Richmond City Council
July 11, 2023

383
In an effort to reduce paper usage, this page has been
left blank for double-sided printing purposes.

If printing, please consider using 100% recycled paper.

Exhibit A-1

384

1. COVER LETTER
1 March 2, 2022
Ms. Samantha Carr
City Manager’s Office, Economic Development
City of Richmond
450 Civic Center Plaza, Richmond, CA 94804
submitted online, via BidSync
SUBJECT: SOQ for Consulting Services Related to the City of Richmond’s Solid Waste Collection Franchise Agreement
Ms. Carr,
R3 Consulting Group, Inc. (R3) is pleased to submit the attached Statement of Qualifications (SOQ) to express our interest in Consulting Services Related to the City of Richmond’s (City) Solid Waste Collection Franchise Agreement. For this project, we have teamed with Envirolutions, and their letter of commitment to be a part of the R3 Project Team is included in the Appendix of this proposal.

Firm Description & History
R3 Consulting Group, Inc. - Prime Consultant
Incorporated in California in 2002, R3 is a California Certified Small Business with offices in Oakland and Roseville. We specialize in providing a diverse range of solid waste management consulting services to public agencies, including rate and financial reviews, competitive procurement and/or extension negotiations of collection, processing and disposal services; development, implementation and monitoring of service contracts and franchise agreements; and legislative compliance.

Our team has dedicated their careers to the field of solid waste management and sustainability, and skillfully deliver expert industry analysis and recommendations to our clients, who consist of municipalities, jurisdictions, public agencies, and joint power authorities. R3’s Oakland office is located nearest to the City and will accordingly be the project headquarters: 405 14th Street, Suite 350, Oakland, CA 94612 | 916.782.7821 Envirolutions - Subconsultant
Founded in 2014, Envirolutions specializes in designing and implementing zero waste, recycling, and sustainability projects, including engaging businesses such as grocery stores, restaurants, hotels, and multi-tenant commercial complexes and multifamily dwellings in implementing effective waste diversion programs.

Their clients have included municipal and county governments as well as private industry throughout the Bay Area including but not limited to the cities of Oakland, San Francisco, Piedmont, Alameda, Sausalito, as well as StopWaste, RecycleSmart, RethinkWaste, and the County of Marin.

Exhibit A-1

385
405 14th Street, Oakland, CA 94612 | p 916.782.7821 | f 916.782.7824 | www.r3cgi.com

1. COVER LETTER
2 Qualifications & Experience
The R3 project team brings a strong understanding of Richmond’s solid waste and recycling circumstances, including the City’s long-standing collection agreement with Richmond Sanitary Service and the City’s membership in RecycleMore, the West Contra Costa Integrated Waste Management Authority. R3 has assisted the City in prior contracting and rate matters involving its collection agreement, including the development and funding of programs to combat litter and illegal dumping in the City and new bulky item collection services for multi-family customers. Moreover, our project team has over 15 years working in West Contra Costa County – as a result, we have unparalleled knowledge of the solid waste and recycling circumstances and marketplace, which is a distinct advantage of engaging our Team.

Envirolutions’ outreach experience includes innovative projects engaging multiple stakeholders in setting up effective and efficient recycling and organics programs that maximize participation and waste diversion. In order to accomplish this, they have designed inclusive outreach campaigns that involve workshops, training, community engagement, and bilingual outreach utilizing partnerships with community organizations, business associations, homeowners associations, and property management associations.

In addition to the project team included in the proposal, Envirolutions has a proven track record of pulling from a cadre of accomplished and multilingual subcontractors to achieve project goals within scope and on time.

Statement of Understanding, Intent, & Willingness
We have reviewed and understand all elements of the City’s RFQ and intend to perform the services outlined. We are willing to enter into an agreement as prescribed by the RFQ, including the insurance requirements and those terms and conditions prescribed in the sample Service Agreement. Our proposal price will be valid for a period of at least 180 days.

Designated Contact Person
We appreciate the opportunity to submit our proposal to the City. As Project Manager and Principal-in-Charge, Garth Schultz will be your primary point of contact. As Principal, Garth is authorized to contractually obligate R3 and negotiate contracts on behalf of the team. * * * * *
We look forward to continuing our work with the City of Richmond, and we appreciate the opportunity to submit this proposal. Should you have any questions regarding our proposal or need any additional information, please don’t hesitate to reach out directly.

Sincerely,
Garth Schultz | Principal
R3 Consulting Group, Inc.
510.292.0853 | [email protected]
Exhibit A-1

386

2. SCOPE OF WORK
City of Richmond | Solid Waste Collection Franchise Agreement 1 Understanding of the City
R3 has a robust understanding of the City of Richmond and its solid waste collection contracting needs, which is based on our prior working relationships with the City as well as our long history of working in the solid waste and recycling industry in West Contra Costa County since the early 2000’s. We understand the City’s needs and desires with respect to evaluating its future contracting options that include addressing community needs, costs and rates, compliance with State laws, and the City’s membership in RecycleMore, the West Contra Costa Integrated Waste Management Authority.

Objectives to Accomplish
» Assess the City’s current solid waste collection franchise agreement and recommend updates based on current industry best practices. » Conduct a thorough financial and feasibility analysis regarding the City’s options. » Solicit community input on the current agreement and future actions. » Advise City staff and the City Council on a recommended course of action for solid waste collection services effective starting July 1, 2025.

Work to be Completed
Via this engagement, R3 will provide the City with expert solid waste consulting services as they relate to evaluation of solid waste contract terms and conditions, programs and services, and resultant costs and rates. R3 will be the City’s key partner and guide throughout the process (pursuant to RFQ Scope of Services Item 1), as the City seeks to facilitate City Council decision regarding whether to continue its solid waste contracting relationship with Richmond Sanitary Service (RSS) or proceed to a competitive procurement process for a new solid waste collection agreement. The specific work to be completed is summarized in the nine task areas outlined below, which correspond to Scope of Services Items 2 - 10 in the City’s RFQ. 1 - Collection Agreement Analysis & Recommendations
Drawing on our rich experience working on solid waste collection agreements throughout California, R3 will prepare a summary of best practices, terms and conditions, programs, and key provisions that should be considered by the City in its amended or new collection agreement. We will also conduct a thorough review of the current Agreement, in order to provide findings and recommendations for an amended or new contract. This may include an analysis of the City’s other solid waste-related agreements.

Task 1 Deliverables
— Project kick-off meeting.
— Summary of best practices, terms and conditions, programs, and key provisions for consideration in an amended or new collection agreement.

ATTACHMENT 1 - SCOPE OF WORK
Exhibit A-1

387

2. SCOPE OF WORK
2 2 - Community Profile & Metrics
Using resources identified in the City’s RFQ as well as information in reports provided to the City by RSS, R3 will identify, gather, and summarize key information such as numbers of solid waste subscriptions by type, waste streams by type and ton, rates by customer classification, current solid waste service offerings, and demographic information to represent an accurate community profile that will inform the development of findings and recommendations via other tasks.

Task 2 Deliverable
— Solid waste profile and landscape report.
3 - Solid Waste Collection Gap Analysis
Using the resources identified by the City in its RFQ, as well as the outcomes of other tasks, R3 will research, assess, and leverage current plans, policies, City services, and delivery methods to conduct a gap analysis to establish findings and recommendations for the City’s future solid waste collection agreement and other agreements including but not limited to the Golden Bear Transfer Station Agreement. This may also include an analysis of whether or not the City should continue to be a party to the Post-Collection Agreement held by RecycleMore, recommend post-collection rate calculation revisions, or seek other alternatives.

Task 3 Deliverables
— Interviews with City staff members.
— Richmond solid waste gap analysis.
4 - Community Engagement
R3’s sub-consultant partner, Envirolutions, will work in collaboration with the City and R3 to develop and facilitate an inclusive, innovative, and accessible, multilingual community engagement process. This process will include reaching out to the overall Richmond community and stakeholders, and our approach is discussed in more detail below.

Finalize Project Design and Develop Project Materials
Envirolutions will seek input from City staff, local government and key stakeholders regarding the project design to ensure our approach is sound, keys into the desired impacts of the project, and is appropriate for the Richmond community. Outreach materials will be generated to inform the different participant groups regarding the purpose of the project and will be accessible through multilingual announcements.

Promotional materials will be distributed through various methods including print, social media, flyers, and through community listservs and announcement boards.

Design and Conduct Community Survey
With the input and involvement of City staff, Envirolutions will design a short survey to be conducted during community engagement events that will collect easily tabulatable responses that will inform the project and provide the basis for further inquiry.

Questions will primarily be multiple-choice with a few qualitative fill-in-the-blank questions at the end. Ideally the survey will not be longer than 15 questions.

Exhibit A-1

388

2. SCOPE OF WORK
City of Richmond | Solid Waste Collection Franchise Agreement 3 It will be designed to be distributed digitally, in-person via a tablet or laptop computer, or via printed surveys. The different formats for distribution will help ensure the inclusion of groups that vary in age, access to technology and/or comfort with social media platforms.

The survey will be distributed at the various meetings, town hall gatherings, tabling and workshop activities we host and attend, and survey respondents will include City staff, business associations, community leaders, and civic organizations. The survey will be distributed with care to prevent entities outside of Richmond mistakenly participating, yet feedback from participants will be submitted anonymously to allow participants to speak freely. It will be required that attendees provide proof of residency or that their business is located within Richmond prior to being able to participate.

Present at Community Meetings
Envirolutions will host and/or attend 10 community meetings to further provide opportunities for community engagement. The meetings will be hosted by, or for, civic organizations, faith-based organizations, cultural affinity groups, unions, business groups and/or trade organizations. In addition to explaining the rationale behind the project, they will collect survey responses from participants and have time allocated for asking additional questions and addressing comments and concerns brought by attendees.

Answers will be collected, collated, and included in the final report. In order to provide maximum access, a portion of the community meetings will be held virtually and the rest will be held in-person. The community meetings will be held in multiple languages (English and Spanish) whenever possible.

Conduct Stakeholder Engagement Interviews
Envirolutions will seek to conduct up to 10 individual stakeholder engagement interviews to ensure we are including the perspective of the business community as well as other key stakeholders. Invitees for the interviews will include members of local business associations, property management organizations, homeowner associations, the Chamber of Commerce and other local trade organizations.

In addition to asking the multiple-choice questions included in the survey, Envirolutions will develop, in advance, a series of pre-approved open-ended questions to garner authentic and individual feedback. The interviews will be conducted either in-person or via video conference call. Interview responses will be kept anonymous upon request.

Answers will be analyzed, collated, and included in the final report.

Conduct Community Workshops
Envirolutions will convene three community workshops that will differ from our community meetings in length and content. The community workshops will occur later in the project and will be informed by the findings from the previous community engagement events.

Exhibit A-1

389

2. SCOPE OF WORK
4 Rather than simply soliciting feedback, the Community Workshops will seek to engage civic organizations, faith-based organizations, cultural affinity groups, unions, business groups and trade organizations with the explicit goal of providing solution-oriented constructive feedback for City staff to incorporate into their future decision-making process how they proceed in the future. The community workshops will be longer in format (2-3 hours) and may include in-person translation services.

Envirolutions suggests the City consider providing light refreshments and food, and childcare, if possible, to ensure a greater cross-section of attendees can be present.

Neither R3 nor Envirolutions are positioned to provide those services via this proposal, so provision of light refreshments, food, and childcare is at the City’s discretion and cost. All community workshops will be held in-person.

Produce and Present Community Engagement Report to City staff At the summation of the project, Envirolutions will incorporate findings into a final report and deliver a presentation of this report at a City Council meeting around the end of April 2023. They will synthesize the data points to decipher trends and outcomes and then transform this data into easily digestible charts and graphs to help convey our findings clearly. They will present the data in a manner that is best utilized for City staff based on input at the early stages of the project. Images and testimonials from our community engagement activities will be included. And finally, based on their experience during the project, they will make various recommendations for next steps.

Task 4 Deliverables
— Conduct community survey.
— Design of multilingual community outreach and education materials (English and Spanish).
— Attendance at 10 community meetings.
— 10 stakeholder engagement interviews.
— Plan and organize 3 community workshops including setting-up translation services (for in-person meetings).
— Presentation of draft community engagement report to City staff. — Community engagement report including report of survey findings and most desired services.
5 - Financial Analysis
Via this task, R3 will research and assess current City collection rates and fees, potential renegotiation costs, and costs of developing a new solid waste collection franchise agreement. R3 will conduct a thorough financial analysis to better inform the City staff, City Council, and community members regarding the potential outcomes of both a renegotiation process and a competitive procurement process. This may include a financial analysis of the City’s other solid waste-related agreements.

Task 5 Deliverable
— Richmond solid waste financial analysis.

Exhibit A-1

390

2. SCOPE OF WORK
City of Richmond | Solid Waste Collection Franchise Agreement 5 6 - Council, Staff, & Community Meetings
Working in partnership with City staff, and subject to the budgetary limitations in this proposal, R3 will attend meetings upon request, including but not limited to City Council meetings, Richmond Coordinating Council meetings, community meetings, and multiple internal meetings with City staff members. Such meetings will be in person when feasible, otherwise, meetings will be virtual. These meetings will be in addition to the meetings outlined in Task 4 and Task 8.

Task 6 Deliverable
— Preparation of meeting materials and presentation of information at meetings. 7 - Negotiation Meetings
As needed, R3 will attend negotiation meetings and support the City with potential rate adjustment negotiations with RSS in order to develop findings and recommendations with respect to renegotiating the agreement with RSS or proceeding to competitive procurement. R3 will attend negotiation meetings as necessary to negotiate and communicate with the City, RSS and other relevant stakeholders (such as RecycleMore), and to provide any necessary support to City staff during these negotiations.

This task assumes that City staff and R3 will have the authority to proceed with solesource negotiations with RSS, which may require early Council direction to conduct such negotiations. It is generally desirable to conduct sole source negotiations prior to proceeding with a competitive RFP, and the timeline for this project allows for both.

Task 7 Deliverable
— City Council staff report and presentation regarding sole-source negotiation (dependent on gap analysis findings).
8 - Progress Update Presentations
R3 will provide and present updates to the City Council approximately every six months regarding progress and key decision points throughout the project. As needed, and subject to the budgetary limitations in this proposal, R3 will also be available to conduct progress update presentations to Neighborhood Councils, commissions, and boards.

Task 8 Deliverable
— Preparation of meeting materials and presentation of information at meetings. ______________________________
____________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________ ______________
______________
______________________________________________________
__________________________
___________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
---------------
_____________________
_____________
_______________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________ ____________________________________
__________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________ __________________________
Exhibit A-1

391
In an effort to reduce paper usage, this page has been
left blank for double-sided printing purposes.

If printing, please consider using 100% recycled paper.

Exhibit A-1

392

3. TIMELINE OF PROJECT
City of Richmond | Solid Waste Collection Franchise Agreement 7 Our tentative timeline and project schedule is both subject to revision, based on the timing of contract award, and negotiable, to best meet the City’s needs for this engagement. The timeline by task, below, includes anticipated time needed to provide draft deliverables, meetings with the City to review and discuss draft deliverables, revise the draft deliverables, and complete the finalization of deliverables.

Overall Timeline
The overall objective of this project is to facilitate a decision of the City Council regarding whether to continue its contracting relationship with Richmond Sanitary Service or proceed to competitively procure a new solid waste contract with an effective date of July 1, 2025.

In either case, a new or extended agreement for solid waste services should be executed 12 months prior to that date (i.e., July 1, 2024), in order to allow for smooth transition. To meet that milestone, the City Council should make a decision regarding whether to continue its contracting arrangement or conduct a competitive procurement no later than June 2023, which would provide one year for a competitive procurement effort, if desired by the Council. Our project timeline is geared to facilitate a City Council decision by that date. 1 Collection Agreement Analysis and Recommendations July 2022 - August 2022 2 Community Profile and Metrics July 2022 - September 2022 3 Solid Waste Collection Gap Analysis July 2022 - September 2022 4 Community Engagement July 2022 - March 2023*
5 Financial Analysis July 2022 - September 2022
6 Council, Staff and Community Meetings July 2022 - April 2023 7 Negotiation Meetings January 2023 - April 2023
8 Progress Update Presentations November 2022 - April 2023*

TASK TIMELINE
* see notes on following page

3. TIMELINE OF PROJECT
___________________________________________
__________________________________________
___________________________________________
Exhibit A-1

393

3. TIMELINE OF PROJECT
8 Timeline Notes
The schedule for Task 4, Community Engagement, is flexible and will be designed with the involvement of key City stakeholders. As such, it is premature to include a firm timeline for completion of that task at this time.

That being said, we understand from the City’s RFQ that it is desirable to conduct a workshop with relevant stakeholders as soon as possible – to that end, we recommend an initial stakeholder workshop shortly after contract execution, by September 2022.

The remainder of the community engagement task schedule will be informed by the community engagement design process and is anticipated to conclude in advance of the Task 8 City Council progress update presentation in April 2023.

With respect to Task 8, Progress Update Presentations, the City’s RFQ requested updates to the Council (and Neighborhood Councils, commissions, boards, and community organizations as requested) every six months during the project. With the anticipated contract award in July 2022, pursuant to the City’s RFQ, we suggest scheduling the progress updates for November 2022 and April 2023. _____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ Exhibit A-1

394

4. PROPOSED BUDGET & COSTS
City of Richmond | Solid Waste Collection Franchise Agreement 9

4. PROPOSED BUDGET & COSTS
Budget Narrative
R3’s proposed budget and costs for this project is shown in the Budget Table, on the following page. The budget spreadsheet indicates the cost of each of the eight (8) major elements identified in the scope of services and is inclusive of all direct and indirect project costs associated with this project, including the estimated hours by staff person and task.

As proposed, our not to exceed budget for this engagement is $136,735. Please note that this not-to-exceed budget, and that hours and costs by specific task may vary, with the exception of task 8, Community Engagement, which we would plan to expend in full. This not-to-exceed cost does not include development and execution or award of a new solid waste collection agreement - completion of a new agreement with RSS or completion of an RFP competitive procurement process is not included in this proposal. R3 will happily subject separate scopes of work, budgets and schedules to complete one or both of those efforts upon after contract award pursuant to the City’s RFQ.

As shown in the spreadsheet, our proposed budget includes the costs associated with facilitating effective community engagement activities, as described in the commitment letter from Envirolutions (see Appendix). That commitment letter also includes an estimated $800 in Envirolutions’ mileage costs and minor materials costs, as well as 360 hours of Envirolutions staff time to complete the task 8 activities. Additionally, we have included 50 hours of R3 staff time in the community engagement efforts, to ensure that other project tasks are well informed by the community engagement process (and vice versa). Our cost proposal includes a 10% markup on Envirolutions’ hourly billable rates for R3’s management and administration of the subcontract, invoicing, and payments to Envirolutions as our sub-contractor.

Please note that Tasks 6, 7 and 8 include meetings with Council, community members, staff, and the City’s solid waste contractor. R3 is flexible with respect to the number of such meetings that are attended upon request by the City – however, if additional meetings (above and beyond the allotted hours available for meetings in those tasks) are necessary, these additional meetings requested and agreed to by the City and R3 will be above the not-to-exceed budget at our hourly rates.

R3 will not costs or invoice the City in excess of the not-to-exceed amount proposed herein without prior approval of the City, and we will take care to communicate if and when the number of requested meetings starts to approach the hours and cost thresholds established in the spreadsheet, on the following page.

R3 is willing to negotiate revisions to our proposed hours, budget, and costs in order to best meet the needs of the City with appropriate revisions to the expected scope of work.

Exhibit A-1

395

4. PROPOSED BUDGET & COSTS
10 Garth Schultz
Principal
Scott Hanin
Sr. Project Director
R3 Staff
Sr. Project Manager
R3 Staff
Project Manager
Juliana Gerber
Associate Director
Alejandra Warren
& Refugio
Sanchez
$ 285 $ 285 $ 220 $ 200 $ 121 121 $
1 Collection Agreement Analysis and Recommendations 5 5 30 0 0 0 40 $ - $ 9,4502 Community Profile and Metrics 5 5 0 35 0 0 45 $ - $ 9,8503 Solid Waste Collection Gap Analysis 5 5 25 5 0 0 40 $ - $ 9,3504 Community Engagement 10 0 0 40 100 260 410 $ 800 $ 55,2105 Financial Analysis 10 25 0 0 0 0 35 $ - $ 9,9756 Council, Staff and Community Meetings 30 10 0 15 0 0 55 $ - $ 14,4007 Negotiation Meetings 20 40 0 0 0 0 60 $ - $ 17,1008 Progress Update Presentations 20 20 0 0 0 0 40 $ - $ 11,400 105 110 55 95 100 260 725 $ 136,735
TASKS

STAFF MEMBER & HOURLY RATE
TOTAL

HOURS EXPENSES TOTAL COST
TOTALS
Budget Table _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Exhibit A-1 Page 14 396

5. STAFFING
City of Richmond | Solid Waste Collection Franchise Agreement 9

5. STAFFING
Project Team
R3 and Envirolutions have complementary industry experience and expertise.

R3’s broad experience has allowed us to address a variety of issues that typically confront our municipal clients during the implementation of solid waste and recycling programs and facilities, including regulatory compliance, community outreach and public education, land-use planning and permitting, inter-jurisdictional coordination, planning requirements and diversion mandates, labor issues, and customer service and billing functions.

Both R3 and Envirolutions have profound knowledge of statewide solid waste and recycling issues, including infrastructure (and more specifically, a depth of expertise on Bay area facilities and issues), regulatory requirements, and available resources.

Together, this project team will exceed the City’s expectations for consulting services related to the City’s solid waste collection franchise.

Organizational Chart
Our proposed team will be led by R3 Principal, Garth Schultz. Garth will be supported by R3 Sr. Project Director, Scott Hanin, R3 Sr. Project Managers, Rose Radford and Carrie Baxter, R3 Project Manager, Claire Wilson, and Envirolutions team members, Juliana Gerber and Alejandra Warren.

PROJECT MANAGER
Garth Schultz
Principal

KEY TEAM MEMBERS
Scott Hanin
Sr. Project Director
Claire Wilson
Project Manager
Rose Radford
Sr. Project Manager
Carrie Baxter
Sr. Project Manager
Resumes
Resumes for each key team member can be found in the appendix.

SUBCONSULTANT
Alejandra Warren
Outreach Director
Juliana Gerber
Associate Director

ENVIROLUTIONS
Exhibit A 1

397

5. STAFFING
10 Roles & Responsibilities
Name + Role Responsibilities
Garth Schultz
Overall Project
Manager
Garth will be the Project Manager and will be the primary point of contact. He will be responsible for overseeing the team – including sub-consultants – providing quality control and quality assurance on deliverables; managing project accounting, finances and invoices, and; ensuring cost-effective and quality assured project delivery on time and on budget. Garth will be the lead R3 figure in high profile community, staff, and Council meetings.

Scott Hanin
Lead Contract
Strategist and
Negotiator
Scott is a seasoned public agency professional and is particularly adept at facilitating inter-agency policy and contracting solutions thanks to his prior work as a City Manager of El Cerrito and Executive Director of the West Contra Costa Integrated Waste Management Authority. Scott will lead the project team’s efforts with respect to contracting strategy and negotiations.

Rose Radford
Contracting
Analyst
Rose has helped over a dozen agencies with their SB 1383 procurement requirement calculations and planning and is currently leading R3’s overall SB 1383 compliance projects for eight agencies in Marin County and all of San Benito County. For the City, Rose will provide contracting analysis to ensure that the City’s solid waste collection agreements are a best match to the City’s solid waste services and State compliance needs.

Carrie Baxter
Procurement
Analyst
Carrie is one of R3’s lead contracting procurement analysts, and has supported over a dozen cities in conducting competitive RFP processes for solid waste services agreements. For this engagement, Carrie will provide strategic support and analysis related to the City’s decision-making process for its next solid waste collection agreement.

Claire Wilson
Community and
Compliance
Analyst
Claire is a talented and passionate waste recovery and reduction consultant, with experience in many aspects of SB 1383
compliance planning and implementation. Claire will provide leadership and support with respect to the community and stakeholder engagement processes and will also provide support for the City’s compliance needs with the State.

Juliana Gerber
Envirolutions
Overall Project
Manager
Juliana will be responsible for day-to-day project management of the subconsultant team including communication and coordination of all activities to the project team, coordinating schedule, budget management, quality assurance, and report preparation.

Alejandra
Warren
Envirolutions
Outreach Lead
Alejandra will be the lead on community engagement and outreach for the project, responsible for the planning and coordination of community meetings, training, webinars and other forms of community engagement. She will also be involved in data collection and analysis and will assist with the final report preparation.

Exhibit A-1

398

6. QUALIFICATIONS & REFERENCES
City of Richmond | Solid Waste Collection Franchise Agreement 11

6. QUALIFICATIONS & REFERENCES
Qualifications
Summary of Demonstrated Capability
For the past 20 years, R3’s project team has developed a unique level of relevant experience and knowledge of solid waste solutions that can help you deliver the programs and policies that your community needs. Our work, with a sampling shown below, covers everything from agreement negotiations to policy and ordinances development, legislative compliance, and education and outreach.

JURISDICTION

SERVICE(S) PROVIDED
Legislative Compliance
Record Keeping &
Reporting
Collection Agreement
Assistance
Ordinances & Policies
Edible Food Recovery
Education & Outreach
Procurement of
Recovered Organics
City of Brentwood     
City of Citrus Heights       
City of Concord       
City of El Cerrito     
City of Fairfield       
City of Folsom       
City of Hercules   
City of Los Altos       
City of Martinez       
City of Petaluma      
City of Rancho Cordova       
City of Richmond  
City of Riverside     
City of Rohnert Park    
City of San Pablo  
City of Santa Clara     
City of Santa Rosa      
City of Vallejo       
City of West Sacramento       
Kings Waste and Recycling Authority       
RecycleMore       
Sacramento County / SWA      
Town of Windsor       
Ventura County       
Exhibit A-1

399

6. QUALIFICATIONS & REFERENCES
12 R3 References
City of Santa Clara | Franchise Agreement Negotiations & Rate Study R3 was engaged by the City to assist in the preparation and negotiation of the City’s exclusive Franchise Agreements (Agreements) with Recology South Bay (Recology) and Mission Trail Waste Systems (MTWS). R3’s work included development of a multi-year Rate Study to help the City establish and set customer rates for solid waste services provided under the New Agreements.

R3 worked with City staff throughout the negotiation process to ensure that the new Agreements achieve the City’s objectives, including compliance with applicable state legislation, and the City’s long-term financial and diversion goals. R3 also assisted with the procurement of a separate contract for waste processing services to meet SB 1383 requirements with GreenWaste Recovery. Negotiations resulted in three compliance options for Council consideration, at varying levels of rate-payer convenience and expense.

City Council selected the most convenient and most expensive option, with projected increases in rates of about 60% over three years. R3 completed a Rate Study for rates effective July 1, 2020, 2021, and 2022 to ensure ongoing funding of City’s entire solid waste program and new expenses related to SB 1383 compliance. Actual rate increases over the three-year period have been slightly lower than originally projected.

For this engagement, R3 completed the following three main tasks for the City:

1. Reviewed current Agreements with Recology and MTWS and prepared recommendations to be included in new exclusive Agreements that ensure flexibility and compliance with SB 1383. Both new Agreements were executed by the City.

2. Advised and assisted with contract negotiations with the City’s current haulers and with a separate waste processor, resulting in selection of a new waste processor.

3. Completed a detailed rate study analysis to help the City establish customer rates for services to be provided under new Agreements, achieving compliance with Prop 218 and SB 1383, and meeting cost-recovery for the City’s solid waste system.

Project Benefits
» Successful negotiations of three solid waste agreements that were executed by the City and are now in effect.
» Successful completion of a cost-of-service rate study which meets the annual solid waste system funding requirements, complies with Prop 218, addresses discounted rates for low-income residents, and funds the costs of SB 1383 compliance.

Client Contact Mr. Dave Staub, Deputy Director of Public Works 1700 Walsh Ave, Santa Clara, CA, 95050
408.615.3086 | [email protected]
Contract Amount $299,000
Project Dates November 2018 – March 2022
Team Members Garth Schultz, Claire Wilson
Exhibit A-1

400

6. QUALIFICATIONS & REFERENCES
City of Richmond | Solid Waste Collection Franchise Agreement 13 City of Santa Clarita | Franchise Agreement Negotiations & Rate Review R3 was engaged by the City to provide an analysis of its exclusive Franchise Agreements (Agreements) for solid waste residential and commercial service with Waste Management (WM) and Burrtec Waste Industries Inc. (Burrtec), which are set to expire in 2023. R3 also prepared a comparative rate and services analysis of surrounding market conditions. One objective of this analysis was to determine the key negotiation points to consider during discussions with WM and Burrtec regarding contract terms, extensions, and/or amendments. Our team comprehensively reviewed the City’s existing Agreements, including amendments, and provided recommendations for contract enhancements that address the City’s goals and state legislative requirements including SB 1383, AB 1826, AB 939, and the China National Sword.

R3 is now also engaged by the City to conduct a competitive procurement RFP process, which is currently underway. R3 developed the RFP document and associated collection agreement and will be assisting the City with the next steps of proposal review and evaluation, interviews and negotiations, and ultimately recommendation of contract award.

R3 addressed the following in our review of the City’s existing Agreements:

1. Adequacy of City’s solid waste collection
programs and services.

2. Performance standards and operational
requirements.

3. Current and future compliance and
reporting requirements related to state
legislative mandates.

4. Addition of street-sweeping services.

5. Rate-setting methodology and
adjustments for changes in recyclable
markets and organics processing.

6. Establishment of realistic and verifiable
diversion requirements.

7. Outreach and education programs.

8. Customer service practices/
liquidated damages.

9. Disposal and processing facilities
available currently and long term.

10. Hauler reporting requirements.

11. Term and extension provisions.

12. Contamination and overage
protocols.

13. Vehicle and container replacement
practice.

Project Benefits
» Positioned City for better long-term solid waste contracts by providing recommendations for contract enhancements that address the City’s goals, state mandates, new technologies and trends, and cost impacts; and » Facilitated necessary compensation adjustments with Burrtec by providing neutral third-party review of Burrtec’s extraordinary rate adjustment request including underlying financial information.

Client Contact Mr. Curtis William, Administrative Assistant 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Santa Clarita, CA 91355
661.255.4308 | [email protected]
Contract Amount $204,409
Project Dates April 2021 – Current Ongoing Project
Team Members Garth Schultz, Carrie Baxter
Exhibit A-1

401

6. QUALIFICATIONS & REFERENCES
14 Zero Waste Marin | Zero Waste Strategic Planning & Organizational Assessment
R3 was recently selected by Zero Waste Marin to conduct an Organizational Assessment of the JPA and provide recommendations on Best Management Practices and agency design that will improve the JPA’s ability to support Marin’s efforts to reduce waste going to landfill; as well as a zero waste feasibility study update that identifies five short-list strategies and a roadmap toward implementation of those strategies.

Project tasks included the following:

1. Researched, analyzed, developed findings, and prepared recommendations regarding the JPA’s Board of Director’s structure and composition, including potential alternatives to current practices.

2. Researched, analyzed, developed findings and prepare recommendations for future JPA staffing, that would be necessary to implement potential future alternative JPA structure and/or composition (such as contract staffing, support costs, expanded program costs, etc.).

3. Researched, analyzed, and developed findings regarding per capita (and/or per ratepayer) funding levels for other similar (and/or model) solid waste and recycling joint powers authorities, including descriptions of zero waste achievement and programs and services provided by the comparison agencies.

4. Conducted workshops with the Executive Committee and/or Board on best management practices in other zero waste communities and similar joint powers authorities.

5. Used our expertise to provide advice and recommendations on possible updates the 1996 Joint Powers Agreement.

6. Mapped out the next steps the JPA could take to effectively move towards its zero waste goals and objectives, and identified five short-list zero waste strategies for implementation based upon updated waste and diversion modeling, stakeholder input, and best practices in zero waste.

Project Benefits
» Enhanced organizational effectiveness; and
» Improved zero waste programs.

Client Contact Ms. Liz Lewis, Former Interim Executive Director 1600 Los Gamos Drive, Suite 210, San Rafael, CA 94903
415.473.7226 | [email protected]
Contract Amount $149,775
Project Dates March 2020 – December 2021
Team Members Garth Schultz, Scott Hanin, Rose Radford, Carrie Baxter, Claire Wilson
Exhibit A-1

402

6. QUALIFICATIONS & REFERENCES
City of Richmond | Solid Waste Collection Franchise Agreement 15 RecycleMore | Planning Assistance for SB 1383 Organic Waste Reduction R3 recently led a team consisting of SCS Engineers, Abbe & Associates, and Cascadia Consulting Group to provide initial planning support for RecycleMore and its Member Agencies in implementing Senate Bill (SB) 1383.

Project tasks included the following:

1. Researched, analyzed, developed findings, and prepared recommendations regarding the JPA’s Board of Director’s structure and composition, including potential alternatives to current practices.

2. Analyzed current RecycleMore organics collection programs for all sectors, including processing, and determined adequacy to support compliance with SB 1383 requirements.

3. Provided an estimate of additional collection and/or processing capacity needed to achieve the SB 1383 requirements.

4. Analyzed existing RecycleMore program compliance requirements and new compliance requirements under SB 1383, consider the listed activities under all state mandates.

5. Provided recommendations for the most effective implementation of required activities, which include:
– Education and Outreach
– Inspection and Enforcement, including the assessment of penalties and contamination monitoring;
– Edible Food Recovery Programs
– Regulation of Self-Haul Sector
– Purchasing Policy Changes
– Municipal Code Updates
– Container Color and Labeling Requirements

6. Provide a recommendation and description for accurate record keeping and monitoring of recommended RecycleMore activities to determine their performance effectiveness and contribution to organics reduction.

Project Benefits
» Enhanced compliance with SB 1383; and
» Improved coordination on legislative compliance between RecycleMore and its Member Agencies.

Client Contact Mr. Peter Holtzclaw, Executive Director
3220 Blume Dr Suite 198, Richmond, CA 94806
510.215.3127 | [email protected]
Contract Amount $63,170
Project Dates April 2020 – Current Ongoing Project
Team Members Garth Schultz, Rose Radford, Claire Wilson Exhibit A-1

403

6. QUALIFICATIONS & REFERENCES
16 Envirolutions References
City of Alameda | Zero Waste Technical Assistance
Envirolutions is serving as a subcontractor to SCS Engineers on a contract to provide commercial and multifamily technical assistance to business and multifamily sites in the city of Alameda. The scope of the work includes visual waste audits, service level recommendations, technical assistance to property management to improve recycling participation and the rolling out of new recycling and organics collection services.

Envirolutions works hand-in-hand with the waste hauler Alameda County Industries (ACI) to provide seamless assistance, which includes, but is not limited to making recommendations for effective sorting systems within the facilities’ operations, helping to facilitate service level changes, and distributing outreach materials.

Client Contact Mr. Marc Green, Program Specialist II
950 W. Mall Square Alameda, CA 94501
510.298.2984 | [email protected]
Contract Amount $26,000, Annually, Allocated to Envirolutions Project Dates August 2018 – Current Ongoing Project
Team Members Juliana Gerber
San Mateo County | Bilingual Sustainability Workshops
Envirolutions staff Alejandra Warren co-developed and presented bilingual and culturally appropriate virtual workshops focused on sustainability issues such as composting, vermicomposting, gardening, and recycling for the San Mateo County Office of Sustainability. She provided translation and interpretation services for curriculum and outreach materials, led trainings on sustainability topics entirely in Spanish, and facilitated bilingual breakout groups which enriched the workshops she led with equity, inclusion and increased community participation.

Additionally, Alejandra was a guest lecturer for the Office of Sustainability’s Master of Resource Conservation Course, which is a 8-week long course offered to residents and businesses based in San Mateo County that covered multiple areas of sustainability including energy and water efficiency, waste management and recycling, food and food distribution systems, transportation alternatives, and open space management.

Client Contact Ms. Avana Andrade, Sustainability Specialist 455 County Center 4th Floor, Redwood City, CA 94063
970.566.1464 | [email protected]
Contract Amount $15,000-$19,000, Annually, Allocated to Envirolutions Project Dates 2019 – 2021
Team Members Alejandra Warren
Exhibit A-1

404

7. VALUE-ADDED SERVICES
City of Richmond | Solid Waste Collection Franchise Agreement 17

7. VALUE-ADDED SERVICES
R3 Value-Adds
Our team has been engaged to provide various services for the City and look forward to continuing our excellent work history with the City. R3 delivers expert industry analysis and recommendations to our clients, who always receive:
» Unbiased, conflict-free project management and objective, fair treatment:
— We have no entanglements with local districts, no hidden agendas, and no pre-ordained vendors. This translates to a high repeat customer rate and solid, respectful relationships with jurisdictions and haulers. — Extensive experience managing projects with multiple stakeholders, which includes planning realistic goals, schedules, and budgets, effectively communicating with all key players, working collaboratively to achieve objectives and stay responsive, and streamlining processes. » Data-driven, money-saving solutions and clear deliverables:
— Best-approach, honest recommendations to the City’s contractual needs, derived from decades of solid waste consulting experience and analysis of client data.
— Focus on improving safety and customer service, increasing productivity, and reducing costs.
— Fair, affordable rates and clearly-defined deliverables – no overages. » Comprehensive, up-to-the-minute understanding of industry regulations:
— Principals and key staff have superior knowledge base from over decades of hands-on industry and legislative compliance experience. » Reliable Team Support:
— We will be an extension of the City’s team, working side-by-side to advise and guide, keep all stakeholders up-to-date, and move the project smoothly forward.

Envirolutions Value-Adds
» Native Spanish speaker Outreach Director, Alejandra Warren, brings a specialized focus on the cultural, socio-economic aspects of waste management and the importance of directly addressing the necessity for multi-focused solid waste service programs;
» Envirolutions is a woman-owned, locally-operated, small business; » Established experience working in and with culturally diverse communities throughout the Bay Area.

Exhibit A-1

405
In an effort to reduce paper usage, this page has been
left blank for double-sided printing purposes.

If printing, please consider using 100% recycled paper.

Exhibit A-1

406

9. EXCEPTIONS TO THIS RFQ 10. STATEMENT OF IMPARTIALITY & DISCLOSURE 8. CONTRACTOR ASSIGNMENT OF SUB-CONTRACT City of Richmond | Solid Waste Collection Franchise Agreement 19

8. CONTRACTOR ASSIGNMENT OF SUB-CONTRACT
R3 ensures that the resulting contract shall not be assigned, transferred, or sublet, in whole or in part, without the prior written approval of the City of Richmond. We intend to subcontract a portion of the resulting contract to Envirolutions. R3 and Envirolutions have complementary industry experience and expertise. Both R3 and Envirolutions have profound knowledge of statewide solid waste and recycling issues, including infrastructure, regulatory requirements, and available resources.

The quality control measures R3 will employ to ensure that Envirolutions complies with the provisions of our potential contract with the City include:
• Developing a project matrix to track and manage project progress, including tasks and subtasks, the assigned primary staff, and supporting Quality Assurance/ Quality Control (QA/QC) staff.
• Maintaining work papers that catalog supporting documentation for all analysis, “ticked and tied” to the project findings, as appropriate. • Assigning senior R3 staff to be responsible for providing critical review and final quality assurance of all project deliverables.
• Including unlimited virtual meetings to clarify and develop a strong understanding of the information we receive from our clients.
• Building opportunities for client feedback throughout our work scope, scheduling regular conference calls with client project staff to strategize, discuss project progress, and proactively resolve any issues that may arise.

R3 takes no exception(s) to this RFQ, including but not limited to the City of Richmond’s Standard Services Agreement.

9. EXCEPTIONS TO THIS RFQ

10. IMPARTIALITY & DISCLOSURE
Confirmation
Neither R3 nor Envirolutions staff are currently participating and will not, during the performance of these services, participate in any other similar work involving a third-party with interests currently in conflict or likely to conflict with the City’s interests.

Exhibit A-1

407
In an effort to reduce paper usage, this page has been
left blank for double-sided printing purposes.

If printing, please consider using 100% recycled paper.

Exhibit A-1

408

APPENDIX
City of Richmond | Solid Waste Collection Franchise Agreement per RFQ, not included in page count

APPENDIX
Table of Contents
Resumes of Project Team
Sanctuary City Compliance Statement
Sub-Consultant Letter of Commitment
R3 Team, 2021 Holiday Gathering
Exhibit A-1

409

APPENDIX
per RFQ, not included in page count
Garth Schultz
Principal
About
Garth Schultz brings 18 years of solid waste management experience in both the private and public sectors. His areas of expertise include managing or assisting with sole source and competitive procurement of collection, materials processing, and transfer and landfill services.

Garth has participated in crafting Request for Proposal (RFP) documents and detailed Agreements that incorporate state legislative requirements, performance incentives, and rate-adjustment guidelines involving various profit bases. He has also evaluated proposals, prepared and presented award recommendations, and assisted with contract negotiations.

Other areas of solid waste industry experience include: developing strategic Zero Waste and high-diversion plans; modeling, reviewing, and restructuring rates; reviewing hauler operations and performance; reviewing solid waste programs and providing recommendations for improvement; and engaging stakeholders and communities through workshops and outreach planning.

Education
» Master of Public Administration and Public Policy Development, Cal State East Bay » Bachelor of Science in Environmental Science and Minor in Public Policy, University of California, Berkeley » Illegal Dumping Grant and Litter Fee Study | City of Richmond Principal, led prior engagements working with the City, including pro bono work that resulted in award of a $500,000 competitive CalRecycle Grant to combat illegal dumping in the City and the development of a Litter Fee Study that resulted in the City adopting new franchise fee funding. Together, these efforts provided millions of dollars of City revenues for important programs and services benefiting the Richmond community. » Franchise Extension Negotiations | City of Healdsburg Principal, recently led the negotiation process to extend, amend, and restate the City’s franchise agreement with their service provider (Recology Sonoma Marin). Garth and other members of the R3 team identified, redrafted, and negotiated agreement terms and conditions that required updating, while also reviewing and negotiating around several iterations of financial proposals from Recology.
» Procurement and Negotiation Assistance | City of Santa Clara Principal, recently led negotiations for the City of Santa Clara for the City’s future exclusive Agreements with Recology South Bay (Recology) and Mission Trail Waste Systems, including a rate study to help the City establish customer rates for services to be provided under the new Agreements. The new Agreements are designed to achieve the City’s objectives, including compliance with applicable state legislation, and the City’s long-term financial and diversion goals. » Procurement and Negotiation Assistance | Cities of: Piedmont, Half Moon Bay, Santa Rosa, Los Altos Principal, managed R3’s work with the City of Piedmont to pursue a negotiated franchise extension with the City’s franchised hauler, and previously assisted with the procurement processes for the cities of Half Moon Bay and Santa Rosa. » Procurement and Negotiation Assistance | RecycleMore and the Cities of Milpitas, Petaluma, Santa Rosa Principal, played a key support role in evaluating post-collection services alternatives for RecycleMore member agencies (Contra Costa County and the cities of El Cerrito, Hercules, Pinole, Richmond, and San Pablo). He also led transition assistance for the City of Milpitas when they switched to a new franchised hauler for solid waste collection. On behalf of the City of Petaluma, he assisted in R3’s extensive review of the proposed assignment of multiple collection, processing, transfer, and other contracts from The Ratto Group (TRG) to Recology Sonoma Marin (Recology) for jurisdictions throughout the counties of Marin and Sonoma.
» High Diversion Implementation Plan | City of Los Altos Principal, recently led the development of the City’s High Diversion Implementation Plan, assisting in developing recommendations for the City’s hauler to meet its 78% diversion requirement and AB 1826 legislative requirements, such as advocating mixed-waste processing to remove organics and recyclables from commercial and multi-family waste streams.

He has assisted numerous cities in other similar projects, updating Municipal Codes to incorporate current state regulatory requirements for clients.
» Environmental Services Management | City of El Cerrito* Lead Negotiator, from 2006 to 2014, Garth worked for the City of El Cerrito in all aspects of solid waste management and recycling. During his tenure with the City, Garth worked collaboratively with City of Richmond staff on a variety of matters, including collaboration on RecycleMore’s post-collection agreement with Republic Services, supporting the development and initiation of green waste composting at the closed West Contra Costa County Landfill.

Relevant Experience
Resumes of Project Team
Exhibit A-1

410

APPENDIX
City of Richmond | Solid Waste Collection Franchise Agreement per RFQ, not included in page count Scott Hanin
Sr. Project Director
About
Scott Hanin has more than 30 years of solid waste experience, including serving as the Executive Director of the West Contra Costa Integrated Waste Management Authority (WCCIWMA). Scott was also City Manager for the City of El Cerrito for 17 years, a member agency of the WCCIWMA. Scott oversaw all aspects of city government including budget development, strategic planning, community engagement, organizational development and restructuring, capital projects, legislative compliance, and oversight of all department heads.

He conducted multiple operational reviews of the City’s solid waste and recycling operations, which led to numerous changes in program operations including the design and construction of the City’s award-winning drop-off center. Throughout his career Scott has worked with dozens of local governments on the review and development of modern solid waste agreements.

Now in his work with R3, Scott is currently assisting Zero Waste Marin in an organizational review of the agency. He recently managed a debt financing study as a subcontractor to R3 for Zero Waste Sonoma. Prior to moving to California, Scott oversaw performance and evaluations of the operations of the New York City Department of Sanitation in his role in the Mayor’s Office of Operations.

Education
» Master of Public Administration, New York University
» Bachelor of Arts in Political Science, University of Delaware » Executive Certification in Public Administration, UC Berkeley » Review of Franchise Assignment | City of Milpitas
Project Director, performed a detailed review of the qualifications of Waste Connections as it relates to a potential assignment of the franchise agreement from Milpitas Sanitation. » Review of Organizational Structure | Zero Waste Marin Project Director, performed an analysis of the organizational structure of the JPA and provided recommendations for improvements to staffing model through changes in governance, wages and benefits. Compared responsibilities and services with that of similar JPAs. Wrote report of findings and presented recommendations to staff and Board Members. » Development of Debt Service Strategy | Zero Waste Sonoma Project Director, developed a financial plan and strategy to help the JPA evaluate debt service alternatives for the development and acquisition of land for new facilities. This included a schedule as well as rate impacts including drafting of the staff reports for the Board.
» Assistance with Disposal Agreement Negotiations | City of Los Altos Project Support, currently working with the City to negotiate a new disposal agreement with Republic Industries in an effort to ensure disposal capacity, increased diversion and rate stability. » Prop 218 Detailed Rate Review of Recology’s Rates | Zero Waste Sonoma Project Manager, currently leading the effort to evaluate the financial impact of adding collection service to current accounts that self-haul their waste because of legislation requiring mandatory service for all properties. Also, managing a detailed rate review of the County areas, including the impact of additional programs related to SB 1383. Scott is also leading the overall project efforts to meet Zero Waste Sonoma’s expectations of mandatory subscription to organics and solid waste collection service per SB 1383.
» Negotiation Assistance | City of Westlake Village
Project Support, currently working with the City to assist in negotiation of a new collection agreement and developing support for city fees that will comply with Proposition 218. He is conducting an analysis of the City’s solid waste collection system in relation to Waste Management’s requested term extension for meeting regulatory requirements. » Assistance with Agreement Assignment | Novato Sanitary District Project Support, currently working with the District to evaluate the possible assignment of the current collection franchise from the sanitary district to the City. Coordinating the assignment with all of the stakeholders including the Sanitary District, City, LAFCO and the hauler. The franchise agreement between Novato Sanitary District and Recology covers both the entirety of the City of Novato, and some parts of Unincorporated Marin County. The agreement was executed in May 2011, and was set to expire on December 31, 2025; however, the assignment provision of the Collections Agreement triggered at the time of Recology’s assignment of the agreement and will now expire on the date of the assignment in 2024.

Relevant Experience
Exhibit A-1

411

APPENDIX
per RFQ, not included in page count
Rose Radford
Sr. Project Manager
About
Rose Radford has accumulated valuable experience in environmental consulting, research, policy, and data analysis. With her strong background in research and technical writing, Rose has provided valuable support for procurement of solid waste collection services by writing high-diversion collection service and processing/disposal agreements, conducting extensive surveys, and coordinating clear communications between clients and proposers.

Her other areas of expertise include: solid waste management planning and program development; operations, programs, and facility reviews; Municipal Code analysis and revision; researching and compiling data; operational and performance reviews of haulers; field studies and survey coordination; and financial planning, including rate modeling, rate studies and rate reviews.

Education
» Master of Public Administration in Environmental Science and Policy; Columbia University » Bachelor of Science in Conservation and Resource Studies; University of California, Berkeley » Construction and Demolition Facility Evaluator; Recycling Certification Institute Relevant Experience
» Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 5-Year Review | City of Richmond Project Manager, engaged to conduct the City’s 5-Year Review of Republic Services’ CUP for the West Contra Costa Sanitary Landfill Bulk Materials Processing Center (inclusive of Golden Bear Transfer Station and associated solid waste facilities). Rose led the evaluation and verification of Republic’s compliance with the CUP performance requirements during the period. She then assisted the City in drafting and negotiating changes to the CUP and a staff report to the Planning Commission, which included the recommendation to conduct ongoing monitoring for the period of one additional year.

The additional year of monitoring is complete and Republic was found to be substantially in compliance with the City’s requirements. Rose is currently engaged by the City to conduct ongoing monitoring of Republic’s compliance. » Planning Assistance in Response to SB 1383 Organic Waste Reduction Mandates | RecycleMore Project Manager, evaluated the JPA and its Member Agencies’ preparedness for SB 1383 by engaging with JPA and Member Agency staff as well as hauler representatives, providing specific guidance on areas of particular concern, recommending responsible entities for each requirement, and assisting in the first stages of implementation. Currently, Rose is reviewing draft municipal code updates to be provided by RecycleMore to Member Agencies for their consideration. » Negotiation and Procurement Assistance | Town of Atherton Project Analyst, currently providing procurement assistance services for the Town of Atherton (Town), evaluating and determining their best option for solid waste collection, recycling, processing, and disposal services. The Town currently has a Franchise Agreement with their hauler that expires in December 2020. R3 is assisting with identifying and documenting known current services and costs for those services provided to the Town by Recology and SBWMA and evaluating the Town’s options for securing a different service provider for collection services only, and for collections, recycling, processing and disposal services together.
» Contract Extension Negotiations | City of Los Altos
Project Manager, recently assisted Garth Schultz in contract extension negotiations with the franchised hauler on behalf of the City of Los Altos (City). Rose completed the City’s SB 1383 readiness analysis, identifying key contract terms to include in the extension negotiations, drafted the proposed contract language, and negotiated key outcomes identified by the City as priorities. The extension negotiations resulted in a franchise agreement that was SB 1383-ready, including universal roll-out of organics service to all businesses in the City, and a 20% reduction in the rate increase originally proposed by the hauler. » Solid Waste Hauler Procurement | City of Piedmont
Project Manager, she was instrumental in each step of the City of Piedmont’s recent procurement assistance project for solid waste collection services, participating in community engagement processes, incorporating requests from City Council, and writing both the RFP and the base contract used in the procurement. » Organics Processing Procurement Assistance | Zero Waste Sonoma (formerly Sonoma County Waste Management) Project Manager, assisted incorporated key recommendations and findings about organics material processing in the County of Sonoma to compile a Request for Information, which was followed by a full procurement process for Zero Waste Sonoma. As part of this process, she drafted and revised the RFP document and its attachments, participated in facilitating community workshops, and drafted the two high-diversion and high-performance base contracts for use by the Agency and its selected contractors. She assisted in the technical evaluation of the submitted proposals, including an evaluation of the proposed site location, capacity, pricing, and other issues of concern to the agency.

Exhibit A-1

412
Carrie Baxter
Sr. Project Manager
About
Carrie Baxter has over a decade of experience in solid waste consulting, in a broad range of operational, planning, and financial projects. She specializes in providing legislative compliance assistance to local jurisdictions for implementing or expanding programs related to organic material collection, tracking, and infrastructure development, as well as assisting in negotiating improvements and best practices into municipal codes and collection agreements.

Carrie also has significant experience with competitive procurement projects for solid waste management services, including providing financial analysis services, such as studying rates and how to incentivize diversion, and engaging the community and stakeholders. In addition, Carrie routinely supports operations and performance reviews, evaluating billing and reporting systems and conducting on-site route audits, conducting comprehensive benchmarking and rate surveys, and creating disaster debris management plans for various cities in California.

Education & Achievements
» Bachelor of Science in Organization, Leadership & Management: University of San Francisco » Ms. Baxter authored an article in the March/April 2019 BioCycle Magazine » Presented at the 2019 BioCycle West Coast Conference; the 2019 CRRA Conference on Rate Setting for Organics Diversion; and the 2018 CRRA Conference on Disaster Planning

APPENDIX
City of Richmond | Solid Waste Collection Franchise Agreement per RFQ, not included in page count Relevant Experience
» Procurement and Negotiation Assistance | Cities of: El Cajon, Banning, Eastvale, San Juan Capistrano, Fairfield, Santa Clara, Santa Clarita, Irwindale, and Vallejo, and CalPoly Pomona Project Manager, Carrie used her particular expertise in reviewing Agreements and recommending updates and revisions to contract language to incorporate legislative requirements and improve the efficiency, safety, and overall cost-effectiveness of existing operations.
» Procurement and Negotiation Assistance | County of Nevada Lead Analyst, served as the Lead Analyst for the negotiation of the County’s collection and transfer operation services.

Through this process, she analyzed Waste Management’s current diversion, compared customer rates and services to jurisdictions in the surrounding region, and analyzed the cost of needed renovations and improvements. » Procurement and Negotiation Assistance | City of Rolling Hills Estates Lead Analyst, recently assisted in the negotiations with the City of Rolling Hills Estates and their hauler, designing the new Agreement to assist the City in complying with state legislation and improve Waste Management’s public education and reporting, while maintaining current service levels. » Procurement and Negotiation Assistance | City of Half Moon Bay Lead Analyst, through the recent procurement process for solid waste collection services with the City, Ms. Baxter assisted in evaluating proposals, conducted site visits of the proposed facilities, assisted with negotiations, and prepared a final staff report to present the results and recommendations to City Council. As a result of negotiations, Ms. Baxter identified capital needs and operational efficiencies to help reduce operational costs, implemented new diversion programs (green and curbside recycling, residential and commercial food scrap collection), and increased diversion requirements due to analysis of surrounding jurisdictions. » Procurement and Negotiation Assistance | Zero Waste Sonoma Lead Analyst, assisted Zero Waste Sonoma in obtaining two short-term processing facility Agreements, and is currently providing on-call assistance in the finalization of one long-term processing facility Agreement to provide for organics processing capacity throughout the Sonoma County region. She also recently participated in the negotiation assistance for the nearby cities of Shafter and Rohnert Park and the Town of Windsor. » Solid Waste Franchise Review | Recology Sonoma Marin
Lead Analyst, reviewed the proposed assignment of solid waste franchise and other Agreements held by The Ratto Group (TRG) to Recology Sonoma Marin (Recology) for the cities of Cloverdale, Cotati, Healdsburg, Petaluma, Rohnert Park, Santa Rosa, Sebastopol, Sonoma County, Marin County, Novato Sanitary District, and Zero Waste Sonoma (Agencies). Specifically, she led the review of services and other requirements in the Agreements to assist the agencies in determining Recology’s operational and financial ability to perform the activities covered under the Agreements. She presented the findings in a final report to the affected Agencies and at several City Council meetings.

Exhibit A-1

413

APPENDIX
per RFQ, not included in page count
Claire Wilson
Project Manager
About
Claire Wilson combines her background in environmental science and ecology with her experience in research and data analysis to work with local governments in reducing and better managing their waste streams. She has a strong background in legislative compliance and community outreach and education, and her expertise is centered around policy development, state law compliance, and solid waste agreement negotiations. She is experienced in Zero Waste and high diversion planning and implementation, specializes in community and stakeholder engagement strategies, and has worked with jurisdictions to develop innovative methodologies to approach Zero Waste and comply with State legislation, including AB 341, 1828, and SB 1383. To date, Claire has helped 75+ clients manage their hauler contracts, achieve compliance with State and local legislation, and implement new and exciting policies and programs around reuse, foodware, edible food recovery, and zero waste. She has also drafted municipal ordinances to update and clearly define diversion goals, state requirements, as well as codify such requirements in solid waste franchise agreements.

Education
» Bachelor of Science in Environmental Studies - University of California, Santa Barbara » Zero Waste Community Associate Certification - Zero Waste USA » 2019 Young Professionals Scholarship Recipient - California Resource Recovery Association Relevant Experience
» Legislative Compliance Assistance | RecycleMore (West Contra Costa Integrated Waste Management Authority) Project Support, authored the Inspection and Enforcement analysis for RecycleMore as a part of our SB 1383 planning effort, and attended meetings with agency staff to identify implementation steps for SB 1383 compliance. She conducted outreach and community engagement by notifying covered and non-compliant customers under AB 1826 and AB 341. She contacted over 200 customers and conducted site visits to educate business owners and determine their next steps. » Planning Assistance in Response to SB 1383 Organic Waste Reduction Mandates | RecycleMore Project Analyst, provided initial planning support for RecycleMore in implementing SB 1383. She analyzed current organics collection programs for all sectors, including processing, and determined adequacy to support compliance with SB 1383 and provided an estimate of additional collection and/or processing capacity needed. Additionally, she analyzed existing program compliance and new compliance requirements and provided recommendations for the most effective implementation. » Solid Waste Collection & Street Sweeping Procurement Services | City of Thousand Oaks Lead Analyst, currently serving as the Lead Analyst with the City in drafting the City’s new collection services agreement, and was a member of the selection team in the RFP process. She assisted in evaluating proposals and scoring, and finalizing the City’s franchise agreement.
» Solid Waste Organic Program Review | City of Riverside Project Analyst, recommended modifications and updates to the City’s existing program in support of state requirements for recycling and organics diversion, such as AB 341, AB 1826, SB 1383 and AB 1594. Also developed AB 1826 compliance plan for submission to CalRecycle.
» SB 1383 Compliance Plan | City of Vallejo
Project Analyst, developed a corrective action plan to achieve AB 1826 compliance, including exemption forms, compliance letters, tracking sheets, and scripts; and a clear action plan that identified responsible entities and actions to be taken, and Municipal Code updates for mandatory organics collection. » SB 1383 Organics Waste Reduction and Recycling Program | Ventura County Lead Analyst, currently evaluating the County’s franchise agreements, determining compliance with State Laws including SB 1383, analyzing and making recommendations around the Compost Materials Handling Facility Agreement, revising and drafting a compliant SB 1383 solid waste ordinance and construction and demolition ordinance, facilitating stakeholder engagement to inform future decisions around solid waste collection in the County. » SB 1383 (Organics) Rate Survey | CalRecycle (Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery) Project Analyst, provided research assistance on SB 1383 implementation, including compilation of data on rate structures, infrastructure development, and compost facility capacity for jurisdictions/haulers throughout California. » Food Recovery Program Strategic Plan | Alameda County Community Food Bank Project Analyst, developed a strategic plan for increasing food recovery and distribution efficiencies as well as funding strategies to meet the requirements of SB 1383. Identified food generators and modeled the amount of food that must be recovered to meet the State’s goal.

Exhibit A-1

414

APPENDIX
City of Richmond | Solid Waste Collection Franchise Agreement per RFQ, not included in page count Juliana Gerber is an environmental consultant with
7 years of direct experience in planning and
implementing recycling and zero waste projects. Her
expertise includes working on projects in the public and private sectors, and with agencies such as the cities of Piedmont, Alameda, Sausalito, as well as Zero Waste
Marin, StopWaste and RecycleSmart. Her work on these
projects primarily included project management for
accessible outreach and education programs,
conducting surveys, performing waste audits, and
providing technical assistance to property managers in
the commercial and multifamily sectors to assist with AB 341, AB 1826, and SB 1383 compliance as well as any
local ordinances. A focus on building outreach that is
accessible to all stakeholders is a priority.

Juliana was promoted to serve as the Associate Director of the Bay Area Woman-Owned firm, Envirolutions, LLC in 2021 after 6 years working with the firm. Envirolutions specializes in designing and implementing zero waste,
recycling and sustainability projects, assisting
restaurants, hotels, multi-tenant commercial complexes
and multifamily dwellings in implementing effective
waste diversion programs. This has included conducting
waste audits, hosting staff and management training,
and recommending service level changes.

Juliana also currently serves as the Financial
Coordinator for the Berkeley-based non-profit Northern
California Recycling Association (NCRA). Juliana started her environmental career in 2005 at Edgar & Associates
in Sacramento, a regulatory environmental compliance
engineering firm, where she managed day-to-day
operations of the business, as well as studied legislation, edited various studies and permitting plans, and
performed all executive assistant duties for the firm.

Exhibit A-1

415

APPENDIX
per RFQ, not included in page count
Alejandrƾ WarreǏ is a sustainability consultant
and intersectional environmentalist working on
diverse Zero Waste, resource conservation and
environmental justice projects across the Bay Area.

She co-led efforts to pass the first single-use plastic ban in San Mateo County in 2018 and co-founded
Plastic Free Future in 2020 a California non-profit
organization dedicated to the reduction and
elimination of plastic pollution through promoting
reusable alternatives and focusing on education to
underserved communities. Alejandra currently
works on multilingual outreach and technical
assistance to businesses adopting new foodware
ordinances and compliance with SB1383.

As Outreach Director with Envirolutions Consulting
she has managed and supported projects for
Salesforce, San Francisco Environment, the Sausalito
Sustainability Commission, the Office of
Sustainability of San Mateo County and more.

Through her work with Plastic Free Future, Alejandra
develops and implements innovative, culturally
appropriate programs, webinars and tabling events
to reach out to unattended communities. Alejandra
proudly taps into her Indigenous/Latinx roots to
enrich her work and interactions with people and
nature.

Exhibit A-1

416

APPENDIX
City of Richmond | Solid Waste Collection Franchise Agreement per RFQ, not included in page count

CITY OF RICHMOND
Sanctuary City Compliance Statement
The undersigned, an authorized agent of R3 Consulting Group Inc. (hereafter "Contractor"), has had an opportunity to review the requirements of City of Richmond Ordinance 12-18 (hereafter "Sanctuary City Contracting Ordinance" or “SCCO”).

Contractor understands and agrees that the City may choose with whom it will maintain business relations and may refrain from contracting with any person or entity that provides Data Broker or Extreme Vetting services to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Division of the United States Department of Homeland Security (“ICE”). Contractor understands the meaning of the following terms used in the SCCO:
a. "Data Broker” means either of the following:
i. The collection of information, including personal information about consumers, from a wide variety of sources for the purposes of reselling such information to their customers, which include both private-sector business and government agencies; ii. The aggregation of data that was collected for another purpose from that for which it is ultimately used.
b. “Extreme Vetting” means data mining, threat modeling, predictive risk analysis, or other similar services."
Contractor understands that it is not eligible to receive or retain a City contract if at the time the Contract is executed, or at any time during the term of the Contract, it provides Data Broker or Extreme Vetting services to ICE.

Contractor further understands and agrees that Contractor's failure to comply with the SCCO shall constitute a material default of the Contract and the City Manager may terminate the Contract and bar Contractor from bidding on future contracts with the City for five (5) years from the effective date of the contract termination.

By executing this Statement, Contractor certifies that it complies with the requirements of the SCCO and that if at any time during the term of the Contract it ceases to comply, Contractor will promptly notify the City Manager in writing. Any person or entity who knowingly or willingly supplies false information in violation of the SCCO shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and subject to a $1,000 fine.

Based on the foregoing, the undersigned declares under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed this 2 day of March, 2022 , at Albany, California.

Printed Name: Garth Schultz Title: President
Signed: Date: March 2, 2022
Business Entity: R3 Consulting Group Inc., a California S Corporation Vendor SCCO Compliance Statement (Augt2020)
Sanctuary City Compliance Statement
Exhibit A-1

417

APPENDIX
City of Richmond | Solid Waste Collection Franchise Agreement 11 R3 Consulting Group
1512 Eureka Rd STE 220
Roseville, CA 95661
RE: Subconsultant Letter of Commitment
Dear Ms Peggy Paulsen:

This letter serves as a commitment for services and budget quote for subcontracting services related to the proposal, CONSULTING SERVICES RELATED TO THE CITY OF RICHMOND’S SOLID WASTE COLLECTION FRANCHISE AGREEMENT. Costs include Envirolutions time and services to perform the following:

Task Task Description Budget
1: Project
Design
* Involve City management, business associations, community leaders, and civic organizations for their assistance in designing an inclusive process for community engagement * Inform key stakeholders of the process and integrate their feedback into project design * Design survey questions and the process for data collection and analysis * Determine indicators for program success
* Secure any necessary equipment and/or printed materials $ 6,600
2: Community
Engagement
* Execute an innovative, and accessible multilingual community engagement process including stakeholders such as community organizations, civic groups, neighborhood councils, low-income housing service providers and faith leaders
* Conduct surveys through community meetings, town hall gatherings, tabling, workshops, webinars, and other methods of outreach
$ 15,400
3: Engage
Business and
Property
Management
Associations
* Include the perspective of the business community by reaching out to local businesses associations, property management associations, Homeowners Associations (HOAs), the Chamber of Commerce and other local trade organizations
* These groups will similarly be engaged through conducting surveys during meetings, webinars, workshops and other methods of outreach
$ 9,900
4: Data
Compilation
* Synthesizing data to decipher trends and outcomes once all surveying and data collection has been completed
* Transform data into graphs and slides that can be shared with project funders to present results $ 4,400
5: Reporting * Incorporate results into the final report for the project $ 3,300 6: Materials
and travel * Placeholder budget for any printed materials needed and for mileage to and from outreach events $ 800 Total Estimated Budget $ 40,400
By submission of this commitment letter, Envirolutions certifies that the information submitted within the application is true, complete and accurate to the best of our knowledge. If you have any questions, please contact the undersigned.

Regards,
Juliana Gerber
6/13/2022
Associate Director, Envirolutions LLC
[email protected] l (916) 519-9212
Sub-Consultant Letter of Commitment
Exhibit A-1

418
1512 Eureka Road, Suite 220, Roseville CA 95661 | p 916.782.7821 | f 916.782.7824 | www.r3cgi.com June 30, 2023
Ms. Shasa Curl, City Manager
City of Richmond
450 Civic Center Plaza
Richmond, CA 94804
submitted via email to: [email protected]
SUBJECT: Solid Waste Collection Agreements RFP - R3 Part B Proposal Dear Ms. Curl,
R3 Consulting Group, Inc. (R3) is pleased to submit the attached proposal to express our interest in providing the Cities of Richmond and San Pablo (Cities) with consulting services for a competitive RFP to secure new solid waste collection agreements.

Introduction
Our team is uniquely qualified to provide the requested services to the Cities, in that we have the ability to leverage our current work efforts with multiple jurisdictions throughout the State. Most recently, for the City of Rosemead, R3 led the team in procuring new solid waste collection services through a competitive process - yielding unanimous City Council approval of the new Agreement, which has a focus on compliant organic collection programs.

R3 is at the forefront of SB 1383 compliance planning and implementation - we have been actively tracking the development of the regulations and have participated in the SB 1383 rule-making process through its finalization. SB 1383 has complex requirements, which affects many aspects of solid waste collection and post-collection systems.

Project Team
Garth Schultz, Principal, will serve as Project Lead and primary point of contact. Scott Hanin, Rose Radford, Paulina Benner, Claire Wilson, Sarah Koplowicz and Maryann Hulsman will provide direct support. Our team also has the ability to draw upon additional staff members on an as-needed basis.

Throughout this engagement, we will work with the Cities to establish a coordinated approach, thus facilitating a cost-effective and smooth transition into implementation for the Cities, the selected hauler(s), and, of course, for your solid waste customers.
* * * * *
We are excited about this opportunity to work with the Cities in this engagement. Should you have questions regarding our proposal or need additional information, please reach out to me directly.

Sincerely,
Garth Schultz | Principal
R3 Consulting Group, Inc.
510.292.0853 | [email protected]
Exhibit A-1

419
Cities of Richmond and San Pablo | Solid Waste Collection Agreements TOC

1. Scope of Work
page 1

2. Qualifications
page 6

3. Cost Proposal
page 8

TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS
Exhibit A-1

420
Cities of Richmond and San Pablo | Solid Waste Collection Agreements 1

1. Part B SCOPE OF WORK
Because R3 primarily provides services to public agencies, our clients receive unbiased opinions and recommendations throughout the negotiation and/or procurement process. We maintain excellent professional working relationships and have no conflicts of interest with landfill and facility operators or haulers. R3 staff have heard directly from many of the companies that they appreciate our knowledge and non-confrontational style in achieving successful outcomes for all parties.

More specifically, we understand what information these solid waste, recycling and organics collection companies will need to provide, how they can best provide that information, and can further anticipate and address business interest concerns that may arise during the procurement process. Our approach to working with solid waste, recycling and organics collection companies is to be direct, respectful of their time and effort, and help them prepare the best possible proposal for the consideration by the Cities.

This approach helps remove barriers to hauler cooperation with negotiating final terms of a new agreement, minimizes the number of information requests to haulers, and provide for cost-effective completion of the project without the need for intensive City staff involvement. Our focus on providing services exclusively to public agencies helps ensure that the Cities’ best interests are represented.

Solid waste consulting firms who provide services to haulers/solid waste operators cannot provide this same level of protection. This vulnerability can result in an apparent – if not actual – conflict of interest, and in turn, limits the success of the project. Unlike our competitors, R3 has the staffing backgrounds from public agencies, solid waste firms, policy and financial companies, all of whom can aid the engagement as needed.

Project Approach
Our approach to conducting procurement projects is structured and orderly and follows a well-tested methodology. R3 will prepare a draft franchise agreement for the Cities. The draft agreement will be included as part of the RFP packet that R3 develops. Proposers will be required to identify exceptions they take to the draft language and offer acceptable alternative language for the Cities’ consideration. The Cities will not however be required to accept any proposed exception.

R3 will also provide the following services as part of the procurement process:
› Develop a list of haulers to receive the RFP.
› Conduct a pre-proposal Zoom meeting with potential proposers. › Prepare written responses to questions submitted regarding the RFP and preparing addenda as necessary.
› Evaluate proposals and work with but not necessarily be part of the Evaluation Team. › Manage and facilitate interviews with proposers, if needed. › Conduct negotiation sessions.
› Prepare staff reports and presentations.
› Finalize the franchise agreement(s).
› Present recommendations to the City Councils.

Scope of Work Part B
Kick-Off Meeting
Upon authorization to proceed, R3 will facilitate a kick-off meeting with staff from the Cities. The meeting will provide an opportunity to review the project objectives, R3’s project approach, schedule, and data availability. The kick-off meeting will serve to set the expectations, project responsibilities, milestones and timeline for the Scope of Work and establish the best means for ongoing communication and collaboration between R3 and the Cities for the duration of this engagement.

1. SCOPE OF WORK
Exhibit A-1

421
Cities of Richmond and San Pablo | Solid Waste Collection Agreements 2 One item of importance for discussion during the kick-off meeting will be how R3 and the Cities’ staff will work collaboratively to ensure that this project provides the best possible outcomes for customers and ratepayers, while still achieving meaningful compliance with the law. Also, at this meeting or sooner, R3 will develop an information request from the Cities to ensure as much accurate and current information is shared with prospective proposers. After the kick-off meeting, R3 will provide meeting minutes including notes, schedule, and milestones. Ongoing coordination will continue throughout the project through virtual meetings.

To provide the most cost-effective services, we have budgeted for many meetings to be virtual, including regular check-in meetings with the Cities’ staff. This approach has proven to be very successful in other similar engagements. In person meetings are still beneficial for completing major milestones of the project.

Task B2 Technical Document Development and Presentations Task B2.1 Develop a New Solid Waste Franchise Agreement Using our experience bringing California municipalities into compliance with CalRecycle requirements, and with our understanding of recent state legislation, we will advise the Cities on the latest solid waste trends as it pertains to both franchised services and the Agreement development. This information will be discussed during our kick-off meeting, as well as in follow-up correspondence with the Cities. R3 will draft the new Agreement incorporating the information gathered in prior tasks. Because we are currently developing similar agreements for several clients, we can include the current industry standards and best practices for items such as performance bonds, indemnification, insurance, liquidated damages and reporting and record keeping requirements. The new Agreement will also include detailed performance requirements that establish minimum service standards for inclusion in the Agreement that are both quantifiable and easily measured to verify compliance Performance requirements may include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following:
› Disposal and processing facility requirements.
› Minimum waste diversion requirements.
› Collection vehicle emissions standards and requirements. › Collection vehicle weight, size, and noise limitations. › Specifications for container size, color, and labeling. › Public education program requirements (e.g., quarterly newsletter, annual campaigns, classroom presentations). › Collection and recycling services to the Cities’ offices, facilities, and events. › Collection service hours.
› Collection service quality standards.
› Collection driver uniforms and identification badges. › Customer service standards.

Task B2.2 Prepare Qualifications and Recommended Eligible Service Providers As part of the RFP Package, R3 will prepare minimum qualifications regarding each potential service provider’s capacity and capability to perform the requisite services during the contract term and any extension. These qualifications will be required to be submitted with the submittal of proposals from qualified collection contractors. R3 has an extensive list of solid waste companies operating in California and nationally and will provide a mailing list to the Cities for consideration when sending out the RFP package. R3 will work with the Cities to publicize the availability of the RFP package and work with staff to post the RFP on the Cities’ websites.

As part of this task, we will provide an electronic version of the draft minimum qualifications to the Cities for comments. At staff’s preference and in conjunction with our check in meetings, we will be available to meet with staff to address comments. Following discussion with the Cities and using a single compiled document with comments from the Cities, R3 will compile our final minimum qualifications for incorporation into the RFP Package.

Task B2.3 Prepare Criteria and Methodology to Evaluate Proposals R3 will prepare a written set of recommended evaluation criteria and a methodology for review and discussion with staff. In R3’s experience, the evaluation will include, but not be limited to, conducting an initial “pass-fail” review.

We will provide an electronic version of the draft criteria and methodology to evaluate proposals to the Cities for comments.

1. SCOPE OF WORK
Note:

Exhibit A-1

422
Cities of Richmond and San Pablo | Solid Waste Collection Agreements 3 At staff’s preference and in conjunction with our regular virtual check in meetings, we will be available to meet with staff to address comments. Following discussion with the Cities and using a single compiled document with comments from the Cities, R3 will compile our final criteria and methodology to evaluate proposals for incorporation into the RFP Package.

Task B2.4 Prepare RFP Package
Task B2.4.1 Prepare Request for Proposal (RFP) Package
R3 will develop an RFP package – this includes a draft RFP, a draft Solid Waste Agreement and cost forms for proposers to complete, and the evaluation criteria and methodology. The draft RFP will specify minimum requirements and qualifications and will require proposers to submit work plans that specify how they will transition to new services, achieve diversion requirements, implement customer service programs, and promote public education activities. The RFP package will include waste data (tonnage and current account data) previously collected in Task 1.

Separate sections of the RFP may include, for example:
› Section A: Introduction to the RFP, Instructions, Schedule, Procurement Goals and Objectives. › Section B: Available Background Information, Demographic, Service Account Data (i.e., tonnage, number of accounts, historical operating information, and current services). › Section C: Overview of Requested Service Requirements. › Section D: Response Format and Submittal Process, Qualification Requirements, Required Work Plans, and Proposed Rates.
— Transition Plan, detailing the plans and schedule of events leading up to the provision of new services. — Operations Plan, presenting specific collection and processing programs to be implemented in the Cities including vehicles, containers, route operations, facilities, safety, and reporting. — Customer Service Plan, detailing specifically customer service operations. — Diversion Plan, describing the diversion and sustainability programs associated with providing the requested services.
— Education and Outreach Plan, specifying methods and public education materials that will be used at program start-up and throughout the agreement term and any extensions. — Financial Services Plan, access to capital, current financial statements, balance sheet, profit and loss statement and debt.
— Proposal Cost and Service Forms, excel worksheets for proposers to provide their proposed customer rates and supporting cost data.
› Section E: Evaluation Selection Criteria and Evaluation Process. › Section F: RFP Conditions, Communication Protocol for Contractors and the Cities, and Proposal Cost and Service Forms.
› Attachment 1: Draft Solid Waste Agreement.

Task B2.4.2 Finalize and Issue RFP and Agreement
Following staff review, R3 will be available to meet with staff and the Cities’ legal counsels to address comments.

Based on Cities’ direction, R3 will finalize the RFP package and provide the Cities with an electronic copy which can be used to present to City Councils for review, if desired. Prior to issuance of the RFP, each City Council will have the opportunity to review and provide comments.

Task B2.4.3 Conduct a Mandatory Pre-Proposal Meeting and Prepare the RFP R3 will conduct a mandatory pre-proposal meeting with prospective proposers. The pre-proposal meeting will provide the opportunity for the Cities to review the RFP with prospective proposers and answer questions as appropriate.

We will prepare written responses to questions raised before and during the pre-proposal meeting for submittal to all parties that attended the meeting. In addition, R3 will prepare addenda to the RFP as necessary.

Task B2.5 Evaluate Proposals
R3 will assist the Cities with the evaluation of up to four proposals received in response to the RFP. The evaluation will include, but not be limited to, conducting an initial “pass-fail” checklist against RFP minimum requirements, and evaluating the proposers’ qualifications, references, processing and disposal facilities, approach to meeting diversion requirements, customer rates (prices), collection methods, customer service programs, financial statements, transition experience and work plans.

1. SCOPE OF WORK
Exhibit A-1

423
Cities of Richmond and San Pablo | Solid Waste Collection Agreements 4 After the initial evaluation is completed, we will prepare any written requests for clarification to the haulers, as necessary. In the event a proposal does not meet the minimum requirements of the RFP, we will recommend that the proposal be disqualified as “non-compliant”.

R3’s role in the evaluation process will also include facilitating the evaluation meetings and developing proposal summaries and rankings as appropriate. This will include providing staff with questions in advance to be asked to evaluate the information provided during interviews.

Separate sections of the evaluation analysis may include, for example:
› Executive Summary (introducing and summarizing the evaluation analysis and the recommendation.) › Summary of RFP Responses
› Financial Capability
› Technical Proposal (work plans including route design, public safety plan, sustainability programs, and education and outreach plan.)
› Customer Rate and Cost Proposals (consistent with the proposed activities, proposed equipment, requested services, and work plans.)
› Enhanced Proposal Terms
› Rate Revenues to the Hauler and Cities
› Start-up Capital Costs
Following drafting the evaluation analysis, R3 will facilitate several meetings with Cities’ staff, as directed. Meetings will include (1) a summary of the proposals received, including any proposed enhancements, and (2) the results of the evaluation process.

Additional aspects of the evaluation process will include:
› Meeting with Cities’ staff to discuss evaluation criteria and select proposers to be selected for interviews. › Coordinating interviews with up to four (4) proposers, including scheduling and development of questions in consultation with Cities’ staff.
› Leading up to two (2) meetings to provide (1) a summary of the proposals received, including any proposed enhancements; and (2) the results of the evaluation process. › Collaborating with staff to present results to the City Councils.

All work performed through Task 2 will be coordinated as a joint procurement effort covering both Cities at once.

Following presentation of evaluation results to the City Councils, R3 will work with the Cities individually to negotiate final agreements with the selected proposer. Therefore, Task 3 will entail work efforts performed to the benefit of the individual Cities, and not jointly.

Task B3 Negotiate with Top Ranked Proposer(s) and Present Results Task B3.1 Agreement Negotiations
Based on direction from the Cities, R3 will confirm deal points, and lead Agreement negotiations with the top ranked proposer(s). Negotiations will focus on clarifying the proposer’s services and cost proposal and incorporating optional services as may be selected by Cities’ staff. This Task will include meetings with the Cities beforehand to confirm our approach for the negotiations. Our proposal assumes up to two (2) negotiation meetings with top ranked proposers, including pre- and post-discussions with Cities’ staff to confirm approach and recap as necessary.

Task B3.2 Finalize New Agreement and Present Recommendations to City Councils R3 will present the results of the evaluation process to City Councils tentatively set for February 2024, including recommendations made by the evaluation team. This will include a summary of the proposal process, proposals received, the evaluation process, and the results and recommendations for award of the Agreement. Based on direction from City Councils, we will incorporate program changes or options selected by City Councils and finalize the Agreement for the finalist proposer to sign. This will include incorporating changes to the draft agreement through the issuance of addenda by the Cities, final program options selected during the selection process, proposed rates, final work plans, exhibits, etc.

R3 will prepare a second presentation to City Councils summarizing the evaluation process and recommendations for award based on program changes or options selected by City Councils during the first presentation.

1. SCOPE OF WORK
Exhibit A-1

424
Cities of Richmond and San Pablo | Solid Waste Collection Agreements 5 Project Schedule
R3’s proposed schedule, below, incorporates tentative completion dates. Please note that this schedule provides the relative timing of major project tasks and will be adjusted, if necessary, based on when authorization to proceed is granted.

TASK TENTATIVE

COMPLETION
Project Initiation and Kick-Off Meeting August 2, 2023
Develop New Franchise Agreement September 13, 2023
Prepare RFP Package September 13, 2023
Finalize and Issue RFP and Agreement October 11, 2023
Conduct a Mandatory Pre-Proposal Meeting and Prepare RFP Addenda November 8, 2023 Proposals Due December 6, 2023
Proposals Evaluation January 10, 2024
Interviews January 24, 2024
Present Evaluation Team Results to City Councils February 21, 2024 Negotiate with Top Ranked Proposer(s) March 20, 2024
Finalize New Agreement and Present Recommendations to City Councils May 15, 2024 New Agreements July 1, 2025

1. SCOPE OF WORK
Exhibit A-1

425
Cities of Richmond and San Pablo | Solid Waste Collection Agreements 6

2. R3 QUALIFICATIONS
About R3
Incorporated in California in 2002, R3 is a California Certified Small Business with offices in Oakland and Roseville. For the past two decades, we have specialized in providing a diverse range of solid waste management consulting services to public agencies, including rate and financial reviews, competitive procurement and/or extension negotiations of collection, processing and disposal services; development, implementation and monitoring of service contracts and franchise agreements; and legislative compliance.

For the past two decades, we have specialized in providing a diverse range of solid waste management consulting services to public agencies, including:
› Planning, implementation and monitoring, and administrative services in support of legislative compliance with SB 1383 and SB 1016 and Assembly Bill (AB) 939, AB 341, AB 1826, AB 1594, AB 1669, AB 901, and AB 876.
› Rate and financial reviews and analyses of fees, rates, and rate structure options. › Competitive procurements and/or extension negotiations of collection, processing, and disposal. › Developing, implementing, and monitoring hauler performance of service contracts and agreements.

Our team has dedicated their careers to the field of solid waste management and sustainability, and skillfully deliver expert industry analysis and recommendations to our clients, who consist of municipalities, jurisdictions, public agencies, and joint power authorities - but never the solid waste companies we may be reviewing someday.

Procurement & Negotiation Services
Our team provides a variety of negotiation and procurement assistance services for our clients, ranging from assisting jurisdictions with “sole-source” negotiations with an existing service provider, to managing all aspects of a competitive procurement process for solid waste and recycling collection, recycling, organics, processing and disposal services. We typically provide “full-service” procurement assistance, meaning that we work closely with our clients on all aspects of a competitive procurement project.

Our procurement and negotiation services include the following:
› Negotiation, development, and monitoring of contracts and Agreements. › Assistance with the technical and financial evaluation of proposals. › Evaluation of commercial collection system service options and structures. › Development of policy and programmatic alternatives that meet the specific needs of the community. › Compliance monitoring and review.
› Design of performance standards, incentives, and penalties related to contractor performance. › Development of an annual adjustment mechanism to contractor compensation and user rates and fees. › Leadership in community and stakeholder engagement processes, including workshops, focus groups, surveys, interviews, and presentations.
› Preparation and distribution of Request for Proposals packages, including the Agreement and operating contracts.

2. R3 QUALIFICATIONS
Exhibit A-1

426
Cities of Richmond and San Pablo | Solid Waste Collection Agreements 7 Relevant Experience and References
Since 2002, R3’s project team has developed a unique level of relevant experience and knowledge of solid waste solutions that can help you deliver the programs and policies that your community needs. Our work, with a sampling shown below, covers everything from agreement negotiations to policy and ordinances development, legislative compliance, and education and outreach.

Our team is proud to have served 120+ clients over the past three years, and below, we have compiled a sample list of projects relevant to the Cities’ scope of work.

Operations &
Performance
Review
Rate Study /
Financial
Review
SB 1383
Compliance
Negotiation
Assistance
Procurement
Assistance
City of Banning X X
City of Beaumont X X
City of Burbank X X X
City of Cloverdale X X X X
City of Eastvale X
City of El Cajon X X
City of Fairfield X X X X
City of Folsom X X X X
City of Petaluma X X X X X
City of Piedmont X X X X
City of Pomona X X X X X
City of Rancho Cordova X X X X X
City of Rohnert Park X X X
City of Rosemead X X
City of Salinas X X X X
City of San Bruno X X X
City of San Luis Obispo X
City of Santa Barbara X
City of Santa Clara X X X X
City of Santa Clarita X X X
City of Santa Monica X X X
City of Santa Rosa X X X X
City of Turlock X X
County of Sacramento X X
Sonoma County X X X
Town of Windsor X X X
CLIENT

SERVICES PROVIDED

2. R3 QUALIFICATIONS
Exhibit A-1

427
Cities of Richmond and San Pablo | Solid Waste Collection Agreements 8

3. PROJECT BUDGET
R3 proposes to complete a joint procurement for the Cities for a cost of $183,025. Table 1, below, shows the cost and relative level of effort broken out by task. Additional consulting services beyond those proposed will be charged at the hourly billing rates shown in Table 2, below. Note: The cost share, per City, is half of the total budget, or $91,512.50 per City. Fees for work completed will be billed monthly at the first of each month, for the preceding month, and are due within 30 days of the invoice date. It is common to have the selected proposer reimburse the jurisdiction for the cost of the effort, and it is our intention to support the Cities in doing so via this engagement.

R3’s current agreement with the City is projected to have approximately $51,575 in remaining value after the conclusion of the current community engagement efforts. Given this remaining value, approval of this proposal would require an amendment of $131,450 to our agreement, for a revised not-to-exceed contract amount of $268,185.

Table 1: Breakdown of Costs

HOURS COST
1 Project Initiation and Kick-Off Meeting 20 $ 4,475
2 Technical Document Development and Evaluation 520 $ 116,875 3 Negotiate with Top Ranked Proposer(s) and Present Results 190 $ 43,375 730 $ 164,725
80 $ 18,300
TOTAL 810 $ 183,025
TASKS
10% Contigency

TASKS TOTAL
Table 2: Standard Hourly Billing Rates

CLASSIFICATION HOURLY RATE
Principal $ 285
Sr. Director $ 285
Director $ 240
Sr. Managing Consultant $ 220
Managing Consultant $ 200
Sr. Consultant $ 190
Consultant $ 170
Associate Consultant $ 155

REIMBURSABLE COSTS
Consultants/Subcontractors Cost plus 10%
Lodging and Meals Direct cost
Travel — Private or company car At Current Federal Rate Travel — Other Direct cost
Delivery and other expenses Direct cost

3. PROJECT BUDGET
Exhibit A-1

428
429
430

July 11, 2023
Economic Development
DATE: July 11, 2023
TO: Mayor Martinez and Members of the City Council
FROM: Nannette Beacham, Economic Development Director
Lizeht Zepeda, Senior Business Assistance Officer
Shané Johnson, Senior Administrative Analyst
Lilia Corral, Management Analyst
Subject: Contract with CSW/Stuber-Stroeh Engineering Group, Inc.

FINANCIAL IMPACT: The proposed expenditure will be budgeted in the Port’s Fiscal Year (FY) 2023-2024 and FY 2024-2025 budgets
accordingly (40161080-400201).

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

December 3, 2019

STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:

City Staff is requesting City Council approval of a
contract with CSW/Stuber-Stroeh Engineering Group,
Inc. for engineering services for the Port of Richmond.

RECOMMENDED ACTION: APPROVE a sole-source contract with CSW|ST2 in the amount of $93,000, for engineering services at the Port of Richmond, for a term beginning July 12, 2023, through June 30, 2024 with an option to extend for one additional year, in an amount not-to-exceed $96,0000 for the
extension period – Economic Development Department
(Nannette Beacham 510-621-1306/Lilia Corral 510-620-
6787).

AGENDA
REPORT
431
Page
2 of 4
July 11, 2023
432

July 11, 2023
DISCUSSION:

Background
On July 11, 2017, the City Council authorized an agreement with Highland Consulting Group (Robert Stevens, Principal Engineer), to complete the close out of the grantfunded Operations and Security Center project, which included the renovation of the Rigger’s Loft into the Port Administration office and space for leasing, and other improvements at Point Potrero Marine Terminal (PPMT), which included a twelve-mile (12) fiber optic network operating at ten (10) gigabits per second (Gb/s) serving the City of Richmond, a high mast lighting project improving security, rehabilitating much of the electrical infrastructure, and an extension of the San Francisco Bay Trail into PPMT that includes two (2) overlooks and a hillside pathway.

In the succeeding years, Robert Stevens provided the Port of Richmond with additional support for the polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB) cleanup of the graving basins, relocation of the S.S. Red Oak Victory Ship, berth infrastructure repairs, mandated dredging, utility infrastructure, and reporting compliancy with State and Federal agencies. On December 3, 2019, the City Council approved a contract with CSW/Stuber-Stroeh Engineering Group, Inc. (CSW|ST2), formerly Highland Consulting Group (Robert Stevens, Engineer), for engineering and program management services for the Port of Richmond for a term of one (1) year.

Sole Source Contract
CSW|ST2 currently prepares, updates, and provides reports for the facilities assessment of Port infrastructure; completes grant applications to fund capital improvement projects; assesses designs, and supports updates to infrastructure at Port facilities; provides technical support for the development of leases; supports dredging projects at Port facilities; provides technical support to tenants regarding dock capacity, berth length, water depth, utility capacity; and provides other engineering services as requested by Port staff.

Robert Stevens, president, and engineer of CSW|ST2, has provided engineering design, program management, and construction support to the Port of Richmond for the last sixteen (16) years. He has a strong understanding of the existing infrastructure and the expertise to complete the integration of capital improvement projects.

A sole-source form was completed as Robert Stevens, of CSW|ST2, has worked closely with previous Port staff for several years, and has accumulated historical, contextual, engineering, and databased knowledge regarding Port matters (Attachment 1).

City staff is seeking approval of a one (1) year contract with CSW|ST2 for a total contract amount not-to-exceed $93,000, with an option to extend for one (1) additional year inr an amount not-to-exceed $96,0000, for engineering services at the Port of Richmond (Attachment 2).
433

July 11, 2023
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:

Attachment 1 – Sole Source (Signed)
Attachment 2 – Standard Contract to the Contract
434
435
436
437

CITY OF RICHMOND

STANDARD CONTRACT
Department: Project Manager:

Project Manager E-mail: Project Manager Phone No:

PR No: Vendor No: P.O./Contract No:

Description of Services:

The parties to this STANDARD CONTRACT do mutually agree and promise as follows:

1. Parties. The parties to this Contract are the City of Richmond (herein referred to as the “City”) and the following named Contractor:

Company Name:

Street Address:

City, State, Zip Code:

Contact Person:

Telephone: Email:

Business License No: / Expiration Date:

A California [ ] corporation, [ ] limited liability corporation [ ] general partnership, [ ] limited partnership, [ ] individual, [ ] non-profit corporation, [ ] individual dba as [specify:] ,
[ ] other [specify:]

2. Term. The effective date of this Contract is and it
terminates unless terminated as provided herein.

3. Payment Limit. City’s total payments to Contractor under this Contract shall not exceed $ . City shall not pay for services that exceed
the Contract Payment Limit unless a contract amendment has been approved by the City Council or City Manager.

4. Contractor’s Obligations. Contractor shall provide those services and carry out that work described in the Service Plan (Exhibit A) which is attached hereto and is incorporated herein by reference, subject to all the terms and conditions contained or incorporated herein.

5. City's Obligations. City shall make to the Contractor those payments described in the Payment Provisions (Exhibit B) which are attached hereto and are incorporated herein by reference, subject to all the terms and conditions contained or incorporated herein.
438

6. Authorized Representatives and Notices. This Contract is subject to the Authorized Representatives and Notices Provisions (Exhibit C) which are attached hereto and are incorporated herein by reference.

7. General Conditions. This Contract is subject to the General Conditions (Exhibit D) which are attached hereto and are incorporated herein by reference, subject to all the terms and conditions contained or incorporated herein.

8. Special Conditions. This Contract is subject to the Special Conditions (Exhibit E) (if any) which are attached hereto and are incorporated herein by reference, subject to all the terms and conditions contained or incorporated herein. (Note:
other than Public Works contracts, the City will agree to Special Conditions only in unusual circumstances.)

9. Insurance Provisions. This Contract is subject to the Insurance Provisions (Exhibit F) which are attached hereto and are incorporated herein by reference.

10. Signatures. These signatures attest the parties' Contract hereto:

CITY OF RICHMOND CONTRACTOR:
a municipal corporation

By:
(* The Corporation Chairperson of the Board,
President or Vice President should sign below)

Title: By:

I hereby certify that this Contract Title:
has been approved by City Council.

Date Signed:

By:

City Clerk
(* The Corporation Chief Financial Officer,
Secretary or Assistant Secretary should sign below)
Approved as to form:

By:

By: Title:

City Attorney
Date Signed:

(NOTE: Pursuant to California Corporations
Code Section 313, if Contractor is a corporation
or nonprofit organization, this Contract (1) must
be signed by (a) the Chairperson of the Board,
President or Vice-President and (b) the
Secretary any Assistant Secretary, the Chief
Financial Officer or any Assistant Treasurer.

LIST OF ATTACHMENTS:

Service Plan Exhibit A
Payment Provisions Exhibit B
Authorized Representatives and Notices Exhibit C
General Conditions Exhibit D
Special Conditions Exhibit E
Insurance Provisions Exhibit F
Standard Contract/EJ/TE 9-26-07
439
For the Contract between the City of
Richmond and

EXHIBIT A

SERVICE PLAN
Contractor shall, to the satisfaction of the , perform the following services and be compensated as outlined below:
440
X:\Shared\Projects\2023\2300125 Port of Richmond\_proposal\2023-03-14-Corral-Richmond-Port with 1 year Option Extension.docx Adaptive Solutions for Resilient Designs
121 Park Place
Richmond, CA 94801
415.883.9850
www.cswst2.com
Berkeley | Novato | Petaluma
Pleasanton | Redwood City | Richmond
March 10, 2023 (Rev. June 28, 2023)
Project Number: 2300125
Lilia Corral
City of Richmond
450 Civic Center Plaza
Richmond, CA 94804
SUBJECT: Port of Richmond Support – with 1 year Extension Dear Ms. Corral:

It has been our pleasure to support the Port of Richmond’s development over the last several years. Our team will supply services on an as needed basis to complete several of the ongoing projects including:

1. Prepare, update, and provide reports for the facilities assessment of Port infrastructure.

2. Complete grant applications to fund capital improvements.

3. Assess, design, and support updates to infrastructure at port facilities.

4. Technical support to tenants regarding dock capacity, berth length, water depth, and utility capacity.

5. Technical support for the shore power project at PPMT.

6. Finalize window repair at Processing Building.

7. Complete other capital improvement projects outlined for 2023.

8. Provide other engineering services as requested by the Port of Richmond.

SCHEDULE
We will provide services for Fiscal Year 23/24, with an option to extend to Fiscal Year 24/25.

COMPENSATION
We will provide Robert as the Contract Port Engineer for a labor rate of $223 per hour (includes 10% discount). We will reimburse subconsultant costs at direct cost with no markup. Assuming we expend about 8 hours per week, please budget $93,000. If an option is exercised for Fiscal Year 24/25, there will be a 3% increase for the Port Engineer to a labor rate of 230 per hour, with a budget of $96,000.

SERVICES AND STANDARD OF CARE
CSW|ST2’s services shall be limited to those expressly set forth above. We shall have no other obligations or responsibilities for the project except as agreed to in writing, or as provided in this agreement. CSW|ST2’s services shall be provided consistent with, and limited to, the standard of care applicable to such services.

CSW|ST2 shall provide its services consistent with the professional skill and care ordinarily provided by consultants practicing in the same or similar locality under the same or similar circumstances.

Exhibit A- Port of Richmond Proposal
441

X:\Shared\Projects\2023\2300125 Port of Richmond\_proposal\2023-03-14-Corral-Richmond-Port with 1 year Option Extension.docx Thank you for the opportunity in supporting the development of your project. We look forward to working with you and your team. If I can provide any additional information, please contact me at [email protected] or 415.533.1864.

Sincerely,
CSW|ST2
Robert Stevens, PE, TE
Principal
442

X:\Shared\Projects\2023\2300125 Port of Richmond\_proposal\2023-03-14-Corral-Richmond-Port with 1 year Option Extension.docx

BILLING RATE SCHEDULE
Effective January 1, 2023 – December 31, 2023

ENGINEERING SERVICES HOURLY RATES
Senior Engineer $ 193.00
Engineer I, II, III $ 138.00, $ 168.00, $ 187.00
Technician
Engineering Assistant
$ 126.00
$97.00

SURVEY SERVICES HOURLY RATES

OTHER PROFESSIONAL RATES
Principal $ 248.00 - $ 276.00
Associate Principal $ 236.00
Project Manager
Landscape Architect
Sr. Landscape Architect
$ 210.00 - $ 231.00
$ 150.00
$ 165.00
Construction Manager $ 226.00
Resident Engineer $ 166.00
Technical Writer $ 133.00
Graphic Illustrator $ 126.00
Project Assistant $ 97.00
 All expenses for transportation (mileage, bridge fare, etc.) will be charged at the Internal Revenue Service rate plus 10%.
 Filing fees, checking fees, prints, and other outside costs (such as agency submittal/permit fees etc.) will be charged at cost, plus service charges at the rate of 10%.  Billing will be monthly net 30 days.

Senior Surveyor $193.00
Surveyor I, II, III $ 138.00, $ 168.00, $ 187.00
Survey Technician
Surveying Assistant
$ 126.00
$97.00
Two Person Survey Party $ 303.00
Survey Party Chief
Survey Chainman
Survey Apprentice
$ 209.00
$ 94.00
$ 80.00 - $94.00
Aerial Drone Surveyor $ 209.00
443
For the Contract between the City of
Richmond and

EXHIBIT B

PAYMENT PROVISIONS
{PLEASE NOTE THAT THE CITY OF RICHMOND SHALL NOT PAY FOR SERVICES

THAT EXCEED THE CONTRACT PAYMENT LIMIT UNLESS A CONTRACT

AMENDMENT HAS BEEN APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OR THE CITY MANAGER}

1. Provided Contractor is not in default under this Contract, Contractor shall be compensated as provided below.

2. Any and all payments made pursuant to this Contract shall be subject to the Contract Payment Limit. The Payment Limit includes expenses (phones, photo copying, meals and travel etc). Invoices, shall be adequately detailed, based on accurate records, and be in a form reasonably satisfactory to the City. Contractor may be required to provide back-up material upon request.

3. Contractor shall submit timely invoices to the following address:

Attention: City of Richmond, Finance Department - Accounts Payable Project Manager: Department:

PO Box 4046
Richmond, CA 94804-0046

4. All invoices that are submitted by Contractor shall be subject to the approval of the City’s Project Manager, before payments shall be authorized.

5. The City will pay invoice(s) within 45 days after completion of services to the City’s satisfaction. The City shall not pay late fees or interest.

6. A Richmond business license shall be obtained before any payment under this Contract shall be authorized and the business license must be kept current during the term of this Contract for payments to continue to be authorized.

7. All insurance coverage required by this Contract shall be provided by the Contractor before this Contract shall be executed by the City. The insurance coverage must be kept current during the term of this Contract for payments to continue to be authorized. 444
For the Contract between the City of
Richmond and

EXHIBIT C

AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVES AND NOTICES

1. Notices. All notices, demands, statements, or communications provided for by this Contract shall be in writing and may be delivered by deposit in the United States mail, postage prepaid. Notices to the City shall be addressed to the Department Head and (as delineated below in section 1.1) to the project manager responsible for the administration of or the supervision of the scope of work under this Contract. Notices to the Contractor shall be addressed to the party designated by Contractor (as delineated below in section 1.2). Notice shall be deemed delivered (a) upon personal delivery; (b) as of the fifth business day after mailing by United States certified mail, postage prepaid, addressed to the proper party; or (c) as of 12:00 p.m. on the second business day immediately after the day it is deposited with and accepted by Federal Express, or a similar overnight courier service, addressed to the proper party and marked for next business day morning delivery. For the purposes of this Contract, a "business day" means any day Monday through Friday that is not a holiday recognized by the federal government or the State of California.

1. 1 CITY hereby designates as its Authorized Representative the Project Manager whose name and address are as follows:

City of Richmond
Richmond, CA 94804-0046

1. 2 CONTRACTOR hereby designates as its Authorized Representative the Project Manager whose name and address are as follows:

445
General Conditions/EJ/TE 01-19-11 1 of 13

EXHIBIT D

GENERAL CONDITIONS

1. Independent Contractor. Contractor acknowledges, represents and warrants that Contractor is not a regular or temporary employee, joint venturer or partner of the City, but rather an independent Contractor. This Contract shall not be construed to create an agency, servant, employee, partnership, or joint venture relationship. As an independent Contractor, Contractor shall have no authority to bind City to any obligation or to act as City's agent except as expressly provided herein. Due to the independent Contractor relationship created by this Contract, City shall not withhold state or federal income taxes, the reporting of which shall be Contractor's sole responsibility.

2. Brokers. Contractor acknowledges, represents and warrants that Contractor has not hired, retained or agreed to pay any entity or person any fee, commission, percentage, gift, or any other consideration, contingent upon or resulting from the award or making of this Contract.

3. City Property. The rights to applicable plans, drawings, reports, calculations, data, specifications, videos, graphics or other materials prepared for or obtained pursuant to this Contract, which, upon request, are to be delivered to City within a reasonable time, shall be deemed assigned to City. If applicable, Contractor shall prepare check prints upon request. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Contractor shall not be obligated to provide to City proprietary software or data which Contractor has developed or had developed for Contractor's own use; provided, however, that Contractor shall, pursuant to Section 15 below, indemnify, defend and hold harmless City from and against any discovery or Public Records Act request seeking the disclosure of such proprietary software or data.

4. Patents, Trademarks, Copyrights and Rights in Data. Contractor shall not publish or transfer any materials, discoveries, developments, concepts, designs, ideas, know how, improvements, inventions and/or original works of authorship resulting from activities supported by this Contract without the express prior written consent of the City Manager. If anything resulting from activities supported by this Contract is patentable, trademarkable, copyrightable or otherwise legally protectable, City reserves the exclusive right to seek such intellectual property rights. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Contractor may, after receiving City's prior written consent, seek patent, trademark, copyright or other intellectual property rights on anything resulting from activities supported by this Contract. However, City reserves, and Contractor irrevocably grants, a nonexclusive, fully paid-up, royalty-free, assumable, perpetual, worldwide license, with the right to transfer, sublicense, practice and exploit said license and the right to make, have made, copy, modify, make derivative works of, use, sell, 446
General Conditions/EJ/TE 01-19-11 2 of 13
import, and otherwise distribute under all applicable intellectual properties without restriction of any kind said license.

Contractor further agrees to assist City, at City's expense, in every proper way to secure the City’s rights in any patents, trademarks, copyrights or other intellectual property rights relating thereto, including the disclosure to City of all pertinent information and data with respect thereto. Contractor shall also assist City in the execution of all applications, specifications, oaths, assignments, recordations, and all other instruments which City shall deem necessary in order to apply for, obtain, maintain and transfer such rights, or if not transferable, to waive such rights. Contractor shall further assist City in the execution of all applications, specifications, oaths, assignments, recordations and all other instruments which City shall deem necessary in order to assign and convey to City, and any assigns and nominees the sole and exclusive right, title and interest in and to any patents, trademarks, copyrights or other intellectual property rights relating thereto. Contractor further agrees that its obligation to execute or cause to be executed, when it is in Contractor's power to do so, any such instruments or papers shall continue during and at all times after the end of Contractor's services and until the expiration of the last such intellectual property right. Contractor hereby irrevocably designates and appoints City, and its duly authorized officers, agents and servants, as its agent and attorney-in-fact, to act for and in its behalf and stead to execute and file any such applications and to do all other lawfully permitted acts to further the application for, prosecution, issuance, maintenance or transfer of letters of patents, copyright and other registrations. This power of attorney is coupled with an interest and shall not be affected by Contractor's subsequent incapacity.

5. Inspection. Contractor's performance, place of business and records pertaining to this Contract are subject to monitoring, inspection, review and audit by authorized representatives of the CITY, the State of California, and the United States Government.

If the project or services set forth in Exhibit A shall be performed on City or other public property, City shall have the right to inspect such work without notice. If such project or services shall not be performed on City or other public property, City shall have the right to inspect such work upon reasonable notice.

6. Services. The project or services set forth in Exhibit A shall be performed to the full satisfaction and approval of City. In the event that the project or services set forth in Exhibit A are also itemized by price, City, in its sole discretion, may, upon notice to Contractor, delete certain items or services set forth in Exhibit A, in which case there shall be a corresponding reduction in the amount of compensation paid to Contractor. 447
General Conditions/EJ/TE 01-19-11 3 of 13
Contractor shall, at its own cost and expense, furnish all facilities and equipment necessary for Contractor to complete the project or perform the services required herein, unless otherwise provided in Exhibit A.

7. Records. Contractor shall keep and make available for inspection and copying by authorized representatives of the City, the State of California, and the United States Government, the Contractor's regular business records and such additional records pertaining to this Contract as may be required by the City.

Contractor shall retain all documents pertaining to this Contract for a period of five (5) years after this Contract's termination (or for any further period that is required by law) and until all Federal or State audits are complete and exceptions resolved for this contract's funding period. Upon request, CONTRACTOR shall make these records available to authorized representatives of the CITY, the State of California, and the United States Government.

Contractor shall keep full and detailed accounts, maintain records, and exercise such controls as may be necessary for proper financial management under this Contract. The Contractor’s accounting and control systems shall be satisfactory to City. Contractor's accounting systems shall conform to generally accepted accounting principles and all records shall provide a breakdown of total costs charged under this Contract, including properly executed payrolls, time records, utility bills, invoices and vouchers. The City shall be afforded prompt access to Contractor's records, books, and Contractor shall preserve such project records for a period of at least five (5 years after the termination of this Contract , or for such longer period as may be required by law.

Contractor shall permit City and its authorized representatives and accountants to inspect, examine and copy Contractor's books, records, accounts, correspondence, instructions, drawings, receipts, subcontracts, purchase orders, vouchers, memoranda and other data relating to the project or services set forth in Exhibit A, and any and all data relevant to this Contract at any reasonable time for the purpose of auditing and verifying statements, invoices, or bills submitted by Contractor pursuant to this Contract and shall provide such assistance as may be reasonably required in the course of such inspection. Contractor shall also allow City access to the record keeping and accounting personnel of Contractor.

City further reserves the right to examine and re-examine said books, records, accounts, and data during the five (5 year period following the termination of this Contract; and Contractor shall in no event dispose of, destroy, alter, or mutilate said books, records, accounts, and data in any manner whatever for five (5 years after the termination of this Contract. 448
General Conditions/EJ/TE 01-19-11 4 of 13
Pursuant to California Government Code § 10527, the parties to this Contract shall be subject to the examination and audit of representatives of the Auditor General of the State of California for a period of three (3) years after final payment under this Contract. The examination and audit shall be confined to those matters connected with the performance of this Contract including, but not limited to, the cost of administering this Contract.

8. Changes and Extra Work. All changes and/or extra work under this Contract shall be performed and paid for in accordance with the following:

Only the City Council or the City Manager may authorize extra and/or changed work. Contractor expressly recognizes that other City personnel are without authorization to either order extra and/or changed work or waive contract requirements. Failure of Contractor to secure the authorization for such extra and/or changed work shall constitute a waiver of any and all right to adjustment in contract price due to such unauthorized work and Contractor thereafter shall be entitled to no compensation whatsoever for performance of such extra and/or changed work.

If Contractor is of the opinion that any work which Contractor has been directed to perform is beyond the scope of this Contract and constitutes extra work, Contractor shall promptly notify City of the fact. The City shall make a determination as to whether or not such work is, in fact, beyond the scope of this Contract and constitutes extra work. In the event that City determines that such work does constitute extra work, City shall provide extra compensation to Contractor on a fair and equitable basis. A change order or Contract Amendment providing for such compensation for extra work shall be negotiated between City and Contractor and executed by Contractor and the appropriate City official.

In the event City determines that such work does not constitute extra work, Contractor shall not be paid extra compensation above that provided herein and if such determination is made by City staff, said determination may be appealed to the City Council; provided, however, a written appeal must be submitted to the City Manager within five (5) days after the staff's determination is sent to Contractor. Said written appeal shall include a description of each and every ground upon which Contractor challenges the staff's determination.

9. Additional Assistance. If this Contract requires Contractor to prepare plans and specifications, Contractor shall provide assistance as necessary to resolve any questions regarding such plans and specifications that may arise during the period of advertising for bids, and Contractor shall issue 449
General Conditions/EJ/TE 01-19-11 5 of 13
any necessary addenda to the plans and specifications as requested. In the event Contractor is of the opinion that City's requests for addenda and assistance is outside the scope of normal services, the parties shall proceed in accordance with the changes and extra work provisions of Section 8 of these General Conditions.

10. Professional Ability. Contractor acknowledges, represents and warrants that Contractor and its employees are skilled and able to competently provide the services hereunder, and possess all professional licenses, certifications, and approvals necessary to engage in their occupations.

City has relied upon the professional ability and training of Contractor as a material inducement to enter into this Contract. Contractor shall perform in accordance with generally accepted professional practices and standards of Contractor's profession. In the event that City, in its sole discretion, desires the removal of any person employed or retained by Contractor to perform services hereunder, such person shall be removed immediately upon receiving notice from City.

11. Business License. Contractor shall obtain a Richmond Business License before performing any services required under this Contract. The failure to so obtain such license shall be a material breach of this Contract and grounds for immediate termination by City; provided, however, that City may waive the business license requirement in writing under unusual or extraordinary circumstances without necessitating any modification of this Contract to reflect such waiver.

12. Termination Without Default. Notwithstanding any provision herein to the contrary, City may, in its sole and absolute discretion and without cause, terminate this Contract at any time prior to completion by Contractor of the project or services hereunder, immediately upon written notice to Contractor. Contractor may terminate this Contract at any time in its sole and absolute discretion and without cause upon 30 days' written notice to City. In the event of termination by either party, Contractor shall be compensated for: (1) all authorized work satisfactorily performed prior to the effective date of termination; (2) necessary materials or services of others ordered by Contractor for this Contract, prior to receipt of notice of termination, irrespective of whether such materials or services of others have actually been delivered, provided that Contractor is not able to cancel such orders. Compensation for Contractor in such event shall be determined by City in accordance with the percentage of the project or services completed by Contractor; and all of Contractor's finished or unfinished work product through the time of the City's last payment shall be transferred and assigned to City. Additionally, in the event of such termination, the City may proceed with the work in any reasonable manner it chooses.
450
General Conditions/EJ/TE 01-19-11 6 of 13

13. Termination in the Event of Default. Should Contractor fail to perform any of its obligations hereunder, within the time and in the manner provided or otherwise violate any of the terms of this Contract, City may immediately terminate this Contract by giving written notice of such termination, stating the reasons for such termination. Contractor shall be compensated as provided in Section 12 of these General Conditions; provided, however, there shall be deducted from such amount the amount of damage, including attorney's fees, expert witness fees and costs, if any, sustained by City by virtue of Contractor's breach of this Contract. Additionally, in the event of such termination, the City may proceed with the work in any reasonable manner it chooses.

14. Conflict of Interest. Contractor acknowledges, represents and warrants that Contractor shall avoid all conflicts of interest (as defined under any federal, state or local statute, rule or regulation, or at common law) with respect to this Contract. Contractor further acknowledges, represents and warrants that no City official or employee has any economic interest, as defined in Title 2, California Code of Regulations §§ 18703.1 through 18703.5, with Contractor that would invalidate this Contract. Contractor acknowledges that in the event that Contractor shall be found by any judicial or administrative body to have any conflict of interest (as defined above) with respect to this Contract, all consideration received under this Contract shall be forfeited and returned to City forthwith. This provision shall survive the termination of this Contract for one (1) year.

15. Indemnification.
(a) If this Contract is a contract for design professional services subject to California Civil Code Section 2782.8(a) and Contractor is a design professional, as defined in California Civil Code Section 2782.8(b)(2), Contractor shall hold harmless, defend and indemnify the City, its officers, agents, employees, and volunteers from and against any and all claims, damages, losses, and expenses including attorneys’ fees arising out of, or pertaining to, or relating to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of the Contractor, except where caused by the active negligence, sole negligence, or willful misconduct of the City. To the fullest extent permitted by law, Contractor shall immediately defend and indemnify the City and its officers, agents, employees, and volunteers from and against any and all liabilities, regardless of nature or type, that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of the Contractor, or its employees, agents, or subcontractors.

Liabilities subject to the duties to defend and indemnify include, without limitation, any and all claims, losses, damages, penalties, fines, and judgments; associated investigation and administrative expenses; defense costs, including but not limited to reasonable attorneys’ fees; court costs; and costs of alternative dispute resolution. Contractor’s obligation to 451
General Conditions/EJ/TE 01-19-11 7 of 13
indemnify applies unless it is finally adjudicated that the liability was caused by the sole active negligence or sole willful misconduct of an indemnified party.
(b) If this Contract is not a contract for design professional services subject to California Civil Code Section 2782.8(a) or Contractor is not a design professional as defined in California Civil Code Section 2782.8(b)(2), Contractor shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City, its officers, agents, employees and volunteers from any and all claims, suits, or actions of every name, kind and description, brought forth on account of injuries to or death of any person or damage to property arising from or connected with the willful misconduct, negligent acts, errors or omissions, ultra-hazardous activities, activities giving rise to strict liability, or defects in design by Contractor or any person directly or indirectly employed by, or acting as, the agent for Contractor in the performance of this Contract, including the concurrent or successive passive negligence of the City, its officers, agents, employees or volunteers.
(c) It is understood that the duty of Contractor to indemnify and hold harmless includes the duty to defend as set forth in Section 2778 of the California Civil Code. Contractor shall be obligated to defend, in all legal, equitable, administrative, or special proceedings, with counsel approved by the City, the City and its officers, agents, employees, and volunteers, immediately upon tender to Contractor of the claim in any form or at any stage of an action or proceeding, whether or not liability is established. An allegation or determination that persons other than Contractor are responsible for the claim does not relieve Contractor from its separate and distinct obligation to defend under this Section 15. The obligation to defend extends through final judgment, including exhaustion of any appeals. The defense obligation includes an obligation to provide independent counsel if Contractor asserts that liability is caused in whole, or in part, by the negligence or willful misconduct of an indemnified party. (d) The review, acceptance or approval of the Contractor’s work or work product by any indemnified party shall not affect, relieve or reduce the Contractor’s indemnification or defense obligations. This Section 15 survives completion of the services or the termination of this Contract.

The provisions of this Section 15 are not limited by, and do not affect, the provisions of this Contract relating to insurance.
(e) Acceptance of insurance certificates and endorsements required under this Contract does not relieve Contractor from liability under this Section

15. This Section 15 shall apply whether or not such insurance policies are determined to be applicable to any such damages or claims for damages.

16. Safety. Contractor acknowledges that the City is committed to the highest standards of workplace safety. Contractor shall perform all work hereunder in full compliance with applicable local, state and federal safety requirements including but not limited to Occupational Safety and Health Administration requirements, and shall assume sole and complete 452
General Conditions/EJ/TE 01-19-11 8 of 13
responsibility for the safety of Contractor's employees and any subContractor's employees. If a death, serious personal injury or substantial property damage occurs in connection with the performance of this Contract, Contractor shall immediately notify the City by telephone.

17. Insurance. Insurance requirements are set forth in Exhibit F to this Contract. Contractor shall abide by the insurance requirements set forth in said Exhibit F.

18. Non-Liability of Officials and Employees of the City. No official or employee of the City shall be personally liable for any default or liability under this Contract.

19. Compliance with Laws. Contractor shall comply with all federal, state and local laws, statutes, ordinances, rules and regulations, and the orders and decrees of any courts or administrative bodies or tribunals, with respect to this Contract, including without limitation environmental laws, employment discrimination laws and prevailing wage laws. Compliance under this provision includes compliance with all provisions of the Richmond Municipal Code ("Municipal Code"), including Chapters 2.50, 2.52, 2.56, and 2.60, if applicable.

Contractor acknowledges that under § 2.60.070 of the Municipal Code ("Living Wage Ordinance"), Contractor shall promptly provide to City documents and information verifying its compliance with the Living Wage Ordinance. Also as prescribed in § 2.60.070, Contractor shall notify each of its affected employees with regards to the wages that are required to be paid pursuant to the Living Wage Ordinance.

Contractor shall comply with § 2.28.030 of the Municipal Code, obligating every Contractor or subcontractor under a contract or subcontract with the City for public work or for goods or for services to refrain from discriminatory employment or subcontracting practices on the basis of race, color, sex, sexual orientation, religious creed, national origin or ancestry of any employee, any applicant for employment or any potential subcontractor.

Contractor acknowledges that the City’s Drug Free Workplace Policy, Violence in the Workplace Policy and the Policy Against Workplace Harassment, are available on the City’s website at
http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/workplacepolicies . Contractor agrees to abide by the terms and conditions of said policies.

20. Limitations upon Subcontracting and Assignment. This Contract binds the heirs, successors, assigns and representatives of Contractor. The Contractor shall not enter into subcontracts for any work contemplated 453
General Conditions/EJ/TE 01-19-11 9 of 13
under this Contract and shall not assign this Contract, nor any portion hereof or monies due or to become due, without the prior written consent of the City Council or its designee.

Contractor acknowledges that the services which Contractor shall provide under this Contract are unique, personal services which, except as otherwise provided herein, Contractor shall not assign or sublet to any other party without the prior written approval of City, which approval may be withheld in City's sole and absolute discretion. In the event that City, in writing, approves any assignment or subletting of this Contract or the retention of subcontractors by Contractor, Contractor shall provide to City upon request copies of each and every subcontract contract prior to the execution thereof by Contractor and subcontractor. Any assignment by Contractor of any or all of its rights under this Contract without first obtaining City's prior written consent shall be a default under this Contract.

The sale, assignment, transfer or other disposition of any of the issued and outstanding capital stock of Contractor (if applicable), or of the interest of any general partner or joint venturer or syndicate member if Contractor is a partnership or joint-venture or syndicate, which shall result in a change of control of Contractor, shall be deemed an assignment. For this purpose, control shall mean fifty percent or more of the voting power or twenty-five percent or more of the assets of the corporation, partnership or joint-venture.

21. Integration. This Contract constitutes the entire agreement between the parties concerning the subject matter hereof and supersedes any previous oral or written agreement; provided, however, that correspondence or documents exchanged between Contractor and City may be used to assist in the interpretation of the Exhibits to this Contract.

22. Modifications and Amendments. This Contract may be modified or amended only by a change order or Contract Amendment executed by both parties and approved as to form by the City Attorney.

23. Conflicting Provisions. In the event of a conflict between these General Conditions and those of any Exhibit or attachment hereto, these General Conditions shall prevail; provided, however, that any Special Conditions as set forth in Exhibit E shall prevail over these General Conditions. In the event of a conflict between the terms and conditions of any two or more Exhibits or attachments hereto, those prepared by City shall prevail over those prepared by the Contractor, and the terms and conditions preferred by the City shall prevail over those preferred by the Contractor.

24. Non-exclusivity. Notwithstanding any provision herein to the contrary, the services provided by Contractor hereunder shall be non-exclusive, and 454
General Conditions/EJ/TE 01-19-11 10 of 13
City reserves the right to employ other Contractors in connection with the project.

25. Exhibits. All Exhibits hereto are made a part hereof and incorporated herein by reference; provided, however, that any language in Exhibit A which does not pertain to the project description, proposal, scope of services, or method of compensation (as applicable) , or any corresponding responsibilities of City, shall be deemed extraneous to, and not a part of, this Contract.

26. Force Majeure. Neither party hereto shall be considered in default in the performance of its obligations hereunder to the extent that the performance of such an obligation is prevented or delayed by reason of acts of God, strikes, boycotts, lock-outs, inability to procure materials not related to the price thereof, failure of power, restrictive governmental laws and regulations enacted after the date of this Contract, riots, civil unrest, acts of terrorism, insurrection, war, declaration of a state or national emergency or other reasons of a like nature not within the reasonable control of such party.

27. Time of the Essence. Time is of the essence of this Contract. Contractor and City agree that any time period set forth in Exhibit A represents their best estimates with respect to completion dates and both Contractor and City acknowledge that departures from the schedule may occur.

Therefore, both Contractor and City will use reasonable efforts to notify one another of changes to the schedule. Contractor shall not be responsible for performance delays caused by others, or delays beyond Contractor's control, and such delays shall extend the times for performance of Contractor's work.

28. Confidentiality. Contractor agrees to comply with, and to require its employees, agents and partners to comply with, all applicable State or Federal statutes or regulations respecting confidentially, including but not limited to, the identity of persons served under this Contract, their records, or services provided them, and assures that:

All applications and records concerning any individual made or kept by Contractor or any public officer or agency in connection with the administration of or relating to services provided under this Contract will be confidential, and will not be open to examination for any purposes not directly connected with the administration of such service.

No person will publish or disclose or permit or cause to be published or disclosed, any list of persons receiving services, except as may be required in the administration of such service.
455
General Conditions/EJ/TE 01-19-11 11 of 13

29. Third Parties. Nothing herein shall be interpreted as creating any rights or benefits in any third parties. For purposes hereof, transferees or assignees as permitted under this Contract shall not be considered "third parties."

30. Governing Law. This Contract shall be construed in accordance with the law of the State of California without regard to principles of conflicts of law.

This Contract is made in Contra Costa County, California, and any action relating to this Contract shall be instituted and prosecuted in the courts of Contra Costa County, California.

31. Nonrenewal. Contractor understands and agrees that there is no representation, implication, or understanding that the services provided by Contractor under this Contract will be purchased or renewed by the City under a new contract following expiration or termination of this Contract, and waives all rights or claims to notice or hearing respecting any failure by City to continue the purchase of all or any failure to continue purchase of all or any such services from Contractor.

32. Claims. Any claim by Contractor against City hereunder shall be subject to Government Code §§ 800 et seq. The claims presentation provisions of said Act are hereby modified such that the presentation of all claims hereunder to the City shall be waived if not made within six months after accrual of the cause of action.

33. Interpretation. This Contract shall be interpreted as if drafted by both parties.

34. Warranty. In the event that any product shall be provided to the City as part of this Contract, Contractor warrants as follows: Contractor possesses good title to the product and the right to transfer the product to City; the product shall be delivered to the City free from any security interest or other lien; the product meets any specifications contained herein; the product shall be free from material defects in materials and workmanship under normal use for a period of one (1) year from the date of delivery; and the product shall be fit for its intended purpose(s). Notwithstanding the foregoing, consumable and maintenance items (such as light bulbs and batteries) shall be warranted for a period of one hundred and eighty (180) days from the date of delivery. All repairs during the warranty period shall be promptly performed by Contractor, at Contractor's expense, including shipping.

35. Severability. In the event that any of the provisions or portions or applications thereof of this Contract are held to be unenforceable or invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, City and Contractor shall negotiate an equitable adjustment in the provisions of the Contract with a view 456
General Conditions/EJ/TE 01-19-11 12 of 13
toward effecting the purpose of this Contract, and the validity and enforceability of the remaining provisions or portions or applications thereof, shall not be affected thereby.

36. Authority. City warrants and represents that the signatory hereto (the Mayor of the City of Richmond or the City Manager) is duly authorized to enter into and execute this Contract on behalf of City. The party signing on behalf of Contractor warrants and represents that he or she is duly authorized to enter into and execute this Contract on behalf of Contractor, and shall be personally liable to City if he or she is not duly authorized to enter into and execute this Contract on behalf of Contractor.

37. Waiver. The waiver by City of any breach of any term or provision of this Contract shall not be construed as a waiver of any subsequent breach.

Inspections or approvals, or statements by any officer, agent or employee of the City relating to the Contractor’s performance, or payments therefore, or any combination of these acts, shall not relieve the Contractor’s obligation to fulfill this Contract as prescribed; nor shall the City be thereby stopped from bringing any action for damages or enforcement arising from any failure to comply with any of the terms and conditions of this Contract.

38. Possessory Interest. If this Contract results in the Contractor having possession of, claim to or right to the possession of land or improvements, but does not vest ownership of the land or improvements in the same person, or if this Contract results in the placement of taxable improvements on tax exempt land (Revenue and Taxation Code 107), such interest or improvements may represent a possessory interest subject to property tax, and Contractor may be subject to the payment of property taxes levied on such interest.

39. Performance and Final Acceptance.

Contractor represents that it is experienced, qualified, registered, licensed, equipped, organized and financed to perform the services under this Contract.

Contractor shall perform the services under this Contract with that degree of skill and judgment normally exercised by professional firms performing services of a similar nature in the State of California, and shall be responsible for the professional quality, technical accuracy and coordination of the services it performs under this Contract. In addition to the other rights and remedies which City may have, Contractor shall, at its own expense, correct any services which fail to meet the above standard. 457
General Conditions/EJ/TE 01-19-11 13 of 13
City shall provide Contractor an opportunity to cure errors and omission which may be disclosed during the review of submittals, with no increase in the authorized Contract Payment Limit. Should Contractor fail to make necessary corrections in a timely manner, such corrections shall be made by the City and the cost thereof shall be charged to Contractor.

If warranted, City shall determine, and Contractor may request such determination, that Contractor has satisfactorily completed performance of this Contract. Upon such determination, City shall issue to Contractor a written Notice of Final Acceptance, after which Contractor shall not incur further costs under this Contract. Contractor shall respond to such Notice of Final Acceptance by executing and submitting to City a Release and Certificate of Final Payment.

40. Survival. The rights and obligations of the parties which by their nature survive termination or completion of the services covered by this Contract shall remain in full force and effect after termination or completion. 458
For the Contract between the City of
Richmond and

EXHIBIT E

SPECIAL CONDITIONS
The General Conditions are hereby amended to include the following modifications and/or provisions (if applicable):
459
For the Contract between the City of
Richmond and

EXHIBIT F

INSURANCE PROVISIONS
During the entire term of this Contract and any extension or modification thereof, the CONTRACTOR shall keep in effect insurance policies meeting the insurance requirements specified in the insurance provisions which are attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
460
___ Exhibit F
___ Section 8
City of Richmond - Insurance Requirements - Type 2:

Professional Services
Type 2 – Page 1 of 3
Revised: September 2011
In all instances where CONTRACTOR or its representatives will provide professional services (architects, engineers, construction management, counselors, medical professionals, hospitals, clinics, attorneys, consultants, accountants, etc.) to the City of Richmond (City), the City requires the following MINIMUM insurance requirements and limits.

CONTRACTOR shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract, agreement, or other order for work, services or supplies, insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder and the results of that work by the CONTRACTOR, its agents, representatives, employees or subcontractors. Maintenance of proper insurance coverage is a material element of the contract. Failure to maintain or renew coverage or to provide evidence of renewal may be treated by the City as a material breach of contract.

CONTRACTOR agrees that in the event of loss due to any of the perils for which it has agreed to provide Commercial General Liability insurance, CONTRACTOR shall look solely to its insurance for recovery.

CONTRACTOR hereby grants to CITY, on behalf of any insurer providing Commercial General Liability insurance to either CONTRACTOR or CITY with respect to the services of CONSULTANT herein, a waiver of any right to subrogation which any such insurer of said CONTRACTOR may acquire against the CITY by virtue of the payment of any loss under such insurance.

Original, signed certificates and original, separate policy endorsements, naming the City as an additional insured for general liability coverage, as well as a waiver of subrogation for Workers’ Compensation insurance, shall be received and approved by the City before any work may begin. However, failure to do so shall not operate as a waiver of these insurance requirements.

City reserves the right to modify or require additional coverages for specific risk exposures depending on scope of CONTRACTORS work.

Minimum coverage is detailed below. The policy limits of coverage shall be made available to the full limits of the policy. The minimum limits stated herein shall not serve to reduce the policy limits of coverage of CONTRACTOR.

Minimum Scope of Insurance – the following forms shall be provided and coverage shall be at least as broad as the following:

1. Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (ISO Occurrence Form CG 0001), and including coverage for bodily and personal injury, property damage, and products and completed operations (if applicable).

2. Insurance Services Office Automobile Liability coverage (ISO Form CA 0001, Code 1, Any Auto).

3. Original and Separate Additional Insured Endorsement for General Liability (ISO Form CG 20 10 11/85 or its equivalent) with primary and non-contributory language.

4. Workers’ Compensation Insurance as required by the State of California including Employer’s Liability coverage.

5. Original and Separate Waiver of Subrogation for Workers’ Compensation insurance.

6. Professional Liability or Errors & Omissions Liability Insurance appropriate to the CONTRACTOR’s profession (if required.)
Required Coverage Minimum Limits
Workers’ Compensation and
Employers’ Liability
Statutory limits as required by the State of California including $1 million Employers’ Liability per accident, per employee for bodily injury or disease.

If CONTRACTOR is self-insured, provide a certificate of Permission to SelfInsure, signed by the California Department of Industrial Relations and SelfInsurance. If contractor is a sole proprietor (has no employees) than contractor must sign “Contractor Release of Liability” found at:
http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/index.aspx?nid=61.

General Liability
(primary and excess limits
combined)
$2,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If the policy includes a general aggregate, either the general aggregate shall apply separately to this project, service or location or the minimum required aggregate limit shall be twice the per occurrence limit ($4 million aggregate limit).

Policy shall be endorsed to name the City of Richmond as an additional insured per the conditions detailed below.
461
___ Exhibit F
___ Section 8
City of Richmond - Insurance Requirements - Type 2:

Professional Services
Type 2 – Page 2 of 3
Revised: September 2011
Automobile Liability $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury and property damage.

PROJECT COST REQUIRED LIMIT
$0 - $1 million $1 million p/o
$1 million - $5 million $2 million p/o
Over $5 million $5 million p/o
Professional Liability or Errors &
Omissions Liability –
Required for all professionals
including architects, engineers,
consultants, construction
management, counselors, medical
professionals, hospitals, clinics,
attorneys and accountants, & other
consultants as may be required by
the City.

Required Policy Conditions
Additional Insured Endorsement Applicable to General Liability coverage.

The City of Richmond, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers are to be named as additional insureds for all liability arising out of the operations by or on behalf of the named insured including bodily injury, deaths and property damage or destruction arising in any respect directly or indirectly in the performance of this contract.

ISO form CG 20 10 (11/85) or its equivalent is required. If the Contractor is supplying their product or providing a service then the endorsement must not exclude products and completed operations coverage. If it does, then CG 20 37 (10/01) is also required.

SAMPLE Endorsements can be found at
http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/index.aspx?nid=61.

Primary and Noncontributory The contractor’s insurance coverage must be primary coverage as it pertains to the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers. Any insurance or self insurance maintained by the City is wholly separate from the insurance of the contractor and in no way relieves the contractor from its responsibility to provide insurance.

Waiver of Subrogation
Endorsement Form
Contractor’s insurer will provide a Waiver of Subrogation in favor of the City for Workers’ Compensation Insurance during the life of this contract.

SAMPLE Endorsements can be found at
http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/index.aspx?nid=61.

Deductibles and Self-Insured
Retentions
Any deductible or self-insured retention must be declared to and approved by the City. At the option of the City either the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retention as respects the City or the CONTRACTOR shall procure a financial guarantee in an amount equal to the deductible or self-insured retention guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claims administration and defense expenses.

Contractor is responsible for satisfaction of the deductible and/or self-insured retention for each loss.

A. M. Best Rating A:VII or Better. If the A.M. Best Rating falls below the required rating, CONTRACTOR must replace coverage immediately and provide notice to City.

Umbrella/Excess Liability Policies
If an Umbrella or Excess Liability Policy is used to meet the liability limits, coverage shall be as broad as specified for underlying coverage’s and cover those insured in the underlying policies. 462
___ Exhibit F
___ Section 8
City of Richmond - Insurance Requirements - Type 2:

Professional Services
Type 2 – Page 3 of 3
Revised: September 2011
Claims-Made Policies
If any insurance policy is written on a claims-made form: 1) the retroactive date must be shown, and must be before the date of the contract or the beginning of contract work. 2) Insurance must be maintained and evidence of insurance must be provided for at least five (5) years after completion of the contract of work. 3) If coverage is canceled or non-renewed, and not replaced with another claims-made policy form with a retroactive date prior to the contract effective date, the Contractor must purchase an extended period coverage for a minimum of five (5) years after completion of contract work.

Subcontractors
CONTRACTOR shall include all subcontractors as insured under its policies or shall furnish to the City for review and approval, separate certificates and endorsements for each subcontractor. All coverage for subcontractors shall be subject to all of the requirements stated herein.

CONTRACTOR agrees to defend and indemnify the City of Richmond for any damage resulting to it from failure of either CONTRACTOR or any subcontractor to take out or maintain the required insurance policies. The fact that insurance is obtained by CONTRACTOR, and/or CONTRACTOR’s subcontractors, will not be deemed to release or diminish the liability of CONTRACTOR, including, without limitation, liability under the indemnity provisions of this contract. Damages recoverable by CITY from CONTRACTOR or any third party will not be limited by the amount of the required insurance coverage.

Verification of Coverage
All original certificates and endorsements shall be received and approved by the City before work may begin.

The City of Richmond reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies including endorsements affecting the coverage at any time.

Original insurance certificates and required policy endorsements shall be mailed or delivered to the Designated Project Manager for the City of Richmond.

Insurance certificates and endorsements may be faxed to the Designated Project Manger. However, CONTRACTOR must mail the original certificates and endorsements to Designated Project Manager once faxed.

Continuous Coverage
CONTRACTOR shall maintain the required insurance for the life of the contract. Should the CONTRACTOR cease to have insurance as required during this time, all work by the CONTRACTOR pursuant to this agreement shall cease until insurance acceptable to the City is provided. In the event that CONTRACTOR fails to comply with the City’s insurance requirements, the City may take such action as it deems necessary to protect the City’s interests. Such action may include but is not limited to termination of the contract, withholding of payments, or other actions as the City deems appropriate.

If services or the scope of work extend beyond the expiration dates of the required insurance policies initially approved by the City, CONTRACTOR must provide updated certificates and endorsements indicating that the required coverage, terms and conditions are still in place. Renewal certificates and updated endorsements shall be mailed to the Designated Project Manager.

Cancellation
CONTRACTOR shall ensure that coverage shall not be cancelled, reduced or otherwise materially changed except after thirty (30) days’ prior written notice has been given to the City.

Reporting Requirements
Any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policies including breaches of warranties shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers.

Consistent with Public Policy
The insuring provisions, insofar as they may be judged to be against public policy shall be void and unenforceable only to the minimum extent necessary so that the remaining terms and provisions herein may be consistent with public policy and thus enforceable.
463

CITY OF RICHMOND
Sanctuary City Compliance Statement
The undersigned, an authorized agent of (hereafter
"Contractor"), has had an opportunity to review the requirements of City of Richmond Ordinance 12-18 (hereafter "Sanctuary City Contracting Ordinance" or “SCCO”). Contractor understands and agrees that the City may choose with whom it will maintain businessrelations and may refrain from contracting with any person or entity that provides Data Broker or Extreme Vetting services to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Division of the United States Department of Homeland Security (“ICE”).

Contractor understandsthe meaning of the following terms used in the SCCO:
a. "Data Broker” means either of the following:
i. The collection of information, including personal information about consumers, from a wide variety of sources for the purposes of reselling such information to their customers, which include both private-sector business and government agencies; ii. The aggregation of data that was collected for another purpose from that for which it is ultimately used.
b. “Extreme Vetting” means data mining, threat modeling, predictive risk analysis, or other similar services."
Contractor understandsthat it is not eligible to receive or retain a City contract if at the time the Contract is executed, or at any time during the term of the Contract, it provides Data Broker or Extreme Vetting services to ICE.

Contractor further understands and agrees that Contractor'sfailure to comply with the SCCO shall constitute a material default of the Contract and the City Manager may terminate the Contract and bar Contractor from bidding on future contracts with the City for five (5) years from the effective date of the contract termination.

By executing this Statement, Contractor certifies that it complies with the requirements of the SCCO and that if at any time during the term of the Contract it ceases to comply, Contractor will promptly notify the City Manager in writing. Any person or entity who knowingly or willingly suppliesfalse information in violation of the SCCO shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and subject to a $1,000 fine.

Based on the foregoing, the undersigned declares under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed this day of , 20 , at , California.

Printed Name: Title:

Signed: Date:

Business Entity:

Vendor SCCO Compliance Statement (Augt2020)
EXHIBIT G - Sanctuary City Compliance Statement
464

July 11, 2023
Finance Department
DATE: July 11, 2023
TO: Mayor Martinez and Members of the City Council
FROM: Nickie Mastay, Deputy City Manager, Internal Services Mubeen Qader, Deputy Director of Finance
Jerry Chak, Accounting Manager
Subject: Investment and Cash Balance Report and Monthly Overtime Reports for the Month of May 2023
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact due to this agenda item.

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

N/A

STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:

City staff is requesting that the City Council receive the City’s Investment and Cash Balance Report and Monthly
Overtime Reports for the month of May 2023.

RECOMMENDED ACTION: RECEIVE the City’s Investment and Cash Balance Report and Monthly Overtime Reports for the month of
May 2023 – Finance Department (Nickie Mastay/Mubeen
Qader 510-412-2077).

DISCUSSION:

The Investment and Cash Balance Report is a monthly report of the City’s pooled cash balance. The Portfolio Management Report represents the monthly bank balances, along with market balances of permitted investments according to the City’s Investment Policy. Investment in the Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF), money market, agency AGENDA
REPORT
465

July 11, 2023
bonds, certificates of deposits, and corporate notes are all allowable and permitted according to the Fiscal Year (FY) 2022-2023 Investment Policy.

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:

Attachment 1 – Investment and Cash Balance Report for May 2023 Attachment 2 – Overtime Report for May 2023
Attachment 3 – Overtime Public Safety Report for May 2023 466
Finance Department – Treasury Division

M E M O R A N D U M
To: Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Nickie Mastay, Deputy City Manager
Mubeen Qader, Deputy Director of Finance
Jerry Chak, Accounting Manager
Date: July 11, 2023
Subject: MONTHLY CASH BALANCES & INVESTMENT REPORT –
May 2023
Enclosed for your information are the Investment Report, Portfolio Summary, and Comparative Cash Report for the month of May 2023 prepared by the City Treasurer pursuant to the statutory requirements of the State of California.
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475

6. Overtime Report ( All Funds ) ( May 2023)
PERIOD 11, MAY 2023
92% Threshold

ORIGINAL

BUDGET TRANSFERS REVISED BUDGET
YTD

EXPENDED

AVAILABLE
BUDGET
PCT
GENERAL FUND (summary)
400031 OVERTIME/General 1,179,856 442,049 1,621,905 1,890,796 (268,891) 117% 400032 OVERTIME/Sworn 9,499,934 (365,435) 9,134,499 8,885,208 249,291 97% TOTAL GENERAL FUND 10,679,790 76,614 10,756,404 10,776,004 (19,600) 100% Overtime By Department

CITY MANAGER
Administration 2,500 2,500 2,500 0%

CITY CLERK
Administration 20,000 20,000 20,700 (700) 103% Attended monthly City Council meetings. -

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT -
General Plan Code Enforcement 20,380 20,380 2,116 18,264 100% Code Enforcement work performed in North Richmond's Mitigation Fund area.

FINANCE -
Administration 1,900 1,900 156 1,744 8%
General Accounting 2,500 9,500 12,000 10,328 1,672 86%
Payroll 33,700 33,700 68,212 (34,512) 202% Short-staffed Treasury/Cash Management 1,200 1,200 1,939 (739) 162% Special project assisting Public Works researching grants related invoicing and payments
Accounts Payable 600 600 243 357 41%
Revenue Collection 2,000 (7) 1,993 4,104 (2,111) 206% Analyzing and Processing Measure U Business Tax.

TOTAL FINANCE 6,400 44,993 51,393 84,981 (33,588) 165%

HUMAN RESOURCES
Administration 293 (293) 100% Short-staffed in Administration Division POLICE
Administration 324,792 165,435 490,227 473,750 16,477 97% CAD Dispatch System 481,125 199,500 680,625 655,390 25,235 96% RM System 2,420 2,420 965 1,455 40%
Parking Enforcement 5,537 500 6,037 5,620 417 93%
Sworn Administration 5,000,000 (200,000) 4,800,000 4,371,580 428,420 91% Sworn Cops Grant 146,015 (146,015) - -
Sworn Regulatory 19,420 (19,420) - -
TOTAL POLICE 5,979,309 - 5,979,309 5,507,304 472,005 92%

6. Overtime Report ( All Funds ) ( May 2023)
92% Threshold

ORIGINAL

BUDGET TRANSFERS REVISED BUDGET
YTD

EXPENDED

AVAILABLE
BUDGET
PCT
FIRE
Administration - - 1,183 (1,183) 100% One-time Fire Admin special project Suppression - - 113,270 (113,270) 100% Staff retro overtime pay prior to promotion Sworn Administration - - 554 (554) 100%
Sworn Suppression 4,305,402 4,305,402 4,444,435 (139,033) 103% Vacation/Comp Time off; Injury-related leave and vacancies Sworn Prevention 29,097 29,097 13,398 15,699 46%
Sworn Training 55,241 (55,241) 100% Vacation/Comp Time off TOTAL FIRE 4,334,499 - 4,334,499 4,628,081 (293,582) 107%

PUBLIC WORKS & ENGINEERING SVCS
Facility Maintenance Administration - 655 (655) 100%
Stationary Engineers 10,000 10,000 20,159 (10,159) 202% Building Services 1,000 1,000 3,483 (2,483) 348% COVID cleaning in RPD; BART, Main Library Courtyard, Recreation Center.

Stationery Engineers replastered Richmond Swim Center, emergency repair to Plunge pump and hot water pump at Nevin housing; Fleet work on fire apparatus and storm related emergencies.

Utility Sections 100,000 100,000 113,757 (13,757) 114%
Electric 25,000 25,000 36,222 (11,222) 145%
Parks & Landscape Admin 136,000 136,000 241,296 (105,296) 177% Tree trimming, weed control, and emergency call-outs in various areas throughout the City.

Streets Administration - 2,303 (2,303) 100% Special events and storm related activities Street Sweeping 1,100 1,100 680 420 62%
Pavement Maintenance 11,447 11,447 16,863 (5,416) 147%
Traffic Signs & Lines 4,885 4,885 4,770 115 98%
Equipment Services 4,000 4,000 12,583 (8,583) 315%
Abatement Services 27,000 27,000 32,635 (5,635) 121% Increased Dumpster Day Clean-ups TOTAL PUBLIC WORKS 320,432 - 320,432 485,405 (164,973) 151%

LIBRARY
Library Administration - 8,000 8,000 4,718 3,282 59%

COMMUNITY SERVICES
Recreation Administration 600 1,200 1,800 1,276 524 71% Booker T Center 250 250 123 127 49%
Nevin Center 1,000 1,000 1,000 0%
Shields Reid 37 37 37 (0) 0%
Recreation Complex 2,500 2,500 344 2,156 14%
Parchester Center 200 200 54 146 27%
May Valley Center 1,200 1,200 217 983 18%
Recreation DPRC 1,000 (500) 500 232 268 46%

6. Overtime Report ( All Funds ) ( May 2023)
92% Threshold

ORIGINAL

BUDGET TRANSFERS REVISED BUDGET
YTD

EXPENDED

AVAILABLE
BUDGET
PCT
Senior Center 300 300 300 0%
Senior Center Annex 200 87 287 325 (38) 113% Senior Annex staff covering Senior Center while their staff was out Aquatics 2,200 961 3,161 4,056 (895) 128% Aquatics section is short-staffed (lifeguards).

Convention Center 5,000 5,000 31,637 (26,637) 633% Convention center is covering Contra Costa Health Services and Rentals on weekends
Plunge 2,200 955 3,155 4,055 (900) 129% Aquatics section is short-staffed (lifeguards).

TOTAL COMMUNITY SERVICES 16,650 2,741 19,391 42,356 (22,966) 218%

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM
Administration 500 500 50 450 10%
TOTAL GENERAL FUND 10,679,790 76,614 10,756,404 10,776,004 (19,600) 100%

NON-GENERAL FUND
Overtime By Fund
1012 HILLTOP LANDSCAPE MAINT DIST 15,515 15,515 25,019 (9,504) 161% Tree trimming, weed control, irrigation leaks and emergency call-outs 1015 MARINA BAY LNDSCP & LIGHT DIST 25,300 25,300 35,030 (9,730) 138% Tree trimming, weed control, irrigation leaks and emergency call-outs 1018 RENT CONTROL - 701 (701) 100%
1050 CR-PLANNING & BUILDING 9,500 9,500 214 9,286 2%
1055 ENCROACHMENT SVCS 8,000 8,000 11,681 (3,681) 146%
4003 WASTEWATER 8,100 8,100 8,100 0%
4404 RHA-NEVIN PLAZA 15,000 15,000 24,819 (9,819) 165% On call emergency after hours requests and on weekends. 4405 RHA-NYSTROM VILLAGE 10,000 10,000 10,208 (208) 102% On call emergency after hours requests and on weekends. 4501 RHA-CENTRAL OFFICE COST CTR - 247 (247) 100% On call emergency after hours requests and on weekends. 5001 INSURANCE RESERVES - 163 (163) 100%
TOTAL NON-GENERAL FUNDS 91,415 - 91,415 108,082 (16,667) 118%

6.b. Overtime Report ( Public Safety) (May 2023)
City of Richmond
Public Safety Sworn Overtime
Fund: 0001 - General Fund
Period 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Average
Month July August September October November December January February March April May June YTD YTD Remaining Monthly Target % 8% 17% 25% 33% 42% 50% 58% 67% 75% 83% 92% 100% Total $ Total % Budget Expense

ORIGINAL
BUDGET

REVISED
BUDGET
FY2017-18 Overtime - Sworn 3,169,000 3,169,000 569,194 440,670 445,282 459,402 452,278 396,762 322,524 497,979 455,202 554,449 509,368 466,567 5,569,677 175.8% (2,400,677) 464,139.77 FY2018-19 Overtime - Sworn 3,433,019 3,433,019 482,143 537,369 655,866 437,794 524,577 430,398 367,322 512,595 422,587 497,767 536,209 505,966 5,910,593 172.2% (2,477,574) 492,549.39 FY2019-20 Overtime - Sworn 5,000,000 4,800,000 473,963 469,392 491,205 509,931 449,751 473,935 390,897 498,501 501,383 479,696 560,031 439,159 5,737,844 119.5% (937,844) 478,153.64 FY2020-21 Overtime - Sworn 5,000,000 3,533,043 275,202 246,822 296,775 382,618 306,787 278,293 205,529 303,631 307,092 357,284 323,537 368,366 3,651,936 103.4% (118,893) 304,328.00 FY2021-22 Overtime - Sworn 5,165,434 5,165,434 358,067 389,828 472,454 417,698 322,193 301,011 240,070 323,173 309,207 327,424 301,721 360,540 4,123,386 79.8% 1,042,048 343,615.51 FY2022-23 Overtime - Sworn 5,165,435 4,800,000 365,627 345,212 390,077 354,865 370,205 401,964 394,652 472,091 442,662 397,356 436,869 4,371,580 91.1% 428,420 397,416.32 FY2017-18 Overtime - Sworn 2,486,914 2,486,914 268,465 345,174 291,221 359,542 367,182 310,508 336,315 176,449 132,298 196,306 203,912 166,108 3,153,480 126.8% (666,566) 262,789.99 FY2018-19 Overtime - Sworn 2,509,914 2,509,914 257,785 245,946 179,272 171,370 219,937 204,997 261,780 216,596 196,343 310,702 220,368 275,966 2,761,062 110.0% (251,148) 230,088.48 FY2019-20 Overtime - Sworn 4,305,402 2,509,914 295,166 277,886 286,016 300,083 332,654 382,084 347,492 328,467 350,709 302,505 264,571 325,335 3,792,969 151.1% (1,283,055) 316,080.74 FY2020-21 Overtime - Sworn 4,305,402 3,193,165 398,678 380,282 417,982 393,922 267,819 345,928 341,403 305,081 172,961 261,923 263,518 286,039 3,835,537 120.1% (642,372) 319,628.08 FY2021-22 Overtime - Sworn 3,629,097 4,334,499 334,236 434,974 358,578 358,251 352,789 327,832 427,404 396,618 297,215 351,463 715,688 429,890 4,784,938 110.4% (450,439) 398,744.82 FY2022-23 Overtime - Sworn 4,334,499 4,334,499 444,959 444,457 414,638 401,115 402,116 379,882 443,531 475,560 339,814 398,079 369,477 4,513,628 104.1% (179,129) 410,329.82 FY2022-23 TOTAL 9,499,934 9,134,499 810,586 789,669 804,715 755,980 772,321 781,846 838,183 947,651 782,476 795,435 806,347 - 8,885,208 97.3% 249,291 807,746.14

BUDGET ACTUALS TOTAL

POLICE FIRE

479

July 11, 2023
Finance Department
DATE: July 11, 2023
TO: Mayor Martinez and Members of the City Council
FROM: Mubeen Qader, Deputy Director of Finance
Jerry Chak, Accounting Manager
Subject: Contract Amendment with Badawi and Associates for Audit Services
FINANCIAL IMPACT: The cost of this amendment is not to exceed $309,775 per fiscal year. This amount is included in the approved Fiscal Year 2023-2024 budget. Subsequent payments
will be budgeted annually within the subsequent fiscal
year budgets. Funding to cover auditing services is
budgeted within 01172015-400215.

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

March 17, 2020

STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:

City staff is seeking approval to amend its contract with Badawi and Associates to extend for two additional fiscal years to audit the City’s financial statements for the fiscal years ending June 30, 2023, and June 30, 2024.

RECOMMENDED ACTION: APPROVE an amendment to the contract with Badawi and Associates to continue providing annual audit
services to the City and its related entities for Fiscal Years 2022-2023 and 2023-2024, for an amount not to
exceed $309,775 per fiscal year – Finance Department
(Mubeen Qader/Jerry Chak 510-620-6569).

AGENDA
REPORT
480

July 11, 2023
DISCUSSION:

On March 17, 2020, City Council approved a contract with Badawi and Associates to audit the City’s financial statements and financial statements of component entities, including the Richmond Housing Authority, for the fiscal years ending June 30, 2020, June 30, 2021, and June 30, 2022, with an option to extend the contract in one-year periods, not to exceed a total of two additional fiscal years. The performance of Badawi and Associates has been satisfactory; therefore, City staff is seeking a contract amendment for Badawi and Associates to provide annual audit services to the City and its related entities extending to Fiscal Years 2022-2023 and 2023-2024. The amendment extends the contract period by an additional two years and increases the contract amount by $619,550 from $910,820 to $1,530,370 in an amount not to exceed $309,775 per fiscal year.

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:

Attachment 1 – Contract Amendment 1
Attachment 2 – Original Contract
481

CITY OF RICHMOND

CONTRACT AMENDMENT
Department: Project Manager:

Project Manager E-mail: Project Manager Phone No:

P.R. No: Vendor No: P.O./Contract No:

Description of Services:

Amendment No. ___ modifies the: (2nd or subsequent amendments attach Amendment History page)

Term, Payment Limit and Service Plan
Payment Limit and Service Plan

Term and Service Plan
Service Plan
The parties to this Contract Amendment do mutually agree and promise as follows:

1. Parties. The parties to this Contract Amendment are the City of Richmond, California, a municipal corporation (City), and the following named Contractor:

Company Name:

Street Address:

City, State, Zip Code:

Contact Person:

Telephone: Email:

Business License No: / Expiration Date:

A California [ ] corporation, [ ] limited liability corporation [ ] general partnership, [ ] limited partnership, [ ] individual, [ ] non-profit corporation, [ ] individual dba as [specify:]
[ ] other [specify:]

2. Purpose. This Contract Amendment is being entered into to amend the Contract between City and Contractor which was approved by the City Council of the City of Richmond or executed by the City Manager on , which original term commenced on and terminates with an original
contract payment limit of $ . Said contract shall hereinafter be referred to as the "Original Contract" and is incorporated herein by reference.

3. Original Contract Provisions. The parties hereto agree to continue to abide by those terms and conditions of the Original Contract, and any amendments thereto, which are unaffected by this Contract Amendment.

Finance Department Jerry Chak [email protected] (510) 620-6569 14373 5117 Annual audits for the fiscal years ending June 30, 2023 and June 30, 2024. ✔
1 Badawi & Associates
2855 Telegraph Avenue, Suite 312 Berkeley, CA 94705 Ahmed Badawi (510) 768-8244 [email protected] 40059976 December 31, 2023 ✔ April 2, 2020 July 1, 2020 June 30, 2023 910,820.00
482
Contract Amendment/EJ/TE 09-26-07

4. Amendment Provisions. This Contract Amendment is subject to the Amendment Provisions attached hereto, which are incorporated herein by reference, and which control over any conflicting provisions of the Original Contract, or any amendment thereto.

5. City of Richmond Business License Active Status Maintained. Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 7.04.030, the Contractor must maintain its City of Richmond business license for this Contract Amendment to be deemed to be in effect.

6. Insurance Coverage Updated and Maintained. Pursuant to the Original Contract, the Contractor shall provide the City with updated insurance certificates, and the Contractor shall maintain insurance coverage, for this Contract Amendment to be deemed to be in effect.

7. Signatures. These signatures attest the parties’ agreement hereto:

CITY OF RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA
a municipal corporation
By _______________________
Title:

I hereby certify that the Original Contract
and this Amendment have been approved
by the City Council or executed by the City
Manager.

By _______________________
City Clerk
Approved as to form:

By_______________________
City Attorney
List of Attachments:

1. Amendment Provisions

2. Updated Insurance Certificates
CONTRACTOR:
______________________________
(*The Corporation Chairperson of the Board, President or Vice-President should sign on the line below.)
By____________________________
Title:________________________
(*The Corporation Chief Financial Officer, Secretary or Assistant Secretary should sign on the line below.)
By:___________________________
Title:________________________
(NOTE: Pursuant to California Corporations
Code Section 313, if Contractor is a
corporation or nonprofit organization, this
Contract (1) should be signed by the
Chairperson of the Board, President or
Vice-President and the Chief Financial
Officer, Secretary or Assistant Secretary; (2)
should have both signatures conform to
designated representative groups pursuant
to Corporations Code Section 313.

Badawi & Associates 483
Contract Amendment between the City of Richmond and
Amendment No. P.O./Contract No.

AMENDMENT PROVISIONS (TERM, PAYMENT LIMIT AND SERVICE PLAN)

1. Paragraph 2 (Term) of the Original Contract is hereby amended to extend the Contract term. Paragraph 2 of the Original Contract is amended to read as follows:
"2. Term. The effective date of this Contract is
____________________________________________________________ (Insert original contract commencement date)
and it terminates
___________________________________________________.
(Insert new contract termination date)
unless sooner terminated as provided herein."

2. Paragraph 3 (Payment Limit) of the Original Contract is hereby amended to increase the payment limit by $ . Paragraph 3 of the Original Contract is amended to read as follows:
"3. Payment Limit. City's total payments to Contractor under this Contract shall not exceed $ including expenses."
“The City of Richmond shall not pay for services that exceed the Contract Payment Limit without the prior written approval of the City Manager if the total Contract amount does not exceed $10,000 or without the prior approval of the City Council if the total Contract amount is over $10,000.”

3. The Service Plan (Exhibit A) of the Original Contract is hereby amended to include the following tasks and/or services:

Contract Amendment/EJ/TE 9-26-07
1 5117
Badawi & Associates
July 1, 2020 June 30, 2025 619,550.00 1,530,370.00
Contractor shall conduct the annual audits for the fiscal years ending June 30, 2023 and June 30, 2024 of the City of Richmond's (including Successor Agency footnotes) and Richmond Housing Authority's (including RHA Properties and its affiliated entities) financial statements and Single Audits, Joint Powers Financing Authority Financial Statements, Annual Report of City Financial Transactions to State Controller, Management and Internal Control Recommendations and agreed upon procedures report to comply with HUD Real Estate Assessment Center (REAC). If required, Badawi & Associates shall also perform compliance audits of the City's Transportation Development Act Grants.
484
Contract Amendment between the City of Richmond and
Amendment No. P.O./Contract No.

AMENDMENT PROVISIONS (AMENDMENT HISTORY)
The first Contract Amendment was approved by City Council of the City of Richmond or executed by the City Manager on for one or more of the
following provisions (check those that apply):

Increased contract payment limit by $ ________________for a payment limit not to exceed $ _________________________.

Term Amendment (insert new termination date):________________________

Service Plan
The second Contract Amendment was approved by City Council of the City of Richmond or executed by the City Manager on for one or more of the following provisions (check those that apply):

Increased contract payment limit by $ ________________for a payment limit not to exceed $ _________________________.

Term Amendment (insert new termination date):________________________

Service Plan
The third Contract Amendment was approved by City Council of the City of Richmond or executed by the City Manager on for one or more of the
following provisions (check those that apply):

Increased contract payment limit by $ ________________for a payment limit not to exceed $ _________________________.

Term Amendment (insert new termination date):________________________

Service Plan
The fourth Contract Amendment was approved by City Council of the City of Richmond or executed by the City Manager on for one or more of the following provisions (check those that apply):

Increased contract payment limit by $ ________________for a payment limit not to exceed $ _________________________.

Term Amendment (insert new termination date):________________________

Service Plan
The fifth Contract Amendment was approved by City Council of the City of Richmond or executed by the City Manager on for one or more of the
following provisions (check those that apply):

Increased contract payment limit by $ ________________for a payment limit not to exceed $ _________________________.

Term Amendment (insert new termination date):________________________

Service Plan
1 5117
Badawi & Associates
619,550.00 1,530,370.00 6/30/2025 ✔
✔
1,530,370.00 1,530,370.00 1,530,370.00 1,530,370.00
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542

July 11, 2023
Human Resources
DATE: July 11, 2023
TO: Mayor Martinez and Members of the City Council
FROM: Shasa Curl, City Manager
Nickie Mastay, Deputy City Manager, Internal Services
Sharrone Taylor, Interim Director of Human Resources
Subject: Emergency Services Data Analysis Report by Matrix Consultants
FINANCIAL IMPACT: N/A

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

October 19, 2021 and March 15, 2022

STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:

City Council directed City staff to issue a Request for Proposals (RFP) to conduct an emergency services data
analysis. City Council approved a contract with Matrix
Consulting Group as the desired consultant to perform
the analysis and associated details. Matrix has
completed the study and issued a final report.

RECOMMENDED ACTION: RECEIVE a report from Matrix Consulting Group regarding their emergency services data analysis – City Manager’s Office/Human Resources Department (Shasa
Curl/Nickie Mastay/Sharrone Taylor 510-620-6803).

AGENDA
REPORT
543

July 11, 2023
DISCUSSION:

Background
On October 19, 2021, City Council directed City staff to issue a Request for Proposals (RFP) for a consultant to analyze emergency services data. Per the staff report, the purpose of the emergency services data analysis was to provide “A comprehensive assessment of the types of emergencies residents report and our city’s response to calls for service [in order to help] our city improve service delivery and determine where resources are needed.”
The objective of the study was to produce a comprehensive assessment of (1) the types of emergencies that residents report, and (2) our City’s response to emergency calls for service to determine where resources are needed and to help our City improve service delivery.

City staff issued the RFP on December 23, 2021, and Matrix Consulting Group was selected. On March 15, 2022, the City Council approved the contract with Matrix.

Study
The project commenced in April 2022, with Matrix staff meeting with various stakeholders about the project. City staff provided a significant amount of data in order for Matrix to conduct a four-year analysis of police and fire calls for service in Richmond.

Data utilized in this study was developed based on the work conducted by the Matrix project team, including:
• Collection and analysis of workload and service data. • A review of operational documents and reports, budget data, organizational structure, and key practices.
• Planning documents on anticipated developments in the city over the 20-year planning period.

In addition to reviewing data, Matrix interviewed key City personnel such as dispatch, fire, and police employees to develop an understanding of each department, including the organization, structure, and staffing. Matrix conducted interviews at all levels, including managers, supervisors, and line-level staff.

Community engagement was also an important part of the study. Multiple community meetings were held so that the community could provide feedback and input on emergency services in Richmond (police and fire). Matrix held open community forums and attended meetings with various community groups, including the Reimagining Public Safety Task Force, the West Contra Costa Fire Safe Council, Reimagine Richmond, Richmond Neighborhood Coordinating Council, and Richmond Neighbors for Safer Communities.
544

July 11, 2023
While the study encompassed both police and fire issues, most of the discussion in these focus group meetings centered around police services. Matrix used a question guide to facilitate discussion directed toward obtaining valuable input from participants.

Topics included: Legitimacy and Trust; Transparency and Accountability; and Community Priorities.

Report
The study culminated in Matrix issuing two final reports, which are available on the study’s website at https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/4324/Richmond-Emergency-ServicesStudy. The final reports outline the full scope of the study, their methodology, and the data analyzed. They provide a detailed summary of each department including staffing, structure, and calls for service. The reports also provide an analysis of the data that they reviewed and include recommendations for addressing some of the issues identified through the course of the study.

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:

Attachment 1 – Richmond Police Matrix Report
Attachment 2 – Richmond Fire Matrix Report
545
Police Department Emergency Services Review

RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA
March 6, 2023
matrix
consulting group
546
Table of Contents
Introduction and Executive Summary 1
Community Perspectives on Policing in Richmond 9
Summary of the Richmond Police Department 12
Patrol Bureau 28
Investigations Bureau 79
Administration Bureau 102
Office of the Chief 121
547
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 1

1. Introduction and Executive Summary
This document provides the results of the services review for the Richmond Police Department. This report culminates the efforts of the Matrix Consulting Group team working with the Police Department on its operations and resource needs now and into the future.

Scope of Work
The scope of this study included the assessment of current law enforcement operations, response capabilities, staffing, and other resources necessary for the delivery of services to the city. A review of services and the delivery of those services should be performed periodically to ensure needs are being met. This project focused on the emergency services system delivery that included:
• Proactivity
• Resource allocations and staffing
• Alternative service delivery
• Management of resources
• Responsiveness to the public
The study and this report also set the stage for longer term improvements in departmental operations.

Approaches Utilized in the Study
Data utilized in this study was developed based on the work conducted by the project team, including.
• Interviews conducted with staff.
• Collection and analysis of workload and service data. • A review of operational documents and reports, budget data, organizational structure, and key practices.
• Planning documents on anticipated developments in the City over the 20-year planning period.

The study also provided opportunities for the public to provide input into the quality and responsiveness of resources. In all, six public meetings were held with the community. 548
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 2
The input received was valuable to this process and to help the project team better understand the City of Richmond and the community it serves.

Executive Summary
Richmond initiated this Emergency Services Review to address the need for a thorough examination of its current workloads and service delivery and determine what this means for its operations and staffing. The explicit goal for the City in this study of the Police Department (and Fire Department) was to seek a fact-based assessment of workloads and services with a goal of a maximizing efficiency for the resources being committed to public safety services.

However, police services cannot just be examined from a workload and efficiency lens.

The expectations of the community as it relates to transparency, accountability and support are important too. A renewed focus and scrutiny has been placed on law enforcement in recent years, with increased calls for reform and change in policing, particularly regarding interactions with marginalized communities. Responding to the new environment and facilitating a dynamic shift in the police-community relationship will require a new architecture and novel approaches to policing. Adopting a more holistic view of policing practices is critical in anticipating and responding to the heightened level of scrutiny.

Richmond has not stood still waiting for reform. Reducing homicides and gun violence generally by over half from their peak over 10 years ago. The community has risen to help itself; the City has created and/or supported new programs such as the Office of Neighborhood Safety, and the Police Department has focused more on positive interactions and engagement. However, in the past few years these efforts have been in jeopardy in face of strong headwinds associated with questions associated with the legitimacy of policing in the community of and the profession’s inability to attract and retain a work force that supports these goals.

The study undertaken by the Matrix Consulting Group balanced all these objectives – while analytically evaluating staffing needs in each departmental function; the study team also evaluated policies, training, recruitment and hiring.

The perspectives of the community were vital to this process. The Matrix team held five (5) virtual meetings (four virtually and one in person) with community members. The meetings were general, and one was with the business community. While the study encompassed both police and fire issues, most of the discussion in these focus group meetings was on the police. One meeting was just on fire service issues to focus more on those issues. The topics for discussion in these meetings was:
549
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 3
• Legitimacy and Trust
• Transparency and Accountability
• Community Priorities
The first chapter of this report summarizes the input received in these discussions. • The Police Department has had to reduce its services in the past few years due to budget reductions.
• While participants generally feel safe, perceptions of safety vary around the City, and many felt less safe at night.
• Concerns about the impacts of homelessness and persons in mental health crises on crime and current approaches to policing marginalized populations. • Ensure that police officers are accountable for their actions. • The Police Department needs to better use data to make operational decisions. • Many participants felt that the RPD’s response priorities were inconsistent. • Many participants would like to see an increase in RPD engagement with neighborhood meetings, business and other community groups. • Not doing enough about ‘minor crimes’ (e.g., shoplifting). • Some community members felt that in some responses there was disparate treatment.
• Generally, trust of the police has improved this year.

These themes identified and strengthened the need to ensure that the Richmond Police Department not only had adequate resources to work with and support the community but they, too, need adequate support.

Strategic Improvement Opportunities
The following table provides a summary of recommendations established in this report.

The report itself should be reviewed to understand the factual basis behind each recommendation as well as the analysis leading to each recommendation. 550
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 4
Summary of Recommendations
Patrol Bureau
Redistribute the number of officers on each patrol staff to mitigate severe service level issues on certain days, as follows:

Team 1: 11 officers, unchanged from 11
Team 2: 9 officers, down from 10
Team 3: 7 officers, down from 9
Team 4: 13 officers, up from 12
Team 5: 11 officers, down from 12
Add 13 officer positions to patrol in order to achieve a proactive time level of 40%, for a total of 68 authorized officer positions.

Add 1 additional full-time Sergeant to Traffic when supervisory span of control exceeds 7:1 for a total of 2 authorized full-time Sergeants.

Add 1 full-time Lieutenant to manage the Traffic and Special Events Division As staffing allows, fill current vacant positions in Special Enforcement in order to implement an effective traffic safety program.

Maintain current authorized staffing level of 9 officers in Special Enforcement.

Establish policy mandating officers inform dispatch when conducting all traffic stops.

Maintain current authorized staffing level of now 5 Parking Enforcement Representatives.

Form a collaboration of government agencies and community partnerships in order to reduce the abandoned vehicle issue in the City of Richmond.

Add two full-time Commercial Vehicle Enforcement Officer positions to the Special Enforcement Section.

Add two full-time Impaired Driving Enforcement Officer positions to the Special Enforcement Section.

Incorporate the job functions of the Crime Scene Technician into a newly established job classification of Community Service Officer.

Create a new civilian Community Service Officer classification within the department that responds to certain types of non-emergency calls in the field.

Fill the two authorized part-time Cadet position vacancies. 551
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 5
Train dispatchers to incorporate new CSO methodology into call taking and dispatching protocols.

Divert a wide range of non-emergency calls for service to civilian responders, comprising up to 12% of all calls currently handled by sworn officers.

Add 8 full-time Community Service Officers to staff the new Community Service Officer Program.

Create a crisis response unit staffed by civilians to provide a specialized response to calls involving homelessness and mental health crisis, diverting many of them from sworn response.

Two teams should be created for crisis response, each comprised of 1 field clinician and 1 EMT. – In total, this represents an adding two field clinician positions and two EMTs. – The two teams would work 8-hour shifts, from 8:00AM to 4:00PM and 4:00PM to midnight. – One vehicle, one MDT, and two radios would be needed, given the common time for the first shift’s end and the second shift’s start.

Investigations Bureau
Increase authorized staffing in Homicides by 4 detectives for a total of 10 detectives assigned.

Increase authorized staffing in Homicides by 1 sergeant for a total of 2 sergeants assigned.

Increase authorized staffing in the Domestic and Sexual Violence Unit by 7 detectives for a total of 13 detectives assigned.

Increase authorized staffing in the Domestic and Sexual Violence Unit by 1 sergeant for a total of 2 sergeants assigned.

Increase authorized staffing in the General Crimes Unit by 10 detectives for a total of 18.

Increase authorized staffing in the General Crimes Unit by 1 sergeant for a total of 2 sergeants.

Split the General Crimes Unit into person crimes and property crimes (including financial crimes) RPD should stand up a proactive investigative team comprised of 1 sergeant and 4 detectives.

Add 2 crime analysts to assist with cases for a total of 3 analysts assigned.

Add a supervisor in Crime Analysis to oversee the 3 analysts.

Maintain authorized staffing of 1 sergeant in the Safe Streets Task Force.

Add 2 additional civilian crime scene technicians and a supervisor for a total of 3 crime scene technicians and 1 supervisor.

Transition the sworn detective position in the crime scene unit to a civilian position upon 552
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 6
promotion, transfer or retirement of the current crime scene detective.

Administration Bureau
Reassign jail facility supervisory responsibilities to new jail supervisor position (more on jail supervisor recommendation in jail facility section of report).

Create a departmental training committee comprised of a cross-section of employees and community members.

Conduct a training needs assessment.

Develop a yearly department training plan.

Increase annual training to a minimum of 40 hours per year inclusive of state mandated training.

Develop a comprehensive Recruitment, Hiring, and Retention Plan.

Add 2 full-time Background Investigators to the Training and Personnel Unit in order to fill current vacancies.

Add 1 full-time non-sworn Jail Supervisor.

Add an additional 4 Dispatch positions for an authorized total of 1 Communications Manager, 4 Dispatch Supervisors, and 21 Dispatchers.

Maintain the current authorized FTE of 9 Records Specialists in the Property and Records Section but hire to fill the three current vacancies within this position.

Maintain the current authorized FTE of 1 Property Technician in the Property and Records Section but hire to current vacancy within this position.

Maintain the current authorized staffing of 1 FTE Network Specialist II within the Public Safety Technology Section. Hire to fill the current vacancy.

Office of the Chief
Increase the Specialist position within the Crime Prevention Unit from 1 to 2 FTE to account for the increase in need due to the increase in homelessness in Richmond. Assign the two Crime Prevention Specialists to responsibilities surrounding acting as a homelessness liaison, and supporting operations-based crime prevention measures, respectively.

Maintain current authorized staffing of 1 manager and 2 sergeants within the Office of Professional Accountability.
553
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 7
Summary of Recommended Staffing Levels
The analysis of needs has determined that staffing levels in the Police Department are seriously deficient to meet the needs of the public in terms of the balance of workloads, service level and delivery needs. There are many indicators of this overall conclusion – ranging from a severe lack of proactive ability in patrol, cases not followed up or solved, lack of many supportive functions. The analysis has reviewed opportunities to reduce workloads and handle other workloads with different resources. Despite this, major needs remain.

The reader is invited to review the report for the depth needed to understand these issues and the rationale behind the recommendations.

Position
Current
Authorized
Staff Current Staff Difference
New
Recomm.

Positions
New
Authorized
Total Staff
Office of the Chief
Chief of Police 1 1 0 1
Assistant Chief of Police 1 1 0 1
Public Information Officer 1 0 1 1
Admin. Services Analyst 1 1 0 1
Administrative Aid 2 2 0 2
Manager 2 2 0 2
Sergeant 2 2 0 2
Senior Accountant 1 1 0 1
Specialist 1 0 1 1 2
12 10 2 1 13
Patrol Operations Bureau
Captain 1 1 0 1
Lieutenant 6 6 0 1 7
Sergeant 11 10 1 1 12
Officer 65 49 16 13 78
Crime Scene Technician 3 2 1 3
Parking Enforcement Rep. 5 2 3 5
Cadet 2 0 2 2
Commercial Vehicle
Enforcement Officer 0 0 0 2 2
Impaired Driving
Enforcement Officer 0 0 0 2 2
Community Services Officer 0 0 0 8 8
Mental Health Field Clinician 0 0 0 2 2
Mental Health EMT 0 0 0 2 2
93 70 23 31 124
554
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 8
Position
Current
Authorized
Staff Current Staff Difference
New
Recomm.

Positions
New
Authorized
Total Staff
Captain 1 1 0 1
Lieutenant 1 1 0 1
Sergeant 4 4 0 3 7
Detective 19 12 7 21 40
Youth Program Assistant 1 0 1 1
Crime Analyst Supervisor 0 0 0 1 1
Crime Analyst 1 1 0 2 3
Crime Analysis Technician 1 1 0 1
Crime Scene Tech. Supv. 0 0 0 1 1
Crime Scene Technician 0 0 0 3 3
28 20 8 31 59
Administration Bureau
Captain 1 0 1 1
Lieutenant 1 1 0 1
Sergeant 1 1 0 1
Detective (Backgrounds) 0 0 0 2 2
Officer 3 3 0 3
Jailer Supervisor 0 0 0 1 1
Jailer 6 5 1 6
Records Manager 1 1 0 1
Records Specialist 9 6 3 9
Office Assistant II 1 1 0 1
Property Technician 1 0 1 1
Assistant Property
Technician 1 1 0 1
Supervisor 1 1 0 1
Systems Administrator 1 1 0 1
Network Specialist II 1 0 1 1
Network Specialist I 1 1 0 1
CCTV Specialist 1 1 0 1
Communications Manager 1 1 0 1
Communications Supervisor 4 4 0 4
Communications Dispatcher 17 7 10 4 21
52 35 17 7 59
Total 185 135 50 70 255
555
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 9

2. Community Perspectives on Policing in Richmond
As a crucial part of the strategic planning process, project staff at Matrix Consulting Group met with numerous community members in the City of Richmond. These focus groups provided opportunities for stakeholders of Richmond to offer their input to ensure that the focus of policing in the City is tailored to the needs and desires of the community.

This first chapter offers a summary of the key issues gathered from these focus groups.

1. Focus Groups
The Matrix Team held seven (7) virtual meetings (four virtually and one in person) with community members. The meetings were general, and one was with the business community. Two of these meetings were with Richmond’s Reimagining Public Safety Task Force; one was with Richmond’s Neighborhood Coordinating Council. While the study encompassed both police and fire issues, most of the discussion in these focus group meetings was on the police. One meeting was just on fire service issues to focus more on those issues.

2. Question Guide
This question guide was developed by the MCG team to help facilitate discussion directed toward obtaining valuable input from participants. The core questions in this question guide were utilized for both internal and external focus groups to provide parallels in needs and concerns among members of the community.

The meetings were all well-attended with between 20 – 40 participants each and participation rates among attendees was high.

The topics for discussion are described below:

Legitimacy and Trust

1. How would you describe the historical relationship between RPD and the community? Is it getting better, worse or about the same in the past 5 years?

2. Do you feel safe in your community?

3. Do you have trust and confidence in RPD to respond and treat residents appropriately as an incident or event requires?

4. Do you believe RPD works to develop and maintain strong relationships with the community?
556
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 10

5. Do you think RPD works to develop and maintain strong relationships with minority communities?
Transparency and Accountability

6. Do you believe RPD demonstrates transparency, accountability, and integrity as it relates to complaints?

7. Do you believe RPD is receptive to feedback and complaints from the public and does RPD make it easy for the public to express their concerns? Community Priorities

8. What do you believe should be the primary roles of police in Richmond?

9. Effective policing goes far beyond dealing with criminal matters. Would you like to see RPD continue these types of initiatives?

10. Do you believe police should help resolve cultural and social issues?

11. Would you be willing to work with the police to improve and strengthen your community for all residents?

3. Community Focus Group Key Themes
Listed below are key themes that were consistently found throughout most internal and external focus groups. Following these key themes, a further expansion of meetings notes is provided.

Issues Identified
• The Police Department has had to reduce its services in the past few years due to budget reductions.
• While participants generally feel safe, perceptions of safety vary around the City, and many felt less safe at night.
• Concerns about the impacts of homelessness and persons in mental health crises on crime and current approaches to policing marginalized populations. • Ensure that police officers are accountable for their actions. • The Police Department needs to better use data to make operational decisions. • Many participants felt that the RPD’s response priorities were inconsistent. • Many participants would like to see an increase in RPD engagement with neighborhood meetings, business and other community groups. 557
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 11
• Not doing enough about ‘minor crimes’ (e.g., shoplifting). • Some community members felt that in some responses there was disparate treatment.
• Generally, trust of the police has improved this year.

Solutions Identified
• Hire more officers; create more diverse roles for officers (e.g., bikes). • Provide resources inside and/or outside of police to support marginalized communities (e.g., homeless and persons in need of mental health services). • Improve police oversight internally as well as through the Police Review Commission.
• More visibility, especially at night.
• Manage expectations on response starting at dispatch. • While Covid19 may have driven perceptions of engagement, double down on program involvement.
• More youth programs.
• An enhanced recruitment effort can help the RPD be more reflective of the community it serves.
• Provide greater transparency on complaints made against officers. • Implement multi-lingual support throughout the Department. • Provide my training to officers; provide more training on diversity, equity, and inclusion to officers.

These perspectives provided an important base for the assessment conducted by the project team.
558
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 12

3. Summary of the Richmond Police Department
The following descriptive profile outlines the organization, structure, and staffing of the Richmond Police Department (RPD). The information contained in the profile was developed through many interviews conducted within RPD at all levels of the organization, including managers, supervisors, and line-level staff. The structure of the profile is:
• The organizational structure of each area of the Police Department. • High level descriptions of the main functions and work areas of each division. • The number of authorized (budgeted) and current (filled) positions by rank or classification assigned to each functional area.
• The roles, objectives, and responsibilities of each functional area.

The profile was the first deliverable of this project and was reviewed with managers in the Department. The profile helped to serve as a foundation for our assumptions regarding staffing and current organizational characteristics of the Department.

1. Police Department Organization
The Richmond Police Department serves a diverse community of approximately 115,000 residents over a geographic area of 56 square miles, of which 33.7 miles are land and

22.3 miles are water area. Located within the city limits are numerous residential neighborhoods, an active port, industrial and technological resources, major retail and business centers, and several thousand acres of parkland.

The Department is organized into three Bureaus: Patrol Operations, Investigations, and Administration. Each Bureau is subsequently organized into Divisions and Sections. Each Bureau, as well as the Office of the Chief are detailed in the following sections.

The following chart outlines the organization of the Richmond Police Department:
559
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 13

2. Office of the Chief
The office of the Chief is comprised of the Chief of Police, the Assistant Chief, the Office of Professional Accountability, the Financial Services Unit, and the Crime Prevention Services Unit. Also located in the office of the chief is the Public Information Officer, the Administrative Services Analyst, and the Administrative Aide. Staff is comprised of a combination of sworn and non-sworn personnel.

The Chief provides overall direction, guidance, and leadership for the Police Department.

The Chief has responsibility for every area of the organization and ensures that the Department meets its mission in accordance with the established values and has overall responsibility for budget management.
(1) Organization
The following chart outlines the organization of the administrative functions of the office of the Chief:

City of Richmond
Police Department
Chief of Police
Patrol
Operations
Bureau
Northern District
Patrol
Central District
Patrol
Southern District
Patrol
Traffic & Special
Events Division
Investigations
Bureau
Investigative
Units
Crime Scene Unit
Crime Analysis
Unit
Task Forces
Administration
Bureau
Personnel &
Training Section
Records Section
Police IT Section
Communications
Center
560
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 14
(2) Staffing and Unit Descriptions
The following table provides the personnel and major tasks of staff in the Office of the Chief:

Unit/Division Filled Auth Position Unit Description
Office of the Chief
1 1
0 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
Chief of Police
Assistant Police Chief
Public Information Officer
Admin. Services Analyst
Administrative Aide
• The Chief of Police provides
executive leadership of the Police
Department and serves as the
chief law enforcement official of
the city. The Chief interfaces with
elected officials, city
management, and the public as
necessary.
• The Assistant Chief assists with
executive leadership, oversight of
employees, and assists the Chief
of Police as needed.
• The Public Information Officer
promotes cooperation between
the department and news media,
disseminates information, and
interacts with community
members.
• The Administrative Services
Analyst serves as the executive
Chief of Police
Assistant
Police Chief
Crime
Prevention
Services Unit
Financial
Services Unit
Office of
Professional
Accountability
Administrative
Aide
Administrative
Analyst
Public
Information
Officer
561
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 15
Unit/Division Filled Auth Position Unit Description
assistant to the Chief of Police
and assists with administrative
duties as needed.
• The Administrative Aide assists
with administrative tasks and
functions.

Office of
Professional
Accountability
1 2
1 2
Manager
Sergeant
• The Manager manages the day-today operations of the office and supervises the two sergeants.
• The Sergeant conducts internal
investigations related to potential
department policy violations.
• The office also conducts internal
investigations of officer involved
shootings and/or other critical
incidents, and uses of force as
mandated by department policy.

Conduct internal audits of
department policies and
procedures.

Financial Services
Unit
1 1
1 1
Senior Accountant
Administrative Aide
(shared with Personnel &
Training half time)
• The Senior Accountant is
responsible for the management
of all purchases and requisitions.
• Responsibilities include
maintaining department budget,
managing cash collections,
assists with grants and proposals,
assists with resource planning,
and financial management of
external contracts.
• The Administrative Aide
completes purchase orders and
entries.

Crime Prevention
Services Unit
1 0
1 1
Manager
Specialist
• The Manager manages the day-today operations of the unit and provides oversight. Member of
the city’s reimagining public
safety task force,
• The Manager and Specialist are
responsible for the following
tasks: All crime prevention
services, education, special
events training, and community
outreach programs, department
intern and volunteer programs,
raising funds for emergency
housing assistance and
562
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 16
Unit/Division Filled Auth Position Unit Description
encampment resolution funds,
and homeless outreach services.

Sworn 4 4
Non-Sworn 6 8
Total Staff 10 12

3. Patrol Operations Bureau
The Patrol Operations Bureau is led by a Captain and is comprised of the Patrol Division and the Traffic and Special Events Unit. Staff is comprised of a combination of sworn and non-sworn personnel.
(1) Organization
The following chart outlines the organizational structure within the Operations Division:
(2) Staffing and Unit Descriptions
The following table provides the personnel and major tasks of staff in the Patrol Operations Bureau:

Patrol
Operations
Bureau
Team 1
Traffic &
Special Events
Parking
Enforcement
Cadets
Mental Health
Team
Team 2 Team 3 Team 4 Team 5
563
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 17
Unit/Division Filled Auth Position Unit Description
Patrol Operations Bureau
1 1 Captain • The Captain manages the overall
operations of the bureau and provides
oversight of all employees.

Team 1 1
2 8
0 1
1 2
10 1
1 Lieutenant
Sergeant
Patrol Officer
K9 Officer
Crime Scene Tech.
• The Lieutenant manages the overall
operations of the team and provides
oversight of all employees.
• The Lieutenant is the Watch Commander
while on shift and has the following
collateral duties: Traffic/Special Unit,
administrative oversight of the Southern
District, PIO/Social Media, Marine Unit,
Homeless Outreach/Public Dumping,
Explores, Bicycle Coordinator,
Cadets/Rangers, Honor Guard, CSI/CST
Program, Youth Services, CCTV
Manager, and Awards Committee.
• The Sergeant serves as a first-line
supervisor and has a collateral duty of
administrative oversight of a city district.
• The Officer is assigned to a beat,
responds to community generated calls
for service, and provides proactive law
enforcement services.
• The K9 Officer is assigned to a beat,
responds to community generated calls
for service, and assists officers with
canine services when needed.
• The Crime Scene Technician responds to
calls which require evidence collection
and scene processing.
• Team 1 works 4/10 schedule MondayThursday, 6:30am-4:30pm.

Mental Health
Team
0 1 Officer • The Mental Health Task Force Officer is
partnered with a mental health worker. A
county wide team which responds to
citizens in crisis and coordinates followup services.
• Team 1 Sergeant supervises the Mental
Health Team Officer.

Team 2 1
2 7
0 1
1 2
9 1
1 Lieutenant
Sergeant
Officer
K9 Officer
Crime Scene Tech.
• The Lieutenant manages the overall
operations of the team and provides
oversight of all employees.
• The Lieutenant is the Watch Commander
on shift and has the following collateral
duties: Administrative oversight of the
Northern District, department overtime
564
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 18
Unit/Division Filled Auth Position Unit Description
signup, Asset Forfeiture Program, and
Crime Free Multi Housing.
• The Sergeant serves as a first-line
supervisor and has a collateral duty of
administrative oversight of a city district.
• The Officer is assigned to a beat,
responds to community generated calls
for service, and provides proactive law
enforcement services.
• The Crime Scene Technician responds to
calls which require evidence collection
and scene processing.
• Team 2 works 4/10 schedule MondayThursday, 3pm-1am.

Team 3 2
2 8
1 2
2 9
1 Lieutenant
Sergeant
Officer
K9 Officer
(1 Lieutenant is
currently on
extended leave)
• The Lieutenant manages the overall
operations of the team and provides
oversight of all employees.
• The Lieutenant is the Watch Commander
on shift and has the following collateral
duties: Office of Emergency Services
liaison and Civil Unrest Coordinator.
• The Sergeant serves as a first-line
supervisor and has a collateral duty of
administrative oversight of a city district.
• The Officer is assigned to a beat,
responds to community generated calls
for service, and provides proactive law
enforcement services.
• The K9 Officer is assigned to a beat,
responds to community generated calls
for service, and assists officers with
canine services when needed.
• The Crime Scene Technician responds to
calls which require evidence collection
and scene processing (duties currently
assigned as an auxiliary function for an
officer).
• Team 3 works 4/10 schedule MondayThursday, 9pm-7am.

Team 4 1
2 10
1 0
1 2
11 1
1 Lieutenant
Sergeant
Officer
K9 Officer
Crime Scene Tech.
• The Lieutenant manages the overall
operations of the team and provides
oversight of all employees.
• The Lieutenant is the Watch Commander
on shift and has the following collateral
duties: Administrative oversight of the
Central District, use of force board, CIT
program manager, Peer Support Team,
565
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 19
Unit/Division Filled Auth Position Unit Description
Recruiting Team, employee preemployment background investigator. • The Sergeant serves as a first-line
supervisor and has a collateral duty of
administrative oversight of a city district.
• The Officer is assigned to a beat,
responds to community generated calls
for service, and provides proactive law
enforcement services.
• The K9 Officer is assigned to a beat,
responds to community generated calls
for service, and assists officers with
canine services when needed.
• The Crime Scene Technician responds to
calls which require evidence collection
and scene processing (duties currently
assigned as an auxiliary function for an
officer).
• Team 4 works 3/12.5 schedule FridaySunday, 6:30am-7pm (1 Thursday payback day each month for training).

Team 5 1
2 8
1 1
2 11
1 Lieutenant
Sergeant
Officer
K9 Officer
• The Lieutenant manages the overall
operations of the team and provides
oversight of all employees.
• The Lieutenant is the Watch Commander
on shift and has the following collateral
duties: Vehicle fleet, dirt bikes, Police
Explores, Range/Firearms, and Armory.
• The Sergeant serves as a first-line
supervisor and has a collateral duty of
administrative oversight of a city district.
• The Officer is assigned to a beat,
responds to community generated calls
for service, and provides proactive law
enforcement services.
• The K9 Officer is assigned to a beat,
responds to community generated calls
for service, and assists officers with
canine services when needed.
• The Crime Scene Technician responds to
calls which require evidence collection
and scene processing (duties currently
assigned as an auxiliary function for an
officer).
• Team 5 works 3/12.5 schedule FridaySunday, 6:30pm-7am (1 Thursday payback day each month for training).
566
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 20
Unit/Division Filled Auth Position Unit Description
Traffic & Special
Events Unit
0 4
1 9
Sergeant
Officer
• The Traffic & Special events unit is
managed by the Patrol Team 1
Lieutenant.
• The Sergeant is the first line supervisor.
• The officer responds to community
generated calls for service related to
traffic crashes and provides proactive
traffic enforcement.
• Officers work 7am-5pm, MondayThursday or Tuesday-Friday.

Parking
Enforcement Unit
2 5 Representative • The Parking Enforcement Unit is
supervised by the Traffic & Special
Events Unit Sergeant.
• Representatives tow abandoned
vehicles, tag vehicles for later
abatement, issue citations for illegally
parked vehicles and vehicles parked in
no parking zones during street sweeping
days.

Cadet Program 0 2 Cadet (PT) • Cadets complete certain past-tense crime reports and assist the Parking
Enforcement Unit as needed.

Sworn 65 83
Non-Sworn 4 10
Total Staff 69 93

4. Investigations Bureau
The Investigations Bureau is led by a Captain and is comprised of the Homicide Unit, General Crimes Unit, Domestic Violence Unit, and Youth Services. Also located within the Investigations Bureau is the Crime Analyst, a Crime Scene Detective, and the FBI Task Force Sergeant. Staff is comprised of a combination of sworn and non-sworn personnel.

Staff is comprised of a combination of sworn and non-sworn personnel. (1) Organization
The following chart outlines the organizational structure within the Investigations Bureau:
567
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 21
(2) Staffing and Unit Descriptions
The following table provides the personnel and major tasks of staff in the Investigations Bureau:

Unit/Division Filled Auth Position Unit Description
Investigations Bureau
1 1 Captain • The Captain oversees the day-to-day
operations and coordinates long term
planning.
• The Captain coordinates with other
divisions/units and supervises the
lieutenant.
1 1 Lieutenant • The Lieutenant oversees daily operations and coordinates internal resources.
• The lieutenant supervises the four
sergeants.

Homicide 1
3 1
4 Sergeant
Detective
• The Sergeant supervises the detectives.
• Assigns, monitors and reviews cases.
• Coordinates resources.

Investigations
Bureau
Homicide General Crimes
Domestic and
Sexual Violence /
FJC
Youth Services
Crime Analysis Crime Scene
Task Forces
568
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 22
Unit/Division Filled Auth Position Unit Description
• The Detectives investigate homicides,
shootings, serious assaults.
• Detectives conduct interviews, write
warrants and complete investigative
reports.
• Detectives work dayshift hours on a 4-
10 schedule covering Monday through
Friday.

Domestic and
Sexual
Violence/FJC Unit
1 3
1 5
Sergeant
Detective
• The Sergeant supervises the detectives.
• Assigns, monitors and reviews cases.
• Coordinates resources.
• The detectives investigate sex crimes
cases including sex assault and sex
abuse.
• The Detectives also investigate
domestic violence cases.
• Detectives conduct interviews, write
warrants and complete investigative
reports.
• Detectives work dayshift hours on a 4-
10 schedule covering Monday through
Friday.

General Crimes 1
4 1
6 Sergeant
Detective
• The Sergeant supervises the detectives.
• Assigns, monitors and reviews cases.
• Coordinates resources.
• The Detectives investigate all crimes
that are not investigated by other units
which includes assaults, robberies, and
property crimes.
• Detectives conduct interviews, write
warrants and complete investigative
reports.
• Detectives work dayshift hours on a 4-
10 schedule covering Monday through
Friday.

Youth Services 1
0 3
1 Detective
Youth Program
Services Assistant
• The Detectives investigate youth related
crimes.
• Detectives conduct interviews, write
warrants and complete investigative
reports.
• Detectives workday shift hours on a 4-
10 schedule covering Monday through
Friday.
• The Youth Program Services Assistant
completes various administrative
assignments in support of the PAL crime
prevention program, assists in oversight
569
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 23
Unit/Division Filled Auth Position Unit Description
of PAL grant funds, and manages the
truancy and diversion programs.

Crime Analysis 1
1 1
1 Crime Analyst
Crime Analysis
Technician
• The Crime Analyst prepares crime
statistics.
• Conducts cell phone downloads.
• Assists detectives with other
investigative tasks.
• The Crime Analysis Technician assists
the Crime Analyst as needed.

Task Force 1 1 Sergeant • Assigned to FBI Safe Streets Task Force.
• Supervises officers from multiple
agencies.
• Conducts long term investigations.

Crime Scene 1 1 Detective • Processes crime scenes.
• Recovers and documents evidence.

Sworn 18 25
Non-Sworn 2 3
Total Staff 20 28

5. Administration Bureau
The Administration Bureau is led by a Captain and comprised of the Personnel and Training Section, the Records Section, the Police IT Section, and the Communications Center. Staff is comprised of a combination of sworn and non-sworn personnel. 570
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 24
(1) Organization
The following chart outlines the organization of the Administration Bureau:
(2) Staffing and Unit Descriptions
The following table provides the personnel and major tasks of staff within the Administration Bureau:

Unit/Division Filled Auth Position Unit Description
Administration Bureau
0 1
1 1
Captain
Lieutenant
• The Captain manages the overall
operations of the administration
bureau and provides oversight of
all employees (position is currently
vacant – Investigations Bureau
Captain currently oversees as
collateral assignment).
• The Lieutenant manages the dayto-day operations of the bureau. • The Lieutenant oversees
department injury and long-term
disability claims, oversees city
external contracts.

Personnel and
Training Section
1 2
1 2
Sergeant
Officer
Administrative Aide (PT)
(shared with Financial
Services Unit – included
in Office of Chief total)
• The Sergeant supervises the dayto-day operations of the personnel and training section and the jail
facility.
• The Sergeant works Monday
through Thursday, 6am – 4pm.
• The sergeant has the following
collateral duties: Oversees station
upkeep/maintenance, SWAT
Administration
Bureau
Personnel and
Training Section
Jail Facility
Property and
Records Section
Police Safety
Technology Section
Communications
Center
571
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 25
Unit/Division Filled Auth Position Unit Description
sergeant, K9 coordinator, Firearms
and Defensive Tactics
instructor/PTO coordinator.
• The Sergeant also supervises the
day-to-day operations of the jail.
• One Officer is assigned to
recruiting and hiring duties. One
officer is assigned to coordinate
department’s in-service training.
• The part time Administrative Aide
schedules applicant background
investigation interviews and
performs administrative functions.

Works 2 days in personnel and
training section and 2 days in
finance section.

Jail Facility 1
5 1
6 Officer
Jailer
• The Officer is the lead jailer and
performs jailer functions and
transports prisoners as needed.
• The Jailer performs prisoner
searches, conducts medical
screenings, books prisoners into
jail, and are responsible for the
care and custody of prisoners in
facility.
• Jailers are broken up into 3 teams
of 2 and work 6am-6pm, 6pm-6am,
and 2pm-12am.

Property and
Records Section
1 6
1 0
1 1
9 1
1 1
Records Manager
Records Specialist
Office Assistant II
Property Technician
Assistant Property
Technician
• The Records Manager oversees
the day-to-day operations of the
section and provides oversight of
employees. Reports to the
Administrative Lieutenant.
• Records Manager manages
employee shift schedules and
oversees compliance statistics
and information related data
bases.
• The Records Specialist is
responsible for records data entry
and oversight. 2 work dayshifts, 2
work swing shift, and 1 works
graveyard.
• The Office Assistant II completes
subpoena data entry and is liaison
with Richmond court facilities.
• The Property Technician conducts
property and evidence entry,
572
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 26
Unit/Division Filled Auth Position Unit Description
maintains storage and upkeep, and
catalogues all property. Oversees
management of all firearms and
ammunition.
• The Assistant Property Technician
assists the Property Technician
will all duties and functions.

Police Safety
Technology
Section
1 1
0 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
Supervisor
Systems Administrator
Network Specialist II
Network Specialist I
CCTV Specialist
• The Supervisor manages the dayto-day operation of the section and provides employee oversight.
• The Supervisor has oversight for
all police and fire technology,
technological based operating
systems, CLEPT coordination, and
liaison with CA DOJ.
• The Supervisor is responsible for
all section employee hiring and
training.
• The Systems Administrator
supervises section employees.
• The Systems Administrator
maintains and updates CAD/RMS
system and updates vendor
contracts.
• The Network Specialist II assists
with data related tasks,
maintenance of routers and
switches, updates firewalls as
needed. Assists technical
administration contracts and
vendors. Assists in on-going
maintenance of mobile devices,
tablets, laptops, and other devices.
• The Network Specialist I performs
P/C tech and oversees all
technology reparations throughout
department. Manages all
equipment hardware updates and
replacement as needed.
• The CCTV Specialist is responsible
for all on-site maintenance,
cleaning, and upkeep of all CCTV
cameras throughout Richmond
and at the Hall of Justice building.

Communications
Center
1 4
1 4
Manager
Supervisor
• The Manager oversees the day-today operations of the communication center.
573
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 27
Unit/Division Filled Auth Position Unit Description
13 17 Dispatcher Responsible for building and
equipment contracts and upkeep.
• The Supervisor is the first-line
supervisor of assigned team and
oversees the team’s functions
during shift.
• The Dispatcher answers
emergency and non-emergency
telephone calls from citizens, gives
medical instructions as needed,
dispatches calls for services and
assists field personnel.
• Dispatch personnel are broken up
into 4 teams of 1 supervisor/2
dispatchers who work 3, 12-hour
shifts.
• Each team is responsible for 3
dispatch channels during a shift.

Sworn 5 6
Non-Sworn 36 46
Total Staff 41 52
574
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 28

4. Patrol Bureau

1. Patrol Workload Analysis
The following sections provide analysis of patrol workload and other issues relating to the effectiveness of field services.
(1) CAD Analysis Methodology
Our project team has calculated the community-generated workload of the department by analyzing incident records in the computer aided dispatch (CAD) database, covering the entirety of calendar year 2021.

Data for multiple years was received and analyzed as part of this study; however, the analysis of staffing needs focuses on a single year (2021) in order to compare current staffing capacity against workload. In the multi-year analysis, which is contained at the end of this chapter, a three-year period is used. This is because the department used a different CAD system prior to then that would not have provided useable data for the analysis.

For incidents to be identified as community-generated calls for service and included in our analysis of patrol, each of the following conditions needed to be met:
• The incident must have been unique.
• The incident must have been first created in calendar year 2021. 2021 is the best of recent years to use as a base because of the unique nature of workloads in 2020 due to Covid19 and the timeliness of workloads pre-Covid. • The incident must have involved at least one officer assigned to patrol, as identified by the individual unit codes of each response to the call. • The incident type of the event must have sufficiently corresponded to a community-generated event. Call types that could be identified with a high level of certainty as being either self-initiated (e.g., traffic stops) or other kinds of activity generated by the department (e.g., directed patrol) are not counted as communitygenerated calls for service. • There must have been no major irregularities or issues with the data recorded for the incident that would prevent sufficient analysis, such as having no unit code or lack of any time stamps.
575
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 29
After filtering through the data using the methodology outlined above, the remaining incidents represent the community-generated calls for service handled by RPD patrol units.
(2) Calls for Service by Hour and Weekday
The following table displays the total number of calls for service handled by patrol units by each hour and day of the week:

Calls for Service by Hour and Weekday (2021)
Hour Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Total
12a 390 203 165 168 177 230 275 1,608
1am 289 181 121 139 138 180 219 1,267
2am 222 128 125 140 124 151 175 1,065
3am 214 125 121 117 116 137 152 982
4am 109 97 94 89 109 114 137 749
5am 125 110 90 113 97 116 121 772
6am 121 125 153 121 123 137 93 873
7am 152 199 184 202 189 171 158 1,255
8am 234 292 258 244 260 285 260 1,833
9am 298 345 313 318 280 299 315 2,168
10am 340 324 296 301 311 329 359 2,260
11am 322 336 305 322 356 359 335 2,335
12pm 313 366 312 364 320 354 370 2,399
1pm 372 330 315 315 306 356 346 2,340
2pm 342 365 335 356 362 374 341 2,475
3pm 342 362 373 343 360 358 365 2,503
4pm 367 348 389 379 400 375 352 2,610
5pm 329 373 399 400 375 389 362 2,627
6pm 364 370 352 363 387 381 392 2,609
7pm 384 368 357 341 374 444 421 2,689
8pm 404 284 309 346 364 387 449 2,543
9pm 358 312 305 318 330 414 521 2,558
10pm 350 298 266 306 345 404 608 2,577
11pm 243 235 257 277 250 364 484 2,110
Total 6,984 6,476 6,194 6,382 6,453 7,108 7,610 47,207
576
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 30
Call activity is approximately consistent throughout the week, except for Friday and Saturday evenings, which have increase call activity for several hours later than other nights.

The following chart demonstrates how call activity is distributed specifically across a 24- hour period:

Call for Service Activity by Hour (2021)
Call for service activity forms a highly consistent plateau from the mid-morning until the late evening. During this period, activity levels fluctuate by only minimal degrees. Given that the plateau period is around 12 hours in duration, this finding provides important considerations for patrol officer deployment and scheduling. (3) Calls for Service by Month
The following table displays calls for service totals by month, showing seasonal variation as a percentage difference from the quarterly average:
577
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 31
Calls for Service by Month (2021)
Month # of CFS Seasonal +/-
Jan 3,897
Feb 3,302 -6.7%
Mar 3,808
Apr 3,726
May 4,267 +2.1%
Jun 4,056
Jul 4,212
Aug 4,022 +2.9%
Sep 3,913
Oct 4,158
Nov 3,845 +1.7%
Dec 4,001
Total 47,207
Seasonality is relatively even, except for the first quarter, which has markedly less call activity compared with the other months. This could be partially since COVID-19 restrictions were still largely in effect during this period, thus leading to reduced call activity. As restrictions were eased in later months, call activity appears to have picked back up.
(4) Most Common Types of Calls for Service
The following table provides the ten most common incident categories of calls for service handled by patrol units in 2021, as well as the average call handling time (HT)1 for each:
1 Handling time is defined as the total time in which a patrol unit was assigned to an incident. It is calculated as the difference between the recorded time stamps the unit being dispatched and cleared from the incident.
578
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 32
Most Common Call for Service Categories (2021)
Incident Type2 # CFS HT 12a 4a 8a 12p 4p 8p
DISTURBANCE 4,189 26.2
ALARM AUDIBLE 3,049 19.2
UNWANTED PERSON 2,419 24.9
MUSIC 2,275 16.2
SUSP. PERSON 1,739 20.2
SUSP. VEHICLE 1,623 29.0
911 DISCONN. 1,418 23.5
MV THEFT 1,383 54.1
MENTAL PATIENT 1,295 29.5
PARKING VIOL. 1,290 32.4
All Other Types 26,527 39.4
Total 47,207 33.5
Motor vehicle thefts, which are the only call type on the list with a handling time over 50 minutes, have a narrow activity window centered around 9:00AM. This is likely as people wake and find that their car is missing, resulting in a significant uptick in workload. (5) Call for Service Response Time by Priority Level
The following table displays call for service statistics priority level, showing the distribution of calls by response time for each category, with the median (middle value) response time3 indicated as a semitransparent blue line:
2 It should be noted that call types have been abbreviated, with each of those listed corresponding to the “(In Progress)” subtype.
3 Response time is defined in this report as the duration between the call creation timestamp and the arrival time stamp for the first patrol officer on the scene. 579
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 33
Call for Service Response Time by Priority Level (2021) Response times to emergency calls for service (P1) are excellent, with a median response time of just 6.7 minutes. The next-most severe priority category comprises 46% of all calls for service, indicating that it is an exceptionally broad grouping of call types. Even so, the median response time is low, at just 12.2 minutes. It is not until the least severe call type (P4), which comprises only 21% of all calls for service, that median response time rises above 30 minutes.

In agencies where patrol is severely short-staffed, it is common for response times for lower-priority incidents to be high. This reflects situations where there are no units available to take these calls. The variation in response times by hour also tends to reflect this, with periods of higher workload relative to the number of on-duty officers having extended response times.

This is true in Richmond as well, as shown by the following table displaying median response times by hour for all calls, as well as lower priority calls for service (P4) specifically:

Median Response Times by Hour (2021)
Hour All CFS P4 Only
0000 11.0 21.2
0100 9.9 20.9
0200 9.2 16.0
0300 9.3 14.8
0400 10.1 18.0
0500 10.7 21.0
0600 31.5 69.9
580
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 34
Hour All CFS P4 Only
0700 20.4 37.9
0800 16.3 33.7
0900 18.3 29.3
1000 19.7 35.0
1100 19.7 38.3
1200 21.5 43.4
1300 21.5 40.6
1400 21.9 39.1
1500 26.1 47.4
1600 19.8 44.1
1700 21.0 50.2
1800 27.0 50.2
1900 18.8 35.2
2000 15.0 34.2
2100 15.3 33.3
2200 11.9 22.6
2300 11.3 23.9
Overall 17.0 37.4
In addition to the sharp uptick at 0600, response time steadily increases in the afternoon and early evening hours. For P4 incidents, it reaches a level that is more than three times that of the late nighttime hours.

2. Analysis of Patrol Resource Needs
Analysis of the community-generated workload handled by patrol units is at the core of analyzing field staffing needs. Developing an understanding of where, when, and what types of calls are received provides a detailed account of the service needs of the community, and by measuring the time used in responding and handling these calls, the staffing requirements for meeting the community’s service needs can then be determined.

To provide a high level of service, it is not enough for patrol units to function as call responders. Instead, officers must have sufficient time outside of community-driven workload to proactively address public safety issues, conduct problem-oriented policing, and perform other self-directed engagement activities within the service environment. As a result, patrol staffing needs are calculated not only from a standpoint of the capacity of current resources to handle workloads, but also their ability to provide a certain level of service beyond responding to calls.
581
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 35
With this focus in mind, the following sections examine process used by the project team to determine the patrol resource needs of the Richmond Police Department based on current workloads, staff availability, and service level objectives. (1) Overview of the Resource Needs Analysis
An objective and accurate assessment of patrol staffing requires analysis of the following three factors:
i. The number of community-generated workload hours handled by patrol.
ii. The total number of hours that patrol is on-duty and able to handle those workloads, based on current staffing numbers and net availability factors (e.g., leave, administrative time, etc.). iii. The remaining amount of time that patrol must be proactive, which can also be referred to as “uncommitted” time.

This study defines the result of this process as, patrol proactivity, or the percentage of patrol officers’ time in which they are available and on-duty that is not spent responding to community-generated calls for service. This calculation can also be expressed visually as an equation:

Total Net Available Hours – Total CFS Workload Hours
Total Net Available Hours
= % Proactivity
The result of this equation is the overall level of proactivity in patrol, which in turn provides a model for the ability of patrol units to be proactive given current resources and community-generated workloads. There are some qualifications to this, which include the following:
• Optimal proactivity levels are a generalized target, and a single percentage should be applied to every agency. The actual needs of an individual department vary based on several factors, including:
– Other resources the department must proactively engage with the community and address issues, such as a dedicated proactive unit. – Community expectations and ability to support a certain level of service. – Whether fluctuations in the workload levels throughout the day require additional or fewer resources to be staffed to provide adequate coverage. 582
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 36
• Sufficient proactivity at an overall level does not guarantee, based on workload patterns, and deployment schedules, that resources are sufficient throughout all times of the day and week.

Overall, the Richmond Police Department should generally target an overall proactivity level of at least 35-40% as an effective benchmark of patrol coverage.

Additional context behind this range, and the service level that proactive time levels above and below this range translate to, are provided in the following dot points:
• In agencies that are severely understaffed in patrol functions, and consequently have very little proactive time (under 35% overall), calls will frequently be held in queues as resources cannot handle the incoming workload. Proactivity also falls behind, as officers in such agencies would have little to no time to be proactive.

When gaps do occur, the high rate of workload relative to available time can have a limiting factor on self-initiated generation, as officers avoid being tied up on a proactive activity such as a traffic stop in case priority calls for service occur. • As proactivity increases (around 35-45% overall), the generation of self-initiated activity rapidly increases, as officers can deal with already-identified opportunities to proactively address issues in the community, some of which are prioritized and project-oriented engagements.
• Beyond those levels (at least 45-50% overall), depending on scheduling and deployment efficiency, the time available for proactive policing increases further, and opportunities to engage in self-initiated activity expand. However, the number of priority needs for self-initiated activity (e.g., addressing narcotics activity) also decrease. Despite this, no limitations exist on the time that can be spent on activities such as saturation/directed patrols and community engagement activities.
(2) Patrol Unit Staffing and Net Availability
The Richmond Police Department follows a hybrid shift configuration that assigns personnel to five teams with fixed workdays. Teams 1-3 work 10-hour shifts Monday through Thursday, while teams 4 and 5 work 12.5-hour shifts Friday through Sunday.

The following table outlines this schedule, showing the number of positions that are assigned to each shift team (including those on long-term and injury leave, but excluding vacancies):
583
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 37
Patrol Shift Configuration (Current/2021 Staffing Levels)4 Week 1 Week 2
Shift Hours Start End S M T W Th F Sa S M T W Th F Sa Actual Auth.

Team 1 10.0 0630 1630 X X X X X X X X11 11
Team 2 10.0 1500 0100 X X X X X X X X10 10
Team 3 10.0 2100 0700 X X X X X X X X9 10
Team 4 12.5 0630 1900 X X X X X X11 12
Team 5 12.5 1830 0700 X X X X X X10 12
Numbers are inclusive of filled (non-vacant) officer positions only.

In total, this alignment results in 31 officers are assigned to work Monday through Thursday, while 24 officers are assigned Friday through Sunday. The effects of this schedule will be explored later in the analysis.

While the table provides the scheduled staffing levels, it does not reflect the numbers that are actually on-duty and available to work on at any given time. Out of the 2,080 hours per year that each officer is scheduled to work in a year (excluding overtime), a large percentage is not actually spent on-duty and available in the field.

As a result, it is critical to understand the amount of time that officers are on leave – including vacation, sick, injury, military, or any other type of leave – as well as any hours dedicated to on-duty court or training time, and all time spent on administrative tasks such as attending shift briefings. The impact of each of these factors is determined through a combination of calculations made from RPD data and estimates based on the experience of the project team, which are then subtracted from the base number of annual work hours per position. The result represents the total net available hours of patrol officers, or the time in which they are on-duty and available to complete workloads and other activities in the field:
4 Figures displayed in the table also include those in injury and long-term leave, but exclude permanent vacancies in which the position slot is actually open. 584
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 38
The table below outlines the calculation process in detail, outlining how each contributing factor is calculated:

Factors Used to Calculate Patrol Net Availability
Work Hours Per Year
The total number of scheduled work hours for patrol officers, without factoring in leave, training, or anything else that takes officers away from normal on-duty work. This factor forms the base number from which other availability factors are subtracted from.

Base number: 2,080 scheduled work hours per year
Total Leave Hours (subtracted from total work hours per year) Includes all types of leave, as well as injuries, light duty, and military leave – anything that would cause officers that are normally scheduled to work on a specific day to instead not be on duty. As a result, this category excludes on-duty training, administrative time, and on-duty court time.

Calculated from RPD data: 351 hours of leave per year
On-Duty Court Time (subtracted from total work hours per year) The total number of hours that each officer spends per year attending court while on duty, including transit time. Court attendance while on overtime is not included in the figure.

Without any data recording on-duty court time specifically for patrol officers, the number of hours is estimated based on the experience of the project team.

Estimated: 20 hours of on-duty court time per year
On-Duty Training Time (subtracted from total work hours per year) The total number of hours spent per year in training that are completed while on-duty and not on overtime.

Calculated: 78 hours of on-duty training time per year
585
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 39
Administrative Time (subtracted from total work hours per year) The total number of hours per year spent completing administrative tasks while onduty, including briefing, meal breaks, and various other activities.

The number is calculated as an estimate by multiplying 90 minutes of time per shift times the number of shifts actually worked by officers in a year after factoring out the shifts that are not worked as a result of leave being taken.

Estimated: 259 hours of administrative time per year
Total Net Available Hours
After subtracting the previous factors from the total work hours per year, the remaining hours comprise the total net available hours for officers – the time in which they are available to work after accounting for all leave, on-duty training, court, and administrative time. Net availability can also be expressed as a percentage of the base number of work hours per year.

Calculated by subtracting the previously listed factors from the base number:
1,371 net available hours per officer
The following table summarizes this calculation process, displaying how each net availability factor contributes to the overall net availability of patrol officers:

Calculation of Patrol Unit Net Availability (2021)
Base Annual Work Hours 2,080
Total Leave Hours − 351
On-Duty Training Hours − 78
On-Duty Court Time Hours − 20
Administrative Hours − 259
Net Available Hours Per Officer = 1,371
Number of Officer Positions × 51
Total Net Available Hours = 69,924
586
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 40
Overall, the 51 officer positions combine for a total of 69,924 net available hours per year, representing the time in which they are on duty and able to respond to communitygenerated incidents and be proactive. (3) Overview of Call for Service Workload Factors
The previous chapter of the report examined various trends in patrol workload, including variations by time of day and of week, common incident types, as well as several other methods. This section advances this analysis, detailing the full extent of the resource demands that these incidents create for responding patrol personnel.

Each call for service represents a certain amount of workload, much of which is not captured within the handling time of the primary unit. Some of these factors can be calculated directly from data provided by the department, while others must be estimated due to limitations in their measurability.

The following table outlines the factors that must be considered in order to capture the full scope of community-generated workload, and provides an explanation of the process used to calculate each factor:
587
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 41
Factors Used to Calculate Total Patrol Workload
Number of Community-Generated Calls for Service (2021)
Data obtained from an export of CAD data covering a period of an entire year that has been analyzed and filtered in order to determine the number and characteristics of all communitygenerated activity handled by patrol officers. The calculation process used to develop this number has been summarized in previous sections.

At 47,207 calls for service, this equates to approximately 0.43 calls for service per capita (using 2020 Census data). This is a relatively typical rate for communities the size of Richmond.

Calculated from RPD data: 47,207 community-generated calls for service Primary Unit Handling Time (2021)
The time used by the primary unit to handle a community-generated call for service, including time spent traveling to the scene of the incident and the duration of on-scene time.

For each incident, this number is calculated as the difference between ‘call cleared’ time stamp and the ‘unit dispatched’ time stamp.

In the experience of the project team, the average handling time is typically between 30 and 42 minutes in agencies where time spent writing reports and transporting/booking prisoners is not included within the recorded CAD data time stamps. At 33.5 minutes of handling time for the primary unit, RPD is comfortably within the middle of the distribution for similarly sized communities.

Calculated from RPD data: 33.5 minutes of handling time per call for service 588
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 42
Number of Backup Unit Responses (2021)
The total number of backup unit responses to community-generated calls for service. This number often varies based on the severity of the call, as well as the geographical density of the area being served.

This number can also be expressed as the rate of backup unit responses to calls for service and is inclusive of any additional backup units beyond the first.

Calculated from RPD data: 0.64 backup units per call for service Backup Unit Handling Time (multiplied by the rate) (2021) The handling time for backup units responding to calls for service is calculated using the same process that was used for primary units, representing the time from the unit being dispatched to the unit clearing the call.

When CAD data lists unique time stamps for each unit on a call (rather than only for the first unit or overall for the call), the handling time calculated individually. In this case, the CAD data only displayed time stamps for the first unit, and as a result, handling time for backup units was estimated at a rate of 75% of the primary unit’s handling time on each individual call – a normative estimate based on the experience of the project team.

Because calls featuring backup unit responses tend to be more severe, and consequently often require higher workloads for personnel on-scene, the average backup unit handling time is about the same as the average for all primary units – even after applying the 75% factor to the handling time value.

Calculated/estimated from RPD data: 33.1 minutes of handling time per backup unit Number of Reports Written (2021)
The total number of reports and other assignments relating to calls for service that have been completed by patrol units, estimated at one report written for every three calls for service. This includes any supporting work completed by backup units.

In this case, the number has been calculated from RPD data, with approximately 0.16 reports written by patrol officers per call for service.

Calculated from RPD data: 0.16 reports written per call for service 589
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 43
Report Writing Time (multiplied by the report writing rate) The average amount of time it takes to complete a report or other assignment in relation to a call for service. Without any data detailing this specifically, report writing time must be estimated based on the experience of the project team. It is assumed that 45 minutes are spent per written report, including the time spent by backup units on supporting work assignments.

Estimated: 45 minutes per report
Total Workload Per Call for Service (2021)
The total time involved in handling a community-generated call for service, including the factors calculated for primary and backup unit handling time, reporting writing time, and jail transport/booking time.

The product of multiplying this value by the calls for service total at each hour and day of the week is the number of hours of community-generated workload handled by patrol units – equating to approximately 48,631 total hours in 2021.

Calculated from previously listed factors: 61.8 total minutes of workload per call for service
Each of the factors summarized in this section contribute to the overall picture of patrol workload – the total number of hours required for patrol units to handle communitygenerated calls for service, including primary and backup unit handling times, report writing time, and jail transport time.

These factors are summarized in the following table:
590
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 44
Summary of CFS Workload Factors (2021)
Total Calls for Service 47,207 54% Avg. Primary Unit Handling Time 33.5 min.

Backup Units Per CFS 0.64 34% Avg. Backup Unit Handling Time 33.1 min.

Reports Written Per CFS 0.16 12% Time Per Report 45.0 min.

Avg. Workload Per Call 61.8 min.

Total Workload 48,631 hrs.

Overall, each call represents an average workload of 61.8 minutes, including all time spent by the primary unit handling the call, the time spent by any backup units attached to the call, as well as any reports or other assignments completed in relation to the incident.
(4) Calculation of Overall Patrol Proactivity
Using the results of the analysis of both patrol workloads and staff availability, it is now possible to determine the remaining time in which patrol units can function proactively.

The result can then function as a barometer from which to gauge the capacity of current resources to handle call workload demands, given objectives for meeting a certain service level.

The following table shows the calculation process used by the project team to determine overall proactivity levels, representing the percentage of time that patrol officers have available outside of handling community-generated workloads:
591
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 45
Calculation of Overall Patrol Proactivity (2021)
Total Patrol Net Available Hours 69,924
Total Patrol Workload Hours – 48,631
Resulting # of Uncommitted Hours = 21,293
Divided by Total Net Available Hours ÷ 69,924
Overall Proactive Time Level = 30.5%
At 30.5% proactive time, Richmond is below the 35-40% target range, indicating that resources are insufficient at an overall level. In terms of how this affects service levels on a day-to-day or hourly basis, the efficiency of how staff are deployed can exacerbate any existing deficiencies in staffing levels. But regardless of how staff are deployed, the results of this analysis indicate that the number of staff allocated to patrol is simply not enough.

The following chart shows this analysis at a more detailed level, providing proactivity levels in four-hour blocks throughout the week:

Proactivity by Hour and Weekday (Based on 2021 Workload) Even with a proactive time level of 30.5% at an overall level, the reality is much worse at certain times of the day. During the weekdays, morning and afternoon proactive time generally hovers within the 10-20%, indicating that calls are frequently backing up, as 592
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 46
there are not enough officers to handle them. However, the issue is significantly more severe on the weekends, where proactive time falls into negative values.

Earlier in this analysis, it was demonstrated that call for service activity is somewhat higher Friday, Saturday, and Sunday, as shown in the following table:

Call for Service Activity by Weekday (2021)
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
Total 6,984 6,476 6,194 6,382 6,453 7,108 7,610
+/-% from Avg. +4% -4% -8% -5% -4% +5% +13%
Clearly, workload is higher Friday through Sunday compared with Monday through Thursday. This contributes to the issue where on Monday through Thursday, overall proactive time is 39% – within the target range – while on Friday through Sunday, proactive time averages just 17%.

However, the primary reason for this issue is that 30 officers are assigned to the Monday through Thursday teams, while just 21 officers are assigned Friday through Sunday teams. While it is true that the former works 10-hour shifts over four days, compared with

12.5-hour shifts over three days, the resulting on-duty staffing levels are equivalent after accounting for net availability factors. In fact, paired against the plateau RPD experiences in hourly call volume, the weekend schedule is ultimately more efficient in meeting workload demands.

Nonetheless, the current allocation of staff between shift teams is extraordinarily inefficient in providing equitable service and consistent service levels. Even if the overall staffing issue in patrol cannot be immediately addressed, some of the most egregious issues facing patrol can be addressed with existing resources.

To do this, officers can simply be shifted between shift teams as follows:
• Team 1: 11 officers, unchanged from 11
• Team 2: 9 officers, down from 10
• Team 3: 7 officers, down from 9
• Team 4: 13 officers, up from 12
• Team 5: 11 officers, down from 12
593
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 47
The effect that this alternative allocation of officers has on proactive time levels by hour and weekday are shown in the following table, comparing the results against the current allocation of staff:

Effects of Redistributing Patrol Officers on Proactive Time (Based on 2021 Workload) Current Allocation Alternative Allocation
It is evident that, even if the overall staffing issue is not addressed, the service level experienced by residents is significantly better under the alternative allocation, with some of the most severe time periods having resource deficiencies mitigated to an extent.

Minimum Staffing Levels
To provide an adequate level of officer safety, Richmond PD’s policy 216.2 reads as follows:

Minimum staffing levels should result in the scheduling of at least four regular supervisors on duty whenever possible. Patrol Sergeants will ensure that at least one field supervisor is deployed during each watch, in addition to the Patrol Sergeant.

Geographically, the city of Richmond has been segmented in three Districts.

Each District is comprised of three beats. At a minimum, at least one officer will be assigned to each beat on any given watch.

The reallocations above will drop the necessary patrol units below that which is necessary to abide by Policy 216.2. However, in the experience of MCG project staff, the geographic beats that have a low call for service total should be combined. This 594
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 48
combination will result in a continual level of service provided by RPD patrol units and allow the staffing levels recommended above to abide by Policy 216.2.

Recommendations:

Redistribute the number of officers on each patrol staff to mitigate severe service level issues on certain days, as follows:

Team 1: 11 officers, unchanged from 11
Team 2: 9 officers, down from 10
Team 3: 7 officers, down from 9
Team 4: 13 officers, up from 12
Team 5: 11 officers, down from 12
Combine the lowest calls for service beats throughout the city for staffing levels to meet minimum staffing levels in accordance with RPD Policy 216.2. (5) Patrol Staffing Levels Required to Meet Service Level Objectives To determine staffing needs, it is also important to consider the number of vacancies that currently exist, as well as the rate of turnover. An agency will never be fully staffed, as there will always be vacancies occurring as a result of retirement, termination, and other factors. When these events occur, it takes a significant amount of time to recruit a new position, complete the hiring process, run an academy, and complete the FTO program before the individual becomes an on-duty officer. Given this consideration, agencies must always hire above the number needed to provide a targeted level of service.

The amount of ‘buffer’ that an agency requires should be based on the historical rate of attrition within patrol. Attrition can take many forms – if it is assumed that most vacancies are carried in patrol staffing, a vacancy at the officer level in any other area of the organization would consequently remove one officer from regular patrol duties.

Likewise, promotions would have the same effect, in that they create an open position slot in patrol. Not included, however, are positions that become vacant while the individual is still in the academy or FTO program, and they are not counted in our analysis as being part of ‘actual’ patrol staffing.

The following table provides sworn separation over the past four years, showing the total number of separations as a percentage of the authorized total. Given the number of departures, using the current filled number would provide a misleading count. 595
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 49
Sworn Turnover by Year (2018 – 2021)
Year
# Sworn
Departures
As % of Sworn
Positions
2018 14 12.0%
2019 19 16.2%
2020 13 11.1%
2021 24 20.5%
Avg. 17.5 15.0%
This rate of turnover, at 15.0% far exceeds the normal rate for sworn turnover, which in most departments the project team has worked with is around 5-8%. Put simply, this is an unsustainable crisis, and makes it virtually impossible to recruit sufficient personnel to meet the gap.

Nonetheless, given these considerations, an additional 15% authorized (budgeted) positions should be added on top of the actual number currently filled (actual) positions in order to account for turnover while maintaining the ability to meet the targeted proactivity level. This will be shown side-by-side with a more normal turnover rate, in order to illustrate how such a high rate of turnover affects staffing needs.

The resulting figure can then be rounded to the nearest whole number, assuming that positions cannot be added fractionally. It is worth noting that the number of officers needed without turnover is fractional, as it is an intermediate step in the calculation process.

It is important to note that the calculations do not consider the effect of cumulative vacancies that are not able to be replaced and filled over a multi-year period. This is intended, as budgeting for additional staff does not fix recruiting, hiring, or training issues.

Instead, the turnover factor is designed to provide a balance against the rate of attrition, assuming new recruits can complete the academy and FTO program each year.

These calculations are shown in the following table:
596
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 50
Calculation of Patrol Unit Staffing Needs (Based on 2021 Workload) 5% Turnover
(Normal)
15%
(RPD Actual)
Total Workload Hours 48,631 48,631
Proactivity Target 40% 40%
Staffed Hours Needed = 81,052 81,052
Net Available Hours Per Officer ÷ 1,371 1,371
Turnover Factor + 5.0% 15.0%
Patrol Officer FTEs Needed = 63 68
RPD currently has four vacancies (excluding long-term leave and light duty, which have been factored into net availability calculations), for a total of 55 authorized (budgeted) positions. The 68 positions needed to achieve 40% at a turnover rate of 15% is 13 above this number. If turnover rates were more normal (around 5%), then only 8 additional positions would be needed to reach 40% proactive time.

These calculations can also be adjusted for a lower target service level. If the proactive time target were 35%, at a turnover rate of 15%, 63 positions would be needed. To reach that same level of 35% with 5% turnover, just 58 positions would be needed.

Recommendations:

Add 13 officer positions to patrol in order to achieve a proactive time level of 40%, for a total of 68 authorized officer positions.

3. Patrol Self-Initiated Activity
The analysis to this point has focused exclusively on the reactive portion of patrol workload, consisting of community-generated calls for service and related work. In the remaining available time, which is referred to in this report as proactive time, officers can proactively address public safety issues through targeted enforcement, saturation patrol, community engagement, problem-oriented policing projects, and other activity. Equally critical to the question of how much proactive time is available is how and whether it is used in this manner.

There are some limitations on how the use of proactive time is measured, however. Not all proactive policing efforts are tracked in CAD data, such as some informal area checks, saturation patrol, miscellaneous field contacts, and other types of activity. However, 597
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 51
many categories of officer-initiated activity are nonetheless recorded, such as traffic stops, predictive policing efforts, and follow-up investigations.

Nonetheless, CAD data does provide for a significant portion of officer-initiated activity to be analyzed to examined for how utilized uncommitted time is for proactive policing. (4.1) Self-Initiated Activity by Hour and Weekday
Self-initiated activity displays different hourly trends compared to community-generated calls for service, as illustrated in the following table:

Self-Initiated Activity by Hour and Weekday (2021)
Hour Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Total
12am 64 38 50 49 58 58 80 397
1am 57 38 56 33 53 49 53 339
2am 56 31 38 29 44 34 52 284
3am 28 26 26 30 40 21 30 201
4am 22 26 16 22 18 15 22 141
5am 7 7 11 9 8 18 10 70
6am 5 2 12 12 7 7 4 49
7am 10 101 117 95 76 25 30 454
8am 56 168 195 203 170 80 90 962
9am 61 128 137 107 136 70 103 742
10am 72 118 126 155 110 79 84 744
11am 70 97 125 128 108 65 70 663
12pm 57 88 117 102 81 70 68 583
1pm 46 74 101 102 91 44 68 526
2pm 72 57 100 67 72 58 86 512
3pm 76 60 64 57 55 74 92 478
4pm 73 93 100 109 74 85 104 638
5pm 53 78 123 90 81 82 91 598
6pm 26 78 117 98 73 36 27 455
7pm 49 74 74 99 63 58 51 468
8pm 72 68 89 77 53 95 107 561
9pm 82 61 89 60 58 99 92 541
10pm 74 120 159 135 89 95 95 767
11pm 57 115 104 104 96 94 80 650
Total 1,245 1,746 2,146 1,972 1,714 1,411 1,589 11,823
598
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 52
Self-initiated activity peaks sharply at certain hours, with 8:00AM representing the most active hour. Interestingly, this does not coincide with the start of a shift coming on duty. (4.2) Self-Initiated Activity by Category
Unlike community-generated calls for service, self-initiated activity is typically more concentrated over a few call types:

Most Common Categories of Self-Initiated Activity (2021) Incident Type # CFS HT 12a 4a 8a 12p 4p 8p
TRAFFIC STOP 4,951 19.4
SUSP. VEHICLE 1,502 28.3
SECURITY CHECK 1,444 22.4
EXTRA PATROL 781 22.3
FOLLOW UP (RPT) 747 36.3
FLAG DOWN 525 28.5
BEAT PROJECTS 390 27.1
ABANDONED AUTO 248 42.7
PEDESTRIAN STOP 176 29.7
RECOVERED STOLEN 130 67.0
All Other Types 929 61.1
Total 11,823 27.3
Coinciding with the map of all activity by hour, many of the common categories of selfinitiated activity most prevalent in the morning hours, such as suspicious vehicle and security checks.

Overall, self-initiated activity on behalf of RPD patrol units is lacking in the experience of MCG project staff. In calendar year 2021, RPD patrol units reported only 11,823 instances of self-initiated activity compared to that of the 47,207 calls for service responded to in 2021. This results in only 25% self-initiated activity, a percentage that is significantly low in the experience of MCG project staff.
599
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 53
This finding signifies the relevance of taking the necessary steps to increase the proactivity levels of RPD patrol units. Not only does the increase in proactive time provide patrol units the ability to conduct more enforcement-related activity to combat crime but provides them the ability to increase their community policing presence throughout the city. At the moment, RPD does not have the manpower to field a police presence with adequate staff to conduct the community policing practices that have been proven to improve relationships with community members and address quality of life issues that are plaguing cities like Richmond across the country.

4. Multi-Year Trends in Patrol Workload and Self-Initiated Activity The analysis of CAD data has focused on 2021, as it is the most recent full calendar year of data available. 2018 data is not available because it is in a different CAD system and its output is not useable, especially in a multi-year comparison. It is important, however, to view of the findings of the analysis within the context of how workload has shifted beyond that timeframe, particularly given the cumulative effects of turnover in recent years.

Both the number of calls for service, as well as self-initiated incidents, have declined precipitously since 2019:

Calls for Service Self-Initiated
Year # +/- # +/-
2019 54,600 29,922
2020 49,964 -4,636 13,730 -16,192
2021 47,207 -2,757 11,823 -1,907
The cause of the decline is readily apparent, with impacts from the COVID-19 pandemic beginning to affect call for service demand in March 2020. Ongoing restrictions through a significant percentage of 2021 limited recovery in both call for service and self-initiated activity.

The following chart shows these overall trends graphically:
600
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 54
Call for Service and Self-Initiated Activity Trends by Year Calls for Service and Self-Initiated Activity by Month (2019 – 2021) By the end of 2021, call for service activity largely recovered to its seasonal normal level of activity; however, the same is not true for self-initiated activity, which continued to be generated at around one third of the normal pre-pandemic level. 601
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 55
Self-initiated activity declined more precipitously than calls for service due to the nature of proactive activity, which often includes initiating contacts with high numbers of individuals over a short period of time. The COVID-19 pandemic was inherently discouraging to these types of activities. For instance, if an officer were to conduct a series of traffic stops in a proactive enforcement effort, the risk of exposure from contacting that many individuals would be reasonably high.

The following pages demonstrate this issue by comparing the most common types of self-initiated incidents conducted by patrol officers in 2019, 2020, and 2021:

Most Common Self-Initiated Incident Types by Year
2019
Incident Type # CFS HT 12a 4a 8a 12p 4p 8p
TRAFFIC STOP 12,837 16.8
BEAT PROJECTS 4,835 20.5
SUSPICIOUS VEHICLE 2,979 21.7
SECURITY CHECK 2,310 20.3
PEDESTRIAN STOP 1,399 24.7
Total – All Types 29,922 22.6
2020
Incident Type # CFS HT 12a 4a 8a 12p 4p 8p
TRAFFIC STOP 5,887 19.0
SECURITY CHECK 1,545 21.6
SUSPICIOUS VEHICLE 1,117 28.4
BEAT PROJECTS 1,030 16.8
EXTRA PATROL 705 21.5
Total – All Types 13,730 25.7
602
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 56
2021
Incident Type # CFS HT 12a 4a 8a 12p 4p 8p
TRAFFIC STOP 4,951 19.4
SUSPICIOUS VEHICLE 1,502 28.3
SECURITY CHECK 1,444 22.4
EXTRA PATROL 781 22.3
FOLLOW UP 747 36.3
Total – All Types 11,823 27.3
From 2019 to 2020, traffic stops decrease by about half, and further decline by around 1,000 in 2021. Activities such as pedestrian stops decrease from a high of 1,399 in 2019 to falling off the list – in 2021, they occurred just 179 times. Activities such as security checks and extra patrol, which involve less interaction with the public, also declined.

With the department experiencing high rates of turnover, the number of vacancies in patrol by 2021 has also likely impacted the ability of self-initiated activity to recover even as COVID-19 restrictions were lifted.

The table below compares hourly call for service using the same color shading scale:
603
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 57
Trends in Hourly Call Activity by Year
Hour 2019 2020 2021
12a 1,755 1,810 1,608
1am 1,435 1,338 1,267
2am 1,113 1,092 1,065
3am 949 914 982
4am 848 850 749
5am 880 787 772
6am 1047 841 873
7am 1,695 1,272 1,255
8am 2,323 1,821 1,833
9am 2,540 2,127 2,168
10am 2,647 2,363 2,260
11am 2,778 2,474 2,335
12pm 2,719 2,447 2,399
1pm 2,786 2,523 2,340
2pm 2,849 2,509 2,475
3pm 2,959 2,650 2,503
4pm 3,082 2,735 2,610
5pm 3,083 2,859 2,627
6pm 3,141 2,881 2,609
7pm 3,036 2,914 2,689
8pm 2,969 2,756 2,543
9pm 3,055 3,010 2,558
10pm 2,734 2,745 2,577
11pm 2,177 2,246 2,110
Total 54,600 49,964 47,207
The overall pattern of call activity, in terms of the range of hours where activity levels rise and fall, is essentially the same throughout the three-year time period. The difference is in its magnitude, with individual hours having fewer calls for service in 2021 compared to 2019. In most hours, this equates to a difference of around 200-400 calls.

The main conclusion that can be drawn from this analysis is that 2022 CAD data should be examined at the end of the year in order to gauge whether community-generated workload has reached pre-pandemic levels, as well as whether there has been any upward shift in self-initiated activity, which showed virtually no signs of recovery by the end of 2021. This could likely be compounded by staffing shortages caused in part by attrition. 604
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 58
As officers have less time to be proactive, less self-initiated activity will occur. This underscores the critical need to fill vacancies and incentivize retention for sworn personnel at all levels.

4. Traffic and Special Events Division
The Traffic and Special Events Division is comprised of the Traffic Enforcement Section and the Special Enforcement Section. Within these sections are the parking enforcement representatives, motor officers, and cadets. The Traffic Section is primarily responsible for traffic collision investigation, traffic-related criminal investigations, traffic law enforcement, problem solving, and collision prevention. The section also provides traffic control for city festivals and escorts city events and parades.

Administrative oversight of the division is assigned to the Patrol Team 1 Lieutenant as a collateral assignment and the Traffic and Special Events Division Sergeant is assigned first-line supervisor duties. The Sergeant works 7am – 5pm, Monday through Thursday.

Other Sergeant duties include personnel scheduling, special event planning and scheduling, special event permit review, and grant management. The Sergeant is on-call on all off-duty workdays.

The Sergeant also has the following collateral duties:
• Police cadet / Ranger Programs Coordinator
• Vehicle Fleet Coordinator
• Dirt Bike Motorcycle Program Coordinator
• Office of Emergency Services Coordinator
• SWAT Sergeant
• Emergency Vehicle Operations Course (EVOC) Coordinator There are clear advantages in assigning managers and supervisors collateral duties.

These advantages include being more cost effective than the alternative of retaining more personnel and providing for opportunities to enhance their professional experience.

Caution should be used not to overburden employees with collateral duties which take away from primary supervisory functions. Given the primary duties associated with the Traffic and Special Events Sergeant position, it is recommended that the current collateral duty assignments not exceed the current number.

Officer to Sergeant span of control ratios have a significant impact on the performance of first-line supervisors and their ability to fulfill the range of their duties effectively. While factors such as job functions, available technology, and the competencies of the 605
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 59
supervisor and staff may play a role in this ratio, the recommended supervisory span of control is seven Officers to one Sergeant.

The below chart depicts the traffic and special events division’s current supervisory span of control:

Supervisory Span of Control Ratio
Sergeant 6:1
The current authorized staffing level for the division is fourteen employees. At full strength, supervisory span of control will increase to 14:1. It is recommended that an additional Sergeant be added to the division in order to ensure proper supervisory span of control as the total number of employees increase. Taking into consideration the total number of collateral duty assignments the current supervisor has assigned; this additional supervisor should be added when the supervisory span of control exceeds 7:1.

As mentioned previously, the Patrol Team 1 Lieutenant is currently assigned administrative oversight of the division as a collateral duty. This Lieutenant also has eight other administrative oversight collateral duty assignments (in addition to patrol team 1 Lieutenant responsibilities). As such, many of the management functions associated with the division are fulfilled by the Sergeant. These management functions include planning and scheduling special events, special event permit review, managing all department traffic related grants, directing proactive enforcement efforts, preparing work schedules, and overseeing records and equipment.

Along with the previously mentioned management functions, the Sergeant is responsible for the following tasks:
• Supervising subordinate officers in the performance of their duties. • Maintaining inventory of equipment.
• Training subordinates.
• Disseminating information to subordinates.
• Ensuring policies and procedures are followed.
• Observing subordinates in handling calls for service and other duties. • Reviewing and approving various reports.
• Listening to problems voiced by subordinates.
• Providing direct supervision for potential high-risk calls or situations. • Interpreting policies and informing subordinates.
606
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 60
One of the most important tasks assigned to police first-line supervisors is the supervision of subordinate officers in the performance of their duties. Given the amount of management functions currently assigned to the Traffic and Special Events Sergeant, little time is given to supervising subordinates. The supervision of subordinates is imperative given the nature of the Police Officer function. It is recommended that a Lieutenant be assigned to the Traffic and Special Events Division in order to perform the various management functions and provide the Sergeant with adequate time in order to sufficiently supervise subordinates.

Recommendations:

Add 1 additional full-time Sergeant to Traffic when supervisory span of control exceeds 7:1 for a total of 2 authorized full-time Sergeants.

Add 1 full-time Lieutenant to manage the Traffic and Special Events Division. (1) Special Enforcement Section
The Special Enforcement Section is currently staffed with four officers (authorized nine).

These four officers work 7am – 5pm, Monday through Thursday or Tuesday through Friday. The unit is supervised by the traffic and special events division sergeant.

The unit’s primary functions are conducting proactive traffic enforcement on police motorcycles and investigating traffic collisions. These four Officers are trained in traffic collision reconstruction and investigate all fatality and serious injury collisions. Each officer is also assigned an investigative case load. Other duties include assisting traffic control in special events and other large crowd events. One Officer is on-call during nonwork hours each week.

The following table provides the ten most common incident categories of calls for service handled by the special enforcement section in 2021, as well as the average call handling time (HT)5 for each:
5 Handling time is defined as the total time in which a unit was assigned to an incident. It is calculated as the difference between the recorded time stamps the unit being dispatched and cleared from the incident.
607
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 61
Traffic Special Enforcement Section – Most Common Incident Types Incident Type # CFS HT 12a 4a 8a 12p 4p 8p
1179 - ACCIDENT 1141 89 120.1
1182 - ACCIDENT NO INJURY 51 53.3
20002 - HIT AND RUN NO INJURY 37 61.5
1183 - ACCIDENT NO DETAILS 19 64.8
1181 - ACCIDENT MINOR INJURY 16 69.3
1125 - TRAFFIC HAZARD 16 67.2
20001 - HIT & RUN WITH INJURY 12 111.9
23103 - RECKLESS DRIVING 11 13.7
23152 - DRUNK DRIVING 10 150.3
MGUN - MAN WITH A GUN 8 45.9
All Other Types 106 84.1
Total 375 83.7
In 2021, the Special Enforcement Section handled a total of 375 calls for service which were entered into the computer-aided dispatch (CAD) system. Accidents are the most common incident type, with the highest number occurring between 12pm and 4pm. The average handling time for each call for service is 120.1 minutes. As depicted in the above table, nine out of the top ten calls for service are traffic related.

The following table provides the ten most common incident categories of officer selfinitiated activity conducted by the special enforcement section in 2021, as well as the average call handling time (HT)6 for each:
6 Handling time is defined as the total time in which a unit was assigned to an incident. It is calculated as the difference between the recorded time stamps the unit being dispatched and cleared from the incident.
608
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 62
Traffic SI Incident Types
Incident Type # CFS HT 12a 4a 8a 12p 4p 8p
1195 - TRAFFIC STOP 900 21.4
1059 - SECURITY CHECK 41 63.4
1124 - ABANDONED AUTO 33 70.2
FOLLOW - FOLLOW UP 27 118.0
1182 - ACCIDENT NO INJURY 22 60.6
1154 - SUSPICIOUS VEHICLE 16 76.0
PMISC - POLICE MISC 11 78.5
1125 - TRAFFIC HAZARD 11 31.7
FLAG - FLAG DOWN 10 55.4
1184 - TRAFFIC CONTROL 10 86.4
All Other Types 38 100.5
Total 1,119 32.5
In 2021, the Special Enforcement Section conducted a total of 1,119 self-initiated incidents which were entered into the computer-aided dispatch (CAD) system. An overwhelming majority of self-initiated activity are traffic stops, with the highest number occurring between 8am and 10am. The average handling time for each traffic stop is 21.4 minutes.

As previously mentioned, a total of 900 reported traffic stops were conducted by the traffic enforcement section. The base number of workdays in an officer’s year is 208 (not including leave time, training, or anything else which will take an officer away from normal on-duty work). Using the above base workday total, traffic enforcement section officers completed an average of 2 traffic stops each workday.

Many departments throughout the United States have a policy in place which dictates that an officer must inform dispatch when conducting all traffic stops. The Richmond Police Department does not have such a policy. As such, there may be instances where a traffic stop may not be captured in the above data. Such policies are crucial in promoting police transparency and establishing mutual trust within the community. 609
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 63
The Motor Officers are also tasked with conducting traffic collision investigations and are assigned an investigative caseload. The below chart depicts the total number of traffic collision investigations completed in a one-year period (8/18/21 – 8/18/22):

Traffic Collision Investigations
Total Investigations 122
The length of a traffic collision investigation is dependent on several factors, to include the complexity of the collision itself. As depicted in the above Traffic CFS Incident Type chart, the average handling time for each traffic collision investigation with injuries was 120.1 minutes each. Hit and run traffic collision investigations with injury, take an average of 61.5 minutes each. Additional investigative time is typically required which is performed in the station and is not accounted for in CAD data. During this same time frame, officers investigated a total of four fatal traffic collisions. Fatal, near fatal, and traffic collisions causing serious bodily injury are typically labor intensive and may take several weeks to complete.

Each year, the Special Enforcement Section assists with traffic control during city sponsored special events. The unit participated in the following special events in 2021:
2021 Special Events
Brazen Half Marathon
Little League Opening Day
Good Friday
Lao Parade
Cinco De Mayo Parade
Cinco De Mayo Festival
California Police Memorial
Juneteenth Parade
Juneteenth Festival
Richmond Half Marathon
3rd of July Fireworks
4th of July Fireworks
National Night Out
GRIP 5k Walk/Run
Halloween Night Operation
St. Marks – Christmas Parade
New Year’s Even Operation
Total Events: 17
Each year, the Special Enforcement Section conducts several operations in support of the State of California Traffic Safety Grant. The following grant operations were conducted in a one-year period (10/1/21 – 9/30/22):
610
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 64
Traffic Safety Grant
DUI Checkpoints 9
DUI Saturation Patrols 16
Traffic Enforcement Operations 4
Distracted Driving Operations 4
Bike/Pedestrian Safety Operations 4
Collaborative DUI Saturation Operations 2
Collaborative Traffic Enforcement Operations 2
DUI/Wanted Person Bulletin Distributions 12
Total Operations 53
Motor vehicle crashes are one of the leading causes of death in the United States and most crashes are preventable. The Richmond Police Department has a traffic safety program dedicated towards increasing awareness for traffic safety and changing risky driving behaviors, thereby preventing vehicle collisions. High visibility enforcement is a universal traffic safety approach designed to create deterrence and change unlawful traffic behaviors. High visibility enforcement combines highly visible and proactive law enforcement targeting a specific traffic safety issue. Police efforts should be combined with visibility elements and a public strategy to educate the public and promote voluntary compliance with traffic laws.

Although the Richmond Police Department has a dedicated Traffic Unit focused on traffic safety, the unit is currently not fully staffed, and has not been fully staffed for some time.

A successful program requires full time Officers dedicated towards both enforcement efforts and public education. When staffing allows, the remaining authorized positions should be filled in order to implement an effective traffic safety program.

In 2020, 7.3% of all fatal vehicle crashes in the State of California involved large trucks (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration statistics). A large majority of these large trucks are commercial vehicles. The City of Richmond has a large portion of commercial vehicles which travel on city streets each day. In order to expand upon the department’s current traffic safety program, an effective and proactive commercial vehicle safety and enforcement program should be established. This program should combine enforcement of commercial vehicle safety laws with extensive communication, education, and community outreach. It is recommended that two full-time Commercial Vehicle Enforcement Officers be added to the Special Enforcement Unit in order to establish this program.

According to United States Department of Justice research, the average DUI violator commits that offense approximately eighty times in a one-year period. The psychophysical faculty generally affected first by alcohol is reaction time. Nationally, 611
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 65
more than half of the drivers who die in vehicle crashes have been drinking. In 2020, the State of California had the second highest number of alcohol impaired driving crash fatalities in the United States (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration statistics).

On average, one alcohol impaired driving fatality occurred every 45 minutes throughout the United States. It is recommended that the department add two Impaired Driving Enforcement Officers in order to establish an impaired driving safety program. This program should combine proactive enforcement with extensive communication, education, and community outreach in order to reduce the number of alcohol and drug impaired drivers within the City of Richmond.

Recommendations:

As staffing allows, fill current vacant positions in Special Enforcement in order to implement an effective traffic safety program.

Maintain current authorized staffing level of 9 officers in Special Enforcement.

Establish policy mandating officers inform dispatch when conducting all traffic stops.

Add two full-time Commercial Vehicle Enforcement Officer positions to the Special Enforcement Section.

Add two full-time Impaired Driving Enforcement Officer positions to the Special Enforcement Section.
(2) Parking Enforcement Unit
The Parking Enforcement Unit is currently staffed with five (5) Parking Enforcement Representatives (two within that have just been authorized and funded). The unit is supervised by the Traffic and Special Events Division Sergeant. The unit is responsible for towing abandoned vehicles, tagging vehicles for later abatement, issuing citations for illegally parked vehicles and vehicles parked in no parking zones during street sweeping days.

Abandoned vehicles are often viewed as a quality-of-life problem due to being unsightly and symbolizing and contributing to signs of disorder and decay in neighborhoods. In some instances, abandoned vehicles can undermine the quality of life while potentially contributing to further problems such as containing gasoline and other dangerous fluids, becoming targets for arson, and obstructing street-cleaning.

The total number of vehicles towed by the Parking Enforcement Unit in a one-year period (8/1/21 – 8/1/22) was 719.
612
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 66
The base number of workdays in a parking representative’s year is 208 (not including leave time, training, or anything else which will take the representative away from normal on-duty work). Using the above base workday total, parking enforcement representatives towed an average of 2 vehicles each workday during the one-year time frame.

Currently, police department personnel have sole responsibility for targeting abandoned vehicle issues in the city. A collaboration of government agencies and community partnerships should be formed in order to address this issue at its root cause. City government agencies include code enforcement, environmental protection, streets and transportation, and public works. Community partnerships include vehicle towing and storage operators and area scrap yards.

Recommendations:

Maintain current authorized staffing level of 5 Parking Enforcement Representatives.

Form a collaboration of government agencies and community partnerships in order to reduce the abandoned vehicle issue in the City of Richmond. (3) Cadet Program
The cadet program is supervised by the Traffic and Special Events Sergeant. Currently, the program is not staffed (authorized two part-time paid employees). Cadets complete certain past-tense crime reports and assist the parking enforcement unit as needed. cadet programs are used in departments which employ a community-oriented policing philosophy and are used as a strategy to bridge the gap between the community and police. Cadet programs are also used as an avenue for a person seeking to become a Police Officer once they are able. It is recommended that the authorized two part-time positions be filled as soon as possible.
(4) Community Service Officer Program Development
Many citizens calls for police service do not require a sworn police officer to enforce laws.

For this reason, many agencies use non-sworn positions for a variety of functions which have been traditionally performed by police officers. The Richmond Police Department currently uses non-sworn Crime Scene Technicians in order to assist Officers. In order to enhance service delivery, it is recommended that the Crime Scene Technician functions be incorporated into a newly established job classification of Community Service Officer.

Community Service Officer programs are non-sworn positions which support crime prevention, investigations, and other responses where full police powers are unnecessary. Typically, Community Service Officers handle a wide variety of call types such as crime scene investigations, certain traffic crash investigations, crimes not in 613
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 67
progress, or where a suspect is currently not on scene. Community Service Officers spend a majority of their workday in the field. As such, a new Community Service Officer program should be contained within the Patrol Division and under the direct supervision of Patrol Sergeants to ensure proper supervisory oversight. (4.1) Scope of Call Diversion Programs in Other Communities The project team has conducted a comparative review of agencies which deploy civilian Community Service Officers (CSO) to handle calls for service in the field. For each of these agencies, CAD data has been analyzed using the same methodology, which uses records showing all units that respond to a call, how it originated, and a means of identifying what type of unit each radio call sign corresponds to.

It should be noted that the call types shown in the comparative data do not comprise all the calls that each agency’s CSOs respond to. Call types have been selected for their comparability between different agencies, as well as their impact (i.e., how many calls of that type were handled by CSOs). Consequently, there are a plethora of call types that each agency’s CSOs handle but are not included as table category. Many of these additional call types correspond to various types of minor ordinance/code violation, report, or other information for police.

Furthermore, there are important considerations for how the percentages should be interpreted. The data shown is based on the number of calls that CSOs responded to out of all occurrences of those call types during the hours and days they were on duty for.

There may have been significant numbers of additional calls that CSOs could have handled – in that there were no characteristics of the call that required a sworn officer – but did not for a variety of reasons that do not relate to the call itself. For instance, the CSO(s) could have been sick, on vacation, or another type of leave, or calls could have occurred concurrently and prevented a CSO from responding to both, resulting in a patrol officer being assigned the call.

The overall diversion rate statistic shown in the table displays the percentage of calls for service that CSOs handled during the hours and days they are on duty for. This includes the calls that are diverted that do not fit under any of the categories included in the table.

Nonetheless, the overall diversion rate functions as an effective barometer of how well diversion has been implemented.

The following table summarizes the results of this comparative analysis, showing percentage of calls that were diverted to CSOs in each agency by type of call:
614
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 68
% of Calls Handled by CSOs During Their On-Duty Hours
Type Fremont
Rancho
Cordova Roseville
Mountain
View
West
Sacramento Avg. Max
Traffic Hazard 50% 11% 50% 37% 50%
Theft 25% 41% 39% 35% 53% 39% 53%
Accident (Non-Inj.) 20% 22% 14% 42% 25% 42%
Theft From Vehicle 65% 41% 56% 46% 66% 55% 66%
Auto Theft 66% 45% 42% 55% 62% 54% 66%
Recovered Stolen 65% 44% 35% 58% 21% 45% 65%
Lost/Found Property 70% 18% 47% 67% 50% 50% 70%
Graffiti 56% 80% 50% 62% 80%
Vandalism 15% 20% 37% 47% 49% 34% 49%
Runaway/Missing 50% 25% 40% 48% 37% 40% 50%
Burglary-Residential 60% 38% 39% 52% 50% 48% 60%
Burglary-Comm. 74% 60% 39% 60% 50% 57% 74%
Fraud 15% 33% 49% 63% 40% 63%
Parking Complaint 82% 27% 70% 60% 82%
Grand Theft 21% 31% 30% 59% 35% 59%
Accident (Min. Inj.) 16% 15% 12% 47% 23% 47%
Pickup 12% 93% 53% 93%
Diversion Rate 20% 11% 10% 29% 12% 16% 29%
From this analysis, it is clear that there are prevailing practices and significant precedent for a wide range of calls to be handled alternatively by civilian responders. This includes many calls involving the report of crimes, such as burglaries (cold only/past tense), fraud, and theft incidents; as well as several process-oriented workloads such as events involving lost/found property or recovered stolen property.

The common traits among the selected call types principally include the following:
• Lack of on scene suspects/perpetrators; consequently, low risk involved. • Lack of two conflicting parties (such as in a domestic incident). 615
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 69
• Arrests do not need to be made in responding to the call. (4.2) Implementation Considerations
Dispatchers would need to be trained and provided with a list of call types that can potentially be diverted, at around 26 different types. Within these call types, dispatchers would check for the first two conditions to be met – lack of on-scene suspects, and a lack of two conflicting parties involved. In other words, they would differentiate that the event is a past-tense report. Existing processes for call notes that are provided by call takers typically provide this differentiation already. Consequently, likely the only training needed would be on the part of dispatchers to check for these conditions and dispatch a CSO over a patrol officer if they are on duty.

Illustrative Dispatcher Checklist
If YES to the following:

Does the incident type assigned by the call taker match the list of those eligible for CSO?
Did the issue already occur (i.e., it is not in progress) If the event is a traffic accident, are there injuries? And if NO to the following:

If the event is a burglary, has the caller entered the house? Is the event a dispute (i.e., involving multiple parties? Is there a suspect identified?
Are there weapons involved or any form of violence, including threat of violence?
As an additional layer, patrol supervisors examining call notes as they come out, as well as the CSO who is assigned to the call, would be able to provide an additional check to ensure that the calls meet the criteria assigned.

Nonetheless, the characteristics that have been outlined ensure that a civilian would be able to safely handle the call. Information obtained through the normal dispatching process would be able to confirm that the reports are past tense, and that the event is not in progress. This is particularly important for burglary calls and is a key reason why the diversion percentages are limited to an average of 48% and max of 60%. It should be 616
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 70
noted that police labor groups will need to be consulted and on be on board for some of these changes, however.

In many cases, particularly Rancho Cordova, Roseville, and West Sacramento, the percentages may have been driven down due to staffing, as theoretically the characteristics of a call that would make a civilian eligible to handle them would not be significantly different from city to city, to a reasonable extent. As a result, the max values for the percentage of calls diverted are ultimately more relevant to this analysis, in examining what the upper potential is for Tacoma to divert calls for service.

In order to implement a new Community Service Officer program, it will require City of Richmond officials, department leadership, and the Richmond Police Department Officers Association to meet, discuss, and agree to program functions. This Community Service Officer program recommendation is not a recommendation to reduce the total number of authorized sworn Police Officer positions. Likewise, any increase in sworn Police Officer recommendations made throughout this report should not be affected by the Community Service Officer program implementation.

Recommendations:

Hire and fill the two authorized part-time Cadet position vacancies.

Create a new civilian Community Service Officer classification within the department that responds to certain types of non-emergency calls in the field.

Incorporate the job functions of the Crime Scene Technician into a newly established job classification of Community Service Officer.

Train dispatchers to incorporate new CSO methodology into call taking and dispatching protocols.
(4.3) Determining the Potential for Call Diversion in Richmond Based on the comparative analysis of other departments that deploy CSOs to respond to lower priority calls for service, the project team conducted an analysis of the feasibility of implementing program with similar scope in Richmond.

Richmond Police Department call types were mapped against the categories used in the comparative analysis, with percentages assigned that reflect the upper potential (max) values from the other agencies. Some discretion is used based on the experience of the project team, which includes former law enforcement, to accurately gauge the types and percentage of calls that a civilian responder could safely and effectively respond to.

The following table presents the results of this analysis:
617
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 71
Estimated Potential for Non-Emergency Call Diversion
Category Call Type
Total #
CFS
%
Div. # Diverted
Cold Report MOTOR VEHICLE THEFT 1409 66% 930
BURGLARY 288 60% 173
BURGLARY – COMMERCIAL 211 74% 156
FRAUD 272 63% 171
FRAUD (REPORT) 47 64% 30
BURGLARY 13 62% 8
Missing/Runaway JUV OUT OF CONTROL/RUNAWAY 238 50% 119
MISSING PERSON 222 50% 111
JUV OUT OF CONTROL 91 51% 34
MISSING JUVENILE 67 51% 34
RUNAWAY JUVENILE RETURN 16 50% 8
Parking/Traffic PARKING VIOLATION 1310 82% 1074
TRAFFIC HAZARD 971 50% 486
ACCIDENT – NON-INJURY 730 42% 307
TRANSPORTATION 79 92% 73
ACCIDENT – MINOR INJURY 74 47% 35
Property PETTY THEFT 1092 53% 579
GRAND THEFT 466 59% 275
VANDALISM 927 49% 454
AUTO BURGLARY 536 66% 354
RECOVERED STOLEN 516 65% 335
In total, the analysis demonstrates that up to 5,746 calls for service, or 12% of all calls for service handled by Richmond Police Department Patrol Officers can be diverted to civilian responders, subject to discussion with police labor groups. These numbers reflect 2021 data using the same methodology that was used for the original study of Richmond Police Department patrol workload.

Decisions regarding when to deploy civilian call responders should be based on activity levels in order to maximize diversion of calls. Most of the above divertible calls for service occurred between the hours of 7am and 8pm. Implementing a 10-hour shift, a 7am – 5pm 618
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 72
and 10am – 8pm shift is recommended. Implementing a 12-hour shift, an 8am – 8pm shift is recommended.
(4.4) Staffing the Civilian Call Responder Alternative
There is significant potential for implementing a call diversion program based on the analysis of divertible call types. Consequently, the staffing resources that would be needed to staff such a program must also be examined.

Approaches to deployment vary among the agencies included in the comparative review, with most deploying CSOs across two shifts in order to achieve greater coverage. Almost all have CSOs working seven days per week.

Among the cities included in the comparative review, CSOs handle and divert an average of just over 500 calls per year:

Overview of Comparative Call Diversion Programs
City % Diverted # CSOs
Calls/Yr. Per
CSO
Fremont 20% 7 688
Rancho Cordova 11% 4 471
Roseville 10% 4 238
Mountain View 29% 4 516
West Sacramento 12% 2 702
On 10-hour shifts with standard net availability factors (accounting for leave, training, etc.), the average of 523 calls per CSO equates to around 3.3 calls per shift. Consequently, the higher number of around 700 per CSO for Fremont and West Sacramento CSOs is easily attainable and is akin to a more reasonable levels of staff utilization. At 700 calls per CSO, each is handling around 4.4 calls per shift. With report time factored in, the resulting utilization levels allow for workload to be sufficient while still allowing for a buffer factor should activity be higher on certain days. This is particularly important because the narrower the scope of calls that a civilian responder can handle, the greater day-to-day variability there will be in how busy they are, which impacts staff utilization considerations.

Staffing needs can be determined based on this ratio. Using the 700 calls per CSO target, staffing needs can be calculated as follows:
619
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 73
Calculation of CSO Staffing Needs: Ratio Method
% of CFS Diverted 12%
# of Calls Diverted 5,746
Target Calls Per CSO 700
FTEs Needed 8
As mentioned previously, most of the divertible calls for service occurred between the hours of 7am and 8pm. If implementing a 10-hour shift, the 8 positions confirmed by analysis may be staggered across two shifts, with each shift being organized with 4 CSOs each. One shift covering 7am – 5pm and the other shift covering 10am – 8pm.

Alternatively, implementing one 12-hour shift would ensure scheduling across a 7-day week more efficiently. If implementing a 12-hour shift, an 8am – 8pm shift is recommended. Two of the positions should function as working leads, reporting to a Patrol Sergeant on duty.

Recommendations:

Divert a wide range of non-emergency calls for service to civilian responders, comprising up to 12% of all calls currently handled by sworn officers.

Add 8 full-time Community Service Officers to staff the new Community Service Officer Program.
(5) Mental Health Crisis Response
In recent years, more and more has been asked of police officers. As homelessness has grown and access to mental health treatment has diminished, police have been increasingly asked to function as social workers in the field. This requires officers to function in situations that benefit greatly from extensive expertise and knowledge of underlying mental health crisis response strategies, ones that can also be high-risk.

Alternative response, including the civilian call diversion program outlined previously, as well as the prospect of implementing mental health crisis response, aims to refocus the long-term trend of broadening police officer roles and divert calls to other types of response:
620
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 74
Before Implementing Call Diversion Approaches
After Implementing Call Diversion Approaches
Crisis response teams are an effective strategy for providing a specialized response to calls involving homelessness and mental health crisis, diverting a significant percentage away from sworn response. This approach has been implemented with great success in a number of cities, such as Eugene (CAHOOTS program) and Portland (Portland Street Response) in Oregon.
(5.1) Evaluating the Need for Crisis Response
To evaluate the potential for a mental health crisis response team to be implemented, the project team analyzed CAD data covering the same time period that was used in the patrol analysis. A challenge to this analysis is that there are no events that correlate exactly to an incident involving mental health crisis, and more specifically, the types of events that a crisis response team would be able to respond to and divert from regular patrol. 621
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 75
Consequently, proxy events must be selected that most likely involve mental health crisis and meet eligibility requirements for a crisis team response.

However, not every occurrence of these events could likely be handled by a crisis response team. As with the CSO call diversion analysis, estimates must be made based on the percentage of calls that a mobile crisis team could potentially respond to. This is done based on the experience of the project team, which includes former sworn law enforcement personnel.

Using RPD incident types, the selected proxy events, and the percentage of those calls that could be diverted, are as follows:

Scope of Mental Health Divertible Calls
UNWANT - UNWANTED PERSON (IN PROGRESS) 15%
5150 - MENTAL PATIENT (IN PROGRESS) 60%
WELFCK - WELFARE CHECK (IN PROGRESS) 25%
1053 - MAN DOWN (IN PROGRESS) 70%
It is important to note that the “MAN DOWN” events do not necessarily signify a critical life-threatening emergency and are selected here for their correlation to events involving homelessness.

Estimated Mental Health Call Diversion Workload
# CFS % Diverted # Diverted Avg. HT
UNWANTED PERSON 2,419 15% 363 24.9
MENTAL PATIENT 1,295 60% 777 29.5
WELFARE CHECK 1,264 25% 316 29.3
MAN DOWN 461 70% 323 20.6
SUICIDE ATTEMPT 74 50% 37 41.7
Total 5,513 – 1,816 26.9
The findings suggest that there is significant opportunity to implement a mental health crisis team in Richmond. At 1,816 calls for service that can be diverted, this equates to approximately five calls per day, or around 3.9% of the calls handled by the department.

Of course, the figures shown include calls occurring on a full 24-hour basis. It is critical to examine further when these types of calls are happening, as a 24-hour crisis team may not be feasible for several reasons.
622
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 76
(2) Deployment Considerations
Hours of deployment would need to be focused around the times in which mental health crisis events are most likely to occur in order to maximize the number of call diversion opportunities.

The following table provides a visualization of the frequency of the event types selected for a civilian community crisis response team:

Frequency of Divertible Homelessness and Mental Health Calls At the overall level, is clear that the bulk of these calls occur from around 8:00 AM to midnight; however, this is not that different from the hourly activity levels for all calls for service handled by the department.

Interestingly, however, there is somewhat of a divergence in the high-activity periods by type of call. Unwanted Person incidents occur highest in the morning and early afternoon hours, presumably as residents are active and out of their homes, as well as during the hours during which most businesses are open. For the Mental Patient incidents, there is a sharp uptick around 7:00PM until around midnight or just after. In contrast, welfare check incidents decrease around this time.

These findings indicate that two shifts would likely be needed to fully implement a strategy that shifts these types of workloads away from regular patrol:
• A day shift, working from 8:00AM until 4:00PM.
• A swing shift, working from 4:00PM until 12:00AM.
623
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 77
Importantly, the common start/end time between shifts would allow for a single vehicle to be shared between two shifts.
(5.3) Staffing Needs for a Crisis Response Team
The types of staff needed are a function of the roles and responsibilities handled by the unit. These include:
• Communication and field social services case work.
• Mental health crisis events, requiring clinical mental health background. • Response to events with unconscious individuals, where an emergency medical issue may need to be identified.
– Some of these may involve overdose on opiate narcotics, requiring the administration of naloxone (Narcan).

With these considerations in mind, two distinct roles would be needed in a mental health crisis response unit:
• A field clinician, with a background in mental health crisis and social services. • An EMT, who can provide immediate medical care, including the administration of naloxone.

For a fully functional team, a unit would be comprised of two personnel – one of each role – in a single vehicle that would respond to certain 911 events in the field. Most of these responses would not require backup from law enforcement personnel, as has been the experience of similar programs such as CAHOOTS and Portland Street Response.

In order to staff two teams working a day and swing shift five days per week, four positions would need to be added. Each team would need to be outfitted with one vehicle, two radios, and one MDT (in-car computer).

To increase utilization and potentially share costs, the department should examine opportunities to utilize the team regionally with other nearby municipalities.

Recommendations:

Create a crisis response unit staffed by civilians to provide a specialized response to calls involving homelessness and mental health crisis, diverting many of them from sworn response.

Two teams should be established for crisis response, each comprised of 1 field clinician and 1 EMT.
624
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 78
– In total, this represents an adding two field clinician positions and two EMTs. – The two teams would work 8-hour shifts, from 8:00AM to 4:00PM and 4:00PM to midnight.
– One vehicle, one MDT, and two radios would be needed, given the common time for the first shift’s end and the second shift’s start. 625
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 79

5. Investigations Bureau
The Investigations Bureau consists of the Homicide, Domestic and Sexual Violence, General Crimes, Youth Services, Crimes Analysis, Crime Scene, and Safe Streets Task Force. The Investigations Bureau is led by a Captain who is supported by a Lieutenant.

1. Investigations Workload Analysis
In reviewing investigative units, it is important to understand the amount of reported crime as this directly impacts potential caseloads. Most agencies report their crime statistics to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) for purposes of tracking crime nationally. There are two types of crimes reported to the FBI Part 1 and Part 2. Part 1 are the most serious types of violent and property crime. Part 1 crimes include: Homicide, Rape, Robbery, Aggravated Assault, Burglary, Larceny-Theft, Motor Vehicle Theft and Arson. Part 2 crimes include: Simple Assault, Forgery, Fraud, Vandalism Weapons Possession, Prostitution, D.U.I., etc.

The following table shows the UCR reported Part 1 crime for the last 5 years. 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
Violent Crime 849 780 766 622 566
Criminal Homicide 18 17 22 18 18
Sexual Assault 77 104 93 65 83
Robbery 409 328 255 244 234
Aggravated Assault 345 331 396 295 231
Property Crime 4225 4018 3257 3143 3013
Arson 55 36 52 37 33
Burglary 1608 1335 787 653 631
Larceny-Theft 1,351 1,702 1,334 1349 1304
Motor Vehicle Theft 1211 945 1084 1104 1045
Violent Crime - 33%
Property Crime - 28%
As can be seen by the preceding chart, reported violent crime is down 33% over the last 5 years while property crime is down 28% during the same period. The following chart displays the same information graphically:
626
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 80
As the chart demonstrates reported violent and property has decreased over the last five years.

In 2012 the Investigations Bureau had 32 detectives assigned including proactive units.

In the years since there have been staff reductions even though the rate of crime has been relatively consistent. This means potential caseloads have been consistent, though the number of detectives the cases has declined. Additionally, detective caseloads have become much more complex and time consuming due to increased technology, electronic and DNA evidence and legal requirements increasing the need for subpoenas and warrants.

2. Calculation of Detective Net Availability
Before determining availability and staffing needs, it is important to first review the number of net available hours detectives are available to conduct investigations. To conduct this analysis, it is critical to understand the amount of time that detectives are on leave – including vacation, sick, injury, military, or any other type of leave – as well as hours dedicated to on-duty court or training time, and time spent on administrative tasks.

The impact of each of these factors is determined through a combination of calculations made from RPD data and estimates based on the experience of the project team, which are then subtracted from the base number of annual work hours per position. The result represents the total net available hours of detectives and other positions, or the time in which they are on-duty and available to complete workloads and other activities in the field.
849 780 766 622 566
4225 4018
3257 3143 3013
0 500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
Reported Part 1 Crimes
Violent Crime Property Crime
Linear (Violent Crime) Linear (Property Crime)
627
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 81
Net availability for detectives is different from patrol, in part because of court and administrative responsibilities. Workloads such as case plans, search warrant execution, and so forth that do not fit directly into case investigative hours are included within an estimated administrative time figure. The table below outlines this process in detail, outlining how each contributing factor is calculated:

Factors Used to Calculate Detective Net Availability
Work Hours Per Year
The total number of scheduled work hours for detectives, without factoring in leave, training, or anything else that takes detectives away from normal on-duty work. This factor forms the base number from which other availability factors are subtracted from.

Base number: 2,080 scheduled work hours per year
Total Leave Hours (subtracted from total work hours per year) Includes all types of leave, including injuries and military leave, FMLA – anything that would cause detectives that are normally scheduled to work on a specific day to instead not be on duty. As a result, this category excludes on-duty training, administrative time, and on-duty court time.

From RPD Data: 351 hours of leave per year
On-Duty Training Time (subtracted from total work hours per year) The average total number of hours spent per year in training that are completed while on-duty and not on overtime. This is calculated at 45 hours per detective per year with six detectives on SWAT receiving an additional 260 hours per year. Because not all detectives are on the SWAT team, the additional training is only calculated for the detectives that are.

From RPD Data: 78 hours of on-duty training time per year 628
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 82
On-Duty Court Time (subtracted from total work hours per year) The total number of hours that each detective spends per year attending court while on duty, including transit time. Court attendance while on overtime is not included in the figure.

Without any data recording on-duty court time specifically for detectives, the number of hours is estimated based on the experience of the project team.

Estimated: 120 hours of on-duty court time per year
Administrative Time (subtracted from net available hours after leave, court and training hours deducted)
The total number of hours per year spent completing administrative tasks while onduty, including staff meetings, returning phone calls, emails, maintaining contact with victims and victim’s families, search warrant preparation and planning and various other activities including some operations that may not be directly captured in the case hours calculations.

The number is calculated as an estimated 20% of net work hours after other deductions.

Estimated: 306 hours of administrative time per year
Total Net Available Hours
After subtracting the previous factors from the total work hours per year, the remaining hours comprise the total net available hours for detectives – the time in which they are available to work after accounting for all leave, on-duty training, court, and administrative time. Net availability can also be expressed as a percentage of the base number of work hours per year.

Calculated by subtracting the previously listed factors from the base number:
1,225 net available hours per detective
The following table summarizes this calculation process, displaying how each net availability factor contributes to the overall net availability of detectives:
629
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 83
Calculation of Detective Net Availability
Base Annual Work Hours 2,080
Total Leave Hours – 351
On-Duty Training Hours – 78
On-Duty Court Time Hours – 120
Administrative Hours – 306
Net Available Hours Per Detective = 1,225
Overall, the detective has approximately 1,225 net available hours per year, representing the total time in which they are able to conduct investigations. These hours will be used in the following sections to analyze detective caseloads.

3. Caseload Hours
Not all investigative cases require the same number of investigative hours, for example a homicide investigation requires more investigative time (and resources) than a burglary.

To factor for this, Matrix Consulting Group developed several case type investigative caseload work hours. These were developed through dozens of studies and interviews with detective working cases. The following case type caseload workload hours were used to calculate staff resource needs:
(3.1) Homicide
Homicide cases are among the most complex and time-consuming investigations that are conducted. These cases receive a high level of scrutiny and therefore almost all investigative techniques are used. Additionally, because of their complexity they are typically handled by a group of detectives and additional resources are often used. The following table shows a breakdown of approximate caseload hours for a homicide case or officer involved shooting:

Task Processes Involved Approximate
Time
% of Time
Completed
DNA Evidence to Crime Lab 4 hours 100%
Crime Scene
Material
Evidence to Property Control 4 hours 100%
Cell Phones Cell Phone Downloads, with some
taking longer than others.
30 hours 100%
630
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 84
Task Processes Involved Approximate
Time
% of Time
Completed
Video Review of video recovered from
scene and BWC
40 hours 100%
Social
Media/Electronic
Records/Physical
location
Warrants/Subpoenas/Review of
Evidence Obtained.
60 hours 100%
Location Data Warrants/Subpoenas/Review of
Evidence Obtained.
40 hours 100%
Surveillance Surveillance, including locating
suspect and report writing.
10 hours 100%
Postmortem
Exam
Autopsy performed by ME
(Detectives observe and consult)
6 hours 100%
Victim / Witness
Interview(s)
Interview(s), including report writing. 40 hours 100%
Suspect
Interview(s)
Interview(s), including report writing. 12 hours 50%
Jail Call
Monitoring
Listen to calls, write reports. 20 Hours 100%
Consult with DA Conduct follow up, write additional
reports.
10 hours 100%
Total 276 hours- If all
tasks completed
On Average 276 hours
This list is not all inclusive and does not contain all elements and not every homicide will have the same amount of evidence or interviews conducted. Included in these hours is the assumption that detectives will be using RMS searches, social media searches, checking association files, receiving informant information and other investigative techniques (trackers, cell tower data, etc.), if available.

It also assumed that detectives work as a team and not all investigative hours will be worked by a single detective (These are hours for lead detective only). Many cases will not require the number of hours listed, but some cases may require significantly more.

Using the case time estimates and the percentage of the time that each subtask is completed, this translates to approximately 276.0 hours allotted per solvable case. 631
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 85
Additionally, on average most departments assign a team of other detectives to assist during the early stages of a homicide investigation which represents approximately 40 hours per investigator assigned.
(3.2) Person Crimes
Person crimes cases are treated more seriously by the judicial system and tend to have more witnesses and evidence requiring more time in interviews and recovering and processing evidence than property crimes.

Approximate case hours were developed through numerous interviews with detectives, and are summarized in the following table:

Task Processes Involved
Approximate
Time
% of Time
Completed
DNA Evidence to crime lab, includes
submission and report.
3 hours 10%
Crime Scene
Material
Evidence to property control,
inspection, and report writing.
4 hours 30%
Cell Phones Cell phone downloads, with some
taking longer than others.
10 hours 50%
Video Review of video recovered from
scene and BWC, report writing.
10 hours 50%
Social Media/
Elec. Records
Warrants/subpoenas, including
submission and report.
10 hours 20%
Location Data Warrants/subpoenas, including
submission and report.
20 hours 20%
Surveillance Surveillance, including locating
suspect and report writing.
10 hours 10%
Victim / Witness
Interview(s)
Interview(s), including report writing. 2 hours 100%
Suspect
Interview(s)
Interview(s), including report writing. 2 hours 50%
Jail Call
Monitoring
Listen to calls, report writing. 10 hours 10%
Consult with DA Conduct follow up, write additional
reports.
1 hours 20%
632
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 86
Task Processes Involved
Approximate
Time
% of Time
Completed
Total If all tasks completed: 82.0 hours
On average: 22.6 hours
This list is not all inclusive and does not contain all elements of an investigation and not every case will have same amount of evidence or interviews conducted. Included in these hours is the assumption that detectives will be using RMS searches, checking association files, receiving informant information, and other investigative techniques (trackers, cell tower data, etc.), if available. Many cases will not require the number of hours listed, but some cases may require significantly more.

Based on the percentage for how often each subtask is completed, each solvable case equates to an average of approximately 22.6 hours.
(3.3) Sexual Assault
Sexual assault and crimes against children are even more complex cases that are treated more seriously by the judicial system; they tend to have less witnesses, thus requiring more time in interviews and recovery and processing of evidence than other person crimes. The following chart describes approximate investigative times for sex crimes:

Processes Involved
Approximate
Time
% of Time
Completed
DNA Evidence to crime lab, includes
submission and report.
2 hours 50%
Crime Scene
Material
Evidence to property control,
inspection, and report writing.
2 hours 50%
Cell Phones Cell phone downloads, with some
taking longer than others.
4 hours 40%
Video Review of video recovered from
scene and BWC, report writing.
4 hours 50%
Social Media/
Elec. Records
Warrants/subpoenas, including
submission and report.
10 hours 20%
Location Data Warrants/subpoenas, including
submission and report.
20 hours 40%
633
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 87
Processes Involved
Approximate
Time
% of Time
Completed
Surveillance Surveillance, including locating
suspect and report writing.
10 hours 20%
Sex Assault Kit Sex Assault Exam including report
writing.
6 Hours 90%
Victim / Witness
Interviews
Interview(s), including report writing. 2 hours 100%
Suspect Interview(s), including report writing. 2 hours 50% Jail Call
Monitoring
Listen to calls, report writing. 2 hours 40%
Consult with DA Review case, perform follow up,
includes report writing.
1 hours 20%
Total If all tasks completed: 65.0 hours
On average: 26.6 hours
This list is not all inclusive and does not contain all elements of all investigations. Not every case will have same amount of evidence or interviews conducted. Included in these hours is the assumption that detectives will be using RMS searches, checking association files, receiving informant information and other investigative techniques (trackers, cell tower data, etc.), if available. Many cases will not require the number of hours listed, but some cases may require significantly more.

Using the above work hour estimates and the percentage of the time that each subtask is completed, this translates to approximately 26.6 hours per solvable case. (3.4) Internet Crimes Against Children (ICAC)
Internet Crimes Against Children are complex investigative cases which rely heavily on digital forensic evidence that requires unique processes. These cases are treated more seriously by the judicial system; they tend to have less witnesses, thus requiring more time in interviews and recovery and processing of evidence than other crimes. The following chart describes approximate investigative times for sex crimes:
634
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 88
Processes Involved
Approximate
Time
% of Time
Completed
Cell Phones Cell phone downloads, with some
taking longer than others.
4 hours 30%
Video Review of video recovered from
scene and BWC, report writing.
4 hours 30%
Social Media/
Elec. Records
Warrants/subpoenas, including
submission and report.
6 hours 20%
Location Data Warrants/subpoenas, including
submission and report.
20 hours 30%
Surveillance Surveillance, including locating
suspect and report writing.
10 hours 20%
Document /
Digital Evidence
Review
Review/ recover images, files, and
write reports.
30 Hours 100%
Victim / Witness
Interviews
Interview(s), including report writing. 2 hours 50%
Suspect Suspect interview(s), including report
writing.
2 hours 50%
Jail Call
Monitoring
Listen to calls, report writing. 4 hours 10%
Consult with DA Review case, perform follow up,
includes report writing.
4 hours 10%
Total If all tasks completed: 86.0 hours
On average: 44.4 hours
This list is not all inclusive and does not contain all elements and not every sex assault case will have same amount of evidence or interviews conducted. Included in these hours is the assumption that detectives will be using RMS searches, checking association files, receiving informant information and other investigative techniques (trackers, cell tower data, etc.), if available. Many cases will not require the number of hours listed, but some cases may require significantly more.

Using the above work hour estimates and the percentage of the time that each subtask is completed, this translates to approximately 44.4 hours per solvable case. 635
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 89
(3.5) Burglary / Property Crime
Burglary / Property Crimes are typically less complex investigative cases than person crimes and generally require less investigative time or resources. These cases are treated less seriously by the judicial system, and they tend to have less witnesses. The following chart describes approximate investigative times for Burglary / Property Crimes:

Processes Involved
Approximate
Time
% of Time
Completed
DNA Evidence to crime lab, includes
submission and report.
2 hours 20%
Crime Scene
Material
Evidence to property control,
inspection, and report writing.
2 hours 20%
Cell Phones Cell phone downloads, with some
taking longer than others.
4 hours 50%
Video Review of video recovered from
scene and BWC, report writing.
2 hours 50%
Social Media/
Elec. Records
Warrants/subpoenas, including
submission and report.
6 hours 30%
Location Data Warrants/subpoenas, including
submission and report.
20 hours 40%
Surveillance Surveillance, including locating
suspect and report writing.
10 hours 20%
Victim / Witness
Interviews
Interview(s), including report writing. 1 hours 50%
Suspect
Interview
Interview(s), including report writing. 1 hours 50%
Jail Call
Monitoring
Listen to calls, report writing. 2 hours 10%
Consult with DA Review case, perform follow up,
includes report writing.
1 hours 10%
Total If all tasks completed: 51.0 hours
On average: 16.9 hours
This list is not all inclusive and does not contain all elements of all investigations. Not every case will have same amount of evidence or interviews conducted. Included in these 636
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 90
hours is the assumption that detectives will be using RMS searches, checking association files, receiving informant information and other investigative techniques (trackers, cell tower data, etc.), if available. Many cases will not require the number of hours listed, but some cases may require significantly more.

Using the above work hour estimates and the percentage of the time that each subtask is completed, this translates to approximately 16.9 hours per solvable case. (3.6) Financial Crimes
Financial crimes are exceedingly difficult cases to pursue and typically take longer to investigate as much of the evidence must be subpoenaed or obtained with a search warrant. In addition, much of the evidence belongs to financial institutions and detectives must wait for them to comply with legal requests for information before they can proceed, and this can take weeks to months depending on the type and amount of data requested.

They also tend to have much lower solvability rates (approximately 50% less solvable than person crimes). These types of cases typically do not require a detective to respond to a scene and are often handled as follow up a day or more after the occurrence. The following chart details processes and times associated with investigating financial crimes:

Processes Involved
Approximate
Time
% of Time
Completed
Document /
Digital Evidence
Review
Review/ recover financial data, files,
and write reports.
12 hours 100%
Video Review of video recovered from
scene and BWC, report writing.
4 hours 10%
Social Media/
Elec. Records
Warrants/subpoenas, including
submission and report.
8 hours 10%
Cell Phone /
computer
evidence
Warrants/subpoenas, including
submission and report.
8 hours 50%
Location Data Warrants/subpoenas, including
submission and report.
20 hours 50%
Victim / Witness
Interview(s)
Interview(s), including report writing. 2 hours 100%
637
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 91
Processes Involved
Approximate
Time
% of Time
Completed
Suspect
Interview(s)
Interview(s), including report writing. 2 hours 20%
Total If all tasks completed: 56.0 hours
On average: 29.6 hours
This list is not all inclusive and does not contain all elements of all investigations. Not every case will have same amount of evidence or interviews conducted. Included in these hours is the assumption that detectives will be using RMS searches, checking association files, receiving informant information and other investigative techniques (trackers, cell tower data, etc.), if available. Many cases will not require the number of hours listed, but some cases may require significantly more.

Using the above work hour estimates and the percentage of the time that each subtask is completed, this translates to approximately 29.6 hours per solvable case. (3.7) Domestic Assault
Domestic Assault cases are generally less investigative intense the victim and suspect are known; however, they do require some investigation for successful prosecution. The following chart describes approximate investigative times for these cases:

Processes Involved
Approximate
Time
% of Time
Completed
DNA Evidence to crime lab, includes
submission and report.
2 hours 20%
Crime Scene
Material
Evidence to property control,
inspection, and report writing.
2 hours 10%
Cell Phones Cell phone downloads, with some
taking longer than others.
4 hours 50%
Video Review of video recovered from
scene and BWC, report writing.
2 hours 100%
Social Media/
Elec. Records
Warrants/subpoenas, including
submission and report.
4 hours 20%
Surveillance Surveillance, including locating
suspect and report writing.
2 hours 20%
638
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 92
Processes Involved
Approximate
Time
% of Time
Completed
Victim / Witness
Interviews
Interview(s), including report writing. 2 hours 100%
Suspect
Interview
Interview(s), including report writing. 2 hours 50%
Jail Call
Monitoring
Listen to calls, report writing. 2 hours 10%
Consult with DA Review case, perform follow up,
includes report writing.
1 hours 10%
Total If all tasks completed: 21.0 hours
On average: 8.7 hours
This list is not all inclusive and does not contain all elements of all investigations. Not every case will have same amount of evidence or interviews conducted. Included in these hours is the assumption that detectives will be using RMS searches, checking association files, receiving informant information and other investigative techniques (trackers, cell tower data, etc.), if available. Many cases will not require the number of hours listed, but some cases may require significantly more.

Using the above work hour estimates and the percentage of the time that each subtask is completed, this translates to approximately 8.7 hours per solvable case. (3.8) Missing / Runaway
Missing / Runaway cases typical involve interviewing reporting party, last person to have seen them, checking last known locations, close friends and relatives and entering information into teletype. Depending on leads and investigation required by law or agency policy these cases range from 2 to 4 hours with an average of about 3 hours. (3.9) General Crimes / Officer Assist
General crimes / officer assists can vary greatly depending on the type of crime or assistance needed. These cases are typically lower-level crimes where some follow up is needed or an officer needs assistance with a case they are working. This can include assisting with a cell phone download, social media or open sources search, warrant preparation or other investigative techniques. Depending on the type of crime and investigative need these cases take between 4 and 8 hours with an average of 6 hours. 639
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 93

4. Caseload Workload Hours Analysis by Unit
To determine the caseload the project team reviewed the detective caseload and then sorted the cases by case type. The case types were divided into the detective units responsible for that type of investigation. Using the caseload hours by case type the total caseloads per work unit were then calculated.
(4.1) Homicide Unit
The following table details the homicide unit caseload with associated work hours:
2021 Homicide Unit Caseload # Investigative Hours Per Total Hours Homicide 12 275 3,300
Homicide Assist 12* 160 1,920
Person Crimes (Assaults / Shootings /
Other) 264 22.6 5,966
Total 276 N/A 11,186
*Not included caseload count total.

As the table above indicates, the caseload assigned is represents approximately 11,186 hours.

As mentioned above there are a total of 6 authorized detective positions assigned to work cases with 1 current vacancy. Using the previous calculation of net available caseload hours and total 2021 caseload the number of detectives needed to investigate the caseload can be determined:

Calculation of Detective Staffing Needs
Total Caseload Hours 11,186
Divided by total net available
hours for 1 detective (1,225) ÷ 1,225
Number of Detectives Needed = 9.13
As the chart indicates the number of detectives recommended to work the assigned caseload hours assigned is 9.13 and there are a total of 5 detectives currently assigned with 6 authorized. As noted in a previous section RPD has a very low clearance rate on person crimes compared to peers. To achieve workable caseloads levels with current assigned caseloads a total of 10 detectives is needed. Additionally, to provide supervisory support an additional sergeant is needed to maintain a recommended ratio of no more than 6 to 9 direct reports per supervisory.
640
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 94
Recommendations:

Increase authorized staffing in Homicides by 4 detectives for a total of 10 detectives assigned.

Increase authorized staffing in Homicides by 1 sergeant for a total of 2 sergeants assigned.
(4.2) Domestic and Sexual Violence Unit
The following table details the special victims unit caseload with associated work hours:
2021 Domestic and Sexual Violence Unit
Caseload # Investigative Hours Per Total Hours
Sex Assault / Abuse – Elder / Child Abuse 557 26.6 14,816 Domestic Violence 147 8.7 1,278
Total 704 N/A 16,094
As the table above indicates, the caseload assigned is represents approximately 16,094 hours.

As mentioned above there are a total of 6 authorized detective positions assigned to work cases with 1 current vacancies. Using the previous calculation of net available caseload hours and total 2021 caseload the number of detectives needed to investigate the caseload can be determined:

Calculation of Detective Staffing Needs
Total Caseload Hours 16,094
Divided by total net available
hours for 1 detective (1,225) ÷ 1,225
Number of Detectives Needed = 13.1
As the chart indicates the number of detectives recommended to work the assigned caseload hours assigned is 13.1 and there are a total of 5 detectives currently assigned with 6 authorized. As noted in a previous section RPD has a very low clearance rate on person crimes compared to peers. To achieve workable caseloads levels with current assigned caseloads a total of 13 detectives is needed. Additionally, to provide supervisory support an additional sergeant is needed to maintain a recommended ratio of no more than 6 to 9 direct reports per supervisory.
641
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 95
Recommendations:

Increase authorized staffing in the Domestic and Sexual Violence Unit by 7 detectives for a total of 13 detectives assigned.

Increase authorized staffing in the Domestic and Sexual Violence Unit by 1 sergeant for a total of 2 sergeants assigned.
(4.3) General Crimes Unit
The following table details the property crimes unit caseload with associated work hours:
2021 General Crimes Caseload # Investigative Hours Per Total Hours Burglary 328 16.6 5,444
Fraud / Forgery 38 29.6 1,124
Other Person Crimes 418 22.6 9,446
Robbery 149 22.6 3,367
Stolen Vehicles* 151 16.6 2,506
Total 1,084 N/A 21,887
*Estimated on historically only 10% of reported stolen vehicles being investigated.

As the table above indicates, the caseload assigned is represents approximately 21,887 hours.

As mentioned above there are a total of 6 authorized detective positions (1 youth crimes) assigned to work cases with 2 current vacancies. Using the previous calculation of net available caseload hours and total 2021 caseload the number of detectives needed to investigate the caseload can be determined:

Calculation of Detective Staffing Needs
Total Caseload Hours 21,887
Divided by total net available
hours for 1 detective (1,225) ÷ 1,225
Number of Detectives Needed = 17.8
As the chart indicates the number of detectives recommended to work the assigned caseload hours assigned is 17.8 and there are a total of 6 detectives currently assigned with 8 authorized. As noted in a previous section RPD has a very low clearance rate on person/property crimes compared to peers. To achieve workable caseloads levels with current assigned caseloads a total of 18 detectives is needed. Additionally, to provide 642
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 96
supervisory support an additional sergeant is needed to maintain a recommended ratio of no more than 6 to 9 direct reports per supervisory.

General crimes are a combination of two prior units that included person crimes and property which were consolidated due to staffing shortages. The focus of these two units is very dissimilar and they are not typically combined in other police departments serving a similar sized population as Richmond. General crimes should be separated into two separate units to better focus investigative efforts.

Recommendations:

Increase authorized staffing in the General Crimes Unit by 10 detectives for a total of 18 detectives assigned.

Increase authorized staffing in the General Crimes Unit by 1 sergeant for a total of 2 sergeants assigned.

Split the General Crimes Unit into person crimes and property crimes (including financial crimes)
(4.4) Crime Analysis
The Crime Analysis Unit consists of 1 crime analyst. The crime analyst position operates more like an investigative analyst in that they assist with investigations by performing cell phone data extraction and other investigative tasks. The crime analyst also prepares crime statistics and reports. Performance measures are not tracked for this position.

There is a currently a backlog on processing cell phone downloads and other investigative tasks and only priority cases are handled. There were 1,074 Part 1 violent crimes reported in 2020 and only 1 crime analyst to assist with these cases. This does not include other cases where a crime analyst would be helpful in securing more evidence, especially cell phone and location data. With current resources fewer digital devices are processed than would be expected. The following table illustrates potential crime analyst caseloads.

Potential Crime Analyst Activities
Category Number Average Hours per
Phone /Device*
Total Hours
70% of Reported Part 1 Violent Crime Cases
(1,074 X .70)
751 3 2,253
20% of Reported Part 1 Property Crime Cases
(3,745 X .20)
749 3 2,247
Total 1,500 N/A 4,500
*Includes digital extraction (cell phone downloads), interpreting data, documenting, and writing reports. 643
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 97
As the table indicates the unit should be processing approximately 1,500 Part 1 crime related digital evidence which represents approximately 4,500 hours of work.

As mentioned above there is 1 authorized position assigned to process digital evidence.

Using the previous calculation of net available hours and the estimated total of digital evidence that should be processed the number of staff needed to process the cell phones / digital evidence can be determined:

Calculation of Staffing Needs
Total Caseload Hours 4,500
Divided by total net available
hours for 1 staff (1,225) ÷ 1,720
Number of Detectives Needed = 2.61
As the chart indicates the number of staff recommended to work the estimated caseload is 2.61 and there is a total of 1 analyst currently assigned. Adding 2 more analysts to assist with cell phone downloads, interpreting location data and conducting social media searches could greatly increase the case solvency rate for the department.

With added staff the unit should have a dedicated supervisor assigned to maintain a reasonable span of control. The supervisor should be a working supervisor that also maintains a smaller caseload in addition to supervises the unit.

Recommendation:

Add 2 crime analysts to assist with cases for a total of 3 analysts assigned.

Add a supervisor in Crime Analysis to oversee the 3 analysts. (4.5) Safe Streets Task Force
One sergeant is assigned to the Safe Streets Task Force. The Safe Streets Task Force combines local, state, and federal partners to target violent crimes. The sergeant assigned to the unit supervises officers from multiple agencies. The multi -agency task force provides Richmond with investigative resources and financial support they could not as easily accomplish on their own. As a proactive unit, there is not set specific benchmark for case solvency as there are many variables involved in each case that can be unique. Violent crime and gang cases require extensive surveillance, search warrants and the use of other investigative techniques which can labor intensive. This task force, though reduced in staff provides a benefit to the City of Richmond through additional investigative resources and financial benefits that cover overtime and other operational expenses.
644
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 98
Recommendation:

Maintain authorized staffing of 1 sergeant in the Safe Streets Task Force. (4.6) Crime Scene
The Crime Scene Unit consists of 1 detective. The CSU responds to serious violent crimes assisting mostly just the homicide unit. There are 3 crime scene techs that assist patrol with lower-level cases. This is currently a collateral duty for 3 officers. The crime scene unit in investigations photographs and recovers evidence at serious crime scenes. As noted earlier there were 1,074 violent crimes reported in 2020. There were and additional 3,745 Part 1 crimes reported in 2020. With current resources fewer crimes scenes are processed than would be expected. There are digital evidence recovery technicians so all on scene digital evidence recovery is done by officers on scene, investigative detectives, or the crime scene detective. This is not a best practice as digital evidence recovery requires technical skills that should be certified for court testimony expertise and consistency.

The table below shows potential workload if major crime scenes were processed in 2021:

Potential Crime Scene Activities
Category Number Avg Hours/Scene* Total Hours
70% of Reported Part 1 Violent Crime Cases
(1,074 X .70)
751 3 2,253
30% of Reported Part 1 Property Crime Cases
(3,745 X .30)
1,123 2 2,246
Total 1,874 N/A 4,499
*Includes travel time, documenting, recovering evidence, placing evidence into the property room, and writing reports.

As the table indicates the crime scene unit should be processing approximately 1,874 Part 1 crime scenes which represents approximately 4,499 hours of work.

As mentioned above there is 1 authorized detective positions assigned to process crime scenes. Using the previous calculation of net available hours and the estimated total of crime scenes that should be processed the number of staff needed to process the crime scenes can be determined:
645
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 99
Calculation of Staffing Needs
Total Caseload Hours 4,499
Divided by total net available
hours for 1 detective/ staff (1,225) ÷ 1,225
Number of Detectives Needed = 3.67
As the chart indicates the number of staff recommended to work the estimated caseload is 3.67 and there is a total of 1 detective currently assigned.

Crime scene processing does not require law enforcement credentials or specific officer training. Many agencies successfully process crime scenes using all civilian staff.

Civilian staff are typically paid less than the sworn personnel and are therefore more economical. Over time the police department should transition to all civilian staff for crime scene staffing.

If crime scene were to be civilianized the number of net available work hours would increase due to less on duty training, court, and time off. The following table shows staffing needs using civilian staffing:

Calculation of Staffing Needs
Total Caseload Hours 4,499
Divided by total net available
hours for 1 detective/ staff (1,720) ÷ 1,720
Number of Crime Scene
Technicians Needed = 2.61
As the chart indicates the number of staff recommended to work the estimated caseload is 2.61 and there is a total of 1 detective currently assigned.

The unit should be transitioned to civilian staff with new hires being civilian and the sworn detective position should be transitioned to civilian staff upon transfer, promotion, or retirement of the current detective.

With added staff the unit should have a dedicated supervisor assigned to maintain a reasonable span of control. The supervisor should be a working supervisor that also maintains a smaller caseload in addition to supervises the unit.

Recommendation:

Add 2 additional civilian crime scene technicians and a supervisor for a total of 3 crime scene technicians and 1 supervisor.
646
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 100
Transition the sworn detective position assigned to crime scenes to a civilian upon retirement, transfer or promotion.

5. Proactive Investigations
The Richmond police department had proactive investigative units until staffing shortages required the positions to be eliminated to focus on responding to calls for service. The investigative proactive units focused on repeat offenders and high crime locations. Proactive investigative units have time to conduct surveillance, write warrants and safely conduct stops along with other investigative techniques. Dedicated staffing to conduct proactive investigations of problem locations or repeat offenders is a very common among progressive law enforcement agencies.

Proactive investigations provide law enforcement agencies the ability to perform investigations that require additional time and equipment to be successful. The RPD lacks proactive investigative resources which a proactive investigative team would prefer. Proactive units can help make communities safer by mitigating chronic crime locations and by focuses on repeat offenders.

Proactive investigation teams do create some liability because their work is self-initiated and some of the investigations can be very complex. To mitigate the liability a sergeant should be included as a direct supervisor in the unit and the unit should consist of two teams of two detectives so that stops can be conducted with at least to detectives present.

Recommendation:

RPD should stand up a proactive investigative team comprised of 1 sergeant and 4 detectives.

6. Summary of Investigation Bureau Staffing Needs
Based on the 2021 workload, detective net availability, and average time by case load type the number of staff needed was determined. The following table summarizes the number of staff needed by type.
647
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 101
Recommended Investigative Staffing by Unit
Case Type Captain Lieutenant Sergeants Detectives Civilian Total Investigations Admin 1 1 0 0 0 2
Homicide Unit 0 0 2 9 0 11
Domestic and Sexual
Violence Unit 0 0 2 13 0 15
General Crimes Unit
(Eliminate) 0 0 0 0 0 0
Person Crimes Unit
(NEW) 0 0 1 9 0 10
Property Crimes Unit
(NEW) 0 0 1 9 0 10
Proactive Investigations
(New) 0 0 1 4 0 5
Safe Streets TF 0 0 1 0 0 1
Crime Analysis 0 0 0 0 4 4
Crime Scene Unit 0 0 0 0 4 4
Total 1 1 7 40 8 62
The recommended staffing is a large increase over current staffing with 34 additional staff recommended.
648
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 102

6. Administration Bureau
The Administration Bureau is led by a Captain and comprised of the Personnel and Training Section, the Records Section, the Police IT Section, and the Communications Center. Staff is comprised of a combination of sworn and non-sworn personnel.

1. Personnel and Training Section
The Personnel and Training Section is responsible for several administrative functions within the police department. These functions include the development of training plans, procurement of equipment, and compliance maintenance with the California Peace Officers Standards and Training (POST). The Section is also responsible for the recruitment and hiring of all sworn Police Officers and Professional Support Staff for the department.

The Section is comprised of one Sergeant, two Officers, and one Administrative Aid. The Sergeant works 6am – 4pm, Monday through Thursday. One Officer works 8am – 6pm, Monday through Thursday and the other Officer works 7:30am – 5:30pm, Tuesday through Friday. The Administrative Aid works 6am – 4pm, Monday through Thursday but is only assigned to the Section two days each week. The other two days are assigned to the Financial Services Unit.

The Personnel and Training Section Sergeant is assigned first-line supervisory duties and the following collateral duty assignments:
• SWAT
• Armory coordinator
• Police service dog program coordinator
• Jail operations
• Building services
• Probationary review board
• Police training officer program
• Defensive tactics and taser programs
There are clear advantages in assigning managers and supervisors collateral duties.

These advantages include being more cost effective than the alternative of retaining more personnel and providing for opportunities to enhance their professional experience. 649
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 103
Caution should be used not to overburden employees with collateral duties which take away from primary supervisory functions. Given the primary duties associated with the personnel and training sergeant position, it is recommended that the current collateral duty assignments not exceed the current number.

Officer to Sergeant span of control ratios have a significant impact on the performance of first-line supervisors and their ability to fulfill the range of their duties effectively. While factors such as job functions, available technology, and the competencies of the supervisor and staff may play a role in this ratio, the recommended supervisory span of control is seven officers to one sergeant. The below chart depicts the Personnel and Training Sergeant’s current supervisory span of control:

Supervisory Span of Control Ratio
Sergeant 1:10
The current supervisor span of control exceeds the recommended ratio of 1:7. Seven of the Personnel and Training Section Sergeant’s subordinates work within the 24- hour jail facility. As such, there are times when a direct supervisory gap exists among jail personnel.

Recommendation:

Reassign jail facility supervisory responsibilities to new jail supervisor position (more on jail supervisor recommendation in jail facility section of report).

1.2 Training
The Personnel and Training Section Officers coordinate the department’s yearly inservice training. All Richmond Police department trainers are part-time (collateral duty assignments). The Range and Firearms Program, Defensive Tactics and Taser Program, and the Emergency Vehicle Operations Course (EVOC) Program are each managed by a Lieutenant and coordinated by a Sergeant (collateral duty assignments).

The following table depicts all department mandated training in 2021:

Richmond Police Department Training
Topic Hours
Firearms 16
Defensive Tactics 1.5
Driver Training 4
High Speed Vehicle Pursuit 2
650
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 104
Each year, Police Officers in the State of California are mandated to complete twenty-four or more hours of POST qualified training during a two-year cycle. The following table depicts the total number of hours mandated by the State of California, Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST):

California POST Mandated Training Requirements
Topic Requirement
Domestic Violence Complaints Every 2 years
First Aid and CPR Every 2 years
High Speed Vehicle Pursuits 2 hours each year
Racial and Identity Profiling Every 5 years
Firearms 4 hours minimum each year
Driver Training/Awareness 4 hours minimum each year
Arrest and Control (Defensive Tactics) 4 hours minimum each year Strategic Communications 2 hours minimum each year
Use of Force 4 hours minimum each year
While the two-year California POST training cycle is not complete, the Richmond Police Department was deficient in arrest and control training hours (defensive tactics) in 2021.

Effective and consistent education and training is of strategic importance in modern policing. The current California POST mandated training hours are a limited requirement which does not meet current best practices; forty hours of in-service training per year.

In 2014, a Presidential Task Force on 21st Policing was created in order to strengthen community policing and trust among Law Enforcement Officers and the communities they serve. One key task force recommendation focused on the need for police training to be expanded upon and more effective in order to meet the scope of current and future police responsibilities. The task force also recommended that police organizations engage community members, particularly those with special expertise in the training process and provide leadership training to all personnel throughout their careers.

In order to expand upon its current training, it is recommended that the Richmond Police Department conduct a training needs assessment and develop a yearly training plan.

1.3 Training Needs Assessment
Prior to the development of a training plan, an organizational needs assessment should be conducted. This assessment should be based on current issues within the department, as well as emerging trends in policing. Topics such as crisis intervention, deescalation, arrest and control techniques, and complaints or performance issues which affect more than one employee should be addressed. This assessment should be conducted with stakeholders at the officer, non-sworn and supervisory levels. 651
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 105
A training needs assessment should include the following:
• Review of statutory changes.
• Review of policy changes.
• A review of department needs for training on specific tasks. • A national survey of emerging trends.
• A local survey of trends.
• Data from the department on use of force, complaints, officer involved traffic collisions, process or procedure failures, lawsuits to determine if any issues could be mitigated through training.
• Legal updates.
• Career advancement training.
• Leadership training.

A well thought-out assessment will include needs from each role/ function within the department and may be different for each unit. Community participation and input should be solicited while conducting the training needs assessment.

1.4 Training Plan
There is no formalized training plan developed by the agency to ensure police trends or department needs are incorporated into training cycles. A training plan should be developed once a needs assessment has been completed. A formalized training plan will help to ensure all employees receive the training they need to be effective at their job. A training plan would also detail when training should be conducted so that all state training mandates are met and that all employees receive the needed training to be most effective.

A training committee should be created to develop the plan. This can help with employee “buy in” for the plan and can also help explain “the why” and “how” the plan was developed. A training committee should consist at a minimum of one person from each major area of the department since different units of areas may have specific needs.

Community members can be a valuable asset to a police organization’s training. As such, community representatives should also participate in the training committee. Once the plan is developed a matrix should be completed so that time frames and attendance goals are met. This yearly training plan should be developed and approved by department leadership at the beginning of each year.
652
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 106
Recommendations:

Create a departmental training committee comprised of a cross-section of employees and community members.

Conduct a training needs assessment.

Develop a yearly department training plan.

Increase annual training to a minimum of 40 hours per year inclusive of state mandated training.

1.5 Recruitment and Hiring
The Personnel and Training Section Officers coordinate all department pre-employment background investigations. These Officers also coordinate the department’s recruitment efforts.

The Police Executive Research Forum recently surveyed its members regarding staffing, hiring, retirement, and resignation trends among officers from 2019 through 2021.

Although the hiring of new officers increased in 2021 after falling sharply in 2020, officer resignations and retirements continue to strain overall staffing levels. Staffing at agencies in the Western United States decreased more than the overall average. Agencies continue to face serious staffing shortages. The Richmond Police Department currently has forty-one vacant positions throughout the department.

The Richmond Police Department utilizes various social media platforms and recruitment approaches, including a link to its recruitment page on the front page of the department’s website. A diverse workforce is essential in building trust between police departments and the communities they serve. Nationally, police agencies have altered recruitment and hiring approaches such as offering hiring bonuses and changing eligibility requirements.

Police agencies have also begun giving retention bonuses or pay increases to target staffing issues.

The Richmond Police Department does not currently have a strategic recruitment, hiring, and retention plan. Such a plan will build trust within the community and ensure the department is representative of the community in terms of characteristics, ability, background, and experience. A comprehensive recruitment, hiring, and retention plan should be created with the following goals:
• Engage department stakeholders in order to ensure the Richmond Police Department’s organizational culture is guided by community policing, procedural 653
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 107
justice, and cultural inclusivity.
• Engage community stakeholders in order to ensure the Richmond Police Department’s workforce reflects the characteristics of the community members of Richmond.
• Evaluate employment criteria, standards, and benchmarks to ensure that they are tailored to the skills needed to perform job functions, and consequently attract, select, and retain the most qualified and desirable employees.

A comprehensive recruitment, hiring, and retention plan should include the following:
(1) Recruitment
• Modify recruitment efforts to expand the diversity and volume of young adults who perceive a career on the department is a viable career field to consider. • Proactive and targeted community outreach efforts in order to encourage applicants from diverse populations to consider all careers within the department. (2) Hiring
• Evaluate the current selection processes used to reduce the time and burden traditional approaches place on applicants and the expense these efforts create for the department.
• Evaluate current hiring process to ensure testing requirements correspond with job-related functions.
• Evaluate the pre-employment background process in order to adopt a holistic view of skills and strengths applicants bring to the department. • Cultivate awareness among current employees that they play a key role in recruiting future employees as they perform their duties within their communities. • Consider how the orientation and structure used to train new employees might work against efforts to recruit sufficient diverse personnel. (3) Retention
• Explore how job sharing and part-time positions might enable the department to retain employees, even during life phases when employees have demanding responsibilities as caregivers.
• Pursue a workplace that is welcoming to increase a wide range of diversity and inclusion efforts within the department.
• Evaluate traditional organizational practices in ways that might make careers more desirable and sustainable.
654
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 108
• Develop a department mentorship program and institute leadership training which is critical to providing officers the support, guidance, and resources needed to succeed and earn promotions.
• Evaluate potential incentives in order to retain officers.

Pre-employment background investigations are currently assigned to part-time Investigators as a collateral duty assignment. These part-time Background Investigators are assigned to various units from within the department. The department also utilizes an outside pre-employment background investigation company as needed. In 2021, six department part-time Background Investigators and two private Background Investigators were used. In 2021, the department received one hundred and sixty applications (one hundred and five sworn and fifty-five non-sworn). Background Investigators completed a total of seventeen background investigations (eleven sworn and six non-sworn). The department hired four sworn positions and three non-sworn positions in 2021.

There are currently forty-five vacant positions throughout the department (twenty-six sworn and nineteen non-sworn). Based on historic processing rates, sworn positions require approximately fifty applications in order to fill three to seven positions. Many applicants fail the background process, however that is after time and effort has been invested in starting the background process and preliminary investigation on personal history questionnaires. The following table indicates the workload associated with processing backgrounds based on interviews and previous studies:

Positions
# of
positions
needed
Number of Applicants
to process based on
ratio of 7 successes to
50 applicants
Hours per
background
process
Total workload
hours
Sworn 26 182 80 14,560
Civilian 19 133 80 10,640
Total 45 315 N/A 25,200
As the table indicates it will take approximately 25,200 work hours in order to fill current department vacancies. Though part time Background Investigators are ideal for a limited number of pre-employment investigations because of their flexibility, they are limited in the number of hours they can work. This means there is limited ability to assign more backgrounds to them when needed. Part-time Investigators are generally limited to 960 hours per year. The following table indicates how many part time Investigators are needed to fill current vacancies in one year.
655
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 109
Calculation of Staffing Needs
Total workload hours 25,200
Divided by total net available hours for 1 investigator (960) ÷ 960 Number of investigators needed = 26.25
As the table indicates, 26 part time Background Investigators are required in order to complete the total number of pre-employment backgrounds required to fill current vacancies. Though it is unlikely this number of pre-employment investigations would need to be completed in a one-year period, the tables illustrate that with current part time resources there are capacity issues. Adding 2 full-time background investigators will increase flexibility and capacity.

Recommendations:

Develop a comprehensive Recruitment, Hiring, and Retention Plan.

Add 2 full-time Background Investigators to the Training and Personnel Unit in order to fill current vacancies.

2. Jail Facility
The Richmond Police Department maintains a type II jail facility which is used as a temporary holding facility. All prisoners brought into the jail are either issued a citation and immediately released or transported to the Martinez Detention facility within twentyfour hours of booking. The jail does not house prisoners serving sentences, nor do personnel transport prisoners to court proceedings. Although a large majority of prisoners booked into the facility are from the Richmond Police Department, the California Highway Patrol utilizes the facility as well.

The Administration Bureau’s Lieutenant manages the jail facility and provides employee oversight. The Personnel and Training Section Sergeant is assigned first-line supervisory duties of all jail employees. The jail facility is comprised of one Officer and five Jailers (authorized 6). The Officer serves as the Lead Jailer and performs jailer functions and transports prisoners as needed. Jailers perform prisoner searches, conduct medical screenings, book prisoners into the jail facility, and are responsible for the care and custody of prisoners inside the facility. The Jailers are broken up in to three teams of two, who work either 6am – 6pm, 6pm – 6am, or 2pm – 12am shifts. All jailers are required to participate in an eight-hour course once every two years in order to remain in compliance with State of California regulations.
656
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 110
The below chart depicts the total jail facility bookings from 2021 through 2019:

Jail Bookings
2021 1,944
2020 2,040
2019 2,651
Current jail facility best practices specify that Jailer observation posts should be immediately adjacent to inmate living areas in order to allow jailers to hear and respond promptly to emergency situations. The Richmond Police Department maintains observation posts and has a minimum of two Jailers on duty at all times.

Although the jail facility is used as a temporary holding facility, there are certain risks and liability which accompany this type of facility operations. Prisoners may arrive with varying degrees of medical, mental health, substance abuse, and family issues. While inside the jail, these prisoners may display a wide range of behaviors, including fear, anger, and anxiety, as well as violent, anti-social, and suicidal behaviors. Although the department maintains adequate jailer staffing, there is a need for a full-time primary supervisor within the jail facility. The following tasks should be assigned to this full-time primary supervisor:
• Immediate supervision of subordinates in the performance of their duties. • Maintain inventory of equipment.
• Train subordinates.
• Disseminate information to subordinates.
• Ensure policies and procedures are followed.
• Review and approve various reports.
• Provide direct supervision for potential high-risk situations. • Perform employee and jail facility audits.
• Ensure proper care / custody of prisoners is maintained.

As previously discussed, the current immediate supervisor for all jail facility employees is the Personnel and Training Sergeant. This Sergeant currently has a total of eight collateral duty assignments, outside of primary work functions. In order to ensure proper supervision of jail facility employees and proper care and custody of prisoners, a full-time supervisor is needed. This supervisor will assist in minimizing risk and liability concerns 657
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 111
from within the jail facility. It is also recommended that this jail facility supervisor be a non-sworn Police Officer position.

Recommendation:

Add 1 full-time non-sworn Jail Supervisor.

3. Communications Center
The Richmond Police Department Communications Center is the contact and answering point for all emergency and non-emergency phone calls for the cities of Richmond and El Cerrito. All employees working within the center are California POST and National Academy of Emergency Medical Dispatchers EMD certified and participate in yearly training updates. The Communications Center is led by a Communications Manager and comprised of four Dispatch Supervisors and thirteen Dispatchers (authorized seventeen).

Employees work twelve-hour shifts, 6am – 6pm or 6pm – 6am.

Dispatch duties include gathering critical information during emergencies and coordinating the needed response by dispatching appropriate police, fire, and medical units. When encountering calls for medical assistance, dispatch staff are trained to provide both critical and non-critical medical instructions over the telephone to aid in the care of patient prior to emergency units arriving on scene.

Dispatcher to Supervisor span of control ratios have a significant impact on the performance of first-line supervisors and their ability to fulfill the range of their duties effectively. While factors such as job functions, available technology, and the competencies of the supervisor and staff may play a role in this ratio, the recommended supervisory span of control is seven Dispatchers to one Supervisor. The below chart depicts the Communications Center Dispatch Supervisor’s current supervisory span of control:

Supervisory Span of Control Ratio
Supervisor #1 1:3
Supervisor #2 1:3
Supervisor #3 1:3
Supervisor #4 1:4
Although the current supervisory span of control is well within the recommended ratio, current staffing levels reduce proper supervisory oversight. Dispatch Supervisors are often performing dispatch functions during a given shift due to current reduced staffing 658
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 112
levels. This oversight includes overseeing dispatchers while handling emergency calls and other citizen requests. Supervisors also have other duties assigned such as training new employees, reviewing performance evaluations, and providing feedback to help improve overall performance. None of these supervisory functions can be performed while a Supervisor is receiving and dispatching calls.

Employees are currently working mandatory overtime to cover vacancies and have done so for quite some time. The below chart depicts the total number of overtime hours collectively worked in 2021:
2021 Communications Center Overtime
Total Overtime Hours 9,531
In 2021, the thirteen Dispatchers worked a total of 794 extra 12- hours shifts for the year.

3.1 Dispatch Workload and Staffing
The project team has utilized emergency communications workload/staffing methodologies in its work with dispatch centers around the country; these methodologies are also supported by the Public Safety Dispatch Professional Association (APCO). Based on emergency communications workloads associated with handling requests for service from the public and supporting officers in the field on the radio, the number of FTE’s needed in each hour to accommodate this volume can be determined for each hour. This analytical process includes taking the number of calls for service per hour and multiplying this by the average time needed to handle the phones and the radio for each call. The following table depicts the total weekly average number of calls for service handled by dispatch in 2021 (both dispatched and self-initiated):
659
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 113
Weekly Average CFS Per Hour (CAD)
Hour Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
12am 8.73 4.63 4.13 4.17 4.52 5.54 6.83
1am 6.65 4.21 3.40 3.31 3.67 4.40 5.23
2am 5.35 3.06 3.13 3.25 3.23 3.56 4.37
3am 4.65 2.90 2.83 2.83 3.00 3.04 3.50
4am 2.52 2.37 2.12 2.13 2.44 2.48 3.06
5am 2.54 2.25 1.94 2.35 2.02 2.58 2.52
6am 2.42 2.44 3.17 2.56 2.50 2.77 1.87
7am 3.12 5.77 5.79 5.71 5.10 3.77 3.62
8am 5.58 8.85 8.71 8.60 8.27 7.02 6.73
9am 6.90 9.10 8.65 8.17 8.00 7.10 8.04
10am 7.92 8.50 8.12 8.77 8.10 7.85 8.52
11am 7.54 8.33 8.27 8.65 8.92 8.15 7.79
12pm 7.12 8.73 8.25 8.96 7.71 8.15 8.42
1pm 8.04 7.77 8.00 8.02 7.63 7.69 7.96
2pm 7.96 8.12 8.37 8.13 8.35 8.31 8.21
3pm 8.04 8.12 8.40 7.69 7.98 8.31 8.79
4pm 8.46 8.48 9.40 9.38 9.12 8.85 8.77
5pm 7.35 8.67 10.04 9.42 8.77 9.06 8.71
6pm 7.50 8.62 9.02 8.87 8.85 8.02 8.06
7pm 8.33 8.50 8.29 8.46 8.40 9.65 9.08
8pm 9.15 6.77 7.65 8.13 8.02 9.27 10.69
9pm 8.46 7.17 7.58 7.27 7.46 9.87 11.79
10pm 8.15 8.04 8.17 8.48 8.35 9.60 13.52
11pm 5.77 6.73 6.94 7.33 6.65 8.81 10.85
In 2021, the Communications Center received a total of 238,816 telephone calls. 84,659 of these calls were received on emergency telephone lines and 154,157 were received on non-emergency telephone lines. Each call was an average of 106 seconds in length. Data representing telephone calls specific to each day and hour in 2021 was unable to be provided. As such, an overall yearly average of telephone calls was determined based on available data. On average, 47.7 minutes of occupied call taking time occurred during each hour in 2021. The following table illustrates this calculation process:

Calculation of Occupied Call Taking Time
Total Telephone Calls 238,816
Divided by total days in year ÷ 365 = 654
Divided by total hours in day ÷ 24 = 27
Multiplied by average call time x 106
= 2,862 seconds (47.7 minutes)
Based on the above workload factors, the number of occupied minutes in each hour can 660
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 114
be determined. For call-taking, this entails multiplying the number of calls by the average number of minutes occupied by each call (the call duration), data which was provided by the Department. For dispatching, a figure of 3.5 minutes per incident is used, a number which aligns with the typical radio operation and dispatch processing time for joint police and fire communications centers, based on the project team’s experience with scores of similar agencies. The following table depicts the average number of occupied minutes in each hour for call-taking and dispatch operations:

Weekly Average Occupied Minutes Per Hour
Hour Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
12am 78.26 63.92 62.17 62.31 63.52 67.08 71.59
1am 70.99 62.44 59.61 59.28 60.56 63.11 66.01
2am 66.41 58.40 58.67 59.08 59.01 60.15 62.98
3am 63.99 57.86 57.59 57.59 58.20 58.33 59.95
4am 56.52 55.98 55.10 55.17 56.25 56.38 58.40
5am 56.58 55.58 54.50 55.91 54.77 56.72 56.52
6am 56.18 56.25 58.81 56.65 56.45 57.39 54.23
7am 58.60 67.89 67.96 67.69 65.54 60.89 60.35
8am 67.22 78.66 78.19 77.79 76.64 72.27 71.26
9am 71.86 79.54 77.99 76.31 75.70 72.54 75.83
10am 75.43 77.45 76.10 78.39 76.04 75.16 77.52
11am 74.08 76.84 76.64 77.99 78.93 76.24 74.96
12pm 72.60 78.26 76.58 79.07 74.69 76.24 77.18
1pm 75.83 74.89 75.70 75.77 74.42 74.62 75.57
2pm 75.57 76.10 76.98 76.17 76.91 76.78 76.44
3pm 75.83 76.10 77.11 74.62 75.63 76.78 78.46
4pm 77.32 77.38 80.61 80.55 79.60 78.66 78.39
5pm 73.41 78.06 82.83 80.68 78.39 79.40 78.19
6pm 73.95 77.85 79.27 78.73 78.66 75.77 75.90
7pm 76.84 77.45 76.71 77.32 77.11 81.49 79.47
8pm 79.74 71.39 74.49 76.17 75.77 80.14 85.12
9pm 77.32 72.81 74.22 73.14 73.82 82.23 88.96
10pm 76.24 75.83 76.31 77.38 76.91 81.29 95.02
11pm 67.89 71.26 72.00 73.34 70.99 78.53 85.66
Since it is not desirable to have a dispatcher be on the phone or the radio constantly, the combined number of minutes is divided by a target utilization rate – 50% of total time.

This means that on average, staff would be occupied 30 minutes per hour with call-taking and dispatching, with the other 30 minutes free as marginal time to decompress, make outbound calls, and handle non-dispatch related work. The following table shows these 661
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 115
calculations illustrating the need for FTE’s for each hour of the week based on this analysis:

FTE / Hour Needed at 50% Occupancy
Hour Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
12am 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00
1am 3.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 3.00
2am 3.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 3.00
3am 3.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00
4am 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00
5am 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00
6am 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00
7am 2.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00
8am 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00
9am 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00
10am 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00
11am 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00
12pm 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00
1pm 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00
2pm 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00
3pm 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00
4pm 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00
5pm 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00
6pm 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00
7pm 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00
8pm 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00
9pm 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00
10pm 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 4.00
11pm 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00
As the table indicates, during a given time, a minimum of two dispatch positions and a maximum of four dispatch positions are needed in order to cover the current workload volume. Caution should be used while interpreting these results. As previously mentioned, the call time average is based off a yearly average versus day and hour specific averages.

In order to meet the maximum four dispatch position staffing requirement, employees must cover a total of 35,064 hours in a one-year period. The base number of hours in an employee’s work year is 2,184. After accounting for vacation, sick leave, training, and other off-floor absences a figure of 1,720 hours is typically more appropriate. Using this 1,720 hour figure, a total of twenty-one dispatch positions are needed. The following table 662
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 116
illustrates this calculation process:

Calculation of Dispatcher Staffing Needs
Total hours in 1 year period 8,766
Multiplied by dispatch positions needed x 4
= 35,064
Divided by total work hours ÷ 1,720
= 20.38
Total Number of Dispatchers Needed 21
As previously mentioned, the Communications Center is currently staffed with four Dispatch Supervisors and thirteen Dispatchers (authorized seventeen). It is recommended the authorized seventeen dispatch positions be elevated to twenty-one.

Recommendations:

Hire 5 additional Dispatchers in order to fill current authorized positions.

Add an additional 4 Dispatch positions for an authorized total of 1 Communications Manager, 4 Dispatch Supervisors, and 21 Dispatchers.

4. Property and Records Section
The Property and Records Section at the Richmond Police Department is tasked with the oversight of property and evidence as well as the imputation of data and records processing for the Department. The Section is overseen by a single civilian manager who is tasked with the general oversight of the Section and conducts all scheduling, budget, and supervisory tasks associated with the Section. This position is currently fully staffed at 1 FTE and should be maintained moving forward. The Section manager is supported directly by an Office Assistant II position. There are no workload indicators for this position; however, this position should be maintained for logistical support to the Section moving forward.

4.1 Records Specialists
Records Specialists within the Unit are tasked with data entry and oversight. There are currently 6 FTE staffed of the 9 authorized positions. These positions are spread throughout the three shifts that correspond with RPD’s patrol staff (Day, Swing, and Graveyard). Records Specialists are also required to complete records entry for the neighboring El Cerrito Police Department. The table below exhibits the workload indicators associated with the records entry that Specialists are responsible for:
663
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 117
Workload Indicator 2018 2019 2020 2021
Accident Report 1,559 1,240 983 425
Fingerprinting 137 112 26 4
Incident Report 15 8 32 72
Offense Report 1,002 928 731 979
Photo 27 37 21 21
Police Clearance 144 142 101 112
Video 3 1 5 1
911 Tapes 4 2 1
Citation Entry 6,299 6,364 4,001 4,982
Weapon License Denial 2 1 0 6
Weapon License Approval 3 0 2 0
Request a Report (Online Website) 91
COPLOGIC 2,200 2,771 2,729 2,891
Total 11,391 11,608 8,633 9,585
As can be seen, there was an approximate 25% decrease in workload in calendar year 2020 as a result of the COVID19 pandemic. However, 2021 workload statistics show a rise in workload and 2022 figures should expect workload for records specialists to return to pre-pandemic norms. As such, the staffing of Records Specialists within the Unit should be maintained and kept at pre-pandemic staffing numbers, filling the three vacant positions to reach the authorized staffing level of 9 FTE.

Recommendation:

Maintain the current authorized FTE of 9 Records Specialists in the Property and Records Section but hire to fill the three current vacancies within this position.

4.2 Property Technician
There is currently 1 FTE authorized for the Property Technician position within the Property and Records Section at RPD. The Property Technician is responsible for conducting property and evidence entry, maintaining evidence storage and upkeep, and catalogues all property and evidence. The Property Technician is also responsible for the oversight and management of all firearms and ammunition. This position is currently vacant.

The following table provides an overview of the workload of the Property Technician:

Workload Indicator 2018 2019 2020 2021
Property Taken In 4,307 5,135 4,307 4,307
Property Purged 445 451 857 1,418
Total Actions 4,752 5,586 5,164 5,725
664
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 118
The workload associated with property and evidence at RPD has shown a slight increase over the past four calendar years: however, not exceeding the need for any additional authorized FTE for the position, as there is adequate assistance provided by the assistant property technician position (listed below).

Most importantly, the Property Technician is responsible for the conduction of audits of property and evidence under the purview of Richmond PD. These audits are to be completed on an annual basis, abiding by best practices. Seeing as this vacancy does not facilitate the conduction of necessary annual audits, administration at RPD should seek to fill the current vacancy of the Property Technician immediately.

Recommendation:

Maintain the current authorized FTE of 1 Property Technician in the Property and Records Section but hire to current vacancy within this position.

4.3 Assistant Property Technician
There is currently 1 authorized FTE for the position of Assistant Property Technician within the Property and Records Section at RPD. The Assistant Property Technician is tasked with assisting the Property Technician with all duties listed above in their purview.

This position is a direct support position without any difference in workload indicators.

This position is currently fully staffed.

The table provided in the previous section shows that, while there is a slight increase in property workload over the past 4 years, there is no justification for increasing the authorized staffing levels for Assistant Property Technicians.

Recommendation:

Maintain the current authorized FTE of 1 Assistant Property Technician in the Property and Records Section.

5. Public Safety Technology Section
The Police Safety Technology Section within the Richmond Police Department services all technology-related equipment and devices for operational and support personnel throughout the Department. The Public Safety Technology Section oversees both police and fire department technology resources.

The Section is supervised by a Section Supervisor who is tasked with all oversight responsibilities for the Section, including staffing, scheduling, budgeting, and day-to-day oversight of the Section. The Supervisor is also responsible for maintaining standards 665
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 119
and reporting requirements outlined by CLEPT and the Department of Justice. The Supervisor position is currently fully staffed at 1 FTE.

Recommendation:

Maintain the current authorized FTE of 1 Supervisor in the Public Safety Technology Section.

5.1 Systems Administrator
The Systems Administrator position reports directly to the Section Supervisor and is tasked with the supervision of section employees in coordination with the Supervisor.

The Systems Administrator is also responsible for the maintenance and updating responsibilities of the Computer Automated Dispatch (CAD)/Records Management System (RMS) program. The Systems Administrator also upholds, and coordinates vendor contracts associated with these two technology services.

There are no workload indicators associated with the Systems Administrator position.

This position is currently fully staffed at 1 FTE.

Recommendation:

Maintain the current authorized staffing of 1 FTE Systems Administrator within the Public Safety Technology Section.

5.2 Network Specialists
Network Specialists are tasked with a variety of network-related responsibilities spanning data-related tasks, the maintenance of routers and switches, firewall maintenance, the maintenance and replacement of all technology resources deployed to public safety personnel. There are two authorized Network Specialist positions currently within the Public Safety Technology Section, one at the Network Specialist I level and one at the Network Specialist II level. Currently, the Network Specialist I position is staffed at 1 FTE, while the Network Specialist II position is vacant at this time.

There are no workload indicators associated with the Network Specialist positions.

Recommendation:

Maintain the current authorized staffing of 1 FTE Network Specialist II within the Public Safety Technology Section. Hire to fill the current vacancy.

Maintain the current authorized staffing of 1 FTE Network Specialist I within the Public Safety Technology Section.
666
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 120

5.3 CCTV Specialist
The CCTV Specialist within the Public Safety Technology Section at RPD is tasked with the maintenance and upkeep of all CCTV cameras and the associated systems throughout the entire Richmond jurisdiction. This includes all CCTV cameras deployed in the field (i.e., throughout the city) as well as those that are deployed at the Hall of Justice building to assist in security measures. The CCTV Specialist also coordinates with neighborhood police officers in the requests for CCTV camera deployment to certain areas for a variety of issues. The CCTV Specialist position is currently fully staffed at 1 FTE.

There are currently no workload indicators associated with the CCTV Specialist position, however, there are plans to introduce additional cameras (~10) to the jurisdiction.

Recommendation:

Maintain the current authorized staffing of 1 FTE CCTV Specialist within the Public Safety Technology Section.
667
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 121

7. Office of the Chief
The Office of the Chief at the Richmond Police Department consists of one Chief of Police, one Assistant Chief of Police, a Crime Prevention Services Unit, a Finance Unit, and the Office of Professional Accountability. The Public Information Officer is also present within the Office of the Chief; however, does not fall under one of the organizational units.

The Chief provides overall direction, guidance, and leadership for the Police Department.

The Chief has responsibility for every area of the organization and ensures that the Department meets its mission in accordance with the established values and has overall responsibility for budget management. The Chief can delegate responsibilities as they deem fit to the Assistant Chief of Police. The Crime Prevention Unit, Finance Unit, and Office of Professional Accountability report directly to the Chief of Police and are evaluated in the following sections.
(1) Finance Unit
The Financial Services Unit at the Richmond Police Department is tasked with the conduction and oversight of all fiscal duties associated with police department budgets and functions. It is currently staffed and supervised by one (1) FTE Senior Accountant.

The Senior Accountant is assisted (on a part-time basis with the Personnel & Training Unit) by an administrative aid.

Seeing as the roles and responsibilities of the Unit, and namely the Senior Accountant, relies in fiscal reporting, the sole workload indicator associated with this Unit directly translates to any changes within the overall police budget.

Recommendation:

Maintain the current staffing of one (1) FTE Senior Accountant in the Financial Services Unit.
(2) Crime Prevention Unit
The Crime Prevention Unit at the Richmond Police Department is tasked with a variety of job duties that encompass both internal crime prevention matters, as well as balancing relationships with external entities within the social service providers of the City of Richmond and Contra Costa County for social issues such as homelessness and poverty.

Crime prevention methods utilized by RPD are overseen by the Unit Manager and include education (case management updates for patrol officers, informational flyers for the public, etc.) and engagement activities and events (monthly meetings, holiday outreach 668
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 122
measures, etc.). Beyond these assignments, the Crime Prevention Unit also oversees social media monitoring and the volunteer/internship program at RPD, as well as oversees all external communication and reporting duties associated with the homelessness crisis that is plaguing Richmond.

As mentioned, the Crime Prevention Unit is led by a Unit Manager who is responsible for the oversight of all the projects and programs under the purview of the Unit, as well as responsible for the scheduling, payroll, training, policy direction and budgeting responsibilities of the Unit. This position is currently fully staffed at 1 FTE. The succeeding section will highlight the fact that this position has been conducting all Unit responsibilities alone, as there is a vacancy in the supporting position within the Unit. In this time, the Unit has still been able to uphold all the requirements of the Unit, as well as raise $60,000 in funds for Emergency Housing Assistance, $80,000 in funds for the Richmond Coordinated Outreach Referral and Engagement, and $4.8 million for encampment resolution funds.

Recommendation:

Maintain the current staffing of one (1) FTE for the Manager of the Crime Prevention Unit. (2.1) Crime Prevention Specialists
There is currently a vacancy of the one (1) FTE position for the Crime Prevention Unit Specialist position. This position is integral in the proper functioning of the Unit, as the wide variety of topics that the Unit is tasked with overseeing mandates the work of, at least, one FTE Crime Prevention Specialist. While there are no direct indicators of workload with the Crime Prevention Unit, there are external workload indicators that can be utilized to evaluate the need for additional staff within the Unit. Seeing as a main responsibility of the Unit over the past several years, and moving forward, has been the relationships and focus on homelessness issues in the City, statistics related to unsheltered individuals throughout the City serves as an adequate proxy for workload for the Unit.

The homelessness outbreak spanning most localities throughout Northern California, that has been compounded as a result of the COVID19 pandemic, has hit the City of Richmond harder than any locale in Contra Costa County. The County conducted a census report targeting homelessness statistics and results related to Richmond are as follows:
• There has been an 90% increase in unsheltered individuals from 2019 to 2022 in the City of Richmond, rising from 333 to 6327.
7 See: https://cchealth.org/h3/coc/pdf/PIT-infographic-2022.pdf. 669
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 123
• The 632 unsheltered persons is:
– The highest number of unsheltered individuals by City throughout all of Contra Costa County,
– Accounts for 72% of all unsheltered individuals in the West County, and – Accounts for 27% of all unsheltered individuals throughout the entirety of Contra Costa County.

This drastic increase in unsheltered individuals, on top of the traditional crime prevention activities and work that is overseen and conducted by the Unit, mandates the proper staffing of the Crime Prevention Specialist position within the Unit. As such, administration at RPD should seek to 1) fill the vacant Specialist position currently authorized, and 2) add an additional FTE position to support the efforts of the Unit as it pertains specifically to the homelessness issue in the City of Richmond.

These two Specialist positions should be isolated to focus on specialties and areas of interest. One should be tasked with the focus on homelessness issues and external relationships with Contra Costa County and City of Richmond social services (i.e., CORE), while the other Specialist position should be tasked with the production of crime prevention material that is currently being completed by the Unit Manager. This staffing will result in the following organizational chart within the Crime Prevention Unit:

This realignment of duties will allow for Specialists to conduct work associated with their areas of interest, facilitation efficiency and an increased work product. Further, it will allow the Unit Manager to focus on managerial tasks such as contract management, fundraising efforts, meetings (both community and internal meetings related to crime prevention), policy direction, and training.

Recommendation:

Increase the Specialist position within the Crime Prevention Unit from 1 to 2 FTE to account for the increase in need due to the increase in homelessness in Richmond.

Crime Prevention
Unit Manager
Crime Prevention
Specialist
(Homelessness
Liaison)
Crime Prevention
Specialist
(Operations)
670
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 124
Assign the two Crime Prevention Specialists to responsibilities surrounding acting as a homelessness liaison, and supporting operations-based crime prevention measures, respectively.
(3) Office of Professional Accountability
The Office of Professional Accountability is an independent office within the Richmond Police Department. The unit is responsible for investigating complaints against members of the Richmond Police Department. The office consists of a manager and 2 sergeants (1 vacancy). The unit works closely with the Community Police Review Commission which has oversight into appeals and has responsibility for reviewing police use of force and racial bias.

The office also tracks all use of force, makes entry into IAPro and Blue team and they assist the Community Review Commission with producing body worn camera video for commission review. The manager is a liaison to the commission. (3.1) Office of Professional Accountability Workload Analysis In reviewing professional standards or internal affairs investigative units an average investigative case ours is used. This is developed by interviewing personnel in the unit and developing task hour metric. It is important to understand that every case is different, and some cases are very complex and require significantly more hours to investigate and some cases are relatively simple and do not require more than a few hours to investigate and document. The average hours are used as performance metric designed to establish approximate work hours for a typical internal affairs case.

Case Time Estimates for Administrative IA Investigations (Non-OIS) Common Tasks Processes Avg. Time % of Cases
Complaint
Review
Determine if allegation is a policy
violation. Time figure includes
reviewing complaint.
2 hours 100%
Find relevant CAD entry,
police report, video or other
documentation relevant to
the complaint
Determine subject(s) of allegation.

Time figure includes CAD enquiry
and report(s) review.
4 hours 100%
Review Body Worn Camera
or other Video / Audio
Evidence
Document evidence to sustain
or exonerate department
member.
8 hours 100%
671
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 125
Common Tasks Processes Avg. Time % of Cases
Interview Complainant Determine all complaint allegations (including writing summary / notes)
3 hour 100%
Write Complaint and
Allegation(s)
Determine which policy or policies
could have been violated. Includes
review and report writing time.
4 hours 100%
Schedule subject officer
Interview
Includes sending written notice
within proper timelines.

0.5 hours 100%
Write Interview Questions N/A 1 hour 100%
Conduct witness interviews (Includes Scheduling)- Some cases only have officer or complainant as
witnesses
4 hour 50%
Conduct subject interviews Interviews are recorded, and the time estimated includes report
writing.
4 hours 100%
Write Investigative Finding Includes report writing. 16 hours 100% Total On average 44.5 hours
This list is not all inclusive and does not contain all steps that may be taken. Some cases may have several witnesses.
(3.2) Office of Professional Accountability Caseload
The following chart includes the 2020 caseload for OPA:
2019 Professional Standards Number Case
Hours
Total
Administrative Investigation 27 44.5 1,201
Citizen Complaints 8 44.5 356
Total 35 N/A 1,557
As the table indicates there were a total of 35 complaints investigated in 2020. 27 of these complaints were internal administrative investigations while 8 were citizen generated.
(3.3) Summary of Workload Hours for OPA
As mentioned above there are a total of 2 authorized sergeant positions assigned to work cases with 1 current vacancy. Using the previous calculation of net available caseload 672
Police Emergency Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 126
hours and total 2020 caseload the number of sergeants needed to investigate the caseload can be determined:

Calculation of Staffing Needs
Total Caseload Hours 1,557
Divided by total net available
hours for 1 position (1,225) ÷ 1,225
Number of Staff Needed = 1.27
As the chart indicates the number of sergeants recommended to work the assigned caseload hours assigned is 1.27 and there are a total of 2 sergeants (1 vacancy). The caseload hours are not inclusive of all tasks and functions assigned to the sergeants / staff assigned.

The manager coordinates all of the activities in the office of professional accountability and is responsible for the day to day operations. The manager is a liaison to Community Police Review Commission. The manager has additional responsibilities for reporting and documenting the unit activities. There are no task time performance metrics for this position.

The number of investigations requires more time than 1 sergeant and with other assigned tasks to the unit requires two sergeants and a manager assigned to be effective.

Recommendations:

Maintain current authorized staffing of 1 manager and 2 sergeants within the Office of Professional Accountability.
673
Fire Department Emergency Services Review

RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA
March 6, 2023
matrix
consulting group
674
Table of Contents
Introduction and Executive Summary 1
Scope of Work 1
Approaches Utilized in the Study 1
Executive Summary 2
Strategic Improvement Opportunities 5
Organization and Overview 7
Background 7
Demographic Profile 7
Organization 10
Operations 12
Training and Education 20
Fire Prevention 20
Financial Resources 21
Emergency Services System Dynamics 23
Emergency Medical Services 23
Fire Suppression Services 25
National Response Time Criteria 27
Effective Response Force 30
Evaluation of the Richmond Fire Services 36
675
Response Time Data 36
Community Performance Standards 36
Call Processing 38
Turnout Time 39
Distribution of Resources 39
Concentration of Resources 39
System Reliability 47
Strategic Operational Improvement Opportunities 50
Community Growth and Emergency Services Demand 50
Staffing and Overtime 51
Call Processing 57
Turnout Time 58
Distribution of Resources 60
Concentration of Resources 62
Emergency Medical Services 65
Essential Services 67
Fire Prevention Division 67
Wildland Urban Interface 69
Training and Education 70
Emergency Management 71
676
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 1
Introduction and Executive Summary
This document provides the results of the services review for the Richmond Fire Department. This report culminates the efforts of the Matrix Consulting Group team working with the fire department on its operations and resource needs now and into the future. This report also took a great level of input, support and collaboration from fire department staff.

Scope of Work
The scope of this study included the assessment of the current fire protection system operations, response capabilities, staffing, and other resources necessary for the delivery of services to the city. A review of services and the delivery of those services should be performed periodically to ensure needs are being met. This project focused on the emergency services system delivery that included:
• Response capabilities.
• Response time analysis.
• Resource locations.
• Available resources to serve the city.
• Staffing and manpower.

The study and this report also provide projections of service needs and resources over a 20-year planning period.

Approaches Utilized in the Study
Data utilized in this study was developed based on the work conducted by the project team, including.
• Interviews conducted with staff.
• Collection and analysis of workload and service data. • A review of strategic documents and reports, budget data, organizational structure, and key practices.
• Planning documents on anticipated developments in the City over the 20-year planning period.
677
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 2
This study, then, was a comprehensive review of current and projected resource needs now and into the future.

Executive Summary
The City of Richmond is located in northwest Contra Costa County along the San Francisco Bay. Within the city is a Chevron Oil refinery and the Port of Richmond, a deepwater port. Encompassing approximately 56 square miles, the fire department provides service to the city from 7 fire stations. The fire department is a part of the overall county fire protection system in that automatic aid is available from Contra Costa County Fire Department, El Cerrito, Kensington, and Pinole.

In terms of distribution, the measure of getting initial resources to an emergency to begin mitigation efforts, the fire stations are located in an effective manner to provide the services. For concentration, the ability of the emergency services system to get the appropriate number of personnel and resources to the scene of an emergency within a prescribed time to effectively mitigate the incident, the fire protections system can provide appropriate resources. The latter, uses the automatic aid companies to ensure the resources are available to respond. Challenges ahead for the Richmond Fire Department are centered on personnel.

For the operations section of the fire department, the minimum staffing for each shift is 25 personnel. To meet this need, the fire department has used an average of 51,800 hours of overtime for the past four years with worker compensation leave accounting for the largest part. Based on the leave taken for the past four years it will require 1.31 personnel per position to provide staffing for one year or 33 (32.75) personnel per shift. This translates to 99 personnel assigned to the operational staffing to provide the minimum staffing required for operations. While this will not eliminate the use of overtime, it will significantly reduce the use of overtime.

Training and education are considered a major function in a fire department as it is critical for personnel to maintain perishable skills and become proficient to handle low frequency – high consequence events. For Richmond, this area of the fire department is managed and coordinated by a Battalion Chief. Recruitment to fill this position is currently underway. Until the position is permanently filled the duties are being handled by the Deputy Fire Chief. This in in addition to the operational duties of the Deputy Chief to ensure the fire protection system is properly staffed and ready to deliver emergency services.

Risk reduction activities are a part of the Fire Prevention Division. Included in this division is code enforcement, fire investigations, public education, and the needs of the Chevron 678
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 3
Refinery. With a total of five personnel assigned to the division, one is assigned as the Fire Marshal to manage the division and one is assigned to the Chevron Refinery. This leaves three personnel to address public education, code enforcement, plan review, fire investigations, and defensible space inspections. Engine companies do perform some of the fire safety inspections that relieves some of the workload from the fire prevention staff. However, based on the number of annual inspections to be completed, the code enforcement activities will need to be increased from three personnel to four personnel.

This allows each inspector to complete 600 initial inspections per year and approximately 300 follow-up inspections per year.

Wildland fires are a continual threat with the number and intensity of these fire increasing throughout the region and the state. There is a significant wildland urban interface on the east side of the city with the Wildcat Canyon Regional Park and the Kennedy Grove Regional Recreation area. These two areas are adjacent to a larger area that includes Briones Regional Park. With the recent history of wildfires in the urban areas such Santa Rosa and Paradise, it is imperative the city prepare for this potential fire threat. Using defensible spaces around homes and businesses, the threat can be reduced. There are over 4,300 defensible space inspections to be completed in the city that could be completed using a civilian inspector to provide education and inspection activities to the residents.

Another unmet need is emergency management and the planning that accompanies this section. Recruitment to fill this position is currently underway. With the current position is unfilled, the duties for this position fall to the Fire Chief. Planning is a key function of this position and without a focused staff these plans can become outdated and of little use in the event of an emergency. As well, there are grant funds that are available to assist the city in mitigation efforts that also requires the planning to be current and approved by various other agencies such as FEMA.

To provide context to the staffing issues, the following table provides a comparison of authorized personnel, unfilled positions, and future needs. This information is as of December 31, 2022.
679
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 4
Richmond Fire Department Staffing Comparison
Position Authorized
Staff
Current
Staff Deviation Recommended Staffing
Revised
Authorized
Staff
Fire Chief 1 1 0 1
Deputy Fire Chief 1 1 0 1
Battalion Fire Chief 4 3 1 4
Fire Marshal 1 1 0 1
Deputy Fire Marshal 1 1 0 1
Captain 24 21 3 3 27
Engineer 24 21 3 3 27
Firefighter 30 26 4 15 45
Fire Inspector I 1 1 0 1 2
Fire Inspector II 2 2 0 2
Emergency Services Manager 1 0 1 1
Administrative Service Analyst 1 0 1 1
Associate Admin Analyst 1 0 1
Emergency Services Analyst 1 0 1 1
Administrative Aid 1 1 0 1
Fire Adaptive Community
Coordinator 0 0 0 1 1
Public Education Coordinator 0 0 0 1 1
Total 94 80 14 24 117
The City Human Resources Department has contracted with CPS Consulting to assist with filling the sworn and promotional vacancies in the Department. Human Resources is recruiting for two (2) open civilian administrative positions. The plan is to hod promotional recruitment processes in January and February 2023 to fill the promotional openings. Interviews with for firefighter openings were conducted in October 2022. These candidates are having background investigations completed and will begin their firefighter training at the Firefighter Training Academy once they pass the background check.

Emergency medical services are delivered using a tiered response between the fire department and American Medical Response (AMR). The county provides, through contract, emergency medical services with the fire departments providing additional response capabilities on critical calls. As an alternative, the city could use smaller vehicles such as a quick response vehicle to deliver the service instead of the fire apparatus. This would reduce the wear and tear on the larger apparatus and could reduce the cost of delivering the service. This would entail the quick response vehicle responding with two personnel leaving the third with the fire apparatus to respond to fire calls as needed. This type of staffing would create a tandem response meaning the quick 680
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 5
response vehicle and fire apparatus would respond together on a fire related call if the quick response vehicle was already out of the station.

Strategic Improvement Opportunities
The following table provides a summary of recommendations established in this report.

The report itself should be reviewed to understand the factual basis behind each recommendation as well as the analysis leading to each recommendation.

SUMMARY OF RECOMENDATIONS

ADMINISTRATIVE AND ORGANIZATIONAL
Review the worker compensation process within the city to streamline the processes to ensure employees are receiving appropriate services and a return-to-work authorization within an appropriate time frame reducing the amount of time employees are off duty.

Increase the number of personnel per shift over the next three to five years to reduce the amount of overtime needed to provide services and to address the fatigue and sleep deprivation issues.

Establish a Fire Adaptive Community Coordinator civilian position, in the next 12 to 24 months, to handle the defensible space inspections and create proactive programs increasing education efforts

EMERGENCY OPERATIONS
The city should establish performance objectives for turnout time for medical calls and fire related calls.

Establish a reporting system to create a mechanism to monitor progress of improvements to turnout time.

Establish baseline performance objectives for call processing, turnout time, and travel time for the dispatch center and fire department.

Monitor the various response time components as compared to the established performance objectives.

Work with Contra Costa Fire Protection District and Contra Costa County Emergency Medical Services to address any changes to be made to the emergency medical response in the city.

Consider utilizing cross-staffed quick response EMS vehicles as part of the medical response system to allow a quicker response and potentially reducing the cost of these responses. 681
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 6

ESSENTIAL FUNCTIONS
The city should establish performance objectives for the communications center for call answering and call processing.

Work with the dispatch center to improve the dispatch processes, to improve data capturing, and to meet the established performance objectives.

Establish a reporting system to create a mechanism to monitor progress of improvements to the dispatching services.

Work the dispatch center to improve the use of the Emergency Medical Dispatch (EMD) system to reduce any unnecessary responses of resources to emergency medical calls for service.

Utilize civilian personnel to provide public education and increase the exposure of fire safety education to the school aged children and targeted audiences in support of Community Risk Reduction principles
Monitor fire investigation workload to ensure code enforcement activities are not adversely affected by this collateral duty
682
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 7
Organization and Overview
This section provides an overview of the general characteristics of the Richmond Fire Department.

Background
In 1901, after a significant fire event, it was decided that the community needed fire protection and created a volunteer fire service. 1902 brought about the purchase of the first fire engine, a chemical fire engine. This type of engine was purchased due to the fact that water supply had not yet been established in the city. Eventually, there were a total of five volunteer departments created to serve the city. After functioning as a volunteer department for over a decade, the Richmond Fire Department became a full-time fire department in 1915.

The Fire Department serves the City of Richmond, which is located in northwest Contra Costa County along the San Francisco Bay. The city encompasses nearly 56 square miles of which 22.2 square miles are water and the remaining 33.8 land. Overall population density for the city is approximately 3,425 people per square mile based on the 2020 population of 116,448 and 33.8 square miles of land. Within Richmond resides a Chevron Oil refinery, an Amtrak station, and the Port of Richmond, a deep-water port. The city is also well served by both interstate highway and railroad systems.

The city is governed by six elected Council members and a separately elected Mayor who is also a member of the council. The City also has a City Manager, selected by the Council, who oversees the day-to-day city operations and department heads. The Fire Chief and staff are responsible for the day-to-day operations of the Fire Department.

Demographic Profile
The following table illustrates the demographic profile of City of Richmond and changes that have occurred since the 2010 Census.
683
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 8
City of Richmond Demographics
U.S. Census Bureau 2010 2015 2020
Estimated Richmond Population 102,264 107,597 116,448
Median Age 34.5 35.2 37.2
Children Under Age 5 7.2% 7.2% 5.6%
Children Ages 5 to 19 years 21.5% 18.7% 18.3%
Persons Age 20 to 59 years 56.8% 57.3% 56.4%
Persons Age 60 and Over 14.5% 16.7% 19.6%
Median Income $27,646 $26,335 $32,714
Employment Sectors:

Education, Health Care, Soc. Svc. 21.8% 20.7% 22.8%
Retail Trade 10.8% 11.8% 9.4%
Professional, Scientific, Mgmt. 11.1% 13.5% 14.9%
Finance, Insurance, Real Estate 7.2% 5.1% 4.0%
Entertainment, Recreation, Food 10.1% 12.0% 11.7%
Construction 8.5% 9.2% 9.4%
Manufacturing 7.1% 5.7% 4.8%
Transportation, Warehousing, Util. 7.1% 5.5% 7.5%
Public Administration 4.4% 4.0% 3.7%
Other Services 5.7% 6.9% 6.5%
Wholesale 2.9% 2.7% 2.7%
Information 2.7% 1.9% 2.2%
Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing 0.5% 1.1% 0.6%
The population of the City has increased approximately 14% since 2010 adding an estimated 14,184 residents. The largest change between the age groups is the over 60 age group with a 5.1% increase. Additionally, there was a 4.8% decrease in the combined categories under 20 years of age. The median age of the city has risen to 37.2 years, which is an increase of 2.7, for the past nineteen years.

The following map provides a view of population density by census blocks. 684
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 9
Population densities are significantly higher in the areas west of I-80 and more evenly dispersed in the east. The greatest density is located in the center of the incorporated area bordered by I-80 and Richmond Pkwy. There are a few pockets of higher density throughout the eastern portion of the City.
685
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 10
Organization
The RFD operates with a Fire Chief, Deputy Chief, and 3 Battalion Chiefs. The Battalion Chiefs, who report directly to the Deputy Chief, manage three shifts that work a 48 hours on and 96 hours off schedule. Shifts begin and end at 0730 hours. Each shift is made up of 1 Battalion Chief, 8 Captains, 8 Engineers, and 10 Firefighters.

Fire Prevention reports directly to the Fire Chief and currently consists of a Fire Marshal, Deputy Fire Marshall, and 2 inspectors. Also reporting to the Fire Chief are an Administrative position, an Emergency Services Analyst and an Office of Emergency Services which is currently vacant. The delivery and planning of training currently falls under the Deputy Fire Chief while awaiting a process to promote a Battalion Chief to be over Training
Mission Statement
The Richmond Fire Department is a dedicated workforce of highly motivated and technically skilled professionals of rapid response. It is our purpose to protect life and preserve property.

We are a profession that knows no limit to what we will respond to and we prepare without constraint to meet the challenges of our chosen profession.

The citizens, businesses, and visitors to the City of Richmond can expect a caring, courteous, and competent response when rendered our aid.

The organizational chart that follows illustrates the current Fire Department organization. 686
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 11
Richmond Fire Department Organizational Chart
Fire Chief
Operations
Deputy Fire Chief
A Shift
Battalion Chief
Fire Captain
(8)
Fire Engineer
(8)
Firefighter
(10)
B Shift
Battalion Chief
Fire Captain
(8)
Fire Engineer
(8)
Firefighter
(10)
C Shift
Battalion Chief
Fire Captain
(8)
Fire Engineer
(8)
Firefighter
(10)
Training
Division
Battalion Chief
Fire Prevention
Fire Marshal
Deputy Fire
Marshal
Fire Inspectors
(3)
Office of
Emergency Services
Administration
Emergency
Services Analyst
687
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 12
Operations
This section provides an overview of the emergency operations of Richmond Fire Department.

Physical Resources
Service to the city is provided from seven (7) fire stations located throughout the incorporated city limits. The following map illustrates the location of the fire stations. 688
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 13
The fire department is authorized 81 operational personnel of which 74 operational positions are currently filled. Each operational shift staffs 7 engine companies and 1 truck company with a minimum of 3 personnel on each apparatus. Including the Battalion Chief, each shift has a minimum staffing of 25 personnel. In addition to fire suppression, the department also provides hazardous materials response, technical rescue, BLS medical first responder, marine response, fire prevention and fire investigations.

The fire department utilizes both automatic aid and mutual aid. Primary automatic aid departments are El Cerrito and Albany south of the city and Contra Costa County Fire in the north. The City of Berkley provides mutual aid when called.

The tables that follow outline the apparatus and staffing for the station.

Station 61
140 W. Richmond Ave.

Description
of Use Provides service to the western section of the city near the Chevron Refinery.

Apparatus
Space 3 bays-drive through
Assigned
Apparatus
Unit ID Year Description Type Minimum
Staffing
E 61 2008 Spartan Gladiator – Hi Tech Type I Engine 3
BA 61 2004 Spartan Metro – SVI Breathing Support
2013 Moose Vessel M2-37 Fire Boat
2008 Ford F-150 Marine
2008 Spartan Gladiator – Hi Tech Reserve Engine
Station 62
1065 7th St.

Description
of Use
Located in the northwest area of the city providing services to the north and central sections of the city.

Apparatus
Space 2 bays-drive through
Assigned
Apparatus
Unit ID Year Description Type Minimum
Staffing
E 62 2020 Spartan Gladiator– Hi Tech Type I Engine 3
BR 62 2001 Chevrolet 3500 Type 6 Engine Cross Staffed
2008 Spartan Gladiator Reserve Engine
689
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 14
Station 63
5201 Valley View Rd.

Description
of Use
Provides service to the eastern areas of the city and is bordered by the San Pablo Ridge to the west.

Apparatus
Space 2 bays-drive through
Assigned
Apparatus Unit ID Year Description Type Minimum Staffing E 63 2012 Spartan Metro Star – Hi Tech Type I Engine 3
BR 63 2009 Ford F-450 – Hi Tech Type 6 Engine Cross Staffed Station 64
140 Richmond Ave.

Description
of Use
Provides service to the southern section of the city and houses the on-duty Battalion Chief.

Apparatus
Space 3 bays-drive through
Assigned
Apparatus
Unit ID Year Description Type Minimum
Staffing
E 64 2020 Spartan Gladiator – Hi Tech Type I Engine 3
T 64 2008 Spartan Gladiator – LTI Aerial Ladder 3
BC 64 2015 Ford Explorer Command 1
HM 64 2005 Spartan Metro Star – SVI Hazardous
Materials Cross Staffed
Station 66
4100 Clinton Ave.

Description
of Use
Located in the eastern areas along I-80 provides service to the east area but also to the central section of the city.

Apparatus
Space 2 bays-drive through
Assigned
Apparatus
Unit ID Year Description Type Minimum
Staffing
E 66 2020 Spartan Gladiator – Hi Tech Type I Engine 3
BR 66 2001 Chevrolet 3500 Type 6 Engine Cross Staffed
Station 67
1131 Cutting Rd.

Description
of Use
Located along the southwest area of the city provides service to the harbor area and the south central section of the city.

Apparatus
Space 3 bay no drive through with 2 bay entrance on East side rear Assigned
Apparatus
Unit ID Year Description Type Minimum
Staffing
E 67 2019 Spartan Gladiator – Hi Tech Type I Engine 3
R 67 2015 Spartan Metro Star – EVI Heavy Rescue Cross Staffed 2008 Spartan Gladiator – Hi Tech Reserve Engine
690
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 15
Station 68
2904 Hilltop Rd.

Description
of Use Provides service to the northeast area of the city in the area of the Hilltop Mall.

Apparatus
Space 3 bays-drive through
Assigned
Apparatus
Unit ID Year Description Type Minimum
Staffing
E 68 2019 Spartan Gladiator – Hi Tech Type I Engine 3
BR 68 2009 Ford F-450 – Hi Tech Type 6 Engine Cross Staffed R 68 1999 Navistar Rescue Ambulance Cross Staffed
T 68 2001 Spartan Gladiator – LTI Aerial Ladder Cross Staffed Historical Workload
The Richmond Fire Department responds to emergency and non-emergency calls for service. The following table illustrates the activities of the RFD grouped by the type of call over the last four years.
691
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 16
Calls for Service
2018 2019 2020 2021 Total Pct.

Auto Accident 641 726 646 726 2,739 4.7%
Medical Calls 8,159 7,739 7,497 7,302 30,697 53.1%
Total Medical and Auto Accidents 8,800 8,465 8,143 8,028 33,436 57.8% Fire Alarm – Activation 410 470 399 465 1,744 3.0%
Fire Alarm – False 44 33 24 21 122 0.2%
Fire Alarm – Malfunction 130 162 165 145 602 1.0%
Auto / Mutual Aid 996 917 824 800 3,537 6.1%
Smoke Scare 219 241 270 218 948 1.6%
Structure Fire 40 52 59 61 212 0.4%
Other Type Fire 104 98 99 90 391 0.7%
Vegetation/Debris/Grass 408 592 894 857 2,751 4.8%
Vehicle Fires 130 95 144 142 511 0.9%
All Fire Calls 2,481 2,660 2,878 2,799 10,818 18.7%
Rescue Calls - Extrication 25 32 20 21 98 0.2%
Rescue Calls - Other 14 2 13 4 33 0.1%
Rescue Calls - Search 2 5 0 1 8 0.0%
Rescue Calls - Water 5 3 3 10 21 0.0%
All Rescue Calls 46 42 36 36 160 0.3%
Dispatched/Cancelled 2,242 2,358 2,313 1,961 8,874 15.3% Overpressure Rupture/Explosion/Overheat 4 8 4 3 19 0.0% Good Intent Calls 82 182 184 160 608 1.1%
Hazardous Condition 235 293 244 322 1,094 1.9%
Hazardous Materials 3 4 2 2 11 0.0%
Service Calls 371 402 379 454 1,606 2.8%
Severe Weather Alerts 1 22 14 17 54 0.1%
Non-Coded Calls 48 300 440 346 1,134 2.0%
Other Type of Calls 2,986 3,569 3,580 3,265 13,400 23.2% Total Calls for Service 14,313 14,736 14,637 14,128 57,814 Overall, medical calls combined with auto accidents represent 57.8% of the total call volume. Fire alarms, fire alarm activations, and fire alarm malfunctions, combined total

4.3% of the total call volume. For the four years combined, 15.3% of the calls were dispatched and subsequently cancelled.

The following table displays the total number of calls for service handled by the Richmond Fire Department by each hour and day of the week for the past four years. Both emergency and non-emergency calls were included to provide an overall view of the call demand on the emergency services system.
692
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 17
2018 – 2021 Calls for Service by Hour and Weekday
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
12 am 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.5%
1 am 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% 0.4% 0.5%
2 am 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.4%
3 am 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3%
4 am 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3%
5 am 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3%
6 am 0.3% 0.4% 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4%
7 am 0.4% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4%
8 am 0.5% 0.6% 0.7% 0.6% 0.7% 0.6% 0.5%
9 am 0.5% 0.7% 0.7% 0.7% 0.8% 0.7% 0.6%
10 am 0.7% 0.8% 0.7% 0.7% 0.8% 0.8% 0.7%
11 am 0.6% 0.7% 0.7% 0.8% 0.7% 0.7% 0.8%
12 pm 0.7% 0.7% 0.8% 0.7% 0.8% 0.8% 0.7%
1 pm 0.8% 0.7% 0.8% 0.8% 0.7% 0.8% 0.8%
2 pm 0.7% 0.7% 0.8% 0.8% 0.7% 0.7% 0.8%
3 pm 0.7% 0.8% 0.8% 0.8% 0.8% 0.8% 0.7%
4 pm 0.7% 0.8% 0.7% 0.7% 0.7% 0.7% 0.7%
5 pm 0.7% 0.8% 0.8% 0.8% 0.8% 0.7% 0.7%
6 pm 0.8% 0.8% 0.7% 0.8% 0.7% 0.8% 0.7%
7 pm 0.8% 0.7% 0.7% 0.7% 0.7% 0.8% 0.7%
8 pm 0.7% 0.7% 0.7% 0.7% 0.7% 0.7% 0.7%
9 pm 0.7% 0.7% 0.6% 0.6% 0.7% 0.7% 0.7%
10 pm 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.7%
11 pm 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.6%
The call volume is heaviest during the middle part of the day from mid-morning to the early evening with Friday having the most calls and Sunday the fewest. The calls for service varied by time of day and day of the week. The busiest hour of the day is 5 pm with the slowest hour being 4 am.
693
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 18
The following chart further illustrates the calls for service by hour of the day.

As illustrated above, calls continue to increase through the morning hours then remain steady through most of the day peaking at 5 pm. The calls begin to decline at the 7 pm hour and sharply decline at the 11 pm hour. Calls then continue to decline with 4 am being the slowest hour of the day.

The following map illustrates the call demand using GIS technology to outline where the majority of the calls are occurring.
0 500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
12a 3a 6a 9a 12p 3p 6p 9p
2018 - 2021 Calls by Hour of the Day
694
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 19
As illustrated, the highest volume of calls is in the west central portion of the city. There is also a clustering of calls in the northeast located around Station 68. 695
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 20
Training and Education
Training and education for the RFD is managed by the Deputy Fire Chief. Currently there is a vacancy for a Battalion Chief to oversee Training. The following table illustrates the man hours for a variety of topics for 2018 to 2021.

Topic 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
Academy 77.0 0.0 9,516.0 0.0 9,593.0
Administration, Management or
Supervision 908.0 661.5 1,005.0 704.5 3,278.5
Aircraft/Airfield Operations 56.0 30.0 50.0 56.0 192.0
Construction Technology and Fire
Protection Systems 3,776.0 257.0 618.5 550.0 5,201.5
Emergency Medical 1,025.0 902.5 1,379.3 613.0 3,919.3
Emergency Operations 2,193.0 2,163.5 2,454.0 1,956.0 8,766.3 Fire and Arson Investigation 61.0 118.0 438.5 334.0 951.0 Hazardous Materials 503.0 503.0 548.0 147.0 1,700.5
ICS and NWCG Courses 78.0 48.0 30.5 48.0 204.5
Instructor Training 78.0 0.0 132.0 138.0 348.0
Office and Clerical Skills 174.0 392.5 489.0 448.0 1,503.5 Portable and Fixed Accessory
Equipment 1,139.0 1,052.5 1,011.5 1,027.0 4,230.0
Preventative Maintenance 1,841.0 1,367.0 2,086.0 1,536.0 6,829.9 Prevention 948.0 1,536.5 990.5 937.0 4,411.5
Rescue Practices 1,252.0 1,068.0 1,221.0 1,292.0 4,832.5 Vehicle Operations and Pump Use 930.0 993.5 1,358.5 1,455.0 4,736.3 Total Man-Hours 15,038.0 11,094.0 23,328.0 11,239.0
As illustrated 11,239 man-hours were expended for training and education in 2021, an average of approximately 148 hours per person based on 76 personnel records. Hands on training supplemented by online training platforms are both being utilized.

Fire Prevention
Fire safety inspections and public education programs are the responsibility of this section that is headed by the Fire Marshal, Deputy Fire Marshal, and 2 Fire Inspectors. In addition to fire inspections, this section is over fire investigations, plan review, and vegetation management of Very High Hazard Zones. Engine companies will assist with low-risk fire inspections as Fire Prevention performs inspections on high-risk properties and new construction. In the following table the activities of this section are illustrated. 696
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 21
Prevention Activity
2019 2020 2021
Inspection Activities 4,059 3,273 2,830
Plan Review Activities 300 284 102
Fire Investigations NR NR 37
Total Activities 4,359 3,557 2,969
As illustrated above, fire prevention activity has declined over the past three (3) years.

Much of this reduction is due to the Covid-19 pandemic that has limited access to commercial occupancies requiring code compliance inspections.

Financial Resources
The City operates on a fiscal year ending on June 30 of each year. The Fire Chief collaborates with the City Manager and the Finance Department to develop the annual budget for the Fire Department.

Revenues
The Fire Department obtains its funding primarily through the general fund. The largest sources of revenue for the City includes sales tax at 29%, utility user tax at 26%, and property taxes at 24% of the General Fund total. The following table illustrates the funding sources for the Fire Department within the General Fund and other sources as identified for the past three years.

Financial Resources FY 2019/20 FY 2020/21 FY 2021/22
General Fund-0001 $32,481,310 $36,811,379 $37,236,465
Outside Funded Svc-1006 $3,501 $20,000 $0
Emergency Med Svc-1007 $218,705 $301,900 $215,586
Hazmat-1013 $260,528 $360,335 $0
ECIA-1017 $97,415 $67,000 $0
Emergency Operation & Disaster-1304 $123,302 $0 $0
Impact Fee-2113 $74,637 $126,762 $0
Total Financial Resources $33,259,398 $37,687,376 $37,452,051 697
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 22
Expenditures
The following table is a historical and budgeted summary of the operating expenditures for the Fire Department over the past three years.

Line Item FY 2021 Actual FY 2022 Adjusted FY 2023 Budgeted Salaries $16,915,495 $18,632,677 $18,574,259
Benefits $13,815,750 $14,428,325 $14,824,371
Professional Services $669,161 $1,865,420 $1,599,815
Other Operating Expenses $256,769 $407,877 $426,677
Utilities $28,207 $33,500 $33,500
Equipment & Contract Services $152,248 $177,950 $234,850 Provision for Insurance Loss $10,618 $24,861 $23,000
Cost Pool $892,331 $1,642,331 $1,214,448
Asset/Capital Outlay $77,811 $33,639 $80,500
Debt Service Expenditure $114,991 $114,778 $114,613
Operating Transfer Out $326,018 $326,018 $326,018
Total Fire Department Expenditures $33,259,399 $37,687,376 $37,452,051 Salaries and Benefits represent 89% of the Fire Department’s overall budget. The next significant items, Professional Services and Cost Pool, combined represent 8% of total expenditures.
698
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 23
Emergency Services System Dynamics
In making decisions about the emergency services system, it is important for the leadership of Richmond to understand the science behind the location of resources, the deployment strategies of those resources, and other parts necessary to form an effective emergency services system. For many years the Insurance Services Office (ISO) had set the standard for deployment through their Public Protection Classification system. This system was designed to provide insurers a basis for setting insurance rates and to limit their exposure to large losses and catastrophic events. While these efforts provided a good starting point, there is much more for the leadership to know while making decisions about the emergency services in Richmond.

Nationally, the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), Commission for Public Safety Excellence (CPSE), American Heart Association (AHA), United States Fire Administration (USFA), Underwriters Laboratories (UL), Factory Mutual (FM), National Institutes of Standards and Technology (NIST), and Insurance Services Office (ISO) have put considerable effort into data collection, analysis, and the eventual development of performance objectives for the delivery of fire and emergency medical services. This effort is critical for local governments making decisions about deployment and location of emergency resources. The objectives promoted for Fire/Rescue and EMS providers have their basis derived from research that has been conducted in these two critical issues:
• What is the key point in a fire’s “life” for gaining control of the blaze while minimizing the impact on the structure of origin and on those structures around it? • What is the impact of the passage of time on survivability for victims of cardiac arrest? The next sections explain the decision points for these factors. It begins with the analysis, followed by how the Boise Fire Department compares to the standards.

Emergency Medical Services
Delivery of emergency medical services is a function of the emergency services system to be considered. Emergency medical calls are rising in the fire district, and the types of calls are wide ranging. However, as a part of a community’s healthcare system, one of the primary factors in the design of the emergency medical response is the ability to deliver basic CPR and defibrillation to victims of cardiac arrest. The graph below demonstrates the survivability of cardiac patients as related to time from onset:
699
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 24
This graph illustrates that the chances of survival of sudden cardiac arrest diminish approximately 10% for each minute that passes before the initiation of CPR and/or defibrillation. These dynamics are the result of extensive studies of the survivability of patients suffering from cardiac arrest. While the demand for services in EMS is wide ranging, the survival rates for full arrests are often utilized as benchmarks for response time standards as they are more readily evaluated because of the ease in defining patient outcomes (a patient either survives or does not). This research results in the recommended objective of provision of basic life support (BLS) within 4-minutes of notification and the provision of advanced life support (ALS) within 8 minutes of notification.

Considering the response time continuum, the response time goal for emergency services is to provide BLS within 6 minutes of the onset of the incident (including detection, dispatch, and travel time) and ALS within 10 minutes. This is often used as the foundation for a two-tier system where fire resources function as first responders with additional (ALS) assistance provided by responding ambulance units and personnel.

Additionally, recent research is beginning to show the impact and efficacy of rapid deployment of automatic defibrillators to cardiac arrests. This research – conducted in King County (WA), Houston (TX) and as part of the OPALS study in Ontario, Canada – shows that the AED can be the largest single contributor to the successful outcome of a cardiac arrest – particularly when accompanied by early delivery of CPR. It is also important to note that these medical research efforts have been focused on a small fraction of the emergency responses handled by typical EMS systems – non-cardiac events make up the large majority of EMS and total system responses and this research Detection 9-1- of
Some Manageable Time
Unmanageable
Time
EMS ResponseTime Time Varies
Response Time / Intervention vs. Survival
1 700
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 25
does not attempt to address the need for such rapid (and expensive) intervention on these events.

Fire Suppression Services
The chart that follows, shows a typical “flashover” curve for interior structure fires based on data from NFPA, ISO, and the NIST. The point in time represented by the occurrence of “flashover” is critical because it defines when all the contents of a room become involved in the fire. This is also the point at which a fire typically shifts from “room and contents” to a “structure” fire – involving a wider area of the building and posing a potential risk to the structures surrounding the original location of the fire.

Note that this illustration depicts a fire from the moment of inception – not from the moment that a fire is detected or reported. This demonstrates the importance of early detection and fast reporting as well as rapid dispatch of responding units. This also shows the critical need for a rapid (and sufficiently staffed) initial response – by quickly initiating the attack on a fire, “flashover” can be averted. The points below describe the major changes that occur at a fire when “flashover” occurs:
701
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 26
• It is the end of time for effective search and rescue in a room involved in the fire. It means the likely death of any person trapped in the room – either civilian or firefighter. • After this point in a fire is reached, portable extinguishers can no longer have a successful impact on controlling the blaze. Only larger diameter fire hoses will have enough water supply to affect a fire after this point.
• The fire has reached the end of the “growth” phase and has entered the fully developed phase. During this phase, every combustible object is subject to the full impact of the fire.
• This also signals the changeover from “contents” to “structure” fire. This is also the beginning of collapse danger for the structure. Structural collapse begins to become a major risk at this point and reaches the highest point during the decay stage of the fire (after the fire has been extinguished).

It should be noted that not every fire will reach flashover – and that not every fire will “wait” for the 8-minute mark to reach flashover. A quickly responding fire crew can do things to prevent or delay the occurrence of flashover. These options include:
• Use of a master stream device, using a handline through a window, or other “fast attack” methodology.
• Ventilating the room to allow hot gases to escape before they can cause the ignition of other materials in the room.
• Not ventilating a room – under some circumstances this will stifle a fire and prevent flashover from occurring.

Each of these techniques requires the rapid response of appropriately trained fire suppression resources that can safely initiate these actions. In the absence of automatic fire suppression systems, access to interior fires can again be limited by a safety requirement related to staffing levels. OSHA and related industry standards require the presence of at least 2-firefighters on the exterior of a building before entry can be made to a structure in which the environment has been contaminated by a fire unless there is an immediate threat to life. Staffing levels also impact property damage, loss of business, and other economic impacts such as utilities, sales and income tax, and property taxes.

The results of the research efforts previously noted have been utilized by communities and first responders, often on their own with no single reference, to develop local response time and other performance objectives. However, there are four major sources of information to which responders and local policymakers can refer when determining the most appropriate response objectives for their community:
702
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 27
• The Insurance Services Office (ISO) provides basic information regarding distances between fire stations. However, this “objective” does little to recognize the unique nature of every community’s road network, population, calls for service, call density, etc.
• The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) promulgated a document entitled:
“NFPA 1710: Objective for the Organization and Deployment of Fire Suppression Operations, Emergency Medical Operations, and Special Operations to the Public by Career Fire Departments.” This document (NFPA 1710) was published in 2001 and generated a great deal of dialogue and debate – which is still ongoing. • The Commission on Fire Accreditation International (CFAI) in its “Objectives of Coverage” manual, places the responsibility for identifying “appropriate” response objectives on the locality. These objectives should be developed following a comprehensive exercise in which the risks and hazards in the community are compared to the likelihood of their occurrence.
• The American Heart Association (AHA) provides information on the response to cardiac events, the preferred methods of treatment, and the timing of the delivery of the medical care and treatment.

The next section examines the issue of response time.

National Response Time Criteria
The expression of response time has changed. In years past, the measurement was expressed as an average of time. This essentially represents how the system or district is performing 50% of the time and is not a true reflection of how the fire district is performing. With the research that has been performed in developing performance standards and practices, the use of fractal time has become the best practice in the measurement and presentation of response time components. Fractal response time measures how often (as a percent of calls) a department can perform within each response time component. The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) and the Center for Public Safety Excellence (CPSE) use the 90th percentile as the standard to meet for benchmark and baseline criteria. Benchmark measurements are described as the industry best practice. Baseline measurements are described as the actual performance of the organization.

Response time to an emergency or call for assistance has been broken down into measurable and non-measurable segments. The response time continuum begins when the state of normalcy changes to a recognizable emergency. The following chart outlines the cascade of events that occurs once an emergency starts or is recognized. Those 703
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 28
highlighted points represent hard data or that which is quantitative versus soft data or that which is subjective and unknown.

Response Time Continuum
State of Normalcy
Discovery of Emergency
Reaction to Emergency
Call Received by PSAP
Call Processing
Response Units Notified
Turnout Time
Units Responding
Travel Time
Units Arriving
Mitigation Begins
Mitigation Completed
State of Normalcy Returns
The highlighted points in the chart above represent three segments that can be used for evaluation: call processing, turnout time, and travel time. Each of these components represent a different point in the response time continuum and through their measurement and evaluation, areas for improvement can be identified. Below are the definitions for the three components:
• Call Processing is the defined as beginning when the call taker answers the call and ends with the dispatching of appropriate emergency services. • Turnout Time is defined as beginning when the emergency service receives the call and is on the apparatus responding (wheels rolling) to the call. • Travel Time is defined as beginning when the apparatus and personnel begin the response (wheels rolling) and ends once on location of the emergency (wheels stopped).

The National Fire Protections Association (NFPA), Center for Public Safety Excellence (CPSE), and the Insurance Services Office (ISO) offered reference points for communities to follow relative to fire service responses; however, only NFPA 1710 offers any specificity. It is important to note that the performance objectives (in terms of response 704
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 29
times) provided in the NFPA 1710 document are derived from the basic research previously described. These include the following (all are taken from section 4.1.2.1 of NFPA 1710):
• One minute four seconds (64 seconds) for the processing of an incoming emergency phone call, including the completion of the dispatching of fire response units. • “One minute twenty seconds (80 seconds) for turnout time for fire related incidents.” This is also called reflex time, reaction time, “out-the-chute” time, etc. This is the time that elapses between dispatch and when the units are actively responding. • “One minute (60 seconds) for turnout time for emergency medical incidents.” This is also called reflex time, reaction time, “out-the-chute” time, etc. This is the time that elapses between dispatch and when the units are actively responding to an emergency medical incident.
• “Four minutes (240 seconds) or less for the arrival of the first arriving engine company at a fire suppression incident and/or 8 minutes (480 seconds) or less for the deployment of a full first-alarm assignment at a fire suppression incident.” • “Four minutes (240 seconds) or less for the arrival of a unit with first responder or higher-level capability at an emergency medical incident.” • “Eight minutes (480 seconds) or less for the deployment of a full first-alarm assignment at a fire suppression incident.”
• In section 4.1.2.4, NFPA 1710 goes on to state: “The fire department shall establish a performance objective of not less than 90 percent for the achievement of each response time objective specified in 4.1.2.1”
• The American Heart Association (AHA) does not promulgate or identify performance objectives; it does, however, provide the background information and motivation for the responses to cardiac arrest and other health related issues.

It is also critical to note that these time objectives apply to emergency calls for service – there is nothing in the NFPA documents (nor in any other objective) that suggests that communities cannot establish a differential response to calls for service determined to be non-emergency in nature. In the response timetables included below, non-emergency responses were removed; only emergency responses are included.

The expression of response time has changed. In years past the measurement was expressed as an average of time. This essentially represents how the system or department is performing 50% of the time and is not a true reflection of how a department is performing. With the research that has been performed in developing performance standards and practices, the use of fractal time has become the best practice in the 705
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 30
measurement and presentation of response time components. Fractal response time measures how often (as a percent of calls) a department can perform within each response time component. The NFPA and CPSE use the 90th percentile as the standard to meet for benchmark and baseline criteria.

Previously the Center for Public Safety Excellence had defined benchmark and baseline response times for each of the three components. They have since determined they are not a standard making organization and decided to leave the establishment of response time standards to others. However, their body of work is significant and has been used by numerous communities across the country to assist with determining what baseline services should be for a community.

The definitions for the criteria of each service area are defined in the table below. CPSE also gives a community a range of acceptable performance standards from “Baseline”, minimally accepted performance or to “Benchmark”, fully compliant with best practices.

CPSE had previously set the following performance standards for urban, suburban, and rural areas:

Service Area/Population Density Response Travel Time Standards Urban: Population density of over 1,000 per square mile 1st Unit 2nd Unit 1st Alarm Balance Performance
Benchmark 4 minutes 8 minutes 8 minutes 90%
Baseline 5 minutes/12
seconds
10 minutes 24
seconds
10 minutes/24
seconds 90%
Suburban: Population density between 500 and 1,000 per square mile Benchmark 5 minutes 8 minutes 10 minutes 90%
Baseline 6 minutes/30
seconds
10 minutes/24
seconds 13 minutes 90%
Rural: Population density of less than 500 per square mile Benchmark 10 minutes 14 minutes 14 minutes 90%
Baseline 13 minutes 18 minutes/12
seconds
18 minutes/12
seconds 90%
Effective Response Force
There are several tasks, which must occur simultaneously, to adequately combat different types of fires. The absence of adequate personnel to perform these tasks requires each task to be prioritized and completed in chronological order. These fire ground tasks include command, scene safety, search and rescue, water supply, fire attack, pump operations, ventilation, back up, and rapid intervention. 706
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 31
An initial full alarm assignment should be able to provide personnel to accomplish the following tasks:
• Establish incident command outside of the hazard area. This will allow coordination and direction of the incoming emergency response personnel and apparatus. A minimum of one person should be dedicated to this task. • Establish an uninterrupted water supply of at least 400 gallons per minute for 30 minutes. Once established the supply line can be maintained by the pump operator to ensure uninterrupted water supply. A minimum of one person is assigned to this task that can then assume support role.
• Establish an effective water flow rate of 300 gallons per minute. This will be supplied to a minimum of two hand lines each operating at a minimum flow of 100 gallons per minute. Each hand line must have two individuals assigned with one serving as the attack line and the other as a back-up line.
• Provision of one support person to handle the hydrant hookup, utility control, forcible entry, and assist in deploying fire hose lines.
• Establish a search and rescue team. Each team will consist of a minimum of two. • Establish a ventilation team. Each team will consist of a minimum of two personnel. • Establish an initial rapid intervention team (RIT). Each RIT team shall consist of a minimum of two properly trained and equipped personnel.

Critical tasking will vary depending on the size and nature of the incident. The Center for Public Safety Excellence (CPSE) provides a suggestive list of tasks that need to be completed at a fire situation based on the risk. A similar list is provided within the NFPA 1710 document. The CPSE analysis, from the 8th edition, is summarized in the table below showing the minimum required personnel to mitigate the initial emergency response requirements by occupancy risk:
707
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 32
Critical Tasks for the Effective and Efficient Control of Structural Fires Critical Task Maximum
Risk High Risk Moderate Risk Low Risk
Attack Line 4 4 4 2
Search and Rescue 4 2 2 0
Ventilation 4 2 2 0
Backup Line 2 2 2 2
Rapid Intervention 2 2 2 0
Pump Operator 1 1 1 1
Water Supply 1* 1* 1* 1*
Support (Utilities) 1* 1* 1* 1*
Command 1 1 1 1
Safety Officer 1 1 1 1
Salvage/Overhaul 2 0 0** 0
Command Aid 1 1 0 0
Operations Chief 1 1 0 0
Logistics 1 0 0 0
Planning 1 0 0 0
Staging Officer 1 1 0 0
Rehabilitation 1 1 0 0
Division Supervisors 2 1 0 0
High-rise Evacuation 10 0 0 0
Stairwell Support 10 0 0 0
Total Personnel 50 – 51 21 – 22 16 – 17 8 – 9
*Tasks can be performed by the same individual.
**Task can be performed by the attack crew
Adding to the critical tasks and staffing issues is the OSHA requirement of two in – two out in 1910.134(g)(4). These regulations state that if entry into an Immediately Dangerous to Life and Health (IDLH) atmosphere is necessary, two firefighters must enter together and remain in contact with each other. In addition, there must be two firefighters located outside the IDLH atmosphere for potential rescue if needed. This is a mandatory requirement.

The concept of an effective response force carries through for other response types by the Fire Company. The tables below outline the critical tasks for an effective response force for those response types.
708
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 33
Critical Tasks for Hazardous Materials
Critical Task High Risk Low Risk
Command/Safety 2 1
Liaison 1 1
Decontamination 4 4
Research Support 2 1
Team Leader, Entry Team, Backup Team 6 6
Total Personnel 15 13
Critical Tasks for Initial Wildland Urban Interface Fires Critical Task No Hydrants With Hydrants
Command/Safety 1 1
Pump Operations 1 1
Attack Line 2 2
Structure Protection 3 2
Water Supply 1 0
Tender Operator 2 0
Exposure Lines 2 0
Total Personnel 12 6
Critical Tasks for Technical Rescue Operations
Critical Task Swift Water High/Low
Angle
Confined
Space
Command/Safety 1 1 2
Rescue Team 3 2 2
Backup Team 2 2 2
Patient Care 2 2 2
Rope Tender 2 0 0
Upstream Spotter 2 0 0
Downstream Safety 2 0 0
Rigger 0 1 1
Attendant 0 1 1
Ground Support 0 4 4
Edge Person 0 1 0
Shoring 0 0 0
Total Personnel 14 14 14
The previous tables illustrate the needs for a sampling of hazardous materials, wildland urban interface, and technical rescue incidents and there are numerous other response types. Each of the technical rescue incidents will require similar numbers of personnel or 709
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 34
more depending on the complexity of the incident. Further, many of the positions require personnel to be certified in those positions or that discipline.

As with the emergency services system, an effective response force is needed for the effective and efficient delivery of emergency medical services. A task analysis for emergency medical calls analyzes three different types of calls or patient conditions.

These three types of calls usually require the most effort on the part of the response team. Other calls or patient types can generally be handled with two or three personnel.

Many times, especially in trauma calls, there are multiple patients. The table below outlines the tasks for handling these critical patients and the number of responders it may require for a successful outcome. It is important to note that some tasks are accomplished by the same personnel, so the total is not simple addition of the positions noted.

Critical Tasks for Effective Patient Care
Critical Task Cardiac
Arrest Stroke
Multi-System
Trauma
Patient Assessment 2 per patient 2 per patient 2 per patient Airway Management/Intubation 2 per patient 2 per patient 2 per patient Cardiac Defibrillation 1 N/A N/A
CPR 1 N/A N/A
EKG Monitoring 1 1 1
IV/Pharmacology 1 1 1
Splint/Bandage/Immobilization N/A N/A 1
Patient Lifting/Packaging 2 – 4 2 – 4 2 – 4
Medical Information Collection 1 1 1
Total per Patient 6 - 8 5 - 7 6 - 8
710
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 35
Critical Tasks for Technical Rescue Operations
Critical Task Swift Water High/Low
Angle
Confined
Space
Command/Safety 1 1 2
Rescue Team 3 2 2
Backup Team 2 2 2
Patient Care 2 2 2
Rope Tender 2 0 0
Upstream Spotter 2 0 0
Downstream Safety 2 0 0
Rigger 0 1 1
Attendant 0 1 1
Ground Support 0 4 4
Edge Person 0 1 0
Shoring 0 0 0
Total Personnel 14 14 14
711
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 36
Evaluation of the Richmond Fire Services
This section compares and evaluates the current deployment and performance of the Richmond Fire Department as it relates to the benchmark and baseline performance objectives.

Response Time Data
Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) data for 2018, 2019, 2020, and 2021 was examined and evaluated. The data is not without issues such as coding problems, transcription errors, and equipment failures. The project team used the following mechanism to address these issues.

Only qualified data is used to calculate response time and any related components. To be considered the data must meet the following criteria:
• The incident must have been unique.
• The incident must have involved at least one Fire Department unit being dispatched to the call.
• Calls that are missing data are not used in the computations for call processing, turnout time, travel time, or call duration.
• Any call with usually long times or times sorted incorrectly (arrived before dispatch time) were removed.
• Non-emergency responses are removed; only emergency responses, Charlie, Delta, and Echo types, are included.

After filtering the data using the methodology outlined above, the remaining incidents represent the response time for calls for service handled by the Fire Department.

Community Performance Standards
As noted previously there are three nationally recognized models to use to design and improve a fire protection system in our communities. Each model is based on different aspects of a community from population density, the type of fire department, and the road miles in the area.

The applicability for the NFPA models is based on the definitions of the fire department servicing the community.
712
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 37
NFPA 1710 Standard for the Organization and Deployment of Fire Suppression Operations, Emergency Medical Operations, and Special Operations to the Public by Career Fire Departments was last published in 2020.
• Defines a career fire department as one that utilizes full-time or full-time equivalent (FTE) station-based personnel immediately available to comprise at least 50 percent of an initial full alarm assignment.

ISO continues to use their standard 1.5-mile and 2.5-mile criteria for engine company and ladder company placement. Although they now accept a systematic performance evaluation that demonstrates the department can meet the time constraints outlined in NFPA 1710.

Appendix A contained in the NFPA 1710 document provides additional information and background as it pertains to service delivery objectives for the jurisdiction as follows:
“There can be incidents or areas where the response criteria are affected by circumstances such as response personnel who are not on duty, unstaffed fire station facilities, natural barriers, traffic congestion, insufficient water supply, and density of population or property. The reduced level of service should be documented in the written organizational statement by the percentage of incidents and geographical areas for which the total response time criteria are achieved.

Additional service delivery performance objectives should be established by the AHJ for occupancies other than those identified within the standard for benchmark single-family dwellings. Factors to be considered include specific response areas (i.e., suburban, rural, and wilderness) and occupancy hazards.” This passage acknowledges the authority having jurisdiction (AHJ) is responsible for determining the level of service to be provided by the emergency services. Considerations for the level of service include, but not limited to, the way the emergency service responds, travel time, staffing, emergency calls versus non-emergency calls, roadways, financial resources, and those calls involving different occupancies.

Previously the Center for Public Safety Excellence had defined benchmark and baseline response times for each of the three components. These baseline performance objectives were derived from the benchmark response times to a lesser 70% of the benchmark. They have since determined they are not a standard making organization and decided to leave the establishment of response time standards to others. However, their body of work is significant and has been used by numerous communities across the country to assist with determining what baseline services should be for a community. 713
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 38
Call Processing
Performance Standards
Dispatch services for the fire department is provided by the police department communications center. As such the fire department does not have direct control over the dispatch center or the call processing performance. NFPA 1221 Standard for the Installation, Maintenance and Use of Emergency Services Communications Systems establishes the call processing benchmarks as outlined in the following chart.

NFPA 1221 Benchmark Performance Objectives
Component Target Performance
Calls Answered
Within 15 seconds 90%
Within 20 seconds 95%
Call Processing Within 60 seconds 90%
Call Processing for:

These types of calls are exempt from
the call processing time illustrated
above.
* Language Translation
* TTY/TDD Device Services
* Hazardous Materials
* Technical Rescue
* Text Message
* Calls Received during a Disaster
* Unable to Determine Location
Both CPSE and ISO use the 60 second call processing time benchmark performance objective as outlined in NFPA 1221 for their requirements.

System Performance
The table below summarizes the performance of the communications center.

Richmond Communications Center Performance
All Emergency Calls –
90th Percentile Times
2018 –
2021 2018 2019 2020 2021 Benchmark
Call Processing Pick-up to Dispatch 3:47 3:27 3:34 3:59 4:05 1:00 For the four-year period, call processing was over the performance objective benchmark established by NFPA 1221 by 2 minutes and 47 seconds.
714
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 39
Turnout Time
Performance Standards
Turnout time is a measurable time segment that begins when the emergency service unit receives the call and is on the apparatus responding (wheels rolling) to the call. The following tables provides a comparison between the four models for benchmark performance objectives and the ACCESS performance objectives.

Turnout Time – Performance Objectives
Call Type NFPA 1710 ISO CPSE
Emergency Medical Calls 60 seconds or less
90% of the time No Requirement 60 seconds or less 90% of the time Fire or Special Operations Calls 80 seconds or less
90% of the time No Requirement 80 seconds or less 90% of the time System Performance
The table below illustrates the performance for the Richmond Fire Department.

Richmond Fire Department Turnout Time Performance
All Emergency Calls –
90th Percentile Times
2018 –
2021 2018 2019 2020 2021 Benchmark
Turnout
Time 1st Unit Medical Calls 2:36 2:42 2:30 2:38 2:34 1:00 Fire Calls 2:22 2:27 2:22 2:19 2:18 1:20
All times shown is the 90th percentile time for the four-year period and then for each of the four years. The benchmark performance objective time shown to the right represents industry best practice. As shown, turnout time for medical calls for the four-year period was 1 minute and 36 seconds over the benchmark performance objective. For the same period, fire related calls were 1 minute and 2 seconds over the benchmark performance objective.

Distribution of Resources
Distribution is the measure of getting initial resources to an emergency to begin mitigation efforts. This is measured in a variety of ways including percentage of square miles, percentage of road miles and travel time. The Insurance Services Office (ISO) has used road miles for many years advocating one and a half miles for an engine company and two and a half miles for a ladder company. With the advent of GIS technology and improved computer aided dispatch (CAD) systems, the use of actual travel time is another more accurate measure for the distribution of resources. 715
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 40
Performance Standards
Travel time is a measurable time segment that begins when the apparatus and personnel begin the response (wheels rolling) and ends once on location of the emergency (wheels stopped). It is the most appropriate measurement available for the distribution of resources that has a proven record of success. The table that follows is used for the travel time dynamics of the emergency services system.

First Arriving Unit - Benchmark Performance Objectives
Demand
Zone Demographics NFPA 1710 ISO CPSE
Urban Greater than 1,000 per
sq. mile
4 minutes or less
90% of the time.

1.5 road miles in
the built-upon area
4 minutes or less
90% of the time
Suburban 500 - 1,000 per sq. mile 4 minutes or less
90% of the time.

1.5 road miles in
the built-upon area
5 minutes or less
90% of the time
Rural Area Less than 500 per sq.
mile
4 minutes or less
90% of the time.

1.5 road miles in
the built-upon area
10 minutes or less
90% of the time
Remote
Area
Travel Distance greater
than / equal to 8 miles
4 minutes or less
90% of the time.

1.5 road miles in
the built-upon area
No Requirement
There are several notable items contained in the previous table. NFPA 1710 does not address the various demographics or population densities. CPSE addresses the travel time for the various demographics with differing travel times and ISO only addresses the built upon area defined as those areas with fire hydrants available.

System Performance
Richmond fits the urban demographic definition with a population density 3,425 residents per square mile, however areas adjacent to Wildcat Canyon Regional Park and Sobrante Ridge have lower population densities. The table that follows illustrates the travel time for the urban demographic as compared to the recommended benchmark performance objectives as represented by National Fire Protection Agency (NFPA) Standard 1710.

All Emergency Calls –
90th Percentile Times
2018 –
2021 2018 2019 2020 2021 Benchmark
Travel Time 1st Unit –
Distribution 6:44 6:30 6:38 6:52 6:55 4:00
For 2021, the travel time performance in the city is 6 minutes and 55 seconds, which is 2 minutes and 55 seconds over the benchmark performance objective. Travel times have slightly increased from 2018 to 2021.

For a visual perspective the following map illustrates the four-minute travel time expectations using the existing fire stations in the city. 716
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 41
This map illustrates the fire stations used by the Richmond Fire Department to serve the city using the four-minute benchmark performance objective. There are areas to the south of I-580, the central section of the city, and to the east of station 63 that are outside the travel time polygon.
717
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 42
Concentration of Resources
Concentration of resources is generally described as the ability of the emergency services system to get the appropriate number of personnel and resources to the scene of an emergency within a prescribed time to effectively mitigate the incident. There are two segments to this component – the first is the arrival of second suppression apparatus and the second is the arrival of an effective response force both of which use travel time as the measurement.

Performance Standards
As noted, there are two segments to the concentration of resources, the first segment uses travel time for the second arriving fire suppression apparatus. The second segment involves the number of personnel. Again, these two segments represent the most appropriate measurement available for the concentration of resources and these measurements has a proven record of success nationally.

Second Arriving Suppression Apparatus
Travel time is the primary measurement for the second arriving fire suppression unit. The following table summarizes the differing viewpoints for the travel time of the second arriving unit.

Demand Zone Demographics NFPA 1710 ISO CPSE
Urban Greater than 1,000
per sq. mile
6 minutes or less
90% of the time
No time or mileage
requirement
8 minutes or less
90% of the time
Suburban 500 – 1,000 per sq.
mile
6 minutes or less
90% of the time
No time or mileage
requirement
8 minutes or less
90% of the time
Rural Area Less than 500 per
sq. mile
6 minutes or less
90% of the time
No time or mileage
requirement
14 minutes or less
90% of the time
Remote Area
Travel Distance
greater than / equal
to 8 miles
6 minutes or less
90% of the time
No time or mileage
requirement No Requirement
As can be noted in the previous table, CPSE and NFPA 1710 have requirements for the second arriving apparatus, ISO is silent on this topic.

First Alarm Assignment
Travel time and number of personnel arriving at the scene of an emergency is the measurement for the first alarm assignment. The next table illustrates the travel time for the first alarm assignment.
718
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 43
Demand Zone Demographics NFPA 1710 ISO CPSE
Urban Greater than 1,000
per sq. mile
8 minutes or less
90% of the time
No time or mileage
requirement
8 minutes or less
90% of the time
Suburban 500 – 1,000 per sq.
mile
8 minutes or less
90% of the time
No time or mileage
requirement
10 minutes or less
90% of the time
Rural Area Less than 500 per
sq. mile
8 minutes or less
90% of the time
No time or mileage
requirement
14 minutes or less
90% of the time
Remote Area
Travel Distance
greater than / equal
to 8 miles
8 minutes or less
90% of the time
No time or mileage
requirement No Requirement
In the previous table, a moderate risk structure fire is used as the basis for the benchmark performance objectives.

As mentioned previously, the second part of the concentration of resource arrival time concerns the number of personnel arriving with the first alarm assignment. The next table summarizes NFPA, ISO, and CPSE standards for the number of personnel arriving for a first alarm assignment for a single-family dwelling.

Demand Zone Demographics NFPA 1710 ISO CPSE
Urban Greater than 1,000 per
sq. mile 16 personnel No specific requirement 16 personnel Suburban 500 – 1,000 per sq.
mile 16 personnel No specific requirement 16 personnel
Rural Less than 500 per sq.
mile 16 personnel No specific requirement 16 personnel
Remote Travel Distance greater
than / equal to 8 miles 16 personnel No specific requirement 16 personnel As illustrated, ISO does not specify the number of personnel that is expected or anticipated to arrive, and instead provides points for the personnel – meaning the more on-duty personnel the more points are added to the overall evaluation. NFPA 1710 and CPSE base their personnel requirements on creating an effective response force using critical tasking.

For the effective response force, 16 personnel were used for the concentration of resources representing a moderate risk structure fire (single family house). The following tables illustrate the performance of the fire department for the past four years for each the city.
719
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 44
Structure Fires –
90th Percentile Times
2018 -
2021 2018 2019 2020 2021 Benchmark
Travel
Time
1st Unit –
Distribution
5:28 6:40 4:49 5:29 5:23 4:00
n = 215 n = 40 n = 52 n = 58 n = 65
2nd Arriving
Suppression Unit
8:32 9:13 6:38 8:42 8:31 6:00
n = 167 n = 37 n = 37 n = 44 n = 49
ERF –
Concentration
24:45 26:59 16:42 12:00 29:33 8:00
n = 40 n = 18 n = 10 n = 9 n = 65
Statistically these travel times use a small data set and therefore should be viewed with a certain amount of skepticism In terms of travel time, the response time for the first arriving unit is relatively close to the benchmark performance objective. However, the second arriving suppression unit for the past four years is 2 minutes and 32 seconds over the benchmark performance objective.

The data for the previous table is limited to structure fires only as coded in the CAD data from the dispatch center. With a smaller data set, one or two calls for service can have an effect on the response time shown. For example, in 2018 of the 18 structure fire calls 2 calls had a travel time of 33 minutes and 46 seconds and the other had a travel time of 44 minutes and 35 seconds to meet the 16 personnel effective response force. Removing these two incidents, the travel time for the remaining 16 incidents was 9 minutes and 23 seconds.

The following map illustrates the expected performance staffing concentrations assuming all resources in each station are available to respond using the 8-minute travel time. In this illustration, only Richmond resources are shown. 720
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 45
As illustrated, the western core of the city can achieve a 16-person effective response force however, areas to the northern sections of the city are not able to meet the effective response force in the eight-minute travel time benchmark performance objective. For additional perspective, the following map illustrates the arrival of an effective response force using the same travel time performance objective that also includes mutual aid partners.
721
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 46
In terms of an effective response force, there are improvements within the city with mutual aid partners. However, the area to the north and east of station 63 is not within the benchmark performance objectives.
722
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 47
System Reliability
The concept of distribution and concentration of resources can be influenced by other contributing factors including unit hour utilization and concurrent calls for service.

Unit Utilization
Unit utilization is a factor in determining whether there is an appropriate emergency services system response. For purposes of this analysis, unit utilization is calculated by taking the total hours the unit is committed to incidents for the year divided by the total hours in a year. Expressed as a percentage, it identifies the amount of time the unit is committed but more importantly the amount of time the unit is available.

In 2016 Henrico County, Virginia conducted a study of unit utilization. Through their study they developed a scale to identify the community impact on travel time and availability of their emergency medical units.1
Factor Indicator Description
16% to 24% Ideal Commitment
Range
Personnel can maintain training requirements and physical fitness and can consistently achieve response time benchmarks. Units are available to the community more than 75 percent of the day. Units below 0.16 should be evaluated for more efficient use as additional operating capacity is available.
25% System Stress
Community availability and unit sustainability are not questioned.

First-due units are responding to their assigned community 75 percent of the time, and response benchmarks are rarely missed.

At this level, agency leaders must understand that commitment factor increases are imminent. The community this unit serves will begin to see increasingly longer response times as neighboring stations send apparatus during one out of four calls.
26% to 29% Evaluation Range
In this range, the community served will experience delayed incident responses. Just under 30 percent of the day, first-due ambulances are unavailable; thus, neighboring responders will likely exceed goals. Agency leadership should immediately begin identifying funding sources to provide relief. At this range, commitment factors are only expected to increase.
30% or
more
Line in the Sand
Not Sustainable: Commitment Threshold – shows our community has less than a 70 percent chance of timely emergency service and immediate relief is vital. Personnel assigned to units at or exceeding 0.3 may show signs of fatigue and burnout and may be at increased risk of errors. Required training and physical fitness sessions are not consistently completed.
1 https://www.fireengineering.com/apparatus-equipment/how-busy-is-busy/#gref 723
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 48
Richmond Fire Department Actual Unit Utilization
Unit
2018 2019 2020 2021
Duration Pct. of
Time Avg. Duration Pct. of Time Avg. Duration Pct. of Time Avg. Duration Pct. of Time Avg.

E67 835:11:59 9.5% 0:16:15 782:55:26 8.9% 0:13:57 849:28:00 9.7% 0:15:19 847:33:49 9.7% 0:16:46 E62 712:20:10 8.1% 0:16:16 593:44:57 6.8% 0:14:23 652:45:18 7.5% 0:16:10 825:25:57 9.4% 0:22:56 E64 666:15:42 7.6% 0:17:10 706:34:56 8.1% 0:17:05 778:16:57 8.9% 0:17:38 801:54:17 9.2% 0:18:07 E66 684:51:41 7.8% 0:14:19 642:28:22 7.3% 0:14:25 644:25:54 7.4% 0:14:19 795:50:58 9.1% 0:17:54 E68 651:58:57 7.4% 0:17:23 644:02:39 7.4% 0:15:28 711:06:13 8.1% 0:16:54 776:37:52 8.9% 0:17:22 E61 415:30:33 4.7% 0:19:23 379:28:04 4.3% 0:17:44 370:11:16 4.2% 0:16:47 554:01:05 6.3% 0:25:31 E63 258:15:17 2.9% 0:20:27 239:34:45 2.7% 0:17:14 236:57:57 2.7% 0:17:07 275:55:43 3.1% 0:21:44 T64 306:17:29 3.5% 0:15:05 277:58:32 3.2% 0:13:07 264:58:03 3.0% 0:17:27 266:07:46 3.0% 0:18:22 Generally, the unit utilization is not an issue until it begins to reach 20% to 25% and/or if it begins to interfere with the travel time of the unit. Typically, unit utilization is more of an issue for medical units as they handle a high call volume. It is a useful tool with fire suppression units as these units also respond to medical calls although there is no transport involved. In 2021, no units were over 10% with Engine 67 the closest at 9.7% in terms of committed time to emergency calls. 724
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 49
Concurrent Calls
It is common for an emergency services system to have multiple requests for service occurring simultaneously. The larger the system the more frequently this will occur and with the appropriate resources this can be handled efficiently.

Calls 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total %
1 6,119 5,954 5,825 5,694 23,592 43.4%
2 4,627 4,622 4,591 4,538 18,378 33.8%
3 2,107 1,842 1,986 2,196 8,131 15.0%
4 722 606 700 792 2,820 5.2%
5 248 158 214 249 869 1.6%
6+ 154 85 127 226 592 1.1%
Total 13,977 13,267 13,443 13,695 54,382 100%
The measurement for concurrent calls is based on the occurrence of additional calls for service while another call is in progress. In this instance, when one call is occurring, 57% of the time more than one request for service is being handled. Further, when one call is in progress, for approximately 49% of those calls there are two or three calls occurring simultaneously.
725
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 50
Strategic Operational Improvement Opportunities
During this study, several opportunities for improvement were identified. Some of those are related to the growth of the community, while others are gaps in service levels. This chapter provides recommendations intended to provide improvements to the emergency services system within the City of Richmond.

Community Growth and Emergency Services Demand
Using the US Census Bureau data, the annual growth rate for the past nine years has been approximately 1.5% for the city. The chart that follows visualizes this trend.

Based on an annual population growth rate of 1.5%, the City of Richmond would reach a population of approximately 158,000 by 2040. However, there are published reports indicating the population growth is slowing. For example, the California Department of Finance projections indicate the population in the city reduced by 0.1% between 2021 and 2022 and a reduction in population of 0.4% for Contra Costa County.

Based on the demographics, the population of the city is also aging. In 2010 approximately 14.5% of the population was 60 years or older. According to the 2020 census, data that age group increased to approximately 19.6% of the population, an annual increase of approximately 0.6%. As the population ages, service demands also begin to change, especially in emergency medical needs. 0 20000
40000
60000
80000
100000
120000
140000
160000
180000
2010 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040
Population Projection
Population Over Age 60
726
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 51
Based on the 2020 population of the city and the calls for service, the average call per person is 0.13 calls. However, based on the calls for service over the past four years, there has been an average reduction in calls by approximately 0.4% per year. The following chart provides a visual perspective for calls for service.

The overall trend for calls for service has a reduction over the past four years. It should be noted that many departments across the country experienced a reduction in the calls for service due to the pandemic. Some of those departments have reported a sharp increase in calls for service since the pandemic is on the decline while others, such as Richmond, are not witnessing the same increase. The average between the populationbased projection and the calls for service, based projection indicates an increase in calls for service from approximately 14,000 in 2021 to approximately 16,500 in 2040.

Staffing and Overtime
In every industry a certain minimum staffing level is formally or informally identified to meet work demands. These work demands can vary widely, from developing a product within recurring deadlines, to meeting specific customer service goals, to ensuring safe practices. If the industry/agency does not have sufficient initial staff resources to meet this baseline (minimum) staffing requirements, overtime will be required unless the agency chooses to allow work demand outputs and outcomes to decline/suffer. In general, overtime dedicated consistently to this category will result in long-term negative consequences, such as a decrease in productivity, reduced quality of work, increased safety risks, increased stress, and increased turnover rates. 0 5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
2020 2021 2025 2030 2035 2040
Calls for Service Projection
CFS by Population CFS by Calls Average CFS
727
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 52
Characteristics of Overtime
The use of overtime has significant potential benefits as well as disadvantages, and balancing these requires close management, best practice protocols and thoughtful consideration of a variety of other factors related to staff and operations. There are key positive and negative characteristics of overtime, as discussed in the following subsections.

Benefits of Overtime
As is well known, the primary benefits an organization derives from using overtime is the cost avoidance of hiring additional personnel. Indeed, proper management of overtime can avoid many undesirable outcomes such as missed deadlines, poorer customer service, cost overruns, staff lay-offs, and a variety of other consequences detrimental to both the organization and employee. Furthermore, overtime to a certain degree is perceived by most to be a desirable benefit, thereby allowing an organization to attract and retain personnel if a moderate amount of overtime is a regular part of the operational culture.

While overtime is fiscally advantageous to an organization based on the avoidance of paying for additional fixed costs such as insurance, sick leave earning, vacation earning, etc., it is only beneficial to a point. There is a “break-even” point where the variable costs (time and-one-half payment, retirement costs, employment taxes, etc.) do not compensate for fixed cost savings. While every single agency would be different dependent upon their unique compensation structures, a general rule of thumb that should be used when considering the fiscal elements of overtime usage compared to the use of new staff positions is:

As a guideline, 54 work hours per employee per week represents the fiscal benchmark break-even point for paying (14-hours weekly) overtime.2 It needs to be recognized that the above benchmark is a guideline only and based on a 40-hour employee, not the 56 average work week the personnel in Richmond Fire Operations work. Every unique position in any different agency will have its own “fiscal benchmark outcome” based on the salary, benefit, retirement, and taxing structure that influences overtime costs. The noted benchmark provides guidance that once overtime approaches this benchmark “ceiling,” from a fiscal standpoint exclusively a new position should be hired in the vast majority of instances. As discussed subsequently, the fiscal 2 Municipal Solid Waste Professionals article:
http://www.mswmanagement.com/MSW/Articles/Overtime_The_Effect_on_Cost_4174.aspx 728
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 53
reasons to hire personnel instead of use overtime should be considered of secondary importance.

Research data suggest that many employees appreciate the opportunity to earn a moderate amount of overtime over the course of a year. According to Shiftwork Solutions LLC, “Employers that offer modest amounts of overtime will not only satisfy a majority of their employees, but also will improve their competitive position in the local market.” This is reflected by the results of their shift work surveying which demonstrated that the majority of employees would like some level of weekly overtime (averaging 7.3 hours per week), but with more than 4-in-10 desiring less than 6 hours per week3:

When the desired level of weekly overtime by employee is compared against the fiscal benchmark break-even point for overtime, a clear difference emerges. On average employees would desire approximately one-half the fiscal benchmark with only one-in-six employees having a willingness to work that much overtime on a weekly basis. This differential helps frame the potential negative characteristics of overtime, as discussed further below.

Negative Effects
Consideration must be given such factors as fatigue, sleep deprivation, and quality of life issues for any shift that has 24-hour components. In terms of fatigue, studies have documented a root cause in human fatigue is the work and rest patterns in the preceding seven-day period. According to a study by Dr. Susan Koen of Round the Clock Systems, a minimum of a 3:4 ratio is needed to ensure that shift employees obtain a sufficient amount of rest and sleep in order to prevent cumulative physical fatigue as well as a sleep debt. The 24/48 schedule as well as the 48/96 schedule both have a 1:2 ratio, which is significantly better than the recommended minimum. Therefore, the structural design of both schedules supports employees’ needed sleep and rest cycles.4 However, sleep deprivation is another factor that needs to be considered. According to Dr. Sara Jahnke, your body operates on circadian rhythms, which is a 24-hour cycle of physiological processes. Going without sleep for too long and interrupting that rhythm leads to physical and cognitive problems. Chronic sleep deprivation increases risk for hypertension, cancer, ulcers, heart attack and stroke.5 The Koen study identifies sleep disruptions as the issue in sleep deprivation. The number of calls during the nighttime 3 Why Overtime? Shift Schedule Design: www.shift-schedule-design.com 4 https://pueblowestmetro.com/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Item/821?fileID=1323 5https://www.firerescue1.com/health-wellness/articles/is-the-firefighter-4896-shift-a-health-hazardBtSYBb011J5sHVB3/ 729
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 54
hours, nighttime identified between 10:00 pm and 6:00 am, could have an effect on the sleep deprivation factor.

In terms of the 48/96 shift, the concern is the first 24-hour shift and those overnight calls.

Koen finds for firefighters who typically have one call during the night (depending on the length of the call and how easy it is for them to return to sleep), they will typically start their second day on shift with only mild sleep deprivation. She further reports those firefighters who average two calls during a typical on-duty night will most likely be in a state of moderate sleep deprivation, where cognitive fatigue problems will begin surfacing. However, if managed correctly, these instances can be addressed and not become a problem.

Quality of life issues were also addressed in the Koen study. Family interaction is a large part of the off-duty time. Many of those interviewed indicated they spend their first offduty day sleeping as their call volume creates sleep deprivation issues. This means they are not positively interacting with their family members. This study identified key aspects of off duty time to consider.
• Consecutive hours available to be a fully present, active family member. • The amount of weekend off-duty time.
• The frequency of weekend off-duty time.
• The consecutive time spent away from the family.

According to the Koen study, the 48/96 schedule provides additional off duty time allowing the personnel to become fully engaged with their family. However, sleep deprivation is a concern but can be managed. Jahnke states paying attention to sleep, education about proper screening and treatment for sleep disorders, appropriate use of caffeine and appropriate use of napping for busy stations will likely be useful in decreasing the negative effects of shift work among firefighters.

Overtime Management
It is critical to recognize that the underpinnings of overtime usage are an exercise in risk management. Balancing employee, department, city, and community needs through the use of overtime as opposed to other work-related options is ultimately an effort in judging risk. This framing element should be a core management principle as recognizing the symptoms of poorly used overtime as well as solutions that overtime use can bring is tantamount to efficient and effective agency operations. A March 2013 study entitled 730
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 55
‘Management of Overtime’ by the Amtrak Office of Inspector General went into detail to discuss overtime (and related issues) in the context of managing risk.6 The following table illustrates the use of overtime for the past four years in the Richmond Fire Department.
2018 2019 2020 2021
Minimum Staffing 34,749 51,687 58,130 54,500
Other types of Overtime 1,802 878 4,244 3,114
Total OT Hours 36,551 52,565 62,374 57,614
The overtime hours shown in the previous table are for those operational personnel and do not include administrative or fire prevention personnel. In 2019, the country was at the height of the global pandemic with many front-line first response personnel contracting the disease. Some of the effects of the pandemic have carried on into 2020 and 2021.

Operational Shift Staffing
As noted previously, the fire department is staffing its operations with 81 personnel, with a minimum staffing of 25 personnel, across seven stations using a three-platoon system.

To staff the shifts, 27 personnel are assigned to a shift which allows 2 personnel to be off duty for vacation, holidays, sick leave, or other paid time off without the use of overtime. The following table illustrates the number of hours used by the operational personnel for the past four years.

Type of Leave 2018 2019 2020 2021 Avg.

Catastrophic Leave 86 4 336 142.0
Comp Time Off 4,764 5,392 4,953 6,290 5,349.8
COVID 3,859 1,273 2,566.0
Death in Family 802 498 634 432 591.5
Floating Holiday 32 32 32 16 28.0
Jury Duty 9 10 22 31 18.0
LWOP‐ Disability 2,440 576 3,240 2,085.3
LWOP‐LOA 720 720.0
Paid Admin Leave (HR) 384 288 792 488.0
Parental Leave 244 472 360 144 305.0
Sick 7,784 9,116 7,391 10,711 8,750.5
Unpaid Leave 408 655 5,232 2,501 2,199.0
Vacation 14,767 14,687 13,393 15,337 14,546.0
Work Comp (Injury, TTD) 10,982 17,714 20,366 17,137 16,549.8 Total Hours 39,792 51,486 57,110 58,960 51,837.0
6 Management of Overtime Report OIG-A-2013-009, March 26, 2013 pgs 14-16 731
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 56
For the past three years, worker compensation hours averaged 33% of the total leave taken by the operational personnel. Vacation leave accounts for an average of 26% for the same time frame.

Breaking down the shift into hours for the year provides a clear view of staffing issues.

There are 8,760 hours in the calendar year and the fire department operates with three shifts. One position requires 2,920 hours to fill that position for the year. Using data from the past four years, the average paid-time-off (PTO) was used to determine the number of hours available for each position. The following table illustrates the hours available.

Hours for One Position 2,920.00
Catastrophic Leave 1.8
Comp Time Off 67.7
COVID 32.5
Death in Family 7.5
Floating Holiday 0.4
Jury Duty 0.2
LWOP‐ Disability 26.4
LWOP‐LOA 9.1
Paid Admin Leave (HR) 6.2
Parental Leave 3.9
Sick 110.5
Unpaid Leave 27.8
Vacation 184.1
Work Comp (Injury, TTD) 209.5
Hours Available 2,232.39
Number of Personnel for One Position 1.31
Using the average number of operational personnel for the four years of leave data provide an average number of hours for each employee for the type of leave. As shown, it will require 1.31 personnel (2,920 / 2,232.39) to provide staffing for one year or 33 (32.75) personnel per shift. This translates to 99 personnel assigned to the operational staffing to provide the minimum staffing required for operations. For perspective and using the data from the previous table, to staff an engine company with a minimum staffing of 3 personnel, it will require 3.93 or 4 personnel to staff the apparatus. The number used to staff one position will fluctuate from year to year due to unforeseen circumstances such as long-term injury or illness.

One type of leave that stands out is the worker compensation leave. For the past four years there is an average of over 200 hours per year for each employee. Removing this leave type reduces the staffing coefficient changing from 1.31 to 1.2. Using the 1.2 coefficient the number of personnel needed to staff operations goes from 99 personnel to 90 personnel. While the spike in workers compensation coincides with the pandemic, 732
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 57
COVID leave is shown separately. The worker compensation process can become a cumbersome process as there are many moving parts some of which may not be in local control. The process in the city should be reviewed and streamlined as much as possible to ensure the employee receives the appropriate care and more importantly can be returned to the workforce.

Recommendations:

Review the worker compensation process within the city to streamline the processes to ensure employees are receiving appropriate services and a return-to-work authorization within an appropriate time frame reducing the amount of time employees are off duty.

Increase the number of personnel per shift over the next three to five years to reduce the amount of overtime needed to provide services and to address the fatigue and sleep deprivation issues.

Call Processing
The call processing time is measured from the time the call is answered by the dispatcher until the field units are dispatched. Dispatching services in the city is the responsibility of the police department. Establishing performance objectives for call answering and call processing not only provides direction to the employees but also establishes expectations for the public and the agencies served. These performance objectives also provide the basis for staffing and operations within the center. With the establishment of performance objectives, there will need to be mechanism created to monitor the actual performance against the established objectives. This will also provide an avenue for the improvement of performance and operations of the center The call processing component is not in the direct control of the fire department however, the department should work with the communications center to improve their call processing performance. Times illustrated in the following table is the call processing performance for a four-year period and were obtained via the computer aided dispatch system.

All Emergency Calls –
Call Processing
2018 -
2020 Benchmark
90th Percentile 3:47 1:00
80th Percentile 2:50
70th Percentile 2:22
733
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 58
As can be seen, the past four years combined of call processing time for emergency calls was 3 minutes and 47 seconds for 90% of the time 2 minutes and 50 seconds for 80% of the time.

The previous table shows the achievable incremental improvement to the call processing time segment of the response time continuum. For example, improving the 90% fractal time from 3 minutes and 47 seconds to 2 minutes and 50 seconds represents a 10% improvement. As well, reducing the 90% fractal time to 2 minute and 22 seconds would represent a 20% improvement. Incremental improvements are measurable and provide a baseline to measure those improvements.

Recommendation
The city should establish performance objectives for the communications center for call answering and call processing.

Establish a reporting system to create a mechanism to monitor progress of improvements to the dispatching services.

Turnout Time
There are several factors that will influence the turnout time for apparatus including the station layout. Such considerations include stairs, detour to restroom, policy for signaling enroute, opening the bay doors, policy for gathering response information, and the personal protective gear that must be donned. In any case, formally establishing turnout time performance objectives provides direction to the employees and establishes the expectations of their performance. As well, the public understands and knows what to expect from their fire services.

The following table illustrates the turnout time for the past four years, derived by combining the last four-years of turnout time data using the same filtering mechanisms as previously noted. It is shown as a fractal time ranging from 90% to 70% for emergency medical calls and fire-related calls.
2018 - 2021 90% 80% 70% Benchmark
Turnout Time – EMS 2:36 1:57 1:39 1:00
Turnout Time – Fire 2:22 1:45 1:27 1:20
For the past four-years combined the turnout time for medical calls was 2 minutes and 36 seconds for 90% of the time and for 80% of the time the turnout time was 1 minute and 57 seconds.
734
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 59
This table illustrates the achievable incremental improvement to the turnout time segment of the response time continuum. For example, improving the 90% fractal time from 2 minutes and 36 seconds to 1 minute and 57 seconds represents a 10% improvement. As well, reducing the 90% fractal time to 1 minute and 39 seconds would represent a 20% improvement. Incremental improvements are measurable and provide a baseline to measure those improvements.

Recording the time a unit begins its response is a function of the dispatch center and the dispatcher handling the call. The process used in the Communications Center is for the unit to notify the dispatcher of the response and the dispatcher then records or time stamps the enroute time. It is possible for the dispatcher to be handling several issues simultaneously resulting in a delay in the recording of the enroute time. It is also possible for the unit to be delayed in notifying the dispatcher of the response due to other radio traffic or other issues that may be occurring simultaneously. The times and variances previously illustrated is the first step to identify any issues or problems with how response times and unit performance is currently captured and reported. The next step is to establish guidelines for accurately capturing the turnout time performance and identify those times when the turnout time is beyond established thresholds. This will allow for the evaluation of the problem, identify if it is a data issue, an operational issue, or other technical problem and the process further refined to improve the reliability of the data.

Improvement to the turnout time component can take several forms. Some departments have installed timers in the station at the apparatus bay doors that indicate the amount of time that has elapsed since the dispatch was received. This allows the crews to instantly see their turnout time performance and according to some departments has helped to improve their turnout time. Many departments have also encouraged and required the on-duty crews to place their gear at or on the apparatus instead of leaving it in the locker or other location within the station.

Other remedies include the posting of turnout time by station and by shift. This allows the company officer to see the results and work to improve the turnout time of his or her units. Some departments have instituted a process to hold the company officer accountable for excessively long turnout times by creating a written report as to why the turnout time was excessive. This could be established using the current baseline turnout time as a trigger point to generate a time variance report.

Another option is to establish a standard operating procedure as to when a unit is to place themselves enroute. For example, one shift will place themselves enroute from the living quarters while another shift will place themselves enroute once they are on the truck. Still yet, another shift may wait until they have cleared the bay doors, all of which will vary the 735
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 60
reported turnout time and possibly skew the data related to actual performance.

Establishing a procedure will improve the accuracy of the data.

Recommendations:

The city should establish performance objectives for turnout time for medical calls and fire related calls.

Establish a reporting system to create a mechanism to monitor progress of improvements to turnout time.

Distribution of Resources
Distribution is the measure of getting initial resources to an emergency to begin mitigation efforts. This is measured in a variety of ways including percentage of square miles, percentage of road miles and travel time. The Insurance Services Office (ISO) has used road miles for many years advocating one and a half miles for an engine company and two and a half miles for a ladder company. With the advent of GIS technology and improved computer aided dispatch (CAD) systems, the use of actual travel time is another more accurate measure for the distribution of resources.

In terms of the distribution of resources, it was previously noted the travel time for the past four years is 6 minutes and 44 seconds as shown in the following table.

All Emergency Calls –
90th Percentile Times
2018 –
2021 2018 2019 2020 2021 Benchmark CPSE Baseline
Travel
Time
1st Unit –
Distribution 6:44 6:30 6:38 6:52 6:55 4:00 5:20
Previously the Center for Public Safety Excellence had defined benchmark and baseline response times for each of the three components. These baseline performance objectives were derived from the benchmark response times to a lesser 70% of the benchmark. They have since determined they are not a standard making organization and decided to leave the establishment of response time standards to others. However, their body of work is significant and has been used by numerous communities across the country to assist with determining what baseline services should be for a community and is shown here for comparison purposes.

The following map illustrates the travel time for the city using the Richmond fire stations and the surrounding fire stations that provide automatic and mutual aid. The cooperative efforts between the various fire service agencies provide the region with appropriate responses regardless of the boundary.
736
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 61
In as much as the city has not adopted performance objectives for travel time, using the CPSE baseline travel time the distribution of resources appears to be appropriate based on the GIS analysis. This also illustrates the use of all automatic aid partners which is a common practice throughout the country.

With the GIS analysis illustrating a 5 minute 20 second drive time from all the resources providing appropriate service, a further review of the CAD data indicates there may be 737
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 62
issues that are not providing accurate data. The following table illustrates some of the data issues.
2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
No Dispatch Time Recorded 1.8% 9.9% 7.2% 1.3% 5.1%
No Enroute Time Recorded 11.2% 12.2% 10.1% 9.2% 10.7%
Call Processing Time at 00:00 4.5% 3.8% 6.2% 6.8% 5.3%
Turnout Time at 00:00 9.5% 2.0% 2.1% 2.3% 4.0%
For the past four years, approximately 5% of the records examined did not have a dispatch time recorded and over 10% of the records examined did not have an enroute time recorded for the unit. More importantly, there are records that have identical time stamps for call received, dispatch and enroute time as illustrated by the approximately 10% of the calls that did not have any time registered for call processing and turnout time. As previously noted, the CAD data is not without coding problems such as an enroute time shown at an earlier time than a dispatch time. The data presented here is after these types of coding issues were removed. As an example of the issue, consider an enroute time that is the same as a dispatch time, this likely means the turnout time is included in the travel time. As such, this extends the travel time and does not provide an accurate measurement and skews the data that would be used for any evaluation of resources.

Additionally, sharing the data with the city administration and the general public does not accurately portray the services being provided.

Recommendations:

Establish baseline performance objectives for call processing, turnout time, and travel time for the dispatch center and fire department.

Work with the dispatch center to improve the dispatch processes, to improve data capturing, and to meet the established performance objectives.

Monitor the various response time components as compared to the established performance objectives.

Concentration of Resources
Concentration of resources is generally described as the ability of the emergency services system to get the appropriate number of personnel and resources to the scene of an emergency within a prescribed time to effectively mitigate the incident. There are two segments to this component – the first is the arrival of second suppression apparatus and the second is the arrival of an effective response force both of which use travel time as the measurement.
738
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 63
As previously shown, the travel times for structure fires in the city are illustrated in the following table.

Structure Fires –
90th Percentile Times
2018 -
2021 2018 2019 2020 2021 Benchmark CPSE Baseline
Travel
Time
1st Unit –
Distribution
5:28 6:40 4:49 5:29 5:23 4:00 5:20
n = 215 n = 40 n = 52 n = 58 n = 65
2nd Arriving
Suppression Unit
8:32 9:13 6:38 8:42 8:31 6:00 10:24
n = 167 n = 37 n = 37 n = 44 n = 49
ERF –
Concentration
24:45 26:59 16:42 12:00 29:33 8:00 10:24
n = 40 n = 18 n = 10 n = 9 n = 65
Statistically these travel times use a small data set and therefore should be viewed with a certain amount of skepticism Note this table includes the CPSE baseline travel times of 5 minutes and 20 seconds for the first arriving unit and 10 minutes and 24 seconds for the second arriving unit and the effective response force. The following map illustrates the arrival of the effective response force in the city using all automatic aid partners. 739
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 64
As illustrated a large area of the city is capable of receiving an effective response force of 16 personnel within the baseline travel time. Areas outside the baseline performance objective are to the east of Station 63 and the far west sections of the city near the bay.

As with the distribution section, the CAD data may not be accurate as there is a large disconnect between the data and GIS analysis. Once the issues with the CAD data are corrected and can portray the data more accurately, a more thorough analysis can be completed.
740
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 65
Emergency Medical Services
Contra Costa County Fire Protection District provides emergency medical services to the county through a contract with Contra Costa County. The fire district sub-contracts with American Medical Response (AMR) for service delivery. The contract requires the ambulances to be staffed with one paramedic and one EMT for responses into Contra Costa County and the City of Richmond. As well, the contract has response time requirements and penalties if those are not met. In terms of response by the fire department, the communications center uses an emergency medical dispatch (EMD) system so the calls being responded to by the fire department are priority calls. EMD is a mechanism used by the dispatch center to ensure the right resources are sent to a call for service. This is accomplished through the interrogation of the caller through a series of preset questions to determine the nature of the call. The following table is data from the patient care reports of the fire department.

Richmond Fire Department Patient Care Responses
DISPOSITION 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total Pct.

Technical Assistance Only (No Patient
Contact) 3,108 3,293 2,805 2,819 12,025 37.2%
Transport By AMR (No Fire Ride In) 1,682 2,077 2,000 2,327 8,086 25.0% Transport by AMR (Fire Ride In) 122 116 140 127 505 1.6% Cancelled at Scene - No Patient Contact 1,485 1,460 1,869 1,775 6,589 20.4% Transferred Care (Trans. Outcome TBD) 743 495 378 375 1,991 6.2% Cancelled Prior To Arrival 361 581 514 571 2,027 6.3%
Dead at Scene 95 117 145 153 510 1.6%
Release At Scene (RAS) 100 166 159 139 564 1.7%
Transport By Other EMS Agency 10 11 21 14 56 0.2%
Declines Care or EMS Transport 3 0 0 0 3 0.0%
Refusal of Care After Treatment 2 0 0 0 2 0.0%
TOTAL 7,711 8,316 8,031 8,300 32,358 100.0%
Over the past four years approximately 27% of the calls were cancelled at the scene or prior to arrival and less than 2% required the fire department to provide personnel to complete patient care during transport. Further evaluation of the data found approximately 96% of the calls had the nature of the call listed as none or unknown. To reduce the number of emergency medical calls fire companies are responding to, the EMD system may need to be adjusted. As well, additional training of the dispatchers may be needed to ensure they are current with EMD system and its use.

While the EMD functions in the dispatch center are used to ensure the appropriate resources are sent to a medical call, another service delivery method could be employed.

The current delivery system is to send an engine company to the call. Using a smaller 741
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 66
quick response vehicle, such as an SUV or similar vehicle, to respond to the call for service would reduce the wear and tear on the apparatus and potentially reduce the cost of the operation (fuel, oil, etc.) of the apparatus. The operation would be to have two personnel respond in the SUV to the call leaving one at the station with the engine. Should a fire call be received while the medical crew is out, the engine would respond as would the quick response vehicle to create the 3-person crew. In essence, the engine company would become a two-vehicle unit.

Recommendations:

Work with Contra Costa Fire Protection District and Contra Costa County Emergency Medical Services to address any changes to be made to the emergency medical response in the city.

Work the dispatch center to improve the use of the Emergency Medical Dispatch (EMD) system to reduce any unnecessary responses of resources to emergency medical calls for service.

Consider utilizing cross-staffed quick response EMS vehicles as part of the medical response system to allow a quicker response and potentially reducing the cost of these responses.
742
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 67
Essential Services
The primary purpose of the Richmond Fire Department is to respond to and mitigate fire and medical emergencies within the city. To support these responses, there are a variety of other functions and responsibilities assigned to the fire department such as fire prevention and training. Historically the fire service has been tasked only with fire suppression however, in the past few decades there have been changes that now entails a fire protection system to provide service to the community.

Fire Prevention Division
Fire prevention and loss control is the first defense against unwanted fires and is an integral part of the Community Risk Reduction programs. The goal of any fire prevention program is to prevent the fire from occurring, prevent the loss of life, reduce the severity of a fire if one does occur, and if a fire does occur to enable the fire suppression forces to perform their tasks more effectively. These goals are accomplished through building inspections, public education activities, and the planning before a building is built.

This division is responsible to provide code enforcement, fire investigations, and public education. Staffing for this division is a Fire Marshal, Deputy Fire Marshal and three Fire Inspectors. One of the Fire Inspectors is assigned to The Chevron Refinery through a contract with Chevron. The Fire Marshal reports to the Fire Chief.

Code Enforcement
There are performance objectives that have been established to provide direction to the code enforcement operations. These objectives use the type of occupancy to determine the frequency of fire safety inspections. As illustrated in the following table, the type of occupancy determines the frequency of fire safety inspections.

Occupancy / Risk Classification Occupancy Type Inspection Frequency State Mandated Inspections –
Use Groups A, I, F, E, Daycare
Places of Assembly, Hospitals, Assisted
Living Facilities, Residential Care, and
Educational Occupancies.

Annually
Fire Prevention Inspections –
Use Groups R and H
Hotels, Motels, Boarding Houses,
Apartment Houses, Dormitories, and High
Hazard Occupancies.

Annually
Engine Company Inspections –
Use Groups M and R
Mercantile Stores, Banks, Retail Sales, and
Business Offices, Low Risk Apartments Annually
All the properties have been established as annual inspections, Fire Prevention staff handle all the inspections with the exception of the Mercantile Use Group and lower risk 743
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 68
apartment buildings that are performed by the engine companies. The following table illustrates the workload for the Fire Prevention staff.

Occupancy Type Number of Occupancies Target per Staff Staff Needed High Risk 566 600 0.9
Moderate Risk 1,160 600 1.9
Follow-Up Inspections 863 1,000 0.9
Total Inspections 2,589 3.7
For follow-up inspections, it is estimated that half of the occupancies inspected will have code violations that will require a follow-up inspection. These inspections are targeted as only the violations are to be reviewed so more can be completed. The current staffing for the fire safety inspections section is 2 personnel for code enforcement activities outside the Chevron Refinery. To meet the established performance objectives, this section should have 4 personnel.

The Chevron Refinery has an inspector assigned to that facility. The mandatory inspections for that facility will need to be monitored to ensure those inspections are being completed as mandated by state regulations. In addition to the Chevron facility, many cities are grappling with the homeless issues and the lack of housing. In many jurisdictions small tent cities are popping up and creating fire safety issues in addition to other challenges. It is not unusual for Fire Prevention staff to become involved as a part of a city’s effort to address this issue that will also have an impact on the daily activities of the Fire Prevention Division. As this challenge grows, the staffing for a Fire Prevention Division may need to be increased to handle the influx of the homeless.

Recommendations:

Increase the staffing for code enforcement activities from 3 2 personnel to 4 personnel and continue to monitor code enforcement activities to address the staffing needs related to fire safety inspections, fire investigations, and other challenges faced by the city.

Public Education
Public education is a key component of the Community Risk Reduction process. Through this process fire data is collected and used to target audiences within the community about specific fire related issues. Through these education efforts, the fire problem can be reduced.

Within the city there is no public education program or staff to organize or manage such a program. Many cities utilize civilian personnel to deliver the message to the public.

Adding a civilian public educator would allow the current staff to concentrate their efforts 744
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 69
on the technical inspections and code enforcement aspects of the Fire Prevention Division. In addition, the wildland fire threat is another area the public educator could be utilized to provide information to the public.

Recommendation
Utilize civilian personnel to provide public education and increase the exposure of fire safety education to the school aged children and targeted audiences in support of Community Risk Reduction principles.

Fire Investigations
Fire investigations are typically handled by the Fire Prevention Division. In 2021 there were 38 fire investigations in the city. The following table provides some context to fire investigations in terms of time spent to complete an investigation.

Target Hours per Investigation
Fire Investigations
Incendiary 80
Accidental 10
Undetermined 10
Vehicle Fire Investigations
Vehicle incendiary 30
Accidental/Undetermined 5
It should be noted the target hours for an incendiary fire investigation is not necessarily for an investigator but rather for the investigation itself meaning some of those hours are attributable to evidence collection and report writing.

Based on the 38 investigations in 2021, that translates to approximately 3 investigations per month. Depending on the type of investigation and the time spent to complete the investigation, this will impede the ability of the inspectors to complete their assigned code enforcement activities.

Recommendations:

Monitor fire investigation workload to ensure code enforcement activities are not adversely affected by this collateral duty.

Wildland Urban Interface
Wildland fires continue to increase in number and intensity throughout the United States.

In Richmond, there is a significant wildland urban interface on the east side of the city 745
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 70
with the Wildcat Canyon Regional Park and the Kennedy Grove Regional Recreation area.

These two areas are adjacent to a larger area that includes Briones Regional Park.

Mitigation is the largest component of any strategy to minimize the threat and reduction of damage. The National Cohesive Wildland Fire Management Strategy, a collaboration between the Department of Interior and the Department of Agriculture, is one such document that highlights the effective use of mitigation. Fire Adapted Communities is another resource for information and programs for the mitigation efforts in the wildland fire arena. Mitigation efforts begin with the individual homes and the creation of defensible spaces around the structures on the property. In large part this involves education of the homeowner and an inspection of the property to assist the homeowner to become firesafe. Other mitigation efforts are more regional in nature to include clearing of debris, prescribed burns, and other methods to reduce the fuel.

The current program in Richmond uses fire prevention personnel to provide homeowner assessments and other mitigation efforts. There are approximately 4,300 defensible space inspections to be completed on an annual basis. Staffing a Fire Adaptive Community Coordinator would allow for an improved defensible space inspection program. This civilian position would also work in conjunction with the public education specialist to improve the communications with the homeowners and neighborhood associations.

Recommendation
Establish a Fire Adaptive Community Coordinator civilian position, in the next 12 to 24 months, to handle the defensible space inspections and create proactive programs increasing education efforts.

Training and Education
Training and education are considered a major function in a fire department as it is critical for personnel to maintain perishable skills and become proficient to handle low frequency – high consequence events. In Richmond this division is responsible for continuing education to the existing workforce. Training programs offered by the Training Division include fire suppression, emergency medical care, hazardous materials containment and recovery, and technical rescue. There is a Battalion Chief that provides training and education services to the fire department. This position is currently vacant, so the Deputy Fire Chief is managing the programming.
2018 2019 2020 2021
Total Staff-Hours 15,038.0 11,094.0 23,328.0 11,239.0
746
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 71
As illustrated 11,239 man-hours were expended for training and education in 2021, an average of approximately 148 hours per person based on 76 personnel records. Hands on training supplemented by online training platforms are both being utilized.

Without the Battalion Chief, the Deputy Chief must directly oversee the training function as well as the daily operations of the department. At the time of this report, there is an active recruitment process to fill the position. Filling this position is essential for the continued success of the personnel and fire department.

Emergency Management
Emergency Management essentially contains four phases with each phase containing individual processes or phases.

As shown the four phases are preparedness, response, recovery, and mitigation. • The purpose of mitigation efforts is to reduce or eliminate the impact from any potential hazards.
• The preparedness phase is building the capacity and capabilities of the County to manage an event or disaster.
• Responding to an event or disaster is the act of mitigating the negative effects of the event or disaster. This can be in the form of a single fire department or health department to several agencies working together.
• Recovery from a large-scale event or disaster can take a considerable amount of time to complete. The complexity of the community involved, and the extent of the damage will challenge the community.
747
Fire Department Services Review Richmond, CA
Matrix Consulting Group 72
Each phase relies on the other to be successful. The response phase is only successful if the plans were appropriately written and tested. Recovery in the aftermath is successful if the continuity of operations plans were successfully completed and tested. The response to an event is successful if the members of the public are appropriately educated. With emergency management organizations being a clearinghouse agency, they need to be resources for planning, training, education, mitigation, and recovery efforts. Moreover, there are grant funds available for mitigation projects and for building capacity to handle the emergency event that may occur.

Richmond has a dedicated position for the emergency management role; however, it is not filled and the responsibility for these activities shifts to the Fire Chief. The detail required of these plans and activities require a concentrated effort on the part of the emergency management staff. As well, there are likely grant funds that are available to assist the city that are not being acquired due to a lack of focus in this arena. For example, with a Presidential Disaster Declaration in the State of California there are grant funds that become available to any jurisdiction for mitigation projects provided the mitigation plan is up to date and approved by FEMA. At the time of this report, there is an active recruitment process to fill the position. It is imperative the emergency management section be staffed to not only ensure the city is prepared for a large-scale emergency but also to manage any grant funds that may become available. 748