Richmond City Council
July 1, 2025

Date

City Council

DATE: June 24, 2025
TO: Mayor Eduardo Martinez and Members of the City Council FROM:

Councilmember Jamelia Brown
Subject:

Develop and Launch a 6-month Pilot Program working-
titled, “Clean Richmond” Community Maintenance Crews
FINANCIAL IMPACT:

General Fund or available funding source identified by
staff

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

None known at this time.

STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:

Across Richmond, particularly in historically underserved neighborhoods, residents have consistently voiced urgent concerns about the persistent accumulation of litter, illegal dumping, graffiti, and unsafe conditions throughout our communities and in negl ected public spaces. While the
City’s Public Works team remains dedicated and
responsive, the growing volume of day -to-day
maintenance demands has stretched available resources
thin, limiting the City's ability to address smaller, yet highly visible, issues in a timely and consistent manner.

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

DIRECT staff to identify a funding source and issue a
Request for Proposals (RFP) to identify a nonprofit partner to launch a 6 -month pilot program working -titled “Clean Richmond” Community Maintenance Crew. The program
will prioritize Transitional Age Youth (TAY) and sunset six months after the start date . During the pilot period, staff will hire four full -time equivalent (FTE) positions in Public Works - Councilmember Jamelia Brown (510 -
AGENDA
REPORT
1916

Date
412-2050). This item was continued from the June 17,
2025, meeting.

DISCUSSION:

Richmond’s neighborhoods are at a critical juncture. There is an urgent and growing need to address the daily accumulation of trash, illegal dumping, graffiti, and visible blight across communities, particularly in historically underserved areas. Although the City’s Public Works Department remains committed and hardworking, the rising volume of day-to-day maintenance needs has stretched available resources thin, making it challenging to address the increased visible issue with the frequency our communities deserve.

Environmental psychology teaches us a powerful truth: what we consistently maintain, we consistently value. This shows that consistent maintenance of public spaces not only improves aesthetics but also trains public behavior. Studies suggest that when residents regularly see clean, well-maintained streets and parks, they are less likely to engage in littering, dumping, or vandalism. This “broken windows” principle—originally coined by social scientists James Q. Wilson and George L.

Kelling—demonstrates that clean, cared-for spaces reinforce positive community norms and expectations, while neglected spaces invite further neglect.

The Clean Richmond pilot program meets this moment. By hiring, training, and deploying Richmond residents to steward their own neighborhoods, we can immediately improve our city’s most neglected areas while transforming long-term community behavior. Clean Richmond is more than a beautification effort; it is a declaration that every neighborhood matters, every resident matters, and every block deserves to be seen, cared for, and protected with the intended purpose of:
 Improving safety, cleanliness, and walkability of our neighborhoods, key corridors, parks, and alleys
 Boost community morale and neighborhood pride
 Provide meaningful employment opportunities, especially for residents traditionally marginalized from the workforce
1917

Date
 Relieve Public Works from smaller daily maintenance tasks, enabling them to prioritize major infrastructure projects
This model builds on the proven success of initiatives like Urban Alchemy in San Francisco and Los Angeles, the Urban Compassion Project in West Hollywood, and Richmond’s own Pogo Park Maintenance Team— showing that consistent, community-driven stewardship can transform public spaces, reduce blight, rebuild trust in government services, and restore neighborhood pride. By embedding visible, local maintenance crews, these initiatives have demonstrated lasting improvements in public safety, perception, and community engagement.

In addition to adult staffing, through our nonprofit management partner, Clean Richmond could offer high school students and youth on probation the ability to volunteer on weekends to:
 Fulfill required community service hours
 Develop a sense of civic pride and responsibility
 Build positive connections with peers, mentors, and city leadership This youth engagement component also supports the City’s maintenance efforts and empowers Richmond’s next generation by providing young people with meaningful opportunities to contribute to their community, develop leadership skills, and strengthen the City's investment in both its physical spaces and social fabric.

Through the Clean Richmond initiative, the City has the opportunity to immediately uplift our neighborhoods, restore visible pride in underserved areas, reduce blight across key corridors, and build a long-term behavioral shift where residents and visitors alike respect and care for Richmond’s public spaces—every day, on every block.

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:

Attachment 1: Proposed Clean Richmond Pilot Budget and Compensation Plan (If needed).

Attachment 2: Proposed Timeline for Clean Richmond Pilot Launch (If needed). 1918
Attachment 1: Proposed Clean Richmond Pilot Budget and Compensation Plan
Duration: 6-month Pilot Program
Work Schedule: 20 hours/week
Crew Members: 10
Team Leads: 2
Personnel Compensation
Role Hourly Rate Weekly
Hours
# of
Workers
Duration
(Weeks)
Total Cost
Crew
Members
$23 20 10 26 $119,600
Team Leads $25 20 2 26 $26,000
Subtotal $145,600
Supplies and Materials
Category Estimated Cost
Safety Gear (vests, gloves, boots) $3,000
Cleaning Tools (brooms, pickers) $4,000
Graffiti Removal & Paint Supplies $3,000
Trash Bags, PPE, Misc. Consumables $2,000
Uniforms & Branded Apparel $2,000
Subtotal $14,000
Program Management & Training
Category Estimated Cost
Nonprofit Program Coordination/Admin $20,000
Initial & Ongoing Training Workshops $5,000
Background Checks, Insurance, Payroll $6,000
Subtotal $31,000
Total Estimated Budget
**TOTAL ESTIMATED BUDGET: $190,600**
1919
Attachment 2: Proposed Timeline for Clean Richmond Pilot Launch This timeline outlines the phases and milestones for launching and implementing the Clean Richmond 6-month pilot program.

Phase Activity Estimated Dates
Phase 1: Planning &
Approval
Council approval of pilot
and directive to issue RFP
June 17, 2025
RFP released to identify
nonprofit partner
June 24, 2025
RFP review and selection by
City staff
July 15, 2025
Nonprofit partner
agreement finalized
July 22, 2025
Phase 2: Program Setup Job descriptions created
and posted
July 29, 2025
Recruitment, interviews,
and onboarding
Aug 1–23, 2025
Staff and youth orientation
and training
Aug 26–30, 2025
Final preparation of
supplies, uniforms, tools
Aug 26–30, 2025
Phase 3: Pilot
Implementation
Clean Richmond crews
deployed citywide
Sept 2, 2025
Ongoing community clean-
up and maintenance
Sept 2, 2025 – Feb 28, 2026
Phase 4: Evaluation &
Reporting
1st Quarterly Report to
Council
October 15, 2025
2nd Quarterly Report to
Council (midpoint)
December 10, 2025
3rd & Final Report with
Evaluation
March 10, 2026

1920

June 17, 2025

City Council

DATE: June 17, 2025
TO: Mayor Martinez and Members of the City Council
FROM:

Councilmember Soheila Bana
Councilmember Doria Robinson (co-sponsor)
Subject:

Visibility, Preservation and Protection of City-Owned
Historic Buildings and Historically Significant Locations FINANCIAL IMPACT: Anticipated costs include staff time to coordinate the inventory, fabricate and install signage, and implement basic protective measures. These expenses may be
minimal, phased in and potentially offset by external
grants and partnerships.

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

None.

STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:

Richmond is home to many sites and structures of
architectural, cultural, and historical significance that reflect the city’s diverse and vibrant past. However, two recent fires have highlighted the vulnerability of these assets:
 On April 25, 2023, the privately owned International
Hotel which was one of Richmond’s most historic
buildings tied to the legacy of the Pullman porters,
was completely destroyed by fire, resulting in the loss of an irreplaceable cultural asset.
 On May 23, 2025, the Sakai house one of 3 historic
Mira Flores structures, which is also privately owned
and is located on a site historically linked to
Richmond’s Japanese American and agricultural
history and preservation efforts, sustained
significant fire damage.

AGENDA
REPORT
1921

June 17, 2025
These events have drawn public concern and
emphasized the need for Richmond to take a proactive
approach to preserving its historical resources.

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

DIRECT City staff to work with the Historic Preservation Commission and community groups to:
 Formalize and publicly share a verified list of city- owned historic buildings and historically significant
locations.
 Create a process to accept nominations, review
and if warranted, install commemorative signage
on City-owned historic structures and important
locations of cultural memory (e.g., the former site
of the International Hotel). Additionally, the City
should offer to coordinate and assist with the
installation of plaques or historical markers for
privately owned historic buildings and sites,
provided the property owners are willing. This will
help commemorate important places regardless of
ownership and ensure the community's history
remains visible and celebrated.
 Develop and implement basic preservation
measures to protect city-owned historic buildings
from vandalism and fire damage.
 Explore grant and partnership opportunities to
support preservation efforts, with support from the
Historic Preservation Commission and local
history organizations.
 Create a staff led and City Council approved
process to evaluate whether any of the identified
historic buildings require additional site-specific
protection measures that would involve new
budget allocations. Rather than mandating uniform
maintenance rules, evaluate each structure’s
preservation needs individually, based on
historical significance, community interest, and
available resources.
 Provide a status update to the City Council within
180 days on progress made, challenges
encountered, and next steps for implementation -
Councilmember Soheila Bana (510-672-
3490)/Councilmember Doria Robinson (510-672-1387).

1922

June 17, 2025
DISCUSSION:

To ensure Richmond honors and preserves its history in a meaningful and actionable way, the following steps are proposed:
 Inventory & Visibility: Work with the Historic Preservation Commission and other community groups to verify and maintain a public inventory of historic buildings and historically significant sites both those that are city owned and privately owned. Ensure the inventory clearly indicates current ownership.  Commemorative Signage: Create a process to accept nominations, review and if warranted, install commemorative signage on city-owned historic structures and important locations of cultural memory (e.g., the former site of the International Hotel). Additionally, the City should offer to coordinate and assist with the installation of plaques or historical markers for privately owned historic buildings and sites, provided the property owners are willing. This will help commemorate important places regardless of ownership and ensure the community's history remains visible and celebrated.
 Protection Measures: Implement basic, cost-effective measures to protect high- priority sites, such as lighting, fire-resistant landscaping, fencing, and, where feasible, surveillance equipment.
 Case-by-Case Approach: Rather than mandating uniform maintenance rules, evaluate each structure’s preservation needs individually, based on historical significance, community interest, and available resources.  Funding & Collaboration: Seek preservation grants and engage community partners such as the Richmond Museum of History to support ongoing efforts and minimize fiscal impact.

This approach balances action with practicality, ensuring that Richmond’s historical legacy is honored without placing unsustainable financial burdens on the City.

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:

None

1923

June 24, 2025

City Council

DATE: June 24, 2025
TO: Mayor Martinez and Members of the City Council
FROM:

Councilmember Jamelia Brown
Councilmember Sue Wilson (co-sponsor)
Subject:

Presentation from Futuro Health -Healthcare Career
Training
FINANCIAL IMPACT: Authorize up to $22,700 from the General Fund, identified grants, or other available funds. Staff will coordinate with Futuro Health to verify eligibility and disburse payments accordingly.

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

None.

STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:

Futuro Health, launched by SEIU-UHW and Kaiser
Permanente, provides tuition-free healthcare career
training. While program tuition is free, accepted
applicants are responsible for a $77 background check
and drug screening fee, and a $150 non-refundable
application fee ($227 total), which can be cost-prohibitive for low-income residents.

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

RECEIVE a presentation from Futuro Health and ADOPT
a resolution authorizing the allocation of up to $22,700 from an identified funding source to eliminate financial barriers for up to 100 Richmond residents accepted into Futuro Health career training programs by covering
mandatory application, background check, and drug
screening fees - Councilmember Jamelia Brown (510-
412-2050)/Councilmember Sue Wilson (510-609-2111).

AGENDA
REPORT
1924

June 24, 2025

DISCUSSION:

Futuro Health is a nonprofit organization established through a partnership between SEIU-United Healthcare Workers West (SEIU-UHW) and Kaiser Permanente. Futuro Health aims to build the largest network of credentialed allied health workers in the nation by providing tuition-free education and training programs for individuals aspiring to enter healthcare professions.

Futuro Health provides a range of tuition-free programs in high-demand allied health careers, including:
 Medical Assistant
 Pharmacy Technician
 Phlebotomy
 Emergency Room Technician
 Certified Nursing Assistant
 Community Health Worker
 Patient Care Technician
 Surgical Technologist
 Vocational Nursing
 Peer Support Specialist
 Healthcare Customer Service Paraprofessional

This proposal seeks to eliminate financial barriers for up to 100 Richmond residents by covering the $227 fee upon program acceptance. Supporting these costs aligns with the City’s workforce development goals and promotes access to high-demand healthcare careers.

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:

Attachment 1 – Futuro Health Program Presentation
Attachment 2 – Resolution
1925
Healthcare Opportunities
FUTURO
R A S H A A D A . P R I T C H E T T

S E I U - U H W
1926
1 4
2 5
3 7
6 SEIU-UHW and Futuro Health off er tuition-free
career pathways to build the future of healthcare
Partnership
Intro
8 9
1927
2 4
1 5
3 7
6 8
9 Why It Matters
Together, we’re growing our
healthcare workforce — helping future
professionals build careers without
debt!
1928
3 4
1 5
2 7
6 Minimum Eligibility
• Referred by an SEIU-UHW member
• 18+, CA resident, eligible to work
• GED or high school diploma
• Can study 3–5 hrs/day
• Reliable tech, internet, transportation
8 9
1929
4 3
1 5
2 7
6 8
9 Career
PathwaysMedical Assistant
(MA)
8-12 months | Clinical lab +
full-time externship
MAs support doctors & nurses
in both admin and clinical care.

Patient Care Technician
(PCT)
5-6 months | Includes acute
CNA certification
Support nursing staff: vital
signs, patient mobility, more.

Emergency Room
Technician
5-8 months | Clinical
externship required
Trained EMTs working in ER
settings. Not offered in
Sacramento.
1930
5 3
1 4
2 7
6 8
9 Career
Pathways
Patient Care Representatives
(PCR)100% Online | 4-6 months
Manage records, stats, and
assist patients with quality
care resources.

Healthcare Customer
Service Paraprofessional
100% Online | 5-6 months
Handle scheduling, insurance,
and patient registration.

Peer Support
Specialist
100% Online | 4 months
Help others recover using your
own lived experience.

EKG/ECG Technician
4 months | Hybrid
Run and manage heart rhythm
tests under physician
supervision.1931
6 3
1 4
2 7
5 Readiness Checklist
• Ready to start in 2 weeks
• In contact with success coach
• Committed to one program
• Willing to do full-time externship
• Have a working laptop
• Understand vaccination/job placement policy
8 9
1932
7 3
1 4
2 6
5 8
9 1933
8 3
1 4
2 6
5 7
9 In times of uncertainty there are
few things that are... one of
those things is free education
through Futuro!
Pathways are filled on first
come first serve basis.

Call to Action
1934
9 3
1 4
2 6
5 7
8 Contact Details
Phone :

[email protected]
415-306-1394
Email :

Thank
you
Name : Rashaad Pritchett
1935

Reso. No. _____

RESOLUTION NO. ______

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND AUTHORIZING THE ALLOCATION OF UP TO $22,700 FROM THE GENERAL

FUND TO SUPPORT RICHMOND RESIDENTS ACCEPTED INTO FUTURO

HEALTH CAREER TRAINING PROGRAMS

WHEREAS, Futuro Health is a nonprofit organization established by SEIU -United Healthcare Workers West (SEIU -UHW) in partnership with Kaiser Permanente to expand access to credentialed allied health careers through tuition-free education and training; and

WHEREAS, Futuro Health offers career pathways in high -demand healthcare fields, including Medical Assistant, Pharmacy Technician, Phlebotomy, Certified Nursing Assistant, Community Health Worker, Peer Support Specialist, and more; and

WHEREAS, although tuition is covered by the program, accepted applicants are required to pay a $150 non-refundable application fee and a $77 fee for a mandatory background check and drug screening, for a total of $227, which may serve as a barrier for low-income residents; and

WHEREAS, the City Council of Richmond recognizes the importance of investing in equitable workforce development and expanding access to sustainable career opportunities for youth, reentry residents, and historically underserved communities; and

WHEREAS, th e City Council desires to remove financial barriers for up to 100 Richmond residents accepted into Futuro Health programs by covering the required $227 fee upon acceptance; and

WHEREAS, this action is consistent with the City’s goals to support economic mobility, workforce readiness, and community health outcomes.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED , by the City Council of the City of Richmond, California, that the City hereby authorizes the allocation of up to $22,700 from the General Fund, identified grant s, or other available funding sources to cover the required fees for up to 100 Richmond residents accepted into Futuro Health career training programs.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that City staff are directed to work in coordination with Futuro Health to ver ify eligibility and acceptance, and to administer the disbursement of funds accordingly.

******************

***THE CLERK’S OFFICE WILL COMPLETE THE INFORMATION BELOW****

I certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Richmond at a regular meeting thereof held on Mmmm dd, yyyy, by the following vote:

AYES: AYES:

NOES:

ABSTENTIONS:

ABSENT:

CLERK OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND
(SEAL)
1936

Reso. No. _____

Approved:

Mayor

Approved as to form:

City Attorney

State of California }
County of Contra Costa : ss.

City of Richmond }

I certify that the foregoing is a true copy of Resolution No. _____, finally passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Richmond at a regular meeting held on Mmmm dd, yyyy.

_______________________________________
Pamela Christian, Clerk of the City of Richmond
1937

July 1, 2025
DocID #47141v2

Public Works

DATE: July 1, 2025
TO: Mayor Martinez and Members of the City Council
FROM:

Daniel Chavarria, PE, Director of Public Works
Robert Armijo, PE, Deputy Public Works Director / City
Engineer
Andy Cho, PE, Senior Civil Engineer
Subject:

Annual Update on Sidewalk Vending Program
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no direct financial impact associated with this informational update and request for Council direction. All current program activities, including consultant support, are funded through previously approved appropriations.

No additional funding is requested at this time.

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

June 25, 2024
July 2, 2024

STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:

City staff is providing a one-year update on the
implementation of the City’s Sidewalk Vending
Ordinance, which was adopted to promote public health,
safety, accessibility, and economic opportunity through the regulation of sidewalk vending. This update
summarizes key enforcement activities, vendor
engagement efforts, and lessons learned during the first year of implementation. City staff are seeking City
Council feedback on program direction and potential
ordinance revisions to inform a more comprehensive
update anticipated later this year
AGENDA
REPORT
1938

July 1, 2025
DocID #47141v2
RECOMMENDED ACTION:

RECEIVE a PRESENTATION on the first-year
implementation of the City’s Sidewalk Vending Program
and PROVIDE DIRECTION to staff regarding program
priorities and potential revisions to the ordinance – Public Works (Andy Cho 510-620-6547/Robert Armijo 510-620-
5477).

DISCUSSION:

On July 2, 2024, the City Council adopted a Sidewalk Vending Ordinance, codified at Richmond Municipal Code Chapter 7.42, to align with State law (SB 946) and promote public health, safety, accessibility, and economic opportunity through the regulation of sidewalk vending. The ordinance established requirements including the need for a special business permit, operational and locational standards, food vending provisions, and enforcement protocols. On the same date, the City Council adopted a companion resolution establishing fees, fines, and administrative penalties to support program implementation.

Following adoption, staff launched a coordinated, multi-departmental effort to implement the ordinance. This included a sustained education and outreach campaign aimed at informing sidewalk vendors of the new regulations and helping them come into compliance. The Mobile Vendor Plaza flyers and informational packets—including permit applications, regulations, and a map of suggested vendor locations—have been distributed during outreach to sidewalk vendors.

Additional meet and confer is needed since the current enforcement of the sidewalk vendor ordinance is within the public right of way, and as such, within the Department of Public Works. In the interim, Consultant 4Leaf, Inc., is under contract with the Public Works and provides up to 40 hours per week of field-based enforcement and outreach.

The consultant’s consistent presence and multilingual engagement have been instrumental in building relationships with vendors, especially those with limited familiarity with City requirements.

Initial implementation has revealed both successes and challenges. While many vendors have demonstrated a willingness to comply, sustained outreach, translated materials, and technical assistance have been necessary to support that compliance.

Interdepartmental coordination—particularly with the City Manager’s Office, Community Services Department, Police Department, Economic Development Department, Community Development, and Contra Costa County Health—has been essential in navigating the permitting process, supporting food vendors, and addressing public health and safety concerns.

Program Statistics (Fiscal Year 2024–25):
 Number of sidewalk vending permits issued: 14
 Total vendor encounters by enforcement staff: 303
1939

July 1, 2025
DocID #47141v2
 Number of Notices of Violation issued: 298
 Fines collected: $0

Despite the volume of citations, the City has not collected fines from vendors. This is primarily due to the difficulty of confirming vendor identities in the field, limited authority to compel payment, and broader enforcement constraints under SB 946. As a result, monetary penalties have had limited deterrent value, particularly with non-cooperative vendors. However, persistent field presence and non-punitive outreach have proven more effective in encouraging compliance.

Enforcement Trends and Activity Areas:

Enforcement activity varied over the course of the year. The consultant conducted saturation patrols in commercial and recreational corridors based on complaint data, observed activity, and seasonal trends. Key areas of vendor concentration included:

 August–September 2024: 23rd Street, Macdonald Avenue, Cutting Boulevard  October–December 2024: Civic Center and San Pablo Avenue area  January–March 2025: 23rd Street corridor, Barrett Avenue, and southern Cutting Boulevard
 April–May 2025: Hilltop Mall, Miller/Knox Regional Park, and Central Richmond

Monthly breakdowns of vendor encounters, Notices of Violation, and other statistics— including use of open flames and proximity to 23rd Street merchants—are included in the attached report. Heatmap images documenting vendor activity by location and quarter are also included as attachments to this report.

Analysis - Key findings:

 When the enforcement program launched in August 2024, 68 unpermitted vendors were identified. Since then, that number has steadily decreased, with monthly figures now consistently in the 20s. These trends suggest that the enforcement program has been largely effective. However, the persistently low, but stable numbers highlight ongoing challenges and the program's limitations.  To date, no fines have been collected. Identifying vendors remains a challenge, as many are reluctant to provide identification for a variety of reasons.

Additionally, our enforcement officer is not legally authorized to request personal identification.
 Time of vendor encounters was broadly distributed:
o 5:000 am – 11:59 am: 82 encounters
o 12:00 pm – 5:59 pm: 145 encounters
o 6:00 pm – 12:00 pm: 55 encounters
 Street vendors showcased a vibrant variety of goods, with food items making up a dominant 96 percent of all sales. Offerings ranged from tacos, hot dogs, and fresh fruit to pupusas and roasted corn—while a smaller share, just 4 percent, featured non-food items like clothing and even cell phones. 1940

July 1, 2025
DocID #47141v2
 Vendors utilized a wide variety of equipment, such as pushcarts, grills, mobile food trucks, trailers, and setups with tents and tables. o Equipment snapshot: 70 tables, 66 carts; 8-foot trucks, 8 trailers, 4 trucks, 1 cooler,
 Gender breakdown of vendors: 60 percent male (144 individuals) and 40 percent female (106 individuals).
 Ethnicity distribution was predominantly Hispanic/Latino (97%):
o 264 Hispanic/Latinos, 5 African Americans, 1 Indian, 1 Samoan  A total of 14 Special Business Permits have been issued, with the majority being stationery and non-food vendors:
o 12 stationary vendors and 2 roaming vendors
o 4 food vendors and 10 non-food vendors
o
Mobile Vendor Plaza (MVP) now “The Lot” and Program Highlights:

One of the program’s most impactful developments has been the establishment of the Mobile Vendor Plaza (MVP), now known as “The Lot,” by the City Manager's Office, Economic Development, and Public Works Departments, in collaboration with the Richmond Farmers Market. This initiative has resulted in a total of three City-sponsored vendor locations in Richmond.

“The Lot” operates downtown at 1395 Macdonald Avenue, on Thursdays and Saturdays, 11:00 AM – 9:00 PM. With the support of City Council and all stakeholders, “The Lot” has emerged as a popular, well-attended, and structured venue that provides a safe, supportive space for sidewalk vendors. It has also served as a valuable tool for encouraging compliance by offering a designated, City-sanctioned location for vending, and is becoming a promising best practice to support local entrepreneurship. There is also an opportunity for vendors to participate in the two other locations hosted by the Richmond Farmers Market – Civic Center Market at 325 Civic Center Plaza on Fridays, 7:00 AM to 1:00 PM, and the Marina Bay Market at Regatta Blvd. and Melville Square on Saturdays 10:00 AM – 2:00 PM.

To enhance branding and public recognition, the MVP is currently undergoing a rebranding effort, now known as “The Lot.” City staff believe that this rebranding will further enhance the program's visibility and reinforce its role in promoting safe, legal, and successful sidewalk vending in Richmond.

Program Review and Potential Ordinance Refinements:

On May 13, 2025, staff held a coordination meeting with participating departments to review the program’s first-year performance and prepare for this Council update. The meeting covered ordinance implementation, enforcement results, public health coordination, and opportunities for program improvement.

Based on operational experience and inter-departmental feedback, staff have identified several potential refinements to the ordinance for Council consideration:
1941

July 1, 2025
DocID #47141v2

 Clarify permissible vending locations, particularly in relation to sidewalk width, curb ramps, and driveways, to ensure ADA compliance and preserve pedestrian circulation
 Increase the minimum setback distance between sidewalk vendors and primary entrances to brick-and-mortar businesses, especially in high-foot-traffic commercial areas
 An alternative enforcement mechanism or tool may need to be explored, as imposing fines is nearly impractical.

This agenda item marks the one-year anniversary of the program’s implementation.

Staff are providing this update to share data, highlight accomplishments and challenges, and request feedback from the City Council on the direction of the program and possible ordinance revisions. Based on Council input and continued engagement with vendors and stakeholders, staff anticipate returning in December 2025 with formal recommendations for ordinance amendments.

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:

Attachment 1 – Sidewalk Vendor Enforcement – Annual Report (Aug 2024 – May 2025) Attachment 2 – Sidewalk Vendor Activity Heatmap (Aug–Sep 2024) Attachment 3 – Sidewalk Vendor Activity Heatmap (Oct–Dec 2024) Attachment 4 – Sidewalk Vendor Activity Heatmap (Jan–Mar 2025) Attachment 5 – Sidewalk Vendor Activity Heatmap (Apr–May 2025)

1942
ATTCHMENT 1 - Sidewalk Vendor Enforcement – Annual Report (7/1/24-5/4/25) Case #: Location: Date: Time:

Business N/Ame/Description of
Items Being Sold: Name of Operator: Gender: Ethnicity: Age: Contact Info: Type: Private Property Permits? Open Flame? Total Contact:

VE24-001 S. 23rd St. (~345) 08/15/24 8:15 AM Drinks and Snacks Kara Female Hispanic N/A Vehicle/Table No No No 1 VE24-002 Florida Ave. (~2230) 08/15/24 8:20 AM Coffeee and Drinks Theodora Pascual Male Hispanic N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-003 Cutting Blvd. (~925) 08/15/24 8:40 AM Unknown Mercedes Hispanic N/A Vehicle/Table No No No 1 VE24-004 Harbor Way (~431) 08/15/24 8:45 AM Chips and Drinks Griselda Female Hispanic N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-005 Nevin Ave. (~1322) 08/15/24 9:00 AM The Looney Bean Jeron Davis Male N/A Trailer No No No 1 VE24-006 Nevin Ave. (~912-998)
*Farmers Market 08/15/24 9:15 AM Simba Heir Farm Simba Indian N/A Tent/Table No No No 1 VE24-007 W. McDonald Ave. (~4300) 08/15/24 9:30 AM Fruitas Mar Baeya- Fruit Miriam Female Hispanic N/A Table No No No 3 " 08/17/24 7:35 PM " Miriam * Hispanic N/A " No " "
08/21/24 7:00 PM " Miriam * Hispanic N/A " No " "
VE24-008 W. McDonald Ave. (~4500) 08/15/24 9:35 AM Food and Juice Nora Female Hispanic N/A Tent/Tables No No No 1 VE24-009 W. McDonald Ave. (~4500) 08/15/24 9:45 AM Fruita Fresca El MichoacaNo- Fruit Cups Noel Male Hispanic N/A Tent/Tables No No No 1
VE24-010 29th St. 08/15/24 10:15 AM Cut Fruit Gilberto Male Hispanic N/A Umbrella/Table No No Yes? 1 VE24-011 23rd St. (~1231) 08/16/24 12:30 PM Reeas Josmar Hispanic N/A Tent/Tables No No No 1 VE24-012 W. McDonald Ave. (~4800) 08/16/24 12:55 PM Fruit/ Cut Fruit Maria Female Hispanic N/A Umbrella/Table No No No 1 VE24-013 W. McDonald Ave. (~4800) 08/16/24 1:00 PM Simply Sarai's Cuisine Unattended Female African American N/A Trailer No No No 2 " 08/30/24 11:35 AM " " * * N/A Van & Trailer No No No
VE24-014 W. McDonald Ave. (~3834) 08/16/24 1:15 PM Antojitos Sabritas Hilberto Male Hispanic N/A Cart No No No 2 23rd. St (653) 08/21/24 5:20 PM " Karla Female N/A Cart No No No VE24-015 Harbor Way (~361) 08/16/24 1:30 PM Chef Green Deon Green Male African American N/A Tent/Tables No No Yes 1 VE24-016 8th St. (~248) 08/16/24 1:40 PM Prepared Food Maria Female Hispanic N/A Tent/Tables No No No 2 08/21/24 8:00 PM " Maria Female Hispanic N/A " No " "
VE24-017 McBryde Ave. (~3701) 08/16/24 2:10 PM Drinks and Snacks Christian Sanchez Hispanic N/A Cart No No No 1 VE24-018 Esmond Ave. (~2807) 08/16/24 2:15 PM Drinks and Snacks Veronica Female Hispanic N/A Cart No No No 1 VE24-019 Forida Ave. (~1014) 08/16/24 2:40 PM Snacks Raquel Male Hispanic N/A Cart No No No 1 VE24-020 San Pablo Ave. (~12590) 08/16/24 3:00 PM Loaded Chicken Male N/A Trailer No No No 3 San Pablo Ave. (2800) 08/23/24 3:00 PM " N/A " No " "
San Pablo Ave (~12620) 09/13/24 6:55 PM " Male Hispanic N/A " No No No VE24-021 S. 23rd St. (~414) 08/16/24 3:40 PM Prepared Food Lidia Morales Female Hispanic N/A Tent/Tables No No No 1 VE24-022 S. 21St. St (~443) 08/16/24 3:45 PM Prepared Food Jabari Male African American N/A Trailer No No No 1 VE24-023 S. 23rd St. (~330) 08/17/24 5:45 PM Elotes/ Prepared Food SebaStian Male Hispanic N/A Cart/Tent No No Yes 1 VE24-024 Rheem Ave. (~3325) 08/17/24 6:55 PM Fruit, Drinks and Snacks Luis Angel Male Hispanic N/A Cart No No No 2 Market Ave. (2101-2147) 08/25/24 11:45 AM " Luis Angel Male Hispanic N/A Cart No No No VE24-025 Rheem Ave. (~3401) 08/17/24 7:00 PM Prepared Food Maria Female Hispanic N/A Tent/Tables No No No 1 VE24-026 Cutting Blvd. (~Universal
Church) 08/18/24 1:00 PM Prepared Food UnkNown N/A Tent/Tables No No No 1 VE24-027 23rd St (~) 08/18/24 1:30 PM El Poblanito La Catracha Valeria Female Hispanic N/A Trailer No No No 1 VE24-028 23rd. St. (~) 08/18/24 1:50 PM Tacos and Burritos Taco Truck Hispanic N/A Truck No No UnkNown 1 VE24-029 23rd St. (~) 08/18/24 1:55 PM Chicken Jasmin Female Hispanic N/A Grill/Tables No No Yes VE24-030 W. McDoN/Ald (~) 08/18/24 3:15 PM Fruit Cups Angelina Female Hispanic N/A None No No No 1 VE24-031 Barrett Ave. (~) 08/18/24 3:35 PM Tacos and Burritos Maria Female Hispanic N/A Tent/Tables No No No VE24-032 23rd St. (~) 08/18/24 2:20 PM Drinks and Snacks George Male Hispanic N/A Truck No No No VE24-033 23rd St. (1097) 08/21/24 5:15pm El Chaparro- Cut Fruit Hispanic N/A Cart w/ Umbrella No No No VE24-034 Andradade Ave. (2300-2398) 08/21/24 6:10 PM Super Churros Hispanic N/A Trailer No No No VE24-035 29th St. 08/21/24 6:45 PM Cut Fruit Diego Male Hispanic N/A Tent/Table No No No VE24-036 23rd St. (1041) 08/22/24 9:47 AM TaMales Karol Lopez Female Hispanic N/A Cart No No No VE24-037 Cutting Blvd. (3627) 08/23/24 1:40 PM Briseno Produce Male Hispanic N/A Truck No No No 4 Cutting Blvd. (3701) 09/04/24 1:55 PM Briseno Produce Valente Male Hispanic 21 N/A " No " "

"(~3627) 09/11/24 6:00 PM Briseno Produce " " " " N/A " No " " " 09/12/24 1:35 PM " " " " " N/A " No Yes-Enviro, Busn Lic No VE24-038 23rd St. (243) 08/23/24 2:25 PM Produce Jesus- Watermelon Guy Male Hispanic N/A Truck/Table No No No " 08/28/24 6:13 PM " " Hispanic N/A No
VE24-039 W. McDonald Ave. (3834) 08/23/24 3:55 PM Drinks and Snacks Christina Female Hispanic N/A Cart No No No VE24-040 23rd St. (1544) 08/24/24 4:55 PM Prepared Food (Tacos) Elisa Female Hispanic N/A Tent/Table No No No VE24-041 Dover Ave. (~2133) 08/24/24 5:05 PM Drinks and Snacks Moises Male Hispanic N/A Cart No No No VE24-042 Barrett Ave. (~2401) 08/24/24 5:50 PM Prepared Food (Tacos) Luis Male Hispanic N/A Tent/Table No No No 1 VE24-043 23rd St. (~1088) 08/25/24 11:40 AM Produce Juan Male Hispanic N/A Umbrella/Table No No No 1 VE24-044 Market Ave. (~1900) 08/25/24 11:50 AM Mariscos Mariscos Ninos Lindos Males Hispanic N/A Tent/Table No No No 1 VE24-045 Emeric Ave. (~2276-2298) 08/25/24 11:55 AM Ice Cream Maria Female Hispanic N/A Cart No No No 1 VE24-046 Fred Jackson Wy. (~1800) 08/25/24 1:45 PM Ice Cream Juan Male Hispanic N/A Cart No No No 1 VE24-047 Rheem Ave. (~2889) 08/28/24 6:45 PM Fruit and Snacks Ana Female Hispanic N/A Tent/Table No No No 1 VE24-048 23rd St. (~971) 08/28/24 7:50 PM Prepared Food Joel Male Hispanic N/A Tent/Table No No No 1 VE24-049 McDonald Ave. (~4250) 08/29/24 2:30 PM Cut Fruit Refused Female Hispanic N/A Tent/Table No No No 1 VE24-050 McDonald Ave. (~4250) 08/29/24 2:30 PM Cut Fruit & Honey Refused Female Hispanic N/A Tent/Table No No No 1 VE24-051 McDonald Ave. (~4250) 08/29/24 2:35 PM Cut Fruit Joel Male Hispanic N/A Tent/Table No No No 1 VE24-052 Harbor Wy. (695) 08/30/24 9:48 AM Coffeee and Drinks Lizeth Female Hispanic N/A Tent/Table/Vehicle No No No 1 VE24-053 Ohio Ave. (~1329) 08/30/24 10:05 AM Flowers Francisca Perez Female Hispanic N/A Umbrella/Table No No No 1 VE24-054 Barrett Ave. (~3228) 08/30/24 11:20 AM Watermelon Adan Male Hispanic N/A Truck No No No 1 VE24-055 W. McDonald Ave. (~4800) 08/30/24 11:30 AM Cut Fruit Marjulan Hispanic N/A Tent/Table Yes No No 1 VE24-056 E. Richmond Ave. (~1) 08/30/24 11:45 AM Fruit Cups & Snacks Santiago Male Hispanic N/A Tent/Table No No No 1 VE24-057 23rd St. & Lincoln Ave. 08/31/24 7:26 PM Prepared Food (Tacos) Hispanic N/A Tent/Tables No No Yes 1 VE24-058 San Pablo Ave. (~12490) 08/31/24 7:05 PM Prepared Food Michoacan Burgers Male & Females Hispanic N/A Tent/Table Yes No No 1 VE24-059 27th St. (~404) 08/31/24 8:05 PM Prepared Food (Birria) Maria Female Hispanic N/A Tent/Table No No No 1 VE24-060 Cutting Blvd. & 23rd St. 08/31/24 8:35 PM Prepared Food (Tacos) Dylan's Tacos/ Claudia Orellao Male/Males Hispanic N/A Tent/Table No No No 1 23rd St. (~968) 09/01/24 7:53 PM " " " N/A
VE24-061 Barrett Ave. (~2400-2442) 09/01/24 6:12 PM Prepared Food (Tacos) Arturo Male Hispanic N/A Tent/Tables Yes No No 1 VE24-062 Cutting Blvd. (~2315) 09/01/24 6:50 PM Dylan's Tacos- Tacos Jonsalez Male Hispanic N/A Tent/Tables No No No 6 " 09/06/24 7:00 PM " Male Hispanic N/A Tent/Tables No No No 23rd St (~968) 09/08/24 7:13 PM " Jose Luis Male Hispanic 21 N/A Tent/Tables No No No Hilltop Mall Rd (~2982-2990) 09/11/24 4:30 PM " William Male Hispanic 24 N/A Tent/Tables Yes No No 09/12/24 8:00 PM " Male Hispanic N/A Tent/Tables No No No Hilltop Mall Rd (~2982-2990) 09/13/24 7:20 PM " Male Hispanic N/A Tent/Tables Yes No No VE24-063 Cutting Blvd. (3701) 09/04/24 1:55 PM Fruit/ Watermelon Valente Male Hispanic 21 N/A VE24-064 McDonald Ave. (~4302) 09/05/24 12:35 PM Fruit/ Cut Fruit Noel Male Hispanic 50 N/A Tent/Table Yes No No 1 VE24-065 San Pablo Ave. (~12056) 09/05/24 12:25 PM Antojitos Guanacos (Tacos and Pupusas) Walter Male Hispanic 42 N/A Taco Truck No Envir. Health- Yes No 1 VE24-066 Barrett Ave. (~2719) 09/06/24 5:40 PM Desserts Melissa Female Hispanic N/A Tent/Table Yes No No 1 VE24-067 McDonald Ave. (~4300) 09/06/24 6:00 PM Packaged Snacks Diana Female Hispanic 32 N/A Chair & Cooler Yes No No 1 VE24-068 McDonald Ave. (~4300) 09/06/24 6:15 PM Cut Fruit/Honey Medium Female Hispanic N/A Tent/Table Yes Envir. Health- Yes No 2 " 09/11/24 5:40 PM " " Female Hispanic N/A Table Yes "+business Lic No VE24-069 McDonald Ave. (~4300) 09/06/24 6:10 PM Fruita Fresca El MichoacaNo- (Cut Fruit) Male Hispanic 61 N/A Tent/Table Yes Envir. Health- Yes No 2 " 09/11/24 5:25 PM " Noel Male Hispanic 61 N/A Tent/Table Yes Envir. Health- Sidewalk Vendor app. Yes No
VE24-070 McDonald Ave. (~4500) 09/06/24 6:05 PM Packaged Snacks Maria Female Hispanic 51 N/A Tent/Table Yes No No 2 " 09/11/24 5:30 PM " " " " " N/A Tent/Table Yes No No
VE24-071 Cutting Blvd. (~2300) 09/06/24 7:10 PM Taqueria Tio- Tacos Eustaquio Salas Male Hispanic 40 N/A Trailer/ Tent/Table No No 1 VE24-072 Market Ave. (~740) 09/07/24 10:00 AM Drinks and Snacks Norma Female Hispanic N/A Cart No No No 1 VE24-073 6th St. (322) 09/07/24 10:20 AM Ricas Pupusas Ana Female Hispanic 40 N/A Tent/Table Yes No No 1 VE24-074 McDonald Ave. (~1401) 09/07/24 12:00 PM Access Wireless- Free Phones Marco Male Hispanic 37 N/A Tent/Table No No No 1 VE24-075 Barrett Ave (~2401) 09/08/24 5:50 PM El Conelo-Tacos Ulises Male Hispanic N/A Vehicle/Trailer No No No 2 " 09/15/24 4:35 PM " " " " N/A " No Mob Ped Per No
VE24-076 37th St (~992) 09/08/24 6:26 PM Snacks, Drinks, Cut Fruit Jovannny Male Hispanic 25 N/A Tent/Table/Cart No No No 1 VE24-077 San Pablo Ave(~12860) 09/11/24 5:05 PM Mariscos Taqueria-Tacos and Burritos Elado Ortiz Male Hispanic N/A Vehicle/Tent/
Tables/Bathroom Yes Yes No 1
VE24-078 Wall Ave (~3627) 09/11/24 5:55 PM Chiquis-Tacos/Burritos Male Hispanic 27 510-660-8336 Vehicle/Tent/ Tables Yes No No 1 VE24-079 Cutting Ave (~2220) 09/11/24 6:15 PM Tacos Las Palmas-Tacos Burritos etc. Teresa Female Hispanic 510-860-0329 Food Truck Yes Yes No 1 VE24-080 Cutting (~1001) 09/11/24 7:15 PM La Kanta- Tacos, burritos ect. Male Hispanic N/A Food Truck Yes No No 1 VE24-081 S 15th St/Cutting Blvd 09/11/24 7:25 PM Tacos Zaragoza- Tacos, Burritos etc. Male Hispanic N/A Food Truck No No No 1
VE24-082 W McDonald Ave (~3625) 09/12/24 4:40 PM La Alma De Sol- Tacos, Burritos Abrason Male Hispanic N/A Food Truck Yes No No 1 VE24-083 Cutting Blvd (~3103) 09/12/24 5:35 PM Prep Food Male African American N/A Table Yes No No 1 VE24-084 S 23rd St (~157) x Florida 09/12/24 5:50 PM Snacks, Cut Fruit, Corn Fredrico Varez Male Hispanic 51 N/A Cart No No No 1 VE24-085 25th St (~473-499)x Barrett
Ave 09/12/24 6:10 PM Tacos Yesenia Mejia Female Hispanic 45 510-447-3735 Truck/Trailer/ Tables No No No 1 VE24-086 Barret Ave (~2400-2442) 09/12/24 6:30 PM Antojitos- Tacos, Burritos Ect. Male Hispanic 20's 510-369-9034 Food Truck Yes Enviro, Busn Lic No 1

VE24-087 McDonald Ave (~ 1503) 09/12/24 6:55 PM Richmond Eats- Tacos, Burritos Etc. Ramero Hernandez Male Hispanic 51 510-776-2511 Trailer/ Tent/Table Yes Enviro, Busn Lic No 1 VE24-088 Meeker Ave (~2157) 09/13/24 5:00 PM Curbside Kitchen- Lumpia Ect. N/A Male Hispanic 30 N/A Food Truck No Enviro, Busn Lic No 1 VE24-089 Vincent Park 09/13/24 5:20 PM Cut Fruit, Snacks, Drinks Magdalena Female Hispanic 39 N/A Cart/Umbrella No No No 1 VE24-090 Cutting BlvdxMariN/A Way 09/13/24 5:55 PM Clothing, Accs. Griselda Gutierrez Female Hispanic 62 N/A Tent/Tables No No No 1 VE24-091 Martin Luther King Jr. Park 09/13/24 6:20 PM Cut Fruit, Snacks Erma Female Hispanic 25 N/A Cart/Umbrella No No No 1 VE24-092 San Pablo Ave (~12620) 09/13/24 6:55 PM Loaded Chicken Don Male Hispanic 26 N/A Cart VE24-093 Fred Jackson Way (~1853) 09/14/24 10:10 AM Samon sundays of god- Chicken Teotu Male Samoan 45 N/A Tent/Table Yes No Yes 1 VE24-094 Grove Ave (~421 09/14/24 10:30 AM Arepas Y Empanadas- Empanadas, Pupusas Arepos Yosmar Female Hispanic 45 415-866-4867 Tent/Table No Submitted(10-15 Bus Days) Enviro... Inspec Sched No 1
VE24-095 W Riichmond Ave (~3) 09/14/24 11:25 AM Cut Fruit Santos Martin Male Hispanic 25 N/A Tent/Table/Ice cheSt No No No 1 VE24-096 23rd St (~435) 09/14/24 12:25 PM Tacos ect. Mariana Female Hispanic 24 N/A Tent/Table/ BBQ trailer No No Yes 1 VE24-097 25th St. (~417-435) 09/14/24 12:35 AM Hot Dogs None Cooperative 3 Females 1 Male Hispanic 25 N/A Carts(loading into van) No No No 1 VE24-098 23rd St. (~778) 09/15/24 2:35 PM Corn, Fruit, Chips Veronica Female Hispanic 32 N/A Cart No No No 1 VE24-099 Humphery Ave (~2300) 09/15/24 2:40 PM Tacos ect. Male Hispanic 34 N/A Cart No No No 1 VE24-100 23rd St (~1245) 09/15/24 2:50 PM Clothing Female African American 50's N/A Tent/Table Yes (school) No No 1 VE24-101 23rd St (~1245) 09/15/24 2:55 PM Tacos Dor Female Hispanic 40's N/A Tent/Table No No No 1 VE24-102 276 Gertrued Ave 09/21/24 4:40 PM Corn Joel Juarez Male Hispanic 30 415-240-6952 Cart No No No 1 VE24-103 550 Harbor Way 09/21/24 5:15 PM Street Vendor El Guerrevito Male Hispanic 510-374-6301 Cart No No No 1 VE24-104 304 Chesley Ave 09/21/24 6:00 PM Prepared Food Edwardo Male Hispanic 18 510-688-2103 Table No No No 1 VE24-105 629 42nd St. 09/25/24 1:37 PM Cut Fruit Ana Cristino/ Campos Rosa Female Hispanic 23 510-230-7285 Cart No No No 1 VE24-106 100-198 6th St 09/25/24 5:36 PM Cut Fruit Catalina Rasaja Female Hispanic 25 510-417-6057 Cart No No No 1 VE24-107 276 Gertrued Ave 09/28/24 7:15 PM Prepared Food Male Hispanic 32 415-342-6259 No No No 1 ******** MISSING OCTOBER DATA 1
VE24-108 450 Civic Center 11/02/24 2:40 PM Tacos Maria Hernandez Female Hispanic 25 N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-109 1250 23rd St. 11/07/24 4:39 PM Fruit Josue Male Hispanic 23 N/A Cart No No No 1 VE24-110 3717 Wall Ave. 11/08/24 6:01 PM Pupusas Salvador Male Hispanic 47 N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-110 23rd & Wendell 11/08/24 7:00 PM Hotdogs Eric Male Hispanic 61 N/A Cart No No No 1 VE24-111 Fred Jackson Wy. & Chelsey
Ave. 11/08/24 8:14 PM Tacos Maria Female Hispanic 29 N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-112 12545 San Pablo Ave 11/15/24 7:37 PM Taco Truck Stephania Chavez Female Hispanic 36 N/A Taco Truck No No No 1 VE24-113 2131 McDonald Ave. 11/23/24 5:43 PM Corn Vendor Luisa Lopez Female Hispanic 29 N/A Cart No No No 1 VE24-114 35 E Richmond Ave 11/27/24 11:19 AM Cut Fruit Vendor Sandra Ramirez Female Hispanic 25 N/A Cart No No No 1 VE24-115 3220 Blume Dr 11/27/24 10:44 AM Flowers & Fruit Vendor Maria Female Hispanic 24 N/A Cart No No No 1 VE24-116 801 Madeline rd 12/04/24 8:54 PM Fruit Sofia Female Hispanic N/A N/A Cart No No No 1 VE24-117 801 Madeline rd 12/05/24 7:20 PM Fruit Jose Luis Male Hispanic 32 N/A Cart No No No 1 VE24-118 1434 Bissell 12/06/24 5:54 PM Tacos Mariana Gonzalez Female Hispanic 29 N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-119 10305 San Pablo Ave 12/08/24 5:36 PM Fruit Lupe Female Hispanic 27 N/A Cart No No No 1 VE24-120 290 Broadway 12/12/24 12:39 PM Snacks Fruits and drinks Roberto Male Hispanic 28 N/A Cart No No No 1 VE24-121 2019 Garvin 12/13/24 3:23 PM Fruit and Flowers Seferina Female Hispanic 60 N/A Cart No No No 1 VE24-122 107 Marina Way Richmond CA
94804 12/17/24 1:38 PM Fruit Daniel Cervantes Male Hispanic 25 N/A Cart No No No 1 VE24-123 23rd and Alfreda 12/18/24 3:23 PM Tacos Oscar Male Hispanic 26 N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-124 2131 McDonald Ave 12/19/24 7:09 PM Pupusa David Male Hispanic 28 N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-125 801 Madeline RD 12/27/24 6:55 PM Tacos Conrado Male Hispanic 27 N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-126 Richmond Pkwy 01/04/24 3:14 PM Tacos Silverio Ramirez Male Hispanic 39 N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-127 Harbour and Cutting 01/08/25 7:40 AM Whole Fruit EStersita Female Hispanic 24 N/A Cart No No No 1 VE24-128 2547 Clinton Ave 01/05/25 5:00 PM Tacos Jose Salvador Male Hispanic 49 N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-129 San Pablo & McDonald Ave 01/09/25 11:17 AM Tacos Carmina Female Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-130 San Pablo & McDonald Ave 01/19/25 9:37 AM Flowers/Décor Alejandra Avalos Male Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-131 San Pablo Ave 01/09/25 9:26 AM Tacos Daniel Soto Male Hispanic 26 N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-132 Harbour and Cutting 01/09/25 7:30 AM Tacos Salvina Female Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-133 225 228th St Richmond 01/10/25 5:10 PM Fruit and Snacks Tocayo Male Hispanic 29 N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-134 710 23rd St Richmond 01/10/25 5:25 PM Tacos Samuel ma Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-135 2975 Hilltop 01/10/25 7:10 PM Pupusa Cynthia Sanchez Female Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-136 South Harbor and Cutting 01/14/25 8:00 AM Hot Dogs Maria Female Hispanic 23 N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-137 12010 San Pablo Ave 1/142025 8:59 AM Tacos N/A Female Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-138 12010 San Pablo Ave 01/14/25 9:05 AM Hamburgers/ hotdogs Saul Medina Male Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-139 1430 Cutting Blvd 01/14/25 11:26 AM Tacos Jose Herrera Male Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-140 South Harbor and Cutting 01/14/25 8:00 AM Whole Fruit/Flowers Manuel Aguilar Male Hispanic N/A N/A Cart No No No 1 VE24-141 12010 San Pablo Ave 1/142025 8:59 AM Tacos Javier Zepeda Male Hispanic 25 N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-142 12010 San Pablo Ave 01/14/25 9:05 AM Snacks/ Corn Cup Lisa Aquiliya Female Hispanic 33 N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-143 1430 Cutting Blvd 01/14/25 11:26 AM Tacos N/A Table Hispanic 35 N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-144 4838 McDonald Ave 01/15/25 7:53 AM Tacos N/A Table Hispanic 37 N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-145 4838 McDonald Ave 01/15/25 7:58 AM Tacos Estersita Table Hispanic 21 N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-146 4838 McDonald Ave 01/15/25 8:05 AM Tacos N/A Table Hispanic 27 N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-147 11965 San Pablo Ave 01/15/25 8:10 AM Tacos N/A Table Hispanic 35 N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-148 Harbor 01/15/25 7:10 AM Tacos Siomara Chavez Table Hispanic 51 N/A Table No No No 1

VE24-149 831 23rd St 01/16/25 1:51 PM Pupusa/Corn Cups N/A Table Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-150 930 23rd St 01/16/25 6:39 PM Hamburgers/ Hotdogs Ivette Table Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-151 2131 McDonald 01/17/25 5:02 PM Tacos Sandra Female Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-152 1707 Rosevelt 01/17/25 4:48 PM Shaved Ice ESter Female Hispanic N/A N/A Cart No No No 1 VE24-153 Miller Knox 01/25/25 11:25 AM Tacos Magnolia Female Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-154 2315 Cutting Blvd 01/28/25 12:00 PM Tacos Virjinia Ramos Female Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-155 23rd and Lincoln 01/28/25 5:42 PM Tacos N/A Female Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-156 463 44th St 01/30/25 2:22 PM Tacos N/A Female Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-157 1245 23rd St 01/30/25 3:30 PM Tacos/Pupusa Daniella Female Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-158 1245 23rd St 01/30/25 3:30 PM Tacos Rodolfo Male Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-159 Miller Knox 01/25/25 11:25 AM Tacos Manuel Aguilar Male Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-160 2315 Cutting Blvd 01/28/25 12:00 PM Ice Cream Vendor Laura Padilla Female Hispanic N/A N/A Cart No No No 1 VE24-161 23rd and Lincoln 01/28/25 5:42 PM Shaved Ice N/A Female Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-162 463 44th St 01/30/25 2:22 PM Pupusa N/A Male Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-163 1245 23rd St 01/30/25 3:30 PM Mexican Food N/A Male Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-164 1245 23rd St 01/30/25 3:30 PM Mexican Food N/A Male Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-165 Miller Knox 01/25/25 11:25 AM Flowers & Fruit Vendor N/A Male Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-166 2315 Cutting Blvd 01/28/25 12:00 PM Flowers Alejandra Medina Female Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-167 23rd and Lincoln 01/28/25 5:42 PM Mexican Food Cheli Zamora Male Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-168 463 44th St 01/30/25 2:22 PM Flowers and Fruit N/A Male Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-169 1245 23rd St 01/30/25 3:30 PM Mexican Food Ester Cenizos Female Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-170 1245 23rd St 01/30/25 3:30 PM Mexican Food N/A Female Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-171 Madeline Rd 02/01/25 5:54 PM Mexican Food Pablo Escobedo Male Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-172 Madeline Rd 02/06/25 8:30 PM Pupusa N/A Male Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-173 46th and Barrett 02/07/25 9:30 AM Mexican Food N/A Male Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-174 San Pablo Ave 02/07/25 9:45 AM Mexican Food N/A Male Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-175 120205 San Pablo Ave 02/10/25 7:35 AM Mexican Food N/A Male Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-176 120205 San Pablo Ave 02/10/25 7:40 AM Mexican Food Jose Calderon Male Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-177 12025 San Pablo Ave 02/10/25 7:45 AM Mexican Food N/A Male Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-178 120205 San Pablo Ave 02/10/25 7:50 AM Tamales/Champurado David Male Hispanic N/A N/A Cart No No No 1 VE24-179 120205 San Pablo Ave 02/10/25 7:55 AM Pupusa/Pan Dulce N/A Female Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-180 120205 San Pablo Ave 02/11/25 7:10 AM Tamales N/A Male Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-181 120205 San Pablo Ave 02/11/25 7:12 AM Coffeee and Bread Barbara Torres Female Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-182 801 madeline 02/12/25 5:54 PM Mexican Food N/A Female Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-183 1329 Ohio 02/12/25 3:12 PM Mexican Food N/A Female Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-184 23rd St 02/14/25 7:30 AM Tamales/Champurado N/A Male Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-185 23rd St 02/14/25 8:00 AM Tamales/Coffeee Imelda Female Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-186 23rd and Bissell St 02/14/25 9:10 AM Pupusa N/A Female Hispanic N/A 510-230-5362 Table No No No 1 VE24-187 23rd and Bissell St 02/14/25 9:15 AM Tamales N/A Female Hispanic N/A 925-549-3086 Table No No No 1 VE24-188 23rd and Brooks St 02/14/25 9:26 AM Coffee and Bread N/A Male Hispanic N/A 510-478-4009 Table No No No 1 VE24-189 23rd and Sanford 02/14/25 9:44 AM Coffee and Bread Mario Male Hispanic N/A 510-672-8340 Table No No No 1 VE24-190 23rd and grant St 0/14/2025 10:03 AM Fruit Lucho Male Hispanic N/A 510-837-1649 Cart No No No 1 VE24-191 23rd and Visalia St 02/14/25 10:20 AM Pupusa Samuel Padilla Male Hispanic N/A 510-837-1649 Table No No No 1 VE24-192 23rd And Barrett St 02/14/25 10:26 AM Tacos Alejandro Medina Male Hispanic N/A 510-575-1594 Table No No No 1 VE24-193 23rd And Barrett St 02/14/25 10:34 AM Tamales Odilon Graciano Male Hispanic N/A 510-334-2996 Table No No No 1 VE24-194 23rd and St 02/14/25 10:54 AM Tamales Luna Female Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-195 Barrett 02/14/25 11:47 AM Fruit Jose Flores Male Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-196 Marina Lake Dr 02/14/25 11:54 AM Fruit, Chips and Drinks Isandra Female Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-197 Marina Lake Dr 02/14/25 11:57 AM Tacos David Delaluz Male Hispanic N/A 323-629-3373 Table No No No 1 VE24-198 McDonald and 12th 02/14/25 12:10 PM Tacos/Pupusa Mariana Climaco Female Hispanic N/A 510-960-9692 Table No No No 1 VE24-199 McDonald and 13th 02/14/25 12:36 PM Shaved Ice Yaira Lopez Female Hispanic 24 510-375-8674 Cart No No No 1 VE24-200 23rd an cutting 02/14/25 1:01 PM Tacos Wendy Delacruz Female Hispanic 36 323-629-3294 Table No No No 1 VE24-201 cutting 02/14/25 1:30 PM Tacos El Chacho Male Hispanic 22 N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-202 37th and Barrett 02/15/25 11:54 AM Tacos Marcos Garcia Male Hispanic 25 N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-203 38th and Barrett 02/15/25 12:10 PM Pupusa Rita Female Hispanic 26 N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-204 Broadway and McdoN/Alds 02/16/25 12:34 PM Tacos Pedro Gonsalez Male Hispanic 50 N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-205 Miller Knox 02/21/25 2:36 PM Tacos Christian Sanchez Male Hispanic 22 707-898-3109 Table No No No 1 VE24-206 Barrett Betania
Church(sidewalk) 03/01/25 6:34 PM Pupusa Jose Alejandro Male Hispanic 39 415-299-2749 Table No No No 1 VE24-207 Miller Knox 03/02/25 10:49 AM Fruits Juan Andres Male Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-208 John F Kennedy Park 03/03/25 3:03 PM Fruits, Chips Salvador Male Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-209 8th and Barrett 03/07/25 6:31 PM Food Cart Samuel Male Hispanic 29 N/A Cart No No No 1 VE24-210 1430 Cutting Blvd 03/08/25 7:11 PM Mexican Food Hugo Male Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-211 Miller Knox 03/08/25 5:06 PM Fruit & Snacks Jose Aguilar Male Hispanic N/A N/A Cart No No No 1 VE24-212 Miller Knox 03/08/25 5:29 PM Food Vendor Christian Sanchez Male Hispanic 32 N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-213 Intersection Barrett and 3rd 03/11/25 6:39 AM Food Cart Catalina Rasaja Female Hispanic N/A N/A Cart No No No 1

VE24-214 1001 Cutting Blvd 03/14/25 6:53 AM Food Vendor (Tacos) Nagalie Female Hispanic 26 N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-215 1096 23rd St 03/14/25 1:45 PM Merchandise Vendor Luis Male Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-216 McBryde & Wilson 03/15/25 2:50 PM Food Vendor Tony Male Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-217 Hilltop Mall Rd (~2982-2990) 03/18/25 12:30 PM Food Cart Vendor Uriel Male Hispanic N/A N/A Cart No No No 1 VE24-218 3170 Hilltop Mall 03/18/25 12:50 PM Food Cart Vendor Christina Female Hispanic N/A Cart No No No 1 VE24-219 Intersection of Downer Ave 03/22/25 2:55 PM Food Vendor (Pupusa) N/A Female hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-220 Overend 03/22/25 4:36 PM Food Vendor N/A Male Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-221 Miller Knox 03/23/25 2:15 PM Food Vendor Jose Aguilas Male Hispanic 32 N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-222 Miller Knox 03/23/25 2:25 PM Food Vendor Tony Male Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-223 Gayner and 20th 03/25/25 4:40 PM Food Vendor Pedro Gonsalez Male Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-224 Cutting and Harbour 03/26/25 5:22 AM Pupusa Vendor Rielle Female Hispanic N/A 510-572-4394 Table No No No 1 VE24-225 12025 San Pablo Ave 03/28/25 6:30 AM Food Vendor Orlando Male Hispanic 24 N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-226 12025 San Pablo Ave 03/28/25 6:40 AM Food Vendor Pupusa Diego Velasquez Male Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-227 Miller Knox 03/29/25 1:42 PM Tacos Javier Zepeda Male Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-228 13th and Virginia 03/29/25 1:57 PM Tacos Jonathan Sanchez Male Hispanic 27 N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-229 13th and Virginia 03/29/25 2:10 PM Tacos Porfirio Male Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-230 Intersection of Virginia 04/05/25 2:27 PM Tacos Jonathan Sanchez Male Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-231 Intersection of Virginia 04/05/25 2:27 PM Fruit Jonathan sanchez Male Hispanic N/A N/A Cart No No No 1 VE24-232 Miller Knox 04/05/25 2:45 PM Ice Cream Vendor N/A Male Hispanic N/A N/A Cart No No No 1 VE24-233 Miller Knox 04/05/25 2:55 PM Fruit Jose Aguilar Male Hispanic 27 N/A Cart No No No 1 VE24-234 Hilltop Mall Rd 04/06/25 3:28 PM Fruit N/A Female Hispanic N/A N/A Cart No No No 1 ve24-235 Hilltop Mall Rd 04/06/25 3:35 PM Food Vendor N/A Female Hispanic 34 N/A Cart No No No 1 VE24-236 20th and Burbeck 04/08/25 3:44 PM Ice Cream N/A Female Hispanic 24 N/A Cart No No No 1 VE24-237 Ohio and Marina Ave 04/08/25 5:00 PM Food / Flower Vendor N/A Female Hispanic 27 N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-238 Blume Dr and Klose way 04/11/25 10:48 AM Food Vendor (Tacos) N/A Male Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-239 1430 Cutting Blvd 04/12/25 1:32pm Food Cart Vendor Andres Mendes Female Hispanic 28 N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-240 205 28th St 04/13/25 11:36 AM Food Cart Vendor Miguel Escobedo Male Hispanic N/A N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-241 205 28th St 04/13/25 11:49 AM Ice Cream Vendor Arianna Garcia Female Hispanic 30 N/A Cart No No No 1 VE24-242 29TH and Rheem 04/15/25 1:10 PM Fruit Vendor Juana Female Hispanic 29 N/A Cart No No No 1 VE24-243 Amador and SolaNo 04/15/25 1:30 PM Fruit Vendor Efren Male Hispanic 36 N/A Cart No No No 1 VE24-244 1825 Cutting Bld 04/18/25 5:17 PM Tacos Doniesa Female Hispanic 28 N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-245 Richmond Pkway 04/19/25 1:47 PM Taco/Pupusa Cristal Female Hispanic 21 N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-246 McBryde & 27th 04/20/25 12:13 PM Tacos Tony Male Hispanic 36 N/A Cart No No No 1 VE24-247 212 Bissell Ave 04/23/25 1:00 PM Pupusa Gabriela Female Hispanic 37 N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-248 4838 McDonald Ave 04/27/25 2:48 PM Ice Cream Lorenzo Male Hispanic 50 N/A Cart No No No 1 VE24-249 3040 Hill Top 04/27/25 1:31 PM Tacos Uriel Male Hispanic 24 N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-250 Mcbryde and 37th 04/28/25 5:26 PM Pupusa Tiago Male Hispanic 28 N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-251 3040 Hill Top 04/28/25 3:05 PM Tacos Gabriel Male Hispanic 29 N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-252 450 Civic Center 05/03/25 4:05 PM Merchandise Vendor N/A Male Hispanic N/A N/A Cart No No No 1 VE24-253 450 Civic Center 05/03/25 4:15 PM Hot Dogs Sara Female Hispanic N/A N/A Cart No No No 1 VE24-254 450 Civic Center 05/03/25 4:20 PM Merchandise Vendor Claudia Male Hispanic 23 N/A Cart No No No 1 VE24-255 450 Civic Center 05/03/25 4:25 PM Tacos Marisol Female Hispanic 36 N/A Cart No No No 1 VE24-256 Roosevelt and 23rd 05/04/25 5:39 PM Fruits Josie Female Hispanic 53 N/A Cart No No No 1 VE24-257 Roosevelt and 23rd 05/04/25 5:50 PM Hot Dogs Carmen Gutierrez Female Hispanic 41 N/A Cart No No No 1 VE24-258 2225 Gaynor 05/04/25 5:58 PM Fruits Carlos Male Hispanic 24 N/A Table No No No 1 VE24-259 Rheem Ave and 23rd 05/04/25 6:10 PM Cotton Candy Jose Hernandez Male Hispanic 44 N/A Table No No No 1

ATTACHMENT 2
-

SIDEWALK VENDOR

ACTIVITY HEATMAP
(AUG
–

SEP 2024)
•
This heatmap illustrates the
concentration of sidewalk
vending activity . As seen, key
corridors such as 23rd Street,
MacDonald Avenue, and Cutting
Boulevard represent significant
hot spots for vendor presence and
code enforcement actions
81948
ATTACHMENT 3
-

SIDEWALK VENDOR

ACTIVITY HEATMAP
(OCT
–

DEC 2024)
•
This heatmap visualizes key
vending hotspots. We observed
high concentrations of vending
activity centered around the
Civic Center and San Pablo area.

This data suggests the
importance of sustained
engagement and monitoring
along these corridors.
1949
ATTACHMENT 4
-

SIDEWALK VENDOR

ACTIVITY HEATMAP
(JAN
–

MAR 2025)
•
This heatmap highlights
sidewalk vending hotspots.

Key activity areas include the
23rd Street corridor, Barrett
Avenue, and the southern end
of Cutting Boulevard. These
clusters suggest repeat
operations in high foot traffic
corridors, supporting the
need for continued saturation
patrols.
1950
ATTACHMENT 5
-

SIDEWALK VENDOR

ACTIVITY HEATMAP
(APR
–

MAY 2025)
•
This heatmap displays vendor
activity concentrations recorded.

The most notable activity
clusters occurred near Hilltop
Mall, Miller Knox Park, and
central Richmond. These areas
continue to draw recurring
sidewalk vending, requiring
targeted enforcement and
consistent presence.
1951

(June 24, 2025)
01337.0010 2014277.5

Claudia Jimenez
City Council Member and
Liaison to the Community
Police Review Commission

DATE: July 1, 2025
TO: Mayor Martinez and Members of the City Council
FROM:

Dave Aleshire, City Attorney
SUBJECT:

Community Police Review Commission’s slate of
recommendations to enhance transparency, strengthen
accountability, and increase trust between RPD and
community.

FINANCIAL IMPACT: Requested Annual Budget Increased to $338,629 from $80,129, for an increase of $258,500

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

No previous Council action taken.

STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:

Richmond’s Community Police Review Commission is an
independent civilian oversight body focused on the
Richmond Police Department. However, the Commission
has been studying policies of other cities to find more effective policies to better carry out its duties and provide more effective civilian oversight and align with current statewide and nationwide best practices.

Neighboring cities have implemented more accessible
and transparent oversight systems, which the
Commission feels would help strengthen accountability
and public trust within the community and RPD.

AGENDA
REPORT
1952

(June 24, 2025)
01337.0010 2014277.5
RECOMMENDED ACTION:

DISCUSS and APPROVE the eight (8) recommendations
of the Community Police Review Commission (CPRC),
begin a necessary “meet and confer” process with the
Richmond Police Officer’s Association, and take next
appropriate steps to update the ordinance to expand the CPRC jurisdiction, complaint procedures, and public
access to information, and to increase the CPRC budget
– City Attorney’s Office (Dave Aleshire 510-620-6509).

DISCUSSION:

I. Introduction

The Community Police Review Commission (“CPRC”) recently undertook a substantial and systematic review of its current practices and procedures. It compared its processes to those of other police oversight entities in the Bay Area and throughout the state, as well as those recommended by experts in the field, like the National Association of Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement (“NACOLE”). That effort revealed various opportunities to enhance Richmond’s civilian police oversight policies and practices to align with current best practices.

Through this effort, Commissioners identified thirteen (13) recommendations to the Commission’s practices and procedures that, if implemented, would (a) reduce systemic barriers in the complaint process making it more accessible to the local community, (b) provide greater transparency to the community regarding the Richmond Police Department and the operations of the CPRC, (c) enhance the Commission’s investigative capacity providing for greater accountability, and (d) ensure that all Commissioners are fully trained to do the important and sensitive work of the Commission. The CPRC voted to recommend that the City Council adopt the proposed changes.

II. Actions taken to date

Today, the CPRC is requesting that the City Council consider supporting eight (8) of the thirteen (13) original recommendations. Two (2) of these recommendations have already been approved by the City, including the request to amend the enabling ordinance to require Commissioner training, and the request that a fulltime Confidential Investigator be hired to support the CPRC’s efforts. On June 24, 2025, the Council approved an ordinance amendment (Richmond Municipal Code Chapter 3.54), mandating that all Commissioners participate in at least eight (8) hours of training, including Police Officer shadowing such as ride-alongs, participation in the Richmond 1953

(June 24, 2025)
01337.0010 2014277.5
citizen academy or other similar activity within six (6) months of appointment as well as actively participate in ongoing training.

Regarding the Confidential Investigator, the City has already initiated a formal recruitment process with assistance from The Byers Group, to support the work of the CPRC. The job posting went live on June 12, 2025. The City also hired short-term investigators in the interim.

Two (2) other original recommendations have been determined to be duplicative of current CPRC powers. For instance, the CPRC enabling ordinance already provides the CPRC with the power to “review and evaluate the policies, practices and procedures contained in the Richmond Police Department Manual and develop programs and strategies to promote positive police community relations and make appropriate recommendations to the Chief of Police.” (Richmond Municipal Code Section 3.54.080 – Power and Duties (a).) Any evaluation of RPD policies, practices and procedures would necessarily depend on a review of Police Department operational data. For instance, to understand how an RPD policy is interpreted and/or implemented by the RPD, would necessarily require a review of the RPD data pertaining to the policy and its execution or use in the field, regardless of whether an actual complaint has been filed. Adding an “automatic” review of RPD actions is unnecessary, as such review is already within the CPRC’s purview under its power to review and evaluate RPD policies, practices, and procedures.

Similarly, the current “purpose” language of the CPRC ordinance is already quite broad, which states that “[t]he purpose of [the] Commission is to promote positive relations between the community and the police department and to advise the City Council, City Manager and Chief of Police on all matters pertaining to the administration of the Richmond Police Department. (Richmond Municipal Code Section 3.54.010 – Creation and Purpose.) This language already empowers the CPRC to advise City leadership on “all matters” pertaining to the administration of the RPD making the earlier suggested revisions to the CPRC statement of purpose unnecessary.

Finally, the fifth original recommendation that the Commission be granted a path to seek legal counsel independent of Richmond’s City Attorney is unworkable. While it was initially modeled after the Rent Board’s structure, it has caused some challenges for the City, including the potential for conflicting legal advice and substantial legal risk in a sensitive personnel area subject to litigation.

III. CPRC otherwise recommends eight (8) actions for consideration

1954

(June 24, 2025)
01337.0010 2014277.5

1. Extend the period for filing a complaint from 120 days to one year.

Background:

Under the current structure, community members have 120-days to file a complaint from when the incident occurs. This limitation creates significant barriers for certain individuals who would otherwise seek redress. Factors such as emotional distress, lack of awareness regarding the ability to file a complaint or associated deadline, and delays in gathering evidence can easily hinder a person’s ability to submit a timely complaint.

Additionally, certain incidents may involve complex circumstances, requiring more time to process or investigate, or to possibly engage legal counsel.

Extending the period to one-year provides a more equitable process, allowing individuals ample time to assess their options and perhaps file a complaint. The 1 year limitation aligns with the statute of limitation for investigations of police misconduct under Penal Code Section. Of course, this is likely to increase Commission workload.

NACOLE notes that “[o]ne year is commonly allowed for citizens to file complaints.

However, oversight agencies may be granted discretion to extend the time frame for a complainant’s non-availability based on circumstances beyond his/her control.”1 Regional Comparisons:

Richmond’s current 120-day deadline is among the shortest in the region. Most neighboring jurisdictions, such as Berkeley, Oakland, and San Francisco allow longer periods recognizing that equitable public access to justice requires flexibility.

For example
● Oakland has no time limit
● San Francisco has no time limit
● Berkeley provides 180 days with exceptions
● Riverside provides 6 months
● San Diego has no time limit
● Santa Ana provides 1 year
By extending Richmond’s deadline to one year, we not only increase accessibility, but also bring the City into alignment with regional best practice standards.

2. Change the standard of review for misconduct from “clear and convincing evidence” to “preponderance of the evidence.”

1 https://www.nacole.org/complaints
1955

(June 24, 2025)
01337.0010 2014277.5
Background:

The current standard of review used by the Richmond Community Police Review Commission (CPRC) is “clear and convincing evidence.” This threshold is significantly more stringent than the standard practice for civilian police oversight agencies, at both the state and national levels that employ the “preponderance of the evidence” standard when reviewing cases.

“Preponderance of the evidence” is a legal term for the standard of review applied to weighing evidence when reviewing a complaint. It permits a finding of misconduct when the evidence supports a conclusion that it is “more likely than not” the alleged misconduct has occurred.

The “preponderance of evidence” can be contrasted with the “clear and convincing evidence” standard of review, which permits a finding of misconduct only when the evidence supports a conclusion that it is “highly probable” the alleged misconduct has occurred. The “highly probable” standard is more difficult to prove.

The “preponderance of the evidence” is also internally used by the Richmond Police Department when conducting investigations, creating misalignment when the CPRC evaluates the evidence under a higher standard. Adopting the “preponderance of evidence” standard would ensure consistency across internal and external accountability measures and better uphold the public’s trust in a fair and accessible review process.

Comparisons:

Neighboring jurisdictions and other agencies that employ the “preponderance of evidence” standard include:
● Berkeley’s Office of Director of Police Accountability and Police Accountability Board
● San Francisco’s Department of Police Accountability
● Oakland’s Community Police Review Agency
● Los Angeles’ Office of Inspector General and Citizen Review Board ● Long Beach’s Citizen Police Complaint Commission
● San Diego’s Commission on Police Practices and many more

3. Increase the Commission’s scope of review to include review and investigation of all complaints against Richmond Police Department Officers. 1956

(June 24, 2025)
01337.0010 2014277.5
Background:

Richmond currently employs an unusual hybrid system for receiving and reviewing complaints against police officers, which limits the authority of the CPRC to review of the majority of complaints filed.

The CPRC’s current scope only permits review of complaints alleging:
● Unreasonable and excessive use of force
● discrimination
● sexual misconduct and/or sexual harassment
● discharge of a firearm at a person and/or when death or serious bodily injury results from direct police action
All other categories, including improper search or arrest, negligence of duty, harassment, dishonesty, or interference with First Amendment rights, are reviewed only by the Police Department’s Office of Professional Accountability (“OPA”), not a civilian oversight entity. Only after the OPA completes its review, which can take years, may the complainant can file an appeal with the CPRC within ten (10) days of OPA’s determination. This system significantly restricts the community’s ability to access independent oversight, leading to reduced accountability and lack of transparency.

Independence as a key feature of a civilian oversight system.2 In fact, according to NACOLE, a “key question is whether the oversight system is sufficiently independent— in terms of political, professional and financial independence and authority—to do what is needed and what is asked of it.”3 One of the CPRC’s primary purposes is to provide independent review of complaints involving police misconduct. This function should not be limited by complaint categories. Expanding the scope of the CPRC to review all complaints is essential for accountability and transparency. It empowers the CPRC and thereby the community to identify patterns of possible misconduct, systematically track incidents, and recommend policy through a proactive Commission. Operating under a broader scope of review allows the CPRC to more intentionally define and categorize the type of complaints it receives. The general categories such as “discrimination” is too broad and can mask important details, making it harder to identify trends. By specifying the nature of the complaint, whether it involves race, gender, housing status or another factor, the CPRC can more effectively monitor issues and recommend targeted reform efforts. With the addition of a full-time investigator, the CPRC will have the capacity to provide such oversight, but it also requires the authority to do so. The broader scope will also increase transparency, enhancing community trust.

Regional Comparisons:

2 https://www.nacole.org/mission
3 https://www.nacole.org/oversight_models, Oversight Models: Is one model better than another? 1957

(June 24, 2025)
01337.0010 2014277.5
Other neighboring jurisdictions provide broad review:

Berkeley: Police Accountability Board reviews all complaints against sworn employees of the Berkeley Police Department. See Berkeley Charter Section 125(18) and Berkeley’s Complaint Form.4 Community members can choose whether to file a complaint with the independent Office of Director of Police Accountability or the police department’s Internal Affairs division.

San Francisco: Department of Police Accountability reviews “all complaints regarding police use of force, misconduct or allegations that a member of the Police Department has not properly performed a duty,” except for complaints filed by other members of the Police Department. See San Francisco Charter Section 4.136(d) and San Francisco’s Complaint Form.5 The police department’s internal investigation unit is not involved in reviewing complaints from civilian members of the public.

Oakland: Community Police Review Agency is required to investigate complaints from the public alleging use of force, in-custody deaths, profiling based on a protected characteristic, untruthfulness, and violation of First Amendment rights. It may also investigate complaints alleging any other type of misconduct at the discretion of the Police Commission (Oakland’s community volunteer board). All complaints filed with the agency are also forwarded to the police department’s Internal Affairs Bureau, which may conduct its own investigation. See Oakland CPRA Home Page6 and Oakland’s Complaint Form.7

4. Allow for anonymous complaints and redact complainants’ and witnesses’ names on public documents.

Anonymous Complaints:

Requiring complainants to identify themselves may deter individuals from coming forward with complaints due to the fear of retaliation, privacy concerns, or immigration status or are navigating vulnerable circumstances such as fleeing dangerous situations, risk of exploitation, discrimination or even deportation. Prohibiting anonymous complaints limits access to justice and to the process. Allowing anonymous complaints promotes a safer and more inclusive environment, encouraging broader community participation and protections.

4https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/2022-02/PoliceAccountabilityComplaintFormFillable.pdf 5 https://dpainsite.formtitan.com/ftproject/ft34ef920c01cf40bf918cf03e2b14be99 6 https://www.oaklandca.gov/departments/community-police-review-agency 7 https://apps.oaklandca.gov/CPRAPublic/uploadPDF.aspx and https://apps.oaklandca.gov/CPRAPublic/Complaint.aspx?Isanonymous=True&CCPComplaintId=0 1958

(June 24, 2025)
01337.0010 2014277.5
Removing the signature requirement for filing a complaint furthers these goals.

According to NACOLE, “[c]omplaint forms may require a signature under the penalty of perjury. This may have a chilling effect on a person’s willingness to file a complaint.

The reason for the language is to deter false allegations against the police. One way to minimize the chilling effect while still minimizing the number of false allegations is to not have the language on the initial complaint form, but an agency might choose to include it if/when the complainant provides a sworn statement to the oversight agency.”8 Regional examples:

Other civilian oversight agencies that allow for anonymous complaints:

San Francisco: City Charter mandates investigation of that all complaints within its jurisdiction, including those filed anonymously. Anonymous complaints have the same level of legitimacy as those with identifying information and may lead to disciplinary action or prosecution when warranted. According to an investigator with over 25 years of experience, anonymous complaints have not posed any issues in terms of processing an investigation. As long as there is credible evidence of misconduct, the department proceeds with the investigation, regardless of whether the complainant participates.

While the absence of a complainant may affect the weight of a case, investigators rely on alternative sources such as vehicle numbers, officer identification, incident location, arrest records, CAD data, and official reports to substantiate misconduct allegations and pursue accountability.

Oakland: Community Police Review Agency also allows for the community members to submit anonymous complaints.9 The city’s oversight website explicitly affirms that anyone may file a complaint and outlines the type of critical information that can help strengthen their complaint.

Impact and Data:

Anonymous complaints received by the San Francisco Department of Police Accountability:
● 2024: Q2 (Pg 10) report 34 out of the 204 complaints (17%) ● 2023: Annual report (Page 12): 29 out of 785 complaints (4%) ● 2022: Annual report (Pg 15): 4 out of 704 complaints (1)

Redact Complainants’ and Witnesses’ Names on Public Documents:

Official documents of the CPRC, including those associated with the complaint process should be redacted to remove personal identifying information in order to protect

8 https://www.nacole.org/complaints
9 https://apps.oaklandca.gov/CPRAPublic/
1959

(June 24, 2025)
01337.0010 2014277.5
individual privacy and prevent misuse. Currently, complainants' full names appear on the published public case summaries on the CPRC’s website, and a simple internet search can lead directly to those records. This level of exposure puts individuals at risk for potential fraud, discrimination, harassment and retaliation. Such a policy would bring CPRC in line with established personal data protection regulations, such as HIPPA and encourage more broader participation in the complaint process by ensuring confidentiality.

5. Authorize the Commission to issue subpoenas for the production of books, papers, documents and other evidence.

Background:

The CPRC’s enabling ordinance allows for the CPRC “to subpoena witnesses to testify at the hearing concerning the complaint” but does not authorize the CPRC to issue subpoenas for the production of documents, records, and other evidence. This authority significantly enhances the Commission's ability to fulfill its duties by expanding access to a broader range of evidence, enabling more comprehensive and thorough investigations into police misconduct and supporting its work in providing civilian oversight of the Richmond Police Department.

This expansion aligns with best practices for police oversight agencies across the state, where robust investigative tools are considered essential for maintaining accountability and transparency. In many effective civilian oversight models, subpoena power is a key component that ensures full access to the records necessary to conduct impartial and effective investigations.10 Providing subpoena power, also reinforces public trust in the CPRC’s ability to conduct independent, unbiased, and transparent investigations.

Most California cities with civilian oversight bodies have given those bodies the power to subpoena documentary evidence as well as witness testimony, which supports their essential independence from the police department. For example:
● Berkeley: “The Director of Police Accountability and the Police Accountability Board may issue subpoenas to compel the production of books, papers, and documents, and the attendance of persons to take testimony, as needed to carry out its duties and functions.” (Berkeley Charter Section 125(20)(c).)

● Oakland: Police Commission powers include the power to “issue subpoenas to compel the production of books, papers, and documents and take testimony on any matter pending before it.” (Oakland Charter Section 604(b)(3).)

10 https://www.nacole.org/subpoena_power
1960

(June 24, 2025)
01337.0010 2014277.5

6. Require the Confidential Investigative Officer to publish an annual report pertaining to the work of the CPRC.

Background:

The CPRC currently does not publish an annual report detailing its work, outcomes, or impact limiting the community’s ability to understand the CPRC’s role, effectiveness, credibility, and areas for improvement. To ensure transparency and accountability, the CPRC recommend that the Confidential Investigator prepare and publish a comprehensive annual report every year. Public disclosure of such information will foster community trust and reinforce confidence and accountability, aid in identifying trends and patterns for areas of improvement, ensuring the oversight system remains responsive to community needs, and aligns with principles of effective civilian oversight.

Such report should include all of the following:

A. The CPRC’s processes and procedures for investigating alleged police misconduct.

B. A summary of complaints filed that year including outcomes, timelines showing the time between complaint filing, investigation completion date, CPRC review date, recommendations made by the Commission, and the City’s final disposition of the complaint.

C. A summary of CPRC evaluations conducted regarding the RPD policies, practices and procedures, as well as CPRC reports and recommendations pertaining to RPD policies, practices, procedures, and programs and any responses thereto.

D. CPRC reports and recommendations to the City Council, City Manager and Chief of Police, and responses thereto.

E. A summary of training and education of Police Officers and of Commissioners.

F. Trends and patterns pertaining to vehicles stops, citations and arrests, searches and seizures, use-of-force incidents, officer-involved shootings, use of less-than-lethal force such as use of batons, tasers, WRAP devices, canines, less-lethal projectiles, chemical agents, and firearms, as well as other data the Confidential Investigator finds to be relevant at the discretion of the Officer.
1961

(June 24, 2025)
01337.0010 2014277.5
This practice will foster public trust and confidence in the CPRC’s investigative process and encourage Commission accountability, and provide essential feedback as to areas of improvement.

Examples:

Most civilian oversight bodies throughout California and the U.S. produce regular public reports whether its quarterly, semiannual, or annual basis, demonstrating that regular reporting is both practical and essential to responsive oversight. Other cities and agencies that compile and publish annual reports include: Oakland Community Police Review Agency,11 Oakland Police Commission,12 San Jose Independent Police Auditor,13 Anaheim Police Review Board,14 Riverside Community Police Review Commission,15 San Diego Commission on Police Practices,16 San Diego County Citizen’s Law Enforcement Review Board,17 Sonoma County Independent Office of Law Enforcement Review and Outreach.18

7. Make all non-confidential records and reports available on the City website, except those prohibited from publication or production.

Background:

Currently, Richmond does not make these materials readily accessible. California Penal Code Section 832.7(b)(1) permits the disclosure of records related to reports, investigations, and findings, including investigative reports, evidence, transcripts, and documents setting forth findings or recommended findings. Certain information must be redacted from the records before they are made publicly available, including the names of complainants and other civilian informants. Generally, police officers involved may also be disclosed, subject to certain important exceptions.

Other California cities, such as San Francisco and Riverside, publish non-confidential materials for public access and review. Adopting a similar practice in Richmond would enhance transparency and accountability by informing the community about the CPRC’s investigations and determinations. This would foster greater public trust and encourage

11 https://www.oaklandca.gov/documents/cpra-annual-report-2023-2024 12 https://cao-94612.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/documents/FINAL-2023-OPC-Annual-Report-2.pdf 13 https://www.sanjoseca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/122884/638853150702570000 14 https://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/58935/Anaheim-PRB-Fourth-Annual-Report-2024 15https://www.riversideca.gov/cityclerk/sites/riversideca.gov.cityclerk/files/pdf/CPRC_AR_2023%20Final%20%281 %29.pdf
16 https://www.sandiego.gov/sites/default/files/crb-annual-rpt-fy2019.pdf 17 https://www.sandiegocounty.gov/content/dam/sdc/clerb/annual -reports/2022%20Semi-Annual%20Report 18https://sonomacounty.ca.gov/Main%20County%20Site/Administrative%20Support%20%26%20Fiscal%20Service s/IOLERO/Documents/Annual%20Reports/2324_IOLERO_AR_ADA_ENG.pdf 1962

(June 24, 2025)
01337.0010 2014277.5
the public to engage more meaningfully with the Commission and streamline communications to reduce the burden on City staff by providing access via a centralized platform.

Other California cities have successfully implemented a similar program, in accordance with SB 1421 and SB 16, which mandate public access to certain Police Personnel Records including uses of force and misconduct investigations.

Oakland: Maintains a public-facing database with access to various categories of “non- confidential” records, pertaining to officer-involved shootings, use of force incidents resulting in death or great bodily injury, as well as dishonesty, sexual misconduct, excessive force, failure to intervene, prejudice and unlawful arrest or search. Records are not available until all investigations and appeals are exhausted.

San Francisco: Similarly, San Francisco hosts a webpage where community members can access nonconfidential records related to officer-involved shootings, great bodily injury, dishonestly, unlawful arrest or search, biased policing and excessive force.

8. Approve an annual budget with quarterly financial updates to the Commission and City Council.

The Commission received a General Fund allocation of $80,129 for the Fiscal Year 24- 25, a 15% increase from the previous fiscal year. These funds were distributed across core operational categories, including salaries, services, and administrative costs.

However, this funding level no longer meets the CPRC’s current operational needs due to substantial changes in staffing, new commissioner onboarding, increased investigative workload (backlog of complaints) and an expanded commitment to community engagement.

CPRC Fiscal Year 2024-2025 Budget Item Amount
Salaries and Wages $50,000
Payroll/Fringe Wages $6,212
Professional and Administrative Services $15,000
Other Operating Expenses $1,050
Cost Pool Expenses $5,917
Tabling Event Fees $850
1963

(June 24, 2025)
01337.0010 2014277.5
NACOLE Conference Fees $0
NACOLE Annual Membership Dues $600
Travel, Lodging, and Transportation Expenses $0
CPRC Logo Design Consultant Fee $500
Total Amount $80,129

Details:
● Salaries and Wages covered the part-time Investigator and there were no changes from the previous fiscal year.
○ There may be a need to increase Salaries and Wages allocation to include both the interim and full-time investigators.
● Professional and Administrative Services include transcription of meetings, minutes, etc. and contracts for consultants, and there were no changes. ● Other Operating Expenses include printing, copying, binding, mailing, and office supplies, and there were no changes.
● Cost Pool Allocation was added to FY 2024-2025 and includes general liability insurance.
● NACOLE conference and Travel, Lodging, and Transportation Expenses were not used due to the travel ban to the state of AZ. In the past, for the NACOLE Conference it included the investigator and 2 commissioners, those recently appointed or those who have not participated.
● The CPRC was unaware of whether the NACOLE annual membership was active and what it included.

NACOLE emphasizes that “Allocating sufficient resources to civilian oversight is a crucial determinant to effectiveness. To ensure that work is being performed thoroughly, timely, and at a high level of competency, adequate resources are necessary. Political stakeholders must ensure that their support for civilian oversight includes a sustained commitment to provide adequate and necessary resources. Providing adequate funding can signal a commitment to reform that may lead to greater cooperation by law enforcement executives and unions. Similarly, civilian oversight agencies must have the resources to retain experienced professional staff, provide staff and volunteer board or commission members with adequate training on a regular basis, perform community outreach, and disseminate public reports and other outreach materials in order to be effective.”19

19 https://www.nacole.org/adequate_funding_and_operational_resources 1964

(June 24, 2025)
01337.0010 2014277.5

The CPRC voted to increase the Proposed FY25-26 budget to $400,000 to provide a sufficient flexibility to accommodate higher-than-expected investigative expenses, city attorney fees, training, and expanded outreach or administrative needs.

Key components of Budget Increase:

FY 25-26 CPRC Proposed Budget
CPRC Fiscal Year 2024-2025 Budget Item Amount
Salaries and Wages $263,000
Payroll/Fringe Wages $6,212
Professional and Administrative Services $15,000
Other Operating Expenses $1,050
Cost Pool Expenses $5,917
Tabling Event Fees $850
NACOLE Conference Fees $2,000
NACOLE Annual Membership Dues $600
Travel, Lodging, and Transportation Expenses $5,000
Outreach Materials $2,000
Translation/Interpretation Services $10,000
Training, Consultants, and Educational Costs $15,000
Independent Legal Counsel $10,000
Subpoenaing Documents $2,000
Total Amount $338,629

1. Staffing
The majority of the CPRC budget is allocated to staffing which now includes, both:
● A full-time investigator being advertised at $187,464-$234,336 ● A contractual investigator, that will be provided through Bill Whalen and Associates
Based on Bill Whalen and Associates intro letter, there has been a change of hourly rates given the nature of the backlog of more than 15 complaints and possible incoming 1965

(June 24, 2025)
01337.0010 2014277.5
cases. The CPRC will be billed at $225/hour, with projections ranging from $101,000 - $220,000 depending on the number and complexity of investigations. They may not get through all of them and the workload is unpredictable.

2. Commissioner Training and Development
A proposed $15,000 allocation will support training and professional development for all current and incoming. This includes:
● NACOLE webinars, regional training or annual conference ● Third party consultants at the rate of

3. Outreach and Community Engagement
To maintain community visibility and increase engagement, a dedicated $2,000 line item has been proposed for outreach materials. This includes:
● New logo design & branding
● Tabling supplies (banner, table cloth, candy, tabling fees (some are waived) ● Printing and event materials
Additional funds are anticipated for future costs like printed outreach materials and restocking.

4. Transparency and Fiscal Oversight:

The CPRC requests that City staff provide quarterly financial reports to the commission.

This will improve fiscal transparency, support ongoing budget oversight, and ensure funds are used effectively throughout the year.

The CPRC plays a vital role in providing oversight of RPD to ensure transparency, accountability and community trust. While the commission has made progress, increased responsibilities and operational complexity require a more robust budget.

The proposed $400,00 budget for FY25-FY26 reflects a necessary investment in effective civilian budget oversight. Approval of this will empower the CPRC to operate independently, maintain professional standards, and remain responsive to the community it serves.

IV. Meet and confer process pursuant to the Meyer-Milias-Brown Act with the Richmond Police Officer’s Association
1966

(June 24, 2025)
01337.0010 2014277.5

The City has been advised by legal counsel representing the City on employment matters that the updates referenced in Sections 1 through 7 above will likely require bargaining with the Richmond Police Officer’s Association (“RPOA”) through a “meet and confer” process. Staff understand that the City is currently bargaining with RPOA.

CPRC staff raised these updates with the City’s employment counsel, who recommends that these items be bargained contemporaneously with the current meet and confer process. As such, the CPRC requests that the City Council direct the City’s labor negotiator to bargain the approved items concurrently with current labor negotiations with RPOA. It further requests that CPRC staff be kept informed as to the status of that process and consulted as to any alterations of the requested updates prior to any agreement to make such alterations or concessions regarding any of the requested updates.

ATTACHMENTS:

None

1967

July 1, 2025

City Council

DATE: July 1, 2025
TO: Mayor Martinez and Members of the City Council
FROM:

Councilmember Doria Robinson
Councilmember Claudia Jimenez (co-sponsor)

Subject:

Establish a fair, open, and transparent RFP process to
allocate the annual budget line item for unhoused
services.

FINANCIAL IMPACT: The current $1.8M in unhoused services funding has already been approved and included in the FY 25 -26
budget. This agenda item would create an annual process that involves community in allocation of these existing funds.

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

May 23, 2023 - Richmond Homelessness Strategic Plan
was approved by City Council

STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:

The goal of this item is to create an ongoing, transparent, fair and inclusive process to allocate unhoused services funds to City initiatives and community-based projects
that clearly support the goals and action steps outlined in the City’s approved and adopted Homeless Strategic
Plan and explicitly includes community members, those
with lived experience and stakeholders in a bi-annual
review and annual allocation process.

AGENDA
REPORT
1968

July 1, 2025
RECOMMENDED ACTION:

DIRECT staff to 1) develop, coordinate and facilitate a bi- annual community process for reviewing and providing
feedback and setting annual priorities for current city funded unhoused interventions; 2) Develop an RFP
process to govern the procurement process for the
allocation of unhoused services funds; 3) Develop
financial strategy to offer multi-year funding and increase annual funding for unhoused interventions, and 4) Return to City Council with related deliverables listed herein for council review, feedback and approval, by no later than November 4th, 2025, so that implementation can begin
by no later than January 31, 2026 - Councilmember Doria Robinson (510-620-6568), Councilmember Claudia
Jimenez (510-620-6565).

DISCUSSION:

Recently, while participating in a ride along with Officer Sousa, we approached and spoke to 3 men sitting on a planter near FoodsCo. Two were staying at the Rescue Mission and had no place to be during the day and they felt they could not hang out at the library all day. The third younger man was searching for a place to stay overnight and was afraid of losing their job due to lack of access to a shower. All three were interested in receiving services. But after reaching out to CORE and waiting nearly 3 hours for a response, these 3 men moved on before CORE was able to arrive from East County. They received no services, no support and will continue to drift, being reported for “loitering” and or “trespassing” with no alternatives.

This experience and many others make it clear that the City of Richmond’s unhoused services have too many gaps and there is a pronounced need to focus in and make a stronger effort to implement the strong recommendations outlined in the Homeless ness Strategic Plan already approved and adopted by the City Council. The City needs to increase current collaborative efforts by creating more ways for our local unhoused services nonprofits to work together with the City and Contra Costa County to identify and fill the gaps in service.

Action steps are listed below on how to utilize the Homelessness Strategic Plan to create a clear, direct, and supportive way for those with lived experience of being unhoused to offer feedback and suggestions on how to improve our unhoused services. There is also a need to host a public forum where our unhoused services providers as well as city staff can regularly report on their efforts and answer questions and receive feedback from the public.
1969

July 1, 2025
Action Item 1: Develop, coord inate and facilitate a bi -annual community process for reviewing and providing feedback to current city funded unhoused interventions.

DIRECT staff to develop, coordinate and facilitate a bi-annual community process for reviewing the Homeless ness Strategic Plan, review the impact and outcomes of current City-funded unhoused interventions, and evaluate those current efforts for alignment with the Homelessness Strategic Plan. This process should actively outreach to and secure participation from individuals living in local surrounding neighborhoods as well as those with lived experience of being unhoused or experiencing housing instability and stakeholders. The goal is to ensure that community perspectives and feedback are integrated into the strategic planning effort, promote transparency, and increase public education and input on the City’s current efforts to address the housing crisis.

Action Item 2: Develop a R equest for Proposals (R FP) process to govern the procurement process for allocation of unhoused services funds.

DIRECT staff to develop an RFP process to govern the procurement process for services funded by the annual (or multi-year per Action Item 3 below ) unhoused services funds. The process should be transparent, fair and inclusive, support local efforts, uplift the humanity of the unhoused and create viable long -term pathways off of the streets and out of encampments that include but also go beyond emergency response;

Action Item 3: Develop financial strategy to offer multi-year funding and increase annual funding for unhoused interventions

DIRECT the City Manager and Finance staff to recommend a financial strategy to transition the annual line item so that it can support projects over a longer 2 - 3 year grant terms and possibly increase annual allocations to unhoused services.

This will allow for less interruption in services and enough time to make progress towards Strategic Plan goals and truly help our most vulnerable residents in their darkest times.

Action Item 4: Return to City Council with related deliverables listed herein for cou ncil review, feedback and approval, by no later than November 4th, 2025, so that implementation can begin by no later than January 31, 2026.

Return to council for council approval of 1) the bi -annual community process design, 2) the RFP language and proc ess and 3) a financial strategy recommendation to make it possible to fund RFPs for multi year projects and increase the allocation as needed over time by no later than November 4th, 2025, so that implementation can begin by no later than January 31, 2026.

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
1970

July 1, 2025
Attachment - Richmond Homelessness Strategic Plan

1971
1 T H E C I T Y O F R I C H M O N D

H O M E L E S S N E S S

S T R A T E G I C P L A N
2 0 2 3
Prepared by

1972
2 Acknowledgements
This Strategic Plan was drafted by Homebase on behalf of the City of Richmond.

Homebase would like to thank the membership of the Strategic Planning Steering Committee for their partnership in developing this Plan. Special thanks to the City of Richmond and Richmond City Council for their assistance with gathering information and providing feedback, and the service providers, local government staff, business partners and other community members who participated in interviews, focus groups, and community meetings and shared their experiences and invaluable insight. We are especially grateful to the Richmond residents experiencing homelessness who shared their time and expertise.

1973
3 Table of Contents
Acknowledgements ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 2 Executive Summary ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 4 Introduction ................................ ................................ ................................ .......................... 7 Background ............................................................................................................................. 7 Initiatives, Programs, and Services in the City of Richmond .................................................. 8 Housing and Services Serving Unhoused Richmond Residents .............................................. 9 Programs Supported by the City of Richmond ..................................................................... 10 Programs Serving Richmond Residents Supported by Contra Costa County ....................... 13 Guiding Principles ................................................................................................................. 15 Community Engagement Methodology................................................................................ 16 Data Collection and Background Research ........................................................................... 19 Scope of Homelessness in Richmond................................ ................................ ..................... 22 Who is Experiencing Homelessness in Richmond? ............................................................... 22 Youth Homelessness-Reflections of Youth ........................................................................... 26 Structural Causes of Homelessness in Richmond ................................................................. 28 Advancing Equity ................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 31 The Significance of Equity ..................................................................................................... 31 Racial Inequalities Reflected in Homelessness Populations ................................................. 32 Overarching Considerations for Effectively Addressing Homelessness ................................ ... 34 Reflections of People with Lived Experience of Homelessness ............................................ 34 Guidance from the Steering Committee............................................................................... 34 Goals and Action Steps ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 36 Goal 1: Improve quality of life for unsheltered individuals and communities ..................... 38 Goal 2: Create temporary supportive housing (such as transitional villages and safe parking sites) and expand and sustain permanent supportive and affordable long-term housing .. 42 Goal 3: Expand homelessness prevention and crisis programming ..................................... 46 Goal 4: Improve economic pathways for unhoused and recently housed individuals ........ 50 Goal 5: Build capacity, collaboration, and accountability within agencies working to address homelessness and the system of care as a whole .................................................. 55 Immediate Priorities ............................................................................................................. 59 Conclusion ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................... 60 Appendix A: Glossary of Terms ................................ ................................ ............................. 61

1974
4 Executive Summary
Homelessness is an urgent crisis in the City of Richmond, and it has increased in scope and visibility since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. The Homelessness Strategic Plan provides a community-wide roadmap to address unsheltered homelessness.

Guiding Principles
The Strategic Plan is driven by a set of Guiding Principles collectively developed by the Strategic Plan Steering Committee:

These guiding principles anchored a robust community engagement process, data analysis, and the creation of the set of recommendations outlined in the Strategic Plan.

Stakeholder engagement included monthly Steering Committee meetings, interviews with people experiencing homelessness, stakeholder focus groups and interviews, a community forum and workshop, a survey of youth impacted by homelessness, and a landscape analysis of available services and resource gaps.

Honor humanity and respect
the rights of others

Recognize that housing
is a human right

Center the perspectives of
those most impacted

Approach the work with
an equity lens

Promote a coordinated
community of care

Pursue accountability and
systems follow-through

Seek to be efficient,
transformative, and results-
oriented

Strive for empathetic
efficiency
1975
5 A Community Approach
Grounded in the guiding principles and centering the voices of people experiencing homelessness in Richmond, the Strategic Plan identifies five goals:

Goal 1

Improve quality of life for unsheltered individuals and communities
Goal 2

Create temporary supportive housing (such as transitional villages and safe parking sites) and expand and sustain permanent supportive and affordable long-term housing
Goal 3

Expand homelessness prevention and crisis programming
Goal 4

Improve economic pathways for unhoused and recently
housed individuals
Goal 5

Build capacity, collaboration, and accountability within agencies working to address homelessness and the
system of care as a whole

This Strategic Plan seeks to build on current efforts and harness the collective commitment to create a meaningful and sustainable impact on homelessness in Richmond. The Homelessness Strategic Plan can be used to establish citywide goals to address homelessness and establish a system to track outcomes and celebrate achievements.

1976
6 The Plan identifies six immediate priority action steps:

Priority Action Step 1 – Create and fund a dedicated city staff position to specifically address homelessness. (Action Step 5.3).

Priority Action Step 2 – Identify funding and development partners for converting hotels and motels to service as Permanent Supportive Housing (PSH) units. (Action Step 2.1)

Priority Action Step 3 – Leverage and expand the Richmond guaranteed income pilot program launched by the Richmond Rapid Response Fund (R3F). (Action Step 4.2).

Priority Action Step 4 – Ensure that essential living amenities such as water, sanitation, hygiene, and electricity are provided at least weekly to all encampments. (Action Step 1.1).

Priority Action Step 5 – Secure commitment from a faith-based community partner to pilot the first Safe Parking Site in the Richmond Safe Parking Program. (Action Step

3.4).

Priority Action Step 6 - Strengthen collaboration between the City, County and community-based organizations to improve data collection, implement this Strategic Plan, provide services in the city, and apply for funding opportunities. The dedicated City staff person would determine frequency and format of interagency collaboration, which could include systems level partner meetings, a local data workgroup, or direct service coordination. (Action Step 5.2).

1977
7 Introduction
Background
On a single night in 2022, roughly 582,500 people were experiencing homelessness in the United States. Six in ten (60%) were staying in sheltered locations—emergency shelters, safe havens, or transitional housing programs—and four in ten (40%) were in unsheltered locations such as on the street, in abandoned buildings, or in other places not suitable for human habitation.1 According to the 2020 Contra Costa County Point-in- Time (PIT) Count, there are 280 individuals experiencing unsheltered homelessness on any given night in the City of Richmond – sleeping outside, in vehicles, in tents, or in other places not meant for human habitation.2 The PIT Count is largely considered an undercount of the total number of people experiencing homelessness in any given community. Despite a concerted crisis response and increase in emergency housing funding, the crisis of unsheltered homelessness deepened during the COVID-19 pandemic. 3 Most people who lose their housing in Richmond stay in Richmond; according to the Contra Costa County Homeless Continuum of Care 2021 Annual Report, 30% of County residents who lost their housing did so in west county, including the City of Richmond, and 26% of unsheltered people slept and lived in West Contra Costa County after becoming homeless.4

1 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. The 2022 Annual Homelessness Assessment Report to Congress. Available at: https://www.huduser.gov/portal/sites/default/files/pdf/2022-AHAR-Part-

1.pdf?utm_source=NLIHC+All+Subscribers&utm_campaign=19c916a8b4- memo_010923&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_e090383b5e-19c916a8b4- 293474287&ct=t(memo_010923).
2 Contra Costa County. Contra Costa County: Annual Point in Time Count Report 2020. Available at:
https://cchealth.org/h3/coc/pdf/PIT-report-2020.pdf.
3 A count of unsheltered people was not conducted in 2021 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. As a result of significant inconsistencies discovered in the data, Contra Costa Health is currently unable to verify the accuracy of the 2022 PIT count. https://cchealth.org/h3/coc/reports.php#PIT. Therefore, this report refers to data published in the 2021 Annual Report, available at https://cchealth.org/h3/coc/pdf/Annual-Report- 2021.pdf, the 2020 PIT Count, and Contra Costa County Health, Housing, and Homelessness Data Summary for Homebase, 9/8/22.
4 Contra Costa County Continuum of Care (CoC). Contra Costa CoC 2021 Annual Report. Available at:
https://cchealth.org/h3/coc/pdf/Annual-Report-2021.pdf. 1978
8 This crisis is not new. The City of Richmond declared a shelter crisis in 2018,5 finding that the health and safety of unhoused people is threatened by a lack of shelter and the City passed a resolution declaring homelessness a public health emergency.6 These two resolutions allow the City an expanded range of options when looking towards both long term and temporary solutions for homelessness.

In August 2021, the City of Richmond issued a Request for Proposals to facilitate the development of a City of Richmond Homelessness Strategic Plan and contracted with Homebase, a national technical assistance provider helping communities prevent and address homelessness. The Strategic Plan provides a community-wide roadmap to addressing unsheltered homelessness that supports County and regional efforts and leverages resources for a collective response to homelessness. It is designed to guide the City of Richmond, community-based organizations, and other community stakeholders as they make decisions about funding, programs, and priorities to address unsheltered homelessness in the city. It recognizes and seeks to complement existing efforts underway on a local, county, and regional basis to prevent and address homelessness.

Initiatives, Program s, and Services in the City of Richmond The following is a sampling of the many strong community efforts and achievements in the city to address unsheltered homelessness.

The Regional Impact Council , convened by All Home, developed the Regional Action Plan (RAP),7 a strategy to reduce unsheltered homelessness in the nine-county Bay Area by 75% in three years. The RAP created the 1-2-4 framework to promote strategic investment in interim housing (+1 unit), permanent housing (+2 units) and homelessness prevention (+4 units). All Home advances regional solutions that disrupt the cycles of poverty and homelessness, redress racial disparities, and create more economic mobility opportunities for people with extremely low incomes.

5 City of Richmond. Resolution No. 79-18. Available at:
https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/ArchiveCenter/ViewFile/Item/9064. 6 City of Richmond. Resolution No. 48-18. Available at:
https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/ArchiveCenter/ViewFile/Item/8880. 7 All Home. Regional Action Plan: A Call to Action from the Regional Impact Council, February 2021.

Available at: https://www.allhomeca.org/regionalactionplan/. 1979
9 The draft City of Richmond Housing Element update,8 issued in October 2022 for public review and input, is the City’s proposed approach to meeting its fair share of regional housing needs from 2023-2031, including housing for special needs populations, such as the unhoused.

The Richmond City Council convened the Reimagining Public Safety Community Taskforce 9 in October 2020 to create a transition from the city’s community policing model to a redesigned public safety system that prioritizes community investments in services and housing.

The Richmond City Council established The Homeless Taskforce in 2017 to focus on the identification and implementation of annual policy priorities to impact homelessness in Richmond.10

Housing and Services Serving Unhoused Richmond Residents While homelessness continues to be a challenge in the city of Richmond and across the Bay Area, local and regional efforts have established an invaluable foundation for continued progress in addressing homelessness, including:

Supportive housing – Supportive housing — including affordable housing, case management, and supportive services — forms the core of the City’s strategy to make homelessness rare, brief, and non-recurring. Supportive housing programs embrace a Housing First philosophy with the understanding that housing alone is insufficient and a support system is absolutely necessary so each client receives the appropriate level of support to achieve their goals. These programs consider every household ready for and deserving of safe and stable housing.

Crisis Response and Unhoused Interventions - While affordable and supportive housing are central to ending homelessness, the reality remains that individuals at risk of homelessness and those currently experiencing homelessness need programs and

8 City of Richmond. Public Review Draft 6th Cycle Housing Element Update (2023-2031), October 2022. Available at:
https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/63306/LWC_Richmond_HEU_PRD_102122?b idId=.
9 https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/4011/Reimagining-Public-Safety. 10 https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/faq.aspx?TID=60.
1980
10 services that address their immediate needs. These crisis response strategies are, for many, the first step to maintaining or regaining housing stability. They involve supporting people where they currently live in unstable and unsafe encampments, helping with their essential needs, and mitigating the vulnerabilities of unhoused individuals who live unsafely outdoors and are at high risk of dying on the streets lacking these responses. Emergency shelters, drop-in centers, and street outreach and encampment-centered programs provide support to unhoused residents as well as those at risk of losing their housing.

The section below describes permanent housing, supportive services, and crisis response initiatives available to people experiencing homelessness in Richmond that receive funding from the City of Richmond and are supported by Contra Costa County.

Programs Supported by the City of Richmond
Crisis Response and Unhoused Interventions

People experiencing unsheltered homelessness live in a wide range of settings, including a large vehicle encampment near Castro Street. The City received a $4.8 million grant of Encampment Resolution Funding (ERF) from the California Interagency Council on Homelessness (Cal ICH) for the Castro Encampment Resolution Project (CERP). The CERP is a two-year plan to improve living conditions at the Castro encampment, provide services to residents, create a path to safe and stable housing and restore the site to its original use by June 2024. The City contracted with Way2Love, Inc. to oversee the project implementation and the Castro Site Care Team, which includes a Site Manager, Rapid Rehousing Navigator, and dedicated County Coordinated Outreach Referral Engagement (CORE) team.11

11 https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/4370/Vanessa-A-Calloway-dba-Way2Love-Inc. 1981
11 On October 1,2022, the City closed the Rydin Road RV encampment with the goal of connecting residents with housing. The City Council allocated $250,000 ($200,00 for housing transitions and $50,000 in flex funds for other personal expenses) to assist Rydin Road residents with transitioning to stable housing. Several former Rydin Road residents moved from the encampment into housing options, but some ended up in another unsheltered situation. On October 26, 2022, City staff presented the following update to the Reimagining Public Safety Task Force on the status of 29 Rydin Road residents, representing 23 households12:

• 6 transitions completed and people placed in housing
• 14 transition plans approved by City
• 3 transition plans under development, residents placed in motel • 5 residents with no transition plan are living in interim housing, including shelters and motels
• 1 resident passed away

The city will provide rental assistance to residents for up to six months as they transition to their housing choice. The lessons learned from these efforts offer an opportunity to pivot in approach.

Housing First and Short-Term Emergency Housing programs –The City of Richmond contracted with the Richmond Community Foundation (RCF) to develop and implement a Housing First Program, which is designed to connect unhoused Richmond residents with stable housing and necessary services. The Housing First Program, which prioritizes former Rydin Road residents, includes needs assessments, housing transition planning, housing identification, rent and move-in assistance, service referrals, and care management. The total program funding amount is $425,000. The City of Richmond also contracted with RCF to development and implement a Short- Term Emergency Housing Program to provide rental subsidies or hotel and motel vouchers on an emergency and short-term basis to support individuals and families experiencing homelessness. This total program funding amount is $100,000.

Pilot Interim Sheltering Project – In 2021, the Richmond City Council voted to establish a two-year Safe Parking Pilot Program, which allows private property owners to host up to four vehicle households for a limited duration.13 Safe Parking programs

12 Information provided by City of Richmond Housing Division. 13 https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/4027/Safe-Parking-Pilot-Program. 1982
12 have gained traction nationwide as an emerging practice for providing emergency interim housing. However, due to neighborhood opposition, concern over liability, and lack of funding, this pilot has not yet resulted in the establishment of a safe parking pilot site in the City and the Ordinance is set to expire in June 2023. 1983
13 Streets Team and Showers – The City contracts with Safe Organized Space Richmond (SOS), a program of Rebuilding Together East Bay-North, to spearhead a Streets Team and mobile shower and hygiene programs.14 SOS employs unsheltered individuals to provide encampment cleanup services, deliver mobile showers, and provide additional amenities such as trash pickup, portable toilets, and drinking water.

Richmond Rapid Response Fund (R3F) – The City launched R3F as a wraparound initiative to provide immediate relief to Richmond residents affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. Through American Response Protection Act (ARPA) funds, the City allocated $600,000 to provide rental and mortgage assistance, provide assistance to people experiencing homelessness to prepare them for stable housing, help residents facing eviction, and provide financial disbursements to residents impacted by COVID-

19.15 After disbursing funds to residents and service providers, R3F is launching a community design process and building its capacity to pilot a guaranteed income program.

Programs Serving Richmond Residents Supported by Contra Costa County The Contra Costa Continuum of Care (CoC) is designated by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to receive federal funding and coordinate local resources for Contra Costa County. The Contra Costa County Continuum of Care (CoC) is administered by Contra Costa County Health Services’ Health, Housing and Homeless Services Division (H3),16 which supports the CoC in obtaining federal funding, identifying local priorities, and carrying out the duties of a CoC, as determined by HUD. The Strategic Plan was developed in alignment with the CoC’s system-level efforts. H3 has invested $3.5 million in Richmond-based programs, and Richmond residents are served in every program in the CoC.17

14 https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/4214/Rebuilding-Together-East-Bay-North-RTEBN. 15 https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/4335/West-Contra-Costa-Public-Education-Fund-. 16 https://cchealth.org/h3/coc/.
17 Data provided by H3.
1984
14 The City of Richmond contracts with H3 through the Castro Encampment Resolution Project (CERP) and a designated Coordinated Outreach Referral Engagement (CORE) team in Richmond to connect unsheltered people to the County’s Continuum of Care.

Services include intake, housing and shelter placement, health care referrals, and mental health referrals. The following programs support the housing needs of Richmond residents:

Supportive Housing
Destination Home
Permanent Connections

Transitional Housing/Rapid Rehousing
Hope Solutions TAY Rapid Rehousing
Mary McGovern Transitional Housing for TAY
Pomona Street Apartments
Trinity CARE Center

Crisis Response and Unhoused Interventions
Bay Area Rescue Mission
Brookside Shelter
Calli House Youth Shelter
Concord Shelter
Contra Costa Coordinated Entry System
Contra Costa Crisis Center - 211
Delta Landing
GRIP CARE Center
GRIP Family Shelter
Health Care for the Homeless
The Hume Center Rapid Resolution
Mountain View Family Shelter
Philip Dorn Respite Center
Richmond/San Pablo CORE Team

1985
15 Guiding Principles
The Steering Committee collectively developed the following Guiding Principles designed to shape the development of the Strategic Plan:

These guiding principles were used to guide the community engagement methodology, data analysis, and recommendations.

Honor humanity and respect
the rights of others
Individuals and communities who are
unhoused should be treated with dignity
and deserve the same access to
resources as housed individuals.

Access to resources is a right and not
something to be earned.

Approach the work
with an equity lens
Ending homelessness should take into
account the myriad of ways that
marginalization has occurred and
actively intervene to disrupt the
conditions that cause inequities,
including racism.

Promote a coordinated
community of care
Relevant parties should work together,
not in silos, to address homelessness.

Pursue accountability and
systems follow-through
There should be mechanisms put into
place to hold systems and all relevant
parties accountable to doing the work to
end homelessness with impact and time
sensitivity.

Center the perspectives of
those most impacted
People with lived experience, as the
experts in their own lives, should guide
both the understanding and solutions for
addressing homelessness.

Recognize that housing is a
human right
Interventions and supports should be
built on the assumption that everyone
deserves safe and stable housing
without conditions.

Seek to be efficient,
transformative, and results-
oriented
Efforts to end homelessness should
have real impact and not simply modify
the existing landscape of policies and
services.

Strive for empathetic
efficiency
Solutions to addressing homelessness
should be rooted in urgency, while
holding in mind that interventions and
supports should be built with
intentionality and rooted in the
experiences of unhoused communities.
1986
16 Community Engagemen t Methodology
The Richmond Homelessness Strategic Plan was developed with input from more than 30 people with lived experience of homelessness and more than 40 local organizations, as well as extensive data collection and background research.

Stakeholder Engagement
The Strategic Plan reflects considerable community engagement, including monthly Steering Committee meetings, interviews with residents experiencing homelessness, stakeholder focus groups and interviews, a community forum and workshop, a survey of youth impacted by homelessness, and a landscape analysis of available services and resource gaps. The community process was iterative – during each focus group, interview, survey, and engagement, participants identified additional community members for consultation and input. The process involved the following:

City Webpage – A designated City webpage
and email notification signup allowed members
of the public to access timely information online.

Strategic Plan Steering Committee – The
Steering Committee is a 19-member group of
racially diverse stakeholders representing a wide
range of sectors. The Committee included
people with lived experience of homelessness,
advocates, community activists, the faith
community, homeless service providers,
business leaders, local and county government,
and City Council members. To complement and
collaborate with existing homelessness
intervention strategies, the Steering Committee
also included participants from the Contra Costa
Council on Homelessness, the Richmond
Homeless Task Force, and the Regional Impact
Council.

✓ 30 Lived Experience
Interviews & Focus Groups
✓ 40 Local Organizations
✓ City Website Signup
✓ 19-Member Group
Steering Committee
✓ Interdepartmental City
Staff Working Group
✓ Stakeholder Interviews
✓ Community Outreach
✓ City Council Study Session
✓ Youth Online Surveys
1987
17 The Steering Committee convened monthly from May to November 2022, provided strategic direction and expertise in the development and implementation of the community engagement plan, and identified stakeholders during the community engagement process. The Steering Committee also played a key role in the development and prioritization of implementation strategies.

Lived Experience Interviews and Focus Groups – Homebase conducted individual interviews and focus groups with people currently living in two tent encampments, one vehicle encampment, and an emergency shelter.

Nineteen people currently or formerly living in encampments participated in interviews, with questions focused on contributors to homelessness, available services, and ideas for improvement. Seven people living in emergency shelter participated in two focus groups. In recognition of the disproportionate impact of homelessness on communities of color, interview and focus group participants were also asked about their experiences of discrimination in accessing housing and services. The residents in one encampment were primarily undocumented immigrants who spoke Spanish and interviews were conducted with the interpretation assistance of an unhoused resident. People experiencing homelessness received a gift card for their participation in interviews, focus groups, or for completing surveys.

Community Stakeholder Focus Groups – Homebase convened a series of focus groups for facilitated conversations around challenges and solutions to addressing homelessness in Richmond. Focus groups were organized by sector. • The Public Sector focus group included representatives from city and county government, educational representatives, and criminal legal system partners. • The Community focus group included community-based and faith-based organizations and neighborhood groups.
• The Business focus group included local business leaders and workforce and economic development representatives.
• The Providers focus group included organizations that provide housing, services, and healthcare.
• The Steering Committee focus group included the 19-member Steering Committee.

1988
18 Stakeholder Interviews – Homebase conducted individual interviews with representatives of homeless service providers, the CORE county outreach team, county leadership and City of Richmond Councilmembers. These interviews provided an opportunity to drill down into more detailed action steps and complement the data collected in other community engagement efforts.

Youth Survey – Homebase and the RYSE Center conducted an online survey that was completed by 48 youth ages 13 to 22 whose communities are impacted by homelessness, including 14 youth with lived experience of homelessness. The survey included questions seeking input on their experiences of homelessness and their ideas for preventing and more adequately addressing homelessness among youth and young adults.

Community Outreach – In September 2022, Homebase conducted a virtual community forum in English and Spanish to share information about the community plan and gather input from the public.

City Council Study Session – The City of Richmond City Council will conduct a Study Session in the winter of 2023 to review and provide further direction on the strategic plan. The Study Session will be open to the public.

Organizations, Groups & Community Members Consulted During the Development of the Strategic Plan
City of Richmond residents experiencing homelessness
Business, Economic , and Workforce Development
Chevron
City of Richmond – Employment and Training
Council of Business and Industry
Contra Costa County Employment and Human Services
NAACP
Richmond Main Street
Richmond Pacific Railroad
Rubicon Programs
Wareham Property Group

1989
19 Community, Faith -based , and Neighborhood Organizations All Home
Faith in Action East Bay
Family Justice Center
Richmond Community Foundation
Richmond Neighborhood Coordinating Council
Richmond Public Library
Richmond Rapid Response Fund
Richmond Rotary
West Contra Costa Public Education Fund

City, County, Education , and Criminal Legal System Re presentatives City of Richmond City Manager’s Office
City of Richmond Councilmembers
City of Richmond Housing Division
City of Richmond Planning Division
City of Richmond Police Department
Community Education Partnerships
Contra Costa County Department of Conservation Development Contra Costa County Health Services’ Health, Housing and Homeless Services Division (H3)
Coordinated Outreach Referral Engagement (CORE) team
Housing Authority of Contra Costa County
Office of Reentry and Justice
West Contra Costa School District

Housing, Health , and Service Providers
Bay Area Rescue Mission
Collaborising
Contra Costa County Behavioral Health
Contra Costa County Public Health
Greater Richmond Interfaith Program (GRIP)
Housing Consortium of the East Bay
Lifelong Medical Care
RYSE Center
Safe Organized Spaces Richmond (SOS)
Way2Love
West County Adult Mental Health
Data Collection and Background Research
1990
20 This report reflects an in-depth review of existing reports and data about the City of Richmond and Contra Costa County, including:
• City of Richmond State of the City (2020-2022)18
• City of Richmond Unhoused Interventions RFPs/RFQs and Contracts19 • City of Richmond’s Housing Element 6th Cycle Public Review Draft20 • Contra Costa CoC 2021 Annual Report, edited August 202221 • Contra Costa CoC Point in Time Count22
• Contra Costa County: 2020 Point in Time Count Report23 • Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) Data24
• Housing Policy and Belonging in Richmond, Haas Institute for a Fair and Inclusive Society Research Report25
• Implementation of the Reimagining Public Safety Task Force Recommendations26

18 City of Richmond. State of the City annual report presented by Mayor Tom Butts to the City Council.

Available at: https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/3539/State-of-the-City. 19 https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/4212/Unhoused-Interventions. 20 City of Richmond. 6th Cycle Housing Element Public Review Draft – October 21, 2022. Available at:
https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/4372/Resources.
21 https://cchealth.org/h3/coc/pdf/Annual-Report-2021.pdf. 22 https://cchealth.org/h3/coc/reports.php#PIT.
23 https://cchealth.org/h3/coc/pdf/PIT-report-2020.pdf. 24 Contra Costa County. Contra Costa County Health, Housing, and Homelessness Data Summary for Homebase, 9/8/22.
25 Available at:
https://haasinstitute.berkeley.edu/sites/default/files/haasinstitute_housingandbelongingrichmond_psprint_j an11.pdf.
26 Implementation of the Reimagining Public Safety Task Force Recommendations - June 1, 2021. 1991
21 • Regional Action Plan: A Call to Action from the Regional Impact Council27 • Richmond, California Health in All Policies Progress Report 202028 • Richmond, California The National Community Survey Report of Results 202129 • Richmond Department of Children and Youth 2020 Community Needs Assessment Report30
• Richmond Fund for Children and Youth Strategic Investment Plan Fiscal Years 2021-202431

27 All Home. Regional Action Plan: A Call to Action from the Regional Impact Council. February 2021.

Available at: https://www.allhomeca.org/regionalactionplan/. 28 Available at: https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/59800/The-NCS-Report--- Richmond-CA-2021
29 National Research Center. The National Community Survey Report of Results. 2021. Available at:
https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/59800/The-NCS-Report---Richmond-CA-2021. 30 https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/56599/2020-Community-Needs-Assessment- Report.
31 https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/56831/RFCY-2021-2024-Strategic-Investment- Plan.
1992
22 Scope of Homelessness in Richmond

Although challenging to quantify, homelessness in Richmond increased in scope and visibility during the COVID-19 pandemic. According to the 2020 Point-in-Time Count, Richmond reported 280 persons experiencing unsheltered homelessness.32 Who is Experiencing Homelessness in Richmond?
Homelessness disproportionately impacts Black and Indigenous people, undocumented immigrants, people with disabilities, and people with criminal histories. In Richmond, although people who identify as Black/African American make up 18% of the general population, they make up 57% of the population experiencing homelessness. People who identify as American Indian/Alaska Native population make up 1% of the general population but 11% of the population experiencing homelessness in Richmond.

32 A count of unsheltered people was not conducted in 2021 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. As a result of significant inconsistencies discovered in the data, Contra Costa Health is currently unable to verify the accuracy of the 2022 PIT count. https://cchealth.org/h3/coc/reports.php#PIT. Therefore, this report refers to data published in the 2021 Annual Report, available at https://cchealth.org/h3/coc/pdf/Annual-Report- 2021.pdf, the 2020 PIT Count, and Contra Costa County Health, Housing, and Homelessness Data Summary for Homebase, 9/8/22.
“Richmond costs have quadrupled but my income hasn’t. So many people are living in cars, and you wouldn’t guess.”
-Resident, Brookside Shelter
1993
23 Household Type
The vast majority (85%) of people experiencing homelessness in Richmond are adults- only households (Figure A).33 They are disproportionately Black/African American, and 67% of people experiencing homelessness have a disabling condition, compared to 12% of the general population in Richmond.34 Fifty-eight percent (58%) of people experiencing homelessness in Richmond are men, and 42% are women; less than ten individuals identified as transgender or gender non-conforming.35 Intersecting identities (for example, a Black woman with a disabling condition) layer on vulnerabilities for homelessness. As noted in Figure A, 85% of people experiencing homelessness in Richmond live in adult-only households, and 15% live in families with children.

Figure A: Household Type

33 Contra Costa County. Contra Costa County Health, Housing, and Homelessness Data Summary for Homebase. 9/8/22.
34 Contra Costa County. Homeless population data: Contra Costa County Health, Housing, and Homelessness Data Summary for Homebase. 9/8/22. General population data source: www.policymap.com.
35 Contra Costa County. Contra Costa County Health, Housing, and Homelessness Data Summary for Homebase. 9/8/22.
85%
15%
Household Type
Adults-Only Households Families with Children
1994
24 Age Groups
Fifty six percent (56%) of people experiencing homelessness in Richmond were adults ages 25-54, compared to 44% in the general Richmond population.36 Children under age 18 are underrepresented in the homeless population, comprising 21.6% of the general population and 8% of the homeless population (Figure B).37

Figure B: People Experiencing Homelessness by Age

36 Homeless population data: Contra Costa County Health, Housing, and Homelessness Data Summary for Homebase, 9/8/22; General Richmond population data source:
https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/8348/COR-Fact-Sheet?bidId=. 37 Contra Costa County. Contra Costa County Health, Housing, and Homelessness Data Summary for Homebase. 9/8/22. General population data source:
https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/richmondcitycalifornia.

Minors
(<18)
8% TAY
(18-24)
9%
Adults
(25-54)
56%
Older Adults
(55-61)
16%
Seniors
11%
People Experiencing Homelessness
By Age
1995
25 Subpopulations
Veterans and people with disabilities are overrepresented among people experiencing homelessness. While 3.2% of Richmond residents are veterans, 5% of Richmond residents experiencing homelessness are veterans.38 As noted below, while 12% of Richmond residents overall identify as having a disability, 67% of people experiencing homelessness have a disabling condition, which includes physical and mental health disabilities, substance use disorders, and chronic health conditions.39 Specific disabling conditions among people experiencing homelessness in Richmond are described below (Figure C).40

Figure C: Disabling conditions among people experiencing homelessness.

38 Homeless population data: Contra Costa County Health, Housing, and Homelessness Data Summary for Homebase. 9/8/22; General population data source: www.census.gov 39 Contra Costa County. Homeless population data: Contra Costa County Health, Housing, and Homelessness Data Summary for Homebase. 9/8/22; General population data source: www.policymap.com.
40 Contra Costa County. Homeless population data: Contra Costa County Health, Housing, and Homelessness Data Summary for Homebase. 9/8/22.
31%
25%
23%
11%
10%
Mental Health
Chronic Health
Physical Disability
Development Disability
Substance Use Disorder
Disabling Conditions among People
Experiencing Homelessness
1996
26 Criminal Legal System and Homelessness
The intersection between the criminal legal system and homelessness is a crisis at the local, statewide, and national level. According to the Prison Policy Initiative, formerly incarcerated people are nearly ten times as likely to experience homelessness as the general population.41 In Contra Costa County, more than two-thirds of people surveyed during the 2020 PIT count had been previously incarcerated in jail or prison and 25% were on probation or parole on the night of the count.42 The intersections of systemic racism and criminal justice involvement also compound and facilitate racial disparities that are present.

Youth Homelessness -Reflections of Youth
As stated above, nearly 20% of people experiencing homelessness in Richmond are under the age of 24, a group that is often overlooked when examining the issue. To uplift the voices of youth experiencing homelessness, Homebase collaborated with RYSE Center, a youth-serving organization based in Richmond whose mission is to:

Homebase and RYSE surveyed 48 youth ages 13-22 about their experiences of housing and homelessness. Of the youth surveyed, a combined majority either lost their housing (31%) or worried they’d lose their housing (21%). Thirteen of the fourteen youth who identified themselves in this way also identified as Black, Indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC) or non-white. This reflects the trend described above related to racial disparities in homelessness in Richmond and also reflects the trend of causes of homelessness; like the general population of those experiencing homelessness, more than half of the youth surveyed became homelessness for financial reasons.

41 Prison Policy Initiative. Nowhere to Go: Homelessness among formerly incarcerated people. Available at: https://www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/housing.html.
42 Contra Costa County. Annual Point in Time Count Report 2020. Available at:
https://cchealth.org/h3/coc/pdf/PIT-report-2020.pdf.
“Create safe spaces grounded in social justice that build youth power for young people to love, learn, educate, heal and transform lives and communities.”

1997
27 The youth survey also included questions regarding where young people stayed while they were unhoused:
• Nearly two-thirds (65%) of the youth surveyed indicated that they stayed with someone in their support circle (friends, partner, or relative), and 50% indicated that they were currently staying in a vehicle (there may be intersections between the two groups).
• Sixty percent (60%) of youth surveyed had experienced homelessness for a duration of between 1 and 6 months, while 25% experienced homelessness for more time and 15% had experienced homelessness for less time.

Many of these youth were disconnected from supports. One third of youth became homeless on their own and half did not tell anyone about losing their housing. Common themes emerged regarding barriers to sharing this information or asking for help, including feeling “embarrassed” or “weird,” pointing to the larger need to reframe the issue so young people can access services and supports without fear of judgment.

Of those who received support for their situation, 65% relied on natural supports (including family and friends), while 40% felt supported by their school. The preexisting supports that youth have in their lives represent an opportunity for interventions to build upon and enhance these natural forms of community.

Youth with lived experiences of homelessness cited three major needs: food, shelter, and stable home environments.

Unconditional access to these resources was also reflected in other interviews with people experiencing homelessness.

“I would love for people to start acknowledging others. I often see unhoused individuals brazenly ignored by people walking by when they are reaching out and/or simply asking a question – and this breaks my heart. I think it is so very dehumanizing to not even acknowledge someone saying something directly to you, deeming them unworthy of a simple “no, thank you” or “I’m sorry I don’t have any cash.” I think the very least one can do is acknowledge their fellow person.” -Youth survey respondent, 19 years old

94% of the youth
surveyed believe
that housing is a
human right.

1998
28 Structural Causes of H omelessness in Richmond
The root causes of homelessness in Richmond including systemic factors such as housing market conditions, income and a lack of living-wage jobs, and a history of inequitable housing and environmental policies rooted in racism. • Discriminatory Housing Policy – The City of Richmond has a history of structural housing discrimination and racism which impacts housing in Richmond today. The population of Richmond quadrupled from 24,000 to over 100,000 between 1940 and 1943 during World War II after people from the South were recruited by the Kaiser Shipyards to build ships for the war efforts. Black residents, pushed out of the South by experiences of racism, moved to Richmond in a wave with a population increase of 270 to 14,000. In seeking to address the huge need for housing, public housing authorities segregated Black residents to poorly constructed war housing designed to be temporary that was later torn down, displacing Black residents, largely to public housing projects previously vacated by white residents. They also moved to North Richmond, which lacked services and the capacity for affordable construction, and later, South Richmond.43
• Historic Exclusion from Homeownership – Access to private housing was also discriminatory, with Black residents prohibited from accessing loans to purchase newly built homes for several decades. Racially restrictive covenants were written into legal deeds, which barred the sale of homes to Black residents. Later on, “blockbusting” took place, in which realtors stoked the racial anxieties of white homeowners, who were encouraged to sell their homes at or below market price, which were in turn sold to Black people and other people of color that could finance their homes with subprime loans and higher interest rates. This predatory lending eventually led to foreclosures and displacement of longtime BIPOC residents during the foreclosure crisis in the 2000s.44

43Rothstein, Richard. A History of Exclusion. Oakland Magazine. Available at:
https://www.oaklandmagazine.com/a-history-of-exclusion. 44 City of Richmond. Housing Element, Appendix F: Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing. Available at:
https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/63304/LWC_Richmond_HEU_AppF_AFFH_PRD_1 02122?bidId=.
1999
29 • Housing Affordability and Rental Market Conditions – Structural housing market conditions include the supply and cost of rental housing. As noted in Homelessness is a Housing Problem, “High rental costs and low vacancy rates create a challenging market for many residents in a city, and those challenges are compounded for people with low incomes and/or physical or mental health concerns.”45 With a low vacancy rate of 2.8%,46 Richmond also has some of the highest rental costs in the country: in 2020, the median gross rent in Richmond was $1,574.47 More than half (58%) of Richmond renters and two-thirds (67%) of Richmond homeowners are cost-burdened, meaning they spend more than a third of their monthly income on housing expenses.48 With so many cost- burdened renters and homeowners, the impact of discreet financial events can push someone into homelessness, including an unexpected hospital visit or car repair.
• Income – A number of people in interviews and focus groups mentioned a lack of living wage jobs in Richmond. With a lack of living wage jobs, income has not kept up with rising housing cost. Despite working multiple jobs, people may still be unable to afford housing. There are a variety of systemic barriers to obtaining and maintaining employment, including the experience of homelessness itself.

Maintaining employment may also be disrupted by a medical emergency, incarceration, mental health and substance use challenges, or domestic violence.

45 Colburn, Gregg and Aldern, Clayton Page. Homelessness is a Housing Problem. 2022. 46 Policy Map. Change in Rental Vacancy Rates 2015 to 2020, Available at:
https://www.policymap.com/report_widget?type=fur&area=predefined&sid=10192&pid=697005456 (based on Census data, accessed 9 December 2022).
47 Policy Map. Median Rent By Neighborhood. 2020. Available at:
https://www.policymap.com/report_widget?type=fur&area=predefined&sid=10192&pid=697005456 (based on Census data, accessed 9 December 2022).
48 City of Richmond. Community Needs Assessment Report. 2020. Available at:
https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/56599/2020-Community-Needs-Assessment- Report.
2000
30 • Environmental Concerns and Health Inequities – The history of racial residential segregation continues to play a significant role in the overall health profile for Richmond residents.49 Richmond residents identify the quality of the natural environment, cleanliness, and air quality as much lower than national benchmarks.50 In recognition of the importance of environmental equity to resolve disproportionate exposure to environmental toxins, including lead paint and mold, Richmond became the first city in California to adopt a Health in All Policies (HiAP) Strategy and Ordinance in 2014.51

49 City of Richmond. Community Health and Wellness Element. Available at:
https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/6999/110-Health-and-Wellness-Element?bidId=. 50 City of Richmond. The National Community Survey Report of Results. 2021. Available at:
https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/59800/The-NCS-Report---Richmond-CA-2021. 51 City of Richmond. Ordinance No. 27-15 N.S. Available at:
https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/ArchiveCenter/ViewFile/Item/6999.

2001
31 Advancing Equity
The Significance of Equity
Equity is fundamental to a fair and just society. Addressing equity in homelessness requires pinpointing where there are disproportionate needs and focusing efforts on removing barriers and strengthening access to housing and services accordingly. The end goal is for full and equal access to opportunities, power and resources so that all people flourish. The process of advancing toward equity demands commitment, investment, and care.

Those most negatively affected by inequities must define what the journey to well-being looks like, as well as defining well-being itself. Key to these efforts is centering the voices of those most impacted, not only to informing our understanding but also to directly shape systemic solutions.

Meaningfully advancing equity requires dismantling deeply entrenched systems of privilege and oppression that have led to inequitable decision-making processes and uneven distribution of benefits and burdens. Similarly, it is necessary to focus attention and resources on those people and places where needs are greatest to ensure that decisions, policies and practices produce gains for all.

While there are a broad range of equity-minded activities in Richmond and the region, there remains a need for increased coordination and cross-sector solutions that match the scale of inequities present. Stakeholders in the City of Richmond from different sectors and common interests must be collectively committed to addressing homelessness with an equity lens. This Strategic Plan has a strong emphasis on both the input from residents with lived experiences of homelessness, as well as on racial equity, to identify disproportionate needs in the community. Considerations to advance equity are also provided in the Goals and Action Steps section.

2002
32 Racial Inequalities Reflected in Homelessness Populations

Racial Disparities in Richmon d
Race is a strong correlate of poverty in communities and poverty is a predictor of homelessness, which produces racial disparities in homelessness. As noted above, the racial and ethnic representation of the homeless population in Richmond does not align with the general population of Richmond.52 For example, although people who identify as Black/African American make up 18% of the general population, they make up 57% of the population experiencing homelessness. People who identify as American Indian/Alaska Native population make up 1% of the general population but 11% of the population experiencing homelessness in Richmond (Figure D).

Figure D: Race and Ethnicity

Racial Disparities in Contra Costa County

52 Contra Costa County. Homeless population data: Contra Costa County Health, Housing, and Homelessness Data Summary for Homebase. 9/8/22; General population data source: www.policymap.com.
57%
24%
11%
3% 1% 2%
17%
2%
18%
36%
1%
30%
0%
15%
44%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Race and Ethnicity
Homeless Population General Population
2003
33 The racial inequities present in Richmond are reflected across Contra Costa county:

Black people are 9% of the population in Contra Costa county, yet they represent 42% of people experiencing homelessness in the county.53 The American Indian, Native Alaskan and Indigenous population makes up 1% of the general population but 8% of the homeless population in Contra Costa county.54

Underpinning these disparities are historical inequities in housing policies and practices, segregation, discriminatory laws and enforcement, and restricted economic opportunities. Communities of color, low-income households, people with disabilities, LGBTQIA+ individuals, and survivors of violence and trauma all experience homelessness at higher rates and face greater systemic barriers to housing stability.

Those with multiple at-risk identities likely face compounding risk for homelessness and other harms.

53 Contra Costa Continuum of Care. 2021 Annual Report. Available at:
https://cchealth.org/h3/coc/pdf/Annual-Report-2021.pdf. 54 Contra Costa Continuum of Care. 2021 Annual Report. Available at:
https://cchealth.org/h3/coc/pdf/Annual-Report-2021.pdf.

2004
34 Overarching Considerations for Effectively Addressing Homelessness
Reflections of People with Lived E xperience of Homelessness As a critical part of community engagement to develop this plan, Homebase interviewed people with current lived experience of homelessness in Richmond. Three primary needs from the current system of care emerged from those conversations:

Guidance from the Steering Committee
The following considerations were generated using the guiding principles developed by the Strategic Plan Steering Committee and best practices in addressing homelessness:

1. Equity should be prioritized as a foundational element of addressing homelessness. Interventions to reduce disparities and move towards equity should be shaped by both individual and systemic considerations.

2. Recognizing the humanity of individuals was a common thread. Solutions must honor the health and dignity of all members of the community, including those who are unhoused, in a meaningful way.

3. The issue of homelessness should be conceptualized not just from the perspective of individualism, but from a community perspective. Those experiencing homelessness are already part of communities that can be strengthened by having access to resources.

To be treated with
dignity and respect

To be safe and
healthy

To have means and
opportunities toward
stability and security
1 2
3 2005
35 4. Solutions for addressing homelessness should be sustainable. Ongoing funding, program longevity, and system-wide commitment to approaching the issue from an action-oriented perspective are needed.

5. An important driver of interventions must be creating space for impacted individuals and communities to define what it means to be treated with respect and what safe, health, and security look like.

2006
36 Goals and Action Steps
The stakeholder engagement process outlined above, in combination with data analysis and the guidance of the Steering Committee, instructed the development of the following goals, recommendations, and short- and long-term action steps. The purpose of this section is to provide guidance to community stakeholders on how to effectively collaborate to address the issue of homelessness in Richmond.

While each goal is important, goals have been ordered to prioritize the immediate needs of unsheltered individuals and communities (Goal 1) with the overarching aim to create and sustain viable housing options (Goal 2). Goals 3 and 4 delve into more detailed recommendations regarding homelessness prevention, crisis response, and enhancing economic pathways. Finally, Goal 5 speaks to systems-level strategies to increase effectiveness and transparency.

1. Improve quality of life for unsheltered individuals and communities.

2. Create temporary supportive housing (such as transitional villages and safe parking sites) and expand and sustain permanent supportive and affordable long- term housing.

3. Expand prevention and crisis programming.

4. Improve economic pathways for unhoused and recently housed individuals.

5. Build capacity, collaboration and accountability within agencies working to address homelessness and the system of care as a whole.

Each goal includes descriptions of short-term and long-term action steps. Short-term action steps should be completed within 12 to 36 months while long-term action steps should be completed in 3 to 5 years. There is also a chart under each goal that briefly describes each short-term action step, its purpose, general guidance around funding sources, and community examples to inform the development of Richmond- specific initiatives. Homebase looked across similarly sized communities for investment recommendations.
2007
37 The following is a non-exhaustive list of various funding sources that could help enable and sustain the action steps provided in this plan.

Public funding:
• Local funding, including the City General Fund.
• Contra Costa County funding, including Measure X, Employment and Human Services, Department of Conservation and Development, Office of Reentry and Justice, and Contra Costa Public Defenders.
• California state funding, including the Homeless Housing, Assistance and Prevention (HHAP Grant Program), the Encampment Resolution Funding (ERF) Program, Mental Health Services Act, and Homekey.
• Federal funding, including the Continuum of Care (CoC) program, Youth Homeless Demonstration Program (YHDP) program, Emergency Solutions Grant program, and Grants for the Benefit of Homeless Individuals (GBHI) program.

Private funding:
• Banks
• Corporations and businesses
• Foundations
• Individual donors
In kind/non-monetary supports:
• Clothing
• Collaboration and partnerships
• Food
• Medical supplies
• Office and meeting space
• Office supplies
• Volunteer time

2008
38 Goal 1: Improve quality of life for unsheltered individuals and communities

Since 2020, the number of people experiencing unsheltered homelessness has increased exponentially, resulting in increased visibility of vehicle and tent encampments. It is critical that individuals and families experiencing unsheltered homelessness (i.e., living in on the street, in cars, and in places not meant for human habitation) have access to services and resources. Ending homelessness for individuals and families who have long been homeless often requires frequent and repeated engagement over time to build trust and connection.

Please see the next page for the short-term action steps.

“We need clean space, sanitation and
sewage services.”
-Resident, Castro vehicle encampment
“If people have homes in a community
setting, they are not homeless. They are
living in a neighborhood.”
-Former resident, Rydin Road encampment
2009
39 Short-Term Action Steps
Action Steps Purpose Funding
Sources
Community
Examples

1.1 Ensure that essential living
amenities such as water,
sanitation, hygiene, and electricity
are provided at least weekly to all
encampments.

Improve the quality of life for
unsheltered individuals and
communities while longer
term housing plans and
resources are accessed and
developed.

Local The Department of Homelessness
and Supportive Housing provides a
robust set of utilities at its Bayview
Vehicle Triage Center, including
microwaves, a charging station and
laundry, in addition to common
supports like showers and toilets,
with a goal of getting electric utility
services.

1.2 Provide at least 1,000
transportation vouchers or other
navigational and transportation
services that bridges unhoused
individuals to gain greater access
to employment, school,
community resources, case
management, and other essential
safety net or personal
development services.

Connect individuals to
needed community
resources that are currently
a distance from
encampments; improve
physical and mental health
(including substance use
needs); connect with
employment resources and
jobs; provide flexible
transportation support
across all times of the day.

Local,
County
At various locations across the
United States, the United Way
operates Ride United, with the goal
of reducing transportation barriers
that can contribute to poverty and
systemic racism. As a public-private
partnership, rides and other basic
needs are provided from a rights-
based perspective.
2010
40 Action Steps Purpose Funding
Sources
Community
Examples

1.3 Provide veterinary care and
other pet supplies like leashes
and dog food.

Support folks in caring for
their pets and center their
humanity; improve
sanitation and health of
animals.

State The State of California’s
Department of Housing and
Community Development is funding
efforts to support the integration of
pets into emergency housing to
reduce these barriers to access.

1.4 Expand case management
and other care-related
individualized services directly in
encampments to build
connections for unsheltered
individuals to have access to an
expanded array of opportunities
and resources for personal
development, wellness and
health, financial means to secure
and sustain housing, and ongoing
supports for long-term
stabilization.

Increase access to case
management services other
supports and resources.

Local, State The Contra Costa County
Coordinated Outreach Referral,
Engagement (CORE) program
engages individuals living outside to
help them stabilize and secure
permanent housing. Consider
building upon these efforts to
increase access to ongoing case
management.

2011
41 Long-Term Action Steps

1. Collaborate with Contra Costa County to create a robust street medicine program to address individuals’ medical needs, which can become deadly without access to resources. Street medicine refers to providing direct medical care on the streets to unhoused and other hard to reach populations.

2. Improve access to workforce and other income-generating opportunities to afford market rate housing.

3. Create a community education initiative that builds trust and relationships between unhoused residents and other community members by bringing neighbors together and debunking myths about homelessness.

Equity Actions

1. Community education campaigns should center and partner with people with lived experience of homelessness in the development of educational materials, strategy development and implementation, and relationship building. Partnership may include the development of a peer mentorship and training program for people experiencing homelessness.

2. Community-based case management providers should be equipped to provide meaningful, culturally affirming, and quality services. Staff should be linguistically competent and representative of the communities supported, including people with lived experiences and BIPOC staff to meet the cultural needs of unsheltered communities, a group that is overwhelmingly BIPOC. Ongoing capacity building for service providers builds skills and expertise and provides support to allow providers to sustainably engage in the work, especially given vicarious trauma and personal connections to the issue of homelessness.

Other Considerations
The City’s planned closures of the Castro and Rydin Road encampments have resulted in numerous challenges for residents and service providers. Interviews with current and former residents revealed a strong sense of community among encampments, and the need for basic services, such as personal hygiene facilities, garbage disposal and sanitation services. Some impacted residents have expressed a lack of alternative housing options available and the severing of community ties due to being relocated to other areas and cities. This underscores the need to center the individuals most affected and utilize a holistic, community-oriented perspective in designing solutions.

2012
42 Given the impact of these challenges on the realities of the lives of those in the unsheltered community, it is crucial to build trust between these individuals and the City of Richmond in the name of supporting the long-term vision of ending unsheltered homelessness.

Goal 2: Create temporary supportive housing (such as transitional villages and safe parking sites) and expand and sustain permanent supportive and affordable long -term housing

The cornerstone of addressing unsheltered homelessness is housing. Permanent supportive housing (PSH) is a proven solution to homelessness for the most vulnerable – pairing housing with case management and supportive services. On the other end of the spectrum, affordable housing targeted toward extremely low income (ELI) individuals, whose incomes do not exceed the greater of either 30% of the Area Median Income (AMI) or the federal poverty line, is more appropriate for high burdened households who do not need substantial services. A spectrum of housing options is needed to meet the varied needs of Richmond residents who are currently experiencing homelessness.

Please see the next page for the short-term action steps.

“The lack of affordable housing is a huge issue in Richmond. There are so many unused buildings that should be used to create more housing.” -Participant, Community Focus Group
2013
43 Short-Term Action Steps
Action Steps Purpose Funding
Source Community Examples

2.1 Identify funding and
development partners for
converting hotels and motels to
serve as PSH units.

Build upon lessons learned
from Project Roomkey and
Homekey which quickly
offered housing for
unsheltered individuals.

State One of the strategies embedded within
the State of California’s approach to
addressing homelessness through
Homekey includes converting hotels
and motels into interim and permanent
housing. A long-term funding strategy
must be developed for operation costs.

2.2 Fund at least one
sustainable landlord incentive
program of at least $75,000 to
develop and maintain a pool of
landlords who will rent to
households holding PSH
vouchers or other locally funded
rental subsidies.55
Counter market influences
and increase utilization
rates of vouchers and
rental subsidies.

Local Various cities have established
landlord incentive programs, including
Housing Commission of the City of San
Diego and the Housing Authority of Los
Angeles. In the City of Los Angeles,
participating landlords are eligible for
incentive payouts such as: a one-time
signing bonus for each unit leased or
three months’ rent (whichever is less),
a one-time reimbursement for new
contract inspection repairs, reliable
subsidized monthly payments, and free

55 Investment recommendations based on successful efforts in similarly-sized communities. 2014
44 Action Steps Purpose Funding
Source Community Examples
property listing. Sustainability and/or
replenishment of funding is a key
element of ensuring the continuity of
such programming.

2.3 Identify vacant or
underutilized properties to
create permanent supportive
housing or develop other
affordable housing for ELI
households.

Provide a range of long-
term options for individuals
experiencing
homelessness.

Local,
County,
State
Recent strategies for addressing
homelessness include the State of
California’s efforts to utilize state-
owned properties to address
homelessness.

2.4 Explore establishing a land
trust that enables development
of units that can be used for
permanent supportive housing
and other units for ELI
households.

Protect potential sites for
development.

Local, State Land trusts are increasingly being used
by Cities as a means to protect land
from private development in favor of
developing public land for affordable
housing. The City of Oakland has
recently used taxpayer-approved local
spending to develop affordable units
with a racial equity lens through a
community land trust.

2015
45 Long-Term Action Steps

1. Build relationships and feedback loops with affordable housing developers to understand how best to streamline the development process, including identifying alignment for a master siting plan.

2. Leverage amendments to the City Zoning Code outlined in the Housing Element to increase development of transitional and supportive housing.56 Provide funding and incentives, including tax breaks and reduced permitting costs, to facilitate the development of permanent supportive housing units and units for ELI households. Note that amendments to development ordinances could be achieved in a shorter timeframe to allow for longer-term development strategies.

Equity Actions

1. Implement a full array of housing types, such as multifamily developments and accessory dwelling units (ADU), instead of an overemphasis on single family housing, which has an exclusionary history linked to racial segregation. The California Health and Safety Code57 requires that cities and counties develop a plan that incentivizes and promotes the creation of ADUs that can be offered at affordable rent for very low to moderate-income households.

2. Consider various neighborhoods for developing housing so as not to concentrate housing in low-income areas with the goal of expanding access to resources and economic security.

3. Explore policies that prioritize current or previously displaced Richmond residents for new affordable housing.

56 City of Richmond. Public Review Draft 6th Cycle Housing Element Update (2023-2031), October 2022.

Available at:
https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/63306/LWC_Richmond_HEU_PRD_102122?bidId=. 57 California Health (Section 65583(c)(7)), available at:
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=GOV&sectionNum=65583. 2016
46 Goal 3: Expand homelessness prevention and crisis programming

Efforts to address homelessness should be multifaceted and include interventions that both prevent homelessness and provide crisis supports when individuals become homeless. Interim housing and other immediate crisis interventions such as flexible financial assistance are critical elements of an effective homelessness response system. The goal of crisis programming is to make feasible the transition of vulnerable unhoused individuals out of homelessness and provide a stable experience that facilitates placement into permanent housing. The bridge into permanent housing must support the stated needs of people with current lived experience of homelessness in Richmond. These interventions should target not just individual needs but also consider needs from a community perspective.

Please see the next page for the short-term action steps.

“One single traumatic event can result in homelessness. Many Richmond residents are one sneeze away from becoming unhoused.”
-Participant, Public Sector Focus Group
2017
47 Short-Term Action Steps
Action Steps Purpose Funding
Source Community Examples

3.1 Establish a flexible fund for
financial assistance for diversion
and housing focused-problem
solving, including time limited or
one-off expenses of at least
$100,000.58 Consider a youth-
specific set aside to support
youth staying with family and
friends (e.g., funds for grocery
cards to alleviate financial
strain).

Buffer emergency financial
considerations that may
impact someone’s ability to
maintain housing.

Local, County,
Private
The Community Health
Partnership, based in Colorado,
has an expansive “Flex Fund” that
provides a continuum of support to
those experiencing homelessness
and housing instability. The fund is
supported by Kaiser Permanente
and administered by nonprofits
and city agencies.

3.2 Expand upon locally driven
crisis tools like eviction
moratoriums.

Support individuals in
maintaining housing from a
systemic policy lens.

Local The City of Richmond has already
utilized eviction moratoriums
during the pandemic; revisiting
these strategies is recommended.

3.3 Expand interim housing
options for transition-age youth,
older adults, and other
Increase crisis housing
options to meet immediate,
short-term housing and
County, State,
Federal
The HUD 100-Day Challenge to
Prevent and End Youth and Young
Adult Homelessness highlights

58 Investment recommendations based on successful efforts in similarly sized communities. 2018
48 Action Steps Purpose Funding
Source Community Examples
vulnerable populations. These
interim housing options may
expand on the expected design
of how bridge housing can be
most effectively provided for
targeted populations, including
young people.
service needs of vulnerable
populations.
emerging and best practices in
serving transition-age youth.

3.4 Secure commitment from a
faith-based community partner
to pilot the first Safe Parking
Site in the Richmond Safe
Parking Program.

Provide resources to
unsheltered residents to
meet immediate safety and
basic needs.

City The City of Mountain View
implements a safe parking
program in private and public lots
throughout the City with priority for
families with students in Mountain
View school districts, those who
work/live in Mountain View,
seniors, and people with
disabilities. The Scattered Sites
Subgroup of the Richmond
Homeless Taskforce continues to
conduct targeted outreach to
congregations and other faith
organizations.

3.5 Identify property for the
development of an interim
housing project, which aims to
immediately transition
Leverage existing City
resources that can serve as
a launching pad to
City The City of Los Angeles conducted
an audit of City-owned land,
including parking lots and property,
with the intention of utilizing it for
2019
49 Action Steps Purpose Funding
Source Community Examples
vulnerable clients out of
homelessness and facilitate
placement into permanent
housing. The property may be
vacant or City-owned land. Land
slated for permanent
development may be used as
interim housing during the
entitlement process.
permanent, supportive, and
affordable housing.
interim housing or support
facilities. In 2019, the City of
Richmond approved a Tiny Homes
on Wheels Pilot Project to evaluate
the feasibility of using tiny homes
to provide interim housing to
people experiencing
homelessness.
2020
50 Long-Term Action Steps

1. Develop and identify funds for a subsidy program that provides ongoing rental assistance for extremely low income and high rent burdened households. This program can be modeled after the Statewide Emergency Rental Assistance Program (ERAP), which provides short-term rental assistance to low-income households who were unable to pay rent due to COVID-19.

2. Identify the preferred physical design (ex. tiny home, pallet shelter, etc.), number of units, and on-site services to project needed operations costs to fund an interim housing project. Work with Contra Costa County to identify features of existing sites that have high rates of successful permanent housing placement.

Equity Actions

1. Establish low-barrier crisis response services that can accommodate different types of family configurations to increase racial equity in the homeless system of care. Other equity-building strategies should also be explored so that the people obtaining crisis programming support are representative of the unhoused population.

Goal 4: Improve econo mic pathways for unhoused and recently housed individuals

People experiencing homelessness, service providers,
neighborhood groups, and business owners all cited the
need for pathways to employment and economic stability
for unhoused and recently housed Richmond residents.

Workforce development programs play an important role
in supporting individuals and communities in moving
towards economic stability.
“People experiencing homelessness are seen as a
burden, but they are actually a potential workforce. If we didn’t have to waste our energy on meeting our
basic needs, we would have the energy and resources
to revitalize the economy of Richmond.”
-Former resident, Rydin Road vehicle encampment
Guaranteed basic income
was identified throughout
the community engagement
process as a strategy to
combat inequities that spans
the first four goals of the
Strategic Plan. Richmond as
a whole, including those
experiencing homelessness,
benefits when all individuals
have the right to economic
security they need to thrive.
2021
51 Economic supports should provide both person-centered, individual support and be systemic in nature, taking into account the structural factors that impact individuals’ abilities to access and maintain employment. To disrupt cycles of generational poverty for youth, supports must also be tailored to youth who are unhoused or at risk of homelessness.

Please see the next page for the short-term action steps.

2022
52 Short-Term Action Steps
Action Steps Purpose Funding
Sources Community Examples

4.1 Expand workforce
development services and
employment-focused case
management that prioritizes
employment of unhoused
individuals and increase people
accessing these services by
50% annually.59
Increase the current capacity
of agencies in Richmond
supporting individuals
throughout the interview
process, including preparing
them for interviews, as well as
supports needed for
sustaining employment like
transportation and clothing.

County, State,
Federal
A local example is
RichmondWORKS, which
connects workforce opportunities
by providing occupational training
and job search/placement
assistance to the job seeker and
staffing and hiring assistance to
local businesses.

4.2 Leverage or help fund the
Richmond guaranteed income
pilot program launched by the
Richmond Rapid Response
Fund (R3F).

To provide unconditional,
consistent cash payments to
ensure all residents have the
income they need to meet
their basic needs.

Local, County,
Private
The City of Stockton embarked
upon a guaranteed income
pilot that saw positive outcomes.

The Richmond Rapid Response
Fund has launched a community
design process for a guaranteed
basic income program.

4.3 Create at least three new
partnerships with local
businesses to build
Collaborate with the business
community to provide local
job opportunities.

Local, County,
Private
The Heartland Alliance published
an Employer Engagement Toolkit
that guides workforce development

59 Investment recommendations based on successful efforts in similarly-sized communities. 2023
53 Action Steps Purpose Funding
Sources Community Examples
employment pathways for
people experiencing
homelessness.
stakeholders in building out
relationships with businesses and
provides program design support
and strategy.

4.4 Pilot at least one new
pathway to employment
program for individuals who
have been incarcerated,
including record expungement
and employment opportunities
developed specifically for
reentry.

Reduce barriers to
employment and develop
opportunities specific to the
needs of those leaving
institutional settings.

Local, County,
State, Federal
Homeboy Industries, a prominent
nonprofit organization in Los
Angeles, has pioneered a social
enterprise model that supports
reentry programming and
sustainable employment for
previously incarcerated individuals.

4.5 Expand youth-friendly
employment programs for
youth experiencing and at risk
of homelessness.

Increase the capacity of
established local programs,
such as YouthWORKS, to
provide subsidized internship
and employment
opportunities to Richmond
youth.

Local, County,
State, Federal,
Private
YouthWORKS offers a Work
Experience Program and Youth
Employment Program for
Richmond youth, and provides
services including internships,
apprenticeship training, work
readiness and life skills
workshops, and support services.

2024
54 Long-Term Action Steps

1. Increase digital literacy resources for job seekers experiencing homelessness.

Consider partnering with Literacy for Every Adult (LEAP) to focus on the unhoused.

2. Connect and expand access to language courses for English language learners experiencing homelessness.

3. Expand transportation resources for employment-related needs.

Equity Actions

1. Examine other racial disparities intersecting with homelessness such as system- involvement (juvenile and criminal legal system and foster care involvement), lack of living wage jobs and job availability, housing and employment bias against those who are unhoused or are recently unhoused, and a lack of accessible and supportive services. An emphasis on increasing reentry programming and addressing chronic homelessness with entry-level work and empowerment-based programming should be included in these efforts.

2. Direct economic investments and resources to communities and neighborhoods that have experienced the most significant racial inequities.

2025
55 Goal 5: Build capacity, collaboration , and accountability within agencies working to address homelessness and the system of care as a whole

The City of Richmond has a broad network of
community-based service providers, as well as
local and regional government agencies
committed to preventing and addressing
homelessness in the city. There remains a
community desire for transparency and
accountability regarding what services are
offered, how organizations work together,
and how funding to address homelessness
is utilized.

Please see the next page for the short-term action steps.

“Transparency and communication with the community needs to be improved. We need to know what’s working and what’s not working so that we can come together for a strategic approach.”
-Participant, Business Focus Group
“I’d like to see a low-barrier
innovation fund. Service
providers can use the funding to
innovate, build best practices
and scale up.”
-Participant, Providers Focus
Group
2026
56 Short-Term Action Steps
Action Steps Purpose Funding
Source Community Examples

5.1 Create ongoing leadership
opportunities with
compensation for people with
lived experience of
homelessness to share their
stories, provide feedback to
the system of care, and
participate in designing
solutions to address
homelessness. To leverage
existing efforts, leadership
opportunities should be
incorporated into existing City
Commissions or Advisory
Boards to empower individuals
with lived experience with the
authority to make policy
recommendations to the City
Council.

To sustainably amplify the
voice of people with lived
experience of homelessness
to determine service gaps,
needs, and solutions to
homelessness.

Local, State,
Federal
The Lived Experience Advisory
Board (LEAB) in Santa Clara
County is a leadership
development body consisting of
members with current or past
experience of homelessness.
2027
57 Action Steps Purpose Funding
Source Community Examples

5.2 Strengthen collaboration
between the city, county and
community-based
organizations to improve data
collection, implement this
strategic plan, provide
services in the city, and apply
for funding opportunities. The
dedicated City staff person
(see 5.3) would determine
frequency and format of
interagency collaboration,
which could include systems
level partner meetings, a local
data workgroup, or direct
service coordination.

Leverage existing resources,
expertise, and capacity to
build systemwide capacity
and develop mutually
beneficial partnerships.

Local, State Details will be developed by local
stakeholders.

5.3 Create and fund a
dedicated city staff position to
specifically address
homelessness.

Centralize efforts to address
homelessness to ensure
quality, accountability, and
sustainability in effort and
approach.

Local, State A variety of cities, including the
comparably sized city of
Riverside, have a dedicated staff
person to address homelessness.

2028
58 Long-Term Action Steps

1. Build organizational capacity of city agencies, community-based organizations, and the County CORE team in the form of increased funding, staffing, expertise, planning, and volunteer base.

2. Create a $1 million innovation fund to encourage new strategies to address homelessness with the goal of providing low-barrier access for organizations to try new strategies, particularly organizations with direct ties to the community who may not have had the capacity to apply for other funding opportunities.

Equity Actions

1. Create a culture that values racial equity and cultural competence among City staff who engage with residents experiencing homelessness and/or support programs that serve this population, which includes ongoing training and support.

2. Systematically provide resources and support to BIPOC-led community organizations serving people experiencing homelessness to better integrate them into the system of care and create opportunities for them to train other community organizations and members around equity and cultural competence.

3. Create pro-equity contracting processes that are visible and accessible to contractors of varied size and capacity.

4. Develop effective and accountable leadership for advancing equity within the homeless system of care.

5. Create citywide goals to advance equity related to addressing homelessness and establish a system to track outcomes and celebrate achievements.

6. Increase capacity of organizations and their staff to ensure inclusive engagement of people with lived experience in decision-making, including providing funding, training on best practices, and interpretation resources.

2029
59 Immediate Priorit y Action Steps
The Homelessness Strategic Plan can be used to establish citywide goals to address homelessness and establish a system to track outcomes and celebrate achievements.

The Plan identifies six immediate priority action steps:

Priority Action Step 1 – Create and fund a dedicated city staff position to specifically address homelessness. (Action Step 5.3).

Priority Action Step 2 – Identify funding and development partners for converting hotels and motels to service as Permanent Supportive Housing (PSH) units. (Action Step 2.1)

Priority Action Step 3 – Leverage and expand the Richmond guaranteed income pilot program launched by the Richmond Rapid Response Fund (R3F). (Action Step 4.2).

Priority Action Step 4 – Ensure that essential living amenities such as water, sanitation, hygiene, and electricity are provided at least weekly to all encampments. (Action Step 1.1).

Priority Action Step 5 – Secure commitment from a faith-based community partner to pilot the first Safe Parking Site in the Richmond Safe Parking Program. (Action Step

3.4).

Priority Action Step 6 - Strengthen collaboration between the City, County and community-based organizations to improve data collection, implement this Strategic Plan, provide services in the city, and apply for funding opportunities. The dedicated City staff person would determine frequency and format of interagency collaboration, which could include systems level partner meetings, a local data workgroup, or direct service coordination. (Action Step 5.2).

2030
60 Conclusion
Homelessness in the city of Richmond is a pressing issue for the entire community. A range of stakeholders, including the City, service providers, businesses, sheltered and unsheltered residents must remain invested in collaboratively addressing the issue in an urgent, effective, and accountable way.

Given the existence of racial disparities and economic structures that have negative impact on the wellbeing of individuals and communities, the causes and solutions to homelessness must be informed by an understanding of the systemic conditions that underlie homelessness. Solutions must include systemic policy changes and localized interventions that support both individuals and communities.

This Strategic Plan contains recommendations for both specific short-term action steps and long-term action steps to meet the following goals:

1. Improve quality of life for unsheltered individuals and communities;

2. Create temporary supportive housing and expand/sustain permanent supportive and affordable long-term housing;

3. Expand prevention and crisis programming;

4. Improve economic pathways for unhoused and recently housed individuals; and

5. Build capacity, collaboration and accountability within agencies working to address homelessness and the system of care as a whole.

These goals and the related action steps were developed by robust community input and analysis and serve as a starting point to guide communitywide efforts to address homelessness.

As the City and community of Richmond continue to move forward with addressing homelessness, recognizing and acting upon an understanding of the humanity of all residents is a foundational element to provide meaningful change. In building upon current efforts and drawing lessons from what can be done differently, the City of Richmond can collaboratively affect changes to positively impact and build upon the strengths of the whole community.

2031
61 Appendix A: Glossary of Terms

Term Definition
Community
Land Trust
A nonprofit corporation that holds land on behalf of a community to steward for affordable housing and other community-centered assets.

Continuum of
Care (CoC)
A regional or local planning body that coordinates housing and services funding for homeless families and individuals.

Continuum of
Care Program
Funding
Competitive funding opportunity from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) primarily used for
community-wide efforts to end homelessness, including strategies such as permanent supportive housing, rapid re-housing, and infrastructure supports.

Chronically
Homeless
Federal designation for when a person has been homeless for at least a year, either 12 months consecutively or over the course of at least 4 separate occasions in the past 3 years. To be chronically homeless, the individual or head of household must also have a disability.

Coordinated
Entry
A centralized approach to connect the region’s most vulnerable homeless residents to housing through a single community-wide assessment tool and program matching system.

CORE Contra Costa County’s Coordinated Outreach Referral, Engagement program.

Cost Burden The ratio of housing costs to household income. For renters, housing cost is gross rent (contract rent plus utilities). For owners, housing cost is "select monthly owner costs,” which includes mortgage payment, utilities, association fees, insurance, and real estate taxes.

Day Center or
Day Services
Offer showers, internet access, case management, housing navigation, and other supportive services during traditional daytime hours. In most cases these services are free.
2032
62 Term Definition
Diversion A strategy that prevents homelessness for people seeking shelter by helping them identify immediate alternate housing
arrangements and, if necessary, connecting them with services and financial assistance to help them return to permanent housing.

Emergency
Shelter
Any facility with overnight sleeping accommodations, the primary purpose of which is to provide temporary shelter for the homeless in general or for specific populations of the homeless. Shelter may include year-round emergency shelters, winter and warming shelters, navigation centers and transitional housing. These types of shelter have varying hours, lengths of stay, food service, and support services.

Extremely Low
Income (ELI)
The category “extremely low-income households” is a subset of “very low-income households,” and is defined as 30% (or less) of the area median income.

General Plan A statement of goals, objectives, policies, and actions that describe the community’s priorities for the next 20 years.

California State law requires that every city adopt and maintain an up to date, internally consistent General Plan.

HMIS A Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) is a local information technology system used to collect client-level data and data on the provision of housing and services to homeless individuals and families and persons at risk of homelessness.

Each Continuum of Care (CoC) is responsible for selecting an HMIS software solution that complies with HUD's data collection, management, and reporting standards.

Homeless
System of Care
(or System of
Care)
Another way of describing the Continuum of Care (CoC)
and the broader network of partners who come together to work to support people experiencing homelessness or at
risk of homelessness.
2033
63 Term Definition
Housing
Element
The City’s plan to meet the housing needs of everyone in the community. It is incorporated into the City’s General Plan, or blueprint for how the city will grow and develop. Housing Element Updates are required every eight years by the California Department of Housing and Community Development to guide the creation of housing policy in Richmond.

Housing First A well-accepted, national, evidenced-based best practice that eliminates barriers to housing, ensuring individuals and families can exit homelessness as quickly as possible. Housing First is an approach to quickly and successfully connect households experiencing homelessness to permanent housing without
preconditions and barriers to entry, such as sobriety, treatment or service participation requirements. Supportive services are offered on a voluntary basis to maximize housing stability and prevent returns to homelessness as opposed to addressing predetermined treatment goals prior to permanent housing entry.60

60 What Housing First Really Means, National Alliance to End Homelessness (NAEH), https://endhomelessness.org/what-housing-first-really-means/. 2034
64 Term Definition
Housing-
Focused
Shelter (or
sometimes
called
Navigation
Center)
Shelters that help people connect with long-term solutions to homelessness and address the barriers that keep them from becoming housed. The goal is to help people exit homelessness as rapidly as possible. Once housed, people can work on the underlying challenges that undermine their stability. Housing- Focused Shelters typically offer: admissions policies that screen-in (not screen out) households, and welcome pets, partners, and possessions; minimal rules and restrictions that focus on safety (e.g., no weapons) and ability for people to come and go, with 24- hour operations; client-centered services tailored to support a household’s ability to exit homelessness (e.g., job training, benefits enrollment); physical layout and aesthetics that include community spaces, outdoor spaces for pets, storage for
possessions, mixed-gender dormitories that allow partners to request beds next to one another, and other design elements that promote a welcoming environment; staff with cultural
competencies who treat residents with respect and dignity and caseloads that are kept small enough for staff to spend adequate time with each client; and co-location of benefits eligibility workers, health care, Department of Public Health, and other services.

HUD The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development is the federal agency responsible for national policy and programs that address housing needs, improve and develop communities, and enforce fair housing laws.

Interim Housing Shorter-term crisis options for temporary accommodation to help unhoused people stabilize on the way to permanent housing.

Interim housing can include emergency shelters, navigation centers, and transitional housing, among other housing types.61

61 Reimagining Interim Housing Supplement, The Framework for an Equitable Homelessness Response, https://endhomelessness.org/wp-
content/uploads/2022/12/DOC_ReimaginingInterimHousing_Supplement_FINAL.pdf. 2035
65 Term Definition
Landlord
Incentive
Programs
Programs that provide education and incentives to landlords to make it more likely they will rent to people experiencing homelessness. They can provide funding to support risk mitigation (compensating landlords if tenants harm their premises) and financial incentives that make landlords more likely to rent to people transitioning out of homelessness. Most programs include an education component and address racial inequities in voucher acceptance and access to housing.

Low-Barrier
Shelter
Emergency shelters that have removed most
requirements/obstacles for entry into the program so that households are more likely go indoors to connect to services rather than stay on the street. For example, unhoused residents are allowed to bring their pets and possessions, to live with their partners, and do not have to exit the shelter each morning. They are not expected to abstain from using alcohol or other drugs, so long as they do not engage in these activities in common areas of the shelter and are respectful of other residents and staff.

People with
Lived
Experience of
Homelessness
Term used to refer to people who have lived through the experience of homelessness and have first-hand knowledge of what it feels like to live unsheltered and/or to move through the homeless system of care.

Permanent
Supportive
Housing (PSH)
Provides long-term housing with intensive supportive services to persons with disabilities. These programs typically target people with extensive experiences of homelessness and multiple vulnerabilities and needs who would not be able to retain housing without significant support.

Point-in-Time
Count (PIT)
A count of sheltered and unsheltered people experiencing homelessness on a single night required by HUD.

Prevention A strategy intended to target people who are at imminent risk of homelessness (whereas diversion usually targets people as they are initially trying to gain entry into shelter).

Racial Equity In the context of homelessness, this speaks to the need for communities to address the overrepresentation of people of color among those experiencing homelessness due to historic and continued systemic discrimination and racism.
2036
66 Term Definition
Racial Equity
Action Plan
Written document to support the Contra Costa Continuum of Care with analysis of both quantitative and qualitative data to identify racial and ethnic disparities, and opportunities to advance racial equity.

Rapid Re-
Housing (RRH)
Provides rental housing subsidies and tailored supportive services for up to 24-months, with the goal of helping people to transition during that time period to more permanent housing.

Regional
Housing Needs
Assessment
(RHNA)
Required under California housing law as part of a City’s General Plan.

Street Outreach Multi-disciplinary teams who work on the streets or in encampments to engage with people experiencing homelessness who may be disconnected or alienated from services and supports that are offered at an agency.

Subsidy (or
Housing
Subsidy)
Subsidized housing is government sponsored economic
assistance aimed towards alleviating housing costs and expenses for individuals and families with low to moderate incomes.

Supportive
Services
Includes assistance applying for benefits, mental health and substance use services, outpatient health services, information and referral services, child care, education, life skills training, employment assistance and job training, housing search and counseling services, legal services, outreach services, transportation, food assistance, risk assessment and safety planning (particularly for individuals and families experiencing domestic violence), and case management services such as counseling, finding and coordinating services, and monitoring and evaluating progress in a program.

Transition Age
Youth (TAY)
Persons between age 18 and 24 who are transitioning from childhood to adulthood. TAY can be housed or unhoused.
2037
67 Term Definition
Transitional
Housing
Provides temporary housing accommodations and supportive services. While many households benefit most from direct connections to permanent housing programs such as RRH or PSH (which are often more cost-effective over the long term), transitional housing can also be an effective support in the intermediary. Certain subpopulations, such as people fleeing domestic violence and transition age youth, can meaningfully benefit from a transitional housing environment.

Universal Basic
Income (UBI)
Universal basic income is a government program in which residents, regardless of income or means, are guaranteed a set amount of money regularly with the purpose of addressing economic inequality and promoting economic security.

Voucher (or
Housing
Voucher)
A voucher or housing voucher that can be spent on rented housing, such as Section 8 public housing in the United States, to help low-income individuals and families secure housing.

Written
Standards
Written document that outlines the key elements of HUD’s regulations for projects funded under the Continuum of Care or Emergency Solutions Grant.

2038

July 1, 2025

City Council

DATE: July 1, 2025
TO: Mayor Martinez and Members of the City Council
FROM:

Vice Mayor Cesar Zepeda

Subject:

Presentation from Levitree for Nature-Based Solutions for Sea-Level Rise
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no financial impact for receiving this presentation.

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

None.

STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:

To help Richmond’s shoreline with sea level rise and
ground water infiltration. The nature-based solutions may possibly be used at Parchester Village, Marina Bay, Point Richmond, and other Richmond communities that will be
impacted by Sea Level Rise and ground water infiltration RECOMMENDED ACTION:

RECEIVE a presentation from Levitree to learn about
possible nature-based solutions to help Richmond’s
shoreline with sea level rise and ground water infiltration - Vice Mayor Cesar Zepeda (510-620-6593).

DISCUSSION:

Receive a presentation from Levitree to learn about possible nature-based solutions to help Richmond’s shoreline with sea level rise. This solution can possibly be used at AGENDA
REPORT
2039

July 1, 2025
Parchester Village, Marina Bay, Point Richmond, and other Richmond communities that will be impacted by sea-level rise and ground water infiltration.

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:

Attachment 1 – Levitree PPT

2040
Reshape the World®
2041
2042
-60ft
+6ft
0ft
Secret sauce: fracture techniques, slurry
composition, ML data set, first-mover
2043
Pilot Site in Wilton, CA
2044
2045
2046
2047
2048
2049

(insert date of meeting)

City Council

DATE: July 1, 2025
TO: Mayor Martinez and Members of the City Council
FROM:

Councilmember Soheila Bana
Councilmember Doria Robinson (co-sponsor)
Councilmember Jamelia Brown (co-sponsor)
Subject:

Allocate $2,000 from City Event Budget for the 2025 El
Sobrante Stroll
FINANCIAL IMPACT: An expenditure of $2,000 from the existing event budget.

No additional funding is required. (Account String:
01251151-400322).

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

September 10, 2024

STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:

The El Sobrante Stroll is a long-standing community
event that celebrates local culture, small businesses, and civic engagement. Each year, it draws thousands of
attendees from Richmond, El Sobrante, Pinole, San
Pablo, Hercules and surrounding areas as far as Vallejo.

The event features booths, music, food, and local
organization showcases, serving as a vital platform for community unity and visibility.

The City of Richmond has previously supported local
community events through its designated event budget to promote equity, cultural engagement, and neighborhood
cohesion.

AGENDA
REPORT
2050

(insert date of meeting)
RECOMMENDED ACTION:

APPROVE a resolution authorizing the allocation of
$2,000 from the City of Richmond’s allotted event budget to support the 2025 El Sobrante Stroll - Councilmember
Soheila Bana (510-672-3490)/Councilmember Doria
Robinson (510-620-6568)/Councilmember Jamelia
Brown (510-609-5780).

DISCUSSION:

This item proposes allocating $2,000 from the City's event budget to help cover expenses related to Richmond’s participation in the 2025 El Sobrante Stroll, such as outreach materials, booth fees, and promotional activities. The allocation will enhance Richmond’s presence and strengthen collaboration with El Sobrante and unincorporated communities.

Supporting this event aligns with the City’s broader goals of cultural inclusion, civic engagement, and neighborhood pride.

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:

Attachment 1 – Resolution
Attachment 2 – El Sobrante Stroll Flyer 2025
2051

Reso. No. _____

RESOLUTION NO. ______

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND ALLOCATING $2,000 FROM THE CITY’S EVENT BUDGET TO SUPPORT THE 2025 EL SOBRANTE STROLL
WHEREAS, the El Sobrante Stroll is a well -established annual event that fosters community spirit and strengthens cultural and civic connections across Richmond and neighboring communities; and WHEREAS, for District 4, which lacks a formal community hub or center, the event serves as a rare and essential opportunity for community gathering, fostering neighborhood identity, connection, and pride; and WHEREAS, the Stroll provides both meaningful economic opportunities for Richmond-based vendors and a unique platform for community groups and city departments to engage with residents, promote services, and expand outreach in a neighboring area with strong ties to Richmond neighborhoods; and WHEREAS, although it is held on San Pablo Dam Road —which is mostly located in uni ncorporated Contra Costa County —many Richmond residents attend and participate; it remains the only major community event that brings together residents from the surrounding areas and offers a valuable opportunity for them to connect with City services and staff by visiting Richmond’s informational booths; and WHEREAS, participation in such events is consistent with the City of Richmond’s goals of promoting community engagement, diversity, and regional collaboration, and this allocation will enhance Richmond’s visibility and affirm its commitment to regional partnerships.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Richmond hereby authorizes the allocation of $2,000 from the City’s designated event budget to support Richmond’s participation in the 2025 El Sobrante Stroll.

******************

***THE CLERK’S OFFICE WILL COMPLETE THE INFORMATION BELOW****

I certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Richmond at a regular meeting thereof held on Mmmm dd, yyyy, by the following vote:

AYES: AYES:

NOES:

ABSTENTIONS:

ABSENT:

CLERK OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND
(SEAL)
Approved:

Mayor

Approved as to form:

City Attorney

State of California }
2052

Reso. No. _____

County of Contra Costa : ss.

City of Richmond }

I certify that the foregoing is a true copy of Resolution No. _____, finally passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Richmond at a regular meeting held on Mmmm dd, yyyy.

_______________________________________
Pamela Christian, Clerk of the City of Richmond
2053
2054