10 TOP PERSONAL ACTIONS TO SUPPORT OUR CLIMATE GOALS,

AS RECOMMENDED BY RICHMOND HIGH SCHOOL HEALTH ACADEMY
iv
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Vision and Mission 1

1.2 Goals
3 1.3 CAP Development Pr
ocess
3 1.4 Relationship to Other City Plans
4 1.5 Relationship to State Policies on Climate Change
5 CHAPTER 2 OPPORTUNITIES AND CHALLENGES

2.1 Building a Better Community in the Face of Climate Change 13

2.2 Greenhouse Gases and their Impact on Climate
14 2.3 Vulnerabilities and Potential Consequences in Richmond 17 2.4 Climate Change and Public Health
18 2.5 Economic Opportunities
20 2.6 The Role of State and Regional Action
21 CHAPTER 3 EMISSIONS INVENTORIES, FORECASTS, AND REDUCTION TARGET

3.1 Community Inventory 26

3.2 Municipal Inventory
28 3.3 Emissions Forecasts and Reduction T
argets
29 1
2 3

Contents
vi
City of Richmond California Climate Action Plan
CHAPTER 4 OBJECTIVES AND STRATEGIES

4.1 Organization of Objectives and Strategies 35
Objective 1: Energy Efficient Buildings and F
acilities
38 Objective 2: Increase Use and Generation of Renewable Ener gy
43 Objective 3: Sustainable Transpor
tation and Land Use
47 Objective 4: Zer
o Waste
53 Objective 5: Water Conser
vation
57 Objective 6: Green Infrastructur
e, Urban Forestry and Agriculture
61 Objective 7: Green Business and Industr
y
65 Objective 8: Resiliency to Climate Change
70 CHAPTER 5 IMPLEMENTATION AND MONITORING

5.1 Overview 81

5.2 Responsibility and Outreach Channels
81 5.3 Key Implementation Considerations
82 5.4 Tracking Per
formance and Co-Benefits
88 5.5 Aligning with Funding Opportunities
96 GLOSSARY OF TERMS AND ACRONYMS 101

APPENDICES
A. Stakeholder Outreach and Education A-1
B. City of Richmond GHG Inventories
B-1
C. Traffic Study Report
C-1
D. Quantification Methods for GHG Reduction Measures
D-1
E. Implementing Actions
E-1
F . City of Richmond Climate Change Adaptation Study
F-1
4 5

1 City of Richmond
Climate Action Plan

CHAPTER
Introduction

Introduction
1 City of Richmond California Climate Action Plan
Climate change presents the City of Richmond with complex challenges and tremendous opportunities. The City is
committed to creating a healthy, equitable community for all of its residents. The Richmond Climate Action Plan (CAP) is a multi-objective plan that addresses environmental, social and economic issues related to climate change. The CAP
builds on the goals and policies in the City’s General Plan and the Health in All Policies Strategy (HiAP) to further the City’s efforts to build health equity through the reduction of local GHG emissions, and to simultaneously ensure that the community is well prepared for the impacts of climate change. It elevates health equity priorities in the selection of climate action measures, building on the City’s existing policy framework to support a healthy, vibrant, and equitable City.

The City of Richmond is committed to developing a coordinated approach to reducing GHG emissions within the community, and the CAP establishes the framework for that process. It provides an inventory of the City’s emissions, establishes an emissions reduction target, and identifies feasible City and community actions that cost-effectively reduce GHG
emissions and improve community health across all sectors.

Climate Action Plan Mission
Serve as a roadmap for the City to reduce greenhouse
gas emissions, create jobs, and prepare for the impacts of climate change on public health, infrastructure, the
economy, ecosystems, and public spaces in our
community.

INTRODUCTION
In the last decade, cities across the globe have taken the lead in addressing climate change at the local level. Municipal and regional climate action plans are becoming standard operations across the nation, as cities have a responsibility and a unique capacity to tailor and develop programs to reduce community greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and prepare for the impacts of climate change.

In addition to reducing GHG emissions, successful
implementation of the CAP will result in numerous co-benefits to the community, and will position the City to obtain grant funding for sustainable development programs such as
affordable housing, transit-oriented development, and urban forestry.

1.1 Vision and Mission
The CAP expands and operationalizes the community vision for health equity, sustainability, and climate change established in the Richmond General Plan 2030. The Richmond CAP
Community Vision is as follows:

Introduction
2 City of Richmond California Climate Action Plan
Community Vision
The City of Richmond plays a pivotal role in developing climate policy at a local level that, in turn, influences regional, state, and national objectives. The City relies on clean energy sources, waste reduction practices, sustainable buildings and innovative land use planning to reduce energy and climate impacts. These measures have resulted in broad community benefits including dramatic reductions in fossil fuel use, cost savings, emission reductions, improved health equity, water conservation, and an enhanced quality of life. City officials and community members value and protect natural resources and continue to work together to reduce the impacts of a changing climate. A renewed focus on education and local and regional partnerships further supports sustainable practices that will nurture human health and environmental quality for future generations. The City builds resiliency to climate change impacts through actions focused on transitioning to renewable energy, strengthening critical transportation infrastructure, creating safe and affordable housing, enhancing local jobs and wages, creating healthy local food systems, and protecting natural resources and habitat.

Co-benefits of Implementing the City of Richmond Climate Action Plan z Improve community health and air quality
z Increase investment in homes and buildings
z Complete streets and increased urban tree canopy
z Conserve water and other natural resources
z Increase home and building values
z Create local green jobs
z Reduce utility bills and maintenance costs
z Increase educational and training opportunities
z More resilient infrastructure prepared for climate change impacts

Introduction
3 City of Richmond California Climate Action Plan
In support of this vision, the mission of the Richmond CAP is to serve as a roadmap for how the City will reduce GHG emissions, create local jobs, and prepare for the impacts of climate change on public health, infrastructure, ecosystems, and public spaces in our community. The CAP supports the community’s goals and policies in the City’s General Plan 2030, and builds upon other local policies such as the Health in All Policies Strategy. It also enables the City to implement strategies that successfully fulfill the requirements of state initiatives Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32) and Senate Bill 375 (SB 375).

1.2 Goals
The Richmond CAP is founded on four overarching goals that represent the aim or desired result of climate action planning in the City.

1. GHG Emissions
Reduction: The City is committed to
substantially reducing GHG emissions originating from
the community and from government operations. The
City will contribute to emissions reductions needed to
achieve statewide targets and reduce the societal and
environmental risks associated with climate change.

2. Healthy and
Resilient Community: Richmond is committed
to sustainable growth that provides a healthy, resilient and equitable environment for all. Richmond will continue to invest resources in residences, businesses, infrastructure, and public spaces to better prepare for the impacts of
climate change. Every resident should have access to
walkable neighborhoods, and good jobs. Homes should
be safe, affordable, and efficient. Urban forestry and
green space should be integrated throughout the City’s
neighborhoods.

3. Prosperous Local
Economy: The City will work with the
local business community to capitalize on emerging
clean technology economic opportunities in energy,
transportation, land use, and general consumption. Local jobs creation will create more employment options and
reduce the need for City residents to commute to distant employment centers.

4. Engaged Community
and Educated Youth: The City
is committed to utilizing culturally and linguistically responsive outreach to engage the community and
maximize community participation and benefits. Students, residents, and businesses are essential partners in
confronting the climate change challenge. An engaged
community is more cohesive and capable of achieving
City climate program goals in energy efficiency, waste
reduction, water conservation, sustainable transportation, and sustainable resources such as community gardens
and healthy food. In Richmond’s youth lies its foundation for a sustainable and resilient future. Young people
empathize and embrace climate-smart behaviors, and
are empowered to take ownership of Richmond’s future
as active citizens within the local climate change policy decision-making processes.

1.3 CAP Development Process
The Richmond CAP is the culmination of several years of work within the City, and organizes the City’s past and future path with that of the growing state and worldwide movement to address the causes of human-induced climate change.

In 2007, the City signed the U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement, a pledge to meet the Kyoto Protocol’s goal to reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. In 2009, the City published its 2005 baseline GHG inventory as a first step to understand its sources of GHG emissions across the community. That same year, Richmond became a member of
ICLEI: Local Governments for Sustainability, an international network for municipalities dedicated to addressing climate change. In 2008, the City Council adopted Resolution 108- 08 committing to the GHG emissions target established by AB 32, and to achieving an 80 percent reduction below 1990 levels by 2050.

Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32)
California’s Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006,
or AB 32, seeks to fight climate change through a
comprehensive program reducing GHG emissions
from virtually all sources statewide. The landmark law
requires the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to
develop regulations and market mechanisms that will cut statewide GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020.

Introduction
4 City of Richmond California Climate Action Plan
Richmond strengthened its commitment to climate action in 2012 with the adoption of an Energy and Climate Element into the City’s General Plan 2030 update, which seeks to recognize and responsibly address the impacts of climate change.

Developing a CAP is an implementing action of the General Plan 2030.

Preparation of the Richmond Draft CAP began in earnest
in 2013, and commenced with a community workshop to
discuss the CAP with partners from UC Berkeley. The City collaborated with the UC Berkeley Department of City and Regional Planning and the School of Public Health to develop a 2012 update of the GHG inventory, survey current best practices for the Plan, and evaluate policy synergies with state and federal initiatives. In 2014, the City also sought input on CAP strategies and actions from 250 Richmond High School students via the Youth Plan Learn Act Now (Y-PLAN) Program, sponsored by the UC Berkeley Center for Cities + Schools and the City of Richmond. The Y-PLAN program analyzed what
actions residents, businesses, schools, and the City could undertake to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

In 2015, the City held two additional community workshops and hosted three luncheons with stakeholders representing community-based organizations, businesses, and utilities, franchisees, and industry groups. These events provided ample opportunity for stakeholder input, informed the
strategies and actions included in the CAP , and helped identify and strengthen important partnerships for pursuing funding and implementing the CAP .

The City also held meetings with the Bay Area Regional
Collaborative (BARC), Bay Area Air Quality Management
District (BAAQMD), Association of Bay Area Governments
(ABAG), Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), the Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC),
and UC Berkeley’s School of Public Health. These meetings were designed to capture important stakeholder concerns regarding the City’s climate action planning, to help align the CAP with regional transportation plans, state and regional climate programs, and funding opportunities.

This CAP reflects the vast breadth and depth of input received at these events and through these programs. Appendix A:

Stakeholder Outreach and Education includes the City’s CAP Community Engagement Plan, as well as a summary of input received during community and stakeholder engagement
events. Appendix E: Implementing Actions provides a timeline of state and local actions to date that address climate change.

1.4 Relationship to
Other City Plans
The City of Richmond understands that addressing climate change goes beyond environmental concerns. Efforts to
reduce GHG emissions and improve resilience to climate
change will improve the local economy, sustainability,
health, and well-being of the entire community. The City is continuously working to address climate change through
policy, and has adopted numerous plans and strategies that directly or indirectly support climate action. The Richmond CAP was influenced by, and builds upon, these plans and strategies, including the City’s General Plan, the Health in All Policies Strategy (HiAP), Draft Urban Greening Master Plan, Parks Master Plan, Richmond Bicycle Master Plan, and Richmond Pedestrian Plan. The CAP not only directly supports policies within these plans, it provides actions that implement requirements of these policies.

Introduction
5 City of Richmond California Climate Action Plan

RICHMOND CLIMATE

ACTION PLAN
Health in All
Policies Strategy
Draft Urban Greening
Master Plan
Parks Master
Plan
Richmond Bicycle
Master Plan/Pedestrian Plan
Richmond
General Plan 2030
City Council
Resolutions

1.5 Relationship to State
Policies on Climate Change
Many strategies for monitoring and addressing climate
change have emerged at the international, national, and state levels. California remains a leader in the effort to reduce GHG emissions through mitigation and adaptation strategies. With AB 32, California became the first state in the U.S. to mandate GHG emissions reductions across its entire economy. To
support AB 32, California has been developing policy and passing legislation that seeks to control emissions
of gases that contribute to climate change. These have
included regulatory approaches such as mandatory reporting for significant sources of GHG emissions and caps on
emission levels, as well as market-based mechanisms, such as the state’s Cap and Trade program. The state policies and regulations most relevant to the Richmond CAP are briefly described below.

Introduction
6 City of Richmond California Climate Action Plan
Richmond General Plan 2030
richmond general plan 2030
On April 25, 2012, the Richmond City Council adopted a new General Plan to guide the City’s sustainable growth and development. The General Plan provides a comprehensive framework for developing a healthy city and healthy neighborhoods.

The Energy and Climate Change Element of the General Plan provides Richmond’s community vision for energy and climate in 2030. The element examines how the City’s land use and transportation network will affect energy consumption and determines what measures can be implemented to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The element also provides policy direction for protecting energy resources and responding to climate change, and provides goals, policies, and actions to address energy conservation, renewable energy generation and use, sustainable business development, and responsible community revitalization.

The Richmond CAP stems from, and supports implementation of these General Plan goals, policies, and actions. The first goal in the Energy and Climate Change Element is “Leadership in Managing Climate Change” (Goal EC1). General Plan policies supporting this goal include:
z Policy EC1.1
Leadership and Advocacy: Take a leadership role in advocating for local, regional and national solutions to climate change at all levels of government and with the private sector. z Policy EC1.2
Public Awareness and Support: Provide incentives to encourage residents and businesses to reduce their carbon footprint by raising their awareness about the impacts of climate change and by building support for climate change initiatives in Richmond and the greater region.

Moreover, the structure and content of the CAP meet the directive of General Plan Action EC1A, which calls for development of a CAP for reducing GHG emissions to meet or exceed state reduction targets.

EO-S-3-05 provided the basis for subsequent regulation
to reduce GHG emissions, including AB 32 and SB 375
(described below). It also created the California Climate Action Team (CAT), which is tasked with preparing biennial science assessment reports on climate changes and adaptation
options for California.

Executive Order S-3-05
Executive Order (EO) S-3-05, signed on June 1, 2005 by
Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, set the stage for multiple legislative actions to reduce GHG emissions in California. EO S-3-05 established the following statewide GHG emissions targets:
y By 2010, reduce GHG emissions to 2000 lev
els;
y By 2020, reduce GHG emissions to 1990 lev
els; and
y By 2050,
reduce GHG emissions to 80 percent below 1990
levels.

Introduction
7 City of Richmond California Climate Action Plan
Richmond Health in All Policies Strategy (HiAP)
City of Richmond
Health in All Policies Strategy 2013-2014
The City is fully committed to achieving the highest level of health for all Richmond residents. The City’s HiAP Strategy reflects this pledge to health equity by integrating health and wellness throughout City policies, programs, and operations. The City defines health equity as attaining the highest level of health for all people, while describing health inequity as differences in health that are unfair, unjust, and preventable. Environmental conditions, socioeconomic conditions, and other root causes contribute to health inequity.

Health Equity is incorporated into the CAP in the following ways:
z Commitment to
Health Equity: The City’s vision for a healthy, climate-resilient City includes a commitment to improving the overall health of all its residents (health equity) by implementing GHG reduction measures that also address unnecessary and unjust health burdens faced by some of its most disadvantaged residents (health inequities). z Strategies and Actions: The CAP includes specific strategies and actions that work towards these goals by :
y Encouraging physical activity through pedestrian and bicycle infrastructur e.
y Advancing state,
regional, and local efforts to reduce GHG emissions, criteria pollutants, and short-lived climate pollutants through enforcement of existing emission regulations. y Supporting local agriculture and food pr
oduction to ensure residents have better access to healthy local foods. y Building healthy schools
through partnerships to reduce energy and water consumption, and increase solid waste diversion.
y Developing
partnerships with community-based organizations that support workforce development and green jobs. y Targeting specific pr
ograms such as energy efficient upgrades and solar installation to low-income facilities. y Encouraging safe, affordable, and healthy housing.

Assembly Bill 32 – California Global
Warming Solutions Act of 2006
AB 32 was approved by the legislature and signed by Governor Schwarzenegger in 2006. The landmark legislation requires the state to reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 and directs the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to develop the plans, programs, and regulations needed to achieve
reductions in a technologically feasible and cost-effective manner. Under the legislation, CARB is mandated to:
y Identify early action
items that can be quickly
implemented to achieve GHG reductions. These early
action items were adopted by CARB in 2007 and include
regulations affecting landfill operations, motor vehicle fuels, car refrigerants, and port operations, among other regulations.
y Create and adopt r
egulations that require the state’s
largest industrial emitters of GHGs to report and verify their emissions on an annual basis.
y Develop and maintain a Climate Change Scoping Plan
to identify the most technologically feasible and cost- effective measures to achieve the necessary emissions
reductions to reach 1990 levels by 2020. The first Scoping Plan,
1 adopted in 2008, put forth a variety of programs,
regulations, incentives, and market-based mechanisms
to reduce GHG emissions across the state, including:
y Expanding and str
engthening existing energy
efficiency programs;
y Achieving a
statewide renewables energy mix of 33
percent for electricity generation;
1 CARB 2008 Scoping Plan. Available at http://arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/scopingplan.htm

Introduction
8 City of Richmond California Climate Action Plan
y Developing a California Cap and Trade program
affecting
major industrial facilities and power plants
in the state as well as companies that import power
from other states for sale in California;
y Establishing targets
for transportation-related GHGs
for regions throughout California and pursuing
policies and incentives to achieve those targets;
y Adopting measures
pursuant to existing laws
including clean car standards and low carbon fuel
standards;
y Creating tar
geted fees on high global warming
potential gases and a fee to fund the administrative
costs of the state’s long term commitment to AB 32
implementation; and
y Adopting measures
to increase commercial recycling.

CARB’s 2014 update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan
outlined the challenges to reducing statewide GHG emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050, clarified the role of local governments in reducing GHG emissions within their jurisdictions, and highlighted the need for targeted investment, new policy developments, and rapid market uptake of new technologies in transportation, energy, agriculture, water, waste management and land management. The next update
to the Scoping Plan, due to be released in late 2016, is expected to include new program and policy details that will demonstrate how the state expects to meet its long-term GHG targets.

Senate Bill 97 – California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
Guideline Amendments of 2007
Senate Bill (SB) 97 amends the CEQA Guidelines to address GHG emissions. Local governments may now use adopted
plans consistent with the amended CEQA Guidelines to
assess the cumulative impacts of projects on climate change, if the plan for the reduction of GHG emissions accomplishes the following:
y Quantifies GHG emissions,
both existing and projected
over a specified time period, resulting from activities within a defined geographic area;
y Establishes a le
vel, based on substantial evidence,
below which the contribution to GHG emissions from
activities covered by the plan would not be cumulatively considerable;

Introduction
9 City of Richmond California Climate Action Plan
2 Association of Bay Area Go vernments (ABAG) and MTC, 2013. Plan Bay Area 2013: Strategy for a Sustainable Region. July 2013.

SB 375 – Sustainable Communities
and Climate Protection Act of 2008
SB 375, also known as the Sustainable Communities and
Climate Protection Act of 2008, builds off of AB 32 and aims to reduce GHG emissions by linking transportation funding to land use planning. It requires the state’s metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) to create a sustainable communities strategy (SCS) in their regional transportation plan (RTP) for the purpose of reducing urban sprawl and reliance on automobiles. Under SB 375, CARB established for each MPO a regional target for GHG emissions reductions from passenger vehicle use. The regional GHG reduction targets for the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) region, which is the MPO with jurisdiction over Richmond, are 7 percent per capita by 2020 and 15 percent per capita by 2035 from 2005 levels.
2 y Identifies and analyz
es the GHG emissions resulting
from specific actions or categories of actions anticipated within the geographic area;
y Specifies measures
or a group of measures, including
performance standards, that substantial evidence
demonstrates, if implemented on a project-by-project
basis, would collectively achieve the specified emissions level;
y Establishes a mechanism
to monitor the plan’s progress
toward achieving the specified emissions level and to
require an amendment if the plan is not achieving it; and y Is adopted
in a public process following environmental
review.

Introduction
10 City of Richmond California Climate Action Plan
Executive Order B-30-15 calls on CARB to update the AB 32 Climate Change Scoping Plan to incorporate the 2030 statewide target. In June 2016, CARB released a 2030 Draft Scoping Plan Update concept paper describing policy scenarios for achieving the target. The scenarios present the various ways in which industrial emissions could be reduced (e.g., cap & trade, carbon tax, new regulations) and how aggressive the state would need to be in expanding the use of zero emission and plug-in hybrid vehicles by 2030. All scenarios call for enhancing reductions from existing programs (e.g., increase the use of zero emission and plug-in electric vehicles) along with aggressive implementation of existing policies like SB 350 and the state’s Proposed Short-Lived Climate Pollutant (SLCP) Reduction Strategy. Although the paper states that local actions are critical for implementation of California’s ambitious climate agenda, there is no specific guidance for setting post-2020 reduction targets for local climate action plans. The City is expecting more concrete guidance from the state with the eventual release of the 2030 Scoping Plan Update later in the year.

Senate Bill 379
Beginning January 1, 2017, SB 379 requires California cities and counties, upon the next revision of their local hazard mitigation plan, to include climate adaptation and resiliency strategies in the safety elements of their general plans. The bill requires the safety element update to include a set of goals, policies, and objectives for their communities based on a vulnerability assessment, as well as implementation measures to increase community resilience to climate
change. The safety element update can incorporate these components by reference from an adopted local hazard
mitigation plan and/or climate adaptation plan.

Senate Bill 535 – Greenhouse Gas
Reduction Fund and Disadvantaged
Communities (2012)
SB 535 requires the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) to identify disadvantaged communities, and requires that 25 percent of all funds allocated pursuant to an investment plan for the use of state moneys collected through a Cap and Trade program be allocated to projects that benefit disadvantaged communities and at least 10 percent of the 25 percent to be spent on projects located in disadvantaged communities.

Senate Bill 350
In October 2015, the California legislature passed the Clean Energy and Pollution Reduction Act of 2015 (SB 350), requiring the State to 1) generate half of its electricity from renewable energy sources; 2) double energy efficiency for both electricity and natural gas end uses in all buildings by 2030; and 3) substantially improve the infrastructure for electric vehicle transportation.

Executive Order B-30-15
On April 29, 2015, Governor Jerry Brown signed Executive Order (EO) B-30-15 to establish an interim GHG emission reduction target to reduce GHG emissions to 40 percent
below 1990 levels by 2030. This new target represents the most aggressive goal set by any government in North America to reduce GHG emissions by 2030. The EO also establishes a climate adaptation directive for state investments and agencies, and requires state agencies to “take current and future climate change impacts into account” and consider “full life-cycle cost accounting” when making future planning and investment decisions, particularly as applied to infrastructure planning.

City of Richmond
Climate Action Plan
CHAPTER 2
Opportunities and Challenges

Opportunities and Challenges
13 City of Richmond California Climate Action Plan

OPPORTUNITIES

AND CHALLENGES
Climate change presents the City with enormous challenges and tremendous opportunities. Taking meaningful action on climate change can mean challenging the status quo and questioning long-held beliefs. But the urgent need to take action provides the City with a unique opportunity to build a thriving community based on sustainable, equitable and resilient systems. This chapter provides a summary of the science behind climate change and the local impacts expected in Richmond. It introduces the City’s primary vulnerabilities to climate change, describes the nexus between climate change and public health, and concludes with a discussion of the economic opportunities associated with reducing emissions and increasing community resilience.

Although climate change presents serious long-term
challenges to the City of Richmond, it also presents
opportunities. Strong public policy that provides funding for climate change mitigation and adaptation has multiple benefits. For example, strategies to dramatically reduce community-wide GHG will also invest in homes and
infrastructure and improve public health. By investing in skilled workers and new low carbon technologies like clean energy, renewable materials, and bio-based fuels, the City can develop new engines for job growth and sustainable
economic prosperity. By investing in adaptation strategies, such as flood and tidal defenses, the City can lessen the impact of future natural disasters while simultaneously driving economic growth by strengthening infrastructure. By instituting public health measures to deal with heat waves, and air quality impacts, the City can plan for climate change in a way that protects vulnerable populations and provides an equitable distribution of costs, benefits, and opportunities for all members of the Richmond community.

2.1 Building a Better
Community in the Face
of Climate Change
Climate change is happening, as evidenced by larger, more powerful storms, changing precipitation patterns, and rising seas. Climate change is a challenge that demands action in both reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to minimize future hazards, and investing in resilience and adaptation measures for the impacts we are experiencing now and expect to worsen in the coming decades.

Opportunities and Challenges
14 City of Richmond California Climate Action Plan

2.2 Greenhouse Gases and
their Impact on Climate
The Greenhouse Effect is a natural phenomenon whereby
greenhouse gases trap heat in the atmosphere and regulate the Earth’s temperature. This natural effect is responsible for maintaining a habitable climate, but over the last century human activities have greatly increased atmospheric
concentrations of greenhouse gases. According to the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), it is very likely that this increase of human-generated GHG emissions, which has accelerated since the mid-20th century, is a primary cause of climate change. Atmospheric concentrations of
GHG emissions now far exceed the average of the past
several thousand years. Land use changes, burning of fossil fuels, and agricultural practices have all contributed to this observed increase. Global climate models clearly show that human activity is having an effect on global temperatures Photo courtesy of The Royal Society;
https://royalsociety.org/topics-policy/projects/climate-change-evidence-causes/basics-of-climate-change/ Figure 2-1: The Greenhouse Effect

Opportunities and Challenges
15 City of Richmond California Climate Action Plan
The most prevalent GHGs are carbon dioxide (CO2) and water vapor. Others important GHGs are methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6). These gases are emitted through a variety of natural processes and human activities, as follows:
y CO2 and N2O are bypr
oducts of fossil fuel combustion;
y N2O is associa
ted with agricultural operations, such as
fertilization of crops;
y CH4 is common
ly created by off-gassing from agricultural
practices (e.g., manure from cows), anaerobic composting, and landfills;
y CFCs were widely used as refrigerants, propellants, and cleaning solvents; their production has been mostly
eliminated by international treaty, but past emissions
remain in the atmosphere due to their long lifespan;
y HFCs are
now used as a substitute for chlorofluorocarbons
in refrigeration and cooling; and
y PFCs and SF6
emissions are common byproducts of
industries such as aluminum production and semi-
conductor manufacturing.

Figure 2-2: Impact of Sea Level Rise on City of Richmond Transportation and Energy Assets

Opportunities and Challenges
16 City of Richmond California Climate Action Plan
The City of Richmond has also completed its first Climate Change Adaptation Study (see Appendix F) which includes an evaluation of climate change impacts at the local scale and a vulnerability and risk assessment of the City’s most important assets to rising temperatures, rising seas, extreme weather events, and more extreme droughts.1 The methodology
used to develop the City’s Adaptation Study expands on the Adapting to Rising Tides (ART) methodology2 developed by the Bay Conservation and Development Commissions (BCDC) and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Coastal Services Center, to evaluate how San Francisco Bay Area communities can adapt to sea level rise and storm event flooding. The findings from the City of Richmond Climate Change Adaptation Study, which incorporate a wide range of analyses done for the Contra Costa County ART Project,
3 are
summarized in the following sections.

Rising Seas
Historical records show that sea level in San Francisco Bay has risen more than 7 inches (18 cm) over the past 100 years.

Scientists agree that the rate of sea level rise is accelerating, but projections of future sea levels vary considerably. The State of California has adopted sea level rise projections for the San Francisco Bay region from the National Research Council (NRC), which includes an allowance for vertical land motion (tectonic uplift, or subsidence from compaction of sediments). For the Bay Area, the NRC projects 11 inches of sea level rise (measured at Mean Higher High Water, or MHHW) over current levels by 2050 (with a range of 5 to 24 inches) and 36 inches by 2100 (with a range of 17 to 66 inches by 2100). The Contra Costa County ART Project mapped these sea level rise scenarios, as well as higher Bay water elevations ranging from 77 to 108 inches above MHHW. These higher
levels are above current predictions for sea level rise likely to occur before 2100, but they illustrate short-term flooding that could occur in that time frame when extreme tides are coupled with sea level rise. For example, 77 inches above MHHW is approximately equal to a 36-inch sea level rise plus 100-year extreme tide
As described in the Adaptation Study, hundreds of Richmond homes are at risk from current or future flooding that will be more frequent or extensive as sea level rises. Critical infrastructure including roads, railways, and wastewater treatment plants are vulnerable to sea level rise and coastal flooding, as are recreational areas at Point Isabel Recreational Shoreline, Miller Knox Regional Shoreline, and Point Pinole Regional Shoreline. Figure 2-2 illustrates the anticipated impact of sea level rise on transportation and energy assets in the City of Richmond, using a projection of 77 inches above MHHW (equivalent to 36-inch sea level rise plus 100-year extreme tide). The Chevron refinery is located in a high risk area for sea level rise, as is the Port of Richmond, and critical stretches of important highways and rail lines.

Rising Temperatures
California in general expects overall hotter conditions for both average and extreme temperatures. An increase in heat waves and wildfires are expected to be among the earliest climate impacts experienced across the state.
4 According to
the State’s climate adaptation planning tool known as Cal- Adapt, the City of Richmond area can expect to experience a rise in average annual temperature of about 3 to 6 degrees Fahrenheit above the historical average by the end of the century. Urban areas with lots of pavement and few trees will tend to heat up even more. Though extreme heat events in coastal areas like Richmond are not expected to be as severe or as long-lasting as further inland, the residents of these historically cooler areas are less accustomed to hot weather and may not be as well prepared or equipped to deal with it.

Air conditioning is far less common, for example. Outdoor workers, elderly populations, and infants are particularly vulnerable to extreme temperatures.
51 City of Richmond Climate Change Adaptation Study, 2016. 2 San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC) and the NOAA Coastal Services Center, 2011: Adapting to Rising Tides; project information and resources available at http://www.adaptingtorisingtides.org/ 3 Project information available at: http://www.adaptingtorisingtides.or g/project/contra-costa-county-adapting-to-rising-tides-project 4 California Natural Resources Agency, 2014, Saf eguarding California: Reducing Climate Risk; An update to the 2009 California Climate Adaptation Strategy, http://resources.ca.gov/climate/safeguarding/ 5 Contra Costa Health Services. Climate Change Vulnerability in Contra Costa County: A Focus on Heat, 2015

Opportunities and Challenges
17 City of Richmond California Climate Action Plan
different natural resource conditions. The report emphasizes the unprecedented levels of leadership and cooperation
needed amongst multiple stakeholders to effectively address adaptation.
8 The local impacts on climate described in the prior section will affect community infrastructure and resources. The City of Richmond Climate Change Adaptation Study assesses
vulnerabilities for the following eleven categories of
community assets, which include City-owned or operated
facilities deemed critical for operations, utility services, and risk management, and other tangible and non-tangible assets that are important to community health, safety, and well- being. Assets are categorized as follows:

1. Community Services and Public F
acilities

2. Public Health

3. Housing

4. Water Supply

5. Wastewater Management

6. Stormwater Management

7. Transportat
ion Infrastructure

8. Shoreline Flood Management

9. Energy Security and Infrastructur
e

10. Solid Waste/Hazar
dous Materials Management

11. Natural Areas/Ecosystems/Recr
eation Assets

12. Commercial and Industrial Assets
6 Cayan, Tyree, and Iacobellis, 2012. Climate Change Scenarios for the San Francisco Region.

California Energy Commission Publication No. CEC-500-2012-042. 7 San Francisco Bay Area Integrated Regional Water Management Plan, September 2013. Available at: http://bairwmp.or g/ 8 California Natural Resources Agency, 2014, Saf eguarding California: Reducing Climate Risk; An update to the 2009 California Climate Adaptation Strategy, http://resources.ca.gov/climate/safeguarding/ Precipitation and Drought
Climate models indicate that the San Francisco Bay Area is likely to continue with its Mediterranean climate of cool wet winters and hot dry summers, but conditions will be drier than the historical average in the second half of the century. While average conditions may be drier, the expectation is that more intense downpours will occur during a somewhat shorter
rainy season.
6 Since the City already has an arid climate, it is
sensitive to a decrease in annual local precipitation, which can cause local drought, impacting local flora and contributing to wildfire risk. An increase in local precipitation during extreme storms can increase the peak storm runoff, thereby increasing the risk of flooding due to the overtopping of stormwater channels, pipes, pumps, and creeks.

Regional changes in precipitation and temperature patterns present a long-term risk to the City’s water supply. Climate models predict reductions in the average annual Sierra
snowpack with a shift in snowmelt runoff to earlier in the year, changes in the timing, intensity and variability of precipitation, and an increased amount of precipitation falling as rain instead of as snow.
7 Long-term changes in watershed vegetation and increased incidence of wildfires could affect water quality in local reservoirs. Higher temperatures would also increase
evaporation, which in turn would increase irrigation demand.

2.3 Vulnerabilities and Potential
Consequences in Richmond
In its recently published update to the California Climate Adaptation Strategy, the California Natural Resources Agency outlines the significant climate change impacts facing the Bay Area, including sea level rise, public health problems arising from more extremely hot days and poorer air quality; longer and more intense wildfire conditions; more frequent droughts with possible disruptions in fresh water supplies; and vastly

Opportunities and Challenges
18 City of Richmond California Climate Action Plan
Richmond’s greatest risks related to climate change result from the City’s shoreline, the inherent sensitivities of its Mediterranean climate, and its dependence on imported water from the distant Sierra Nevada as its primary water supply.

Some of the City’s most critical assets are located in close proximity to the low-lying shoreline where risk of damage or disruption from sea level rise is significant. These include wastewater treatment facilities, stormwater management
infrastructure, residential neighborhoods, historical landmarks, the Chevron Refinery and other industrial areas including the Port of Richmond, highways, rail lines, emergency response facilities, and parks. Climate change is expected to bring hotter and drier summers and winter storms that are predicted to be fewer in number but higher in intensity. These changes can stress natural habitats and public health while posing a potentially serious risk to the long-term reliability of the City’s potable water supply. Based on this study, the City-owned and community assets at highest risk from climate change by the year 2100 include the following:

1. Property
and infrastructure located in areas along the bay
shore prone to coastal flooding. Current levees are not designed to protect these assets from sea level rise;

2. The City’
s long-term potable water supply, which is largely
dependent on runoff from the Sierra Nevada Mountains,
especially during dry years;

3. Road transportation
assets including streets and highway
approaches that are located in flood-prone areas near the bay shore;

4. The health and
well-being of the most vulnerable of the
City’s residential populations, and its natural inhabitants (flora and fauna), which can experience severe stress from extreme heat, drought and extreme precipitation events; and

5. Parks, r
oads and residential areas in the Richmond Hills
that become increasingly high risk zones for wildfires by the year 2100.

Richmond is already engaged in multiple planning efforts that address some or all of these risks. However, the Adaptation Study represents the City’s first widely coordinated effort to identify and document vulnerabilities across a broad range of community assets, and assess the risk of climate-related impacts to those assets over near-term (to 2050) and longer- term (to 2100) planning horizons.

2.4 Climate Change and
Public Health
Climate change presents a significant risk to community health. More extreme weather events, worsening air quality, and increased transmission of infectious disease may
negatively affect human health, health behaviors, and the socio-economic factors that influence health outcomes.

Some existing health threats may intensify, while new health threats may emerge. The impacts of climate change will not affect everyone equally. It is expected that already burdened and vulnerable populations, such as the elderly, infants and children, people of color/communities of color, and people living in poverty, will be disproportionally impacted by climate change. Fortunately, many of the actions that address climate change also improve the health and wellbeing of vulnerable communities, helping to address the existing, unequal health burdens faced by some of the City’s most disadvantaged
residents.

Health Effects and
Vulnerable Populations
Climate change, together with other stressors, is expected to impact many facets of public health. For example, extreme heat can cause premature death, cardiovascular stress or failure, and heat-related illness such as heat stroke, heat exhaustion, and kidney stones. Air pollution can cause
increased asthma attacks, allergies, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and other cardiovascular and respiratory diseases. Any of these stressors can lead to mental health disorders such as depression, anxiety, Post-traumatic Stress Disorder (PSD), substance abuse, and other conditions.

Opportunities and Challenges
19 City of Richmond California Climate Action Plan
Health Co-benefits
Climate change will have significant health impacts and it is important that people are prepared to mitigate and adapt to our changing climate. Many climate change mitigation and adaptation efforts can bring multiple health co-benefits to Richmond residents. For example, reducing vehicle miles traveled by increasing safe and accessible walking and
bicycling infrastructure can increase physical activity, reduce air pollution, and decrease injury collisions. Corresponding health co-benefits include reductions in chronic disease, obesity levels, and respiratory diseases, and improvements in mental health.

Promoting local agriculture and food systems can increase access to healthy and fresh foods, reduce upstream energy use, and increase local social cohesion. Urban greening is another strategy that helps reduce energy use, moderate temperature and the urban heat island health effect, reduce air and noise pollution, and enhance safety. Likewise, having access to urban green space can improve physical and mental health.

Finally, climate actions can indirectly improve health. Actions that reduce residential building energy use can reduce
household energy cost and promote healthy homes while at the same time creating local green jobs with living wages.

Better employment, housing, and other physical environment factors are all factors that affect health and wellbeing.

Climate Change and Health Equity
Climate change will act as a stress multiplier for many existing health problems which already disproportionally impact low- income populations and communities of color in Richmond.

While climate change is expected to affect environmental conditions such as temperature and air quality, which can result in more illness and injury, it is also expected to impact socio-economic conditions and access to basic goods and services, such as health care, food, and housing, exacerbating existing cumulative stress.

Community Resiliency to Climate Change
The driving hypothesis behind the City’s HiAP Strategy
is recognizing that the cumulative impact of multiple
stressors on the body is a key factor in the persistence of health inequities. Toxic stress refers to prolonged
and repeated exposure to multiple negative factors that have known physical and mental health impacts that
contribute to chronic conditions such as heart disease
and diabetes, including poor air quality resulting from GHG emissions. Similarly, the “climate gap” refers to
the disproportionate and unequal health and economic
impact that climate change has on people of color and
low income communities.
9 Together, the City’s HiAP
Strategy and the CAP focus on reducing toxic stress and the climate gap by focusing on the Social Determinants
of Health, the conditions in the environment in which
people are born, live, work, play, and age that affect a wide range of health and quality of life outcomes.

The City’s most vulnerable populations (the elderly, low- income families, communities of color, and individuals
already suffering from chronic diseases) face significant risk from extreme heat events. These populations will also face higher risk of health problems from worsening air quality and new disease vectors. The City has an important role, in partnership with public agencies and community-based organizations, to educate and engage the public on climate change issues, and to promote community involvement in
actions to reduce climate change risks, using linguistically and culturally responsive approaches that are effective to improving resiliency for diverse populations.
9 Morello-Frosh, Rachel, Manuel Pastor, James Sadd, and Seth Shonkoff. The Climate Gap: Inequalities in How Climate Change Hurts Americans & How to Close the Gap. May 2009, a
vailable at: https://dornsife.usc.edu/pere/climategap/

Opportunities and Challenges
20 City of Richmond California Climate Action Plan
The map in Figure 2-3 shows the disadvantaged communities in Richmond designated by California Environmental
Protection Agency (CalEPA) for the purpose of implementing SB 535, which allocates twenty-five percent of available moneys in the State’s Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund
(GGRF) to projects that provide benefits to disadvantaged communities.
10 These areas are disproportionately affected
by environmental pollution and other hazards that can lead to negative public health effects, exposure or environmental degradation. Their location is determined by CalEnviroScreen

2.0,
11 a screening tool that uses twenty-one indicators to
identify communities most burdened by pollution from
multiple sources and most vulnerable to its effects, taking into account their socioeconomic characteristics and underlying health status. These areas tend to have high concentrations of people with low income, high unemployment, low levels of home ownership, high rent burden, health sensitivities, or low levels of educational attainment. Communities in North Richmond, Central Richmond, South Richmond, and
the Richmond Annex are among those designated by these
criteria as disadvantaged communities.

Actions focusing on the most burdened and vulnerable
communities can help alleviate existing health and social inequities by helping to address some of the upstream root causes of those inequities. As opportunities to build local capacity, engage and empower the community, and implement cross-sector partnerships are integrated into the City’s climate change efforts, the CAP will be leveraged to maximize health co-benefits and reduce existing inequities. Furthermore, by strengthening local capacity to respond to natural hazards when they occur, the City can reduce the number and severity of injuries and illnesses when they do happen.

2.5 Economic Opportunities
The City is already home to many prominent, innovative
green businesses and clean tech companies, and is poised to be a new center of innovation in the low carbon economy.

Studies conducted by CARB and others show that economic growth does not have to be compromised to achieve deep
reductions in GHG emissions in line with the state’s goal of 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050.
12 The state is committed
to meeting this challenge though innovation and investment that will drive technology development and advance social progress. Recent legislation and policy developments are providing clear signals that the transformation to a low carbon economy is upon us, encouraging businesses to invest in clean technology and develop products and services that do not come at the expense of future generations, but instead, provide even more opportunity for growth in the future.

Achieving GHG reductions of this magnitude requires
innovation and investment in energy, transportation,
agriculture, water, waste management, and land management.

It also requires scaling up the market adoption of new
technologies in these sectors. Already, public and private investment in new technologies has reaped broad economic benefits for the state along with significant GHG reductions.

Energy policies in particular have enabled the state to emerge Figure 2-3: Disadvantaged Communities in Richmond
Courtesy Image by; California Environmental Protection Agency http://www.calepa.ca.gov/EnvJustice/GHGInvest/
10 See SB 535 maps at the California Office of Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) web site: http://oehha.maps.ar cgis.com/apps/Viewer/index.html? appid=dae2fb1e42674c12a04a2b302a080598
11 CalEnviroScreen is the state’s Environmental Health Screening Tool used to help identify California communities that are disproportionately burdened by multiple sources of pollution. CalEPA has used the tool to designate California communities as disadvantaged pursuant to Senate Bill 535. The tool will be updated periodically; CalEnviroScreen 3.0 Draft became available in September 2016. 12 California Air Resources Board (CARB), 2014: First Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan, May 2014.

Opportunities and Challenges
21 City of Richmond California Climate Action Plan
as the national leader in both clean energy jobs and clean energy investment. Title 24 and other energy standards have saved Californians $74 billion in energy costs since 1977. 13 California has the fourth lowest per-capita energy-related GHG emissions in the country and produces on average twice as much economic value for every unit of electricity used. The state’s AB 32 Scoping Plan Update references multiple studies that show how businesses in the U.S. could collectively cut energy-related GHG emissions by more than 20 percent by 2020, and generate hundreds of billions of dollars in net savings.
14 New economic opportunities will continue to emerge as state and regional agencies direct investment, policy and planning towards reducing GHG emissions. Electrification of the transportation and building sectors, decarbonization of electricity supply, and designing new buildings to be net energy producers are just three examples of the transformative developments required for the state to meet its long term GHG targets. Many of the technologies needed to accomplish these outcomes are cost-competitive and available today. As technologies improve and supporting infrastructure becomes available, costs will come down, accelerating market uptake and saving consumers money that will be re-directed
elsewhere into the economy.

The City of Richmond recognizes future business growth
opportunities in the bioscience and green/clean technology sectors and has set has set a long-term vision to be nationally recognized for business development in these sectors.

Richmond has an abundance of marketable assets that
position it for growth in the low-carbon economy, including robust transportation and transit networks, proximity
and partnerships with world-class universities and urban innovation centers, and relatively affordable real estate. 15 2.6 The Role of State and
Regional Action
The Richmond CAP contains many strategies and actions
designed to enhance and leverage existing State policies and programs. Building on the State’s existing policies and programs improves the effectiveness of the CAP and
increases State funding opportunities.

The State is providing an important leadership role in climate protection through policy development, planning, regulations, research, legislation, and funding programs. California has established a broad framework, across all sectors of the economy, to reduce GHG emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. This framework, outlined by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) in the Climate Change Scoping Plan Update of 2014, identifies the following six sectors that must undergo profound transformation in order for the State to meet its 2050 goal:

1. Energy

2. Transportat
ion (Vehicles/Equipment, Land Use, Fuels, and
Infrastructure)

3. Agriculture

4. Water

5. Waste Management

6. Natural and Working Lands
13 California Air Resources Board (CARB), 2014: First Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan, May 2014. 14 City of Richmond Marketing Plan, 2013, by Social Sector Solutions (S3), a pr oject of the UC Berkeley Haas Business School MBA program. 15 California Energy Commission web site, accessed November 28, 2015: http://www.energy.ca.gov/efficiency/savings.html

Opportunities and Challenges
22 City of Richmond California Climate Action Plan
California’s Scoping Plan measures are designed to reduce state-wide emissions from each of these sectors. State
measures include developing new policies, supporting
emerging technologies, and growing the markets for those technologies. Market transformation is a recurring theme of the Scoping Plan Update, which acknowledges the role that the State must play in developing infrastructure and commercial markets for low-carbon solutions to grow to
the scale required to meet its GHG emissions reduction
goal. Convergence of technologies and market objectives is needed across multiple sectors and will require integrated planning among dozens of State agencies as well as closely coordinated efforts with locally-driven GHG reduction efforts, such as the City of Richmond CAP .

Many of the State’s transportation measures, including the Advanced Clean Car standards and the Low Carbon Fuel
Standard (LCFS), are designed to achieve consistent GHG reductions statewide by increasing vehicle efficiency and reducing the carbon intensity of fuels. These measures have been incorporated into the City’s forecasted GHG emissions through the year 2050.

California’s energy policies have enabled the State to
emerge as the national leader in both clean energy jobs and infrastructure investment. With respect to energy, California has the fourth lowest per-capita emissions in the country and produces on average twice as much economic value
for every unit of electricity used. The State adopted SB 350 in 2015 establishing requirements that by the year 2030 the State’s buildings increase energy efficiency by 50 percent, and electricity be generated from 50 percent renewable
energy sources. The Richmond CAP builds on these policies, facilitates effective implementation within the City, and in some cases goes beyond the State’s standards and policy goals to achieve deeper reductions.
16 Association of Bay Area Go vernments (ABAG) and Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), 2013. Plan Bay Area 2013: Strategy for a Sustainable Region, July 2013
17 PDAs in Richmond include the Central Richmond and 23rd Street Corridors, South Richmond, and North Richmond. For maps and more information, see the Plan Bay Area web site: http://gis.abag.ca.gov/website/PDAShowcase/ As described in CAP Chapter 1, Introduction, the Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008 (SB 375) aims to reduce GHG emissions from cars and light-duty trucks by incentivizing denser development that reduces urban
sprawl. Plan Bay Area
16 is the Region’s required Sustainable
Communities Strategy (SCS), which demonstrates how the
Bay Area region will integrate transportation, land-use and housing to reduce GHG emissions. Plan Bay Area concentrates approximately 80 percent of housing growth and 66 percent of job growth in Priority Development Areas (PDAs). A
majority of PDAs are infill development areas located near existing or planned public transit, and in communities where there is local commitment to develop more housing.
17 The
One Bay Area Grant (OBAG) program associated with Plan
Bay Area provides discretionary funds geared toward transit- oriented housing projects and transportation infrastructure that supports growth in the PDAs. These funds can be spent on infrastructure items such as new bicycle lanes and more pedestrian-friendly sidewalks. Transportation and land use strategies in the CAP are geared toward leveraging the OBAG program.

City of Richmond
Climate Action Plan
CHAPTER 3
Emissions Inventories, Forecasts, and Reduction Target

Emissions Inventories, Forecast, and Reduction Targets
25 City of Richmond California Climate Action Plan

EMISSIONS

INVENTORIES,

FORECASTS, AND

REDUCTION TARGET
The City of Richmond greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions inventory quantifies the annual GHG emissions resulting from activities within the City by residents, businesses, and local government. The community inventory provides an understanding of where GHG emissions are originating and informs development of effective strategies and actions to reduce emissions.

1. Community GHG Inventory: Includes all emission sources within the community with the exception of large industrial sources that are regulated by CARB and are a part of
California’s Cap and Trade Program per the requirements of Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32). These sources are referred to in this chapter as “AB 32-regulated facilities. ”

2. Community GHG
Inventory with AB 32-Regulated Sources:

Includes emissions from all sources located within the City of Richmond including large industrial facilities regulated by the State.
2 The City’s baseline Community GHG Inventory for 2005
forms the basis for setting emissions reduction targets and measuring future progress. In developing the CAP , the City revised its existing 2005 inventory with better transportation and solid waste data, and compiled a 2012 inventory update that allows the City to start assessing emissions trends over time. Detailed information regarding the boundaries of analysis, methods of quantification, data sources, and changes that occurred between the 2005 and 2012 inventories is provided in Appendix B.

The 2005 baseline and 2012 updated inventories account for GHG emissions in metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCO2e)
1 from four sectors: energy, transportation, solid
waste, and water. The GHG inventories are presented as:
1 MTCO2e combines the global warming potential (GWP), or extent to which each GHG is able to trap heat, for carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4) and/or nitrous o
xide (N2O) into a single unit of measurement for purposes of comparison. 2 These sources were not r egulated per the requirements of AB 32 in 2005, as AB 32 was not signed until 2006.

Emissions Inventories, Forecast, and Reduction Targets
26 City of Richmond California Climate Action Plan
This approach is consistent with guidance from the BAAQMD, which recommends presenting community GHG inventories
with and without large industrial sources that are regulated by the State through CARB. The adjusted inventory approach 1) provides City directives and actions that advance sustainability for community emission sources; and 2) institutionalizes and formalizes City support of State cap-and-trade regulation of large industrial facilities.

3.1 Community Inventory
As shown in Table 3-1, the baseline (2005) Community GHG Inventory for the City of Richmond includes 693, 426 MTCO2e.

In 2012, community emissions rose by 0.4% to 696,407
MTCO2e.

If large industrial sources currently regulated by AB 32 3 are
added to the Community Inventory, total 2005 emissions from sources within the City of Richmond amount to more than 5.6 million MTCO2e.

Figure 3-1 illustrates the results of the 2005 community inventory, with and without emissions from AB 32-regulated sources. Without the emissions from AB-32 regulated sources, the Richmond Community GHG Inventory resembles that of
most other cities in California. Contributing the largest share of emissions to adjusted Community GHG Inventory is On- road Transportation, accounting for approximately 38 percent of total emissions. Commercial/Industrial/Municipal Energy Use (from electricity and natural gas) accounts for around 33 percent of total emissions, while 18 percent is attributed to Residential Energy Use. The remaining emissions are
comprised of GHGs from Solid Waste (7 percent), Off-road Transportation (3 percent), Water and Wastewater (1 percent).

In 2012 the City emitted approximately 4.9 million MTCO2e, of which almost 4.2 MTCO2e (82 percent) is attributed to large industrial emissions regulated by AB 32 (see Table 3-1).

The 2012 inventory is similar to the 2005 inventory in terms of total emissions and relative contribution by sector. The vast majority of emissions were the result of large industrial sources that are regulated by AB 32, and when those sources are excluded, the biggest contributions are from On-road Transportation (54 percent), followed by Commercial/
Industrial/Municipal Energy Use (25 percent), and Residential Energy Use (13 percent).

Table 3-1: GHG Emissions Inventory Results
Sector
2005
MTCO2e
(baseline)
2012
MTCO2e
Change from 2005 to 2012
MTCO2e Percent
Residential Energy Use 126,118 120,248 -5,870 -4.7
Commercial/Industrial/Municipal Energy Use 226,591 225,736 -855 -0.4 Transportation (On- and Off-road) 287,916 299,701 11,785 4.1 Solid Waste 50,214 48,999 -1,215 -2.4
Wastewater 222 239 17 7.6
Water 2,364 1,484 -880 -37.2
Community GHG Inventory 693,426 696,407 2,982 0.4
Large Industrial Energy Use (Regulated by AB
32) 4,914,982 4,169,879
-745,103 -15.2
Community GHG Inventory with AB 32-Regulated Sources 5,608,407 4,866,206 -742,121 -13.2 3 These sources were not r egulated per the requirements of AB 32 in 2005, as AB 32 was not signed until 2006.

Emissions Inventories, Forecast, and Reduction Targets
27 City of Richmond California Climate Action Plan
How does the Richmond Cap Consider “AB 32 Regulated” Sources? The Richmond CAP is largely focused on GHG emissions sources that the City controls or influences. Consistent with guidance from the BAAQMD and ICLEI’s Draft Community-wide Protocol, the City is supporting AB 32 as the primary vehicle and framework to regulate and reduce emissions from large industrial facilities (Chevron, West Contra Costa County Landfill, and New NGC, Inc.) in its community-wide GHG reduction target for the following reasons:

1. These facilities’ GHG
emissions are regulated by CARB under the state’s Cap and Trade program, which requires that power generators, refineries, and other large industrial emitters that emit more than 25,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent per year (which collectively represent approximately 85 percent of the state’s emissions) reduce their emissions over time in line with the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32). The Cap and Trade program provides a limit on emissions with the state as the enforcing agency; the City does not have the same jurisdictional authority.

2. These facilities ar
e also regulated through the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and the California Energy Commission (CEC), and are subject to air quality and emissions standards set forth by the Environmental Protection Agency, CARB, and the BAAQMD.

3. Chevron
’s GHG emissions are currently limited by the Conditional Use Permit the City recently issued for the Chevron Refinery Modernization Project. Mitigation included in the project’s Environmental Impact Report (EIR) ensures compliance with AB 32 by requiring the refinery, even operating at full capacity (100% utilization), to maintain no net increase (NNI) in GHG emissions, and include numerous measures to reduce GHG emissions from operations. In addition, the subsequent Environmental and Community Investment Agreement (ECIA) between Chevron and the City identifies a number of Community-based GHG Reduction Programs (CGRPs) designed to mitigate the refinery’s operational GHG emissions that fall outside of California’s Cap and Trade Program, and allocates funding to those programs and to community programs that overlap those in the CAP , covering the transportation and mobility, energy, solid waste, and biological sequestration sectors.

Figure 3-1: 2005 Baseline Community GHG Inventory
Residential Energy Use
Commercial/Industrial Energy Use
Transportation: On-road
Transportation: Off-road
Solid Waste
Water/Wastewater
92%
2%
5%
1%
33%
38%
18%
7%
3% 1%<1%1%
2005 Including AB-32 Regulated Sources Excluding AB-32 Regulated Sources

Emissions Inventories, Forecast, and Reduction Targets
28 City of Richmond California Climate Action Plan
Comparison of the 2005 and 2012 inventories shows that the City saw a reduction in total GHG emissions, including Large Industrial Energy Use by sources regulated under AB 32, of 742,121 MTCO2e over the seven year period (a 13.2 percent reduction). Excluding sources regulated by AB 32, emissions increased by 0.4 percent (2,982 MTCO2e). As shown in Table 3-1, every sector saw a reduction in emissions with the exception of Transportation and Wastewater, which exhibited increases of 4.1 and 7.6 percent, respectively. The sectors that exhibited the greatest decrease in emissions were Water (37.2 percent) and Large Industrial Energy Use (15.2 percent).

3.2 Municipal Inventory
The GHG emissions associated with municipal facilities
and operations, referred to as the Municipal Inventory, are a subset of the community-wide inventory. The Municipal Inventory represents less than one percent of the Community Inventory. Despite this low percentage, the City of Richmond recognizes the importance of providing leadership to the community and is committed to introducing policies and
programs to reduce GHG emissions associated with its
operations. Table 3-2 shows the municipal emissions for 2005 and 2012, which are estimated to be around 7,845
MTCO2e and 8,175 MTCO2e, respectively. In 2005 municipal energy use for Buildings accounted for the greatest share of emissions at approximately 46 percent, followed by the City’s Vehicle Fleet at 18 percent and Streetlights at 17 percent. In 2012, the City’s Vehicle Fleet had surpassed energy use as the greatest source of municipal emissions at around 35 percent, followed by Buildings at approximately 33 percent, and Water and Sewerage at 13 percent.

Figure 3-2: 2012 Community GHG Inventory Update
Residential Energy Use
Commercial/Industrial Energy Use
Transportation: On-road
Transportation: Off-road
Solid Waste
Water/Wastewater
90%
Including AB-32
Regulated Sources
Excluding AB-32
Regulated Sources
2%1%
6%
<1%1%
33%39%
17%
7%
4% <1%

Emissions Inventories, Forecast, and Reduction Targets
29 City of Richmond California Climate Action Plan
Table 3-2: Municipal Inventory Results
2005 2012
Percent Change 2005-2012
MTCO2e Percent MTCO2e Percent
Buildings 3,599 45.9 2,669 32.6 -26%
Streetlights 1,312 16.7 930 11.4 -29%
Water and Sewerage 1,005 12.8 1,033 12.6 3%
Waste 543 6.9 701 8.6 29%
Vehicle Fleet 1,386* 17.7 2,842 34.8 105%
Total 7,845 100 8,175 100 4%
*2005 data unavailable, 2008 used as proxy year
4 The BAU forecast takes into consideration emissions r eductions resulting from implementation of statewide mandates including the California’s Advanced Clean Car Initiative (Pavley II standards) to reduce GHG emissions from passenger vehicles and the Low Carbon Fuel Standard to reduce the carbon intensity of vehicle fuels. For additional information on how future emissions were calculated, see Appendix B. 5 Note that state measures affecting ener gy efficiency (e.g., SB 350) and renewable energy (Renewables Portfolio Standard) are not accounted for here.

Adjusted Business as Usual Forecast
The adjusted business as usual (Adjusted BAU) forecast
accounts for the local impact of state measures designed to reduce GHG emissions. Through its Climate Change Scoping Plan Update of 2014, the State of California establishes a broad framework to reduce GHG emissions to 80 percent
below 1990 levels by 2050, across all sectors of the economy.

Transportation measures in particular are designed to achieve consistent GHG emissions reductions across the state by increasing vehicle efficiency and reducing the carbon intensity of fuels used by the statewide vehicle fleet. These measures include the Pavley II/CAFÉ (Corporate Average Fuel Economy) Vehicle standards (known as the Advanced Clean Car initiative in California), the Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS), the Tire Pressure Program, the Tire Tread Standard, and the Heavy Duty Vehicle Emission Reduction Program. Collectively, these measures are expected to reduce statewide transportation emissions by nearly 35 percent from the 2030 BAU forecast, and by extension should reduce community-wide emissions in the City of Richmond by the same percentage.

The Adjusted Business-As-Usual forecast for the City accounts for these state-level transportation measures.
5 Figure 3-3
shows how the BAU forecast compares to the Adjusted BAU forecast that accounts for state measures.

3.3 Emissions Forecasts and
Reduction Targets
Business as Usual Forecast
Business-as-usual (BAU) emissions forecasts for 2020 and 2030 were derived based on demographic growth projections from the City of Richmond General Plan 2030 for future
population, jobs, and households. Emissions forecasts for 2040 and 2050 were derived by continuing the average annual growth rates from 2005 to 2030. Excluding sources regulated by AB 32, the City of Richmond’s community emissions are expected to increase approximately 11 percent between
2005 (the baseline year) and 2020, from 693,426 to 767,673 MTCO2e; by 2030 emissions would increase approximately 46 percent from baseline conditions to approximately 1,015,000 MTCO2e; by 2050 emissions would increase to nearly 1.3
million MT CO2e.
4 The BAU emissions forecasts are depicted
in Figure 3-3. (For additional information on how these forecasts were derived see Appendix B.)

Emissions Inventories, Forecast, and Reduction Targets
30 City of Richmond California Climate Action Plan
6 Governor Schwarzenegger’s Executive Order S-3-05 established a statewide GHG emissions goal of 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. 7 In its Climate Change Scoping Plan of September 2008, and confirmed in the Scoping Plan Update in 2014, CARB recommends that local gov
ernments adopt a GHG reduction target consistent with the State’s commitment to reach 1990 levels by 2020. This was identified as equivalent to 15% below “current” levels at the time of writing (2008). In its GHG Plan Level Guidance, BAAQMD also recommends using a baseline year of 2008 or earlier.
8 Under California’s constitutional system, the Legislature, not the Governor, is entrusted to make statewide laws. (See Santa Ana Hospital Medical Center v. Belshe (1997) 56 Cal.App.4th 819, 836; see also Cal. Const. Art. 4 § 8(b)). The Legislature did not include EO S-3-05 goals in AB 32, and has not incorporated the EO in any implementing legislation or applicable plans. 9 Governor Brown’s Executive Order B-3-15 established the statewide interim GHG emission reduction target at 40% below 1990 levels. 10 Available online at http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/2013_update/first_update_climate_change_scoping_plan.pdf (last accessed 7/11/16). on May 22, 2014, the CARB approved the “First Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan” describing the state’s progress towards achieving AB 32 and broader goals.
10 The
update stated that “California is on track to meet the near- term 2020 greenhouse gas limit and is well positioned to maintain and continue reductions beyond 2020 as required by AB 32. ” Specifically, “if California realizes the expected benefits of existing policy goals (such as 12,000 megawatts [MW] of renewable distributed generation by 2020, net zero energy homes after 2020, existing building retrofits under AB 758, and others) it could reduce emissions by 2030 to levels squarely in line with those needed in the developed world and to stay on track to reduce emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. ”
Figure 3-3: Richmond GHG Emissions Baseline and Forecasts Forecast emissions
(Business as Usual)
Forecast BAU emissions
accounting for State
transportation measures
Reduction Target
On September 6, 2008, the Richmond City Council passed
Resolution No. 108-08 establishing a goal of achieving GHG reduction targets consistent with AB 32 and the Governor’s 2005 Executive Order S-3-05, which correspond to achieving 1990 emissions levels by 2020 and 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050, respectively.
6 Consistent with Resolution No.
108-08, the City has established a 2020 GHG reduction target for the CAP of 15 percent below 2005 levels by 2020.
7 In addition, although executive orders do not have the same status as legislation
8, the City is committed to supporting the
state’s continued work toward meeting the deeper reductions called for in Executive Orders S-3-05 and B-3-15.
9 Notably,
200,000
400,000
600,000
800,000
1,000,000
1,200,000
1,400,000
Actual
2005
Actual
2012
Forecast
2020
Forecast
2030
Forecast
2040
Forecast
2050
2005 Baseline Emissions = 693 ,426

Emissions Inventories, Forecast, and Reduction Targets
31 City of Richmond California Climate Action Plan
Figure 3-4: Richmond GHG Emissions Baseline, Forecasts, and 2020 Target Forecast emissions
(Business as Usual)
Adjusted forecast BAU
emissions, with State
transportation measures
Emissions trajectory
based on state targets
The City’s 2020 GHG emissions target, equivalent to 15
percent below 2005 levels, is 589,412 metric tons CO2e. Figure 3-4 illustrates the 2020 target in relation to deeper reductions needed for the City to maintain an emissions trajectory in line with the longer term statewide goals established by Executive Orders S-3-05 and B-3-15.

As outlined in the next chapter, Objectives and Strategies, the CAP provides a clear roadmap to meeting the 2020 target mandated by AB 32, and includes measures that will enable the City to accomplish much deeper reductions by 2030 and beyond, consistent with City commitments to support the state’s progress toward deeper emissions reductions as called for in Executive Orders S-3-05 and B-3-15. As the State enacts new policies and regulations for reducing GHG emissions, the CAP and the City’s own GHG reduction targets will be revised accordingly.
200,000
400,000
600,000
800,000
1,000,000
1,200,000
1,400,000
Actual
2005
Actual
2012
Forecast
2020
Forecast
2030
Forecast
2040
Forecast
2050
Business as Usual (BAU) Emissions
Adjusted BAU Emissions
2030 Statewide goal = 40% below 1990 levels
2050 Statewide goal = 80% below 1990 levels
2020 Target = 589,412
2005 Baseline Emissions = 693,426

Emissions Inventories, Forecast, and Reduction Targets
32 City of Richmond California Climate Action Plan Page 531 of 597

Tab 23
Richmond
Community Survey

December 20, 2022

Library and Community Services

DATE: December 20, 2022
TO: Mayor Butt and Members of the City Council
FROM:

LaShonda White, Interim Director of Community Services
Patrick Seals, Senior Management Analyst

Subject:

2023 and 2025 Richmond Community Surveys
FINANCIAL IMPACT: The total cost to enter into a 36-month agreement for the survey will not exceed $78,000.
 $31,525 – 2023 Community Survey
 $7,500 – Ongoing access to Richmond’s profile on
Polco in 2024
 $32,500 – 2025 Community Survey
 $6,475 – Contingency for additional survey
services (2023-2025)
The funds to cover the cost of the 2023 will be allocated from the Internal Services and City Manager’s Office
budgets (01371118-400201 and 01131013-400201,
respectively). Costs for future services will be budgeted appropriately in Fiscal Year (FY) 2023-2024 and FY
2024-2025.

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

March 2, 2021

STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:

Every two (2) years since 2007, the City of Richmond has enrolled in the National Research Center’s National
Citizen Survey Program to conduct a community survey
to help the City Council set spending priorities and for city service delivery improvement. City Council decided that the survey should be conducted biennially; therefore, the City Manager’s Office would like to enroll in the survey program for 2023 and 2025, and ongoing profile and
subscriber access during the 2024.

AGENDA
REPORT

December 20, 2022
RECOMMENDED ACTION:

AUTHORIZE the city manager or their designee to enter
into a 36-month agreement with Polco/National Research
Center’s National Citizen Survey Program to facilitate
and conduct the 2023 ($31,525) and 2025 ($32,500)
Richmond Community Surveys, and provide ongoing
subscriber outreach and profile management in 2024
($7,500), for a total contract payment limit of $78,000, including a $6,475 contingency to support additional
survey-related services – Library and Community
Services (LaShonda White/Patrick Seals 510-620-6512).

DISCUSSION:

The City of Richmond has enrolled in the National Research Center’s (NRC) National Citizen Survey (NCS) biennially since 2007. The NCS is a collaborative effort between the NRC, a public research firm focused on public sector information needs, and the International City/County Management Association (ICMA). NRC has a benchmark database that holds hundreds of thousands of resident opinions – making it the largest of its kind in the United States. A few years ago, NRC merged with Polco, an online community engagement polling platform, to give public sector organizations the data they need to make more informed decisions. To allow for continuity and comparison of results, City staff recommends allowing NRC/Polco to conduct Richmond’s 2023 and 2025 Community Survey (Attachment 1). Additional information regarding Polco/NRC can be found at https://info.polco.us/about-nrc

The City Manager’s Office would like to enter into an agreement (Attachment 2) and enroll in the program for 2023 in order to:

 Assess the quality of community life and services provided to residents;  Track residents’ perceptions of service quality, community amenities, and public safety over time;
 Help make informed decisions about how to allocate resources;  Assess support for local policies;
 Gather information on residents’ use of services; and  Compare results from previous years to measure changes over time

The results from surveys conducted between 2007 and 2021 can be found on the City’s website at http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/index.aspx?NID=1871 . Survey results are
utilized in various documents and city reports such as the Department of Children and Youth Community Needs Assessment, Health in All Policies report, and grant applications.

2023 Survey
The quote for Richmond’s 2023 iteration of The NCS totals $31,525 (Attachment 3). The City Council needs to approve enrollment in the program in order to officially signup to

December 20, 2022
conduct the 2023 and 2025 survey. No other documents or forms are needed. The 2023 and 2025 survey instruments will closely resemble the past surveys in format and content which will enable Polco/NRC to compare survey results from multiple years (Attachment 4). In 2020, Polco/NRC refreshed the NCS survey template; however, overall, most of Richmond’s trends will be preserved as the vast majority of survey questions have remained.

The Polco/NRC will mail out surveys to randomly selected and geographically dispersed Richmond households. The selected households will initially receive a postcard informing them that they have been selected to participate in the survey and that the survey is also available online and in Spanish. The households will then receive the survey in the mail and reminders within a two- or three-week period. In an effort to receive the maximum amount of participation from those selected to complete the survey, City staff will publicize the survey via social media, connections with community- based organizations, the City’s internet site, KCRT, and other venues. Polco/NRC will process the surveys, perform the data analysis, and produce and draft a report for the City’s review. The main report will contain graphs and tables of the results, a description of the methodology, information on understanding the results, and comparisons of the results to other jurisdictions that completed the Polco/NRC’s survey.

Next Steps
If City Council approves the agreement and enrollment in the NCS program, it is anticipated that the survey will be released in late January 2023 and a presentation on the survey findings will be presented to City Council in April or May 2023 (A ttachment
5). Based on the NRC’s relationship with Polco, the City has unlimited access to posting questions on the Polco platform, as part of the new pricing structure, so staff will also be able to provide survey results on specific and relevant questions to Council and the community.

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:

Attachment 1 – Sole Source
Attachment 2 – Draft Polco Services Agreement
Attachment 3 – Polco NRC Quote
Attachment 4 – Sample 2023 Survey Instrument
Attachment 5 – Proposed Timeline

The National Community Survey™ • © 2001-2021 National Research Center, Inc.

The XYZ of ABC 2021 Community Survey

Please complete this survey if you are the adult (age 18 or older) in the household who most recently had a birthday (the year of birth does not matter). Your responses are anonymous and will be reported in group form only.

1. Please rate each of the following aspects of quality of life in ABC.

Excellent Good Fair Poor Don ’t know
ABC as a place to live .............................................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Your neighborhood as a place to live .............................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 ABC as a place to raise children ......................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 ABC as a place to work ........................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 ABC as a place to visit ............................................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 ABC as a place to retire .......................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 The overall quality of life in ABC ....................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Sense of community ................................................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5

2. Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to ABC as a whole.

Excellent Good Fair Poor Don ’t know
Overall economic health of ABC ........................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Overall quality of the transportation system (auto, bicycle, foot, bus) in ABC ....................................................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Overall design or layout of ABC’s residential and commercial areas (e.g., homes, buildings, streets, parks, etc.) ................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Overall quality of the utility infrastructure in ABC
(water, sewer, storm water, electric, gas) ................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Overall feeling of safety in ABC .......................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Overall quality of natural environment in ABC ........................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Overall quality of parks and recreation opportunities ............................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Overall health and wellness opportunities in ABC .................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Overall opportunities for education, culture, and the arts..................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Residents’ connection and engagement with their community .......................... 1 2 3 4 5

3. Please indicate how likely or unlikely you are to do each of the following.

Very Somewhat Somewhat Very Don ’t
likely likely unlikely unlikely know
Recommend living in ABC to someone who asks .................................1 2 3 4 5 Remain in ABC for the next five years .......................................................1 2 3 4 5

4. Please rate how safe or unsafe you feel:

Very Somewhat Neither safe Somewhat Very Don ’t
safe safe nor unsafe unsafe unsafe know
In your neighborhood during the day ...................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 In ABC’s downtown/commercial area
during the day ............................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 From property crime ....................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 From violent crime ........................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 From fire, flood, or other natural disaster ............................. 1 2 3 4 5 6

5. Please rate the job you feel the ABC community does at each of the following.

Excellent Good Fair Poor Don’t know
Making all residents feel welcome ................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Attracting people from diverse backgrounds .............................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Valuing/respecting residents from diverse backgrounds ...................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Taking care of vulnerable residents (elderly, disabled, homeless, etc.) ........... 1 2 3 4 5

6. Please rate each of the following in the ABC community.

Excellent Good Fair Poor Don ’t know
Overall quality of business and service establishments in ABC........................... 1 2 3 4 5 Variety of business and service establishments in ABC .......................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Vibrancy of downtown/commercial area ..................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Employment opportunities ................................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Shopping opportunities ........................................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Cost of living in ABC ................................................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Overall image or reputation of ABC ................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5

The National Community Survey™ • © 2001-2021 National Research Center, Inc.

7. Please also rate each of the following in the ABC community.

Excellent Good Fair Poor Don’t know
Traffic flow on major streets ............................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Ease of public parking ............................................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Ease of travel by car in ABC ................................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Ease of travel by public transportation in ABC ........................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Ease of travel by bicycle in ABC ......................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Ease of walking in ABC .......................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Well-planned residential growth ...................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Well-planned commercial growth .................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Well-designed neighborhoods ........................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Preservation of the historical or cultural character of the community ............ 1 2 3 4 5 Public places where people want to spend time ........................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Variety of housing options ................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Availability of affordable quality housing ..................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Overall quality of new development in ABC ................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Overall appearance of ABC .................................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Cleanliness of ABC ................................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Water resources (beaches, lakes, ponds, riverways, etc.) ..................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Air quality .................................................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Availability of paths and walking trails .......................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Fitness opportunities (including exercise classes and paths or trails, etc.) ... 1 2 3 4 5 Recreational opportunities .................................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Availability of affordable quality food ............................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Availability of affordable quality health care ............................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Availability of preventive health services ..................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Availability of affordable quality mental health care ............................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Opportunities to attend cultural/arts/music activities .......................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Community support for the arts ........................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Availability of affordable quality childcare/preschool ............................................ 1 2 3 4 5 K-12 education .......................................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Adult educational opportunities ....................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Sense of civic/community pride ........................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Neighborliness of residents in ABC .................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Opportunities to participate in social events and activities .................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Opportunities to attend special events and festivals ............................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Opportunities to volunteer .................................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Opportunities to participate in community matters ................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Openness and acceptance of the community toward people
of diverse backgrounds ..................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5

8. Please indicate whether or not you have done each of the following in the last 12 months.

No Yes
Contacted the XYZ of ABC (in-person, phone, email, or web) for help or information ....................................... 1 2 Contacted ABC elected officials (in-person, phone, email, or web) to express your opinion .......................... 1 2 Attended a local public meeting (of local elected officials like City Council or County Commissioners, advisory boards, town halls, HOA, neighborhood watch, etc.) ............................................ 1 2 Watched (online or on television) a local public meeting ............................................................................................... 1 2 Volunteered your time to some group/activity in ABC .................................................................................................... 1 2 Campaigned or advocated for a local issue, cause, or candidate .................................................................................. 1 2 Voted in your most recent local election ................................................................................................................................ 1 2 Used bus, rail, subway, or other public transportation instead of driving ............................................................... 1 2 Carpooled with other adults or children instead of driving alone .............................................................................. 1 2 Walked or biked instead of driving ........................................................................................................................................... 1 2

The National Community Survey™ • © 2001-2021 National Research Center, Inc.

The XYZ of ABC 2021 Community Survey

9. Please rate the quality of each of the following services in ABC.

Excellent Good Fair Poor Don ’t know
Public information services ............................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Economic development ..................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Traffic enforcement ............................................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Traffic signal timing ............................................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Street repair ........................................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Street cleaning ....................................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Street lighting ........................................................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Snow removal ........................................................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Sidewalk maintenance ....................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Bus or transit services ....................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Land use, planning, and zoning ...................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Code enforcement (weeds, abandoned buildings, etc.) ...................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Affordable high-speed internet access ....................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Garbage collection ............................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Drinking water ...................................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Sewer services ....................................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Storm water management (storm drainage, dams, levees, etc.) .................... 1 2 3 4 5 Power (electric and/or gas) utility ............................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Utility billing .......................................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Police/Sheriff services ....................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Crime prevention ................................................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Animal control ....................................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Ambulance or emergency medical services ............................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Fire services ........................................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Fire prevention and education ....................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Emergency preparedness (services that prepare the community for natural disasters or other emergency situations) ..................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Preservation of natural areas (open space, farmlands, and greenbelts) ..... 1 2 3 4 5 ABC open space ..................................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Recycling .................................................................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Yard waste pick-up.............................................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 XYZ parks ................................................................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Recreation programs or classes .................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Recreation centers or facilities ...................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Health services ...................................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Public library services ....................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Overall customer service by ABC employees
(police, receptionists, planners, etc.) ..................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5

10. Please rate the following categories of ABC government performance.

Excellent Good Fair Poor Don ’t know
The value of services for the taxes paid to ABC ...................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 The overall direction that ABC is taking .................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 The job ABC government does at welcoming resident
involvement ....................................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Overall confidence in ABC government ...................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Generally acting in the best interest of the community ...................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Being honest ........................................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Being open and transparent to the public ................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Informing residents about issues facing the community ................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Treating all residents fairly ............................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Treating residents with respect .................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5

The National Community Survey™ • © 2001-2021 National Research Center, Inc.

11. Overall, how would you rate the quality of the services provided by each of the following? Excellent Good Fair Poor Don’t know
The XYZ of ABC ..................................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 The Federal Government .................................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5

12. Please rate how important, if at all, you think it is for the ABC community to focus on each of the following in the coming two years.

Very Somewhat Not at all
Essential important important important
Overall economic health of ABC ...........................................................................................1 2 3 4 Overall quality of the transportation system (auto, bicycle, foot, bus) in ABC ..........................................................................................................................................1 2 3 4 Overall design or layout of ABC’s residential and commercial areas (e.g., homes, buildings, streets, parks, etc.) .....................................................1 2 3 4 Overall quality of the utility infrastructure in ABC
(water, sewer, storm water, electric, gas) ....................................................................1 2 3 4 Overall feeling of safety in ABC .............................................................................................1 2 3 4 Overall quality of natural environment in ABC ..............................................................1 2 3 4 Overall quality of parks and recreation opportunities ...............................................1 2 3 4 Overall health and wellness opportunities in ABC .......................................................1 2 3 4 Overall opportunities for education, culture, and the arts........................................1 2 3 4 Residents’ connection and engagement with their community .............................1 2 3 4 xx. Custom Question #1 Custom Question #1 Custom Question #1 Custom Question #1 Custom Question #1 Custom Question #1 Custom Question #1 Custom Question #1 Custom Question #1 Custom Question #1 Custom Question #1 Custom Question #1 Custom Question #1 Custom Question #1 Custom Question #1 Custom Question #1 Custom Question #1
 Scale point 1  Scale point 2  Scale point 3  Scale point 4  Scale point5 xx. Custom Question #2 Custom Question #2 Custom Question #2 Custom Question #2 Custom Question #2 Custom Question #2 Custom Question #2 Custom Question #2 Custom Question #2 Custom Question #2 Custom Question #2 Custom Question #2 Custom Question #2 Custom Question #2 Custom Question #2 Custom Question #2 Custom Question #2
 Scale point 1  Scale point 2  Scale point 3  Scale point 4  Scale point5 xx. Custom Question #3 Custom Question #3 Custom Question #3 Custom Question #3 Custom Question #3 Custom Question #3 Custom Question #3 Custom Question #3 Custom Question #3 Custom Question #3 Custom Question #3 Custom Question #3 Custom Question #3 Custom Question #3 Custom Question #3 Custom Question #3 Custom Question #3
 Scale point 1  Scale point 2  Scale point 3  Scale point 4  Scale point5 xx. OPTIONAL [See Worksheets for details and price of this option] Open-Ended Question Open-Ended Question Open-Ended Question Open-Ended Question Open-Ended Question Open-Ended Question Open-Ended Question Open-Ended Question Open-Ended Question Open-Ended Question Open-Ended Question Open- Ended Question

The National Community Survey™ • © 2001-2021 National Research Center, Inc.

The XYZ of ABC 2021 Community Survey

Our last questions are about you and your household.

Again, all of your responses to this survey are completely anonymous and will be reported in group form only.

D1. In general, how many times do you:

Several Once A few times Every Less often Don’t
times a day a day a week few weeks or never know
Access the internet from your home using
a computer, laptop, or tablet computer ......................1 2 3 4 5 6 Access the internet from your cell phone .......................1 2 3 4 5 6 Visit social media sites such as Facebook,
Twitter, Nextdoor, etc. .......................................................1 2 3 4 5 6 Use or check email ....................................................................1 2 3 4 5 6 Share your opinions online ...................................................1 2 3 4 5 6 Shop online ..................................................................................1 2 3 4 5 6 D2. Please rate your overall health.
 Excellent  Very good  Good  Fair  Poor
D3. What impact, if any, do you think the economy will have on your family income in the next 6 months? Do you think the impact will be:
 Very positive  Somewhat positive  Neutral  Somewhat negative  Very negative

D4. How many years have you lived in ABC ?
 Less than 2 years
 2-5 years
 6-10 years
 11-20 years
 More than 20 years
D5. Which best describes the building you live in?
 One family house detached from any other houses
 Building with two or more homes
(duplex, townhome, apartment, or condominium)
 Mobile home
 Other
D6. Do you rent or own your home?
 Rent
 Own
D7. About how much is your monthly housing cost
for the place you live (including rent, mortgage
payment, property tax, property insurance, and
homeowners’ association (HOA) fees)?
 Less than $500  $2,000 to $2,499
 $500 to $999  $2,500 to $2,999
 $1,000 to $1,499  $3,000 to $3,499
 $1,500 to $1,999  $3,500 or more
D8. Do any children 17 or under live in your
household?
 No  Yes
D9. Are you or any other members of your
household aged 65 or older?
 No  Yes

D10. How much do you anticipate your household ’s
total income before taxes will be for the current
year? (Please include in your total income
money from all sources for all persons living in
your household.)
 Less than $25,000  $75,000 to $99,999
 $25,000 to $49,999  $100,000 to $149,999
 $50,000 to $74,999  $150,000 or more
D11. Are you Spanish, Hispanic or Latino?
 No, not Spanish, Hispanic, or Latino
 Yes, I consider myself to be Spanish, Hispanic, or
Latino
D12. What is your race? (Mark one or more races to
indicate what race you consider yourself to be.)
 American Indian or Alaskan Native
 Asian, Asian Indian, or Pacific Islander
 Black or African American
 White
 Other
D13. In which category is your age?
 18-24 years  55-64 years
 25-34 years  65-74 years
 35-44 years  75 years or older
 45-54 years
D14. What is your gender?
 Female
 Male
 Identify in another way

Thank you! Please return the completed survey in the postage-paid envelope to:

National Research Center, Inc., PO Box 549, Belle Mead, NJ 08502

Date
Dec 16
Dec 23
Jan 13
Jan 13
Jan 13 to Jan 27
Jan 27 to Mar 17
Jan 27
Feb 3
Reminder postcards sent Feb 8
Mar 3
Mar 17
Mar 17
Mar 17 to Apr 14
Apr 14Program Manager provides link to report on Polco
After the Survey
After your community has completed The NCS, stay engaged with your community members by posting additional surveys and polls on Polco!
Conducting the Survey
Data collection is open for The NCS - track response on Polco! Postcards sent
Survey packets sent
Open participation survey begins (Program Manager will provide link) Data collection closes for the random sample survey and open participation survey Send Program Manager final count of returned postcards
Survey analysis and report writing
Sample Timeline for The National Community Survey™
Item
Preparing for the Survey
Program Manager sends The NCS instrument for review
Send Program Manager drafts of optional custom questions to add to the survey Mailing materials and survey instrument are finalized
Program Manager generates sample of representative households in your community Polco prints materials, prepare mailings and sets up the survey online

Tab 24
Fee Waiver &
Partnership Policy

1 City of Richmond Community Services - Recreation Division Fee Waiver Policy
I. PURPOSE

The purpose of the draft fee waiver policy is to establish fiscally responsible guidelines to equitably evaluate and consider fee waiver requests for one-time events or temporary uses of City facilities and parks. These guidelines establish parameters for waiving outdoor park or indoor facility use fees for community-wide events and activities which benefit the public for special events or temporary uses. For purposes of this policy, the term “fee waiver” is the granting of a reduction or dismissal of a required fee normally charged for the use of a City-owned facility or park.

II. POLICY

The Community Services Department-Recreation Division (Recreation) recognizes the value of working with and supporting organizations to provide services and programs that benefit the Richmond community. Recreation strives to be an exceptional steward over City facilities, parks, and funding for programs and services. Charging fees is a standard practice in the Recreation and Parks industry when individuals, private groups, government or non-profit groups wish to reserve and exclusively utilize public facilities.

Fees charged for programs and facility/park usage help cover the cost of providing such services and maintaining facilities. This policy is established for determining when applicable City and Recreation fees (e.g., application, facility use, permit and other departmental charges) established by the City of Richmond’s Master Fee Schedule may be waived.

Scheduling and use of facilities and events are subject to availability of requested facilities and do not have preference over City programs and activities or previous commitments. The policy is effective to the extent a fee waiver can be considered without negatively impacting the City’s or Recreation’s budget or current operations.

III. ELIGIBILITY

Fees may be waived when such action is determined by the City of Richmond to be in the best interest of the City of Richmond, our residents, and the service applicant. Eligible organizations include the following:
1) Intergovernmental Cooperation
2) Non‐Profit Organization
3) Official City of Richmond Partner (Per Approved Partnership Policy) 4) City of Richmond Co-Sponsored Event

Intergovernmental Cooperation
Fees may be waived for events or temporary uses when the applicant is another government agency and the use is related to the performance of its normal functions and is a benefit to Richmond residents.

2 Non-Profit Organization
A fee waiver may be approved for eligible non-profit organizations, including organizations with a non-profit fiscal agent, that is tax-exempt under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Examples of organizations that could receive possible fee reduction or waivers include:
• Established Richmond Neighborhood Councils for monthly neighborhood council meetings and/or events.
• Events organized by groups with a current Adopt-a-Spot agreement and evidence of active participation in the program.
• Organizations funded by the Community Services Department/Recreation Division and City Manager’s Office, Economic Development Love Your Block Mini-Grant program and organized by groups with active grant agreements.

Official City of Richmond Partner
An official partner is an organization or individual that has completed the Partnership Policy process with the City of Richmond. These partners have demonstrated actions to provide a needed benefit to the community and therefore are eligible for fee waivers for the program delineated in the Partnership Agreement. All fees charged and/or reduced or waived will be listed in the Partnership Agreement. Any additional activities and associated requests for reduced or waived fees requested on behalf of the recognized partner would cause an amendment to that Agreement and would be subject to review and approval.

Department Sponsored Program
Fees may be waived for events and programs that are sponsored or co-sponsored by the City. The organization/agency requesting sponsorship by the City has a 501(c)(3) status, the program must benefit the Richmond community, and no event fees shall be charged.

Appropriate recognition as Sponsor or Co-sponsor of the event or program is provided for the City of Richmond on all promotional materials and at the event or program. All resources provided by the City in sponsorship of the event (fee waiver or in-kind service) must be provided for within the Department’s current budget allocations without a reduction or increase of services or costs.

IV. ELIGIBLE AND INELIGIBLE USES

Eligible Uses:
• Application fees, certain permit fees, and/or facility use/rental fees may be eligible for waiver through this policy.
• Fee waivers are available for a variety of events including sporting, cultural, general, and major community events, as long as the event meets the criteria set forth in this policy.
• Organizations can receive up to $5,000 in fee reductions or waivers within a 12- month period.

3 The following fees cannot be waived under this Policy:
• Staffing or labor costs (i.e. overtime for staff working outside of normal operations), security costs, utility reimbursement costs, deposits for damages to facilities, refuse removal cost, custodial costs, maintenance costs, and other applicable department costs
• Insurance or other fees as required by the City and/or ordinance • Liquor license, food permits and health permits
• City of Richmond business license fees

The following projects and events are ineligible:
• Organizations based outside City of Richmond (unless the demonstrated benefits are primarily to the residents of Richmond)
• Activities primarily of a fundraising or charitable nature unless the funds directly benefit City-owned facilities and/or programs. • Events or activities that are not open to the public
• Events that are political in nature or by individuals seeking political office or elected officials for the purpose of an election campaign • Religious organizations seeking space or facilities for religious services • Commercial events
• Corporate events
• Family or social gatherings
• Events that provide no community benefit
• Trainings that charge for participation
• Projects or organizations who have failed to fulfill their obligations during previous events or activities for which Community Services Department/Recreation Division facility permit fees were waived or reduced • Events at the Richmond Convention Center (Auditorium) or the Richmond Aquatic Centers (Richmond Plunge or Richmond Swim Center) • Events scheduled that would conflict with already planned City of Richmond community events (e.g., 3rd of July).

V. PROCEDURES

1. Review the Fee Waiver Policy and Complete the Fee Waiver Application and Facility Reservation Permit (provides an estimate of the requested facility use fees).

2. Submit the Application, Permit, and the following required documents to Recreation per the specified schedule. The request must be submitted by an authorized representative.

Required Documents:
a. Applicant’s non‐profit organization documents or any other documents as may be required to show the applicant’s organizational paperwork. b. Appropriate insurance documents
c. Applicant’s financial statement showing revenues and expenses d. Any other documents that may be required and requested by the Recreation Division.

4 3. If the request involves approval from another City of Richmond department, the request will be forwarded to that department.

4. Fee waiver applications will be assessed and reviewed based on the requirements listed in this document by an internal city panel (consisting of staff from the City Manager’s Office, Community Services and Finance) and the Recreation Deputy Director based on the timeline published in this document.

5. Based on review and scoring by the internal city panel, the Recreation Deputy Director will make a recommendation to the Director of Community Services for final approval or denial.

6. The Director of Community Services will make the final decision regarding a fee waiver request and the applicant will be notified of final decision per the specified schedule, and if approved and applicable, will submit a Special Event Permit.

7. Within forty-five (45) days of completion of the event for which a fee waiver was given, the organization should provide a written report to the Recreation Division, to include at a minimum the number of participants, event revenue and expenses, and a description of the benefit to the City.

8. Failure to abide by the rules and procedures as set forth in this document may result in the respective permittee being denied the current and any future fee waiver requests. Organizations that fail to cancel the approved event less than 30 days before their scheduled event and/or that fail to abide by the guidelines and requirements set forth in this policy may forfeit their ability to request future fee reductions or waivers or enter into Partnerships with the City for the following twelve (12) months.

VI. ACKNOWLEDGMENT & MARKETING

All recipients of a fee waiver or reduction shall acknowledge the City of Richmond in all publicity relating to the event or activity. Acknowledgement includes City of Richmond logos and statements in all advertising and promotional material, media releases and in other promotional contexts. Promotional opportunities should be detailed in the event application.

VII. FACILITY FEE WAIVER CRITERIA

In determining if a fee waiver is warranted, the following criteria may be considered:

Organization Structure and Experience
• Be offered by an eligible organization
• Organization serves the Richmond community
• Level of organization’s experience producing events/programs in Richmond

5 Application Completeness and Compliance
• Application is complete and all required documents are submitted by the stated deadline
• The event or program is in compliance with the City’s non-discrimination policy • The organization is in good financial standing with the City • There is no evidence of previous violations of the Fee Waiver Policy (organizations that violate this Policy or present false information about their event or program may not be eligible for fee waivers)

Event or Program Design and Community Benefit
• Description of event and proposed impact on community • Event or program demonstrates a general public benefit to Richmond residents • Organization offers activities or events associated with the Division’s mission • Organization offers an event or programs that are not available through Recreation or another City department
• Event or program is open to the entire public at no charge • Organization is collaborating with any other entities • Marketing and outreach plan is clearly articulated
• The proposed event or program will have no significant impact on the facilities or department activities, that the permittee will provide volunteer services and materials to mitigate any impacts created by the event or program, or that the impacts are adequately offset by the public benefit provided by the program or event

Required Resources and Budget
• Level of and reason for fee waiver request (above what is approved via the Master Fee Schedule)
• Organization budget provided
• The organization must submit their policy showing that they do not deny participants/players due to their inability to pay registration or participation fees • The imposition of fees would create a financial hardship on the organization or would have a detrimental effect upon the services provided to the public

VIII. FEE WAIVER APPLICATION SCHEDULE
In order to fully support the success of your event, Recreation staff asks that organizations submit the Fee Waiver application and all applicable documents by the dates outlined in the schedule below. This schedule provides both City staff and organizations sufficient time to adequately plan for events. It also ensures that the Special Event Permit is routed to internal and external departments/entities with sufficient time and allows for staff to review all required documents well in advance of scheduled events.

Requests may be denied if organizations fail to meet these deadlines.

6 Quarter Event Start Month Application Due Approval/Denial Notification

Quarter 1 January
February
March
October 1st November 1st
Quarter 2 April
May
June
January 1st February 1st
Quarter 3 July
August
September
April 1st May 1st
Quarter 4 October
November
December
July 1st August 1st

IX. PROPOSED APPLICATION COMPONENTS
The City of Richmond recognizes the value of partnering with other agencies and organizations in providing services that benefit the community and its residents. In order to request a waiver of fees, organizations must complete an application and submit it with necessary documentation to the Recreation. Components of a proposed application are below:
• Organization Information – Contact information, type of organization (government, non-profit, co-sponsor, etc.), organizational financial information • Event Information – event description, event purpose, list of activities that will take place, list of fees being charged, time and date of the event, indicate the specific facility(ies) for which a fee waiver is requested, projected attendance, promotion and outreach plans, collaborating organizations, etc.
• Fee Waiver Request – How does event benefit Richmond community, explanation of why fee waiver is being requested, amount of waiver being requested and explanation as to why, and how event fees would create a financial hardship

1 FACILITY FEE REDUCTION/WAIVER APPLICATION FORM

CITY OF RICHMOND

COMMUNITY SERVICES-RECREATION
3230 Macdonald Avenue
Richmond, CA 94804
[email protected]
(510) 620-6793

Please read and carefully complete the following application. Failure to provide accurate information may result in a delay or denial of your request for a fee reduction/waiver. Please attach a completed copy of the following documents for review:
➢ Facility Rental Application
➢ Special Event Permit Application (if applicable)

1. APPLICANT INFORMATION
Name of Group/Organization:

Type of Organization (Government, Non‐Profit Organization, Official City of Richmond Partner or City of Richmond Co-Sponsored Event):

Is your organization an official non-profit organization: □ Yes □ No Provide Tax ID documentation (Non-profit only):

Applicant Name/Person Responsible: Title:

Cell Phone: Alternate Phone:

Email Address:

2. FACILITY INFORMATION

Please provide the name and location of the facility or park that you are requesting to hold your event or program.

Why are you choosing to hold this event at a city facility or park?

2 3. EVENT INFORMATION
Provide a detailed description of the event, its purpose, and the activities that will take place.

Will you be charging a fee for this event? If yes, list the fees. □ Yes □ No

Provide anticipated daily and total attendance information.

Will the event be open to the public? □ Yes □ No

Is this event a fundraiser? □ Yes □ No

3. EVENT DATES/TIMES
Event Set-up date: Event Set-up time:

Event Set-up date: Event Set-up time:

Start End date: Event End time:

Event Breakdown date: Event Breakdown time:

4. FEE REDUCTION/WAIVER INFORMATION
Please answer the questions that apply to your event
How does this event or program benefit the residents of Richmond?

Do you provide a service or program solely to the residents of Richmond? Provide details.

Indicate the negative impact or financial hardship that the normal facility fees would create for your event or agency. You may attach a budget or financial statement for your organization or event to clarify the reason for your fee waiver request.

Are you partnering with a City of Richmond department? If so, please list and provide a point of contact.

3 List all the partners/sponsors you are working with on this event

5. EVENT BUDGET
Provide a copy of your organization’s current year budget. Provide a proposed budget for your program offer.

6. FEE REDUCTION/WAIVER REQUEST
□ 25% □ 50% □ 75% □ 100% □ Other:

7. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I acknowledge that this request and any subsequent approval or denial does not guarantee the availability of City of Richmond facilities and/or equipment. I further understand that I must have completed all applicable reservation procedures prior to submitting this application including but not limited to reserving the facility and/or equipment and paying the application fee, security deposit. I further acknowledge that if the request is denied or a reduction of fees is granted, the organization I represent must pay all remaining fees by the due date and that all established permit regulations and Community Services- Recreation rules will be following during and after the event.

Name (print): __________________________________________ Date: _____________ Signature: ______________________________________ Title: _____________________

STAFF USE ONLY

FEE WAIVER APPROVED □ FEE WAIVER DENIED □

NAME AND TITLE OF APPROVER

SIGNATURE OF AUTHORIZED STAFF

1 City of Richmond Community Services Department – Recreation Division Partnership Policy
I. Policy Purpose & Background
The purpose of the Partnership Policy is to establish policies, guidelines and procedures that govern how partnerships between the City of Richmond Community Services Department - Recreation Division (Recreation) and external entities are evaluated, entered into and managed. This allows the agency to be proactive rather than reactive when presented with a partnership opportunity. It also sets a “level playing field” for all potential partners, so that they know and understand in advance the parameters and selection criteria for a proposed partnership.

The main goal for these partnerships is enhancing public offerings. Recreation is interested in promoting partnerships which involve cooperation among many partners, bringing resources together to accomplish goals in a synergistic manner. Proposals that incorporate such collaborative efforts will receive priority status.

II. Background
For many years, Recreation has worked with a variety of individuals and organizations to provide programs and services to Richmond residents. These arrangements, or partnerships, have steadily grown in numbers causing Recreation to recognize the need to create more formal policies and procedures to ensure that the partnerships are consistent with the mission and values of Recreation and that partners are treated with consistency and equity.

III. Partnership Purpose
Recreation seeks to establish partnerships with non-profit and other public agencies to enhance recreation opportunities for Richmond residents. Recreation’s goal in partnering is to improve service by providing a wider range of recreational services to the community.

The purpose of a partnership is to expand or enhance the services Recreation delivers to Richmond residents. Partnerships should positively affect the quality of recreational, cultural, and outdoor experiences. A major component in exploring any potential partnership will be to identify additional collaborating partners that may help provide a synergistic working relationship in terms of resources and community contributions. The City will post the Partnership Policy on the City’s website.

2 IV. Partnership Categories
Recreation engages with partners that fall into one of the following categories:
• Individuals
• Businesses or corporations
• Social service or community organizations
• Non-profit organizations
• Volunteer/neighborhood organizations (including ‘friends of’ groups) • Districts and Quasi-governmental entities
• Governmental entities
• Public School Districts
V. Required Conditions
The Partner must:
• Align with Recreation’s mission, values, and goals.
• Comply with all applicable laws, rules, policies, and health guidelines • Have th
e necessary competency, resources, or license(s) (if applicable) to engage in the proposed activity.
• Meet insurance coverage requirements as determined by the City’s Risk Management Office.
• Submit proposed activities to Recreation for review and approval. • Meet all applicable Recreation maintenance standards and construction requirements (if applicable)
• Provide programs that compliment City programming efforts and are not in direct competition.
• Present their current year budget
• Attest to receiving and agree to following all communication requirements • Demonstrate the activity provides a community benefit or significant value to the community or a significant portion of its residents.
• Prove that they are serving the residents of Richmond through their general program operations.
• Agree to or submit a policy demonstrating that they do not deny participants due to their inability to pay registration or participation fees. • For youth serving organizations, show proof of performing background screenings of coaches and administrators.
• Demonstrate that the proposed partnership has no significant impact on the facilities or department activities, that the partner will provide volunteer services and materials to mitigate any impacts created by the event or program, or that the impacts are adequately offset by the public benefit provided by the program or event.

3 VI. Expectations for Partners
Partners will generally provide one or more of the following activities:
 Funding for programs or projects
 Park and/or facility operational support, maintenance and improvements  Tabling at City events
 Voluntee
r time including but not limited to conducting at least one (1) quarterly clean-up of utilized spaces encouraging participant and community participation  Keep all areas clean and free of debris after every scheduled use  Provide in-kind services and goods
 Help the City activate and promote ownership of spaces  Park and facility operational support and improvements  Programs at reduced or no cost to constituents
 Fulfill the City’s fingerprinting and TB testing requirement  As required, provide the City’s requirement for proof of vaccination VII. Process
The steps for the creation of a partnership with Recreation are as follows:

A. Notification
Recreation may release a Request for Proposal (RFP) through BidsOnline and/or via the City’s website that will inform all interested partners of the availability of partnerships with the City. This will be done at a minimum annually on December 1st through notification in social media post, flyers and through any other notification method that is feasible. Based on need, Recreation also reserves the right to reach out directly to organizations that provided specific services to discuss the possibility of partnering.

B. Preliminary Proposal
The proposing partner takes the first step to propose partnering. To help in reviewing both the partnerships proposed, and the project to be developed in partnership, Recreation asks for the entity to complete the Partnership Application Form.

C. Review and Planning
If initial review of the Partnership Application Form yields interest and appears to be mutually beneficial, the Recreation Supervisor will work with potential partners to negotiate a scope of work for inclusion in the Recreation Memorandum of Understanding.

The Recreation Supervisor is available to answer questions related to the creation of an initial proposal,
and after initial interest has been indicated, will work with the proposing partner to create a checklist of what actions need to take place next. Each project will have distinctive planning, design, review, and support issues. The Recreation

4 Supervisor will facilitate the process of determining how the partnership will address these issues. The Recreation Supervisor and the proposing partner can also facilitate input from the Library and Community Services Director, Deputy Director for Community Services-Recreation, Recreation and Parks Commission and City Manager providing guidance for the partners as to necessary steps.

D. Cost Evaluation
The partnership must cover the costs the partnership incurs, regardless of how the partnered project is staffed. If City of Richmond - Recreation staff resources are to be used by the partnership, those costs should be included in its project proposal and budget.

It is important to note that for most proposed partnerships, there will be considerable staff time spent on the review and approval process once a project passes the initial review stage. This time includes discussions with Proposing Partners, exploration of synergistic partnering opportunities, possible RFP processes, facilitation of the approval process, and assistance in writing and negotiating agreements, contracting, etc.

VIII. Definitions
 Partnership: A partnership is a cooperative venture between two or more parties with a common goal, who combine complementary resources to establish a mutual direction or complete a mutually beneficial project. Partnerships can be facility-based or program-specific.
 Partner: an individual, organization or group that, through a written agreement, provides a service or benefit to Recreation and/or Richmond’s residents and in e
xchange gets some benefit from Recreation.
 Partnership Application: a standardized application each potential Partner completes and submits to Recreation.
 Partnership Agreement: a written and formally executed agreement between Recreation and an outside party that details the terms of the Partnership. The Partnership Agreement must be signed by all parties, including formal execution in accordance with City laws, before Partner work can begin.  Public Benefit: an activity or service that accomplishes a public purpose promoting the needs, interests, social, economic, and cultural well-being, or the health and safety of a community and complements the vision and direction of Recreation.

5 3$571(56+,3$33/,&$7,21)25029(59,(:
&,7<2)5,&+021'
&20081,7<6(59,&(65(&5($7,21
0DFGRQDOG$YHQXH
5LFKPRQG&$
 
FVGUHJLVWUDWLRQ#FLULFKPRQGFDXV




7KH&RPPXQLW\6HUYLFHV'HSDUWPHQW5HFUHDWLRQ'LYLVLRQIRUWKH&LW\RI5LFKPRQGLVVHHNLQJ SDUWQHUVKLSVWRH[SDQGUHVRXUFHVIRUUHFUHDWLRQRSSRUWXQLWLHVLPSURYHVHUYLFHGHOLYHU\DQG HQKDQFHWKHDPHQLWLHVRIIHUHGDWRXUIDFLOLWLHV$SDUWQHUVKLSLVDZRUNLQJUHODWLRQVKLSEHWZHHQ &RPPXQLW\6HUYLFHV5HFUHDWLRQDQGDQRWKHUHQWLW\ZLWKFRPSDWLEOHYDOXHVDQGJRDOVWKDW UHVXOWVLQFOHDUDQGPHDVXUDEOHSXEOLFEHQHILWV7KHSDUWQHUVKLSZLOOH[SDQGWKH&RPPXQLW\ 6HUYLFHV5HFUHDWLRQ¶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¶VSUHIHUUHGIDFLOLW\XVHV7KHVHSUHIHUUHGXVHVLQFOXGHWKHIROORZLQJ 
¾ <RXWKDQGWHHQDFWLYLWLHV
¾ $GXOWDFWLYLWLHV
¾ )LWQHVVDQGDWKOHWLFDFWLYLWLHV
¾ 6HQLRUSURJUDPDFWLYLWLHV
¾ +HDOWKDQG:HOOQHVVSURJUDPDFWLYLWLHV
6HOHFWLRQ3URFHVV
7KH3DUWQHUVKLS$SSOLFDWLRQ)RUP
$SSOLFDWLRQ
PXVWEHFRPSOHWHGDQGVXEPLWWHGWRLQLWLDWHWKH
SDUWQHUVKLSSURFHVV7KH$SSOLFDWLRQ)RUPPXVWEHSULQWHGRUW\SHGDQGHQWLUHO\FRPSOHWHGLQ RUGHUWREHFRQVLGHUHG
LQFRPSOHWHIRUPVZLOOQRWEHUHYLHZHG
7KH$SSOLFDWLRQZLOOEHUHYLHZHGE\DSSURSULDWH&RPPXQLW\6HUYLFHV'HSDUWPHQW5HFUHDWLRQ 'LYLVLRQVWDIISHUWKHVWDWHGJXLGHOLQHV)ROORZLQJWKHHYDOXDWLRQRIWKH$SSOLFDWLRQVWDIIPD\ 

DSSURYHRIWKHSURSRVDODQGHQWHUQHJRWLDWLRQV

UHTXHVWDGGLWLRQDOLQIRUPDWLRQIURPWKH
DSSOLFDQWRU

UHMHFWWKHSURSRVDO

6 In addition to the Community Services-Recreation’s application approval, all projects will be required to comply with all applicable local, state, and federal laws and regulations.

Submission
Printed or typed forms can be submitted in the following manner:

Mail:

Partnership Application
Community Services-Recreation
3230 Macdonald Avenue
Richmond, CA 94804
Email: [email protected]; with a subject line of “Partnership Application” Apply online: link to be provided
Questions regarding the Partnership Application should be submitted to:

Troy Porter, Recreation Supervisor
Phone: (510) 620-6822
Email: [email protected]

7 PARTNERSHIP APPLICATION FORM
Review Partnership Policy prior to completing this Partnership Application Form. If approved for partnership, your organization’s Certificate of Insurance and Additionally Insured Form and Richmond business license will be required.

Type or print the form clearly.

1. APPLICANT INFORMATION
Name of Group/Organization:

Is this a non-profit organization: □ Yes □ No Tax ID # (Non-profit only):

If a non-profit, attach copy of 501(c)3 determination letter Applicant Name/Person Responsible: Title:

Phone: Alternate Phone:

Email Address:

Website Address:

City of Richmond business license # (if applicable):

Name and location of facility of interest:

Date, Times, Months, Hours needed:

Briefly describe your organization’s history, mission, and reason for partnering with the Community Services-Recreation (Attach additional sheets if necessary) Are other organizations collaborating with you on this project? Name them and describe their role of contribution? (Attach additional sheets if necessary)
Who is your Community Services-Recreation contact (if applicable)? Name and Email Address:

2. PROJECT DESIGN
Please be as complete as possible. Attach additional pages if necessary.

8 Provide a description of the proposed partnership activity or program.

Who is the target audience for your program? What is the age range? How many individuals will you have the capacity to serve?
What is your recruitment plan for getting individuals to participate in this program(s)? Describe which specific areas of the facility you will be needing? For example, community center gym, multi-purpose room, specific room, park, field, etc.

Has your organization led this activity/program in the past at another location? If yes, when and at which location(s)?
How does the proposed partnership align with the Community Services-Recreation’s mission, vision and values?
Why is your organization interested in partnering with the Community Services-Recreation? Please individually list and discuss the benefits (monetary and non-monetary) for your organization.

Describe any enhanced ADA accessibility needs for your program.

3. BENEFIT TO RECREATION AND PUBLIC
Does Community Services-Recreation already offer a service or program similar to the one you are proposing? If so, why would adding another be a good idea? Describe the specific public benefits (i.e., environmental, social or cultural benefits, increased access to programming, etc.) your proposed partnership will generate.

How will you measure those public benefits to demonstrate if the partnership is meeting its goals? (Regular public benefit reports are required as part of any Partnership)

9 Does your proposal increase Community Services-Recreation’s capacity to support underserved communities? If so, how?

4. PROJECT FUNDING AND BUSINESS OFFER
What is the estimated total cost of your partnership proposal? Provide a copy of your organization’s current year budget. Provide a proposed budget for your program offer.

What in-kind support does the proposal request from Community Services-Recreation? What would it be used for?
Does the proposal include an expectation that it would generate revenues? If so, what is the revenue source? What portion of revenues would be directed to Community Services-Recreation? Describe any anticipated fees you may charge and how you will address financial barriers for participation?
Are you requesting a reduction or waiver of fees as part of your partnership proposal? If so, please describe.

5. SUPPORT FOR YOUR PROJECT
Please list community and public support for this proposal.

6. COMMUNITY SERVICES-RECREATION FIELD PARTNER APPLICATION (IF APPLICABLE)
Providing routine and minor maintenance services is part of our partnership program. Select from below and/or add any specific maintenance tasks your organization will offer. o Remove trash and debris. How many times per week?
o Remove weeds and vines from around trees, plants, shrubs, fences and/or park buildings.

How many times per week?
o Coordinate quarterly community clean ups and/or beautification events. During which months?
o Prepare and/or line ball fields.
o Remove graffiti.
o Rake leaves as needed.
o Other services

Councilmember
Orientation

CITY OF RICHMOND
January 17, 2023
1Page 561 of 597
Agenda
01 Mural: Nevin Terrace, Jeff Carnie

1. City of Richmond Overview &
Contacts

2. City Council Agenda Process &
Administrative Support

3. Meeting Procedures &
Mandatory Council Trainings

4. Municipal Finance & Budgeting

5. City-Wide Guiding Documents

6. Key Dates & Next Steps

7. Questions 2Page 562 of 597
Overview
and
Contacts
01 Introductions
02 City of Richmond Charter
03 Information on Council-
Manager Form of Government
04 City of Richmond
Organizational Chart
05 City of Richmond Key Staff
06 Administrative Calendar
3Page 563 of 597
Introductions
Shasa Curl
City Manager
Pamela Christian
City Clerk
Dave Aleshire
City Attorney
4Page 564 of 597
City of Richmond Charter
01 02
03 Key Point #1
Key Point #2
Key Point #3
5City of Richmond Charter

Council-Manager Form of
Government
People of Richmond
Governing Body
City Manager
Department Heads
6Page 566 of 597
City of Richmond
Organizational Chart
7Page 567 of 597
Key Staff
Nickie Mastay LaShonda White Trina Jackson-Lincoln

DEPUTY CITY MANAGER
Internal Services

DEPUTY CITY MANAGER
Community Services

COUNCIL LIAISON
8Page 568 of 597
Key Staff - Directors
Meet all our directors!
Bisa French Angel Montoya Daniel Chavarria Lina Velasco

POLICE FIRE PUBLIC WORKS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
9Page 569 of 597
Key Staff - Directors
Meet all our directors!
Delmy Cuellar Sharrone Taylor
Sue Hartman Nannette Beacham

FINANCE HUMAN RESOURCES INFORMATION

TECHNOLOGY

ECONOMIC

DEVELOPMENT
10Page 570 of 597
Emergency Operations Center
(EOC) Contact Information
11

Administrative Calendar
12 Contains the governing dates for administrative actions, reports, audits, and other matters of importance to departments/divisions
Highlights responsibilities and workloads
Identifies responsibilities and workloads
01 02
03 Enhances accountability and ensures compliance04 Page 572 of 597 City Council
Agenda
Process &
Administrative
Support
01 City Council References and
Support, Council Meeting
Technical Guidelines
02 Agenda Item Process
for Councilmembers03
Reimbursement Requests
Appointments to City and
Regional Boards, Commissions,
Committees, Etc.

Councilmember
Benefits Summary
04 05
13Page 573 of 597
City Council References
and Support
14Page 574 of 597
Appointments to City and
Regional Boards,
Commissions, & Committees
15Page 575 of 597
Agenda Item Process for
Councilmembers
Deadline for agenda items:
12 PM on Wednesday
before desired meeting
Strongly suggested that
place holders are
submitted as early as
possible
If agenda report and
supporting documents are
not submitted by 12 PM,
item will be pushed to next
meeting
01 02
03 16

Agenda & Resolution
Templates
01 17

Travel/Training
Reimbursement Requests
18

Councilmember Benefits
Summary
Salary:
• $3,875/month for Mayor
• $1,402/month for Council
Member
Travel and Benefits,
including medical and
dental
01 04
19 Stipend:
• $30/meeting for RHA &
Redevelopment Agency
02 Car Allowance:
• $350/month for Mayor
• $300/month for Council
Member
03

Meeting
Procedures
and
Mandatory
Council
Trainings
01 City Council Rules of
Procedure and Order
02 City Attorney’s
Office Overview
20

City Council Rules of
Procedure and Order
This document overviews:
21 City Council Rules of Procedure and Order
01 Officer’s Responsibilities
Meetings02
03 04
05 Agenda Preparation
Order of Business
Conducting Meetings
06 Procedural Matters

City Attorney’s Office
Overview
01 Summary of Brown Act, and
Common Legal Issues
Personal Liability for Acts of
Officers and Employees of the City
Understanding Basics of Public
Service Ethics Laws
02 03
04 05
06 Financial Management for Elected
Officials
Ethics Laws Principles for Public
Servants
Conflicts of Interest Laws
Rosenberg’s Rule of Order07
22

Municipal
Finance and
Budgeting
01 Readings on Understanding
Municipal Findings
02 Adopted FY 2022-23
Operating Budget & 5-Year
Capital Improvement Plan
03 State Audit Corrective
Action Plan
04 Budget Calendar
05 Guiding Fiscal Policy
23

Readings on Understanding
Municipal Financing
01 City Revenues in California
Taxes02
03 04
05 Revenue From Other Government
Agencies
Revenue From Other Government
Agencies
Service Charges, Assessments,
and Fines
Readings include information on
municipal revenues in California for
cities, counties, and special districts
24

Adopted FY 2022-23 Operating
Budget & 5-Year Capital
Improvement Plan
01 The Adopted FY 2022-2023
Operating Budget is
structurally balanced with
both revenues and
expenditures of $206,632,248
City staff will continue to
monitor the City’s financials
closely and will provide
quarterly updates
01 02
25 Adopted FY 2022-2023 Operating Budget
& 5 – Year Capital Improvement Plan
Incorporated community and
labor union input
03

State Audit Corrective
Action Plan
The State Audit Corrective Action Plan intends to
improve the City’s overall fiscal health by
eliminating high risk designations.

Eliminating High Risk
Budget Strategy – Review and update
fund balance, identify contingent long-
term budget and balancing options
Richmond Housing Authority (RHA) –
Complete RHA recovery agreement actions
and execute RHA/City administration
agreement
Operations – Review/update contract
compliance documentation process,
contract compliance checklist, and fee
schedule policy
01 02
03 26Page 586 of 597
Budget Calendar
27Budget Calendar

Guiding Fiscal Policy
Guiding budgeting policies, including
budget development, non-occurring
revenues, capital asset acquisitions
Special funds regulation, including
evaluation method, cost of operation,
management, etc.

Encumbrances and disencumbrances
regulation, including timely actions
01 02
03 04
05 Funds balances/accounting, fiscal
sustainability planning, debt
management, & capital and technology
projects
Reserve policies, including operating
General Fund expenditures as a
minimum reserve policy
28

City-Wide
Guiding
Documents
01 General Plan 2030
02 Richmond Race and Equity
Initiative (GARE)
03 Health in All Policies
(HiAP)
04 Climate Action Plan
05 Richmond
Community Survey
06 Fee Waiver &
Partnership Policy
29

02 General Plan 2030
The General Plan provides a policy
framework to help the City maximize key
opportunities and direct resources to
improve its quality of life and cultivate a
dynamic economy.

Promoting Richmond’s Diversity
Through Policy Framework
01 03
The General Plan is an inclusive city
framework intended to guide decision-
making
The General Plan aims to address the
physical, economic, cultural, and social
needs of all the people in Richmond
The General Plan promotes policies to
restore its traditional compact
neighborhoods
30 General Plan 2030

Richmond Race and Equity
Initiative (GARE)
“The Government Alliance on Race and Equity
(GARE) is a national network of government
working to achieve racial equity and advance
opportunities for all” – from
www.racialequityalliance.org
01 Joint project with Haas Institute for a
Fair & Inclusive Society and Race
Forward
A national network focused on
achieving racial equity
Eliminating racial disproportionalities so
that race can no longer be used to
predict success
Making Success Achievable For All
02 03
31 Richmond Race and Equity Initiative (GARE)

Health in All Policies (HiAP)
01 02
03 Health in All Policies , or “healthy public policy,” is based on the idea that health starts with where people live,
work, learn, and play, and that community health is
influenced by more than individual choices.

Health Equity in Richmond
01 Health equity means taking specific actions to
eliminate the social and physical inequities that
influence our opportunities to be healthy
Richmond’s HiAP Ordinance recognizes that health
is not just something that occurs at a doctor’s
office or in a hospital, but rather health can be
found in the everyday decisions made in almost
every city department
Richmond’s HiAP is not an end into itself, it’s a
collective call for on-going action and attention
to the practices, programs and policies that can
further health equity, racial and social justice for
Richmond’s residents
32

Climate Action Plan (CAP)
The City is committed to equitably improving
safety, sustainability and health for all Richmond
residents.

Advancing Climate Resilience Locally
01 The CAP is a roadmap to reduce
greenhouse emissions, create jobs, and
prepare for the impacts of climate change
in our community
Expands and operationalizes the
community’s health and environmental
goals established in the General Plan 2030
Data related to the Climate Action Plan
implementation can be viewed at
www.transparentrichmond.org
02 03
33

The City of Richmond enrolled in the National
Research Center’s National Citizen Survey to
help City Council establish spending priorities
and community service delivery
improvement. The survey will help with the
following:
01 Asses the quality of community life
and services provided to residents
Track residents’ perceptions of service
quality, community amenities, and
public safety over time
Help make informed decisions about
how to allocate resources for the
people of Richmond
City Service Delivery Improvement
02 03
Richmond Community
Survey
34 Richmond Community Survey

01 The purpose of the Fee Waiver
and Partnership Policies is to
establish responsible
guidelines to equitably
evaluate and consider fee
waiver requests, as well as
ongoing partnerships
Information can be found at:

Fee Waiver & Partnership
Policy
Organizations can receive up
to $3,000 in fee waivers within
a 12-month period
Making City Services Available
for All
02 03
Fee Waiver &
Partnership Policy
35

01 02
0 Key Dates & Next Steps
36 Event Date Location Department & Contact Person
Human Resources
Onboarding
01/10/2023 -
01/13/2023
City Hall, Human
Resources, 3rd
Floor
To schedule or for inquiries, contact:

Human Resources – Sharrone Taylor,
[email protected],
(510) 620-6803
IT Equipment 01/10/2023 -
01/13/2023
City Hall, Human
Resources, 1st
Floor
To schedule or for inquiries, contact:

Information Technology – Sue Hartman,
[email protected]
(510) 620-6874
Mid-Year Presentations,
Departmental Overviews
01/17/2023
01/24/2023
02/07/2023
2/21/2023
2/28/2023
Council Chamber City Manager’s Office – Shasa Curl,
[email protected], (510)
620-6512
Internal Services – Nickie Mastay,
[email protected],
(510) 620-6609
League of CA Cities City
Council Training
01/18/2023 -
01/20/2023
Sacramento, CA To schedule or for inquiries, contact:

Council Liaison – Trina Jackson-Lincoln,
[email protected], (510)
620-6581
City Council Strategic
Planning Process
Pending Pending City Manager’s Office – Shasa
Curl, [email protected],
(510) 620-6512Page 596 of 597
Thank You
&
Questions!
37