PORT OF RICHMOND
WRITTEN STATEMENT TO PORT AUDIT FINDINGS
PORT MANAGEMENT AND PERFORMANCE AUDIT FINDINGS
Finding Reference Number: 1 – Port Strategic Plan
Management response:
In addition to the Strategic Business Plan from 2007 mentioned within this audit, there was a 2011 Final Port Audit (similar to this current performance audit) that made recommendations regarding port operations and direction. See attached for reference on last performance audit.
This finding indicates that a strategic plan would result in longer-term leases with tenants and more direct investment in the port (see Staff Decision Making and Tenant Selection). However, there are costs and benefits related to shorter-term leases. Furthermore, the size of facility and type of operation to be supported are factors in determining lease duration. Most of the lease properties within PPMT (Finger piers and basins) are suited for and leased by small to mid-size marine operations (e.g. vessel lay berthing, tugboat operations, barge and dredging operations). These are not cargo handling import/export operations and consist of shore-side facilities of less than 1 to 3 acres. It is important at this time and going forward that we have flexibility in the lease and usage of these facilities as the development of a strategic plan may indicate alternative and/or other preferred maritime and port priority usage. We do agree the soliciting property improvement and investment in all leases is desirable and should be incorporated at appropriate levels for each site.
We agree a strategic plan is needed. The strategic planning project will start in 2024 and be completed in 1H 2025.
Finding Reference Number: 2 – Port Procedures
Management response:
As mentioned in the Audit, the Port is an Enterprise Fund operating under management of the General Fund. Several port procedures are based on and documented within City processes. The Port relies on City resources and departments for various and multiple support functions.
We do agree that a dedicated procedures manual is needed for the Port. Upon hiring additional headcount and as part of the strategic planning process, a port procedures manual will be developed.
Finding Reference Number: 3 – Maintenance Staff and Deferred Maintenance Management response:
We agree that the Port needs to be better resourced. Requests are being submitted to increase headcount.
A project management resource will be utilized to manage maintenance priorities.
Attachment A: Written Statement for Port Audit Findings 48 877
Finding Reference Number: 4 – Finance Staff and Financial Monitoring
Management response:
Regarding comments on flat revenue, note that in previous leases CPI increases did not become effective until after the initial lease term. This resulted in leases that did not increase on an annual basis. The current and revised lease template includes annual CPI increases.
Regarding comments on limited support for Grant Applications, a Grant and legislative resource is more important than an accounting resource. The Port’s preference is to use a commercial resource (sales, marketing) for financial reporting and closer engagement with the City accounting department.
Agree that the Port needs to be better resourced overall. Requests are being submitted to increase headcount. The port is working with Finance to establish a dedicated accounting resource so that the resource can be more familiar with operations across the Port and can assist with the development of port financial plans and reports.
Finding Reference Number: 5 – Lease Solicitation, Selection, and Vetting Process
Management response:
The Surplus Property Authority role has been discussed with City Council and is being addressed within CAO.
The lease solicitation, selection and vetting process follows City Richmond Real Estate processes and procedures. We agree a port specific process is preferred. The most recent lease of Basin 1 at Pt. Potrero Marine Terminal (2023) followed a standard process of lease solicitation and tracking through an RFP process. The port wants to make this process as robust as possible and will undertake efforts to improve interest in the Port properties and track all activity related to solicitation, selection, and vetting.
Given the unique nature of port properties and in particular the unique nature and status of the Port of Richmond properties, we anticipate there will be some degree of unsolicited request for leasing space.
Finding Reference Number: 6 – Lease Volume Guarantee Verification and Documentation
Management response:
The port and tenants operate under lease agreements with the standards of law facilitating compliance.
Within the port industry, landlord ports may undertake an audit of the cargo volumes on a one to two or three year basis. The Audit report is correct that at current resourcing levels, the Port could not do this on a regular basis at this time. A volume verification and audit process can be built into the port procedures manual as well as into cargo operations leasing documents going forward.
Finding Reference Number: 7 – Environmental Compliance and Lease Monitoring
Management response:
Similar to Finding 6 above, the port and tenants operate under lease agreements with the standards of law facilitating compliance. Within the port industry, landlord ports may undertake an audit of terminal operations and environmental compliance at some regular cadence. The Audit report is correct that at current resourcing levels, the Port could not do this on a regular basis. An operations and environmental Attachment A: Written Statement for Port Audit Findings 49 878
audit process can be built into the port procedures manual as well as into leasing documents going forward.
Our larger concern with regard to environmental condition is the unleased properties that are subject to vandalism, waste disposal and blight.
Finding Reference Number: 8 – Security at Port Facilities
Management response:
Agree with comments that leasing the properties is most effective at keeping them safe and secure. The port will be installing the Flock Camera system to improve security and safety.
Finding Reference Number: 9 – Debt to the General Fund
Management response:
Agree the debt to the General Fund needs to be validated as well as evaluated to ensure appropriate balance of payments. Some port properties at the time of the loan agreement and subsequent amendments, have changed or are no longer available within the port portfolio. Such changes need to be accounted for in the repayment terms.
None of the current Port staff were engaged or working with the Port at the time of the loan and subsequent resolutions. Ultimately the Port would like to get out from under this debt.
Finding Reference Number: 10 – Personal Emails
Management response:
Although this is not City practice, staff researched this item with the Information Technology Department and personal email was used by the prior Port Director. This is not City practice. Currently, personal email is only used in situations where a city email cannot be used such as Google docs. Staff will work with Information Technology to ensure adherence to City practice.
Attachment A: Written Statement for Port Audit Findings 50 879
PORT OF RICHMOND
RESPONSES TO GENERAL COMMENTS FROM ORIGINAL SCOPE
1. Is the Port making the best use of public funds?
Management response:
When addressing the Port’s funding and financials, it is important to highlight and reiterate that the Port is an Enterprise Fund, hence, the cost of providing goods and services is based on leases of port assets and user charges (i.e. tariffs). Although “best use” may evolve and refined through the pending strategic plan, the Port’s properties are nearly all leased and generating revenue except for facilities that are under activity with the City Attorney’s office. These include Terminal 1 and the General Warehouse. An RFP to lease the Cafeteria Building was unsuccessfully concluded. The lease for Basin 1, which transitioned due to moved tenant, is currently being finalized.
2. Is the Port utilizing efficient operating practices? Management response:
The Port utilizes resources and departments within City Management, including Finance, Human Resources, Purchasing, IT and Real Estate to name a few. City staff are generally utilizing the procedures for their respective departments when managing Port tasks. Having stated this, as the Port staff is reestablished, policies and procedures specific to Port activity will be consolidated and documented to ensure standard operating practices going forward.
3. Does the Port have an effective organization and/or management structure, including staffing and operations, when compared to other similar ports? Are there opportunities for improvement?
Management response:
The Port is highly focused on rebuilding staff and optimally utilizing contract staff, such as our Engineering Consultant Robert Stevens, as well as continuing to partner with City staff to establish dedicated attention where needed, such as Accounting.
The activity at the Port is growing with the addition of the Port Director, and the activity will increase with proper staffing levels. Ultimately, the Port’s activity and revenue will grow. The lack of a Port Board is not an immediate priority but should be reviewed at some point. The breadth of responsibilities and mandates for City Management and City Council are significant. Having a dedicated Port Board allows members of that Board to better understand the operations and economic benefits of the Port to provide direction and oversight to Port management. There are always opportunities for improvement.
4. Is the Port complying with internal controls, government rules and regulations? Management response:
The Port agrees that with continual development of lease terms and agreements, as well as the development of standard operating procedures, the process of auditing tenants will be incorporated into operations. To make best use of resources and funds, these will likely be annual or bi-annual activities.
Attachment B: Responses to General Comments from Original Scope 51 880
5. Does the Port’s current oversight structure guarantee transparency and public access to the information? If not, what are the recommendations?
Management response:
This topic is touched upon in Question Number 3 and 4 above.
6. Does the Port have an adequate management control system for accounting measuring, reporting, and monitoring its leases?
Management response:
Please see response to Question 4 above.
7. Are staffing levels appropriate for the size and complexity of the Port’s operations and business requirements?
Management response:
The Port is still currently staffed by one full-time employee, the Port Director. Other Economic Development staff support the Port on a part-time basis. The Port is seeking to incorporate the following staff/positions within the coming 12 to 15 months:
Sr. Business Assistance Officer (Lizeht – convert to full-time Port) Port Marketing/Operations Manager (position filled but not active employee) Development Project Manager II (Port Projects and Maintenance Initiatives) - to be hired FY2024-2025.
For future request: Grants and Legislative Affairs Officer – to be budgeted.
By comparison, the Port of Redwood City is of similar size and complexity to the Port of Richmond.
Redwood City is also very close on a financial basis operating a $12M dollar business. Port of Redwood City has a staff of 12 persons.
8. Are there opportunities for management/staff to carry out operations in a different way that might yield desired results more effectively or at a lower cost?
Management response:
Management recognizes the Port has not been properly resourced or managed over a several-year period.
The new and current Port Director is focused on improving revenue, operations, safety, facility utilization, and compliance across the port. This will come at a higher cost as more staff and investment are needed.
The Port team is focused on growing revenue and improving the Port’s balance sheet.
9. Is security at the Port effective? What are the recommendations for improvement?
Management response:
Security at the Port is improving with a renewed effort by Port staff to monitor properties and vacant areas around the Port. However, cable theft of AT&T copper wires has increased. The Port has met with RPD to discuss considerations and coverage around the Port area. This collaboration is just the first step.
The Port is also finalizing plans to install the Flock Camera system at locations around the port to improve drivers’ behavior as well as to provide further security in the port area. Further improvements being pursued include asphalt curbs and gates to limit access to unmonitored areas and to prevent sideshow activity.
Attachment B: Responses to General Comments from Original Scope 52 881
10. Are there specific physical changes to infrastructure that should be made to the Port properties that would improve the operation and maintenance of the facilities?
Management response:
The Port’s infrastructure is aging and in poor condition. The Port will be seeking vendors to complete a comprehensive Facilities Condition Assessment at the earliest opportunity. This is expected to take place simultaneously with the Strategic Planning exercise. The Port’s Wharfs, in particular, require significant investment to strengthen and refurbish these assets with a view towards using them productively for another 50 years.
11. Is technology adequate and utilized efficiently? Is the technology in alignment with business needs and relevant industry benchmarks?
Management response:
No further additions to GPP comments. The Port will review and consider IT improvements in the future.
12. Are leases or loan rates reasonable compared to industry standards and local market?
Management response:
The uniqueness of the facilities at the Port of Richmond makes an ‘apples to apples’ comparison of lease rates difficult. Based on informal discussion and review of other public port leasing data, the lease rates in Richmond are fair and competitive. Some existing leases are the result of opportunistic engagement, such as the lease for Terminal 4. If this space were not being utilized the Port would be left managing safety and security issues as well as the associated costs. Additionally, revenue for the cargo handling facilities at the Port (AWC and AKK) are based on Tariff rates that are controlled by the Federal Maritime Commission (FMC). Hence, we rely on the market rate setting capability by the FMC, although the Port does have some control in CPI increases to tariffs. Ultimately, increasing cargo throughput increases the Port’s revenue, hence, supporting our tenant’s growth is important.
Additionally, following a detailed review of the Auto Warehousing Company’s lease terms in recent months, the Port engaged the Land Econ Group to conduct an analysis of our Auto/RoRo business with other Ports handling Auto/RoRo operations. Please see the attached report Port of Richmond AWC Review which indicates that the Port of Richmond’s AWC business is healthy and positive. A constraint of our business is the weight bearing strength of Richmond’s wharfs. We are not able to handle heavy vehicles and equipment (RoRo cargo) that would generate higher tariffs. As indicated in the Port Audit, with the pending completion of bond payments, the Port’s liability for bond payments will be eliminated.
13. Is the Port responsive to the needs of customers, including tenants, city departments, council, members of the broader community, and regulatory agencies? Recommend how this could be more effective.
Management response:
The conclusions in this section reflect that the Port was understaffed and underfunded over a several year period. Operations will be more effective and efficient with increased staffing and investment.
14. Does the Port have an adequate management control system for measuring, reporting, and monitoring its leases?
Management response:
Audit comments have been addressed in 3, 4, 5 and 6 above.
Attachment B: Responses to General Comments from Original Scope 53 882
15. Review and make recommendations regarding policies and procedures relating to tenant services.
Management response:
No further comments.
16. Can the Port take any legal actions against the delinquent tenants to recover lost revenue?
Management review:
The Port is working with City Attorney’s Office regarding delinquencies and other tenant compliance considerations.
17. Are there any conflict-of-interest issues involving any current or former City Council members, Current or former City staff, Current or former Port’s tenants, Current and former Port’s contractors?
Management response:
The current Port management is unaware of any conflict-of-interest issues.
18. Is the Port adequately accounting for the prudent and effective management of the resources entrusted to them?
Management response:
No further comment to GPP’s report.
19. Is the Port following sound procurement practices, budgeting process, and accounting rules?
Management response:
No further comment to GPP’s report. A number of general management practices addressed through comments above and through response to Findings.
20. Review and make recommendations, as applicable, on the following:
a. Budgeting process and purchasing...
b. Accounting systems...
c. Adequacy of Port financial oversight...
Management response:
No further comment to GPP’s reporting.
21. Assess the adequacy of Port financial oversight from the Finance Department.
Management response:
No further comment. Please see GPP reporting Finding 4.
Attachment B: Responses to General Comments from Original Scope 54 883
MEMO II
To: Charl
es Gerard, Port of Richmond
From: Bill Lee, Land Econ Group
RE: Review of AWC Performance
Date: March 14, 2024
INTRODUCTION
The
Port of Richmond requested that Land Econ Group (LEG) review the performance of Auto Warehousing Corporation (AWC) in order to understand the market pricing for similar facilities for long-term planning. Our evaluation followed two tracks: 1) How AWC’s performance in at the Port of Richmond compares to other public California ports that import/export a substantial number of automobiles, and 2) How AWC processing of Subaru automobiles compares in numbers to total US Subaru sales.
COMPARISON TO OTHER CALIFORNIA PORTS
The key
public port competitors to the Port of Richmond for the import and export of automobiles are the Port of San Diego, Port Hueneme and the Port of San Francisco. The ports of San Diego and Hueneme are major players in the automobile import/export business, while the Port of San Francisco appears to face some challenges in this business.
Port of San Diego
The
San Diego Unified Port District has contracted with The Pasha Group to act as Terminal Operator of the National City Marine Terminal for the purpose of importing, exporting and short-term storage of automobiles. In terms of revenue generation, the Pasha Group has consistently been within the top five or six of this Port’s most productive tenants. The primary boundaries of this terminal cover 230 acres. However, the cargo handled at this terminal also includes coastwise lumber (Pacific Northwest), domestic coastwise cargo to and from Hawaii (Pasha Hawaii Transport Line), and international OEM (Original Equipment Manufacturer). There are multiple other tenants and customers at this terminal Attachment C: Memo II
55 884
2 with leases and temporary use occupancy permits; therefore, the entire 230-acre area is not exclusively dedicated to automobile processing.
Figure 1: National City Marine Terminal
During FY 2022/23 this terminal handled 290,539 automobile units and Pasha generated $12,022,000 in revenue for the Port (Table 1). The estimated per unit revenue amounted to $41. The per acre revenue for automobiles is not particularly meaningful because of the multiple overlapping uses for this acreage. A recently completed study, National City Marine Terminal (NCMT) Optimization Study completed in September of 2015, recommended that this terminal increase its automobile throughput target to 600,000 units per year in the medium term and 800,000 units per year long term.
If the Port of San Diego actually achieve success approaching this level, the Port of Richmond’s automobile import/export business will notice its competitive impact.
Attachment C: Memo II
56 885
3 Table 1: Comparison of Automobile Import/Export Metrics for Selected Ports
Port of San Francisco
In May of 2016, the San Francisco Port Commission approved a 15-year marine terminal management agreement with Pasha Automotive Service, a subsidiary of the Pasha Group for Pier 80. This pier is San Francisco’s primary general cargo terminal, consists of approximately 60 acres of cargo laydown space, two warehouses, and four deep water berths. While this agreement was signed with great fanfare with the promise of well-paid longshoreman jobs, the actual performance has been less than impressive. In FY2018/19 Pier 80 processed a high of 77,052 automobile units and generated $2,639,013 in revenue or $64 per unit. However, by FY2022/23 the unit count had dropped to 28,976 with revenue generation falling to $334,809 or only $12 per unit. Because of location and high cost, the Port of San Francisco has not competed effectively against ports like San Diego, Hueneme and Richmond.
AMG Reported Acreage Revenue
Port Lessee Year Units Units Total Per AMG Unit Per Process Unit Leased per Acre Richmond AWC FY 2022/23 145,000 91,252 $7,324,134 $51 $80 75 $97,655 Richmond AWC FY 2023/24 est 85,000 93,000* $3,419,550 $40 $37 75 $45,594 San Fracisco Pasha FY 2016/17 NA 15,093 $1,189,470 NA $79 60 $19,825 San Fracisco Pasha FY 2017/18 NA 34,039 $2,177,128 NA $64 60 $36,285 San Fracisco Pasha FY 2018/19 NA 77,052 $2,639,013 NA $34 60 $43,984 San Fracisco Pasha FY 2019/20 NA 52,714 $1,544,698 NA $29 60 $25,745 San Fracisco Pasha FY 2022/23 NA 28,976 $334,809 NA $12 60 $5,580 San Diego Pasha FY 2022/23 NA 290,539 $12,022,000 NA $41 230 $52,270 Hueneme WWS/BMW/
Glovis FY 2021/22 NA 148,183 $9,407,345 NA $63 NA NA
*Estimated by LEG
Source: Individual Port Fianancial Reports or Public Records Requests Amount Paid
Attachment C: Memo II
57 886
4 Figure 2: Port of San Francisco Pier 80
Port Hueneme
The Port of Hueneme ranks sixth in the nation in terms of automobile import/export volume.
This Port dedicates approximately 40 acres of terminal land for use by its Ro-Ro customers and stages automobiles in over 8,000 bays. In addition to the 13 western states served by the Port’s import of automobiles, auto exports are delivered to the Port from California, Ohio and Michigan. Approximately half of the Port’s revenue is generated from contracts with three vehicle distribution, manufacturing and handling companies. These companies and their partners process vehicles prior to delivery to dealerships as well as coordinate inland transportation. The two vehicle distributors include Wallenius- Wilhelmsen Services (WWS) and Glovis America, Inc. BMW North America processes its own vehicles through this port.
The Port’s financial analysis indicated that operating revenue for auto cargo totaled $9,407,345 for FY 2021/22 with the processing of 148,183 units. Revenue per auto units was $63, although it is possible this number includes the processing of heavy equipment. While Port Hueneme has 40 acres dedicated for Ro-Ro operations, WWS, Glovis and BMW have additional acreage available for automobile processing rendering the revenue per acre calculation meaningless. The major auto brands that are processed in Hueneme include BMW, Subaru, Kia, Hyundai, Volve, GM and Tesla.
Attachment C: Memo II
58 887
5 CONCLUSIONS FOR AWC OUTLOOK
The comparison analysis in Table 1 indicates that AWC/Port of Richmond’s financial performance is largely in line with its key public port competitors. For FY 2023/24 with the annual minimum guarantee (AMG) of 85,000, the City Finance Department has estimated total revenue from AWC of $3.4 million or $40 per unit and approximately $46,000 per acre. The Port of San Diego in FY 2022/23 achieved $41 per unit and $52,000 per acre with Pasha as the lessee. After opening Pier 80 for auto processing with considerable fanfare, performance at the Port of San Francisco’s Pier 80 has declined substantially.
During FY 2022/23, San Francisco processed only 29,000 units and earned only $12 per unit and $5,600 per acre.
A review of the units processed by auto brand (Table 2) indicates that Honda units dropped off sharply from FY 2018/19 to FY 2019/20 as Honda shifted production to the US, although a rebound was apparent in FY 2022/23 as Honda/Lexus imported some models not produced in the US. The overall number of units processed declined by nearly 15,000 units in FY 2020/21 likely due to the Covid pandemic. Led by Subaru and Honda, the number of units processed at Richmond climbed back to 72,100 in FY 2022/23 from a Covid low of 50,600 in FY 2020/21. Approximately one in ten Subarus sold in the US came through the Port of Richmond during the past two fiscal years. Given the US policy direction favoring domestic and North American manufacturing, it will be a challenge for the West Coast ports to substantially ramp up automobile import volume in the years ahead. The Port and AWC need to work cooperatively to develop a mutually supportive strategy going forward to greatly enhance the throughput of automobiles at the Port of Richmond. A key step would be to develop an in-depth understanding of the global auto market and to carefully track which brands are coming into Richmond and which brands represent new opportunities for the future of AWC and Richmond.
Table 2: Auto Units Processed at the Port of Richmond and Subaru Market Share
Calendar Total US AWC Richmond
Fiscal Year Honda Subaru Ford Total Year Subaru Sales Subaru Market 2018-19 45,196 NA NA NA 2019 700,117 NA
2019-20 6,260 53,999 4,946 65,205 2020 611,942 8.8% 2020-21 4,917 43,202 2,515 50,634 2021 583,810 7.4% 2021-22 3,188 54,722 1,023 58,933 2022 556,581 9.8% 2022-23 13,571 58,556 - - 72,127 2023 632,086 9.3% Source: Port of Richmond, GPP Analytics analysis of Port records and Good Car Bad Car Automotive Sales Data Units Processed
Attachment C: Memo II
59 888
Internal Audit of
Port of Richmond
llleluta ad
for
City of Richmond
June 28, 2011
Kevin W. Harper CPA & Associates
3002 Seriana Court
Union City, CA 94587
(510) 324-1022
[email protected]
Attachment D: Internal Audit of Port of Richmond, June 28, 2011 60 889
Table of Contents
I. PURPOSE OF REVIEW
II. SCOPE AND APPROACH
III. OVERVIEW OF PORT OPERATIONS
• Mission
• Property Description
• Financial Summaries and Forecast
• Tariff and Fees
• Summary of Tenant Leases
• Summary of Internal Controls
• Staffing
• City Financing
• Capital Projects and Funding
IV. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
• Organization Structure
• Property Management
• Loans Payable to City
• Layberth Vessels
• Tenant Agreements
• Financial Reporting
• Security Deposits
• Certificates of Insurance
• Goals and Operating Statistics
• Financial Procedures
• Operating Procedures
• Marina Dredging Project
Page No.
1 1
2 13
Attachment D: Internal Audit of Port of Richmond, June 28, 2011 61 890
City of Richmond
Internal Audit of the Port of Richmond
I. PURPOSE OF REVIEW
The Port of Richmond (the "Port") is a department of the City of Richmond (the "City"). This internal audit of Port activities was conducted to review the financial operations, efficiency, effectiveness and organizational structure of the Port and to provide City management with recommendations for improvement.
II. SCOPE AND APPROACH
The procedures that we performed during the internal audit were:
• Held discussions with City management to:
o Finalize scope of internal audit
o Obtain financial statements, budget and other relevant documents o Agree on timing and communication protocols
o Schedule interviews
• Gathered and read budget, policies and procedures, organization charts, financial statements, performance measures and other relevant documents • Prepared detailed work plan
• Interviewed employees and management of the Port of Richmond. Interviews focused on:
o Mission and goals
o Rate setting, billing and collecting procedures
o Current business process workflow, practices and procedures o Environmental and other risks
o Capital project plans and related funding
o Capabilities of financial software
o Historical problems and concerns
• Gathered "best practices" data and analyzed operations, work flow and record keeping and developed recommendations
Attachment D: Internal Audit of Port of Richmond, June 28, 2011 62 891
• Prepared draft report containing a discussion of tariff fees, tenant leases and rental revenue, financial statements and forecasts, summary of internal controls, summary of city financing, capital projects and funding, work plan, findings, and recommendations for improvement
• Reviewed findings and recommendations with the Port Director to assure facts are correct, and that recommendations are understood and implementable • Revised report based on feedback and presented final report to City management III. OVERVIEW OF OPERATIONS
Mission
The Port is responsible for developing, marketing, leasing, operating and maintaining all City owned marine terminals to obtain the maximum financial benefit to the City. Port revenue is generated through the application of the Port Tariff and property lease agreements, which is used to fund operations, maintenance, capital improvements and debt service.
Property Description
Richmond has 32 miles of shoreline along the northern and eastern reaches of San Francisco Bay. There are five city-owned terminals. These tenant-operated terminals handle a variety of liquid and dry bulk commodities, automobiles and diversified cargo. There are ten privately owned terminals in the vicinity of the Port's operations that handle bulk liquid, dry bulk materials, metals, and bulk cargo; however the Port has no operational or oversight responsibilities for them. The Port has approximately 200 acres of land and 400,000 square feet of building space, of which approximately 40 acres and 180,000 square feet of building space is not currently rented. A brief description of each terminal and a map of the terminals follows:
• Terminal 1 - 14 acres of land and a warehouse in need of repair. Not currently rented.
The Redevelopment Agency is leading a request for proposal process to develop. • Terminal 2 - 8 acres of land and two warehouses totaling 140,000 square feet used for the storage and distribution of liquid bulk. The terminal is currently rented to a private business.
• Terminal 3 - 20 acres of land and a warehouse of 80,000 square feet used for the import, storage and distribution of bulk cargo and containers. The terminal is currently not rented but the second and third floors serves as the Port's Administrative Office. • Terminal 4 - 31 acres of land and a warehouse of 12,000 square feet used for trucking and storage.
• Point Potrero Marine Terminal-130 acres of land, four graving docks, two finger piers and two warehouses totaling 170,000 square feet used for import, storage and distribution of autos, dry and liquid bulk, The terminal is currently rented to seven private businesses, two nonprofit organizations and one federal agency.
Attachment D: Internal Audit of Port of Richmond, June 28, 2011 63 892
Financial Summaries and Forecast
Following are Port operating results from the City's audited annual financial report for each of the previous four years ( on the accrual basis of accounting):
OPERATING REVENUES
Leases
Layberth
Other
Total Operating Revenues (Note 1)
OPERATING EXPENSES
Salaries and wages
General and administration
3 I
2006-07
$5,206,410
186,216
5,392,626
735,394
1,345,398
2007-08
$5,765,173
170,331
(35,378)
5,900,126
837,443
2,129,592
2008-09
$4,893,730
202,110
5,095,840
1,008,522
2,284,256
2009-10
$3,867,981
14,172
3,882,153
1,076,538
1,483,175
Attachment D: Internal Audit of Port of Richmond, June 28, 2011 64 893
Maintenance
Depreciation
Other
Total Operating Expenses (Note 2)
Operating Income (Loss)
NONOPERATING REVENUES (EXPENSES)
Gain (loss) on retirement of capital assets
Interest income
Grants
Interest expense
Total Nonoperating Revenues (Expenses) (Note 3)
Income (Loss) Before Transfers
Transfers In (Note 4)
Transfers Out
Changes in Net Assets
Beginning Net Assets
Ending Net Assets (Note 5)
Notes:
22,075
908,726
3,440
3,015.033
2,377.593
41,000
187,774
(675,700)
(446,926)
1.930.667
1,047,225
2.977.892
(5,632,589)
$(2,654.697)
50,661
919,326
7,037
3,944.059
1.956.067
(60,272)
161,534
2,782,673
(585,458)
2298.477
4.254.544
1,863,750
(156,870)
187,023
886,392
11,312
4.377.505
718.335
146,422
50,027
(361,764)
065.315)
553,020
(7,608)
368,404
1,393,558
79,338
4.401,013
(518.860)
(452,495)
(17,096)
25,000
(3,757,708)
(4,202,299)
(4.721.159)
5.961.424 545,412 (4.721.159)
(2,654,697) 3,306,727 3,489,1 11
SJ.306,727 $ 3•852•139 $(1.232.048)
(1) Operating revenues in fiscal year 2009-10 declined primarily from Auto Warehousing due to construction of Honda improvements.
(2) Operating expenses increased from fiscal year 2006-07 primarily as a result of two additional Port employees and additional depreciation and maintenance related to the new Honda facilities. (3) Non-operating revenues (expenses)-The large grant revenue in fiscal year 2007-08 was for security cameras and the large interest expense in fiscal year 2009-10 was debt service on the Honda debt. (4) Transfers in-Fiscal year 2006-07 represents transfer in of proceeds from Port Terminal Lease Revenue Bond Fund to pay for capital improvements. Fiscal year 2007-08 represents transfer in for closure of certain Port funds and consolidation into a single fund. (5) Ending net assets for fiscal year 2008-09 not equal beginning net assets for fiscal year 2009-10 because of the City's implementation of a new accounting standard regarding derivative investments.
Below is the Port's financial forecast for the current and four subsequent years. Since the forecast is shown on a cash basis of accounting, it is not consistent with the historical results shown in the table above ( e.g., it includes capital outlay expenditures instead of depreciation expense and includes contribution from bond proceeds as a transfer in).
Attachment D: Internal Audit of Port of Richmond, June 28, 2011 65 894
Projected
Actual Budget Forecast Forecast Forecast
2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
REVENUES
Leases $ 6,567,997 $8 ,176,447 $8,335,753 $8,493,725 $8,814,663 Grants (Note 1) 400,000 11,600,000
Other Revenues 28,446 50!000 50,000 50,000 50,000
Total Revenues 6,996,443 19,826,447 8,385,753 8,543,725 8,864,663
EXPENDITURES
Salaries & Benefits 918,137 965,375 997,806 1,041,700 1,087,592 Professional & Admin 150,000 1,188,475 1,247,899 1,310,294 1,403,539 Other Operating 54,200 49,300 51,765 54,353 57,071
Equipment & Contract Services 45,000 38,500 40,425 42,446 44,569 Utilities 201,700 237,100 248,955 261,403 274,473
Provision for Insurance 24,000 30,000 31,500 33,075 34,729 Cost Pool 942,802 883,269 942,802 942,802 942,802
Capital Outlay (Note 1) 8,758,035 13,480,000 1,000,000
Debt Service 3,855,443 3,868,055 3,868,055 6,203,862 6,092,854 Total Expenditures 14,949,317 20,740,074 8,429,207 9,889,935 9,937,629
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES
{USES)
Contribs from Bond Proceeds (Note 2) 9,405,465 1,108,053 Operating Transfer In (Note 3) 750,000
Operating Transfers Out (Note 3) {250,000} {150,000} {150,000} {150,000} Total Other Financing Sources
(Uses) 9,4051465 1,608,053 {150,000) {150,000} {150,000) Operating Surplus (Deficit) 1,452,591 694,426 (193,454) (1,496,210) (1,222,%6) Beginning Balance 457,607 1,910,198 2,604,624 2,411,170 914,960 Ending Balance $1,910,198 $2,604,624 $2,411,170 $914,960 $(308,006) Notes:
(1) Grants revenue and capital outlay expenditures for fiscal year 2011-12 are both large as a result of grant funding received to construct facility improvements as discussed on page 11. (2) Represents use of 2009 lease revenue bond proceeds for Honda improvements. (3) Represents $750,000 operating transfer from City General Fund to finance Subaru improvements, and related repayments to the General Fund of$150,000 per year. $100,000 transfer out in fiscal year 2011-12 is for Riggers Loft project
Fiscal years 20123-13 through 2014-15 forecast an aggregate operating deficit of nearly $3 million. Port management believes this forecast is conservative because it (i) assumes no new s I
Attachment D: Internal Audit of Port of Richmond, June 28, 2011 66 895
tenants even though the Port is actively pursuing new business from China and (ii) excludes significant expenditure on capital projects and potential grant funding.
Tariff and Fees
Amounts charged to tenants for dockage, wharfage and service charges are recommended by the Port Director and approved by both the City Council and the California Association of Port Authorities. The rates are based on the type of commodity being shipped. The tariff for the Port of Richmond has not been revised since April 2007 and prior to that had not changed since December 1999. Following are the most used rates from the Port's tariff:
• Dockage - based on the length of the ship
times tariff rate times the number of days
docked. Example rates are:
30 meters
390 meters
• Wharfage:
o Non-containerized cargo vessel
through pipeline
o Automobiles, pleasure or passenger,
including pick-up trucks or chassis,
not exceeding 10 passengers per vehicle
• Service and Facility Charges - Liquids in bulk
from/to vessel or barge
$84 for 1st 24-hour period
$11,950 for 1st 24-hour period
$1.50 per metric ton
$23.10 each
$ 1.50 per metric ton
Attachment D: Internal Audit of Port of Richmond, June 28, 2011 67 896
Summary of Tenant Leases
Following is a summary ofleases for fiscal year 2009-10:
Security
Revenue Annual Rent Deposit per
Tenant Location Lease Term FY2009-10 Increase Lease
Space Re""11 Begin End
Aloha Moving PPMT 6/4/2003 na $ 20,408 none $1,800
Foss Maritime PPMT 1/112007 1/1/2012 284,940 4% 9,000
General Services Admin PPMT 3/1/2006 212812011 65,000 none none Honda of El Cerrito PPMT 12/1/2007 11/30/2009 78,000 5% 6,500 Crowley Maritime PPMT 10/2412002 na 17,724 none 1,000
California Oils Terminal2 1/1/1991 6130/2016 232,631 4% none Auto Warehousing PPMT 5/112004 5/1/2014 1,082,163 none none Marine Spill Response PPMT 6130/2003 6/13/2013 270,265 3% none Nextel TerminalJ 12/31/1998 12/31/2013 24,542 5% none
Oscar Niemeth PPMT 3/612006 na 43,549 none none
Maas Boat Co. PPMT 1/1/1995 na 23,063 5% 1,636
Pio Trucking Terminal4 6/1/2010 5/31/2011 20,250 none 4,500 Richmond Museum PPMT 9/20/1998 6/20/1999 na none
DockqgeFeq
ISS Marine Srvc Inchcape Vessel 430,981
K-Sea transportation LLC Vessel 16,288
Matson Navigation Vessel 194,521
Northland Nautical Vessel 819
Olympic Tug and Barge Vessel 7,454
Red Oak Victory Vessel 7,885
Sause Bros Vessel 93,224
Starlight Maria Vessel 195
Stcvedoria Services Vessel 469,200
Translogix (AWC storage) Vessel 16,276
Wilhelmser Ship Service Vessel 33,605
Patriot Environmental Svces Vessel 10,000
Norton Lilly Vessel 26,451
K line America Inc. Vessel 2,585
$3 472619
7 I
Attachment D: Internal Audit of Port of Richmond, June 28, 2011 68 897
Summary of Internal Controls
Billing Procedures
The Port bills and collects three types of revenue: 1) monthly rent; 2) layberth or docking fees; and 3) the Auto Warehousing contract.
• Monthly Rent- Bills are prepared by the Financial Manager. The monthly rent is for the rental of the actual space a tenant uses. There are currently eleven tenants that pay monthly rentals. The Financial Manager prepares the invoices for the monthly rentals.
The following procedures are followed:
o Monthly invoices are entered into MUNIS
o Invoice batches are printed, checked for accuracy and emailed to the City's Finance Department (Finance)
o All backup is scanned and sent to Finance
o Finance approves and posts the batch in MUNIS
o Finance mails the invoices to the tenants and also sends the Financial Manager a copy
o All payments are mailed directly to finance. Finance does not notify the Port when the cash is actually received but sends a monthly statement to the Financial Manager who mails to the tenants
o The Financial Manager prepares a receivables aging report which is downloaded from MUNIS
• Layberth or Docking Fees - Currently the Port has two major tenants that pay for docking and wharfage: California Oils and Honda. Each one uses a vessel agent that submits a Vessel Activity Report, which lists the ship name, arrival dates, number of units and total wharfage, to the Port's Financial Manager. The information is verified by the Financial Manager by comparing to the Port's Vessel Schedule Report. The vessel agent is billed for wharf age and dockage based on the tariff rates and are entered in MUNIS as described above.
• Auto Warehousing Contract - The agreement with Auto Warehousing Company (A WC) requires the Port to refund to A WC 25% of the total wharfage earned for the month. Each month a Vessel Schedule Report and a Honda Revenue Earned Report are submitted by AWC to the Port's Financial Manager. The Honda Revenue Earned Report contains the revenue earned by each vessel that arrived at the Port, and the wharfage, surcharge, services, storage and facility charges per unit. The Financial Manager compares the volume information on the Vessel Schedule Report to the amounts billed on the Honda Earned Revenue Report. A WC is billed based on the tariff rates and are entered in MUNIS as described above.
Purchasing and Cash Disbursement Procedures
The Port uses a purchasing checklist (P3 form) that is required for all purchases of goods and services. The P3 form is completed by the person initiating the transaction. The P3 form is entered in MUNIS by the Financial Manager and is approved by the Port Director. Once the P3 Attachment D: Internal Audit of Port of Richmond, June 28, 2011 69 898
form is approved in MUNIS, a pmchase requisition is entered, approved and a purchase order is created for all contracts exceeding $10,000. The person who initiated the transaction mails the purchase order to the vendor.
Invoices are submitted by vendors directly to Finance. Finance emails the Port the invoices to approve for payment. The Financial Manager prints the invoices and obtains the signature of either the Port Director or the Development Project Manager for approval. The approved invoice is scanned as a "goods received" document and is entered into MUNIS. The Financial Manager emails Finance to notify them to pay the invoice.
Three Port employees have Calcards for purchases with up to a maximum of $3,000 per day.
The Port $500 petty cash fund for small pmchases.
Payroll Procedures
The Port's payroll is processed by the Operations Administrator. The Port is included in the City's payroll process which is on a semi-monthly basis. The Port has five employees.
On an annual basis, Finance sends the Port a schedule of timesheet due dates. A blank timesheet is also sent and copies are made for each employee for each pay period. Staff signs their timesheets and are approved by the Port Director. The Port Director's timesheet is approved by the City Manager.
Staff requests for time off are handled via the intranet by using an Employee Self Service Request Form (ESS). The ESS form goes to the Port Director for approval and the request is sent back to the employee. On the timesheet due date, the ESS form is printed and attached to the timesheet. All timesheets and ESS forms are then forwarded to City Payroll for processing.
Accounting and Reporting Procedures
Journal entries are processed using the City's standard journal entry procedures. The Financial Manager prepares all journal entries using the journal entry form and enters into MUNIS.
MUNIS automatically assigns a journal entry number. All backup for the entry is scanned and sent to Finance for review, approval and posting. Finance sends the journal back to the Financial Manager after it has been posted in MUNIS.
Each month a budget vs. actual variance report is prepared by the Port and is due to Finance by the 10th of the following month. The variance report is prepared by the Financial Manager with information downloaded from MUNIS. The reports are reviewed and discussed in staff meetings at the Port. Each quarter the Port prepares a performance measures report which analyzes the activities of the Administration and Capital Improvement Projects divisions. The Port also prepares a midyear review report and a five-year projection report.
Budgeting Procedures
The Financial Manager coordinates the budget preparation process and all staff are involved in providing information. A budget narrative is prepared to accompany the budget amounts. The budget is reviewed by the Executive Director and then uploaded to MUNIS for review by Attachment D: Internal Audit of Port of Richmond, June 28, 2011 70 899
Finance. At the end of each month, the Financial Manager prepares a budget vs. actual variance report that is reviewed by Port management
Staffing
The Port has the following staffing as of March 31, 2011:
• Port Director -Jim Matzorkis
• Port Administrator - Open
• Development Project Manager II - Michael Williams
• Operations Administrator - Janie Singleton
• Financial Manager - Delmy Cuellar
• Maintenance Lead Worker - Tim Goins
City Financing
Loan from City
On May 17, 2006, the City and Port entered into a promissory note effective June 30, 2005 in the amount of$17,139,855. The note bore no interest and required repayments of$6.3 million on or about July 1, 2006, $700,000 for 2008-09 and $2,027,971 for each fiscal year thereafter until the note was fully repaid during fiscal year 2013-14. The note states that the amount owed by the Port is for "Port terminal leases and other Port projects financed by the General Fund".
On May 24, 2007, the City and Port entered into a promissory note in the same amount of $17,139,855. The note requires principal repayments of$50,000 for fiscal year 2006-07 and fiscal year 2007-08, $6,350,000 for fiscal year 2008-09, $2,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2009-10 through 2013-14, and $689,855 for fiscal year 2014-15. The repayment schedule attached to the note begins charging interest for fiscal year 2009-10 at the interest rate equivalent to the three year LAIF of the outstanding principal amount. The repayment schedule assumed that the $6,350,000 principal payment scheduled for fiscal year 2008-09 would be made, however terminal I was not sold as expected so this payment was not made.
Following is actual activity related to the City loan per the Port's accounting records since its inception:
$17,139,855 Owed to City at June 30, 2006 per promissory note (50,000) Repayment May 2007
(50,000) Repayment June 2008
397,525 Interest accrued at June 30, 2010
$17,437.380 Owed to City at June 30, 2010
Indirect Cost Allocations
The Port pays the City's General Fund $942,802 per year for its share of the City's indirect costs.
We understand that the City has conducted a new cost allocation study during fiscal year 2010- 11 and the Port's share of allocated costs will decline to $836,017 per year. Specifically, the allocated costs for fiscal year 2010-11 are:
10 I
Attachment D: Internal Audit of Port of Richmond, June 28, 2011 71 900
Maintenance
Information technology
General liability insurance
Communications
PC support
Financial software
Geographic information system
Administration
Total
$ 37,450
27,385
25,527
16,388
5,265
42,453
1,144
787,190
$942,802
Administration charges are allocations of costs related to building usage, City Council and Mayor, City Manager, Finance, Human Resources, City Clerk and City Attorney.
Capital Projects and Funding
Following is a schedule showing the Port's approved capital projects, and the related financing:
Project Description Expenditures
3/31/11 LTD Budget
Bay Trail Shipyard No. 3 $ 692,000
Berth Dredging 1,058,844
Fiber Optic Network 4,310,504
Honda Port of Entry at PPMT $3,220,162 5,771,329
Integrated Video Surveillance System 3,018,027
Lighting Improvements at PPMT 2,650,000
Marina Dredging 2,100,000
Port Rail Corridor Facilities 1,904,917 2,295,211
Railroad Improvements Quiet Zones 190,088 1,000,000
Subaru Building 4 Rehab 750,000
Terminal 2 Timber Wharf Replacement 1,000,000
Terminal 3 Office Building Upgrade 154,561 3,787,889
Total $S.462,Z�8 $28-�33,B04
The financing sources listed above are:
• Grant -represents grants awarded to Port as discussed on page 12.
Financing Sources
Grant
Unfunded
Grant
Debt Proceeds
Grant
Grant
City
Debt Proceeds
Port Cash
City
Unfunded
Grant
• Debt Proceeds-represents $47,110,000 of2009 lease revenue bonds issued to finance Honda improvements. This debt is secured by minimum annual guarantee in Honda lease agreement
• City-the City's Marina Enterprise Fund is paying for the marina dredging project and the City is loaning $750,000 to the Port for Subaru improvements • Port Cash -represents amounts funded by Port operating surplus • Unfunded -represents project whose revenue source has not yet been identified 111
Attachment D: Internal Audit of Port of Richmond, June 28, 2011 72 901
Following is a schedule showing the Port's grants as of March 31, 2011:
Granting Agency
Ass'n of Bay Area Governments
U.S. Dept of Homeland Security
Calif Emergency Mgmt Agency
Calif Emergency Mgmt Agency
Calif State Coastal Conservancy
CalTrans
U.S. Dept of Homeland Security
Calif Emergency Mgmt Agency
Project
Bay Trail Project
Video Surveillance
Video Surveillance
PPMT Lighting
Bay Trail Project
Bay Trail Project
Fiber Optic Network
Security Center
Award
Amount
$ 289,000
2,311,138
754,507
2,650,000
97,000
350,000
4,310,504
3,787,889
$14,550,038
Life-to-Date
Expenditures
$154,561
$154,561
Attachment D: Internal Audit of Port of Richmond, June 28, 2011 73 902
IV. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
1. ORGANIZATION STRUCTURE
The Port's strategic plan states that "The valuable real estate and coastal waters belonging to the community should be cared for in a manner that protects the interests of that community through, environmental stewardship, economic development and job creation." The Port's mission is " ... to obtain the maximum financial benefit to the City." Infrastructure investment needs will continue to be a major burden for the smaller ports, including the Port. When a port is governed by a city council, its infrastructure needs frequently are delayed as more pressing social issues are addressed. As a result, more ports are moving toward the privatization of managerial and financial responsibilities. Privatization allows some ports to stay competitive with the upgraded facilities needed to meet the needs of shipping lines.
In one privatization model, a port authority is established to own the land, berths and other infrastructure. The port authority would take direction from the City Council as it relates to broad public interests. Otherwise it would be autonomous, own its own assets, set its own budget, manage investments, establish staffing levels and pay, and have its own governing body.
A private company or another port would be hired to manage the commercial side of the transactions. The port authority would spell out service quality, goals and social obligations that port management must meet. It would retain the right to set overall policies for the port but would forego making operating decisions. This, in effect, would give the professional port managers the same authority and responsibility as if they were functioning in the private sector.
There are other privatization models that would require the City to sell the Port's assets. Those models are not described here and are not being recommended.
Recommendation
The City should consider establishing an autonomous port authority to manage the port in a manner to make it more competitive with other ports. Alternatively, the City should consider the benefits of outsourcing operational management another port or to a professional port management firm.
2. PROPERTY MANAGEMENT
The Port has significant land and building assets that were acquired at various times over the past several decades. The City has not conducted appraisals of its land and buildings and therefore does not know their market value. In the last 15 years, Port management estimates that the City has invested over $40 million in capital improvements for projects such as rail line extension, environmental cleanup and dock/pier improvement. The Port currently has capital projects underway totaling over $28 million as described on page 11. There are numerous other capital projects that need to be undertaken for the Port to continue to draw tenants, including electrical system upgrade, timber wharf replacement, Riggers Loft building renovation, Point Potrero general warehouse renovation, terminal 2 berth upgrade, terminal 4 docks/piers replacement, and cafeteria building renovation.
Attachment D: Internal Audit of Port of Richmond, June 28, 2011 74 903
Several large governments, including seaports, have started using public-private partnerships to finance their large capital projects. These partnerships are frequently structured so that the private partner pays a large upfront cash payment and agrees to make certain capital improvements. In return the private partner gets a long term lease at a reduced rental fee. The government retains ownership of the land and improvements and the end of the lease term.
The Port has no property manager. A property manager would focus on maximizing revenue for each parcel of land by understanding each parcel's highest and best use, understanding the needs of potential tenants and buyers, developing plans to make needed improvements and obtain related funding. These duties were partially handled by the former Port Administrator, a position vacant since October 2010.
Recommendations
The City should hire or engage a property manager to develop detailed plans to maximize return on investment to the City for each parcel by studying the competitive needs of its current and potential tenants; renew current leases having lower than market value rents as described in Finding 5; develop and prioritize a list of needed facilities improvements; secure financing to improve the facilities; and lead the global Environmental Impact Report the Port has initiated.
The Port's master list of needed capital projects should be formalized and prioritized.
The criteria used to determine when a desired project is placed on the master list and the criteria used to prioritize those projects should be defined.
3. LOANS PAY ABLE TO CITY
The Port and City entered into a promissory note dated May 2006 and amended May 2007 whereby the Port agreed to repay the City $17,139,188 plus interest for "Port terminal leases and other Port projects financed by the General Fund." The only documentation that City and Port personnel could locate indicates that original loans were made between 1985 and 1995 in annual amounts ranging from approximately $387,000 to $2.0 million, and that the note amount is composed of $8,872,397 of principal and $8,075,597 of accrued interest. This documentation did not specify the purpose of the loans.
There are several problems with the calculations of interest on these loans:
• Prior to execution of the first promissory note in May 2006, there is no evidence of intent or agreement that the loans would carry interest nor what interest rate would be used • The period for which interest was charged is not consistent. It appears interest was charged each year through June 30, 2004, not charged from then until June 30, 2009 and again charged starting July 1, 2009
• The interest rate used may not be consistent. The only calculations the City could provide of interest indicates that 5.5% was used for fiscal years 2002-03 and 2003-04.
There is no documentation of how this 5.5% rate was determined.
Attachment D: Internal Audit of Port of Richmond, June 28, 2011 75 904
• The promissory note indicates that the interest rate starting in fiscal year 2006-07 will be the three-year average of the State of California Local Agency Investment Fund's rate, however the promissory note also refers to a rate of 4.000%. • The balance on which interest is calculated is not clear. It is normal for interest to be determined based on the outstanding balance (principal and interest totaling $17,139,188). Up to fiscal year 2003-04, interest was calculated based only on the outstanding principal balance ($8,872,397).
• The interest accrued for fiscal year 2009-10 incorrectly excluded interest on the 1995 principal amount of $334,647. Beginning with the promissory note in fiscal year 2006- 07, interest is calculated on the entire outstanding balance.
There is inadequate documentation of the underlying services provided by the City that lead to the need for Port's repayment to the City. As mentioned above, the only documentation provided by Port and City staff shows the year of each loan amount but no details of what the funds were advanced for. The first paragraph of the promissory note dated May 27, 2007 identifies the reason for the loan as follows: "Since on or about December 2004, the City of Richmond (City) has provided the following services to the Port of Richmond (Port): Port Tenninal Leases and other Port projects :financed by the General Fund." However, the loans originated in the period 1985 through 1995. In addition, the description of the specific services provided by the City is not clear (i.e., it is not clear how "Port Tenninal Leases" would lead to required repayments to the City).
The Port is not in compliance with and the repayment schedule included in the promissory note.
The note calls for annual repayments to the City each fiscal year as follows:
Fiscal year 2006-07 $ 50,000
Fiscal year 2007-08 50,000
Fiscal year 2008-09 6,350,000
Fiscal year 2009-10 2,000,000
Fiscal year 2010-11 2,000,000
Fiscal year 2011-12 2,000,000
Fiscal year 2012-13 2,000,000
Fiscal year 2013-14 2,000,000
Fiscal year 2014-15 689,855
The two $50,000 repayments were made as scheduled. However, no payments have been made since then.
State law requires a reasonable relationship between the payment of a fee and the purpose for which it is charged. Therefore it is important that the City have adequate documentation of all charges paid by the Port to the General Fund and be able to demonstrate the value provided to Port tenants.
Generally accepted accounting principles require that the Port have both the intent and ability to repay a liability for it to be appropriately reported in its :financial statements. The Port's intent to repay is documented in the promissory note. However, its ability to repay is in substantial doubt.
Attachment D: Internal Audit of Port of Richmond, June 28, 2011 76 905
It has repaid only approximately $285,000 in the last 25 years including none in the last four years. The Port's five-year financial forecast shows an aggregate operating deficit of over $2 million during fiscal years 2011-12 through 2014-15.
Recommendations
The City should locate and document the specific services provided to the Port that led to the $8,762,397 of loans. For any portion of the loans for which documentation is not available, the City and Port should remove the related loan amount from their accounting records. Note that removing the loan from the accounting records does not necessarily remove the legal liability to repay the loan should the Port later gain the ability to repay.
The City and Port should determine the Port's ability to repay the loans. Ifit is not clear that the Port has such ability within a reasonable time, the amount exceeding the Port's ability to repay should be removed from the accounting records.
The City should recalculate the amount of interest due on the outstanding balance since its inception based on a consistent and defensible methodology. The method described in the promissory note (three year rolling average ofLAIF applied to the average outstanding balance each year) is an example of a reasonable method.
The City and Port should update the promissory note to better define the services for which the Port is repaying, update the repayment schedule and clarify how the interest rate is determined.
4. LA YBERTH VESSELS
The Port is missing out on significant revenue per year from layberth vessels. Layberth means temporary docking of vessels between assignments. In approximately December 2009, the Port stopped accepting layberth vessels. In order to accept layberth vessels, Federal law requires the Port to have a security officer and to have a security plan approved by the Coast Guard. The Port was previously allowed to accept layberth vessels using the security officer and security plan of a former tenant. Layberth revenue averaged approximately $175,000 per year for fiscal years 2007-08 and 2008-09.
In Resolution 18-98, the City Council authorized the Port Director to enter into Temporary Berthing Assignment Agreements and provided the format of such agreement. However, the Port has not used this agreement nor any other written agreement for layberth vessels using Port facilities. The Port requires only a reservation request form to be completed; this form does not have any clauses to protect the Port against risks of damage to facilities or other losses.
Recommendations
The Port should appoint a security officer, develop and security plan, and submit it to the Coast Guard for review. If the workload of current Port managers is deemed more mission-critical, then a consultant should be hired to complete this task. As soon as the security plan is approved, the Port should advertise its reopening as a layberth location.
Attachment D: Internal Audit of Port of Richmond, June 28, 2011 77 906
The Port should follow Resolution 18-98 by executing the Temporary Berthing Assignment Agreement for every vessel docking at the Port.
5. TENANTAGREEMENTS
The Port enters into lease agreements with each tenant. Of the Port's thirteen fiscal year 2009-10 tenants, there was no lease agreement in the Port's files for two tenants and for two others the lease agreements were not signed. The Port's leases were entered into at various dates since 1998. Six of the thirteen leases do not have a provision for rent increases. If these six agreements had automatic rent increases of 3% per year, the Port would have earned approximately $20,000 more during fiscal year 2009-10.
Of the Port's thirteen fiscal year 2009-10 tenants, four lease agreements are with the Surplus Property Authority of the City of Richmond (the "Authority"). Per discussions with management of the Port, Finance, City Attorney and City Clerk departments, none knew of the origin nor purpose of the Authority. The City's annual financial report states that the Authority was "fonned to become the owner of certain property declared surplus by the U.S.
Government" and that ''the Authority is inactive".
The Port's lease agreements with Auto Warehousing Company (AWC) and Honda of California are large (several million dollars of Port revenue each year) and complex (minimum annual guarantee, volume rebate, significant capital improvements, different requirements during the construction period). Much of the information needed to determine the correct billing to tenants is received from the tenants. The only verification of such tenant-provided information is comparison of quantities to Port records. An example of a complex issue needing interpretation is that AWC sent its calculation of the minimum annual guarantee deficiency that used the tariff rate per vehicle of $23 .10 instead of the wharfage rate per the Honda agreement of $25.50.
Recommendations
The Port should obtain signed copies of each active tenant agreement. It should negotiate lease amendments to include an escalation clause as each agreement expires. In the future, all lease agreements should include a provision for automatic rent increases.
The City should verify the status and purpose of the Surplus Property Authority. If it is determined to be beneficial to maintain, the City's annual report disclosure about the Authority should be updated. If it is not deemed beneficial to maintain, it should be dissolved.
Port operating personnel should study the Auto Warehousing and Honda leases to assure thorough understanding of their complexities and gain both City management and City attorney interpretations as necessary. Information received from the tenants that affect the Port's revenue should be closely scrutinized with knowledge of the agreements, historical trends and tenant operations.
Attachment D: Internal Audit of Port of Richmond, June 28, 2011 78 907
6. FINANCIAL REPORTING
The Port's primary financial reports (budget, monthly financial statements, annual financial statements and five-year projection) are inconsistent in format. For example, the CAFR and the five-year projection use different expense categories:
• CAFR - salaries & wages, general & administration, maintenance, depreciation, and other.
• Budget, five-year projection, monthly financial statements - professional & administration, other operating, equipment & contract services, utilities, insurance, cost pool, capital outlay and debt service.
Another example is that the bases of accounting used for each of these reports differs: the annual financial statements use the full accrual basis, the budget and monthly financial statements use the cash basis, and the five-year projection uses a working capital basis.
There were several errors noted in the Port's primary financial reports, including:
• In the annual financial statements (CAFR):
o Revenue from layberth vessels was incorrectly reported as "marina berth rentals" in fiscal years 2006-07 and 2007-08.
o Lease revenue from Auto Warehousing Company was reported as "lease income" while all other lease revenue was reported as "service charges". o Port staff was unable to fully reconcile fiscal year 2009-10 revenue per the CAFR to the general ledger and the revenue report.
• In the five-year projection:
o The Port's repayment to the City of$750,000 for an advance to fund Subaru improvements scheduled for fiscal years 2011-12 through 2015-16 were inadvertently added rather than deducted from operating surplus/deficit. o Rental income for fiscal year 2010-11 of$6,504,113 was input in error and should have been $7,054,113.
o Although the projection purportedly uses the working capital basis, unused debt proceeds was not included. This leads to the need to add an arbitrary revenue line item in the five-year projection for the estimated amount of debt proceeds to be used to finance capital projects. The Port called this amount ($8,066,540 for fiscal year 2010-11) "operating transfers in" even though it is not a transfer. o A negative amount of $1 million is shown for the terminal 2 wharf improvements capital project in fiscal year 2010-11.
o The five-year projection repeated the expected amount of grant revenue and related capital outlay expenditures in multiple years. Specifically, the grant revenues discussed on page 12 and related capital expenditures were shown in their entirety in fiscal year 2010-11; the amounts not used during that year were then carried forward and shown again in the five-year projection in fiscal year 2011-12. This resulted in an overstatement in total revenues and expenditures during the forecast period of over $8 million.
Attachment D: Internal Audit of Port of Richmond, June 28, 2011 79 908
• In the budget and monthly financial statements:
o Although the budget purportedly uses the cash basis, unused debt proceeds were not included. This leads to the need to add arbitrary revenue line items in the five-year projection for the amount of debt proceeds to be used to finance capital projects. The Port called these amounts "bond proceeds" and "capitalized interest" ($30,636,961 and $1,449,700, respectively, for fiscal year 2009-10).
Because of the inconsistent formats and errors, the Port's primary financial reports are hard to interpret, internally inconsistent, difficult to answer questions about, difficult to reconcile to each other and therefore of limited reliability to Port and City management.
Recommendations
The City should determine the most appropriate format, level of detail and basis of accounting to depict Port operations. This format should be used for every Port financial report or presentation. If the City determines that the Port's budget must be prepared on a basis of accounting other than full accrual, then the budget format should depart as little as possible from the format determined for the Port reports. The five-year projection should be prepared on the full accrual basis, consistent with enterprise fund and business organizations.
The number of errors and inconsistencies in the financial reports indicates an inadequate level of review. Each report should be reviewed in detail by both Port management and City Finance prior to finaliz.ation and distribution.
7. SECURITY DEPOSITS
The Port collects security deposits from some of its tenants and returns it or applies it to the final rent payment when a tenant leaves. The amount of the deposit is typically equal to one month's rent. The Port has no standard procedure for determining whether a security deposit will be required. Seven of the Port's thirteen leases require security deposits. Of the six tenants required to have a security deposit, the Port holds such deposits only for two of them. The Port also holds a security deposit of$3,000 for a former tenant who left the Port in 2009.
Recommendation
The Port should develop written procedures for security deposits, including the following:
• Circumstances a deposit is required, and how the amount is determined • Include requirement for a security deposit in the standard lease agreement • Maintain a separate listing of security deposits
• Account for security deposits in the general ledger
• Conduct annual reconciliation of security deposits to the general ledger • Circumstances and method used to refund deposits
• Amount of time Port will wait before writing off unrefunded deposit The Port should immediately collect security deposits from the four tenants having such requirement in their lease agreement who have not yet paid.
Attachment D: Internal Audit of Port of Richmond, June 28, 2011 80 909
8. CERTIFICATES OF INSURANCE
All the Port's lease agreements call for the tenants to maintain adequate insurance. Of the Port's fifteen fiscal year 2009-10 tenants, the Port did not have certificates of insurance or other evidence of insurance for all required coverages for nine tenants. In addition, one certificate of insurance on file had expired and one certificate evidenced a lower amount of coverage than required by the lease agreement.
Recommendation
The Port should obtain certificates of insurance from each tenant demonstrating the appropriate coverages, limits and effective dates. They should develop and implement procedures to assure that certificates of insurance are obtained when new tenants move in and each year thereafter upon expiration of each policy.
9. GOALS AND OPERATING STATISTICS
The Port develops objectives, strategic goals, supporting actions and success indicators as part of the budget process each year. For the fiscal year 2011-12 budget, the Port identified five key objectives, two strategic goals, twelve supporting actions and 24 success indicators. Success indicators are linked to supporting actions which are, in turn, linked to goals. However, the goals are not clearly linked to the key objectives.
The two strategic goals (maximize revenue and improve facilities) and key objectives have been the same every year for each of the last three years. Having the same goals each year is indicative that goals are not specific enough.
Most of the success indicators gathered and reported are not useful for management decision making nor accountability, or they are not clear. The cost to gather the information therefore outweighs their benefit. Examples of ineffective success indicators are:
o # of annual customer satisfaction survey completed (1) o # of Port industry conferences and meetings attended (4) o Generate and review monthly P & L with Port management (12) o % of state/fed security agency oversight compliance (100%) Examples of effective success indicators used by the Port include revenue generated per acre and total cost per acre.
Recommendation
The Port should clearly link its strategic goals to its key objectives each year. The goals should be very specific and measurable enough to know when they have been accomplished. The Port should also revise its success indicators to assure that they are meaningful, cost-beneficial to gather, and accurate. It is better to have a small number of meaningful success indicators than a large number that are not important or hard to interpret.
10. FINANCIAL PROCEDURES
The Port has no documented financial procedures except those adopted at the City level. Some of the Port's financial operations are unique and are therefore not adequately covered by City policies and procedures. The Government Finance Officers Association recommends in its Attachment D: Internal Audit of Port of Richmond, June 28, 2011 81 910
Recommended Practices that every government document its accounting procedures " ... as an essential component of a comprehensive framework of internal controls." Documentation of comprehensive accounting procedures will allow:
• Management to understand and evaluate whether procedures provide adequate internal controls and mitigation of risks
• Employees to review and revise procedures as circumstances, laws, technology and accounting standards change
• Internal and external auditors to assess the adequacy of the Pores internal controls • New employees to be trained to provide consistent service and quality upon staff turnover
The Port has been awarded eight grants totaling $14,550,038 for capital improvements as discussed on page 12. Although the Port had a significant grant in fiscal year 2007-08, it has no written or otherwise well-established procedures for accounting for grant expenditures, preparation and review of reimbursement requests and compliance with grant requirements.
Recommendation
The Port should identify and document its significant financial procedures, except for any existing City procedures that are considered adequate to address the Port's activities.
Procedures should include those tasks required to be performed by Port employees for all of the main types of business transactions, including:
• Cash receipts (invoicing, writing receipts, billing and collection) • Purchasing ( use of purchase orders, petty cash, purchasing cards, contracting, receiving)
• Payroll ( distribution of costs, travel and expense reimbursements) • Capital assets (acquisition of land and equipment, periodic physical inventories, capitalization thresholds, depreciation calculations)
• Reporting (internal monthly reports, periodic reports to the Council, annual audit)
• Budget (annual budgeting, budget vs. actual comparisons, cash flow projections, long-range planning)
• Grants ( cost accumulation, reimbursement requests, compliance monitoring) • Internal controls (segregation of duties, responsibilities for establishing and monitoring controls)
11. OPERATING PROCEDURES
The Port has not documented its standard operating procedures. Written procedures will:
• Ensure that everyone doing the work understands the task, including current and future employees
• Ensure consistency with other City departments doing similar tasks • Improve efficiency by assuring each task is thoroughly understood and reviewed by management, eliminating time spent "reinventing the wheel" each time a task is done, and reducing the need for re-work
• Improve quality by reducing inconsistencies in the work product Attachment D: Internal Audit of Port of Richmond, June 28, 2011 82 911
A Port tenant went bankrupt in November 2008, owing the Port 37 months of rent. $134,800 was approved for write off at the June 2011 City Council meeting, more than four years after the tenant moved out. The City did not file a claim with the bankruptcy court and therefore did not collect any amount through bankruptcy proceedings. The Port has no formal procedures for checking credit of tenants before they move in. The City did not comply with Administrative policy AP251 "Write Off of Delinquent Accounts" which states:
"Each quarter the Finance Department, the appropriate operating department director and the City Attorney shall review delinquent accounts receivable as shown on the Accounts Receivable Aging Report form (Exhibit 503-6) to assess their collectivity." Recommendation
The Port should identify its major operating procedures. These procedures may include property mgmt, disaster planning, communication with tenants, communication with vessels, tenant move-in and move-out, tenant background checks, security, budgeting and related monitoring, capital project planning and funding. For each major operating procedure, the Port should document the related tasks. 1bis documentation is best done by employees during their normal performance of each task and then reviewed by Port management.
12. MARINA DREDGING PROJECT
The City has asked the Port to manage the Marina dredging project. The Port is budgeting this project in fiscal year 2011-12. It is anticipated that the Richmond Marina enterprise fund will transfer $2.1 million to the Port to cover the cost of dredging. However, no mechanism for reimbursement of the Port for the cost of management and staff time has been established. The City charges the Port $942,802 per year for its share of City indirect costs so it is consistent with City practice to reimburse the Port for its costs of managing this non-Port project.
Recommendation
The City should estimate the cost of Port management and staff time on the Marina dredging project. 1bis amount should be included in the budget for reimbursement to the Port.
Attachment D: Internal Audit of Port of Richmond, June 28, 2011 83 912
December 17, 2024
Economic Development
DATE: December 17, 2024
TO: Mayor Martinez and Members of the City Council
FROM: Nannette Beacham, Director of Economic Development Samantha Carr, Environmental Manager
Subject:
Annual Solid Waste Rate Adjustment
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no significant financial impact to the City’s General Fund.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:
December 7, 2021, December 6 , 2022 , December 19,
2023
STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:
The Franchise Agreement between the City of Richmond
and Republic Services provides for an annual adjustment based on the Consumer Price Index (CPI) and bulky item
pick-up program participation.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: ADOPT a resolution to update the 2025 solid waste collection rates for January 1, 2025 until the end of the current contract on June 30, 2025 – Economic
Development (Samantha Carr 510-620-5407/ Nannette
Beacham 510-620-1306).
DISCUSSION:
The City of Richmond’s solid waste and recycling services are provided by two agreements with Republic Services: 1) a collection franchise agreement managed by the City of Richmond; and 2) a post-collection agreement managed by the West Contra Costa Integrated Waste Management Authority (“RecycleMore”). Pickup rates are set at the end of the year based on Consumer Price Index (CPI) adjustments.
AGENDA
REPORT
913
December 17, 2024
Adjustments to the 2025 solid waste collection rate include: a) CPI adjustment; and, b) the bulky item program adjustment charges. Approximately 77 percent of Richmond customers subscribe to the 35-gallon trash cart service. These rates will be in effect from January 1, 2025, until the end of the current contract term on June 30, 2025.
Starting July 1, 2025, there will be new rates as determined by the new Solid Waste Franchise Agreement (subject to City Council approval in 2025). The new agreement is currently being negotiated.
The 2025 financial impact for solid waste collection services for the 35-gallon residential cart service will amount to: a) CPI increase of $1.13 per month; and b) bulky item adjustment increase of $0.06, for a total collection increase of $1.19. In addition, the post-collection agreement results in an increase of $0.34 per month for 35-gallon trash cart service. The overall total rate increase of the solid waste collection and post collection services is a total of $1.53. A summary of the residential and commercial collection and post-collection rates for the 2025 calendar year are noted below in Tables 2 and 3 as well as in Attachments 1 and 2.
CPI Adjustment
Pursuant to the collection Franchise Agreement between the City of Richmond and Republic Services, the City is obligated to adjust the solid waste collection rates on an annual basis according to the change in the CPI. The attached letter from Republic Services provides an official notice of the percentage increase (Attachment 2).
City Council adoption of the resolution updates and formalizes the 2025 solid waste collection rates (Attachment 1). The terms of the City’s collection Franchise Agreements with Republic Services state the collection rates are to be adjusted by the CPI. The indicated October 2023 to October 2024 CPI change for the San Francisco-Oakland- Hayward Metropolitan Area is 2.39 percent.
The collection service portion of the residential and commercial rates is being adjusted by 2.39 percent. Under terms of the 2014 Franchise Agreement Amendment which terminates on June 30, 2025, City staff members negotiated a cap on CPI increases for residential customers at 3.25 percent annually with overages carried over to the next year. There is a total residential CPI carryover of 2.83 percent from the previous rate- setting year. There will be 0.86 percent added to the 2025 rate for a total residential CPI of 3.25 percent.
Additionally, the Senior 35-gallon rate will be increased by $1.19, exactly $1.00 less than the regular 35-gallon rate per the Franchise agreement.
Post-Collection Rate Adjustment
On November 7, 2024, the Regional RecycleMore Board approved post-collection rate adjustments as shown below in Table 1. The approved RecycleMore resolution is included as Attachment 3.
914
December 17, 2024
Table 1: Post Collection Agreement Percent and Dollar 2025 Rate Increase
Percent Increase from 2024 Dollar Increase from 2025
Residential Sector
(35 Gallon Cart)
2.6% $0.34 Per Month
Commercial Sector 0.8% $0.10 Per Cubic Yard
Industrial Sector 5.5% $11.29 Per Ton
Table 2: 2025 Residential Service Rates (Monthly)
CITY OF RICHMOND
2025 RESIDENTIAL SERVICE RATES (January 1, 2025- June 30, 2025) 2024
Collection
Rate
2025
CPI 3.25%
*
Adjust
2025
Bulky
Item
Charge
2025
Senior
Rate
Adjust
2025
Collection
Charge
2025 Post
Collection
(IRRF)
Surcharge
2025
Total
Combined
Monthly
Rate
20-
gallon
$31.53 $1.02 $0.06 32.61 7.56 40.17
Senior
20-
gallon
29.79 0.97 $0.06 30.82 7.56 38.38
35-
gallon
34.73 1.13 $0.06 35.92 13.27 49.19
Senior
35-
gallon
33.73 1.10 $0.06 $0.03 34.92 13.27 48.19
65-
gallon
66.22 2.15 $0.06 68.43 24.66 93.09
95-
gallon
98.06 3.19 $0.06 101.31 37.02 138.33
Richmond Residential Rates
*CPI 2.39% + 0.86% CPI carryover from 2024=3.25%
Table 3: 2025 Commercial Rates (Monthly)
915
December 17, 2024
Bulky Item Participation
An enhanced bulky item collection service was included in the 2014 Franchise Agreement for residential customers. Residential customers may schedule a pick-up for bulky items (up to three items) at no additional cost once per year by calling Republic Services at (510) 262-7100. The program aims to reduce or prevent illegal dumping by providing a bulky item collection service to ratepayers and incorporating the costs into the monthly rates. Bi-lingual participation flyers are included as bill inserts twice per year to encourage participation (below right). Illegal dumping postcards are also posted around City Hall and City facilities (below left). For more information about the program visit, www.richmondenvironment.org.
In 2024, the number of participant households slightly increased from 9.4 percent to 9.8 percent. The slight increase in participation will result in a $0.06 per month rebate of solid waste collection rates for the 2025 calendar year. The data can be viewed on the city’s Transparent Richmond website.
916
December 17, 2024
Graph 1: Republic Services Bulky Item Pick-up Program Participation: Program Start in 2015 to 2024
source: bulky item pickups | transparent richmond
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
Attachment 1 – Resolution Updating Solid Waste Service Rates Attachment 2 – Republic Services CPI Adjustment Notice
Attachment 3 – RecycleMore Resolution 24-04 Approving 2025 Post-Collection Rate Adjustment
917
DocID #32878v1
RESOLUTION NO-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF CITY OF RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA TO UPDATE THE SOLID WASTE COLLECTION RATES FOR JANUARY 1, 2025 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2025
WHEREAS, the City of Richmond (“the City”) and Richmond Sanitary Service, a subsidiary of Republic Services, Inc, (“RS”) entered into an exclusive franchise agreement entitled “Franchise Agreement Between City of Richmond and RS,” effective July 1, 1986, as amended (“Franchise Agreement"), for solid waste collection services; and
WHEREAS, the Franchise Agreement includes the collection of trash, recyclables, compost, and bulky items from residents and businesses; and
WHEREAS, the Franchise Agreement provides that the City Council is to approve collection rates paid by ratepayers; and
WHEREAS, a resident bulky item collection service was included as an amendment in 2014 to the Franchise Agreement ("2014 Amendment"); and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the collection Franchise Agreement, the City is obligated to adjust the solid waste collection rates on an annual basis in accordance with the change in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) and the bulky item participation rate; and
WHEREAS, under the terms of the 2014 Amendment, City staff members negotiated that CPI increases for the years 2018 through 2025 shall be capped at a maximum of 3.25 percent annually; and
WHEREAS, the City Council approved the Richmond Climate Action Plan (CAP) directing staff to increase solid waste diversion; and
WHEREAS, in 2019, the City Council adopted Richmond Municipal Code Section
9.20.157providing that solid waste rates may be updated annually by Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Richmond does hereby resolve, declare, determine and order that the solid waste collection rates as stated in Richmond Municipal Code Sections 9.20.150 and 9.20.155 and as set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto are hereby approved and said rates are effective January 1, 2025 until the end of the current contract June 30, 2025.
918
DocID #32878v1
1 of 2
919
DocID #32878v1
* * * * * * *
IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED that the foregoing resolution was duly introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the
wit:
AYES: CO UNCILMEMBER:
NOES: CO UNCILMEMBER:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBER:
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBER:
held on the by the following vote, to
CLERK OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND
Approved:
EDUARDO MARTINEZ
Mayor
Approved as to form:
DAVE ALESHIRE
City Attorney
2 of 2
920
Exhibit A- January 1, 2025 to June 30, 2025 Collection Rates
DocID #32878v1
Section Resolution Text 2025 2024
9.20.150(a)1 For single-family residences, the charge for the weekly collection of each receptacle of thirty-five (35) gallons per week shall be $ per month per receptacle.
$35.92
$34.73
9.20.150(a)2 For single family residences, the charge for the weekly collection of each receptacle of sixty-five (65) gallons per week shall be $ per month per receptacle.
$68.43
$66.22
9.20.150(a)3 For single family residences, the charge for the weekly collection of each receptacle of ninety-five (95)
gallons per week shall be $ per month per receptacle.
$101.31 $98.06
$66.22 9.20.150(a)4 For each min-can (receptacle not exceeding twenty (20) gallons in volume capacity) collected once per week at a single-family residence, the charge shall be $ per
month per receptacle.
$32.61
$31.53
9.20.150(a)5 The above rates include weekly service for one (1) solid waste cart (brown), one (1) 65-gallon (blue) cart for
recyclables and one (1) 65-gallon (green) cart for organics.
Additional blue and green carts are available at additional cost of $ __per month per receptacle.
$10.95
$10.69
9.20.150(a)6 For residential units in multiple family dwellings, for each residential unit receiving collection service, the charge for the weekly collection of each receptacle of
thirty-five (35) gallons shall be $ per month per
receptacle.
$35.92
$34.73
9.20.150(a)7 For residential units in multiple family dwellings, for each residential unit receiving collection of each receptacle of sixty- five (65) gallons per week shall be $ per month per receptacle.
$68.43
$66.22
9.20.150(a)8 For residential units in multiple family dwellings, for each residential unit receiving collection of each receptacle of ninety- five (95) gallons per week shall be $ per
month per receptacle.
$101.31
$98.06
9.20.15(a)9 For each mini-can (a receptacle not exceeding twenty (20) gallons in volume capacity) collected once per week from a residential unit of a multi-family dwelling, the charge shall be $ per month per receptacle.
$32.61
$31.53
9.20.150(a)11 In addition to the rates set forth in the above subsections, a carry-out fee of $ per receptacle per month for solid
waste receptacles and $ per receptacle per
month for recycling or green waste receptacles may be
charged to those owners utilizing such service.
$11.01 $10.75
$11.01 $10.75
921
Exhibit A- January 1, 2025 to June 30, 2025 Collection Rates
DocID #32878v1
Section
Resolution Text 2025 2024
9.20.150(a)12 For senior citizens (individuals sixty-two (62) years of age or older who own or reside in a single-family residence (including duplexes) or a residential unit in a multi-family residence where service is billed separately the charge for the collection of the first thirty-five (35) gallon receptacle once per week shall be $ per month. For collection of
one only 20-gallon receptacle once per week shall be
$ . For the purposes of this subsection, a residence
may qualify for the senior citizen rate if at least one of the owners or occupants is a senior citizen as defined by this subsection.
$34.92
$33.73
$30.82
$29.79
9.20.150(a)13(A) Return trip surcharge, per cart $ _. $41.73 $40.76
9.20.150(a)13(B) Additional recycle/ green waste, per cart per month $ _.
More than one (1) recycling cart, or more than one (1)
green waste cart.
$10.95
$10.69
9.20.150(a)13(C) Missing cart/insert removal, per cart $ _. For instances where upon account closure, carts not found/set out for retrieval. Customer unauthorized removal of insert to
increase cart capacity from 20-gallon to 35-gallon.
$79.73
$77.87
9.20.150(a)13(D) Overage, per bag $ . For instances where the trash, recycling, or green waste cart filled above cart rim.
$13.96
$13.63
9.20.150(a)13(E) Same week on-call curbside clean-up $ . Depending upon collection vehicle capacity, standard bulky item
collection scheduled within 10 days of request at no
additional charge. Same week bulky item clean-ups are
subject to an expedited service surcharge.
$21.30
$20.80
9.20.150(a)13(F) Contamination surcharge $ . $36.18 $35.34
9.20.150(b) In addition to the rates provided for in subsection (a) of this section, an additional surcharge of $ for each thirty-five (35) gallons of receptacle capacity $ for each sixty-five (65) gallons of receptacle capacity $ for each ninety- five (95) gallons of receptacle capacity; or an additional $ for each twenty (20) gallon mini-can shall be charged each month on each receptacle as established by the Board of Directors of the West Contra Costa Integrated Waste
Management Authority (WCCIWMA) or its successor
entity, in accordance with the Joint Powers Agreement
between the City and the WCCIWMA.
$13.27
$12.93
$24.66
$24.03
$37.02
$36.07
$7.56
$7.37
922
DocID #32878v1
Section Resolution Text 2025 2024
9.20.155(a)1 COMMERCIAL CART COLLECTION SERVICE
RATES 30/35 gallon per month
$46.76
$45.67
COMMERCIAL CART COLLECTION SERVICE
RATES 60/65 gallon per month
$98.21
$95.92
COMMERCIAL CART COLLECTION SERVICE
RATES 95/100 gallon per month
$123.79
$120.90
The rates set forth above include a $ per yard/per
month/per pick-up/per week IRRF Surcharge.
$51.44
$51.00
9.20.155(b)1(A) Special pickups without 24-hour notice or same day service $88.69
$86.62
9.20.155(b)1(B) Steam clean box $125.32 $122.39
9.20.155(b)1(C) Charge for moving container more than 15 feet (per foot) $0.23
$0.22
9.20.155(b)1(D) Lock and key charge $23.65 $23.10
9.20.155(b)(2) Special pick-up rates for the collection of bulky items and large quantities: 1 Cubic Yard
$113.90
$111.24
2 Cubic Yard $179.44 $175.25
3 Cubic Yard $241.42 $235.78
4 Cubic Yard $301.51 $294.47
5 Cubic Yard $360.60 $352.18
6 Cubic Yard $419.13 $409.35
7 Cubic Yard $477.32 $466.18
9.20.155(c) COMMERCIAL CART RATE -- IRRF SURCHARGE:
30/35 gallon per month
$13.27
$12.93
COMMERCIAL CART RATE -- IRRF SURCHARGE:
60/65 gallon per month
$24.66
$24.03
COMMERCIAL CART RATE -- IRRF SURCHARGE:
95/100 gallon per month
$37.02
$36.07
923
DocID #32878v1
Table 1: Residential Service Rates
CITY OF RICHMOND
2025 RESIDENTIAL SERVICE RATES
2024 2025 2025 2025
Discounted
Senior Rate
Adjustment
2025 2025 2025
Collection CPI 3.25% * Bulky Item Collection IRRF Combined Rate Adjust Charge Charge Surcharge Mo. Rate
35-gallon $34.73 $1.13 0.06 $35.92 $13.27 $49.19
65-gallon 66.22 2.15 0.06 68.43 24.66 $93.09
95-gallon 98.06 3.19 0.06 101.31 37.02 $138.33
20-gallon 31.53 1.02 0.06 32.61 7.56 $40.17
Senior20-
gallon 29.79 0.97 0.06 30.82 7.56 $38.38
Senior 35-
gallon 33.73 1.10 0.06 0.03 34.92 13.27 $48.19
Richmond Residential Rates
*CPI 2.39% + 0.86% CPI carryover from 2024 = 3.25%
Table 2: Commercial Service Rates
2025 Commercial Service Rates *
Bin Times per Week
Size 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1 Yard 319.39 563.76 807.88 1,052.19 1,296.58
2 Yard 528.14 969.62 1,411.39 1,852.98 2,294.74
3 Yard 725.09 1,353.64 1,982.01 2,610.72 3,239.30
4 Yard 916.43 1,727.02 2,537.86 3,348.49 4,159.08 4,969.68 5 Yard 1,104.77 2,095.48 3,086.14 4,077.10 5,067.77
6 Yard 1,291.41 2,461.58 3,631.78 4,801.77 5,972.18
7 Yard 1,476.62 2,826.51 4,176.20 5,525.86 6,875.53 8,225.24 9,574.89 *Includes $51.44 per yard/per month/per pick-up per week (IRRF Surcharge)
924
DocID #32878v1
Table 3: Industrial Service Rates
CITY OF RICHMOND
2025 INDUSTRIAL RECYCLING SERVICE RATES
<<<<< FOR INDUSTRIAL CUSTOMERS ONLY >>>>>
Recycling Times Per Week
Bin Size 1 2 3 4 5
1 Yard 159.70 281.88 403.94 526.10 648.29
2 Yard 264.07 484.81 705.70 926.49 1,147.37
3 Yard 362.55 676.82 991.01 1,305.36 1,619.65
4 Yard 458.22 863.51 1,268.93 1,674.25 2,079.54
5 Yard 552.39 1,047.74 1,543.07 2,038.55 2,533.89
6 Yard 645.71 1,230.79 1,815.89 2,400.89 2,986.09
7 Yard 738.31 1,413.26 2,088.10 2,762.93 3,437.77
Table 4: Special Services
SPECIAL SERVICES
2024 2025 2025
Rate 2.39% Rate
Adjust
Contamination $35.34 $0.84 $36.18
Add'l Green/Blue Cart $10.69 $0.26 $10.95
Carryout per cart $10.75 $0.26 $11.01
Special Pick-up (same day) $86.62 $2.07 $88.69
Steam Clean Box $122.39 $2.93 $125.32
Moving Container over
15ft. (per foot)
$0.22 $0.01 $0.23
Lock & Key Charge $23.10 $0.55 $23.65
Extra Pick-ups 1yd $111.24 $2.66 $113.90
Extra Pick-ups 2yd $175.25 $4.19 $179.44
Extra Pick-ups 3yd $235.78 $5.64 $241.42
Extra Pick-ups 4yd $294.47 $7.04 $301.51
Extra Pick-ups 5yd $352.18 $8.42 $360.51
Extra Pick-ups 6yd $409.35 $9.78 $419.13
Extra Pick-ups 7yd $466.18 $11.14 $477.32
925
926
RESOLUTION NO. 24-04
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF
THE WEST CONTRA COSTA INTEGRATED WASTE
MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY APPROVING THE
CALENDAR YEAR HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS
WASTE PROGRAM BUDGET AND THE POST-
COLLECTION RATES FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2025
WHEREAS, the Joint Powers Agreement creating the West Contra Costa Integrated Waste Management Authority (“Authority”) provides that the Authority is to approve post- collection rates to be paid by ratepayers; and
WHEREAS, Republic Services, Inc. and each of its affiliates providing services to the Authority, collectively referred to as “Contractor” by means of the services and facilities of Golden Bear Transfer Station, Keller Canyon Landfill, West Contra Costa Sanitary Landfill and West County Resource Recovery, provides Post-Collection Services to the Authority through an agreement between Contractor and the Authority; and
WHEREAS, the Authority intends to approve and maintain reasonable rates for the post-Collection services described in the Post-Collection Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the Authority Board of Directors conducted a Public Hearing on the proposed Post-Collection Rates for 2025 on November 7, 2024, and considered all evidence presented regarding the proposed rates.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of Directors of the West Contra Costa Integrated Waste Management Authority resolves as follows:
Section 1. The Calendar Year 2025 Household Hazardous Waste (HHW) Budget set forth in Agenda Item 8.1 Attachment 10 attached hereto in the amount of $1,544,766 is hereby approved.
Section 2. Post-Collection Rates set forth in Agenda Item 8.1 – Attachment 10 attached hereto are hereby approved and said rates are effective January 1, 2025.
Section 3. This Resolution shall be immediately effective upon adoption by the Board of Directors.
Section 4. The Secretary shall certify passage of this Resolution and cause it to be distributed to all Directors and Alternates, Authority Members, Contra Costa County, 927
Authority Officers, Richmond Sanitary Service, Inc., West County Resource Recovery, Inc., and other interested parties upon request.
ATTEST: CHAIR OF THE BOARD
__________________________________________ ______________________________ Claudia Menjivar, Board Secretary Date Anthony Tave, Board Chair Date Attachments: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the Board of Directors of the West Contra Costa Integrated Waste Management Authority at a Special Meeting on November 7, 2024, by the following vote:
AYES: Directors: _________________________________________________________________________ NOES: Directors:_________________________________________________________________________ ABSTAIN: Directors:_____________________________________________________________________ ABSENT: Directors:______________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________
Claudia Menjivar, Board Secretary
Romero, Zepeda, Xavier, Rudnick
11/12/24 11/12/24
928
929
December 17, 2024
Finance Department
DATE: December 17, 2024
TO: Mayor Martinez and Members of the City Council
FROM:
Andrea Miller, Director of Finance
Mubeen Qader, Deputy Director of Finance
Jerry Gurule, Accounting Manager
Antonio Banuelos, Accounting Manager
Subject:
Investment and Cash Balance Report, Monthly Overtime
Reports, and Documentary Transfer Tax Report for the
Month of October 2024
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact due to this agenda item.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:
None.
STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:
City staff is requesting that the City Council receive the City’s Investment and Cash Balance Report, Monthly
Overtime Reports, and Documentary Transfer Tax
Report for the month of October 2024.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
RECEIVE the City’s Investment and Cash Balance
Report, Monthly Overtime Reports, and Documentary
Transfer Tax Report for the month of October 2024 –
Finance Department (Andrea Miller 510-620-6740).
AGENDA
REPORT
930
December 17, 2024
DISCUSSION:
Investment and Cash Balance Report
It is the policy of the City of Richmond (City) to invest public funds in a manner which prioritizes safety and liquidity over yield while meeting the daily cash flow demands of the City and conforming to all state and local statutes governing the investment of public funds. In accordance with California Government Code Section 53 646 and the City’s Investment Policy, the Director of Finance shall report monthly on the City's pooled and Bond funds to the City Manager and City Council and shall report quarterly on other investments.
The Investment and Cash Balance Report is a monthly report of the City’s pooled cash balance which include General Fund, Special Revenue, Debt Service, Capital Projects, Enterprise, Internal service, Trust & Agency, Redevelopment/Successor Agency, and any other Funds investment activities under the direction of the City.
The Portfolio Management Report represents the monthly bank balances, along with market balances of permitted investments according to the City’s Investment Policy.
Investment in the Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF), CalTrust, money market, agency bonds, certificates of deposits, and corporate notes are all allowable by California Government Code Section 536 01 and permitted according to the City of Richmond’s Investment Policy updated October 17, 2023.
This investment report was prepared after the April 30, 2024 special City Council meeting to add additional restrictions to the City of Richmond’s Investment Policy and reflects the portfolio as of October 31, 2024. Based on the policy direction received during the special City Council meeting, Council directed staff to review and modify the City of Richmond’s Investment Policy to add additional restrictions eliminating the investment of City funds in industries that facilitate violence, war, oppression, and apartheid. Staff has been directed to present Investment Policy modifications and recommendations for socially responsible investments to Council for consideration which will occur at the December 3, 2024 City Council meeting.
At the September 2024 Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) meeting, the Federal Reserve (Fed) lowered interest rates by 50 basis points, easing monetary policy for the first time in four years. This lowers the interest rate target to a range of 4.75% - 5% on investments. In November 2024, as a follow-up to September’s big half-percentage point reduction, the F OMC lowered its benchmark overnight borrowing rate by a quarter percentage point, or 25 basis points, to a target range of 4.50% -4.75%. The City has started to see a slight decrease in our rate of return due to these recent rate cuts.
The City is allowed to pre-fund future Pension and OPEB costs in accordance with the City’s Pension and Other Post-Employment Benefits (OPEB) policies. These funds are invested according to the polic ies funding objectives and funding guidelines. The City maintains a Section 115 C ombination Trust for City -OPEB & Pension administered by Public Agency Retirement Services (PARS) and a California Employers’ Retiree Benefit 931
December 17, 2024
Trust (CERBT) administered by California Public Employees’ Retiremen t System (CalPERS) for RPOA -OPEB. Each Trust is comprised of a diversified portfolio of investments consistent with the Trust’s objectives and liquidity requirements.
Overtime Reports
The overtime reports for the month of October 2024 provides a summary o f budget-to- actual overtime usage by department for miscellaneous and sworn staff. Year-over-year and month-over-month totals are included for sworn staff.
Documentary Transfer Tax
At the June 24th City Council Budget Hearing, City Council requested monthly updates of the Transfer Tax received by the City of Richmond from the County for the sale of properties in Richmond. As this is the City’s most volatile revenue stream, the amounts received month-to-month can vary from the low $300 thousand to the highs of $3 million – a few large sales can widely swing the revenues.
In November, the City received data from the County for the October Transfer Tax which will total $4,394,236.
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
Attachment 1 – Investment and Cash Balance Report for October 2024.
Attachment 2 – Overtime Report for October 2024.
Attachment 3 – Overtime Public Safety Report for October 2024.
Attachment 4 – Documentary Transfer Tax Report for October 2024.
932
933
934
935
936
937
938
939
940
941
942
943
944
945
946
947
Overtime Report for October 2024 (Attachment 2)
PERIOD 4, OCTOBER 2024
33% Threshold
ORIGINAL
BUDGET TRANSFERS REVISED
BUDGET
YTD
EXPENDED
AVAILABLE
BUDGET PCT
GENERAL FUND (summary)
400031 OVERTIME/General 1,903,320 25,512 1,928,832 899,472 1,029,361 47% 400032 OVERTIME/Sworn 11,190,934 - 11,190,934 3,728,919 7,462,015 33% TOTAL GENERAL FUND 13,094,254 25,512 13,119,766 4,628,391 8,491,375 35% Overtime By Department
CITY CLERK
Administration 25,000 - 25,000 4,854 20,146 19%
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
General Plan Code Enforcement - 20,000 20,000 154 19,846 1%
FINANCE
Payroll 30,000 - 30,000 5,756 24,244 19% Accounts Payable - - - 317 (317) 100% Revenue Collection 5,000 - 5,000 515 4,485 10% TOTAL FINANCE 35,000 - 35,000 6,589 28,411 19%
HUMAN RESOURCES
Administration - - - 144 (144) 100% POLICE
Administration 490,227 - 490,227 196,093 294,134 40% CAD Dispatch System 751,511 - 751,511 338,209 413,302 45% RM System 4,000 - 4,000 1,552 2,448 39% Parking Enforcement 4,000 - 4,000 6,225 (2,225) 156% Sworn Administration 6,708,965 - 6,708,965 2,279,574 4,429,391 34% TOTAL POLICE 7,958,703 - 7,958,703 2,821,653 5,137,050 35% FIRE
Administration 2,000 - 2,000 2,010 (10) 101% Suppression - - - 137,404 (137,404) 100% Sworn Suppression 4,452,872 - 4,452,872 1,410,265 3,042,607 32% Sworn Prevention 29,097 - 29,097 3,753 25,344 13% Prevention - - - 741 (741) 100% Prv-Chvrn Insp - - - 1,133 (1,133) 100% Sworn Prv-Chvrn Insp - - - 1,953 (1,953) 100% Sworn Training - - - 33,375 (33,375) 100% TOTAL FIRE 4,483,969 - 4,483,969 1,590,634 2,893,335 35%
OFFICE OF NEIGHBORHOOD SAFETY
Administration 40,000 - 40,000 1,573 38,427 4%
Overtime Report for October 2024 (Attachment 2)
33% Threshold
ORIGINAL
BUDGET TRANSFERS REVISED
BUDGET
YTD
EXPENDED
AVAILABLE
BUDGET PCT
PUBLIC WORKS & ENGINEERING SVCS
Stationary Engineers 12,000 - 12,000 3,746 8,254 31% Building Services 5,000 - 5,000 3,560 1,440 71% Utility Sections 132,000 - 132,000 31,006 100,994 23% Electric 25,000 - 25,000 13,900 11,100 56% Parks & Landscape Admin 200,000 - 200,000 72,863 127,137 36% Streets Administration 36,000 (34,000) 2,000 - 2,000 0% Street Sweeping 1,100 5,000 6,100 60 6,040 1% Pavement Maintenance 41,447 15,000 56,447 22,716 33,731 40% Traffic Signs & Lines 4,885 14,000 18,885 10,503 8,382 56% Equipment Services 20,000 - 20,000 6,264 13,736 31% Abatement Services 50,000 - 50,000 19,498 30,502 39% TOTAL PUBLIC WORKS 527,432 - 527,432 184,117 343,315 35%
LIBRARY
Library Administration 7,000 - 7,000 7,289 (289) 104%
COMMUNITY SERVICES
Recreation Services/Cities of Service - - - 123 (123) 100% Recreation Administration 400 - 400 756 (356) 189% Booker T Center 100 - 100 62 38 62% Nevin Center 1,800 - 1,800 741 1,059 41% Shields Reid 200 - 200 - 200 0% Recreation Complex 1,000 - 1,000 1,872 (872) 187% Parchester Center 700 - 700 850 (150) 121% May Valley Center 700 - 700 1,061 (361) 152% Recreation DPRC 750 - 750 11 739 1% Senior Center 200 - 200 14 186 7% Senior Center Annex 300 - 300 142 158 47% Aquatics 5,000 - 5,000 2,085 2,915 42% Convention Center 1,500 5,512 7,012 2,636 4,376 38% Plunge 3,500 - 3,500 1,032 2,468 29% TOTAL COMMUNITY SERVICES 16,150 5,512 21,662 11,385 10,277 53%
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM
Administration 1,000 - 1,000 - 1,000 0% TOTAL GENERAL FUND 13,094,254 25,512 13,119,766 4,628,391 8,491,375 35%
NON-GENERAL FUND
Overtime Report for October 2024 (Attachment 2)
33% Threshold
ORIGINAL
BUDGET TRANSFERS REVISED
BUDGET
YTD
EXPENDED
AVAILABLE
BUDGET PCT
Overtime By Fund
1012 HILLTOP LANDSCAPE MAINT DIST 20,000 - 20,000 1,080 18,920 5% 1015 MARINA BAY LNDSCP & LIGHT DIST 25,300 - 25,300 7,138 18,162 28% 1018 RENT CONTROL 2,500 - 2,500 1,417 1,083 57% 1050 CR-PLANNING & BUILDING 9,500 - 9,500 1,979 7,521 21% 1050 CR-PLANNING & BUILDING 15,000 - 15,000 4,286 10,714 29% 1055 ENCROACHMENT SVCS 25,000 - 25,000 16,868 8,132 67% 1303 KIDS FIRST INITIATIVE - - - 1,285 (1,285) 100% 4003 WASTEWATER ADMINISTRATION - - - 7,560 (7,560) 100% 4003 WASTEWATER PRE-TREATMENT 7,500 - 7,500 7,865 (365) 105% 4006 STORMWATER
- - - 874 (874) 100% -
4404 RHA-NEVIN PLAZA - - - 257 (257) 100% 4405 RHA-NYSTROM VILLAGE 11,000 - 11,000 3,548 7,452 32% TOTAL NON-GENERAL FUNDS 115,800 - 115,800 54,157 61,643 47%
Overtime Public Safety Report for October 2024 (Attachment 3) City of Richmond
Public Safety Sworn Overtime
Fund: 0001 - General Fund
Period 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Average
Month July August September October November December January February March April May June YTD YTD Remaining Monthly Target % 8% 17% 25% 33% 42% 50% 58% 67% 75% 83% 92% 100% Total $ Total % Budget Expense
ORIGINAL
BUDGET
REVISED
BUDGET
FY2017-18 Overtime - Sworn 3,169,000 3,169,000 569,194 440,670 445,282 459,402 452,278 396,762 322,524 497,979 455,202 554,449 509,368 466,567 5,569,677 175.8% (2,400,677) 464,139.77 FY2018-19 Overtime - Sworn 3,433,019 3,433,019 482,143 537,369 655,866 437,794 524,577 430,398 367,322 512,595 422,587 497,767 536,209 505,966 5,910,592 172.2% (2,477,573) 492,549.37 FY2019-20 Overtime - Sworn 5,000,000 4,800,000 473,963 469,392 491,205 509,931 449,751 473,935 390,897 498,501 501,383 479,696 560,031 439,159 5,737,844 119.5% (937,844) 478,153.64 FY2020-21 Overtime - Sworn 2,497,290 3,533,043 275,202 246,822 296,775 382,618 306,787 278,293 205,529 303,631 307,092 357,284 323,537 368,366 3,651,935 103.4% (118,892) 304,327.96 FY2021-22 Overtime - Sworn 5,165,434 5,165,434 379,016 408,253 487,481 423,830 333,006 307,152 255,420 330,788 314,524 336,044 304,989 366,419 4,246,922 82.2% 918,512 353,910.14 POLICEFY2022-23 Overtime - Sworn 5,165,435 4,800,000 373,491 355,649 399,628 355,866 377,889 401,964 396,783 474,403 463,499 416,775 496,542 449,394 4,961,883 103.4% (161,883) 413,490.26 FY2023-24 Overtime - Sworn 4,800,000 6,708,965 487,105 925,716 477,693 462,417 470,347 531,204 424,452 626,680 478,293 593,735 568,535 588,097 6,634,274 98.9% 74,691 552,856.16 FY2024-25 Overtime - Sworn 6,708,965 6,708,965 560,788 543,814 584,028 590,943 2,279,574 34.0% 4,429,391 569,893.48 FY2017-18 Overtime - Sworn 2,486,914 2,486,914 268,465 345,174 291,221 359,542 367,182 310,508 336,315 176,449 132,298 196,306 203,912 166,108 3,153,480 126.8% (666,566) 262,789.99 FY2018-19 Overtime - Sworn 2,509,914 2,509,914 257,785 245,946 179,272 171,370 219,937 204,997 261,780 216,596 196,343 310,702 220,368 275,166 2,760,261 110.0% (250,347) 230,021.77 FY2019-20 Overtime - Sworn 4,305,402 2,509,914 295,166 277,886 286,016 300,083 332,654 382,084 347,492 328,467 350,709 302,505 264,571 325,335 3,792,969 151.1% (1,283,055) 316,080.74 FY2020-21 Overtime - Sworn 1,993,165 3,193,165 398,678 380,282 417,982 393,922 267,819 345,928 341,403 305,081 172,961 261,923 263,518 286,039 3,835,537 120.1% (642,372) 319,628.09 FY2021-22 Overtime - Sworn 3,629,097 4,334,499 334,236 434,974 358,578 358,251 352,789 327,832 448,493 410,429 297,215 355,475 725,409 438,807 4,842,489 111.7% (507,990) 403,540.77 FIREFY2022-23 Overtime - Sworn 4,334,499 4,334,499 444,959 444,457 414,638 401,115 402,116 379,882 443,531 475,560 339,814 398,079 369,477 435,057 4,948,685 114.2% (614,186) 412,390.41 FY2023-24 Overtime - Sworn 4,482,969 5,135,869 524,969 473,094 348,296 346,854 363,759 315,266 363,100 382,930 381,442 417,762 431,523 357,820 4,706,814 91.6% 429,055 392,234.47 FY2024-25 Overtime - Sworn 4,481,969 4,481,969 285,095 332,480 414,036 417,735 1,449,345 32.3% 3,032,624 362,336.32 FY2024-25 TOTAL 11,190,934 11,190,934 845,882 876,295 998,064 1,008,678 - - - - - - - - 3,728,919 33.3% 7,462,015 932,229.80
BUDGET ACTUALS TOTAL
951
Documentary Transfer Tax
The City of Richmond receives Documentary Transfer Tax from the County for the sale of properties in Richmond. As one of the most volatile revenue stream s for the City, the amounts received can vary month- to-month from the low $300 thousand to the highs of $3 million. A few large sales can widely swing the revenues.
In FY2023-24, the City budgeted $13.3 million for the Transfer Tax category and received $8.6 million, equating to a difference of $4.7 million.
For FY2024-25, the City has budgeted $7.4 million. The difference between the budgeted amounts in these two years is that in the current budget, staff did not include sales over $10 million. These few and unpredictable transactions skew the monthly sales a mounts.
Removing these transactions from the calculation yields more predictable and obtainable amounts to be used for budgeting.
As a reminder, Measure H, approved by Richmond voters in November 2018, went into effect at the end of December 2018. M easure H increased the real estate transfer tax from 0.7 percent to 1.25 percent for properties with a sale price of over $1 million but below $3 million, 2.5 percent for properties with a sale price between $3 - $10 million, and
3.0 percent for properties with a sale price over $10 million.
The table below shows each monthly payment going back to FY2018- 19 and highlights the volatility of this revenue stream. Of note are the very high payments received in certain months which are shown as significant peaks.
Attachment 4 - Documentary Transfer Tax for October 2024 952
Action City Split
$3,325.00
$3,185.00
$4,060.00
$4,235.00
$5,915.00
$13,750.00
$2,121.00
$6,657.00
$6,692.00
$4,060.00
$3,850.00
$5,845.00
$6,993.00
$924.00
$6,090.00
$4,865.00
$6,034.00
$5,460.00
$3,920.00
$2,569.00
$2,450.00
$3,500.00
$5,110.00
$4,340.00
$1,225.00
$1,750.00
$3,010.00
$3,640.00
$4,305.00
$3,360.00
$3,710.00
$3,815.00
$4,095.00
$3,360.00
$2,275.00
$3,325.00
$2,940.00
$2,660.00
$3,710.00
$5,075.00
$3,885.00
$2,086.00
$3,423.00
$5,180.00
$2,296.00
$3,640.00
$6,741.00
$6,300.00
$5,705.00
$1,015.00
$6,160.00
2024-0105861 10/22/2024 08:48 10/22/2024 08:48:00
2024-0106078 10/22/2024 11:25 10/22/2024 11:25:00
2024-0105185 10/18/2024 13:41 10/18/2024 13:41:00
2024-0105627 10/21/2024 12:24 10/21/2024 12:24:00
2024-0105652 10/21/2024 13:01 10/21/2024 13:01:00
2024-0104902 10/18/2024 09:34 10/18/2024 09:34:00
2024-0105112 10/18/2024 12:38 10/18/2024 12:38:00
2024-0105156 10/18/2024 13:13 10/18/2024 13:13:00
2024-0102762 10/17/2024 11:20 10/17/2024 11:20:00
2024-0102804 10/17/2024 12:03 10/17/2024 12:03:00
2024-0102906 10/17/2024 14:11 10/17/2024 14:11:00
2024-0102493 10/17/2024 08:21 10/17/2024 08:21:00
2024-0102647 10/17/2024 10:04 10/17/2024 10:04:00
2024-0102733 10/17/2024 11:15 10/17/2024 11:15:00
2024-0101615 10/15/2024 14:15 10/15/2024 14:15:00
2024-0101822 10/16/2024 08:25 10/16/2024 08:25:00
2024-0102349 10/16/2024 13:56 10/16/2024 13:56:00
2024-0101452 10/15/2024 11:16 10/15/2024 11:16:00
2024-0101527 10/15/2024 12:52 10/15/2024 12:52:00
2024-0101605 10/15/2024 14:09 10/15/2024 14:09:00
2024-0101412 10/15/2024 10:42 10/15/2024 10:42:00
2024-0101430 10/15/2024 11:01 10/15/2024 11:01:00
2024-0101436 10/15/2024 11:04 10/15/2024 11:04:00
2024-0100859 10/14/2024 08:27 10/14/2024 08:27:00
2024-0101398 10/15/2024 10:21 10/15/2024 10:21:00
2024-0101409 10/15/2024 10:40 10/15/2024 10:40:00
2024-0100706 10/11/2024 12:10 10/11/2024 12:10:00
2024-0100734 10/11/2024 12:59 10/11/2024 12:59:00
2024-0100858 10/14/2024 08:27 10/14/2024 08:27:00
2024-0100341 10/11/2024 07:53 10/11/2024 07:53:00
2024-0100344 10/11/2024 07:54 10/11/2024 07:54:00
2024-0100346 10/11/2024 07:55 10/11/2024 07:55:00
2024-0099904 10/10/2024 09:15 10/10/2024 09:15:00
2024-0099990 10/10/2024 11:06 10/10/2024 11:06:00
2024-0100130 10/10/2024 13:55 10/10/2024 13:55:00
2024-0098641 10/07/2024 12:10 10/07/2024 12:10:00
2024-0099323 10/09/2024 08:12 10/09/2024 08:12:00
2024-0099394 10/09/2024 09:09 10/09/2024 09:09:00
2024-0098232 10/04/2024 13:23 10/04/2024 13:23:00
2024-0098252 10/04/2024 13:50 10/04/2024 13:50:00
2024-0098471 10/07/2024 10:03 10/07/2024 10:03:00
2024-0098157 10/04/2024 11:54 10/04/2024 11:54:00
2024-0098188 10/04/2024 12:14 10/04/2024 12:14:00
2024-0098210 10/04/2024 12:51 10/04/2024 12:51:00
2024-0097727 10/03/2024 16:15 10/03/2024 16:15:00
2024-0097786 10/04/2024 07:59 10/04/2024 07:59:00
2024-0097888 10/04/2024 08:50 10/04/2024 08:50:00
2024-0097103 10/02/2024 12:52 10/02/2024 12:52:00
2024-0097558 10/03/2024 12:29 10/03/2024 12:29:00
2024-0097654 10/03/2024 15:13 10/03/2024 15:13:00
Document No. Recording Date/Time Transaction Date/Time
For Richmond
2024-0096811 10/01/2024 14:36 10/01/2024 14:36:00
KRISTIN B. CONNELLY, CLERK-RECORDER
County of Contra Costa
555 Escobar Street * Martinez, CA 94553
Recorder (925) 335-7900 * Fax (925) 335-7926
Transfer Tax Monthly Detail by City
Report Date & Time
11/06/2024 19:00
For Month: October 2024
City: Rm Richmond
Attachment 4 - Documentary Transfer Tax for October 2024 953
$12,812.50
$30,000.00
$13,550.00
$2,025,000.00
$1,620,000.00
$330,000.00
$3,220.00
$4,550.00
$5,845.00
$4,046.00
$4,060.00
$6,475.00
$1,246.00
$3,150.00
$13,450.00
$5,523.00
$14,687.50
$3,682.00
$3,605.00
$3,290.00
$24,437.50
$6,160.00
$3,234.00
$3,990.00
$6,195.00
$4,900.00
$4,200.00
$2,800.00
$4,375.00
$4,725.00
$6,391.00
$4,394,235.50
Total $ of Cap docs 4,326,496.50$ $4,394,235.50
Total Count of Cap docs 56 $82.00
Total For Richmond
Total:
Count:
2024-0118195 10/31/2024 14:14 10/31/2024 14:14:00
2024-0118250 10/31/2024 15:19 10/31/2024 15:19:00
2024-0118287 10/31/2024 15:42 10/31/2024 15:42:00
2024-0117976 10/31/2024 10:40 10/31/2024 10:40:00
2024-0118184 10/31/2024 14:03 10/31/2024 14:03:00
2024-0118189 10/31/2024 14:06 10/31/2024 14:06:00
2024-0117292 10/30/2024 09:22 10/30/2024 09:22:00
2024-0117795 10/30/2024 15:15 10/30/2024 15:15:00
2024-0117883 10/31/2024 09:21 10/31/2024 09:21:00
2024-0116996 10/29/2024 14:03 10/29/2024 14:03:00
2024-0116999 10/29/2024 14:05 10/29/2024 14:05:00
2024-0117024 10/29/2024 14:13 10/29/2024 14:13:00
2024-0116351 10/28/2024 14:02 10/28/2024 14:02:00
2024-0116361 10/28/2024 14:21 10/28/2024 14:21:00
2024-0116816 10/29/2024 11:22 10/29/2024 11:22:00
2024-0116096 10/28/2024 09:30 10/28/2024 09:30:00
2024-0116272 10/28/2024 12:13 10/28/2024 12:13:00
2024-0116316 10/28/2024 13:09 10/28/2024 13:09:00
2024-0115687 10/25/2024 13:42 10/25/2024 13:42:00
2024-0115727 10/25/2024 14:33 10/25/2024 14:33:00
2024-0116026 10/28/2024 08:53 10/28/2024 08:53:00
2024-0107276 10/24/2024 11:11 10/24/2024 11:11:00
2024-0115588 10/25/2024 11:23 10/25/2024 11:23:00
2024-0115675 10/25/2024 13:36 10/25/2024 13:36:00
2024-0107036 10/24/2024 08:50 10/24/2024 08:50:00
2024-0107037 10/24/2024 08:50 10/24/2024 08:50:00
2024-0107232 10/24/2024 10:06 10/24/2024 10:06:00
2024-0106441 10/23/2024 08:05 10/23/2024 08:05:00
2024-0106509 10/23/2024 09:57 10/23/2024 09:57:00
2024-0107035 10/24/2024 08:50 10/24/2024 08:50:00
2024-0106231 10/22/2024 12:58 10/22/2024 12:58:00
Attachment 4 - Documentary Transfer Tax for October 2024 954
December 17, 2024
Human Resources
DATE: December 17, 2024
TO: Mayor Martinez and Members of the City Council
FROM:
Nickie Mastay, Deputy City Manager, Internal Services
Sharrone Taylor, Director of Human Resources
Subject:
City Holiday Closure from December 24, 2024, through
January 1, 2025
FINANCIAL IMPACT: The estimated fiscal impact of two paid holidays by bargaining unit is as follows:
SEIU Local 1021 ~ $326,206
IFPTE Local 21 ~ $348,530
SEIU Local 1021 Part-Time Unit (one-time lump payment
of $600) ~ $108,000
Total Fiscal Impact: ~$782,736
PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:
Not Applicable
STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:
A City holiday office closure is proposed between
December 24 through January 1, 2025. December 25,
2024, and January 1, 2025, are designated as City
holidays. The City will compensate employees for full
days on December 24 and December 31. City Council
approval is required to approve side letter agreements
between the City and the impacted unions (SEIU 1021
General Employees Full-Time and Part-Time Units and
IFPTE Local 21 Mid-Management and Executive Units)
regarding the holiday closure.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
ADOPT a resolution approving the Side Letters between
the City of Richmond and Service Employees
International Union (SEIU) Local 1021 (Full-Time and
Part-Time Units) and International Federation of
Professional and Technical Engineers (IFPTE) Local 21
(Mid-Management and Executive Management Units)
regarding the holiday closure for December 2024 –
AGENDA
REPORT
955
December 17, 2024
Human Resources Department (Sharrone Taylor/Nickie
Mastay 510-620-6602).
DISCUSSION:
The City of Richmond aims to be an employer of choice and recognizes the valuable contributions of its staff to the community. To support staff well-being, the following is proposed that City offices close on December 24 and remain closed through January 1, 2025. Offices will reopen on January 2, 2025. December 25, 2024, and January 1, 2025, are currently designated as City holidays. The City will compensate employees for full days on December 24 and December 31. Certain departments, deemed critically essential, will maintain either full or minimal operations during this closure.
Employees are permitted to use available vacation, floating holidays, administrative leave, or compensatory time accruals for December 26, 27, 30, 2024. In addition, employees who do not have available accrual balances for December 26, 27, and 30, have the option to go into the negative in their floating holiday balance. The negative will be cleared using their January 2025 floating holiday accrual.
Police – Fully Operational
o Contact: Assistant Police Chief T. Simmons 510-620-6651 Fire – Operations Division will be open. Management staff are on call, administrative staff are off.
o Contact: Battalion Chief’s Office: 510-620-6989
Community Services - Recreation
Richmond Recreation Complex -Winter Break Youth Camp, December 23, 2024 - January 3, 2025, and will be closed on the holidays - December 25 and January 1.
Richmond Plunge will have a regular schedule on December 23 and modified hours (8:00 a.m.-2:00 p.m.) December 24, 26, 27, 30, 31 and reopen on January 2, 2025.
o Contact: Ranjana Maharaj, Deputy Director Community Services – Recreation 510-385-4343 or Tetteh Kisseh, Recreation Supervisor 510- 829-1832.
Community Services - Library
Open on December 23, 2024, regular hours, and closed December 24 – 26, 2024. Reopen December 27 - 30, 2024 and close December 31 and January 1 and will reopen on January 2, 2025.
o Contact: Kate Eppler, Deputy Director Community Services- Library 510-620-5452
Human Resources – Management staff will be on standby. 956
December 17, 2024
o Contact: Sharrone Taylor, Director of Human Resources 510-621-1732
Information Technology – Essential employees are available for emergency issues.
o Contact: Sue Hartman, Director of Information Technology 510-620-6874
Public Works – Minimal Staffing – The five Operations & Maintenance Divisions are considered essential services and have historically had mandatory minimal staffing during the City’s holiday season shutdowns:
Abatement
Facilities Maintenance
Fleet Maintenance
Parks Maintenance
Streets Maintenance
o Contact: Tawfic Halaby, Deputy Director Public Works- Operations 510-672-4537
Richmond Housing Authority - Staff will be on-call and the department will arrange for phone calls to be answered.
o Antoinette Terrell, Housing Authority Director
510-621-1300
SEIU 1021 Part-Time Employees Unit: One-Time Lump Sum Payment
The City recognizes the impact that the holiday closure will have on our part-time hourly employees and greatly appreciates the dedication and commitment of our front-line workers. To help mitigate the loss of wages during this period, the City has agreed to provide a one-time lump sum payment of $600 to active SEIU 1021 Part-Time Unit employees.
FISCAL IMPACT:
As part of the agreement with the full-time SEIU Local 1021, IFPTE Local 21 Mid- Management, and Executive Management unions, the City will provide paid full days for December 24 and December 31, 2024. The fiscal impact of the two paid days and the $600 lump sum payment for part-time employees is approximately $782,736.
NEXT STEPS:
The City has negotiated the impacts of the holiday closure in good faith with the affected bargaining units. The parties have come to an agreement about the holiday closure as outlined in the side letter agreements (Attachments 2-5). 957
December 17, 2024
City staff is requesting that the City Council adopt the resolution approving the Holiday Closure side letter agreements between the City of Richmond and SEIU Local 1021 General Employees, SEIU Part-Time and Intermittent Unit, IFPTE Local 21 Mid- Management Unit, and the IFPTE Local 21 Executive Management Unit.
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
Attachment 1 – Resolution
Attachment 2 – Side Letter with SEIU Local 1021 General Employees Attachment 3 – Side Letter with SEIU Local 1021 Part-Time and Intermittent Employees Attachment 4 – Side Letter with Local 21 Mid-Management Unit Attachment 5 – Side Letter with Local 21 Executive Management Unit
958
RESOLUTION NO. _____
RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA APPROVING THE SIDE LETTER REGARDING HOLIDAY CLOSURE FOR 2024
BETWEEN THE CITY OF RICHMOND AND SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION (SEIU) LOCAL 1021 (PART-TIME AND FULL TIME UNITS) AND
INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION OF PROFESSIONAL AND TECHNICAL ENGINEERS (IFPTE) LOCAL 21 (MID-MANAGEMENT AND EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT UNITS)
WHEREAS, the City has negotiated in good faith with SEIU 1021 (Part-Time and Full- Time Units) and IFPTE Local 21 (Mid-Management and Executive Management Units), regarding a holiday closure for 2024; and
WHEREAS, the parties have executed a Side Letter for each of the four bargaining units regarding the terms of a holiday closure for 2024; and
WHEREAS, the Side Letter shall not bind the parties until they are ratified by a majority of both the SEIU Local 1021 (Part-Time and Full-Time Units) and IFPTE Local 21(Mid- Management and Executive Management Units) membership and ratified by the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the Side Letter will establish a holiday closure for 2024 for December 24, 26, 27, 30, 31; and
WHEREAS, the Side Letter will grant two City paid holidays for December 24, 2024 and December 31, 2024 for active employees in the SEIU 1021 General Full-Time Unit and IFPTE Local 21 Mid-Management and Executive Management Units; and
WHEREAS, the Side Letter will grant a $600 lump sum payment to part-time active employees in the SEIU Local 1012 Part-Time Unit; and
WHEREAS, the adoption of these Side Letters will support a stable and amicable labor relations environment in the City.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that effective December 17, 2024, that the City Council of Richmond approves the Side Letters among the City of Richmond, SEIU Local 1021 (Part-Time and Full-Time), and IFPTE Local 21 (Mid-Management and Executive Management) regarding holiday closure for December 24, 26, 27, 30, 31, the terms of which are set for and marked as Attachments 2, 3, 4, and 5 to the agenda report in support of the resolution.
-----------
I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted by the Council of the City of Richmond at a regular meeting thereof held by the following vote:
959
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTENTIONS:
ABSENT:
_____________________________
CLERK OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND
(SEAL)
Approved:
____________________
Mayor
Approved as to form:
____________________
City Attorney
960
961
962
963
964
December 17, 2024
Human Resources
DATE: December 17, 2024
TO: Mayor Martinez and Members of the City Council
FROM:
Nickie Mastay, Deputy City Manager – Internal Services
Sharrone Taylor, Human Resources Director
Trina Jackson-Lincoln, Project Coordinator
Subject:
Allocate $48,325 for the Race Forward Equity Training
Contract and four CPS Human Resources Consulting DEI
training courses held in Oct. 2024
FINANCIAL IMPACT: $48,325 must be appropriated from the General Fund to Human Resources Professional Services (0118106-
400206)
PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:
April 2, 2024 – City Council approved a two-year contract not to exceed $55,000 with Race Forward to facilitate a Race Equity Training Series for a term beginning April
2024 through December 2026.
October 22, 2024 City Council presentation.
STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:
City Council’s approval is required to appropriate funding from the General Fund to pay for Race Equity Initiative training.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
APPROPRIATE $48,325 for Race Equity training courses
and DIRECT staff to return to City Council with a update of the Race Equity Program by March 2025 - Human
Resources Department/City Council Administration
(Sharrone Taylor/Trina Jackson Lincoln 510-620-6581).
AGENDA
REPORT
965
December 17, 2024
DISCUSSION:
FUNDING APPROPRIATION
At the April 2, 2024, City Council meeting, the Richmond City Council adopted a two-year contract with Race Forward not to exceed $55,000 to facilitate a Race Equity Training Series for city employees, members of Boards and Commissions , and community partners. The four eight-hour training courses include:
Advancing Race Equity: The role of government (January 30, 2025) Using a Race Equity Toolkit (March 6, 2025)
Leading for Race Equity (March 7, 2025)
Cross-sector Organizing (TBD b/w July-September 2025)
In addition, three two-hour Diversity Equity and Inclusion courses were held in October 2025 for management and front-line staff at the cost of $8,325.
Why Diversity Matters for Staff (October 8, 2024)
Why Diversity Matters for Leaders (October 16, 2024)
Implicit Bias (October 22, 2024)
Funding in the amount of $55,000 was allocated to the 2023-2024 FY for the Race Equity Training Series, however, the unspent funds were not carried forward to the current FY 2024-2025 budget. Therefore, staff are requesting the balance of $48,325 be appropriated from the General Fund to cover the cost of the training delineated above.
ACTION ITEMS
City Council voted on October 22, 2024, to receive an update on the Race Equity Action Plan and ensure they are given the opportunity to provide direction to staff . The action items identified/prioritized include:
Establish criteria for liaisons/team members.
Develop an orientation and training program for Race Equity Plan Liaisons so they understand our objectives.
Increase the frequency of our meetings.
Create Key Performance Indicators (KPIs).
Align deliverables with a clear timeline.
Hire a consultant and/or dedicated staff person to oversee the Race Equity Initiative Implementation
966
December 17, 2024
Recommend revisions to the Race Equity Action Plan.
Simplify the goals to make them reader-friendly in collaboration with the community.
Create action plans for each goal for the next five years.
CURRENT PROGRESS AND NEXT STEPS
Human Resources staff have been diligently working to meet the set goals for implementing the initiative. They have collaborated with City Council administrative staff and County representatives to create the implementation plan's f ramework. In addition, they have engaged a consultant from Peer Advocates Consulting Agency to provide expertise and guidance for this project.
On December 11, 2024 , staff met with the Management Leadership Team to introduce the framework of the Race Equity Plan, which will include:
Preparing departmental Race Equity Statements
Identifying personnel that will represent their respective departments for task forces designed to establish the Race Equity Initiative Monthly meetings
Providing specialized training to the task force members to prepare them to be change agents in their departments and the organization as a whole.
In addition, staff will return to the City Council at mid-year to request funding for the Peer Advocates consultant to maintain the mom entum of the implementation and ensure continuity.
Vice Mayor Claudia Jimenez and Council Member Melvin Willis strongly support this initiative to expand the City’s diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts.
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
Attachment 1 – April 2, 2024, City Council Meeting Minutes Attachment 2- October 22, 2024 City Council Meeting Minutes
967
cc02Apr2024 – ud
RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA,
April 2, 2024, 4:30 p.m.
Community Services Building
440 Civic Center Plaza
Richmond, CA 94804
_____________________________________________________________________
A. OPEN SESSION TO HEAR PUBLIC COMMENT BEFORE CLOSED SESSION The Open Session was called to order at 5:00 p.m. by Mayor Eduardo Martinez.
B. ROLL CALL
Present: Councilmembers Melvin Willis, Cesar Zepeda, Vice Mayor Claudia Jimenez, and Mayor Eduardo Martinez. Absent: Councilmember Soheila Bana was absent the entire meeting due to illness. Councilmembers Gayle McLaughlin and Doria Robinson were absent the entire meeting.
C. CLOSED SESSION
A motion made by Vice Mayor Jimenez, seconded by Councilmember Willis, added an emergency item to C-3 Conference with Legal Council - Anticipated Litigation, by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Zepeda, Willis, Vice Mayor Jimenez, and Mayor Martinez. Absent: Councilmembers Bana, McLaughlin, and Robinson.
C.1 LIABILITY CLAIMS (Government Code Section 54956.9)
• Claimant: Tara McGirr
Agency claimed against: City of Richmond
• Claimant: Nicole Abetkov
Agency claimed against: City of Richmond
• Claimant: Sauncie Quillen
Agency claimed against: City of Richmond
C.2 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION (paragraph (1) of Subdivision [d] of Government Code Section 54956.9) • Peterson v. City of Richmond, et al.
• Winehaven v. City of Richmond
• Guidiville Rancheria of California, et al. v. United States of America, et al. • North Coast Rivers Alliance et al./Point Molate Alliance et al. v. City of Richmond
C.3 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED LITIGATION (Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to paragraph (2) or (3) of Subdivision (d) [as applicable] of Government Code Section 54956.9) • One case
968
cc02Apr2024 – ud
C.4 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EV ALUATION (Government Code Section 54957)
• Title: City Attorney
D. PUBLIC COMMENT BEFORE CLOSED SESSION (limited to items on the Closed Session agenda only)
None.
E. ADJOURN TO CLOSED SESSION
Open Session adjourned to Closed Session at 5:03 p.m. Closed Session adjourned at 6:30 p.m.
F. SPECIAL MEETING OF THE SURPLUS PROPERTY AUTHORITY
The Special meeting of the Surplus Property Authority was called to order at 6:33 p.m. by Chairperson Eduardo Martinez.
G. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Chairperson Eduardo Martinez led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
H. ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners Melvin Willis, Cesar Zepeda, Vice Chairperson Claudia Jimenez, and Chairperson Eduardo Martinez. Absent: Commissioner Soheila Bana was absent the entire meeting due to illness. Commissioners Gayle McLaughlin, and Doria Robinson were absent the entire meeting.
I. STATEMENT OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST
None.
J. AGENDA REVIEW
None.
K. PUBLIC COMMENT
None.
L. SURPLUS PROPERTY AUTHORITY CONSENT CALENDAR
Motion by Commissioner Melvin Willis
Seconded by Commissioner Cesar Zepeda
Ayes (4): Commissioners Melvin Willis, Cesar Zepeda, Vice Chairperson Claudia Jimenez, and Chairperson Eduardo Martinez
Absent (3): Commissioners Doria Robinson, Soheila Bana, and Gayle McLaughlin
Passed (4 to 0)
L.1 Minutes of the Surplus Property Authority
APPROVE the minutes of the February 27, 2024, Joint Surplus Property Authority/City Council meeting - City Clerk's Office (Pamela Christian 510-620- 6513).
969
cc02Apr2024 – ud
L.2 Second Contract Amendment with Flock Group, Inc. to Add Additional Cameras at the Point Potrero Marine Terminal.
APPROVE a second contract amendment with Flock Group, Inc. in the amount of $39,300, for a new total contract amount not to exceed $1,037,400, for additional cameras to be installed at the Point Potrero Marine Terminal, for the term ending February 28, 2026 – Police Department/Port of Richmond (Chief Bisa French 510-621-1802/Charles Gerard 510-829-2253).
M. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 6:37 p.m.
N. REGULAR MEETING OF THE RICHMOND CITY COUNCIL
The meeting was called to order at 6:37 p.m. by Mayor Eduardo Martinez.
O. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
P. ROLL CALL
Present: Councilmembers Melvin Willis, Cesar Zepeda, Vice Mayor Claudia Jimenez, and Mayor Eduardo Martinez. Absent: Councilmember Soheila Bana was absent the entire meeting due to illness. Councilmembers Gayle McLaughlin and Doria Robinson were absent the entire meeting.
Q. STATEMENT OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST
None.
R. AGENDA REVIEW
Item W.3.a. - (Temporary Moratorium on New Tobacco Retailers) was removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion.
S. REPORT FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY OF FINAL DECISIONS MADE
DURING CLOSED SESSION
C.1 LIABILITY CLAIMS (Government Code Section 54956.9) • Claimant: Tara McGirr
Agency claimed against: City of Richmond
• Claimant: Nicole Abetkov
Agency claimed against: City of Richmond
• Claimant: Sauncie Quillen
Agency claimed against: City of Richmond
Status report was given. No reportable action was taken.
C.2 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION (paragraph (1) of Subdivision [d] of Government Code Section 54956.9) · Peterson v. City of Richmond, et al.
· Winehaven v. City of Richmond
· Guidiville Rancheria of California, et al. v. United States of America, et al. · North Coast Rivers Alliance et al./Point Molate Alliance et al. v. City of Richmond Status report was given. No reportable action was taken.
970
cc02Apr2024 – ud
C.3 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED LITIGATION (Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to paragraph (2) or (3) of Subdivision (d) [as applicable] of Government Code Section 54956.9) · One case
Status report was given. No reportable action was taken.
C.4 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EV ALUATION (Government Code Section 54957)
· Title: City Attorney
Not discussed.
T. REPORT FROM THE CITY MANAGER (public comment allowed under Open Forum)
City Manager Shasa Curl presented the report as follows: All City Staff Meeting was held on March 27, 2024, in the City Council Chambers and via Zoom; Richmond Fire recognized by the Richmond Kiwanis Club at Public Safety Awards Dinner on March 22, 2024; the Marina Bay Farmer's Market Kick-Off was on Sunday, April 7, 2024; MCE offered no cost home upgrades for qualified Richmond residents. More information can be obtained at https://mcecleanenergy.org/home-savings/ or by calling 888-632-3674; and Love Your Block In-Kind Sponsorship Program was accepting applications at www.loveyourblock.org.
T.1 NEW EMPLOYEE REPORT - 1st Tuesday
Human Resources Director Sharrone Taylor provided the New Employee Report as follows: Jennifer Dang, Administrative Assistant, Konyae Miller, Jailer; Leah Eric, Payroll Coordinator; Abdul Black, Administrative Student Intern; Pedro Barragan, Maintenance Aide; Eduardo Zacarias, Maintenance Aide II; Neisha Moore, Communications Dispatcher I; Brandon Grate, Police Officer Trainee; Esteban Tirado-Rodriguez, Lifeguard, Allison Tong, Lifeguard; Adam Chaffee, Administrative Student Intern; Stephanie Munoz, Police Officer Trainee; Adam Gonzalez, Police Officer Trainee; Adan Rodriguez, Maintenance Aide II; and Angelica Howay was promoted to Administrative Services Coordinator.
U. REPORTS OF OFFICERS: REFERRALS TO STAFF, AND GENERAL REPORTS (INCLUDING AB 1234 REPORTS)(limited to two minutes per
Councilmember)(public comments allowed under Open Forum) Councilmember Willis announced that the Bay Area Girl's Club would host the "Men Who Cook Event" on Sunday, April 14, 2024, from 2 p.m. to 5 p.m. at Cobiz at 1503 Macdonald Avenue.
Councilmember Zepeda reported the following: attended the Shimada Sayonara event on March 27, 2024; attended the raising of the Trans Flag on Friday, March 29, 2024; the District 2 Community meeting would be on April 6, 2024, from 10 a.m. to 12 p.m. at Bridge Arts; and attended the Police & Fire event honoring service to the community.
Vice Mayor Jimenez invited everyone to the ACCE event regarding decarbonizing at Grace Lutheran Church, at 2369 Barrett Avenue, on Thursday, April 4, 2024, from 6 p.m. to 8 p.m.
V. OPEN FORUM FOR PUBLIC COMMENT
971
cc02Apr2024 – ud
(public comment on items that remain on the Consent Calendar or items not on the agenda - limited to 2 minutes unless otherwise specified - Back and forth dialogue with the Council is prohibited)
Don Gosney invited interested people to join the Plumbers & Steamfitters Local 342. For more information Mr. Gosney could be contacted at [email protected] or by calling (510) 685-2403.
Mark Wassberg gave comments regarding transgenders.
Rick Perez showed his sweatshirt with the Pedie Perez Proclamation on the front and a photo of the cultural training he attended on the back.
Patricia Perez gave comments regarding the death of her grandson Pedie Perez.
Samiyah Tillman requested support for the resident physicians at LifeLong Urgent Care Center to receive fair compensation.
W. CITY COUNCIL CONSENT CALENDAR
(All items placed under the Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and noncontroversial. These items will be enacted upon together with a motion and second, without discussion, of any member of the City Council, and each item shall be deemed to have received the action recommended.)
Motion by Councilmember Melvin Willis
Seconded by Vice Mayor Claudia Jimenez
Ayes (4): Councilmember Melvin Willis, Councilmember Cesar Zepeda, Vice Mayor Claudia Jimenez, and Mayor Eduardo Martinez
Absent (3): Councilmember Soheila Bana, Councilmember Gayle McLaughlin, and Councilmember Doria Robinson
Passed (4 to 0)
W.1 City Attorney's Office
W.1.a Legal Services Agreement with Manning & Kass, Ellrod, Ramirez & Trester, LLP
APPROVE a new legal services agreement with Manning & Kass, Ellrod, Ramirez & Trester LLP for a total amount not to exceed $75,000 for a term beginning July 1, 2022, to June 30, 2025 – City Attorney’s Office (Dave Aleshire 510-620-6509).
W.1.b Approve a 6th Amendment for Allen, Glaessner, Hazelwood & Werth LLP APPROVE a Sixth Amendment to a legal services agreement with Allen, Glaessner, Hazelwood & Werth LLP increasing the compensation by an amount not to exceed $150,000, for a total new contract amount of $1,260,000, and extending the term through June 30, 2025 – City Attorney’s Office (Dave Aleshire/Shannon Moore 510-620- 6509).
W.2 City Clerk's Office
W.2.a Cancellation of April 23, 2024, Regular City Council meeting to hold a special in-person meeting called by the Mayor to be held in the Bermuda Room
972
cc02Apr2024 – ud
APPROVE the cancellation of the April 23, 2024, Regular City Council meeting to hold a special in-person meeting on April 23, 2024, from 4:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. called by Mayor Martinez as a follow-up and conclusion to the special meeting held in the Bermuda Room on November 14, 2023; Henry Gardner will facilitate a discussion with the City Council regarding “Working Relations and Expectations” - City Clerk’s Office (Pamela Christian 510-620-6513).
W.3 City Council
W.3.a Temporary Moratorium on New Tobacco Retailers
ADOPT an urgency ordinance placing a temporary 45-day moratorium on the issuance of any new permit, license, or other entitlement for any new tobacco retailer in the City of Richmond - (Mayor Martinez 510-620- 6503/Vice Mayor Jimenez 510-620-6565/Councilmember Willis 510-412- 2050).
Councilmembers Jimenez and Willis gave an overview of the matter.
Hector Rojas presented a PowerPoint which highlighted the existing regulations, and details of the proposed moratorium.
Guadalupe Enllana and Mayra Lopez gave comments. Discussion ensued.
Three smoke shops were not licensed as tobacco retailers and were subject to closure.
There was not a supermajority of the councilmembers present in order to act on the temporary moratorium, therefore this matter was continued to the April 16, 2024, City Council meeting for consideration.
W.4 Economic Development
W.4.a Second Contract Amendment with Flock Group, Inc. to Add Additional Cameras at the Point Potrero Marine Terminal.
APPROVE a second contract amendment with Flock Group, Inc. in the amount of $39,300, for a new total contract amount not to exceed $1,037,400, for additional cameras to be installed at the Point Potrero Marine Terminal, for the term ending February 28, 2026 – Police Department/Port of Richmond (Chief Bisa French 510-621-1802/Charles Gerard 510-829-2253).
W.5 Library and Community Services
W.5.a Contract for Installation of Window Coverings in the Madeline F.
Whittlesey Community Room
APPROVE a contract with Hauser Shade & Sons, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $19,339.35, for installation of window treatments in the Richmond Main Library’s Madeline F. Whittlesey Community Room, for a term beginning March 1, 2024, through March 1, 2025 — Community Services Department (Kate Eppler 510-620-5452/Leah J. Clark 510-621- 1557).
W.5.b Accept and Appropriate an $8,363 Grant from the Bay Area Library and Information System to Support Library Membership in Professional Associations
ADOPT a resolution to ACCEPT and APPROPRIATE into the Fiscal Year 2023-2024 budget a Bay Area Library and Information System grant for 973
cc02Apr2024 – ud
institutional membership fees in the amount of $8,363 – Community Services Department (LaShonda White 510-620-6828/Kate Eppler 510- 620-5452).
Adopted Resolution No. 23-24.
W.6 Police Department
W.6.a Sole-Source Contract with Motorrad LLC for Police Motorcycle Maintenance and Repair
APPROVE a three-year sole-source contract with Motorrad LLC to provide ongoing maintenance and repair services for the police department’s motorcycle fleet, at a cost not to exceed $90,000, for the contract term July 1, 2024, to June 30, 2027, with the option of two, mutually agreed upon, one-year extension terms for an additional cost not to exceed $30,000 per fiscal year – Police Department (Chief Bisa French 510-621-1802).
W.6.b Purchase of Three Speed Trailers and SafePace Cloud Access from Traffic Logix.
APPROVE the purchase of three speed radar trailers and SafePace Cloud Access from Traffic Logix at a cost of $28,842.30 – Police Department (Chief Bisa French 510-621-1802).
W.6.c Second Contract Amendment to add $15,000 in funds to contract with Du- All Safety, LLC.
APPROVE a second contract amendment with Du-All Safety, LLC for additional funding of $15,000, for a total amount not to exceed $775,206, for the contract term ending June 30, 2024 – Police Department (Chief Bisa French 510-621-1802).
W.7 Public Works
W.7.a Abatement Report from the Public Works Director
RECEIVE a written abatement report from the Public Works Director - Public Works Department (Daniel Chavarria 510-620-5478).
X. NEW BUSINESS
X.1 Prevent Nepotism During the Appointment Process for Richmond Boards, Commissions, Committees, and Task Forces, and City Hiring and Employment.
DISCUSS and PROVIDE direction to the City Attorney’s Office to draft and for staff to implement a City policy preventing City Council Members from appointing family members to Richmond boards, commissions, committees, and task forces - Councilmember Cesar Zepeda (510-620-6593) and Vice Mayor Claudia Jimenez (510-620-6565). This item was continued from the March 19, 2024, and March 26, 2024, meetings.
City Attorney Dave Aleshire gave an overview of the matter.
Don Gosney gave comments in person. Eli Moore, and Jessi Taran gave comments via Zoom.
Discussion ensued. The city council recommended the following: Committees or commissions that have decision making power should be stricter; applies to 974
cc02Apr2024 – ud
directors and staff who had hiring power; ask on the board and commission application if person applying is related to a member of the city council; those with business relationships or associations would not be appointed; and that members would serve out their term and would not be reappointed. This matter was continued for further discussion to the April 16, 2024, City Council meeting.
Motion by Vice Mayor Claudia Jimenez
Seconded by Councilmember Cesar Zepeda
Ayes (4): Councilmember Melvin Willis, Councilmember Cesar Zepeda, Vice Mayor Claudia Jimenez, and Mayor Eduardo Martinez
Absent (3): Councilmember Soheila Bana, Councilmember Gayle McLaughlin, and Councilmember Doria Robinson
Passed (4 to 0)
X.2 Race Forward Training Series
APPROVE a sole-source two-year contract with Race Forward to conduct a series of race equity trainings for employees, public officials, and community partners not to exceed $55,000, for a term beginning April 2024 through December 2026 – City Council Office (Trina Jackson-Lincoln 510-620-6581).
City Council Liaison and Project Coordinator Trina Jackson provided an overview of the matter. Jessi Taran and Deborah Small gave comments via Zoom.
A motion was made to approve the contract.
Motion by Councilmember Melvin Willis
Seconded by Vice Mayor Claudia Jimenez
Ayes (4): Councilmember Melvin Willis, Councilmember Cesar Zepeda, Vice Mayor Claudia Jimenez, and Mayor Eduardo Martinez
Absent (3): Councilmember Soheila Bana, Councilmember Gayle McLaughlin, and Councilmember Doria Robinson
Passed (4 to 0)
Y. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 8:42 p.m., to meet again on April 16, 2024, at 6:30 p.m.
Clerk of the City of Richmond Mayor
975
From: Dee Joyce
To: City Clerk Dept User
Subject: Craneway contract with Orton, Council and City Attorney Inaction Date: Tuesday, April 2, 2024 11:41:30 AM
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
Good Evening,
The contract with Orton regarding it's use of the Craneway may have been signed many years ago by different City Council members, but that does not release the current City Council from taking such actions as to hold Orton to the contract. The current City Council may believe it was a bad contract to have signed, that also does not release the current City Council from holding Orton to the contract.
PB Development's plan of last year for paid-membership pickleball club was denied last year because the Craneway is designated for use as a public trust, governed by the City of Richmond, the California State Lands Commission, and the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission. Per City staffers themselves, the City of Richmond has not made any approvals for the use of the Craneway for pickleball, membership or no membership. Representatives of PB, Orton and the Pickleball organization pushing this project have been contradictory in their communications with regards to intent of use for the Craneway. On the one hand they claim it would be an event center with restaurant and bar, and on the other, that no events will be scheduled in the future.
The pickleball courts, as they exist now, are permanent alterations to the Craneway, in conflict with Orton's latest claim that there have been only alterations to the decor and theme.
Orton needs to be held accountable for their making permanent alterations to the Craneway without the necessary approvals and their shady and contemptible actions by requiring them to remove the pickle ball courts.
Then, they may submit truthful plans for any change in use for the Craneway.
Respectfully,
Deborah Rheuark, Richmond resident
976
(a)
(b)
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(1)
(2)
(3)
(a)
(b)
(c)
(a)
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
From: Leisa Johnson
To: Sabrina Lundy; Jasuara Castaneda; Ursula Deloa
Cc: Pamela Christian; City Clerk Dept User; Leisa Johnson Subject: Revised Public Comments, Item W.3.a - Temporary moratorium on new tobacco retailers - April 2, 2024 City Council Meeting Date: Tuesday, April 2, 2024 3:37:19 PM
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
Hello Sabrina, Jasuara and Ursula -
I realize that you have already sent the package out to the City Council. However, can you please incorporate the revised email thread below as my written public comments for the supplementary minutes? Can you please let me know one way or the other when you get a chance? Many thanks.
Warm regards,
Leisa
Begin forwarded message:
From: Leisa Johnson <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Questions for Consent Calendar Item W.3.a - Moratorium for new tobacco retailers Date: April 2, 2024 at 2:54:37 PM PDT
To: Bisa French <[email protected]>
Cc: Lina Velasco <[email protected]>, Eduardo Martinez <[email protected]>, Claudia Jimenez <[email protected]>, Melvin Willis <[email protected]>, Eva Mann <[email protected]>, Shasa Curl <[email protected]>, City Clerk Dept User <[email protected]>, Hector Rojas <[email protected]>, Shannon Moore <[email protected]>, Dave Aleshire <[email protected]> Please note that I am not bcc’ing the other 4 councilmembers on this reply as I do not wish to inadvertently commit a Brown Act violation.
CM Curl or someone from the City Attorney’s office - Can one of you please forward this communication to the other 4 councilmembers so they are aware of this information before tonight’s CC meeting as it is my understanding that that email forward would not be in violation of the Brown Act as long as they don’t communicate / have a conversation about it.
Thank you, Chief French and Lina for responding. It is very helpful and so very much appreciated.
Unfortunately, there are many questions remaining, including for our City Attorney’s office. As such, I am requesting that this item be pulled this evening.
I am 100% in support of a moratorium on new licenses for tobacco. I also support a moratorium on all new retailers for tobacco, alcohol and cannabis until Code Enforcement and/or RPD has adequate staffing to ensure compliance and appropriate regulatory oversight as authorized by RMC and state law. I simply don’t believe the City has adequate staffing to support the existing regulations let alone any new ones, and hasn’t since 2020, for all three categories. Which is why I asked question #7 below.
Unfortunately, the inability of the City to provide appropriate licensing and regulatory oversight is directly linked to RPD being defunded in back to back years:
2020: $7.8M — $5.8M due to the permanent loss of 34 positions, including 21 sworn officers and 13 civilians 2021: $3M due to the permanent loss of another 12 sworn officer positions.
Total permanent reductions: 46 total positions - 33 sworn officers and 13 civilian positions And this doesn’t even include the numerous officers that RPD has lost due to retirement, resignation and leave since 2020.
I fully appreciate that the department is actively trying to recruit and fill vacant positions, but it will take years to recover from these negative cuts and the loss of so many key regulatory and investigative units in the department.
As Chief French said below, by 2020, they were down to only 1 FTE in the Regulatory Unit prior to transferring it to Code Enforcement in 2021.
Per Lina, Code Enforcement hired one FTE in 2023, but they lost staff and had staff out for various reasons.
It is unclear if this one new FTE in 2023 went to support building & planning code enforcement due to the simultaneous attrition of more FTEs within this department and their roles prior to receiving the Regulatory Unit from RPD in 2021.
Of particular concern is that based on RMC in Chapter 7.106, RPD is legally responsible for licensing and compliance monitoring for tobacco retailers. Key parts of that code are pasted below.
Some key elements of RMC, Chapter 7.106 https://library.municode.com/ca/richmond/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=ARTVIIBU_CH7.106TORELI
7.106.020 - Defnitions.
"Department" as used in this chapter shall mean the Richmond Police Department.
7.106.050 - Location requirements.
Except as provided in Section 7.106.060, in land use districts where tobacco retailing regulated by this chapter would otherwise be a permitted use, no license may be issued, and no existing license may be renewed, to authorize tobacco retailing if the tobacco retailers is:
Within 500 feet of any parcel occupied by any existing tobacco retailing business; or Within 1,000 feet of any parcel occupied by a youth-populated area. For purposes of this subsection, "youth-populated area" means a parcel that is occupied by a:
Public or private school;
Playground open to the public;
Park open to the public or to all the residents of a private community or open to the public or to all the residents of a private community; or Library Open to the Public. For purposes of this section, distance is measured by the shortest line connecting any point on the property line of the parcel on which tobacco retailing business will be established or maintained to any point on the property line of the other parcel. (Ord. No. 20-18 N.S. , § I, 7-17-2018)
7.106.070 - Application procedure.
Application for a tobacco retailer's license shall be submitted in the name of each proprietor proposing to conduct retail tobacco sales and shall be signed by each proprietor or an authorized agent thereof, and shall include the license application fee set forth under Section 7.106.120.
It is the responsibility of each proprietor to be informed regarding all laws applicable to tobacco retailing, including those laws affecting the issuance of a tobacco retailer's license. No proprietor may rely on the issuance of a license as a determination by the City that the proprietor has complied with all laws applicable to tobacco retailers. A license issued contrary to this chapter, contrary to any other law, or on the basis of false or misleading information supplied by a proprietor shall be revoked pursuant to Section 7.106.120 of this chapter. Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to vest in any person obtaining and maintaining a tobacco retailer's license any status or right to act as a tobacco retailer in contravention of any provision of law.
All applications shall be submitted on a form supplied by the Richmond Police Department and shall contain, at a minimum, the following information:
The name, address, telephone number, driver's license or similar identification, including date of birth, of each proprietor of the business that is seeking a license.
A single name and mailing address authorized by each proprietor to receive all communications and notices (the "authorized address") required by, authorized by, or convenient to the enforcement of this chapter. If an authorized address is not supplied, each proprietor shall be understood to consent to the provision of notice at the business address specified in subparagraph (1) above.
Proof that the location for which a tobacco retailer's License is sought has been issued a valid state tobacco retailer's license by the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration.
Whether or not any proprietor or any agent of the proprietor has admitted violating, or has been found to have violated, this chapter and, if so, the dates and locations of all such violations within the previous past five years.
A copy of the conditional use permit, if applicable (or an explanation as to why such permit is not required).
A statement signed by each proprietor that no drug paraphernalia is or will be sold at the business seeking the license.All information required by the Department to apply for a tobacco retailer's license shall be updated with the Richmond Police Department whenever the information changes. A tobacco retailer shall provide the Department with any updates within ten (10) business days of a change. (Ord. No. 20-18 N.S. , § I, 7-17-2018)
7.106.080 - Issuance of license.
Upon the receipt of an application for a tobacco retailer's license and the license fee required by this chapter, the Richmond Police Department shall issue a license unless substantial evidence demonstrates that one or more of the following bases for denial exists:
The information presented in the application is incomplete, inaccurate, or false. Intentionally supplying inaccurate or false information shall be a violation of this chapter.
The application seeks authorization for tobacco retailing for a proprietor to whom this chapter prohibits a license to be issued.
The application seeks authorization for tobacco retailing at a location for which this chapter prohibits a license to be issued.
The application seeks authorization for tobacco retailing that is prohibited pursuant to this chapter (e.g., mobile vending), that is unlawful pursuant to this Code, or that is unlawful pursuant to any other law. (Ord. No. 20-18 N.S.
, § I, 7-17-2018)
7.106.090 - Tobacco retailing without a license.
In addition to any other penalty authorized by law, if a court of competent jurisdiction determines, or the Department finds based on a preponderance of evidence, after notice and an opportunity to be heard, that any person has engaged in tobacco retailing at a location without a valid tobacco retailer's license, either directly or through the person's agents or employees, the person shall be ineligible to apply for, or to be issued, a tobacco retailing License as follows:
After a first violation of this section at a location within any sixty-month period, no new license may issue for the person or the location (unless ownership of the business at the location has been transferred in an Arm's Length Transaction), until thirty (30) days have passed from the date of the violation.
After a second violation of this section at a location within any sixty-month period, no new license may issue for the person or the location (unless ownership of the business at the location has been transferred in an arm's length transaction), until ninety (90) days have passed from the date of the violation.
After of a third or subsequent violation of this section at a location within any sixty-month period, no new license may issue for the person or the location (unless ownership of the business at the location has been transferred in an arm's length transaction), until five (5) years have passed from the date of the violation. (Ord. No. 20-18 N.S. , § I, 7-17-2018)
7.106.120 - License fees.
Amount of Fees. The fee shall be established in a schedule of fees. The fees shall be calculated so as to recover the total costs of both license administration and license enforcement, including, for example, issuing the license, administering the license program, retailer education, retailer inspection and compliance checks, documentation of violations, and prosecution of violators, but shall not exceed the cost of the regulatory program authorized by the Chapter. All fees and interest upon proceeds of fees shall be used exclusively to fund the program, and shall be separately accounted for. Fees are nonrefundable except as may be required by law. (Ord. No. 20-18 N.S. , § I, 7-17-2018)
7.106.140 - Compliance monitoring.
Compliance with this chapter shall be monitored by the Department. Any peace officer may enforce the penal provisions of this chapter.
Nothing in this chapter shall create a right of action in any tobacco retailer licensee or other person against the city or its agents.
Compliance checks shall determine, at a minimum, if the tobacco retailer is conducting business in a manner that complies with tobacco laws regulating youth access to tobacco. When appropriate, the compliance checks shall determine compliance with other laws applicable to tobacco retailing. (Ord. No. 20-18 N.S. , § I, 7-17-2018)
Key Questions/Comments for City Staff and the City Attorney
1. Since RPD is legally required to issue licenses (shall is not the same as may) and has not been doing so since 2020, does that not mean that all licenses — renewals and new — that have been issued from 2021 until now are invalid?
2. As such, has there not been a defacto moratorium on existing and new tobacco retailers since 2021 since there is no ability to issue licenses or renewals per RMC?
3. All three retailers - tobacco, alcohol and cannabis - have regulatory fees associated with them in the master fee schedule. These fees are supposed to cover the cost of FTEs to monitor compliance and enforce code.
Has the City been charging these fees since 2020?
If not, why?
If yes, where have all of those fees been going since 2020?
4. How many licensed retailers violate RMC 7.106.050 (location requirements, see above)? To not have this critical unit staffed for the past 3+ years has put the community, and in particular the youth, at significant risk.
I hope all of these serious concerns and questions can be addressed at tonight’s (or a future) City Council meeting, and that the City Council will understand the gravity of this situation. They need to prioritize the staffing of this department, and hopefully place it back under RPD (where it makes the most sense) once they have been provided the necessary resources and staffing to carry out the legally defined & required responsibilities.
Lastly, thank you again for responding and helping shed light on all of this, and how the Council can help staff effectively perform the duties expected of them and better serve/protect the community in the process.
Warm regards,
Leisa
On Apr 2, 2024, at 12:49 PM, Bisa French <[email protected]> wrote:
Please see my response in green.
Bisa French
Chief of Police
Richmond Police Department
On Apr 2, 2024, at 9:37 AM, Lina Velasco <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Leisa,
See my responses to your questions in your email below. Please note the moratorium only addresses tobacco and not cannabis or alcohol. The moratorium would restrict new tobacco retailer licenses to be issued temporarily while new enhanced regulations are studied. Renewals would still be permitted, as would all enforcement provisions of the Tobacco Retailers licenses. We hope that you’ll agree this will be beneficial in addressing community concerns raised around tobacco retailers.
-Lina
From: Leisa Johnson <[email protected]
>
Sent: Monday, April 1, 2024 7:02 PM
977
To: Eduardo Martinez <[email protected]>; Claudia Jimenez <[email protected]>; Melvin Willis <[email protected]>; Eva Mann <[email protected]>; Lina Velasco <[email protected]>; Bisa French <[email protected]> Cc: Shasa Curl <[email protected]>; City Clerk Dept User <[email protected]>; Leisa Johnson <[email protected]> Subject: Questions for Consent Calendar Item W.3.a - Moratorium for new tobacco retailers
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
Good evening Mayor Martinez, Vice Mayor Jimenez, Councilmember Willis, Director Velasco, Ms. Mann, and Chief French -
The other four councilmembers have been bcc’d in case anyone replies all.
Below is a summary of questions regarding the proposed moratorium for new tobacco retailers.
If these questions/concerns can all be addressed via email before tomorrow night’s City Council meeting, great. If not, then I am requesting that the item please be pulled, should no one else have already requested this.
1. Per the agenda report: “Currently, the City has 78 licensed tobacco retailers , which were issued licenses mostly by the Richmond Police Department’s former Regulatory Unit and most recently by Community Development’s Code Enforcement Division.”
How did staff derive this number?
Does it include any shop that has received a license in the past and whose licenses are current? This number is the renewal invoices sent in 2024 only. Only 38 of the 78 renewals have been paid and are current. The moratorium will allow renewals to be issued.
Or does this number also include tobacco retailers who don’t currently have valid licenses? This does not include any unpermitted retailers.
People have posted on social media at least one example of a smoke shop that doesn’t have a valid business license.
2. Per the agenda report: "In addition to special licensing for tobacco retailers, the City does not allow smoke shops in the City; however, complaints have been received that some have been established within the City. Smoke shops currently operating with a tobacco retailer’s license have not been required to obtain a conditional use permit (CUP), as business license issuance is not tied to zoning (or building) code compliance.” If the City does not allow smoke shops, then why were any granted a license to operate as a tobacco retailer? The smoke shop prohibition was adopted in 2016. Those existing prior are legal non-conforming uses. We believe some have established without proper city approvals. Enforcement actions will be pursued.
The CUP comment seems irrelevant if they aren’t even legal to begin with. The CUP process would also provide an opportunity to adopt site-specific conditions and a public notification process to give the public an opportunity to provide comment. The moratorium would prohibit any new tobacco retailer licenses to be issued until we study a new regulations, including potentially increasing the distance requirements between retailers to avoid an over saturation of retailers within the city.
3. Regulatory Unit staffing
RPD transferred the regulatory unit to Code Enforcement some time in 2021 or 2022. When exactly did this transfer happen? In 2021.
How long has the regulatory unit under either RPD or Code Enforcement not been appropriately staffed? When the regulatory unit was still under RPD, when exactly was the last time there was an assigned FTE to this unit prior to transferring it to Code Enforcement? Chief French will have to address this. We had one officer assigned in 2020. He focused mainly on marijuana dispensary compliance. As of 2021 we no longer have a regulatory unit and have not issued any permits.
As of January 2023, Code Enforcement had not hired any new personnel into the regulatory unit. Has anyone been hired to date since the transfer? If not, why? Code Enforcement does not have an established regulatory unit per se, as all Code Enforcement officers can be used to enforce the licensing requirements. We did hire one Code Enforcement Officer 1 in 2023, but the unit has also lost staff during this time and had staff out for various reasons. We have done two recruitment processes for Code Enforcement officers, including one with an outside firm. We are currently working with HR on another process. The market for trained officer is high so it’s been difficult to fill positions.
4. What was/is required by RPD/Code Enforcement, respectively, to issue an alcohol, tobacco or cannabis license.
Is there a special license required in addition to a business license? Yes, there it is a special license required called a tobacco retailers license. Alcohol retail sales require a CUP. Cannabis requires a CUP and Cannabis business permit.
Does licensing (new and annual renewal) require a paper review process only or does it also require an in-person inspection of the property? The ordinance does not require an inspection to occur prior to issuance of a tobacco retailers license. It does allow for compliance checks to confirm retailers are not selling any prohibited items and complying with local, state, and federal regulations regarding tobacco sales.
If the latter, who has been doing those inspections over the past several years when the Regulatory Unit hasn’t been staffed? Code Enforcement officers are assigned to do compliance checks and investigate complaints.
Are these inspections done in parallel with the Planning Division (see #5 below)? No. Only annual inspections for cannabis are done by Planning. Code inspects tobacco and alcohol. Planning is engaged by Code as needed.
5. Per the agenda report, “Tobacco regulations are generally enforced by the Code Enforcement Unit. The Planning Division enforces the licensing and land use components of tobacco businesses within the City.”
By law / RMC, how often are tobacco, alcohol and cannabis retailers required to be inspected and by whom? Current RMC regulations require annual inspection for cannabis and alcohol sales only. When we study new regulations for tobacco, we may want to change this for tobacco. Compliance checks for tobacco are allowed.
When was the last time inspections occurred? It varies based on the regulated substance. We are behind on compliance inspections for tobacco and alcohol given staffing.
When was the last time any enforcement action(s) occurred? Coordinated enforcement actions have not occurred in Code since we assumed responsibilities in 2021.
Are there currently any tobacco retailers & smoke shops within 300 ft of a school or youth-oriented facility? We believe there are and will study this further, but they may be operating without proper licensing.
6. How is the City planning to enforce regulations (existing &/or new) without the proper staffing to do so? This will be studied further and will be specified when new regulations are recommended.
7. Why doesn’t this moratorium extend to new retailers that fall under the oversight of an appropriately staffed Regulatory Unit, including tobacco, alcohol and cannabis? The proposed moratorium only addresses tobacco. This does no affect alcohol and cannabis. The moratorium would allow for enhanced regulations to be studied related to tobacco including possibly increasing the distance between retailers and also providing for a CUP process that will allow the public to be notified and provide comment throughout the process.
Hopefully staff can address these questions for the Council and Public either in advance of or at tomorrow’s City Council meeting.
Thank you.
Warm regards,
Leisa
978
cc22Oct2024 - prc
1 RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA,
October 22, 2024, 4:30 p.m.
Community Services Building
440 Civic Center Plaza
Richmond, CA 94804
_____________________________________________________________________ A. OPEN SESSION TO HEAR PUBLIC COMMENT BEFORE CLOSED SESSION The Open Session was called to order by Vice Mayor Claudia Jimenez at 4:31 p.m.
B. ROLL CALL
Present: Councilmembers Gayle McLaughlin, Melvin Willis, Cesar Zepeda, and Vice Mayor Claudia Jimenez. Absent: Councilmember Soheila Bana arrived after adjourning to Closed Session. Councilmember Doria Robinson and Mayor Eduardo Martinez were absent for the entire meeting.
C. CLOSED SESSION
C.1 LIABILITY CLAIMS (Government Code Section 54956.9)
• Claimant: Carmen Santana
• Claimant: Harbor Gate Partners, LP
• Claimant: Terminal One Development, LLC.
C.2 CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS (Government Code
Section 54957.6)
• Agency Representatives: Sharrone Taylor and Jack Hughes Employee organizations:
1. SEIU Local 1021 Full Time Unit and Part Time Unit
2. IFPTE Local 21 Mid-Level Management Unit and Executive Management Units
3. Richmond Police Officers Association RPOA
4. Richmond Police Management Association RPMA
5. IAFF Local 188
6. Richmond Fire Management Association RFMA
C.3 CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (Government Code Section 54956.8)
• Property: 1689 Regatta Boulevard
Agency Negotiators: Nannette Beacham and Anne Lanphar
Negotiating Parties: DiCon Fiberoptics, Inc.
Under negotiation: Price and terms of payment
C.4 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION (paragraph (1) of Subdivision [d] of Government Code Section 54956.9) • Winehaven v. City of Richmond
D. PUBLIC COMMENT BEFORE CLOSED SESSION (limited to items on the Closed Session agenda only)
Cordell Hindler gave comments regarding Item C.4
979
cc22Oct2024 - prc
2 E. ADJOURN TO CLOSED SESSION
The city council adjourned to Closed Session at 4:34 p.m., Closed Session adjourned at 6:32 p.m.
________________________________________________________ F. SPECIAL MEETING OF THE RICHMOND HOUSING AUTHORITY
The Special Meeting of the Richmond Housing Authority was called to order by Vice Chairperson Claudia Jimenez at 6:37 p.m.
G. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Vice Chairperson Jimenez led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
H. ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners Soheila Bana, Gayle McLaughlin, Melvin Willis, Cesar Zepeda, and Vice Chair Claudia Jimenez, . Absent: Commissioner Doria Robinson and Chairperson Eduardo Martinez were absent the entire meeting.
I. STATEMENT OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST
None.
J. REPORT FROM THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
Gabino Arredondo, Interim Housing Authority Executive Director, provided the report.
Link to view presentation: INTERIM EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT K. AGENDA REVIEW
No changes.
L. HOUSING AUTHORITY CONSENT CALENDAR
On motion of Commissioner Melvin Willis, seconded by Tenant Commissioner Jaycine Scott, approved the Housing Authority Consent Calendar by the following vote: Ayes:
Commissioners Soheila Bana, Gayle McLaughlin, Melvin Willis, Cesar Zepeda, and Vice Chair Claudia Jimenez. Noes: None. Abstentions: None. Absent: Commissioner Doria Robinson and Chairperson Eduardo Martinez.
L.1 Richmond Housing Authority (RHA) Cost Allocation Plan Approval ADOPT a resolution approving the Title 2 Code of Federal Regulations 200 Compliant Version Cost Allocation Plan to be implemented for Richmond Housing Authority (RHA) Budgeting (Fiscal Year 2024-2025) – Richmond Housing Authority/Finance Department (Gabino Arredondo 510-620-6606/Rita Martinez 510-621-1546).
Resolution No. 2200
L.2 Housing Authority Meeting Minutes
APPROVE the minutes of the June 18, 2024, Richmond Housing Authority/Richmond City Council joint special meeting and July 2, 2024, regular Richmond Housing Authority meeting - City Clerk's Office (Pamela Christian 510-620-6513).
M. HOUSING AUTHORITY PUBLIC HEARINGS
M.1 Richmond Housing Authority (RHA) Annual Plan
980
cc22Oct2024 - prc
3 HOLD a public hearing; ADOPT a resolution approving the Richmond Housing Authority (RHA) Annual Plan; and AUTHORIZE submission of the proposed Annual Plan to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) - Richmond Housing Authority (Gabino Arredondo 510-620-6606).
Housing Authority Secretary Pamela Christian announced that it was time to hold a public hearing to approve the Richmond Housing Authority Annual Plan and Authorize submission of the proposed Annual Plan to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Interim Housing Authority Executive Director Gabino Arredondo presented the annual plan. Link to view presentation: RHA
ANNUAL PLAN
Following the staff presentation, Vice Chair Jimenez opened the public hearing.
Cordell Hindler gave comments. Following the public comment, Vice Chair Jimenez closed the public hearing. There were no clarifying questions from the commissioners. On motion of Commissioner Melvin Willis, seconded by Commissioner Zepeda, adopted Resolution No. 2201 approving the Richmond Housing Authority Annual Plan; and authorized submission of the proposed Annual Plan to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development by the following vote: Ayes: Commissioners Soheila Bana, Gayle McLaughlin, Melvin Willis, Cesar Zepeda, and Vice Chair Claudia Jimenez. Noes: None.
Abstentions: None. Absent: Commissioner Doria Robinson and Chairperson Eduardo Martinez.
N. ADJOURNMENT
The special meeting of the Richmond Housing Authority adjourned by 6:49 p.m. _______________________________________________________ O. REGULAR MEETING OF THE RICHMOND CITY COUNCIL
The regular meeting of the Richmond City Council was called to order at 6:49 p.m. by Vice Mayor Claudia Jimenez.
P. ROLL CALL
Present: Councilmembers Soheila Bana, Gayle McLaughlin, Melvin Willis, Cesar Zepeda, and Vice Mayor Claudia Jimenez. Absent: Councilmember Doria Robinson and Mayor Eduardo Martinez were absent for the entire meeting.
Q. STATEMENT OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Councilmember Willis reported a conflict of interest with Item V .2.a (Project Labor Agreement for Neighborhood-Scale Building Decarbonization Project). He will recuse himself from any discussion or vote on the item.
R. AGENDA REVIEW
Item V .2.b (Proclamation Recognizing Transgender Day of Remembrance 2024) was removed from the Consent Calendar to be heard directly following the Report from the City Manager; correction to the contract term date for Item V .4.a (Port Contract with Moffatt and Nichol for Facilities Assessment) the term date was corrected to 06/30/2025; change to the contract total amount for Item V .6.c (Resolution to approve a contract with 4Leaf Inc. for the Sidewalk Vendor Ordinance Enforcement) the contract total amount was changed from $500,000 to $150,000; and Item X.4 (Update on the Race Equity Action Plan) was moved to be heard directly following Item X.1 (Presentation on Contra Costa Mosquito and Vector Control).
S. REPORT FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY OF FINAL DECISIONS MADE
DURING CLOSED SESSION
981
cc22Oct2024 - prc
4 C. CLOSED SESSION
C.1 LIABILITY CLAIMS (Government Code Section 54956.9)
• Claimant: Carmen Santana - Item discussed and direction was given to the negotiators
• Claimant: Harbor Gate Partners, LP - Item discussed and direction was given to the negotiators
• Claimant: Terminal One Development, LLC. - Item not discussed and deferred to a future meeting
C.2 CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS (Government Code Section 54957.6)
• Agency Representatives: Sharrone Taylor and Jack Hughes Employee organizations:
1. SEIU Local 1021 Full Time Unit and Part Time Unit
2. IFPTE Local 21 Mid-Level Management Unit and Executive Management Units
3. Richmond Police Officers Association RPOA
4. Richmond Police Management Association RPMA
5. IAFF Local 188
6. Richmond Fire Management Association RFMA
No reportable action
C.3 CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (Government Code Section 54956.8)
• Property: 1689 Regatta Boulevard
Agency Negotiators: Nannette Beacham and Anne Lanphar
Negotiating Parties: DiCon Fiberoptics, Inc.
Under negotiation: Price and terms of payment
Status of negotiations discussed and negotiators were directed to further negotiations
C.4 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION (paragraph (1) of Subdivision [d] of Government Code Section 54956.9) • Winehaven v. City of Richmond
Discussion on status of litigation
T. REPORT FROM THE CITY MANAGER (public comment allowed under Open Forum)
City Manager Shasa Curl provided a report. Link to view: CITY MANAGER'S REPORT
U. OPEN FORUM FOR PUBLIC COMMENT
(public comment on items that remain on the Consent Calendar or items not on the agenda - limited to 2 minutes unless otherwise specified - Back and forth dialogue with the Council is prohibited)
Cordell Hindler urged the council not to place so many lengthy items on the same agenda, he also informed the council that its attendance at galas within the City of Richmond was very important.
982
cc22Oct2024 - prc
5 Antwon Cloird gave comments regarding housing development within the City of Richmond for the unhoused and urged the council to contact him for a reliable and affordable green builder.
Eric Lerner, Blanca Retano, Zenaida Gomez, and Tim Frank gave comments in support of Item V .2.a. (Project Labor Agreement for the Clean Energy and Healthy Homes Project).
Mark Wassberg gave comments regarding Israel.
Anne Horton and Rosie Rendon gave comments regarding an incident with the Richmond Police Department when searching for a suspect in their neighborhood.
Jamin Pursell gave comments regarding the establishment of the Richmond Rainbow Pride.
Soheila Bana reported on her vacation to Japan; the unveiling of the Spring Street name change to Pedi Perez was scheduled for Saturday October 26, 2024, at 1:30 p.m., and the Richmond Gun Violence Reduction Initiative was partnering with Silence the Violence to create a safety stakeholder association - a Zoom meeting was scheduled for October 23, 2024, at 6 p.m. - contact [email protected] for the link and information.
Jessi Taran gave comments regarding Proposition 36 and the housing needed for the unhoused.
Jenny Garcia gave comments regarding the importance of voting.
V. CITY COUNCIL CONSENT CALENDAR
(All items placed under the Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and noncontroversial. These items will be enacted upon together with a motion and second, without discussion, of any member of the City Council, and each item shall be deemed to have received the action recommended.)
On motion of Councilmember Gayle McLaughlin, seconded by Councilmember Cesar Zepeda approved all items on the Consent Calendar (excluding item V .2.b - Proclamation Recognizing Transgender Day of Remembrance 2024 - heard separately) by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Soheila Bana, Gayle McLaughlin, Melvin Willis, Cesar Zepeda, and Vice Mayor Claudia Jimenez. Noes: None. Abstentions:
None. Absent: Councilmember Doria Robinson and Mayor Eduardo Martinez.
NOTE: Councilmember Melvin Willis recused himself on Item V .2.a (Project Labor Agreement for Neighborhood-Scale Building Decarbonization Project).
V. 1 City Attorney's Office
V .1.a Legal Services Agreement with Oppenheimer Investigations Group APPROVE a legal services agreement with Oppenheimer Investigations Group for a term of October 22, 2024, through September 30, 2027, for a total amount not to exceed $300,000 – City Attorney’s Office/Human Resources Department (Shannon Moore/Nickie Mastay/Sharrone Taylor 510-620-6600).
V. 2 City Council
V .2.a Project Labor Agreement for Neighborhood-Scale Building Decarbonization Project
ADOPT a resolution to support entering into a Project Labor Agreement (PLA) for the Richmond Clean Energy and Healthy Homes project and 983
cc22Oct2024 - prc
6 DIRECT staff to work with the Contra Costa Building Trades and Construction Council and other partners on this project to finalize such a PLA – Councilmembers Gayle McLaughlin (510-620-6636) and Doria Robinson (510-620-6568).
NOTE: Councilmember Melvin Willis recused himself from any discussion or vote on this item due to a conflict of interest.
Resolution No. 117-24
V .2.b Proclamation Recognizing Transgender Day of Remembrance 2024 PROCLAMATION recognizing Transgender Day of Remembrance 2024 that honors the memory of those whose lives were lost in acts of anti- transgender violence and to continue to invest in efforts to promote acceptance and to end violence towards transgender individuals – Councilmember Cesar Zepeda (510-620-6593).
The City Council presented the proclamation. Mark Wassberg gave comments in person. Bk Williams, Yenny Garcia, Jessi Taran, Nadine, and Jim Becker gave comments remotely.
V .2.c Return $75,000 to Prologis to Disburse to Organization Supporting Unhoused
DIRECT staff to issue a refund of $75,000 to Prologis to disburse directly to an organization of its choice for purposes of helping the unhoused with health and wellness needs – Councilmember Gayle McLaughlin (510-620- 6636).
V. 3 Community Development
V .3.a Richmond Industrial Safety Ordinance Amendments (RISO) Regarding Tank Terminals
ADOPT an ordinance (second reading) amending Chapter 6.43 of the Richmond Municipal Code to include specific requirements for tank terminals to afford additional public safety and protections against accidental releases from incidents - Community Development Department (Lina Velasco/Richard Diaz 510-620-6841).
Ordinance No. 10-24 N.S.
V. 4 Economic Development
V .4.a Port Contract with Moffatt and Nichol for Facilities Assessment ADOPT a resolution approving a budget amendment increasing the Port’s budget from the Port Fund by $134,000; and APPROVE a contract agreement with Moffatt and Nichol in the amount of $284,000 for a comprehensive facilities assessment of the Point Potrero Marine Terminal wharfs, graving basins, and piers, for a term ending June 30, 2025 – 984
cc22Oct2024 - prc
7 Economic Development Department (Charles Gerard 510-829- 2253/Lizeht Zepeda 510-620-6653).
NOTE: The contract term date was corrected in the contract to end 6/30/2025.
Adopted Resolution No. 118-24.
V .4.b Annual Arts Organization Allocation
APPROVE contracts with Nurturing Independence Through Artistic Development, Richmond Art Center, and East Bay Center for the Performing Arts, in the amount of $150,000 per organization per year, beginning July 1, 2024, through June 30, 2027, with two optional one-year extensions at an additional $150,000 per organization per extension year, to support collaborative arts and cultural programs in the City of Richmond, all subject to budget approval – Economic Development Department (Nannette Beacham 510-621-1306/Winifred Day 510-620- 6952).
V. 5 Fire Department
V .5.a Richmond fire boat “Victory” Repair Services and Maintenance APPROVE a sole-source contract with Bay Marine Boatworks dba Svendsen’s Bay Marine in an amount not to exceed $300,000, for a three- year term effective October 23, 2024, through October 22, 2027, with a two one-year extension option not to exceed an additional $200,000, for the extended term to provide repair and ongoing maintenance services – Fire Department (Chief Aaron Osorio 510-307-8021/Den Mark Marcelo 510-307-8038).
V. 6 Public Works
V .6.a Abatement Report from the Director of Public Works RECEIVE a written abatement report from the Director of Public Works - Public Works Department (Daniel Chavarria 510-620-5478).
V .6.b Resolution to Award a Contract with Arup US, Inc. for the Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) Fleet and Infrastructure Transition Plan
ADOPT a resolution to award a contract to Arup US, Inc. for the Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) Fleet and Infrastructure Transition Plan in an amount not to exceed $250,000 and APPROPRIATE funds in an amount not to exceed $250,000 in the Environmental and Community Investment Agreement (ECIA) Fund 1017 – Public Works Department (Mike Owyang 510-621-1363/Robert Armijo 510-620-5477/Daniel Chavarria 510-620- 5478).
Resolution No. 119-24
V .6.c Resolution to Approve a Contract with 4Leaf Inc for the Sidewalk Vendor Ordinance Enforcement
ADOPT a resolution authorizing staff to enter into an on-call contract with 4Leaf, Inc. for an amount not to exceed $500,000 $150,000 to support enforcement activities for the Sidewalk Vendor Ordinance – Public Works 985
cc22Oct2024 - prc
8 Department (Daniel Chavarria 510-620-5478/Robert Armijo 510-620- 5477/Junne Garcia 510-621-1332).
NOTE: The total contract amount was changed from $500,000 to $150,000.
Resolution No. 120-24
W. PUBLIC HEARINGS
W.1 Rename Virginia Playlot to Floria Evans Park
City Clerk Pamela Christian announced that pursuant to public notice, it was time to hold a public hearing to rename Virginia Playlot to Floria Evans Park and waive cost recovery fees – Councilmember Doria Robinson (510-620-6568).
Deputy City Manager Lashonda White gave an overview.
Vice Mayor Jimenez declared the public hearing open.
The following individuals gave comments: Cordell Hindler, Antwon Cloird, Miranda Walker, Curtis Evans, Luther Evans, and Carretha Walker gave comments in person. Yenny Garcia gave comments remotely.
Vice Mayor Jimenez closed the public hearing. On motion of Councilmember Melvin Willis, seconded by Vice Mayor Jimenez adopted a resolution to rename Virginia Playlot to Floria Evans Park and waived cost recovery fees by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Soheila Bana, Gayle McLaughlin, Melvin Willis, Cesar Zepeda, and Vice Mayor Claudia Jimenez. Noes: None.
Abstentions: None. Absent: Councilmember Doria Robinson and Mayor Eduardo Martinez.
This item adopted Resolution No. 121-24
X. STUDY AND ACTION SESSION
X.1 Presentation on Contra Costa Mosquito and Vector Control RECEIVE a presentation from Contra Costa Mosquito and Vector Control - Mayor’s Office (Mayor Eduardo Martinez 510-620-5303).
Public Affairs Director of the Contra Costa Mosquito and Vector Control Nola Woods gave a presentation.
Link to view presentation: CONTRA COSTA MOSQUITO AND VECTOR
CONTROL PRESENTATION
The Contra Costa Mosquito and Vector Control would provide the city manager with a flyer to include in her City of Richmond Weekly Report.
X.2 Richmond Main Street Initiative Presentation
RECEIVE a presentation by Richmond Main Street Initiative (RMSI) on the Downtown Richmond Property and Business Improvement District (DRPBID) – Economic Development Department (Lizeht Zepeda 510-620-6653/Kyle Lam 510-620-6802/Nannette Beacham 510-620-1306).
Richmond Main Street Initiative Director Sarah Wally gave a presentation.
Link to view presentation: RICHMOND MAIN STREET PRESENTATION 986
cc22Oct2024 - prc
9 The following individuals gave comments in person: Cordell Hindler, Mark Wassberg, and Jamin Pursell. Jessi Taran gave comments remotely.
X.3 Presentation of Mid-year Report from the Richmond-Shimada Friendship Committee
PRESENTATION from the Richmond-Shimada Friendship Commission on mid- year activities and projects - Councilmember Cesar Zepeda (510-620-6593).
Chair of the Richmond-Shimada Commission Jamie Brown gave a presentation.
Link to view the presentation: RICHMOND-SHIMADA COMMISSION
PRESENTATION
X.4 Update on the Race Equity Action Plan
RECEIVE an update on the Race Equity Action Plan and provide direction to staff on next steps – Vice Mayor Claudia Jimenez (510-620-6565), Councilmembers Melvin Willis (510-412-2050), and Doria Robinson (510-620- 6568).
Trina Jackson-Lincoln, Project Coordinator in City Council Office, gave a presentation.
Link to view presentation: RACE EQUITY ACTION PLAN
The following individuals gave comments in person: Mark Wassberg, Cordell Hindler, Johana Gurdian, Damon Brown, and Alisha Sempler. Mohamed Taleb, Kerby Lynch, Nicki Beasley, and Roxanne Carillo Garza gave comments remotely.
On motion of Councilmember Melvin Willis, seconded by Councilmember Gayle McLaughlin directed staff to hire an equity officer, requested that the city manager direct department heads to go through training, and that each department be required to come up with a race equity statement. A friendly amendment was offered by Councilmember Soheila Bana to require measurable outcomes and data collection incorporated into the process, and to provide a matrix and plan. The friendly amendment was accepted by the maker and seconder of the motion. The motion passed by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Soheila Bana, Gayle McLaughlin, Melvin Willis, Cesar Zepeda, and Vice Mayor Claudia Jimenez. Noes: None. Abstentions: None. Absent: Councilmember Doria Robinson and Mayor Eduardo Martinez.
Y. REPORTS OF OFFICERS: REFERRALS TO STAFF, AND GENERAL REPORTS (INCLUDING AB 1234 REPORTS)(limited to two minutes per
Councilmember)(public comments allowed under Open Forum) Councilmember Cesar Zepeda reported he attended the Cal Cities Conference and Arbor Day.
Councilmember Gayle McLaughlin encouraged everyone to get out and vote in the November 5, 2024, election.
Councilmember Bana reported on notifications in place for fire evacuations.
Z. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 10:18 p.m., to meet again on Tuesday, November 19, 2024.
987
cc22Oct2024 - prc
10 Clerk of the City of Richmond Mayor
988
December 17, 2024
City Manager's Office
City Clerk’s Office
City Attorney’s Office
DATE: December 17, 2024
TO: Mayor Martinez and Members of the City Council
FROM:
Shasa Curl, City Manager
Pamela Christian, City Clerk
Shannon Moore, Chief Assistant City Attorney
Subject:
Draft Amendments to City Council Rules of Procedure and Order
FINANCIAL IMPACT: None
PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:
June 18, 2013
April 22, 2014
October 21, 2014
July 27, 2021
November 23, 2021
January 18, 2022
STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:
Staff is recommending changes to the City Council Rules of Procedure and Order. The proposed changes will bring the City Council meeting schedule in line with California cities' standard practices, provide staff sufficient time to review Councilmember agenda items and align the
Council recess with optimal time for Councilmembers and Staff members to take a summer vacation.
AGENDA
REPORT
989
December 17, 2024
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
DIRECT staff to prepare amendments the City Council
Rules of Procedure and Order to: 1) hold two City
Council meetings each month; 2) require
Councilmembers to submit agenda items by noon two
Fridays before the Thursday publication of the agenda; 3) commence the Council recess in July to align to better
with the school district’s time off; and, 4) develop minor procedural changes to comport with how the meetings
are currently conducted - City Manager’s Office/City
Clerk’s Office/City Attorney’s Office (Shasa Curl/Pamela Christian/Shannon Moore 510-620-6512).
DISCUSSION:
The City Manager’s Office held several meetings with the City Clerk and City Attorney’s Offices to develop and propose amendments to the City Council Rules of Procedure and Order to improve staff morale and develop recommendations to streamline the process for agenda review of Council items. Over the course of these meetings, three key amendments are recommended.
First, to align the City of Richmond with the practices of other California cities, staff recommend that the City Council limit regular Council meetings to no more than two each month. The City of Richmond is one of a few cities in California that holds three monthly meetings (Survey attached).
Second, the current deadline for Councilmembers is noon on Wednesday before the agenda is published on Thursday. This current deadline does not provide the City Manager, City Attorney’s Office, or the impacted departmental personnel with adequate time to properly conduct an administrative and legal review of agenda items prior to Council meetings. Moving the deadline to noon the two Fridays before the publication of the agenda aims to provide staff with sufficient time to review and process City Council agenda items properly.
Third, the current City Council recess (August/September) does not align with the school district’s vacation schedule. Councilmembers and City staff frequently schedule vacations during the summer break, which leads to decreased staffing during the summer months. Moving the Council recess to the summer months will allow departments to submit and review agenda items while fully staffed, improve staff efficiency, and better utilize staff resources. It is also recommended that no City Council meetings be held during City observed holiday weeks to allow City Council members and staff to attend community events and celebrations.
990
December 17, 2024
In sum, the City Manager, City Clerk, and City Attorney’s Office recommend amending the City Council Rules to:
1. Holding only two Council meetings a month – suggest the 1st and 3rd Tuesday
2. Commencing Council recess to include July and August to align with the school district’s time off suggest: (City Council recess period shall begin the first Tuesday in July and reconvene in September on the first Tuesday following the week of Labor Day), and refrain from holding City council meetings during City observed holidays (e.g., last week’s meeting during Thanksgiving week); and
3. Councilmembers to follow amended agenda deadlines (removing the Wednesday at noon deadline before the Thursday publication) and moving to noon two Fridays before the Thursday publication of the agenda.
4. Develop minor procedural changes to comport with how the meeting is currently conducted.
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
Attachment 1 – Survey of City Council Meeting Frequency - Cities in California
991
JURISDICTION # OF MEETINGS PER MONTH NOTES
Moraga/Orinda Fire District 1 one per month
City of Santa Cruz 2 2nd and 4th Tuesdays
City of Antioch 2
Two meetings per month - only one meeting in July
for summer break and one meeting in December
City of Berkeley 2
we do not meet in August so a few other months
have three meetings
City of Chowchilla 2
Regular meetings on the 2nd and 4th Tuesdays of
each month
City of Clayton 2 Two regular meetings per month
City of Danville 2
We have 2 regular meetings (evening) and 1 study
session (morning). Those are the regularly
scheduled meetings on the calendar.
City of El Cerrito 2
City of Fowler 2 The first and third Tuesdays per month City of Hercules 2
Two per month- With, August, December and
November being the exception. We only hold 1
approved meeting during these months.
City of Lafayette 2
Lafayette has two regular meetings per month. We
try to have only one meeting in August and
December.
City of Laguna Beach 2
City of Lake Elsinore 2 Two council meetings per month.
City of Live Oak 2
1st and 3rd Wednesday of each month unless the
meeting falls on a holiday
City of Livermore 2
We hold 2, the second and fourth Monday. On
occasion we will have a Special Meeting
City of Los Banos 2 1st and 3rd Wednesday of each month City of Luguna Hill 2
We hold 2 a month and the second one is subject
to cancellation if there are not sufficient items for
the agenda.
NUMBER OF COUNCIL MEETINGS PER MONTH BY NUMBER OF MEETINGS/ JURISDICTION - AS OF 12-9-24
992
JURISDICTION # OF MEETINGS PER MONTH NOTES
NUMBER OF COUNCIL MEETINGS PER MONTH BY NUMBER OF MEETINGS/ JURISDICTION - AS OF 12-9-24 City of Martinez 2
1st and 3rd Wednesday - This year we consistently
had double meetings each day, with a study
session or closed session preceding the Regular
meeting. There has been a lot of chatter of
scheduling additional meetings off schedule as
there’s so much coming through and not enough
time with 2 Wednesdays
City of Montebello 2
Two meetings per month. It is the second and
fourth Wednesday of the month
City of Monterey 2
We have two regular meetings per month, and 10
months out of the year there is also one special
meeting per month. Then, of course, occasionally
special meetings must be added in some kind of
urgent scenario.
City of Napa 2
City of Napa meets regularly twice a month,
however, our Charter and Code state “shall meet
regularly at least once a month.” So we have some
flexibility if need be.
City of Newark 2
City of Orinda 2
City of Pacific Grove 2
The first and third Wednesdays (two each month),
with the exception of January due to the holidays.
This year (new Mayor), we are leaving July open all
month for vacations!
City of Paso Robles 2
Two regular meetings a month on the first and third
Tuesdays. We usually only have one meeting in
July and we will occasionally cancel the meeting
the week of the Cal Cities Annual Conference if a
majority of our councilmembers will be attending
City of Pinole 2 Two per month
993
JURISDICTION # OF MEETINGS PER MONTH NOTES
NUMBER OF COUNCIL MEETINGS PER MONTH BY NUMBER OF MEETINGS/ JURISDICTION - AS OF 12-9-24 City of Pismo Beach 2
Two regular meetings per month, plus special
meetings and closed sessions as needed.
Factoring in all meeting types, we hold around 50
meetings per year.
City of Pleasant Hill 2 1st and 3rd Monday of each month City of Port Hueneme 2
Two meetings per month, first and third Mondays of
the month
City of San Bernadino 2 Two special meetings as needed.
City of San Bruno 2
2 regular meetings a month. Every 2nd and 4th
Tuesday of the month
City of San Carlos 2
city council meets twice a month and typically takes
off 2 meetings in the summer and 1 meeting in
December
City of San Gabriel 2
City of San Juan Capistrano 2
We hold 2 meetings monthly as part of our regular
schedule
City of San Leandro 2
1st and third Mondays. on the second Monday of
each month we hold a work session, which is for
presentations, no action is taken at those meetings
City of San Pablo 2 Two meetings per month
City of Santa Ana 2
Two meetings per month per its adopted Rules and
Procedures Resolution. Special meetings can be
called as needed and Council adopts an annual
calendar of meetings each November, during which
they often cancel several regularly-scheduled
meetings, resulting in some months having only
one meeting.
City of Seal Beach 2
Two meetings per month, with the exception of
July, August, November & December – one
meeting only
994
JURISDICTION # OF MEETINGS PER MONTH NOTES
NUMBER OF COUNCIL MEETINGS PER MONTH BY NUMBER OF MEETINGS/ JURISDICTION - AS OF 12-9-24 City of Slovang 2
Our charter has us for two meetings each month.
The Second and Fourth Monday of each month
City of South Lake Tahoe 2
We are holding 20 in 2025. We aggressively
support a life/work balance, so staff don’t get
burned out
City of Stanton 2
Two meetings each month, except for the month of
December in which we only hold one meeting.
Scheduled: 2nd and 4th Tuesday of each month
except for the 4th Tuesday in December
City of Thousand Oaks 2 Thousand Oaks, we have two meetings a month City of Torrance 2
We used to meet every week, now we meet twice a
month. Once in a while, an additional meeting will
be added, however, we are mostly twice a month.
City of Union City 2 Two meetings per month
City of Upland 2
Two council meetings per month. The second
meeting in August and December is permanently
canceled by resolution
City of Vacaville 2 Two regular meetings per month
City of Vallejo 2
Per our charter, we are required to hold 40
meetings per year and at least 2 per month. This
can include both regular and special meetings. I
believe by end of this year, we will have held 23
regular meetings and a large number of special to
put our total close to 50 meetings for the year.
City of Victorville 2 1st and 3rd Tuesday of each month.
City of Walnut Creek 2
995
JURISDICTION # OF MEETINGS PER MONTH NOTES
NUMBER OF COUNCIL MEETINGS PER MONTH BY NUMBER OF MEETINGS/ JURISDICTION - AS OF 12-9-24 City of West Hollywood 2
Two City Council meetings per month (1st and 3rd
Monday).
City of Yorba Linda 2 First and third Tuesdays
City of Pittsburg 2 Two meetings per month
City of San Ramon 2 Two meetings per month
Temple City 2
City of San Luis Obispo 2
Twice a month, on the 1st and 3rd Tuesday.
However, we often host Special Meetings and
Closed Sessions outside of that schedule.
The Town of San Anselmo 2
During July, August, November and December only
one (1) meeting. We are a small jurisdiction of
13,000 resident
Town of Yountsville 2
Two per month on the 1st and 3rd Tuesday of each
month
City of Concord 3
Three regular meetings per month. Dark in July –
two meetings in November, December, and August
City of Fremont 3
The first three Tuesdays of each month. However,
they do not meeting in August.
City of Richmond 3 1st, 3rd, and 4th Tuesday each month City of Sacramento 5 Five meetings per month
996
December 17, 2024
Library and Community Services
DATE: December 17, 2024
TO: Mayor Martinez and Members of the City Council
FROM:
LaShonda White, Deputy City Manager – Community
Services
Lori Reese-Brown, Project Manager
Subject:
Second Amended Contract between the City of Richmond
and Trans Metro Inc. for On-Call Paratransit Services
FINANCIAL IMPACT: The contract will be funded through Measure J allocations designated for paratransit services in West Contra Costa County (Fund 1003). Measure J funds are
disbursed biannually by the Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) and are earmarked for transit services supporting seniors and disabled individuals. Funds are
specifically allocated for use by transit providers serving qualified residents in the incorporated and
unincorporated areas of West County.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:
September 12, 2023
STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:
The contract between the City of Richmond and Trans
Metro Inc. (TMI) is the second amended contract to
increase the contract amount for the continuation of
ridership support to reduce service gaps in ridership for residents in the incorporated and unincorporated areas of West Contra Costa County.
AGENDA
REPORT
997
December 17, 2024
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
APPROVE the second amended contract with Trans
Metro Inc. (TMI), to support paratransit van services for seniors and individuals with disabilities residing in
Richmond and in municipalities in West County, in an
amount not to exceed $140,000, for a total contract
amount not to exceed $400,000, extending the term
through December 31, 2025 - Community Services
(LaShonda White 510-620-6828/ Lori Reese 510-620-
6869).
DISCUSSION:
Since its inception in 1976, the mission of the R-Transit paratransit service has been to offer safe, reliable transportation to seniors (aged 55 and older) and disabled individuals (aged 18 and older). This service supports individuals’ access to community services and activities, promoting their ability to live independently.
Since March 2018, R-Transit users have been able to utilize LYFT services under a partnership between the City and LYFT, providing riders with multiple transportation options—LYFT, paratransit vans, and Richmond RIDES—to accommodate various travel needs. The LYFT contract was renewed in 2023 to continue these options. For personal and medical appointments, clients may select between LYFT and the City’s paratransit service. Due to the limited number of available City van drivers, clients have increasingly been encouraged to use LYFT. However, as Measure J funding requires annual reporting of ridership data, the City has determined that certain residents in incorporated and unincorporated areas have been underserved. Consequently, the City must provide evidence of outreach and service to eligible residents in these areas to comply with Measure J guidelines.
In April 2023, the city released a Request for Proposals (RFP) twice to seek qualified firms. A selection panel, including Councilmember Zepeda, two members of the Richmond Commission on Aging, and one City staff member reviewed and evaluated the proposals. Trans Metro Inc. received the highest ranking.
The original contract term began on September 13, 2023 through September 30, 2024.
The first amendment extended the contract through December 31, 2024, slightly amended the scope to remove outreach services, and increased the contract by $10,000. The second amendment will increase the contract by $140,000 and extend the term to December 31, 2025. The contract with Trans Metro Inc. will enhance the City’s compliance with Measure J requirements, support the Paratransit Coordinating Council (PCC) recommendations, and fulfill the CCTA’s standards for funding approval. Trans Metro Inc. will supplement the efforts of the City’s two paratransit drivers by providing service across five cities to promote existing services and potentially increase ridership. 998
December 17, 2024
The amended contract will ensure adherence to Measure J guidelines, and adequate service for users. Trans Metro Inc.’s services will also provide essential coverage during periods when City van drivers are unavailable (e.g., due to vacation or sick leave).
The approval of this contract with Trans Metro Inc. represents a strategic step toward meeting the transportation needs of Richmond’s senior and disabled residents, ensuring continuity and accessibility in paratransit services. By supplementing existing services, the partnership will allow the City to meet its Measure J obligations while supporting the independence and mobility of qualified users in West Contra Costa County. The collaboration with Trans Metro Inc. will enhance service capacity, strengthen compliance with regulatory guidelines, and ensure a reliable transportation network that adapts to the needs of our community.
SYNERGISTIC POLICIES:
The policies that support this request are found in the City’s General Plan Climate Action Plan and the Circulation Element where it states as follows:
“Richmond is served by a modern, interconnected, multimodal transportation system.
The city builds on its role as a regional transportation hub, connecting people to destinations throughout the Bay Area and maintaining efficient movement of goods through port and rail operations. Richmond’s circulation system links key regional destinations via convenient freeway access, a trail system, public transportation services including bus (AC Transit), Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) and train (Amtrak).
A bustling ferry terminal provides means for all Richmond residents to travel to and from San Francisco and other Bay Area destinations. Richmond’s grid-based network of streets balances modes of travel, supports pedestrian and bicycle connectivity, transit accessibility and a smooth flow of vehicular traffic. The city is easily navigable with clear directional signage and barrier-free links connecting all neighborhoods. Many residents rely on walking, bicycling and transit. These travel options are supported by attractive streetscapes, pedestrian amenities, connected hubs and reliable bus service.
Crosswalks, sidewalks, traffic calming features, multimodal trails and designated bike routes further provide safe and comfortable conditions for pedestrians and cyclists.”
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
Attachment 1 – Trans Metro Fully Executed Contract (Original Contract) Attachment 2 – Trans Metro Contract Amendment No. 1 ($10,000) Attachment 3 – Trans Metro Contract Amendment No. 2 ($140,000) 999
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.
Community Services
Lori Reese-Brown, Project Manager
[email protected]
(510) 620-6869
8729
6635
Contract between the City of Richmond and Trans Metro Inc. to support transportation services for seniors and disabled persons during City business hours.
Trans Metro Inc.
626 23rd Street
Richmond, CA 94804
Faiz Khan
(415) 513-5777
[email protected]
4004-6163
December 31, 2023
September 12, 2023
September 30, 2024
250,000.00
✔
DocuSign Envelope ID: 0ACA229A-4F1C-4055-B28F-0B5A1C0E01C4 1000
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:
B y :
City Clerk
(* The Corporation Chief Financial Officer,
Secretary or Assistant Secretary should sign below)
Approved as to form:
B y :
B y : T i t l e :
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
Trans Metro Inc.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 0ACA229A-4F1C-4055-B28F-0B5A1C0E01C4 President
9/22/2023
9/22/2023
CFO
Mayor
1001
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:
The Trans Metro team shall meet with City of Richmond (City) specific transportation project goals and expected outcomes for outreach and transporting resident users in the unincorporated and incorporated areas of west Contra Costa County. Contractor shall meet the goals as outlined in its proposal attached hereto and shall provide quarterly reports for meeting the objectives and goals for annual reporting to the Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA), and the West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee (WCCTAC) • Identify any critical local or regional issues
• Identify project contacts and establish interface protocols • Implement the work plan project schedule and refine as required (outreach) • Identify all contacts and stakeholders (outreach)
Transport client users to personal and medical appointments as necessary (8:30am-4:30pm; Monday - Friday) within the service area of west Contra Costa County ONLY.
The City Project Manager and Trans Metro Inc. will discuss the project, task, budget, and schedule progress with the City and, as necessary, other consultants. The City will be responsible for drafting the agenda. Trans Metro will be responsible for the meeting notes and meeting minutes for each meeting.
Trans Metro will be responsible for meeting the task budget and schedule, Outreach, Transportation, and Project Management as describe in its scope of work submitted and approved by the City to authorize this contract.
• (See attached Trans Metro Scope of Services).
Project Manager
Trans Metro Inc.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 0ACA229A-4F1C-4055-B28F-0B5A1C0E01C4 1002
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 PA YMENT 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 Contra ctor 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 a fter 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.
Lori Reese-Brown, Project Manager
Trans Metro Inc.
Community Services
Lori Reese-Brown, Project Manager
DocuSign Envelope ID: 0ACA229A-4F1C-4055-B28F-0B5A1C0E01C4 1003
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:
Trans Metro Inc.
Trans Metro Inc.
Lori Reese-Brown, Project Manager
440 Civic Center Plaza
Faiz Khan, Project Manager
626 23rd Street
Richmond, CA 94804
DocuSign Envelope ID: 0ACA229A-4F1C-4055-B28F-0B5A1C0E01C4 1004
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, C opyrights 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, DocuSign Envelope ID: 0ACA229A-4F1C-4055-B28F-0B5A1C0E01C4 1005
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.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 0ACA229A-4F1C-4055-B28F-0B5A1C0E01C4 1006
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 C ontract's termination (or for any further period that is required by law) and until all Fede ral or State audits are complete and exceptions resolved for this contract's funding period. Upon request, CONTRACTOR shall make thes e 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.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 0ACA229A-4F1C-4055-B28F-0B5A1C0E01C4 1007
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 DocuSign Envelope ID: 0ACA229A-4F1C-4055-B28F-0B5A1C0E01C4 1008
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.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 0ACA229A-4F1C-4055-B28F-0B5A1C0E01C4 1009
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 DocuSign Envelope ID: 0ACA229A-4F1C-4055-B28F-0B5A1C0E01C4 1010
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 DocuSign Envelope ID: 0ACA229A-4F1C-4055-B28F-0B5A1C0E01C4 1011
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 DocuSign Envelope ID: 0ACA229A-4F1C-4055-B28F-0B5A1C0E01C4 1012
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 DocuSign Envelope ID: 0ACA229A-4F1C-4055-B28F-0B5A1C0E01C4 1013
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.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 0ACA229A-4F1C-4055-B28F-0B5A1C0E01C4 1014
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 DocuSign Envelope ID: 0ACA229A-4F1C-4055-B28F-0B5A1C0E01C4 1015
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.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 0ACA229A-4F1C-4055-B28F-0B5A1C0E01C4 1016
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.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 0ACA229A-4F1C-4055-B28F-0B5A1C0E01C4 1017
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):
N/A.
Trans Metro Inc.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 0ACA229A-4F1C-4055-B28F-0B5A1C0E01C4 1018
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.
Trans Metro Inc.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 0ACA229A-4F1C-4055-B28F-0B5A1C0E01C4 1019
___ Exhibit F
___ Section 8
City of Richmond - Insurance Requirements – Type 6:
Transportation Providers
Type 6 – Page 1 of 3
Revised: September 2011
In all instances where a CONTRACTOR or its representatives will be conducting business and/or providing services, 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 and Automobile 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 and Automobile 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 and automobile liability, 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) including coverage for bodily and personal injury, property damage, and products and completed operations.
2. Insurance Services Office Automobile Liability coverage (ISO Form CA 0001, Code 1, Any Auto)
3. Original and Separate Additional Insured Endorsements 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.
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 Self- Insure, signed by the California Department of Industrial Relations and Self- Insurance. 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.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 0ACA229A-4F1C-4055-B28F-0B5A1C0E01C4 1020
___ Exhibit F
___ Section 8
City of Richmond - Insurance Requirements – Type 6:
Transportation Providers
Type 6 – Page 2 of 3
Revised: September 2011
General Liability
(primary and excess limits
combined)
$1,000,000 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 ($2 million aggregate).
Policy shall also include coverage for liability arising out of the use and operation of any City-owned or City-furnished equipment used or operated by the CONTRACTOR, its personnel, agents or subcontractors.
Policy shall be endorsed to name the City of Richmond as an additional insured per the conditions detailed below.
Automobile Liability $5,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury and property damage.
Policy shall be endorsed to name the City of Richmond as an additional insured.
Required Policy Conditions
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.
Additional Insured Endorsement
Applicable to General and Auto 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 but not limited to bodily injury, deaths and property damage or destruction arising in any respect directly or indirectly in the performance of this contract.
For general liability coverage, ISO form CG 20 10 (11/85) or its equivalent is required. 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 coverage 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.
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 coverages and cover those insured in the underlying policies.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 0ACA229A-4F1C-4055-B28F-0B5A1C0E01C4 1021
___ Exhibit F
___ Section 8
City of Richmond - Insurance Requirements – Type 6:
Transportation Providers
Type 6 – 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 Manager. 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: 0ACA229A-4F1C-4055-B28F-0B5A1C0E01C4 1022
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 Service - Transportaiton
Lori Reese-Brown
[email protected]
(510) 620-6869
8729
6635
Amended contract between the City of Richmond and Trans Metro Inc. for the continuance of rideshare services for Paratransit clients.
1 Trans Metro Inc.
626 23rd Street
Richmond, CA 94804
Faiz Khan
(415) 513-5777
[email protected]
4004-6163
December 31, 2024
✔
September 12, 2023
September 12, 2023
September 30, 2024
250,000.00
Docusign Envelope ID: A4EF62E8-2016-4987-AB5C-8DCD955E9CC5 1023
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.
Trans Metro Inc.
Docusign Envelope ID: A4EF62E8-2016-4987-AB5C-8DCD955E9CC5 President
City Manager
11/4/2024
1024
Contract Amendment between the City of Richmond and
Amendment No. P.O./Contract No.
AMENDMENT PROVISIONS (TERM, PAYMENT LIMIT AND SERVICE PLAN)
1. Paragraph 2 (Term) of the Original Contract is hereby amended to extend the Contract term. Paragraph 2 of the Original Contract is amended to read as follows:
"2. Term. The effective date of this Contract is
____________________________________________________________ (Insert original contract commencement date)
and it terminates
___________________________________________________.
(Insert new contract termination date)
unless sooner terminated as provided herein."
2. Paragraph 3 (Payment Limit) of the Original Contract is hereby amended to increase the payment limit by $ . Paragraph 3 of the Original Contract is amended to read as follows:
"3. Payment Limit. City's total payments to Contractor under this Contract shall not exceed $ including expenses."
“The City of Richmond shall not pay for services that exceed the Contract Payment Limit without the prior written approval of the City Manager if the total Contract amount does not exceed $10,000 or without the prior approval of the City Council if the total Contract amount is over $10,000.”
3. The Service Plan (Exhibit A) of the Original Contract is hereby amended to include the following tasks and/or services:
Contract Amendment/EJ/TE 9-26-07
1 6635
September 12, 2023
December 31, 2024
10,000.00
260,000.00
Trans Metro Inc.
Through September 30, 2024, the Contractor will continue to perform all duties as outlined in the original contract.
Starting October 1, 2024, the Contract is no longer requested to provide any services related to outreach and marketing which were billed at $85 per hour. The services related to performing as needed transportation services to support the City's paratransit program and as outlined in the original contract, billed at $92 per hour for
8.5 hours per day at a rate $782 per day, are still required.
Docusign Envelope ID: A4EF62E8-2016-4987-AB5C-8DCD955E9CC5 1025
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 Service - Transportaiton
Lori Reese-Brown
[email protected]
(510) 620-6869
Amended contract between the City of Richmond and Trans Metro Inc. for the continuance of rideshare services for Paratransit clients.
✔
✔
2 Trans Metro Inc.
626 23rd Street
Richmond, CA 94804
Faiz Khan
(415) 513-5777
[email protected]
4004-6163
December 31, 2025
✔
September 12, 2023
September 12, 2023
September 30, 2024
250,000.00
1026
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.
Trans Metro Inc.
1027
Contract Amendment between the City of Richmond and
Amendment No. P.O./Contract No.
AMENDMENT PROVISIONS (TERM, PAYMENT LIMIT AND SERVICE PLAN)
1. Paragraph 2 (Term) of the Original Contract is hereby amended to extend the Contract term. Paragraph 2 of the Original Contract is amended to read as follows:
"2. Term. The effective date of this Contract is
____________________________________________________________ (Insert original contract commencement date)
and it terminates
___________________________________________________.
(Insert new contract termination date)
unless sooner terminated as provided herein."
2. Paragraph 3 (Payment Limit) of the Original Contract is hereby amended to increase the payment limit by $ . Paragraph 3 of the Original Contract is amended to read as follows:
"3. Payment Limit. City's total payments to Contractor under this Contract shall not exceed $ including expenses."
“The City of Richmond shall not pay for services that exceed the Contract Payment Limit without the prior written approval of the City Manager if the total Contract amount does not exceed $10,000 or without the prior approval of the City Council if the total Contract amount is over $10,000.”
3. The Service Plan (Exhibit A) of the Original Contract is hereby amended to include the following tasks and/or services:
Contract Amendment/EJ/TE 9-26-07
2 Trans Metro Inc.
September 12, 2023
December 31, 2025
140,000.00
400,000.00
Supplemental van services to transport seniors ages 55 and older, and adults with disabilities ages 18 and over, within the municipalities of West Contra Costa County. 1028
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
2 Trans Metro Inc.
9/30/2024
10,000.00
260,000.00
12/31/2024
✔
✔
140,000.00
12/31/2025
400,000.00
400,000.00
400,000.00
400,000.00
1029