Richmond City Council
April 28, 2026

PLEASE NOTE: HYBRID MEETING FORMAT

- SPECIAL OPEN SESSION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
- REGULAR MEETING OF THE RICHMOND CITY COUNCIL

Tuesday, April 28, 2026, 5:00 p.m.

Community Services Building
440 Civic Center Plaza
Richmond, CA 94804
Members:

Eduardo Martinez, Mayor at Large
Jamelia Brown, Councilmember District 1
Cesar Zepeda, Councilmember District 2
Doria Robinson, Vice Mayor, District 3
Soheila Bana, Councilmember District 4
Sue Wilson, Councilmember District 5
Claudia Jimenez, Councilmember District 6
NOTICE: MASKS ARE STRONGLY ENCOURAGED!!
***REGISTER TO VOTE HERE!!***
https://registertovote.ca.gov/
The last day to register to vote for the June 2, 2026, Primary Election is May 18, 2026 The last day to register to vote for the November 3, 2026, General Election is October 19, 2026 Link to City Council Agendas/Packets
http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/4157/City-ofRichmond-Council-Meetings Register to receive notification of new agendas, etc.
http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/list.aspx
HOW TO WATCH THE MEETING FROM HOME:

1. KCRT – Comcast Channel 28 or AT&T Uverse Channel 99

2. Livestream online at http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/3178/KCRT-Live HOW TO SUBMIT PUBLIC COMMENTS:

In Person: Anyone who desires to address the City Council during Open Forum, must complete and file a pink speaker’s card with the City Clerk prior to the City Council’s consideration of the item. Online speakers: must raise their hand when instructed by the clerk. Once the City Clerk has announced the item and given a count of the number of total speakers, no person shall be permitted to speak on the item other than those persons who have submitted their names to the City Clerk or those that have their hand raised.

The amount of time allotted to individual speakers shall be determined based on the total number of persons requesting to speak during this item. The time allocation for each speaker will be as follows: 15 or fewer speakers, a maximum of 2 minutes; 16 to 24 speakers, a maximum of 1 and one-half minutes; and 25 or more speakers, a maximum of 1 minute.

NON-PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS LISTED ON THE AGENDA: Each speaker will be allowed up to TWO minutes to address the Council. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS: Speakers are allowed up to THREE (3) minutes to address the Council.

Via Zoom: Anyone who desires to address the City Council on items appearing on the agenda, including Open Forum, must raise their hand once public comment is open. The public speakers attending in person will be called first, followed by Zoom participants (when appropriate). Only those public speakers that have their hand raised at the appropriate time will be recognized.

Open Session and City Council: Please click the link below to join the webinar:
https://zoom.us/j/99312205643?pwd=MDdqNnRmS2k4ZkRTOWhlUldQOUF1Zz09 Passcode: ccmeeting
By iPhone one-tap: US: +16699006833,,99312205643# or +13462487799,,99312205643# By Telephone: Dial (for higher quality, dial a number based on your current location): US: +1 669 900 6833 or +1 346 248 7799 or +1 253 215 8782 or +1 312 626 6799 or +1 929 205 6099 or +1 301 715 8592 Webinar ID: 993 1220 5643
International numbers available: https://zoom.us/u/aehrwCgISx To comment by video conference: click on the Participants button at the bottom of your screen and select the “Raise Your Hand” button to request to speak when Public Comment is being asked for. When called upon, press the unmute button. After the allotted time, you will then be re-muted. ** To comment by phone: you will be prompted to “Raise Your Hand” by pressing “*9” to request to speak when Public Comment is asked for. When called upon, you will be asked to unmuted by pressing *6. After the allotted time, you will then be re-muted. Instructions of how to raise your hand by phone are available at:
4/28/26 CC MTG.
2 https://support.zoom.us/hc/en-us/articles/201362663 -Joining-a-meeting-by-phone. ** **The mayor will announce the agenda item number and open public comment when appropriate.

Via mail: received by 1:00 p.m. the day of the meeting, sent to 450 Civic Center Plaza, 3rd Floor, Office of the Clerk, Richmond, CA 94804.

Via eComments: eComments are available once an agenda is published. Locate the meeting in "upcoming meetings" and click the comment bubble icon. Click on the item you wish to comment on. eComments can be submitted when the agenda is published and until the conclusion of public comments for the agenda item. Email your comment to [email protected] should you have difficulty submitting an eComment during a meeting.

Via email: to [email protected] by 1:00 p.m. the day of the meeting.

Emails MUST contain in the subject line 1) public comments – Open Session prior to Closed Session; 2) public comments – Open Forum; or 3) public comments agenda item #__ [include the agenda item number].

Properly labeled public comments will be considered a public record, put into the official meeting record, available after the meeting as supplemental materials, and will be posted as an attachment to the meeting minutes when the minutes are posted: http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/Archive.aspx?AMID=31 The City cannot guarantee that its network and/or the site will be uninterrupted. To ensure that the City Council receives your comments, you are strongly encouraged to submit your comments in writing in advance of the meeting.

Procedures for Removing Items from the Consent Calendar: Members of the public who request to remove an item from the consent calendar must first discuss the item with a staff member by phone or a back-andforth email discussion, and state the name of the staff member when requesting removal of the item from the consent calendar (by 2 p.m. the day of the meeting). The procedures for discussion do not apply to items sponsored by the mayor or councilmembers.

Any member of the City Council who would like to remove an item from the consent calendar must notify the appropriate staff person and the City Clerk’s Office prior to the meeting. Although members of the City Council are encouraged to ask questions and share concerns with staff ahead of the meeting, they are not required to do so.

The Clerk’s Office must be informed of any requests to remove items from the Consent Calendar. Items removed from the Consent Calendar shall be placed at the end of the agenda for consideration.

CONDUCT AT MEETINGS: Richmond City Council meetings are limited public forums during which the City strives to provide an open, safe atmosphere and promote robust public debate. Members of the public, however, must comply with state law, as well as the City’s laws and procedures and may not actually disrupt the orderly conduct of these meetings. The public, for example, may not shout or use amplifying devices, must submit comment cards and speak during their allotted time, may not create a physical disturbance, may not speak on matters unrelated to issues within the jurisdiction of the City Council or the agenda item at hand, and may not cause immediate threats to public safety. 4/28/26 CC MTG.
3 Click here for City Harassment Policy

Accessibility for Individuals with Disabilities: Upon request, the City will provide for written agenda materials in appropriate alternative formats, or disability-related modification or accommodation, including auxiliary aids or services and sign language interpreters, to enable individuals with disabilities to participate in and provide comments at/related to public meetings. Please submit a request, including your name, phone number and/or email address, and a description of the modification, accommodation, auxiliary aid, service or alternative format requested at least two days before the meeting. Requests should be emailed to [email protected] or submitted by phone at 510-620-6513, ext. 9, or 510-620-6509.

Requests made by mail to City Clerk’s Office, City Council meeting, 450 Civic Center Plaza, Richmond, CA 94804 must be received at least two days before the meeting. Requests will be granted whenever possible and resolved in favor of accessibility.

Unless otherwise noted in an agenda description, all actions taken by the Council include a determination that CEQA does not apply (i.e., the action is not a project and therefore exempt from CEQA).

Disclaimer: The City Clerk's Office translates agendas to enhance public access. Translated agendas are provided as a courtesy and do not constitute legal notice of the meeting or items to be discussed. In case of discrepancy, the English agenda will prevail.

Pages
4/28/26 CC MTG.
4 A. SPECIAL OPEN SESSION TO HEAR PUBLIC COMMENT BEFORE CLOSED

SESSION
5:00 p.m.

B. ROLL CALL
C. CLOSED SESSION
C.1 CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS (Government Code Section 54957.6)
Agency Representatives: Sharrone Taylor, Jack Hughes, and Lisa Charbonneau
Employee organizations:

1. SEIU Local 1021 Full Time Unit and Part Time Unit

2. IFPTE Local 21 Mid-Level Management Unit and Executive Management Units

3. Richmond Police Officers Association RPOA

4. Richmond Police Management Association RPMA

5. IAFF Local 188

6. Richmond Fire Management Association RFMA
C.2 CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (Government Code Section 54956.8)
Property: 1324 Canal Boulevard
Agency Negotiator: Nannette Beacham, Charles Gerard
Negotiating Parties: Mossbridge
Under Negotiation: Price, Terms of Payment
D. PUBLIC COMMENT BEFORE CLOSED SESSION (limited to items on the Closed Session agenda only)
E. ADJOURN TO CLOSED SESSION
________________________________________________________ 4/28/26 CC MTG.
5 F. REGULAR MEETING OF THE RICHMOND CITY COUNCIL
6:00 p.m.

G. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
H. ROLL CALL
I. STATEMENT OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST
J. AGENDA REVIEW
K. REPORT FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY OF FINAL DECISIONS MADE DURING

CLOSED SESSION
L. REPORT FROM THE CITY MANAGER (public comment allowed under Open Forum) M. COMMENDATIONS, PRESENTATIONS, AND PROCLAMATIONS
M.1 Proclamation Honoring Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI) Heritage Month and Recognizing The AAPI Community Celebration
12 PROCLAMATION declaring May 2026 as Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI) Heritage Month in the City of Richmond and recognizing the AAPI Community Celebration at the Richmond Auditorium - Councilmember Soheila Bana (510-672-3490).

N. OPEN FORUM FOR PUBLIC COMMENT
(public comment on items that remain on the Consent Calendar or items not on the agenda - limited to 2 minutes unless otherwise specified - Back and forth dialogue with the Council is prohibited)
O. CITY COUNCIL CONSENT CALENDAR
(All items placed under the Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and noncontroversial. These items will be enacted upon together with a motion and second, without discussion, of any member of the City Council, and each item shall be deemed to have received the action recommended.)
O.1 City Clerk's Office
O.1.a Meeting Minutes 16
APPROVE the minutes of the March 17 and April 7, 2026, regular City Council meetings - City Clerk's Office (Pamela Christian 510- 620-6513).
4/28/26 CC MTG.
6 O.2 Community Development
O.2.a Grant Agreement with Contra Costa Interfaith Transitional Housing, Inc. (dba Hope Solutions)
39 APPROVE a grant agreement in an amount not to exceed $300,000 with Contra Costa Interfaith Transitional Housing, Inc. (dba Hope Solutions) to provide capital and supportive services funding for the Tiny House Village and Garden Project at 175 23rd Street for a term expiring December 31, 2027– Community Development Department (Lina Velasco/Jesus Morales 510-620-6649).

O.2.b Authorize AHSC Grant Application for Riveter Project and Associated Active Transportation Improvements
69 ADOPT a resolution to AUTHORIZE the City’s participation in an Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities Program (AHSC) grant application for the Riveter Project, a 59-unit affordable housing development at 100 38th Street, for the purposes of implementing certain pedestrian and bicycle improvements, and AUTOHRIZE the city manager or their designee to execute the necessary agreements with the Co-Applicants to complete the project components with grant funds and appropriate the grant funds, if awarded – Community Development Department (Lina Velasco 510-620-6841).

O.3 Economic Development
O.3.a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the West Contra Costa Integrated Waste Management Authority (RecycleMore) for Implementation of California Senate Bill 1383 (SB 1383) 76 ADOPT a resolution approving a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City and the West Contra Costa Integrated Waste Management Authority (RecycleMore) regarding
implementation of California Senate Bill 1383 (SB 1383) regulatory requirements and AUTHORIZE the city manager or their designee to execute the MOU – Economic Development Department (Samantha Carr 510-620-5407).

O.3.b Contract with John C. Martin Associates, LLC for the Port Economic Impact Study
97 APPROVE a contract with John C. Martin Associates, LLC to provide an economic impact study of Port of Richmond activity, in an amount not to exceed $112,900, with a term ending June 30, 2027 - Economic Development Department (Charles Gerard 510-620-6792). 4/28/26 CC MTG.
7 O.4 Library and Community Services
O.4.a Contract Amendment No. 2 with LCP Tracker for Labor Compliance Monitoring and Reporting Services
167
APPROVE the second amendment to the agreement with
LCPtracker, Inc., in the amount of $29,000, for a total contract amount not to exceed $56,999, for the term beginning March 5, 2025, and ending March 4, 2027, to continue providing labor compliance software for certified payroll, workforce tracking, and ordinance compliance on City-funded projects – Community Services Department/Employment and Training (Tamara Walker 510-307- 8006/LaShonda White 510-620-6828).

O.4.b Contract with Unity Courier Services, Inc. for Delivery of Interlibrary Loan Materials
215
APPROVE a sole-source contract with Unity Courier Service, Inc. for Link+ interlibrary courier services, with a term beginning July 1, 2025, and ending June 30, 2028, for a total payment limit of $42,000 – Community Service-Library (Christopher Larsen/Kate
Eppler/LaShonda White 510-620-5524).

O.4.c Contract Amendment No. 3 with Charleston Mobility for Electric Bikeshare Operations
271
APPROVE a third contract amendment with Charleston Mobility in an amount not to exceed $390,000 for a total not-to-exceed contract amount of $3,540,341, to support the continued operation of the citywide electric bikeshare program till the end of the fiscal year to allow time to determine the future of the program during the Fiscal Year 2026-27 budget process; and APPROPRIATE $390,000 from the Environmental and Community Investment Agreement (ECIA) Transportation budget to cover the cost of the contract amendment – Public Works Department/Community Services Department (Gabino Arredondo 510-620-6606/LaShonda White 510-620-6828).

O.4.d Accept and Appropriate California Tahoe Conservancy -Tahoe for All Grant Funds
329
ADOPT a resolution to ACCEPT and APPROPRIATE grant funds in the amount of $60,000 from California Tahoe Conservancy-Tahoe for All Grant Program Fund; and AUTHORIZE the city manager or their designee to execute the agreement – Community Services
Department/Recreation (Ranjana Maharaj/Jene Levine- Snipes 510- 307-8132).
4/28/26 CC MTG.
8 O.4.e Contract Amendment No. 4 with Pogo Park for the Harbour-8 Park Expansion Project and Operating and Management
334
APPROVE a fourth contract amendment with Pogo Park to complete the Harbour-8 Park Expansion Project increasing the payment limit by $3,275,000, for a total not-to-exceed amount of $12,430,725, and AUTHORIZE the city manager or their designee to negotiate and execute an Operations and Management Agreement with Pogo Park, with approval as to form by the City Attorney’s Office, for the programming and maintenance of park facilities, for a term ending May 1, 2029, with two one-year extension options – Community Services Department/Public Works Department (LaShonda White 510-620-6828/Daniel Chavarria 510-620-5478).

O.5 Mayor's Office
O.5.a Proclamation recognizing April 2026 as Alcohol Awareness Month 461 PROCLAMATION recognizing April 2026 as Alcohol Awareness Month and encouraging community-wide efforts to promote education, prevention, and support services – Mayor’s Office (Mayor Eduardo Martinez 510-620-6503).

O.5.b Proclamation declaring April 2026 as Sexual Assault Awareness Month
464
PROCLAMATION declaring April 2026 as Sexual Assault Awareness Month – Mayor’s Office (Mayor Eduardo Martinez 510-620-6503).

O.5.c Proclamation recognizing May 3-9, 2026 as National Small Business Week
467
PROCLAMATION recognizing May 3–9, 2026, as National Small Business Week in the City of Richmond and encouraging all residents to support local small businesses – Mayor's Office (Mayor Eduardo Martinez 510-620-6503).

O.5.d Establish the Richmond-Sebastia Sister City Commission 470 ADOPT a resolution establishing the Richmond-Sebastia Sister City Commission, directing the Commission to prepare bylaws subject to City Council approval, and establishing basic organizational requirements - Mayor’s Office (Mayor Eduardo Martinez 510-620- 5303).

O.5.e Appointment of Ric Ambrose to the Richmond Arts and Culture Commission
475
APPOINT Ric Ambrose to the Richmond Arts and Culture
Commission to a vacant seat with a new term ending January 31, 2030 – Mayor’s Office (Mayor Eduardo Martinez 510-620-6503). 4/28/26 CC MTG.
9 O.5.f Appointment of Bryan M. Harris to the Contra Costa County Advisory Council on Aging
480
APPOINT Bryan M. Harris, Contra Costa County Advisory Council on Aging (ACOA), City of Richmond’s Seat, Term Expires September 30, 2028 - Mayor’s Office (Mayor Eduardo Martinez 510-620-6503).

O.5.g Appointment of Eva Hernandez to the Workforce Development Board 484 APPOINT Eva Hernandez to the Workforce Development Board to a vacant seat with a new term ending March 1, 2030 – Mayor’s Office (Mayor Eduardo Martinez 510-620-6503).

O.6 Public Works
O.6.a Contract with The Halleman Group, LLC for Owner’s Advisor Services for Wastewater and Stormwater Operator Procurement 487
ADOPT a resolution to APPROVE a contract with The Halleman Group, LLC to provide Owner’s Advisor services for procurement of an operator for the wastewater treatment plant, wastewater collection system, and stormwater collection system, in an amount not to exceed $250,000, for a term from May 1, 2026, through April 30, 2028; and AUTHORIZE the city manager or their designee to execute all necessary documents – Public Works Department (Daniel Chavarria 510-620-5478/Tawfic Halaby 510-620-5482).

P. BUDGET SESSION
P.1 Update on Community Engagement on Limited-Term Revenue and Authorization to Negotiate and Execute a Contract with Dalberg Advisors 720
RECEIVE an update on community engagement efforts related to limited-term revenues, APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the city manager and city attorney to negotiate and execute a contract award with Dalberg Advisors, subject to approval as to form by the city attorney – Finance Department (Shasa Curl 510- 620-6512/Emily Combs 510-620-679).

Q. STUDY AND ACTION SESSION
Q.1 Presentation from San Francisco Bay Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART) Director Barnali Ghosh for 2026
910
RECEIVE a presentation from the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART) Director regarding BART’s recent service improvements and the transit fiscal crisis due to Work From Home – City Manager’s Office (Gabino Arredondo 510-620-6606).

Q.2 Introduce Ordinance Amending Sidewalk Vendor Regulations (RMC Chapter

7.42)
926
INTRODUCE an ordinance (first reading) amending Chapter 7.42 of the Richmond Municipal Code (Sidewalk Vendor Ordinance) to update administrative procedures, waiver provisions, and enforcement mechanisms - Public Works Department (Andy Cho 620-6547/Robert Armijo 620-5477). 4/28/26 CC MTG.
10 Q.3 Contract with Liftech Consultants, Inc. for Planning and Design Services for the Relocation of the SS Red Oak Victory
952
RECEIVE a presentation from Rosie the Riveter / WWII Home Front National Historical Park and APPROVE a contract with Liftech Consultants Inc. in the amount of $299,797 for planning and preliminary design of the relocation of the Red Oak for a term ending June 30, 2027 - Economic Development Department/Port (Charles Gerard 510-620-6792). This item was continued from the February 3, 2026, meeting.

Q.4 Creating a Park and Playground in Pullman Neighborhood to begin to Correct Decades of Systemic Underinvestment in this Underserved Neighborhood 1072
DIRECT staff to work with the Pullman Neighborhood Council to explore acquisition of Parcel # (APN): 513-025-001-1 comprising the vacant lot at South 27th Street and Florida Avenue to evaluate feasibility, funding opportunities, and development pathways to establish and develop a neighborhood park that serves Pullman families and to RETURN to the City Council with recommendations and a proposed timeline within 90 days - Vice Mayor Doria Robinson (510-620-6568) and Councilmember Claudia Jimenez (510-620- 6565).

Q.5 Opposition to Proposed CO2 Waste Dumping Projects & CO2 Pipelines in Richmond, Contra Costa, and Solano Counties
1077
RECEIVE a presentation on proposed Montezuma CO2 Hub, a carbon waste dumping project, that would require a massive build out of pipelines through Richmond, risking the health and safety of Richmond residents and ADOPT a resolution that opposes the proposed Montezuma Carbon Sequestration Hub's CO2 pipeline waste dumping projects and CO2 pipelines in Richmond, Contra Costa, and Solano Counties - Councilmember Claudia Jimenez (510-620- 6565).

Q.6 Presentation by UC Berkeley Scientists and Community Partners on Earthquake Preparedness
1093
RECEIVE a presentation from leading experts—the UC Berkeley Seismology Lab, Berkeley Center for Smart Infrastructure, Community Emergency Response Team (CERT), Emergency Communication (Em Comm), and West Contra Costa Fire Safe Council (WCCFSC)—regarding local earthquake probabilities, regional vulnerabilities - Councilmember Soheila Bana (510-672- 3490).

R. REPORTS OF OFFICERS: REFERRALS TO STAFF, AND GENERAL REPORTS (INCLUDING AB 1234 REPORTS)(limited to two minutes per Councilmember) S. ADJOURNMENT
________________________
4/28/26 CC MTG.
11

April 28, 2026
City Council
DATE: April 28, 2026
TO: Mayor Martinez and Members of the City Council
FROM: Councilmember Soheila Bana
Subject: Proclamation Honoring Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI) Heritage Month and Recognizing The
AAPI Community Celebration
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with this action. The proposed proclamation and recognition of the AAPI
Community Celebration are supported by existing City
sponsorships and collaborative contributions from
participating community organizations.

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

None.

STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:

Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI) Heritage
Month is observed annually in May to recognize the
historical and cultural contributions of people of Asian and Pacific Islander descent to the United States. In
Richmond, the AAPI population in Richmond makes up
about 14 percent of the City’s population and represents a vital part of our City’s diversity, entrepreneurship, and cultural resilience.

On May 2, 2026, the City of Richmond is sponsoring a
community-wide celebration at the Richmond Memorial
Auditorium. This event is a collaborative effort involving a broad coalition of community partners, county partners, and social service organizations.

AGENDA
REPORT
12

April 28, 2026
RECOMMENDED ACTION: PROCLAMATION declaring May 2026 as Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI) Heritage Month in
the City of Richmond and recognizing the AAPI
Community Celebration at the Richmond Auditorium -
Councilmember Soheila Bana (510-672-3490).

DISCUSSION:

The 2026 AAPI Community Celebration is designed to foster solidarity across diverse AAPI groups, specifically including those from West and Central Asia. The event is centered on the theme of "Culture as Power," recognizing that cultural expression is not only a way to preserve traditions but also a form of "cultural capital" that strengthens the political and economic standing of our residents.

The celebration includes:
 Cultural Performances: Taiko drumming, Tibetan folk dance, Lao-Khmu dance, and Nepali youth dance
 Community Solidarity: Resource fair featuring approximately 20 partners offering legal, health, education, and social services
 Youth Engagement: Talent show and fashion show featuring local artists and youth from diverse backgrounds, including Nepali and Latino communities  Flavors from Around the World: Afghan, Nepali, and Eritrean cuisine With this proclamation, the City of Richmond reaffirms its commitment to racial equity and social justice, ensuring that our immigrant and minority communities are seen, heard, and celebrated.

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:

Attachment 1 – Proclamation Honoring AAPI Heritage Month and Celebrating Community Resiliency
13 WHEREAS, May is nationally recognized as Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI) Heritage Month, a time to celebrate the diverse cultures, rich histories, and significant contributions of the AAPI community to the fabric of our nation and the City of Richmond; and
WHEREAS, the AAPI Community Celebration on May 2, 2026, is an opportunity to celebrate the diverse cultures within the AAPI community, including those of West and Central Asia, and is designed to build relationships and foster solidarity across AAPI groups and communities; and
WHEREAS, this event recognizes culture as power, acknowledging that cultural capital is an asset that shapes political and economic systems; and further recognizes that at the individual and community level, cultural expression preserves traditions, sustains connections to home, and can itself be an act of resistance; and WHEREAS, this celebration is made possible through the sponsorship of the City of Richmond and the collaborative efforts of a dedicated coalition of community partners, including:
• The SAFE Center
• The Office of Racial Equity and Social Justice
• The Center for Empowering Refugees and Immigrants
• Community Health for Asian Americans
• East Bay Center for the Performing Arts
• NAMI Contra Costa
• Project Second Chance, Contra Costa Libraries
• Stand Together Contra Costa
• Diversity in Health
• RotaCare West
• Immigration Institute of the Bay Area
• Jubilee Legal
• Asian Pacific Environmental Network
• The Latina Center; and

HONORING ASIAN AMERICAN AND PACIFIC ISLANDER (AAPI)

HERITAGE MONTH AND CELEBRATING COMMUNITY

RESILIENCY IN THE CITY OF RICHMOND

14 WHEREAS, the festivities showcase the vibrant cultural spirit of Richmond through a Resource Fair, a Talent Show by local artists, a Fashion Show by The Latina Center and Nepali children, and performances by the Sakura Kai Taiko Drumming group, the Namchod Kyetsel Tibetan folk dance team, the East Bay Bokeo Lao-Khmu dancers, and the Rose's Nepali youth dancers.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Richmond City Council does hereby proclaim May 2026 as AAPI Heritage Month in the City of Richmond and encourages all residents to join in this celebration of culture and community solidarity.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that I, Eduardo Martinez, the Mayor of the City of Richmond commends all participating organizations and performers for their dedication to building a more inclusive Richmond where every immigrant and minority community is seen, heard, and supported.
______________________________
Mayor Eduardo Martinez
At Large
April 28, 2026
_______________________________
Council Member Soheila Bana
District 6
15 cc17Mar2026 – sl/prc

RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA, March 17, 2026
Community Services Building
440 Civic Center Plaza
Richmond, CA 94804
_____________________________________________________________________ A. SPECIAL OPEN SESSION TO HEAR PUBLIC COMMENT BEFORE CLOSED

SESSION
The Richmond City Council Evening Open Session was called to order at 5:00 p.m. by Mayor Eduardo Martinez.

B. ROLL CALL

Present: Councilmembers Claudia Jimenez, Jamelia Brown, Sue Wilson, Cesar Zepeda, Vice Mayor Doria Robinson, and Mayor Eduardo Martinez. Absent: Councilmember Soheila Bana arrived at 5:05 p.m. after the roll was called.

C. CLOSED SESSION
C.1 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION (paragraph (1) of Subdivision [d] of Government Code Section 54956.9)  Dorn v. City of Richmond
C.2 CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS (Government Code
Section 54957.6)
 Agency Representatives: Sharrone Taylor, Jack Hughes, and Lisa Charbonneau
Employee organizations:

1. SEIU Local 1021 Full-Time Unit and Part-Time Unit

2. IFPTE Local 21 Mid-Level Management Unit and Executive Management Units

3. Richmond Police Officers Association RPOA

4. Richmond Police Management Association RPMA

5. IAFF Local 188

6. Richmond Fire Management Association RFMA
D. PUBLIC COMMENT BEFORE CLOSED SESSION (limited to items on the Closed Session agenda only)
Cordell Hindler gave comments in person regarding Item C.2 (labor negotiations).

The following speakers gave comments via teleconference regarding Item C.2: Ben Therriault, Nathan Lonso, Kevin Lemus, and Alexander Caine.

City Manager Shasa Curl stated that she made decisions based on written reports, and until there were written reports provided for the administrative record, that was when she would move forward with the next steps, always related to personnel matters.

E. ADJOURN TO CLOSED SESSION
The Open Session adjourned to Closed Session at 5:11 p.m. Closed Session adjourned at 6:01 p.m.
16 cc17Mar2026 – sl/prc

F. SPECIAL MEETING OF THE RICHMOND HOUSING AUTHORITY
The Special Meeting of the Richmond Housing Authority was called to order at 6:05 p.m. by Chairperson Eduardo Martinez.

G. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Chairperson Martinez led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.

H. ROLL CALL

Present: Commissioners Claudia Jimenez, Jamelia Brown, Sue Wilson, Cesar Zepeda, Vice Chairperson Doria Robinson, Chairperson Eduardo Martinez, and Housing Authority Tenant Commissioner Jaycine Scott. Absent: Commissioner Soheila Bana arrived at 6:07 p.m. after the roll was called.

I. STATEMENT OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST
None.

J. AGENDA REVIEW
None.

K. HOUSING AUTHORITY OPEN FORUM
Cordell Hindler gave comments in support of the Housing Authority Consent Calendar items.

L. HOUSING AUTHORITY CONSENT CALENDAR
Motion by Tenant Commissioner Scott
Seconded by Commissioner Jimenez
To approve both items on the Housing Authority Consent Calendar.

Ayes (8): Commissioner Bana, Commissioner Brown, Commissioner Jimenez, Commissioner Wilson, Commissioner Zepeda, Vice Chairperson Robinson, Chairperson Martinez, and Tenant Commissioner Scott.

Passed (8 to 0)
L.1 Contract Amendment No. 1 with RK Roofing and Construction Inc ADOPT a resolution to APPROVE the first contract amendment with RK Roofing and Construction, Inc. for gutter replacement at the Nystrom Village property, increasing the payment limit by $322,000, for total payment limit of $592,000, and extending the term expiration through June 30, 2027 – Economic Development Department/Richmond Housing Authority (Nannette Beacham/Antoinette Terrell/Gregory Palomino 510-621-1300).

Adopted Resolution No. 2225
L.2 Meeting Minutes
APPROVE the minutes of the February 17, 2026, special Housing Authority meeting - City Clerk's Office (Pamela Christian 510-620-6513).

M. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 6:07 p.m. 17 cc17Mar2026 – sl/prc

N. REGULAR MEETING OF THE RICHMOND CITY COUNCIL
The Regular Meeting of the Richmond City Council was called to order at 6:08 p.m. by Mayor Eduardo Martinez.

O. ROLL CALL

Present: Councilmembers Soheila Bana, Claudia Jimenez, Jamelia Brown, Sue Wilson, Cesar Zepeda, Vice Mayor Doria Robinson, and Mayor Eduardo Martinez. Absent:

None.

P. STATEMENT OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST
None.

Q. AGENDA REVIEW
City Clerk Pamela Christian announced a correction to the title for Item V.1, stating that it should read: “Fiscal Year 2025–2026 Mid-Year Budget Review.” R. REPORT FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY OF FINAL DECISIONS MADE

DURING CLOSED SESSION
Interim City Attorney Shannon Moore reported that no final decisions were made during Closed Session. She also reported that Item C.1 (Dorn v. City of Richmond case) was not discussed and would be addressed at the March 24, 2026, Closed Session.

S. REPORT FROM THE CITY MANAGER (public comment allowed under Open Forum)
City Manager Shasa Curl presented a PowerPoint. Link to view City Manager's Report
Mayor Martinez announced that it was St. Patrick's Day, and the city manager's birthday was the following week.

Councilmember Bana extended wishes and solidarity to those celebrating Eid al-Fitr, a holiday in Islam marking the end of Ramadan, and Nowruz, also known as the Persian New Year and the spring equinox.

T. OPEN FORUM FOR PUBLIC COMMENT
(public comment on items that remained on the Consent Calendar or items that were not on the agenda – was limited to 2 minutes unless otherwise specified - back and forth dialogue with the Council was prohibited)
The following individuals gave comments in person:

Cordell Hindler gave comments regarding overworked women in the workplace and advocated for increased care and support to improve retention. He also requested a proclamation recognizing the community service efforts of Salesian College Preparatory students.

Don Gosney gave comments regarding the use of the litmus test to evaluate the integrity and decision-making of elected officials, specifically whether they were acting in the best interests of the public. He also emphasized that the people elected councilmembers within their districts to represent all people of Richmond.

Claudia Citroen gave comments regarding the California Open Meeting Law, specifically related to cell phone usage by elected officials and serial meetings. She also requested that the city attorney uphold a former council action establishing a five-minute speaking limit for councilmembers.
18 cc17Mar2026 – sl/prc

Tuan Ngo expressed concerns regarding public safety, defunding, police staffing shortage for emergency calls, and increased crime. He advised the council that their decisions affected the entire city, not just their individual districts.

Chris Moore expressed concerns regarding increased crime rates and misinformation related to technology. He urged the council to stop the violence and help victims of crimes.

Edward Escobar expressed concerns regarding the people most harmed by the council's inaction on matters and urged against choosing ideology over public safety and theory over the protection of residents. He emphasized the inequities among different communities and the loss of basic safety infrastructure.

Laura Sharples and David Sharples urged the council to implement safety protections along McBryde Avenue between 23rd and 29th streets. Ms. Sharples acknowledged the city’s efforts to improve conditions along the corridor. They raised ongoing concerns about road hazards, pedestrian safety, and advocated for traffic-calming measures similar to those used in other neighborhoods. Mr. Sharples also expressed support for the city’s sanctuary law and voiced opposition to increased surveillance measures.

Elsa Stevens urged the council to support California Senate Bill (SB) 995, to strengthen oversight of immigration detention. She noted the financial gains and opportunities for corporate detention facility operators. Ms. Stevens emphasized that SB 995 would help fund immigration rights and fight fascism.

Mark Wassberg played an audio recording of President Donald Trump speaking against sanctuary cities, calling for approval of the “Save America Act,” and suggesting that all voters should be required to present identification and proof of citizenship.

Jessi Taran stated that she was an unhoused resident and advocated for the unhoused community. She expressed concerns regarding the lack of low-income housing and advised that she had not received any city funding or housing assistance.

Oscar Garcia expressed concerns regarding ongoing crime in the Iron Triangle community and emphasized the need for additional assistance. He cited recent shootings and carjackings and urged the council to prioritize public safety.

The following individuals gave comments via teleconference:

Nicolas Remmick, Nathan Lonso, Don Nelson, and Alexander Caine requested that Detective Brandon Hodges be returned to work from administrative leave. They emphasized the importance of surveillance cameras for policing and urged the council to settle the public safety labor contract.

Ben Therriault highlighted distinctions between bullying, criticism, public scrutiny, and accountability. He also expressed concerns regarding the police staffing budget and labor relations.

Mark S. gave comments regarding organizations that claimed to have negotiated the city's $550 million Chevron settlement. He also expressed concerns regarding the council’s delay in taking action on Item W.1 (Flock Safety contract extension) at its March 3, 2026, meeting.

Annie Parnell and Cresent Diamond urged the council to prioritize the voices and needs of Richmond community members over outsiders. They warned that artificial intelligence may be used for public comments. Ms. Parnell expressed her opposition to the reinstatement of officers involved in police shootings. Ms. Diamond expressed concerns regarding fascism and urged the council to consider what public safety actually meant.
19 cc17Mar2026 – sl/prc

Xochil encouraged the council to consider public comments from Richmond community members. She expressed concerns regarding the potential for public speakers to be paid by corporations to influence the decisions of elected officials. Xochil also gave comments regarding opposition to surveillance while supporting increased safety, care, and resources.

City Manager Shasa Curl stated that she consulted with the City Attorney's Office and outside counsel, and there were two current and pending police investigations, one of which included an administrative investigation. She noted that being the city manager was a difficult job and that she made decisions, as much as possible, based on written reports. Ms. Curl confirmed that the council previously adopted the fiscal year 2025- 2026 budget with a 10% vacancy rate across all city departments and that the city continued to negotiate in good faith with bargaining units, including the Richmond Police Officers Association. She reaffirmed her support as city manager for all Richmond staff, including all public safety personnel.

U. CITY COUNCIL CONSENT CALENDAR
(All items placed under the Consent Calendar were considered to be routine and noncontroversial. These items were enacted upon together with a motion and second, without discussion, of any member of the City Council, and each item was deemed to have received the action recommended.)
Motion by Councilmember Jimenez
Seconded by Councilmember Wilson
To approve all items on the City Council Consent Calendar.

Ayes (7): Councilmember Bana, Councilmember Brown, Councilmember Jimenez, Councilmember Wilson, Councilmember Zepeda, Vice Mayor Robinson, and Mayor Martinez.

Passed (7 to 0)
U.1 City Clerk's Office
U.1.a City Council Minutes
APPROVE the minutes of the February 3, and February 17, 2026, Regular City Council meetings - City Clerk's Office (Pamela Christian 510-620- 6513).

U.2 City Council
U.2.a Co-Sponsorship and Venue Reservation for Asian American Pacific Islander (AAPI) Community Celebration
APPROVE an official City of Richmond community event and cosponsorship of the Asian American Pacific Islander (AAPI) Community Celebration and authorize the reservation of the Richmond Auditorium for Saturday, May 2, 2026 - Councilmember Soheila Bana (510-672-3490).

This item was continued from the March 3, 2026, meeting. 20 cc17Mar2026 – sl/prc

U.3 Community Services
U.3.a Accept and Appropriate Carnegie Corporation of New York Grant Funds ADOPT a resolution to ACCEPT and APPROPRIATE $10,000 in gift funds from Carnegie Corporation of New York; and AUTHORIZE a payment of $5,000 from the Carnegie funds to the Richmond Museum Association - Community Services Department (Kate Eppler 510-620- 5452/LaShonda White 510-620-6828).

Adopted Resolution No. 27-26
U.3.b Contract with Innovative Interfaces, Inc. for Integrated Library System Hosting and Maintenance
APPROVE a sole-source contract with Innovative Interfaces, Inc. for Sierra Integrated Library System hosting and maintenance, INN-REACH interlibrary loan services, and the Decision Center analytics tool, with a payment limit of $450,000, for a term of July 1, 2025, through June 30, 2028, with two one-year options to extend - Community Services Department (Christopher Larsen 510-620-5524/Kate Eppler 510-620- 5452).

U.4 Economic Development
U.4.a Contract with Zero Net Energy Alliance for Lighting Fixture Upgrades at City Hall
APPROVE a sole-source contract with Zero Net Energy Alliance (ZNEA) in the amount of $250,000 to upgrade lighting infrastructure at 450 Civic Center Plaza (City Hall) and participate in Marin Clean Energy's (MCE) Virtual Power Plant Program with a term beginning February 27, 2026, through September 30, 2026 – Economic Development Department (Nannette Beacham/Valerie Li 510-621-1554/Samantha Carr 510-620- 5407).

U.4.b Arts and Culture Division Update
RECEIVE an Arts and Culture Division update on the progress of hiring an Arts and Culture Manager and ongoing status of the Mini Grants Program and other public art – Economic Development Department (Nannette Beacham 510-621-1306).

U.5 Finance Department
U.5.a Investment and Cash Balance Report, Monthly Overtime Reports, Documentary Transfer Tax Report, and Other Post-Employment Benefits (OPEB) and Pension Report for the Month of January 2026 RECEIVE the City’s Investment and Cash Balance Report, Monthly Overtime Reports, Documentary Transfer Tax Report, and Other PostEmployment Benefits (OPEB) and Pension Report for the month of January 2026 – Finance Department (Emily Combs 510-620-6740).

U.5.b Annual Review and Update of Financial Policies
ADOPT a resolution to APPROVE updates to the Financial Policies - Finance Department (Emily Combs 510-620-6790/Mubeen Qader 510- 412-2077/Jerry Gurule 510-620-6591).

Adopted Resolution No. 28-26
21 cc17Mar2026 – sl/prc

U.6 Human Resources
U.6.a Contract Amendment No. 1 with Prime Actuarial Consulting for Risk Management Actuarial Services and Consultation
APPROVE the first contract amendment with Prime Actuarial Consulting for the preparation of actuarial reports for Fiscal Years 2025–2026 and 2026–2027, increasing the payment limit by $7,600 for a new total payment limit of $17,100, and extending the term expiration through June 30, 2027- Human Resources Department – (Nickie Mastay/Sharrone Taylor 510-620-6602).

U.6.b Contract with Excel ADR for Alternative Dispute Resolution Consultation Services
APPROVE a contract with Excel ADR in an amount not to exceed $252,000 to administer Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) consultative services for Public Safety Worker’s Compensation Cases with a term from December 6, 2025, to December 6, 2028 – Human Resources Department (Nickie Mastay/Sharrone Taylor 510-620-6602).

U.6.c Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Richmond and IAFF Local 188
ADOPT a resolution to APPROVE a successor Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City of Richmond and International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF) Local 188 for the term of July 1, 2025, to June 30, 2028, and DIRECT the city manager, or their designee, to update the publicly available salary schedule with the adopted wage increases during the term of the MOU – Human Resources Department (Nickie Mastay/Sharrone Taylor 510-620-6602).

Adopted Resolution No. 29-26
U.7 Internal Services
U.7.a Request for Proposals (RFP) to Update Policies and Procedures and Develop City-wide Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs)
AUTHORIZE the city manager, or their designee, to issue a Request for Proposals (RFP) to update and develop policies and procedures and Citywide standard operating procedures (SOPs) – City Manager’s Office (Patrick Seals/Shasa Curl 510-620-6512).

U.8 Public Works
U.8.a Contract with Ninyo & Moore for Boorman Park Site Remediation Oversight
ADOPT a resolution to APPROVE a sole-source contract with Ninyo & Moore, in an amount not to exceed $292,700, for environmental oversight, monitoring, and reporting services for the Boorman Park Site Remediation Project through regulatory closure - Public Works Department (Darcie DeLashmutt 510-672-3944/Robert Armijo 510-620-5477).

Adopted Resolution No. 30-26
22 cc17Mar2026 – sl/prc

U.8.b Accept Ferry Point Sewer Pump Station Project as Complete ADOPT a resolution to APPROPRIATE and AMEND the task
authorization with Veolia to increase the total project authority by $131,366.80; ACCEPT the Ferry Point Sewer Pump Station Project as complete, and AUTHORIZE the city clerk to record the Notice of Completion with the Contra Costa County Recorder; and AUTHORIZE the city engineer to release applicable bonds and retention – Public Works Department (Darcie DeLashmutt 510-672-3944/Robert Armijo 510-620- 5477).

Adopted Resolution No. 31-26
U.8.c Construction Agreements with Musco Sports Lighting, CXT, and FieldTurf for the Soccer Fields-Restrooms–Parks Project ADOPT a resolution to RATIFY construction agreements with Musco Sports Lighting, LLC in the amount of $688,293 with a $103,243.95 contingency for lighting materials and installation for the Shields-Reid Park multipurpose field; CXT Incorporated in the amount of $432,936 with a $64,940.45 contingency for a prefabricated restroom structure and installation at Wendell Park; and FieldTurf USA, Inc. in the amount of $973,209 with a $145,981.35 contingency for synthetic turf materials and installation for the Shields-Reid Park multipurpose field, respectively, for a combined agreement amount of $2,094,438, and authorizing the director of public works to approve change orders up to $314,165.75 (15 percent) for a total payment limit of $2,408,604 – Public Works Department (Darcie DeLashmutt 510-672-3944/Robert Armijo 510-620-5477).

Adopted Resolution No. 32-26
U.8.d Contract with CSW|ST2 for Design of the Harbour Way South and Wright Avenue Transit Junction Project
ADOPT a resolution to APPROVE a sole-source contract with CSW|ST2 for supporting the Harbour Way South and Wright Avenue Section 130 Rail Crossing design phase in an amount not to exceed $148,780.77, for a term ending December 31, 2028 – Public Works Department (Hillal Hamdan 510-621-1612/Robert Armijo 510-620-5477).

Adopted Resolution No. 33-26
U.8.e February 2026 Abatement Report
RECEIVE a report on the February 2026 abatement activities – Public Works Department (Daniel Chavarria 510-620-5478/Darin Fitzpatrick 510-231-3044/Hugo Mendoza 510-231-3030).

V. BUDGET SESSION
V.1 Fiscal Year 2024-25 Mid-Year Budget Review
RECEIVE the Fiscal Year 2025-26 Mid-Year Budget Review presentation and report for the period of July 1, 2025, through December 31, 2025; and ADOPT a resolution approving proposed Fiscal Year 2025-26 Mid-Year budget adjustments – Finance Department (Shasa Curl 510-620-6512/Emily Combs 510-620-6790).

City Manager Shasa Curl introduced the matter. Director of Finance Emily Combs, Deputy Director of Finance Mubeen Qader, and Accounting Manager Jerry Gurule presented a PowerPoint. Link to view Mid-Year Budget Review.

Discussion ensued. The council requested the following: additional information 23 cc17Mar2026 – sl/prc

regarding contingencies for park bathrooms and other items, including the Hilltop Green emergency exit project; status update on the Facilities and Parks Assessment with confirmation that it would include an outline of facility needs and a list of parks where safety improvements had been implemented; and an explanation for what the parks budget line item was servicing. Cordell Hindler gave comments in person. Ben Therriault and Kevin Tisdell gave comments via teleconference.

Motion by Councilmember Zepeda
Seconded by Councilmember Bana
To receive the budget presentation and adopt said resolution.

Ayes (7): Councilmember Bana, Councilmember Brown, Councilmember Jimenez, Councilmember Wilson, Councilmember Zepeda, Vice Mayor Robinson, and Mayor Martinez.

Passed ( 7 to 0)
Adopted Resolution No. 34-26
W. PUBLIC HEARINGS
W.1 Public Hearing and First Reading of an Ordinance Rezoning the John Haley Studio at 771 Ocean Avenue
HOLD a public hearing to INTRODUCE an ordinance (first reading) rezoning to add a -L, Landmark Overlay District to the RL1 base zoning district to the John Haley Studio/House located at 771 Ocean Avenue, Richmond, CA 94801 for the purpose of listing the property on the Richmond Historic Register - Community Development Department (Lina Velasco/Avery Stark 510-620-6714).

City Clerk Pamela Christian announced that it was time, pursuant to public notice, to hold a public hearing. Director of Community Development Lina Velasco introduced the matter. Planning Manager Avery Stark and Senior Planner Michele Morris presented a PowerPoint. Link to view Landmark Overlay District Rezoning. Nomination Preparer Caitlin Hibma presented a PowerPoint. Link to view Richmond Register Landmark Nomination. Mayor Martinez declared the public hearing opened. There were no public speakers. Mayor Martinez closed the public hearing. Discussion ensued.

Motion by Councilmember Bana
Seconded by Councilmember Zepeda
To introduce said ordinance for first reading and lay over for two weeks for the second reading.

Ayes (6): Councilmember Bana, Councilmember Brown, Councilmember Jimenez, Councilmember Wilson, Councilmember Zepeda, and Mayor Martinez.

Absent (1): Vice Mayor Robinson
Passed (6 to 1)
X. NEW BUSINESS
X.1 Options to Deliver Wastewater and Stormwater Services beyond May 2027 RECEIVE a presentation and DIRECT City staff to initiate procurement of a new agreement through a competitive procurement process to hire an operator to operate, maintain, and improve the City’s: a) wastewater treatment plant; b) wastewater collection system; and c) stormwater collection system – Public 24 cc17Mar2026 – sl/prc

Works Department (Daniel Chavarria 510-620-5478/Tawfic Halaby 510-620- 5482/Bradley Harms 510-307-8094).

Director of Public Works Daniel Chavarria introduced the matter. Deputy Director of Public Works Tawfic Halaby and Watearth Consultant Jacob Guise presented a PowerPoint. Link to view Options to Deliver Wastewater and Stormwater Services. Jessi Taran gave comments in person. Kevin Tisdell and Sara Cantor gave comments via teleconference. Discussion ensued. The council requested the following: consider separating stormwater services and bringing it back to the council with different options for internal and external operations; consider a shorter contract term; and explore the Pathway 2 option for city ownership and maintenance.

Motion by Councilmember Bana
Seconded by Councilmember Brown
To receive the presentation and direct staff as recommended.

Substitute Motion by Vice Mayor Robinson
Seconded by Councilmember Jimenez
To direct city staff to initiate procurement of a new agreement through the competitive procurement process to hire an operator to operate, maintain, and improve the city's wastewater treatment plant, wastewater collection system, and stormwater system using option one (hybrid city ownership and private maintenance) as the recommendation; and to extend the
ad-hoc committee to support the process and continue deliberations on alternatives.

Ayes (7): Councilmember Bana, Councilmember Brown, Councilmember Jimenez, Councilmember Wilson, Councilmember Zepeda, Vice Mayor Robinson, and Mayor Martinez.

Passed (7 to 0)
X.2 Flock Safety Contract Extension
RECEIVE a presentation, APPROVE a transitional contract amendment, and PROVIDE direction to staff regarding the Flock CCTV system, Flock Drone as a First Responder (DFR) Program, and Flock Automated License Plate Reader (ALPR) System – Police Department (Chief Timothy Simmons 510-621-1802).

This item was continued from the March 3, 2026, meeting - Public comment is closed - for council deliberation and vote only.

Chief of Police Timothy Simmons introduced the matter. He was joined by Lieutenant Donald Patchin, Captain John Lopez, Police Information Technology Supervisor Eric Tam, and Flock Safety Western Region Public Affairs Manager Lily Ho. Discussion ensued. The council requested the following: a written statement in the contract for how data requests would be handled and allow the council to review the draft contract; provide the Flock Safety Evidence Policy; explore options for the city to maintain its own data storage; and provide crime statistics during the time the Flock cameras were turned off and a statistical analysis for how the cameras were helping.
(At approximately 9:55 a.m., a motion by Councilmember Zepeda, seconded by Councilmember Wilson, to extend the meeting until the end of items X.2 and X.3, passed by the unanimous vote of the City Council). 25 cc17Mar2026 – sl/prc

Motion by Mayor Martinez
Seconded by Councilmember Wilson
Not to approve the contract amendment and direct staff to move forward with the request for proposals process to find a company in California.

Substitute Motion by Councilmember Bana
Seconded by Councilmember Brown
Direct the city attorney and city manager to negotiate a contract amendment with Flock Safety that includes an unauthorized sharing provision; and for the city to own its data.

Ayes (4): Councilmember Bana, Councilmember Brown, Councilmember Zepeda, and Vice Mayor Robinson.

Noes (3): Councilmember Jimenez, Councilmember Wilson, and Mayor Martinez.

Passed (4 to 3)
X.3 Update Regarding the City’s Ongoing and Planned Efforts Related to Immigration Enforcement Actions
RECEIVE an initial report regarding the City’s ongoing and planned efforts related to safeguarding residents from federal civil immigration enforcement actions, including U.S. Customs and Immigration Enforcement (ICE) raids – City Manager’s Office/City Attorney’s Office (Shasa Curl/Shannon Moore 510-620- 6512). This item was continued from the March 3, 2026, meeting.

Item X.3 was continued to the March 24, 2026, City Council meeting.

X.4 Cheese Park (La Moine Park) Improvements—Permanent Restrooms, Drinking Fountain, Playground Safety, Toddler-Area Fencing, Children’s Bike Garden, and Completion of Volunteer-Led Repainting ADOPT a resolution to DIRECT City staff to prepare a comprehensive work plan for improvements at Cheese Park (La Moine Park), including permanent restrooms, a drinking water fountain, playground restoration, safety fencing around the toddler area, completion of repainting started by volunteers, a design of park facilities that include sports courts, senior activity spaces, teen activity areas, and exercise/fitness amenities in consultation with the community, and improving the drainage for the area adjacent to the park that has historically been used as a soccer field, to restore its usability for soccer and other active recreation; and IDENTIFY feasible funding sources in Fiscal Year 2026–27 Capital Improvement Program and operating budget process - Councilmember Soheila Bana (510-672-3490)/Councilmember Claudia Jimenez (510-620-6565).

This item was continued from the March 3, 2026, meeting.

Item X.4 was continued to the March 24, 2026, City Council meeting.

X.5 Create and Implement Blue Envelope Program in Richmond DIRECT the city manager or their designee to create and implement a Blue Envelope Program for residents, including a promotional campaign to inform police officers, first responders, and of the new program and how to participate, and aim to roll out the program in April for Autism Awareness Month - Councilmember Cesar Zepeda (510-620-6593). This item was continued from the March 3, 2026, meeting.

Item X.5 was continued to the March 24, 2026, City Council meeting. 26 cc17Mar2026 – sl/prc

Y. REPORTS OF OFFICERS: REFERRALS TO STAFF, AND GENERAL REPORTS (INCLUDING AB 1234 REPORTS)(limited to two minutes per Councilmember) None.

Z. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned in memory of Latetia Bobo at 10:44 p.m., to meet again on March 24, 2026, at 6:00 p.m.

Pamela Christian, Clerk of the City of
Richmond
Eduardo Martinez, Mayor
27 cc07Apr2026 – ud/prc

RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA,
April 7, 2026, 3:30 p.m.

Community Services Building
440 Civic Center Plaza
Richmond, CA 94804
_____________________________________________________________________ A. OPEN SESSION TO HEAR PUBLIC COMMENT BEFORE CLOSED SESSION The meeting was called to order at 3:30 p.m. by Vice Mayor Doria Robinson.

B. ROLL CALL

Present: Councilmembers Jamelia Brown, Claudia Jimenez, Sue Wilson, Cesar Zepeda, and Vice Mayor Doria Robinson. Absent: Councilmember Soheila Bana arrived after adjourning to Closed Session and Mayor Eduardo Martinez arrived at 3:32 p.m.

C. CLOSED SESSION
C.1 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION (Government
Code Section 54957)
 Title: City Clerk
C.2 CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (Government Code Section 54956.8)
 Property: 1414 Harbour Way South
Agency Negotiator: Lina Velasco (Community Development Director), Emily Combs (Finance Director), Dave Aleshire (Special Counsel) Negotiating Parties: Orton Entertainment, LLC
Under Negotiation: Price, Terms of Payment
C.3 CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS (Government Code
Section 54957.6)
 Agency Representatives: Sharrone Taylor, Jack Hughes, and Lisa Charbonneau
Employee organizations:

1. SEIU Local 1021 Full Time Unit and Part Time Unit

2. IFPTE Local 21 Mid-Level Management Unit and Executive Management Units

3. Richmond Police Officers Association RPOA

4. Richmond Police Management Association RPMA

5. IAFF Local 188

6. Richmond Fire Management Association RFMA
D. PUBLIC COMMENT BEFORE CLOSED SESSION (limited to items on the Closed Session agenda only)
Cordell Hindler spoke in favor of a positive evaluation of the City Clerk and also that Detective Hodges should return to work as soon as possible.

Nate Lonso asked for a fair contract for the Police Department and also spoke in favor of the return of Detective Hodges to duty immediately.
28 cc07Apr2026 – ud/prc

Ben Therriault gave comments regarding a police officer salary schedule comparison of surrounding agencies and also that Detective Hodges should return to work immediately.

Sam Lee gave comments regarding public safety concerns in District 1.

E. ADJOURN TO CLOSED SESSION
Open Session adjourned at 3:40 p.m. Closed session adjourned at 6:01 p.m.

F. REGULAR MEETING OF THE RICHMOND HOUSING AUTHORITY
The meeting was called to order at 6:09 p.m. by Chairperson Eduardo Martinez.

G. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Chairperson Eduardo Martinez led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.

H. ROLL CALL

Present: Commissioners Soheila Bana, Jamelia Brown, Claudia Jimenez, Sue Wilson, Cesar Zepeda, Vice Chairperson Doria Robinson, and Chairperson Eduardo Martinez.

Absent: None.

I. STATEMENT OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST
None.

J. AGENDA REVIEW
None.

K. HOUSING AUTHORITY OPEN FORUM
Cordell Hindler asked the commissioners to approve the March 3, 2026, Housing Authority meeting minutes.

L. HOUSING AUTHORITY CONSENT CALENDAR
Motion by Chairperson Eduardo Martinez
Seconded by Commissioner Claudia Jimenez
Ayes (8): Commissioners Soheila Bana, Jamelia Brown, Claudia Jimenez, Sue Wilson, Cesar Zepeda, Vice Chairperson Doria Robinson, Chairperson Eduardo Martinez, and Tenant Commissioner Jaycine Scott
Passed
L.1 Meeting Minutes
APPROVE the minutes of the March 3, 2026, regular Housing Authority meeting - City Clerk's Office (Pamela Christian 510-620-6513).

M. HOUSING AUTHORITY PUBLIC HEARINGS
M.1 Richmond Housing Authority Fiscal Year 2026 Annual Plan and the Fiscal Year 2026-2030
Secretary to the Richmond Housing Authority Pamela Christian announced that Pursuant to public notice, it was time to hold a public hearing to ADOPT a resolution approving the Richmond Housing Authority Annual Plan and Five-Year Plan; and AUTHORIZE submission of the proposed Annual Plan and Five-Year Plan to U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development – Richmond Housing Authority (Nannette Beacham/Antoinette Terrell 510-620-6784).

Housing Authority Executive Director Antoinette Terrell presented the annual plan.
29 cc07Apr2026 – ud/prc

Link to report: RHA Fiscal Year 2026 Annual Plan-5-Year-Plan-GP The commissioners requested that staff upload the presentation to the city's website.

Cordell Hindler and Jessi Taran gave comments.

Adopted Resolution No. 2226
Motion by Commissioner Soheila Bana
Seconded by Tenant Commissioner Jaycine Scott
Ayes (8): Commissioners Soheila Bana, Jamelia Brown, Claudia Jimenez, Sue Wilson, Cesar Zepeda, Vice Chairperson Doria Robinson, Vice Chairperson Eduardo Martinez, and Tenant Commissioner Jaycine Scott Passed
N. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 6:22 p.m.

O. REGULAR MEETING OF THE RICHMOND CITY COUNCIL
The meeting was called to order at 6:22 p.m. by Mayor Eduardo Martinez.

P. ROLL CALL

Present: Councilmembers Soheila Bana, Jamelia Brown, Claudia Jimenez, Sue Wilson, Cesar Zepeda, Vice Mayor Doria Robinson, and Mayor Eduardo Martinez. Absent:

None.

Q. STATEMENT OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST
None.

R. AGENDA REVIEW
Item V.1.a - Records Retention and Destruction Schedule Update was continued to the April 21, 2026, meeting.

Item V. 4.a - Contract with Willdan Financial Services for the Traffic Impact Fee Study and Comprehensive User Fee Study was removed from the consent calendar for discussion.

S. REPORT FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY OF FINAL DECISIONS MADE

DURING CLOSED SESSION
C.1 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION (Government
Code Section 54957)
 Title: City Clerk
C.2 CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (Government Code Section 54956.8)
 Property: 1414 Harbour Way South
Agency Negotiator: Lina Velasco (Community Development Director), Emily Combs (Finance Director), Dave Aleshire (Special Counsel) Negotiating Parties: Orton Entertainment, LLC
Under Negotiation: Price, Terms of Payment
30 cc07Apr2026 – ud/prc

C.3 CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS (Government Code
Section 54957.6)
 Agency Representatives: Sharrone Taylor, Jack Hughes, and Lisa Charbonneau Employee organizations:

1. SEIU Local 1021 Full Time Unit and Part Time Unit

2. IFPTE Local 21 Mid-Level Management Unit and Executive Management Units

3. Richmond Police Officers Association RPOA

4. Richmond Police Management Association RPMA

5. IAFF Local 188

6. Richmond Fire Management Association RFMA
There were no reportable actions taken on any of the Closed Session items.

T. REPORT FROM THE CITY MANAGER (public comment allowed under Open Forum)
Deputy City Manager Nickie Mastay stated there was no report.

T.1 NEW EMPLOYEE REPORT - 1st Tuesday
Human Resources Director Sharrone Taylor presented the report.

Link to report: March 2026 Employee Report
U. OPEN FORUM FOR PUBLIC COMMENT
(public comment on items that remain on the Consent Calendar or items not on the agenda - limited to 2 minutes unless otherwise specified - Back and forth dialogue with the Council is prohibited)
The following individuals gave comments from the Richmond Auditorium:

Cesar Cortez spoke against association with organized crime.

Manil thanked the city council for the proclamation on the agenda recognizing Nepali New Year.

Jesus Perez requested more space to facilitate the distribution of fresh food in front of O'Riley's on 23rd Street.

Ryan Casum stated that the voices of the youth should be heard.

Daffodil Valtan stated her support for the diploma program at the East Bay Center for the Performing Arts.

The following individuals gave comments via Zoom:

Jessi Taran stated funding received for the unhoused community could be used for a safe parking area or a tiny house community.

Andrew Wilke stated that the Richmond High School marching band and music students performed at the San Francisco Chinese New Year celebration.

Bemjamin Therriault gave comments regarding the negotiation of a fair contract for the police department.

The following individuals gave comments in person:

Cordell Hindler gave comments regarding the current employee shortage. 31 cc07Apr2026 – ud/prc

Don Gosney invited individuals to apply for career opportunities at the Plumbers & Steamfitters Union. More information could be obtained by contacting Mr. Gosney at 510-685-2403 or by e-mail at [email protected].

The following individuals gave comments for continued support of the East Bay Center for the Performing Arts: Runne Simmons, Andrea Landon, Kwaku, Juliana Espinoza, Claudio Vega, Lolis, Keira Burbage, Ian Burbage, Ruthie Dineen, Roxanne Garza, and Julieta Munoz,
The following individuals spoke in favor of the RYSE Center, the Listening Campaign

2.0, and the continued investment in youth and youth programs: Fahima Zaman, Maria Piceno, Alya Alezzani, Elias Avalos, Darren Allen, Ronald Cervantes, Aniyah Jones, Kalvin Crump, Xage Hollines, Sammey Pandey, Diya Bashyal, Angelica Rendon, Taniyah Abercrombie, Alise Bell, Khole Zapanta, Haley Seet, Abtehal Alazzani, Abdullah Alazzani, Hasan Alezzani, Larry Cadwell, Eden Rosenkind, Micah Johnson, Jayla Speech, Iden Rodriguez, Angela Hernandez Lebron, Meshach Bernard, and Delilah Hendrickson.

The following individuals gave comments in support of the Richmond Outdoor Coalition, Watershed and Y.E.S. Programs: Jenny Muholland-Beahrs, Jean Kintscher, Nora Castaneda, Alejandro Castaneda, Franklin Orellana, and Lucia Cano.

Claudia Citreon stated that funding for the youth should be utilized for Richmond youth only.

Cindy Haden stated that Detective Hodges should return to duty Immediately.

Mark Wassberg played an audio regarding illegal immigration.

V. CITY COUNCIL CONSENT CALENDAR
(All items placed under the Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and noncontroversial. These items will be enacted upon together with a motion and second, without discussion, of any member of the City Council, and each item shall be deemed to have received the action recommended.)
The motion to approve the consent calendar did not include the following item, which was continued to the April 21, 2026, city council meeting:

V.1.a - Records Retention and Destruction Schedule Update Motion by Vice Mayor Doria Robinson
Seconded by Councilmember Claudia Jimenez
Ayes (7): Councilmember Soheila Bana, Councilmember Jamelia Brown, Councilmember Claudia Jimenez, Councilmember Sue Wilson, Councilmember Cesar Zepeda, Vice Mayor Doria Robinson, and Mayor Eduardo Martinez Passed
V.1 City Clerk's Office
V.1.a This item will be continued to the April 21, 2026, meeting - Records Retention and Destruction Schedule Update
ADOPT a resolution to make updates to the City-wide Records Retention and Destruction Schedules, excluding the Police Department which will be brought back to City Council for adoption at a later date – City Clerk’s Office (Pamela Christian 510-620-6513). This item was continued from the March 24, 2026, meeting.
32 cc07Apr2026 – ud/prc

V.2 Community Services
V.2.a Sponsorship from Kaiser Permanente for Park Prescription Day ADOPT a resolution to ACCEPT and APPROPRIATE sponsorship funds in the amount of $4,500 from Kaiser Permanente to support Park Prescription Day – Community Services Department (LaShonda White 510-620-6828/Stephanie Ny 510-620-6563).

Adopted Resolution No. 40-26
V.2.b Accept and Appropriate Employment and Training Grant Awards ACCEPT and APPROPRIATE $246,601 in workforce development grant funds from Construction Trades Workforce Initiative ($67,000), Chevron ($20,000), Pinole Youth Foundation ($10,000), and the California Employment Development Department ($149,601) to support workforce development programs and services, including supportive services for RichmondBUILD participants, wages for event stage setup and dismantling, the Youth Trade Fair, and rapid response and layoff aversion services; and AUTHORIZE the city manager, or their designee, to execute all necessary documentation – Community Services Department (Tamara Walker 510-307-8006/LaShonda White 510-620-6828).

V.3 Economic Development
V.3.a Contract with Dynamo Construction for Berth 7 Dock Repair APPROVE a contract with Dynamo Construction for the Berth 7 Dock Repair Project in an amount not to exceed $1,080,650, with a contract term ending December 31, 2027 – Economic Development Department (Charles Gerard 510-215-4600).

V.3.b Quarterly Status Update on Richmond Green-Blue New Deal Projects RECEIVE a quarterly update report on the status of the Richmond GreenBlue New Deal projects - Economic Development Department (Jesson de Leon 510-412-2023/Junne Garcia 510-620-6524/Nannette Beacham 510- 620-1306).

V.3.c Contract with T&R Riparian Restore for Weed Abatement ADOPT a resolution to APPROVE a contract with T&R Riparian Restore for weed abatement and additional services, for a one-year term in a notto-exceed $69,785, with two one-year extension options at $69,785 per year for a total contract amount of $209,355 – Economic Development Department (Charles Gerard 510-620-6792).

Adopted Resolution No. 41-26
V.4 Finance Department
V.4.a Contract with Willdan Financial Services for the Traffic Impact Fee Study and Comprehensive User Fee Study
Deputy Director of Finance Mubeen Quader presented a PowerPoint.

Link to presentation:2026 Willdan Contract Presention
Claudia Citroen gave comments.

Following discussion, a motion was made to approve the item. 33 cc07Apr2026 – ud/prc

Motion by Councilmember Sue Wilson
Seconded by Councilmember Claudia Jimenez
Ayes (6): Councilmember Jamelia Brown, Councilmember Claudia Jimenez, Councilmember Sue Wilson, Councilmember Cesar Zepeda, Vice Mayor Doria Robinson, and Mayor Eduardo Martinez
Passed
V.4.b Investment and Cash Balance Report, Monthly Overtime Reports, Documentary Transfer Tax Report, and Other Post-Employment Benefits (OPEB) and Pension Report for the month of February 2026 RECEIVE the City’s Investment and Cash Balance Report, Monthly Overtime Reports, Documentary Transfer Tax Report, and Other PostEmployment Benefits (OPEB) and Pension Report for the month of February 2026 – Finance Department (Emily Combs 510-620-6740).

V.5 Fire Department
V.5.a 2025 California Fire Code with Local Amendments and 2025 California Wildland-Urban Interface with Local Amendments
ADOPT an ordinance (second reading) amending the Richmond Municipal Code (RMC) Article VIII (Fire) Chapter 8.16 (Fire Prevention Code) to adopt the 2025 California Fire Code with local amendments and to adopt the 2025 California Wildland-Urban Interface Code with local amendments – Fire Department (Chief Aaron Osorio 510-307-8021/Fire Marshal Dante J. Wiley 510-307-8090).

Adopted Ordinance No. 04-26 N.S.

V.6 Mayor's Office
V.6.a Reappointment of Thomas Kaun to the Library Commission.

REAPPOINT Thomas Kaun to the Library Commission with a term that expires on July 1, 2029 – Mayor’s Office (Mayor Eduardo Martinez 510- 620-6503)
V.6.b Kathleen Tarr is seeking an appointment to the Urban Forest Advisory Committee
APPOINT Kathleen Tarr to a vacant seat to the Urban Forestry Advisory Committee. Term expiring November 17, 2029 – Mayor’s Office (Mayor Eduardo Martinez (510) 620-6503).

V.6.c Reappointment to Bryan M Harris for the Commission on Aging REAPPOINT Bryan M Harris to the Commission on Aging with the term that expires on May 19, 2030 – Mayor’s Office (Mayor Eduardo Martinez 510-620-6503)
V.6.d Proclamation recognizing the Nepali New Year
PROCLAMATION recognizing April 14, 2026, as Nepali New Year (Naya Barsha 2083 Bikram Sambat) in the City of Richmond – Mayor’s Office (Mayor Eduardo Martinez 510-620-6503)
34 cc07Apr2026 – ud/prc

V.7 Police Department
V.7.a Purchase Ballistic Helmets from Adamson Police Products APPROVE the purchase of Ops-Core FAST ballistic helmets from Adamson Police Products for the Richmond Police Department SWAT Team in an amount not to exceed $46,232.20 – Police Department (Chief Tim Simmons 510-621-1802).

V.7.b Monthly Crime Report for January 2026
RECEIVE the monthly Crime Report from the Richmond Police Department for January 2026 – Police Department (Chief Tim Simmons 510-621-1802).

V.7.c Recurring Contracts with Contra Costa County and State of California for Law Enforcement and Support Services
ADOPT a resolution and AUTHORIZE the city manager, or their designee, to execute recurring contracts for Fiscal Years 2027–2028, 2028–2029, and 2029–2030 with Contra Costa County and the State of California in an aggregate annual amount of $1,350,000, including the following Contra Costa County services: California Law Enforcement Telecommunications System (CLETS) – $20,000; California Identification Division (CAL ID) – $275,000; Automated Regional Information Exchange System (ARIES) – $55,000; All County Criminal Justice Information System (ACCCJIN) – $50,000; Martinez Detention Facility intake fees – $50,000; alcohol/toxic drug and crime scene evidence analysis – $450,000; Sexual Assault Response Team (SART) examinations – $40,000; annual jail inspection and audit – $1,000; Coroner and Gunshot Residue (GSR) examination and analysis – $10,000; out-of-state inmate extradition – $4,000; Law Enforcement Training Center – $100,000; Department of Information Technology – $50,000; and East Bay Regional Communication System Authority (EBRCS) – $225,000; and State of California services including Live Scan fingerprinting – $20,000 – Police Department (Chief Timothy Simmons 510-621-1802).

Adopted Resolution No. 42-26
V.7.d Contract with Veritone, Inc. for RIPA Report and Audio/Video Redaction Services
APPROVE a sole-source contract with Veritone, Inc. for Racial and Identity Profiling Act (RIPA) reporting support and audio/video redaction services required for California Public Records Act compliance, in an amount not to exceed $300,000 for the period April 8, 2026, through April 7, 2029, with two optional one-year extensions in an amount not to exceed $100,000 per year – Police Department (Chief Timothy Simmons 510- 620-6651/Lieutenant Joseph England 510-620-6661).

V.8 Public Works
V.8.a Construction Agreement with O.C. Jones Inc. for the Area FM Temporary Cap Project
ADOPT a resolution to APPROVE a construction agreement with O. C.

Jones & Sons Inc. for the Area FM Temporary Cap Project in an amount not to exceed $785,350 with an additional 20 percent construction contingency in the amount of $156,700, AUTHORIZE the director of 35 cc07Apr2026 – ud/prc

public works to approve change orders within this contingency amount; and APPROPRIATE $450,000 in the Marina Enterprise Fund 4005 - Public Works Department (Craig Murray 510-307-8188/Hillal Hamdan 510-621-1612).

Adopted Resolution No. 43-26
V.8.b Preparation of the Engineer’s Report for Fiscal Year 2026–2027 for the Marina Bay Landscape and Lighting Maintenance District
ADOPT a resolution ordering the preparation of the annual Engineer’s Report for Fiscal Year 2026–2027 regarding improvements and costs for the Marina Bay Landscape and Lighting Maintenance District – Public Works Department (Daniel Chavarria 510-620-5478/Robert Armijo 510- 620-5477/Darin Fitzpatrick 510-231-3044/Jason Lacey 510-620-6920).

Adopted Resolution No. 44-26
V.8.c Preparation of the Engineer’s Report for Fiscal Year 2026–2027 for the Hilltop Landscape Maintenance District
ADOPT a resolution ordering the preparation of the annual Engineer’s Report for Fiscal Year 2026-2027 regarding improvements and costs for the Hilltop Landscape Maintenance District - Public Works Department (Daniel Chavarria 510-620-5478/Robert Armijo 510-620-5477/Darin Fitzpatrick 510-231-3044/Jason Lacey 510-620-6920).

Adopted Resolution No. 45-26
V.8.d Contract with Chrisp Company for On-Call City-wide Roadway Striping, Stenciling, and Street Sign Services
ADOPT a resolution to APPROVE a contract with Chrisp Company for on-call City-wide roadway striping, stenciling, and street sign services with a not-to-exceed amount of $750,000, for an initial three-year term with the option to extend for two additional one-year terms, in an amount not to exceed $250,000 per year, for a total contract amount not to exceed $1,250,000 - Public Works Department (Daniel Chavarria 510-620- 5478/Darin Fitzpatrick 510-231-3044).

Adopted Resolution No. 46-26
V.8.e Purchase of Bulk Landscaping Materials from Blue Angel International, LLC
ADOPT a resolution to APPROVE the purchase of bulk landscaping materials for City-wide park maintenance, landscaping improvements, and right-of-way restoration efforts from Blue Angel International LLC, for a three-year term in an amount not to exceed $300,000, with the option to extend for two additional one-year terms in an amount not to exceed $100,000 per year, subject to city manager approval – Public Works Department (Daniel Chavarria 510-620-5478/Darin Fitzpatrick 510-231- 3044).

Adopted Resolution No.47-26
V.8.f Purchase of Plant Material from Blue Angel International, LLC ADOPT a resolution to APPROVE the purchase of plant materials for City-wide landscaping, beautification, and vegetation restoration efforts from Blue Angel International, LLC, for a three-year term in an amount 36 cc07Apr2026 – ud/prc

not to exceed $300,000, with the option to extend for two additional oneyear terms in an amount not to exceed $100,000 per year, subject to city manager approval – Public Works Department (Daniel Chavarria 510-620- 5478/Darin Fitzpatrick 510-231-3044)
Adopted Resolution No. 48-26
W. BUDGET SESSION
W.1 Charter Article 15 Review – Richmond Fund for Children and Youth Review RECEIVE a presentation on Article 15 of the Charter regarding the Richmond Fund for Children and Youth and PROVIDE DIRECTION regarding renewal provisions and options – City Manager’s Office/Finance Department (Shasa Curl/Patrick Seals 510-620-6512/Emily Combs/Antonio Banuelos 510-620-6542).

This item was continued from the March 24, 2026, meeting - Public comment is closed - for council deliberation and vote only.

Mayor Martinez gave an overview.

Discussion ensued.

Link to presentation: RFCY Charter 15 Review
The city council stated the following: that the youth in District 1 and 2 should also be represented; that services were distributed equally across the city; and that organizations that receive funding indicate that it was given to them by the City of Richmond.

A motion was made as follows to approve Option 1. City Council Reauthorizes the Article Without Amendment (Keep As-Is)
Under this option, the City Council adopts an ordinance or resolution reauthorizing Article 15 by a simple majority vote on or before June 13, 2026.

This action would extend the Richmond Fund for Children and Youth for an additional ten-year term without amendment, consistent with existing Charter language. No voter action would be required under this option, and all provisions of Article 15 would remain unchanged.

Motion by Vice Mayor Doria Robinson
Seconded by Councilmember Claudia Jimenez
Ayes (7): Councilmember Soheila Bana, Councilmember Jamelia Brown, Councilmember Claudia Jimenez, Councilmember Sue Wilson, Councilmember Cesar Zepeda, Vice Mayor Doria Robinson, and Mayor Eduardo Martinez Passed
X. NEW BUSINESS
X.1 Amending Richmond Municipal Code Chapter 2.30 regarding Use of City Resources for Civil Immigration Enforcement
INTRODUCE an ordinance (first reading) amending Richmond Municipal Code Chapter 2.30 to clarify limitations on the use of city property, personnel, and resources for civil immigration enforcement and develop implementation procedures, including communications plans, and reporting requirements – City Attorney’s Office (Shannon Moore 510-620-5509/Kimberly Chin 510-620-6709). 37 cc07Apr2026 – ud/prc

Interim City Attorney Shannon Moore gave an overview. Senior Assistant City Attorney Kimberly Chen and Project Manager Gabino Arredondo presented a PowerPoint
Link to presentation: Civil Immigration Enforcement Presentation Cordell Hindler and Mark Wassberg gave comments in person.

The following individuals gave comments via Zoom: Crescent, Chris Taaffe, Andrew Melendez, Marisol Cantu, Sonia Decker, and Carlos Juarez Discussion ensued.

Following discussion, a motion was made as follows to introduce the ordinance.

Motion by Councilmember Claudia Jimenez
Seconded by Mayor Eduardo Martinez
Ayes (6): Councilmember Soheila Bana, Councilmember Jamelia Brown, Councilmember Claudia Jimenez, Councilmember Sue Wilson, Councilmember Cesar Zepeda, and Vice Mayor Doria Robinson
Passed
Y. REPORTS OF OFFICERS: REFERRALS TO STAFF, AND GENERAL REPORTS (INCLUDING AB 1234 REPORTS)(limited to two minutes per Councilmember) Mayor Martinez reported that he attended the following: a Read-a-Thon at Washington Elementary School; the Shimada Sayonara Dinner; a WCCTAC Meeting; Holi Festival:

Easter Egg Hunt at Booker T. Anderson; and the Taste of Richmond.

Councilmember Zepeda reported the following: that the 4th Annual District 2 Strategy Meeting would be on Saturday, April 11, 2026, from 10:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. at the Point Richmond Community Center; and that he spoke regarding AB 1941 and copper wire theft at the State Capitol.

Vice Mayor Robinson reported the following: she attended the Taste of Richmond event; that Carlson Boulevard would have additional lights on the northern end also; attended the Pullman Neighborhood Council meeting; and she was appointed to the Green Empowerment Zone as the Richmond representative.

Councilmember Bana reported the following: She continues to represent Richmond at the East Bay Wildfire Coalition; an organization committed to educating the public about wildfire safety and preparedness. Additionally, she joined other women elected officials in issuing a statement against the ongoing conflict in Iran, standing together for peace and solidarity. Councilmember Bana also attended a hazmat commission meeting, further contributing to important discussions on community safety and environmental concerns.

Z. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:42 p.m., to meet again on April 21, 2026, at 6:00 p.m.

Clerk of the City of Richmond Mayor
38

April 28, 2026
Community Development
AGENDA
REPORT
DATE: April 28, 2026
TO: Mayor Martinez and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lina Velasco, Director of Community Development
Jesus M. Morales, Housing Manager
Subject: Grant Agreement with Contra Costa Interfaith
Transitional Housing, Inc. (dba Hope Solutions) for Tiny House Village and Garden Project
FINANCIAL IMPACT: The proposed $300,000 grant agreement is included within the approved fiscal year (FY) 2025-2026 Housing
In-Lieu Fee Fund. Any unspent grant funds will roll over and be budgeted in FY 2026-2027 with no impact on the
General Fund (Account String:13235063-400201-
RI160).

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

March 25, 2025

STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:

On March 25, 2025, the City Council approved a
$300,000 grant to assist with remaining capital and
operating costs for the Tiny House Village and Garden
project that will serve youth ages 18 to 24, who were
formerly unhoused. Due to delays in executing the
agreement, City staff is seeking City Council approval to enter into the agreement since the term expired on
December 31, 2025, for the previously approved
agreement.

RECOMMENDED ACTION: APPROVE a grant agreement in an amount not to exceed $300,000 with Contra Costa Interfaith Transitional Housing, Inc. (dba Hope Solutions) to provide capital and supportive services funding for the Tiny House Village and Garden
Project at 175 23rd Street for a term expiring December 31, 2027– Community Development Department (Lina
Velasco/Jesus Morales 510-620-6649).
39

April 28, 2026
DISCUSSION:

The Richmond Tiny House Village and Garden Project is a collaboration between local community organizations creating Richmond’s first Tiny House Village to serve previously unhoused youth, ages 18-24.

The tiny village is currently covered by the lease amendment with Richmond Police Activities League (RPAL) executed on September 12, 2023, to allow this village to be built at 175 23rd Street. This lease amendment allows for the construction of a Tiny House Village with seven (7) tiny houses at the site to be inhabited by six (6) Richmond unhoused youth and one unit for a resident manager.

On October 2, 2024, Richmond Police Activities League, a California public benefit corporation (RPAL) entered into a sub-lease agreement with Tiny Village Spirit to create and operate a Tiny House Village and related structures necessary to serve homeless youth.

On October 3, 2024, Tiny Village Spirit (TVS), a California public benefit corporation (RPAL) entered into a Supportive Services Agreement with Contra Costa Interfaith Transitional Housing, Inc. (dba Hope Solutions) to provide property management and supportive services to the residents of the project.

On October 4, 2024, the Richmond Police Activities League (RPAL), Tiny Village Spirit (TVS), Hope Solutions, and Safe Organized Spaces-Richmond (SOS) entered a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to construct, provide property management, and supportive services to the residents of the Tiny House Village Project. In the near term, City staff will be returning to City Council for authorization to execute separate lease to RPAL and TVS for portions of the project site. This is anticipated to occur before occupancy of the site begins.

On January 7, 2025, City Council approved a request to grant $300,000 to assist with remaining capital and operating costs for the Tiny House Village and directed staff to prepare a contract and any other necessary agreements in support of the project funding. The grant funds are funded from the affordable housing nexus fee.

On March 25, 2025, City Council approved a grant agreement for $300,000 for a term ending on December 31, 2025, to assist with remaining capital and operating costs for the Tiny House Village. Approximately $103,000 will be used to purchase a three-unit restroom trailer, deck materials, and a yurt. The remainder of the funds will be used to pay for on-site supportive services provided by Hope Solutions. These funds will be paid on a reimbursement basis.

Due to the extensive time that has transpired while City staff worked closely with Contra Costa Interfaith Transitional Housing, Inc. (dba Hope Solutions) and Tiny Village Spirit to obtain all required insurance, the initial term of the agreement approved by City Council, March 1, 2025, through December 31, 2025, expired. All required insurance is now in place and City Council approval is needed for the new term of the Grant 40

April 28, 2026
Agreement, April 1, 2026, through December 31, 2027. Upon City Council approval of the Grant Agreement, a payment towards capital costs of $103,000 will be issued.

Expense Amount Narrative City Payment Disbursement
$103,000 Three (3) Unit Restroom Trailer
Restroom Trailer Deck
Final Payment for Yurt
Reimbursement
$197,000 Operating Cost Reimbursement
$300,000 Total
Total development costs are estimated at $978,912. Therefore, TVS is responsible for raising approximately $875,000 to cover the estimated development costs. TVS is leading the fundraising effort and expects to have all funding, whether in cash, donated materials, and/or labor to complete the project.

The development of this Tiny House Village has been moving forward with support from the City Council, City staff, community-based organizations, and various volunteers throughout the community. The village is adjacent to what will become the RPAL Farm and Garden project. The program participants, ages 18-24, who will be living in the village will be identified through the County’s Coordinated Entry System and will be provided safe shelter.

SYNERGISTIC POLICIES:

Development of the Tiny House Village is in alignment with the City of Richmond Homeless Strategic Plan, adopted by the City Council on May 23, 2023. 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. Short - Term Action Step 2.3 Identify vacant or underutilized properties to create permanent supportive housing or develop other affordable housing for extremely low-income households. The Tiny House Village is a creative project that will provide housing for homeless youth and provide supportive services on an underutilized site.

CONCLUSION:

Community Development staff recommend that the City Council approve the Grant Services Agreement with Contra Costa Interfaith Transitional Housing, Inc. (dba Hope Solutions) for an amount not to exceed $300,000 to provide capital and supportive services for the Richmond Tiny House Village Farm and Garden project at 175 23rd Street for a term extending through December 31, 2027.

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:

Attachment 1 – Grant Agreement with Contra Costa Interfaith Transitional Housing, Inc. (dba Hope Solutions)
41 DocID #36940v1

GRANT SERVICES AGREEMENT

BY AND BETWEEN CITY OF RICHMOND AND CONTRA COSTA INTERFAITH TRANSITIONAL HOUSING, INC. (DBA HOPE SOLUTIONS)
Department: Community Development
Department, Housing Division
Project Manager:

Jesus M. Morales
Project Manager’s E-mail:
[email protected]
Project Manager’s Phone Number:
(510) 620-6649
Grantee:

Contra Costa Interfaith Transitional
Housing, Inc. (dba Hope Solutions)
Contact Name: Deanne Pearn, CEO
Email: [email protected]
Phone: 925-944-2246
Vendor No: Contract No:

Term: 03/01/26 - 2/28/27 Payment Limit: $300,000
Program Summary: Hope Solutions will build a tiny house village (Project) consisting of 7 to 13 tiny homes including one on-site resident manager house on land subleased from the Richmond Police Activities League to be occupied as transitional housing for a period of up to 24 months by unhoused youth ages 18 – 24. Hope Solutions in partnership with Tiny Village Spirit (TVS), will provide development, property management, and supportive services to the residents of the project.

THIS AGREEMENT is hereby entered into on _________________ (“Effective Date”) by and between the City of Richmond, a municipal corporation and charter city (“City”) and Contra Costa Interfaith Transitional Housing, Inc. (dba Hope Solutions), a California public benefit corporation (“Grantee”) (collectively, the “Parties”).

RECITALS
A. On October 1, 2024, the City Council approved Option B appropriating unspent funds for the budget for fiscal year 2024 –2025. Option B included adding $1 million to the Unhoused Intervention account with the purpose of providing funding to GRIP and to Tiny Village Spirit (TVS). TVS will be constructing the tiny house youth village on land subleased from the Richmond Police Activities League (RPAL). City Council recommended that $300,000 be allocated to TVS to assist with construction costs and operation costs for the tiny youth village. TVS will be responsible for fundraising the balance of funds needed for the construction and operation costs.

B. On November 26, 2024, City Council directed staff to work on an agreement with TVS to allocate $300,000 as a city contribution toward the tiny house village. Of this amount, approximately $197,000 will be used for operating costs and the remaining $103,000 will be used for capital costs, including payment for the threeunit restroom trailer, the last payment for the yurt, and funds for restroom trailer deck materials.

C. On January 7, 2025, City Council directed staff to prepare a contract and any other 42 DocID #36940v1
necessary agreements with Contra Costa Interfaith Transitional Housing, Inc. (dba Hope Solutions) to provide up to $300,000 to help finalize the startup costs for the tiny house village to be constructed at 175 23rd Street, Richmond. TVS is a party to a Supportive Services Agreement with Hope Solutions designating Hope Solutions as the Service Provider and its exclusive agent and representative for the purposes of management and operation of the project. Grantee and City now wish to enter into this Agreement for the provision of providing $300,000 for Grantee’s project (as defined below) as approved by the Richmond city Council.

NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed between the Parties hereto that:

ARTICLE I

PROVISIONS
Section 1.1 Scope of Services.

A. Project Delivery. Grantee shall, to the satisfaction of City, construct the tiny house village and provide the services outlined in the Service Plan attached hereto and made a part hereof as Exhibit A (“Project”).

B. General Administration. Grantee and/or its subcontractor shall provide development, property management, and general administrative services to support the Project.

Administrative support includes but is not limited to the following: data collection and analysis, preparation and submission of a mid-year and a final (“Close-Out”) report, budget preparation and submission of demands for reimbursement, and any other function that will ensure compliance with this Agreement.

C. Staffing. For each employee funded by the Grant, Grantee shall provide the name of such employee(s), title, description of job responsibilities, hourly base pay rate or billable rate, and an estimate of time to be spent on the Program by employee per pay period. Such staff information shall be submitted within thirty (30) days of the Effective Date. Grantee shall inform City in writing, within ten (10) working days, of any changes to such staff that occur during the Term.

D. Performance Monitoring. City shall have the right to monitor Grantee’s compliance with the goals and performance standards established in this Agreement.

Substandard performance, as determined by City, shall constitute noncompliance with this Agreement. If action to correct such substandard performance is not taken by Grantee within thirty (30) days after being notified by City in writing, this Agreement may be suspended or terminated. Substandard performance may be shared with Richmond City Council, and/or City staff, and may impact Grantee’s ability to apply for and/or receive future City funds, including Grant funds.
43 DocID #36940v1
E. Site Visits and Meetings. City will coordinate site visits of the Project during and after construction by providing timely notice of intent to visit the project.

Section 1.2 Term.

This Agreement shall commence effective March 1, 2026, and shall terminate on February 28, 2027, and thereafter the Agreement shall be null and void and of no further force or effect, except as otherwise provided herein.

Section 1.3 Funding.

This Agreement shall be deemed executory to the extent that the monies are appropriated in the current City budget for the purposes of this Agreement and no liability shall be incurred by City, or any other department of City, beyond the monies budgeted and available for this purpose. The Agreement is not a general obligation of City. Neither the full faith and credit, nor the taxing power of City is pledged to the payment of any amount due or to become due under this Agreement. It is understood that neither this Agreement nor any representation by any City employee or officer creates any obligation to appropriate or make monies available beyond those monies appropriated in the current City Budget for the purposes of this Agreement.

ARTICLE II

DISBURSEMENT LIMIT
Section 2.1 Amount.

It is expressly agreed and understood that the total amount to be disbursed by City under this Agreement shall not exceed $300,000.00 (“Disbursement Limit”). To the extent practicable, the use of Grant funds shall be used on a pro rata basis with other funds provided to the Project.

Section 2.2 Demands.

The Grantee will submit invoicing for reimbursement of project funds for construction items limited to payment for the three-unit restroom trailer, the last payment for the yurt, and funds for the restroom trailer-deck materials. Grantee will also submit invoices monthly for operational costs during the term of this agreement as outlined in the budget attached hereto as Exhibit B. Grant funds will be disbursed on a reimbursement basis.

It is Grantee’s responsibility to ensure that Grant funds are used only for the eligible costs and amounts specified in the Program Budget, attached hereto and made a part hereof as Exhibit B. Should Grantee fail to use Grant funds in accordance with the Program Budget, the payment of Grant funds may be suspended or terminated.

Section 2.3 Non-Liability.
44 DocID #36940v1
City shall not be liable for any cost that (a) has been paid, reimbursed, or is subject to payment or reimbursement from any other source; (b) was incurred prior to the beginning date of this Agreement; (c) is not in accordance with the terms of this Agreement, including all Exhibits; or (d) has not been billed to City within thirty (30) calendar days after the date this Agreement terminates.

ARTICLE III

LIMITATION ON CITY OBLIGATIONS
Section 3.1 Limitations.

A. Nothing in this Agreement shall make Grantee or Grantee’s employees (a) subject to any of the memoranda of understanding that apply to union represented City employees, (b) subject to the Personnel Rules, Employee Handbook, or Administrative Policy Manual that apply to City employees, (c) subject to any of the benefits received by employees of City, including but not limited to Medical, Dental, Vision, Retirement, Vacation or Sick Leave, and Administrative Leave, (d) covered by City’s Workers’ Compensation Insurance, or (e) employees of City for purposes of the Tort Claims Act (Govt. Code Section 825, et seq) or for any other purpose.

B. Grantee and Grantee’s employees shall not be protected by the same immunities and right to indemnification and defense extended by the Tort Claims Act to public employees, including City employees.

Section 3.2 Termination for Convenience.

This Agreement may be terminated by the City, at its sole and absolute discretion, upon thirty (30) days advance written notice thereof to Grantee or cancelled immediately by written mutual consent of the Parties.

ARTICLE IV

ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS
Section 4.1 Financial Management.

A. Accounting Standards. Grantee shall adhere to Generally Accepted Accounting Principles1, utilize adequate internal controls, and maintain necessary source documentation for all costs incurred.

B. Documentation and Record-Keeping.

1 “Generally Accepted Accounting Principles” refers to the accounting standard adopted by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).
45 DocID #36940v1
(1) Records to be Maintained. Grantee shall maintain all required records pertinent to the activities being funded pursuant to this Agreement, in a manner satisfactory to the City.
(2) Retention. Grantee shall retain all records related to the Program for a period of five (5) years after the termination of all activities funded under this Agreement. (3) Client Data. Grantee shall maintain all client-level data demonstrating client eligibility for the Program, including client name, address, basis for determining eligibility, and description of services provided. Such information shall be made available to City monitors or their designees for review upon request, pursuant to Section 1.1.D of this Agreement.
(4) Close-Outs. Grantee’s obligation to City shall not end until all Close-Out requirements are completed, including preparation of a Close-Out Report at the end of the Term. Activities required during the Close-Out period shall include, but are not limited to submission of the Close-Out Report, making all final payments to employees, vendors, and/or contractors, submission of a Final Invoice (per the invoice requirements set forth in Section 4.1.C(5) below), and return to City all unspent cash advances
(5) Audits and Inspections. All Grantee records with respect to any matters covered by this Agreement shall be made available to City at any time during normal business hours, as often as City deems necessary, to audit, examine, and make excerpts or transcripts of all relevant data. Any deficiencies noted in audit reports must be fully cured by Grantee within thirty (30) days after Grantee’s receipt of such reports. Failure by Grantee to comply with any audit requirements shall constitute a breach of this Agreement and may result in the withholding or termination of future Grant fund payments.

C. Reporting, Evaluation, and Payment Procedures.
(1) Budgets. The Program Budget (Exhibit B) shall include a list of expenditures to be paid for via Grant funds. The Parties may agree to revise the Program Budget from time to time in accordance with existing City policies. (2) Payment Procedures. Subject to the Disbursement Limit, City will pay Grantee the Grant funds available under this Agreement based upon information submitted by Grantee and consistent with the Project Budget and City policies concerning such payments. Payments will be made via paper check or electronic funds transfer and only for eligible expenses actually incurred by Grantee up to the Disbursement Limit. Any funds remaining shall revert to City. Payments will be adjusted by City in accordance with any Advance Payments to Grantee.
46 DocID #36940v1
(3) Progress Reports. Grantee shall submit quarterly grant reports (Progress Report) to the Project Manager in the form and content as set forth in the Grant Report Template, attached hereto as Exhibit C. The Progress Reports are due no later than the Due Dates listed below for each Term, unless an extension is authorized by City, in its sole and absolute discretion:

Quarter Period to be covered in Progress Report Due Date 1 April 1 through June 30, 2026 July 31, 2026
2 July 1 through September 30, 2026 October 31, 2026
3 October 1 through December 31, 2026 January 31, 2027
4 January 1 through March 31, 2027 April 30, 2027
(4) Close-Out Report. The Close-Out Report, covering the entire Grant period, is due no later than thirty (30) days after the end of the Term (as indicated below), unless an extension is authorized by City, in its sole and absolute discretion.

Period to be covered Due Date
April 1, 2026 through March 31, 2027 April 30, 2027
(5) Performance Measurement. On an annual basis, the Richmond Community Development Department will review the Program’s performance scores as outlined in Exhibit A, Exhibit B, and Exhibit C to assess program quality and accountability according to the City’s satisfaction. Failure by the Grantee to meet performance expectations will result in a program improvement process that may result in the withholding, rescinding, or termination of current or future Grant fund payments.
(6) Evaluations. Grantee shall participate in City evaluation activities, including but not limited to administering program participant experience surveys, grantee surveys, and focus groups. Such activities can take place past the conclusion of the program end date.
(7) Technical Assistance Activities. The City may partner with external contractors to provide technical assistance related to data collection, reporting, and continuous improvement and will encourage the Grantee to participate to support the Program’s efforts for continuous improvement efforts.
(8) Invoices. Invoices shall contain, but not be limited to, the following information in sufficient detail and shall be submitted in a form which adequately demonstrates consistency with the Service Plan and Project Budget:
a. Documentation of payment for construction items listed in the Project Budget including payment for the three-unit restroom trailer, the last payment for the yurt, and funds for restroom trailer deck materials, b. Number of hours per task that Grantee or subcontractor staff performed work,
47 DocID #36940v1
c. Number of hours per Grantee or subcontractor staff member being billed or which stipends have been paid,
d. Hourly or flat rate provided to Grantee or subcontractor staff, and e. Itemization of any other operating costs (e.g., youth program incentives, case management expenses, site security, cleaning and sanitizing, security deposit, maintenance/repairs, youth work stipends, and insurance supplies, travel, operating expenses, etc.), where applicable, incurred for which reimbursement is being requested within that Invoice period.

Note: Itemization of indirect cost (e.g., rent, utilities, etc.), although not required, may be requested by and shall be made available to City upon request. (9) Required Supporting Documentation. The following Required Supporting Documentation must be submitted with each Invoice, as applicable:
a. Each Invoice must contain all the information specified in the Grant Report Template (Exhibit C).
b. If the Invoice is requesting reimbursement of any other direct costs (i.e., any costs other than Grantee staff time or stipends—for example, supplies, travel, operating expenses, etc.), the Invoice must be accompanied by copies of actual itemized invoices or receipts for all applicable direct costs. c. If Grantee staff time or stipends are included in the Invoice, City may request that the Invoice be accompanied by signed copies of timesheets, daily logs, and/or payroll records covering all staff hours for which reimbursement is being requested.
(10) Matching Funds. Matching Funds refers to all project funding above the City award that are necessary to construct the tiny homes and supporting infrastructure and provide the services at the proposed levels. Grantee must demonstrate, and is accountable for, raising and documenting funding that equals the balance of funds needed for total construction costs and operating costs for the term of this agreement as a project match. This match of City project funding must be a cash or in-kind match that supports the proposed project. Grantee must provide evidence of in-kind and cash matches upon execution of this agreement, (e.g., through letters, copies of checks, grants, or records of volunteer or donated services.)

ARTICLE V

GENERAL PROVISIONS
Section 5.1 Relationship with of Parties.

Nothing contained in this Agreement shall be interpreted or understood by any of the 48 DocID #36940v1
Parties, or by any third persons, as creating the relationship of employer and employee, principal and agent, limited or general partnership, or joint venture by and between City and Grantee or either Party’s agents, employees volunteers, or subcontractors, and Grantee shall at all times be deemed an independent contractor and shall be wholly responsible for the manner in which it or its employees, volunteers, agents, and/or subcontractors, perform the services required of it by the terms of this Agreement. Grantee has and retains the right to exercise full control of employment, direction, compensation, and discharge of all persons assisting in the performance of the Program under this Agreement.

Section 5.2 Compliance with Laws.

A. With respect to this Agreement, Grantee shall comply with all federal, state, and local laws, statutes, ordinances, rules, and regulations, and the orders and decrees of any courts or administrative bodies or tribunals, including without limitation environmental laws, disability laws (including the Americans with Disability Act), employment discrimination laws, living wage, and prevailing wage laws, as well as all California Department of Justice and Secretary of State requirements. Compliance under this provision also means Grantee’s compliance with all provisions of the Municipal Code of the City of Richmond (“Municipal Code”), including Chapter 2.28 and Chapters 2.50, 2.52, 2.56, 2.60, and 2.65, if applicable, which are hereby incorporated by reference.

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

C. Non-Discrimination.

(1) Grantee agrees to observe the provisions of Section 2.28.030 of the Municipal Code of the City of Richmond, obligating every contractor or subcontractor under a contract or subcontract with the City of Richmond for services to refrain from discriminatory employment or subcontracting practices on the basis of the race, color, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, religious creed, national origin or ancestry of any employee, any applicant for employment or any potential subcontractor. Said Section 2.28.030 is, by this reference, a part of this Agreement. (2) If Grantee is found in violation of the nondiscrimination provisions of the State of California Fair Employment Practices Act or similar provisions of federal law or executive order in the performance of this Agreement, it will be in default of this Agreement. Thereupon, City will have the power to cancel or suspend this Agreement, in whole or in part.

D. Sanctuary City Contracting Ordinance (SCCO). The Richmond Sanctuary City Contracting Ordinance No. 12-18 prohibits the City from granting and or retaining contracts with 49 DocID #36940v1
any person or entity that provides Data Broker or Extreme Vetting services to the U.S.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement Division of the United States Department of Homeland Security (“ICE”). Grantees must submit the Sanctuary City Compliance Statement included herein as Exhibit D along with the bid or proposal prior to execution of the contract.

Section 5.3 Publicity and Acknowledgement of Support.

A. Grantee shall give appropriate credit to City for their financial support in all press releases, publications, annual reports, video credits, dedications, and other public communications regarding the project and services performed pursuant to this Agreement, including but not limited to any tangible final products produced pursuant to this Agreement.

Copies of such materials shall be provided to City for review prior to their release.

B. Grantee hereby grants to City the right and authority to publicize City support for the Project in press releases, publications, and other public communications of any type including, without limitation, digital and web publications, and to use Grantee’s name, likeness, logo, or other official representation of Grantee in such communications.

C. Website Links: Grantee grants revocable permission to City to place links to Grantee’s web site on City’s website. City also grants revocable permission to Grantee to place links to City’s website on Grantee’s web site. Revocation of such permissions shall be noticed in writing and the Party in receipt of such notice shall have thirty (30) days to remove all links to the other Party’s website from its own website.

Section 5.4 Background Checks.

If Grantee provides services to youth or other vulnerable populations (including, but not limited to elderly, differently-abled, chronically ill, unhoused, etc.), Grantee shall require comprehensive background checks and fingerprinting of all its employees, volunteers, agents, or subcontractors that work directly with youth or such other vulnerable populations. The cost of the background checks and fingerprinting shall be borne solely by the Grantee. Grantee agrees to provide City with an affidavit certifying that these background check and fingerprinting processes were completed and that all aforementioned individuals supporting Grantee who provide services to vulnerable populations have successfully passed the background and fingerprinting checks. At City’s discretion, Grantee may also be subject to an audit of the underlying records referred to in and relied upon in preparing the affidavit.

In addition, Grantee must ensure that all its employees, volunteers, agents, and subcontractors have a responsibility to self-report to Grantee within three (3) calendar days any arrest. Grantee must notify the Project Manager within forty-eight (48) hours of all details concerning any reported arrest. Upon City’s request, Grantee shall re-screen any of its employees, volunteers, agents, and/or subcontractors during the term of this Agreement.

Section 5.5 Default.
50 DocID #36940v1
In the event Grantee fails to perform properly any of its obligations hereunder, Grantee shall have thirty (30) days after receipt of written notice from City to cure such failure of performance. If Grantee does not cure the failure within thirty (30) days , or if Grantee fails to commence to cure or, within a reasonable time thereafter, fails to complete the cure, City may, in addition to any other remedies, suspend or terminate this Agreement, complete Grantee’s obligations in any reasonable manner it chooses, or operate or maintain the Program as the City may deem necessary to fulfill requirements of the Grant. Grantee shall reimburse City for any costs or expenses incurred by City because of such failure to perform. If Grantee fails to comply with any of rules, regulations, ordinances, requirements, or provisions of City, in addition to other remedies as provided by law, this Agreement may be suspended or terminated.

Section 5.6 Copyright.

If this Agreement results in any copyrightable material, City reserves the right to royaltyfree, non-exclusive, and irrevocable license to reproduce, publish, or otherwise use and to authorize others to use, the work for government purposes.

Section 5.7 No Claims.

Nothing contained in this Agreement shall create or justify any claim against City by any person that Grantee may have employed or with whom Grantee may have contracted relative to the purchase of materials, supplies, or equipment, or to the furnishing or the performance of any work or services for the Program or otherwise.

Section 5.8 Indemnification.

A. To the fullest extent permissible by law, Grantee shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless, and require its contractors and subcontractors to defend, indemnify and hold harmless, City, its elected and appointed officials, and all of City’s employees and agents (“Indemnified Parties”), from all liability, penalties, costs, losses, damages, expenses, causes of action, claims, or judgments, including attorney's fees and other defense costs (collectively, “Claims”) resulting from injury to or death sustained by any person (including Grantee’s or any contractors’ or subcontractors' employees), or damage to property of any kind, or any other injury or damage whatsoever, which Claims arise out of or are in any way connected with the provision of Program services performed pursuant to this Agreement, regardless of Grantee’s fault or negligence; provided, however, that Grantee’s indemnity obligations hereunder shall not apply to the extent any Claims are caused by the sole and active gross negligence or willful act or omission of an Indemnified Party. The indemnification obligations of Grantee and its contractors and subcontractors shall extend to Claims asserted after termination of this Agreement for whatever reason.

B. In Claims against any person or entity indemnified under Section 5.8.A above by an employee of Grantee, or its contractors and subcontractors, anyone directly or indirectly employed by any one of them or anyone for whose acts one of them may be liable, the indemnification obligation under Section 5.8.A above shall not be limited by a limitation on 51 DocID #36940v1
amount or type of damages, compensation of benefits payable under workers' compensation acts, disability benefit acts, or other employee benefit acts.

Section 5.9 Non-Liability of City Officials, Employees, and Agents.

No member, official, employee, or agent of City shall be personally liable to Grantee in the event of any default or breach by City, for any amount which may become due to Grantee or its successor, or on any obligation under the terms of this Agreement.

Section 5.10 Insurance.

Grantee shall submit to City evidence of and keep current the insurance coverage meeting the general requirements set forth in the Insurance Requirements, attached hereto and made a part hereof as Exhibit E.

Section 5.11 No Third-Party Beneficiaries.

There shall be no third-party beneficiaries to this Agreement.

Section 5.12 Conflict of Interest.

A. Except for approved eligible administrative or personnel costs, no person described in Section 5.12.B below who exercises or has exercised any functions or responsibilities with respect to the activities funded pursuant to this Agreement or who is in a position to participate in a decision-making process or gain inside information with regard to such activities, may obtain a personal or financial interest or benefit from the activity, or have an interest in any contract, subcontract, or agreement with respect thereto, or the proceeds thereunder, either for themselves or for those with whom they have family or business ties, during or at any time after such person's tenure. Grantee shall exercise due diligence to ensure that the prohibition in this Section 5.12.A is followed.

B. The conflict-of-interest provisions of Section 5.12.A above apply to any person who is an employee, agent, consultant, officer, or any immediate family member of such person, or any elected or appointed official of City, or any person related within the third (3rd) degree of such persons.

Section 5.13 Notices, Demands, and Communications.

If at any time after the execution of this Agreement it shall become necessary or convenient for one of the Parties hereto to serve any notice, demand, or communication upon the other Party, such notice, demand, or communication shall be in writing and shall be served personally or by depositing the same in the registered United States mail with return receipt requested and postage prepaid or delivered by express delivery service with return receipt requested. 52 DocID #36940v1
If intended for City, it shall be addressed to:

City of Richmond
450 Civic Center Plaza, Suite 200
Richmond, California 94804
Attention: Community Development Director
With copy to:

City of Richmond
450 Civic Center Plaza, Suite 340
Richmond, CA 94804
Attention: City Attorney
If intended for Grantee, it shall be addressed to:

Deanne Pearn, CEO Hope Solutions
399 Taylor Blvd., Suite 115
Pleasant Hill, CA 94523
With copy to:

Sally Hindman, Executive Director
Tiny Village Spirit
3129 Ellis St.

Berkeley, California
Any notice, demand, or communication shall be deemed given, received, made, or communicated on the date personal delivery is affected or, if mailed in the manner herein specified, on the delivery date or date delivery is refused by the addressee, as shown on the return receipt. Either Party may change its mailing address at any time by giving written notice of such change at least ten (10) days prior to the date such change is desired to be effective.

Section 5.14 Applicable Law.

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

Section 5.15 Parties Bound.

Except as otherwise limited herein, the provisions of this Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the Parties and their heirs, executors, administrators, legal representatives, successors in interest, and assigns. Any reference in this Agreement to a specifically named Party shall be deemed to apply to any successor, heir, administrator, executor, 53 DocID #36940v1
successor, or assign of such Party who has acquired an interest in compliance with the terms of this Agreement or under law.

Section 5.16 Attorneys' Fees.

If any lawsuit is commenced to enforce any of the terms of this Agreement, the prevailing Party will have the right to recover its reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs of suit from the other Party.

Section 5.17 Severability.

If any term of this Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void or unenforceable, the remainder of the provisions shall continue in full force and effect unless the rights and obligations of the Parties have been materially altered or abridged by such invalidation, voiding, or unenforceability.

Section 5.18 Waivers.

Any waiver by City of any obligation or condition in this Agreement must be in writing.

No waiver will be implied from any delay or failure by City to take action on any breach or default of Grantee or to pursue any remedy allowed under this Agreement or applicable law.

Any extension of time granted to Grantee to perform any obligation under this Agreement shall not operate as a waiver or release from any of its obligations under this Agreement. Consent by City to any act or omission by Grantee shall not be construed to be consent to any other or subsequent act or omission or to waive the requirement for Grantee’s written consent to future waivers.

Section 5.19 Title of Parts and Sections.

Any titles of the sections or subsections of this Agreement are inserted for convenience of reference only and shall be disregarded in interpreting any part of the Agreement’s provisions.

Section 5.20 Entire Understanding of the Parties.

This Agreement constitutes the entire understanding and agreement of the Parties with respect to its subject matter. All modifications, amendments, or waivers of any terms of this Agreement shall be in writing and signed by the duly authorized representatives of the Parties.

Section 5.21 Multiple Originals; Counterpart.

This Agreement may be executed in multiple originals, each of which is deemed to be an original, and may be signed in counterparts.
54 DocID #36940v1
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the day and year first written above.

CITY OF RICHMOND:

Kinshasa Curl Date
City Manager
Approved as to form: Attest:
____________________________ _________________________________ James Atencio Pamela Christian
Senior Assistant City Attorney City Clerk
GRANTEE:

Name Date
__________________________________ _____________________________________ Title Signature
55 DocID #36940v1

EXHIBIT A

SERVICE PLAN
In a satisfactory manner as will be determined by the City's Program Manager, Contra Costa Interfaith Transitional Housing, Inc., dba Hope Solutions, (Hope Solutions) and their subcontractor, Tiny Village Spirit (TVS), and any other subcontractors, hereinafter “Grantee” will develop a tiny village with seven tiny homes for unhoused youth ages 18 – 24, provide property management, and supportive services for the project and residents subject to the terms and conditions of the Sublease Agreement by and between the Richmond Police Activities League (RPAL) and Tiny Village Spirit (TVS) dated October 10, 2024, and the Richmond Tiny House Village Supportive Services Agreement by and between Tiny Village Spirit (TVS) and Contra Costa Interfaith Transitional Housing, Inc. (dba Hope Solutions) dated October 3, 2024.

The Sublease Agreement and the Richmond Tiny House Village Supportive Services Agreement are attached hereto as Exhibits F and G and incorporated herein by reference.

Tiny Homes Development
Grantee will develop a tiny village comprising six (6) tiny homes to be occupied as transitional housing by unhoused youth ages 18 – 24 and one on-site Resident Manager unit, a total of seven units and related structures (Project) on land subleased from the Richmond Police Activities League (RPAL) located on the south side of Bissell Avenue between 22nd and 23rd streets in the city of Richmond as more fully described in the Sublease Agreement. Grantee will be responsible for raising funds to cover the development and operating costs of the project, will provide property management, and supportive services for the Project and residents. The city is providing grant funds in the amount of $300,000, which represents a percentage of the total funds needed for the development costs, estimated at $978,912, and for the calendar Year 2026 (6-9 months) operating costs estimated at $275,132.

Grantee will construct the tiny homes as depicted in the plans and specifications in Exhibit D of the Sublease Agreement and only as approved and permitted by all applicable government agencies. Grantee will be responsible to enter into contracts with licensed entities for any construction activity. All work performed by Grantee in relation to the project by Grantee, any entity contracted by Grantee or any of their volunteers, agents, representatives, or contractors shall comply with all relevant federal, state and local laws, rules, regulations and standards, zoning and building codes, ordinances, operating certificates for facilities, or licenses for an activity. Grantee will also be responsible for obtaining any required permits for any site work or structures to be constructed and or placed on the site.

Grantee will provide the following Property Management and Case Management services for the Project and residents as more fully described in the Richmond Tiny House Village Supportive Services Agreement dated October 3, 2024, incorporated herein by reference.

Property management
A. Grantee shall cause the Project to be maintained in a good, clean and sanitary condition that complies with all legal standards for habitability. Grantee shall perform 56 DocID #36940v1
regular and reasonable inspections of the Project. Grantee shall perform or supervise performance of day-to-day maintenance of the Project, perform emergency repairs and perform reasonable preventative maintenance. Grantee shall comply with or abide by any rule, determination, ordinance or law of any federal, state or municipal authority affecting or concerning the Project. Grantee shall address and resolve any serious defects at the Project observed by Grantee. Grantee shall receive and investigate all service requests from residents and take any necessary action regarding such requests.

Grantee shall keep records of any actions taken. Grantee shall be available to receive and respond to requests or emergencies on a 24-hour a day basis.

B. Grantee shall take all reasonable actions to collect rents, charges or other income when due from residents of the Project in accordance with the terms of their tenancies. All funds shall be deposited in the bank account provided by Grantee ("Bank Account") within 3 days of receipt. Grantee may execute all receipts or any other documents reflecting payment by residents of such sums.

C. Grantee shall use reasonable efforts to keep all units at the Project leased. Grantee is authorized to enter into lease agreements with residents in the form approved by Grantee and for the rental amount approved by Grantee. Grantee shall advertise any available units for lease in a timely fashion and using marketing methods agreed to in advance by the Grantee. Grantees shall conduct reasonable activities to screen residents and show available units.

D. Grantee shall determine the eligibility of prospective tenants based on the following criteria: must be between the ages of 18-24, homeless, referred by the Contra Costa County Continuum of Care, with a preference for Richmond residents. Furthermore, Grantee shall collaborate with the City’s Community Services Department - Employment and Training Division Deputy Director or their designee to design and implement a comprehensive assessment, evaluation, and qualification criteria for participants of the Tiny Homes Transitional Housing Program, ensuring that the program participants are evaluated for their fit and readiness. Pre-enrollment assessment will involve a thorough review of each participant’s background, including their housing history, employment history, and any previous involvement in similar programs. Grantee will work closely with Employment and Training Division to create employment roadmaps, enrolling participants in all eligible and/or appropriate City facilitated job readiness programs and trainings. Working collaboratively with the City’s Employment and Training Division, the Grantee will develop a robust system that not only evaluates readiness but also supports participants in their journey towards employment and more permanent housing E. Grantee shall:
a. Select and coordinate the move-in of new residents including maintaining a waiting list, conducting open houses for applicants, conducting interviews of applicants, conducting income certificationsfor applicants, complying with 57 DocID #36940v1
Fair Housing Law, executing Occupancy Agreements with new Residents and facilitating move-in of new Residents.
b. Conduct an orientation for each new resident before or within 3 days following move-in of any new resident.
c. Enforce all terms and conditions of the Occupancy Agreement. Grantee shall cooperate with Grantee regarding any legal proceedings related to eviction of residents at the Project.
d. Not permit any resident to sublease a Unit.
e. Record the condition of each Unit at the time a new resident takes possession of the Unit.
f. Clean and repair all Units following a vacancy.
g. Take all actions to require that all residents complete annual income recertification forms provided by Grantee in compliance with the Grantee’s requirements.
h. Provide Grantee all information regarding the household size and income of residents at the Property on an annual basis to permit TVS to comply with TVS's tax status.

F. Grantee shall permit RPAL or City to inspect the Property and the Units as permitted under law.

G. Grantee shall obtain and maintain in full force and affect any and all licenses required for Grantee lawfully to perform fully its obligations under this Agreement.

Case Management Services
A. Grantee Case Management/Service Coordination includes information, assistance with completing necessary forms as well as referrals to any mainstream benefits and other specialized services asrequested and required by Project residents.

B. Grantee will facilitate regular meetings and communication with Project partners including on an as needed basis to discuss residents who are not in good standing and to come up with a plan to support residents in staying housed. If residents desire or are required to leave the Project, Grantee will work with them to access housing suitable to their needs.

C. Case management and service coordination will be provided on-site three days per week by staff. Office hours shall be posted at the Project. This/these persons(s) will be supervised by a Grantee support services manager.

D. Based on the needs and desires of the tenants, more intensive mental health, crisis intervention and other support can be provided. Additional services staff assigned to oversee crisis and mental health support will be appropriately licensed/credentialed. 58 DocID #36940v1
E. Case Management/Service Coordination will also work to establish and maintain critical linkages to mainstream services including but not limited to criminal justice systems, community-based organizations, health services agencies, public school systems, and substance addiction programs in Contra Costa County.

F. Grantee shall track/provide service utilization and outcome measures utilizing the HMIS system as directed by the County Homeless Program. Grantee will maintain clients' files in locked cabinets and ensure that HIPAA guidelines are followed regarding safety and/or dissemination of client information.

G. Grantee agree to work together to assist internal monitoring controls - including providing annual audits, participating in an annual program meeting, cooperating with on-site monitoring, and sample file reviews.

Timeline
Grantee will construct the tiny homes within the project construction schedule per the plans and specifications in Exhibit D of the Sublease Agreement incorporated herein by reference, which may be adjusted based on current status, and completed and ready for occupancy no later than July 1, 2026. The following are the major completion dates for the Project.

Item Completion date
Utilities completed for any on-site
infrastructure work; electrical, plumbing,
water, sewer, etc.

March 31, 2026
Village perimeter fencing built onsite Complete
Tiny homes - seven units built and onsite Complete
Yurts – built and installed onsite Complete
Toilet, shower and laundry trailers –
delivered and installed onsite
December 31, 2025
Site improvements; walkways and ramps,
parking lot paving, planting and
landscaping security office, tiny house
murals final inspection
March 31, 2026
Tiny homes ready for resident move-in March 31, 2026
Tiny homes and residential manager unit
occupied
July 1-31, 2026
59 DocID #36940v1
Project outcome and evaluation
Project
component
Project
outcome
Indicator
measurement
Goal Evaluation
method
Tiny homes Completion
of tiny homes
# of Units
constructed
7 Certificate of
occupancy
Tiny homes
occupancy -
Youth
Tiny homes
occupied by
eligible youth
# of Units occupied
by Youths
6 Count of
Resident
leases
Tiny homes
occupancy –
Resident
Manager
Tiny home
occupied by
Resident
Manager
# of Units occupied
by Resident
Manager
1 Resident
Manager
Lease /
Agreement
Resident case
management
services
Permanent
housing and
selfsustaining
skills
# of Youth that find
permanent
housing and
employment
80% of
residents
after
12–18
months
Homeless
Management
Information
System
(HMIS)
client data
and client
survey
Resident case
management
services
Permanent
housing and
selfsustaining
skills
# of Youths that
accept employment
training services
50%-
80% of
residents
after
12–18
months
Homeless
Management
Information
System
(HMIS)
client data
and client
survey
Satisfaction
Survey
Youth that
are satisfied
with housing
and services
provided
# of Youth who
report satisfaction
with Program
80% of
residents
Client
Survey
60 DocID #36940v1

EXHIBIT B

PROJECT BUDGET AND OPERATING STATEMENT
The Program Budget can be modified up to the disbursement limit upon written request from the Grantee and approval from the City’s Project Manager.

Richmond Tiny House Village, Farm, and Garden--Capital Budget & Sources of Funds Capital Budget*
Contractual Services and Fees (secures site/tests/contracts/policies) $ 30,000.00 Site Work/Utilities/Electricity/Infrastructure $ 105,000.00 Parking Lot (24 spaces) $ 50,000.00
Kitchen Build Out/Appliances $ 30,000.00
Construction Materials (13 tiny houses, including RA house) $ 205,000.00 Fence (includes mural paint and supplies) $ 30,000.00
Common Room Buildings/Yurts (including hook ups) $ 55,000.00 Landscaping/Artistic Elements $ 20,000.00
Pathways (wheelchair accessible) $ 40,000.00
Gateway/Entrances (including signage) $ 7,000.00
Restroom Trailer (inc. hook ups and wheelchair ramp) $ 70,000.00 Security System $ 20,000.00
Murals/Art Work $ 15,000.00
Murphy Beds and Furnishings (not including in-kind donations) $ 10,000.00 Donated Security Cabin (hook ups and improvements) $ 5,000.00 Project Management/Community Organizing $ 132,000.00
Total Development Costs $ 824,000.00
Contingency (@ 8%) $ 65,920.00
Subtotal $ 889,920.00
Administration/Bookkeeping (@ 10%) $ 88,992.00
TOTAL $ 978,912.00
Updated 11/1/24
*Assumes rounding, does not include In-Kind Volunteer Labor Sources
Government
Contra Costa County measure x $ 65,000.00
City of Richmond $103,000
Total $168,000
Corporations
Arup $7,500
Blue Shield $40,000
Salesforce $50,000
Google $15,000
Kaiser family foundation $50,000
UPS $25,000
$187,500
Private foundations
Amy plant fund $10,000
Anonymous family foundation $15,000
Beretta family foundation $50,000
Beretta family foundation $70,000
East Bay community foundation $2,500
Entertainment industry foundation $10,000
Frederick J Isaac fund $12,000
Walter S Johnson foundation $30,000
Miranda Lux Foundation $15,000
Presuhn Trust $3,000
Red Oak opportunity fund $8,000
San Francisco foundation emergency response $15,000
San Francisco foundation $75,000
Seeley family foundation $5,000
Silicon Valley community foundation $75,000
WW H foundation $5,000
Bernard and Alba Witcan foundation $14,000
Zeller Beck family foundation $5,000
$419,500
Religious funders/Congregation Gifts
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints $77,000
Strawberry Creek friends meeting $5,000
Contra Costa County Misrasha $1,400
Other congregation gifts $7,600
$91,000
Individual gifts
Diane Wilsey $12,000
boona cheema $5,000
Go Fund Me $15,000
Robert Seelig $1,000
Other individual gifts $79,912
$112,912
TOTAL $978,912
61 DocID #36940v1

EXHIBIT B

PROJECT BUDGET AND OPERATING STATEMENT
The Program Budget can be modified up to the disbursement limit upon written request from the Grantee and approval from the City’s Project Manager.

Tiny House Village Operating Budget- Calendar Year 2025 6-9 Months (Start up)

EXPENSES
Personnel
CY 25 (6 mos OE + 9 mos
salaries)
.05 Program Director 4,688
.125 Program Manager 7,500
.5 FTE Village Manager 25,500
.5 FTE Case Manager 25,500
1 FTE Resident Ass't 33,750
subtotal salaries $ 96,938
taxes/benefits (23%) $ 22,296
subtotal personnel $ 119,233
Program Expenses
youth program incentives $ 1,800
case management expenses $ 4,500
subtotal program $ 6,300
Operating Expenses
Site security trainees stipends sub (@$18*24hours*365) $ 78,840 Site security supervision contract (@$25/hr x 500 hours +23% fringe) $ 7,625 Cleaning and sanitizing $ 4,420
Site maintenance and stability $ 12,500
security deposit $ 3,000
maintenance/repairs $ 6,000
Youth work stipends (@$18/hr x6 x3hrs/wk x46weeks) $ 7,452 Insurance $ 4,750
subtotal operating $ 124,587
Adminstrative/Overhead (10%) $ 25,012
Total Budget $ 275,132

SOURCES
City of Richmond $ 197,000
Rental subsidies at $800 per unit (from ERF grant) $ 9,600 $ -
To Be Raised $ 68,532
Prospective Funding
Miranda Lux Foundation $ 15,000
Entertainment Industry Foundation $ 15,000
Bernard Wilkin Foundation $ 10,000
Total Prospective Funding $ 40,000
Remaining unidentified funding $ 28,532
62 DocID #36940v1

EXHIBIT C
The Grant Report Template May be Updated by the City of Richmond at Any Time Progress Report:

Tiny Village Grant Project
Program Project Description: (Provide a brief description of the project/programs your organization is providing with RFCY Grant funds. Activities must be consistent with the Service Plan attached as Exhibit A to the Grant Services Agreement) Task Accomplished and Success to Date:

1. What task has your organization completed in whole or in part during this period? (Task should be consistent with those identified in the Service Plan for the reporting period)

2. Identify and discuss any challenges, issues or problems your organization faced during this period which might impact the program/project’s ability to meet the intended outcomes identified in the Service Plan.

3. What lessons have you learned from participants, staff and/or the community during the course of the project?

4. What feedback have participants and/or members of the community provided Organization Name:

Project Name:

Contact
Person:

Contract
#:

Grant Award
Amount: $
Project Duration:
onths)
Total number of clients served:

Total number of clients served from Richmond:

Indicate the area or neighborhood(s) where services were provided:
63 DocID #36940v1
regarding the program/project? (e.g. quotes, e-mails/letters, summarized findings from surveys)

5. Did your staff participate in any capacity-building opportunities during the reporting period? If so, please identify.

Project Expenses to Date: Attach a completed Invoice for any reimbursable costs incurred during this reporting period. 64 DocID #36940v1

EXHIBIT D

CITY OF RICHMOND
Sanctuary City Compliance Statement
The undersigned, (hereafter "Contractor"), has had an opportunity to review the requirements of City of Richmond Ordinance 12-18 (hereafter "Sanctuary City Contracting Ordinance" or “SCCO”). Contractor understands and agrees that the City may choose with whom it will maintain business relations and may refrain from contracting with any person or entity that provides Data Broker or Extreme Vetting services to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Division of the United States Department of Homeland Security (“ICE”). Contractor understands the meaning of the following terms used in the SCCO:
a. "Data Broker” means either of the following:
i. The collection of information, including personal information about consumers, from a wide variety of sources for the purposes of reselling such information to their customers, which include both private-sector business and government agencies; ii. The aggregation of data that was collected for another purpose from that for which it is ultimately used.
b. “Extreme Vetting” means data mining, threat modeling, predictive risk analysis, or other similar services."
Contractor understandsthat it is not eligible to receive or retain a City contract if at the time the Contract is executed, or at any time during the term of the Contract, it provides Data Broker or Extreme Vetting services to ICE.

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

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

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

Printed Name: Title:

Signed: Date:

Business Entity:
65 DocID #36940v1

EXHIBIT E
Insurance Requirements
During the entire term of this Agreement and any extension or modification thereof, the Grantee shall keep in effect insurance policies meeting the insurance requirements specified in the insurance provisions which are attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. 66 DocID #36940v1

EXHIBIT F
Sublease Agreement
67 DocID #36940v1

EXHIBIT G
Richmond Tiny House Village Supportive Services Agreement 68

April 28, 2026
DocID #69831v1
Community Development
DATE: April 28, 2026
TO: Mayor Martinez and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lina Velasco, Director of Community Development
Daniel Chavarria, Director of Public Works
Subject: Authorize AHSC Grant Application for Riveter Project and Associated Active Transportation Improvements
FINANCIAL IMPACT: The City is proposing participation as a non-Applicant in the Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities
(AHSC) Program grant application. The Co-Applicants
would be Eden Housing and Community Housing
Development Corporation (CHDC) for the Riveter project.

If the grant is awarded, the City will then appropriate the AHSC grant funds and adjust the Community
Development and Public Works budgets accordingly in
coordination with Finance. There is no fiscal impact
associated with this item, and no funds are being
appropriated at this time.

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

October 4, 2022
October 18, 2022

STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:

The Community Development and Public Works
Departments are working with Community Housing
Development Corporation (CHDC) and Eden Housing to
apply for approximately $32 million in funds from the
Strategic Growth Council’s Affordable Housing and
Sustainable Communities Program (AHSC) program for
the Riveter project. The City would be a non-Applicant
participant in the grant and would be responsible for the implementation of certain bicycle and pedestrian
improvements.

AGENDA
REPORT
69

April 28, 2026
DocID #69831v1
RECOMMENDED ACTION: ADOPT a resolution to AUTHORIZE the City’s participation in an Affordable Housing and Sustainable
Communities Program (AHSC) grant application for the
Riveter Project, a 59-unit affordable housing
development at 100 38th Street, for the purposes of
implementing certain pedestrian and bicycle
improvements, and AUTOHRIZE the City Manager or
their designee to execute the necessary agreements with the Co-Applicants to complete the project components
with grant funds and appropriate the grant funds, if
awarded – Community Development Department (Lina
Velasco 510-620-6841).

DISCUSSION:

The City of Richmond has been invited by Co-Applicants, Community Housing Development Corporation (CHDC) and Eden Housing, to participate as a non-Applicant in their application for Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities Program (AHSC) funds for the purpose of delivering the Riveter project, which includes, the Riveter, a 50-unit supportive housing project; bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure to be implemented by the City of Richmond, and new Zero-emission buses for AC Transit.

The AHSC Program is part of California Climate Investments, a statewide initiative that puts billions of Cap-and-Invest dollars to work reducing greenhouse gas emissions, strengthening the economy, and improving public health and the environment — particularly in Disadvantaged Communities (DACs). The AHSC Program furthers the purposes of AB 32 (Chapter 488, Statutes of 2006), SB 375 (Chapter 728, Statutes of 2008), and SB 32 (Chapter 249, Statutes of 2016) by investing in projects that facilitate green-house gas (GHG) reduction by supporting more compact, infill development patterns, encouraging Active Transportation and transit usage, and protecting Agricultural Land from sprawl development (AHSC Round 10 Program Guidelines, February 25, 2026). The AHSC Program is administered by the California Strategic Growth Council (SGC). The Department of Housing and Community Development (Department) will implement the transportation, housing, and infrastructure components of the AHSC Program. The SGC staff will coordinate efforts with City staff, working with the California Air Resources Board (CARB) and the SGC to administer the broader AHSC Program, including developing Program Guidelines, evaluating applications, preparing agreements, monitoring agreement implementation, and AHSC Program reporting.

Riveter Project Summary
Riveter is an Integrated Connectivity Project in Richmond that combines the adaptive reuse of a former Contra Costa County courthouse into 59 units of affordable housing with a robust package of active transportation, transit, workforce, and anti-displacement investments. The residential component is especially distinctive because it transforms a 70

April 28, 2026
DocID #69831v1
surplus public site specifically offered for affordable housing into a new community asset, demonstrating a time- and cost-efficient model for increasing housing supply through adaptive reuse. The City Council approved the Riveter project on October 4 and October 18, 2022. In addition to converting the former health center building, into a 59- unit affordable housing development, the approved project included construction of a new 79-unit affordable housing building; however, that portion of the project is not included in this grant.

The AHSC scope includes more than 2 new lane miles of Class II bikeway, more than 2,000 linear feet of Safe and Accessible Walkway improvements across multiple quadrants of the City, and the purchase of three new zero-emission buses for AC Transit (Attachment 1). These improvements will strengthen neighborhood connectivity, improve safe access to transit and daily destinations, and expand lower-emission mobility options for future residents and nearby low-income households.

Riveter also reflects significant cross-sector collaboration. The City of Richmond helped shape the bike and pedestrian improvements, AC Transit will receive new ZEV buses, RichmondWORKS serves as the workforce partner, and RichmondLAND serves as the anti-displacement partner. Together, these components position Riveter as a model of equitable reinvestment that links affordable housing production with mobility, neighborhood stability, and access to opportunity. The City would be a non-Applicant in the grant and will execute an agreement with the Co-Applicants to receive grant funds to implement the identified pedestrian and bicycle improvements, including overseeing the design, construction plan development, bidding, and construction oversight.

In general, the grant application proposes the following funding requests:
 Housing: $22 Million
 STI: $9.65 Million
o City: $7,500,00
o AC Transit: $2,165,000
 Other (workforce, transit passes, internet): $537,920  Total: ~$32,250,000
The City’s funding request would cover the costs of implementing certain bicycle and pedestrian improvements identified in adopted City plans. The total funding request amounts will be finalized as the application is completed. Applications are due on May 4, 2026.

Therefore, City staff recommend that the City Council adopt a resolution to authorize the City’s participation in an Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities (AHSC) Program grant application for the Riveter Project, a 59-unit affordable housing development at 100 38th Street, for the purpose of implementing pedestrian and bicycle improvements (Attachment 2). City staff further recommends that the City Council authorize the City Manager or their designee to execute the necessary agreements with co-applicants to complete the project components and appropriate the grant funds if awarded.
71

April 28, 2026
DocID #69831v1
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:

Attachment 1 – Map of Project
Attachment 2 – Resolution
72 AHSC Connectivity Improvements
Key
New Sidewalk
New Bike Lane & Pedestrian Improvements
100 38th St. – Housing
N
73 DocID #69832v1
RESOLUTION NO. _____

RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND

AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE AND APPROPRIATION OF AFFORDABLE

HOUSING AND SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES PROGRAM FUNDS FOR

THE RIVETER PROJECT AND RELATED IMPROVEMENTS
WHEREAS, the State of California, the Strategic Growth Council (SGC) and the Department of Housing and Community Development (Department) issued a Notice of Funding Availability dated February 13, 2026 (NOFA), and amended February 25, 2026, under the Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities (AHSC) Program established under Division 44, Part 1 of the Public Resources Code commencing with Section 75200; and
WHEREAS, the SGC is authorized to approve funding allocations for the AHSC Program, subject to the terms and conditions of the NOFA, Program Guidelines, Application Package, and Standard Agreement, and the Department is authorized to administer the approved funding allocations of the AHSC Program; and WHEREAS, the Co-Applicants, Community Housing Development Corporation and Eden Housing, have invited the City of Richmond (City) to be included as a nonApplicant participant for the purposes of implementing certain bicycle and pedestrian connectivity improvements (collectively the “City Connectivity Improvements”); and WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to implement the City Connectivity Improvements portion of the Riveter Project; and
WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to delegate authority to the City Manager or her designee to apply for, receive and accept such AHSC Program funds on behalf of the City, and to negotiate, execute, enter into and deliver such agreements and instruments with the Department or Co-Applicants, related to or in connection with such AHSC program funds without returning to the City Council, for the City Connectivity Improvements; to submit and execute all required AHSC program documents and any amendments thereto for the City Connectivity Improvements to the City Manager or designee; and,
WHEREAS, the City wishes to delegate authorization to negotiate and execute all required implementation and cooperation agreements with project partners, including Co-Applicants and AC Transit, as needed, to implement its project component to the City Manager or her designee.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of the City of Richmond authorizes the City Manager or her designee to take any and all necessary actions to apply for the AHSC Program funds, including executing the AHSC Program Application and AHSC Documents, as detailed in the NOFA dated February 13, 2026 and amended February 25, 2026, for Round 10 in a total amount not to exceed 74 DocID #69832v1
$35,000,000 for all Riveter Project components to be implemented independently by Eden Housing, Community Housing Development Corporation, AC Transit, and the City, of which approximately $22,000,000 is requested as a loan for an Affordable Housing Development (AHD)(“AHSC Loan”) and approximately $10,000,000 is requested for a grant for Housing-Related Infrastructure(HRI), Sustainable Transportation Infrastructure (STI), Transit-Related Amenities (TRA) or Program (PGM) activities (‘AHSC grant”) as defined in the AHSC Program Guidelines.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that if AHSC Program funds are awarded, the Council of the City of Richmond authorizes the City Manager or her designee to execute a State of California Standard Agreement (Standard Agreement) for the AHSC-funded project, including any and all other documents required or deemed necessary or appropriate to secure the AHSC Program funds and all amendments thereto (collectively, the AHSC Documents).

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that if AHSC Program funds are awarded, the Council of the City of Richmond authorizes the City Manager or her designee to appropriate the grant funds once the ASHC Documents are executed. --------------------------------------------------------------- I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the City Council of the City of Richmond at a meeting held on April 28, 2026, by the following vote:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
_____________________________

CLERK OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND
(SEAL)
Approved:
______________________

EDUARDO MARTINEZ
Mayor
Approved as to Form:
___________________________

SHANNON MOORE
Interim City Attorney
75

April 28, 2026
Economic Development
DATE: April 28, 2026
TO: Mayor Martinez and Members of the City Council
FROM: Shasa Curl, City Manager
Nannette Beacham, Economic Development Director
Samantha Carr, Environmental Manager
Subject: Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the West Contra Costa Integrated Waste Management Authority
(RecycleMore) for Implementation of California Senate
Bill 1383 (SB 1383)
FINANCIAL IMPACT: The services to be provided under the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) will be funded through existing
Solid Waste post-collection rates and solid waste
franchise fee revenues. No additional appropriation is
required, and this item has no impact on the General
Fund. Any future costs associated with SB 1383
implementation that fall outside the scope of current
rate-funded activities will be evaluated through the
annual budget development process.

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

None.

STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:

California Senate Bill 1383 establishes statewide
mandates for organic waste diversion and edible food
recovery, imposing new regulatory requirements on
jurisdictions, including the City of Richmond, and
necessitating coordinated implementation efforts. The
City has been working with RecycleMore to develop a
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to define roles
and responsibilities for compliance with SB 1383
requirements.

AGENDA
REPORT
76

April 28, 2026
RECOMMENDED ACTION: ADOPT a resolution approving a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City and the West
Contra Costa Integrated Waste Management Authority
(RecycleMore) regarding implementation of California
Senate Bill 1383 (SB 1383) regulatory requirements and
AUTHORIZE the City Manager or their designee to
execute the MOU – Economic Development (Samantha
Carr 510-620-5407).

BACKGROUND:

Senate Bill 1383 (SB 1383) set a statewide goal for the reduction of short-lived climate pollutants by diverting 75 percent of organic waste disposal to landfills by 2025 and recovering 20 percent of currently disposed surplus food for human consumption by 2025. Jurisdictions are required under SB 1383 to provide organic waste services such as, but not limited to, organic waste collection, edible food recovery programs, education and outreach, and monitoring and enforcement. SB 1383 designates the California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) as the regulatory authority to achieve these organic waste disposal reduction targets.

The City of Richmond is a member agency of the West Contra Costa Integrated Waste Management Authority, a California joint powers authority (RecycleMore). RecycleMore is responsible for implementing most State-mandated recycling and organics programs in West County and is willing to expand its current scope to achieve compliance with the new requirements of Senate Bill (SB) 1383 on behalf of its member agencies.

DISCUSSION:

The City has been working with RecycleMore staff to develop a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City of Richmond and RecycleMore to establish roles, responsibilities, and requirements regarding the implementation of SB 1383 as required by the State of California and regulated by CalRecycle. The current MOU designates RecycleMore as the responsible party for implementing the following requirements of SB 1383:

1. Education and Outreach

2. Reporting and Recordkeeping

3. Edible Food Recovery Programs

4. Organic Waste Processing Capacity and Diversion Planning

5. Receipt and Investigation of Complaints

6. Inspection and Enforcement Program

7. Managing Waiver Policy
The City of Richmond will be responsible for:

1. Enforceable Ordinance(s) (completed in 2021)

2. Requiring haulers to implement SB 1383 compliance elements (e.g., collection, containers, monitoring, etc.) (completed as part of the Collection Agreement) 77

April 28, 2026

3. Container labels compliant with SB 1383 (completed as part of the Collection Agreement)

4. Approval of SB 1383 Waivers (ongoing)

5. Development and implementation of an Environmentally Preferable Purchasing Policy compliant with SB 1383 (completed)

6. Procurement of organic waste products (ongoing)

7. Reporting and record-keeping for Richmond required elements (ongoing)

8. Enforcement (ongoing)
CalRecycle, as the regulating authority, is conducting oversight and enforcement on jurisdictions to achieve SB 1383 requirements. As a result, the City of Richmond is subject to compliance evaluations. This MOU enables RecycleMore to leverage its specialized expertise to comply with the new SB 1383 requirements while imposing minimal strain on the City's already limited staffing resources. Funding for services provided as a result of the MOU is sourced from existing Solid Waste post collection rates and franchise fee.

CalRecycle has requested that the City and RecycleMore finalize this MOU as the City is expected to be audited for SB 1383 compliance in 2026. The City expects RecycleMore to approve this SB 1383 MOU at its April 2026 Board meeting.

City staff recommend that the City Council adopt a resolution to approve the MOU between the City and RecycleMore to implement SB 1383 requirements, and further authorize the City Manager, or their designee, to execute the MOU.

SYNERGISTIC POLICIES:

Climate Action Plan:
 Strategy SW 1: Establish a Zero Waste Framework
General Plan 2030:
 Policy EC3.3 Solid Waste Reduction and Recycling. Promote waste reduction and recycling to minimize materials that are processed in landfills DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:

Attachment 1 – Resolution
Attachment 2 – Draft Richmond SB 1383 MOU 4.17.26
78 Reso. No. _____

RESOLUTION NO. ______

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF CITY OF RICHMOND,
CALIFORNIA (1) APPROVING A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
(MOU) BETWEEN WEST CONTRA COSTA INTEGRATED WASTE

MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY (RECYCLEMORE), A JOINT POWERS

AUTHORITY, AND THE CITY OF RICHMOND REGARDING
IMPLEMENTATION OF SENATE BILL 1383 REGULATORY
REQUIREMENTS; AND (2) AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO

EXECUTE THE MOU
WHEREAS, Senate Bill 1383 (SB 1383) sets a statewide goal for the reduction of short-lived climate pollutants by diverting 75% of organic waste disposal to landfills by 2025 and recovering 20% of currently disposed surplus food for human consumption by 2025; and
WHEREAS, jurisdictions are required under SB 1383 to provide organic waste services such as, but not limited to, organic waste collection, edible food recovery programs, education and outreach, and monitoring and enforcement; and WHEREAS, SB 1383 designates the California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) as the regulatory authority to achieve these organic waste disposal reduction targets; and
WHEREAS, the City of Richmond is a member agency of the West Contra Costa Integrated Waste Management Authority (RecycleMore), a California joint powers authority; and
WHEREAS, RecycleMore is responsible for implementing most State-mandated recycling and organics programs in West Contra Costa County and is willing to expand its current scope to achieve compliance with the new requirements of SB 1383 on behalf of its member agencies; and
WHEREAS, the City of Richmond staff has been working with RecycleMore staff to develop a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City of Richmond and RecycleMore to establish roles, responsibilities, and requirements regarding the implementation of SB 1383 as required by the State of California and regulated by CalRecycle; and
WHEREAS, CalRecycle, as the regulating authority, conducts oversight and enforcement on jurisdictions to achieve compliance with SB 1383 requirements, and as a result, the City of Richmond is subject to compliance evaluations; and WHEREAS, this MOU enables RecycleMore to leverage its specialized expertise to comply with the new SB 1383 requirements while imposing minimal strain on the City's already limited staffing resources.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Richmond hereby approves a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between West Contra Costa Integrated Waste Management Authority (RecycleMore) and the City of Richmond regarding the implementation of SB 1383 regulatory requirements; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Richmond authorizes the City Manager or his designee to execute the MOU between RecycleMore and the City of Richmond in substantially the form attached, and to make such changes or additions prior to execution, with the concurrence of the City Attorney, as are necessary or appropriate to maintain consistency with the MOUs executed by other member agencies;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Richmond 79 Reso. No. _____

authorizes the City Manager to take such other actions as may be reasonably necessary to effectuate the intent of this resolution; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the foregoing recitations are true and correct and are included herein by reference as findings.
******************
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:

NOES:

ABSTENTIONS:

ABSENT:

CLERK OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND
(SEAL)
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
80 SB 1383 MOU 1
82821.00012\44824821.1
Memorandum of Understanding
Between West Contra Costa Integrated Waste Management Authority and the City of Richmond Regarding Implementation of SB 1383 Regulations This Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) is made this day of _______________, 2026 (“Effective Date”) by and between the CITY OF RICHMOND (“Richmond”), a municipal corporation hereinafter referred to as “City” and the WEST CONTRA COSTA INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY, a California joint powers authority (“Authority” or “RecycleMore”) (individually “Party” and collectively “Parties”).

RECITALS
A. The Authority is a joint powers authority established pursuant to the California Joint Exercise of Powers Act (Gov. Code §§ 6500 et seq.) pursuant to the Fifth Amendment and Restatement Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement of the West Contra Costa Integrated Waste Management Authority (“JEPA”); and
B. The City is a party to the JEPA and has entered into a franchise agreement with a solid waste collection services provider (“Provider”) for the collection of Solid Waste (the “Franchise Agreement”). The Franchise Agreement provides for certain rights and delegated authorities to the respective solid waste service provider; and C. The Authority operates certain core programs on behalf of and for the benefit of its Member Agencies (as defined below), including but not limited to providing education regarding recycling, composting, and other methods of waste diversion, and conducting, preparing, and submitting all monitoring and reporting pursuant to the California Integrated Waste Management Act (California Public Resources Code §§ 40000 et seq.); and D. Senate Bill (SB) 1383, the Short-lived Climate Pollutants Reduction Act (2016) (which added Sections 39730.5, 39730.6, and 39730.8 to the Health and Safety Code, and added Chapter 13.1 (commencing with Section 42652) to Part 3 of Division 30 of the Public Resources Code, as amended, supplemented, superseded, and replaced from time to time) (“SB 1383”), sets statewide organic waste disposal reduction targets of 50 percent by 2020 and 75 percent by 2025, based on the 2014 organics waste disposal baseline, set forth in Section 39730.6 of the Health and Safety Code, and requires California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (“CalRecycle”) to develop regulations to reduce organics in landfills as a source of methane; and E. CalRecycle adopted the SB 1383 Regulations that created a new Chapter 12 (Short-lived Climate Pollutants) of Division 7 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations and amended portions of regulations of Title 14 CCR and Title 27 CCR (“SB 1383 Regulations”). The SB 1383 Regulations impose requirements on counties, cities, residential households, commercial businesses (including multi-family residential dwellings), commercial edible food generators, haulers, self-haulers, food recovery organizations, and food recovery services to support achievement of statewide organic waste disposal reduction targets; and F. The SB 1383 Regulations require cities and counties, among other things, to adopt and enforce a mechanism to implement relevant provisions of the SB 1383 Regulations 81 SB 1383 MOU 2
82821.00012\44824821.1
concerning regulation of organic waste collection services, generators of organic waste, waste haulers, and generators, and processors of edible food, together with enforcement mechanisms and administrative civil penalties for violations of local regulations; and G. The SB 1383 Regulations also require cities and counties, among other things, to implement programs requiring organic waste generators and waste haulers to meet minimum standards for organic waste collection services, inspect waste containers for prohibited contamination of materials, provide education and outreach information to organic waste generators, report to CalRecycle on compliance with SB 1383 Regulations, and maintain records of compliance with SB 1383 Regulations; and
H. The Provider has developed programs for Organic Waste (as defined below) collection as required by the Franchise Agreement and applicable law; and I. Pursuant to 14 CCR 18981.2(b), cities and counties may designate a public or private entity to fulfill their SB 1383 obligations to adopt an enforceable mechanism through a MOU. However, 14 CCR 18981.2(c) specifies that cities and counties shall remain ultimately responsible for compliance with SB 1383 Regulations; and J. The Parties wish to enter into this MOU to designate certain roles and responsibilities that the Authority shall assume on behalf of the City to implement the SB 1383 Regulations that took effect on January 1, 2022 under the terms and conditions as set forth herein.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing, the Parties hereby agree as follows:

AGREEMENT

1. Recitals. The foregoing recitals are true and correct and hereby incorporated herein.

2. Term. This MOU shall commence on the Effective Date and remain in full force and effect until terminated as set forth in Section 10.

3. Definitions.
(a) “Authority” means the West Contra Costa Integrated Management Authority, also referred to as “RecycleMore” in this Agreement, including in Exhibit A. (b) “Back-haul” means generating and transporting Organic Waste to a destination owned and operated by the generator using the generator’s own employees and equipment, or as otherwise defined in 14 CCR Section 18982(a)(66)(A) or successor regulation. (c) “Blue Container” shall have the same meaning as in 14 CCR Section 18982(a)(5) or successor regulation. The Parties acknowledge that the City may use the term “Recycling Container” in its ordinances to refer to what are defined as Blue Containers herein. (d) “Board of Directors” means the governing body of the Authority. 82 SB 1383 MOU 3
82821.00012\44824821.1
(e) “California Code of Regulations” or “CCR” means the State of California Code of Regulations. CCR references in this MOU are preceded with a number that refers to the relevant Title of the CCR (e.g., “14 CCR” refers to Title 14 of CCR). (f) “CalRecycle” means the California State Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery, which is the state agency designated with responsibility for developing, implementing, and enforcing the SB 1383 Regulations among other duties. (g) “City” means the City of Richmond.
(h) “City Representative” means the City Manager or the City Manager’s designee. (i) “Commercial Business” or “Commercial” means a firm, partnership, proprietorship, joint-stock company, corporation, or association, whether for-profit or nonprofit, strip mall, industrial facility, or a Multifamily Residential Dwelling, or as otherwise defined in 14 CCR Section 18982(a)(6) or successor regulation. A Multi-Family Residential Dwelling that consists of fewer than five (5) units is not a Commercial Business for purposes of this MOU. (j) “Commercial Edible Food Generator” includes a Tier One or a Tier Two Commercial Edible Food Generator as defined in 14 CCR 18982(a)(73) and (a)(74) or successor regulation. For the purposes of this definition, Food Recovery Organizations and Food Recovery Services are not Commercial Edible Food Generators pursuant to 14 CCR Section 18982(a)(7) or successor regulation.
(k) “Compliance Review” means a review of records by an Enforcement Agency to determine compliance with SB 1383 Regulations.
(l) “Container Contamination” or “Contaminated Container” means a container, regardless of type or color, that contains Prohibited Container Contaminants, or as otherwise defined in 14 CCR Section 18982(a)(14) or successor regulation. (m) “County” means the County of Contra Costa.
(n) “Database” means the existing database tracking system (or similar system that may be acquired or created in the future) that the City and Authority share for the purposes of complying with various state laws concerning solid waste handling. (o) “Edible Food” means food intended for human consumption, or as otherwise defined in 14 CCR Section 18982(a)(18) or successor regulation. For the purposes of this MOU or as otherwise defined in 14 CCR Section 18982(a)(18) or successor regulation, Edible Food is not Solid Waste if it is recovered and not discarded. Nothing herein requires or authorizes the recovery of Edible Food that does not meet the food safety requirements of the California Retail Food Code, as codified in the Health and Safety Code Section 113700, et seq. or successor statute.
(p) “Enforcement Action" means an action of the relevant Enforcement Agency to address non-compliance with SB 1383 Regulations including, but not limited to, issuing administrative citations, fines, penalties, or other remedies. 83 SB 1383 MOU 4
82821.00012\44824821.1
(q) “Enforcement Agency” means an entity with the authority to enforce part or all of SB 1383 Regulations as specified herein. The Authority and the City are each an Enforcement Agency.
(r) “Food Recovery Organization” means an entity that engages in the collection or receipt of edible food from Commercial Edible Food Generators and distributes that edible food to the public for food recovery either directly or through other entities or as otherwise defined in 14 CCR Section 18982(a)(25) or successor regulation.
(s) “Food Recovery Services” means a person or entity that collects and transports edible food from a Commercial Edible Food Generator to a Food Recovery Organization or other entities for food recovery or as otherwise defined in 14 CCR Section 18982(a)(26) or successor regulation.
(t) “Generator” means a person or entity that is responsible for the initial creation of Organic Waste, or as otherwise defined in 14 CCR Section 18982(a)(48) or successor regulation. (u) “Gray Container” shall have the same meaning as defined in 14 CCR Section 18982(a)(28) or successor regulation. The Parties acknowledge that the City may use the term “Garbage Container” or “Landfill Container” in its ordinances to refer to what are defined as Gray Containers herein.
(v) “Green Container” shall have the same meaning as defined in 14 CCR Section 18982(a)(29) or successor regulation and shall be used for the purpose of storage and collection of Organic Waste. The Parties acknowledge that the City may use the term “Organics Container” or “Compost Container” in its ordinances to refer to what are defined as Green Containers herein.
(w) “Hauler” means a person or entity who collects Organic Waste from a Generator and delivers it to a reporting entity, end user, or a destination outside of the state. “Hauler” includes public contract haulers, private contract haulers, and Self-Haulers. A person who transports material from a reporting entity to another person is a transporter, not a hauler. (x) “Hauler Route” means the designated itinerary or sequence of stops for each segment of City’s collection service area, or as otherwise defined in 14 CCR Section 18982(a) (31.5) or successor regulation.
(y) “Implementation Record” means all records, physical or electronic, that must be stored in one central location and are required by the SB 1383 Regulations. (z) “Inspection” means an Enforcement Agency’s electronic or on-site review of records, containers, and an entity’s collection, handling, recycling, or landfill disposal of Organic Waste or Edible Food handling to determine if the entity is complying with requirements set forth in the SB 1383 Regulations, or as otherwise defined in 14 CCR Section 18982(a)(35) or successor regulation.
(aa) “Member Agency” or “Member Agencies” means any party, or multiple parties, to the JEPA. Current Member Agencies are the cities of El Cerrito, Hercules, Pinole, Richmond 84 SB 1383 MOU 5
82821.00012\44824821.1
and San Pablo. The Member Agency boundaries for the purpose of this MOU are the legal boundaries of each of the incorporated municipalities.
(bb) “Organics,” or “Organic Waste” means Solid Waste containing material originated from living organisms and their metabolic waste products, including but not limited to food, green material, landscape and pruning waste, organic textiles and carpets, lumber, wood, Paper Products, Printing and Writing Paper, manure, biosolids, digestate, and sludges or as otherwise defined in 14 CCR Section 18982(a)(46) or successor regulation. Biosolids and digestate are as defined by 14 CCR Section 18982(a)(4) and 14 CCR Section 18982(a) (16.5), respectively, or successor regulation.
(cc) “Paper Products” include, but are not limited to, paper janitorial supplies, cartons, wrapping, packaging, file folders, hanging files, corrugated boxes, tissue, and toweling, or as otherwise defined in 14 CCR Section 18982(a)(51) or successor regulation. (dd) “Printing and Writing Paper” include, but are not limited to, copy, xerographic, watermark, cotton fiber, offset, forms, computer printout paper, white wove envelopes, manila envelopes, book paper, note pads, writing tablets, newsprint, and other writing papers, posters, index cards, calendars, brochures, reports, magazines, and publications, or as otherwise defined in 14 CCR Section 18982(a)(54) or successor regulation. (ee) “Prohibited Container Contaminants” includes all of the following: (i) materials placed in the Blue Container that are not identified as acceptable source separated recyclable materials for the Blue Container; (ii) materials placed in the Green Container that are not identified as acceptable source separated Green Container Organic Waste; (iii) materials placed in the Gray Container that are acceptable source separated recyclable materials that can be placed in the Blue Container and/or acceptable source separated Green Container Organic Waste; and (iv) Excluded Waste, as that phrase is defined in Richmond Municipal Code section

9.20.010, placed in any container.
(ff) “Route Review” means a visual Inspection of containers along a Hauler Route for the purpose of determining Container Contamination, and may include mechanical or electronic Inspection methods such as the use of cameras, or as otherwise defined in 14 CCR Section 18982(a)(65) or successor regulation.
(gg) “SB 1383 Regulations,” means Chapter 12 (Short-lived Climate Pollutants) of Division 7 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations and amended portions of regulations of Title 14 CCR and Title 27 CCR or successor regulation. Regulatory references to specific sections listed in the MOU shall be to the SB 1383 Regulations, unless specifically noted otherwise.
(hh) “Self-Hauler” means a person, who hauls Solid Waste, Organic Waste or recyclable material he or she has generated to another person. Self-Hauler also includes a person who back-hauls waste, or as otherwise defined in 14 CCR Section 18982(a)(66) or successor regulation.
(ii) “Solid Waste” has the same meaning as defined in Public Resources Code Section 40191 or successor regulation, which defines Solid Waste as all putrescible and non85 SB 1383 MOU 6
82821.00012\44824821.1
putrescible solid, semisolid, and liquid wastes, including garbage, trash, refuse, paper, rubbish, ashes, industrial wastes, demolition and construction wastes, abandoned vehicles and parts thereof, discarded home and industrial appliances, dewatered, treated, or chemically fixed sewage sludge which is not hazardous waste, manure, vegetable or animal solid and semi-solid wastes, and other discarded solid and semisolid wastes, with the exception that Solid Waste does not include any of the following wastes:
(i) Hazardous waste, as defined in the Public Resources Code Section 40141 or successor statute.
(ii) Radioactive waste regulated pursuant to the State Radiation Control Law (Chapter 8 (commencing with Section 114960) of Part 9 of Division 104 of the Health and Safety Code) or successor statute.
(iii) Medical waste regulated pursuant to the State Medical Waste Management Act (Part 14 (commencing with Section 117600) of Division 104 of the Health and Safety Code).

Untreated medical waste shall not be disposed of in a Solid Waste landfill, as defined in Public Resources Code Section 40195.1 or successor statute. Medical waste that has been treated and deemed to be Solid Waste shall be regulated pursuant to Division 30 of the Public Resources Code or successor statute.

4. Authority Responsibilities. The City hereby delegates to the Authority, and the Authority hereby accepts, the responsibilities enumerated in this Section 4 for compliance with the provisions of SB 1383 Regulations to the extent allowed by law and as specified herein. The Authority intends to approve concurrently herewith or has approved MOUs with the other Member Agencies in which it is accepting or has accepted nearly identical delegation of responsibilities from the other Member Agencies (the “Other MOUs”). It is the Authority’s desire to cost-effectively administer responsibilities so delegated, which may require doing so uniformly across all of the Member Agencies, so far as is feasible under the specific circumstances prevailing in each Member Agency. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the foregoing, it shall be within the Authority’s sole discretion to determine the manner in which it fulfills its responsibilities within each jurisdiction, including whether the performance of responsibilities is administered uniformly or not. In furtherance of this intent, the Authority, in consultation with the Member Agencies, has developed a Workplan, attached as Exhibit A and hereby incorporated by reference, that details the manner in which it will initially perform its responsibilities under this MOU and the Other MOUs. The Workplan includes a column entitled “Requirement,” and the activities listed in that column, and the columns identifying the party responsible for a requirement and whether the work related to a requirement has been delegated in whole or in part to a third party (collectively the “Requirements”), are the ways and means of carrying out the responsibilities. Each year, in conjunction with the Annual Budget and more often if needed, the Authority Board shall consider and approve, subject to Member Agency approval, any necessary changes to the Workplan, including any amendments to align the Workplan with the Annual Budget.

The Workplan is intended to be a flexible framework that can be revised from time to time as may be necessary or prudent. The Parties agree that amendments to the Workplan may necessitate amendments to the MOU. Should State regulatory authorities make changes to, or 86 SB 1383 MOU 7
82821.00012\44824821.1
change interpretations of, requirements under SB 1383, or any other controlling law or regulation, that necessitate changes to the MOU and/or the Workplan to ensure compliance, or should the Parties agree that changes to the Workplan and MOU are necessary, the Executive Director and the City Manager may, but are not required to, administratively amend the MOU and Workplan (an “Administrative Amendment”) to the extent required to ensure compliance and memorialize related agreements made between the Parties.

The Parties agree that an Administrative Amendment to the MOU or Workplan shall not result, directly or indirectly, in the Authority ceasing or substantially failing to perform any of the responsibilities delegated to and accepted by the Authority pursuant to this MOU. In the event that an Administrative Amendment to the MOU or Workplan is authorized, as set forth in this paragraph, and the Administrative Amendment to the Workplan would require the addition of a new Requirement, the City shall have the first right of refusal to be the responsible party for that new Requirement.

The Parties agree that, to the extent permitted by law or regulation, the Authority may perform its responsibilities using its own staff or by contracting with public and private entities according to its Board-approved procurement policy and all applicable State laws. If the Authority contracts with any public or private entity to perform its responsibilities prescribed in this MOU, the Authority shall notify the City in writing and provide contact information for the contracted entity. Whenever the Workplan is changed, the Authority shall provide the City with an updated version of the Workplan within ten (10) calendar days. If either of the Parties desires to modify the MOU in a manner that would result in the City assuming a responsibility not then-currently assigned to it, and that responsibility is funded through the Post-Collection Rate charged by Authority, the Authority and the City shall each have a duty to negotiate in good faith on an equitable mechanism for addressing the funding and staffing impact of the modification.
(a) Education and Outreach. The Authority shall conduct the following education and outreach on behalf of the City:
(i) Generators. Prior to February 1, 2022, the Authority shall make available to Generators, through print and/or electronic media and maintain on its website, the information required pursuant to 14 CCR Sections 18985.1 and 18985.2 or successor regulation. The Authority shall translate such information into Spanish where feasible. The Authority shall update such information as necessary, but at least annually. Prior to disseminating any materials under this paragraph, Authority shall provide the materials to, and obtain approval of the materials from, the City Representative. Each Party shall cooperate in good faith regarding the delivery, review, and approval materials to be disseminated pursuant to this Section, including delivering the materials for review and approval, delivering comments on the materials, and responding to such comments.
(ii) City Procurement Target. The Authority shall annually notify the City of its Organic Waste product procurement target, as required and determined by CalRecycle. Before CalRecycle releases the official procurement targets for City on January 1, 2022 and every five (5) years thereafter, the Authority shall assist City in calculating estimates of the procurement targets pursuant to 14 CCR 18993.1 or successor regulation. In addition, the Authority will assist with the City’s procurement of recovered organic waste products pursuant to the related terms 87 SB 1383 MOU 8
82821.00012\44824821.1
and conditions included in Authority’s Post-Collection Agreement and funding approved by its Board of Directors.
(iii) City Educational Activities. Nothing herein is intended to limit the City’s ability to educate the public about solid-waste handling and recycling. However, it is the Parties intent to ensure consistency of messaging. In furtherance of that intent, the City shall, prior to disseminating any materials that may duplicate or overlap with Authority responsibilities, provide the materials to the Authority for its review prior to its dissemination. Each Party shall cooperate in good faith regarding the delivery and review of materials to be disseminated pursuant to this Section, including delivering the materials for review and approval, delivering comments on the materials, and responding to such comments. (b) Reporting and Recordkeeping. The Authority shall conduct the following reporting and recordkeeping services on behalf of City:
(i) Organics Capacity and Edible Food Recovery. The Authority shall submit reports for Organics processing capacity and Edible Food recovery planning requirements to the County within 120 days of the County’s request as required by 14 CCR 18992.3 or successor regulation.
(ii) Implementation Record. The Authority shall be responsible for maintaining the City’s Implementation Record, and making it available to the CalRecycle, in accordance with 14 CCR Sections 18985.3 and 18995.2 or successor regulation. The Authority shall endeavor to obtain all records required by Chapter 12 and include them in the Implementation Record, and the City shall reasonably cooperate with the Authority in obtaining such records from the City and third parties, including creating such records if necessary.

Authority shall provide City with ongoing access to the Implementation Record, whether it be electronic, paper, and/or cloud-based, through the Term of this MOU. In the event that CalRecycle requests access to the Implementation Record, the Authority shall promptly advise the City of the request. The Authority shall provide the Implementation Record to the City upon termination of this MOU.
(iii) Compliance and Annual Reports. The Authority shall submit the initial City compliance report and City annual reports to CalRecycle as required by 14 CCR 18994.1 and 18994.2 or successor regulation. Authority shall provide a draft copy of such reports to the City Representative for its review and approval at least fourteen (14) calendar days prior to the applicable reporting deadlines set forth in these sections, and City Representative shall meet and confer with Authority within seven (7) calendar days after receiving the draft copy of the report or the reports shall be considered approved by City for submittal to CalRecycle. (c) Edible Food Recovery Programs. The Authority shall coordinate and implement the SB 1383 Regulations’ edible food recovery program requirements to which jurisdictions are subject under 14 CCR §§ 18991.1–18991.2 or successor regulation. The Parties agree that these requirements may be wholly or partially satisfied by agreement with the County or other third parties. The Authority’s duties shall include, but are not limited to: assessment of existing capacity for Edible Food recovery, establishing an Edible Food recovery program, inspection of 88 SB 1383 MOU 9
82821.00012\44824821.1
Commercial Food Edible Generators for compliance, and education and outreach to all businesses, residents, Commercial Edible Food Generators, and any other entities or parties required by law.
(d) Organic Waste Processing Capacity and Diversion Planning. The Authority shall itself or in conjunction with the County estimate existing Organics processing and Edible Food recovery capacities available pursuant to 14 CCR 18992.1 and 18992.2 or successor regulation.

If it is found that either are lacking, the Authority shall assist City in creating an implementation plan to expand capacity.
(e) Receipt of Complaints. The Authority shall be responsible for receiving all written complaints of alleged SB 1383 Regulations violations relating to Generators, Haulers, Food Recovery Organizations and Food Recovery Services and Self-Haulers occurring or having occurred within City’s jurisdiction (“Complaints”). Such Complaints shall include all of the following information in accordance with 14 CCR 18995.3 or successor regulation:
(i) If the Complaint is not anonymous, the name and contact information of the complainant;
(ii) The identity of the alleged violator, if known;
(iii) A description of the alleged violation including location(s) and all other relevant facts known to the complainant;
(iv) Any relevant photographic or documentary evidence to support the allegations in the Complaint; and
(v) The identity of any witnesses, if known.

If the Authority receives a complaint, it shall forward a copy to City within ten (10) working days of receipt and document the complaint in the Database. (f) Investigation of Complaints. Where a Complaint: 1) meets the requirements of Section 4(e); and 2) the Authority determines that the allegations, if true, would constitute a violation of SB 1383 Regulations, it shall function as the Enforcement Agency for the purposes of investigation and commence an investigation within ninety (90) calendar days of receiving such Complaint. The Authority may collaborate with City and/or a Hauler in such investigation where appropriate. It shall not be appropriate to collaborate with a Hauler where it is the subject of the Complaint. The Authority may decline to investigate a Complaint if, in its judgment, investigation is unwarranted because the allegations are contrary to facts known to it. (i) Where the Authority has investigated or declined to investigate a nonanonymous Complaint, it shall notify the complainant regarding the results of the investigation through the contact information provided by the complainant. It shall provide a copy of such notice to the City within ten (10) working days of receipt and document the notice in the Database.
(ii) The Authority shall maintain records of all Complaints received in 89 SB 1383 MOU 10
82821.00012\44824821.1
compliance with Section 4(e) and responses provided in compliance with this subsection in the Implementation Record. The records shall include the Complaint as received and the Authority’s determination of compliance or notice of violations issued. (g) Enforcement Assistance. The Authority shall assist with the enforcement of Chapter 9.20 of the Richmond Municipal Code titled: “Solid Wastes” by performing the following actions:
(i) Monitoring compliance of Generators, Haulers, Food Recovery Organizations and Food Recovery Services through Inspections and Compliance Review conducted in accordance with SB 1383 Regulations (14 CCR § 18995.1 or successor regulation).

The Authority may collaborate with City and/or a Hauler in such Inspections and/or Compliance Review where appropriate; and
(ii) Issuing warnings of violations to Generators, Haulers, Food Recovery Organizations and Food Recovery Services and Self-Haulers and documenting the warning in the Implementation Record. The warnings of violations will act as courtesy notices and be considered as educational outreach. The City may elect to have the Authority to issue up to two warnings for each violation. The Authority may collaborate with City and/or a Hauler before issuance of a warning where appropriate. It shall not be appropriate to collaborate with a Hauler where it is the subject of the Enforcement Action. If the violator fails to comply with the warning within the deadline set forth therein, the Authority shall refer the matter to City to pursue enforcement pursuant to the SB 1383 Regulations, and the City shall function as the Enforcement Agency in accordance with 14 CCR 18995.4 or successor regulation in that matter thereafter. Authority will provide copies of the warning of violation and compliance notes related to the Generator to the City upon referring the Generator to the City for enforcement. Authority will provide support to the City in its carrying out the Enforcement Action, including providing testimonial and other evidence at any hearings, if necessary. If the Authority becomes aware that the violator has complied with the Authority’s warnings or the City’s Notice of Violation, the Authority shall so notify the City.
(h) Waivers. The Authority shall create a standardized waiver request form, which shall be a printable document maintained on the Authority’s website. Each time the Authority updates the form, it shall so advise the City and the Provider. The Authority shall receive and review the submitted waiver requests and may consult with the Provider regarding such request.

Thereafter, the Authority shall consult with the City and recommend whether to approve, deny, or modify the waiver. The City Representative shall make the final decision. The Authority will issue or deny the waiver and notify the Generator. The Authority shall verify the validity of each issued waiver within five (5) years of issuance pursuant to SB 1383 Regulations and provide the City with a recommendation to keep or revoke the waiver. The Authority will maintain, and regularly provide the City with, a list of Generators operating in its jurisdiction that have applied for waivers, and it shall document the list in the Database. The list shall include the status of each application.
(i) De Minimis Waivers: The Authority may waive a Commercial Business’s obligation (including Multi-Family Residential Dwellings) to comply with some or all of the Organic Waste requirements of SB 1383 if the Commercial Business provides documentation 90 SB 1383 MOU 11
82821.00012\44824821.1
that the business generates below a certain amount of Organic Waste material as set forth herein.

Commercial Businesses requesting a de minimis waiver shall:
(1) Submit an application specifying the services that they are requesting a waiver from and provide documentation as noted herein; and (2) Provide sufficient documentation that either:
(a) The Commercial Business’ total Solid Waste collection service is two cubic yards or more per week and Organic Waste subject to collection in a Green Container comprises less than twenty (20) gallons per week per applicable container of the business’ total waste; or
(b) The Commercial Business’ total Solid Waste collection service is less than two (2) cubic yards per week and Organic Waste subject to collection in a Green Container comprises less than ten (10) gallons per week per applicable container of the business’ total waste; and
(3) Acknowledge that it must notify the Authority if circumstances change such that Commercial Business’s Organic Waste exceeds threshold required for waiver, in which case the waiver will be rescinded; and
(4) Acknowledge that, if the de minimis waiver is granted, it will expire after five (5) years and that the waiver is only valid as to the Commercial Business that applied for the waiver, and not as to the property or another business in the same location. (ii) Physical Space Waivers: The Authority may waive an existing Commercial Business’ or property owner’s obligations (including Multi-Family Residential Dwellings) to comply with some or all of the recyclable materials and/or Organic Waste collection service requirements if it receives evidence from its staff, City staff, a hauler, licensed architect, or licensed engineer demonstrating that the premises lacks adequate space for the collection containers required for compliance with the Organic Waste collection requirements of SB 1383. A Commercial Business or property owner may request a physical space waiver through the following process:
(1) Submit an application form specifying the type(s) of collection services for which they are requesting a compliance waiver; and (2) Provide documentation that the premises lacks adequate space for Blue Containers and/or Green Containers including documentation from its hauler, licensed architect, or licensed engineer; and
(3) Provide written verification to the Authority that it is still eligible for physical space waiver every five (5) years, if the Authority has approved application for a physical space waiver.
(iii) Emergency Circumstances – Waivers for City: The Authority will notify CalRecycle and apply for a waiver to landfill Organics if City experiences a natural disaster, uses 91 SB 1383 MOU 12
82821.00012\44824821.1
a recyclable materials or Organic Waste processing facility that has a temporary operational failure, or unforeseen operational restrictions have been imposed upon it by a regulatory agency pursuant to 14 CCR 18984.13 or successor regulation.

5. City Responsibility. The City shall be responsible for all other applicable SB 1383 and SB 1383 Regulations requirements not expressly delegated to and accepted by the Authority as set forth herein, including the Workplan (Exhibit A) as it may be amended from time to time pursuant to Section 4. If the City requests that the Authority accept additional SB 1383 Regulation Responsibilities not listed in the Workplan or perform an additional Requirement listed in the Workplan, the Parties shall meet and confer regarding the request and implementation, if the Authority is willing to do so. Any changes to the Workplan shall comply with the provisions of Section 4.

6. Sharing of information. Within thirty (30) days of a request by the Authority, or as soon thereafter as such information is available to the City, the City shall share with the Authority all data, documents, contact information for Generators within its jurisdiction, or any other information necessary for the Authority to carry out the responsibilities delegated to it in this MOU. The Authority shall not be held responsible for any actions taken by CalRecycle that result from the Authority’s inability to obtain the information reasonably requested from the City pursuant to this Section 6.

7. Staffing and funding. In order for the Authority to carry out its responsibilities in connection with the administration and implementation of the SB 1383 Regulations as specified in this MOU, the Parties agree that the Authority’s costs associated with its responsibilities under this MOU and the Other MOUs will be funded through the Authority’s budget and rate setting process, except as otherwise specified herein. These costs may include the Authority’s cost to engage independent contractors or retain adequate staffing to perform some or all of the duties delegated to it herein. Budget changes related to this MOU will be integrated into the Authority’s regular budget process, or more frequently as needed, and approved by the Board of Directors.

8. Indemnification/Hold Harmless. Each Party shall solely be liable for any and all damages, including attorneys’ fees, resulting from the actions or omissions arising from its performance of the terms of this MOU, except as is expressly stated in Section 9. Each Party (the “Indemnifying Party”) shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the other Party (the “Indemnified Parties”) from and against any and all claims, demands, actions, losses, damages, assessments, charges, judgments, liabilities, costs and expenses (including reasonable attorneys’ fees and disbursements) that may from time to time be asserted by third parties against the Indemnified Parties because of any personal injury, including death, to any person or loss of, physical damage to or loss of use of real or tangible personal property, to the extent caused by the negligence or misconduct of the Indemnifying Party, its agents, employees or contractors in the performance of this MOU.

For purposes of indemnification set forth in this MOU, “Indemnified Parties” means the applicable party, its affiliates, successors and assigns and its and their employees, directors, officers, agents, and volunteers. The Indemnified Parties: 1) shall notify the Indemnifying Party in writing promptly upon learning of any claim or suit for which indemnification may be sought, provided that failure to do so shall have no effect except to the extent the Indemnifying Party is 92 SB 1383 MOU 13
82821.00012\44824821.1
prejudiced thereby; 2) shall have the right to participate in such defense or settlement with its own counsel and at its own expense, but the Indemnifying Party shall have control of this defense or settlement; and 3) shall reasonably cooperate with the defense.

9. Apportionment of Penalties.
(a) Any penalties assessed against the City by CalRecycle that are the result of Authority’s failure to satisfy its obligations under the following provisions of this MOU and its alleged failure, unless alleged failure is caused by or related to the inability of the Authority to obtain information reasonably requested pursuant to Section 6, to comply with the corresponding provision of the SB 1383 Regulations shall be paid by the Authority:
(i) Subdivision (a)(i) of Section 4 [“Education and Outreach – Generators”] (14 CCR §§ 18985.1 and 18985.2).
(ii) Subdivision (b)(i) of Section 4 [“Reporting and Recordkeeping – Organics Capacity and Edible Food Recovery”] (14 CCR § 18992.3). (iii) Subdivision (b)(ii) of Section 4 [“Reporting and Recordkeeping – Implementation Record”] (14 CCR §§ 18985.3 and 18995.2). (iv) Subdivision (b)(iii) of Section 4 [“Reporting and Recordkeeping – Compliance and Annual Reports”] (14 CCR § 18994.1 and 18994.2). (v) Subdivision (c) of Section 4 [“Edible Food Recovery Programs”] (14 CCR §§ 18991.1–18991.2).
(vi) Subdivision (d) of Section 4 [“Organic Waste Processing Capacity and Diversion Planning”] (14 CCR §§ 18992.1 and 18992.2), with the express indication that the Authority shall not be required to pay a penalty arising from the City’s failure to expand capacity.
(vii) Subdivision (e) of Section 4 [“Receipt of Complaints”] (14 CCR §§ 18995.3(a)-(b)).
(viii) Subdivision (f) of Section 4 [“Investigation of Complaints”] (14 CCR §§ 18995.3(c)-(e)).
(ix) Subdivision (g)(i) of Section 4 [“Enforcement Assistance”] (14 CCR §§ 18995.1).
(x) Subdivision (g)(ii) of Section 4 [“Warnings”] (14 CCR §§ 18995.4) with the express indication that the Authority is not required to pay a penalty arising from an alleged failure to commence an action to impose penalties pursuant to 14 CCR sections 18997.1 and 18997.2 as the Authority’s responsibility under subdivision (g) of Section 4 does not extend to commencing such actions.
(xi) Subdivision (h) of Section 4 [“Waivers”] (14 CCR §§ 18984.11). 93 SB 1383 MOU 14
82821.00012\44824821.1
(b) For avoidance of doubt, the Parties hereby indicate that any penalties arising from SB 1383 Regulations requirements not expressly delegated to and accepted by the Authority as set forth herein shall not be payable by the Authority. (c) In the event that the Authority pays any penalties assessed against the City by CalRecycle that are the result of the alleged failure to comply with Subdivision (a)(i) of Section 4, Subdivision (b) of Section 4, the Authority shall be entitled to allocate a reasonable portion of the penalty to the City if, respectively, the Authority (a) had provided compliant educational materials to the City for approval, and the City failed to approve them, (b) requested documentation for the Implementation Record and the City failed to provide them, or (c) referred a matter to the City under Subdivision (g)(ii) of Section 4 and the City elected not to pursue timely enforcement.
(d) Nothing in this Section shall prevent either the City or the Authority (on the City’s behalf when the Authority is obligated to pay the penalty) from challenging CalRecycle enforcement activities. In the event that the Authority intends to challenge CalRecycle’s imposition of a penalty imposed on the City, the City shall reasonably cooperate and assist the Authority in its legal challenge. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the City shall promptly share any Compliance Order or Notices of Violation or accusation issued pursuant to 14 CCR 18997.5 or successor regulation that it receives related to any alleged violations that subdivision (a) would require the Authority to pay.
(e) Any penalties paid by the Authority pursuant to this section shall be paid out of Authority funds.

10. Termination. Either Party may terminate this MOU upon giving at least one hundred and eighty (180) calendar days’ prior written notice to the other Party in the manner set forth in Section 11. The Parties expressly acknowledge, notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this MOU, including specifically Section 7, and/or in the past or then-present Authority budgets, that the Authority shall have no obligation after termination to fund the City’s compliance with the provisions of SB 1383 Regulations delegated to the Authority pursuant to this MOU. If City terminates the MOU effective at the end of a rate year, the Authority will, in conjunction with its Board of Directors action that November to approve the compliance funds included in the following year’s rate structure, calculate the amount due to City to reimburse it for its share of unspent compliance funds based on its percentage share of volume in the rate model during the prior year. The Authority shall provide timely reimbursement of the funds due to the City on a monthly basis promptly after obtaining said revenue monthly pursuant to Authority’s PostCollection Agreement. The compliance funds included in the rate model adopted for the following year’s rate structure shall not require the City or customers in the City to pay for any SB 1383 compliance activities undertaken by Authority since Authority shall reimburse City monies previously included in the rate model.

11. Notice. All notices shall be in writing and shall be served by personal delivery during usual business hours at the principal office of the Party, to an officer or person apparently in charge of that office, or by depositing the same in the United States mail, postage prepaid, and addressed to the Party at its principal office, or to such other address as the Party may designate from time to time by written notice given in the manner specified in this Section. 94 SB 1383 MOU 15
82821.00012\44824821.1
Service of notice pursuant to this Section shall be deemed complete on the day of service by personal delivery or two (2) calendar days after mailing if deposited in the United States mail.

12. Governing Law and Venue. This MOU shall be deemed to be executed within the State of California and construed in accordance with and governed by laws of the State of California.

Venue in any proceeding or action among the Parties arising out of this MOU shall be in Contra Costa County, California.

13. Amendment. This MOU may only be modified or amended by a subsequent written agreement signed by both Parties pursuant to Section 4.

14. Entire Agreement. This MOU, including the Workplan, as it may be amended pursuant to Section 4, represents the entire and integrated agreement between the Parties as to the subject matter referenced herein. This MOU does not restrict the City from applying for and/or accepting additional funding or grants related to SB 1383 compliance or other related topics.

15. Severability. No provision of this MOU shall be interpreted to require any unlawful action by any Party. If any term or portion of this MOU is held to be invalid, illegal, or otherwise unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, then the meaning of that section or clause shall be construed so as to render it enforceable to the extent feasible. If no feasible interpretation would save the section or clause, it shall be severed from this MOU with respect to the matter in question, and the remainder of the MOU shall remain in full force and effect. However, in the event such a section or clause is an essential element of the MOU, the Parties shall promptly negotiate a replacement that will achieve the intent of such unenforceable section or clause to the extent permitted by law.

16. Execution in Counterpart. This MOU may be executed in counterparts and/or by facsimile or other electronic means, and when each Party has signed and delivered at least one such counterpart, each counterpart shall be deemed an original, and, when taken together with other signed counterpart, shall constitute one MOU, which shall be binding upon and effective as to all Parties.

17. No Waiver. The failure of any Party hereto to enforce any of the provisions of this MOU, or the waiver thereof in any instance, shall not be construed as a general waiver or relinquishment on its part of any such provision, and said provision shall nevertheless be and remain in full force and effect.

18. No Partnership. The relationship between the Parties shall not be that of partners, agents or joint ventures for one another, and nothing contained in this MOU shall be deemed to constitute a partnership or agency agreement between them for any purposes, including, but not limited to federal income tax purposes. The Parties, in performing any of their obligations hereunder, shall be independent contractors or independent parties and shall discharge their contractual obligations at their own risk.
[Signatures on following page]
95 SB 1383 MOU 16
82821.00012\44824821.1
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have executed this MOU on the day and year first above written.

ATTEST:

Pamela Christian, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Shannon Moore, Interim City Attorney

CITY OF RICHMOND
Shasa Curl, City Manager
ATTEST:

Viviane Vidal, Board Secretary
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

John Bakker, Authority Counsel

WEST CONTRA COSTA INTEGRATED

WASTE MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY
Cliff Feldman, Executive Director
96

April 28, 2026
Economic Development
PORT
DATE: April 28, 2026
TO: Mayor Martinez and Members of the City Council
FROM: Charles Gerard, Port Director
Danny Wan, Project Manager III
Lizeht Zepeda, Senior Business Assistance Officer
Kyle Lam, Management Analyst
Subject: Contract with John C. Martin Associates, LLC for the Port Economic Impact Study
FINANCIAL IMPACT: The proposed $112,900 expenditure is included within the approved fiscal year 2025-2026 Port Enterprise Fund budget (Account String: 40161080–400201).

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

None.

STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:

The Port of Richmond seeks to retain a qualified
consultant to prepare a comprehensive economic impact
study of Port activity. The study will quantify the
economic value generated by the Port’s maritime
operations, private and public terminals, non-maritime
tenants, and marina activity, and will provide data to
support planning, policy development, community
engagement, and future grant applications.

RECOMMENDED ACTION: APPROVE a contract with John C. Martin Associates, LLC to provide an economic impact study of Port of
Richmond activity, in an amount not to exceed $112,900, with a term ending June 30, 2027 - Economic
Development (Charles Gerard 510-620-6792).

AGENDA
REPORT
97

April 28, 2026
DISCUSSION:

Background
The Port of Richmond (Port) is a significant economic asset that supports international maritime cargo operations, industrial and commercial tenants, and marina activity.

Understanding and quantifying the Port’s economic contributions is critical for development of the Port’s strategic plan, as well as for planning, infrastructure investment, community engagement, and pursuing state and federal funding opportunities. To support these efforts, the City issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) to prepare a comprehensive economic impact study. The economic impact study is a component of the analysis to build the next step for the Port which is a strategic plan.

Request for Proposals (RFP) and Selection Process
On December 8, 2025, the City of Richmond released an RFP for consulting services to prepare an economic impact study for the Port of Richmond (Attachment 1). Proposals were due on January 23, 2026, and a total of seven proposals were received. A mandatory pre-proposal bid meeting was required and stated in the RFP; Zenith Economics, LLC and Charis Advisory Group who submitted RFPs but did not attend the mandatory meeting were excluded from consideration.

The following proposals were received:
 Cambridge Systematics
 Economic & Planning System, Inc. (EPS)
 John C. Martin Associates, LLC
 Miller3 Consulting
 The Tioga Group, Inc.
 Zenith Economics, LLC
 Charis Advisory Group
An evaluation committee with subject matter experts comprised of Economic Development and Finance Department staff members reviewed the proposals based on the criteria outlined in the RFP. Following evaluation, John C. Martin Associates, LLC (Martin Associates) was identified as the top-ranked proposer based on qualifications, experience, and proposed approach (Attachment 2).

Economic Impact Study
The proposed economic impact study will be based on 2025 Port activity and is expected to take approximately four months to complete. The purpose of the study is to quantify the economic contributions of the Port’s maritime operations, non-maritime tenants, and marina activity.

The scope of work includes defining port participants and study parameters; collecting data through stakeholder interviews, Port records, and published economic sources; and preparing a comprehensive economic impact analysis. The study will estimate job, income, business revenue, and tax impacts, including direct, indirect, induced, and port 98

April 28, 2026
user effects. It will also evaluate total economic value and community benefits, including impacts to disadvantaged communities.

In addition, the consultant will develop a Port economic impact model that can be used to evaluate future scenarios such as changes in cargo volumes, terminal development, and infrastructure investments. An optional component of the study includes allocation of impacts by county, state legislative districts, and federal congressional districts.

About Martin Associates
John C. Martin Associates, LLC (Martin Associates) is a nationally recognized leader in maritime economic impact analysis, having conducted more than 900 studies for seaports throughout the United States and Canada. The firm has extensive experience with California and West Coast ports, including prior work for the Ports of Oakland, Redwood City, Stockton, Sacramento, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Long Beach, Hueneme, and San Diego.

Martin Associates is also familiar with the Port of Richmond, having included the Port in its 2021 Pacific Maritime Association economic impact study. This familiarity with local operations, tenants, and cargo activity will support an efficient and comprehensive analysis.

The contract is not to exceed $112,900, which includes $63,700 for the base scope and $49,200 for an optional task or related additional services subject to Port Director approval (Attachment 3).

Recommendation and Next Steps
City staff recommend approval of a contract with Martin Associates to prepare an economic impact study for the Port of Richmond.

Following City Council approval, staff will finalize the contract and issue a notice to proceed. Martin Associates will initiate data collection, stakeholder outreach, and analysis. Upon completion, the consultant will deliver a final report and executive summary for use to guide Port planning, policy development, community engagement/outreach, and future grant applications.

SYNERGISTIC POLICIES:

This contract aligns with City Council Strategic Goal Area 2: Increase Revenue and Improve Economic Development, specifically Strategy 2.5 (Revitalization of the Port) and Strategy 2.5.d (Create a strategic plan).

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:

Attachment 1 – Request for Proposal
Attachment 2 – Scoring Matrix
Attachment 3 – Contract with John C. Martin Associates, LLC 99

Request for Proposals
Port of Richmond Economic Impact Study
Release Date: December 8, 2025
Deadline for Submittal
January 16, 2026
3:00 PM Pacific Time (PT)
Contact: Charles Gerard
Email: [email protected]
Phone Number: 510-620-6792
City of Richmond
Port of Richmond Division
100

Table of Contents
Table of Contents ..........................................................................................................................2 INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................................3 ABOUT THE CITY AND THE PORT .........................................................................................3 PROJECT BACKGROUND / DESCRIPTION ..........................................................................4 Figure 1 ...........................................................................................................................................5 Figure 2 ...........................................................................................................................................5 SCOPE OF SERVICES ...............................................................................................................5 PROPOSAL FORMAT GUIDELINES ........................................................................................7 PROCESS FOR SUBMITTING PROPOSALS .......................................................................12 GENERAL GUIDELINES ...........................................................................................................13 PROPOSAL EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCESS .................................................16 ATTACHMENTS..........................................................................................................................19 101

INTRODUCTION
The City of Richmond is requesting proposals from qualified consultants or firms to conduct an economic impact study of the Port of Richmond (“Port”). The purpose of this study is to assess the Port’s current economic contributions to local, regional, state, and national economy, including employment, tax revenue, business activity and revenues, and community benefits (“Project”).

This request for proposal (RFP) describes the Project, the required scope of services, the consultant selection process, and the minimum information that must be included in the proposal. Failure to submit information in accordance with the RFP requirements and procedures may be cause for disqualification. The anticipated term of this contract will be for a period of six months with an option to extend it for not longer than six additional months by mutual agreement.

Proposers are required to read and understand all information contained within this entire Proposal package. By responding to this RFP, the vendor agrees that it has read the RFP and agrees to all its terms and conditions.

ABOUT THE CITY AND THE PORT
The City of Richmond (“City”) is a Charter City located in Contra Costa County, part of the San Francisco Bay Area with a population of 110,567 residents. It is home to a multi-modal transit hub that includes BART, Amtrak and AC Transit, marinas, shopping, recreational and cultural amenities, and 32 miles of shoreline. Richmond is abundantly served by the interstate highway system. Transcontinental Interstate 80 leads to Sacramento, Reno, and eastward. The Interstate 580 passes through the port area connecting Interstate 80 with the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge, which leads to northsouth US Highway 101. Richmond has 32 miles of shoreline along the northern and eastern reaches of San Francisco Bay.

The Port is approximately nine miles from the Golden Gate on the east shore of San Francisco Bay and is easily accessible by a federally maintained deep water channel, the Richmond Harbor Channel. In addition to the City’s proximity to the interstate highways, the Port is also served by two major transcontinental railroads, Burlington Northern Santa Fe and Union pacific. Thus, whatever the destination or point of origin, cargo can readily be trucked and/or railed to and from the Port. 102

The City owns five terminal facilities which include both wharf facilities and backland parcels that are administered, leased or maintained by the Port Division within the City’s Economic Development Department. The tenant-operated terminals handle a wide range of liquid and dry bulk commodities, automobiles, and diversified cargo. Cityowned assets include warehouses, offices, industrial space, commercial facilities, wharfs and terminals that are used by tenant operations. Some Port structures are historically significant and require preservation considerations.

The Port of Richmond is an integrated maritime and industrial ecosystem that also encompasses ten privately owned terminals for handling bulk liquid, dry bulk materials, metals, and break-bulk cargoes. Many of the Port’s tenants operating port-owned facilities support privately owned industrials along the waterfront.

PROJECT BACKGROUND / DESCRIPTION
The City of Richmond, through its Economic Development Department, is dedicated to building a vibrant, resilient, and inclusive local economy. The Port is an enterprise division that seeks to maximize enterprise and tax revenues, economic activity, job creation and community benefits generated by Port facilities and operations in the City of Richmond. To this end, the City is embarked on an inventory and assessment of its Port assets and infrastructure, analysis of Port land uses both public and private, and the study of the economic impact of current Port operations, as well as potential economic development opportunities. These elements will then inform a strategic plan for a robust and efficient Port enterprise operation and maximum economic and community benefits.

The Port is defined as shown in Figure 1 and 2 below. It includes both City owned properties and those that are privately owned and operated. 103

Figure 1
Figure 2
The economic impact study is a component of the analysis to build the strategic plan. It will describe and quantify the business and personal income, tax revenues, jobs and community benefits that Port assets and operations currently generate.

SCOPE OF SERVICES
The selected consultant will be expected to propose a scope and methodology of describing and quantifying the economic impact of Port’s operations locally, statewide, and nationally with specific emphasis on impacts within the City of Richmond and the region 104

included in the US Bureau of Labor Statistics San Francisco, Oakland and Fremont Region.

The economic study will analyze and quantify the direct, indirect, and induced economic impacts resulting from the Port’s operations, those of its tenants and users, workforce, visitors to the Port, contractors, and customers.

Specifically, the consultant will:

A. Propose the scope of its analysis (including the geographic and economic sectors and industries) and limitations of the study.

B. Identify and describe the Port supply chain and business ecosystem connected to Port assets and operations.

C. Describe the study methodology, including information sources, interviews or surveys to be used, and method of quantifying the economic impacts.

D. Analyze and quantify the following categories of economic impact generated by Port operations and activities on or at Port assets.
 Business revenues generated, including revenues to the Port, value of cargo moved through the Port, and other business revenues generated.  Employment, including direct, induced and indirect jobs generated, specifically identifying employment of City residents.
 Personal earnings impact, including income received by individuals directly employed due to Port operations and land use as well as induced income generated.
 Tax revenues, including tax payments to the City and other local and state governments.
105

For each of the impacts above, the Study will separately describe and quantify the impacts generated by City owned properties and facilities within the Port compared with those impacts generated by privately owned properties and facilities. As well, the economic impacts of the Long Wharf owned and operated by Chevron shall be discussed separately and shall be limited to the impacts of the shipments of cargo through the Long Wharf, and not of the entire Chevron Refinery complex.

E. Conduct stakeholder interviews, surveys and community engagement as appropriate.

F. Describe anecdotal instances of community benefits beyond economic impacted described under “D” above that are derived from the Port and Port activities that are communicated through the interviews and surveys. Examples of “community benefits” include job training opportunities, grants or donations to nonprofit organization, community resilience infrastructure, or public access to recreation or open space.

G. Deliver a final report, executive summary, and presentation materials. City staff will need access to the final report in its original word format.

PROPOSAL FORMAT GUIDELINES
The proposal should be concise, well organized, and demonstrate the proposer’s qualifications and experience applicable to the Project. The proposal shall be limited to twenty (20) double-sided pages (8.5 inches x 11 inches), inclusive of graphics, forms, pictures, photographs, dividers, etcetera, but not of cost proposal, resumes, required forms, certifications, front and back covers, or letters of commitment from subconsultants. The required font size is 12 point, with minimum left and right margins of one-inch, and top and bottom margins of 0.7 inches.

Each proposal will adhere to the following order and content of sections. Proposal should be straightforward, concise and provide “layman” explanations of technical terms that are used. Emphasis should be concentrated on conforming to the RFP instructions, responding to the RFP requirements, and on providing a complete and clear description 106

of the offer. Proposals, which appear unrealistic in terms of technical commitments, lack of technical competence or are indicative of failure to comprehend the complexity and risk of this contract, may be rejected. The following proposal sections are to be included in the Vendor’s response:

A. Vendor Cover Letter
A cover letter, not to exceed three pages in length, should summarize key elements of the proposal and shall:
 Confirm that all elements of this RFP have been reviewed and understood;
 Include a statement of intent to perform the services as outlined;  Express company’s willingness to enter into an agreement under the terms and conditions prescribed by this RFP, insurance requirements (Attachment A) and in the sample Service Agreement (Attachment B);  Submit a written description and brief history of the proposer’s experiences, qualifications and successes in providing economic impact study services described herein. Please indicate the number of employees, client base and location of offices.
 Indicate the address and telephone number of the vendor’s office located nearest to Richmond, California and the office from which the project will be managed.
 Confirm that vendor has a minimum of three (3) years of verifiable economic impact study or economic development consulting experience  Stipulate that the proposal price will be valid for a period of at least 180 days.
 Identify a single person for contact during the RFP review process; and  Cover letter shall be signed by an authorized official of the company.

B. Background and Project Summary Section
The Background and Project Summary Section should describe your understanding of the City, Port of Richmond, the work to be done, and the objectives to be accomplished. Refer to description of services for this RFP. 107

C. Methodology Section
Provide a detailed description of the approach and methodology to be used to accomplish the Scope of Services of this RFP. The Methodology Section should include:
1) An implementation plan that describes in detail (i) the methods, including controls by which your firm manages projects of the type sought by this RFP; (ii) methodology for soliciting and documenting views of internal and external stakeholders; (iii) and any other project management or implementation strategies or techniques that the proposer intends to employ in carrying out the work.
2) Detailed description of efforts your firm will undertake to achieve client satisfaction and to satisfy the requirements of the "Scope of Services" section.
3) Detailed project schedule, identifying all tasks and deliverables to be performed, durations for each task, and overall time of completion. 4) Detailed description of specific tasks you will require from City staff.

Explain what the respective roles of City staff and your staff would be to complete the tasks specified in the Scope of Services.

D. Staffing
Describe proposed Project team organization, including identification and responsibilities of key personnel. Indicate role and responsibility of prime consultants and all sub-consultants. If applicable, indicate how local firms are being utilized to ensure a strong understanding of state and local laws, ordinances, regulations, policies, requirements, and permitting. Indicate the extent of the commitment of key personnel for the duration of the Project and furnish resumes of key personnel. Provide an indication of the staffing level for the Project. The City of Richmond’s evaluation of the proposal will consider the proposer’s entire team; therefore, no changes in the team composition will be allowed without prior written approval of the City of Richmond. Sub-consultant letters of commitment are required and must be submitted with the proposal. 108

Describe the experience of the proposer’s Project team in detail, including the team’s Project Manager, and other key staff members, on projects of similar size, capacity, and dollar value. For each similar project, include the client’s name and correct telephone number. It is the City of Richmond’s policy to interview proposers’ references as well as references identified by the City of Richmond.

E. Qualifications
The information requested in this section should describe the qualifications of the firm, key staff and sub‐contractors performing projects within the past five years that are similar in size and scope to demonstrate competence to perform these services. Information shall include:
1) Names of key staff that participated in named projects and their specific responsibilities with respect to this scope of service. 2) A summary of your firm’s demonstrated capability, including length of time that your firm has provided the services being requested in this Request for Proposal.
3) Provide at least three (3) references that received similar services from your firm. The City of Richmond reserves the right to contact any of the organizations or individuals listed. Information provided shall include:
a) Client Name and contact info
 Telephone & e-mail address
 Address
b) Description of services provided including contract amount c) Project start and end dates
F. Cost Information
Provide the total direct and indirect costs to complete all tasks identified in the scope of services. Even if the method of payment to proposer will be fixed fee, a detailed cost breakdown shall be provided identifying: (1) the number of staff hours and hourly rates for each professional and administrative staff person who will be committed to this Project; (2) all other direct costs, such as materials and 109

reproduction costs; and (3) sub-consultant services, if needed. These rates will also be used to negotiate rates for other projects (including optional tasks) that may be assigned. No additional funds will be paid above and beyond the original quote given by the selected Vendor.

Proposers will be paid at the same rates set forth in their cost proposal unless further negotiated in writing and agreed to by the City of Richmond.

G. Value Added Services
Please provide any additional services of benefit not specifically required herein, which the Proposer offers to provide.

H. Contractor Assignment of Sub-Contract
The resulting contract shall not be assigned, transferred, or sublet, in whole or in part, without the prior written approval of the City of Richmond. If Proposers intend to subcontract any portion of the resulting contract, they must describe their process for selecting such subcontractor(s) and the quality control measures that the Proposer will employ to ensure that any subcontractor complies with the provisions of Proposer’s contract with the City.

I. Previous Contracts with the City of Richmond
The proposer shall submit a list which indicates all prime contracts and/or amendments awarded to the proposer by the City of Richmond for the last three (3) years. The list shall include a short description of the Project, the Project scope of work, award date, completion date, name of City of Richmond’s assigned Project Manager, and contract value.

J. Exceptions to this Request for Proposals
The proposer shall state whether it takes exception(s) to this RFP, including but not limited to the City of Richmond’s Standard Services Agreement – RFP (Attachment B). If the proposer does take exception(s) to any portion of the RFP or contract, the specific portion to which exception(s) is taken must be identified by section number and explained. Requests for changes or additions to sections of City of Richmond’s Standard Services Agreement must be shown by requesting deletion of specific words and/or by providing new requested contract 110

language. Requests for complete replacement of the City of Richmond’s Standard Services Agreement for another contract will not be granted. Failure to make exceptions to the RFP or Standard Services Agreement within the proposal will be deemed a waiver of any objection. Exceptions will be considered during the proposal evaluation process.

K. Statement of Impartiality and Disclosure
The nature of this Project requires an impartial unbiased approach on the part of the proposer’s team. This proposal shall include a statement declaring that the proposer’s and sub-consultants are not currently, and will not, during the performance of these services, participate in any other similar work involving a third-party with interests currently in conflict or likely to be in conflict with City of Richmond’s interests. Additionally, proposer is required to disclose any pending or active investigations or litigation that may affect the reputation or ability of the proposer to carry out the Project.

PROCESS FOR SUBMITTING PROPOSALS
Questions Concerning Request for Proposals
The Port will hold a mandatory pre-bid meeting to cover City of Richmond Insurance and contract requirements at 0900 am Pacific Time on December 18, 2025.

Conference call information will be provided prior to this date.

All questions must be submitted via the electronic BidsOnline system on the Q&A tab by 5:00pm PST, December 19, 2025. If the City finds it necessary to issue an addendum, prospective Offerors will receive e-mail notification of addendum.

Otherwise, answers to questions received will be provided on the Q&A tab and notification will be sent by January 6, 2026. It is the proposer’s responsibility to periodically check the BidsOnline website www.ci.richmond.ca.us/bids for any possible Addenda to the RFP that may have been posted.

A party submitting a proposal shall not contact or lobby any City Council member, City official, employee (except those specified for contact) or agent regarding the RFP. Any party attempting to influence or circumvent the RFP, bid submittal, and review process may have their proposal rejected for violating this provision of the RFP. 111

Interested parties may download copies of the above-mentioned proposal by visiting the City's web site, www.ci.richmond.ca.us/bids. To download RFP, new vendors will be required to register. Once the vendor downloads any documents relative to a solicitation, that vendor's name will appear on the Prospective Bidders list for that project and will receive any addenda or notifications relating to the RFP.

Submission of Proposals
The proposal and any required certifications shall be signed by an individual or individuals authorized to execute legal documents on behalf of the proposer.

Electronic Proposals shall be submitted via the City’s secure online bidding system. All required sections of the proposal must be submitted via the website. Contractor is solely responsible for “on time” submission of their electronic proposal. The Bid Management System will not accept late proposals, and no exceptions shall be made. Contractors will receive an e-bid confirmation number with a time stamp from the Bid Management System indicating that their bid was submitted successfully. The City will only receive those proposals that were transmitted successfully.

The proposal must be received no later than 3:00 p.m., local time, on January 16, 2026.

The City of Richmond reserves the right to waive inconsequential irregularities.

GENERAL GUIDELINES
This RFP does not commit the City of Richmond to award a contract, to defray any costs incurred in the preparation of a proposal pursuant to this RFP, or to procure or contract for work. The City of Richmond may reject a proposal without providing the reason(s) underlying the decline. A failure to award a contract to the proposer with the lowest cost proposal shall not constitute a valid cause of action against the City of Richmond. The City shall not be responsible for work done, even in good faith, prior to final approval of the proposed contract. The City may investigate the qualifications of any proposer under consideration, require confirmation of information furnished by the proposer, and require additional evidence or qualifications to perform the Services described in this RFP.

The City reserves the right to:
112

1. Reject any or all proposals.

2. Issue subsequent Requests for Proposal.

3. Postpone opening for its own convenience.

4. Remedy technical errors in the Request for Proposal process.

5. Negotiate with any, all, or none of the Proposers.

6. Solicit best and final offers from all or some of the Proposers.

7. Select one or more Proposers.

8. Accept other than the lowest proposed fees.

9. Waive informalities and irregularities in proposals.

Public Records
All proposals submitted in response to this RFP become the property of the City of Richmond and public records and, as such, may be subject to public review. Documents protected by law from public disclosure will not be disclosed by the City of Richmond if clearly marked with the word "confidential" on each applicable page. Trade secrets may be marked as confidential only to the extent they meet the requirements of California Government Code section 6254.7. Only information claimed to be a trade secret at the time of submittal to the City of Richmond and marked as "confidential" will be treated as a trade secret.

Insurance Requirements
The City of Richmond requires consultants doing business with it to obtain insurance, as shown in RFP Attachment A. The required insurance certificates must comply with all requirements of the standards as shown and must be provided within fifteen (15) days of issuance of the Notice of Intent to Award and prior to the commencement of any work on the Project.

Business Licenses
The successful Contractor and all subcontractors used in the work will be required to hold or to obtain a City of Richmond business license for which the fee will not be waived.
113

Compliance with City Ordinances
The contractor and all subcontractors shall comply with the City of Richmond Nondiscrimination Clauses in City Contracts Ordinance (Richmond Municipal Code (RMC) Chapter 2.28), Business Opportunity Ordinance (RMC Chapter 2.50), Local Employment Program Ordinance (RMC Chapter 2.56), Living Wage Ordinance (RMC Chapter 2.60) and Ordinance Banning the Requirement to Provide Information of Prior Criminal Convictions on all Employment Applications (“Ban the Box”) (RMC Chapter

2.65), which are incorporated into the Contract Documents by this reference.

Sanctuary City Contracting Ordinance (SCCO)
The Richmond Sanctuary City Contracting Ordinance No. 12-18 (Attachment D) prohibits the City from granting and or retaining contracts with any person or entity that provides Data Broker or Extreme Vetting services to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Division of the United States Department of Homeland Security (“ICE”).

Proposers must submit the attached Sanctuary City Compliance Statement with their Proposal. (Attachment C)
Limited Liability Company Disclosure Statement (LLCS)
Resolution No. 86-21 (Attachment E), approved by City Council on July 6, 2021, requires disclosure of the identities of beneficial & responsible owners of Limited Liability Corporations (LLC). Proposers must submit the attached Disclosure Statement of Limited Liability Companies Form with their Proposal (Attachment F).

Collusion
By submitting a proposal, each proposer represents and warrants that its proposal is genuine and not false or collusive or made in the interest of, or on behalf of any person not named therein; that the proposer has not directly or indirectly induced or solicited any other person to submit a false proposal, or any other person to refrain from submitting a proposal; and that the proposer has not, in any manner, sought collusion to secure any improper advantage over any other person submitting a proposal.

Withdrawal of Proposals
A proposer may withdraw their proposal before the expiration of the time for submission of proposals by delivering to the Finance Department a written request for withdrawal 114

signed by, or on behalf of, the proposer.

Ownership of Documents
All reports, studies, information, data, statistics, forms, designs, plans, procedures, systems and any other materials produced for the Project shall be the sole and exclusive property of the City. No such materials or properties produced in whole or in part for the Project shall be subject to private use, copyrights or patent rights by Proposer in the United States or in any other country without the express written consent of the City. The City shall have unrestricted authority to publish, disclose (except as may be limited by the provisions of the Public Records Act), distribute, and otherwise use, copyright or patent, in whole or in part, any such reports, studies, data, statistics, forms or other materials or properties produced for this project.

PROPOSAL EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCESS
All proposals shall be reviewed to verify that the Proposer has met the minimum requirements. Proposals that have not complied with requirements do not meet minimum content and quality standards or take unacceptable exceptions to the General Terms and Conditions of the Service Agreement, will be eliminated from further consideration. Proposals will be reviewed and evaluated by an evaluation committee comprised of City of Richmond personnel.

The top Proposals may then be invited to make a presentation to the evaluation panel in a City Office in Richmond, California, at no cost to the City. The selected proposal shall provide the most cost-effective approach that meets the City’s requirements. The lowest price proposal will not necessarily be selected.

The City reserves the right to reject any or all proposals, or to make no award. The City also reserves the right to require modifications follow‐up with requests for additional information, including, but not limited to, follow‐up interviews. The City may request Best and Final offers based upon improved understanding of the offers or changed scope of service. The City will negotiate with that vendor to determine final pricing and contract form. Because this proposal is negotiable, all pricing data will remain confidential until after award is made, and there will be no public opening and reading of Proposals.

Overall responsiveness to the RFP is an important factor in the evaluation process. The criteria upon which the evaluation of the proposals will be based include, but are not 115

limited to, the following:

The Proposal/Methodology and Approach to Work – 25%
The proposer’s responsiveness to the RFP, including completeness and thoroughness of proposal; all required information must be provided in the format specified. This category will also evaluate:
 Ability to provide services as outlined in the RFP.
 Approach and proposed methodology to project scope
 Demonstrated knowledge of the work required
 Explanation of the Project or services required
 Innovative approaches and internal measures for timely completion of Project Experience/Past Performance/References – 20%
Consideration will be given based upon the firm’s experience, years in business, past and current client references; technical expertise and professional competence in areas directly related to this RFP; number of years of experience in performing similar work.

Project Team – 20%
Proposer should demonstrate that all key personnel have been successfully involved with projects of similar scope and magnitude. This category will evaluate the firms:
 Qualifications and relevant individual experience
 Unique qualification of key personnel
 Staff Availability / Time commitment of key members
 Organization chart
Proposer Qualifications – 20%
This category will evaluate the proposer’s ability to take upon itself the responsibilities set forth in the Scope of Services and produce the required outcome in a timely manner.

Consideration will be given for the overall quality of the proposal, including a demonstrated understanding of the purpose, scope and objective of the services to be performed. It is the intention of the City of Richmond to award a contract to the Proposer 116

who furnishes satisfactory evidence that the Proposer has the requisite experience and ability to enable the Proposer to execute the work successfully and properly, and to complete services in a timely manner. To determine the degree of responsibility to be credited to the Proposer, the City of Richmond will weigh the evidence that the Proposer has performed other contracts of like nature, magnitude and comparable difficulty and comparable rates of progress.

Cost Proposal – 15%
The cost proposal should align with the scope and quality of work expected and should reflect fair market value of consultant work of like kind. The proposal is also evaluated for its completeness and transparency of cost for itemized tasks and milestones.

At the request of the City of Richmond, vendors may be requested to give an oral presentation/demonstration on vendor’s proposal, which would include a detailed analysis of how each of the RFP requirements would be addressed should Offeror receive the award. The demonstration shall be conducted at no cost to the City. The purpose of the demonstration is to observe the system in an operational environment and to verify its capability, suitability, and adaptability to the performance requirements stipulated in this solicitation.

The City will schedule the system demonstration date, time, and location with the successful finalists. If the vendor fails to perform the demonstration on the specified date stipulated, the City may elect to reject the proposal or to re-schedule the demonstration in its best interest.

Vendors are not guaranteed an opportunity to demonstrate. Vendors may be eliminated from consideration based solely on inability to meet minimal requirements and/or review of written proposals. The City shall be the sole judge of the acceptability of the system in conformance with the specifications and its decision shall be final.

Pre-Award Negotiations
After the proposals are opened, but prior to award, the City may elect to conduct negotiations with the highest ranked proposer for purposes of:
 Resolving minor differences and information
 Clarifying necessary details and responsibilities, including Project delivery 117

milestones
 Emphasizing important issues and points
 Receiving assurances from proposers
 Cost/budget clarifications, including payment schedule matched to certain satisfaction of milestones.

If the City cannot successfully negotiate a contract with the highest ranked proposer, the City may begin negotiations with the second highest ranked proposer.

Selection may be made without further discussion, negotiations or Offeror’s presentations; therefore, Offeror shall offer the most favorable terms in response to this RFP. Offeror must demonstrate an understanding of the scope of service to be provided and the ability to accomplish the tasks set forth. Offeror shall include information that will enable the City to determine the Offeror’s overall qualifications. The City reserves the right to request additional information or clarification on any matter included in the proposal response, to enable the City to arrive at the final award decision.

Award
When the Review Panel has completed its work, City staff will then recommend a consultant to the City Manager and City Council for approval. The services provided by the successful bidder shall be governed by a Standard Services Agreement (Attachment B).

ATTACHMENTS
A. Insurance Requirements
B. Standard Contract
C. Sanctuary City Compliance Statement
D. Sanctuary City Contracting Ordinance No. 12-18
E. Limited Liability Corporation (LLC) Resolution No.
86-21
F. Limited Liability Corporation Form
118

PORT OF RICHMOND ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDY
Bid Due Date: 1/23/2026
1 2 3 4 5
Martin &
Associates Tioga Group
Cambridge
Systematics
Economic
Planning Systems
Inc
Miller3
Consulting, Inc.

Scorer #1 91 92 84 79 74
Scorer #2 95 86 84 88 71
Scorer #3 91 91 83 83 79
Scorer #4 94 92 90 84 83
Scorer #5 88 89 89 82 69
Total Score 459 450 430 416 376
Average Score 91.8 90 86 83.2 75.2
119

CITY OF RICHMOND

STANDARD CONTRACT
Department: City Project Manager:

City Project Manager E-mail: City Project Manager Phone No:

Vendor No: Contract No:

Description of Services:

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

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

Contractor Name:

Street Address:

City, State, Zip Code:

Contact Person:

Telephone: Email:

Business License No:
☐ A California corporation, ☐ limited liability corporation ☐ general partnership, ☐ limited partnership, ☐ individual, ☐ non-profit corporation, ☐ individual dba as [specify:] ____________________ ☐ other [specify:] _______________________________

2. Term. The effective date of this Contract is _______________________ and terminates _________________ unless terminated earlier as set forth herein.

3. Payment Limit. City’s total payments to Contractor under this Contract shall not exceed $______________ (“Contract Payment Limit”) unless a Contract Amendment has been approved by the City Council or City Manager. If this amount includes a contingency, Contractor acknowledges that any use of such contingency shall be for work beyond the original scope of services and requires prior written authorization by the City. If noted below, Compensation for work done under this Contract, shall not exceed as follows:

FY _________ total compensation shall not exceed $_________________ FY _________ total compensation shall not exceed $_________________ FY _________ total compensation shall not exceed $_________________

4. Contractor’s Obligations. Contractor agrees to perform all work at its own cost and expense, to furnish all labor, tools, equipment, materials, except as otherwise specified, in accordance with the Service Plan set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein.

5. City Obligations. City shall make payments to the Contractor in accordance with the Payment Provisions set forth in Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated herein.

Economic Development/Port Charles Gerard [email protected] (510) 215-4600 Port Economic Impact Study
John C. Martin Associates, LLC (Martin Associates) 941 Wheatland Avenue, Ste. 203 Lancaster, PA, 17603 John Martin (717) 295-2428 [email protected] April 28, 2026 June 30, 2027 112,900.00 120

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

7. General Conditions. This Contract is subject to the General Conditions (Exhibit D), which are attached hereto and incorporated herein.

8. Special Conditions. This Contract is subject to the Special Conditions (Exhibit E) (if any), which are attached hereto and incorporated herein.

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

10. Sanctuary City Compliance Statement. This Contract is subject to the Sanctuary City Compliance Statement (Exhibit G), which is attached hereto and incorporated herein.

11. Signatures. These signatures attest the parties' agreement hereto:

CITY OF RICHMOND,
a municipal corporation [BUSINESS NAME]
(* The Corporation Chairperson of the Board, President, or Vice President should sign below)
By: _________________________ By: ___________________________ Title: ________________________ Title: __________________________ Date Signed: _________________ Date Signed: ___________________ I hereby certify that this Contract (* The Corporation Chief Financial Officer or Assistant has been approved by City Council Treasurer, or Secretary or Assistant Secretary should or the City Manager. sign below)
By: _________________________ By: ___________________________ City Clerk Title: __________________________
Date Signed: ____________________
Approved as to form:
(NOTE: Pursuant to California Corporations Code Section By: _________________________ 313, if Contractor is a corporation or nonprofit organization, City Attorney this Contract (1) must be signed by (a) the Chairperson of the Board, President, or Vice-President and (b) the
Chief Financial Officer or Assistant Treasurer, or
Secretary or Assistant Secretary)
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS:

Service Plan Exhibit A
Payment Provisions Exhibit B
Authorized Representatives and Notices Exhibit C
General Conditions Exhibit D
Special Conditions Exhibit E
Insurance Provisions Exhibit F
Sanctuary City Compliance Statement Exhibit G
John C. Martin Associates, LLC (Martin Associates)
121
Contract No: ________ For the Contract between the City of Richmond and
_____________________________

EXHIBIT A

SERVICE PLAN
Contractor shall, to the satisfaction of the Project Manager (set forth in Exhibit B), perform the following services and be compensated as outlined below [or attach service plan if necessary]:

John C. Martin Associates, LLC (Martin Associat
Scope attached.

The contract is not to exceed $112,900, including $63,700 for the base scope and $49,200 for an optional task or related additional services subject to Port Director approval. 122
1 January 13, 2026
Mr. Charles Gerard
Port Director
Port of Richmond
1322 Canal Blvd
Richmond, CA 94804
Dear Mr. Gerard,
Martin Associates is pleased to submit our proposal to conduct an economic impact study of the Port of Richmond. Martin Associates is the industry leader in conducting economic impact studies of seaport activity, having conducted more than 900 economic impact studies for nearly every seaport in the U.S. and Canada over our 40 years of business. Martin Associates is very familiar with the maritime operations in the Bay Area, having conducted economic impact studies for the Ports of Oakland, Redwood City, Stockton, Sacramento and San Francisco. We have also conducted the economic impact studies for the Ports of Los Angeles, Long Beach, Hueneme, and San Diego, both individually as well as part of the impact studies we conduct for the Pacific Maritime Association.

Martin Associates prepares the economic impact analysis of the West Coast seaports on a regular basis. The West Coast economic impact studies we conduct for the Pacific Maritime Association estimate impacts supported by all maritime cargo operations and facilities at the deepwater ports in California, Washington and Oregon. Martin Associates’ most recent economic impact study conducted for the Pacific Maritime Association in 2021 included the economic impacts of the Port of Richmond. Impacts included both public city owned properties and facilities located within the Port and private operations such as the Chevron Richmond facility, and were based on detailed interviews with each tenant of the Port as well as private terminal operators. Separate terminal models were developed for each operation at the Port.

The 2021 Pacific Maritime Association Economic Impacts of the West Coast Seaports included the development of a specific impact model for the Port of Richmond that provided estimates of jobs, income, revenue and taxes supported by the five City owned terminals and ten privately owned terminals.

With respect to non-California West Coast ports, Martin Associates provides continual economic impact support services and modeling for the ports of Portland (seaport, airport and commercial and real estate tenants); Grays Harbor (marine cargo, industrial and commercial real estate, commercial and sport fishing); Longview, Everett, Bellingham (commercial and industrial tenants and commercial and sport fishing); Vancouver, (WA); Port Townsend (marine trades, commercial and 123
2 sport fishing); and Port of Ilwaco (commercial and recreation fishing). We also develop the economic impact models for the terminals included in the Northwest Seaport Alliance (Seattle and Tacoma).

On the Atlantic Coast, Martin Associates has developed economic impact studies for Miami, Port Everglades, Port Canaveral, Jacksonville, Palm Beach, the North Carolina State Ports Authority, Ports of Virginia, Baltimore, Philadelphia, South Jersey Port Corporation, Boston (marine cargo, cruise, commercial fishing), Providence, and New Bedford (MA) (commercial fishing and processing).

We also conduct the economic impact studies of all ports in Florida for the Florida Ports Council.

On the Gulf of Mexico, we conduct economic impact studies for the Ports of Tampa, Panama City, Pensacola, Mobile, Port Manatee, New Orleans, Gulfport, and Lake Charles, as well as all ports in the state of Texas, including Houston, Galveston, Corpus Christi, Texas City, Freeport, and Brownsville. We are just beginning statewide impact study for the Ports of Louisiana. We also provide the economic impact studies for 40 U.S. and Canadian Ports on the Great Lake and St. Lawrence Seaway every 5 years.

The economic impact methodology used by Martin Associates is based on detailed assessments of each individual port’s operations and has gained widespread acceptance throughout these industry sectors. Because of this level of detail, these impact analyses are highly defensible, and the direct economic impacts can be traced to the individual firm. Economic Impact Studies have become integral planning tools for our port and airport clients in addition to the traditional public relations use of impact studies. It is to be emphasized that the Martin Associates methodology to assess the economic impacts of seaports has been reviewed and accepted not only by the nation’s ports, ocean carriers, terminal operators and cruise lines, but also by the U.S. Council of Economic Advisors, the U.S. Federal Reserve Board, and the International Trade Commission.

From a community benefit perspective, we have used our economic impact studies and economic impact models to demonstrate to the community the positive economic benefits of the port’s current operations as well as the potential impacts of new projects, new terminal development investments, and navigational improvements. We also combine the economic impact analyses with benefit cost analysis to demonstrate the net environmental, safety, and infrastructure benefits associated with specific maritime projects, and the use of the port’s marine terminals. This has been a successful formula to engage community support of port projects, as well as to secure federal and state grants. Our impact studies are also used to identify job categories most critical to maintain and grow port operations including warehousing, trucking, marine construction, etc. which can be used to target training programs. Our studies are also used to identify the impacts of the port in economically disadvantaged communities.
124
3 Martin Associates has no conflicts of interest or any exceptions to the RFP and the offer will remain in effect for a minimum 180 days. We accept the insurance requirements as well. Martin Associates and the team will not participate in any other similar work involving a third-party with interests currently in conflict or likely to be in conflict with the City of Richmond. There are no pending or active investigations or litigation against Martin Associates or any member of the team.

Again, thank you for this opportunity to submit a proposal to conduct the Port of Richmond Economic Impact Study. Should you have any questions, please feel free to call me at (717) 295-2428 or (717) 371-8599 (cell). Martin Associates headquarters is 941 Wheatland Ave, Suite 203 in Lancaster, PA. Martin Associates also has an office in Avon, CO.

Sincerely,
John C. Martin, PhD
Manager, John C. Martin Associates, LLC
125
4 I. PROJECT SCOPE
The economic impact studies developed by Martin Associates are based on detailed interviews with all marine tenants, as well as those firms’ providing services to support the maritime activity and those industries using the port’s marine terminals. Having included the Port of Richmond in our previous West Coast Maritime Economic Impact studies for the Pacific Maritime Association, we are very familiar with the composition of the Port and its tenants and private terminals within the Port District and have developed detailed models of each of these operations. The Port of Richmond’s roots are in petroleum and liquid bulks but have expanded its dry bulk, RoRo and break-bulk cargo handling capabilities. For example, imported autos moving via Auto Warehousing are delivered to dealerships throughout the western United States via truck and rail. Private liquid bulk facilities such as BP, Chevron, Kinder Morgan, IMTT and ConocoPhillips handle a variety of petroleum products, renewable fuels, and lubricants. Gypsum, stone, sand and aggregate are also imported through the Port of Richmond supporting local drywall manufacturing and the construction industry. Sims America exports scrap metal from the East Bay region to global markets. The Port of Richmond also leases terminal and dock space to support maritime infrastructure and energy projects in the San Francisco Bay region. Several maritime support companies such as Foss Maritime and Dutra Group are also Port of Richmond tenants. In addition to quantifying the impacts of the cargo related operations, we will also quantify the impact of the non-maritime tenants located at the Port, as well as the economic impacts of Marina Bay Yacht Harbor and Point San Pablo Harbor.

The Martin Associates’ approach measures the current maritime impacts of the port as well as non-maritime related tenants and the marina activity. We develop proprietary maritime economic impact models, as well as real estate and marina models to quantify the impacts of industrial and commercial real estate tenants as well as the activity of the marina boat owners. The port model can be used to test the sensitivity of impacts to changes in such factors as tonnage levels, commodity mix, vessel size, labor productivity and work rules, new terminal development, inland modal distribution, and changes in the port's commodity specific hinterland. The port model can also be used for annual updates and to quantify the impacts of channel deepening and widening, as well as new real estate tenants and cargo. Tonnage forecasts as well as revenue and financial performance scenarios can be used directly in the model to estimate the impact of future activity at the Port of Richmond and for specific tenants, as well as to evaluate alternative marketing and facilities development strategies. The impact model can also be used to evaluate specific terminal activity, such as new construction or the addition of a new carrier.

The seaport impact analysis will demonstrate the impact of the Port’s marine terminals and support services by cargo type and job sector. Also, the impacts of the non-maritime real estate tenants.

Impacts will include the following:
• Business revenues
• Employment described by:
▪ Direct, indirect, and induced
▪ Business category
▪ Place of residence
▪ Employee earnings
▪ Local purchasing
126
5 • State, local and federal taxes generated
The following tasks detail our approach to measuring the economic impacts generated by seaport activity at the marine terminals, as well as the impacts of the industrial and commercial tenants and the Port’s marinas. To gather input data, we will use a combination of personal interviews, telephone interviews, published state and county data, and port operational models developed from port-specific terminal operations. Our approach consists of the following tasks.

TASK 1: Define Port Participants and Study Structure
This is a crucial task, as it is necessary to rigidly define what is to be measured and to further identify the interrelationships between the various impact sectors. We will use a list of the Port marine dependent tenants, as well as industrial tenants and users of the marine terminals located in proximity to the Port but not necessarily on Port property. We will also identify service providers such as tug operations, forwarders, agents, pilots, marine construction firms etc. providing services to the port operations. We will use the Port directory of services, Port tenant lists and the Golden Gate Ports Handbook, as well as Martin Associates’ proprietary data bases developed from previous impact studies of Bay Area ports, as well as our economic impact studies of the West Coast Seaports (for the PMA), which also include the Port of Richmond.

Subtask 1.2: Identify Major Commodity Groups
Since the impacts will be commodity-type specific, the major commodity groups to be used in the analysis will be identified and agreed upon with the port. Commodities normally reflect the method of handling, which has a significant effect on the economic impacts generated. The impacts will be estimated by commodity/handling type, and by specific terminal. Having identified the port participants and the commodity-group categories, we will collect the input data for the economic impact analysis, as described in the following task.

TASK 2: Collect Data
In this task, data required to estimate the impacts will be collected through a combination of personal and telephone interviews; the use of port-specific data regarding surface transportation patterns and service, commodity origins/destinations (O/Ds), and the use of state and county specific data published by the U.S. Bureau of Census (i.e., County Business Patterns, Census of Service Industries, Census of Retail Trade, Census of Wholesale Trade, Census of Construction, etc.), and the US Bureau of Economic Analysis.

TASK 3: Estimate Job Impacts
Four types of employment impacts will be generated:
• Direct Jobs are the jobs directly dependent upon the shipment and receipt of cargo via the terminals. (These are jobs that would cease if the port were to be closed.) Also included are direct jobs with the non-cargo real estate tenants. • Induced Jobs are the jobs generated in the regional economy due to the in-state purchases of goods and services by those directly employed in port-dependent activity. • Indirect Jobs are jobs with local suppliers of goods and services that are purchased by firms (stevedores, agents, towing companies, forwarders, trucking companies, nonmaritime tenants, etc.) that are directly dependent upon the port. 127
6 • Shipper/Consignee (Port User) Jobs are the jobs with shippers/consignees moving cargo through the port’s marine terminals including petroleum, liquid bulks, dry bulks, break bulk and RoRo cargo.

In this task, the direct job impacts will be estimated separately for each of the following impact sectors:
• Surface Transportation;
• Maritime Services;
• Shippers and Consignees; and
• Port Authority.

For the most part, direct jobs will be estimated on the basis of interview results. Jobs dependent on port-specific tonnage (by major commodity group) and vessel calls (associated with major commodities) will be estimated using labor productivity and ship call data collected during the interviews. Direct job impacts will be estimated for major commodity types handled at the port and will be expressed as full-time equivalent jobs by commodity type. The direct job impact will be estimated on a county/MSA-specific basis, based on the location of employees' residences, as identified through interviews with the tenants, as well as induced models developed at the appropriate level of geographic detail. We can also estimate the economic impacts by County within the state of California, and by state Assembly and Senate Districts, and by Federal Congressional Districts within the State. The impact can also be estimated by state throughout the U.S. This allocation of impacts to county, state legislative districts, and Federal Congressional Districts within the State are presented in a separate optional task in the following work scope.

Subtask 3.1: Estimate Surface Transportation Sector Direct Job Impact The surface transportation sector consists of railroads, trucking firms and barges moving cargo to and from the Port of Richmond’s marine terminals.
• Railroad Employment Impact will be estimated based on the typical origin/destination movement of the rail-moved commodities. The annual rail tonnage, by commodity, will be converted into required annual carloads and, subsequently, into trainloads.

Based on typical O/D patterns for each rail-moved commodity, the average number of crew changes will be estimated to calculate the number of full-time equivalent crew jobs. Crew jobs will be adjusted to include administrative employees, based on the ratio of administrative employees to train crews.
• Truck Employment Impact will be based on the typical O/D movements for cargoes hauled by truck to and from the terminals. Annual truck-hauled tonnage (by commodity) will be converted into annual required truck trips, which then will be converted into full time equivalent truck driver jobs. The driver impact will be adjusted to reflect administrative and dispatcher employment as well. The impact of drayage to a rail terminal will also be included in this impact. • Linehaul Barge Employment Impact will be estimated on the size of barge and tow size, as well as O/D movements and will factor in crew and support jobs. 128
7 Subtask 3.2: Estimate Maritime Service Sector Direct Job Impacts The job impacts in this category will be obtained directly from interviews, supplemented, as necessary, by published local data. Specific categories for which economic models will be used to estimate commodity-specific job impacts are described in the following paragraphs. • Terminal jobs - both direct full time terminal jobs as well as casual terminal jobs associated with the load and discharge of cargo will be included in this category. The casual jobs generated by each major commodity handled at the marine terminals will be estimated based on actual average productivity, as determined through interviews with the terminal operators and combined with the total tonnage of each commodity. • Pilots - The number of pilots required for each major commodity will be estimated based on the number of pilots required to bring a vessel (associated with each commodity) to and from the port, the number of such vessels per year and the number of assignments a typical pilot works per year.
• Towing firms’ jobs - Crew jobs aboard tugs will be estimated based on the average number of crewmen (or crew hours) per tug, the number of tugs required to bring a vessel (associated with a given commodity) to and from the port, and the number of such vessel calls per year. The administrative employees of towing firms will be identified from interview results. These impacts are separate from the jobs with the linehaul barge operations.
• Shipyards - The number of workers employed in ship repair yards providing services to vessels calling Port of Richmond will be estimated from interview results. These workers will not be allocated to a specific commodity but will be included only in the estimate of total jobs.
• Marine terminal construction – Employment in this category includes jobs with firms providing on-going maintenance as well as new terminal construction at the Port. • Other maritime service sector firms - Employment in other maritime service sector firms will be estimated from the results of the interviews. The job impacts will be allocated to each major commodity based on the percentage of business in each type of firm attributed to a particular commodity. These firms include agents, freight forwarders, warehouse operators, NVOCC's, surveyors, customhouse brokers, etc.

Special emphasis will be placed on identifying the impacts generated by activity at the Port of Richmond versus activity at other Bay Area ports, for which the same firm provides services. We have also developed a freight forwarder model that allows us to assign a specific forwarding or customs house clearance fee per ton to specific types of cargo. This fee per ton or unit will be used to estimate the purchases by commodity type from this category of the maritime services sector. These purchases of forwarding services and customhouse brokerage services will be converted into full-time equivalent jobs for relevant commodities.
• Non-maritime port tenants located at the Port of Richmond Subtask 3.3: Estimate Shipper/Consignee Job Impacts
Two types of shippers/consignees are associated with port activity. The first type consists of users totally dependent upon the marine terminals and is typically employed at facilities that depend upon the shipment and receipt of cargo over the Port’s marine terminals and could not use other ports in the region due to logistics costs. The jobs in these firms totally dependent upon port activity will 129
8 be estimated based on the responses to the interviews. The second type of shippers/consignees consists of users of the marine terminals who are not totally dependent upon the marine terminals and use the port facilities for the shipment and receipt of cargo. These will be included in user related jobs.

Subtask 3.4: Estimate Port Authority Impacts
Administration jobs with the Port of Richmond.

TASK 4: Estimate Income Impacts
The estimation of income impacts will be a fairly straight-forward process. For participants in each of the economic sectors, the average annual earnings per person will be estimated from the questionnaire results or from secondary research data. This annual salary, multiplied by the corresponding number of full-time equivalent jobs, will equal the income impact for each participant in each of the economic sectors.

To estimate the effect of re-spending the port-generated income throughout the regional economy, a regional income multiplier will be applied to the initial personal earnings impact received by those workers employed due to activity at the marine terminals and port complex. The appropriate local/regional income multiplier will be obtained from the U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis, Regional Input-Output Modeling System (RIMS II). The re-spending effect will then be used to estimate induced jobs, as described in Task 5, following.

TASK 5: Estimate Induced Impacts
The employment created by port activity in turn creates income, which is spent and re-spent throughout the local, state and national economies. As a result of the purchases of goods and services by individuals directly dependent upon the port, additional jobs in the local, state and national economies will be generated. In this task, we will isolate that fraction of the personal income impact used by individuals to purchase goods and services produced in the local economy and the resulting induced employment generated for the Richmond area residents, as well as the state of California.

It is important to emphasize that these jobs are generated due to the purchases by individuals employed due to port activity, not by firms supplying services at the Port.

TASK 6: Estimate Indirect Impacts
Indirect state job impacts are generated by the purchases of firms dependent upon the port activity. As part of the interviews and data collection effort, Martin Associates will develop local purchase profiles for firms directly dependent upon the maritime activity and tenants located at the Port of Richmond. The local and in-state purchases by the firms providing direct services to the port will then be used with the RIMS II model for Richmond and Contra Costa County, as well as for the State.

TASK 7: Estimate Business Revenue Impacts
The revenue impact is a measure of the level of gross sales generated by maritime activity at the port. The gross revenue impact consists of income earned by workers employed due to port activity, profits distributed to shareholders, expenditures used for the purchases of equipment and maintenance services, investments, and tax payments. Revenue impacts will be estimated for each of 130
9 the economic sectors and allocated by commodity. We will also provide an estimate of the value of the cargo moving via the marine terminals, as this measure is a critical measure in estimating the user impacts, as described in Task 9.

Subtask 7.1: Estimate Revenue Impacts to the Surface Transportation Sector Revenue accruing to the railroads, trucking firms and barge operations will be estimated by multiplying an average rail or truck rate by the tonnage of each commodity handled by each mode at the port. The average commodity rates will be estimated from interviews with railroads, trucking firms and tug/barge operations. Revenue from drayage is also included.

Subtask 7.2: Estimate Revenue Impacts to the Maritime Services Sector The revenue impacts accruing to the maritime services sector and non-cargo real estate tenants will be estimated from several sources. In most cases, the revenue by firm will be estimated directly from interview results. For example, terminal operators provide the revenue per commodity for stevedoring, handling and other terminal services. Interviews with warehouses operators provide the average revenue per ton earned based on average dwell times of each type of warehoused commodity.

Agents provide the disbursements for a typical type of vessel call, including pilotage fees and towing fees, as well as agent fees and bunkers. The revenue impacts will be aggregated over the firms in the maritime sector to estimate a total maritime service sector revenue impact by commodity. Special attention will be given to avoid double counting when summing the revenue impacts over members of the maritime sector.

TASK 8: Tax Impacts
Federal, state and local tax impacts will be estimated primarily by using per income tax burdens obtained from the Tax Foundation database, as well as a corporate tax index from the U.S. Bureau of Census to be applied to the business revenue, and California specific taxes for state and local sales taxes, property taxes and income tax.

TASK 9: Port User Impacts
Essentially, each commodity/commodity group is associated with a producing or consuming industry. These are users that are not included as direct industrial tenants of the Port or included as dependent shippers/consignees located in proximity to the Port’s marine terminals. For each related user industry, we then develop production functions that relate the value of exports and imports to the total value of total industry shipments specific to that industry. Data from the Bureau of Economic Analysis is used in this process. The value of each commodity group moving via the port terminals will be identified from USA Trade On-Line. Based on the origin/destination patterns of each commodity (as identified from terminal operator and steamship line interviews) as well as port records, we can then allocate in-state vs. out-of-state cargo flows and, hence, value of cargo. The value of in-state cargo flows, by commodity and associated industry are then inputted into the producing or consuming industry-specific production functions developed by Martin Associates from the U.S. Census of Manufacturing and the Bureau of Economic Analysis to estimate employment, income and value added within the various geographic areas generated by the cargo moving via the marine terminals. Related user taxes are also estimated. It is to be emphasized that the direct, induced and indirect jobs, income, revenue and taxes generated by cargo activity are subtracted from the port user impacts identified in this task in order to avoid double counting. 131
10 TASK 10: Marina Impacts
In this task, Martin Associates will develop an estimate of the impacts generated by the Port’s marina operations. These impacts include the supplies purchased per typical recreational boat owner, by type of boat, and a survey of the boat yard and equipment/service suppliers and restaurants that serve the marina. Expenditures by type of boat will be identified for supplies, fuel, local purchases of equipment, repairs of electrical equipment, as well as storage, painting, haul out and vessel repairs.

This data will be based on data developed as part of our numerous marina impact studies including the studies for the Santa Cruz Harbor District, Redwood City, Everett, Bellingham, Port Townsend, Grays Harbor, Olympia and Seattle. Martin Associates maintains a “living data base” regarding annual expenditures for recreational boating for moored motor and sail boats. We have just updated this database as part of our just completed economic impact study of the Alabama waterways (2005) and our current study of the state of Texas recreational boating impacts.

The expenditure profiles from the data supplied by the above noted sources will be aggregated by type of expenditure and type/size of boat. The expenditure data will be multiplied by the relevant jobs to sales ratios developed from the U.S. Census and U.S. County Business Patterns data for the local marine supply firms located in the Richmond area as well as interviews with the Port. This will provide an estimate of the direct jobs supported by the Port of Richmond marinas. The jobs can be identified by type of service supplier as well as by type of boat. Income and revenue impacts will also be estimated based on interviews and a review of U.S. Bureau of Census Data and County Business Patterns data for industries providing the services to the recreational boating sector in the Richmond area. Slip fees generated from the marina activity will be collected from the Port records based on slip fees.

The potential impacts of transient boats will also be estimated, based on typical expenditure profiles of overnight visitors by type of boat. This data will be derived from marina operations, as well as from a set of interviews with the marina operator regarding nights stayed, typical passengers per transient call. The direct revenue from the marina operations as well as the support services will be estimated from the interview results, the marina model, as well as the revenue from marina operations provided to Martin Associates from the Port.

A marina model will be developed that will allow for sensitivity analysis as to changes in the types and number of boats moored at the Port’s marina, as well as changes in the number of transient boat operations.

TASK 11: Estimate Total Economic Value
The total economic value of the combined activity at the Port of Richmond to the State will consist of the direct business revenue, the value of output to the users and the re-spending impact.

These three economic impact components are independent and adding the three components together will not include any double counting. This economic value of the Port to Contra Costa County and the State can then be compared to the state Gross Domestic Product., as well as to the GDP of the County and the MSA in which the Port is located.
132
11 TASK 12: Estimate the Cargo Economic Impacts by State Legislative District, Federal Congressional Districts within the State, and by Other States (Optional Task) To estimate the economic impacts by state legislative district and by state throughout the U.S., it will be necessary to purchase the S&P Transearch data which will be used to trace the flow of cargo to and from the Port marine terminals and the counties throughout California. The impacts will then be estimated by county within the state and by state throughout the U.S., by commodity. The impacts by commodity and then by county within California will then be allocated to legislative district within the state, including federal congressional districts. The Transearch data will also be used to allocate the impacts to states outside of California by commodity. We have used this approach to estimate the impacts by state and federal legislative districts and by county for our economic impact studies for the Port of Oakland, the Port of Houston, the Port of Mobile and our just completed (2025) current economic impact study of the San Pedro Bay Ports for the Pacific Maritime Association.

TASK 13: Develop Port Impact Sensitivity Model
Martin Associates will develop a Port of Richmond economic impact model during the course of this study. The impact model, which is based on Excel, will provide a tool by which impacts can be updated periodically, and to test the sensitivity of the impacts to changes in tonnage levels, new facilities development, commodity mix, vessel calls, labor productivity and work rules, vessel mix, vessel load factors, channel dredging, and inland transportation modal mix (i.e., increased use of rail versus truck for a particular commodity, etc.). The model will be very useful in evaluating the incremental benefits from terminal development and infrastructure investment. The impact analysis of these types of investments will be very important in "selling" the investments and terminal expansions to the public and can also be used in bond justification. Finally, the seaport economic impact model will provide a framework to evaluate the economic impacts associated with alternative terminal development, as well as the impact of new industrial users and industrial and real estate tenants. The model can similarly be used to evaluate the potential impacts of future cargo projections.

All impacts are estimated on a commodity specific and sector specific basis, as well as by terminal.

The short-term impacts of a construction project can also be estimated, as well as the longer-term sustained impacts resulting from increased throughput, new vessel service, etc.

This model will also provide the framework to isolate the economic impacts associated with Chevron Refinery operations. The impacts of this operation can be discussed separately and shall be limited to the impacts of the shipments of cargo through the Long Wharf, and not the entire Chevron Refinery Complex. In addition, we will be able to estimate the impacts for the entire Chevron Refinery, as well as the impacts supported by the shipments of the Chevron cargo via the Long Wharf.

As with all of our port impact studies, Martin Associates will maintain control of the model and conduct sensitivity analysis and annual updates with new tonnage figures and specific projects provided by the Port for a period of 3 years at no cost. The model and underlying data we collect at the firm level of detail are held in confidence by Martin Associates and not provided to the Port or any other entities. This is done since the data required to develop the economic impacts and supporting models are highly sensitive from a competitive standpoint and cannot be collected without such confidential agreements between Martin Associates and the Port tenants. We typically respond to a request by a port for an impact sensitivity run within 8 hours and provide the economic impact associated with specific projects or new tonnage levels. After 3 years, 133
12 the model should be recalibrated through a study update to capture structural changes that occur over the three-year period.

TASK 14: Evaluate Community Benefits
Martin Associates’s economic impact study results have recently been used by the Port of Oakland and the Port of Houston to demonstrate the Port’s impacts on economically disadvantaged communities and to further identify the impact of the Port operations on specific occupations and industry sectors. This information was used to identify occupations that are critical to the Port operations and have typically been held by minority workers, including trucking, warehousing, freight forwarders/shipping and receiving clerks. We can identify these impacts as part of this proposed study.

In addition, we also can demonstrate the environmental benefits of the Port in terms of reduced trucking emissions and increased safety benefits of the use of the local port facilities. The emissions benefits is a separate analysis not included in this economic impact analysis scope, but can be included if the Port so wishes. These benefits are used in our benefit cost studies used for ports in applying for state and federal grants including MEGA, PIDP, and INFRA grants.

Another example of the use of the economic impact studies and benefits analyses that we conduct is the use this type of safety and emissions benefit analysis to reevaluate the transportation cost savings (the NED Benefits) that are projected to be generated under two scenarios regarding the deepening of the Stockton Deepwater Ship Channel (SDWSC) to a 38-foot and 40-foot navigation channel depth.

TASK 15: Prepare Final Report
The report will present the impacts by major commodity and for individual job categories within the economic sectors. Impacts will be discussed for the total port activity, as well as separately for cargo handled at public versus private terminals (i.e., petroleum/petrochemical terminals), as well as the marina impacts. The main intent of the report will be to educate the general population as to the importance of the port to the community, to provide a tool for port planning and to provide the benefits information required for capital spending decisions, terminal development and intermodal projects. In addition, a separate executive summary will be prepared, and if requested, we will present the findings at a public meeting.
134
13 PROJECT COST AND SCHEDULE, RESUMES, QUALIFICATIONS AND

REFERENCES AND REQUIRED FORMS
135
14 II. Project Cost and Schedule
The economic impact study will require about 4 months to conduct and will be based on 2025 port activity. The cost of the basic economic impact analysis is $63,700, excluding the Optional Task

12. If the Port wishes to include the Optional Task to allocate the impacts by county and state legislative and Federal Congressional Districts within the state of California, as well as for other states, the cost of this task is $19,200 and the cost of the Transearch data to be used to allocate the impacts by county is estimated at $30,000. However, we will obtain a final data cost for the S&P Transearch data should the Port wish to include the county and legislative district allocations. The $30,000 cost estimate of this data is based on recent similar data purchases Martin Associates has made from S&P.

Project Cost
Project Schedule
Officer in
Charge
Senior
Economist Research ADMIN Total
Personnel Rate $275 $225 $200 $150 Cost
Hours
Data Collection 40 60 100 8 $45,700
Estimate Impacts and Model Development
24 24 24 8 $18,000
Total Cost for Economic Impact Sutdy
Excluding Optional Task $63,700
Allocation of Impacts by Jurisdictions and
Legislative Districts - Optional Task 24 40 24 $19,200
Cost of Transearch (for Optional Task) $30,000
136
15 III. PROJECT TEAM AND RESUMES
Dr. John Martin will oversee the project and modeling efforts. Mr. Michael Sarbaugh will be the day-to-day project manager. He will be assisted by Ms. Marnie Bergman, Ms. Michelle Wingenroth, and Mr. Jeffrey Sweeney.

Dr. John C. Martin, founder and manager of Martin
Associates, will direct and coordinate the study team's work, and develop the economic impact models. Over his 50 years of providing maritime and airport consulting services, he has managed more than 3,500 port economic impact and planning studies for more than 500 seaports in the United States and Canada, Ireland, Europe, South America, Africa, China and the Caribbean. Specifically, Dr. Martin has conducted economic impact studies for the Atlantic Coast ports of Boston, Providence, Baltimore, New York/New Jersey, Philadelphia and the Delaware River ports, Norfolk, Wilmington NC. He has directed studies for all ports in Florida, as well as Mobile, Gulfport, and New Orleans; all ports in Texas; the California ports of Oakland, Los Angeles, Long Beach, Hueneme, Stockton, Sacramento, San Diego, and San Francisco; all ports in Oregon; and all ports in Washington; He has also led the economic impact studies of the U.S. and Canadian Great Lakes ports for a binational group of government and private sector clients in 2010, 2018, and 2023. These studies include detailed market analyses, cargo projections, development of strategic marketing plans, facility capacity analyses, the development of investment plans, financial feasibility analysis, economic impact analysis and detailed terminal design and layout. He also prepares analysis for ocean carriers, marine terminal operators, airports and federal agencies in the United States and Canada.

Dr. Martin provides consulting services to the leading marine terminal operators of the world, including Hutchison Port Holdings, Stevedoring Services of America (SSA), Ports America, Yusen Terminals, Ceres (now part of SSA), Kinder Morgan, PSA, Logistec, QSL/American Stevedores, CMA-CGM and SAAM. In addition to Dr. Martin’s extensive experience with the maritime industry, he has also managed nearly 100 airport studies with major airports in the United States.

Dr. Martin is widely recognized as one of the nation’s leading transportation economists focusing on economic impact analysis of seaports and airports, as well as the development of seaport strategic plans and development of public/private partnerships for large transportation infrastructure projects. His private sector investment clients include Macquarie, First Sentier, Goldman Sachs, Fortress Investments, Bank of Montreal, Carlyle ING, and Och Ziff. Dr. Martin also prepares benefit cost analyses for many federal grant requests, including TIGER, PIDP, INFRA, MEGA, etc.

He has testified before the Council of Economic Advisors and the International Trade Policy Council regarding the imposition of the steel import quotas. Dr. Martin also prepared the economic analysis for the 1999, 2002, 2014-2015, 2022-2023 ILWU contract negotiations at the West Coast Ports. The Martin Associates economic impact models have been reviewed by the U.S. Federal Reserve Board and the U.S. Council of Economic Advisors and were used by the Bush Administration to enact Taft Hartly to resolve the 2002 West Coast port lockdown. He has appeared on CNN, CNBC, BBC, NPR, and ABC News and has been regularly quoted in leading business journals and Years of Experience: 50
With Martin Associates: 40
Education:

Ph.D., Economics, 1978, The
George Washington University,
M.Phil Economics, 1977,
The George Washington
University
B.A. (Cum Laude), Economics,
1973, Millersville University
137
16 the Wall Street Journal regarding issues related to the marine transportation system infrastructure constraints as well as the importance of ports in the logistics decision making of major importers.

Mr. Michael Sarbaugh specializes in economic impact
analysis of seaports and airports, market analysis and the development of NED benefits of channel deepening studies. He was the Project Manager on our Economic Impact Studies at the Ports of Stockton, Port of Redwood City, Miami (including marine cargo and cruise), Oakland (including marine cargo, aviation and real estate), Hueneme, Corpus Christi, Portland (OR) (including marine cargo, shipyard, aviation and real estate), Vancouver (WA) (including marine cargo and real estate), Seattle (including marine cargo, fishing fleet facilities, recreational boating/marinas, cruise, aviation and real estate), Bellingham (including real estate and marinas), Everett (including marine cargo and recreational boating/marinas), Olympia (including marine cargo, marinas and real estate), and Galveston (including marine cargo and maintenance dredging). He also managed the most recent economic impact study of the Calcasieu Ship Channel (Lake Charles, LA) and the economic impact study for the Port of New Orleans.

Mr. Sarbaugh was chief economist on our 2017 and 2022 Economic Impact Studies to quantify the impacts of cargo moving on the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Seaway. Forty-two different ports along the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Seaway are included in the study. The Economic Impact Studies quantify the impacts of cargo, cruise and in some cases, real estate impacts to the local regional economies. Mr. Sarbaugh also conducted cruise passenger surveys for the Ports of Baltimore, Canaveral, Seattle and Bellingham (Alaskan Marine Highway). Mr. Sarbaugh was head researcher for channel maintenance, deepening and navigational studies for the Ports of Stockton, Oakland, Port of Texas City, Houston, and the Port of Baltimore. These studies used similar methodology to show the NED benefits of maintaining the channel to the costs of maintenance dredging of the channel. All USACE maintenance and dredging studies require an NED analysis.

Mr. Jeffrey Sweeney has provided consulting services to seaport and airport clients since 1994. He is a specialist in economic impact analysis and the development of strategic marketing plans for seaports. Mr. Sweeney has conducted economic impact studies for the Ports of San Francisco (including marine cargo, real estate, marinas, commercial fishing and shipyard), Los Angeles (including marine cargo cruise, fish processing, recreational boating/marinas and real estate), Long Beach, Tampa (including marine cargo, cruise, ship repair and real estate), Houston, Corpus Christi (including marine cargo and military deployment and rest operations), Wilmington (DE), Oakland (including marine cargo, aviation and real estate), Baltimore (including marine cargo and cruise), Philadelphia, and Tacoma as well as numerous ports on the Great Lakes and Inland River System. Mr. Sweeney was the project manager on our completed comprehensive economic impact study for the Great Lakes/St.

Lawrence Seaway System. This analysis consisted of 32 United States and Canadian ports and represents the most comprehensive economic impact study completed for the System. The results of the analysis were presented on a national, state/provincial and local level.

Years of Experience: 31
With Martin Associates: 31
Education:

B.A., Economics, 1994,
Millersville University
MS Logistics, 2013, Penn State
University
Years of Experience: 23
With Martin Associates: 23
Education:

B.S., Business and Economics,
2003, Gettysburg College
138
17 Mr. Sweeney managed the Ports of Indiana strategic plan, with a focus on the development of the river ports of Jeffersonville and Mt. Vernon, as well as Burns Harbor. Mr. Sweeney managed the strategic plan for the Port of Cincinnati, as well as developed the economic impact analysis for the Port of Cincinnati.

Mr. Sweeney conducted cruise passenger surveys for the Ports of Baltimore, Canaveral and Seattle, and provides the economic impact services for Port Everglades, FL (including marine cargo and cruise). Mr. Sweeney has developed market assessments and strategic plans for Port Everglades and Miami which included detailed assessment of the ports’ competitive market position and the impact of dredging, the competitive impact of the development of on-dock rail, and the development of import distribution centers in the region. He has directed the bond justification studies for the Port of Jacksonville in support of the MOL/TraPac Terminal and Hanjin Terminal which included detailed cargo and revenue projections by commodity and line of business. For the Port of Palm Beach, he completed a detailed analysis of market demand and distribution center (DC) space needed in South Florida. The analysis also illustrated a detailed assessment of specific consumption market penetration within Florida and a detailed model of inland transportation costs from port of entry to DC to consumption markets. Mr. Sweeney has been a speaker at numerous industry conventions and seminars including the American Association of Port Authorities.

Ms. Michelle Wingenroth is a specialist in economic
impact analysis and the development of strategic marketing plans and financial analyses for seaports. She is currently the project manager of our cruise economic impact study for the Port of San Francisco as well as our statewide economic impact study for the State of Texas. She has conducted economic impact studies for the Ports of Oakland, Long Beach, Houston, Los Angeles
(including marine cargo, cruise, fish processing, recreational boating/marinas and real estate), Canaveral (including marine cargo, cruise, recreational boating/marina and real estate), Freeport (including marine cargo and maintenance dredging), Corpus Christi, Baton Rouge, New Orleans, Baltimore (including cargo and cruise), Wilmington (NC), Portland (OR) (including marine cargo, shipyard, aviation and real estate), and Virginia Port Authority. She was lead researcher on our study of the economic impacts of the Port of Pittsburgh, which was awarded the nation’s top honor in research and economic impact studies by the American Waterway Operators Association. She is also the project manager on the state of Texas Economic Impact Studies (2012, 2016, 2022, and currently).

Ms. Wingenroth conducts the cruise impact studies at the Ports of Miami, Port Everglades, Galveston, Boston, Baltimore, Jacksonville, and Port Canaveral. Ms. Wingenroth provides the economic impact analysis support for the cruise operations of Disney Lines.

Ms. Wingenroth has conducted cruise impact studies for the Ports of Miami, Boston, Baltimore, Montreal, Jacksonville, Tampa and Port Canaveral. Ms. Wingenroth provides the economic impact analysis support for the cruise operations of Disney Lines. Ms Wingenroth also directs the airport impact studies conducted by Martin Associates, at many of the nation’s leading airports, including Miami, Nashville, Knoxville, Milwaukee and Minneapolis, as well as impact studies for Fresno, Sacramento, Pease Airport (Portsmouth New Hampshire), and Van Nuys Airport.

Years of Experience: 33
With Martin Associates: 33
Education:

B.A., Business Administration, 1993,
Millersville University
139
18 Ms. Marnie Bergman joined the Martin Associates’
team with eight years’ experience in the corporate transportation and logistics industry. Ms. Bergman was an assistant manager in the transportation department at Saks Fifth Avenue, a logistics analyst with UPM-Kymmene, Inc., a global logistics manager with Scholastic, Inc. and a global transportation analyst with Becton Dickinson.

Ms. Bergman has assisted in providing research for the
2017 and 2021 Economic impact studies of the Delaware River Ports, including the Port of Bucks, Philaport, Diamond State Port Corp, and the South Jersey Port Corp. She has also conducted economic impact studies for the Port of Houston, Maryland Port Administration (including marine cargo, cruise and maintenance dredging) and Port of Portland (including marine cargo, shipyard, aviation and real estate), Port of Baltimore, Port of Miami, Port Canaveral, Port of Seattle, Port of Oakland, Port of San Francisco, Panama City and Port of Boston. She also assisted in analyzing the internal logistics system in Jamaica and the potential development of a transhipment hub and logistics distribution complex.

Ms. Bergman recently completed the economic impact for the Alabama Waterways, including the Port of Mobile as well as the river ports within the state. She is currently developing the economic impact models for all ports in Texas.

Ms. Becky Polito specializes in the development of
inland logistics information for many of the studies prepared by Martin Associates. She has developed distribution center location information and has calculated inland truck and rail
transportation rates and costs using mileage/rate software to develop costs from “port origin” and competing port locations to the inland logistic points.

She has also conducted research for the economic studies completed for the Delaware River Ports (Philadelphia Regional Port Authority, Port of Bucks, South Jersey Port Corp. and Port of Wilmington), Port of Baltimore, Port of Seattle, Port of Lake Charles, Port of Los Angeles, Port of Port Everglades, Port of San Diego, Bridgeport Port Authority, Cleveland – Cuyahoga County Port Authority, Port of Jacksonville,).

Years of Experience: 20
With Martin Associates: 20
Education:

B.A., English, 2001, McDaniel
College
Years of Experience: 22
With Martin Associates: 14
Education:

B.S., Business Logistics, 1995, Smeal
College of Business at the Penn State
University
140
19 IV. MARTIN ASSOCIATES QUALIFICATIONS
John C. Martin Associates, LLC (DBA Martin Associates), is headquartered in Lancaster Pennsylvania and employs 8 professionals. Martin Associates is an internationally recognized leading maritime and transportation economics/logistics consulting firm. Since its founding in 1986 by John Martin, Martin Associates has conducted more than 2,000 economic and planning studies for nearly every Port in the United States and Canada, as well as Ports in China, Europe, South America, Africa, and the Caribbean. Martin Associates provides consulting services to numerous global terminal operators and investment groups with respect to private sector development as well as identification of ports in which to establish terminal operations. Martin Associates is deeply involved in the development of private public partnerships (P3s) for marine terminal development, and our terminal clients include Ports America, SSA, Yusen Terminals, Logistec, Kinder Morgan, SAAM, Ceres, PSA (Singapore Port Authority), CMA-CGM and Hutchison Port Holdings. Our terminal investment clients include UBS, ING, Bank of Montreal, Goldman Sachs, Macquarie, Fortress, Och Ziff, Mid-Ocean, and First Sentier.

Economic Impact Analyses
Over the last 40 years, Martin Associates has developed more than 900 economic impact studies for ports, port systems and airports throughout the U.S. and Canada. The economic impact methodology used by Martin Associates is based on detailed assessments of each individual port or airport’s operations and has gained widespread acceptance throughout these industry sectors. Because of this level of detail, these impact analyses are highly defensible, and the direct economic impacts can be traced to the individual firm. Economic Impact Studies have become integral planning tools for our port and airport clients in addition to the traditional public relations use of impact studies.

Martin Associates’ economic impact studies can be categorized as seaport, cruise, airport, shipyard, waterfront real estate development, and ferry studies.

Seaport Economic Impact Studies
The Martin Associates’ Seaport Model is used in economic impact studies as a tool to estimate the impact of future activity by using tonnage forecasts and revenue and financial performance scenarios developed for each of the ports. It is also possible to evaluate specific terminal activity such as new construction or the addition of a new carrier, as well as navigational projects such as channel deepening and channel depth maintenance. The model is able to test the sensitivity of impacts to changes in factors such as tonnage levels, commodity mix, vessel size, labor productivity and work rules, new terminal development, inland modal distribution (i.e. double stack service versus conventional rail service), changes in the port’s commodity specific hinterland (origin and destination markets as well as discretionary cargo).

As discussed in our introductory letter, in addition to our continual economic impact modeling of the San Pedro Bay Ports, Martin Associates has developed economic impact models for the ports of Oakland, San Francisco, San Diego, Hueneme, Richmond, Redwood City, Sacramento, Stockton, and Humboldt Bay. With respect to non-California West Coast ports, Martin Associates provides continual economic impact support services and modeling for the ports of Portland (seaport, airport and commercial and real estate tenants); Grays Harbor (marine cargo, industrial and commercial real estate, commercial and sport fishing); Longview, Everett, Bellingham (commercial and industrial 141
20 tenants and commercial and sport fishing); Vancouver, (WA); Port Townsend (marine trades, commercial and sport fishing); and Port of Ilwaco (commercial and recreation fishing). We also develop the economic impact models for the terminals included in the Northwest Seaport Alliance (Seattle and Tacoma).

Martin Associates conducts the economic impact studies for the Florida ports of Miami, Port Everglades, Port Canaveral, Jacksonville, Tampa, Palm Beach, Manatee, Port St. Joe, Pensacola, as well as for the Florida port system (for the Florida Ports Council).

On the Atlantic Coast, Martin Associates has developed economic impact studies for the above noted Florida ports, as well as for the North Carolina State Ports Authority, Ports of Virginia, Baltimore, Philadelphia, South Jersey Port Corporation, Boston (marine cargo, cruise, commercial fishing), Providence, and New Bedford (MA) (commercial fishing and processing).

On the Gulf of Mexico, we conduct economic impact studies for the Ports of Tampa, Panama City, Pensacola, Mobile, Port Manatee, New Orleans, Gulfport, and Lake Charles, as well as all ports in the state of Texas, including Houston, Galveston, Corpus Christi, Texas City, Freeport, and Brownsville.

Recently we have been developing economic impact studies at the state level or regional level for numerous clients. For example, we recently completed the 2024 economic impact analysis of the state of Texas public ports, which was an update of our 2012, 2015, and 2018 statewide economic impact studies. We recently updated our statewide economic impact study of the Florida Port System (2024) which we conduct about every three years. As part of these studies, we develop an estimate of the economic impacts generated by dollar of investment, as well as develop ROI measures for specific projects at Florida ports that are applying for Florida DOT grants. Martin Associates has just been selected to conduct the statewide economic impact study for the Louisiana ports. We just completed economic impact studies of all ports in Alabama including the inland reiver terminals as well as the Port of Mobile (2024).

In 2022, we completed the economic impact of the Great Lakes/St. Lawrence Seaway Transportation System, which included the development of 40 detailed economic models for the key U.S. and Canadian Ports in terms of tonnage volume, and the development of generic port model structures which were used to estimate the economic impact of individual terminals and smaller ports located throughout the Great Lakes. The generic models were constructed for large, medium and small port operations, and used to estimate, along with the 408 individual port models, the total economic impact of the Great Lakes/St. Lawrence Seaway Transportation System. We conducted this same bi-national impact study in 2010 and 2018 and are slated to develop a similar study in 2027. For the American Association of Port Authorities, Martin Associates also developed the 2018 economic impact analysis of the U.S. coastal ports. We have conducted similar studies for AAPA in 2007 and 2015. The results of statewide and regional economic impact studies have been used to demonstrate the importance of the port system to the state legislature, as well as for lobbying purposes at the federal level.

For the Pacific Maritime Association, Martin Associates developed the economic impact of the West Coast ports in 2021, which was used in the ILWU/PMA contract negotiations. In addition, individual models were developed at the national and state levels for California, Oregon and Washington, and have been used to estimate the economic impact of diversions of cargo activity to 142
21 Canadian, East and Gulf Coast ports as the result of the West Coast congestion issues in 2014 and 2015, as well as currently due to the supply chain congestion at the San Pedro Bay Ports as well as diversions due to potential labor actions during the 2022 ILWU contract negotiations.

Our impact studies have been a continued featured topic at many of the American Association of Port Authorities conferences. The impact models have been subject to review by the U.S. Council of Economic Advisors, the Federal Reserve Board and the International Trade Commission. The seaport impact model has been used to assess the economic impacts of the West Coast port shutdown in 2002, the impacts of the imposition of the Section 201 Steel Import Quotas, and the potential impact of port closures due to national security issues. Our economic impact models were used by the Bush Administration in enacting the Taft Hartley Act during the 2002 West Coast shutdown and also the Bush Administration to revoke the Section 201 Steel Import Quotas. We have also estimated the economic impacts of the section 232 steel import quotas for the American Institute for International Steel (2017).

Martin Associates has recently been estimating the economic impacts of seaport activity at state and federal legislative districts levels within a state, as well as within states throughout the U.S.

In 2022 we completed the economic impact analysis of the Port of Houston, and estimated the jobs, income economic output and taxes throughout the U.S. at the county level of detail, by commodity group. These impacts at the county level of detail were then used to estimate the economic impacts of the Port of Houston on state congressional districts which are then used to educate lawmakers on the importance of infrastructure investments as well as navigational projects, and the impact on economically disadvantaged communities and minority workforces. We developed similar economic impacts at the State and Federal legislative districts for our recent economic impact study of the Port of Oakland, as well as evaluated the economic impact of the Port of Oakland on disadvantaged communities and specific occupational categories. We just completed a similar impact analysis of the Port of New Orleans the Port of Lake Charles on state and federal legislative districts within Louisiana as well as by state throughout the U.S. We conducted a similar analysis at the legislative level of detail and by state for the Port of Mobile, and will be updating that study in 2026.

Cruise/Passenger Impact Analysis
Martin Associates has developed cruise economic impact models for several ports throughout the U.S. The impact analysis includes a detailed survey of embarking passengers and crew from several of the key cruise services as well as the development of detailed disbursement accounts for specific type of cruise ship calling at the ports. These expenditure profiles are developed for home port cruises as well as port-of-call cruises.

The cruise impact model can be used to test the sensitivity of the impacts due to vessel size, routing, percent of fly-in passengers, and the number of nights stayed pre and post cruise, etc. Cruise models are also used with cargo models to evaluate alternative uses of waterfront land for cargo or cruise terminal development. This methodology is used to estimate the impact of cruise business at the Ports of Miami, Port Everglades, Tampa, Port Canaveral, Jacksonville, Baltimore, Boston, Los Angeles, Seattle, San Francisco, Norfolk, Galveston, Houston, and Philadelphia. Martin Associates also provides the economic impact consulting for Disney Cruises.

Our cruise model was used by the Florida DOT in demonstrating the economic impact of COVID-19 on the state’s cruise industry. We also use a derivation of this model to assess the impacts 143
22 of ferry operations, including the Washington State Ferry operations, as well as San Francisco Bay ferry operations and the impact of potential ferry operations on the Great Lakes, and Connecticut to New York ferry operations. We are currently conducting the economic impact analysis of cruise activity at the Port of San Francisco.

Fishing Impacts
Martin Associates has developed a detailed model of commercial fishing activity at the Port of Seattle’s Fisherman’s Terminal and Elliott Bay and the Maritime Industrial Center, and a similar commercial fishing and fish processing economic impact model for the Port of San Francisco. Martin Associates has also developed such commercial fishing models for the Port of Los Angeles, the Port of Galveston, Port LaVaca/Port Comfort, the Port of Brownsville, Port of Bellingham, Grays Harbor, Port of Victoria, New Bedford (MA), Port of Ilwaco and Chinook, Port Townsend and the Port of Boston. We just completed the economic impacts of commercial and recreational fishing activity including fishing tournaments within the state of Alabama and are currently conducting such a study for all ports and waterways within the state of Texas. These models are used to assess the impacts of changes in the composition of the commercial fishing fleet as well as the impact of changes in commercial fishing regulations and the impact of changes in alternative uses for commercial fishing fleet slips and berths.

Recreational Boating Impact Analysis
Martin Associates has developed a model to measure the impacts of recreational boating. The model not only addresses the local employment at marinas and support services at the marinas, but also the impact of local purchases to support the recreational boating operations. These include repairs and supplies, retail purchases as well as storage. We have developed economic impact studies for the marinas owned by the Port of San Francisco, the Port of Tacoma, the Port of Seattle, the Port of Everett, the Port of Olympia, Port of Los Angeles, the Port of Bellingham, and the Port of Boston.

In 2024 we estimated the economic impacts of recreational boating on all of Alabama waterways and are now conducting a similar study of recreational boating in Texas for the Texas Department of Transportation.

Shipyard Impact Analysis
Martin Associates has developed detailed ship building and repair economic impact models that are used to measure the jobs, revenue, income and tax impacts of shipyard activity, by type of activity –new building, ship and barge repair, modular construction, military versus cargo versus passenger ships, etc. These models have been developed for shipyards at the Port of Portland, Port of Tampa, Port of Seattle, Port of San Francisco, Port of Erie and the Port of Philadelphia. We have used the shipyard model to estimate the economic impacts of the opening of a new shipyard (Meyer Werft Yard) in Philadelphia, as well as to monitor the on-going dry-docking activities at the Port of San Francisco owned shipyard.

Martin Associates along with former Secretary of the Navy Donald Winter, is about to start a major shipbuilding strategy for the Great lakes states in order to position the states’ shipyards and key industries to successfully participate in the Nation’s shipbuilding program. 144
23 Commercial and Industrial Real Estate Impacts
Martin Associates has developed a methodology for measuring the economic impacts of commercial and industrial real estate development on port owned property for the ports including Los Angeles, Seattle, Grays Harbor, San Francisco, Portland, Bellingham, Everett, Olympia, Tampa Bay, Palm Beach, Boston, and Oakland. These studies assess alternative development of waterfront land and evaluate the economic impacts associated with industrial and commercial real estate development. In Oakland, this model was used to assess the impact of developing a resort hotel vs. reserving the land for future maritime uses. In Seattle, the impact models have been used to assess the impact of developing a parcel of land as a container facility or a ship repair yard, as well as the development of the Central City Waterfront, including a museum, hotel, restaurant, world trade center and condominium development. We completed a detailed distribution impact model for the Port of Portland, and this model was used to identify the potential impacts of new distribution centers, by type of distribution activity. The distribution impact model can isolate the economic impacts (including jobs, income, taxes, typical local purchases, trucking, service areas, etc.) of specific types of distribution activity – retail FAK, perishables/groceries, steel, apparel, bulk feeds. The model is also designed to identify the key factors that drive the selection process of specific types of distribution activities, including local market, equipment availability, ocean carrier service, local labor costs and taxes.

Additionally, we completed an analysis of riverboat gambling for the Port of Philadelphia, and the impact models were used to assess the relative economic benefits of marine terminal operations vs. riverboat gaming and hotel development. We have also developed a similar analysis to measure the economic impacts of industrial and economic development in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania.

Airport Economic Studies
Martin Associates provides economic impact services to the majority of the nation’s leading airports. These include Atlanta-Hartsfield International Airport, Baltimore-Washington International Airport, Denver International Airport and Stapleton International Airport, Harrisburg International Airport, Miami International Airport, Milwaukee International Airport, Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport, Nashville International Airport, Oakland International Airport, Portland International Airport, San Francisco International Airport, San Jose International Airport, SeattleTacoma International Airport, Toronto’s Lester Pearson International Airport, Fresno Yosemite International Airport, Washington Dulles International Airport, and Regan National Airport. We have just been retained by the Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport. 145
24 REFERENCES FOR MARTIN ASSOCIATES CHECK THESE

1. Economic, Market and Planning studies for JAXPORT- Beth McCague, CFO, (904)357-3044, [email protected]

2. Economic, Market and Planning studies for Baltimore – Dominic Scurti, Deputy Director of Planning, (410)385-4439, [email protected]

3. Economic studies for the Pacific Maritime Association- Craig Epperson, Senior Vice President, (415)576-3246, [email protected]

4. Economic Studies for Port of Mobile –Maggie Oliver, VP, Communications and Federal Affairs, (251)441-8130, [email protected]

5. Economic Impact of the Port of New Orleans - Matthew Gresham, Chief Government Affairs Officer, (504)528-3255, [email protected]

6. Economic Impact and strategic Planning for the Port of Lake Charles – Richert Self, Executive Director, (337)493-3501, [email protected]

7. Economic Impact studies for Port Hueneme, Kristin Decas, CEO/Port Director, (805)488- 3677, [email protected]

8. Economic, Market and Planning Studies for Tampa - Ram Kancharla, VP Planning and Development, (813)905-5162, [email protected]

9. Economic, Market and Planning Studies for PortMaimi – Andy Hecker, CFO, (305)347-4907, [email protected], Alissa Penaloza, Chief Strategy Officer, (305)329-4035, [email protected]

10. Economic, Market and Planning studies for Port of Houston, Jordan Frisby, Chief of Staff, (713)670-2550, [email protected], Charlie Jenkins, CEO, [email protected], John Mosley, CCO, [email protected]
146
25 147
26 148
Contract No: ________ For the Contract between the City of Richmond and
_____________________________

EXHIBIT B

PAYMENT PROVISIONS

1. COMPENSATION TO CONTRACTOR:
a. Provided Contractor is not in default under this Contract, Contractor shall be compensated in the manner set forth herein.
b. All payments made pursuant to this Contract shall be subject to the Contract Payment Limit. The Payment Limit includes expenses (phones, photocopying, meals and travel, etc.). Invoices shall be adequately detailed, based on accurate records, and be in a form reasonably satisfactory to the City. Contractor may be required to provide back-up material upon request. c. All City vendors receiving new contracts shall sign up to receive electronic payments through the City’s Automated Clearinghouse (ACH) payments service/provider.

2. SUBMISSION OF INVOICES:

Contractor shall submit timely invoices by email to
[email protected] and/or to the following address:

Attention: City of Richmond Finance/Account Payable
Project Manager: _______________________
P.O. Box 4046
Richmond, CA 94804

3. All invoices that are submitted by Contractor shall be subject to the approval of the City Project Manager, _______________________, before payments shall be authorized.
a. The City will pay invoice(s) within 45 days after completion of services to the City’s satisfaction. The City shall not pay late fees or interest.
b. All appropriate permits, certificates, and licenses, including a City business license shall be obtained and maintained for the duration of this Contract before any payment is authorized.

4. All insurance coverage required by this Contract shall be provided by the Contractor before this Contract is executed by the City. The insurance coverage required by this Contract shall be maintained by Contractor for the duration of this Contract and must be in place before any payment is authorized.

Charles Gerard Charles Gerard John C. Martin Associates, LLC (Martin Associat 149
Contract No: ________ For the Contract between the City of Richmond and
_____________________________

EXHIBIT C

AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVES AND NOTICES

1. All required written notices shall be delivered: (i) by hand; or (ii) sent by registered, express, or certified mail, with return receipt requested or with delivery confirmation requested from the U.S. postal service; or (iii) sent by overnight or same day courier service at the party’s respective address listed in this Section.

2. Each notice shall be deemed to have been received on the earlier to occur of:
actual delivery or the date on which delivery is refused; or three (3) days after notice is deposited in the U.S. mail or with a courier service in the manner described above (Sundays and City holidays excepted).

3. Either party may, at any time, change its notice address (other than to a post office box address) by giving the other party three (3) days prior written notice of the new address.

4. All notices, demands, requests, or approvals from Contractor to the City shall be addressed to the City at:

City of Richmond
450 Civic Center Plaza
Richmond, CA 94804
Email: ________________________________________________

5. All notices, demands, requests, or approvals from the City to Contractor shall be addressed to Contractor at:

Attn:

Email: ________________________________________________ Charles Gerard [email protected] John C. Martin Associates, LLC (Martin Associat John C. Martin Associates, LLC (Martin Associates) 941 Wheatland Avenue, Ste. 203 Lancaster, PA, 17603 [email protected] 150
Contract No: ________ For the Contract between the City of Richmond and
_____________________________

EXHIBIT D

GENERAL CONDITIONS

1. INDEPENDENT PARTIES:

Contractor hereby declares that Contractor is engaged as an independent business and Contractor agrees to perform the services as an independent contractor.

The manner and means of conducting the services and tasks are under the control of Contractor except to the extent they are limited by statute, rule or regulation and the express terms of this Contract. No civil service status or other right of employment will be acquired by virtue of Contractor’s services. None of the benefits provided by the City to its employees, including but not limited to unemployment insurance, workers’ compensation plans, vacation and sick leave, are available from the City to Contractor, its employees or agents. Deductions shall not be made for any state or federal taxes, FICA payments, PERS payments, or other purposes normally associated with an employer-employee relationship from any compensation due to Contractor. Payments of the above items, if required, are the responsibility of Contractor.

2. TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE:

Contractor and the City agree that time is of the essence regarding the performance of this Contract.

3. STANDARD OF CARE:

Contractor agrees to perform all services hereunder in a manner commensurate with the prevailing standards of like professionals or service Contractors, as applicable, in the San Francisco Bay Area and agrees that all services shall be performed by qualified and experienced personnel who are not employed by the City.

4. IMMIGRATION REFORM AND CONTROL ACT (IRCA):

Contractor assumes all responsibility for verifying the identity and employment authorization of all of its employees performing work hereunder, pursuant to all applicable IRCA or other federal, or state rules and regulations. Contractor shall indemnify, defend, and hold the City harmless from and against any loss, damage, liability, costs or expenses arising from any noncompliance of this provision by Contractor.

5. NON-DISCRIMINATION:

Consistent with the City’s policy and state and federal law that harassment and discrimination are unacceptable conduct, Contractor and its employees, contractors, and agents shall not harass or discriminate against any job applicant, City employee, or any other person on the basis of any kind of any statutorily (federal, state or local) protected class, including but not limited to: race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, John C. Martin Associates, LLC (Martin Associat
151
Contract No: ________ For the Contract between the City of Richmond and
_____________________________
disability (both mental and physical) including HIV and AIDS, medical condition (e.g. cancer), genetic information, marital status, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, age, sexual orientation, pregnancy, political affiliation, military and veteran status or legitimate union activities. Contractor agrees that any violation of this provision shall constitute a material breach of this Contract.

6. CITY PROPERTY:
a. Each and every report, draft, work product, map, record, applicable plans, drawings, calculation, data, specification, video, graphic, or any other material or document produced, prepared or caused to be prepared by Contractor pursuant to or in connection with this Contract shall be the exclusive property of the City. b. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Contractor shall not be obligated to provide to City proprietary software or data which Contractor has developed or had developed for Contractor's own use; provided, however, that Contractor shall, pursuant to Section 11 below, indemnify, defend and hold the City harmless from and against any discovery or Public Records Act request seeking the disclosure of such proprietary software or data. c. No report, information or other data given to or prepared or assembled by Contractor pursuant to this Contract shall be made available to any individual or organization by Contractor without prior approval of the City Manager or their designee. d. Contractor shall, at such time and in such form as City Manager or their designee may require, furnish reports concerning the status of services and tasks required under this Contract.

7. RECORDS:
a. Contractor shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to the services, tasks, work, documents and data in sufficient detail to permit an evaluation of Contractor’s performance under the Contract, as well as maintain books and records related to sales, costs, expenses, receipts and other such information required by the City that relate to the performance of the services and tasks under this Contract (collectively the “Records”).
b. All Records shall be maintained in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and shall be clearly identified and readily accessible. Contractor shall provide free access to the Records to the representatives of the City or its designees during regular business hours upon reasonable prior notice. The City has the right to examine and audit the Records, and to make copies or transcripts therefrom as necessary, and to allow inspection of all proceedings and activities related to this Contract. Such Records, together with supporting documents, shall be kept separate from other documents and records and shall be maintained by Contractor for a period of five (5) years after receipt of final payment.

John C. Martin Associates, LLC (Martin Associat
152
Contract No: ________ For the Contract between the City of Richmond and
_____________________________
c. If supplemental examination or audit of the Records is necessary due to concerns raised by the City’s preliminary examination or audit of records, and the City’s supplemental examination or audit of the records discloses a failure to adhere to appropriate internal financial controls, or other breach of this Contract or failure to act in good faith, then Contractor shall reimburse the City for all reasonable costs and expenses associated with the supplemental examination or audit.

8. PERMITS AND LICENSES:

Contractor, at its sole expense, shall obtain and maintain during the term of this Contract, all appropriate permits, certificates and licenses, including a City business license, required in connection with the performance of the services and tasks hereunder.

The failure to obtain such permits and licenses shall be a material breach of this Contract and grounds for immediate termination by City; provided, however, that City may waive the business license requirement in writing under unusual or extraordinary circumstances without necessitating any modification of this Contract to reflect such waiver.

9. TERMINATION:
a. Termination Without Default. Notwithstanding any provision herein to the contrary, the City may, in its sole and absolute discretion and without cause, terminate this Contract at any time prior to completion by Contractor of the project or services hereunder immediately upon transmission of written notice to Contractor as provided in Exhibit C “Authorized Representatives and Notices”.
b. Termination in the Event of Default. Should Contractor fail to perform any of its obligations hereunder, within the time and in the manner provided or otherwise violate any of the terms of this Contract, City may immediately terminate this Contract by giving written notice of such termination, stating the reasons for such termination. Contractor shall be compensated as provided in Exhibit B; provided, however, there shall be deducted from such amount the amount of damage, including attorney's fees, expert witness fees and costs, if any, sustained by City by virtue of Contractor's breach of this Contract. Additionally, in the event of such termination, the City may proceed with the work in any reasonable manner it chooses.

10. CONFLICT OF INTEREST:

Contractor acknowledges, represents and warrants that Contractor shall avoid all conflicts of interest (as defined under any federal, state or local statute, rule or regulation, or at common law) with respect to this Contract. Contractor further acknowledges, represents and warrants that no City official or employee has any economic interest, as defined in Title 2, California Code of Regulations §§ 18703.1 through 18703.5, with Contractor that would invalidate this Contract. Contractor acknowledges that in the event that Contractor shall be found by any judicial or administrative body to have any conflict of interest (as defined above) with respect to this Contract, all consideration received under John C. Martin Associates, LLC (Martin Associat
153
Contract No: ________ For the Contract between the City of Richmond and
_____________________________
this Contract shall be forfeited and returned to City forthwith. This provision shall survive the termination of this Contract for one (1) year.

11. HOLD HARMLESS:
a. To the fullest extent permitted by law, Contractor shall indemnify, defend (with counsel acceptable to the City) and hold harmless the City, its City Council, boards, commissions, officials, employees, agents and volunteers (“Indemnitees”) from and against any and all loss, damages, liability, obligations, claims, suits, judgments, costs and expenses whatsoever, including attorney’s fees and costs of litigation (“Claims”), arising from or in any manner connected to Contractor’s performance of its obligations under this Contract or failure to comply with any of its obligations under this Contract or out of the operations conducted by Contractor even if the City is found to have been negligent. If the Claims filed against Indemnitees allege negligence, recklessness or willful misconduct on the part of Contractor, Contractor shall have no right of reimbursement against Indemnitees for the costs of defense even if negligence, recklessness or willful misconduct is not found on the part of Contractor. Contractor shall not have any obligations to indemnify Indemnitees if the loss or damage is found to have resulted solely from the negligence or the willful misconduct of the City. The defense and indemnification obligations of this Contract are undertaken in addition to, and shall not in any way be limited by, the insurance obligations contained in this Contract. b. This indemnification obligation shall survive this Contract and shall not be limited by any term of any insurance policy required under this Contract; provided however, that if this Contract is for design professional services, this indemnity provision is limited to claims that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of the design professional (as defined in California Civil Code section 2782.8).

12. LIMITATIONS UPON SUBCONTRACTING AND ASSIGNMENT:
a. This Contract binds the heirs, successors, assigns and representatives of Contractor. The Contractor shall not enter into subcontracts for any work contemplated under this Contract and shall not assign this Contract, nor any portion hereof or monies due or to become due, without the prior written consent of the City Council or its designee.
b. Contractor shall not assign, sublease, hypothecate, or transfer this Contract, or any interest therein, directly or indirectly, by operation of law or otherwise, without prior written consent of the City Manager. Contractor shall submit a written request for consent to transfer to the City Manager at least thirty (30) days in advance of the desired transfer.

The City Manager or their designee may consent or reject such request in their sole and absolute discretion. Any attempt to do so without said consent shall be null and void, and any assignee, sublessee, hypothecate or transferee shall acquire no right or interest by reason of such attempted assignment, hypothecation or transfer. However, claims for John C. Martin Associates, LLC (Martin Associat
154
Contract No: ________ For the Contract between the City of Richmond and
_____________________________
money against the City under this Contract may be assigned by Contractor to a bank, trust company or other financial institution without prior written consent. c. The sale, assignment, transfer or other disposition of any of the issued and outstanding capital stock of Contractor (if applicable), or of the interest of any general partner or joint venturer or syndicate member if Contractor is a partnership or jointventure or syndicate, which shall result in a change of control of Contractor, shall be deemed an assignment. For this purpose, control shall mean fifty percent or more of the voting power or twenty-five percent or more of the assets of the corporation, partnership or joint-venture.
d. Only those persons and/or businesses whose names and resumés are attached to this Contract shall be used in the performance of this Contract. However, if after the start of this Contract, Contractor wishes to use sub-contractors, at no additional costs to the City, then Contractor shall submit a written request for consent to add subcontractors including the names of the sub-contractors and the reasons for the request to the City Manager at least five (5) days in advance. The City Manager may consent or reject such requests in their sole and absolute discretion. e. Each sub-contractor shall be required to furnish proof of workers’ compensation insurance and shall also be required to carry general, automobile and professional liability insurance (as applicable) in reasonable conformity to the insurance carried by Contractor.
f. In addition, any tasks or services performed by sub-contractors shall be subject to each provision of this Contract. Contractor shall include the following language in their Contract with any sub-contractor: “Sub-Contractors hired by Contractor agree to be bound to Contractor and the City in the same manner and to the same extent as Contractor is bound to the City.”
g. The requirements in this Section 12 shall not apply to persons who are merely providing materials, supplies, data or information that Contractor then analyzes and incorporates into its work product.

13. SAFETY:
a. Contractor acknowledges that the City is committed to the highest standards of workplace safety. Contractor will be solely and completely responsible for conditions of all vehicles owned or operated by Contractor, including the safety of all persons and property during performance of the services and tasks under this Contract.

Contractor shall assume sole and complete responsibility for the safety of Contractor's employees and any of subcontractor's employees This requirement will apply continuously and not be limited to normal working hours. In addition, Contractor will comply with all safety provisions in conformance with U.S. Department of Labor Occupational Safety and Health Act, any equivalent state law, and all other applicable John C. Martin Associates, LLC (Martin Associat
155
Contract No: ________ For the Contract between the City of Richmond and
_____________________________
federal, state, county and local laws, ordinances, codes, and any regulations that may be detailed in other parts of the Contract. Where any of these are in conflict, the more stringent requirements will be followed. Contractor’s failure to thoroughly familiarize itself with the aforementioned safety provisions will not relieve it from compliance with the obligations and penalties set forth herein.
b. Contractor will immediately notify the City (in no event less than 24 hours) of any incident of death, serious personal injury or substantial property damage that occurs in connection with the performance of this Contract. Contractor will promptly submit to the City a written report of all incidents that occur in connection with this Contract. This report must include the following information: (i) name and address of injured or deceased person(s); (ii) name and address of Contractor’s employee(s) involved in the incident; (iii) name and address of Contractor’s liability insurance carrier; (iv) a detailed description of the incident; and (v) a police report.
c. Contractor acknowledges that the City shall have the right to impose, at the City’s sole discretion, requirements that it deems are necessary to protect the health and safety of the City employees, residents, and visitors. Contractor agrees to comply with all such requirements, including, but not limited to, mandatory vaccinations, the use of personal protective equipment (e.g. masks), physical distancing, and health screenings.

Contractor also agrees to make available to the City, at the City’s request, records to demonstrate Contractor’s compliance with this Section.

14. INSURANCE:

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

15. COMPLIANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE LAWS:
a. During the term of this Contract, Contractor shall keep fully informed of all existing and future state and federal laws and all municipal ordinances and regulations of the City of Richmond which affect the manner in which the services or tasks are to be performed by Contractor, as well as all such orders and decrees of bodies or tribunals having any jurisdiction or authority over the same. Contractor shall comply with all applicable laws, state and federal and all ordinances, rules and regulations enacted or issued by the City. Compliance under this provision includes compliance with all provisions of the Richmond Municipal Code ("Municipal Code"), including Chapters 2.50,

2.52, 2.56, and 2.60, if applicable.
b. Contractor acknowledges that under § 2.60.070 of the Municipal Code ("Living Wage Ordinance"), Contractor is required to provide the City with documents and information verifying its compliance with the Living Wage Ordinance. Contractor shall notify each of its affected employees with regards to the wages that are required to be paid pursuant to the Living Wage Ordinance as prescribed in § 2.60.070 of the Municipal Code.

John C. Martin Associates, LLC (Martin Associat
156
Contract No: ________ For the Contract between the City of Richmond and
_____________________________
c. Contractor shall comply with § 2.28.030 of the Municipal Code, obligating every Contractor or sub-Contractor under an agreement or sub-agreement with the City for public works, goods or services to refrain from discriminatory employment or practices on the basis of race, color, sex, sexual orientation, religious creed, national origin or ancestry of any employee, any applicant for employment or any potential sub-contractor. d. Contractor acknowledges that the City’s Drug Free Workplace Policy, Violence in the Workplace Policy and the Policy Against Workplace Harassment, are available on the City’s website at http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/workplacepolicies.

Contractor agrees to abide by the terms and conditions of said policies.

16. INTEGRATED CONTRACT:

The Recitals and exhibits are a material part of this Contract and are expressly incorporated herein. This Contract represents the full and complete understanding of every kind or nature whatsoever between the parties hereto, and all preliminary negotiations and agreements of whatsoever kind or nature are merged herein. No verbal agreement or implied covenant shall be held to vary the provisions hereof. Any modification of this Contract will be effective only by written execution signed by both the City and Contractor.

17. CONFLICTING PROVISIONS:

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

18. FORCE MAJEURE:

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

19. CONFLICT OF LAW:

This Contract shall be interpreted under, and enforced by the laws of the State of John C. Martin Associates, LLC (Martin Associat
157
Contract No: ________ For the Contract between the City of Richmond and
_____________________________
California without regard to any choice of law rules which may direct the application of laws of another jurisdiction. The Contract and obligations of the parties are subject to all valid laws, orders, rules, and regulations of the authorities having jurisdiction over this Contract (or the successors of those authorities). Any suits brought pursuant to this Contract shall be filed with the courts of the County of Contra Costa, State of California.

20. CLAIMS:

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

21. INTERPRETATION:

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

22. WARRANTY:

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

23. SEVERABILITY:

In the event that any of the provisions or portions or applications thereof of this Contract are held to be unenforceable or invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, City and Contractor shall negotiate an equitable adjustment in the provisions of the Contract with a view toward effecting the purpose of this Contract, and the validity and enforceability of the remaining provisions or portions or applications thereof, shall not be affected thereby.

24. AUTHORITY:

City warrants and represents that the signatory hereto (the Mayor of the City of Richmond or the City Manager) is duly authorized to enter into and execute this Contract on behalf of City. The party signing on behalf of Contractor warrants and represents that they are duly authorized to enter into and execute this Contract on behalf of Contractor, John C. Martin Associates, LLC (Martin Associat
158
Contract No: ________ For the Contract between the City of Richmond and
_____________________________
and shall be personally liable to City if they are not duly authorized to enter into and execute this Contract on behalf of Contractor.

25. WAIVER:

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

26. COUNTERPARTS:

This Contract may be executed in any number of counterparts (including by fax, PDF, DocuSign, or other electronic means), each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which shall constitute one and the same instrument.

27. SANCTUARY CITY CONTRACTING ORDINANCE (SCCO):

The Richmond Sanctuary City Contracting Ordinance No. 12-18 prohibits the City from granting and or retaining contracts with any person or entity that provides Data Broker or Extreme Vetting services to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Division of the United States Department of Homeland Security (“ICE”). Contractor must submit the Sanctuary City Compliance Statement, attached hereto as Exhibit G.

John C. Martin Associates, LLC (Martin Associat
159
Contract No: ________ For the Contract between the City of Richmond and
_____________________________

EXHIBIT E

SPECIAL CONDITIONS
The General Conditions are hereby amended to include the following modifications and/or provisions (if applicable, otherwise please state “NONE”):

John C. Martin Associates, LLC (Martin Associates)
NONE.
160
Contract No: ________ For the Contract between the City of Richmond and
_____________________________

EXHIBIT F

INSURANCE PROVISIONS
☐ CHECK HERE IF RISK MANAGEMENT HAS APPROVED WAIVING INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR THIS CONTRACT.

1. CERTIFICATES: Before the commencement of the terms of this Contract, and during the entire term of this Contract and any extension or modification thereof, Contractor shall furnish the City’s Risk Manager with certificates showing the type, amount, class of operations covered, effective dates and dates of expiration of insurance coverage in compliance with coverage requirements set forth by the City and incorporated herein.

Such certificates, which do not limit Contractor’s indemnification, shall also contain substantially the following statement:
“Should any of the above insurance covered by this certificate be canceled or coverage reduced before the expiration date thereof, the insurer affording coverage shall provide thirty (30) days’ advance written notice to the City of Richmond.

Attention: Risk Manager.”
Contractor shall maintain in force at all times during the performance of this Contract all appropriate coverage of insurance required by this Contract with an insurance company licensed to offer insurance business in the State of California with a current A.M. Best’s rating of no less than A:VII or Standard & Poor’s Rating (if rated) of at least BBB unless otherwise acceptable to the City. Contractor shall deliver updated insurance certificates to the City at the address set forth in Exhibit C prior to the expiration of the existing insurance certificate for the duration of the term of Contract.

Endorsements naming the City, its City Council, boards, commissions, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers as additional insured shall be submitted with the insurance certificates.

2. COVERAGE REQUIREMENTS: The City’s insurance requirements depend upon the type of service being provided and/or the provider. The City’s insurance requirements will fall into one of the following categories (unless otherwise provided by the City):

Consultants and Contractors – Type 1
Professional Services – Type 2
Environmental Risk/Hazardous Waste Material – Type 3
Lease of City Property – Type 4
Vendors, Suppliers, Small Grant Recipients & Nonprofit Organizations – Type 5 Transportation Providers – Type 6
Professional Services Pyrotechnics – Type 7
Cyber and I.T. Risks – Type 8
John C. Martin Associates, LLC (Martin Associates)
161
Contract No: ________ For the Contract between the City of Richmond and
_____________________________
The insurance requirements classification applicable to this Contract shall be attached to this Exhibit F and made a part hereof.

3. FAILURE TO SECURE: If Contractor at any time during the term hereof should fail to secure or maintain the foregoing insurance, the City shall be permitted to obtain such insurance in Contractor’s name or as an agent of Contractor and shall be compensated by Contractor for the costs of the insurance premiums at the maximum rate permitted by law and computed from the date written notice is received that the premiums have not been paid.

4. SUFFICIENCY OF INSURANCE: The insurance limits required by the City are not represented as being sufficient to protect Contractor. Contractor is advised to consult Contractor’s insurance broker to determine adequate coverage for Contractor. The coverage and limits shall be (1) the minimum coverage and limits specified in this Contract; or (2) the broader coverage and maximum limits of the coverage carried by or available to Contractor; whichever is greater.

INSERT INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS CLASSIFICATION APPLICABLE TO THIS CONTRACT: (IF NECESSARY, CONFIRM WITH RISK MANAGER)
John C. Martin Associates, LLC (Martin Associates)
162
___ Exhibit F
___ Section 8
City of Richmond - Insurance Requirements - Type 2:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Policy shall be endorsed to name the City of Richmond as an additional insured per the conditions detailed below.
163
___ Exhibit F
___ Section 8
City of Richmond - Insurance Requirements - Type 2:

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

PROJECT COST REQUIRED LIMIT
$0 - $1 million $1 million p/o
$1 million - $5 million $2 million p/o
Over $5 million $5 million p/o

Professional Liability or Errors &
Omissions Liability –
Required for all professionals
including architects, engineers,
consultants, construction
management, counselors, medical
professionals, hospitals, clinics,
attorneys and accountants, & other
consultants as may be required by
the City.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Umbrella/Excess Liability Policies
If an Umbrella or Excess Liability Policy is used to meet the liability limits, coverage shall be as broad as specified for underlying coverage’s and cover those insured in the underlying policies. 164
___ Exhibit F
___ Section 8
City of Richmond - Insurance Requirements - Type 2:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Consistent with Public Policy
The insuring provisions, insofar as they may be judged to be against public policy shall be void and unenforceable only to the minimum extent necessary so that the remaining terms and provisions herein may be consistent with public policy and thus enforceable.
165
Contract No: ________ For the Contract between the City of Richmond and
_____________________________

EXHIBIT G

SANCTUARY CITY COMPLIANCE STATEMENT
The undersigned, (hereafter "Contractor"), has had an opportunity to review the requirements of City of Richmond Ordinance 12-18 (hereafter "Sanctuary City Contracting Ordinance" or “SCCO”).

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

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

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

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

Printed Name: Title:

Signed: Date:

Business Entity:

John C. Martin Associates, LLC (Martin Associates)
166