Richmond City Council
June 25, 2024

June 25, 2024
City Council
DATE: June 25, 2024
TO: Mayor Martinez and Members of the City Council
FROM: Council Member Bana
Subject: Request a presentation from the Fire Department on the Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP).

FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no financial impact related to receiving a report.

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

No previous action

STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:

Request a presentation from the Fire Department on the
Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP).

RECOMMENDED ACTION: REQUEST a presentation from the Fire Department on the Community Wildfire Protection Plan -
Councilmember Soheila Bana (510-672-6503).

AGENDA
REPORT
217

June 25, 2024
DISCUSSION:

Council Member Bana has extended an invitation to the Fire Chief to present at a City Council meeting regarding the Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP), with the aim of enhancing public awareness about its recommendations. Recent events, including the local 5-acre fire at Blum Drive and Richmond Parkway, and the ongoing 15,000-acre fire near Tracy, underscore the critical need for such public education initiatives.

If the City Council approves the request for a presentation, the Fire Department will return to the City Council to present the CWPP at the September 24, 2024, City Council Meeting unless otherwise notified.

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:

None
218

June 25, 2024
Department
DATE: June 25, 2024
TO: Mayor Martinez and Members of the City Council
FROM: LaShonda White, Deputy City Manager – Community
Services
Sam Vaughn, Deputy Director of Community Services –
Office of Neighborhood Safety
Michael Romero, Program Manager of Community Crisis
Response
Subject: Establishment of a Community Crisis Response Program Community Advisory Board and Proposed Bylaws
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no financial impact.

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

July 26, 2022
September 12, 2023

STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:

On September 12, 2023, City Council instructed City staff to work with the Reimagining Public Safety Community
Task Force (Task Force) to help develop the proposal for the structure of the Community Crisis Response Program
(CCRP) Community Advisory Board (CAB), including its
purpose, powers, and composition. The Task Force
drafted and is recommending approval of the CCRP CAB
bylaws.

RECOMMENDED ACTION: APPROVE the establishment of a Community Crisis Response Program Community Advisory Board, and the
proposed bylaws drafted and recommended by the
Reimagining Public Safety Community Task Force –
Community Services Department (LaShonda White 510-
620-6512/Sam Vaughn 510-620-5404).

AGENDA
REPORT
219

June 25, 2024
DISCUSSION:

The formation of the Community Crisis Response Program (CCRP) began in November 2020, emerging from discussions within the Reimagining Public Safety Task Force (Task Force). Through a series of Task Force community roundtable forums, subcommittee meetings, and subsequent approvals by City Council in the Fall of 2021.

City staff issued a Request for Proposal in early 2022 leading to the approval of a contract with Urban Strategies Council (USC) to facilitate the CCRP's implementation, including the establishment of a Community Advisory Board (CAB).

On July 8, 2023, a draft report from USC on the Implementation of the Community Crisis Response Program in Richmond was shared with Task Force members and discussed at meetings on July 12, 2023, and August 23, 2023. At the special meeting on August 30, 2023, the members voted to recommend to the City Council that CCRP be implemented within a new or existing department within the City of Richmond.

On September 12, 2023, the City Council voted to place CCRP under the leadership of the Office of Neighborhood Safety (ONS). The City Council also directed staff to return in November with more specific guidelines for launching the program, begin recruitment to staff the program by December 15, 2023, and launch the program by August 2024.

Lastly, the City Council instructed City staff to work with the Task Force to help develop the proposal for the structure of the CCRP Community Advisory Board (CAB), including purpose, powers, and composition.

At the September 27, 2023, and October 25, 2023, Task Force meetings, members began discussing a proposal for the purpose, powers, and composition of the CAB and subsequently, a working group was formed. The working group, which included Task Force members Marisol Cantú, Jamin Pursell, Kristin Kilian-Lobos, and Steve Bischoff, drafted a proposal in advance of the November 29, 2023, special meeting of the Task Force. However, action was not taken by the Task Force until the March 27, 2024, meeting, where a motion was made to submit to the City Attorney’s Office draft bylaws for review and subsequent City Council approval.

The Task Force was asked to come up with bylaws for the CCRP Community Advisory Board Working Group. The stated purpose of the CAB is to provide a method for the public to be able to interact with a standard board, and to be integrated into the City to offer a method where residents could be informed and have their complaints heard. The CAB’s bylaws were modeled closely to other City of Richmond boards and commissions. The committee understood that the CAB would not do CCRP’s work but would support and enhance it.

City staff have been working diligently to launch the CCRP based on City Council direction. Most recently, Michael Romero, a professional with more than 20 years of mental health and crisis intervention experience, started with the City of Richmond as its CCRP Program Manager on May 16, 2024. Looking ahead, one of the immediate objectives for the CCRP is to establish a Community Advisory Board, accept the 220

June 25, 2024
proposed bylaws drafted and recommended by the Reimagining Public Safety Task Force, and appoint members to fill the CAB seats.

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:

Attachment 1 – [DRAFT] Community Crisis Response Program Community Advisory Board (CAB) Bylaws.
221
I. Creation and Composition of the Board 1
A. Establishment of the CCRP Community Advisory Board (CAB) 1 B. Composition of the Community Advisory Board (CAB) 2
C. Formation in Advance of Implementation 3
II. Appointment and Qualifications of Members. 3
III. Compensation 4
IV. Terms of Office. 4
V. Absence from Meetings 4
VI. Officers 4
VII. Powers and Duties 5
A. Community Engagement and Education 5
B. Community Feedback and Complaint Mechanisms 5
C. Volunteer Coordination and Community Networks 6
D. Program Development and Evaluation 6
E. Resource Management and Reporting 7
VIII. Meetings 7
IX. Rules and Records 8
I. Creation and Composition of the Board
A. Establishment of the CCRP Community Advisory Board (CAB)

1. Purpose: An independent and committed Community Advisory Board (CAB) is a critical element in ensuring the successful and accountable operation of the Richmond Community Crisis Response Program (CCRP). The CAB's primary purpose is to promote and maintain community confidence, ensure the program’s fidelity to its core values and program’s transparency, and provide proactive opportunities to address programmatic challenges that may arise during the program's data-driven implementation and operation.

2. Oversight and Support: The CAB is established to provide oversight and support for the CCRP. It shall work closely with the program, ensuring its alignment with community needs and values while holding it accountable for its actions and outcomes. It shall provide input and support in formulating annual and long-term goals.

3. Access to Information: The CAB shall have access to program information and data, including anonymized program data related to 222
CCRP activities. This access is essential to facilitate informed decisionmaking and to evaluate the program's impact effectively.

4. Transparency: The CAB shall operate with a commitment to transparency. Meetings, reports, complaints, and data shall be made anonymous and public-facing to the extent possible, except for information containing identifying details. Transparency is a crucial mechanism to build trust in the CAB and to address any concerns regarding representation or the selection process for the board.

B. Composition of the Community Advisory Board (CAB)

1. Membership Selection: The CAB shall be composed of community members who are representative of the diverse demographics, backgrounds, and perspectives within the Richmond community. The membership shall comprise community members who have been impacted economically, legally, familial, or professionals and workers within the community support system. The Membership selection shall be conducted through a transparent and inclusive process, which may include open applications, interviews, and community input to ensure broad representation.

2. Independence: CAB members shall be independent and not direct employees or contractors with the City of Richmond, the CCRP, or any other organization that might create conflicts of interest. This independence is crucial to ensure unbiased oversight and support. Each CAB member shall complete an economic statement of interest.

3. Diversity: The CAB shall strive for diversity in its composition, including but not limited to age, gender, race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and community affiliations. We aim to include members of impacted communities as the primary makeup of this board. This diversity will ensure that the board reflects the entire Richmond community.

4. Commitment: Members of the CAB shall demonstrate a solid commitment to the well-being and betterment of the Richmond community. Their dedication to the CCRP goals, mission, values, and objectives is essential to fulfill their responsibilities effectively.
223
C. Formation in Advance of Implementation

1. Pre-Implementation Formation: The CAB shall be formed 2-3 months prior to the launch of the CCRP. This proactive approach ensures that there is a structured mechanism for community engagement in the decision-making process leading up to program implementation. This ensures the CAB will be able to meet quorum prior to program launch.

2. Decision-Making and Input: The CAB shall actively participate in discussions and decision-making processes related to the development, design, operational aspects, and organizational expansion of the CCRP based on the Council’s adoption of the USC report in September 2022 and the work done by the Reimagining Public Community Safety Taskforce. Their input and recommendations shall be considered during the planning stages/phases to align the program with community expectations.

3. Early Community Engagement: By creating the CAB in advance, the community has an opportunity to engage early in the process, voice concerns, and shape the program's direction to meet its needs effectively.

The board shall promote the CCRP through educational forums prior to the launch date.

In conclusion, the establishment of an independent and diverse Community Advisory Board is essential for the success of the Richmond Community Crisis Response Program. This will play a pivotal role in fostering community confidence, addressing challenges, and ensuring the program's transparency and accountability. In forming the board, the program demonstrates its commitment to community engagement and responsiveness from the very beginning.

II. Appointment and Qualifications of Members
A. The Board shall consist of at least nine (9) and at most thirteen (13) members, maintaining a body at an odd number, who shall not be officers or employees of the City of Richmond and who shall be appointed by the Mayor. The Mayor shall endeavor to appoint individuals representing diverse social, economic, and political interests and shall confer with the City Council concerning all appointments. All members of the Advisory Board shall live or work or can display deep connections within the Richmond Community. All vacancies on the 224
Advisory Board shall be filled by appointment by the Mayor for the unexpired period.

B. A quorum shall consist of a majority of the members of the Board. Whenever a quorum attends any meeting of the Board, the concurrence of a majority of the board present at such meeting shall be necessary to constitute an act of the Board.

III. Compensation
A. Members of the Advisory Board shall serve without compensation, provided that the City Council may authorize the reimbursement of reasonable expenses incurred by the members in the performance of their duties.

IV. Terms of Office
A. The term of each member of the Advisory Board shall be for three (3) years; provided, however, that of the members first appointed after the effective date of this section, four shall be appointed to serve for one year, four shall be appointed to serve for two years, and five shall be appointed to serve for three years as determined by lots by such members at the first regularly scheduled meeting following the adoption of this chapter. Each member shall continue to serve in such capacity until the member's successor has been duly appointed and is acting.

V. Absence from Meetings
A. The absence of any member of the Advisory Board from more than three regularly scheduled meetings of the Advisory Board within any twelveconsecutive-month period, and who fails to provide an excuse that is determined to be reasonable, shall constitute an automatic resignation from the Commission.

Such resignation shall not, however, disqualify an individual from subsequently being appointed to the same or any other city committee, board, or commission.

In the event of any such resignation, the vacancy shall be filled by appointment for the unexpired portion of the term of the appointee's predecessor in the manner prescribed in Section 3.54.020.
225
VI. Officers
A. The Advisory Board shall elect from among its members a chairperson and a vice chairperson who shall serve in such capacities for one year or until the successors are duly elected. In case of a vacancy in either of these positions, the Advisory Board shall elect a successor who shall serve the unexpired balance of the predecessor's term.

VII. Powers and Duties
A. Community Engagement and Education

1. Community Awareness, Engagement, and Education: The City Advisory Board will actively engage with the Richmond community through public events, listening sessions, community workshops, and outreach efforts to raise awareness about the (CCRP) and its objectives and services.

Furthermore, the Board will help implement educational outreach plans and initiatives, including disseminating informational materials and conducting community training sessions to inform the community about the CCRP's mission, functions, and available resources. Board members will also serve as community ambassadors for the program, fostering connections and promoting community understanding.

2. Programs and Promote Positive Relations: The Board is responsible for advising and promoting programs that foster positive community relations.

This includes initiatives aimed at preventing community conflicts, programmatic challenges, or city barriers by promoting inclusivity and strengthening community relationships and networks. This includes promoting language accessibility and culturally responsive programming.

The Board shall ensure that CCRP services are accessible to all community members, including those from diverse linguistic and cultural backgrounds. This may involve promoting accessibility and advocating for translation & interpretation services, culturally sensitive outreach, and engagement strategies.

3. Whenever a board member communicates with the news media or others, or appears at a public hearing or before another City Agency or Department to discuss existing or proposed legislation or policy, the board member shall make every reasonable effort to specify that the member is expressing a personal opinion, view or position, unless speaking on a topic the full board has approved.
226
B. Community Feedback and Complaint Mechanisms

1. Community Forum for Community Concerns: The Board shall establish and maintain a community forum for community members to raise substantive concerns, offer suggestions, and share feedback related to the CCRP's operations. This forum will serve as a platform for open dialogue and problem-solving.

2. Website for Complaints Outside of the Board: The Board shall ensure there is a dedicated section and survey on the CCRP website where community members can submit complaints, report incidents, or seek assistance outside of the formal community forum. The Board will regularly review community feedback submitted through the CCRP website. This will encourage community members to continually weigh in on programmatic goals.

C. Volunteer Coordination and Community Networks

1. Volunteerism: The CAB shall promote opportunities for volunteerism with the CCRP. The Board shall give recommendations on volunteer opportunities and outreach events to recruit volunteers and collect volunteer feedback. The Board shall assist CCRP staff in training and engaging community volunteers to support CCRP activities.

2. Insight into Community Networks and Communications: The Board members, with their deep community connections, shall provide valuable insights into community networks and offer recommendations on how to enhance communication and engagement with local community members.

D. Program Development and Evaluation

1. Design and Implementation of CCRP: The Board shall actively support the design and implementation of CCRP initiatives, ensuring they align with community needs and values. This includes feedback on expectations for and needs from the crisis response team, proposed call categories and phone access points, exclusionary response criteria, team composition, and overall organizational expansion.
227

2. Training Recommendations: The Board shall provide recommendations to maintain alignment with California and National standards for the training and professional development of CCRP staff to enhance their capacity to respond effectively to community crises. The board shall give input on the program’s training curriculum, including cultural and population-specific training.

3. Review and Evaluate Policies, Practices, and Procedures: The Board shall review regular internal assessments of CCRP policies, practices, and procedures to identify areas for improvement and ensure alignment with the program's objectives, goals, and expansion plans. The Board shall work collaboratively with staff to research national best practices, trends, and policies to inform the CCRP.

E. Resource Management and Reporting

1. Budget Oversight: The Board is responsible for overseeing the budget allocated to the CCRP. This includes reviewing financial reports, making budget recommendations, and ensuring that resources are allocated efficiently to support the program's goals.

2. Hiring Panels: The Board shall review job descriptions and participate in hiring panels for CCRP leadership. The Board shall designate a CAB member to be involved in selecting and approving CCRP leadership. This ensures that hiring decisions align with the program's mission and values.

3. Referral Network and Lists: The Board shall recommend community resources and service providers to the CCRP to facilitate referrals for individuals in crisis. This list of community resources will be accessible to the public via the CCRP website.

4. Review Success Metrics and Evaluations: The Board shall regularly review success metrics and evaluation reports from staff, encompassing qualitative and quantitative data, to measure the program's impact and make recommendations for necessary adjustments. The Board members shall be part of the ongoing evaluations and audits.

5. Reporting to Council: The Board shall provide quarterly reports and, when deemed necessary, detail the CCRP's progress, challenges, and recommendations for improvement to the City Council.
228
These powers and duties shall guide the City Advisory Board's actions and responsibilities in overseeing the Richmond Community Crisis Response Program. The Board members will work collectively to fulfill these functions, ensuring the program's effectiveness in serving the Richmond community.

VIII. Meetings
A. The Advisory Board shall hold its first meeting within thirty days after all of its members have been appointed. At such meetings, the Advisory Board shall fix the time and place of regular meetings of the Commission, which shall not be less frequent than once each month. All meetings of the Advisory Board shall be open to the public and in accordance with the City of Richmond Boards, Commissions, and Committees Handbook.

IX. Rules and Records
A. The Advisory Board shall, in consultation with the City Manager and with the approval of the City Council, adopt rules for the transaction of business of the Commission, which rules shall, among other things, include the manner of calling and giving notice of special meetings and hearings and the appointment and powers of standing subcommittees. Said standing subcommittees may be formed to work on various topics within the scope of police activities. The Advisory Board shall keep records of its resolutions, rules, transactions, motions, and orders in accordance with the City of Richmond Boards, Commissions, and Committees Handbook.
229

June 25, 2024
City Manager's Office
DATE: June 18, 2024
TO: Mayor Martinez and Members of the City Council
FROM: Patrick Seals, Administrative Chief
Nicholas Delgado, Associate Management Analyst
Subject: FY 2024-2025 Richmond Environmental and Community Investment Agreement (ECIA) Community Grant Program
Grant Awardee Recommendation
FINANCIAL IMPACT: A total of $606,000 is allocated for the FY 2024-2025 grant cycle (11771018-400201 2A111)

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

December 19, 2023

STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:

On July 29, 2014, the City and Chevron Products Company entered into the initial Chevron Modernization Project
Environmental and Community Investment Agreement
(ECIA). Under the ECIA, a competitive grant program was established to fund community programs focused on
community, youth, and youth sports. Staff is bringing forth a subsequent funding recommendation from the ECIA
Grant Review Committee for the FY 2024-2025 Richmond
ECIA Community Grant Program for final review and
approval by the City Council.

RECOMMENDED ACTION: APPROVE a recommendation from the Environmental & Community Investment Agreement (ECIA) Grant Review
Committee for Fiscal Year 2024-2025 grant awards to 16
organizations in an amount not to exceed $491,733;
ADOPT a resolution; and AUTHORIZE the city manager
to negotiate and execute Grant Service Agreements with
approved grantees – City Manager’s Office (Patrick
Seals/Nicholas Delgado 510-620-6512).

AGENDA
REPORT
230

June 25, 2024
DISCUSSION:

Background
The ECIA provides $90 million in revenue to Richmond over a 10-year period. From this total, $6 million is allocated to fund the competitive grant program.

The FY 2024-2025 grant cycle is allocated in the following ways:

Grant Award
Options
Eligibility Award Decision
Made By
Award Range Total Award
Amount
1 Competitive
Grant Awards
(Relevant for this
Staff Report)
Non-profit organizations
reporting gross receipts of
equal to or less than
$50,000 annually (990N)
City Council
(Recommendations
made by ECIA
Review Committee)
$5,000 - $50,000 $500,000
2 Competitive
Grant Awards
(Relevant for this
Staff Report)
Non-profit organizations
reporting gross receipts of
more than $50,000
annually (990/Audited
Financials)
City Council
(Recommendations
made by ECIA
Review Committee)
3 City Council
Approved
Awards
Organizations that applied
for the ECIA Grant
(categories 1 and 2) but
where not recommended
for funding
City Council
Amounts based
on Council
discretion
$ 56,000
4 Community
Services MiniGrant Awards
Non-profit organizations
with 501(c)(3) tax status
with programming
connected to the
Community Services
Department
Community
Services
Department Up to $5,000 $ 50,000
TOTAL $606,000
On December 19, 2023, the City Council approved the Fiscal Year (FY) 2024-2025 Environmental and Community Investment Agreement (ECIA) competitive grant program annual allocation of $606,000 and authorized the release of the Request for Application and Guidelines (Attachment 1) as recommended by the City Council ad hoc committee (ad hoc committee) consisting of Councilmembers Bana, Zepeda, and Willis.

Outreach and Technical Support
Information about the FY 2024-2025 ECIA grant cycle was posted to the City’s website, presented in the City Manager’s Weekly Report, and emailed through various listservs to inform as many organizations as possible of the ECIA grant. 231

June 25, 2024
Also, City staff members hosted two (2) workshops that focused on completing the ECIA grant application. All grant-related materials and video-recorded training sessions were posted on the City’s ECIA grant webpage.

Evaluation Process
The ECIA grant application was released on December 22, 2023, and applications were due on February 9, 2024. A total of 64 grant applications were received of which 60 eligible applications were submitted to the ECIA Grant Review Committee (Committee) for evaluation and scoring in April 2024. The 60 eligible applications equated to over $2 million in award requests. All applications were evaluated and rated independently by each Committee member using the criteria listed below.  Total Points Available: 110 Points
o Program/Project Description and Concept (Total 40 points) o Impact and Goals (Total 40 points)
o Financial Viability (Total 20 points)
o Richmond-based (10 extra points)
Committee members submitted their scores and evaluations to City staff members in May 2024. City staff members totaled and averaged the scores for each application and generated rankings (a ranking of 1 denoting the highest average score overall, a ranking of 2 denoting the second highest average score overall, etc.). The Committee met on June 7, 2024, to discuss the rankings and propose funding recommendations for City Council’s approval (Attachment 2 – FY 2024-2025 ECIA Grant Evaluation Matrix and Ranking Sheet).

FY 2024-2025 ECIA Grant Award Recommendations
The Committee is recommending that the following 16 organizations receive a total of $491,733 in funding at the “ECIA Committee Recommendation” level for the FY 2023- 2024 grant cycle for Category 1 ($324,106) and Category 2 ($167,627). 232

June 25, 2024
Category 1 (990N) Recommendations
Organizations with gross receipts less than $50,000
Organization Name Project Titles Requested
Amount
ECIA Committee
Recommendation
STEMSail Richmond Science Sailing After
School
$6,300 $6,300
East Bay Pickleball
Association
BTA Park LIGHTS & WCSYC
Program
$47,806 $47,806
Touch of New Life Youth Public Safety Academy $50,000 $50,000 Center for Lao Studies Lao Arts & Culture Program $25,000 $25,000 Khmu National
Federation Inc.

Cultural Healing Program $50,000 $50,000
Black Neighborhood Youth Empowerment Program $50,000 $50,000 Oshiana Unique
Thompkins Foundation
R.O.M. Joy Club $20,000 $20,000
1Hundred Years
Enterprise Foundation
Credible Messengers $50,000 $50,000
Kings Accountability
Group Inc.

Into Action Youth Mentoring $50,000 $25,000
TOTAL $349,106 $324,106
Category 2 (990) Recommendations
Organizations with gross receipts greater than $50,000
Organization Name Project Titles Requested
Amount
ECIA Committee
Recommendation
Practice Space* Speech and Debate Program $9,000 $9,000 Greater Richmond
Interfaith Program*
GRIP Playground Refurbishment $50,000 $25,000
East Bay Center for the
Performing Arts*
Cross Cultural Arts Education for
Richmond Students
$50,000 $25,000
Watershed Project* Richmond Watershed
Connections
$50,000 $25,000
Earth Team Sustainable Youth Internships $42,627 $42,627 233

June 25, 2024
Organization Name Project Titles Requested
Amount
ECIA Committee
Recommendation
Latina Center* Growing Young Latin Future
Leaders
$50,000 $16,000
West County Salesian
Youth Club
West County Youth Sports
Enrichment Initiative
$50,000 $25,000
TOTAL $301,627 $167,627
*Organizations who reported annual budgets over $750,000 (per last completed 990s or audited financials).

Next Steps
After approval of the grant award recommendations by City Council, City staff members will enter into grant agreements with awardees. City staff members will manage the contract processes which include, but are not limited to, entering into contracts with grantees, contract administration, serving as a point of contact for all grantees, conducting site visits, reviewing progress reports, and reviewing and approving invoices.

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:

Attachment 1 – FY 2024-2025 ECIA Grant Application
Attachment 2 – FY 2024-2025 ECIA Grant Guidelines
Attachment 3 – FY 2024-2025 ECIA Grant Program Evaluation Matrix and Ranking (Category 1 - 990N and Category 2 - 990/Audited Financials) Attachment 4 – Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to enter into Grant Service Agreements with the FY 2024-2025 ECIA Grant Awardees
234
APPLICATION DEADLINE: Friday, February 9, 2024, NO LATER THAN 11:59 p.m.

SECTION I – ORGANIZATION INFORMATION
Community-Based Organization Information (Applicant Information):

Fiscal Sponsor (Organization with 501(c)(3) tax status:

Name of Organization:

Click here to enter text.

Executive Director Name:

Click here to enter text.

Organization Address:

Click here to enter text.

Project Manager Name (primary contact for
the grant):

Click here to enter text.

Project Manager Title:

Click here to enter text.

Phone Number:

Click here to enter text.

Email Address:

Click here to enter text.

Program/Project Budget:

Program/Project Budget:
$ Click here to enter text.

Amount of Grant Funds requested:
$ Click here to enter text.

Organizational Budget:
$ Click here to enter text.

Fiscal-Sponsor Budget (If applicable):
$ Click here to enter text.

Program/Project:

Program/Project Title: Click here to enter text.

Program Project Summary (50-word limit): Click here to enter text. % of Richmond Residents Served by Your Proposed Program/Project?: Click here to enter text.

Will Your Program or Project Serve Youth (through age 21)?: Click here to select “Yes” or “No” Please select one (1) category that BEST describes the type of project or program that your organization plans to provide with the requested grant funds from the drop-down list:

CLICK HERE and Select the program category from the drop-down. - 1-
FY 2024-25 ECIA Grant Application
Name of Organization:

Click here to enter text.

Executive Director Name:

Click here to enter text.

Organization Address
Click here to enter text.

Project Manager Name (primary contact for
the grant):

Click here to enter text.

Project Manager Title:

Click here to enter text.

Email Address:

Click here to enter text.

Phone Number:

Click here to enter text.
235
SECTION 2 – PROGRAM/PROJECT DESCRIPTION
a. Provide information about your organization (e.g. number of years in operation, description of services provided and the population served).

Click here to enter text.
b. Describe in detail the program or project your organization is proposing to implement with the grant funds. Clearly list the major components or aspects of your program or project.

Click here to enter text.
c. Provide a timeline for project implementation using the template below. Include specific tasks/activities that will be accomplished within each quarter.

Task/Activities Month
1 st Term (July 1, 2024 – December 31, 2024)
Click here to list, bullet, or number entries. Click here to list corresponding dates.
2 nd Term (January 1, 2025 – June 30, 2025)
Click here to list, bullet, or number entries. Click here to list corresponding dates.
d. List the staff members responsible for the implementation of the program or project. Briefly describe the staff’s experience working on the proposed program/project and/or similar projects. Include résumés or provide descriptions of work experience with each copy of the application.

Click here to enter text.
e. If you plan to collaborate with other entities (i.e. non-profits, governmental entities, private entities) to implement your program or project, please complete the table below.

Note: A letter of collaboration must be included as a part of your application ONLY IF your organization plans to partner with a government entity(ies) (e.g. city, state, county, school district, etc.).

Partner Specific Role:

Click here to enter text. Click here to enter text.

Click here to enter text. Click here to enter text.
- 2-
FY 2024-25 ECIA Grant Application 236
SECTION 3 – PROJECT IMPACT AND GOALS
a. Describe the target population and geographic area that your organization plans to serve with the grant funds and what impact the proposed program or project will have on the target population.

Click here to enter text.
b. List the number of individuals that will be served as a result of your program or project.

Total Number of Individuals Served by
Proposed ECIA Funded Program or
Project
Total Number of Richmond Residents
Served by Proposed ECIA Funded
Program or Project
Click here to enter text. Click here to enter text.
c. List the major program or project goal(s) and how your organization will measure if you reach your desired goal. The goal should be measurable and data-driven. There should be at least one (1) expected outcome per major program or project component.

Major Program
Component(s)
Major Program
Outcome(s)
Indicator/
Measurement
Goal Evaluation
Method
Click here to enter text. Click here to enter
text.

Click here to
enter text.

Click
here.

Click here to enter
text.

Click here to enter text. Click here to enter
text.

Click here to
enter text.

Click
here.

Click here to enter
text.
d. How will your organization assess or gauge the success of your program/project at its completion?
Click here to enter text.
e. How do you plan to sustain the program or project after the grant funds are expended? Click here to enter text.

SECTION 4 – FINANCIAL VIABILITY
a. Attach your organizational budget to each copy of the application. The organizational budget can be submitted in any format as long as it shows revenue and expenditures for your organization’s current operating year.
b. Complete the program budget table using the provided MS Word or MS Excel template to complete the table.
- 3-
FY 2024-25 ECIA Grant Application 237
FY 2024-25 ECIA GRANT APPLICATION SUBMISSION ACKNOWLEDGMENT This page should be included in your application packet. It will not count toward your page limit.

By submitting this application and the supporting application materials, you agree that:
● You are an Officer on the Board of Directors of the organization submitting the grant application
● You have thoroughly read and understand the grant program guidelines and application questions and City of Richmond requirements (business license, insurance, and grant agreement)
● All questions contained in the application have been answered and the following required documents are included as part of our application packet:
☐Completed application (all sections completed and questions answered, including resumes)
☐Organizational budget
☐Proof of 501(c)(3) status (Non-Profit Status Determination letter from the Internal Revenue Service)
☐Financial statements – most recent (current) audited financials or Internal Revenue Service Form 990 or 990-N. Reviewed or compiled annual financial statements are allowable for faith-based organizations.
☐List of Board of Directors and their affiliations
☐Letter describing and authorizing collaboration with a governmental entity(ies), if applicable
☐Signed agreement between the organization and the fiscal sponsor, if applicable ● Your organization will obtain comprehensive background checks and/or fingerprinting of all employees and/or volunteers.
● Volunteers that work directly with youth or such other vulnerable populations. (For applicable organizations requesting funds to support an existing or new youth program and/or program that works with other vulnerable populations.) ● To the best of your knowledge, the information included as part of this application is true and accurate
------------------------------------------
Click here to enter Organization Name. Click here to enter a date from drop-down.

Click here to enter Name of Board Officer. Click here to enter Title of Board Officer.

Signature – Officer of Board
- 4-
FY 2024-25 ECIA Grant Application 238
SECTION 4 – FINANCIAL VIABILITY
a. Total organization budget (based on prior year’s 990 or audited financials): Click here to enter Organizational Budget.
b. Include your organizational budget to each copy of the application c. Complete the budget template below. If needed, add rows and provide as much detail as possible in the revenue and expenditure sections.
● Revenue section: List all of the revenue sources that will fund your proposed program (e.g. grants, program fees, in-kind donations) and state those sources are pending and/or approved. Include your organization’s ECIA request. ● Expenditures: List, with as much detail as possible, the expenditure categories (e.g. salaries, benefits, program supplies)
● The revenue total and the expenditure total in the “ECIA Request” column should match. The same is true for the “Project Budget” column.

For example, if your organization is requesting a total of $10,000 from the ECIA grant program, that amount should be listed in the “Revenue” section of the budget table. You would then need to complete the “Expenditure” section of the budget table, making sure that the total amount of the expenditures is also equal to $10,000 (the total amount of the revenue requested).
● Use the “Budget Narrative” section to justify and explain the expenditures outlined in your program budget table.

Program Budget Table
ECIA Grant Application – Budget Table

REVENUE
Category
(List Funding Sources)
ECIA Request Project Budget Revenue Status
(Approved/Pending)
Revenue Total $ $

EXPENDITURES
Category ECIA Request Project Budget Budget Narrative
(if applicable)
Expenditure Total $ $
239
Guidelines -1- FY 2024-2025 ECIA Grant
FY 2024-2025

RICHMOND - ENVIRONMENTAL & COMMUNITY INVESTMENT

AGREEMENT (ECIA)

COMMUNITY GRANT PROGRAM GUIDELINES &

APPLICATION

REQUEST FOR APPLICATION (RFA)
All interested applicants should check the City’s ECIA website (www.ci.richmond.ca.us/ECIAgrants) to ensure that they receive any addendums to this RFA, emails or special announcements.

Application is due on Friday, February 9, 2024, at 11:59 p.m. (NO EXCEPTIONS) Materials must be submitted electronically to:
www.ci.richmond.ca.us/ECIAapplications
240
Guidelines -2- FY 2024-2025 ECIA Grant

RICHMOND - ECIA COMMUNITY GRANT PROGRAM
FY 2024-2025 GRANT GUIDELINES AND APPLICATION
Table of Contents
ECIA Background ........................................................................... 3 Eligibility Requirements................................................................... 4 Grant Award Amounts and Categories ........................................... 4 Eligible Uses of Grant Funds .......................................................... 5 Ineligible Uses of Grant Funds........................................................ 5 Fiscal Sponsorships........................................................................ 6 Collaborating Organizations............................................................ 7 Application Submission Requirements............................................ 7 Application Submission Details....................................................... 8 Payment Provisions ........................................................................ 8 Review Criteria ............................................................................... 8 Application Review and Selection Process..................................... 9 Application Deadline ..................................................................... 10 Late Application or Modification to Applications............................ 10 Applicant Assistance Prior to Due Date ........................................ 10 Schedule....................................................................................... 11 Questions or Addendums to the Applications ............................... 11 Grantee Requirements.................................................................. 11 City Staff Contact.......................................................................... 12 General Terms and Conditions ..................................................... 12 Exhibits ......................................................................................... 14 241
Guidelines -3- FY 2024-2025 ECIA Grant

RICHMOND - ECIA COMMUNITY GRANT PROGRAM
FY 2024-2025 GRANT APPLICATION GUIDELINES

ECIA BACKGROUND
On July 29, 2014, the Richmond City Council approved the Chevron Environmental and Community Investment Agreement (ECIA), which will invest $90 million dollars to the Richmond community over 10-years. The ECIA includes investments in community programs, a scholarship program, competitive community grants, community-based greenhouse gas reduction programs, and a photovoltaic solar farm.

The ECIA specifies the amount and disbursement timeline of Chevron’s funding obligation, as well as funding allocations over a ten-year period (beginning in 2016) for the following programs:
• Scholarship program - $35 million
• Electric City and Easy Go - $18 million
• Roof-top solar, energy retrofit, zoning ordinance update - $6.25 million • Job training program - $6 million
• Competitive grant program - $6 million
• Transportation and transit programs - $2.75 million
• Public safety programs - $2 million
• Urban Forestry - $2 million
• Free internet access - $1 million
• Climate Action Plan - $1 million
It is proposed that $606,000 is allocated for the FY 2024-25 grant cycle.

It is the goal of the Richmond City Council to provide opportunities for organizations with varying capacities and financial needs to have access to ECIA grant funds. ECIA grant funds are awarded on an annual basis and therefore, organizations should not become reliant on this funding source. All Richmond-serving non-profit organizations are eligible to apply for funding; however, in an attempt to fund a variety of organizations, the City Council would like to allocate the majority of the available grant funding to organizations that have smaller annual budgets, greater needs for capacity building and limited staffing, and that might not have access to other forms of funding.
242
Guidelines -4- FY 2024-2025 ECIA Grant

ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS
Organizations must meet the following conditions to be eligible to apply for a grant:
• Provide services focused on the community, youth and/or youth sports to Richmond and North Richmond residents
• Operate as a non-profit entity with 501(c)(3) tax status with current financial statements (i.e., Filed I.R.S. Form 990 or 990-N or current audited financials). Fiscal sponsors can be used.
• Provide services to Richmond residents (Richmond-serving)  A minimum of 80 percent of the organization’s proposed grant-funded programs/services must be provided to Richmond residents. If awarded an ECIA grant, grant funds can only be spent serving Richmond residents. • Note: Organizations that received an ECIA grant award of more than $10,000 during the previous (FY 2023-24) ECIA grant cycle are ineligible to apply in the current grant cycle (FY 2024-25).

GRANT AWARD AMOUNTS AND CATEGORIES
Grant allocation amount: The amount available for the FY 2024-2025 grant cycle (July 1, 2024 – June 30, 2025) is $606,000.

Minimum and maximum grant awards: The minimum grant award is $5,000. The maximum grant award is $50,000. The number of awards available will be determined based on the amount of each award.

Number of applications per grant cycle: Organizations may submit only one application per grant cycle.

Award categories: $606,000 available for grants is allocated over four different categories listed below. Categories 1 and 2 are relevant to this Request for Application:

Grant Award
Options
Eligibility Award Decision
Made By
Award Range Total Award
Amount
1 Competitive
Grant Awards
(Relevant for this
Application)
Non-profit organizations
reporting gross receipts of
less than $50,000
annually
City Council
(Recommendations
made by ECIA
Review Panel)
$10,000 -
$50,000
$500,000
See Special
Note Below
2 Competitive
Grant Awards
(Relevant for this
Application)
Non-profit organizations
reporting gross receipts of
more than $50,000
annually
City Council
(Recommendations
made by ECIA
Review Panel)
243
Guidelines -5- FY 2024-2025 ECIA Grant
3 City Council
Approved
Awards
Organizations that applied
for the ECIA Grant
(categories 1 and 2) but
were not recommended
for funding
City Council $10,000 $ 56,000
4 Community
Services MiniGrant Awards
Non-profit organizations
with 501(c)(3) tax status
with programming
connected to the
Community Services
Department
Community
Services
Department
Up to $10,000 $ 50,000
TOTAL $606,000
SPECIAL NOTE:
• A maximum of $100,000 in grant awards is available to organizations with annual budgets over $750,000 (per last completed 990s or audited financials).

ELIGIBLE USES OF GRANT FUNDS
Grants will be awarded to projects or programs in the following areas:
 Youth programs (through age 21)
 Youth sports programs (through age 21)
 Community-focused programs
*Youth-serving organizations are defined as those organizations where 80% of ECIA grant-funded programs/services will be provided to youth (birth through age 21) Examples of eligible projects or programs include but are not limited to:
• Youth enrichment projects
• Summer camps
• Youth sports programs
• Programs that support health and wellness and eliminate health disparities • Bike and pedestrian pathway enhancements and construction projects • Programs that support students and parents at Richmond schools • Service-learning programs
• Gardening and urban greening projects

INELIGIBLE USES OF GRANT FUNDS
Grant funds may not be used for the following reasons:
• Repayment of existing debt or pre-existing tax liens or obligations • Legal, loan, or bank fees
• Subsidization of existing contracts
244
Guidelines -6- FY 2024-2025 ECIA Grant
• Political campaigns or lobbying
• Advancement of certain sectarian, politically partisan, or religious projects (grant funds should be used for specific programs and not to advance the causes of any of the stated groups)
• Fundraisers or other events not open to the general public • A project or program which is clearly intended for commercial gain • A project or program that occurs before or after the grant award period • Support of individuals
• For businesses established for personal benefit or profit • To support annual fund drives
• To fund an agency’s deficit or endowment
• To repay loans
• Furniture
• Cell phones
• Bonuses
• For the direct support of religious activities. Secular activities offered to the Richmond community that is provided by religious organizations regardless of congregational membership or statements of belief may be eligible for grant funds.

FISCAL SPONSORSHIPS
What types of organizations should utilize a fiscal sponsor? • A non-governmental organization (sponsoree) that does not have 501(c)(3) tax status must utilize a fiscal sponsor to apply for this grant. It is the sole responsibility of the sponsoree to find an organization with 501(c)(3) tax status that is willing to serve as a fiscal sponsor.

What is fiscal sponsorship?
• Fiscal sponsorship allows organizations without 501(c)(3) tax status to apply for the ECIA grant, as well as other grants that require an organization to have such status. • A fiscal sponsorship agreement should be entered into between the sponsoree and an organization that has 501(c)(3) tax status.
• The fiscal sponsorship agreement allows the sponsoree to raise tax-deductible contributions through grants and individual donations.
• Tax-deductible funds are given to the fiscal sponsor and restricted to the use of the sponsoree.

How does a fiscal sponsorship work for the ECIA grant process?:
• The fiscal sponsor will serve as the applicant. Fiscal sponsors will enter into a grant services agreement with the City of Richmond and must meet all requirements and submit all required documents.
• A signed agreement between the sponsoree and fiscal sponsor must be included in the submitted application. The organization actually implementing the program and performing the services will act as the sponsoree or fiscal sponsor’s sub-grantee. • Fiscal sponsors can also apply for grants.
245
Guidelines -7- FY 2024-2025 ECIA Grant
• In addition to requesting funds for its own purposes, organizations may also act as a fiscal agent for other organizations.

COLLABORATING ORGANIZATIONS
Through this grant program, the City strongly encourages applicants to collaborate with other organizations. Collaboration is a mutually beneficial relationship to meet a common goal. Collaboration can come in many forms, from information sharing to joint programming. It can help organizations reduce redundancy in service sectors, leverage resources, share strengths, and increase efficiencies.

For purposes of this grant, when partnering with another organization, the application and budget of the lead organization will be considered for review and determination of funding. Therefore, the partnering organization is free to apply independently for funding for another project or program.

If the successful implementation of your proposed ECIA grant-funded program is dependent on the collaboration with a governmental entity (i.e., state, county, city, school district, etc.), then a written agreement authorizing the collaborative relationship must accompany your grant application. At a minimum, the agreement should contain the following information: names of the government entity(ies) or agency(ies) which will participate in the collaboration, contact information for the partner(s), and a description of the primary purpose of the collaboration. For example, if the implementation of your proposed program is contingent upon working at a school in the West Contra Costa County Unified School District or utilizing space at a Richmond recreation center, then a letter from the collaborating entity must agree to the proposed partnership.

APPLICATION SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS
The following materials must be submitted as part of a complete application packet by 11:59 p.m. on Friday, February 9, 2024, to be considered for funding (feel free to use this section as a check-list). The inability to adhere to the requirements below may impact an organization’s overall scores:
• Completed application
o Eight (8) pages
o Applicant Organizational Budget
o Applicant Program Budget
• Proof of 501(c)(3) status (Non-Profit Status Determination letter from the Internal Revenue Service) or fiscal sponsor’s corresponding documents • Financial statements – most recent (current) audited financials or Internal Revenue Service Form 990 or 990-N for tax-exempt organizations whose gross receipts are typically $50,000 or less or fiscal sponsor’s corresponding documents. Faith-based organizations may submit reviewed or annual financial statements. • List of Board of Directors and affiliations or fiscal sponsor’s corresponding documents
• Letter describing and authorizing collaboration (if with a governmental entity), if 246
Guidelines -8- FY 2024-2025 ECIA Grant
applicable
• Signed agreement between the organization and the fiscal sponsor, if applicable Note: City staff will confirm that the organization has filed the required document(s) in California and is authorized to carry out its business activities (California Secretary of State - https://businesssearch.sos.ca.gov and the State of California Department of Justice - https://oag.ca.gov/charities). Applications submitted by organizations not identified with “active” or “current” status may be disqualified.

For organizations with 501(c)(3) tax status, City staff may check websites such as the Internal Revenue Service at www.irs.gov and GuideStar at www.guidestar.org to gather additional information about the applicant organization.

APPLICATION SUBMISSION DETAILS
• Submit completed grant application (include budgets and résumés and/or descriptions of work experience with the application) and a set of all additional required documents. • The responses to the application questions shall be limited to eight (8) pages. This page limit is not inclusive of budgets, résumés, descriptions of work experience, or documents requested as part of the application.
• All submitted materials should be typed in a 12 point font size and Arial font style.

Applications must be easily reproducible on a standard copying machine. • All costs incurred in the preparation of an application are the applicant’s responsibility. • Applications must be completed and submitted electronically via www.ci.richmond.ca.us/ECIAapplication by Friday, February 9, 2024, at 11:59 p.m.

Applications received after this date and time will not be considered and will not be eligible for review and scoring by the Review Panel.

PAYMENT PROVISIONS
An initial advance payment of fifty percent (50%) of the total award amount will be advanced to all grantees as part of the application award process. Grantees receiving an advance payment may be eligible for an additional advance of thirty-five percent (35%) of the award amount, contingent upon the submission of complete and adequate reporting and invoicing documentation. The remaining fifteen percent (15%) will be reserved until the completion of the grant program and final submittal of all required documentation.

Payments will only be made for the eligible items and amounts specified in the approved grant agreement budget and a manner consistent with the payment provisions contained in the executed grant agreement.

REVIEW CRITERIA
All submitted applications, which comply with the grant requirements, will be evaluated and rated using the criteria listed below. The maximum score that an application can 247
Guidelines -9- FY 2024-2025 ECIA Grant
receive is 110 points. This includes 100 points from criteria areas #1-5 and an extra 10 points if the organization is Richmond-based (10 points) Total Points Available for Criteria Areas #1-5: 100 Points

1. Program/Project Description and Concept (Total 40 points) • Applicant adhered to all stated guidelines
• Application is complete, clear and understandable
• Program/project description and components are clearly stated and specific • Timeline is practical, and the proposed activities are well defined and technically feasible
• Management and staff are qualified to implement the project or program and achieve stated goals
• Staff has experience working on the project or program and/or similar programs or projects
• A collaborative initiative is described to deliver the program or project

2. Impact and Goals (Total 40 points)
• The program or project has the ability to positively contribute to the targeted population
• Goals are clearly articulated and measurable
• An evaluation component is included and connected to the program goals • The organization has a plan on how to sustain the program or project after grant funds are expended

3. Financial Viability (Total 20 points)
• Program/project budget and organizational budgets are included, clearly defined, cost-effective, accurate and realistic
• Relationship between grant funds requested and the program budget is clearly shown
Total Extra Points Available to Richmond-based organizations (10 Points) • Richmond-based is defined as maintaining principal offices, studios, or other facilities within the boundaries of the City of Richmond. Applicable to organizations providing services (sponsoree), not fiscal sponsors.

APPLICATION REVIEW AND SELECTION PROCESS
The City's overall objective is to award grants to highly qualified organizations that provide needed services to Richmond and North Richmond residents. Within this overall objective, it is also the City’s intent that the selection process is fair and transparent.

Applications will be evaluated and scored by a City Council-approved ECIA Grant Review Panel (Review Panel) consisting of no more than five (5) individuals residing in or employed in Richmond (not City of Richmond employees).

The selection process is divided into the following steps:
248
Guidelines -10- FY 2024-2025 ECIA Grant

1. Applications are received by the due date.

2. All applications are reviewed in depth by City staff for responsiveness, completeness, and satisfaction of eligibility requirements. Based on this review, eligible claims will proceed to the application evaluation process.

3. All complete and eligible applications are forwarded to the Review Panel, which will review and score the applications using the criteria listed in the guidelines and make an award recommendation to City Council. The inability to adhere to the application requirements may impact an organization’s overall scores. Grant awards can be less than the applicant’s original request.

4. The Review Panel’s recommendations are forwarded to the City Council for review, discussion, and approval.

Any party applying shall not contact or lobby any City Council member, ECIA Review Panel member, City official, employee (except those specified for contact) or agent regarding the RFA. Any party attempting to influence or circumvent the RFA, application submittal, and/or review process may have their application rejected for violating this provision of the RFA.

All scores are final. There is no grievance process.

Copies of Review Panel comments and scoring will be made available upon request.

APPLICATION DEADLINE
The deadline to submit an application and all relevant attachments is Friday, February 9, 2024, at 11:59 p.m. There are no exceptions for applications submitted after the deadline.

LATE APPLICATIONS OR MODIFICATIONS TO APPLICATIONS
Applications submitted after the specified date and time will not be considered.

Organizations assume responsibility for the timely submission of applications and all required documents. Any applications may be withdrawn or modified by a written request signed by the applicant.

APPLICANT ASSISTANCE BEFORE DUE DATE
Capacity Building - The City, recognizing the technical, skill-based components of a grant application process, may provide free capacity-building workshops in 2024. The dates and times of all subsequent workshops will be shared via the City’s ECIA 249
Guidelines -11- FY 2024-2025 ECIA Grant
website. Although recommended, organizations are not required to attend any of the capacity-building workshops offered by the City.

SCHEDULE
The schedule associated with the application is below. The City reserves the right to alter this schedule as necessary.

TASK DATE
Application Release Date January 2, 2024
FY 2024-25 ECIA Information Session January 2024
Applications Due (No Exceptions) February 9, 2024, by 11:59 p.m.

Application Review and Scoring March – April 2024
City Council Review and Approval April 2024
Grant Award Notification May 2024
Grant Award Period July 1, 2024 - June 30, 2025

QUESTIONS OR ADDENDUMS TO THE APPLICATIONS
It is strongly recommended that organizations register on the City’s E-Notify Me webpage (http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/list.aspx) to ensure that they receive any addendums to or notifications regarding this RFA or the ECIA grant program.

Any requests for clarification or other questions concerning this RFA should be submitted in writing to City staff via [email protected].

GRANTEE REQUIREMENTS
If awarded a grant, organizations will be required to do the following:
• A Grant Service Agreement with specific deliverables will be executed. All organizations are expected to initiate projects within three (3) months of execution of the grant agreement. The scope of work will be based on the application submitted. • Submit bi-annual progress reports and reimbursement requests (templates will be included as part of the executed grant agreement):
o Progress and Final Report - Reports will be required and must provide detailed information about the services provided. Grantees that do not submit the required reports run the risk of forfeiting their funding. A final report at the conclusion of the project or program is also required.
o Funding Requests – Requests must include the necessary documents to substantiate the disbursement (e.g., receipts, timecards, payroll records, etc.).

Grantees that do not adhere to the invoicing requirements run the risk of forfeiting their funding.
250
Guidelines -12- FY 2024-2025 ECIA Grant
• Host City staff and/or members of the Review Panel for one or more site visit and/or program evaluation.
• Published program materials shall include the City seal or logo and shall state, “Made possible in part by the Richmond-ECIA Community Grant Program.” The material must be appropriate, relevant, and aligned with the approved project and should be reviewed and approved by City staff before release.
• Complete and submit a W-9 form and Supplemental Vendor Application. • Obtain a City of Richmond business license. Organizations are responsible for all associated fees. Information can be found at
http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/66/Business-Licenses.
• Meet the City of Richmond insurance requirements. Fiscal sponsors, serving as the grantee, must have insurance that covers all actions of the non-profit and/or community-based organization acting as the sub-grantee. Organizations may use grant awards to cover insurance costs.

CITY STAFF CONTACT
For inquiries or clarification regarding this program or application, please contact ECIA staff at [email protected] or Shane Johnson, City Manager’s Office at (510) 620-5458 or Patrick Seals, Richmond Department of Children & Youth at (510) 307- 8016.

GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS
Background Checks: Organizations that provide services to youth or other vulnerable populations (elderly, people with disabilities, etc.) must require comprehensive background checks and fingerprinting of all employees and/or volunteers that work directly with youth or such other vulnerable populations.

Limitations: All facts and opinions stated herein are based upon available information and no representations or warranties are made with respect to their accuracy or completeness.

The application and the selection process shall in no way be deemed to create a binding contract, agreement, or offer of any kind between the City and the applicant organization.

If the City selects a grantee pursuant to this RFA, any legal rights and obligations between the successful applicant, if any, and the City will come into existence only when a grant agreement is fully executed by the parties, and the legal rights and obligations of each party shall at that time be only those rights and obligations which are set forth in the grant agreement and any other documents specifically referred to in that grant agreement.
251
Guidelines -13- FY 2024-2025 ECIA Grant
Each organization submitting applications in response to this RFA agrees that the preparation of all materials for submittal to the City are at the organization’s sole cost and expense, and the City shall not, under any circumstances, be responsible for any costs or expenses incurred by any candidate. In addition, each organization agrees that all documentation and materials submitted in response to this RFA shall remain the property of the City and may be used by the City for any reason whatsoever. In accordance with California law relating to access to public records, the City may be required to publicly disclose all submitted information and materials to third parties requesting such information.

Award: The City reserves the right to accept or reject any or all applications, to alter the selection process in any way, to postpone the selection process for its own convenience at any time for any reason whatsoever, to waive any defects in any application, to issue a new RFA at any time, or to provide a grant to any organization it deems appropriate in its sole and absolute discretion within or outside of the RFA evaluation process. City reserves the right to terminate a grant agreement within sixty (60) days without cause. All materials submitted become the property of the City and will not be returned. Funds awarded are public funds and any information submitted or generated is subject to public disclosure requirements, including the Public Records Act.

Federal, State and Local Laws: As part of the RFA process, the selected grantee will be required to comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws, including the City of Richmond’s Nondiscrimination Ordinance (Chapter 2.28), Business Opportunity Ordinance (Chapter 2.50), Local Employment Program Ordinance (Chapter 2.56), and Living Wage Ordinance (Chapter 2.60), if applicable. Please contact the City Attorney’s office for further information regarding the above requirements. 252
Summary
Sum of Total
Scores
Avg. Score
(100)
Lidia Carol Lily Jim Rank Organization Requested Rank Organization Requested Recommended Youth? Over $750k Notes Organization
Value
Requested
1 18 Reasons* 50,000 0 96 100 78 0 274 91.33 26 18 Reasons* 50,000 1 Practice Space* 9,000 9,000 9,000 2 A.B.L.E Community Development Foundation 47,550 0 88 105 65 0 258 86.00 38 A.B.L.E Community Development Foundation 47,550 2 Greater Richmond Interfaith Program* 50,000 25,000 25,000 3 Albany Berkeley Soccer Club* 50,000 0 75 52 15 0 142 47.33 50 Albany Berkeley Soccer Club* 50,000 3 East Bay Center for the Performing Arts* 50,000 25,000 25000 4 Berkeley Baby Book Project 24,612 0 94 97 94 0 285 95.00 17 Berkeley Baby Book Project 24,612 4 Watershed Project* 50,000 25,000 25,000 5 Bike East Bay* 19,546 0 99 91 70 0 260 86.67 36 Bike East Bay* 19,546 5 Earth Team 42,627 42,627 42,627 6 Bright Futures Growth & Development Center 50,000 0 88 10 100 0 198 66.00 47 Bright Futures Growth & Development Center 50,000 6 Latina Center* 50,000 16,000 16000 7 Children's Art Studio Richmond 50,000 0 45 105 110 0 260 86.67 37 Children's Art Studio Richmond 50,000 7 Richmond Neighborhood Housing Services* 50,000 8 CoBiz 50,000 0 80 88 40 0 208 69.33 45 CoBiz 50,000 8 Desarrollo Familiar* 50,000 9 Coherent Development Research Institute 18,700 0 100 87 85 0 272 90.67 28 Coherent Development Research Institute 18,700 9 Richmond Police Activities League* 46,822 10 Collaborising 50,000 0 80 90 95 0 265 88.33 32 Collaborising 50,000 10 West County Salesian Youth Club 50,000 25000 11 Community Housing Development Corporation 50,000 0 102 104 68 0 274 91.33 27 Community Housing Development Corporation 50,000 11 Early Childhood Mental Health Program* 50,000 12 Community Violence Solutions 49,999 0 94 79 85 0 258 86.00 39 Community Violence Solutions 49,999 12 Renaissance Entrepreneurship Center* 35,000 13 Cool the Earth 25,000 0 65 84 0 0 149 49.67 49 Cool the Earth 25,000 13 YES Nature to Neighborhodds* 48,569 14 CoR Employment & Training* 50,000 0 100 97 10 0 207 69.00 46 CoR Employment & Training* 50,000 14 Studio 510 Social & Emotional Restoration* 10,000 15 Desarrollo Familiar* 50,000 0 109 89 106 0 304 101.33 8 Desarrollo Familiar* 50,000 15 Motivated 2 Help Others 50,000 16 D.R.E.A.M. Financial Academy 45,000 0 75 82 58 0 215 71.67 43 D.R.E.A.M. Financial Academy 45,000 16 Youth Code Now 50,000 17 Early Childhood Mental Health Program* 50,000 0 103 94 100 0 297 99.00 11 Early Childhood Mental Health Program* 50,000 17 Berkeley Baby Book Project 24,612 18 Earth Team 42,627 0 109 92 108 0 309 103.00 5 Earth Team 42,627 18 Scientific Adventures for Girls* 50,000 19 East Bay Center for the Performing Arts* 50,000 0 107 99 110 0 316 105.33 3 East Bay Center for the Performing Arts* 50,000 19 Safe Organized Spaces* 50,000 20 Ephesians Community Development Center 50,000 0 95 100 86 0 281 93.67 21 Ephesians Community Development Center 50,000 20 SparkPoint Contra Costa* 22,795 21 Greater Richmond Interfaith Program* 50,000 0 107 106 110 0 323 107.67 2 Greater Richmond Interfaith Program* 50,000 21 Ephesians Community Development Center 50,000 22 House of Loving Hands 50,000 0 82 94 73 0 249 83.00 40 House of Loving Hands 50,000 22 Richmond Community Tennis Association 50,000 23 Hurlbut Benevolent Foundation 30,000 0 83 56 25 0 164 54.67 48 Hurlbut Benevolent Foundation 30,000 23 Mira Vista PTA 38,500 24 Jelly's Place 26,000 0 98 94 83 0 275 91.67 25 Jelly's Place 26,000 24 YMCA of the East Bay* 33,000 25 Latina Center* 50,000 0 107 96 105 0 308 102.67 6 Latina Center* 50,000 25 Jelly's Place 26,000 26 Mira Vista PTA 38,500 0 88 99 92 0 279 93.00 23 Mira Vista PTA 38,500 26 18 Reasons* 50,000 27 Motivated 2 Help Others 50,000 0 94 99 95 0 288 96.00 15 Motivated 2 Help Others 50,000 27 Community Housing Development Corporation 50,000 28 North & Greater Richmond Blues Foundation 50,000 0 75 103 83 0 261 87.00 34 North & Greater Richmond Blues Foundation 50,000 28 Coherent Development Research Institute 18,700 29 P.U.S.H 4 Purpose 20,000 0 65 105 40 0 210 70.00 44 P.U.S.H 4 Purpose 20,000 29 West Contra Costa Public Edication Fund* 50,000 30 Practice Space* 9,000 0 107 110 110 0 327 109.00 1 Practice Space* 9,000 30 Youth Finance Institute of America 34,000 31 Renaissance Entrepreneurship Center* 35,000 0 89 97 110 0 296 98.67 12 Renaissance Entrepreneurship Center* 35,000 31 Youth Tennis Advantage 30,000 32 Richmond Community Tennis Association 50,000 0 73 100 107 0 280 93.33 22 Richmond Community Tennis Association 50,000 32 Collaborising 50,000 33 Richmond Neighborhood Housing Services* 50,000 0 103 102 101 0 306 102.00 7 Richmond Neighborhood Housing Services* 50,000 33 Summer Search Bay Area* 50,000 34 Richmond Police Activities League* 46,822 0 107 105 90 0 302 100.67 9 Richmond Police Activities League* 46,822 34 North & Greater Richmond Blues Foundation 50,000 35 Safe Organized Spaces* 50,000 0 85 106 93 0 284 94.67 19 Safe Organized Spaces* 50,000 35 Weigh of Life 42,000 36 Scientific Adventures for Girls* 50,000 0 91 96 98 0 285 95.00 18 Scientific Adventures for Girls* 50,000 36 Bike East Bay* 19,546 32 Shooting Stars Foundation 50,000 0 88 86 70 0 244 81.33 42 Shooting Stars Foundation 50,000 37 Children's Art Studio Richmond 50,000 33 SparkPoint Contra Costa* 22,795 0 78 110 10 0 198 94.00 20 SparkPoint Contra Costa* 22,795 38 A.B.L.E Community Development Foundation 47,550 34 Studio 510 Social & Emotional Restoration* 10,000 0 95 100 98 0 293 97.67 14 Studio 510 Social & Emotional Restoration* 10,000 39 Community Violence Solutions 49,999 35 Summer Search Bay Area* 50,000 0 90 86 87 0 263 87.67 33 Summer Search Bay Area* 50,000 40 House of Loving Hands 50,000 36 Watershed Project* 50,000 0 108 100 102 0 310 103.33 4 Watershed Project* 50,000 41 West County Mandarin School 50,000 37 Weigh of Life 42,000 0 85 108 68 0 261 87.00 35 Weigh of Life 42,000 42 Shooting Stars Foundation 50,000 38 West Contra Costa Public Edication Fund* 50,000 0 80 97 93 0 270 90.00 29 West Contra Costa Public Edication Fund* 50,000 43 D.R.E.A.M. Financial Academy 45,000 39 West County Mandarin School 50,000 0 79 91 75 0 245 81.67 41 West County Mandarin School 50,000 44 P.U.S.H 4 Purpose 20,000 40 West County Salesian Youth Club 50,000 0 109 97 95 0 301 100.33 10 West County Salesian Youth Club 50,000 45 CoBiz 50,000 41 YES Nature to Neighborhodds* 48,569 0 107 90 99 0 296 98.67 13 YES Nature to Neighborhodds* 48,569 46 CoR Employment & Training* 50,000 42 YMCA of the East Bay* 33,000 0 98 91 88 0 277 92.33 24 YMCA of the East Bay* 33,000 47 Bright Futures Growth & Development Center 50,000 43 Youth Code Now 50,000 0 102 99 86 0 287 95.67 16 Youth Code Now 50,000 48 Hurlbut Benevolent Foundation 30,000 44 Youth Finance Institute of America 34,000 0 86 90 92 0 268 89.33 30 Youth Finance Institute of America 34,000 49 Cool the Earth 25,000 45 Youth Tennis Advantage 30,000 0 96 93 77 0 266 88.67 31 Youth Tennis Advantage 30,000 50 Albany Berkeley Soccer Club* 50,000 47 48
49 50
51 52
-
142,627 167,627
Total Grant Money Requested 2,098,720 Total Requested 2,098,720 Total Requested 2,098,720 Lydia Carol Lily Jim

0.00 91.18 93.02 80.76 0.00
Remaining Award Amount
Total Scores Per Reviewer (100) Overall Rankings
Average Scores per Reviewer
Overall Rankings
142,627
Total Recommended Award
Total Grant Allocation
500,000
357,373
253
Summary
Sum of
Total
Scores
Avg. Score
(100)
Carol Lily Jim Rank Organization Requested Rank Organization Requested AVG Recommended Youth? Over $750k Notes Organization
Value
Requested
1 1Hundred Years Enterprise $50,000 0 73 108 55 0 236 78.67 8 1Hundred Years Enterprise 50,000 1 STEMSail 6,300 108.00 6,300 2 Black Neighborhood $50,000 0 93 89 90 0 272 90.67 6 Black Neighborhood 50,000 2 East Bay Pickleball Assocoation 47,806 100.67 47,806 3 Center for Lao Studies $25,000 0 99 80 96 0 275 91.67 4 Center for Lao Studies 25,000 3 Touch of New Life 50,000 97.00 50,000 4 East Bay Pickleball Assocoation $47,806 0 101 99 104 0 304 101.33 2 East Bay Pickleball Assocoation 47,806 4 Center for Lao Studies 25,000 94.00 25,000 5 Khmu National Federation, Inc. $50,000 0 80 88 105 0 273 91.00 5 Khmu National Federation, Inc. 50,000 5 Khmu National Federation, Inc. 50,000 92.33 50,000 6 Kings Accountability Group Inc $50,000 0 60 90 80 0 230 76.67 9 Kings Accountability Group Inc 50,000 6 Black Neighborhood 50,000 87.33 50,000 7 Oshiana Unique Thompkins
Foundation $20,000 0 87 81 77 0 245 81.67 7
Oshiana Unique Thompkins
Foundation 20,000 7 Oshiana Unique Thompkins Foundation 20,000 82.33 20000 8 STEMSail $6,300 0 110 109 109 0 328 109.33 1 STEMSail 6,300 8 1Hundred Years Enterprise Foundation 50,000 76.67 50000 9 Touch of New Life $50,000 0 93 91 103 0 287 95.67 3 Touch of New Life 50,000 9 Kings Accountability Group Inc 50,000 75.67 25000 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 10 0 10 0 0
11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 11 0 11 0 0
12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 12 0 12 0 0
13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 13 0 13 0 0
Total Grant Money Requested 349,106.00 Total Requested 349,106.00 Total Requested 349,106.00 Carol Lily Jim

0.00 88.44 92.78 91.00 0.00
175,894
Remaining Award Amount
Total Scores Per Reviewer (100) Overall Rankings
Average Scores per Reviewer
Overall Rankings
324,106
Total Recommended Award
Total Grant Allocation
500,000
254
1 RESOLUTION NO._________________

RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA AUTHORIZING

THE CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE GRANT SERVICE AGREEMENTS

WITH NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS THAT RECEIVED GRANT AWARDS FROM THE FY 2024-2025 ENVIRONMENTAL AND COMMUNITY INVESTMENT AGREEMENT (ECIA) FOR AN

AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED FOUR HUNDRED NINTY-ONE THOUSAND SEVEN HUNDRED AND THIRTY-THREE DOLLARS ($491,733)
WHEREAS, on July 29, 2014, the City of Richmond and Chevron Products Company entered into the initial Chevron Modernization Project Environmental and Community Investment Agreement (ECIA); and
WHEREAS, the ECIA was amended in August 2015 and December 2015; and WHEREAS, the ECIA provides $90 million to Richmond over a 10-year period ($80 million in revenue to the City and $10 million for a photovoltaic solar farm) and includes investments in community-based greenhouse gas reduction programs and various community programs, including but not limited to a competitive grant program; and WHEREAS, $6 million is allocated to fund the competitive grant program which was established to fund community programs and non-profits focused on community, youth, and youth sports; and WHEREAS, $606,000 is allocated for FY 2024-2025 for grant awards within four (4) grant categories; and
WHEREAS, in FY 2024-2025 there is a total of $500,000 available to award in category 1 [organizations reporting gross receipts of equal to or less than $50,000 annually (990N)] and category 2 [organizations reporting gross receipts of more than $50,000 annually (990)], with a minimum grant award of $5,000 and maximum grant award of $50,000, with a maximum of $100,000 earmarked for organizations with annual budgets at or exceeding $750,000; and WHEREAS, on December 19, 2023, the City Council authorized the release of the “Fiscal Year 2024-2025 Richmond - ECIA Community Grant Program Guidelines and Application”; and WHEREAS, eligible organizations were required to have 501(c)(3) tax status and provide services to Richmond and/or North Richmond residents; and
WHEREAS, the application was released on December 22, 2023; and WHEREAS, applications were due on February 9, 2024, and sixty-four (64) organizations submitted applications totaling more than $2 million in funding requests; and WHEREAS, after review by City staff for completeness, sixty (60) applications were forwarded for review and scoring by the Council-appointed ECIA Grant Review Committee; and 255
2 WHEREAS, the ECIA Grant Review Committee recommended to City Council that grants be awarded to the following sixteen (16) organizations, for a total award amount not to exceed $491,733; and Category 1 (990N Organizations)
Organization
Recommended
Award Amount
STEMSail $6,300
East Bay Pickleball Association $47,806
Touch of New Life $50,000
Center for Lao Studies $25,000
Khmu National Federation Inc. $50,000
Black Neighborhood $50,000
Oshiana Unique Thompkins Foundation $20,000
1Hundred Years Enterprise Foundation $50,000
Kings Accountability Group Inc. $25,000
TOTAL $324,106
Category 2
(990 Organizations)
Organization
Recommende
d Award
Amount
Practice Space $9,000
Greater Richmond Interfaith Program $25,000
East Bay Center for the Performing Arts $25,000
Watershed Project $25,000
Earth Team $42,627
Latina Center $16,000
West County Salesian Youth Club $25,000
TOTAL $167,627
WHEREAS, the Richmond City Council authorizes City staff to negotiate and enter into grant service agreements with the sixteen (16) recipient organizations and to provide oversight to assure that deliverables are met and that activities and expenses are consistent with the intent of each agreement; and
WHEREAS, the City Council received and accepted a staff report dated June 25, 2024, with regard to this resolution.

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Council of the City of Richmond, California, adopts the Resolution to allocate FY 2024-2025 Environmental and Community Investment Agreement (ECIA) funds to the grantees in the amounts specified above, and authorizes the City Manager’s Office to negotiate and execute contracts with award recipients. 256
3 ------------------------------------------------------ I certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted by the Members of the City Council of the City of Richmond, California at a regular meeting held on June 25, 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTENTIONS:

ABSENT:

______________________________
Clerk of the City of Richmond
Approved:
_______________________________________
Mayor
Approved as to form:
________________________________________
City Attorney
257

June 25, 2024
Community Development
DATE: June 25, 2024
TO: Mayor Martinez and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lina Velasco, Director of Community Development
Tamara Walker, Community Services, Deputy Director
Employment and Training
Beatriz Guerrero Auna, Project Coordinator of
Transformative Climate Community
Subject: Contract with The Glen Price Group
FINANCIAL IMPACT: The costs associated with this contract will be paid for using the Transformative Climate Community (TCC)
Implementation Grant. The $50,000 budget was assigned
in Exhibit B of the Strategic Growth Council – TCC
Program Implementation Grant Agreement with the City
of Richmond for a Place-Based Strategy Consultant
under Task No. 1 of the Workforce Development and
Economic Opportunity Program.

Account string: 13771041-400201-16G22.

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

October 3, 2023, September 19, 2023, December 20,
2022, June 21, 2022

STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:

On October 27, 2022, Richmond and its co-applicants
were awarded a $35 million Transformative Climate
Communities (TCC) Round 4 Implementation Grant by
the California Strategic Growth Council (“SGC”). The
Community Development Department is requesting City
Council approval of a contract with The Glen Price
Group, for a total contract amount of $50,000, to prepare a Place-Based Workforce Development Strategy and
Implementation Plan for the City of Richmond’s
AGENDA
REPORT
258

June 25, 2024
Workforce Development and Economic Opportunity Plan
(WDEOP) under the TCC implementation grant.

RECOMMENDED ACTION: APPROVE a contract with The Glen Price Group, in an amount not to exceed $50,000, with a term beginning
July 1, 2024, and expiring on December 31, 2025, to
conduct Place-Based Workforce Development Strategy
and Implementation Plan for the City of Richmond under
the Transformative Climate Communities implementation
grant - Community Development Department/Community
Services Department (Lina Velasco/Beatriz Guerrero
Auna 510-620-5450/Tamara Walker 510-307-8006).

DISCUSSION:

On June 21, 2022, the City Council authorized an application for a Transformative Climate Communities (TCC) Round 4 Implementation Grant for the Richmond Rising project. The City’s proposal included five co-applicants, Groundwork Richmond, GRID Alternatives, Rich City Rides, Trust for Public Land (TPL), and Urban Tilth. On October 27, 2022, Richmond’s application was awarded a $35 million Transformative Climate Communities (TCC) Round 4 Implementation Grant by the California Strategic Growth Council (See Attachment 1). Richmond’s project titled Richmond Rising: Healthy, Connected, and Climate Strong focuses on projects serving the Iron Triangle, Santa Fe, and Coronado neighborhoods. The ten (10) key projects included in the Richmond Rising project are:

1. Neighborhood Complete Streets: walking and biking improvements on Harbour Way, Ohio Avenue, and some AC Transit bus stops – City CIP
Subproject Lead: City of Richmond Engineering & Capital Improvement Project

2. Richmond Wellness Trail, Phase 2: walking and biking improvements to connect Phase 1, Richmond BART and central neighborhoods, with the waterfront and ferry terminal.

Subproject Lead: Trust for Public Lands

3. E-Bike Lending Library: long- and short-term e-bikes access for free to target neighborhood residents to improve carbon-free mobility options.

Subproject Lead: Rich City Rides

4. Resilient Homes for Healthy Communities: residential solar panel installations and home energy efficiency and health and safety upgrades at no cost to incomequalifying residents. 259

June 25, 2024
Subproject Lead: GRID Alternatives

5. Basins of Relations: residential greywater systems and rainwater capture systems at no cost to income-qualifying residents, installed by local youth who receive training in watershed stewardship and installation.

Subproject Lead: Urban Tilth

6. Bosque del Barrio: tree planting throughout the project area to create a healthy urban forest.

Subproject Lead: Groundwork Richmond

7. ADA Accessible Garden: edible and pollinator garden at Unity Park with specially designed planting beds so seniors and wheelchair users can comfortably participate in gardening and community activities.

Subproject Lead: Urban Tilth

8. Orchard for ALL!: creating a distributed orchard through fruit tree giveaways, with tree care and harvest support offered in exchange for a share of the harvest, which will be distributed at free farm stands and in veggie boxes.

Subproject Lead: Urban Tilth

9. Veggie RX: prescription veggie boxes in partnership with the local health clinic, to provide free fruits and vegetables as preventative care along with community health workers and programming to support change to a more sustainable diet.

Subproject Lead: Urban Tilth

10.E-Bike Share: the project will bring 5 new bike share access points, 70 new E-bikes, and targeted outreach and engagement to the Project Area. – City Transportation Division will be the subproject lead.

Subproject Lead: City of Richmond – Transportation Division In addition, the Richmond Rising project includes three Transformative Plans outlining Community Engagement, Workforce Development, and Displacement Avoidance policies and programs.

Workforce Development and Economic Opportunities Plan (WDEOP) The WDEOP leverages existing and extensive City efforts in workforce development to train residents and connect them to green industry jobs, with a specific focus on undocumented residents since they are often excluded by federal funding programs. A cornerstone of the Workforce Development Plan is GRID Alternatives’ workforce training for competitive-wage jobs in the solar installation and electrician trades. There is growing demand for these types of jobs within the Bay Area and the implementation of the Resilient Homes for Healthy Communities project will directly require people with these skills to implement the project.
260

June 25, 2024
Youth workforce development is an overall focus of Richmond Rising, offering mentorship, training, skills building, credentials, and access to high-quality green jobs, including the Youth Fellows program, developed as part of the Community Engagement Plan. Workforce development is also directly integrated into the Bosque del Barrio, Orchard for All, and Basins of Relations projects, which train youth as part of project work.

This scope of work will support the development of a place-based workforce development strategy and implementation plan for the TCC target community, including desk research, informational interviews, and meetings with the existing Stakeholder Committee to understand the context, needs, and opportunities in the target community.

This will result in a set of research findings, emerging recommendations, development of an overall workforce development strategy, and identification of priority activities for the first year of implementation.

Summary of Selection Consultant Process
On March 25, 2023, the City of Richmond Community Development Department, released a Request for Proposals (RFP) seeking a consultant to develop a Place-Based Workforce Development Strategy and Implementation Plan for the TCC grant focused on the Iron Triangle, Santa Fe, and Coronado neighborhoods. The RFP was sent, , via email as an informal solicitation, to three consultants that have worked for the City in similar projects. No vendor responded to the RFP.

On April 24, 2023, the City of Richmond Community Development Department, reissued the RFP. The RFP was sent to the same three consultants via email as an informal solicitation. One of the three consultants, the Glen Price Group, responded to the RFP (See Attachment 2). The proposal received was reviewed by staff from Community Development and Employment and Training and found to meet the requirements of the RFP, including experience doing this type of work.

The consultant, The Glen Price Group (GPG), has experience supporting workforce development planning and fund development projects in the City of Richmond and beyond. For more than 10 years, GPG has worked with the City of Richmond Employment and Training (E&T) Department to secure state and federal funding to support a range of workforce development projects and initiatives. This includes grant awards from the YouthBuild, Workforce Accelerator, Dislocated Worker, Brownfields Job Training, and other grant programs. In addition, GPG has supported the development of the Richmond Workforce Development Board (WDB) Local Plan.

Therefore, staff is requesting Council approve a contract for $50,000, with the GPG, to support the creation of a Richmond Rising Place-Based Workforce Development Strategy and Implementation Plan (see Attachment 3). The contract would be funded using the TCC Implementation Grant.

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
261

June 25, 2024
Attachment 1 – TCC Grant Award Letter Richmond
Attachment 2 – Quotes Memo
Attachment 3 – Contract
262
1400 Tenth Street, Sacramento, CA 95814 ● www.sgc.ca.gov ● (916) 324-9775 October 31, 2022
Via Email
Mayor Tom Butt
City of Richmond
Attn: Lina Velasco
Director of Community Development
450 Civic Center Plaza, 2nd Floor
Richmond, CA 94804
[email protected]
RE: Award Notification – Transformative Climate Communities (TCC) Program, Round 4, Implementation Grant Award, City of Richmond, “Richmond Rising: Healthy, Connected, and Climate Strong” Dear Mayor Butt,
The California Strategic Growth Council (SGC) is pleased to inform you that the Council approved a Transformative Climate Communities Implementation award of $35 million dollars to the City of Richmond for “Richmond Rising:

Healthy, Connected, and Climate Strong” at its October 27, 2022, meeting. Previously funded by California’s Capand-Trade Program, Round 4 of TCC was funded by a FY 2021-2022 budget appropriation from the General Fund.

This program funding empowers the communities most impacted by pollution to choose their own goals, strategies, and projects to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and local air pollution. The TCC Program reflects the SGC’s commitment to support community-led transformation and achieve equitable, resilient communities and landscapes for all Californians. Congratulations on your successful application.

This letter provides a conditional commitment of grant funds. TCC staff will initiate the Post-Award Consultation (PAC) process soon by scheduling a meeting with the Awardee and sending a review package including review checklists for all projects and transformative plans. This process will involve addressing any outstanding issues identified by TCC staff, reviewers, and the interagency panel, as well as finalizing the grant agreement. Grantees and Partners will need to work closely and collaboratively with TCC Staff to address all issues prior to grant execution. All requested documentation and changes should be finalized within six (6) months after the Council makes awards. New to Round 4, we will provide a mini grant to support administrative, staff, and materials costs for Grantees and Partners as they complete the PAC process. Our partnering agency, the Department of Conservation, will lead the PAC process.

Following execution of the grant agreement, grant funds will be disbursed on a bi-monthly basis for eligible direct, indirect, and indicator tracking costs. All reimbursed costs must meet the requirements for reimbursable tasks outlined in the grant agreement. TCC has also been authorized for an Advance Pay Pilot program (AB 156) and will follow up on the terms for accessing advance pay once approved by Council. Please note that no funds will be reimbursed for costs and expenses incurred prior to grant agreement execution, with the exception of limited PAC costs for staff and materials in accordance with forthcoming guidance.

We look forward to our partnership in the coming years. If you have any questions, please contact Sophie Young, TCC Program Manager, at [email protected].

Sincerely,
Lynn von Koch-Liebert
Executive Director
California Strategic Growth Council
263

MEMORANDUM
DATE: JUNE 4, 2024
TO: SHASA CURL, CITY MANAGER
FROM: BEATRIZ GUERRERO AUNA, TCC PROJECT COORDINATOR

LINA VELASCO, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

TAMARA WALKER, DEPUTY COMMUNITY SERVICES

DIRECTOR EMPLOYMENT & TRAINING
RE: MEMO FOR REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR PLACEBASED WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY AND

IMPLEMENTATION PLAN FOR TRANSFORMATIVE
CLIMATE COMMUNITIES (TCC) GRANT.

On March 25, 2023, the City of Richmond Community Development Department, solicited a Request for Proposals (RFP) seeking a consultant to develop a Place-Based Workforce Development Strategy and Implementation Plan for the TCC grant focused on the Iron Triangle, Santa Fe, and Coronado neighborhoods. The RFP was sent to three consultants provided by the Community Services Department that have worked for the City in similar projects via email as an informal solicitation. No vendor responded to the RFP.

On April 24, 2023, the City of Richmond Community Development Department, reissued the RFP. The RFP was sent to the same three consultants via email as an informal solicitation. This time, one of the three consultants responded to the RFP (See Attachment 2). The proposal received was reviewed by staff from Community Development and Employment and Training and found to meet the requirements of the RFP, including experience doing this type of work.

The RFP was sent to the following consultants both times:

CONSULTANTCONTACT NAME EMAIL QUOTE CITY
Cheryl Maier Cheryl Maier cheryl.l.maier@gmail.
com
Not received Not received
Glen Price Group Aaron Price [email protected]
om
$50,000.00 El Cerrito
David Shinder David Shinder [email protected]
m
Not received Not received

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
264
The consultant, Glen Price Group (GPG), has experience
supporting workforce development planning and fund development projects in the City of Richmond and beyond. For more than 10 years, GPG has worked with the City of Richmond Employment and Training (E&T) Department to secure state and federal funding to support a range of workforce development projects and initiatives. This includes grant awards from the YouthBuild, Workforce Accelerator, Dislocated Worker, Brownfields Job Training, and other grant programs. In addition, GPG has supported the development of the Richmond Workforce Development Board (WDB) Local Plan.

About TCC Grant
On June 21, 2022, the City Council authorized an application for a Transformative Climate Communities (TCC) Round 4 Implementation Grant for the Richmond Rising project. The City’s proposal included five Co-Applicants, Groundwork Richmond, GRID Alternatives, Rich City Rides, Trust for Public Land (TPL), and Urban Tilth. On October 27, 2022, Richmond’s application was awarded a $35 million Transformative Climate Communities (TCC) Round 4 Implementation Grant by the California Strategic Growth Council
Workforce Development and Economic Opportunities Plan (WDEOP) Within the TCC Implementation grant, the WDEOP leverages existing and extensive City efforts in workforce development to train residents and connect them to green industry jobs, with a specific focus on undocumented residents since they are often excluded by federal funding programs. A cornerstone of the Workforce Development Plan is GRID Alternatives’ workforce training for competitive-wage jobs in the solar installation and electrician trades. There is growing demand for these types of jobs within the Bay Area and the implementation of the Resilient Homes for Healthy Communities project will directly require people with these skills to implement the project. Youth workforce development is an overall focus of Richmond Rising, to offer mentorship, training, and supported experiences to gain skills and credentials and access high-quality green jobs, including the Youth Fellows program, developed as part of the Community Engagement Plan. Workforce development is also directly integrated into the Bosque del Barrio, Orchard for All, and Basins of Relations projects, which train youth as part of project work.

Scope of Work
This contract scope will support the development of a place-based workforce development strategy and implementation plan for the TCC target community will include desk research, informational interviews, and meetings with the existing Stakeholder Committee to understand the context, needs, and opportunities in the target community. This will result in a set of research findings and emerging recommendations, development of an overall workforce development strategy, and identification of priority activities for the first year of implementation. 265
Recommended Vendor
Glen Price Group. is being selected as the City’s preferred vendor based on their cost quote and experience completing the work proposed in the scope of work. No other consultants replied to the RFP.

The service contract will be for an amount not-to-exceed $50,000, and term will be from July 1, 2024 through December 31, 2025
266
267

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.
268

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
269
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:
270
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. 271
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:

272
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, 273
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. 274
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. 275
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 276
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.
277
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 278
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 279
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 280
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 281
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.
282
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 283
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. 284
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. 285
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):
286
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.
287

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 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 day of , 20 , at , California.

Printed Name: Title:

Signed: Date:

Business Entity:

Vendor SCCO Compliance Statement (Augt2020)
24 288
___ 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.
289
___ 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. 290
___ 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.
291
WLTR005

THE HARTFORD

BUSINESS SERVICE CENTER
3600 WISEMAN BLVD
SAN ANTONIO TX 78251 June 12, 2024
City of Richmond, its officers,
officials, employees, agents and
volunteers
450 CIVIC CENTER PLAZA
RICHMOND CA 94804
Account Information:

Policy Holder Details : GLEN PRICE GROUP
Contact Us
Need Help?
Chat online or call us at
(866) 467-8730.

We're here Monday - Friday.

Enclosed please find a Certificate Of Insurance for the above referenced Policyholder. Please contact us if you have any questions or concerns.

Sincerely,
Your Hartford Service Team
292

CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE

DATE (MM/DD/YYYY)
06/12/2024

THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AFFIRMATIVELY OR NEGATIVELY AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. THIS CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE ISSUING INSURER(S), AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OR PRODUCER, AND THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER.

IMPORTANT: If the certificate holder is an ADDITIONAL INSURED, the policy(ies) must be endorsed. If SUBROGATIONIS WAIVED, subject to the terms and conditions of the policy, certain policies may require an endorsement. A statement on this certificate does not confer rights to the certificate holder in lieu of such endorsement(s).

PRODUCER

POLLUTRO ROSSLEY INSURANCE AGENCY
45452544
161 NORTH STATE STREET
PAINESVILLE OH 44077
CONTACT NAME:

PHONE
(A/C, No, Ext):
(440) 352-2872 FAX
(A/C, No):

E-MAIL ADDRESS:

INSURER(S) AFFORDING COVERAGE NAIC#
INSURER A : Sentinel Insurance Company Ltd. 11000

INSURED

GLEN PRICE GROUP
1990 N CALIFORNIA BLVD FL 8 PMB 1227
WALNUT CREEK CA 94596-3742
INSURER B : Hartford Fire and Its P&C Affiliates 00914
INSURER C :

INSURER D :

INSURER E :

INSURER F :

COVERAGES CERTIFICATE NUMBER: REVISION NUMBER:

THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED.NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS

CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS.

INSR

LTR TYPE OF INSURANCE ADDLINSR
SUBR

WVD POLICY NUMBER POLICY EFF(MM/DD/YYYY)

POLICY EXP
(MM/DD/Y YYY) LIMITS
A

COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY
X 45 SBM BB3052 08/15/2023 08/15/2024
EACH OCCURRENCE $2,000,000

CLAIMS-MADE X OCCUR DAMAGE TO RENTED
PREMISES (Ea occurrence) $1,000,000
X General Liability MED EXP (Any one person) $10,000
PERSONAL & ADV INJURY $2,000,000
GEN'L AGGREGATE LIMIT APPLIES PER: GENERAL AGGREGATE $4,000,000 POLICY PROJECT X LOC PRODUCTS - COMP/OP AGG $4,000,000 OTHER:

A

AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY
45 SBM BB3052 08/15/2023 08/15/2024

COMBINED SINGLE LIMIT
(Ea accident) $2,000,000
ANY AUTO BODILY INJURY (Per person)

ALL OWNED
AUTOS

SCHEDULED
AUTOS BODILY INJURY (Per accident)

X HIRED

AUTOS X NON-OWNEDAUTOS

PROPERTY DAMAGE
(Per accident)

UMBRELLA LIAB

EXCESS LIAB
OCCUR
CLAIMSMADE

EACH OCCURRENCE

AGGREGATE
DED RETENTION $
B

WORKERS COMPENSATION

AND EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY
ANY

PROPRIETOR/PARTNER/EXECUTIVE
OFFICER/MEMBER EXCLUDED?
(Mandatory in NH)
If yes, describe under
DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS below
N/ A 45 WEC AH8R7C 10/26/2023 10/26/2024
X PER

STATUTE
OTHER
Y/N E.L. EACH ACCIDENT $1,000,000
E.L. DISEASE -EA EMPLOYEE $1,000,000
E.L. DISEASE - POLICY LIMIT $1,000,000

A DATA BREACH - BUS INC & EX
EXP
45 SBM BB3052 08/15/2023 08/15/2024 Limit $10,000
DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS / LOCATIONS / VEHICLES (ACORD 101, Additional Remarks Schedule, may be attached if more space is required) Those usual to the Insured's Operations. Certificate holder is an additional insured per the Business Liability Coverage Form SS0008 attached to this policy.

CERTIFICATE HOLDER CANCELLATION
City of Richmond, its officers,
officials, employees, agents and
volunteers
450 CIVIC CENTER PLAZA
RICHMOND CA 94804

SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED

BEFORE THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, NOTICE WILL BE DELIVERED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE POLICY PROVISIONS.

AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE
© 1988-2015 ACORD CORPORATION. All rights reserved.

ACORD 25 (2016/03) The ACORD name and logo are registered marks of ACORD 293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317

June 25, 2024
Community Development
DATE: June 25, 2024
TO: Mayor Martinez and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lina Velasco, Director of Community Development
George Kabaivanov, Interim Building Official
Eva Mann, Code Enforcement Manager
Subject: Contract Amendment No. 2 with 4 Leaf, Inc.

FINANCIAL IMPACT: The payment limit for this contract will not exceed $1,750,000. The on-call services will be funded through applicant fees or salaries saving due to vacancies in the department.

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

November 17, 2020

STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:

On November 17, 2020, the City Council approved an
on-call contract with 4Leaf, Inc. for $750,000 to provide on-call plan review and inspection services. In December 2023, Amendment No. 1 was executed extending term
expiration to December 31, 2025. The Community
Development Department is requesting approval of
Amendment No. 2 with 4 Leaf, Inc. to increase the
contract amount by $1,000,000, for a total contract
amount of $1,750,000, for on-call plan check, inspection, and code enforcement services.

RECOMMENDED ACTION: APPROVE a contract amendment No. 2 with 4 Leaf, Inc. to increase the contract amount by $1,000,000, for a total contract amount not to exceed $1,750,000, through
December 31, 2025, to provide on-call plan check and
inspection services, including building and code
enforcement-related inspections – Community
Development Department (Lina Velasco 510-620-6841).

AGENDA
REPORT
318

June 25, 2024
DISCUSSION:

Following a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) process for on-call consultants, the City Council approved on-call contracts with 10 firms to provide on-call plan check and inspection services on November 17, 2020. Subsequently, the City Council approved an on-call contract with 4Leaf, Inc. for $750,000 to provide on-call plan review and inspection services. A contract amendment for time was executed in 2023 (See Attachment 2). These types of on-call service contracts allow the city to provide the necessary plan check and inspection services in an efficient and timely manner, as well as augment staff to maintain the level of service for the department while experiencing vacancies.

The Department used on-call building inspection services in the past to meet increased demands and backfill during vacations and work restrictions. With the support of Human Resources, the Department has completed a meet and confer process with SEIU to discuss contracting of temporary contract staff for permit technician and code enforcement services. The additional funds would allow for the following position for approximately 6 months and additional contract capacity if hiring is delayed:
 One (1) full-time permit technician
 Two (2) code enforcement officers
Given staffing shortages, staff are requesting Council approval to add additional funding into the contract to allow for temporary contract services for permit technicians and code enforcement staff. The Community Development Department is requesting approval of Amendment No. 2 with 4Leaf, Inc. to increase the contract amount by $1,000,000, for a total contract amount of $1,750,000, for on-call Plan Check, inspection, and code enforcement services (See Attachment 2).

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:

Attachment 1 – Amendment No. 2
Attachment 2 – Original Contract and Amendment No. 1
319

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.

320
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.
321
Contract Amendment between the City of Richmond and
Amendment No. P.O./Contract No.

AMENDMENT PROVISIONS (PAYMENT LIMIT AND SERVICE PLAN)

1. 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 Amendment 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.”

2. 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
322
City of Richmond
2024 Fee Schedule

July 1, 2024

COST PROPOSAL
FY2024-2025 FEE SCHEDULE & BASIS OF CHARGES

FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND
All Rates are Subject to Basis of Charges

PLAN REVIEW COST STRUCTURE NOTES
Plan Review Percentage: 65%
(Inclusive of all disciplines except Fire and Civil which are billed on an hourly basis)
Hourly Plan Review: $150 Non-Structural Review
$165 Structural Review
Fee includes:
 Initial review and two (2) rechecks. Hourly
charges apply after three (3) or more
rechecks.
 Shipping, courier, and electronic service.

Building
Chief Building Official..........................................................................................................................$180/hour Structural Plan Review Engineer.........................................................................................................$165/hour Non-Structural Plans Examiner...........................................................................................................$150/hour Certified Access Specialist (CASp) Inspector.......................................................................................$175/hour Certified Access Specialist (CASp) Plans Examiner..............................................................................$175/hour Senior Combination Building Inspector (Building Inspector III)..........................................................$140/hour Commercial Building Inspector (Building Inspector II)........................................................................$125/hour Residential Building Inspector (Building Inspector I)..........................................................................$110/hour Permit Manager..................................................................................................................................$110/hour Senior Permit Technician ....................................................................................................................$98/hour Permit Technician ...............................................................................................................................$89/hour Clerk/Administrator ............................................................................................................................$75/hour Supervising Inspector of Record.........................................................................................................$170/hour Inspector of Record.............................................................................................................................$149/hour DSA Class 1 / OSHPD A Inspector........................................................................................................$175/hour DSA Class 2 / OSHPD B Inspector........................................................................................................$145/hour DSA Class 3 / OSHPD C Inspector........................................................................................................$103/hour Code Enforcement
Code Enforcement Director................................................................................................................$195/hour Code Enforcement Manager...............................................................................................................$160/hour Senior Code Enforcement Officer.......................................................................................................$130/hour Code Enforcement Officer II ...............................................................................................................$115/hour Code Enforcement Officer I ................................................................................................................$110/hour Code Enforcement Officer..................................................................................................................$99/hour Housing Inspector...............................................................................................................................$99/hour Hearing Officer....................................................................................................................................$150/hour 323
City of Richmond
2024 Fee Schedule

July 1, 2024
Principal-in-Charge...............................................................................................................................$250/hour Hourly overtime charge per inspector................................................................................................1.5 x hourly rate
Mileage (for inspections performed within the City)..........................................................................IRS Rate + 20% Fire
Fire Protection Engineer (FPE)............................................................................................................$210/hour Fire Prevention Officer........................................................................................................................$155/hour Fire Plans Examiner.............................................................................................................................$170/hour Fire Inspector II...................................................................................................................................$140/hour Fire Inspector I ....................................................................................................................................$125/hour Planning
Housing Policy Director.....................................................................................................................$225/hour Planning Director..............................................................................................................................$205/hour Principal/Planning Manager .............................................................................................................$175/hour Senior Planner...................................................................................................................................$160/hour Associate Planner..............................................................................................................................$140/hour Assistant Planner ..............................................................................................................................$120/hour Planning Technician ..........................................................................................................................$100/hour Project Management
Project Manager................................................................................................................................. $190/hour Principal-in-Charge..............................................................................................................................$280/hour Engineering, Public Works Inspection, & Construction Management (Prevailing Wage) Civil Plan Review (Grading, Improvement Plans) ................................................................................ $175/hour Traffic Engineer.................................................................................................................................... $230/hour Construction Manager..........................................................................................................................$162/hour Public Works Inspector (Regular Time)................................................................................................ $153/hour Public Works Inspector Apprentice….................................................................................................... $99/hour Public Works Plans Examiner….............................................................................................................$145/hour

BASIS OF CHARGES
Rates are inclusive of “tools of the trade” such as forms, telephones, and consumables. • All invoicing will be submitted monthly.
• Staff Augmentation work (excluding plan review) is subject to 4-hour minimum charges unless stated otherwise. Services billed in 4-hour increments.
• Most plan reviews will be done in 10 business days or less and 5 business days or less for re-checks. This is not inclusive of holidays or the day of the pick-up of plans. • Expedited reviews will be billed at 1.5x the plan review fee listed in the fee schedule. Return time will be within seven (7) days of receipt of the plans from the City. • Plan review of deferred submittals & revisions will be billed at the hourly rates listed. 324
City of Richmond
2024 Fee Schedule

July 1, 2024
• All plan review services will be subject to a $350 minimum fee if percentage-based fee or 2-hour minimum charge if hourly rates apply.
• Larger complex plan reviews can be negotiated to achieve the best possible pricing. • All plan review services are billed on a percentage basis and includes the initial review and 2 rechecks. - Plan reviews will be billed on an hourly basis only after the initial review and 2 rechecks unless otherwise agreed upon on a case-by-case basis.
- Fire and Civil Reviews are billed on an hourly basis and are not included in our plan review percentage.
• These above rates reflect the 2024 calendar year
• Overtime and Premium time will be charged as follows:
- Regular time (work begun after 5AM or before 4PM) 1 x hourly rate - Nighttime (work begun after 4PM or before 5AM) 1.125 x hourly rate - Overtime (over 8-hour M-F or Saturdays) 1.5 x hourly rate - Overtime (over 8 hours Sat or 1st 8-hour Sun) 2 x hourly rate - Overtime (over 8 hours Sun or Holidays) 3 x hourly rate • Overtime will only be billed with prior authorization of the Director or other designated City personnel. • All work with less than 8 hours rest between shifts will be charged the appropriate overtime rate. • Mileage driven during the course of Inspections will be charged at cost plus 20%. • Payment due on receipt. All payments over 30 days will be assessed a 1.5% interest charge. • Client shall pay attorneys’ fees, or other costs incurred in collecting delinquent amounts. • Client agrees that 4LEAF’s liability will be limited to the value of services provided. • In accordance with California’s Meal Break and Rest Break Law requirements, Client will be billed one (1) additional hour per day at the regular rate for each missed meal or rest break due to Client-directed tasks or requirements. Client should allow 4LEAF’s non-exempt, hourly employees the opportunity to take their entitled rest and meal breaks during each work shift.

BASIS OF CHARGES – PREVAILING WAGE • Rates shown assume the projects will require compliance with California Prevailing Wage rate requirements and assumes the Client will be filing a PWC-100 Form to the California Department of Industrial Relations (DIR) for the projects.
• Rates for prevailing wage categories are subject to annual escalations in accordance with the bi-annual wage determinations from the California DIR.
• Per the new requirements being enforced under SB 854 and because it is assumed that a PWC-100 Form will be filed by the Client to the CA DIR for each project, 4LEAF is required to notify an authorized Apprenticeship Committee through submittal of a DAS-140 form. We are then required to make an official request to an authorized Apprenticeship Committee for an apprentice by submitting a DAS-142 form. We are not assured the apprenticeship committee will be able to provide a suitable/qualified apprentice for the project. Per the apprenticeship requirements, the hours worked by the apprentice must be in a ratio of 1:5 for apprentice to journeyman hours. 4LEAF will not know the labor classification of the Public Works Apprentice until an Apprentice is dispatched to the site; therefore, the rates for the five Periods listed under the California DIR’s Wage determination for Building Construction Inspector were used to determine the range of hourly rates for Public Works Inspector Apprentice. 325
City of Richmond
2024 Fee Schedule

July 1, 2024
• Pre-approved Overtime and Premium hours for labor categories subject to Prevailing Wage requirements will be charged per the following:
- Nighttime (work begun after 4PM or before 5AM) 1.125 x hourly rate - Overtime (over 8-hour M-F or Saturdays) 1.35 x hourly rate - Overtime (over 8 hours Sat or 1st 8-hour Sun) 1.85 x hourly rate - Overtime (over 8 hours Sun or Holidays) 2.35 x hourly rate • All invoicing will be submitted monthly.
• All work with less than 8 hours rest between shifts will be charged the appropriate overtime rate. • Project-related mileage for inspections will be billed at the allowable IRS Rate. • Payment due on receipt. All payments over 30 days will be assessed a 1.5% interest charge. • Client shall pay attorneys’ fees, or other costs incurred in collecting delinquent amounts. • Client agrees that 4LEAF’s liability will be limited to the value of services provided. • In accordance with California’s Meal Break and Rest Break Law requirements, Client will be billed one (1) additional hour per day at the regular rate for each missed meal or rest break due to Client-directed tasks or requirements. Client should allow 4LEAF’s non-exempt, hourly employees the opportunity to take their entitled rest and meal breaks during each work shift. 326
Task Order: Code Enforcement Services
04/16/24
TBD
City of Richmond
Code Enforcement Services /Weed Abatement
450 Civic Center Plaza
Richmond, CA 94804
ITEM: I 4LEAF ESTIMATED UNIT ESTIMATED

CODE ENFORCEMENT SERVICES PERSONNEL HOURS PRICE TOTAL
Jeffrey Gallegos 1440 $130 $187,200
Alyssa Busby 1440 $110 $158,400
Tayana Mclain 128 $110 $14,080
Nathan Sagastume 128 $110 $14,080
Preliminary Estimated Fees $373,760
Project Management & Administration $0
Total Preliminary Estimated Fees $373,760
Estimate is for 4LEAF to provide Code Enforcement Services to the City of Richmond.

Scope of Work: 4LEAF will provide a qualified Sr Code Enforcement Officer and Code Enforcement Officers to provide code enforcement services. 4lEAF will provide Code Enforcement Officers for after hours Vendor Enforcement as needed for the City of Richmond.

This assignment is five days (5) per week on (40 hours per week) with a one to two (1-2) days per week (8-16 hours on the weekends) as needed for Vendor Enforcement. The City may extend these services as-needed.

This is a time and materials estimate for these services and will be in accordance of the terms and conditions of 4LEAF's on-call Agreement. 4LEAF will bill the rate of $130/hour for a Senior Code Enforcement Officer and $110/hour for a Code Enforcement Officer. All work will be billed at 4 hour minimums and billed in 4 hour increments.

This cost estimate is for 06/01/24 - 02/07/25. Personnel may be subject to change upon city approval.

Code Enforcement Officer - Vendor Enforcement As needed DATE:

PROPOSAL NO.:

CLIENT:

PROJECT:

LOCATION:

Code Enforcement Officer
Code Enforcement Officer - Vendor Enforcement As needed Sr.Code Enforcement Officer
327
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
328
___ 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.
329
___ 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. 330
___ 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.
331

ANY PROPRIETOR/PARTNER/EXECUTIVE
OFFICER/MEMBER EXCLUDED?

INSR ADDL SUBR

LTR INSD WVD

PRODUCER CONTACT
NAME:

PHONE FAX
(A/C, No, Ext): (A/C, No):

E-MAIL
ADDRESS:

INSURER A :

INSURED INSURER B :

INSURER C :

INSURER D :

INSURER E :

INSURER F :

POLICY NUMBER POLICY EFF POLICY EXP TYPE OF INSURANCE (MM/DD/YYYY) (MM/DD/YYYY) LIMITS

AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY

UMBRELLA LIAB

EXCESS LIAB

WORKERS COMPENSATION

AND EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY
DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS / LOCATIONS / VEHICLES (ACORD 101, Additional Remarks Schedule, may be attached if more space is required)

AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE
EACH OCCURRENCE $
DAMAGE TO RENTED CLAIMS-MADE OCCUR PREMISES (Ea occurrence) $ MED EXP (Any one person) $
PERSONAL & ADV INJURY $
GEN'L AGGREGATE LIMIT APPLIES PER: GENERAL AGGREGATE $

PRO- POLICY LOC JECT PRODUCTS - COMP/OP AGG
OTHER: $

COMBINED SINGLE LIMIT
(Ea accident) $
ANY AUTO BODILY INJURY (Per person) $

OWNED SCHEDULED
AUTOS ONLY AUTOS BODILY INJURY (Per accident) $

HIRED NON-OWNED PROPERTY DAMAGE
AUTOS ONLY AUTOS ONLY (Per accident) $
$

OCCUR EACH OCCURRENCE
CLAIMS-MADE AGGREGATE $
DED RETENTION $
PER OTHSTATUTE ER
E.L. EACH ACCIDENT
E.L. DISEASE - EA EMPLOYEE $
If yes, describe under
DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS below E.L. DISEASE - POLICY LIMIT INSURER(S) AFFORDING COVERAGE NAIC #

COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY
Y / N
N / A
(Mandatory in NH)

SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE

THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, NOTICE WILL BE DELIVERED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE POLICY PROVISIONS.

THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS

CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS.

THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS

CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AFFIRMATIVELY OR NEGATIVELY AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. THIS CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE ISSUING INSURER(S), AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OR PRODUCER, AND THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER.

IMPORTANT: If the certificate holder is an ADDITIONAL INSURED, the policy(ies) must have ADDITIONAL INSURED provisions or be endorsed.

If SUBROGATION IS WAIVED, subject to the terms and conditions of the policy, certain policies may require an endorsement. A statement on this certificate does not confer rights to the certificate holder in lieu of such endorsement(s).

COVERAGES CERTIFICATE NUMBER: REVISION NUMBER:

CERTIFICATE HOLDER CANCELLATION
ACORD 25 (2016/03) © 1988-2015 ACORD CORPORATION. All rights reserved.

CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE DATE (MM/DD/YYYY)
$
$
$
$
$
The ACORD name and logo are registered marks of ACORD
4/22/2024
License # 0C41366
(925) 462-8400 (925) 462-8888
25674
4LEAF, Inc.
2126 Rheem Dr
Pleasanton, CA 94588
20044
42374
A 1,000,000
X 6806X631656 3/15/2024 3/15/2025 1,000,000
5,000
1,000,000
2,000,000
2,000,000
A 1,000,000
8106X632782 3/15/2024 3/15/2025
A 6,000,000
CUP6X635599 3/15/2024 3/15/2025 6,000,000
B
X FOWC521971 3/15/2024 3/15/2025 1,000,000
1,000,000
1,000,000
C Professional Liab HCC2425616 4/9/2024 Each Claim 2,000,000 C HCC2425616 4/9/2024 3/15/2025 Aggregate 2,000,000
The attached forms apply as required per written contract or written agreements between the listed parties and the insured, which are subject to the policy provisions. In the absence of such written contract or written agreement the attached form may not be applicable.

The City of Richmond, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers are named as Additional Insureds on General Liability Policy per attached endorsement CG D3 81 09 15. Primary and Non-Contributory applies to General Liability policy per attached endorsement CG D3 81 09 15. Waiver of Subrogation applies to Workers Compensation policy per attached endorsement WC 99 04 10 C.

City of Richmond
450 Civic Center Plaza, Suite 210
Richmond, CA 94804-0046
4LEAINC-01 MINED1
Granite Professional Insurance Brokerage, Inc.
360 Lindbergh Avenue
Livermore, CA 94551 [email protected]
Travelers Property Casualty Company of America
Berkshire Hathaway Homestate
Houston Casualty Company
X
3/15/2025
X
X
X
X
X X
X X
332






333
334


 


  





 
 
 
 




 
  



 




 
  
 



! 

"# $


 

 





 %

& '
( 
  )

*)( 
  
 +



%
 )  
 


 


 ) % + 


 %) 
 
  


 ,(  

 
 %




  ) 

 + 
 


+  

 %)

 
&

 








 -

 


 )& 



 +


) )  

 

&   
 


 

-

  
 
  ) 
) )  
 


( 

( 





 &

  
 


     

 

 

  
 

 

 




  
 

 







 
  

  

 


 

     
  

 


 


 

 
 




  


 
 



  

 

  
 


 

 

 


   



 
  



  


     

 

  
 


   


 

 )  
 + 


  

.
 /



 0

0

 



  ,


( 



 
 1
 
 
 

 


!"#(  

 
 



 
 & 






 
  

 ) 

.
 ) 
) /
   -


 



  ,


(


 
) 
 


) 







!"#(  

 
 234   




  



 

 






)

  





&


  





 ) -  0)0  )

 0

0



 
 563
)  ) /
   
 - 

 00

    
  

  0)7
0 
.
  
   
 
) 
(


-
(


) 

(

 




&


  
   ) %

-
 




   

&

 



  ,

$

( %

 



,

&
 '(





!"#(  

 
  (
"! 
!)$"(  

  


 











) 
  

.




/
  & $ '
  ,
)

 8

-

( 
 


   % - 

   
 %
 ) 
 0
0 ) 


 
  

.
( 


 
+ %) ) % 
 0%
)
*)0  *+ )  00 ) 
(

(
0) 
0 
 


    %
9 



 
) 
(  %  
 
- *%+ )  00

   %)





 0

0 
 
) 0)0   


%

)

( % )  




 0)7
0 (


)

, ', -% ' : ;352




)
)&  



& ,
 5  <

)

 
  
 


( &






&

 





335


 



(

 



*)+ 1


  ) 
   0

0
  
   ) %

- %

 

 
 
 



& 
( 
 


 





 
 
 
 
( , '
( ) 00 



(

(

 

  %



 


 
 00& *.+ = 
 
   
 0
-
 

  
0 


( 



 
-
 )


  0

0  >

 



  ,


( 





   


 -


!"#(  

 
 

 

&







*..+ !

 )  ) 


) 0)0  )

 0

0

 
- 0

0

 > )



  00 ) 7 
(

  %


  
&

 ) %



 ) 
 

&
*...+ 1 )(   


( 


 


 


 


 


 0

0 


( 



 

 ( ) 
 


 



,


%)*%+( 0

0&
 

 
 

 
 *./+ 1

 
%
 
 0

0 








 
 0

0 
) 

*%+   ?@(333  
  %
 %
A
- ) 


%
  0%
)


%
  
 

-
*)0  0) 
0 





B /
 %
   0
0 


 

( 
 
 0
-

 & 1  
  

0 )


 
( %


 %
& )   
 

 

%
 ,-



( 


 
(  %

 



,


%)*0+(


! 
"8 
  

 
 

 


=
"#& 





*/+ 1

 
%
 
 0

0  *0+  
% +


 %) 


 
% +


 0

0   /
(





 
  )



- 

 


  ?233  ) %-

 



 ) 
 
  
  
>&
 
 0

0 


 )


  

 

  
 0

0( % )   



 

 




 
 

 

%
 ,-

 



%

*'+
 ,-


( 


 
( 


1( 

2.$3 "!.
#4

/"!)5"
"!!.(
!3( 

! 
"8 

 

  


 
=
"#(  





 



&  ) 
>

)



 *'+ )


 

( + ) ) 

 
  
 
% 

  *





 ) 

( -



 )
 

( %
( 


 



 %) 



 
 +

& 
 
 
 

  -

%


 

  %




 *&+




+

 ) 






)  *



( 
-  
% 


 
%
 

%

)

  )   
 0

0


 
)( +

(
00 
 ) 
(

(   %


   ) 
 %

&


  
   
  @3 )
 

*$+




 
%

  -
 


  00 ) 
(

(  /
  
)


 )
 %
 )  ) 0)
0( ) 

 
 
 
(

-

A
 )   

B( %



 




( , 
 
A
 )   

 
%

) )B 
&
%
 





&
,
 ;  < : ;352




)
)&  



&

, ', -% '

)

 
  
 


( &






&
336


 

= 
  

  /
  *%+    )  00&

)


 )

-


 

)
 
    
)   
 

 


/
 %) 
  )  00&
 
& = 
  )


! 
%
)  

,
 ,) 
)

 /




& 

 
 
  %)



)( %


 ) % 
%  
 
 



 +


 % 
%

 



  ,

,( 6$2 

 ) 




 
)
-
.

(  

  

 



 /

&




*#+ 


 

    
- +

 ,) 
 )  0

0   
  

.

 

 
  
%

   00 ) 
 

-

 
 
(




    
 
 
  
  0

0  




( , 
 
-
 

 ,


& 
$( %
& 1 

  


%

)  
 )




 




(  )  
 00

  00 
-
 

 )
)



 





  


)9
 
 





& &

 
%

    )
-

 
  



 )9 

 



  ,

( "# $(. $

 
%

 

)
&
&2"(  

  

 

 1

 )    +
  ?5(333  )




 0

0&
! 
%    00

 )   


 
 








 




 
 
 
&

 



  ,


%)( 
  

 

 

   

  





 

 

= ) 

 
  

. 
-

 




 

  ,- 
  
  
 0
0  0

0 -



0&( 

7 
" 68"
"
(  
 

)

 
 0
0  0

0 >


  

 




 

'
( 
 



 )  ) +

*)+ = A
 )  


B9
 

 


?C2  )(   +
  *&+   A
 )   

B9
?D23  )  0
0& *$+  % A
 )   

 
%

) -
 

 






 )B9
 

 

*#+  +
 
( 
 



 




 



 ,- 
 A
 )   
  
 -



0)(
!)
8 !()(.
68"
"
( 

.
B9 


  

 


  *"+ ) 0)0 

. %) ) 

 -



  
 0
0  0

0&
1

 )   ?23  )   +
 
 


   


?5(233  ) 

 +

-

 



,


'(
!)
7"!  %) ) %
  
  
   - 7 .5
(
7 "$
/"!3
5).
( (
"!



(
 00  
 
 


 )&  

  



  
  



 



  ,


0(

/"! '
!)
7"! 7 .5
(
7 "$
/"!3
5).
(
)5" 6("
.

(  

  

 (
"!










1

 ) 

  )
 )

"!

)2 !
8"!(3 


 ) 
  

.
  
 +-
 /
  ) %) 

 
1

 )   ?<33  0

0 


-

  + 
  ) 0
0
  
 
 )



 0

0( 
 
 
 0
0  0

0 *+ 
 %)  0

09  


  

 %)

, ', -% ' : ;352




)
)&  



& ,
 @  <

)

 
  
 


( &






&
337


 



&



 

)  


 

 

 (  



  

.
 





( )



 %) )

 
& *
 ) 


 


& '
-
 


     
  



 
   

  -
 

 
  +

  

 

 



  ,

%(


$")29"(4
.
!"8!"
"()(.
4 ! !) # 
  -
& ( 


  





,
 <  < : ;352




)
)&  



&

, ', -% '

)

 
  
 


( &






&
338
339
5420
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373

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.

Community Development Chris Castanchoa [email protected] (510) 620-6764 13633 / 5420 4Leaf, Inc. will provide on-call plan check and building inspection services for the Community Development Department, City of Richmond, CA.
✔
1 4Leaf, Inc.
2126 Rheem Drive Pleasanton, CA 94588 Craig Tole, Director of Development Services (925) 580-4055 [email protected] 4005-8099 December 31, 2023 ✔ November 17, 2020 December 1, 2020 December 31, 2023 750,000.00 DocuSign Envelope ID: 11ED9913-D855-49CB-B1C7-4BB347FEB4FC 374
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.
4Leaf, Inc.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 11ED9913-D855-49CB-B1C7-4BB347FEB4FC Vice President
President
City Manager 12/5/2023
375
Contract Amendment between the City of Richmond and
Amendment No. P.O./Contract No.

AMENDMENT PROVISIONS (TERM 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. 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
4Leaf, Inc.
1 / 5420 December 1, 2020 December 31, 2025
None.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 11ED9913-D855-49CB-B1C7-4BB347FEB4FC 376
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
4Leaf, Inc.
1 / 5420 750,000.00 ✔ December 31, 2025 750,000.00 750,000.00 750,000.00 750,000.00 DocuSign Envelope ID: 11ED9913-D855-49CB-B1C7-4BB347FEB4FC 377
___ 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.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 11ED9913-D855-49CB-B1C7-4BB347FEB4FC 378
___ 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.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 11ED9913-D855-49CB-B1C7-4BB347FEB4FC 379
___ 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.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 11ED9913-D855-49CB-B1C7-4BB347FEB4FC 380

ANY PROPRIETOR/PARTNER/EXECUTIVE
OFFICER/MEMBER EXCLUDED?

INSR ADDL SUBR

LTR INSD WVD

PRODUCER CONTACT
NAME:

PHONE FAX
(A/C, No, Ext): (A/C, No):

E-MAIL
ADDRESS:

INSURER A :

INSURED INSURER B :

INSURER C :

INSURER D :

INSURER E :

INSURER F :

POLICY NUMBER POLICY EFF POLICY EXP TYPE OF INSURANCE (MM/DD/YYYY) (MM/DD/YYYY) LIMITS

AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY

UMBRELLA LIAB

EXCESS LIAB

WORKERS COMPENSATION

AND EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY
DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS / LOCATIONS / VEHICLES (ACORD 101, Additional Remarks Schedule, may be attached if more space is required)

AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE
EACH OCCURRENCE $
DAMAGE TO RENTED CLAIMS-MADE OCCUR PREMISES (Ea occurrence) $ MED EXP (Any one person) $
PERSONAL & ADV INJURY $
GEN'L AGGREGATE LIMIT APPLIES PER: GENERAL AGGREGATE $

PRO- POLICY LOC JECT PRODUCTS - COMP/OP AGG
OTHER: $

COMBINED SINGLE LIMIT
(Ea accident) $
ANY AUTO BODILY INJURY (Per person) $

OWNED SCHEDULED
AUTOS ONLY AUTOS BODILY INJURY (Per accident) $

HIRED NON-OWNED PROPERTY DAMAGE
AUTOS ONLY AUTOS ONLY (Per accident) $
$

OCCUR EACH OCCURRENCE
CLAIMS-MADE AGGREGATE $
DED RETENTION $
PER OTHSTATUTE ER
E.L. EACH ACCIDENT
E.L. DISEASE - EA EMPLOYEE $
If yes, describe under
DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS below E.L. DISEASE - POLICY LIMIT INSURER(S) AFFORDING COVERAGE NAIC #

COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY
Y / N
N / A
(Mandatory in NH)

SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE

THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, NOTICE WILL BE DELIVERED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE POLICY PROVISIONS.

THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS

CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS.

THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS

CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AFFIRMATIVELY OR NEGATIVELY AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. THIS CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE ISSUING INSURER(S), AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OR PRODUCER, AND THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER.

IMPORTANT: If the certificate holder is an ADDITIONAL INSURED, the policy(ies) must have ADDITIONAL INSURED provisions or be endorsed.

If SUBROGATION IS WAIVED, subject to the terms and conditions of the policy, certain policies may require an endorsement. A statement on this certificate does not confer rights to the certificate holder in lieu of such endorsement(s).

COVERAGES CERTIFICATE NUMBER: REVISION NUMBER:

CERTIFICATE HOLDER CANCELLATION
ACORD 25 (2016/03) © 1988-2015 ACORD CORPORATION. All rights reserved.

CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE DATE (MM/DD/YYYY)
$
$
$
$
$
The ACORD name and logo are registered marks of ACORD
6/21/2023
License # 0C41366
(925) 462-8400 (925) 462-8888
25674
4LEAF, Inc.
2126 Rheem Dr
Pleasanton, CA 94588
35378
A 1,000,000
X 6800J268720 4/9/2023 4/9/2024 1,000,000
5,000
1,000,000
2,000,000
2,000,000
A 1,000,000
8107R025623 4/9/2023 4/9/2024
A 6,000,000
CUP1S364055 4/9/2023 4/9/2024 6,000,000
A
X UB2T357728 4/9/2023 4/9/2024 1,000,000
1,000,000
1,000,000
B Professional Liab MKLV7PL0005809 4/9/2023 Each Claim 2,000,000 B MKLV7PL0005809 4/9/2023 4/9/2024 Aggregate 2,000,000
The attached forms apply as required per written contract or written agreements between the listed parties and the insured, which are subject to the policy provisions. In the absence of such written contract or written agreement the attached form may not be applicable.

The City of Richmond, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers are named as Additional Insureds on General Liability Policy per attached endorsement CG D3 81 09 15. Primary and Non-Contributory applies to General Liability policy per attached endorsement CG D3 81 09 15. Waiver of Subrogation applies to Workers Compensation policy per attached endorsement WC 99 03 76.

City of Richmond
450 Civic Center Plaza, Suite 210
Richmond, CA 94804-0046
4LEAINC-01 MINED1
Granite Professional Insurance Brokerage, Inc.
360 Lindbergh Avenue
Livermore, CA 94551 [email protected]
Travelers Property Casualty Company of America
Evanston Insurance
X
4/9/2024
X
X
X
X
X X
X X
DocuSign Envelope ID: 11ED9913-D855-49CB-B1C7-4BB347FEB4FC 381


 


  





 
 
 
 




 
  



 




 
  
 



! 

"# $


 

 





 %

& '
( 
  )

*)( 
  
 +



%
 )  
 


 


 ) % + 


 %) 
 
  


 ,(  

 
 %




  ) 

 + 
 


+  

 %)

 
&

 








 -

 


 )& 



 +


) )  

 

&   
 


 

-

  
 
  ) 
) )  
 


( 

( 





 &

  
 


     

 

 

  
 

 

 




  
 

 







 
  

  

 


 

     
  

 


 


 

 
 




  


 
 



  

 

  
 


 

 

 


   



 
  



  


     

 

  
 


   


 

 )  
 + 


  

.
 /



 0

0

 



  ,


( 



 
 1
 
 
 

 


!"#(  

 
 



 
 & 






 
  

 ) 

.
 ) 
) /
   -


 



  ,


(


 
) 
 


) 







!"#(  

 
 234   




  



 

 






)

  





&


  





 ) -  0)0  )

 0

0



 
 563
)  ) /
   
 - 

 00

    
  

  0)7
0 
.
  
   
 
) 
(


-
(


) 

(

 




&


  
   ) %

-
 




   

&

 



  ,

$

( %

 



,

&
 '(





!"#(  

 
  (
"! 
!)$"(  

  


 











) 
  

.




/
  & $ '
  ,
)

 8

-

( 
 


   % - 

   
 %
 ) 
 0
0 ) 


 
  

.
( 


 
+ %) ) % 
 0%
)
*)0  *+ )  00 ) 
(

(
0) 
0 
 


    %
9 



 
) 
(  %  
 
- *%+ )  00

   %)





 0

0 
 
) 0)0   


%

)

( % )  




 0)7
0 (


)

, ', -% ' : ;352




)
)&  



& ,
 5  <

)

 
  
 


( &






&

 


 DocuSign Envelope ID: 11ED9913-D855-49CB-B1C7-4BB347FEB4FC 382


 



(

 



*)+ 1


  ) 
   0

0
  
   ) %

- %

 

 
 
 



& 
( 
 


 





 
 
 
 
( , '
( ) 00 



(

(

 

  %



 


 
 00& *.+ = 
 
   
 0
-
 

  
0 


( 



 
-
 )


  0

0  >

 



  ,


( 





   


 -


!"#(  

 
 

 

&







*..+ !

 )  ) 


) 0)0  )

 0

0

 
- 0

0

 > )



  00 ) 7 
(

  %


  
&

 ) %



 ) 
 

&
*...+ 1 )(   


( 


 


 


 


 


 0

0 


( 



 

 ( ) 
 


 



,


%)*%+( 0

0&
 

 
 

 
 *./+ 1

 
%
 
 0

0 








 
 0

0 
) 

*%+   ?@(333  
  %
 %
A
- ) 


%
  0%
)


%
  
 

-
*)0  0) 
0 





B /
 %
   0
0 


 

( 
 
 0
-

 & 1  
  

0 )


 
( %


 %
& )   
 

 

%
 ,-



( 


 
(  %

 



,


%)*0+(


! 
"8 
  

 
 

 


=
"#& 





*/+ 1

 
%
 
 0

0  *0+  
% +


 %) 


 
% +


 0

0   /
(





 
  )



- 

 


  ?233  ) %-

 



 ) 
 
  
  
>&
 
 0

0 


 )


  

 

  
 0

0( % )   



 

 




 
 

 

%
 ,-

 



%

*'+
 ,-


( 


 
( 


1( 

2.$3 "!.
#4

/"!)5"
"!!.(
!3( 

! 
"8 

 

  


 
=
"#(  





 



&  ) 
>

)



 *'+ )


 

( + ) ) 

 
  
 
% 

  *





 ) 

( -



 )
 

( %
( 


 



 %) 



 
 +

& 
 
 
 

  -

%


 

  %




 *&+




+

 ) 






)  *



( 
-  
% 


 
%
 

%

)

  )   
 0

0


 
)( +

(
00 
 ) 
(

(   %


   ) 
 %

&


  
   
  @3 )
 

*$+




 
%

  -
 


  00 ) 
(

(  /
  
)


 )
 %
 )  ) 0)
0( ) 

 
 
 
(

-

A
 )   

B( %



 




( , 
 
A
 )   

 
%

) )B 
&
%
 





&
,
 ;  < : ;352




)
)&  



&

, ', -% '

)

 
  
 


( &






&
DocuSign Envelope ID: 11ED9913-D855-49CB-B1C7-4BB347FEB4FC 383


 

= 
  

  /
  *%+    )  00&

)


 )

-


 

)
 
    
)   
 

 


/
 %) 
  )  00&
 
& = 
  )


! 
%
)  

,
 ,) 
)

 /




& 

 
 
  %)



)( %


 ) % 
%  
 
 



 +


 % 
%

 



  ,

,( 6$2 

 ) 




 
)
-
.

(  

  

 



 /

&




*#+ 


 

    
- +

 ,) 
 )  0

0   
  

.

 

 
  
%

   00 ) 
 

-

 
 
(




    
 
 
  
  0

0  




( , 
 
-
 

 ,


& 
$( %
& 1 

  


%

)  
 )




 




(  )  
 00

  00 
-
 

 )
)



 





  


)9
 
 





& &

 
%

    )
-

 
  



 )9 

 



  ,

( "# $(. $

 
%

 

)
&
&2"(  

  

 

 1

 )    +
  ?5(333  )




 0

0&
! 
%    00

 )   


 
 








 




 
 
 
&

 



  ,


%)( 
  

 

 

   

  





 

 

= ) 

 
  

. 
-

 




 

  ,- 
  
  
 0
0  0

0 -



0&( 

7 
" 68"
"
(  
 

)

 
 0
0  0

0 >


  

 




 

'
( 
 



 )  ) +

*)+ = A
 )  


B9
 

 


?C2  )(   +
  *&+   A
 )   

B9
?D23  )  0
0& *$+  % A
 )   

 
%

) -
 

 






 )B9
 

 

*#+  +
 
( 
 



 




 



 ,- 
 A
 )   
  
 -



0)(
!)
8 !()(.
68"
"
( 

.
B9 


  

 


  *"+ ) 0)0 

. %) ) 

 -



  
 0
0  0

0&
1

 )   ?23  )   +
 
 


   


?5(233  ) 

 +

-

 



,


'(
!)
7"!  %) ) %
  
  
   - 7 .5
(
7 "$
/"!3
5).
( (
"!



(
 00  
 
 


 )&  

  



  
  



 



  ,


0(

/"! '
!)
7"! 7 .5
(
7 "$
/"!3
5).
(
)5" 6("
.

(  

  

 (
"!










1

 ) 

  )
 )

"!

)2 !
8"!(3 


 ) 
  

.
  
 +-
 /
  ) %) 

 
1

 )   ?<33  0

0 


-

  + 
  ) 0
0
  
 
 )



 0

0( 
 
 
 0
0  0

0 *+ 
 %)  0

09  


  

 %)

, ', -% ' : ;352




)
)&  



& ,
 @  <

)

 
  
 


( &






&
DocuSign Envelope ID: 11ED9913-D855-49CB-B1C7-4BB347FEB4FC 384


 



&



 

)  


 

 

 (  



  

.
 





( )



 %) )

 
& *
 ) 


 


& '
-
 


     
  



 
   

  -
 

 
  +

  

 

 



  ,

%(


$")29"(4
.
!"8!"
"()(.
4 ! !) # 
  -
& ( 


  





,
 <  < : ;352




)
)&  



&

, ', -% '

)

 
  
 


( &






&
DocuSign Envelope ID: 11ED9913-D855-49CB-B1C7-4BB347FEB4FC 385
DocuSign Envelope ID: 11ED9913-D855-49CB-B1C7-4BB347FEB4FC 386
DocuSign Envelope ID: 11ED9913-D855-49CB-B1C7-4BB347FEB4FC 387
















 

 



 



 








  




 





 


 






!"

'&$+$'',-+(.-*($+ #$%&
'()*($+

  
 
 



  
 
   
 


   


  







 



 
 



  
 
 
  
  

 
 
  
 


 !











 
















!


"







#

"







"
 #

$
$
  #

%
 $
%


 






  
 
 
 


 



(+/$'0-*($+ %"$1(& '2!(' $+"3 1
+ *
(& + $'&0+*(&(&&!  &!%&2!+* *$ )')-'-*($+$/ *
)$"(
34


6 
 

5
 #

  


DocuSign Envelope ID: 11ED9913-D855-49CB-B1C7-4BB347FEB4FC 388

June 25, 2024
Community Development
DATE: June 25, 2024
TO: Mayor Martinez and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lina Velasco, Director of Community Development
Kristi Ellerbroek, Assistant Planner
Subject: Contract with Mithun to Prepare the City’s Sea Level Rise Adaptation and Resiliency Plan
FINANCIAL IMPACT: This contract will be funded using the City’s fiscal year budgets. $200,000 will be funded by the Fiscal Year
2024-2025 budget and the remaining $200,000 will be
funded by the 2025-2026 Fiscal Year budget. The sole
term of the standard contract will be two years and the payment limit for the contract shall not exceed $400,000.

Staff will be seeking grant funding to off-set portions of the overall costs through a non-competitive grant
program.

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

July 11, 2023

STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:

Following Council direction to issue a Request for
Proposals seeking a consultant to support the
preparation of a Sea Level Rise Adaptation and
Resiliency Plan for the Richmond shoreline, the
Community Development Department is requesting City
Council approval of a professional services contract with Mithun, for an amount not to exceed $400,000, for a term set to begin August 1, 2024, through June 30, 2026, to
create a management framework for sea level rise
adaptation.

AGENDA
REPORT
389

June 25, 2024
RECOMMENDED ACTION: AUTHORIZE the city manager to finalize the negotiation and execute a professional services contract with
Mithun/Environmental Science Associates (ESA), not to
exceed $400,000, for the preparation of framework
components for a Sea Level Rise Adaptation and
Resiliency Plan for the Richmond shoreline - Community
Development Department (Lina Velasco/Kristi Ellerbroek
510-620-6888).

BACKGROUND:

In April 2012, the City Council adopted the General Plan 2030 to guide Richmond’s future growth and development through 15 strategic elements. General Plan Element 8 (Energy and Climate Change) provides policy direction for sustainable energy systems and building climate-resilient communities. The element’s first goal (Goal EC1) calls for Richmond to be a leader in managing climate change. Through the City’s Climate Action Plan adopted in 2016, the City has exhibited dedication to protecting residents and businesses from the risk of climate change impacts. In 2021, the City Council adopted Resolution 43-21 in support of addressing the potential impacts to Richmond from impending sea level rise.

Rising sea and groundwater levels put Richmond at risk. The California Ocean Protection Council estimates the Bay Area may be at risk of up to 1.4 feet of permanent sea level rise inundation by 2050. The City of Richmond has thirty-two miles of shoreline and has the most shoreline of all Bay Area cities. The Richmond Climate Action Plan found that hundreds of Richmond homes and essential infrastructure, such as roads and wastewater treatment facilities, are vulnerable to sea level rise and coasting flooding.

The City of Richmond’s participation in defining local sea level rise policy has a significant impact on local and regional climate objectives. The Bay Conservation and Development Commission’s Regional Shoreline Adaptation Plan calls for all Bay Area municipalities to act on sea level rise concerns and create a shoreline resiliency plan by 2032. Through proactive planning, the City of Richmond can continue to demonstrate leadership in fostering a resilient and sustainable community, while complying with regional legislation to address sea level rise.

On July 11, 2023, the Richmond City Council directed staff to circulate a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the preparation of a Sea Level Rise Adaptation and Resiliency Plan for the Richmond shoreline. The intent of the Sea Level Rise Adaptation and Resiliency Plan is to further evaluate Richmond’s vulnerability to sea level rise and create a management framework for sea level rise adaptation. The Sea Level Rise Adaptation and Resiliency Plan will include an updated sea level rise vulnerability analysis, an adaptation vision document reflecting the community’s sea level rise goals, a citywide inventory of contaminated sites affected by future sea level rise, and identification of specific adaptation measures to promote shoreline restoration and protection. 390

June 25, 2024

DISCUSSION
Consultant Selection Process
On September 29, 2023, the City issued an RFP for Richmond's Sea Level Rise Adaptation and Resiliency Plan. The RFP was posted on the City's BidsOnline System, and 1,459 vendors were notified (See Attachment 2). Of the firms notified, 59 firms downloaded the RFP. There were four (4) total respondents to the RFP.

Each proposal was rated based on technical qualifications and availability of key project team members, experience with sea level rise adaptation planning, and working with regional public agencies. In addition, project understanding, approach to deliverables, and cost-effectiveness to meet the requirements of the RFP were examined. The first rating was through a ranking system by individual interview panel members, followed by one round of interviews for the two highest-ranked firms. The evaluation committee included representatives from the Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC), State Coastal Conservancy, two Community Members, and City Staff from the Community Development Department’s Planning Division and the Public Works Department’s Engineering Division. The Mithun/Environmental Science Associates (ESA) proposal was recommended by the interview panel based on the team’s holistic project understanding, specialty of wide-ranging project deliverables, and costeffectiveness of their approach. The Mithun/ESA proposal also bridges a communitybased approach to adaptation goals with comprehensive data analysis of the challenges facing Richmond’s shoreline.

Proposed Scope of Work
The scope of work proposed by the Mithun/ESA team for preparation of the Sea Level Rise Adaptation and Resiliency Plan consists of seven key project tasks to be completed in an approximately 24-month timeline:
 Task 1 (Project Initiation): In this task, the Mithun/ESA team will create the project schedule and a project organization chart.
 Task 2 (Community Engagement and Outreach Support): In this task, the Mithun/ESA team proposes to facilitate up to seven public meetings, create outreach materials, and support a community-based organization consultant to develop a Community Vision Document crafted with the participation of the Richmond community.
 Task 3 (Confirm Vulnerable Assets): This task will identify community exposures and assets vulnerable to sea level and shallow groundwater rise. This will culminate in a Sea Level Rise Vulnerability Assessment and a digital elevation model.
391

June 25, 2024
 Task 4 (Adaptation Responses): For this task, the team will identify adaptation responses for approximately seven priority locations that have the greatest nearterm exposure and risk to sea level rise, including critical infrastructure. Sites demonstrating more long-term sea level rise risk would also be identified during this task. This task will culminate in the selection of possible near and long-term adaptation frameworks, with the intent to prioritize nature-based solutions where feasible.
 Task 5 (Implementation Approach): This task will provide recommendations and project milestones to implement adaptation strategies for the near-term priority locations identified in Task 4. Phasing strategies, integration of adjacent projects, and a governance approach will also be identified in this task.  Task 6 (Sea Level Rise Adaptation Framework): The Sea Level Rise Adaptation and Resiliency Plan framework components will be drafted and finalized in this task.
 Task 7 (Project Management Support): This task will include the maintenance of the project schedule, reporting, and budget management throughout the project.

Scope Refinements Anticipated
Community Development Department staff request City Council authorization to enter into a professional services contract with Mithun/ESA for the key project tasks identified in the original scope of work, while allowing the City Manager to negotiate the final contract cost and details, for an amount not to exceed $400,000. Due to the extended Council recess, staff were unable to refine the project scope and finalize project fees prior to the request for contract authorization. Through various internal and external conversations, staff finds it necessary to include additional deliverables to the Mithun/ESA proposal to create a more comprehensive Sea Level Rise Adaptation and Resiliency Plan.

It is essential to center community engagement at the forefront of all planning efforts to establish transparency and prioritize intersectional equity and racial justice along our entire shorefront community. The Mithun/ESA team recommends including a community-based organization to lead community engagement to supplement engagement efforts and reach more of the Richmond community. Task 2: Community Engagement will need to be revised to include a subcontract with the Watershed Project to provide additional public outreach. The Watershed Project’s involvement could consist of additional public and stakeholder meetings, community consultation in developing a workforce development plan, multilingual outreach materials, and supplemental outreach efforts to ensure proactive and equitable community involvement is a priority in developing the Sea Level Rise Adaptation and Resiliency Plan.

Given the history of contaminated sites in Richmond, it is crucial to include an inventory of contaminated shoreline sites with additional surveys and technical data collection in 392

June 25, 2024
the project’s scope. Staff proposes to supplement the Mithun-ESA team’s Task 3:

Confirm Vulnerable Assets to create a contaminated site inventory for known and historical unknown contaminated sites on the shoreline. Pending further scope of work discussions, the contaminated site inventory could include the name of toxins and level of contamination at each site, the site’s regulatory context, past and future remediation efforts, and the responsible parties for future remediation of shoreline sites, excluding the present Chevron Refinery and the Port of Richmond. Some other sites with legal restrictions may be exempted from the inventory following subsequent research. Sea level rise adds urgency to contaminated site remediation and restoration along the Richmond shoreline, and the inclusion of the contaminated site inventory is necessary to understand how climate change will impact the legacy of industrial sites on our community and natural resources.

In the original RFP, the Port of Richmond area was excluded from the project scope, as the Port will be assessed in a separate Strategic Plan. However, staff finds that the entire shoreline should be involved in all topographic and general surveys. As such, the revised project scope will include provisions for the Port area to be included in all general City-wide surveys to be specified in the contracting process.

It will be essential for the City to apply for grants to supplement the funding and technical work for the Sea Level Rise Adaptation and Resiliency Plan. Staff is researching various regional grants that complement the proposed additional deliverables to ensure necessary surveys, community outreach, and data collection are accomplished. As such, staff proposes to include Mithun/ESA’s optional task of grant application support and grant writing in the final scope of work and budget.

Key tasks in the scope of work will be further refined to include additional survey data to inform short-term adaptation projects and the inventory of contaminated sites.

Community Development staff will provide the City Council with all details pertaining to the final scope of work once the Mithun/ESA contract is finalized. Elements of key tasks are shown in the fee schedule below. While exact fees have not been determined, the payment limit for the contract shall not exceed $400,000.

Mithun-ESA Team
Task 1: Project Initiation $14,625
Task 2: Community Engagement and Outreach
Support
$24,875
Task 3: Confirm Vulnerable Assets $33,750
Task 4: Adaptation Responses $85,500
Task 5: Implementation Approach $32,250
Task 6: Sea Level Rise Adaptation Framework $20,000
Task 7: Project Management $24,000
Mithun-ESA Consultant Subtotals $235,00
Allowance for additional input on governance,
funding, and specialty engineering
$15,000
393

June 25, 2024
Additional Services & Estimated Costs
Task 2: Watershed Project subcontract and design
team coordination for community engagement
$80,000
Task 3: Additional studies to be determined for
detailed assessments of priority locations, such as
contaminated sites
For example:
 Topographic/bathymetric surveys
 Groundwater flow mapping
 Utility and infrastructure mapping
$30,000
Task 4: Development of adaptation options $40,000
TOTAL ≤ $400,000.00
CONCLUSION:

Staff recommends the City Council authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a professional services contract with Mithun/ESA, not to exceed $400,000, for the preparation of Sea Level Rise Adaptation and Resiliency Plan framework components for the Richmond shoreline.

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:

Attachment 1 – Mithun Proposal
Attachment 2 – BidsOnLine Report
Attachment 3 – Matrix
394
Proposal for Sea Level
Rise Adaptation and
Resiliency Plan
Prepared for the City of Richmond
October 30, 2023
395
mithun.com
On the Cover: Richmond, CA
October 30, 2023
Lina Velasco, Director
Community Development Dept
City of Richmond, California
[email protected]
Re: Sea Level Rise Adaptation and Resiliency Plan for Richmond Dear Lina Velasco and members of the selection committee, On behalf of the Mithun + ESA team of designers, planners and engineers, we are excited to submit this proposal for creation of a Sea Level Rise Adaptation Plan for the City of Richmond. In many ways, Richmond epitomizes both the challenges and opportunities inherent in re-imagining human co-existence with the Bay in the face of Sea Level Rise. The historic industrial development of Richmond’s varied waterfront, has been both foundational in its development and also helped entrench many of the injustices and inequities faced by its current communities. We hope to be a part of helping to re-imagine Richmond’s transformation and adaptation from shared vulnerabilities to a more just and equitable future in this next chapter.

For the past six years, Mithun has led sea level rise (SLR) and climate adaptation planning and design efforts in the Bay Area and beyond, that have centered community in the adaptation design process. ESA has established themselves as Bay Area leaders and innovators in understanding how nature-based features can be applied to a wide range of complex coastal conditions, as well as how to navigate the complex regulatory environment to realize them as built projects. Our combined team has spent considerable time working on Richmondarea focused projects, the most recent of which comprises a similar scope as this RFP for the creation of a Collaborative Shoreline Adaptation Plan for ~5-mile stretch of North Richmond.

This deeply community-based work has been an incredible experience for our team members over multiple years, that we are proud of, and like to share out as a model for other Bay Area municipalities and communities considering the multi-faceted challenge of SLR Adaptation. Of course, given its complex jurisdictional overlaps, where unincorporated areas of Contra Costa County with significant areas of Richmond itself, we have come to understand well the importance of a process that can bring everyone together at the design table, from agencies to property owners to legacy residents and community

PROPOSAL CONTACT
Tim Mollette-Parks
Partner
585 Howard St, #300
San Francisco, CA 94105
[email protected]
(415) 489 4834
396
1 mithun.com
groups. In many respects, we have been learning from Richmond, and cycling back sharing out our work transparently, creating a continuous learning environment that supports people in practicing adaptation together.

From our previous experience, we understand how a planning endeavor such as yours is a crucial opportunity for neighbors to talk with each other about immediate and long-term changes to beloved and intensively used places in their city. Our role as planners and designers is to work with care and sensitivity to this valued place and to set a tone of co-learning and co-designing. Our team takes pride in community-collaboration as a foundation of building adaptation pathways. Our team leadership of Tim Mollette-Parks, Graham Laird Prentice, have been working together to deliver implementable and funded SLR adaptation projects for more than six years, around the Bay Area, and particularly in areas of Richmond and North Richmond.

The Mithun-ESA team would be excited to have the opportunity to work with the City of Richmond to develop a vision and strategy for sea-level rise adaptation that will help the Richmond community achieve a more resilient and equitable future. We understand that developing this sea-level rise adaptation plan is just one important step towards the long-term effort of stewarding a thriving Richmond, and with that in mind, the our team has prepared the attached proposal that we believe will best utilize the city’s available resources to progress planning and community outreach, and move the city on a path towards future grant funding for specific, implementable priority sea-level rise resilience projects, and build partnerships and community capacity to facilitate long-term stewardship of the Richmond shoreline.

Tim Mollette-Parks, Partner Graham Laird Prentice, Senior Associate Partner-in-Charge Project Manager
Qualifications
and Experience
NOTE: Mithun does not have any currently known or potential conflicts of interest with the City of Richmond to disclose. This proposal is valid for a 90-day period. 397
2 3
Qualifications and
Experience
The team we have assembled to support SLR
adaptation on the Richmond shoreline is driven by
shared values of equity, curiosity and collaboration.

Along with this important alignment in values, we’ve
already been working together as a team on SLR
projects in and around Richmond and Contra Costa
County for the previous four years, yielding important
advancements in resilience planning in the region. We’re thrilled to present this team for your consideration to continue our community-centered, nature-prioritized
approach to long-term adaptation to rising sea levels
and groundwater challenges.

Our core team is:

Mithun: overall team lead (and day-to-day project
contact), with focus on physical/spatial coastal
adaptation planning, visualization, community and
communication support, and project management. — Mithun is an integrated design practice of landscape architects, architects and urban designers bringing
their wide range of skills to bear on projects in
a highly collaborative process with clients and
communities. Mithun will lead the project from our
San Francisco-based landscape architecture and
urban design team. We are a California-focused
team, nationally recognized for design excellence,
including the recently awarded AIA National Firm
of the Year for 2023. We take a holistic approach
to planning and design, learning a site in all its
aspects—social/cultural, ecology, hydrology, mobility,
project economics, scale and form, and adjacencies—
and are committed to developing solutions that are
uniquely appropriate to a place.
— Tim Mollette-Parks | Partner in Charge — Graham Laird Prentice | Project Manager, Principal Contact for the City
Supporting our dynamic and diverse team, Tim
Mollette Parks will serve as the partner in charge and
will work closely with Graham Laird Prentice, project
manager and principal contact for the project (and
proficient Spanish speaker). Together, Tim and Graham
will manage the wider team to guarantee smooth
communication and the best outcome for the City of
Richmond.

Tim and Graham have been working together on
Bay Area sea-level rise projects with a specific focus
on areas of Richmond and North Richmond over
the past six years. As managers of complex, large
infrastructure scale projects they bring unique skills to the emerging and nascent issues of climate change
adaptation. As spatial designers they are focused
on the human experience and as implementers of
system-scale ecologies they bring technical knowhow to the conversations that span multiple partners, agencies, regulators and funders. They collaborate
frequently with Mithun teams on projects that address
affordable housing, workforce development and holistic
infrastructure systems for sustainability.

The North Richmond Collaborative Shoreline
Adaptation Plan is a Bay Area model for successful
community engagement and implementation. It’s a
project that emerged from working with a community
advisory board during Resilient by Design into a fullyfunded phase 1 living levee being built by the West County Wastewater District, in partnership with
community, public agencies and local property owners.

The success of their project management approach
is to be listeners, conveners and to create a rich
environment for people to learn and grow with each
other.

North Richmond Collaborative Shoreline Adaptation Plan / North Richmond, CA
Community co-design site walk visiting the wetlands of Wildcat and San Pablo Creeks.
398
4 5
ESA
ESA is a multi-disciplinary environmental engineering
firm serving clients ranging from government agencies
to nonprofits to private industry. ESA is the Bay Area
leader in designing and implementing nature-based
solutions to sea-level rise, with dozens of shoreline
habitat restoration and sea-level rise adaptation
projects completed, and more than 10 projects
currently in stages of development. ESA employs
more than 600 environmental scientists, planners,
engineers, cultural resource specialists, data science
experts and other professionals dedicated to forming
enduring partnerships and raising industry standards.

Combining rigorous science with practical engineering
solutions, ESA specializes in multi-benefit projects that result in sustainable coastal adaptations, water quality improvement, ecosystem restoration, and recreational
benefits. — Michelle Orr, P.E. | ESA Project Director — Eddie Divita, P.E. | ESA Project Manager Michelle and Eddie have worked together on shoreline
management and habitat restoration projects in San
Francisco Bay, along the California Coast, and beyond
for over 12 years. Their work includes the planning,
design, and monitoring for foundational projects
demonstrating innovative nature-based approaches
to improve sea-level rise resilience and restore high
quality shoreline landscapes. They have partnered
with Tim and Graham on previous projects along the
Contra Costa County shoreline, including the North
Richmond Collaborative Shoreline Adaptation Plan and
North Richmond Living Levee. In addition, Mithun and
ESA are working together currently to develop regional
planning guidelines for coastal resilience for the Bay
Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC).

All members of this leadership team, along with each
firm’s support staff identified in our resumes section, have confirmed their availability to support the City of Richmond’s adaptation planning effort, coordinated
with the included project schedule and scope.

When working on issues of SLR in a diversity of areas
like those along the city’s shoreline, we’ve learned
from previous experience it’s crucial to have a deep
bench of advisers with particular specialty knowledge,
that can be brought into the process at key junctures,
driven by needs that may emerge as the team learns
more about the existing conditions and challenges. In
our previous SLR planning and design projects, we’ve
worked with regional thought-leaders in these design
and planning adjacent fields that can be foundational
in unlocking further success of a long-range plan for
living with SLR into the future. In our budget, we have identified funds for supporting focused conversations
or team workshops with these supporting experts.

We’ve worked with all these organizations previously
and have contacted them to be sure they’re open and
available to support this effort in Richmond with their participation in advising conversations or workshops to be determined over the course of the project.

Funding Strategies
NHA Advisors
The Mithun-ESA team previously worked with NHA
Advisors on developing SLR funding strategies for North Richmond and west Contra Costa County.

Governance Strategies
Greenbelt Alliance
Our team has worked with Greenbelt Alliance for years
around governance modeling and communications.

We are currently collaborating with them on the BCDC
Regional Shoreline Adaptation planning guidelines.

Resilient by Design / North Richmond, CA
Specialty Engineering Support
The Mithun-ESA team has strong working relationships
with numerous specialist engineering and technical
consultants. While these specialized disciplines are not required for the base scope of work and have not been
included in the core project team, the Mithun-ESA team
is ready to engage these additional partners if needed
to support services beyond the base scope or for future project phases. — Geotechnical Engineering — Sewer, Pumps, & Other Water Utility Infrastructure:

Carollo Engineers
— Groundwater and Geohydrology — Soil and Groundwater Remediation — Port and Maritime Infrastructure and Facility Engineering
— Transportation Engineering
Resumes of key members of our team are included in
the appendix.
399
6 7
A team uniquely suited to support
SLR adaptation in Richmond
The hallmarks of our team’s qualifications and previous experience gather around five critical aspects of our
team that we think are uniquely crucial to the context
and vulnerabilities of the Richmond shoreline
Equitable Adaptation
Mithun’s approach to co-developing SLR adaptation
approaches is rooted in finding ways to pursue equity
and self-determination, particularly for communities
who have endured environmental and racist injustice.

Our approach emphasizes communication, listening
and regular reflection with the team to ensure that
everyone can do their best work and align with the
project needs. To get there, we see our multi-faceted
role as:
— Educator and Learner (in a co-learning process with
the city and communities)
— Adaptation Planner and Designer
— Visualization andCommunication Specialist
For example, in our work supporting the North
Richmond Shoreline, we collaborated with a local nonprofit to recruit (and compensate) a group of community members to participate in codevelopment of an adaptation vision. The process included educational aspects of learning academies (to level up understanding of SLR vulnerabilities and
adaptation techniques), site tours (to learn together
about the existing conditions of the shoreline) and
co-design workshops (to ensure the designs reflected
community will from their inception, rather than as
only review feedback). Through this layered process of
co-learning and co-design, community members were
more prepared to share the work in their community
networks, and more facile in talking with agency
leaders and elected officials to advocate for selfdetermination and build relationships outside of the community that helped direct regional and federal
funding back to the long-term implementation of
adaptation in their neighborhood.

Doing this type of shoulder-to-shoulder work with
community members over the years has imbued our
team with crucial capabilities in creating outreach
materials that are accessible and engaging for
a variety of background and education levels.

Throughout Mithun’s work in North Richmond,
during Resilient by Design and on the Vancouver
waterfront, we’ve developed approaches and visual
resources for conveying dynamic shoreline conditions
in easy-to-understand ways, through before and
after representations, and simple animations that
prepare viewers to think about adaptation over time.

These visual depictions can serve as the backbone
for multiple uses, including fact sheets, social media
posts, presentations that can also be distributed to
Community Leaders to share in their wider networks
beyond the project-specific meetings. We’ve found
this is another sound strategy for reaching community
members that may not have historically participated in
planning decisions. By co-creating the project and colearning with dedicated community members, who can then take the storytelling into their personal networks around schools, churches and civic groups, a wider net
is cast and can pay dividends for greater participation in this phase and future phases of SLR planning in San
Rafael.

Another technique we’ve used is also noted in the
RFP prompt, which is to integrate other community
priorities into the conversation. In our previous
experience we’ve found that the layering of multiple
benefits that SLR planning can bring is a way to engage more broadly, when climate change may not be the
best pressing factor in the minds of some community
leaders.

For example, part of our climate resilience work in North Richmond focused on housing insecurity and led our
team to support community members in establishing
a community land trust and local home ownership
pathway as protection against gentrification. That cobeneficial aspect of SLR planning in North Richmond cross-pollinated the climate risks aspects with the social vulnerability aspects and brought community members
together that may not have typically engaged with one
another. Our previous SLR planning work has also used
workforce development as a way to build connection
with community segments that may have typically not
been engaged in planning decisions. Resilient by Design / North Richmond, CA ESA
Environmental Planning
and Engineering
Mithun
Prime; Planning Lead
Michelle Orr
Environmental Engineer
Debra Guenther
Design with Equity Advisor;
California Licensed
Landscape Architect
Ethan Wynacht
Project Planner
Policy & Funding
Advisory Bench
Mariel Steiner
Landscape and Urban
Designer
Jeff Canton
ESA Project Manager
Greenbelt Alliance
Eddie Divita
Project Engineer
Katie Stege
GIS Lead
NHA Advisors
City of Richmond
Tim Mollette-Parks
Partner in Charge
Mithun
Graham Laird Prentice
Project Manager
Daily Contact for the City
Mithun
400
8 9
Technical Rigor and Deep Experience in NatureBased SLR Approaches Both Mithun and ESA have experience delivering
projects in coastal conditions around the Bay Area
and beyond that reflect best practices in technical
considerations around feasibility, adaptation measures, compound flooding dynamics considerations, and
local (and hyper local) geotechnical and ecological
considerations. The team members assembled have
experience in designing, both concepts and towards
implementation, nature-based adaptations, including
ecotone slope levees, barrier beaches, a spectrum
of green to grey approaches. ESA’s innovative and
region-leading implementation of ecotone slope levee
approaches at Oro Loma in Alameda County remains
a hallmark project that the region looks to. In addition, our team has studied these types of approaches in
detail around San Pablo Bay and western Contra Costa,
providing us with a deep background in executing
on these approaches efficiently in the planning
and engineering process. The team also has a deep
familiarity with existing data and modeling sources
from our shared long-time experience of working in
climate adaptation around Richmond and the adjacent
geographies.

Communication and Visualization Skills
We see visualization and communication skills of
the Mithun team as foundational to unlocking both
community participation and SLR adaptation planning
success, and ensuring the two are intertwined. We tailor the visualization process, the same as we tailor the
design investigations, specifically to a place, people and ecology. Some of the tools that we find the most useful across our previous work, and that would consider
further with the Richmond team: — Before and after hand sketching, that allows for visualization to happen quickly and iteratively, and
leave room in the process for community members
to see their input take shape in real-time design
— Diagrammatic animations, that can allow
community members to more easily understand
change over time
— Translation of all labeling, titles and other supporting call-outs into Spanish for any community facing work
Workforce Development Integration
Mithun is recognized nationally for our research and
advocacy around workforce development as a critical
co-benefit of climate adaptation. The work of members
of the Mithun team has been featured in symposiums
and presentations at the Landscape Architecture
Foundation in Washington DC, in their focus on Green
New Deal pathways and with the Pacific Northwest's
Regional Collaboration for Green Infrastructure Career
Pathways, convened by The Nature Conservancy.

In our Bay Area work, we have collaborated closely
with local agencies, existing employment groups and
environmental advocates in Contra Costa County to
prioritize local workforce development in economically
disinvested areas. Our team would focus on applying
the lessons we’ve learned in that work to our approach
in Richmond.

Local Needs, Calibrated to Regional Input
As the RFP highlights, working with regional agencies
in SLR adaptation is crucial. We all share vulnerabilities to coastal flooding and groundwater rise across
jurisdictional boundaries. The Mithun-ESA team has
a track record and ongoing effort in engaging with
these issues at the regional level and beyond. Through
our work on the North Richmond Collaboration
Shoreline Adaptation Plan, we have developed working
relationships with regional and state interested
collaborators, including the regional water board and
the SF district office of the US Army Corps of Engineers.

In addition, Mithun is currently the prime consultant
to developing regional planning guidelines for the Bay
Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC).

In that effort, we are playing a crucial role in navigating between regional resilience, and local needs. We believe this overlap of Mithun project teams between potential
local work in Richmond and regional work with BCDC
provides our group with a unique understanding of how
local and regional approaches can be co-supportive,
both in terms of project design, and towards funding,
governance and regulatory considerations.

Recent Mithun + ESA projects in Richmond.
401
10 11
Design for
Climate Justice
Combining a Regional Approach with Local
Self-Determination
The San Francisco Bay Area is taking a proactive
approach to sea level rise issues - working across
agencies and with vulnerable communities to practice
adaptation by sharing science, best practices and
changing regulations.

Discovering Multiple Benefits from Shared Risk and
Opportunity
Respecting local leaders, Mithun amplified community
priorities through a co-design process. The fivemile shoreline adaptation plan and 30% design and engineering of phase one led by Mithun, is a
collaboration between property owners and the
community to look at the multiple benefits through the
lens of shared risks and opportunities.

A Path for Future Change
This innovative co-design process has coalesced around
decades of community leadership, strengthening trust
and long-term stewardship along the way. The new San
Francisco Bay Restoration Regulatory Integration Team
(BRRIT) has come together from six state and federal
agencies in order to streamline the permitting process
for habitat adaptation projects in the Bay.

Client West County Wastewater District; San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority
Overview 5-mile Collaborative Shoreline Plan; 3/4 mile long levee with ecotone slope to protect WCW critical
infrastructure, provide transitional habitat, and
trails for public access.

Metrics Certification
Services Landscape Architecture, Urban Design and Planning Collaborators List here
North Richmond Living Levee
and Collaborative Shoreline
Adaptation Plan
Richmond and North Richmond, California

PHASE I LIVING LEVEE
PHASE 1A ‘NORTH CLUSTER’
PHASE 1B ‘SOUTH CLUSTER’

RICHMOND PARKWAY

WILDCAT CREEK

SAN PABLO CREEK

WEST COUNTY

WATEWATER
NORTH

RICHMOND

WILDCAT
MARSH

DRAFT/CONFIDENTIAL
68 OLLABORATIVE SHORELINE ADAPTATION PLAN / 2023

LEVEE CORE

STUDY AREA BOUNDARY
LEVEE CORE + TRAIL

EXISTING FLOOD CONTROL MEASURES

EXISTING BIKE TRAILS

PROPOSED BIKE LANES

VEGETATED HABITAT SLOPES

PROPOSED BRIDGE / BOARDWALK

PROPOSED TRAILS

EXISTING CLASS I TRAIL
LEGEND

SAN PABLO
MARSH

WILDCAT
MARSH

CHEVRON

REFINERY

RICHMOND

RICHMOND PARKWAY

WILDCAT CREEK
NORTH

RICHMOND

LANDFILL
DOTSON
MARSH
CASTRO
COVE

PARCHESTER

VILLAGE

SAN PABLO CREEK

PHASE I LIVING LEVEE
PHASE 1A ‘NORTH
CLUSTER’

SAN PABLO STRAIT
(SAN FRANCISCO BAY)
PHASE 1B ‘SOUTH
CLUSTER’
The North Richmond
Collaborative Shoreline
Adaptation Plan is a crucial
and visionary project that aims
to create multiple benefits for
some of the most vulnerable
residents of west Contra
Costa County: protecting
critical infrastructure,
bringing together community
members and stakeholders in
an equity-based process, and
delivering important habitat
resilience and public shoreline
access in the face of looming
sea level rise (SLR).

SAN PABLO

SFBRA GRANT APPLICATION

DRAFT/CONFIDENTIAL
7 NORTH RICHMOND COLLABORATIVE SHORELINE ADAPTATION PLAN / 2023 402
12 13
Transformation
through Design
Equity as a Driver of Multi-Benefit Transformation
The Mithun team was assembled to explore how equity
can be rooted as a driver of deep transformation, and to stack benefits across multiple vulnerabilities, supporting a community in addressing a sea level rise and adjoining vulnerabilities such as freshwater flooding, housing
affordability and economic resilience.

A Wide Range of Community-Focused Adaptations
Working with local community-leaders, Mithun assembled
a Community Advisory Board of local residents, advocates and agency leaders to develop ecological resilience
strategies that built on existing planning and ongoing
efforts. Advisory board members became champions
of these projects, leading many to be funded and move
forward.

Urban Ecology as a Racial Equity Tool
Our team’s conceptual approach is rooted in an urban
ecology of strategies that support equity. We propose
re-envisioning our homes as interdependent and a
contributing component of the Bay’s natural systems. We seek to heal divisions and cultivate shared values.

Overview One of 10 teams selected to explore working with communities to develop regionally collaborative
implementable projects to prepare for sea level rise
and climate change impacts
Program Multi-benefit, adaptive design approaches that
empower residents to collectively respond to the
impacts of climate change
Services Architecture, Landscape Architecture, Urban Design and Planning
Resilient by Design
San Francisco Bay Area, California
Mithun studies for shoreline
adaptation in Marin City as
part of Resilient by Design
Regional
Resilience, Local
Priorities
Multiple Scales, All At Once
The Mithun team is supporting the Bay Conservation
and Development Commission (BCDC) in developing
design guidelines that will promote coastal adaptation
that is appropriate to a place, city or subregion, and
can link together for region-wide resilience to sea level rise (SLR).

Equity and Tradeoffs
BCDC’s ongoing coastal adaptation work features
equity as hallmark of their process. Our team of
planners and engagement leaders are supporting
that ambition by developing an Equity Strategy for
the planning effort that frames adaptation tradeoffs
through an environmental justice lens.

Visualization as Communication
The Mithun team is developing animations and 3D
visualizations at throughout the process, to build
shared understanding, and advocate for broad support
for the new adaptation guidelines across the myriad
jurisdictions in the Bay Area.

Client Bay Conservation and Development Commission
Overview Resilience goals, strategies and design guidelines for regionally coordinated sea level rise adaptation
Size 9 counties; more than 400 miles of shoreline
Services Planning, design guidelines, equity strategy support, community engagement support
Collaborators ERG, ESA, Greenbelt Alliance
Regional Shoreline Adaptation Plan
San Francisco Bay Area, California
403
14 15
Co-Benefits for
Community and
Habitat
Client Contra Costa County Flood Control District
Program Fish habitat enhancement, sediment basin
regrading, community park spaces, upgraded trails,
public art opportunities
Size 4 acres
Services Landscape Architecture
Collaborators Watershed Project, Community Engagement; Flow West, Restoration and Civil Engineering
Completion 2024 est.

Wildcat Creek Trail, Community
Park, and Fish Habitat Enhancement
North Richmond, California
Multi-Benefit Enhancements
The design approach for Wildcat Creek builds on years
of activism and community co-design to create new
neighborhood amenities along Wildcat Creek in North
Richmond with a focus on education, play and trail
connectivity. Situated near the Verde School, the project re-envisions an existing fill material storage area into a new mini-park with outdoor classroom.

Improved Habitat and Community Gathering Space
The project team redesigned an existing fish ladder to
repair the connectivity for migrating salmonid. As a
companion response, the team also designed a series
of terraces leading to an overlook above the fish ladder, creating a space for environmental education and
outdoor meeting space for community groups, including
Verde School’s Parent-Teacher Association.

Re-Introducing The Community To Nature
Wildcat Creek offers the only easily accessible natural open space in North Richmond, an community-ofcolor neighborhood that has endured generations of disinvestment. This project improves pedestrian
connectivity, safety and program opportunities along the creek trail, to encourage rediscovery of this riparian area.

Rich City Rides Wellness Hub
Richmond, California
Client Richmond Our Power Coalition
Overview Design and Visualization to support the
Richmond Our Power Coalition’s tour
with Justice Funders, raising capital for 3
new catalyst projects to provide critically
needed spaces, amenities, housing and
food security in North Richmond.

Size 0.25 acres
Services Landscape Architecture, Architecture,
Community Engagement
Visioning Black
Wellness
Creating a compelling vision
The design team worked with community leaders
to understand their goals and priorities for new
development that would address food security and
housing concerns. Then, we worked quickly to translate
those ideas into inspiring yet practical visualizations that could convey the project’s aspirations to potential funders.

A Sanctuary for Black Culture
The Black Wellness Hub envisions a space for mental,
physical, and communal healing. It will hold space for
Black people to learn the history of Black people in
American and throughout the disapora. In addition to
providing space, resources, and equipment for physical
activity and wellness, the space will host cultural
activities such as African drumming, dance, language,
and more.

Reconnecting Community Spaces
The Wellness Hub is also situated immediately next
to Unity Park, enabling fence removal, and reengagement between this new facility and the park itself, including native planting, water management,
and cultivation of fruit trees by neighbors and
community partners.
404
16 17
Client City of Richmond
Size Citywide
Duration 2015 – 2017
Services GHG Inventory, Development of Climate Action
Plan, CEQA Documentation, Vulnerability
Assessment and Adaptation Report
City of Richmond
Climate Action Plan
Adopted | October 2016
ESA led the development of the City of Richmond
Climate Action Plan (CAP), a roadmap for reducing
community-wide GHG emissions and preparing the
City for the anticipated impacts of climate change
on public health, infrastructure, ecosystems, and
public spaces. The CAP builds upon the City’s Health
in All Policies Strategy, providing the vision, goals, and specific actions that will be needed to strengthen
the connections between climate protection, energy
security, community resilience, health equity,and the
local economy. The project included extensive public
outreach, coordination with multiple agencies and
stakeholders, and completion of the City’s first detailed Climate Change Adaptation Study, which downscales
climate change impacts to the local scale and includes
a vulnerability and risk assessment of the City’s most
important assets to rising temperatures, rising seas,
extreme weather events, and more extreme droughts.

City of Richmond Climate Action Plan
Richmond, California
Priority actions for increasing community resilience and adapting to climate change are incorporated into a
CAP chapter on Community Resilience. A key aspect of
the project was the development of robust metrics and
indicators for triple-bottom-line sustainability that will enable the City to monitor both GHG reductions and
co-benefits of CAP strategies and actions.

Decolonizing
Coastal
Adaptation
Exploring Adaptation Pathways
Vancouver’s False Creek is a beloved urban, waterfront
that is vulnerable to sea level rise in the next century.

The Mithun+One team worked with the City, a
community advisory group and youth to create a
vision of the waterfront that makes space for natural
abundance while reconnecting relationships with the
dynamics of land and water.

Decolonizing the Design Process
First Nation knowledge keepers, cultural advisors
and artists were an integral part of the design team
and their stories guided the long-term vision, nearterm actions, and language around adaptation.

The proposed strategies create a vision where the
Musqueam, Squamish and Tsleil-Waututh people can
see themselves, their values, knowledge and culture
represented.

Working toward the Vision
Two pilot projects integrate flood protection measures, habitat creation and traditional knowledge. A forested
berm tests new tree cultivars and plant guilds adapted
to changing temperatures and supports red cedars,
yellow cedars and sequoias. A habitat bench is designed for people, marine life, reuse and decay.

Client City of Vancouver, BC
Overview One of two teams contracted to explore coastal adaptation approaches along Vancouver’s False Creek
Program Tidal marsh, mudflats, clam gardens, urban forest, gravel beach, wetlands, stream daylighting, habitat
structures / First Nations canoe house and cultural
exchange, co-management and stewardship, regional
parks and open space, multi-use trail, education and
interpretive trails / Affordable housing, adaptive reuse, blue-green streets, pedestrian street
Size 160 acres
Services Architecture, Interior Design, Landscape Architecture, Urban Design and Planning
Collaborators One Architecture, Modern Formline, Herrera, Moffatt & Nichol, Charlene Aleck- Tsleil-Waututh Nation
Knowledge Keeper
Sea2City Design Challenge
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
405
18 19
This project is helping to enhance the resilience of one of Marin County’s most visited and vulnerable parks.

Sea-level rise is threatening the Bothin Marsh Preserve’s shoreline habitats and their ability to support native
wildlife, including special-status species, migratory
birds, and rare plant species. It is also threatening a popular segment of the Bay Trail with increasingly
frequent flooding. ESA completed conceptual planning
and restoration engineering analyses for OneTAM and is
currently developing the 30% design engineering.

ESA developed conceptual designs for marsh habitat
enhancement that incorporate a range of established
and innovative measures, including channel excavation,
beneficial reuse of dredged material, coarse beach
shorelines and rare plant propagation. ESA worked
to integrate the marsh enhancement designs with
alternatives for raising and realigning the trail. ESA
estimated sediment supply to the tidal marsh under
existing and proposed conditions with and without
realignment of the adjacent Coyote Creek to assess
how different concepts could enhance habitat and site
evolution with sea-level rise.

Bothin Marsh Sea-level Rise
Adaptation Project
Marin County, California
Client OneTAM (Golden Gate National Parks Conservancy
and Marin County Parks)
Size 67 acres
Duration 2021 - ongoing
Services Wetland Resilience, Engineering Design, Flood
Protection, Habitat Enhancement
Richmond Bay Specific Plan and Draft Environmental Impact Report © 2016 Opticos Design, Inc. | ESA provided CEQA and sea level rise assessment
services for the Richmond Bay Specific Plan and SubArea 4 Project EIR. The Richmond Bay Specific Plan will help transform 360 acres of underutilized industrial
waterfront in Richmond’s South Shoreline area into
a revitalized, pedestrian-oriented district that would
integrate a mixture of high-intensity research and
development uses with new medium-density housing
options. ESA prepared a sea level rise vulnerability and adaptation assessment, which included a coastal flood
assessment that mapped areas vulnerable to flooding
due to sea level rise; a menu of adaptation options for adapting sites to sea level rise; and a flood assessment of selected adaptation options. The results of this
analysis were included in the EIR certified in December, 2016.

In 2020, ESA prepared an Addendum to the 2016 EIR in
response to a development application for the Campus
Bay Project. HRP Campus Bay, LLC proposed to develop
approximately 89 acres of Sub-Area 4 Project analyzed
Richmond Bay Specific Plan /
Campus Bay CEQA Review
Richmond, California
in the EIR, with slight modifications to the development scenario previously envisioned. Specifically, the
addendum was prepared to determine if the analysis in
the Specific Plan EIR adequately addresses the potential environmental impacts that may occur with the
Campus Bay Project, and that none of the conditions
described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 calling
for the preparation of a subsequent EIR or negative
declaration have occurred. In particular, ESA addressed the Campus Bay Project’s consistency with updated
state guidance for sea level rise as well as related
adaptation standards adopted in the Specific Plan. The
addendum was completed in December 2020.

Client City of Richmond
Size 375 acres
Duration 2016 - 2018
Services CEQA Documentation, Environmental Settings,
Impacts and Mitigation Measures
406
20 21
Client California State Coastal Conservancy
Size 100 acres
Duration 2016 – 2020
Services Preliminary Design, CEQA Documentation,
Permitting, Construction Period Services, Physical
Processes and Water Quality Monitoring, Aerial
Drone Surveying
The Giant Marsh Living Shoreline Project, constructed
at Point Pinole, uses a variety of nature-based
shoreline treatments to provide ecological and sealevel rise adaptation benefits. ESA led the engineering design and permitting of the Project’s nature-based
approaches to sea-level rise including installation of
several unique oyster reef balls or cubes composed of
concrete and shell units. These uniquely crafted reef
units were strategically placed in the low marsh area
to function as a buffer against waves, contributing
to shoreline protection. The Giant Marsh project
incorporated a diverse range of tidal and subtidal
plant species, including eelgrass, rockweed, and native cordgrass. These plant species were carefully integrated into the ecosystem to enhance ecological resilience.

ESA’s monitoring of wave attenuation over the oyster
reef, reef stability, and sedimentation is being utilized to support future nature-based adaptation projects across
California State Coastal Conservancy,
Giant Marsh Living Shoreline
Richmond, California
the region. This comprehensive approach to living
shorelines is helping to drive scientific understanding and practical application in San Francisco Bay and
beyond.

ESA is serving as a subconsultant to Fehr & Peers in the preparation of the Richmond Parkway Environmental
Justice & Regional Mobility Plan for West Contra
Costa Transportation Advisory Committee (WCCTAC).

The team is identifying transportation needs along a

9.5-mile major arterial and goods movement corridor
linking I-80 to the north and I-580 to the south, building community consensus on key transportation issues,
and recommending feasible and community-responsive
strategies within Contra Costa County and the City
of Richmond, as well as the nearby cities of San Pablo
and Pinole. ESA’s focus is on the development and
evaluation of strategies that will provide benefits for environmental justice, equity, and greenhouse gas
emissions reductions, particularly for disadvantaged
and vulnerable communities along the corridor.

Richmond Parkway Environmental
Justice & Regional Mobility Plan
Richmond, California
The scope includes assessing and mapping a wide
range of social, economic, and environmental factors,
including sea level rise and flood hazard areas.

Client West Contra Costa County Transportation Advisory Committee
Size 20 miles of shoreline
Duration 9.5 miles
Services Existing conditions and future trends analysis (health equity, hazards), and public outreach
407
22 23
ESA prepared an EIR evaluating the Richmond Terminal
One Project that would convert a vacant, former
industrial site on Richmond’s waterfront. The 14-acre
site will be developed with up to 340 homes, as well
as a two-acre park and a Bay Trail loop. A full EIR was prepared to address all CEQA topics, and particular
effort involved assisting the City with the analysis of the potential aesthetic effects of the new development on
existing significant views, and closely evaluating effects related to cleanup of hazardous materials, sea level rise and flooding, and land use and planning consistency.

A key challenge of this project was its aim for an
aggressive schedule, although the project description
continued to evolve well after public scoping and ESA’s initiation of work. The City published the Draft EIR for public review and comment in March 2016.

Recommendations/Outcomes: In order to address
impacts related to sea level rise at the project site,
ESA recommended the inclusion of a project measure
requiring long-term monitoring and adaptation,
including financing of adaptation features, which was
adopted by the City in the Draft EIR. Additionally,
Richmond Terminal One
Richmond, California
in response to comments received on the Draft EIR,
ESA recommended the preparation of a qualitative
analysis of both wind and shadow impacts that could
result from the construction of the project buildings,
which was prepared and presented in the Response to
Comments document. Outcomes for both the sea level
rise measures and the wind and shadow analyses are
pending.

Client City of Richmond
Size 14 acres
Duration 2014 – 2018
Services Environmental review (CEQA and NEPA), Resource agency consultation, Issue-specific planning ,
surveys and data collection
The derelict Terminal 4 Wharf site is made up of over
2,500 concrete and creosote-contaminated timber
piles, plus a wharf building, decking, and other
appurtenant structures. The removal project consists
of the preparation of 60% construction documents
and environmental documentation, with a strong
emphasis on habitat preservation and restoration.

Design efforts are being supplemented by an extensive
field data collection including real-time wave data. A
comprehensive geomorphic assessment of conditions
before and after removal was conducted to assess the
potential for shoreline re-alignment, long-term slope
stability, and impact on protected sub-tidal resources
including an extensive eelgrass patch that had
developed in the lee of the terminal.
• ESA prepared the engineering design, construction
approach, CEQA, permitting, and monitoring
and construction documents for the removal of
over 2,500 concrete and creosote-treated timber
piles from the Bay, as well as other derelict wharf,
decking, and other structures.

Richmond Terminal Four Wharf
Removal
Richmond, California
• By removing large amounts of fill, alleviating an
ongoing source of contamination, and preventing
current and future navigational hazards, the City
of Richmond can move closer to re-opening this
section of shoreline to development and public
access use.

Client California State Coastal Conservancy
Size N/A
Duration 2018 - 2021
Services Development of 60% design plans and
specifications, Analysis and modeling, cost
estimates, CEQA documentation, monitoring
program for post-construction
408
24 25
Client East Bay Regional Park District
Size 307 acres
Duration 2012 - 2014
Services Opportunities and constraints, Conceptual
Design, Lagoon and wetland habitat restoration,
Pocket Beach Establishment, Grading Plan,
Architectural Site Plan, Construction Cost Estimate,
Shoreline Design, Wave modeling, Sea Level Rise
Planning
ESA assisted the East Bay Regional Park District
(EBRPD) with the development of a lagoon
enhancement feasibility study and conceptual design
for Miller Knox Regional Shoreline in Richmond,
California. ESA led the multi-disciplinary consultant
team to evaluate the feasibility of connecting a
perched, artificial lagoon to San Francisco Bay with
a tidal channel that crosses a new sandy beach.

The objectives of the lagoon enhancement project
include enhancing existing open water and wetland
habitats, improving water quality, and enhancing
the public access experience for park users. For Phase
1 of the project, ESA and its partners developed an
opportunities and constraints analysis and a suite
of conceptual design approaches that focused on
achieving the project objectives while minimizing future maintenance obligations for EBRPD. For Phase 2, the
ESA team developed a conceptual design of lagoon and
Miller Knox Shoreline Enhancement
Richmond, California
beach improvements, which represent a major overhaul
of the existing park from a static experience based on
pump operations to a dynamic experience where the
lagoon is connected to the Bay tides.

ESA provided planning, coastal engineering, design
engineering, and regulatory compliance services to
the Port of San Francisco to help ensure the longterm viability and ecological productivity of a popular recreational and open space area within the Port’s
Southern Waterfront. Prior to project implementation,
the site experienced substantial erosion along its
southern shoreline from storm-driven wind-waves and
tidal flows. This resulted in loss of both wetland acreage and habitat function along approximately 1,600 linear
feet of shoreline.

To address concerns about ongoing habitat loss, ESA
assisted the Port in stabilizing the eroding shoreline
using a “living shoreline,” natural systems approach.

The project, implemented in 2022, constructed a coarse
sand/gravel beach, including stabilizing low rock groins enhanced with oyster reef structures, along the shore
of the Park to mimic natural coarse beaches found
along the shore-facing edge of marshes elsewhere in
San Francisco Bay. The project is expected to provide
shoreline protection and ecological benefits over an
Heron's Head Park Shoreline
Resilience Project
San Francisco, California
approximately 30-year project design life. ESA provided permitting support through the Bay Area Regional
Regulatory Integration Team (BRRIT) process and
support for successful grant funding from the San
Francisco Bay Restoration Authority.

Client Port of San Francisco
Size 21 acres
Duration 2019 - ongoing
Services Coastal Engineering, Design Engineering,
Geomorphic Analyses, Biological Assessment,
Environmental Permitting Support, Beach
Restoration Design, Shoreline and Transitional
Habitat Revegetation
409
26 27
The SAFER Bay project is seeking coastal flood
protection for more than 7 miles of San Francisco Bay
shoreline in San Mateo and Santa Clara Counties.

While achieving this goal, the project is striving to
provide sea-level rise adaptation for both human
and tidal wetland communities, to expand recreation
opportunities along the Bay Trail corridor, and to
collaborate with other regional agencies working on
coastal flood and wetland habitat management, such
as the South Bay Salt Ponds Restoration Project, U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service, and local cities.

ESA assisted the San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers
Authority with its successful grant application for the California Department of Water Resources Local Levee
Assistance Program. The grant award is being used to
fund this project’s planning, environmental compliance, and design.

Strategy to Advance Flood
Protection, Ecosystems and
Recreation (SAFER Bay)
Menlo Park, East Palo Alto, and Palo Alto,
California
ESA led the coastal hydraulics evaluation that informs
design of the coastal flood protection. In addition,
ESA applied its understanding of estuarine hydrology
and geomorphology to guide the integration of flood
protection goals with tidal wetlands habitat restoration.

This integration of flood protection and habitat offers benefits to both objectives. For example, levees can
be protected from waves and scour with tidal wetland
vegetation, while former salt ponds can be restored to
tidal wetlands only with adequate flood protection.

In its assessment of stormwater and interior drainage,
ESA identified and preserved existing flow pathways, as well as considered alternate adaptation strategies for
this freshwater flow that drains to coastal waters that will be impacted by sea-level rise.

ESA also led the CEQA environmental review of the
project. This included directing and conducting
technical studies to assess potential impacts on cultural resources, greenhouse gas and air quality emission
modeling, construction noise modeling, and biological
resources. These studies will serve as the basis for an ESA-authored Environmental Impact Review (EIR).

Building on Our Expertise
This project builds on conceptual design alternatives
that ESA developed for the Palo Alto Regional Water
Quality Control Plant as part of the Oro Loma Ecotone
Demonstration Project. The Phase I project, completed
in 2020, focused on preliminary design and permitting
strategy development. Phase II will include final design and regulatory coordination. Key design considerations
included: integrating the horizontal levee plan with
larger regional efforts to protect low-lying infrastructure from sea-level rise, evaluating quantity of the imported of fill for levee construction, identifying a strategy
for obtaining construction permits, incorporating
public access, and advancing the state of the art for
treatment effectiveness.

Palo Alto Horizontal Levee
Palo Alto, California
ESA evaluated conceptual design alternatives for the
design of a horizontal levee in connection with the Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant (RWQCP)
and the Novato Sanitary District as part of an earlier
project. Both locations shared the goals of creating
habitat for special status species, providing sealevel rise adaptation through accretion of freshwater wetland plant biomass, and providing polishing-level
treatment of wastewater prior to discharge to the San
Francisco Bay. The project team leveraged the expertise gained through their successful implementation of
the horizontal levee (ecotone) demonstration project,
located at the Oro Loma Sanitary District WWTP,
to other potential sites around the perimeter of San
Francisco Bay.
410
28 29
Project
Understanding
Restoring a Former Army Airfield
The California State Coastal Conservancy and US Army
Corps of Engineers are restoring the Hamilton Army
Airfield and adjacent State Lands Commission property
to tidal and seasonal wetlands. Once part of an
extensive tidal wetlands area in San Francisco Bay, this area of low lying land was diked and then converted
to an airfield in 1930. As part of the base closure it is intended that the 900 acres of land be restored to tidal and seasonal wetlands. The site is deeply subsided –
current elevations are approximately 6 feet below sea
level – and approximately 7 M cubic yards of dredged
material have been placed to raise site elevations
prior to opening the site to the tides. ESA provided the conceptual design and is assisting in preparation of
engineering design drawings.

Restoration Through Sedimentation Modeling
The restoration approach employs a combination of
engineering solutions to address site constraints and
reliance on natural sedimentation and vegetation
Hamilton Airfield Wetland
Restoration
Novato, California
colonization to re-establish tidal wetland functions. ESA completed 2D hydrodynamic and sediment transport
modeling, flood modeling, wave analysis, and other
engineering analyses to support the design. The design
includes a “habitat levee” that relies on gentle slopes and vegetation instead of rock armoring for erosion
control.

Seasonal Wetlands
The primary goal of the seasonal wetlands restoration
is to provide 200 acres of sustainable roosting and
foraging habitat for shorebirds. Being highly sensitive to hydrology and invasion by non-native plants,
seasonal wetlands are complex wetlands to restore.

ESA developed a preliminary design for these wetlands.

Together the seasonal and tidal wetlands will evolve
to provide a complete sustainable habitat mosaic for
coastal wildlife.
411
30 31
Concept designs for multi-benefit adaptations to sea level rise North Richmond Living Levee & Shoreline Resilience Plan / North Richmond, CA Project
Understanding
Our team’s understanding of the City of Richmond’s
important ambitions for this project revolves around
creating a shared vision, and associated pathways
to implementation that can engender resilience for
Richmond residents from coastal flooding, groundwater
rise, habitat loss and other risks associated with sea
level rise. The project seeks to reflect communityoriented goals for adaptation, understand comprehensive vulnerability including contaminated
shoreline sites, and work with natural systems to
the greatest extent possible to achieve protection,
restoration and access simultaneously.

With those crucial (and inspiring) goals for the project, our team offers some nuances to the scope to achieve
those aims in ways that work within the timeframe and
budget, while also front-loading some of the long-term
questions that will drive future implementation, such as phasing, partnerships with other agencies and private
stakeholders, and regional coordination with SB 272.

Our team’s approach that follows is designed to create
a “Richmond Sea Level Rise Adaptation Framework” in
response to the City’s RFP; We propose this as a singular final document that meets the ambitions noted
above, with adaptation pathways, next-step project
prioritization, and individual chapters addressing the
various task deliverables from the RFP. This is designed to accomplish the same goals that the city has set out, but it is distinguished from a “SLR Adaptation Plan” as that language has been deemed by SB 272 in recent
weeks to have particular ramifications.

We believe this “Sea Level Rise Adaptation Framework”
approach will set up the City and Richmond
communities for continued success down the line by:
— Understanding critical near-term risks, and what
localized collaborations between the city, and any
related county, regional or private stakeholders,
may be needed for long-term viability in bringing
adaptation projects to construction.
— Crafting the visualization materials and framing
the range of issues to support a robust community
engagement and participatory co-design process
— Incorporating community feedback to articulate sealevel rise adaptation strategies that is deeply aligned with residents lived experience and priorities
— Outlining the potential pathways and
implementation gaps, that apply the range of
strategies, setting up clarity in the next grant funding pursuits.
— Aligning with the forthcoming BCDC planning
guidelines, so that the city of Richmond is prepared
to develop (or participate with other partner
agencies in developing) a Subregional Shoreline
Adaptation Plan towards compliance with SB 272.

Task 1 – Project Initiation
We hope to have the opportunity to kickoff this project with the City and arrive at a shared understanding of
the project purpose, goals, schedule, and deliverables.

OPEN WATER

HABITAT SLOPE

LEVEE CORE SWALE
URBAN
20’ wide
0-150’ wide
10-20’
Accommodate / Modify existing
critical infrastructure and
transportation alignments
Green Stormwater Infrastructure
and other ‘Living’ features back
of Levee Core
Avoid impacts to existing tidal
habitats at the water’s edge
Complement existing habitat
and tidal zones, in preparation
for future sea level rise
Allow for habitat restoration, protection,
and migration
Trail on levee core
Gentler, wider slope creates more
opportunities for transition zone
habitats, while narrower, steeper slope
might be better in some areas to
protect/preserve existing tidal habitats.

Provide walkability and
community amenities,
while framing green
infrastrucutre and sea
level rise protection at
its sides

HABITAT
SLOPE

OUTBOARD
GREEN

INFRASTRUCTURE
INLAND
LEVEE
CORE
Collaborative navigating
to relocate, raise or adapt
existing parcels and
infrastrucutre based on sea
Collaborative planning with
community reduces impact
and increases opportunity
for multi-baenefit solutsion

DRAFT/CONFIDENTIAL
61 NORTH RICHMOND COLLABORATIVE SHORELINE ADAPTATION PLAN / 2023 412
32 33
The Mithun-ESA team is familiar with the broad
range of prior and ongoing efforts for sea-level rise
vulnerability assessment and adaptation planning.

This team has recently completed the North Richmond
Collaborative Shoreline Plan and is assisting BCDC with the development of guidelines for sub-regional Sea-level Rise Adaptation Plans.

ESA also led the preparation of the City of Richmond’s
Climate Adaptation Plan (CAP). The CAP included
a broad assessment of climate change-related
vulnerabilities, and provided policy recommendations,
including development of a sea-level rise adaptation
plan.

The Mithun-ESA team has built strong working
relationships with the Richmond community, local
and regional agencies, and the scientific community.

Our staff are leaders in the fields of community-based
planning and design, climate resilience, and sea-level
rise adaptation planning and design.

The team has also highlighted data gaps
[contaminants, groundwater, shoreline infrastructure]
that we expect to present themselves within this
project initiation phase. The base scope for this task
includes understanding the information relating to
these and potentially others, however we should also
plan to connect with City staff to confirm approach to
these for the duration of the scope. As mentioned in
the Quals section, the Mithun and ESA team provide
a diverse set of in-house technical services, and our
team has established strong relationships with expert
sub-consultants covering a broad range of additional
technical disciplines. Our team is well suited to support additional data collection and technical analyses or
other additional project needs, including:
— Soil and groundwater quality assessments and
remediation design
— Geo-hydrology, including groundwater monitoring
and analysis
— Marine infrastructure and structural engineering
— Utility and transportation engineering
— Geotechnical engineering
— Grant application strategy, financial analysis and
planning
Deliverables:
— Project schedule
— Project organization chart and contact information
— Discussion of potential data gaps; discussion of
synchronization with Task 2 and separate RFP for
CBO community engagement consultant
Task 2 – Community Engagement
Developing a community-centered vision for SLR
adaptation in Richmond is absolutely essential, and
we would like to do everything within the current
budget to support this core task, recognizing that
extending the engagement to the broader affected
Richmond communities will require the substantial
stand-alone effort the city has identified for a separate RFP for a Community-Based Organization to lead. We
expect and encourage that the scope and schedule
of Community Engagement will be developed in
concert with the Overall Work Plan when that scope
is initiated; and that it will prioritize racial equity and justice in its approach to the project as a whole and
the process itself, incorporating best practices from
the larger planning community, such as the Centering
Communities in Adaptation Planning work of the
BCDC. Defining what that means for this project, the
affected communities and stakeholders and how the
stakeholder group will integrate that into its process will be essential.

We expect within this task, that this is intentionally
discussed early in the project and revisited at key
project milestones with the support of the CBO
facilitator. Our team’s approach is to focus not just on what we are doing but HOW we are doing the work,
in a respectful way that acknowledges history and
encourages open and transparent discussion for future
paths.

Our past experience in Richmond and elsewhere
suggest the following for this parallel scope as
minimum considerations:
— Establish stipends for resident participation in the
conversations and community workshops.
— Bring further awareness and community input by
presenting and hearing residents’ comments by
joining meetings where community members are
already invested, including school family events,
creek and watershed council meetings, local housing
and advisory councils, etc.
— Tribal engagement: At the beginning of the 20th
century, more than 400 sacred shellmound burial
sites dotted the shores of the San Francisco Bay,
and it is documented that some were located within
the project study area. Identifying and recognizing
these sites in partnership with Ohlone tribes is
anticipated as part of the community process. There
is recent precedent for such efforts, including the
Confederated Villages of Lisjan’s partnership with
the City of Richmond for the recent construction of
a public art installation, and in the North Richmond
Collaborative Shoreline Adaptation Plan, to identify
opportunities for sites within the project area to
honor the original Indigenous peoples of the East
San Francisco Bay Area, and provide guidance on
conceptual designs for these sites.
— Workforce development planning: CBO to also
support including conversations around Workforce
development planning for the installation, monitoring
and maintenance of proposed adaptations.

That all being said, the current task 2 is under-funded within the current scope to support design and
technical staff to attend the number of meetings
suggested. We want to work with the City of Richmond
and CBO to realize the desired outcomes, so we
suggest identifying whichever 7-8 public meetings (i.e. 3 large community meetings, 2 Planning Commission
meetings, and 2 City Council meetings) will be most
helpful to advancing the core goals of the project.

Deliverables:
— Outreach materials, meeting slides, and other
meeting materials
— Facilitate up to 7-8 public meetings with City staff
and CBO partner
— Draft and final Adaptation Vision (Chapter in the
‘Richmond SLR Adaptation Framework’ Overall
Report), documenting community concerns/goals/
objectives/priorities (in partnership with CBO) and
feedback on draft design options (Task 4)
Recommended Optional Tasks (not included in fee
proposal):
— Additional public meetings
North Richmond Collaborative Shoreline Adaptation Plan / North Richmond, CA Iterative co-design process in North Richmond during which a live sketching session with community members 413
34 35
Task 3 – Confirm Vulnerable Assets
Under Task 3 the Mithun-ESA team will develop an
inventory of vulnerable assets and locations along the
Richmond Shoreline. The team will then conduct an
initial screening to identify which assets and locations appear to have the greatest level of vulnerability, so
that these highly vulnerable assets and locations can be prioritized for near-term adaptation planning efforts.

This assessment will consider vulnerabilities to built
infrastructure as well as impacts to ecological and
cultural resources.

Based on the scope presented in the RFP and the City’s
responses to questions, the Mithun-ESA team proposes
to conduct this task as a desktop-level analysis based
on synthesis of prior studies and available LiDAR and
GIS datasets. The project team proposes to coordinate
this desktop analysis with the outreach to community
members proposed under Task 2 in order to confirm
the findings of the desktop analysis and to gather
additional context for conditions along the shoreline.

During the course of this analysis the project team will also identify critical data gaps and assist the City with additional field data collection and technical studies if needed.

Initial Desktop-Level Vulnerability Analysis
The Mithun-ESA team will conduct a desktop-level sealevel rise vulnerability analysis. This task will build on the climate vulnerability analysis presented in the Richmond CAP, and will also incorporate results from the latest
region-wide analysis of coastal flooding and sea level
rise vulnerability along the San Francisco Bay shoreline, including FEMA’s coastal flood hazard mapping, BCDC’s
Adapting to Rising Tides sea-level rise hazard mapping, State of California Sea-level Rise Guidance, the San
Francisco Bay Shoreline Adaptation Atlas (San Francisco Estuary Institute and SPUR, 2019), the Estuary Blueprint (SFEP), and the San Francisco Baylands Habitat Goals.

The ESA team is intimately familiar with the CAP, and
has extensive experience incorporating the results
and recommendations from these other region-wide
sea-level rise vulnerability studies and planning efforts to inform preparation of sub-regional sea-level rise
adaptation plans.

Sea-level rise presents numerous challenges to shoreline communities, including: — Coastal flooding and tidally-influenced fluvial flooding
— Shoreline habitat conversion and habitat loss — Shoreline erosion and sediment transport — Impacts to groundwater (salinity intrusion and groundwater rise)
— Mobilization of contaminated soils and groundwater
Many of these challenges have been the subject of
prior regional and local studies, and the project team
will review and synthesize the findings from these prior efforts. Members of the Mithun-ESA project team have
deep expertise for several of these topics, including San Francisco Bay shoreline habitat evolution analysis with sea-level rise (see: Evaluating Tidal Marsh Sustainability in the Face of Sea Level Rise: A Hybrid Modeling
Approach Applied to San Francisco Bay), and adjusting
FEMA maps for sea-level rise, including shoreline erosion and other geomorphic changes (See: Relating Future
Coastal Conditions To Existing FEMA Flood Hazard
Maps).

The Mithun-ESA team’s extensive experience working
along the Richmond shoreline will allow for an efficient evaluation of these potential risks and vulnerabilities, and our team has the technical expertise to conduct
more detailed evaluations at a site-specific level if
needed.

Incorporating Community Feedback
While desktop-level analysis can provide a valuable
preliminary overview of potential sea-level rise
vulnerabilities, our team places considerable value
on on-the-ground experience and observations. We
propose to closely coordinate the Task 3 analysis
with the stakeholder outreach conducted under Task
2 to understand how the vulnerabilities identified
in the desktop-level analysis align with community
members’ actual experiences and observations along
the Richmond Shoreline (see suggested schedule &
milestones exhibit). The project team will work with
the City to identify and interview knowledgeable
city, county and local agency staff; select private
land owners; and other community members who
are familiar with the shoreline. The project team will
Apparent flooding pathways along Richmond shoreline areas.

Mithun-ESA diagram over Adapting to Rising Tides data.
414
36 37
of Richmond RFP; however, as several of these locations seemingly have direct downstream effects on adjacent
areas, we propose to coordinate a level of consideration of these with the City in Task 1.

We would also like to note that, at locations 8,9,10
(Gertrude Ave/ N Richmond Neighborhood, West
County Wastewater/Wildcat Marsh, Richmond
Parkway/ North Parr Blvd, and Parchester Village) the
Mithun-ESA team has already begun understanding
and evaluating the vulnerabilities, and potential
adaptation measures, through the team’s prior
work supporting the North Richmond community
in development of their Collaborative Shoreline
Adaptation Plan. Some scope areas of that preliminary
study covered areas of the City of Richmond including
those vulnerable zones along the Parkway. We would be
able to accelerate the studies in those areas efficiently thanks to our existing base models, maps and initial
adaptation approaches, providing some buffer in the
fee structure to focus on those other vulnerable priority locations 3,4,5 (Marina Way, Marina Bay Pkwy, and
Hoffman Channel at I-580), that have had less detailed
studies to date. Those areas of the shoreline that have risk associated with longer timelines for SLR can be
identified and typological section approaches provided
for consideration but developed to less detailed level
than the conceptual design for the near-term risk
zones.

Through this lens of nearer-term exposure, our team
proposes prioritizing early typological studies of
adaptation options in plan and section drawings to
elucidate a broad range of conceptual approaches,
support next steps in community participation
framework and support next steps in funding pursuits.

Through a rough modeling of the physical footprint of
each potential strategy, we can also determine who the
key stakeholders would need to be in any adaptation
strategy. This information can be crucial guidance on
the assembly of community working groups, allowing
the selected community engagement team to
understand the needed partners (landowners, agencies,
neighborhood councils, etc.) that would likely need to
come together, working shoulder-to-shoulder to weigh
the tradeoffs of discuss in further depth the pathways
of implementing those adaptations.

This approach could suggest a two-part schedule, in
which the Mithun-ESA team prioritizes Task 3 and early
conceptual approaches in Task 4, and those inputs
flow into the community engagement set-up process.

Then, the Mithun-ESA team would return to the Task
4 approaches and develop them further after the
community participation process yielded input on those
early vulnerability zones to further refine and complete the deliverables.

Deliverables:
— Adaptation options:
» Prioritize near-term vulnerabilities for adaptation,
based on risk, current land-use patterns and
geomorphological and spatial constraints, with a
focus on nature-based approaches, typological
considerations, and other community priorities.
» Develop a near and longer-term adaptation
vision and strategy that consolidates community
feedback and city priorities.
» Identify potential near and long-term alignments
for coastal flood protection infrastructure, as well
as phasing potential.
also hold a workshop with a technical advisory group
during this task to incorporate the latest science and
adaptation planning guidance.

This feedback from local landowners, government
and agency staff, residents, and technical advisors will provide a critical “reality check”, allowing our team
to confirm or revise the findings of the initial desktop vulnerability analysis, to help identify and resolve
errors or omissions in the available datasets used
in the analysis, and to provide greater context and
understanding for how vulnerable locations are used
and managed, and how potential adaptation measures
might impact or benefit these uses.

The Mithun-ESA successfully applied this approach in
the development of the North Richmond Collaborative
Shoreline Plan, and our team is excited at the
opportunity to build on the findings, partnerships, and experiences from that project to expand sea-level rise
vulnerability assessment and adaptation planning
along the full City of Richmond shoreline.

Outcomes
The key result of this task will be the development of a well-calibrated understanding of how sea-level rise will impact the Richmond community that can be used to
prioritize development of adaptation responses. These
findings will be presented as text and graphics in the
“Vulnerability Assessment” chapter of the Sea Level Rise Adaptation Plan.

This task will also include the identification of data gaps and uncertainties, and recommendations for additional
future data collection and analysis to address these
gaps and uncertainties.

Deliverables:
— Draft and Final Sea Level Rise Vulnerability
Assessment (Chapter in the ‘Richmond SLR
Adaptation Framework’ Overall Report) including:
» Maps and discussion of exposures and assets at
risk from sea-level rise impacts
» Data layers used to map vulnerability that will be
made publicly available.

Optional Additional Tasks (not included in fee
proposal):
— Detailed assessments of priority locations
» Topographic and bathymetric surveys
» Ecological surveys and mapping
» Soil and groundwater contamination testing and
analysis
» Additional utility and infrastructure mapping
» Hydraulic modeling for creeks and stormwater
systems
Task 4 – Adaptation Responses
In Task 4 the Mithun-ESA team will identify a collection of potential adaptation responses to address
anticipated SPR impacts along the Richmond shoreline.

The team will prioritize the development of naturebased approaches wherever possible, but measures will be identified based on location-specific conditions, and the team will also consider “grey infrastructure”
approaches where appropriate.

Our team proposes that Task 4 efforts focus on several
specific priority locations within the study area that
appear to have the greatest near-term vulnerability
as well as threats to critical infrastructure. The specific number and extents of these priority locations will be
discussed during Task 1 and 2 and verified during Task

3. Our team has reviewed the CAP and prior regional
SLR mapping (Adapting to Rising Tides), and our initial understanding is that there are likely to be 8 to 10
priority locations along the shoreline that will be most vulnerable to SLR impacts. In order to most effectively make use of available resources, these priority locations will be confirmed under Task 3, and will become the
focus for planning and analysis of SLR adaptation
responses under this task. The remaining, less
vulnerable segments of the shoreline will be addressed
in a more general way.

These anticipated priority locations include the
Richmond inner harbor shoreline, and at three locations near the Richmond Parkway moving north (see figure).

As indicated by the figure, priority locations 1-2 and 6-7 emerge from the Richmond Port and Chevron vicinities
which are excluded from the Project Scope per the City
Typological approaches for
adaptation in Bay Area habitats
Resilient by Design / San Francisco
Bay Area, CA
415
38 39
Mithun has worked with numerous clients
on multiple objective decision-making
tools to tailor them to the specific project,
agency and community concerns and
interests. Mithun used this values-based
evaluation criteria tool, established by the
City of Vancouver, BC, to assess a range of
scenarios for Sea2City.

FLOOD CONTROL

SEATWALL

BLUE-GREEN

CORRIDOR
BEACH +

HABITAT BENCH
UPLAND

DEVELOPMENT

FLOODPROOF

BUILDINGS

SALT MARSH

WETLAND
» Cross Section and plan enlargements for each of
6-7 priority locations (outside of excluded scope
areas)
— Identification of stakeholders in each of the nearterm vulnerability zones, to support organization of community working groups or co-design groups
— Sync with community engagement process and
public meetings (Task 2) to provide opportunity for
feedback on draft options
— Draft and final adaptation alternatives (chapter in
the ‘Richmond SLR Adaptation Framework’ overall
report)
Optional Additional Tasks (not included in fee
proposal):
— Development of 3rd option (besides no action and 2x
resolved near & longer-term options)
— Evaluation criteria and evaluation results.

Task 5 - Implementation Approach
Working Towards Real-World Projects
In our team’s SLR adaptation experience, working at
both planning and design for implementation phases,
the importance of a phased approach is crucial. The
benefits of phasing are multi-fold:

The early phases can serve as a model of ‘co-learning’
with community members, stakeholders and agency
partners. Early phases can support both physical
resilience to SLR in highest risk areas, as well as build community capacity for supporting adaptation
decision-making now and into the future.

Regional SLR adaptation will be implemented through
a sequence of separate projects coordinated multiple
land owners, lead agencies, and jurisdictions. It is
inevitable that different project leads will have different timelines for implementing adaptation measures on
their properties. A phased approach anticipates this
and allows for coordination and knowledge transfer
across projects.

It is essential to acknowledge the excluded scope areas at Chevron Refinery and Port of Richmond, particularly
in their significant role in downstream flooding
potentials, and what ramifications for implementation
this may have.

Phasing provides clarity and focus in further
fundraising; as adaptation strategies identified in task 4 advance towards implementation, the phasing can
provide a focus to understand the scope of permit
requests and implied construction processes.

Focus on Near-Term Vulnerabilities
As mentioned in Task 4, we have also learned the
importance of identifying Near-Term priorities and
projects in doing this work. This must be synchronized
with the schedule of community engagement, so
that there can be named goals and objectives, and
meaningful feedback on adaptation options identified
by the design team in the process.

Our team’s approach would be to develop an
‘Implementation Approach’ chapter as part of the
overall Richmond SLR Adaptation Framework, that
describes the next steps for the vulnerable zones of
shoreline, based on the phasing developed in Task 4.

Some areas’ next steps will focus on grant funding
pursuits, while others may focus on governance or land
use and zoning implications, depending on the time
horizons for implementation.

An addition to the Implementation Approach chapter,
our team suggests prioritizing conveying any next steps that can move the City towards participation and
compliance with the requirements for subregional plans
that are forthcoming from the Bay Conservation and
Development Commission (BCDC). The Mithun-ESA
team is also supporting the BCDC in developing the
subregional planning guidelines that SB 272 requires
local municipalities to apply to their plans. Our team
will apply our background from that regional work
to the next steps in the implementation approach &
recommendations.

Deliverables:
— Draft and final implementation approach &
recommendations (chapter in the ‘Richmond SLR
Adaptation Framework’ overall report)
Task 6 – Sea Level Rise Adaptation
Framework
There is an art to crafting all aspects of this scope of work into a clear, accessible, and visionary document
that this RFP sets out to create. We hope to have the
opportunity to help the City of Richmond to create
this kind of document to serve as a key reference
and roadmap for transformational adaptation of its
shoreline areas going forward.

Deliverables:
— Draft and final ‘Richmond SLR Adaptation
Framework’ overall report
Task 7 – Project Management
Our team understands the critical importance of
delivering a project on time and within budget,
particularly projects focused on complexities for future work like SLR adaptation planning, with its potentially varied funding sources, wide range of stakeholders
and ambitious goals. Our team will anticipate and
address challenges through a consistent flow of
communication, building on our experience managing
complex adaptation projects, and our previous work
around Richmond.

We meet key project goals by establishing clear
and transparent communication from day one and
416
40 41
preparing a work plan that includes buy-in from all
parties engaged in the project. Graham Prentice from
Mithun will serve as day-to-day primary contact for
the city. He will meet weekly with Eddie Divita (Project Manager at ESA) to ensure focus on schedule, workflow,
weekly priorities and budget check-ins. At critical
milestones the Mithun+ESA team will meet with the
city’s Project Management Team and the larger group
of stakeholders to ensure expectations are being met,
and if any adjustments are required for next-level
effort. These project milestone meetings would occur
at the conclusion of identified project tasks, and are in addition to regular bi-weekly connections with the city Project Manager.
*Please see Proposed Schedule Exhibit for a suggested
format to meet project goals, milestones within a
12-Month timeframe. This is a provisional schedule
meant to suggest potential intervals to meet project
needs and requirements, and will be subject to
discussion and confirmation with City staff as part
of Task 1 – Project Initiation. The Mithun-ESA team
is particularly keen to work with the City and the
onboarding of a CBO consultant for the community
engagement scope to meet project goals; as discussed
in Task 2 narrative, we view synchronizing this schedule to be of central importance to the success of this
project.

This approach could suggest a two-part schedule, in
which the Mithun-ESA team prioritizes Task 1 and 3
and early conceptual approaches in Task 4, and those
inputs flow into the community engagement set-up
process. Then, the Mithun-ESA team would return to the
Task 4 approaches and develop them further after the
community participation process yielded input on those
early vulnerability zones to further refine and complete the deliverables, in order to achieve the Task 5 and 6
that best reflect intent and participation towards next steps.

Deliverables:
— Project management activities as described,
including:
» Invoicing & progress reporting
» Budget management
» Maintaining project schedule & milestones
Recommended Optional Tasks (not included in fee
proposal):
— Grant application support; grant-writing
Project
Schedule
North Richmond Collaborative Shoreline Adaptation Plan / North Richmond, CA 417
TASK 1 Project Initiation
> Schedule confirmation, project directory, team kickoff; review of existing resources, local/regional & SLR guidance Task 2 Community Engagement and Outreach Support
> Assume support for community process throughout the schedule to be coordinated with Community Engagement consultant
> Craft technical and design outreach materials, and visualizations > Present approaches at up to 7 public meetings
> Support consultant CBO in developing Community Vision Document > Develop approaches, with the engagement consultant, to work in partnership with historically excluded and marginalized communities TASK 3 Confirm Vulnerable Assets
> Identify assets vulnerable to sea level rise and shallow groundwater rise, groundwater intrusion, erosion, and fluvial flooding (using best avail data) > Draft and final Sea Level Rise Shoreline Vulnerability Assessment; (incl.advisory feedback) > Develop a digital elevation model using available quality Level 0 LiDAR; GIS layers made available to public
Task 4 Adaptation Responses
4a. Identify Adaptation Strategies
4b. Develop Alternatives and Criteria
4c. Final Near and Long-term Adaptation Frameworks
Task 5 Implementation Approach
> Phasing strategies
> Identify ownership and key interested parties
> Identify funding sources and governance gaps
> Possible integration into adjacent projects
> Optional: ROM cost estimates
Task 6 Sea Level Rise Adaptation Framework
> Detail overall findings, recommendations and adaptation priorities > Prepare a draft Adaptation Framework for initial review by City staff > Prepare a second draft incorporating feedback for public review > Prepare a final draft and presentation to the City Council Task 7 Project Management Support
> Lead monthly project coordination meetings, Invoices, progress reports, budget management, agendas & notes from meetings and other activities

OCT NOV
Updated Schedule & Team Directory
Draft
Implementation
Approach
Final
Implementation
Approach
Final
SLR Adaptation
Framework
Draft
SLR Adaptation
Framework
Finalize Vulnerability
Analysis
Adaptation
Alternatives
Monthly reports & invoices
Initial Project Phase & Analysis
~2-3 months
Suggested break (if needed)
while CBO consultant
scope is initiated and
public outreach & meeting
schedule is determined
Main Project design &
feedback phase, iteration,
and reporting
~6-7 months
Finalized
graphic
deliverables
Note: Assumption of 12 month schedule to be coordinated based on actual start date and coordination with Community Engagement schedule.

JAN FEB. MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT DEC JAN FEB MARCH APRIL 2024 2025

PROPOSED PROJECT TIMELINE
10'
8'
6'
4'
2'
2023

RICHMOND SEA LEVEL RISE RANGE OF SEA LEVEL RISE PREDICTIONS ADAPTATION PLAN ~12 MONTHS
2050
2100
Draft
Vulnerability
Analysis
Preliminary
Options Study
GIS Layers Available
Draft
Analysis for
Community
Feedback
Draft Options
for Community
Feedback
Sync Deliverables
and Schedule with
CBO partner (TBD)
Community Meetings
with CBO partner
(Schedule TBD)
Goals &
Objectives
418
45 Healthy Home:
sea level rise mapped with vulnerable community indicators including health, income, diversity, access to livelihoods Agile Home:
sea level rise mapped with historic and current bayland ecology, conservation areas, and critical habitat designations
Prosperous Home:
sea level rise mapped with displacement risk and gentrification risk for both low income and medium-high income communities Home Team Priorities
overlay mapping analysis showing vulnerable communities, infrastructure, transit investment areas, and critical ecological zones to determine sites
Mithun team's use of GIS to conduct regional planning analysis during Resilient By Design / San Francisco Bay Area, California References &
Cost Proposal
419
46 47
References
Andrew Clough
General Manager
West County Wastewater
[email protected]
510-222-6700
Reference for Mithun and ESA - North Richmond Living
Levee
John Gioia
District One Supervisor, Contra Costa County
BCDC Board Member
[email protected]
(510) 231-8686
Reference for Mithun - Resilient By Design & North
Richmond Living Levee
Juliana Gonzalez
Executive Director
The Watershed Project
[email protected]
(510) 224-4085
Reference for Mithun - North Richmond Living Levee
and Resilient by Design
Princess Robinson
Cooperation Richmond
[email protected]
Reference for Mithun - Resilient by Design, Wildcat
Creek and Tiny Home Eco Village in North Richmond
Dulce Galicia
Richmond LAND
[email protected]
Reference for Mithun - Richmond OurLand, North
Richmond Living Levee and Collaborative Shoreline
Adaptation Plan, and North Richmond Quality of Life Plan Leslie Lacko
Senior Planner
Marin County
[email protected]
(415) 473-4333
Reference for ESA - Tomales Bay Living Shoreline
Jason Warner
General Manager
Oro Loma Sanitary District
(510) 276 4700
[email protected]
Reference for ESA - Oro Loma Horizontal Levee
Demonstration Project
Heidi Nutters
Program Manager
San Francisco Estuary Partnership
(415) 778 6686
[email protected]
Reference for ESA - Palo Alto Horizontal Levee
Jacqueline Zipkin
PE, General Manager
East Bay Dischargers Authority
(510) 278 5910
[email protected]
Reference for ESA - First Mile Horizontal Levee
Proposed
Fee

PROPOSED FEE
Richmond Sea Level Rise Framework
Task 1 Project Initiation
Task 2 Community Engagement
and Outreach Support
Task 3 Confirm Vulnerable Assets
Task 4 Adaptation Responses
Task 5 Implementation Approach
Task 6 Sea Level Rise Adaptation Framework
Task 7 Project Management
Consultant Subtotals
Allowance for additional input on governance,
funding, specialty engineering as noted in
Project Understanding section
$11,375
$19,750
$1,875
$60,250
$17,750
$16,000
$21,500
$148,500
$3,250
$5,125
$31,875
$25,250
$14,500
$4,000
$2,500
$86,500
$14,625
$24,875
$33,750
$85,500
$32,250
$20,000
$24,000
$235,00
$15,000
Task
Mithun ESA Subtotal
Potential Additional Services & Estimated Costs
Task 1
Grant application support and grant writing
$8,000-$12,000
Task 2
Additional public meetings beyond eight (8) identified in scope $18,000 for six (6) add'l meetings
Task 3
Detailed assessments of priority locations
Topographic/bathymetric surveys
Soil and groundwater contamination testing and analysis Utility and infrastructure mapping
Hydraulic modeling for creeks and stormwater systems
$30,000-$50,000 pending any
additional scope discussions
Task 4
Development of an additional adaptation option, besides those described in the scope of work
$20,000
TOTAL $250,000
420
48 49
The Mithun+One team worked with the City of Vancouver, a community advisory group and youth to create a vision of the waterfront that makes space for natural abundance while reconnecting relationships with the dynamics of land and water. Two pilot projects integrate flood protection measures, habitat creation and traditional knowledge.

Sea2City / Vancouver, BC
Appendix:

Resumes
421
50 51
Tim
MolletteParks
Education
University of California, Berkeley, College of
Environmental Design MLA
Eastern Kentucky University, BA, Journalism
Professional Affiliations and Activities
City of Oakland Landmarks Preservation
Advisory Board, 2018-present / American
Society of Landscape Architects / University
of California Berkeley, Adjunct Instructor,
2011–2015 / Landscape Architecture
Foundation, Olmsted Scholar Steering
Committee, 2017–2019 / Land Art Generator
Initiative, Board of Directors, 2017-present
BCDC Regional Shoreline Adaptation Plan
/ San Francisco Bay Area, CA
Project manager for community-centered
process for developing resilience goals
and planning guidelines for regionally
coordinated sea level rise adaptation in
support of the Bay Conservation and
Development Commission (BCDC).

Resilient by Design /
San Francisco Bay, CA
Lead designer for one of ten international
teams selected to explore multi-benefit
designs that leverage investments in sea
level rise adaptations to build health,
wealth and home ownership for residents.

Mithun worked with the North Richmond
Community Advisory Board to develop
projects including green infrastructure for
sea level rise protection, new models for
affordable housing, trail connections, and
urban tree canopy for filtering air and water.

North Richmond Living Levee & Shoreline
Resilience Plan / North Richmond, CA
Project manager and designer for multidisciplinary team studying range of sea level rise adaptation strategies along a 5
mile stretch of San Pablo Bay. Focus is on
multi-benefit solutions developed with local
wastewater treatment district and through
an equity focused community engagement
process
Long Wharf Harbor District /
New Haven, CT
Landscape architect lead for master
planning of a new mixed use private
development along the New Haven
waterfront, a coastal bay site experiencing
sea level rise.

Sea2City / Vancouver, BC
The Sea2City design challenge builds
on the City’s climate resilience plan to
generate ideas and discussion for naturebased adaptations to False Creek that are community-led, equitable and systems
based. Working in the context of Canada’s
Truth and Reconciliation Act, the design
team is actively decolonizing design
practices and reflecting on ways to adapt
the process at each milestone of the work.

Wildcat Creek Trailway and Fish Passage /
North Richmond, CA
Project manager for the regeneration of
riparian and salmonid habitat as well as
provisioning of critical public access and
amenities along North Richmond’s only
natural open space. This multi-benefit
project is the result of years of partnership
and visioning with community advocates in
a highly disinvested area.

Mithun
Partner
ASLA
Role: Partner in Charge
Representative Projects
Tim brings extensive experience delivering landscape
projects of high design quality in both urban and naturalized conditions. Tim’s resume focuses on work conceptually driven, yet clear and flexible enough to endure a community’s
changing demands. These design strategies emanate from
a careful understanding of the local cultural, ecological and programmatic context. Tim has led site design for marketrate housing, affordable housing, and innovative workplace campus projects throughout California. He was also lead designer for the Resilient by Design project, exploring multibenefit solutions for climate change adaptation in the North Richmond neighborhood in the Bay Area.

Graham
Laird
Prentice
Graham’s design work focuses on infrastructural
transformation, ecological regeneration, and frameworks for social equity. He has over 13 years experience in planning and design initiatives to bring about more inclusive and healthy environments, neighborhoods, cities, and regions. Though focused in the San Francisco Bay Area, project experience is grounded on work in Richmond and in complex, multi-scalar thinking in contexts ranging from across the US, to Mexico, Israel/Palestine and India. Past work includes a regional proposal for sea level rise and storm surge adaptation for the lower Chesapeake Bay / Hampton Roads with the US Army Corps
of Engineers, re-imagining Philadelphia’s urban watershed Fairmount Park for the 21st century, and an infrastructural toolkit for communities impacted by industrial pollution, based on a study of the Port of Oakland, California.

Education
University of Pennsylvania, MLA
University of Pennsylvania, BA,
Environmental Science, Political Economy
BCDC Regional Shoreline Adaptation Plan
/ San Francisco Bay Area, CA
Project designer for community-centered
process for developing resilience goals
and planning guidelines for regionally
coordinated sea level rise adaptation in
support of the Bay Conservation and
Development Commission (BCDC).

North Richmond Living Levee & Shoreline
Resilience Plan / North Richmond, CA
Project designer for multi-disciplinary team
studying range of sea level rise adaptation
strategies along a 5 mile stretch of San
Pablo Bay. Focus is on multi-benefit
solutions developed with local wastewater
treatment district and through an equity
focused community engagement process.

Resilient by Design /
San Francisco Bay, CA
One of ten international teams selected
to explore multi-benefit designs that turn
investments in sea level rise adaptations
into opportunities to build health, wealth
and home ownership for residents. The
Mithun Home Team worked with the North
Richmond Community Advisory Board
to develop four projects including green
infrastructure for sea level rise protection,
new models for affordable housing, trail
connections for shoreline access, and an
urban tree canopy for filtering air and water.

Wildcat Creek Trailway and Fish Passage /
North Richmond, CA
Project designer for the regeneration of
riparian and salmonid habitat as well as
provisioning of critical public access and
amenities along North Richmond’s only
natural open space. This multi-benefit
project is the result of years of partnership
and visioning with community advocates in
a highly disinvested area.

Richmond Our Power Coalition /
Richmond, CA
Project manager for visualization services
for four renderings; one each for the
projects being conceptualized by the
ROPC and its member organizations,
working towards intersectional social and
environmental justice in Richmond.

Representative Projects
Mithun
Senior Associate
Role: Project Manager, Day-to-Day
Contact
*Completed with a previous firm 422
52 53
Mariel's design approach works to reveal and illuminate the cultural and ecological conditions that give places meaning.

As a keen observer of people and patterns, she comes to each project with curiosity and strives to create moments of delight and discovery. Her collaborative style and attention to detail help push projects from concept through construction, creating memorable, high performance landscapes no matter the scale.

With a background in environmental health, she has a deep understanding of the way our surroundings impact our daily lives, and the capacity for smart design to promote equity, health, and resilience.

Education
University of California, Berkeley, MLA
University of Michigan, BA, Environment and
Public Health
Registration
Landscape Architect: WA
Professional Affiliations and Activities
American Society of Landscape Architects
(ASLA)
Bay Area Challenge: Resilient by Design /
San Francisco Bay, CA
Landscape designer for one of ten
international teams selected to explore
multi-benefit designs that address
infrastructure updates for sea level rise
resilience and social equity.

North Richmond Quality of Life Plan /
North Richmond (Contra Costa
County), CA
Designer, worked with Healthy Richmond
(a coalition of community organizations,
resident leaders and advocates ) to create
a community visioning document outlining
strategies that will serve as a roadmap for
development meant to build lasting health
equity in the areas of community safety,
youth and education, housing, and business
opportunity.

The Emerson Collective /
East Palo Alto, CA
Landscape designer for 260 units of
affordable housing along with ground-floor
amenity and retail spaces. Site approach
includes trails and buffer spaces, designed
for ecotone slope levees to provide marsh
migration with rising sea levels.

Moss Street Alley Green Infrastructure /
San Francisco, CA
Landscape architect for the transformation
of a street alley into a public pedestrian
space and stormwater demonstration
project in the SOMA neighborhood of San
Francisco. Project engages with the SF Parks
Alliance and includes public art.

India Basin Waterfront / San
Francisco, CA
Landscape/urban designer for a 15-acre
publicly-accessible living shoreline and
open space that preserves and protects
the ecology and character of one of the
last undeveloped waterfront parcels in
San Francisco. This project also includes
habitat driven shoreline-to-ridgeline
design guidelines for the open space and
adjacent mixed-use urban village. The
overall project consists 1,575 residential
units, approximately 200,000 square feet of
commercial space, and approximately 15.5
acres of publicly accessible open space.

Representative Projects
Mariel
Steiner
Mithun
Senior Associate
ASLA
Role: Landscape and Urban
Designer
Katie
Stege
Resilient by Design /
San Francisco Bay, CA
Designer and project manager. One
of ten international teams selected to
explore multi-benefit designs that turn
investments in sea level rise adaptations
into opportunities to build health, wealth
and home ownership for residents. The
Mithun Home Team worked with the North
Richmond Community Advisory Board
to develop four projects including green
infrastructure for sea level rise protection,
new models for affordable housing, trail
connections for shoreline access, and an
urban tree canopy for filtering air and water.

BCDC Regional Shoreline Adaptation Plan
/ San Francisco Bay Area, CA
Project designer and GIS manager
for community-centered process for
developing resilience goals and planning
guidelines for regionally coordinated
sea level rise adaptation in support of
the Bay Conservation and Development
Commission (BCDC).

North Richmond Living Levee & Shoreline
Resilience Plan / North Richmond, CA
Project designer for multi-disciplinary team
studying range of sea level rise adaptation
strategies along a 5 mile stretch of San
Pablo Bay. Focus is on multi-benefit
solutions developed with local wastewater
treatment district and through an equity
focused community engagement process.

Metro Parks Tacoma Ruston Way
Community Vision and Implementation
Program / Tacoma, WA
GIS mapping, data analytics and
community engagement in support of a
Framework Plan to help inform and prioritize
future planning, design and construction
of infrastructure improvements along
a waterfront, roadway, rail, park and
development corridor to increase
community resilience to sea level rise.

DHA Sun Valley Healthy Living Initiative /
Denver, CO
Researcher and designer for Health Impact
Assessment to establish a health baseline,
and prioritize specific project and program
strategies to improve health and wellbeing
of Sun Valley residents.

Representative Projects
Education
Yale University, MArch
Yale University, Master of Environmental
Management
University of Colorado, Boulder, Bachelor of
Environmental Design
Registration
Architect: WA
USGBC LEED Accredited Professional
Professional Affiliations & Activities:

AIA Seattle Committee on Adaptation
& Resilience Co-chair 2020-present /
University of Washington College of Built
Environments Applied Research Consortium
firm liaison / Greenbuild Community &
Affordable Housing Summit Speaker 2018
Katie is an architect and researcher passionate about pursuing interdisciplinary solutions to complex land use challenges.

Katie's dual architectural and environmental background lend a data-driven approach to designs that address rural conservation, outdoor education, and resilient and equitable planning. Katie has supported non-profits like YMCA of Greater Seattle, governmental clients like the US Fish and Wildlife Service, and housing authority clients like Denver Housing Authority in crafting visions for sustainable developments, communicating those visions to stakeholders, and taking steps towards implementing landmark projects. At Mithun, Katie drives internal R+D efforts, supports strategic climate resilience initiatives, and works on conceptual and schematic design at the district, neighborhood, and building scale.

Mithun
Senior Associate
AIA, LEED Green Associate
Role: GIS Lead
423
54 55
Jeff
Caton
Jeff has three decades of planning and project management experience, helping clients develop and manage their sustainability and climate change initiatives through strategy development, stakeholder engagement, benchmarking, performance
measurement, and public communications. He has developed climate action plans (CAPs), sustainability master plans, climate adaptation plans, and all aspects of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions management. He is particularly adept at assessing environmental and sustainability performance and communicating that performance to stakeholders, as well as aligning sustainability goals with organizational strategy. Jeff led the comprehensive regional climate adaptation planning framework for the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), and has developed vulnerability and adaptation plans for the cities of Manhattan Beach, Paramount and Oxnard.

Education
University of Michigan, B.S.,
Environmental Engineering
Registration
Registered Professional Engineer, California,
# 45127
LEED Accredited Professional, US Green
Building Council, 2009
Trained Lead Verifier, AB32 GHG Reporting
Professional Affiliations and Activities
Steering Committee for STAR Community
Rating System
Advisory Committee for SEEC ClearPath tool
development
City of Richmond Climate Action Plan /
Richmond, CA
Project Manager. Jeff led the consulting
team that developed the City of Richmond
CAP, which provides a roadmap for
reducing community-wide GHG emissions
and preparing this coastal city for the
anticipated impacts of climate change on
public health, infrastructure, ecosystems,
and public spaces. Recognizing the city’s
extensive disadvantaged populations, the
CAP builds upon the City’s Health in All
Policies Strategy, providing the vision, goals,
and specific actions that will be needed
to strengthen the connections between
climate protection, community resilience,
public health, local economy, and social
equity.

City of Martinez Climate Action Plan /
Martinez, CA
Senior Technical Advisor. Jeff provided
oversight and quality assurance for the ESA
team that worked with the City of Martinez
to prepare a comprehensive Climate Action
Plan. The Plan includes a plan that identifies
steps that the City can take to adapt to
the effects of a changing climate, including
rising sea level, diminished water supply, and
increased threat of wildfire.

East Bay Regional Parks District - Climate
Change Planning Services / , CA
Project Manager. Jeff led a team that
assisted the District with a climate change
sequestration and adaptation planning
assessment for adaptation strategies,
carbon sequestration contributions, and
future opportunities throughout the
District’s parklands.

Sustainability and Climate Action Plan /
Palo Alto, CA
Adaptation Task Leader. Jeff led the
development of the Palo Alto Climate
Change Adaptation Roadmap, which
examines a broad spectrum of the
community’s climate change vulnerabilities
and prioritizes adaptation responses based
on the risks, needs, and synergies with
related planning efforts. ESA grouped
critical community assets into eleven
functional categories (e.g., water supply)
and assessed their vulnerability to locally
forecasted climate change exposures
including higher temperatures, drought, and
sea level rise.

Representative Projects
ESA
Wetlands and Estuaries Director
PE
Role: ESA Project Manager
Debra
Guenther
As a partner and landscape architect at Mithun, Deb has built a team that brings exceptional quality, critical thinking and awardwinning design to projects. She is committed to connecting people with their surroundings and each other. Deb collaborates with public agencies, private entities, non-profit groups and community members to co-create experiences and places that are meaningful parts of everyday life. Clients benefit from her ability to bring together ideas in policy, practice and design. Her focus on high-performance landscape design has evolved into equity-driven collaborations with priority communities and local organizations on coastal adaptation and resilience projects to address climate change.

Education
Michigan State University, BLA
University of Denver, Graduate Studies
Registration
Landscape Architect: CA, ID, LA, OR, SD,
WA, WY
SITES Accredited Professional
USGBC LEED Accredited Professional
Professional Affiliations and Activities
Partnership for Southern Equity National
Advisory Council, April 2022 – present /
Green Stormwater Infrastructure Workforce
Collaborative (including Snohomish, King
and Pierce Counties), March 2020 – April
2022 / Seattle Parks Foundation Board
Member, 2020-present / EcoDistricts, Board
Member, 2015–2022
Resilient by Design and Shoreline
Collaboration Plan /
San Francisco Bay, CA
Deb led one of ten international teams
selected in 2015 to explore multi-benefit
designs that proactively address sea-level
rise in the Bay Area. The Mithun Home Team
worked with North Richmond community
leaders to turn investments in sea-level rise
adaptation into direct benefits to residents
of health, wealth and home ownership
opportunities. Currently working on a
five-mile shoreline collaborative plan, the
partnerships that emerged have supported
a wide range of successful funding and
regulatory initiatives.

Ruston Way Community Vision and
Implementation Program / Tacoma, WA
Design partner for Framework Plan to
help inform and prioritize future planning,
design and construction of infrastructure
improvements along waterfront, roadway,
rail, park and recreation corridor.

Long Wharf District Phase 1 /
New Haven, CT
Lead landscape architect for a sustainable,
mixed-use residential development that
balances density and scale, resiliency, and
cross-generational amenities, while creating
a sense of place for its mixed-income
residents.

Sea2City / Vancouver, BC
Deb leads the Mithun/One Architecture
team in the Sea2City design challenge
advancing nature-based adaptations in the
contaminated waterway of False Creek. The
two pilot projects integrate flood protection
measures, habitat creation and traditional
knowledge. Working in the context of
Canada's Truth and Reconciliation Act, the
design team is actively decolonizing design
practices and reflecting on ways to adapt the
process at each milestone of the work.

Tulalip Bay Vision Plan / Tulalip, WA
Project manager for concept plan that
protects and improves water quality,
reconnects people to the bay with a
waterfront trail, and provides recreational
connections to the rest of the reservation.

Mithun
Partner
FASLA, SITES AP, LEED AP BD+C
Role: Design with Equity Advisor;
Licensed California Landscape
Architect
Representative Projects
424
56 57
Eddie
Divita
Eddie Divita is an environmental engineer specializing in the analysis of hydrodynamic processes in wetlands and estuarine systems. He conducted both his undergraduate and graduate studies at the University of California, Berkeley, receiving a bachelor’s degree in Civil Engineering and a master’s degree in Environmental Engineering with an emphasis on Environmental Fluid Mechanics. His work at ESA includes hydrologic analysis, numerical modeling, geomorphic studies, and engineering design in support of coastal, wetland, and estuarine management and restoration projects in the San Francisco Bay and Delta and along the Pacific Coast.

Education
M.S. in Environmental Engineering,
University of California Berkeley
B.S., Civil Engineering, University of
California, Berkeley
West County Wastewater, North
Richmond Horizontal Levee / Richmond,
CA
Project Director. The purpose of this project
is to develop a nature-based shoreline
resiliency plan for the protection and
enhancement of North Richmond’s Bay
shoreline to sea-level rise. Eddie is providing
senior guidance for the ESA’s deliverables
and ensuring the project’s progression.

ESA is assisting Mithun Architects with
the hydrology, engineering, ecological
enhancements and permitting.

Golden Gate National Parks Conservancy,
Bothin Marsh Sea-Level Rise Adaptation
Project / Marin County, CA
Project Manager The Golden Gate National
Parks Conservancy and Marin County
Parks are developing plans to improve the
resilience of habitats and public trails at the
Bothin Marsh Preserve against impacts from
rising sea-levels.

Port of San Francisco, Heron’s Head
Resilient Shoreline Project / San Francisco,
CA
Lead Design Engineer. The project will
construct a gravel beach as natural
infrastructure to protect Heron’s Head
marsh from coastal erosion. Eddie managed
the ESA design team, overseeing ESA’s
coastal and civil engineering work, and
coordinating with the project’s technical
advisory committee and with regulatory
agencies to apply for required permits.

Eddie also assisted with preparation of
grant application materials to fund project
construction, resulting in more than $2.5
Million in grant funding awarded for project
construction. Construction was completed
in 2022.

Contra Costa County Flood Control and
Water Conservation District, Lower Walnut
Creek Restoration / Contra Costa County, CA
Hydrologist, Civil Engineer, Deputy
Project Manager. Eddie is coordinating
the development of conceptual designs,
alternatives analysis and evaluation, and
preparation of construction documents for a
restoration project aimed at improving habitats
and reducing flood risk along Lower Walnut
Creek. This project aims to achieve both habitat
and flood protection benefits through the
strategic re-alignment of existing flood control
levees to re-activate the historic floodplain and
improve habitat connectivity.

Representative Projects
ESA
Design Engineer
Role: ESA Project Engineer
Michelle
Orr
Michelle is a water resources engineer who has led the
planning and design of habitat restoration and nature-based infrastructure projects for coastal lagoon, beach, oyster reef, and tidal wetland systems over the past 25+ years. She is passionate about integrating habitat restoration, flood risk management, public access improvements, and community input to create ecologically valuable and climate resilient landscapes. Michelle has worked in California, Oregon, Washington, Louisiana and Florida, with particular experience in the San Francisco Estuary.

Projects completed under her management and leadership
include 10,000s of acres of estuarine and coastal ecosystem restorations, including the largest wetland restoration on the West Coast.

Education
University of California at Berkeley, M.S.,
Water Resources Engineering
Harvard University, B.A., History of Science,
Magna Cum Laude
Registration
Civil Engineer, California
BCDC Regional Shoreline Adaptation Plan
/ San Francisco Bay Area, CA
ESA project lead for community-centered
process for developing resilience goals
and planning guidelines for regionally
coordinated sea-level rise adaptation
in support of the Bay Conservation and
Development Commission (BCDC).