Richmond City Council
July 21, 2026

July 21, 2026

Mayor's Office

DATE: July 21, 2026
TO: Members of the City Council
FROM:

Eduardo Martinez, Mayor

Subject: Ad Hoc Committee Formation for City Council Rules of Procedure and Order Amendments
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no direct fiscal impact associated with the formation of the ad hoc committee. Any future costs
related to implementing recommended changes will be
evaluated as part of subsequent Council actions.

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

May 19, 2026

STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:

On May 19, 2026, the City Council approved an item
requesting that the mayor appoint an ad hoc committee
to work with staff to develop proposed amendments to
the City Council Rules of Procedure and Order.

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

APPOINT the mayor, vice mayor, city attorney, city clerk, and city manager to an ad hoc committee to develop
proposed amendments to the City Council Rules of
Procedure and Order, along with other operational
refinements, to bring forward to the full City Council for approval within 60 days of its formation – Mayor’s Office (Mayor Eduardo Martinez 510-620-6502).

DISCUSSION:

The rules concerning the conduct of public meetings are set forth in Government Code § 54954(d), which states “Each legislative body of a local agency . . . shall provide by ordinance, resolution, bylaw or whatever other rule is required for the conduct of AGENDA
REPORT
788

July 21, 2026
business by that body, the time and place for holding regular meetings.” (“Brown Act”).

For the Richmond City Council, these rules of procedure are set forth in the City Council Rules of Procedure, adopted and amended from time to time by resolution. This is compliant with the Brown Act.

The City Council has recognized the necessity to review and refine its Rules of Procedure and Order to improve operational efficiency. On May 19, 2026, the Council authorized Item N.10.a (Ad-Hoc Committee to Amend City Council Rules of Procedure and Order) on the Consent Calendar, directing the mayor to establish an ad hoc committee. This committee is tasked with collaborating with the city clerk, city attorney, and city manager to develop proposed amendments and enhancements to operations. The recommended modifications will be presented to the full City Council for consideration within 60 days following the appointment of the committee.

Approval of this item will officially confirm the action taken by the City Council on May 19, 2026.

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:

None.
789

July 21, 2026

Mayor's Office

DATE: July 21, 2026
TO: Members of the City Council
FROM: Mayor Martinez and Councilmember Bana
SUBJECT: Appointment of Amanda Campbell to the Richmond Fund for Children and Youth Oversight Board
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no financial impact associated with this item.

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

None.

STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:

Amanda Campbell is applying to serve on the Richmond
Fund for Children and Youth Oversight Board.

RECOMMENDED ACTION: APPOINT Amanda Campbell to the Richmond Fund for Children and Youth Oversight Board to a vacant seat with a term ending December 2, 2027 – Mayor’s Office
(Mayor Eduardo Martinez 510-620-6503/Councilmember
Soheila Bana 510-620-6743).

DISCUSSION:

Amanda B. Campbell is recommended for appointment to the Richmond Fund for Children and Youth Oversight Board. She is a dedicated community leader with more than 20 years of experience supporting the well-being of children, youth, and families.

As a Licensed Marriage and Family Therapist and Co-Founder/Executive Director of The Center for Early Childhood Connections, she has developed community-based programs and partnerships that strengthen early childhood development, family well- AGENDA
REPORT
790

July 21, 2026
being, and access to supportive services for caregivers. She also serves on the Contra Costa College Early Childhood Education Advisory Board, where she has contributed her expertise since 2015.

Ms. Campbell holds undergraduate degrees in Fine Arts and Psychology from New College of California and a master's degree in Counseling Psychology from JFK University. Her professional experience includes collaborating with schools, childcare providers, and community organizations to expand resources and improve outcomes for children and families.

As a Richmond resident and parent, Ms. Campbell brings both professional expertise and lived experience to the Oversight Board. She is committed to ensuring that Richmond's children and youth have access to safe, supportive, and inclusive opportunities that foster healthy development, strengthen families, and empower young people to thrive. Her extensive experience in nonprofit leadership, mental health, early childhood development, and community collaboration will be a valuable asset to the Richmond Fund for Children and Youth Oversight Board.

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:

Attachment 1 – Amanda Campbell’s redacted application

791
Print
Richmond Fund for Children and Youth Oversight Board Application Please check all the boxes to indicate acknowledgment of the following statements:** I understand the responsibilities, powers, and functions of the Richmond Fund for Children and Youth Oversight Board and have reviewed the Department of Children and Youth webpage I am able to attend regular meetings of the Oversight Board which take place the first Monday of each month at 6:00 PM
Participation on the Oversight Board may require filing of the Fair Political Practices Commission’s Statements of Economic Interest (Form 700). If necessary, I will comply with all filing obligations By checking the "I agree" box below, you agree and acknowledge that 1) your application will not be signed in the sense of a traditional paper document, 2) by signing in this alternate manner, you authorize your electronic signature to be valid and binding upon you to the same force and effect as a handwritten signature, and 3) you may still be required to provide a traditional signature at a later date.*
I agree
To the best of my knowledge, the information that is provided is true and correct:

Richmond Fund for Children and Youth Oversight Board
Application - Submission #1287635
Date Submitted: 3/19/2026
792
Name (First M. Last)*
Amanda B Campbell
Date (MM/DD/YYYY):*
03/19/2026
Parent/Guardian (if under 18):

Name (First M. Last):*
Amanda B Campbell
Date (MM/DD/YYYY):*
03/19/2026
Personal Information
Name:*
amanda Campbell
793
794
795
796
797

5. Is there any additional information that you would like to share? If so, please list the information below
References (Optional)
List name, email, phone number and relationship (e.g. teacher, coach, employer, mentor, etc.):

Reference #1
Reference #2
Reference #3
798

Public Works

DATE: July 21, 2026
TO: Mayor Martinez and Members of the City Council
FROM:

Daniel Chavarria, PE, Director of Public Works/City
Engineer
Hillal Hamdan, PE, Senior Civil Engineer
Subject:

Roadway Modification at Glenn Avenue and McBryde
Avenue for the McBryde Avenue Safe Routes to Park
Project
FINANCIAL IMPACT: This work will be implemented as part of the McBryde Avenue Safe Routes to Park Project, which is funded
through the One Bay Area Grant Program (OBAG3). The
costs associated with the proposed roadway
modifications are included within the approved Fiscal
Year 2025-2026 Public Works Department budget
(Account Strings: 15436431-400733-23039,
20136031-400733-23039). This action does not require a
new appropriation and represents a one-time capital
improvement expenditure associated with the Project.

Any future maintenance obligations related to
landscaping or other improvements will be addressed
through interagency coordination and future maintenance agreements as needed.

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

None.

STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:

City staff from the City of Richmond, in coordination with the City of San Pablo, Richmond Fire Department and
Richmond Police Department, seek City Council approval
to modify the Glenn Avenue and McBryde Avenue
intersection by closing the direct vehicular connection at McBryde Avenue in order to improve roadway safety,
reduce cut-through traffic, while maintaining pedestrian AGENDA
REPORT
799

and bicycle connectivity associated with the McBryde
Avenue Safe Routes to Park Project.

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

ADOPT a resolution to APPROVE a roadway
modification associated with the McBryde Avenue Safe
Routes to Park Project, including closure of the direct vehicular connection between Glenn Avenue and
McBryde Avenue to improve traffic safety, reduce cut-
through traffic, and support pedestrian and bicycle
connectivity – Public Works Department (Hillal Hamdan
510-621-1612/Daniel Chavarria 510-620-5478). This
item was continued from the June 16, June 23, and
July 7, 2026, meetings.

DISCUSSION:

City Council approval is requested because the proposed improvements include a permanent change to the public street network through the closure of the direct vehicular connection between Glenn Avenue and McBryde Avenue (Attachment 1). This action would authorize City staff to proceed with final design and implementation of the preferred roadway configuration as part of the McBryde Avenue Safe Routes to Park Project.

In 2025, City staff from the City of Richmond and the City of San Pablo coordinated on safety improvements along the McBryde Avenue corridor as part of the McBryde Avenue Safe Routes to Park Project (Project). The Project includes traffic calming improvements, bicycle facilities, Americans with Disabilities Act-compliant curb ramps, paving improvements, sidewalks, and updated striping and signage.

As part of the Project, City staff evaluated operational and safety conditions at the intersection of Glenn Avenue and McBryde Avenue, including roadway geometry, limited sight distance, short block spacing, intersection skew, cut-through traffic, and pedestrian and bicycle connectivity associated with Wildcat Canyon Regional Park.

Based on this engineering review, closure of the direct vehicular connection between Glenn Avenue and McBryde Avenue was identified as the preferred alternative (Attachment 2).

The proposed roadway modifications would reduce vehicular conflict points, simplify traffic circulation patterns, improve pedestrian and bicycle connectivity, and reduce cut- through traffic using Glenn Avenue to bypass the signalized intersection at McBryde Avenue and Amador Street. The proposed improvements would maintain neighborhood access through the surrounding street network, including access from Glenn Avenue through Yuba Avenue to McBryde Avenue, and would maintain access for emergency response vehicles and adjacent properties.

The City of San Pablo reviewed the improvement plans and provided written support for the proposed modifications to Glenn Avenue, Marin Avenue, and Yuba Avenue near the 800

Richmond/San Pablo jurisdictional boundary. The City of San Pablo also identified several coordination items associated with the proposed improvements, including encroachment permits for Americans with Disabilities Act ramp work within San Pablo jurisdiction, coordination with adjacent property owners, visual identification of jurisdictional boundaries, and a maintenance agreement for proposed landscaping improvements. Richmond staff intends to address these coordination items during final design and implementation (Attachment 3).

In November 2025, City staff conducted a community meeting regarding the proposed improvements and received generally positive feedback regarding the proposed roadway modifications (Attachment 5). City staff also coordinated with the Richmond Fire Department and Richmond Police Department regarding emergency access considerations.

Under a no-action alternative, the existing roadway configuration would remain in place, and the identified operational and safety concerns associated with intersection geometry, vehicle conflicts, and cut-through traffic would continue.

City staff recommend that the City Council adopt a resolution approving the roadway modification associated with the McBryde Avenue Safe Routes to Park Project, including closure of the direct vehicular connection between Glenn Avenue and McBryde Avenue (Attachment 4). The proposed modification would improve traffic safety, reduce cut-through traffic, and support pedestrian and bicycle connectivity while allowing City staff to proceed with final design and implementation of the proposed improvements.

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:

Attachment 1 – Location Map
Attachment 2 – Conceptual Improvement Exhibit
Attachment 3 – City of San Pablo Letter of Support
Attachment 4 – Resolution
Attachment 5 – PowerPoint- Glenn_Avenue_Council_Final

801
3 Glenn Ave
Mcbyde Ave
Sonoma St
802
SIGN TABLEDESIGNATIONSIGN MESSAGENOTESSC-1 "NO OUTLET"W14-2 INSTALL NEW SIGN PANEL, POLE, AND FOUNDATION CITY OF RICHMOND, CA CONTRA COSTA COUNTYBKF ENGINEERS1646 N. CALIFORNIA BLVD.SUITE 400WALNUT CREEK, CA 94596(925) 940-2200www.bkf.com COPYRIGHT © BKF ENGINEERS 2026
04/29/2026NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONPRELIMINARYDATE:

MCBRYDE SAFE ROUTES TO PARK
1" = 20'scale20 0 20 feet40
803

CITY OF SAN PABLO
Public Works Engineering & Environmental Services

1000 Gateway Ave ● San Pablo, CA 94806
Main: 510-215-3060 ● Fax: 510-215-3013
www.SanPabloCA.gov

November 12, 2025

Daniel Chavarria
Public Works Director
City of Richmond Public Works
450 Civic Center Plaza
Richmond, CA 94804

Re: McBryde Avenue Improvement Project
CIP # 20242218

The City of San Pablo has received 35% plans reflecting improvements along McBryde Avenue which includes modifications to Glenn Avenue, Marin Avenue, and Yuba Avenue which abut the City of San Pablo and City of Richmond boundaries. These improvements will provide traffic calming and mitigate traffic utilizing Glenn Avenue to bypass the traffic signal at McBryde and Amador. The City of San Pablo acknowledges that the Changes exist in the primary Right of Way of Richmond, however access to 5601 McBryde Avenue, 5625 McBryde Avenue, and 5633 McBryde Avenue are affected as is the crosswalk across the east side of the intersection of Yuba Avenue and Glenn Avenue.

Furthermore, the project creates a new median at the intersection of Marin Avenue and McBryde Avenue.

The City of San Pablo agrees with these changes with the following requests:

a. Apply for encroachment permits to the City of San Pablo for all ADA ramp improvements within San Pablo.
b. Coordinate with property owners at the specific addresses mentioned above as to improvements to their properties.
c. Provide a visual cue to the boundary between the two agencies. d. Provide a maintenance agreement for pocket park improvements proposed.

Thank you,

Matthew Brown, P.E., Senior Civil Engineer, Acting Public Works Director

Public Works Engineering Department

804

CC: CMO
805
Reso. No. xx-26

RESOLUTION NO. xx-26

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND

APPROVING ROADWAY MODIFICATIONS ASSOCIATED WITH THE MCBRYDE

AVENUE SAFE ROUTES TO PARK PROJECT, INCLUDING CLOSURE OF THE

DIRECT VEHICULAR CONNECTION BETWEEN GLENN AVENUE AND MCBRYDE AVENUE

WHEREAS, the City of Richmond is implementing the McBryde Avenue Safe Routes to Park Project (“Project”) to improve roadway safety, pedestrian accessibility, bicycle connectivity, and multimodal circulation along the McBryde Avenue corridor; and WHEREAS, the Project includes traffic calming improvements, bicycle facilities, Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)-compliant curb ramps, paving improvements, sidewalks, and updated signage and striping; and
WHEREAS, City staff evaluated operational and safety conditions at the intersection of Glenn Avenue and McBryde Avenue, including roadway geometry, limited sight distance, short block spacing, intersection skew, vehicular conflict points, and pedestrian and bicycle connectivity; and
WHEREAS, staff determined that closure of the direct vehicular connection between Glenn Avenue and McBryde Avenue would improve roadway safety, reduce cut-through traffic, simplify circulation patterns, and support multimodal access associated with the Project; and WHEREAS, the proposed roadway modifications would maintain neighborhood access through the surrounding street network, including access between Glenn Avenue and McBryde Avenue through Yuba Avenue; and
WHEREAS, staff coordinated with the City of San Pablo, Richmond Fire Department, and Richmond Police Department regarding the proposed roadway modifications and emergency access considerations; and
WHEREAS, the City of San Pablo reviewed the proposed improvement plans and provided written support for the roadway modifications associated with the Project; and WHEREAS, City staff conducted community outreach regarding the proposed roadway modifications and received generally positive public feedback; and WHEREAS, the roadway modifications are funded through the One Bay Area Grant Program (OBAG3) and are included in the approved Fiscal Year 2025–2026.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richmond that:

Section 1. The City Council finds and determines that the above recitals are true and correct and incorporates them herein by reference. The City Council further finds that the Agenda Report accompanying this item has served as the basis for the actions taken in this Resolution.

Section 2. The City Council hereby approves roadway modifications associated with the McBryde Avenue Safe Routes to Park Project, including closure of the direct vehicular connection between Glenn Avenue and McBryde Avenue.

Section 3. The City Council further finds that the proposed roadway modifications will maintain neighborhood access through the surrounding street network, including access between Glenn Avenue and McBryde Avenue through Yuba Avenue, while improving roadway safety and reducing cut-through traffic.
806
Reso. No. xx-26

Section 4. The City Council further directs that pedestrian and bicycle connectivity between Glenn Avenue and McBryde Avenue shall be maintained as part of the roadway modifications, subject to final engineering design and operational requirements.

Section 5. The City Manager, or designee, is authorized to take all administrative actions necessary to implement the approved roadway modifications, including coordination with the City of San Pablo and execution of related permits, agreements, and implementation documents consistent with this Resolution.

Section 6. The City Clerk is designated as the custodian of the documents and materials that constitute the record of proceedings upon which this decision is based. These records are maintained at the Office of the City Clerk, Richmond City Hall, 450 Civic Center Plaza, Richmond, CA 94804.

Section 7. This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage. *********************

I certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted by the Council of the City of Richmond at a regular meeting thereof held June XX, 2026, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTENTIONS:

ABSENT:

PAMELA CHRISTIAN

CLERK OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND
(SEAL)
Approved:

EDUARDO MARTINEZ
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. XX-26, finally passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Richmond at a regular meeting held on June XX, 2026.

Pamela Christian, Clerk of the City of Richmond
807
GLENN AVENUE AT MCBRYDE AVENUE: PROPOSED ROADWAY

MODIFICATIONS
• Project Background
The Project is funded through the One Bay Area Grant Program (OBAG3) and is included in the approved Fiscal Year 2025–2026 budget. • The Project encompasses traffic calming improvements, bicycle facilities, ADA-compliant curb ramps, pavement rehabilitation, sidewalks, and updated striping and signage. The City of San Pablo reviewed the improvement plans and provided formal written support for the proposed modifications.
808
• Engineering evaluation of roadway geometry, sight distance, block spacing, and adjacent property impacts as the preferred design alternative.
809

COMMUNITY OPEN HOUSE
• The event was held at Café McBryde in Richmond, CA on Saturday, November 8, 2025, between 9:30AM and 12:30PM.

An attendance goal of 40-
50 people, the project
team surpassed its target,
drawing an estimated 70
community members.

Participants were eager
to discuss the project, ask
questions, and share their
thoughts.
810

811

812
Questions
813

City of Richmond - BKF
McBryde Avenue Improvement Project
Community Open House Summary Memo
November 14, 2025
This memo summarizes outreach efforts and community input collected for the McBryde Avenue Improvement project by the City of Richmond and BKF Engineering.

Table of Contents
Community Open House .............................................................................................. 2 Format ...................................................................................................................................... 2 Event Materials .............................................................................................................. 3 Station Posterboards ............................................................................................................................. 3 Project Corridor Station (Table Map) ..................................................................................................... 3 Comment Cards .................................................................................................................................... 3 Key Performance Indicators ................................................................................................... 3 Outreach Materials ........................................................................................................ 4 Invitational Material ................................................................................................................. 4 Flyer ...................................................................................................................................................... 4 A-Frame Posters ................................................................................................................................... 4 Informational Materials ........................................................................................................... 5 Handout ................................................................................................................................................. 5 Website Content .................................................................................................................................... 5 Social Media .......................................................................................................................................... 5 Community Input ........................................................................................................... 6 Map Activity Feedback .......................................................................................................................... 6 Map Comments ..................................................................................................................................... 7 Comment Card Feedback ................................................................................................................... 10 Digital Comments ................................................................................................................................ 14 Next Steps .................................................................................................................... 18

814

2 COMMUNITY OPEN HOUSE
As part of the community engagement process to guide McBryde Avenue Improvement design and development, the City of Richmond and its consultants hosted an open house event to inform the public about the project and gather feedback/priorities from residents, businesses, City officials, and the broader community.

The event was held at Café McBryde in Richmond, CA on Saturday, November 8, 2025, between 9:30AM and 12:30PM. With an attendance goal of 40-50 people, the project team surpassed its target, drawing an estimated 70 community members. Participants were eager to discuss the project, ask questions, and share their thoughts.

Format
The event utilized an open-format design, featuring project information and three interactive display stations and complimentary refreshments, including coffee/tea and morning pastries.

The event began with a brief project introduction made by City staff. Attendees were greeted at a welcome table containing project handouts, paper comment cards, and iPads for digital comment collection. Attendees were free to engage at three dedicated stations that facilitated participation and information exchange. The station topics were as follows:
• Project Corridor Map
• Glenn Avenue Closure
• Proposed Roundabout Improvements
Subject matter experts from the consulting team and City of Richmond staff were present throughout the room, with some assigned to specific stations to facilitate meaningful engagement and to provide technical information to the attendees in both English and Spanish.

815

3 EVENT MATERIALS
The following printed materials were developed for and displayed as part of the three dedicated open house stations.

Station Posterboards
Two 24x36-inch posterboards were developed and printed to support the table map, each highlighting a specific section of the project area and enlarged for clearer viewing of key design features. One illustrated the proposed roundabout improvements, and the other detailed the Glenn Avenue closure.

Project Corridor Station (Table Map)
A 10-foot map of the project corridor was printed and displayed on a large table to help orient attendees with the project area and facilitate discussion and garner feedback.

Comments were recorded directly on the map and through sticky-dot activity, in which attendees placed colored dots representing specific concerns or desired improvements on the areas of the map where they would like to see changes. Some written comments were also made directly on the map.

Comment Cards
Online and paper comment cards were available in both English and Spanish for attendees to fill out during the event. Thirty-two paper comment cards and four digital comments were collected. All comments submitted were in English.

Key Performance Indicators
The table below highlights key performance indicators collected for the Community Open House, capturing overall attendance and engagement during the event.

KPI #
Estimated attendees (based on sign-in sheet records and clicker counter)
70 Paper comment cards collected 32
Digital comments submitted 4
816

4 Emails received at [email protected] XX

OUTREACH MATERIALS
The following outreach collateral was developed to support the Community Open House and project.

Invitational Material
Flyer
To spread the word about the event, an 8.5 x 11-inch flyer was developed and promoted across multiple channels. The flyer was distributed door-to-door, posted on the City's website/select digital channels, shared through partner organizations, and made available in both English and Spanish.

Project Area Canvassing:
• Over October 23-24, the BKF team distributed 500 flyers (in both English & Spanish) to businesses, residents and community organizations throughout the 2-miles length of the project area.

Partner and Digital Channels:
• City staff shared the flyers with community partners including:
o North & East Neighborhood Council
o East Richmond Neighborhood Council
• City staff included the flyers in Richmond’s City Manager weekly report • BKF sent invitational emails with the flyers to City council members:
o Claudia Jimenez
o Soheila Bana
• Convey provided flyers to Café McBryde for posting

A-Frame Posters
To maximize visibility, the bilingual flyers were reproduced in a large format (24x36 inch) for A- frame posters. The two-sided A-Frame was strategically placed outside the event entrance to capture the attention of potential attendees.
817

5 Informational Materials
Handout
A project handout highlighting potential improvements was developed to provide additional project information and contact information for questions or comments. The handouts were available for attendees during the Community Open House. The handout was also translated into Spanish.

Website Content
A project page was set-up by Richmond staff on the City website:
https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/4837/23039---McBryde-Safe-Routes-to-Park-OBAG The web page includes an updated project description as well as provides general information, project map, timeline, and community outreach information including the event flyer image.

Social Media
A suite of social media and email content was developed and deployed to promote the Community Open House. Content was distributed by the City of Richmond via its City Manager newsletter, project website, and social media channels. All social media graphics were translated into Spanish.

Example social media materials:
818

6 COMMUNITY INPUT
The following tables present a comprehensive overview of all community input received from attendees at the Community Open House, including the sticky dot map activity, paper comment cards, and the digital comment form.

Map Activity Feedback
Improvement Count Intersection
Repave Street (Green) 18 • McLaughlin St (2)
• Lassen St (2)
• Ventura St (2)
• Humboldt St (1)
• Amador St (1)
• Kern St (2)
• Sonoma Ave (4)
• Ralston Ave (2)
• Marin Ave (2)
Reduce Speed (Yellow) 16 • 37th St (1)
• San Pablo Ave (2)
• Lassen St (2)
• Ventura St (2)
• Humboldt St (3)
• Yuba St (1)
• Ralston Ave (1)
• Park Ave/Roundabout (2)
• Arlington Blvd (2)
Trash Collection (Red) 5 • San Pablo Ave (3)
• Ralston Ave (2)
New Curb Ramps (Blue) 7 • Amador St (2)
• Sonoma Ave (1)
• Park Ave/Roundabout (4)
819

7 Sidewalk Repair (Black) 3
• Lassen St (1)
• Ventura St (1)
• Amador St (1)

Parking (Pink) 1 • Marin Ave (1)

Map Comments
Comment Location (if applicable)
• Signal timing needs
improvement
• For pedestrians VERY
long wait time
San Pablo Ave

• Switch McLaughlin St

• Pedestrian walking
signs
Glenn Ave
820

8 • Potential Crosswalk
for visibility
Marin Ave

• Repave McBryde Ave (west of roundabout)

• Protected crosswalk
• Potential for no
parking
• Corner creates blind
spot
McBryde Ave (near roundabout)
821

9 • Think about cyclist
traffic crossing in this
area
Marin Ave (near roundabout)

• Re-evaluate existing
conditions
Park Ave (near roundabout)

822

10 • Consider this area for
redesign
McBryde Ave (from roundabout to Arlington)

• When people open car
doors? Major safety
issue!!
Section B

• Protection needed
(bollards or curbs) to
protect cyclists, or else
kids will not be safe riding
here
Section B

Comment Card Feedback
Comment/Feedback Topic(s)
I am so glad we are talking about improvements
I’m concerned about the quality of the streets, the unleveled gravel, the holes – for anyone that is disabled – the street must be leveled for the bikes, scooters, carts. Thank you

• Pavement quality
Please reach out to EBParks
• [email protected]
• [email protected]
• [email protected]
• Park coordination
823

11 Main Sewer line Needs to be replaced due to age. This was scheduled for replacement several years ago.

Replace old Laterals?
Water lines. Unknown
Traffic signal (Missing)
WB McBryde @ Amador RT side High Signal can not be seen at crosswalk.

Afternoon Blinding signal cannot be seen
Parking EB McBryde, Amador to Kern is congested.

Parking McBryde @ Kern (Store) NO red Zone.

Turning left from Kern to McBryde there are blind spots if cars are parked on the corner of McBryde.

Very few bikes ever seen on McBryde
• Parking
• Sewer lines
• Traffic signals
• Turn lanes
• Bikes
McBryde before Amador Roundabout Humboldt Street • Intersections Thank you for your attention to McBryde. My feedback on necessary improvements:

Trash Collection McBryde and San Pablo
Speed Reduction throughout
Repave Road
Protected Bike lane
Greater speed enforcement
Repainted crosswalks at San Pablo
More trees and greenery
More crosswalks and safety features (e.g. lights)
Please consider extending beyond 37th (to 23rd)
• Trash collection
• Speed
• Repave road
• Bike lanes
• Crosswalks
• Trees/greenery
More crosswalks needed to avoid Jaywalking. Currently Jaywalking is not illegal and is increasing
• Crosswalks
Concerned about reduction of lanes from 4 to 2. McBryde drivers tend to speed + I think you’re left hand turn lanes proposed will become unsafe passing lanes causing accidents. Roundabout proposed is great Idea
If planting more trees on McBryde, keep them trimmed, the trees on McBryde between McLaughlin St and San Pablo Ave are only trimmed when the branches are hitting the drivers windshields.

Leaves from the trees plug up the curb drains
• Lane reduction
• Trees/greenery
I am very appreciative of the roundabout at Park & McBryde • Crosswalks 824

12 From Amador to Park, we should add more planted strips and reduce the width of the paved road however possible. This will make the road crossing safer, make the neighborhood more welcoming, and increase the real estate value
One specific suggestion is to move the driving lanes just west of the roundabout inwards and use the extra space to create plantings on either side of the street.
• Vehicle lanes
Need to put something in the intersection of Ralston and McBryde to impede the guys that do car spinning “doughnuts” and also make sure that require cars not to park on the street on the day the sweeper clean the streets
• Unsafe driving
deterrents
• Enforcement
We are very excited about a roundabout at the Park ave circle- McBryde ave intersection (we are bicyclist and are excited about our safety improved)
For east of I-80 (at lease) we’d like the bike lanes to have hard protections as much as possible and there to be more greenery + less pavement. Making the road thin will decrease crossing distances and make them safer, especially in front of the market at the park entrance Can we get a lighted crosswalk across McBryde at Yuba
A “Welcome to Richmond” sign about at McLaughlin + McBryde • Bike safety
• Trees/greenery
• Crosswalks
• Signage

Going west from McBryde through San Pablo Ave intersection, suggest only one turn left lane and one straight lane, the merge on McBryde east of San Pablo Ave is a bottleneck problem with two lanes moving forward
• Turn lanes
Add protected bike lanes wherever possible • Bike lanes Parking on the sidewalk (code enforcement) • Enforcement Please start the project at the park – the most critical part of the plan • Park inclusion Please make sure you hold string for a roundabout @ the top of McBryde with as many ped Crossings as possible.

Would love to see an AC transit line stop @Alvarado Park to make the connection to del Norte Bart + Berkeley sometime. Thanks for your work on this.
• Crosswalks
• AC Transit/Park
connection
Liz Bittner [email protected] 510-898-8127
Maybe bulb outs @ McLaughlin for peds
Island @ McLaughlin for peds crossing
Recommend directional curb ramps
Corners of cross streets should be marked for no parking for better visibility when turning from X street on McBryde
Use CA native plants for any landscaping (coast live oak trees, buckeye trees, shorter plants – ([dryer-->wetter] silver bush lupin, • Crosswalks
• Signage
• Trees/greenery
825

13 sage brush, monkey flower, pacific coast iris, juncus patens)). Consult calscape.org, Richmond’s Urban Forest advisory committee I like the roundabout @ the park entry way it’s currently very hard for pedestrians to access there safely
Limiting speed from vehicles dogging I-80 traffic to cut across to Arlington. Because [illegible] to 1 lane @ way and bring in bike lanes • Crosswalks
• Speed reduction
• Bike lanes
If combining 2 lanes into one will create more traffic, then that is not an improvement
What about divers that do “donuts?” that happens on McLaughlin + McBryde
This corridor is very busy – how can making it one lane help that?? • Lane reduction
• Unsafe driving
Bulb outs
Add a bulb out on the corners to increase visibility + eliminate parking in the “red zones”
Currently people park in the red zone because there is no enforcement
• Crosswalks
• Parking
• Enforcement
Cars coming down Arlington (from the south) can’t see the “stop” sign on McBryde; they have a “yield” sign. So I can be stopped then a car coming from Arlington doesn’t know that they have the ROW to go; they wait; I wait; etc, ripe for a collision!
• Signage
Please add a dashed green bike lane around the perimeter of the McBryde/Park Ave roundabout.

Dashed green bike lane, to show that bikers also belong in roundabout. (currently no clear path for a bike on upper McBryde turning left)
This path currently not clear
• Bike lanes
Strongly opposed to reducing lanes on McBryde
[[email protected]]
• Lane reduction
I would like to see McBryde Ave beautified such as with a median strip from San Pablo Ave to Humboldt w/ trees. It’s a major entrance to the city and should have a gold, welcoming appeal
I would not like to have traffic lanes reduced because McBryde is a thoroughfare, and those of us that live on the cross street would have trouble crossing or turning onto McBryde
[Lanita Pace, 1026 Ventura St, [email protected]]
• Trees/greenery
• Lane reduction
Amador and McBryde stagger traffic like s. park at [illegible text] by the casino
2 lanes both directions on McBryde at Amador, one straight one left turn
Bicycles Need insurance to compensate autos when an accident is bikes fault
• Traffic
• Turn lanes
826

14 We would like to see if possible, more greening in the streetscape. I sit on the urban forest advisory committee, and we are advocating for native plants and pollinator gardens
Please could you consider decreasing the concrete dividers and plant them with short native plants and/or California wildflowers? Vegetation instead of concrete would help support our pollinators, decrease the heat island effect, filter groundwater, and increase the beauty of our community
Thanks so much, Anita Pereire
• Trees/greenery
More tree – native trees
Bike boxes @ traffic signals - Amador + San Pablo
Crosswalk is needed where park intersects with McBryde
Bike boxes at Amador + @ San Pablo Ave
Need safe pedestrian Crossing across McBryde @ Sonoma to Glenn (S->N)
[Marcy Green Hut - [email protected]]
• Trees/greenery
• Bikes
• Crosswalks
Will there be a left-turn light on McBryde @ Amador East-bound to alleviate backups on McBryde?
• Turn lanes/lights
McBryde needs pavement repair from Amador to Park Ave.
and Planting or trees in the median along McBryde would help beautify the wide street.

There is poor visibility at the intersection between cars on upper McBryde and Park ave, any restriping/roundabout should take that into consideration
• Repave road
• Trees/greenery
• Visibility

Speed on McBryde in the morning is outrageous and dangerous! Anything that can be done to mitigate speeding cars that ignore pedestrians in crosswalks on side streets including Yuba, Sonoma, Ralston, Arlington needs to be implemented now and forever Also plant native trees!!!
• Speed
• Crosswalks
• Trees/greenery

Digital Comments
Comment/Feedback Topic(s)
Glad this meeting is happening, thank you

Can the high visibility crosswalk at Ralston be raised? Or is this a conflict for fire route? Can curbs be painted red and eliminate street parking on the inside turn of McBryde as it turns into Arlington? The sidewalk is very narrow and dark there. It needs lights, widening and the neighbor’s property and soil is spilling onto the sidewalk. I walk and bike this route often including early morning when it’s dark. With cars parked there cycling up the steep grade is dangerous as traffic • Crosswalks
• Parking
• Lights
• Bikes
827

15 cannot see cyclists. Early morning people are in their cars there.

Thank you for reducing the lanes!!
Thank you for this opportunity to see and comment on the plans.

Looks good. Please meet the street trees as part of the project. • Trees/greenery
More trees between Yuba St. and Alvarado Park. Speed humps on Yuba St.
• Trees/greenery
We need 2 lanes west bound McBryde at San Pablo Ave, 1st lane left turn lane as it is today, 2nd lane only going straight or turning right onto San Pablo Ave going north.

We need a left turn lane to accommodate one vehicle on west bound McBryde for the driveway at the apartment complex on the south side of McBryde east of Humboldt, that left turn lane should continuing to Humboldt so that we do not block the single lane of west bound McBryde east of Humboldt.
(minus the above mentioned west bound left turn lane) we need 2 lanes the length of the overpass of east bound McBryde at Amador, the same distance for west bound McBryde at Amador. The 1st lane for left turn north & south onto Amador to prevent back up of other traffic stuck in a single lane in each direction waiting for a safe left turn from oncoming traffic, the second lane for straight ahead or right turning vehicles.

We need a staggered traffic light system to allow left turning vehicles safe passage in all four directions at McBryde & Amador. If all vehicles can travel the intersection in the same direction, west bound McBryde turning north or south on Amador & continuing west on McBryde the traffic will flow smoother. The same example will be smoother for east bound McBryde, and both directions of Amador.

Having green left & right arrows, & a standard round green light for traffic going straight ahead in all four directions will make the flow smoother. The timing for the lights will depend on the flow of traffic & the time of day.

Caltrans needs a much bigger sign of "No Turn on Red" at the offramp hoping to stop people who claim "They didn't see the sign". I believe the only enforcement is if someone has a traffic accident because they didn't stop or stopped and then turned on the red light.

Bicyclists need to be required to have insurance for accidents they cause by not obeying traffic laws. If a vehicle collides with a pedestrian or a bicyclist, they are responsible for having insurance, why not bicyclists who do not stop, who travel on the wrong side of the street, or who break other rules of the road that make it unsafe for all.
• Traffic Congestion
• Safety
Thank you for the opportunity to provide feedback on this project.

While I am supportive of this project, as currently designed, it falls short of making the street safe for cyclists of all ages and abilities.

At today's workshop, I was told that Class I (separated) bikeways were never seriously contemplated because of the need to maintain • Bicycle Safety
828

16 existing on-street parking. These two things are not mutually exclusive.

We can have both on-street parking and a physically protected bike lane. I have seen this in many cities around the US.

The proposed design is old-fashioned and is NOT consistent with the latest best practices in Complete Streets.

A painted bike lane does nothing to protect cyclists from fast- moving traffic. As a result, few parents will allow their children to ride here, and it will fail to attract less experienced bikers. Proper bikeways physically separate bike riders from cars, either via grade differences (curbs) or barriers (bollards, jersey barriers). I am not talking about flexible plastic posts that do nothing to physically protect cyclists.

Richmond has an incredible opportunity here, and it would be such a shame to waste it. What we build today will last at least 30 years. I encourage city staff to work with the planners and engineers to come up with a design that encourages walking and cycling for everyone.

Improved Intersection- This does NOT address the issue of the WB stop light a McBryde and Amador. The stop light is very hard to see if you are in the WB RT lane at cross walk. In the late afternoon the Sun light is blinding.

I have requested a street level light on the far corner of the intersection. Your traffic engineer gave me a BS story it was a CALTRANS issue.

When are you going to paint the corner curbs RED at Kern & McBryde? When are you going to have the parking codes enforced at Kern & McBryde. There is a Left turn safety issue NB Kern to WB McBryde. Cars parked at the corner created a blind spot.

They’re very few Bikes on McBryde and nothing to justify the expense.

What will you do about parking EB Amador to Yuba on McBryde? There is not enough parking now in the evening.

Why do you want more trees? The city does not maintain most of the trees around the city now.

I look forward to talking to one of your agents. I would hope the person lives in this area and has driven the McBryde area at different times of the day.
• Street Lights
• Parking
• Landscape
where McBryde/Arlington intersect with park ave, hopefully before I die in that intersection while leaving park peering over my shoulder at the traffic barreling down Arlington. McBryde Alternatively, if someone else dies doing that can you please put up a stop sign then? • Safety
I stopped by the public open house for the McBryde Improvement Plan yesterday (11/8) and would also like to provide a written comment about the proposed plan here. My concerns are specifically focused on the intersection at Park Avenue and McBryde and how the proposed plan accommodates pedestrian traffic. I believe more needs • Safety
• Crosswalks
• Traffic Speed
829

17 to be done to ensure safe crossing for pedestrians. For context, this intersection sits at the entrance to a busy park + playground and has to accommodate pedestrian traffic including children. This is also a dominantly residential area.

I personally walk and run through this area multiple times a week. Park Avenue only has sidewalks on its southeast side, funneling all foot traffic to that side of the intersection. People then need to cross McBryde where it bends eastward so that I can continue on the McBryde sidewalk towards the southwest in the direction of San Pablo Avenue.

The current intersection organization is not safe for pedestrians as we cannot see the vehicular traffic that travels downhill on McBryde at the same time as seeing traffic coming around the slip lane traveling uphill. In order to cross, I have to walk part way up the hill, cross without a crosswalk, and then turn back down the hill to continue on McBryde toward San Pablo Ave. The other side of the Park Avenue and McBryde intersection has a sidewalk that is actively blocked by vehicles that use the sidewalk for parking, making that side impassable. Even if passable, I still have to cross McBryde on a bend across multiple lanes of traffic.

The proposed plan as shown yesterday during the public meeting makes this intersection even more dangerous for pedestrians. The primary problem is that the proposed roundabout does not include crosswalks in the design. A hand drawn crosswalk was drawn on top of the map yesterday, but the location was not at the intersection itself, but in that uphill portion that I mentioned earlier. Placing a crosswalk on the hill both places a large burden on pedestrians that now need to walk up the hill to turn, but also puts them in danger- cars will not expect to have to yield immediately after exiting the roundabout traveling uphill. A secondary problem is that the new roundabout design removes the stop signs that are currently used on part of McBryde entering Park and from Park entering McBryde. This has the overall effect of speeding up vehicular traffic, making the area more dangerous for walkers.

Given the hand drawn crosswalk on the map shown yesterday, it is clear that pedestrian access and safety was not considered in the initial design. To reiterate, this intersection is next to a major park and playground and can have heavy foot traffic including many young children as it is a popular spot for birthday parties.

My recommendation for improvement:
• Reorganize the intersection to fully utilize stop signs, even though this reduces flow
• for cars. Stop signs already are present for part of the traffic moving through the intersection. Include ADA
830

18 compliant curb cuts and crosswalks across Park
Avenue and McBryde Avenue.
• Remove the slip-lane-like turn for cars making the right from McBryde to continue uphill
• on McBryde. Instead, make the turn sharper so that
vehicular traffic has to employ their brake as they make the turn.
• If using a roundabout is a must, include the crosswalks directly into the roundabout.
• Not 100 ft outside of the roundabout where vehicular traffic is less likely to expect a crossing. This could be modeled similar to the scale of the traffic circle located at Barrett and Key Blvd. An added benefit of this scale of traffic circle is that it
• forces traffic to slow along the turn while also being passable by emergency vehicles.

While I am disappointed with the proposed design, I am hopeful that those working on the design will improve it to keep those walking in the community safe, even if it is at the expense of the brake pedal of drivers.

I was not able to make it to the open house on Saturday. I live near McBryde and often cross at Yuba, Ralston, or near the park entrance.

Can you describe what is being proposed as far as pedestrian safety for crossing McBryde at these locations? Traffic can be pretty fast along this road. If pedestrians could trigger a flashing light, that might help. The rumble strips do nothing.

• Pedestrian safety

NEXT STEPS
The City of Richmond and its engineering consultant, BKF, will evaluate the feedback collected during the Community Open House and incorporate it into the project’s ongoing design and analysis. While no additional community events are planned at this time, the City will keep the public informed and may consider future events as needed. 831

July 21, 2026

Public Works

DATE: July 21, 2026
TO: Mayor Martinez and Members of the City Council
FROM:

Janney Lockman, AICP, Associate Transportation
Planner
Gail Payne, Senior Transportation Planner
Daniel Chavarria, PE, Director of Public Works /City
Engineer
Subject:

Accept and Appropriate the California Department of
Transportation Sustainable Transportation Planning
Grant for the Richmond Greenway Gap Closure Project
FINANCIAL IMPACT: Acceptance of this state grant award will provide $700,000 in grant funding to advance planning and
design for the Richmond Greenway Gap Closure Project.

The grant requires a local match of $90,693 (11.47%),
which is available from Measure J Fund 2002, for a total project budget of $790,693. There is no impact on the
General Fund.

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

July 28, 2020
January 24, 2023

STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:

The City of Richmond has been awarded a California
Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Sustainable
Transportation Planning Grant for the Richmond
Greenway Gap Closure Project. City Council action is
required to accept and appropriate the grant funds,
commit the required local match, and authorize the City Manager or designee to execute the restricted grant
agreement and related documents with Caltrans.

AGENDA
REPORT
832

July 21, 2026
RECOMMENDED ACTION:

ADOPT a resolution to ACCEPT and APPROPRIATE the
Caltrans Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant
award in the amount of $700,000 for the Richmond
Greenway Gap Closure Project; APPROPRIATE $90,693
in Measure J as matching funds, for a total project budget of $790,693; and AUTHORIZE the City Manager or their
designee to execute the grant agreement, any
amendments thereto, and related documents with
Caltrans necessary to implement the grant-funded
planning project – Public Works Department (Janney
Lockman 510-307-8097/Gail Payne 510-620-6716/Daniel
Chavarria 510-620-5478).

DISCUSSION:

The Richmond Greenway is a key regional bicycle and pedestrian corridor. However, the eastern and western segments are separated by 23rd Street, Carlson Boulevard, and the Union Pacific Railroad tracks, a barrier collectively known as the “Greenway Gap,” as shown in the Project Area Map (Attachment 1). This gap requires people walking and bicycling to leave the Greenway and navigate rail crossings, truck traffic, and busy roadways.

In 2020, the City received a California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant award of $280,208 to evaluate options for closing the Greenway Gap. In January 2023, the City Council adopted the Richmond Greenway Gap Closure Study, which identified a bicycle and pedestrian bridge as the preferred solution. The proposed bridge would connect the eastern and western portions of the Greenway over 23rd Street, Carlson Boulevard, and the Union Pacific railroad tracks, creating a safer, more continuous route and improving regional connections to the Ohlone Greenway, the San Francisco Bay Trail, and the Richmond- San Rafael Bridge.

The City has since been awarded a second Caltrans Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant of $700,000 to support the next phase of project development. Grant- funded activities include additional planning, coordination with Union Pacific Railroad and the California Public Utilities Commission, community engagement, technical studies, and preparation for environmental review. This work will refine the bridge alignment and design concepts and will position the City to pursue future funding for environmental documentation, final design, and construction.

As a condition of receiving the grant, Caltrans requires the City to adopt a resolution authorizing execution of the grant agreement. In addition, the grant requires a local match of $90,693 (11.47%), for a total project budget of $790,693 (Attachment 2).

The proposed action does not authorize consultant contracts, approve a final design, authorize construction, or commit the City to future implementation costs. Any 833

July 21, 2026
subsequent contracts, construction funding, or other actions requiring City Council approval will return for consideration at a later date.

Under the grant agreement, the City must provide regular progress reports, submit reimbursement requests and supporting financial records, fulfill the required local match, complete the grant-funded work by June 30, 2029, and submit final deliverables by August 29, 2029. The City must also coordinate with railroad, regulatory, transportation, and utility stakeholders throughout the planning process.

The grant requires a local match of $90,693 from Measure J funds. If the City Council does not accept the grant and authorize execution of the grant agreement, the City will forfeit the award and will need to identify another funding source to advance planning for the Richmond Greenway Gap Closure Project.

Accepting and appropriating the Caltrans Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant award will allow the City to advance planning and preliminary design for the Richmond Greenway Gap Closure Project using external funding. City staff recommend adopting a resolution accepting the grant award, committing and appropriating the required matching funds, and authorizing the City Manager or their designee to execute the grant agreement.

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:

Attachment 1 – Project Area Map
Attachment 2 – Resolution
Attachment 3 – Restricted Grant Agreement Template

834

1.) Project Location Maps
Figure 1A: Project Location
Source: Richmond Greenway Gap Closure Study, Final Draft, January 2023 Figure 1B: High-Risk Streets & Collision Severity Map
Source: Richmond Greenway Gap Closure Study, Final Draft, January 2023 The Greenway Gap Project
Richmond
Rich mond Green way - W es t
Richmond Greenway - East
BART
UPRR
Utilities
Carlson Blvd
23rd St
Dirt World
Pullman Portal
Park
Attachment 2 - Project Area Map
835

Reso. No. _____

DocID #74942v1
RESOLUTION NO. XX-26

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND

ACCEPTING A CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORTATION PLANNING GRANT AWARD FOR THE

RICHMOND GREENWAY GAP CLOSURE PROJECT, COMMITTING REQUIRED

LOCAL MATCHING FUNDS, APPROPRIATING GRANT AND MATCHING FUNDS,

AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER OR DESIGNEE TO EXECUTE

AGREEMENTS WITH THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

WHEREAS, Richmond Greenway is a local and regional connector but is not continuous and the gap between the east and west sides of the Richmond Greenway creates travel barriers by forcing trail users onto high-stress streets; and

WHEREAS, closing the Richmond Greenway gap would transform connectivity of the Richmond Greenway, providing seamless access across the City of Richmond; and

WHEREAS, the City of Richmond applied for a California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant for the Richmond Greenway Gap Closure Project (Project); and

WHEREAS, Caltrans awarded the City of Richmond a Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant in the amount of $700,000 for the Project; and

WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Richmond is eligible to receive state funding for certain transportation planning through Caltrans; and

WHEREAS, the state grant award requires a local cash match in the amount of $90,693, for a total project cost of $790,693; and

WHEREAS, matching funds are available in Measure J for the required local match; and

WHEREAS, a Restricted Grant Agreement must be executed with Caltrans before grant funds can be reimbursed through the Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant Program; and

WHEREAS, the City Council desires to delegate authority to the City Manager or designee to execute all Restricted Grant Agreements and any amendments thereto with Caltrans for the Richmond Greenway Gap Closure Project.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:

SECTION 1. The City Council accepts the Caltrans Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant award in the amount of $700,000 for the Richmond Greenway Gap Closure Project.

SECTION 2. The City Council commits local matching funds in the amount of $90,693 from the Measure J Fund for the Richmond Greenway Gap Closure Project.

SECTION 3. The City Council appropriates $700,000 in Caltrans grant funds and $90,693 in Measure J matching funds, for a total project appropriation of $790,693.

SECTION 4. The City Manager or their designee is authorized to execute all Restricted Grant Agreements and any amendments thereto with Caltrans for the Richmond Greenway Gap Closure Project, subject to approval as to form by the City Attorney.

SECTION 5. The City Manager or their designee is authorized to execute related certifications, requests for reimbursement, reports, and administrative documents necessary to accept and implement the Caltrans Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant for the Richmond Greenway Gap Closure Project.

SECTION 6. This Resolution does not authorize construction, approve final design, or commit the City of Richmond to future implementation costs beyond the grant and matching funds expressly approved herein.
836

Reso. No. _____

DocID #74942v1

SECTION 7. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its passage.

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

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 July 21, 2026, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTENTIONS:

ABSENT:

PAMELA CHRISTIAN

CLERK OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND
(SEAL)
Approved:

EDUARDO MARTINEZ
Mayor

Approved as to form:

SHANNON MOORE
Interim 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 July 21, 2026.

Pamela Christian, Clerk of the City of Richmond

837

July 7, 2026

Public Works

DATE: July 7, 2026
TO: Mayor Martinez and Members of the City Council
FROM:

Daniel Chavarria, Director of Public Works
Darin Fitzpatrick, Assistant Deputy Director of Public
Works, Operations & Maintenance
Subject:

Appropriate Marina Bay Landscaping and Lighting
Maintenance District Fund Balance Reserves for
Emergency Lighting Repairs
FINANCIAL IMPACT: The proposed appropriation of up to $141,746 from available Marina Bay Landscaping and Lighting
Maintenance District (MBLLMD) fund balance reserves
will fund emergency lighting repairs. The appropriation utilizes existing MBLLMD reserves and does not increase property owner assessments. There is no impact to the
General Fund.

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

None.

STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:

The City recently experienced significant wire theft and vandalism impacting lighting infrastructure within the
Marina Bay area, including portions of the Marina Bay
Trail system and adjacent park facilities. Approximately 85 lights were identified as non-operational following the theft and vandalism incidents. Due to the extent of the damage and the importance of restoring lighting within
this critical public access corridor, City staff is requesting authorization to appropriate MBLLMD fund balance
reserves to support the required repairs.

AGENDA
REPORT
838

July 7, 2026
RECOMMENDED ACTION:

ADOPT a resolution to APPROPRIATE the Marina Bay
Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District
(MBLLMD) fund balance reserves in an amount not to
exceed $141,746.00 for emergency lighting repairs
associated with wire theft and vandalism within the
Marina Bay area and AUTHORIZE the City Manager or
their designee to take any further actions necessary to complete the repairs - Public Works Department (Daniel
Chavarria 510-620-5478/Darin Fitzpatrick 510-231-3044).

DISCUSSION:

On April 30, 2026, Public Works staff were notified that the Richmond Police Department arrested an individual in the process of committing wire theft and vandalism along the Marina Bay Park Trail corridor. Following an investigation by Public Works and Electrical Division staff, approximately 156 lights were identified as impacted and non-operational due to stolen wiring and related vandalism. Additional impacted areas were later identified near Rosie the Riveter Memorial Park and Barbara & Jay Vincent Park.

The affected corridor is part of the San Francisco Bay Trail system and serves as a critical public access route for residents and visitors. The lighting outages have created operational and public safety concerns within the Marina Bay area, particularly with increased seasonal public use and upcoming waterfront events.

Public Works evaluated both in-house repair options and contractor-supported repair options. City staff determined that utilizing an on-call contractor is the preferred approach due to the scale of the repairs, staffing limitations, and the need to expedite restoration efforts while allowing City crews to continue addressing ongoing citywide maintenance priorities.

Public Works obtained a proposal from NEMA Construction in the amount of $141,746.00 to restore lighting infrastructure damaged by wire theft and vandalism within the Marina Bay area (Attachment 1). The proposed work includes replacement of stolen electrical conductors, splicing, conduit repairs, fuse and fuse holder replacements, installation of security lids, and restoration of lighting systems serving Lucretia Edwards Shoreline Park, Barbara & Jay Vincent Park, the San Francisco Bay Trail, and Crystal Cove Bay Trail. The project will restore approximately 156 lights and bollard lights currently impacted by theft-related outages and improve system security to reduce the likelihood of future vandalism.

The Marina Bay Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District Engineer’s Report authorizes the use of District revenues for the maintenance, servicing, operation, repair, and improvement of parks, trails, landscaping, lighting infrastructure, and related public improvements within the District boundaries (Attachment 2). Eligible expenses include 839

July 7, 2026
electrical energy for public lighting facilities, maintenance and servicing of improvements, and costs incidental to the operation of District improvements.

The affected lighting infrastructure serves Marina Bay Park, Barbara & Jay Vincent Park, Lucretia Edwards Shoreline Park, Rosie the Riveter Memorial Park, and Bay Trail facilities, all of which are located within the District.

Due to the extent of the damage and the need to restore lighting infrastructure serving District improvements, City staff recommend that the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the use of available Marina Bay Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District fund balance to cover the full cost of the emergency repairs (Attachment 3). The proposed appropriation of $141,746.00 is consistent with the authorized uses of District funds and will restore critical lighting infrastructure serving parks, trails, and public access facilities within the Marina Bay area. The proposed appropriation would utilize existing MBLLMD reserves and would not increase property owner assessments.

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:

Attachment 1 – NEMA Construction Proposal
Attachment 2 – Marina Bay Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District Engineer’s Report
Attachment 3 – Resolution
840
NEMA Construction
555 pierce Street # 1005
Albany CA, 94706
Tel 510-525-2398
Fax 510-525-2304
Attn: Clarence Johnson

DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
31,300.00$
33,600.00$
18,800.00$
Crystal Cove-Bay Trail :

Run #8 copper wire through 40 boxes for 35 Bollard lights including splicing 24,800.00$ 24,496.00$
Running Wires between boxes and lights Additional work 8,750.00$ Fix broken conduit or major blockage in conduits
Fuse and fuse holders
TOTAL 141,746.00$
June 25, 2026
Ali Farahani/Owner DATE
Moving boulders
Supply Lids per AZCO Supply quotation # 76179 (attached) Invoice
LUCRETIA EDWARDS SHORELINE PARK:

Run #8 copper wire through 60 concrete boxes for 53 light including splicing BARBARA AND VINCENT PARK:

Run #8 copper wire through 50 concrete boxes for 43 lights including splicing SAN FRANCISCO BAY TRIAL:

Run #8 copper wire through 30 concrete boxes for 25 lights including splicing EXCLUSION:
841
842
843
844
845
846
847
848
849
850
851
852
853
854
855
856
857
858
859
860
861
862
863
864
865
866
867
868
869
870
871
872
873
874
875
876
877
878
879
880
881
882
883
884
885
886
887
888

Reso. No. _____

DocID #72408v1
RESOLUTION NO. ______

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND,

CALIFORNIA, APPROPRIATING MARINA BAY LANDSCAPING AND

LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT FUND BALANCE RESERVES FOR

EMERGENCY LIGHTING REPAIRS RELATED TO WIRE THEFT AND

VANDALISM WITHIN THE MARINA BAY DISTRICT

WHEREAS, on April 30, 2026, Public Works staff was notified that the Richmond Police Department arrested an individual in the process of committing wire theft and vandalism along the Marina Bay Park Trail corridor; and

WHEREAS, following an investigation by Public Works and Electrical Division staff, approximately 156 lights were identified as impacted and non-operational due to stolen wiring and related vandalism; and

WHEREAS, Public Works determined that expedited repairs are necessary to restore lighting, improve public safety, and maintain access within the affected areas; and

WHEREAS, Public Works obtained a proposal from NEMA Construction in the amount of $132,996 for replacement of stolen electrical conductors, conduit repairs, splicing, fuse and fuse holder replacements, security lids, and related work necessary to restore lighting infrastructure damaged by wire theft and vandalism within the Marina Bay area; and

WHEREAS, WHEREAS, the Marina Bay Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District (MBLLMD) Engineer’s Report authorizes District funding for the maintenance, servicing, operation, repair, and improvement of parks, trails, landscaping, lighting infrastructure, and related public improvements within the District boundaries; and

WHEREAS, the damaged lighting infrastructure serves parks, trails, lighting systems, and related public improvements located within the Marina Bay Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District; and

WHEREAS, the Marina Bay Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District Engineer's Report authorizes the use of District revenues for the maintenance, servicing, operation, repair, and improvement of parks, trails, landscaping, lighting infrastructure, and related public improvements within the District boundaries; and

WHEREAS, sufficient fund balance reserves are available within the Marina Bay Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District to support the District’s proportional share of the repair costs.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richmond hereby appropriates an amount not to exceed $141,746.00 from Marina Bay Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District fund balance reserves for emergency lighting repairs associated with wire theft and vandalism within the Marina Bay area; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager or designee is authorized to take any additional actions necessary to implement and complete the repair work consistent with this Resolution.

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

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

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

AYES: AYES:

889

Reso. No. _____

DocID #72408v1
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
890

July 21, 2026

City Manager's Office
Finance Department
Fire Department

DATE: July 21, 2026
TO: Mayor Martinez and Members of the City Council
FROM:

Shasa Curl, City Manager
Aaron Osorio, Fire Chief
Emily Combs, Director of Finance
Subject:

Resolution Determining Necessity and Introduction of an Ordinance Ordering the Submission of a General
Obligation Bond Measure for Fire Station Improvements
FINANCIAL IMPACT: Adoption of the proposed Resolution Determining Necessity and introduction of the proposed ordinance do not authorize the issuance of debt or result in an
immediate fiscal impact. If approved by at least two-thirds of the voters at the November 3, 2026, General Municipal Election, the City would be authorized to issue up to $120 million in general obligation bonds to finance eligible fire station capital improvements. Debt service on the bonds would be repaid from an ad valorem property tax
approved by the voters and would not be paid from the
City's General Fund.

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

May 27, 2025
January 27, 2026
April 21, 2026
June 16, 2026
June 23, 2026

STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:

The City Council is being asked to adopt a resolution
determining that the public interest and necessity
demand the acquisition, construction, and improvement
of certain municipal improvement projects and to
introduce an ordinance ordering the submission of a
general obligation bond measure to the qualified voters of the City at the November 3, 2026, General Municipal
Election.

AGENDA
REPORT
891

July 21, 2026
RECOMMENDED ACTION:

ADOPT a resolution determining that the public interest and necessity demand the acquisition, construction, and improvement of certain municipal improvement projects
and their financing through the issuance of general
obligation bonds; and INTRODUCE an ordinance (first
reading) ordering the submission of a proposition
authorizing the issuance of general obligation bonds to the qualified voters of the City of Richmond at the
November 3, 2026 General Municipal Election – Fire
Department/Finance Department/City Manager’s Office
(Chief Aaron Osorio 510-307-8021/Emily Combs 510-
890-5534/Shasa Curl 510-620-6512).

DISCUSSION:

The City of Richmond has identified significant capital needs associated with its fire station infrastructure. Several fire stations require substantial rehabilitation, modernization, and seismic improvements to continue supporting reliable emergency response, firefighter safety, and the delivery of emergency medical services. Many of these facilities have exceeded their intended useful life and require significant investment to address deferred maintenance, replace deteriorating building systems, improve operational functionality, and enhance the City's ability to respond to emergencies.

City staff have evaluated potential funding options to address these long-term capital needs. Due to the magnitude of the anticipated improvements and the limited availability of existing funding sources, staff has determined that voter-approved general obligation bonds represent the most cost-effective financing mechanism available to fund these capital investments. General obligation bonds are commonly used by California local agencies to finance long-lived public infrastructure because they typically provide lower borrowing costs than other financing alternatives.

Under California Government Code Sections 43600 et seq. and the California Constitution, the City may issue general obligation bonds only upon approval by at least two-thirds of the voters voting on the proposition. Before a bond measure may be submitted to the voters, the City Council must first determine that the proposed improvements are required by the public interest and necessity and initiate the statutory proceedings necessary to place the measure on the ballot.

The proposed Resolution Determining Necessity makes the findings required under California law that the proposed fire station improvements are necessary to protect the public health, safety, and welfare, that existing funding sources are insufficient to finance the improvements, and that financing through the issuance of general obligation bonds is in the public interest. Adoption of the resolution initiates the statutory proceedings required to submit a general obligation bond measure to the voters.

892

July 21, 2026
The proposed Ordinance, introduced for first reading, orders the submission of the bond proposition to the qualified voters of the City at the November 3, 2026, General Municipal Election. The ordinance includes the full text of the proposed ballot measure, including the projects proposed to be financed, the maximum principal amount of bonds to be authorized, and other information required by California law.

NEXT STEPS:

If the City Council adopts the Resolution Determining Necessity and introduces the Ordinance, City staff will return to the City Council on July 28, 2026, for second reading and adoption of the ordinance and consideration of a resolution Calling the Election. If approved, the City will submit the required election materials to the Contra Costa County Elections Division in accordance with the statutory election calendar. If the measure is approved by at least two-thirds of the voters at the November 3, 2026, General Municipal Election, the City would be authorized to issue general obligation bonds to finance the approved fire station improvements.

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:

Attachment 1 – Resolution Determining Necessity
Attachment 2 – Ordinance Ordering Submission of a General Obligation Bond Measure Attachment 3 – Tax Rate Statement
893

RESOLUTION NO. ___ -26

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND,

CALIFORNIA, DETERMINING THAT THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND

NECESSITY DEMAND THE ACQUISITION, CONSTRUCTION AND

IMPROVEMENT OF CERTAIN MUNICIPAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS, AND

THEIR FINANCING THROUGH THE ISSUANCE OF

GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS

WHEREAS, rapid response to fires, medical emergencies, and other disasters depends on a fire department infrastructure that is safe, reliable, and operational when needed, and much of the City’s fire station infrastructure has aged well beyond its intended useful life and no longer reliably meets that need; and

WHEREAS, deferred maintenance and the physical deterioration of the City’s aging fire stations, if left unaddressed, will continue to increase over time, resulting in higher repair costs, greater risk of facility failure, and increa sed risk to firefighters, paramedics, and the public they serve; and

WHEREAS, t he City of Richmond, California (the “City”) , like many California communities, faces heightened exposure to earthquakes, wildfires, and other natural disasters, and it is essential that public safety infrastructure be capable of remaining operational and supporting emergency response efforts during and after such events; and

WHEREAS, modern fire protection and emergency medical services require facilities and working conditions that meet current health, safety, and operational standards, and the City has an ongoing responsibility to maintain its public safety infrastructure accordingly; and

WHEREAS, the City is authorized to issue general obligation bonds to finance municipal improvements pursuant to certain provisions of the California Government Code, including Article 1, commencing with Section 43600, of Chapter 4 of Division 4 of Title 4 and/or Article 4.5, commencing with Section 53506, of Chapter 3 of Part 1 of Division 2 of Title 5 (collectively, the “Bond Law”); and
WHEREAS, under Section 18 of Article XVI and Section 1(b) of Article XIII A of the California Constitution, the City may issue general obligation bonds under and pursuant to the Bond Law, and levy ad valorem taxes to repay them, only with the assent of two -thirds of the voters voting on the proposition; and
WHEREAS, the City intends to issue the Bonds under and pursuant to the Bond Law to finance the cost of the acquisition, construction and improvement of certain property to be used for municipal purposes (the “Improvements”), consisting generally of: the repair, reconstruction, and seismic retrofit of aging and seismically unsafe fire stations; the renovation of firefighter living quarters, including abatement and removal of mold and asbestos ; the repair and replacement of deteriorating electrical, roofing, and plu mbing systems; and other improvements to fire stations and related facilities necessary to support rapid 911 emergency medical and fire response, all as more particularly described in the ballot measure to be submitted to the voters; and WHEREAS, existing funds and funding sources are inadequate to finance the Improvements; and
WHEREAS, the issuance of general obligation bonds is the most cost -effective means available to the City to finance the Improvements, as general obligation bonds typically bear lower interest rates than other forms of financing due to the security provided by the City ’s ad valorem tax pledge, thereby minimizing the overall cost to taxpayers of funding these necessary public safety improvements; and
WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the City and necessary for the preservation of the public peace, health, and safety to issue general obligation bonds to finance the acquisition, construction, and improvement of fire stations and related facilities, as more particularly described 894

Reso. No. _____

in the Improvements, in order to protect the public and ensure the continued delivery of essential fire and emergency medical services; and

WHEREAS, in order to initiate proceedings under the Bond Law to provide for the issuance of general obligation bonds, the City Council of the City (the “City Council”) must make certain findings and determinations; and

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richmond as follows:

Section 1. Declaration of Necessity to Issue Bonds . The public interest and necessity demand, and it is the intention of the City Council to require, the acquisition, construction and improvement of the Improvements, and to issue general obligation bonds (the “Bonds”) to finance the cost thereof, subject to completion of the proceedings required by the Bond Law.

Section 2. Findings. The City Council hereby finds and determines that the estimated costs of the Improvements will require an expenditure by the City greater than the amount allowed for it by the annual tax le vy of the City. The principal amount of the Bonds will not exceed the estimated cost of the Improvements.

Section 3. Issuance of the Bonds. This Resolution is adopted, and the Bonds, if approved by two-thirds of all voters voting on the proposition, are to be issued pursuant to the Bond Law.

Section 4. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect upon its adoption by two - thirds of all members of the City Council.

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

895

Reso. No. _____

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 July 21, 2026, by the following vote:

AYES: AYES:

NOES:

ABSTENTIONS:

ABSENT:

CLERK OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND
(SEAL)
Approved:

Mayor

Approved as to form:

Interim 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 July 21, 2026.

_______________________________________
Pamela Christian, Clerk of the City of Richmond
896

ORDINANCE NO. N.S.

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND,

CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE SUBMISSION OF A PROPOSITION OF

INCURRING A BONDED INDEBTEDNESS TO THE QUALIFIED VOTERS OF THE

CITY OF RICHMOND AT THE GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON NOVEMBER 3, 2026, FOR THE PURPOSE OF FINANCING THE COST OF THE

ACQUISITION, CONSTRUCTION AND IMPROVEMENT OF CERTAIN

MUNICIPAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS

WHEREAS, on July 21, 2026, the City Council of the City of Richmond, California (the “City”) adopted, by a two-thirds vote of all its members, a resolution entitled “A resolution of the City Council of the City of Richmond , California, determining that the public interest and necessity demand the acquisition, construction and improvement of certain municipal improvement projects, and their financing through the issuance of general obligation bonds,” pursuant to which the City Council has found and determined that the public interest and necessity demand the issuance of general obligation bonds to finance the cost of acquisition, construction and improvement of certain municipal improvements, consisting generally of: the repair, reconstruction, and seismic retrofit of aging and seismically unsafe fire stations; the renovation of firefighter living quarters , including abatement and removal of mold and asbestos ; the repair and replacement of deteriorating electrical, roofing, and plumbing systems; and other improvements to fire stations and related facilities necessary to support rapid 911 emergency medical and fire response, all as more particularly described in the Measure (as hereinafter defined); and
WHEREAS, existing funds and funding sources are inadequate to fina nce said improvements; and
WHEREAS, to provide for the issuance by the City of general obligation bonds to provide financing for said improvements, it is necessary for the City Council to adopt an ordinance ordering the submission of the proposition of inc urring bonded indebtedness for such purpose to the qualified voters of the City at a municipal election; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to submit said ballot measure to the qualified voters of the City at the regular election to be held in the City on November 3, 2026, and to consolidate the bond election with other elections held within the City on that date; The City Council of the City of Richmond do ordain as follows:

Section 1. Findings. The foregoing recitals are true and correct, and the City Council so finds and determines.

Section 2. Purpose and Intent. Pursuant to the authority provided by the California Government Code and California Elections Code, the City Council proposes to order the submission of a proposition of incurring bond indebtedness to the qualifie d voters of the City at the general municipal election to be held on November 3, 2026.

Section 3. Call for Election. The City Council hereby orders that a proposition of incurring bond indebtedness (hereinafter referred to as the “Measure”) be submitted to the qualified voters of the City in the form, and for the purposes, set forth in the Measure at the regular election to be held on November 3, 2026.

Section 4. Measure. The City Council hereby submits the Measure to the qualified voters of the City, at the regular election to be held on November 3, 2026. The statement of the Measure shall be in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit A.

Section 5. Object and Purpose of Bonds . The Measure authorizes the issuance of general obligation bonds (the “Bonds”), the object and purpose o f which is to finance the cost of the acquisition, construction and improvement of certain property to be used for municipal purposes (the “Improvements”), consisting of the following:
897

Ord. No. _____

(a) Repair, replace, or reconstruct fire stations that are deteriorating and/or seismically unsafe, including stations that are approximately 80 years old, with reconstruction undertaken where the City Council determines that replacement is more practical than renovation;
(b) Renovate, upgrade, reconstruct, or acquire firefighter l iving quarters, whether located at a fire station or elsewhere, including abatement and removal of mold and asbestos, to meet current (then-applicable, i.e., as of the time of construction) building code and industry standards;
(c) Repair or replace deteriorat ing electrical systems and infrastructure at fire stations;
(d) Repair or replace deteriorating roofs, plumbing, and piping at fire stations to address leaks and deferred maintenance;
(e) Make structural, seismic, and other resiliency improvements at fire stations , in addition to those described above, to improve their ability to remain operational during and after earthquakes, fires, floods, and other disasters or emergencies; (f) Repair, replace, or install fixtures and other permanently installed building systems at fire stations, including emergency generators, HVAC systems, and communications infrastructure, and make other building repairs and improvements at fire stations, to address conditions that impair their function in supporting rapid 911 emergency medical and fire response; and (g) Construct, renovate, upgrade, reconstruct, or acquire training facilities, administrative offices, apparatus bays, and other facilities supporting Fire Department operations.

The Improvements together constitute, and are intended by the City Council to constitute, a single, unified plan and program of municipal improvements for the City, and the listing of individual projects is intended to describe the components of that unified plan.

The authorized Improvements also include all work, facilities and expenditures necessary and incidental to the projects described above. Examples of such work, facilities, and expenditures include, but are not limited to: costs of design, engineering, architect and other professional services, inspections , site preparation, utilities, landscaping, construction management and other planning and permitting, legal, accounting and similar costs; a customary construction contingency; demolition and disposal of existing structures; rental or construction of storage facilities and other space on an interim basis for materials and other equipment and furnishings displaced during construction; addressing unforeseen conditions revealed by construction or renovation, and other necessary improvements required to comply with existing building codes and other applicable law, including the Americans with Disabilities Act; costs of the bond election; bond issuance costs; project administration during the duration of such projects; and financing and interest costs on the Bon ds. Proceeds of the Bonds shall be applied only to the acquisition or improvement of real property, including fixtures and other equipment constituting improvements to real property, and to costs necessary or incidental thereto, consistent with Section 1(b)(2) of Article XIII A of the California Constitution.

The final costs, locations, designs, layouts and other components of the Improvements will be determined as plans are finalized, construction bids are awarded, and projects are completed. The City Council shall determine the priority, order, and timing of the Improvements, the Improvements may be undertaken and completed in any order, and the completion of any individual project is not contingent upon the completion of any other project. The City Counci l cannot guarantee that the Bonds will provide sufficient funds to allow completion of all needed Improvements.

Section 6. Estimated Cost of Improvements. The estimated cost of the Improvements is $120,000,000. The estimated cost includes legal or other fees, the cos ts of printing the Bonds, and other costs and expenses incidental to or connected with the authorization, issuance and sale of the Bonds. To the extent the Improvements financed are revenue -producing public works, the 898

Ord. No. _____

cost of the Improvements may also incl ude bond interest estimated to accrue during the construction period and for a period of not to exceed 12 months after completion of construction.

Section 7. Principal Amount of Bonds. The aggregate principal amount of the Bonds to be issued is not to exceed $120,000,000.

Section 8. Maximum Interest Rate. The maximum rate of interest to be paid on the Bonds shall be 12% per annum. Said interest shall be payable semiannually, except that interest for the first year after the date of the Bonds may be made payable at the end of said year.

Section 9. Issuance and Sale of Bonds. The City proposes to issue and sell the Bonds pursuant to Article 1, commencing with Section 43600, of Chapter 4 of Division 4 of Title 4 of the California Government Code, or Article 4.5, commencing with Section 53506, of Chapter 3 of Part 1 of Division 2 of Title 5 of the California Government Code, in one or more series, in the maximum amount and for the objects and purposes set forth above if two -thirds of all qualified voters voting on the proposition set forth abov e vote in favor thereof. The Bonds will be general obligations of the City payable from and secured by ad valorem taxes levied and collected in the manner prescribed by the laws of the State of California. The revenue generated from the ad valorem tax levi ed and collected will be used for the payment of debt service on the Bonds. All the Bonds shall be equally and ratably secured, without priority, by the taxing power of the City.

Section 10. Manner of Conducting Election. The election on the Measure held on November 3 , 2026 shall be held and conducted, election officers appointed, voting precincts designated, ballots printed, polls opened and closed, ballots counted, and returned, returns canvassed, results declared, and all other proceedings incidental to and connecte d with the election shall be regulated and done in accordance with the provisions of law regulating the election with which it is consolidated.

Section 11. Procedure for Voting on Proposition. Ballots for the election shall be provided in the form and in the number provided by law. Voters shall be provided an opportunity to vote for or against the proposition on the ballot, in accordance with procedures to be adopted by the authorized officers of the County of Contra Costa charged with conducting the election.

Section 12. Accountability Requirements. In accordance with Sections 53410 and 53411 of the California Government Code, the City Council hereby adopts the following accountability requirements relating to the Bonds:
(a) The specific purpose of the Bonds is to finance the Improvements; and (b) The proceeds from the sale of the Bonds will be used only for the purposes specified in the Measure and not for any other purpose; and (c) The proceeds of the Bonds will be deposited into a separate account to be created and held by the City; and
(d) The Director of Finance of the City shall file a report with the Richmond City Council at least annually showing the amount of Bond proceeds collected and expended, and the status of the Improvements; and
(e) The City Council shall appoint a committee comprised of residents of the City to provide community oversight over the expenditure of the Bond proceeds. The size, composition, and specific responsibilities of the Community Oversight Committee will be determined by separate action of the City Council prior to the issuance of any of the Bonds; and
(f) All expenditures also will be subject to an annual independent financial audit to confirm that Bond expenditures are consistent with the intent of the Measure.

Section 13. Identification of Tax . The tax imposed by the Measure is an ad valorem tax levied upon taxable real property in the City, and will be used to pay the principal and interest on the Bonds.
899

Ord. No. _____

Section 14. Official Actions. The Mayor, the City Manager, the Deputy City Manager, the Director of Finance, the City Clerk, and any of their designees, are hereby authorized to execute any documents and to perform all acts necessary to place the Measure on the ballot.

Section 15. Tax Rate Statement. The City Council hereby finds that the estimates and projections contained in the Measure and in the Tax Rate Statement required by Section 9401 of the California Elections Code presented at this meeting and on file with the City Clerk have been made based on currently available information, but depend on a number of variables which are subject to variation. Such estimates and projections have been made in good faith and are not binding or intended to be limitations on the terms of the general obligation bonds proposed to be authorized in the Measure. The City Manager and Director of Finance, each acting alone, are hereby authorized to finalize and execute the Tax Rate Statement, and to file the tax rate statement with the Contra Costa County Registrar of Voters.

Section 16. Interpretation. The provisions of this Ordinance, being necessary for t he health, welfare, and safety of the City and its residents, is to be liberally interpreted to carry out its purposes. No error, irregularity or informality, and no neglect or omission of any officer, in any proceeding taken related to the submission of t he Measure to the qualified voters of the City shall void or invalidate any such proceeding, any Bonds issued by the City or any levy of ad valorem taxes to pay principal of and interest on the Bonds.

Section 17. Severability. If any provision of this Ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect any other provisions or applications, and to this end the provisions this Ordinance are declared to be severable.

Section 18. Publication of Ordinance. This Ordinance shall be published once a day for at least seven days in a newspaper published at least six days a week in the City, or once a week for two weeks in a newspaper published less than six days a week in the City. The first of said publications shall, in eithe r event, be within 15 days after the adoption of this Ordinance. If there are no such newspapers, it shall be posted in three public places in the City for two succeeding weeks. No other notice need be given.

Section 19. Effective Date. In accordance with Section 3693 7(a) of the California Government Code, this Ordinance shall become effective immediately, as an ordinance relating to an election, upon its adoption by two-thirds vote of all the members of the City Council.

*****************************
900

Ord. No. _____

First introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Richmond held on July 21, 2026, and finally passed and adopted at a regular meeting held on July 28, 2026, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTENTIONS:

ABSENT:

Clerk of the City of Richmond

(SEAL)

Approved:

Mayor

Approved as to form:

Interim City Attorney
901

EXHIBIT A

MEASURE TO BE SUBMITTED TO THE VOTERS AUTHORIZING

THE CITY OF RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA TO

ISSUE GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS

TO FINANCE MUNICIPAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS

Section 1. Findings.

WHEREAS, rapid response to fires, medical emergencies, and other disasters depends on a fire department infrastructure that is safe, reliable, and operational when needed, and much of the fire station infrastructure of the City of Richmond, California (the “City”) has aged well beyond its intended useful life and no longer reliably meets that need; and

WHEREAS, d eferred maintenance and the physical deterioration of the City’s aging fire stations, if left unaddressed, will continue to increase over time, resulting in higher repair costs, greater risk of facility failure, and increased risk to firefighters, paramedics, and the public they serve; and

WHEREAS, t he City, like many California communities, faces heightened exposure to earthquakes, wildfires, and other natu ral disasters, and it is essential that public safety infrastructure be capable of remaining operational and supporting emergency response efforts during and after such events; and

WHEREAS, m odern fire protection and emergency medical services require fac ilities and working conditions that meet current health, safety, and operational standards, and the City has an ongoing responsibility to maintain its public safety infrastructure accordingly; and

WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the City and necess ary for the preservation of the public peace, health, and safety to issue general obligation bonds to finance the acquisition, construction, and improvement of fire stations and related facilities, as more particularly described in this Measure , in order t o protect the public and ensure the continued delivery of essential fire and emergency medical services; and

WHEREAS, the City intends to issue general obligation bonds to finance the acquisition, construction and improvement of municipal improvement projects, and the City Council has found and determined that the public interest and necessity demand the issuance of general obligation bonds to finance the cost of acquisition, construction and improvement of certain municipal improvements, consisting generally of: the repair, reconstruction, and seismic retrofit of aging and seismically unsafe fire stations; the renovation of firefighter living quarters , including abatement and removal of mold and asbestos ; the repair and replacement of deteriorating electrical, roofing, and plumbing systems; and other improvements to fire stations and related facilities necessary to support rapid 911 emergency medical and fire response, all as more particularly described in this Measure; and

902

WHEREAS, existing funds and funding sources are inadequate to finance said improvements; and
WHEREAS, the issuance of general obligation bonds is the most cost -effective means available to the City to finance said i mprovements, as general obligation bonds typically bear lower interest rates than other forms of financing due to the security provided by the City ’s ad valorem tax pledge, thereby minimizing the overall cost to taxpayers of funding these necessary public safety improvements;
Section 2. Object and Purpose of Bonds.

This Measure authorizes the issuance of general obligation bonds (the “Bonds”), the object and purpose of which is to finance the cost of the acquisition, construction and improvement of certain property to be used for m unicipal purposes (the “Improvements”), consisting of the following:
(a) Repair, replace, or reconstruct fire stations that are deteriorating and/or seismically unsafe, including stations that are approximately 80 years old, with reconstruction undertaken whe re the City Council determines that replacement is more practical than renovation;
(b) Renovate, upgrade, reconstruct, or acquire firefighter living quarters, whether located at a fire station or elsewhere, including abatement and removal of mold and asbestos, to meet current (then-applicable, i.e., as of the time of construction) building code and industry standards;
(c) Repair or replace deteriorating electrical systems and infrastructure at fire stations;
(d) Repair or replace deteriorating roofs, plumbing, and pipi ng at fire stations to address leaks and deferred maintenance;
(e) Make structural, seismic, and other resiliency improvements at fire stations, in addition to those described above, to improve their ability to remain operational during and after earthquakes, fires, floods, and other disasters or emergencies; (f) Repair, replace, or install fixtures and other permanently installed building systems at fire stations, including emergency generators, HVAC systems, and communications infrastructure, and make other build ing repairs and improvements at fire stations, to address conditions that impair their function in supporting rapid 911 emergency medical and fire response; and (g) Construct, renovate, upgrade, reconstruct, or acquire training facilities, administrative offic es, apparatus bays, and other facilities supporting Fire Department operations.
903

The Improvements described above together constitute, and are intended by the City Council to constitute, a single, unified plan and program of municipal improvements for the C ity, and the listing of individual projects is intended to describe the components of that unified plan.

The authorized Improvements also include all work, facilities and expenditures necessary and incidental to the projects described above. Examples of s uch work, facilities, and expenditures include, but are not limited to: costs of design, engineering, architect and other professional services, inspections, site preparation, utilities, landscaping, construction management and other planning and permittin g, legal, accounting and similar costs; a customary construction contingency; demolition and disposal of existing structures; rental or construction of storage facilities and other space on an interim basis for materials and other equipment and furnishings displaced during construction; addressing unforeseen conditions revealed by construction or renovation, and other necessary improvements required to comply with existing building codes and other applicable law, including the Americans with Disabilities Ac t; costs of the bond election; bond issuance costs; project administration during the duration of such projects; and financing and interest costs on the Bonds. Proceeds of the Bonds shall be applied only to the acquisition or improvement of real property, including fixtures and other equipment constituting improvements to real property, and to costs necessary or incidental thereto, consistent with Section 1(b)(2) of Article XIII A of the California Constitution.

The final costs, locations, designs, layouts and other components of the Improvements will be determined as plans are finalized, construction bids are awarded, and projects are completed.

The City Council shall determine the priority, order, and timing of the Improvements, the Improvements may be u ndertaken and completed in any order, and the completion of any individual project is not contingent upon the completion of any other project. The City Council cannot guarantee that the Bonds will provide sufficient funds to allow completion of all needed Improvements.

Section 3. Estimated Cost of Improvements.

The estimated cost of the Improvements is $120,000,000. The estimated cost includes legal or other fees, the costs of printing the Bonds, and other costs and expenses incidental to or connected with the authorization, issuance and sale of the Bonds. To the extent the Improvements financed are revenue -producing public works, the cost of the Improvements may also include bond interest estimated to accrue during the construction period and for a pe riod of not to exceed 12 months after completion of construction.

Section 4. Principal Amount of Bonds.

The aggregate principal amount of the Bonds to be issued is not to exceed $120,000,000.

Section 5. Maximum Interest Rate.

The maximum rate of interest to be paid on the Bonds shall be 12% per annum.

904

Section 6. Accountability Requirements.

The following accountability measures apply to the issuance of the Bonds pursuant to this Measure:
(a) The specific purpose of the Bonds is to finance the Improvements; and (b) The proceeds from the sale of the Bonds will be used only for the purposes specified in this Measure and not for any other purpose; and (c) The proceeds of the Bonds will be deposited into a separate account to be created and held by the City; and
(d) The City Council shall appoint a committee comprised of residents of the City to provide community oversight over the expenditure of the Bond proceeds. The size, composition, and specific responsibilities of the Commu nity Oversight Committee will be determined by separate action of the City Council prior to the issuance of any of the Bonds; and
(f) All expenditures also will be subject to an annual independent financial audit to confirm that Bond expenditures are consistent with the intent of the Measure.

905

TAX RATE STATEMENT

An election will be held in the City of Richmond, California (the “City”) on November 3, 2026, to authorize the sale of up to $120,000,000 in bonds of the City to finance the specific projects listed in the measure. If such bonds are authorized, the City expects to sell the bonds in one or more series. Principal and interest on the bonds will be payable solely from the proceeds of ad valorem tax levies made upon the taxable property in the City. The following information is provided in compliance with sections 9400 -9404 of the California Elections Code. Such information is based upon the best estimates and projections presently available from official sources, upon experience within the City, and other demonstrable factors.

Based upon the foregoing and projections of the City’s assessed valuation:

1. The best estimate of the average annual tax rate that would be required to be levied to fund the bond issues over the entire duration of the bond debt service, based on a projection of assessed valuations available at the time of filing of this statement is $22.15 per $100,000 of assessed valuation of all property to be taxed. The best estimate of t he final fiscal year in which the tax is anticipated to be collected is 2060.

2. The best estimate of the highest tax rate that would be required to be levied to fund the bond issues, based on a projection of assessed valuations available at the time of filing this statement is $24.06 per $100,000 of assessed valuation of all property to be taxed. The best estimate of the first fiscal year in which the highest tax rate will apply is 2028.

3. The best estimate of the total debt service, including the principal and interest, that would be required to be repaid if all the bonds are issued and sold is $249,749,206.

Voters should note that such estimated tax rates are specific to the repayment of bonds issued under this authorization and are and will be in addition to tax rates levied in connection with other bond authorizations approved or to be approved by the City or any other overlapping public agency.

Voters should note that estimated tax rate is based on the assessed value of taxable property on Contra Costa County’s official tax rolls, not on the property’s market value. Property owners should consult their own property tax bills to determine their property’s assessed value and any applicable tax exemptions.

Attention of all voters is directed to the fact th at the foregoing information is based upon projections and estimates only, which amounts are not maximum amounts or durations and are not binding upon the City. The actual debt service amounts, tax rates and the years in which they will apply may vary from those presently estimated, due to variations from these estimates in the timing of bond sales, the amount of bonds sold and market interest rates at the time of each sale, and actual assessed valuations over the term of repayment of the bonds. The dates of sale and the amount of bonds sold at any given time will be determined by the City based on need for funds and other factors.

The actual interest rates at which the bonds will be sold will depend on the bond market at the time of each sale. Actual future assessed valuation will depend upon the amount and value of taxable property within the City as determined by the Contra Costa County assessor in the annual assessment and the equalization process.

906

Emily Combs
Director of Finance
City of Richmond, California

July __, 2026

907

July 21, 2026

Community Development

DATE: July 21, 2026
TO: Mayor Martinez and Members of the City Council
FROM:

Lina Velasco, Director of Community Development
Avery Stark, Planning Manager
Michele Morris, Senior Planner
Subject:

Zoning Text Amendments Related to Accessory Dwelling
Units and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no financial impact associated with this item.

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

November 10, 2020

STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:

There have been several changes to State law related to Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) and Junior Accessory
Dwelling Units (JADUs), with the most recent changes
effective on January 1, 2026. Prior to the newest
amendments going into effect, the City received a
courtesy review letter, dated October 21, 2024, from the California Department of Housing and Community
Development (HCD) which identified areas where the
City’s ADU ordinance was out of compliance with State
law. The purpose of the proposed zoning text
amendments are to update regulations in the Richmond
Municipal Code for accessory dwelling units (ADUs) and
junior accessory dwelling units (JADUs) to conform with State law.

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

HOLD a public hearing; and INTRODUCE (first reading)
an Ordinance, as recommended by the Planning
Commission, amending Sections 15.04.104.020,

15.04.201.030, 15.04.201.050, and 15.04.610.020 of the
Richmond Municipal Code updating the regulations for
accessory dwelling units and junior accessory dwelling
AGENDA
REPORT
908

July 21, 2026
units to conform with State law – Community
Development Department (Lina Velasco/Avery Stark 510-
620-6714).

BACKGROUND:

In October 2024, the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) completed a courtesy review of the City’s accessory dwelling unit (ADU) and junior accessory dwelling unit (JADU) ordinance adopted in November 2020. Since the City’s Ordinance was adopted in 2020, HCD’s letter dated October 21, 2024 (Attachment 1 identified several areas where the City’s ordinance is out of compliance with State law. The purpose of the proposed zoning text amendment is to update the regulations in the Richmond Municipal Code to conform with recent changes to State law related to ADUs and JADUs, including those conflicts identified by HCD in their review letter and those changes that went into effect on January 1, 2026.

Summary of Key Changes

Below are the key amendments proposed to the regulations for ADUs and JADUs in the Richmond Municipal Code to align with State law (specifically, RMC Sections

15.04.104.020, 15.04.201.030, 15.04.201.050, and 15.04.610.020):

 ADU Definition: Updating the definition of an accessory dwelling unit to include “permanent provision” for “living, sleeping, eating, cooking, and sanitation facilities”  JADU and Garages: Allowing the location of JADUs within attached garages  Height: Updating the permitted height for ADUs, up to 16,18, 20 or 25 feet, under certain conditions
 Parking: Elimination of parking standards for an ADU when a permit application has been submitted simultaneously with an application for a new single-family dwelling or a multifamily dwelling on that same lot
 Location Restrictions: Prohibits any requirement that does not permit at least an 800 square-foot ADU with four-foot side and rear yard setbacks (including in the front yard of the lot)
 Efficiency Kitchen: Allows an ADU to be an efficiency unit which includes having a “partial kitchen” (see California Health and Safety Code 17958.1)  Deed Restriction: Removes the requirement of a deed restriction for an ADU  Historic Resource Definition: Replaces definition of identified historical resources to only be resources listed in the California Register of Historic Resources
 Legally in Existence: Removes the requirement that a portion of a single-family dwelling or accessory structure be “legally in existence” before a conversion to an ADU can occur
 Unit Mixture: Removes the limitation of one type of ADU per lot and allows for all by-right ADU combinations
 Unit Allowances: Allows one JADU per lot in a single-family zone regardless of 909

July 21, 2026
what type of ADU (detached, attached or conversion) is present on the lot.  JADUs and Accessory Structures: A JADU may not be located in an accessory structure, and the expansion of 150 square feet for ingress and egress does not apply to JADUs
 JADUs and Deed Restrictions: Changes the conditions for a deed restriction for JADUs to comply with Government Code section 66333, subdivision (c).

Planning Commission Recommendation

On July 2, 2026, the City’s Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed zoning text amendments to the Richmond Municipal Code (RMC) to provide a recommendation to the City Council. The Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 26-15 recommending that the City Council approve the proposed zoning text amendments to RMC Sections 15.04.104.020, 15.04.201.030, 15.04.201.050, and

15.04.610.020 related to ADUs and JADUs to conform with State law (Attachment 2).

Zoning Text Amendment Findings

A draft of the proposed Ordinance is in Attachment 1 of this Agenda Report. The City Council approving amendments to the Zoning Ordinance (Article XV of the RMC) must make the findings pursuant to RMC Section 15.04.814.050 (Attachment 3). The ordinance includes the following findings and statements of fact demonstrating that the required findings have been satisfied:

A. The proposed amendment is consistent with the General Plan.

Statement of Fact: The proposed zoning text amendment is consistent with General Plan Housing Element Program H-1.4.3 which aims to continue the facilitation of accessory dwelling unit production in part to provide a balanced supply of housing types, densities, and prices to meet the needs of all income groups and amend the ordinance to ensure compliance with State law.

B. The proposed amendment is necessary for public health, safety, and general welfare or will be of benefit to the public.

Statement of Fact: The proposed zoning text amendment will benefit the public by increasing housing production within the City of Richmond and ensuring local regulations comply with State law. California’s housing production is not keeping pace with demand and the lack of housing supply impacts affordability. The State legislature has determined that ADUs and JADUs are critical forms of infill housing development that can be affordable and offer important housing choices within existing neighborhoods, and an effective option for adding much needed housing in California.

C. The proposed amendment has been reviewed in compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. 910

July 21, 2026

Statement of Fact: The proposed zoning text amendments to the Municipal Code are statutorily exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 21080.17 of the Public Resources Code, which provides that CEQA does not apply to the adoption of an ordinance to implement the Article 2 (commencing with Section 66314) or Article 3 (commencing with Section 66333) of Chapter 13 of Division 1 of Title 7 of, the Government Code. The proposed amendment is also exempt from environmental review pursuant to Other Statutory Exemptions, Section 15061(b)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines since it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the Ordinance may have a significant effect on the environment. Regardless of whether the City adopts this Ordinance, accessory dwelling units and junior accessory dwelling units must be allowed in the City in accordance with the standards set forth in State law. Therefore, it can be seen with certainty that the project will not cause any significant impacts.

D. For a change to the Zoning Maps, that the subject property is suitable for the uses permitted in the proposed zone in terms of access, size of parcel, relationship to similar or related uses, and other relevant considerations, and that the proposed change of zoning district is not detrimental to the use of adjacent properties.

Statement of Fact: The proposed zoning text amendment will not change the Zoning map; therefore, the subject finding is not applicable.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:

The project is statutorily exempt from California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review under CEQA Guidelines Section 15282(h), which includes the adoption of an ordinance regarding second units in a single-family or multifamily residential zone by a city to implement provisions of Sections 65852.1 and 65852.2 of the Government Code, as set forth in 21080.17 of the Public Resources Code. Under California Public Resources Code Section 21080.17, CEQA does not apply to the adoption of an ordinance by a city or county implementing the provisions of Article 2 of Chapter 13 of Division 1 of Title 7 of the Government Code, which is California's ADU and JADU law.

Therefore, the adoption of the proposed ordinance is statutorily exempt from CEQA in that it implements State ADU and JADU law.

The proposed amendment is also exempt from environmental review pursuant to Other Statutory Exemptions, Section 15061(b)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines since it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the Ordinance may have a significant effect on the environment. Regardless of whether the City adopts this Ordinance, accessory dwelling units and junior accessory dwelling units must be allowed in the City in accordance with the standards set forth in State law.

Therefore, it can be seen with certainty that the project will not cause any significant 911

July 21, 2026
impacts.

CONCLUSION:

City staff recommend that the City Council hold a public hearing and introduce (first reading) the Ordinance, in Attachment 1, amending RMC Sections 15.04.104.020,

15.04.201.030, 15.04.201.050, and 15.04.610.020 updating regulations for accessory dwelling units and junior accessory dwelling units to conform with State law.

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:

Attachment 1 – HCD Letter dated October 21, 2024
Attachment 2 – PC Resolution No. 26-15
Attachment 3 – Draft Ordinance
Attachment 4 – Proposed Zoning Amendments in Redline

912
STATE OF CALIFORNIA - BUSINESS, CONSUMER SERVICES AND HOUSING AGENCY GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

DIVISION OF HOUSING POLICY DEVELOPMENT
651 Bannon Street
Sacramento, CA 95811
(916) 263-2911 / FAX (916) 263-7453

October 21, 2024
Lina Velasco, Community Development Director
Community Development
City of Richmond
450 Civic Center Plaza, 2nd Floor
Richmond, CA 94804

Dear Lina Velasco:

RE: Review of Richmond’s Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Ordinance under State ADU Law (Gov. Code, §§ 66310 – 66342)
Please Note: As of March 25, 2024, with the Chaptering of Senate Bill (SB) 477 (Chapter 7, Statutes of 2024), the sections of Government Code relevant to State ADU and Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit (JADU) Law have been re-numbered (Enclosure 1).

Thank you for submitting the City of Richmond’s (City) ADU Ordinance No. 27-20 (Ordinance), adopted November 10, 2020, to the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). HCD has reviewed the Ordinance and submits these written findings pursuant to Government Code section 66326, subdivision (a). HCD finds that the Ordinance does not comply with State ADU and JADU Laws in the manner noted below. Under section 66326, subdivision (b)(1), the City has up to 30 days to respond to these findings. Accordingly, the City must provide a written response to these findings no later than November 20, 2024.

The Ordinance addresses many statutory requirements; however, HCD finds that the Ordinance does not comply with State ADU Law in the following respects:

1. Statutory Numbering - The Ordinance contains several references to code sections that were deleted by SB 477, effective March 25, 2024. These include Government Code sections 65852.2, 65852.22 and 65852.26. The contents of these sections were relocated to Government Code, Title 7, Division 1, Chapter 13 (sections 66310-66342, see Enclosure). The City must amend the Ordinance to refer to the correct code sections.

2. Section 15.04.104.020 – Definition – The Ordinance defines ADU as “…including living, sleeping, eating, cooking, and sanitation facilities, on the same lot as a proposed or existing single-family dwelling or existing multifamily dwelling.” However, Government Code section 66313, subdivision (a) requires “permanent provisions”. Therefore, the City must amend the Ordinance to require “permanent provisions” for “living, sleeping, eating, cooking, and sanitation facilities”.

913
Lina Velasco, Community Development Director

3. Sections 15.04.104.020, 15.04.610.020 D.5.f. – JADU and Garages – The Ordinance defines a JADU as “An accessory dwelling unit that is no more than 500 square feet in size, includes an efficiency kitchen consistent with building code standards, and is contained entirely within a proposed or existing single- family dwelling.” However, Government Code section 66333, subdivision (d) states “enclosed uses within the residence, such as attached garages, are considered a part of the proposed or existing single-family residence.” Therefore, the City must amend the Ordinance to clarify that JADUs may be created within enclosed uses, such as attached garages, to comply with State ADU Law.

4. S
ections 15.04.201.030 A.; 15.04.201.050 B.; 15.04.610.020 C.3.e, D.1.c., D.1.d., D.3.a., D.4.a.ii., D.4.b.ii., D.5.a.i. – Height – The Ordinance makes numerous references to a height limit of 16 feet. However, Government Code section 66321, subdivision (b)(4) permits heights up to 16,18, 20 or 25 feet, under certain conditions. The City must ensure the Ordinance complies with height standards provided in State ADU Law.

5. Section 15.04.610.020 C.4. – Parking – The Ordinance states, “No additional parking shall be required…” before introducing the categories of parking exceptions. However, Government Code section 66322, subdivision (a), requires that “A local agency shall not impose any parking standards for an accessory dwelling unit in any of the following instances....” The phrase “additional parking” in the Ordinance implies the application of underlying parking standards which would be inconsistent with State ADU Law.

6. A dditionally, the Ordinance omits reference to the conditions of subdivision (a)(6), which prohibit any parking standards “When a permit application for an accessory dwelling unit is submitted with a permit application to create a new single-family dwelling or a new multifamily dwelling on the same lot, provided that the accessory dwelling unit or the parcel satisfies any other criteria listed in this subdivision.”
Therefore, the City must amend the Ordinance to comply with the parking standards established in State ADU Law.

7. Section 15.04.610.020 B. – Denial – The Ordinance states, “All accessory dwelling unit and junior accessory dwelling unit applications shall be approved or disapproved within 60 days of receiving a completed application…” However, Government Code section 66317, subdivision (b) requires that upon denial, local jurisdictions must “…return in writing a full set of comments to the applicant with a list of items that are defective or deficient and a description of how the application can be remedied by the applicant.” Therefore, the City must amend the Ordinance to reflect the entirety of the approval and denial process to comply with State ADU Law.

8. Section 15.04.610.020 C.1. – Location Restrictions – The Ordinance states, “An accessory dwelling unit shall be located behind the primary dwelling.” This has the effect of extending exclusively for the purposes of ADU development, a 914
Lina Velasco, Community Development Director

required front setback to the rear line of a primary structure. However, local development standards may not preclude any unit subject to Government Code section 66323. The City must amend the Ordinance to note the exceptions.

A
dditionally, for units subject to local development standards pursuant to section 66314, section 66321, subdivision (b)(3) prohibits “Any requirement for a zoning clearance or separate zoning review or any other minimum or maximum size for an accessory dwelling unit, size based upon a percentage of the proposed or existing primary dwelling, or limits on lot coverage, floor area ratio, open space, front setbacks, and minimum lot size, for either attached or detached dwellings that does not permit at least an 800 square foot accessory dwelling unit with four- foot side and rear yard setbacks to be constructed in compliance with all other local development standards.” Therefore, the application of front setbacks cannot preclude the development of an 800 square foot ADU subject to Government Code section 66321, subdivision (b)(3). The City must amend the Ordinance to allow at least an 800 square foot ADU in front of the primary dwelling.

9. Section 15.04.610.020 C.2. – Efficiency Kitchen – The Ordinance states, “An accessory dwelling unit and junior accessory dwelling unit must contain its own kitchen.” However, Government Code section 66313, subdivision (a)(1) allows an ADU to be “an efficiency unit” and the Health and Safety Code 17958.1 allows having a “partial kitchen”. The City must note the exception.

10. Section 15.04.610.020 C.5. – Deed Restriction – The Ordinance requires a recorded deed restriction for ADUs to restrict separate sale, size and attributes, and other provisions. However, Government Code section 66315 states, “No additional standards, other than those provided in Section 66314, shall be used or imposed, including an owner-occupant requirement, except that a local agency may require that the property may be used for rentals of terms 30 days or longer.” A deed restriction would be an “additional standard” and thus cannot be imposed. Therefore, the City must amend the Ordinance to remove this section.

11. Section 15.04.610.020 C.3.f. – Local Historic Register – The Ordinance states, “The architectural treatment of an ADU to be constructed on a lot that has an identified historical resource listed on the federal, state, or local register of historic places shall comply with all applicable ministerial requirements imposed by the Secretary of the Interior.” However, Government Code section 66314, subdivision (b)(1) states that local jurisdictions may, “Impose standards on accessory dwelling units that… prevent adverse impacts on any real property that is listed in the California Register of Historic Resources.” State ADU Law does not include local registers. The City must remove the references to any other historic district, register, or overlay zone.

12. Section 15.04.610.020 D.1.f. – “Legally in Existence” – The Ordinance states, “A portion of a single-family dwelling or detached accessory structure legally in existence may be converted into an accessory dwelling unit….” However, 915
Lina Velasco, Community Development Director

Government Code section 66314, subdivision (d)(3) and section 66323, subdivisions (a)(1) and (a)(3), do not require that the conversion of existing space be ‘legally in existence’. The City must amend the Ordinance to remove the phrase “legally in existence”.

13. S
ection 15.04.610.020 D.4.a. and b.– Unit Mixture – The Ordinance states, “…one of the following categories of accessory dwelling units shall be permitted on a lot….” This phrase is used before the introduction of all four section 66323 ADU types, separated by primary unit type. Later, it states that “A junior accessory dwelling unit is not permitted on a lot with an accessory dwelling unit unless the unit is…” and then refers to the units described in section 66323. This limits ADU development to one format per lot.

However, Government Code section 66323 states, "Notwithstanding Sections 66314 to 66322, inclusive, a local agency shall ministerially approve an application for a building permit within a residential or mixed-use zone to create any of the following: (1) One accessory dwelling unit and one junior accessory dwelling unit per lot with a proposed or existing single-family dwelling…(A) The accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit is within the proposed space of a single family dwelling or existing space of a single-family dwelling or accessory structure." Subparagraph (2) permits "[o]ne detached, new construction, accessory dwelling unit that does not exceed four-foot side and rear yard setbacks." The use of the term "any" followed by an enumeration of by right ADU types permitted indicate that any of these ADU types can be combined on a lot zoned for single family dwellings.

This permits a homeowner, who meets specified requirements, to create one converted ADU; one detached, new construction ADU; and one JADU. Thus, if the local agency approves an ADU that is created from existing (or proposed) space, and the owner subsequently applies for a detached ADU (or vice versa) that meets the size and setbacks pursuant to the subdivision, the local agency cannot deny the application, nor deny a permit for a JADU under this section.

HCD notes that the Legislature, in creating the list, did not use "or" nor "one of" to indicate only one or another would be applicable to the exclusion of the other.

Limiting single-family lots to one ADU would prevent property owners from creating ADUs by-right under section 66323. Therefore, the City must amend the Ordinance to allow for all by-right ADU combinations.

14. Section 15.04.610.020 D.5.a. – JADU Allowances – The Ordinance states, “A junior accessory dwelling unit is not permitted on a lot with an accessory dwelling unit unless the unit is…” and then refers to the units described in section 66323.

However, Government Code section 66333, subdivision (a) permits one JADU “…per residential lot zoned for single-family residences with a single-family residence built, or proposed to be built, on the lot.” One JADU is permitted per lot in a single-family zone regardless of what type of ADU (detached, attached or 916
Lina Velasco, Community Development Director

conversion) is present on the lot. Therefore, the City must amend the Ordinance to remove this restriction.

15. S ection 15.04.610.020 D.5.a.ii. – JADUs and Accessory Structures – The Ordinance section on JADUs states that “an accessory dwelling unit within the proposed or existing space of a single-family dwelling or existing space of an accessory structure. The accessory dwelling unit within the existing space of an accessory structure may include an expansion of not more than 150 square feet beyond the same physical dimensions as the existing accessory structure to accommodate ingress and egress. The accessory dwelling unit shall have exterior access from the single-family home. The setbacks must be sufficient for fire and safety.” However, Government Code section 66333, subdivision (d) requires that JADUs be created “…within the walls of the proposed or existing single-family residence. For purposes of this paragraph, enclosed uses within the residence, such as attached garages, are considered a part of the proposed or existing single-family residence.” JADUs may not be located in an accessory structure, and the expansion of 150 square feet for ingress does not apply to JADUs. The City must amend the Ordinance to comply with State ADU Law.

15.S
ection 04.610.020 D.5.e. – JADUs and Deed Restrictions – The Ordinance states “A deed restriction shall be completed and recorded, in compliance with paragraph D(5) above.” However, the deed restriction omits conditions required in Government Code section 66333, subdivision (c): “(1) A prohibition on the sale of the junior accessory dwelling unit separate from the sale of the single-family residence, including a statement that the deed restriction may be enforced against future purchasers. (2) A restriction on the size and attributes of the junior accessory dwelling unit that conforms with this article.” Therefore, the City must amend the Ordinance to remove the requirement for a deed restriction.

Please note that the City has two options in response to this letter. 1 The City can either
amend the Ordinance to comply with State ADU Law2 or adopt the Ordinance without changes and include findings in its resolution adopting the Ordinance that explain the reasons the City believes that the Ordinance complies with State ADU Law despite HCD’s findings.
3 If the City fails to take either course of action and bring the Ordinance into compliance with State ADU Law, HCD must notify the City and may notify the California Office of the Attorney General that the City is in violation of State ADU Law.4

1 Gov. Code, § 66326, subd. (c)(1).
2 Gov. Code, § 66326, subd. (b)(2)(A).
3 Gov. Code, § 66326, subd. (b)(2)(B).
4 Gov. Code, § 66326, subd. (c)(1).
917
Lina Velasco, Community Development Director

H
CD appreciates the City’s efforts in the preparation and adoption of the Ordinance and welcomes the opportunity to assist the City in fully complying with State ADU Law.

Please feel free to contact mike VanGorder at [email protected] i f you have any questions.

S
incerely,

J
amie Candelaria
Senior Housing Accountability Manager
Housing Policy Development Division

E
nclosure
918
State ADU/JADU Law Statutory Conversion Table
New Government Code Sections Previous Government Code Sections Article 1. General Provisions
66310 65852.150 (a)
66311 65852.150 (b)
66312 65852.150 (c)
66313 General Definition Section
65852.2 (j)
65852.22 (j)
Article 2. Accessory Dwelling Unit Approvals
66314 65852.2(a)(1)(A), (D)(i)-(xii), (a)(4)-(5)
66315 65852.2 (a)(8)
66316 65852.2 (a)(6)
66317 65852.2 (a)(3), (a)(7)
66318 65852.2 (a)(9), 65852.2 (a)(2)
66319 65852.2 (a)(10)
66320 65852.2 (b)
66321 65852.2 (c)
66322 65852.2 (d)
66323 65852.2 (e)
66324 65852.2 (f)
66325 65852.2 (g)
66326 65852.2 (h)
66327 65852.2 (i)
66328 65852.2 (k)
66329 65852.2 (l)
66330 65852.2 (m)
66331 65852.2 (n)
66332 65852.23.

Article 3. Junior Accessory Dwelling Units
66333 65852.22 (a)
66334 65852.22 (b)
66335 65852.22 (c)
66336 65852.22 (d)
66337 65852.22 (e)
66338 65852.22 (f)-(g)
66339 65852.22 (h)
Article 4. Accessory Dwelling Unit Sales
66340 65852.26 (b)
66341 65852.26 (a)
66342 65852.2 (a)(10)
919
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 26-15

A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND

RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND ADOPT

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE XV OF THE RICHMOND

MUNICIPAL CODE RELATED TO ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS AND JUNIOR

ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS
WHEREAS, pursuant to Article Xl, section 7 of the California Constitution and sections 36931 et seq. of the California Government Code, the City may make and enforce within its limits all local, police, sanitary and other ordinances and regulations not in conflict with general laws; and
WHEREAS, the General Plan is the City's constitution for future development and any decision by a City affecting land use and development must be consistent with the General Plan; and
WHEREAS, Housing Element Program H-1.4.3 aims to continue the facilitation of secondary dwelling unit production in part to provide a balanced supply of housing types, densities, and prices to meet the needs of all income groups residing or wishing to reside in the City and to comply with state law; and
WHEREAS, in order to encourage the construction of additional dwelling units to provide more housing for California residents, the State of California has enacted California Government Code sections 66310 through 66342 to encourage the construction of accessory dwelling units and junior accessory dwelling units that went into effect on October 10, 2025 and January 1,2026;and
WHEREAS, Government Code sections 66310 through 66342 require the City to adopt zoning regulations in compliance with state law provisions regarding accessory dwelling units and junior accessory dwelling units; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that the amendments are consistent with the purposes of the General Plan, the purposes of the Municipal Code, and other applicable City ordinances; and
WHEREAS, on April 2, 2026, the Planning Commission held a duly and properly noticed public hearings and considered a recommendation to the City Council proposed zoning text ordinance amendments to Sections 15.04.104.020, 15.04.201.030,

15.04.201.050, and 15.04.610.020 (Accessory Dwelling Units and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units) of the Richmond Municipal Code; and to adopt the amendments to Richmond Municipal Code Sections 15.04.104.020, 15.04.201.030, 15.04.201.050, and

15.04.610.020 (Accessory Dwelling Units and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units), which comply with State ADU Law (Government Code sections 66310 through 66342); and July 2, 2026 Page 1 of 3 Resolution
920
WHEREAS, due to a clerical error within the proposed draft ordinance submitted for review by Planning Commission on April 2, 2026, staff has revised the draft ordinance and requested the Planning Commission for a public hearing to reconsider a recommendation to the City Council on the proposed zoning text amendments to the Richmond Municipal Code related to accessory dwelling units and junior accessory dwelling units; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has considered the proposed agenda report, all public comments, and the amendments of and adoptions to Sections

15.04.104.020, 15.04.201.030, 15.04.201.050, and 15.04.610.020 (Accessory Dwelling Units and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units) of the Richmond Municipal Code, all dated July 2, 2026, and as set forth in this Resolution and the applicable provisions of the Richmond Municipal Code ("the Record").

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Richmond hereby RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of the Ordinance attached hereto as Exhibit A, amending Article 15 of the Richmond Municipal Code; based on the following findings:
1) The proposed amendments to the Municipal Code are statutorily exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 21080.17 of the Public Resources Code, which provides that CEQA does not apply to the adoption of an ordinance to implement the provisions of Sections 66310 through 66342 of the Government Code. The proposed amendments are also exempt from environmental review pursuant to General Rule, Section 15061(b)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines since it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the Ordinance may have a significant effect on the environment. Regardless of whether the City adopts this Ordinance, accessory dwelling units and junior accessory dwelling units must be allowed in the City in accordance with the standards set forth in state law. Therefore, it can be seen with certainty that the project will not cause any significant impacts; and
2) The facts set forth in the recitals in this Resolution are true and correct and incorporated by reference. The recitals constitute findings in this matter and, together with the agenda report, other written reports, public testimony and other information contained in the record, are an adequate and appropriate evidentiary basis for the actions taken in this Resolution; and
3) The amendments of and adoption to Sections 15.04.104.020,

15.04.201.030, 15.04.201.050, and 15.04.610.020 (Accessory Dwelling Units and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units) of the Richmond Municipal Code are consistent with the General Plan, Richmond Municipal Code, and applicable federal and state law; and July 2, 2026 Page 2 of 3 Resolution
921
4) The amendments of and adoption to Sections 15.04.104.020,

15.04.201.030, 15.04.201.050, and 15.04.610.020 (Accessory Dwelling Units and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units) of the Richmond Municipal Code will advance the public interest, health, safety, convenience or welfare.

NOW THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council adopt the amendments to Richmond Municipal Code by amending Sections 15.04.104.020, 15.04.201.030, 15.04.201.050, and

15.04.610.020 (Accessory Dwelling Units and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units) of the Richmond Municipal Code, attached to the Agenda Report dated July 2,2026.

I certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Richmond at a regular meeting thereof held on July 2, 2026, by the following vote:

Chair Jonathan Harrison, Secretary Gay Timmons,
AYES: Shahzaib Shahid, Diana Benitez
NOES: None
ABSTENTIONS: None
ABSENT: Vice-Chair Bruce Brubaker, Alexander Golovets
Approved:

HMdthan Haf-Hscn
Jonathan Harrison (Jul 7. 2026 14'21:21 PDT)
Chair of the Planning Commission
Approved as to form:
/^'ts^c^'
Sei^tor Assistant City Attorney
July 2, 2026 Page 3 of 3 Resolution
922

DocID #74246v1
ORDINANCE NO. __-26

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF RICHMOND AMENDING SECTIONS 15.04.104.020,

15.04.201.030, 15.04.201.050, AND 15.04.610.020 OF THE RICHMOND MUNICIPAL CODE TO COMPLY

WITH STATE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT LAW, AND FINDING THE ACTION EXEMPT FROM THE

CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA)

WHEREAS, California’s Accessory Dwelling Unit Law (Government Code § 66310 et seq.) encourages the production of housing by requiring local jurisdictions to allow accessory dwelling units in any zoning district that allows single-family or multifamily residential use, apply limited development standards for accessory dwelling units, and provide for a streamlined review process; and

WHEREAS, California Government Code § 66314 allows local governments to adopt an ordinance regulating accessory dwelling units, provided the regulations are consistent with State law; and

WHEREAS, Section 15.04.610.020 of the Richmond Municipal Code (RMC) contains regulations for accessory dwelling units (ADUs) and Junior Accessory Dwellings (JADUs); and

WHEREAS, Richmond Municipal Code Section 15.04.610.020 was last amended via Ordinance No. 27-20 N.S., adopted on November 10, 2020; and

WHEREAS, this ordinance (“Ordinance”) amends various sections of the RMC to align with recent changes to State law related to ADUs and JADUs (including but not limited to Government Code § 66310 et seq.); and

WHEREAS, on July 2, 2026, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the proposed Ordinance related to ADUs and JADUs, received the staff report and staff presentation, received comments from the public and interested parties, and discussed the matter.

Following the public hearing, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 26-15 recommending the City Council adopt the proposed Ordinance; and

WHEREAS, on July 21, 2026, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the proposed Ordinance related to ADUs and JADUs, received the staff report and staff presentation, received comments from the public and interested parties, considered the recommendation of the Planning Commission, and discussed the matter; and

WHEREAS, on the basis of the application, plans, materials, and testimony at or before the public hearing, the City Council adopts the following findings and statements of fact in approving the proposed zoning text amendment pursuant to RMC Section 15.04.814.050:

923

DocID #74246v1
A. The proposed amendment is consistent with the General Plan.

Statement of Fact: The proposed zoning text amendment is consistent with General Plan Housing Element Program H-1.4.3 which aims to continue the facilitation of accessory dwelling unit production in part to provide a balanced supply of housing types, densities, and prices to meet the needs of all income groups and amend the ordinance to ensure compliance with State law.

B. The proposed amendment is necessary for public health, safety, and general welfare or will be of benefit to the public.

Statement of Fact: The proposed zoning text amendment will benefit the public by increasing housing production within the City of Richmond and ensuring local regulations comply with State law. California’s housing production is not keeping pace with demand and the lack of housing supply impacts affordability. The State legislature has determined that ADUs and JADUs are critical forms of infill housing development that can be affordable and offer important housing choices within existing neighborhoods, and an effective option for adding much needed housing in California.

C. The proposed amendment has been reviewed in compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act.

Statement of Fact: The proposed zoning text amendment to the Richmond Municipal Code is statutorily exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 21080.17 of the Public Resources Code, which provides that CEQA does not apply to the adoption of an ordinance to implement Article 2 (commencing with Section 66314) or Article 3 (commencing with Section 66333) of Chapter 13 of Division 1 of Title 7 of the Government Code. The proposed amendment is also exempt from environmental review pursuant to General Rule, Section 15061(b)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines since it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the Ordinance may have a significant effect on the environment. Regardless of whether the City adopts this Ordinance, accessory dwelling units and junior accessory dwelling units must be allowed in the City in accordance with the standards set forth in State law. Therefore, it can be seen with certainty that the project will not cause any significant impacts.

D. For a change to the Zoning Maps, that the subject property is suitable for the uses permitted in the proposed zone in terms of access, size of parcel, relationship to similar or related uses, and other relevant considerations, and that the proposed change of zoning district is not detrimental to the use of adjacent properties.

Statement of Fact: The proposed zoning text amendment will not change the Zoning map; therefore, the subject finding is not applicable.

924

DocID #74246v1

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. The recitals above are true and correct and are hereby adopted as the City Council’s findings.

SECTION 2. The City Council finds that adoption of this Ordinance is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.) pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080.17, which statutorily exempts the adoption of an ordinance by a city or county implementing Article 2 (commencing with Section 66314) or Article 3 (commencing with Section 66333) of Chapter 13 of Division 1 of Title 7 of the Government Code (State ADU Law), and pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines since it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the Ordinance may have a significant effect on the environment.

SECTION 3. The Ordinance would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City, as the proposed Ordinance will ensure the City’s zoning ordinance complies with State law related to ADUs and JADUs.

SECTION 4. The City Council has reviewed, considered, and evaluated all of the information prior to acting upon this Ordinance.

SECTION 5. The documents and other materials that constitute the record of proceedings upon which the City Council has based its recommendation are located in and may be obtained from the Planning Division, 450 Civic Center Plaza, Richmond, CA 94804.

SECTION 6. By this ordinance, the City Council approves the zoning text amendment as redlined in Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof.

SECTION 7. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be unconstitutional or invalid, the remaining portions of this Ordinance shall remain in full force and effect. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed each section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance irrespective of the unconstitutionality or invalidity of any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase.

SECTION 8. Effective Date. This Ordinance becomes effective thirty (30) days after its final passage and adoption.

-----------------------------------------------------

925

DocID #74246v1

First introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Richmond held _______________________ and finally passed and adopted at a regular meeting held _________________________by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTENTIONS:

ABSENT:

CLERK OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND
(SEAL)
Approved:

Mayor

Approved as to form:

City Attorney

926

DocID #74246v1

EXHIBIT A
All definitions within this section remain unchanged, except the following definitions are modified or added as noted below:

15.04.104.020 - Definitions.

Accessory Dwelling Unit. An attached or detached residential dwelling that provides complete, independent living facilities for one or more persons, and is located on the same lot as a proposed or existing single-family dwelling or multifamily dwelling. It shall include permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking, and sanitation on the same parcel that the single-family or multifamily dwelling is, or will be, situated. An accessory dwelling unit may be within the same structure as the primary dwelling, in an attached structure, or in a separate detached structure on the same lot. An accessory dwelling unit also includes the following: (i) an efficiency unit, as defined in Section 17958.1 of the Health and Safety Code; and (ii) a manufactured home as defined in Section 18007 of the Health and Safety Code. This use is distinguished from a duplex.

Duplex. A single building that contains two dwelling units or two single unit dwellings on a single parcel.

An accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit does not count as either of the dwelling units that make up a duplex.

Efficiency Unit. Efficiency unit has the same meaning as defined in Section 17958.1 of the California Health and Safety Code.

Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit. A residential dwelling that is no more than 500 square feet of interior livable space in size and is contained entirely within a proposed or existing single-family dwelling, including within accessory spaces enclosed within the residence such as an attached garage. A junior accessory dwelling unit may include separate sanitation facilities or may share sanitation facilities that are within the existing structure.

Livable Space. A space in a dwelling intended for human habitation, including living, sleeping, eating, cooking, or sanitation.

Multifamily Dwelling. For the purposes of Section 15.04.610.020, a structure with two or more attached dwellings on a single lot is considered a multifamily dwelling. Multiple detached single-family dwellings on the same lot are not considered multifamily dwellings for the purposes of Section 15.04.610.020.

The following Section 15.04.201.030 remains unchanged, except for the following subsection A is modified and subsection J is added as noted below:

15.04.201.030 - Development Standards—RH, RL1 and RL2 Districts.

Additional Development Standards for RH and RL Districts A. Accessory Building Maximum Height. A 14-foot height limit applies to accessory buildings or structures.

J. Accessory Dwelling Unit Development Standards. The applicable development standards for accessory dwelling units are provided in Section 15.04.610.020.

927

DocID #74246v1
The following Section 15.04.201.050 remains unchanged, except for the following subsection B is modified and subsection H is added as noted below:

15.04.201.050 - Development Standards—RM Districts.

Additional Development Standards—RM Districts
B. Accessory Building Height. If a peak roof is used, the height limit may be increased to 14 feet.

H. Accessory Dwelling Unit Development Standards. The applicable development standards for accessory dwelling units are provided in Section 15.04.610.020.

The following Section 15.04.610.020 is deleted and replaced as noted below:

15.04.610.020 - Accessory Dwelling Units and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units.

Accessory dwelling units (ADUs) must be located, developed, and operated in compliance with the standards of this Section 15.04.610.020 on a legal lot where single-family or multi-family dwellings are permitted and that contains an existing or proposed single family dwelling or an existing or proposed multifamily dwelling. Junior accessory dwelling units (JADUs) must be located, developed, and operated in compliance with the standards of this Section 15.04.610.020 on a legal lot that is zoned for single- family residential use, and that contains an existing or proposed single family dwelling.

A. Zoning Compliance Review and Building Permit Applications. An accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit application must be considered through the building permit process, which requires the submission and approval of a zoning compliance review application and a building permit application. An applicant for an accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit must submit the application fees and all of the information contained on the zoning compliance review application form and building permit application form provided by the City to the Zoning Administrator and Building Official, as applicable, for ministerial review. No discretionary review or hearing may be permitted unless the application includes other work unrelated to the accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit, in which case the discretionary review or hearing shall be limited to the work unrelated to the application for the accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit.

B. Time Limit to Act on Applications.

1. Completeness Determination. The City must determine if an accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit application is complete and provide written notice of the completeness determination within 15 business days of receipt. If the permit application is incomplete, the written notice to the applicant must include a comprehensive list of incomplete items and a description of how the permit application can be made complete.

The applicant may address the items that are deemed to be incomplete by the City and resubmit the application. If an applicant resubmits an application, the City must determine whether the resubmitted application has remedied all incomplete items listed in the determination within 15 business days after the permitting agency received the resubmitted application. Upon review of the resubmitted application, the City will not require the application to include an item that was not included in the initial application if it was not included in the comprehensive list of incomplete items. If the City does not make a timely determination as required by this paragraph, the application or resubmitted application shall be deemed to be complete.
928

DocID #74246v1

2. Approval or Denial. All accessory dwelling unit and junior accessory dwelling unit permit applications shall be approved or denied within 60 days of the City’s receipt of a complete application if there is an existing single-family or multifamily dwelling on the lot. When an accessory dwelling unit or a junior accessory dwelling unit application is submitted concurrently with an application to create a new single-family or multifamily dwelling, the City may delay approving or denying the accessory dwelling unit and junior accessory dwelling unit permit applications until the City approves or denies the application for the new single-family or multifamily dwelling. If the City has not approved or denied a complete application within 60 days, the application shall be deemed approved. a. As part of a denial of an application for an accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit, within the 60-day review period, the City must return in writing a full set of comments to the applicant with a list of items that are defective or deficient and a description of how the application can be remedied by the applicant if the City denies the application.
b. The City shall grant a delay in processing if requested by the applicant. The 60-day period to approve or deny the permit shall be tolled for the period of the delay. c. Applications utilizing pre-approved detached accessory dwelling unit plans that meet the requirements under Government Code Section 65852.27 shall be approved or denied within 30 days from the date that the City receives a completed application. d. Occupancy of an accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit shall not be permitted until the City approves occupancy of the primary dwelling.

3. Appeal Process. If a permit application is determined to be incomplete or is denied, the applicant may appeal the City’s decision to the Planning Commission by filing a written appeal with the Planning Division. The appeal must be written on the appropriate form provided by the City, identify the decision being appealed, clearly and concisely state the reasons for the appeal, and state specifically how and where the underlying decision is not supported by substantial evidence. The appeal must be accompanied by the required fee. a. A written appeal must be submitted within ten days of the decision regarding the completeness or denial of the application. In the event an appeal period ends on a Saturday, Sunday, or any other day the City is closed, the appeal period is extended to the next consecutive business day.
b. At the appeal hearing, the Planning Commission will consider the application, plans, exhibits, and related project materials that were the subject of the original decision. c. At the appeal hearing, the Planning Commission shall review whether the underlying decision is supported by substantial evidence. The same standards, evaluation criteria, and findings applicable to the original application shall apply. The Planning Commission’s review is limited to the issue(s) raised in the petition for appeal. d. The Planning Commission will make a final written determination on the applicant’s appeal within 60 business days of receiving the applicant’s written appeal.

C. General Requirements.

1. Exempt Accessory Dwelling Units. Any of the following ADUs described in subsection (C)(1)(a) through (C)(1)(d) shall be permitted and are exempt from certain development and design standards, as specified in subsections D and E below. The ADUs described in this subsection C are referred to as "exempt accessory dwelling units". Accessory dwelling units that satisfy the requirements of subsection (C)(1)(a) and (C)(1)(b) may be permitted 929

DocID #74246v1
on the same lot. Accessory dwelling units that satisfy the requirements of subsection (C)(1)(c) and (C)(1)(d) may be permitted on the same lot. a. One accessory dwelling unit on a legal lot with up to one junior accessory dwelling unit and a proposed or existing single-family dwelling if the accessory dwelling unit and junior accessory dwelling unit comply with the following:
i. The accessory dwelling unit is within the proposed or existing space of a single- family dwelling or existing space of an accessory structure and may include an expansion of not more than one hundred and fifty square feet beyond the same physical dimensions as the existing accessory structure. An expansion beyond the physical dimensions of the existing accessory structure shall be limited to accommodating ingress and egress.
ii. The accessory dwelling unit has separate exterior access from the proposed or existing single-family dwelling.
iii. The side and rear setbacks are sufficient for fire and safety. iv. The junior accessory dwelling unit complies with the requirements of this Section. b. One detached, new construction accessory dwelling unit on a legal lot with a proposed or existing single-family dwelling if the accessory dwelling unit provides four-foot side and rear yard setbacks; does not exceed eight hundred square feet of interior livable space in floor area, and the height does not exceed the following, as applicable:
i. Eighteen feet on a legal lot with an existing or proposed single-family dwelling if the lot is within one-half mile walking distance of a major transit stop or a high- quality transit corridor, as those terms are defined in Public Resources Code Section 21155. An additional two feet in height may be permitted to accommodate a roof pitch on the accessory dwelling unit that is aligned with the roof pitch of the single-family dwelling.
ii. Sixteen feet on all other legal lots with an existing or proposed single-family dwelling unit.
c. Up to two detached accessory dwelling units on a legal lot with a proposed multifamily dwelling. On a legal lot with an existing multifamily dwelling, the number of detached accessory dwelling units permitted is equivalent to the number of primary dwelling units existing on the lot or eight, whichever is less. The accessory dwelling units shall have at least four-foot side and rear yard setbacks. However, if the existing multifamily dwelling has a rear or side setback of less than four feet, no modification of the existing multifamily dwelling shall be required as a condition of approving the application to construct an accessory dwelling unit that satisfies the requirements of this subsection. The height of the accessory dwelling units shall not exceed the following, as applicable:
i. Eighteen feet on a legal lot with an existing or proposed multifamily dwelling if the lot is within one-half mile walking distance of a major transit stop or a high-quality transit corridor, as those terms are defined in Public Resources Code Section 21155. An additional two feet in height may be permitted to accommodate a roof pitch on the accessory dwelling unit that is aligned with the roof pitch of the multifamily dwelling;
930

DocID #74246v1
ii. Eighteen feet on a legal lot with an existing or proposed multistory multifamily dwelling;
iii. Sixteen feet on all other legal lots with an existing or proposed multifamily dwelling;
d. A legal lot with an existing multifamily dwelling may contain accessory dwelling units converted from portions of the building that are not used as livable space. The number of accessory dwelling units permitted is equivalent to up to 25 percent of the number of existing, legally permitted units in the multifamily dwelling, or one, whichever is greater.

2. Building Code. Junior accessory dwelling units and accessory dwelling units shall comply with all applicable building code requirements, except as follows:
a. Fire sprinklers shall not be required for an accessory dwelling unit or a junior accessory dwelling unit if they are not required for the primary dwelling. Fire sprinklers shall not be required for an existing primary dwelling unit as a condition of the approval of an accessory dwelling unit.
b. The new construction of an accessory dwelling unit shall not constitute a Group R occupancy change under the local building code, as described in Section 310 of the California Building Code (Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations), unless the building official or enforcement agency makes a written finding based on substantial evidence in the record that the construction of the accessory dwelling unit could have a specific, adverse impact on public health and safety or the accessory dwelling unit is converted from unhabitable or nonresidential space.

3. Owner Occupancy and Short-Term Rentals.
a. Owner Occupancy. If a junior accessory dwelling unit shares a bathroom with the single-family dwelling unit, the owner must occupy as a principal residence either the primary dwelling or the junior accessory dwelling unit, unless the owner is another governmental agency, land trust, or housing organization. Owner occupancy is not required for a junior accessory dwelling unit that has its own bathroom or for an accessory dwelling unit.
b. Short-Term Rentals. Renting or leasing an accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit for fewer than thirty (30) consecutive days is prohibited.

4. Tenancy in Common. Neither an accessory dwelling unit nor junior accessory dwelling unit may be sold separately from the single-family or multifamily dwelling. The accessory dwelling unit and primary unit may be owned by multiple owners as tenants in common if the single-family dwelling and accessory dwelling unit were developed by a qualified nonprofit, as that term is defined in Government Code Section 66340, and if all of the provisions of Government Code Section 66341 are met.

5. Conditions.
a. Acknowledgements:
i. Accessory Dwelling Units. At the time of application for an accessory dwelling unit, the property owner shall acknowledge in writing that the accessory dwelling unit cannot be used for short-term residential rentals of less than thirty (30) days; and ii. Junior Accessory Dwelling Units. At the time of application for a junior accessory dwelling unit, the property owner shall acknowledge in writing that the junior
accessory dwelling unit cannot be used for short-term residential rentals of less than thirty (30) days and that if the single family dwelling and junior accessory dwelling share a bathroom, either the single-family dwelling or the junior 931

DocID #74246v1
accessory dwelling unit shall be the owner's bona fide principal residence, unless the owner is a governmental agency, land trust, or housing organization. b. Covenants for Junior Accessory Dwelling Units. Prior to obtaining building permits for a junior accessory dwelling unit, a property owner shall file with the Contra Costa County Recorder a deed restriction in a form approved by the City Attorney.

A copy of the recorded deed restriction shall be filed with the Zoning Administrator.

This deed restriction shall run with the land, and shall be binding upon any future owners, heirs, or assigns purchasers and shall include:
i. A prohibition on the sale of the junior accessory dwelling unit separate from the sale of the single-family principal dwelling; including a statement that the deed restriction may be enforced against future purposes.
ii. A restriction on the size and attributes of the junior accessory dwelling unit consistent with this Section.

6. Exceptions. An accessory dwelling unit shall comply with the requirements of this Section 15.04.610.020, the underlying zoning district, and other provisions of the City Municipal Code except:
a. If the requirements of the underlying zoning district or other provisions of the City Municipal Code are inconsistent with the provisions of this Section, the standards of this Section shall apply.
b. Limits on lot coverage, front yard setback, floor area ratio, open space, and size must permit or shall be waived to allow a detached or attached accessory dwelling unit with eight hundred square foot of interior livable space and at least four-foot side and rear yard setbacks, if the proposed accessory dwelling unit is in compliance with all other applicable development standards.
c. The City will not deny an application for an accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit because of nonconforming zoning conditions, building code violations, or unpermitted structures on the property that do not present a threat to public health and safety and are not affected by the construction of the accessory dwelling unit. The City will not require as a condition of approval for an application for an accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit the correction of nonconforming zoning conditions.
d. If the application is to legalize an unpermitted accessory dwelling unit or unpermitted junior accessory dwelling unit that was constructed before January 1, 2020, the City will not deny an application to legalize the unpermitted accessory dwelling unit or unpermitted junior accessory dwelling unit if the unpermitted accessory dwelling unit or unpermitted junior accessory dwelling unit does not conform with this Section or building standards pursuant to Health & Safety Code Section 17960 et seq. However, the City may deny the application for an unpermitted accessory dwelling unit or unpermitted junior accessory dwelling unit constructed before January 1, 2020 if the building official makes a finding that correcting the violation is necessary to comply with the standards specified in Health & Safety Code Section 17920.3.
e. No setback is required for a new structure constructed in the same location and to the same dimensions as an existing structure.

D. Objective Design Standards. The following design standards apply to all accessory dwelling units except exempt accessory dwelling units.

1. The materials and colors of the exterior walls, roof, eaves, and windows and doors shall match the appearance and architectural design of those of the primary dwelling. 932

DocID #74246v1

2. The roof slope shall match that of the dominant roof slope of the primary dwelling. The dominant roof slope is the slope shared by the largest portion of the roof.

3. The exterior lighting shall be limited to down-lights or as otherwise required by the building or fire code.

4. All windows that are located 12 feet in height above the finished floor shall be clerestory windows and must be frosted or obscure glass.

5. A new detached ADU shall not be located closer to the front property line than the primary residence unless it is not physically feasible to construct an attached or detached ADU with 800 square feet of interior livable space and at least four-foot side and rear setbacks anywhere else on the property.

6. The architectural treatment of an attached ADU to be constructed on a lot that is listed in the California Register of Historical Resources shall comply with all applicable objective standards imposed by the Secretary of Interior. These standards shall not include requirements on minimum lot size. Further, any new attached ADU proposed on a property listed in the California Register of Historical Resources shall be located behind the main structure where physically feasible. If placing the ADU behind the main structure is not physically feasible, the ADU shall be developed to the side of the main structure. If placing the ADU behind or to the side of the main structure is not physically feasible, the ADU shall be developed in front of the main structure.

E. Objective Development Standards. The following development standards apply to all accessory dwelling units except exempt accessory dwelling units.

1. Accessory Dwelling Units.
a. Number of Units Allowed. Only one accessory dwelling unit shall be permitted on a legal lot that is zoned to allow and contains a proposed or existing single-family or multifamily dwelling.
b. Setbacks. A four feet setback is required from the rear and side property lines. No setback shall be required for the conversion of an existing living area or accessory structure or a structure constructed in the same location and to the same dimensions as an existing structure that is converted to an ADU. c. Floor Area. The maximum floor area for an accessory dwelling unit attached to or detached from a dwelling shall not exceed 850 square feet of interior livable space for a studio or one bedroom or 1,000 square feet of interior livable space for a unit that contains two or more bedrooms. No accessory dwelling unit shall be smaller than the size required to allow an efficiency unit pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 17958.1.
d. Height. The maximum height of a detached or attached ADU shall not exceed:
i. A height of 16 feet for a detached accessory dwelling unit on a lot with an existing or proposed single family or multifamily dwelling unit. ii. A height of 18 feet for a detached accessory dwelling unit on a lot with an existing or proposed single family or multifamily dwelling unit that is within one-half of one mile walking distance of a major transit stop or a high-quality transit corridor, as those terms are defined in Section 21155 of the Public Resources Code. An additional two feet in height shall be permitted to accommodate a roof pitch on the accessory dwelling unit that is aligned with the roof pitch of the primary dwelling unit.
iii. A height of 18 feet for a detached accessory dwelling unit on a lot with an existing or proposed multifamily, multistory dwelling.
933

DocID #74246v1
iv. A height of 25 feet or the height limitation in the then current City zoning ordinance that applies to the primary dwelling, whichever is lower, for an accessory dwelling unit that is attached to a primary dwelling. However, the accessory dwelling unit may not exceed two stories. e. Parking. Accessory dwelling units shall have one parking space per unit, except that studio units shall not require a parking space. Parking for an accessory dwelling unit may be provided as tandem parking on an existing driveway or in a setback area. "Tandem parking" means that two or more automobiles are parked on a driveway or in any other location on a lot, lined up behind one another.

Parking is not required for an accessory dwelling unit in any of the following instances:
i. Where the accessory dwelling unit is located within one-half of one mile walking distance of public transit.
ii. Where the accessory dwelling unit is located within an architecturally and historically significant historic district.
iii. Where the accessory dwelling unit is part of the proposed or existing primary residence or an accessory structure.
iv. When on-street parking permits are required but not offered to the occupant of the accessory dwelling unit.
v. When there is a car share vehicle located within one block of the accessory dwelling unit.
vi. When a permit application for an accessory dwelling unit is submitted with a permit application to create a new single-family dwelling or a new multifamily dwelling on the same lot, provided that the accessory dwelling unit or the parcel satisfies any other criteria listed in this subsection (e). vii. When a garage, carport, or covered parking structure is demolished or converted in conjunction with the construction of an accessory dwelling unit, the parking spaces need not be replaced.

2. Supplemental Standards for Attached Accessory Dwelling Units. a. An attached accessory dwelling unit must share at least one common wall or roofline with the living area of the primary dwelling.
b. An attached accessory dwelling unit shall have a separate entrance, located on the side or the rear of the primary dwelling; provided, however, that in no event shall any external stairwell be placed within the side yard setback.

3. Supplemental Standards for Detached Accessory Dwelling Units. a. The distance between the primary dwelling and a detached accessory dwelling unit must be at least five feet.

4. Junior Accessory Dwelling Units. Junior accessory dwelling units shall comply with the following standards:
a. Number of Units Allowed. Only one junior accessory dwelling unit may be located on any legal lot zoned for and containing a proposed or existing single-family dwelling. If there are multiple detached single-family dwelling units on one legal lot, there can only be one junior accessory dwelling unit.
b. Location of Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit. A junior accessory dwelling unit must be created within the existing walls of a proposed or existing single-family dwelling, including enclosed accessory uses within the single-family dwelling, such as attached garages, which are considered a part of the proposed or existing single-family dwelling for purposes of this Section.
934

DocID #74246v1
c. Size. The total floor space of a junior accessory dwelling unit shall not exceed five hundred square feet of interior livable space.
d. Entrance. An exterior entry separate from the exterior entry for the single-family dwelling unit shall be provided to serve a junior accessory dwelling unit. However, if the junior accessory dwelling unit shares sanitation facilities with the single-family dwelling unit, there must also be an interior entry to the main living area of the single-family dwelling unit.
e. Kitchen. The junior accessory dwelling unit shall include at least an efficiency kitchen which includes cooking appliances, a food preparation counter and storage cabinets that are of reasonable size in relation to the size of the junior accessory dwelling unit.
f. Parking. Parking is not required for a junior accessory dwelling unit.

F. Utilities and Impact Fees.

1. Fees and Utility Connections.
a. Utility Extensions. All utility extensions shall be placed underground. b. Accessory Dwelling Units. All permit and mitigation fees and other charges applicable to primary dwellings in the zone in which the property is located shall apply to an accessory dwelling unit except:
i. Accessory dwelling units shall not be considered new residential uses for the purposes of calculating any connection fees or capacity charges for utilities, including water and sewer service, unless the accessory dwelling unit is constructed with a new single-family dwelling.
ii. An exempt accessory dwelling unit developed under subsection (C)(1)(a) above on a single-family property is exempt from any requirement to install a new or separate utility connection and to pay any associated connection or capacity fees or charges, unless the interior accessory dwelling unit was constructed with a new single-family dwelling.
iii. Any connection or capacity charge shall be proportionate to the burden of the proposed accessory dwelling unit on the water or sewer system, based on either its square feet or the number of drainage fixture units. c. Junior Accessory Dwelling Units.
i. For the purposes of providing service for water, sewer, or power, a junior accessory dwelling unit is not considered a separate or new dwelling unit. No water, sewer, or power requirements may be applied to single-family dwellings containing a junior accessory dwelling unit unless they apply uniformly to all single-family dwellings in the zone regardless of whether or not they contain a junior accessory dwelling unit.
ii. Unless the junior accessory dwelling unit is constructed with a new single- family dwelling, a junior accessory dwelling unit may not be required to install a new or separate utility connection between the junior accessory dwelling unit and the utility, may not be considered a new residential use for purposes of calculating connection fees or capacity charges for utilities, and may not be required to pay any associated connection or capacity fees or charges. d. Utility Connections and Meters. Previously unpermitted accessory dwelling units or previously unpermitted junior accessory dwelling units constructed before January 1, 2020 and permitted pursuant to subsection (C)(6)(d) are not required to pay connection or capacity charges except when utility infrastructure is required to comply with Health & Safety Code Section 17920.3. 935

DocID #74246v1

2. Impact Fees.
a. No impact fees shall be imposed upon a previously unpermitted accessory dwelling unit or previously unpermitted junior accessory dwelling unit constructed before January 1, 2020 that is permitted pursuant to subsection (C)(6)(d). b. No impact fees shall be imposed upon the development of an accessory dwelling unit less than seven hundred fifty square feet of interior livable space or a junior accessory dwelling unit. Any impact fees charged for an accessory dwelling unit of seven hundred fifty square feet of interior livable space or more shall be charged proportionately in relation to the square footage of the primary dwelling unit. For purposes of this provision, an "impact fee" includes the fees specified in Government Code Sections 66000 and 66477. Impact fees do not include connection fees or capacity charges.

G. Conformance with State Law. In cases of conflict between this section and any other provision of this title, the provisions of this section shall prevail. To the extent that any provision of this section is in conflict with State law, the applicable provision of State law shall control, but all other provisions of this section shall remain in full force and effect.

936

DocID #74246v1
ORDINANCE NO. __-26

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF RICHMOND AMENDING SECTIONS 15.04.104.020,

15.04.201.030, 15.04.201.050, AND 15.04.610.020 OF THE RICHMOND MUNICIPAL CODE TO COMPLY

WITH STATE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT LAW, AND FINDING THE ACTION EXEMPT FROM THE

CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA)

WHEREAS, California’s Accessory Dwelling Unit Law (Government Code § 66310 et seq.) encourages the production of housing by requiring local jurisdictions to allow accessory dwelling units in any zoning district that allows single-family or multifamily residential use, apply limited development standards for accessory dwelling units, and provide for a streamlined review process; and

WHEREAS, California Government Code § 66314 allows local governments to adopt an ordinance regulating accessory dwelling units, provided the regulations are consistent with State law; and

WHEREAS, Section 15.04.610.020 of the Richmond Municipal Code (RMC) contains regulations for accessory dwelling units (ADUs) and Junior Accessory Dwellings (JADUs); and

WHEREAS, Richmond Municipal Code Section 15.04.610.020 was last amended via Ordinance No. 27-20 N.S., adopted on November 10, 2020; and

WHEREAS, this ordinance (“Ordinance”) amends various sections of the RMC to align with recent changes to State law related to accessory dwelling units (including but not limited to Government Code § 66310 et seq.); and

WHEREAS, on July 2, 2026, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the proposed Ordinance related to accessory dwelling units, received the staff report and staff presentation, received comments from the public and interested parties, and discussed the matter.

Following the public hearing, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 26-15 recommending the City Council adopt the proposed Ordinance; and

WHEREAS, on July 21, 2026, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the proposed Ordinance related to ADUs and JADUs, received the staff report and staff presentation, received comments from the public and interested parties, considered the recommendation of the Planning Commission, and discussed the matter; and

WHEREAS, on the basis of the application, plans, materials, and testimony at or before the public hearing, the City Council adopts the following findings and statements of fact in approving the proposed zoning text amendment pursuant to RMC Section 15.04.814.050:

A. The proposed amendment is consistent with the General Plan.

937

DocID #74246v1
Statement of Fact: The proposed zoning text amendment is consistent with General Plan Housing Element Program H-1.4.3 which aims to continue the facilitation of accessory dwelling unit production in part to provide a balanced supply of housing types, densities, and prices to meet the needs of all income groups and amend the ordinance to ensure compliance with State law.

B. The proposed amendment is necessary for public health, safety, and general welfare or will be of benefit to the public.

Statement of Fact: The proposed zoning text amendment will benefit the public by increasing housing production within the City of Richmond and ensuring local regulations comply with State law. California’s housing production is not keeping pace with demand and the lack of housing supply impacts affordability. The State legislature has determined that ADUs and JADUs are critical forms of infill housing development that can be affordable and offer important housing choices within existing neighborhoods, and an effective option for adding much needed housing in California.

C. The proposed amendment has been reviewed in compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act.

Statement of Fact: The proposed zoning text amendment to the Richmond Municipal Code is statutorily exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 21080.17 of the Public Resources Code, which provides that CEQA does not apply to the adoption of an ordinance to implement Article 2 (commencing with Section 66314) or Article 3 (commencing with Section 66333) of Chapter 13 of Division 1 of Title 7 of the Government Code. The proposed amendment is also exempt from environmental review pursuant to General Rule, Section 15061(b)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines since it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the Ordinance may have a significant effect on the environment. Regardless of whether the City adopts this Ordinance, accessory dwelling units and junior accessory dwelling units must be allowed in the City in accordance with the standards set forth in State law. Therefore, it can be seen with certainty that the project will not cause any significant impacts.

D. For a change to the Zoning Maps, that the subject property is suitable for the uses permitted in the proposed zone in terms of access, size of parcel, relationship to similar or related uses, and other relevant considerations, and that the proposed change of zoning district is not detrimental to the use of adjacent properties.

Statement of Fact: The proposed zoning text amendment will not change the Zoning map; therefore, the subject finding is not applicable.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

938

DocID #74246v1
SECTION 1. The recitals above are true and correct and are hereby adopted as the City Council’s findings.

SECTION 2. The City Council finds that adoption of this Ordinance is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.) pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080.17, which statutorily exempts the adoption of an ordinance by a city or county implementing Article 2 (commencing with Section 66314) or Article 3 (commencing with Section 66333) of Chapter 13 of Division 1 of Title 7 of the Government Code (State ADU Law), and pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines since it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the Ordinance may have a significant effect on the environment.

SECTION 3. The Ordinance would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City, as the proposed Ordinance will ensure the City’s zoning ordinance complies with State law related to ADUs and JADUs.

SECTION 4. The City Council has reviewed, considered, and evaluated all of the information prior to acting upon this Ordinance.

SECTION 5. The documents and other materials that constitute the record of proceedings upon which the City Council has based its recommendation are located in and may be obtained from the Planning Division, 450 Civic Center Plaza, Richmond, CA 94804.

SECTION 6. By this ordinance, the City Council approves the zoning text amendment as redlined in Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof.

SECTION 7. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be unconstitutional or invalid, the remaining portions of this Ordinance shall remain in full force and effect. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed each section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance irrespective of the unconstitutionality or invalidity of any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase.

SECTION 8. Effective Date. This Ordinance becomes effective thirty (30) days after its final passage and adoption.

-----------------------------------------------------

939

DocID #74246v1

First introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Richmond held _______________________ and finally passed and adopted at a regular meeting held _________________________by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTENTIONS:

ABSENT:

CLERK OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND
(SEAL)
Approved:

Mayor

Approved as to form:

City Attorney

940

DocID #74246v1

EXHIBIT A
All definitions within this section remain unchanged, except the following definitions are modified or added as noted below:

15.04.104.020 - Definitions.

Accessory Dwelling Unit. An attached or detached residential dwelling that provides complete, independent living facilities for one or more persons, including living, sleeping, eating, cooking, and sanitation facilities, on the same lot as a proposed or existing single-family dwelling or existing multifamily dwelling. and is located on the same lot as a proposed or existing single-family dwelling or multifamily dwelling. It shall include permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking, and sanitation on the same parcel that the single-family or multifamily dwelling is, or will be, situated. An accessory dwelling unit may be within the same structure as the primary dwelling, in an attached structure, or in a separate detached structure on the same lot. An accessory dwelling unit also includes the following: (i) an efficiency unit, as defined in Section 17958.1 of the Health and Safety Code; and (ii) a manufactured home as defined in Section 18007 of the Health and Safety Code. This use is distinguished from a duplex. See also Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit.

Duplex. A single building that contains two dwelling units or two single unit dwellings on a single parcel. This use is distinguished from a Second Dwelling Unit, which is an accessory residential unit as defined by State law. An accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit does not count as either of the dwelling units that make up a duplex.

Efficiency Unit. A dwelling unit in a multi-family building with less than 500 square feet of space, meeting all Building Code requirements for such units. Efficiency unit has the same meaning as defined in Section 17958.1 of the California Health and Safety Code.

Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit. A n accessory dwelling unit A residential dwelling that is no more than 500 square feet of interior livable space in size, includes an efficiency kitchen consistent with building code standards, and is contained entirely within a proposed or existing single-family dwelling, including within accessory spaces enclosed within the residence such as an attached garage. A junior accessory dwelling unit may include separate sanitation facilities or may share sanitation facilities that are within the existing structure.

Livable Space. A space in a dwelling intended for human habitation, including living, sleeping, eating, cooking, or sanitation.

Multifamily Dwelling. For the purposes of Section 15.04.610.020, a structure with two or more attached dwellings on a single lot is considered a multifamily dwelling. Multiple detached single-family dwellings on the same lot are not considered multifamily dwellings for the purposes of Section 15.04.610.020.

The following Section 15.04.201.030 remains unchanged, except for the following subsection A is modified and subsection J is added as noted below:

15.04.201.030 - Development Standards—RH, RL1 and RL2 Districts. 941

DocID #74246v1
Additional Development Standards for RH and RL Districts A. Accessory Building Maximum Height. A 14-foot height limit applies to accessory buildings or structures, except that the height may be increased to 16 feet for an accessory dwelling unit.

J. Accessory Dwelling Unit Development Standards. The applicable development standards for accessory dwelling units are provided in Section 15.04.610.020.

The following Section 15.04.201.050 remains unchanged, except for the following subsection B is modified and subsection H is added as noted below:

15.04.201.050 - Development Standards—RM Districts.

Additional Development Standards—RM Districts
B. Accessory Building Height. If a peak roof is used, the height limit may be increased to 14 feet, except that the height may be increased to 16 feet for an accessory dwelling unit.

H. Accessory Dwelling Unit Development Standards. The applicable development standards for accessory dwelling units are provided in Section 15.04.610.020.

The following Section 15.04.610.020 is deleted and replaced as noted below:

15.04.610.020 - Accessory Dwelling Units and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units.

Accessory dwelling units (ADUs) and junior accessory dwelling units (JADUs) must be located, developed, and operated in compliance with the standards of this Chapter 15.04.610.020 in zones where single-family or multi-family dwellings are permitted.

A. Zoning Compliance Review. An applicant for an accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit must submit the application fee and all of the information contained on the application forms provided by the City to the Zoning Administrator for ministerial approval or as part of a building permit application. No discretionary review may be permitted unless the application includes other work unrelated to the accessory dwelling unit, in which case discretionary review shall be limited to the work unrelated to the application for the accessory dwelling unit. The decision of the Zoning Administrator is final and no appeal may be filed.

B. Time Limit to Act. All accessory dwelling unit and junior accessory dwelling unit applications shall be approved or disapproved within 60 days of receiving a completed application if there is an existing dwelling on the lot. The City shall grant a delay in processing if requested by the applicant. Action for an accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit application in connection with a proposed new single-family dwelling may be delayed until the City acts on the permit application for 942

DocID #74246v1
the primary building. Occupancy of the junior or accessory dwelling unit shall not be allowed until the City approves occupancy of the primary dwelling.

C. General Requirements.

1. Relation to Main Dwelling Unit. An accessory dwelling unit shall be located behind the primary dwelling. The accessory dwelling unit shall be either attached to the primary dwelling, located within the primary dwelling, or detached from the primary dwelling and located on the same lot as the primary dwelling. Detached or attached accessory dwelling units shall have exterior designs that are consistent with the primary dwelling and incorporate the same or similar building materials, colors, and exterior surfaces and finishes as those on the primary dwelling.

2. Kitchen Facility. An accessory dwelling unit and junior accessory dwelling unit must contain its own kitchen.

3. Objective Design Standards.
a. The materials and colors of the exterior walls, roof, eaves, and windows and doors shall match the appearance and architectural design of those of the primary dwelling.
b. The roof slope shall match that of the dominant roof slope of the primary dwelling. The dominant roof slope is the slope shared by the largest portion of the roof.
c. The exterior lighting shall be limited to down-lights or as otherwise required by the building or fire code.
d. All windows that are located 12 feet in height above the finished floor shall be clerestory windows and must be frosted or obscure glass. e. A new detached ADU shall not be located closer to the front property line than the primary residence unless it would not be physically feasible to construct an 800-square-foot attached or detached ADU not exceeding 16 feet in height with four-foot side and rear setbacks anywhere else on the property.
f. The architectural treatment of an ADU to be constructed on a lot that has an identified historical resource listed on the federal, state, or local register of historic places shall comply with all applicable ministerial requirements imposed by the Secretary of the Interior.

4. Parking. The minimum parking requirements for an accessory dwelling unit shall be as prescribed in Article 15.04.607 (Parking and Loading Standards), subject to the following additional provisions. Parking for an accessory dwelling unit may be provided as tandem parking on an existing driveway or in a setback area. No additional parking shall be required if the accessory unit is located: (1) within one-half mile walking distance of public transit; (2) in an architecturally and historically significant historic district; (3) in part of a proposed or existing primary residence or an accessory structure; (4) in an area requiring on-street parking permits but they are not offered to the occupant of the second unit; or 943

DocID #74246v1
(5) within one block of a car-share pick up/drop-off location. When a garage, carport, or covered parking structure is demolished or converted in conjunction with the construction of an accessory dwelling unit, the parking spaces need not be replaced.

5. Deed Restriction. Prior to obtaining building permits for an accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit, a property owner shall file with the Contra Costa County Recorder a deed restriction, in a form approved by the City Attorney, which shall include the following provisions. This deed restriction shall run with the land, and shall be binding upon any future owners, heirs, or assigns.

A copy of the recorded deed restriction shall be filed with the Zoning Administrator stating that:
a. The accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit shall not be sold separately from the primary dwelling unit unless consistent with the provisions of Government Code section 65852.26 or successor provision;
b. The accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit is restricted to the size and attributes approved by the Zoning Administrator in its Zoning Compliance review per Article 15.04.804; c. The accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit shall not be rented for a period shorter than 30 days;
d. For a junior accessory dwelling unit, the junior accessory dwelling unit or the remaining portion of the single-family structure must be owner occupied;
e. The restrictions shall be binding upon any successor in owner of the property and lack of compliance with any provisions of the Municipal Code may result in legal action against the property owner, including revocation of any right to maintain an accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit on the property.

D. Development Standards.

1. Accessory Dwelling Units.
a. Setbacks. Side and rear setbacks shall be no less than four feet. No setback shall be required for the conversion of an existing living area or accessory structure or a structure constructed in the same location and to the same dimensions as an existing structure that is converted to an ADU.
b. Floor Area. The maximum floor area for an accessory dwelling unit attached to or detached from a dwelling shall not exceed 850 square feet for a studio or one bedroom or 1,000 square feet for a unit that contains two or more bedrooms. No accessory dwelling unit shall be smaller than the size required to allow an efficiency unit pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 17958.1. Additional limitations apply to junior accessory dwelling units; see paragraph (3) below. 944

DocID #74246v1
c. Height. The maximum height of a detached or attached ADU shall be 16 feet.
d. Limits on lot coverage, floor area ratio, open space, and size must permit or shall be waived to allow an 800 square feet detached or attached accessory dwelling unit 16 feet high with four-foot side and rear yards, if the proposed accessory dwelling unit is in compliance with all other development standards, including but not limited to front yard setbacks.

Front yard setbacks shall be waived if it would not be physically feasible to construct an 800-square-foot ADU not exceeding 16 feet in height with four-foot side and rear setbacks anywhere on the property except within the front setback.
e. An accessory dwelling unit must comply with all development standards for the applicable zoning districts, including setbacks, maximum floor area, and building height, unless they are inconsistent with the provisions of this section, in which case the provisions of this section shall apply.
f. A portion of a single family dwelling or detached accessory structure legally in existence may be converted into an accessory dwelling unit or a structure may be constructed in the same location and to the same dimensions as the existing detached accessory structure, regardless of any existing zoning nonconformity if the existing structure is not modified or added to in any way that increases the level of nonconformity with all applicable zoning regulations.

2. Supplemental Standards for Attached Accessory Dwelling Units. a. An attached accessory dwelling unit must share at least one common wall or roofline with the living area of the primary dwelling. b. An attached accessory dwelling unit shall have a separate entrance, located on the side or the rear of the primary dwelling; provided, however, that in no event shall any external stairwell be placed within the side yard setback.

3. Supplemental Standards for Detached Accessory Dwelling Units. a. The distance between the primary dwelling and a detached accessory dwelling unit must be at least five feet provided, however, that this requirement shall not be applied to prohibit construction of a detached accessory dwelling unit with a total floor area not greater than 800 square feet, not more than 16 feet high, and with side and rear yard setbacks of at least four feet.

4. Supplemental Standards for Exempt Accessory Dwelling Units. a. Notwithstanding any other standard provided in subsections (C) and (D), one of the following categories of accessory dwelling units shall be permitted on a lot with a proposed or existing single family dwelling if they meet the standards of this subsection (D)(4)(a):
945

DocID #74246v1
i. One accessory dwelling unit per lot within the proposed or existing space of a single-family dwelling or existing space of an accessory structure. The accessory dwelling unit within the existing space of an accessory structure may include an expansion of not more than 150 square feet beyond the same physical dimensions as the existing accessory structure to accommodate ingress and egress. The accessory dwelling unit shall have exterior access from the single family home. The setbacks must be sufficient for fire and safety; or
ii. One new detached accessory dwelling unit per lot with a proposed or existing single-family dwelling up to 800 square feet, up to 16 feet in height, and up to four-foot side and rear setbacks;
b. Notwithstanding any other standard provided in subsections (C) and (D), one of the following categories of accessory dwelling units shall be permitted on a lot with an existing multifamily dwelling if they meet the standards of this subsection (D)(4)(b):
i. Accessory dwelling units within the portions of an existing multifamily dwelling structure that are not used as livable space, provided that each unit complies with state building standards for dwellings. An accessory dwelling unit shall not be created within any portion of the habitable area of an existing dwelling unit in a multifamily structure. Up to 25 percent of the number of existing multifamily units in the building, but at least one unit, shall be allowed per lot; or
ii. Up to two detached accessory dwelling units per lot, provided that the height of the accessory dwelling units does not exceed 16 feet and that four-foot side and rear yard setbacks are maintained.

5. Junior Accessory Dwelling Units. Junior accessory dwelling units shall comply with the following standards:
a. Number of Units Allowed. Only one junior accessory dwelling unit may be located on any lot zoned for and containing a proposed or existing single-family dwelling. A junior accessory dwelling unit is not permitted on a lot with an accessory dwelling unit unless the accessory dwelling unit is:
i. A detached, new construction accessory dwelling unit up to 800 square feet, up to 16 feet in height, and with up to four-foot side and rear setbacks; or
ii. An accessory dwelling unit within the proposed or existing space of a single-family dwelling or existing space of an accessory structure. The accessory dwelling unit within the existing space of an accessory structure may include an expansion of not more than 150 square feet beyond the same 946

DocID #74246v1
physical dimensions as the existing accessory structure to accommodate ingress and egress. The accessory dwelling unit shall have exterior access from the single family home. The setbacks must be sufficient for fire and safety
b. Unit Size. No junior accessory dwelling unit shall contain more than 500 square feet of floor space and shall be contained entirely within an existing or proposed single-family. An efficiency unit (a single room that includes sleeping and kitchen functions) shall not contain less than 150 square feet of floor space, exclusive of a bathroom.
c. Owner Occupancy. The owner of a lot proposed for a junior accessory dwelling unit shall occupy as a principal residence either the primary dwelling or the accessory dwelling unless the owner is a government agency, a land trust, or a housing organization.
d. Separate Sale Prohibited. A junior accessory dwelling unit shall not be sold independently of the primary dwelling on the parcel. e. Deed Restriction. A deed restriction shall be completed and recorded, in compliance with paragraph D(5) above.
f. Location of Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit. A junior accessory dwelling unit must be created within the existing walls of a proposed or existing single-family dwelling.
g. Separate Entry Required. A separate exterior entry shall be provided to serve a junior accessory dwelling unit.
h. Kitchen Required. The junior accessory dwelling unit shall include an efficiency kitchen, requiring and limited to the following components:
i. A cooking facility with appliances; and
ii. A food preparation counter and storage cabinets that are of a reasonable size in relation to the size of the junior accessory dwelling unit.
i. Bathroom Required. Access to a bathroom is required, which may be part of the junior accessory dwelling unit or located in the existing primary dwelling. If provided as part of the primary dwelling, the junior accessory dwelling unit shall have direct access to the main living area of the primary dwelling so a resident does not need to go outside to access the bathroom.
j. No Additional Parking Required. No additional parking is required for a junior accessory dwelling unit.

E. Utilities and Impact Fees.

1. Except as provided in subsection (2) below, an accessory dwelling unit may be required to have a new or separate utility connection, including a separate sewer lateral, between the accessory dwelling unit and the utility. A connection fee or capacity charge may be charged that is proportionate to the size in square feet of the accessory dwelling unit or its drainage fixture unit (DFU) values. 947

DocID #74246v1
Separate electric and water meters shall be required for the accessory dwelling unit.

2. Junior accessory dwelling units and accessory dwelling units converted from the proposed or existing space of a single-family dwelling or existing space of an accessory structure are exempt from any requirement to install a new or separate utility connection and to pay any associated connection or capacity fees or charges.

3. All utility extensions shall be placed underground.

4. Junior and accessory dwelling units shall comply with all applicable building code requirements. However, fire sprinklers shall not be required in a junior or accessory dwelling unit if they are not required for the primary dwelling unit.

5. No impact fees may be imposed on a junior or accessory dwelling unit that is less than 750 square feet in size. For purposes of this section, "impact fees" include the fees specified in Section 66000 and 66477 of the Government Code, but do not include utility connection fees or capacity charges. For accessory dwelling units that have a floor area of 750 square feet or more, impact fees shall be charged proportionately in relation to the square footage of the primary dwelling unit.

F. Conformance with State Law. In cases of conflict between this section and any other provision of this title, the provisions of this section shall prevail. To the extent that any provision of this section is in conflict with State law, the applicable provision of State law shall control, but all other provisions of this section shall remain in full force and effect.

15.04.610.020 - Accessory Dwelling Units and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units.

Accessory dwelling units (ADUs) must be located, developed, and operated in compliance with the standards of this Section 15.04.610.020 on a legal lot where single-family or multi-family dwellings are permitted and that contains an existing or proposed single family dwelling or an existing or proposed multifamily dwelling. Junior accessory dwelling units (JADUs) must be located, developed, and operated in compliance with the standards of this Section 15.04.610.020 on a legal lot that is zoned for single- family residential use, and that contains an existing or proposed single family dwelling.

A. Zoning Compliance Review and Building Permit Applications. An accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit application must be considered through the building permit process, which requires the submission and approval of a zoning compliance review application and a building permit application. An applicant for an accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit must submit the application fees and all of the information contained on the zoning compliance review application form and building permit application form provided by the City to the Zoning Administrator and Building Official, as applicable, for ministerial review.

No discretionary review or hearing may be permitted unless the application includes other work unrelated to the accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit, in which case the discretionary review or hearing shall be limited to the work unrelated to the application for the accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit. 948

DocID #74246v1
B. Time Limit to Act on Applications.

1. Completeness Determination. The City must determine if an accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit application is complete and provide written notice of the completeness determination within 15 business days of receipt. If the permit application is incomplete, the written notice to the applicant must include a comprehensive list of incomplete items and a description of how the permit application can be made complete.

The applicant may address the items that are deemed to be incomplete by the City and resubmit the application. If an applicant resubmits an application, the City must determine whether the resubmitted application has remedied all incomplete items listed in the determination within 15 business days after the permitting agency received the resubmitted application. Upon review of the resubmitted application, the City will not require the application to include an item that was not included in the initial application if it was not included in the comprehensive list of incomplete items. If the City does not make a timely determination as required by this paragraph, the application or resubmitted application shall be deemed to be complete.

2. Approval or Denial. All accessory dwelling unit and junior accessory dwelling unit permit applications shall be approved or denied within 60 days of the City’s receipt of a complete application if there is an existing single-family or multifamily dwelling on the lot. When an accessory dwelling unit or a junior accessory dwelling unit application is submitted concurrently with an application to create a new single-family or multifamily dwelling, the City may delay approving or denying the accessory dwelling unit and junior accessory dwelling unit permit applications until the City approves or denies the application for the new single-family or multifamily dwelling. If the City has not approved or denied a complete application within 60 days, the application shall be deemed approved. a. As part of a denial of an application for an accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit, within the 60-day review period, the City must return in writing a full set of comments to the applicant with a list of items that are defective or deficient and a description of how the application can be remedied by the applicant if the City denies the application.
b. The City shall grant a delay in processing if requested by the applicant. The 60-day period to approve or deny the permit shall be tolled for the period of the delay. c. Applications utilizing pre-approved detached accessory dwelling unit plans that meet the requirements under Government Code Section 65852.27 shall be approved or denied within 30 days from the date that the City receives a completed application. d. Occupancy of an accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit shall not be permitted until the City approves occupancy of the primary dwelling.

3. Appeal Process. If a permit application is determined to be incomplete or is denied, the applicant may appeal the City’s decision to the Planning Commission by filing a written appeal with the Planning Division. The appeal must be written on the appropriate form provided by the City, identify the decision being appealed, clearly and concisely state the reasons for the appeal, and state specifically how and where the underlying decision is not supported by substantial evidence. The appeal must be accompanied by the required fee. 949

DocID #74246v1
a. A written appeal must be submitted within ten days of the decision regarding the completeness or denial of the application. In the event an appeal period ends on a Saturday, Sunday, or any other day the City is closed, the appeal period is extended to the next consecutive business day.
b. At the appeal hearing, the Planning Commission will consider the application, plans, exhibits, and related project materials that were the subject of the original decision. c. At the appeal hearing, the Planning Commission shall review whether the underlying decision is supported by substantial evidence. The same standards, evaluation criteria, and findings applicable to the original application shall apply. The Planning Commission’s review is limited to the issue(s) raised in the petition for appeal. d. The Planning Commission will make a final written determination on the applicant’s appeal within 60 business days of receiving the applicant’s written appeal.

C. General Requirements.

1. Exempt Accessory Dwelling Units. Any of the following ADUs described in subsection (C)(1)(a) through (C)(1)(d) shall be permitted and are exempt from certain development and design standards, as specified in subsections D and E below. The ADUs described in this subsection C are referred to as "exempt accessory dwelling units". Accessory dwelling units that satisfy the requirements of subsection (C)(1)(a) and (C)(1)(b) may be permitted on the same lot. Accessory dwelling units that satisfy the requirements of subsection (C)(1)(c) and (C)(1)(d) may be permitted on the same lot.
a. One accessory dwelling unit on a legal lot with up to one junior accessory dwelling unit and a proposed or existing single-family dwelling if the accessory dwelling unit and junior accessory dwelling unit comply with the following:
i. The accessory dwelling unit is within the proposed or existing space of a single- family dwelling or existing space of an accessory structure and may include an expansion of not more than one hundred and fifty square feet beyond the same physical dimensions as the existing accessory structure. An expansion beyond the physical dimensions of the existing accessory structure shall be limited to accommodating ingress and egress.
ii. The accessory dwelling unit has separate exterior access from the proposed or existing single-family dwelling.
iii. The side and rear setbacks are sufficient for fire and safety. iv. The junior accessory dwelling unit complies with the requirements of this Section. b. One detached, new construction accessory dwelling unit on a legal lot with a proposed or existing single-family dwelling if the accessory dwelling unit provides four-foot side and rear yard setbacks; does not exceed eight hundred square feet of interior livable space in floor area, and the height does not exceed the following, as applicable:
i. Eighteen feet on a legal lot with an existing or proposed single-family dwelling if the lot is within one-half mile walking distance of a major transit stop or a high- quality transit corridor, as those terms are defined in Public Resources Code 950

DocID #74246v1
Section 21155. An additional two feet in height may be permitted to accommodate a roof pitch on the accessory dwelling unit that is aligned with the roof pitch of the single-family dwelling;
ii. Sixteen feet on all other legal lots with an existing or proposed single-family dwelling unit.
c. Up to two detached accessory dwelling units on a legal lot with a proposed multifamily dwelling. On a legal lot with an existing multifamily dwelling, the number of detached accessory dwelling units permitted is equivalent to the number of primary dwelling units existing on the lot or eight, whichever is less. The accessory dwelling units shall have at least four-foot side and rear yard setbacks. However, if the existing multifamily dwelling has a rear or side setback of less than four feet, no modification of the existing multifamily dwelling shall be required as a condition of approving the application to construct an accessory dwelling unit that satisfies the requirements of this subsection.

The height of the accessory dwelling units shall not exceed the following, as applicable:
i. Eighteen feet on a legal lot with an existing or proposed multifamily dwelling if the lot is within one-half mile walking distance of a major transit stop or a high-quality transit corridor, as those terms are defined in Public Resources Code Section 21155. An additional two feet in height may be permitted to accommodate a roof pitch on the accessory dwelling unit that is aligned with the roof pitch of the multifamily dwelling;
ii. Eighteen feet on a legal lot with an existing or proposed multistory multifamily dwelling;
iii. Sixteen feet on all other legal lots with an existing or proposed multifamily dwelling;
d. A legal lot with an existing multifamily dwelling may contain accessory dwelling units converted from portions of the building that are not used as livable space. The number of accessory dwelling units permitted is equivalent to up to 25 percent of the number of existing, legally permitted units in the multifamily dwelling, or one, whichever is greater.

2. Building Code. Junior accessory dwelling units and accessory dwelling units shall comply with all applicable building code requirements, except as follows:
a. Fire sprinklers shall not be required for an accessory dwelling unit or a junior accessory dwelling unit if they are not required for the primary dwelling. Fire sprinklers shall not be required for an existing primary dwelling unit as a condition of the approval of an accessory dwelling unit.
b. The new construction of an accessory dwelling unit shall not constitute a Group R occupancy change under the local building code, as described in Section 310 of the California Building Code (Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations), unless the building official or enforcement agency makes a written finding based on substantial evidence in the record that the construction of the accessory dwelling unit could have a specific, adverse impact on public health and safety or the accessory dwelling unit is converted from unhabitable or nonresidential space.

3. Owner Occupancy and Short-Term Rentals.
951

DocID #74246v1
a. Owner Occupancy. If a junior accessory dwelling unit shares a bathroom with the single-family dwelling unit, the owner must occupy as a principal residence either the primary dwelling or the junior accessory dwelling unit, unless the owner is another governmental agency, land trust, or housing organization. Owner occupancy is not required for a junior accessory dwelling unit that has its own bathroom or for an accessory dwelling unit.
b. Short-Term Rentals. Renting or leasing an accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit for fewer than thirty (30) consecutive days is prohibited.

4. Tenancy in Common. Neither an accessory dwelling unit nor junior accessory dwelling unit may be sold separately from the single-family or multifamily dwelling. The accessory dwelling unit and primary unit may be owned by multiple owners as tenants in common if the single-family dwelling and accessory dwelling unit were developed by a qualified nonprofit, as that term is defined in Government Code Section 66340, and if all of the provisions of Government Code Section 66341 are met.

5. Conditions.
a. Acknowledgements:
i. Accessory Dwelling Units. At the time of application for an accessory dwelling unit, the property owner shall acknowledge in writing that the accessory dwelling unit cannot be used for short-term residential rentals of less than thirty (30) days; and
ii. Junior Accessory Dwelling Units. At the time of application for a junior accessory dwelling unit, the property owner shall acknowledge in writing that the junior accessory dwelling unit cannot be used for short-term residential rentals of less than thirty (30) days and that if the single family dwelling and junior accessory dwelling share a bathroom, either the single-family dwelling or the junior accessory dwelling unit shall be the owner's bona fide principal residence, unless the owner is a governmental agency, land trust, or housing organization. b. Covenants for Junior Accessory Dwelling Units. Prior to obtaining building permits for a junior accessory dwelling unit, a property owner shall file with the Contra Costa County Recorder a deed restriction in a form approved by the City Attorney.

A copy of the recorded deed restriction shall be filed with the Zoning Administrator.

This deed restriction shall run with the land, and shall be binding upon any future owners, heirs, or assigns purchasers and shall include:
i. A prohibition on the sale of the junior accessory dwelling unit separate from the sale of the single-family principal dwelling; including a statement that the deed restriction may be enforced against future purposes.
ii. A restriction on the size and attributes of the junior accessory dwelling unit consistent with this Section.

6. Exceptions. An accessory dwelling unit shall comply with the requirements of this Section

15.04.610.020, the underlying zoning district, and other provisions of the City Municipal Code except:
952

DocID #74246v1
a. If the requirements of the underlying zoning district or other provisions of the City Municipal Code are inconsistent with the provisions of this Section, the standards of this Section shall apply.
b. Limits on lot coverage, front yard setback, floor area ratio, open space, and size must permit or shall be waived to allow a detached or attached accessory dwelling unit with eight hundred square foot of interior livable spaceand at least four-foot side and rear yard setbacks, if the proposed accessory dwelling unit is in compliance with all other applicable development standards.
c. The City will not deny an application for an accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit because of nonconforming zoning conditions, building code violations, or unpermitted structures on the property that do not present a threat to public health and safety and are not affected by the construction of the accessory dwelling unit. The City will not require as a condition of approval for an application for an accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit the correction of nonconforming zoning conditions.
d. If the application is to legalize an unpermitted accessory dwelling unit or unpermitted junior accessory dwelling unit that was constructed before January 1, 2020, the City will not deny an application to legalize the unpermitted accessory dwelling unit or unpermitted junior accessory dwelling unit if the unpermitted accessory dwelling unit or unpermitted junior accessory dwelling unit does not conform with this Section or building standards pursuant to Health & Safety Code Section 17960 et seq. However, the City may deny the application for an unpermitted accessory dwelling unit or unpermitted junior accessory dwelling unit constructed before January 1, 2020 if the building official makes a finding that correcting the violation is necessary to comply with the standards specified in Health & Safety Code Section 17920.3.
e. No setback is required for a new structure constructed in the same location and to the same dimensions as an existing structure.

D. Objective Design Standards. The following design standards apply to all accessory dwelling units except exempt accessory dwelling units.

1. The materials and colors of the exterior walls, roof, eaves, and windows and doors shall match the appearance and architectural design of those of the primary dwelling.

2. The roof slope shall match that of the dominant roof slope of the primary dwelling. The dominant roof slope is the slope shared by the largest portion of the roof.

3. The exterior lighting shall be limited to down-lights or as otherwise required by the building or fire code.

4. All windows that are located 12 feet in height above the finished floor shall be clerestory windows and must be frosted or obscure glass.

5. A new detached ADU shall not be located closer to the front property line than the primary residence unless it is not physically feasible to construct an attached or detached ADU with 800 square feet of interior livable space and at least four-foot side and rear setbacks anywhere else on the property.
953

DocID #74246v1

6. The architectural treatment of an attached ADU to be constructed on a lot that is listed in the California Register of Historical Resources shall comply with all applicable objective standards imposed by the Secretary of Interior. These standards shall not include requirements on minimum lot size. Further, any new attached ADU proposed on a property listed in the California Register of Historical Resources shall be located behind the main structure where physically feasible. If placing the ADU behind the main structure is not physically feasible, the ADU shall be developed to the side of the main structure. If placing the ADU behind or to the side of the main structure is not physically feasible, the ADU shall be developed in front of the main structure.

E. Objective Development Standards. The following development standards apply to all accessory dwelling units except exempt accessory dwelling units.

1. Accessory Dwelling Units.
a. Number of Units Allowed. Only one accessory dwelling unit shall be permitted on a legal lot that is zoned to allow and contains a proposed or existing single-family or multifamily dwelling.
b. Setbacks. A four feet setback is required from the rear and side property lines. No setback shall be required for the conversion of an existing living area or accessory structure or a structure constructed in the same location and to the same dimensions as an existing structure that is converted to an ADU. c. Floor Area. The maximum floor area for an accessory dwelling unit attached to or detached from a dwelling shall not exceed 850 square feet of interior livable space for a studio or one bedroom or 1,000 square feet of interior livable space for a unit that contains two or more bedrooms. No accessory dwelling unit shall be smaller than the size required to allow an efficiency unit pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 17958.1.
d. Height. The maximum height of a detached or attached ADU shall not exceed:
i. A height of 16 feet for a detached accessory dwelling unit on a lot with an existing or proposed single family or multifamily dwelling unit. ii. A height of 18 feet for a detached accessory dwelling unit on a lot with an existing or proposed single family or multifamily dwelling unit that is within one- half of one mile walking distance of a major transit stop or a high-quality transit corridor, as those terms are defined in Section 21155 of the Public Resources Code. An additional two feet in height shall be permitted to accommodate a roof pitch on the accessory dwelling unit that is aligned with the roof pitch of the primary dwelling unit.
iii. A height of 18 feet for a detached accessory dwelling unit on a lot with an existing or proposed multifamily, multistory dwelling.
iv. A height of 25 feet or the height limitation in the then current City zoning ordinance that applies to the primary dwelling, whichever is lower, for an accessory dwelling unit that is attached to a primary dwelling. However, the accessory dwelling unit may not exceed two stories.
e. Parking. Accessory dwelling units shall have one parking space per unit, except that studio units shall not require a parking space. Parking for an accessory dwelling unit 954

DocID #74246v1
may be provided as tandem parking on an existing driveway or in a setback area. "Tandem parking" means that two or more automobiles are parked on a driveway or in any other location on a lot, lined up behind one another. Parking is not required for an accessory dwelling unit in any of the following instances:
i. Where the accessory dwelling unit is located within one-half of one mile walking distance of public transit.
ii. Where the accessory dwelling unit is located within an architecturally and historically significant historic district.
iii. Where the accessory dwelling unit is part of the proposed or existing primary residence or an accessory structure.
iv. When on-street parking permits are required but not offered to the occupant of the accessory dwelling unit.
v. When there is a car share vehicle located within one block of the accessory dwelling unit.
vi. When a permit application for an accessory dwelling unit is submitted with a permit application to create a new single-family dwelling or a new multifamily dwelling on the same lot, provided that the accessory dwelling unit or the parcel satisfies any other criteria listed in this subsection (e). vii. When a garage, carport, or covered parking structure is demolished or converted in conjunction with the construction of an accessory dwelling unit, the parking spaces need not be replaced.

2. Supplemental Standards for Attached Accessory Dwelling Units. a. An attached accessory dwelling unit must share at least one common wall or roofline with the living area of the primary dwelling.
b. An attached accessory dwelling unit shall have a separate entrance, located on the side or the rear of the primary dwelling; provided, however, that in no event shall any external stairwell be placed within the side yard setback.

3. Supplemental Standards for Detached Accessory Dwelling Units. a. The distance between the primary dwelling and a detached accessory dwelling unit must be at least five feet.

4. Junior Accessory Dwelling Units. Junior accessory dwelling units shall comply with the following standards:
a. Number of Units Allowed. Only one junior accessory dwelling unit may be located on any legal lot zoned for and containing a proposed or existing single-family dwelling. If there are multiple detached single-family dwelling units on one legal lot, there can only be one junior accessory dwelling unit.
b. Location of Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit. A junior accessory dwelling unit must be created within the existing walls of a proposed or existing single-family dwelling, including enclosed accessory uses within the single family dwelling, such as attached garages, which are considered a part of the proposed or existing single-family dwelling for purposes of this Section.
c. Size. The total floor space of a junior accessory dwelling unit shall not exceed five hundred square feet of interior livable space.
d. Entrance. An exterior entry separate from the exterior entry for the single-family dwelling unit shall be provided to serve a junior accessory dwelling unit. However, if 955

DocID #74246v1
the junior accessory dwelling unit shares sanitation facilities with the single-family dwelling unit, there must also be an interior entry to the main living area of the single-family dwelling unit.
e. Kitchen. The junior accessory dwelling unit shall include at least an efficiency kitchen which includes cooking appliances, a food preparation counter and storage cabinets that are of reasonable size in relation to the size of the junior accessory dwelling unit. f. Parking. Parking is not required for a junior accessory dwelling unit.

F. Utilities and Impact Fees.

1. Fees and Utility Connections.
a. Utility Extensions. All utility extensions shall be placed underground. b. Accessory Dwelling Units. All permit and mitigation fees and other charges applicable to primary dwellings in the zone in which the property is located shall apply to an accessory dwelling units except:
i. Accessory dwelling units shall not be considered new residential uses for the purposes of calculating any connection fees or capacity charges for utilities, including water and sewer service, unless the accessory dwelling unit is constructed with a new single-family dwelling.
ii. An exempt accessory dwelling unit developed under subsection (C)(1)(a) above on a single-family property is exempt from any requirement to install a new or separate utility connection and to pay any associated connection or capacity fees or charges, unless the interior accessory dwelling unit was constructed with a new single-family dwelling.
iii. Any connection or capacity charge shall be proportionate to the burden of the proposed accessory dwelling unit on the water or sewer system, based on either its square feet or the number of drainage fixture units. c. Junior Accessory Dwelling Units.
i. For the purposes of providing service for water, sewer, or power, a junior accessory dwelling unit is not considered a separate or new dwelling unit. No water, sewer, or power requirements may be applied to single-family dwellings containing a junior accessory dwelling unit unless they apply uniformly to all single-family dwellings in the zone regardless of whether or not they contain a junior accessory dwelling unit.
ii. Unless the junior accessory dwelling unit is constructed with a new single-family dwelling, a junior accessory dwelling unit may not be required to install a new or separate utility connection between the junior accessory dwelling unit and the utility, may not be considered a new residential use for purposes of calculating connection fees or capacity charges for utilities, and may not be required to pay any associated connection or capacity fees or charges.
d. Utility Connections and Meters. Previously unpermitted accessory dwelling units or previously unpermitted junior accessory dwelling units constructed before January 1, 2020 and permitted pursuant to subsection (C)(6)(d) are not required to pay connection or capacity charges except when utility infrastructure is required to comply with Health & Safety Code Section 17920.3.
956

DocID #74246v1

2. Impact Fees.
a. No impact fees shall be imposed upon a previously unpermitted accessory dwelling unit or previously unpermitted junior accessory dwelling unit constructed before January 1, 2020 that is permitted pursuant to subsection (C)(6)(d). b. No impact fees shall be imposed upon the development of an accessory dwelling unit less than seven hundred fifty square feet of interior livable space or a junior accessory dwelling unit. Any impact fees charged for an accessory dwelling unit of seven hundred fifty square feet of interior livable space or more shall be charged proportionately in relation to the square footage of the primary dwelling unit. For purposes of this provision, an "impact fee" includes the fees specified in Government Code Sections 66000 and 66477. Impact fees do not include connection fees or capacity charges.

G. Conformance with State Law. In cases of conflict between this section and any other provision of this title, the provisions of this section shall prevail. To the extent that any provision of this section is in conflict with State law, the applicable provision of State law shall control, but all other provisions of this section shall remain in full force and effect.

957

July 21, 2026

Police Department

DATE: July 21, 2026
TO: Mayor Martinez and Members of the City Council
FROM:

Chief Timothy Simmons
Captain John Lopez
SUBJECT:

2025 Annual Military Equipment Use Report
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with this item.

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

April 22, 2025

STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:

California Assembly Bill 481 requires local law
enforcement agencies to obtain governing body approval
for the funding, acquisition, use, and continued use of certain equipment defined by statute as “military
equipment.” AB 481 also requires annual reporting,
public posting of the report, community engagement, and annual City Council review to determine whether
continued authorization remains appropriate. Richmond
Police Department is therefore required to submit its
2025 Annual Military Equipment Use Report for Council
review and approval.

The 2025 report provides updated information regarding
the Department’s military equipment inventory,
operational uses, policy updates, fiscal impact,
complaints and concerns, and projected acquisitions for 2026. The report also responds to specific direction
previously provided by the City Council.

AGENDA
REPORT
958

July 21, 2026
RECOMMENDED ACTION:

ADOPT a resolution approving the Richmond Police
Department’s 2025 Annual Military Equipment Use
Report and authorizing the continued use of approved
military equipment consistent with Government Code
sections 7070 through 7075, Policy Manual section 707,
and the findings required by Government Code section
7071(d) – Police Department (Chief Timothy
Simmons/Captain John Lopez 510-621-1802). This item
was continued from the June 16, and July 7, 2026,
meeting. Public input on this matter was received
during the July 7, 2026, meeting. The Council will
now discuss this item without additional public
comment.

DISCUSSION:

Legal Requirements

Under California Assembly Bill 481 (“AB 481”), codified at Government Code sections 7070–7075, a law enforcement agency that has an approved military equipment use policy has several ongoing annual obligations.

The primary annual requirements are:

1. Prepare and submit an annual military equipment report to the governing body (e.g., City Council) within one year of initial approval and annually thereafter for as long as the equipment remains available for use.

2. Publish the annual report on the agency’s website and keep it publicly available.

3. Hold at least one well-publicized and conveniently located community engagement meeting within 30 days of releasing the annual report.

4. Obtain annual review by the governing body of the military equipment ordinance/policy. The governing body must determine whether to renew, amend, or revoke authorization for the equipment.

The annual report itself must include, at a minimum, for each type of military equipment:
 A summary of how the equipment was used and the purpose of its use;  A summary of complaints or concerns received;
 Results of internal audits;
 Information regarding policy violations and corrective actions;  Total annual costs, including acquisition, training, maintenance, storage, transportation, upgrades, and ongoing expenses;
 Funding sources for the upcoming year;
 Quantity possessed; and
 Any planned acquisitions for the next year.

959

July 21, 2026
The governing body may disapprove of continued use or require amendments if it finds that the equipment:
 has not complied with the standards for approval,
 is no longer necessary,
 or that continued use is inconsistent with public welfare or fiscal responsibility.

2024 Annual Report Approval
During the April 22, 2025, Richmond City Council meeting, the 2024 AB 481 Annual Report was presented by former Chief Bisa French and Captain John Lopez. During that meeting, the City Council provided additional direction to the Police Department regarding future AB 481 reporting, policy development, and community transparency measures. This 2025 Annual Military Equipment Use Report reflects the Department’s efforts to address those directives.

First, the City Council directed the Police Department to develop a process to track each time an officer deploys or displays a patrol rifle during an incident. In response, the Department created an electronic reporting form and implemented a reporting process for officers, supervisors, and watch commanders to document those deployments. The resulting patrol rifle deployment data is included in this report.

Second, the City Council directed the Police Department to amend Policy 707.6 and include a dedicated section addressing the use of armored rescue vehicles borrowed from other agencies, including their purpose, authorized uses, operational controls, and reporting requirements. That policy amendment is included in this report and is intended to provide clarity regarding the Department’s use of armored rescue support from partner agencies when necessary for life safety and high-risk incidents.

Third, the City Council unanimously directed that, for the Department’s 2026 community engagement meeting, notice be provided to the Community Police Review Commission (CPRC), the Mayor’s Office, and the City Council at least two weeks in advance with the intent of enhancing community awareness, encouraging participation and feedback, and assisting in broader public notice of the meeting. This report shows that the required notifications were provided as directed.

Finally, the City Council also directed that the 2025 annual report include location and demographic information, including race and ethnicity data. In response, the Department collected and included estimated location and demographic data in this annual report to the extent such information was known and available.

The 2025 report provides updated information regarding the Department’s military equipment inventory, operational uses, policy updates, fiscal impact, complaints and concerns, and projected acquisitions for 2026. The report identifies the Department’s military equipment by category and model, summarizes operational deployments during the reporting period, and outlines proposed policy revisions related to armored rescue vehicles from other jurisdictions and updated unmanned aerial system operations, including the City Council approved Drone as First Responder program. 960

July 21, 2026

The report further identifies military equipment related expenditures during the reporting period, as well as estimated projected training costs associated with SWAT, Patrol Rifle, Sniper, and Drone as First Responder operations. These training costs reflect the Department’s continuing commitment to ensure that military equipment is used only by properly trained personnel, in accordance with Department policy, applicable law, and the protection of civil rights and public safety.

Public Release, CPRC Presentation, and Community Engagement The Richmond Police Department publicly released the 2025 Annual Military Equipment Use Report on May 14, 2026, by posting the report on the Department’s AB 481 transparency webpage: https://www.richmondca.gov/4248/AB-481---Military-Equipment- Use-Policy

The report was published more than 30 days before the scheduled City Council review on June 16, 2026. The report remained publicly available for review before the Community Police Review Commission presentation, the community engagement meeting, and the City Council meeting.

On Wednesday, June 3, 2026, the Richmond Police Department presented an overview of the 2025 Annual Military Equipment Use Report to the Community Police Review Commission. During that meeting, the Department reviewed the purpose of AB 481, the Department’s annual reporting obligations, the equipment inventory, operational use data, patrol rifle deployment tracking, Drone as First Responder data, demographic and location information, complaints and concerns, fiscal impact, and proposed policy updates. The Department answered questions from the Commission and received feedback regarding the report. The Department also received comments recognizing the thoroughness of the report, the expanded level of detail compared to prior reporting years, and the transparency reflected in the updated reporting format. The June 3, 2026, CPRC meeting video may be reviewed through the City’s CPRC meeting webpage: https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/3269/Audio-of-Meetings

Consistent with Government Code section 7072 and prior City Council direction, the Richmond Police Department also held a separate AB 481 community engagement meeting on Friday, June 5, 2026, in the City Council Chambers. Notice of the community engagement meeting was provided in advance on May 15, 2026, to the Community Police Review Commission, the Mayor’s Office, and the City Council as directed by the City Council during the prior annual review process. The Department also prepared and presented a slide deck presentation for the community engagement meeting, consistent with feedback and recommendations received through the CPRC process. During the community engagement meeting, the Department provided an overview of the 2025 Annual Military Equipment Use Report, discussed the Department’s military equipment inventory and operational uses, reviewed reporting and transparency requirements, and answered questions from members of the community regarding the Department’s funding, acquisition, and use of military equipment.

961

July 21, 2026
These public review opportunities were intended to ensure that the community, the Community Police Review Commission, and the City Council had an opportunity to review the report, ask questions, and provide feedback before the City Council’s annual review and consideration of continued authorization. For these reasons, City staff recommend that the City Council approve the Richmond Police Department’s 2025 Annual Military Equipment Use Report and authorizing continued use of approved military equipment consistent with Government Code sections 7070 through 7075 and Policy Manual section 707.

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:

Attachment 1 – Resolution
Attachment 2 – RPD Military Equipment Annual Report (2025) Attachment 3 – RPD Policy 707

962
Reso. No. ##-##

RESOLUTION NO. ___-26

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND APPROVING THE 2025 MILITARY EQUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT, MAKING THE FINDINGS REQUIRED BY GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 7071(d), AND

AUTHORIZING THE CONTINUED USE OF MILITARY EQUIPMENT BY THE

RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
WHEREAS, Assembly Bill 481 (“AB 481”), codified at Government Code sections 7070 through 7075, requires law enforcement agencies to obtain approval from the governing body before seeking funds for, acquiring, or using military equipment, and requires annual review of the military equipment use policy and annual military equipment report; and WHEREAS, on October 19, 2022, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 12-22 N.S., approving the Richmond Police Department Military Equipment Use Policy pursuant to Government Code section 7071; and
WHEREAS, Government Code section 7072 requires the Richmond Police Department to submit an annual military equipment report to the City Council for each type of military equipment approved by the City Council and to make that report publicly available on the Department’s website for as long as the equipment is available for use; and WHEREAS, the Richmond Police Department prepared and publicly released its 2025 Annual Military Equipment Use Report covering the period of January 1, 2025 through December 31, 2025; and
WHEREAS, the 2025 Annual Military Equipment Use Report includes information regarding the inventory, use, purpose, training, legal and procedural safeguards, complaints, fiscal impacts, and proposed acquisitions relating to military equipment maintained or used by the Richmond Police Department, including information requested by the City Council during the prior annual review process; and
WHEREAS, the Richmond Police Department conducted a community engagement meeting regarding the annual report as required by Government Code section 7072(b); and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the Military Equipment Use Policy, the 2025 Annual Military Equipment Use Report, and all public testimony and information presented regarding the military equipment identified in the report; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code section 7071(d), the City Council is required to determine whether each type of military equipment identified in the policy complies with the standards set forth in Government Code section 7071(d)(1) through (4).

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richmond as follows:

Section 1. Recitals.

The foregoing recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference. 963
Reso. No. ##-##

Section 2. Approval of Annual Report.

The City Council hereby receives, reviews, and approves the Richmond Police Department 2025 Annual Military Equipment Use Report.

Section 3. Findings Pursuant to Government Code Section 7071(d).

The City Council finds, based on the evidence presented, that:

1. The military equipment identified in the Richmond Police Department Military Equipment Use Policy is necessary because there is no reasonable alternative that can achieve the same objective of officer and public safety;

2. The proposed use of the military equipment will safeguard the public’s welfare, safety, civil rights, and civil liberties;

3. The purchase, use, and funding of the military equipment is reasonably cost effective compared to available alternatives that can achieve the same objective of officer and public safety; and

4. The Richmond Police Department has complied with the standards for approval set forth in Government Code section 7071(d).

Section 4. Continued Authorization.

The City Council hereby authorizes the continued use of the military equipment identified in the Richmond Police Department Military Equipment Use Policy and the 2025 Annual Military Equipment Use Report, subject to continued compliance with Government Code sections 7070 through 7075, Department policy, and applicable law.

Section 5. Policy Updates.

The City Council acknowledges and approves the policy updates identified in the 2025 Annual Military Equipment Use Report, including the amendments relating to coordination with other jurisdictions and armored rescue vehicles, and revisions to Unmanned Aerial System operations policies, subject to final review and implementation by the Chief of Police and City Attorney.

Section 6. CEQA.

The City Council finds that this action is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378 because it constitutes an administrative and governmental activity that will not result in a direct or indirect physical change in the environment. In the alternative, the action is exempt under the common sense exemption set forth in CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3).

Section 7. Effective Date.

This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption.

964
Reso. No. ##-##

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Richmond at a regular meeting held on ____________, 2026, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

MAYOR

ATTEST:

CITY CLERK

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 MMDDYYYY.

_______________________________________
Pamela Christian, Clerk of the City of Richmond
965
Policy
707
Richmond Police Department
Richmond PD CA Policy Manual
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2026/02/13, All Rights Reserved.

Published with permission by Richmond Police Department Military Equipment - 1
Military Equipment
707.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE
This policy is provided to fulfill the obligations set forth in Assembly Bill No. 481 and establish guidelines for the funding, acquisition, use, and reporting requirements of "military equipment" as the term is defined in Government Code §7070. These obligations include but are not limited to seeking approval on specific items deemed by statute to be military equipment and requirements related to compliance, annual reporting, and complaints regarding these items. 707.1.1 DEFINITIONS
Definitions related to this policy include (Government Code § 7070):

Governing body – The elected or appointed body that oversees the Department.

Military equipment – Includes but is not limited to the following:
• Unmanned, remotely piloted, powered aerial or ground vehicles. • Mine-resistant ambush-protected (MRAP) vehicles or armored personnel carriers. • High mobility multipurpose wheeled vehicles (HMMWV), two-and-one-half-ton trucks, five-ton trucks, or wheeled vehicles that have a breaching or entry apparatus attached. • Tracked armored vehicles that provide ballistic protection to their occupants. • Command and control vehicles that are either built or modified to facilitate the operational control and direction of public safety units. • Weaponized aircraft, vessels, or vehicles of any kind. • Battering rams, slugs, and breaching apparatuses that are explosive in nature. This does not include a handheld, one-person ram.
• Firearms and ammunition of_.50 caliber or greater, excluding standard-issue shotguns and standard-issue shotgun ammunition.
• Specialized firearms and ammunition of less than_.50 caliber, including firearms and accessories identified as assault weapons in Penal Code § 30510 and Penal Code § 30515, with the exception of standard-issue firearms.
• Any firearm or firearm accessory that is designed to launch explosive projectiles. • Noise-flash diversionary devices and explosive breaching tools. • Munitions containing tear gas or OC, excluding standard, service-issued handheld pepper spray.
• Area denial electroshock devices, microwave weapons, water cannons, long-range acoustic devices (LRADs), acoustic hailing devices, and sound cannons. • Kinetic energy weapons and munitions.
• Any other equipment as determined by a governing body or a state agency to require additional oversight.
966
Richmond Police Department
Richmond PD CA Policy Manual
Military Equipment
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2026/02/13, All Rights Reserved.

Published with permission by Richmond Police Department Military Equipment - 2
707.2 POLICY
It is the policy of the Richmond Police Department that members of this department comply with the provisions of Government Code §7071 with respect to military equipment. Violations of this policy by member(s) of the Richmond Police Department will be investigated in accordance with the Department's Personnel Complaints policy.
707.3 MILITARY EQUIPMENT COORDINATOR
The Chief of Police shall designate a member of this department to act as the military equipment coordinator. The responsibilities of the military equipment coordinator include but are not limited to:
(a) Acting as a liaison to the City Council for matters related to the requirements of this policy.
(b) Identifying department equipment that qualifies as military equipment in the current possession of the Department, or the equipment the Department intends to acquire that requires approval by the City Council.
(c) Conducting an inventory of all military equipment at least annually. (d) Collaborating with any allied agency that may use military equipment within the jurisdiction of Richmond Police Department.
(e) Preparing for, scheduling, and coordinating the annual community engagement meeting to include:

1. Publicizing the details of the meeting.

2. Preparing for public questions regarding the department's funding, acquisition, and use of equipment.
(f) Preparing the annual military equipment report for submission to the Chief of Police (prior to submission to the City Council) and ensuring the report is made available on the departmentwebsite.
707.4 MILITARY EQUIPMENT INVENTORY
The following constitutes a list of qualifying equipment for the Richmond Police Department, as well as provides legal and procedural rules for use and training requirements.

See attachment: Military Equipment Inventory Updated 09012024 (002).pdf 707.5 APPROVAL OF THIS POLICY
The Chief of Police or authorized designee shall obtain approval from the City Council by way of an ordinance approving the military equipment policy. As part of the approval process, the Chief of Police or the authorized designee shall ensure the proposed military equipment policy is submitted to the City Council, a public hearing is held, and the policy is available on the Department's website for at least 30 days prior to any public hearing concerning the military equipment at issue (Government Code §7071). The military equipment policy must be approved by the City Council prior to engaging in any of the following (Government Code §7071):
967
Richmond Police Department
Richmond PD CA Policy Manual
Military Equipment
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2026/02/13, All Rights Reserved.

Published with permission by Richmond Police Department Military Equipment - 3
(a) Requesting military equipment made available pursuant to 10 USC § 2576a (b) Seeking funds for military equipment, including but not limited to applying for a grant, soliciting or accepting private, local, state, or federal funds, in-kind donations, or other donations or transfers.
(c) Acquiring military equipment either permanently or temporarily, including by borrowing or leasing.
(d) Collaborating with another law enforcement agency in the deployment or other use of military equipment within the jurisdiction of this department. (e) Using any new or existing military equipment for a purpose, in a manner, or by a person not previously approved by the City Council.
(f) Soliciting or responding to a proposal for, or entering into an agreement with, any other person or entity to seek funds for, apply to receive, acquire, use, or collaborate in the use of military equipment.
(g) Acquiring military equipment through any means not provided above.

The City Council must be able to make the following findings in approving the Military Equipment Use policy as required by Government Code §7071(d)(1) in order to use military equipment:
(a) The military equipment is necessary because there is no reasonable alternative that can achieve the same objective of officer and civilian safety. (b) The proposed military equipment use policy will safeguard the public's welfare, safety, civil rights, and civil liberties.
(c) If purchasing the equipment, the equipment is reasonably cost-effective compared to available alternatives that can achieve the same objective of officer and civilian safety. (d) Prior military equipment use complied with the military equipment use policy that was in effect at the time, or if prior uses did not comply with the accompanying military equipment use policy, corrective action has been taken to remedy nonconforming uses and ensure future compliance.
707.6 COORDINATION WITH OTHER JURISDICTIONS
Military equipment used by any member of this jurisdiction shall be approved for use and in accordance with this Department policy. Military equipment used by other jurisdictions that are providing mutual aid to this jurisdiction shall comply with their respective military equipment use policies in rendering mutual aid.
707.7 MILITARY EQUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT
Upon approval of this military equipment policy, the Chief of Police or the authorized designee should submit a military equipment report to the City Council for each type of military equipment approved within one year of approval, and annually thereafter for as long as the military equipment is available for use (Government Code § 7072). In considering the annual report and ordinance annually, the City Council needs to consider whether it can continue to make the findings in California Government Code §7071(d)(1).
968
Richmond Police Department
Richmond PD CA Policy Manual
Military Equipment
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2026/02/13, All Rights Reserved.

Published with permission by Richmond Police Department Military Equipment - 4
The Chief of Police or the authorized designee should also make each annual military equipment report publicly available on the department website for as long as the military equipment is available for use. The report shall include all information required by Government Code § 7072 for the preceding calendar year for each type of military equipment in department inventory. 707.8 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
Within 30 days of submitting and publicly releasing the annual report, the Department shall hold at least one well-publicized and conveniently located community engagement meeting, at which the Department should discuss the report and respond to public questions regarding the funding, acquisition, or use of military equipment.
707.9 COMMUNITY CONCERNS AND COMPLAINTS
Pursuant to Government Code §7070(d)(7), members of the public may register complaints or concerns or submit questions by any of the following means:

1. Email: [email protected]

2. In-person or mail:

Richmond Police Department
Attn: AB481 Coordinator
1701 Regatta Boulevard, Richmond, CA 94804
The Department is committed to responding to complaints, concerns, and/or questions received and should respond within ten business days of receiving the correspondence. Any complaints shall be referred to the Community Police Review Commission as the independent oversight body.

All instances of non-compliance with the policy will also be reported to the City Council via the annual military equipment report.
707.10 MILITARY EQUIPMENT TRAINING
Military equipment shall only be used after applicable training, including any course required by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (P.O.S.T.), has been completed unless exigent circumstances exist.
707.11 CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL
Pursuant to California Government Code §7071, the City Council of Richmond approved this Policy pursuant to Ordinance 12.22 N.S. on October 19, 2022. The City Attorney and City Council should be notified in writing of any changes to this policy. All amendments to the policy must be reviewed and approved by City Council.
707.12 COMPLIANCE
The Department's AB481 Coordinator will ensure that Department members comply with this policy. The AB481 Coordinator will conduct an annual audit with assistance from members of 969
Richmond Police Department
Richmond PD CA Policy Manual
Military Equipment
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2026/02/13, All Rights Reserved.

Published with permission by Richmond Police Department Military Equipment - 5
the Office of Professional Accountability. Any violations will be referred to the Office of the Chief of Police and handled in accordance with the Department's Personnel Complaints policy. All instances of non-compliance will be reported to the City Council via the annual military equipment report.
970
Richmond PD CA Policy Manual
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2026/02/13, All Rights Reserved.

Published with permission by Richmond Police Department Attachments - 6
Attachments
971
Attachment
Richmond PD CA Policy Manual
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2026/02/13, All Rights Reserved.

Published with permission by Richmond Police Department Military Equipment Inventory Updated
09012024 (002).pdf - 7
Military Equipment Inventory
Updated 09012024 (002).pdf
Military Equipment Inventory Updated 09012024 (002).pdf 972

Richmond Police Department

MILITARY EQUIPMENT INVENTORY

973
1 | P A G E

Background

Assembly Bill 481 was adopted by the California Legislature and approved by Governor Gavin Newsom in September 2021. It went into effect on January 1, 2022. AB 481 is designed to increase community awareness and oversight over the possession and use by local police departments of certain types of equipment that AB 481 labels as “military” equipment. It requires the City Council to provide both authorization and oversight of the equipment used.

The law, codified in California Government Code sections 7070 through 7075, requires law enforcement agencies to produce a military equipment use policy that identifies and describes: each type of military equipment; its authorized use; fiscal impact; rules/laws that govern use of such equipment; training required; and mechanisms to ensure compliance with the policy. (See Gov. Code section 7070(d)). The City Council is required to approve the policy for the Department to continue using this equipment.

Additionally, the law requires an annual report and annual review by the governing body for continued use of the equipment. AB 481 requires every local law enforcement agency in California to post its proposed military equipment use policy no later than May 1, 2022. The law also requires at least a 30-day period for public comment on the proposed policy before the governing body discusses the proposed policy in a public meeting.

Police agencies across the state have developed similar policies to comply with this new law. The Department’s proposed policy describes the equipment that has already been in the Department’s possession. The Department does not possess any equipment that is atypical for the region.

The City of Richmond possesses fewer types of this equipment than many other Bay Area agencies.

974
2 | P A G E

Definitions

Pursuant to AB-481, the following definitions are applicable only to the Department’s current military equipment inventory and potential future military equipment acquisitions for operational needs. (For a more detailed list, refer to Government Code section 7070, for “military equipment” as defined within the Assembly Bill.)

“Governing body” means the Richmond City Council and Mayor.

“Military equipment” means the following:

1. Unmanned, remotely piloted, powered aerial or ground vehicles.

This definition applies to the Department’s inventory of small Unmanned Aircraft Systems (sUAS) and SWAT robots.

2. Mine-resistant ambush-protected (MRAP) vehicles or armored personnel carriers. (Not applicable to the Richmond Police Department)

3. High mobility multipurpose wheeled vehicles (HMMWV), 2 ½, ton trucks, five-ton trucks, or wheeled vehicles that have breaching or entry apparatus attached. (Not applicable to the Richmond Police Department)

4. Tracked armored vehicles that provide ballistic protection to their occupants (Not applicable to the Richmond Police Department)

5. Command and control vehicles that are either built or modified to facilitate the operational control and direction of public safety units. (Mobile Command Vehicle)

6. Weaponized aircraft, vessels, or vehicles of any kind. (Not applicable to the Richmond Police Department)

7. Battering rams, slugs, and breaching apparatuses that are explosive in nature. This does not include a handheld, one-person ram. (Breaching Shotguns)

975
3 | P A G E

8. Firearms and ammunition of .50 caliber or greater, excluding standard-issue shotguns and standard-issue shotgun ammunition. (Not applicable to the Richmond Police Department)

9. Specialized firearms and ammunition of less than .50 caliber, including firearms and accessories identified as assault weapons in Penal Code 30510 and Penal Code 30515, with exception of standard-issue firearms.

10. Any firearm or firearm accessory that is designed to launch explosive projectiles. (Not applicable to the Richmond Police Department)

11. Noise-flash diversionary devices and explosive breaching tools.

12. Munitions containing tear gas or OC, excluding standard, service- issued handheld pepper spray.

13. Taser Shockwave, microwave weapons, water cannons, and long range acoustic devices also known as LRADs. (Not applicable to the Richmond Police Department)

14. Kinetic energy weapons and munitions to include 40mm launcher, beanbag shotgun, foam-tipped projectiles.

15. Any other equipment as determined by a governing body (Richmond City Council) or a state agency to require additional oversight. (Not applicable to the Richmond Police Department)

976
4 | P A G E

Military Equipment Use Policy

Military equipment use policy means a publicly released, written document governing the use of military equipment by the Department that addresses, at a minimum, all of the following:

1. A description of each type of military equipment, the quantity sought its capabilities, expected lifespan, and product descriptions from the manufacturer of the military equipment.

2. The purposes and authorized uses for which the Department proposes to use each type of military equipment.

3. The fiscal impact of each type of military equipment, including the initial costs of obtaining the equipment and estimated annual costs of maintaining the equipment.

4. The legal and procedural rules that govern each authorized use.

5. The training, including any course required by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training, that must be completed before any sworn member is allowed to use each specific type of military equipment to ensure the full protection of the public’s welfare, safety, civil rights, and civil liberties and full adherence to the military equipment use policy.

6. The mechanisms to ensure compliance with the military equipment use policy, including which independent persons or entities have oversight authority, and, if applicable, what legally enforceable sanctions are put in place for violations of the policy.

7. The procedures by which members of the public may register complaints or concerns or submit questions about the use of each specific type of military equipment, and how the Department will ensure that each complaint, concern, or question receives a response in a timely manner.

977
5 | P A G E

Military Equipment Inventory

The inventory of military equipment, particularly consumable material (ammunition, diversionary devices, extended range impact munitions, etc.) fluctuates regularly. This is based on a variety of factors including but not limited to operational usage, operational deterioration, training, maintenance, expirations, and replenishment guidelines.

The following are various types, descriptions, and guidelines for usage of military equipment currently employed by the Richmond Police Department:

978
6 | P A G E

TACTICAL ROBOT
Equipment Type: Small unmanned tracked robot of any type that is capable of being remotely controlled as well as all of the supporting or attached systems designed for gathering information through imaging, recording or by any other means.

Quantity Owned: One (1) Lifespan: Approximately 5-7 Years Equipment Capabilities: Can support first responders in any hazardous incident, which would benefit from a ground level perspective. These uses could include barricaded suspects or high-risk tactical operations, disasters response, and use in crawl spaces or confined isolated areas to assist in searches for suspects or evidence.

Manufacturer Product Description: Small throwable reconnaissance robot designed and manufactured by Recon Robotics, is for use in law enforcement and military applications. The robot can be used by Law Enforcement First Responders, dismounted patrols, special weapons and tactics (SWAT) and other special operations teams.

Purpose: Used to remotely gain visual and audio data, open doors, and clear buildings.

Uses: This equipment is a battery powered, remote operated device equipped with cameras and communication capabilities. This equipment is for (potential) use during high-risk incidents and use is authorized for all members of the department who have been trained in its use. Incidents that may qualify for its use include, but are not limited to, high-risk warrant services, barricaded subjects, and hostage negotiation/rescue operations. Before entering a structure, particularly in a tactically compromised and dangerous situation, knowledge of a subject’s location is very important, and the robot can provide that without placing anyone at risk. Cameras can also help determine if a subject is armed and if there are other subjects inside that need assistance. Only assigned S.W.A.T. operators who have been trained shall be permitted to operate the small- unmanned tracked robot. Use is established by the S.W.A.T team commander, and or Incident Commander. Robots shall not be used as a Use of Force on a person.

Fiscal Impact: Initial Cost $7,500 Annual Maintenance Cost: $0 Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: It is the policy of the Richmond Police Department to utilize the robot only for official law enforcement purposes, and in a manner, that respects the privacy of our community, pursuant to State and Federal law.

Training Required: S.W.A.T. officers authorized to operate tracked robots are required to successfully complete SWAT Basic school and are subject to practical application training in the use of the robot. Additionally, SWAT Officers regularly train on safe robot deployment in a variety of operational settings.

Other Notes: Recon Robotics Recon Scout

979
7 | P A G E

UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEM (UAS)
Equipment Type: An unmanned aircraft of any type that is capable of sustaining directed flight, whether pre-programmed or remotely controlled, and all of the supporting or attached systems designed for gathering information through imaging, recording or by any other means.

Quantity Owned: Eight (8) Lifespan: Approximately 3-5 Years Manufacturer Product Description:

DJI INSPIRE – Small Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) is an unmanned aircraft of any type that is capable of sustaining directed flight, whether pre-programmed or remotely controlled, and all of the supporting or attached systems designed for gathering information through imaging, recording or by any other means.

QUANTITY – 1 (One)
INITIAL COST – $11,000

DJI Matrice 210 – Equipped with both an aerial zoom and thermal camera, first responders can now quickly locate missing people in remote areas and plan the safest approach path.

QUANTITY – 1 (One)
INITIAL COST – $16,000

DJI Mavic Pro M1P – The Mavic is smaller, lighter, and easier to carry with you thanks to its foldable design. Its new OcuSync transmission system has a longer transmission range and 1080p resolution. Due to its larger size, the Phantom 4 has a higher maximum speed and can withstand stronger winds.

QUANTITY – 1 (One)
INITIAL COST – Donated

DJI Mini 2 – The Mini 2 can resist 29-38kph winds and take off at a max altitude of 4,000 meters, so your footage is stable even when flying along a windy coastline or high above an alpine forest. With a max battery life of 31 minutes, DJI Mini 2 grants more than enough time to compose the perfect shot.

QUANTITY – 2 (Two)
INITIAL COST – $550 x 2

DJI Mavic Enterprise DUAL – Integrated Radiometric FLIR Thermal Sensor with adjustable parameters for emissivity and reflective surfaces.

QUANTITY – 2 (Two)
INTITIAL COST – $3,338 x 2

DJI Mavic 2 Enterprise ADVANCED – A highly versatile yet compact tool that packs a whole lot of performance upgrades. With high-resolution thermal and visual cameras, the M2EA supports up to 32 times digital zoom and is capable of centimeter-level positioning accuracy with the RTK module.

QUANTITY – 1 (One)
INITIAL COST – $7,300
Purpose: UAS can support first responders in any hazardous incident, which would benefit from an aerial perspective. These uses could include search and rescue, barricaded suspects or high-risk tactical operations, disaster response, and video and photographic documentation of crime scenes.
980
8 | P A G E

Uses: Only authorized operators who have completed the required training shall be permitted to operate the UAS.

1. All flights will be approved in advance by a lieutenant and in the absence of management personnel; the sergeant will have the authority to approve missions.

2. All flights will be documented on the mission dispatch form designed for the purpose and all flight time shall be accounted for on the form. The reason for the flight and type of mission as specified and the name of the police manager or supervisor approving the mission will also be documented.

3. The manager or supervisor approving any flight missions, UAS operators and observers will consider the protection of individual civil rights and the reasonable expectation of privacy as a key component of any decision made to deploy the UAS. Each UAS operator and observer will ensure that the operation of the UAS is consistent with local, state, and federal laws.

4. The use of the UAS will be limited to the authorized missions described herein. The authorized missions for the RPD UAS are:
• Post-incident crime scene preservation and documentation • Explosive Ordinance Disposal (EOD) missions
• Response to hazardous materials spills
• Search and Rescue (SAR) missions defined in California Government Code Section 26614 Public safety and life preservation missions to include barricaded suspects, hostage situations, civil unrest incidents, active shooters, apprehension of armed and dangerous and/or violent fleeing suspects, and high-risk search warrants • Disaster response and recovery to include natural or human caused disasters including a full overview of a disaster area for post-incident analysis and documentation • Training missions
• In response to specific requests from local, state, or federal fire authorities for fire response and prevention
• When there is probable cause to believe that (1) the UAS will record images of a place, thing, condition, or event; and (2) that those images would be relevant to proving that a certain felony had occurred or is occurring, or that a particular person committed or is committing a certain felony and the use of the UAS does not infringe upon the reasonable expectation of privacy
• Pursuant to a search warrant

981
9 | P A G E

MOBILE COMMAND CENTER
Equipment Type: Completely self-contained command posts designed to provide the Incident Commander with a mobile base of operation. Some major incidents engender special management challenges and require an on-site incident command structure to assist senior personnel in addressing the circumstance presented by the incident.

Quantity Owned: 1 (One) Lifespan: The EVI Spartan Mobile Command Center was purchased in 2013
and has a 20-year lifespan on chassis and
vehicle structure. Upgrades will be needed
in time to maintain IT systems.

Equipment Capabilities: This vehicle is designed to be a stand-alone mobile command post for large-scale high risk or natural disasters.

Manufacturer Product Description: 2012 EVI Spartan is a 40-foot non-armored vehicle used as an Incident Command Post for preplanned events or unplanned high - risk incidents. As a mobile base of operation, these vehicles contain specialized command, control, and communications equipment to assist with various missions.

Purpose: The Mobile Command Center is a vital component to the police mission when major emergencies, natural and man-made disasters or special events in the community trigger the mobilization and coordination of significant resources in the field. Its primary use is to facilitate the management and coordination of personnel, communications, and equipment resources at complex incidents.

Uses: Instances that require the mobilization and coordination of significant resources in the field. Its primary use is to facilitate the management and coordination of personnel, communications, and equipment resources at complex incidents. It is the policy of the Richmond Police Department to have the Mobile Command Center ready and available for use at any emergency, special operation, special event, or other function requiring the use of an on scene incident command post.

Fiscal Impact: Initial Cost $402,152.52 Annual Maintenance Cost: $3,000 Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: It is the policy of the Richmond Police Department to use the mobile command vehicles only for official law enforcement purposes, and in accordance with California State law regarding the operation of motor vehicles.

Training Required: The driver/operator shall receive training in the safe handling of the vehicle on a closed training course. Once the operator has shown competence in vehicle handling, the driver/operator will drive the vehicle throughout the city.

Authorized drivers will possess a valid Class B California Driver license with an airbrake endorsement and complete requisite training on the operation of the MCC and its systems.

982
10 | P A G E

BREACHING SHOTGUN & PROJECTILES
Equipment Type: Remington 870 Breaching Shotgun and TESAR Breaching Rounds Quantity Owned:

Shotguns - 2 (Two)
Lifespan:
25 years or dependent on operational usage
Breaching Rounds - 300 Approximately 5 Years
Equipment Capabilities: This weapon allows breachers to safely utilize shotgun- breaching rounds in order to destroy deadbolts, locks, and hinges. The standoff that is attached to the end of the barrel allows for positive placement of the gun into the correct position and vents gases to prevent overpressure. This weapon can also defeat windows and sliding glass doors with a flash bang round.

Manufacturer Product Description:

Remington 870 Police Magnum – Pump-action shotgun is a rugged 12gauge with a short, tactical 14” barrel backed by a stout 3” chamber.

TESAR 2 Breaching Rounds – Black Cap 2-3/4” 425 Grain Compressed Copper Frangible 12 Ga Shotgun Slug.

TESAR 1 Breaching Rounds – Orange Cap 2-3/4” 275 Grain Compressed Copper Frangible 12 Ga Shotgun Slug.

Purpose: Shotgun breaching, the use of a breaching shotgun to affect a breach, can be an effective option in SWAT Unit tactics. An effective breach is a design where the least amount of breaching shotgun rounds are used and still accomplishes its goal. An effective shotgun breach can defeat fortified doors and locks.

Uses: Breaching shotguns shall only be used on a door, gate, or other entry in the following circumstances:

1. Barricaded suspect and/or hostage situations.

2. High-risk warrant services

3. When the SRT Commander or SWAT Commander deems their use necessary to safely resolve an incident.

Fiscal Impact:

Breaching Shotguns - Initial Cost $550
(Each)

Breaching Rounds – Initial Cost $2,000
Annual Maintenance Cost:
$100

$500
Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: It is the policy of the Richmond Police Department to utilize breaching tools only for official law enforcement purposes, and pursuant to State and Federal law.

Training Required: SWAT Officers that are trained in the use of breaching shotguns must successfully complete a SWAT Breaching course or in-house training from a breaching instructor. Furthermore, SWAT Officers must undergo live fire proficiency training in its application.

983
11 | P A G E

PATROL RIFLES & AMMUNITION
Equipment Type: A semi-automatic shoulder-fired long gun that fires a rifle caliber cartridge. The Department-approved AR-15 style (Colt M4) weapon system is designed to fire a .223/5.56 caliber projectile.

Quantity Owned:

Rifles - 98 (Ninety-eight) total

.223 Ammunition – 10,000 Rounds

.308 Ammunition – 2,000 Rounds
Lifespan:

15+ Years

Varies

Varies
Equipment Capabilities:

The rifle caliber carbine provides officers the ability to engage hostile suspects at distances generally greater than the effective distance of their handguns. Additionally, patrol rifles offer advantages over handguns, such as increased accuracy potential and the ability to defeat soft body armor but are not appropriate for every situation.

.223 Ammunition - Operational Range from 0-500 yards

.308 Ammunition - Operational Range from 0-1000 yards
Manufacturer Product Description:

COLT M4 Carbine / Patrol Rifle– This carbine provides officers the ability to engage hostile suspects at distances generally greater than the effective distance of their handguns. Colt’s reliability, performance and accuracy provide officers the confidence required to accomplish any mission.

QUANTITY: 50
INITIAL COST: $895 each

COLT M4 / M16 A2E / (Exclusive to trained SWAT operators) – The SWAT M4 rifle provides officers the ability to engage hostile suspects at distances generally greater than the effective distance of their handguns. Additionally, rifles offer advantages over handguns, such as increased accuracy potential and the ability to defeat soft body armor but are not appropriate for every situation.

QUANTITY: 13
INITIAL COST: $1,025 each

COLT Commando / (Exclusive to trained SWAT operators) – The Colt Commando is a very short variant of the M16A1 assault rifle. The dimensions and shorter effective range make more akin to a sub machine gun than an assault rifle.

QUANTITY: 2
INITIAL COST: $1,199 each

DPMS M-160 / (Exclusive to trained SWAT operators) – The DMPS is a very short variant of the M16A1 assault rifle. The dimensions and shorter effective range make more akin to a sub machine gun than an assault rifle.

QUANTITY: 5
INITIAL COST: $1,199 each

984
12 | P A G E

COLT M16 A2 / (Exclusive to trained SWAT operators) – The Colt M16 A2 is a very short variant of the M16A1 assault rifle. The dimensions and shorter effective range make more akin to a sub machine gun than an assault rifle.

QUANTITY: 2
INITIAL COST: $1,199 each

COLT AR-15 Match Target Competition Rifle – This rifle is a Colt Match Target (flattop) with 16″ heavy barrel with 1 in 9 twist. It has a removable handle so that a scope or optical site can be easily mounted. It comes with match rear sights and regular front site.

QUANTITY: 8
INITIAL COST: $1,199 each

H&K MP5 (Exclusive to trained SWAT operators) – Tremendously reliable, with maximum safety for the user, easy to handle, modular, extremely accurate and extraordinarily easy to control when firing.

QUANTITY: 17
INITIAL COST: $965 each

H&R Arms M14 – Weapon is decommissioned
QUANTITY: 1
INITIAL COST: N/A

Gold Dot Soft Point 55 or 62 grain .223 & Federal / Winchester 55 grain FJM .223 - Only ammunition that meet RPD specifications, approved by the Chief of Police, and issued by the Department may be used by officers in their law enforcement responsibilities.

INITIAL COST: $358 per 1,000 rounds
ANNUAL COST: $8,000

Federal Tactical Tru 168 grain .308 & Federal Tactical Bonded Tip 168 grain .308 (Exclusive to trained SWAT operators) - Federal Cartridge .308 Win Tactical Bonded Tip 168 Grain Duty Ammunition is made exclusively for law enforcement and achieves accuracy and terminal performance unmatched by any other ammunition. Designed to defeat the toughest barriers with minimal deflection, Tactical Bonded Tip ammo has quickly become the choice for some of the most intense conditions.

INITIAL COST: $450 per 500 rounds
ANNUAL COST: $2,000
Purpose: In order to more effectively and accurately address the increasing level of firepower and body armor utilized by criminal suspects, the Richmond Police Department (RPD) will make patrol rifles available to qualified patrol officers as an additional and more immediate tactical resource.

Uses: Officers may use rifles in the following situations:
a) When there is an objectively reasonable anticipation of an armed encounter.

b) When an officer is faced with a situation that may require the delivery of accurate and effective fire at long range.

c) Situations where an officer reasonably expects the need to meet or exceed a suspect’s firepower.

985
13 | P A G E

d) When an officer reasonably believes that there may be a need to deliver fire on a barricaded suspect or a suspect with a hostage.

e) When an officer reasonably believes that a suspect may be wearing body armor.

f) When authorized or requested by a supervisor

g) When needed to euthanize an animal

Fiscal Impact: Listed above Annual Maintenance Cost: $250 Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: It is the policy of the Richmond Police Department to utilize rifles only for official law enforcement purposes, and pursuant to State and Federal law regarding the use of force.

Training Required: Officers shall not carry or use the patrol rifle unless they have successfully completed departmental training. This training shall consist of an initial 40- hour patrol rifle user's course and qualification score with a certified patrol rifle instructor. Officers shall thereafter be required to successfully complete quarterly training and qualification conducted by certified patrol rifle instructors.

986
14 | P A G E

DIVERSION DEVICES
Equipment Type: Canisters that emit a loud noise and bright light Quantity Owned: 150 (One hundred-
fifty)
Lifespan: 5 Years
Equipment Capabilities: Diversionary Devices are capable of releasing large amounts of stored energy in the form of heat, light, pressure, and noise. They are intended to temporarily distract, confuse, and disorient subjects. They can also be used as “attention- getting” devices. Light Level 6 – 8 million Candelas Light Duration 10 milliseconds.

Manufacturer Product Description: This compact version of the 8933 Low Roll body is the newest version of the original reusable non-bursting canister that limits movement and rolling once deployed. The compact Distraction Device unit packs all the power of the full size 12-Gram Distraction Device unit.

Purpose: A distraction device is ideal for distracting dangerous suspects during assaults, hostage rescue, room entry or other high-risk arrest situations. To produce atmospheric over-pressure and brilliant white light and, as a result, can cause short-term physiological/psychological sensory deprivation to give officers a tactical advantage.

Uses: Generally, flash/sound diversionary devices may be considered whenever the use of a less lethal diversion would help facilitate entry, enabling arrest and potentially reducing the risk of injury by disorientation of potentially dangerous suspects and/or animals. Diversion devices shall only be used for distraction purposes.

Circumstances for the use of flash/sound diversionary devices include:

1. Barricaded suspect and/or hostage situations.

2. High-risk warrant services.

3. Disperse potentially violent animals.

4. When the SRT Commander or SWAT Commander deems their use necessary to safely resolve an incident.

A Barricaded suspect is defined as an individual who is inside a structure and is actively preventing law enforcement from entering, typically posing a threat to themselves or others.

A High-risk warrant services is defined as operations with significant risk of violence or harm, necessitating specialized equipment and tactics to ensure safety and compliance with the service of the warrant.

An SRT or SWAT Commander may authorize the use of diversion devices for the above mentioned circumstances or when there is a high likelihood of a violent confrontation or when a diversion device is needed to mitigate risk to citizens and officers.

Fiscal Impact: Initial Cost $6,800 per 120
devices
Annual Maintenance Cost: $0
Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: It is the policy of the Richmond Police Department’s policy to utilize diversion devices only for official law enforcement purposes, and pursuant to State and Federal law regarding the use of force.

Training Required: Diversionary Device Trainers must successfully complete a Diversionary Device Course that has been approved by the SWAT Commander. 987
15 | P A G E

Diversionary Device Trainers are responsible for maintaining and updating the SWAT Team's training and qualification as they pertain to the deployment of diversionary devices.

Diversionary Device Trainers will attend at least one course related to diversionary devices every three years for updating training and maintenance of their training skills.

CHEMICAL AGENTS
Equipment Type: Canisters or projectile rounds containing chemical agents that are released when deployed
Quantity Owned: 675 Lifespan: 5 Years
Equipment Capabilities: Depending on the delivery method, chemical agents are capable of being introduced in close proximity or from a distance. Depending on the type of delivery system and/or quantity, chemical agents can be used to saturate individual suspects, violent crowds, or areas of varied size.

Manufacturer Product Description: Examples of chemical agents include CN, CS and OC. Delivery methods include Ferret rounds, blast dispersion rounds/canisters, burning canisters and barricade penetrating rounds.

Defense Tech SPEDE-HEAT – Pyro Burning CS gas
Canister

Quantity: 10

Defense Tech HAN-BALL – Pyro Burning CS gas

Quantity: 20

Defense Tech Flameless Tri-Chamber – Pyro Internal
Burn CS gas

Quantity: 10

CTS Indoor 5230B – Pyro Indoor Safe CS gas with dense
cardboard to prevent heat/outside flame

Quantity: 25

Defense Tech Aerosol Vapor – Non-Pyro OC gas

Quantity: 25

Defense Tech Maximum Smoke – Pyro high volume
white smoke

Quantity: 10

CTS 40mm Liquid Ferret Rounds – Non-Pyro CS gas
Launchable Munition with instantons delivery once
ruptured

Quantity: 100

Defense Tech 40mm Direct Impact OC – Direct impact
OC gas

Quantity: 100

988
16 | P A G E

Pepperball – Pepper ball live projectiles .2% PAVA Quantity: 375 Purpose:

Chemical agenda are to be used exclusively by SRT team members. Generally, during high-risk tactical incidents, chemical agents can be used to dislodge a suspect from a stronghold location with the least possible danger to citizens, police and the suspect.

Chemical agents can be also used to prevent an armed suspect from accurately firing at citizens and/or officers.

Uses: Chemical agents may be used for crowd control, crowd dispersal or against barricaded suspects in certain circumstances. Only the Patrol Sergeant, Incident Commander or Crisis Response Unit Commander may authorize the delivery and use of tear gas, and only after evaluating all conditions known at the time and determining that such force reasonably appears justified and necessary. When practicable, fire personnel should be alerted or summoned to the scene prior to the deployment of tear gas to control any fires and to assist in providing medical aid or gas evacuation if needed.

Kinetic energy projectiles and chemical agents for crowd control purposes shall only be deployed by officers who have received POST training for crowd control if the use is objectively reasonable to defend against a threat to life or serious bodily injury to any individual, including an officer, or to bring an objectively dangerous and unlawful situation safely and effectively under control and in accordance with the following requirements of Penal Code § 13652:

(a) De-escalation techniques or other alternatives to force have been attempted, when objectively reasonable, and have failed.
(b) Repeated, audible announcements are made announcing the intent to use kinetic energy projectiles and chemical agents and the type to be used, when objectively reasonable to do so. The announcements shall be made from various locations, if necessary, and delivered in multiple languages, if appropriate. (c) Individuals are given an objectively reasonable opportunity to disperse and leave the scene.
(d) An objectively reasonable effort has been made to identify individuals engaged in violent acts and those who are not, and kinetic energy projectiles or chemical agents are targeted toward those individuals engaged in violent acts. Projectiles shall not be aimed indiscriminately into a crowd or group of individuals.
(e) Kinetic energy projectiles and chemical agents are used only with the frequency, intensity, and in a manner that is proportional to the threat and objectively reasonable. (f) Officers shall minimize the possible incidental impact of their use of kinetic energy projectiles and chemical agents on bystanders, medical personnel, journalists, or other unintended targets.
(g) An objectively reasonable effort has been made to extract individuals in distress. (h) Medical assistance is promptly provided, if properly trained personnel are present, or procured, for injured persons, when it is reasonable and safe to do so. (i) Kinetic energy projectiles shall not be aimed at the head, neck, or any other vital organs.
(j) Kinetic energy projectiles or chemical agents shall not be used solely due to any of the following:

1. A violation of an imposed curfew.

2. A verbal threat.
989
17 | P A G E

3. Noncompliance with a law enforcement directive.
(k) If the chemical agent to be deployed is tear gas, only an Incident Commander at the scene of the assembly, protest, or demonstration may authorize its use.

Fiscal Impact: Initial Cost $5,000 Annual Maintenance Cost: $3,000 Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: It is the policy of the Richmond Police Department to utilize chemical agents only for official law enforcement purposes, and pursuant to State and Federal law, including those regarding the use of force.

Training Required: Kinetic energy projectiles and chemical agents for crowd control purposes shall only be deployed by officers who have received POST training for crowd control. Proficiency training must be conducted and documented by a Department approved instructor.

LESS LETHAL IMPACT DEVICES & KINETIC ENERGY

PROJECTILES
Equipment Type: Less than lethal tool to launch impact rounds Quantity Owned:

Less lethal impact devices: (35) Thirty-five

Kinetic energy projectiles: 700
Lifespan:

10 Years and dependent on operational
usage

5 Years
Manufacturer Product Description, Capabilities, Quantity, Cost:

Remington 870 Bean Bag Shotgun – Beanbag shotguns are capable of firing a 12-gauge beanbag round with a maximum effective range of sixty feet.

QUANTITY: 17
INITIAL COSTS: $550

Remington 870 Chemical Shotgun (Exclusive to trained SWAT operators) – Beanbag shotguns are capable of firing a 12-gauge beanbag round with a maximum effective range of sixty feet.

QUANTITY: 2
INITIAL COSTS: $550

Penn Arms 40mm, 6-cylnder Pump Multi-Launcher – Capable of firing a variety of munitions with a maximum effective range of 120 feet. The launchers can deliver munitions in the form of chemical agents, sponge baton rounds, or combined QUANTITY: 3
INITIAL COSTS: $1,531 each

Penn Arms 40mm, single-shot launcher – Capable of firing a variety of munitions with a maximum effective range of 120 feet. 40mm launchers can deliver 40mm munitions in the form of chemical agents, sponge baton rounds, or combined QUANTITY: 7
INITIAL COSTS: $1,302 each

990
18 | P A G E

FN 303 Launcher – The lightweight polymer magazine holds 15 projectiles and offers a clear rear cover to allow the operator to instantly verify both the payload type and the number of projectiles remaining
QUANTITY: 4
INITIAL COSTS: $1,299 each

Federal Laboratories 37mm – The long range projectile has a 150 yard range (Decommissioned)
QUANTITY: 2
INITIAL COSTS: $299 each

Defense Tech 40mm Exact Impact Round -
6325 – Safe Range 5 ft – 131 ft; 325 fps
6325-A (Marking) – Safe Range Open 5 Ft – 131 Ft 315 fps Closed 131 Ft – 230 Ft; 425 fps
QUANTITY: 150
INITIAL COST: $3,000

Defense Tech 12 gauge Bean Bag – Drag Stabilized round / Safe Range 20 ft – 75 ft, 270 fps, tear shaped bag filled with #9 shot
QUANTITY: 250
INITIAL COST: $1,000

CTS 12 gauge Bean Bag – Super-sock round / Effective Range up to 75 ft, 270-290 fps, shot filled ballistic fiber
QUANTITY: 300
INITIAL COST: $1,200

Purpose: This department is committed to reducing the potential for violent confrontations. Kinetic energy projectiles, when used properly, are less likely to result in death or serious physical injury and can be used in an attempt to de-escalate a potentially deadly situation. Only department-approved kinetic energy munitions shall be carried and deployed. Approved munitions may be used to compel an individual to cease his/her actions when such munitions present a reasonable option. Officers are not required or compelled to use approved munitions in lieu of other reasonable tactics if the involved officer determines that deployment of these munitions cannot be done safely.

Uses: The safety of hostages, innocent persons and officers takes priority over the safety of subjects engaged in criminal or suicidal behavior. Circumstances appropriate for deployment include:
(a) The suspect is armed with a weapon and the tactical circumstances allow for the safe application of approved munitions.
(b) The suspect has made credible threats to harm him/herself or others. (c) The suspect is engaged in riotous behavior or is throwing rocks, bottles or other dangerous projectiles at people and/or officers.
(d) There is probable cause to believe that the suspect has already committed a crime of violence and is refusing to comply with lawful orders.

Kinetic energy projectiles and chemical agents for crowd control purposes shall only be deployed by officers who have received POST training for crowd control if the use is objectively reasonable to defend against a threat to life or serious bodily injury to any individual, including an officer, or to bring an objectively dangerous and unlawful 991
19 | P A G E

situation safely and effectively under control and in accordance with the following requirements of Penal Code § 13652.

(a) De-escalation techniques or other alternatives to force have been attempted, when objectively reasonable, and have failed.
(b) Repeated, audible announcements are made announcing the intent to use kinetic energy projectiles and chemical agents and the type to be used, when objectively reasonable to do so. The announcements shall be made from various locations, if necessary, and delivered in multiple languages, if appropriate. (c) Individuals are given an objectively reasonable opportunity to disperse and leave the scene.
(d) An objectively reasonable effort has been made to identify individuals engaged in violent acts and those who are not, and kinetic energy projectiles or chemical agents are targeted toward those individuals engaged in violent acts. Projectiles shall not be aimed indiscriminately into a crowd or group of individuals.
(e) Kinetic energy projectiles and chemical agents are used only with the frequency, intensity, and in a manner that is proportional to the threat and objectively reasonable. (f) Officers shall minimize the possible incidental impact of their use of kinetic energy projectiles and chemical agents on bystanders, medical personnel, journalists, or other unintended targets.
(g) An objectively reasonable effort has been made to extract individuals in distress. (h) Medical assistance is promptly provided, if properly trained personnel are present, or procured, for injured persons, when it is reasonable and safe to do so. (i) Kinetic energy projectiles shall not be aimed at the head, neck, or any other vital organs.
(j) Kinetic energy projectiles or chemical agents shall not be used solely due to any of the following:

1. A violation of an imposed curfew.

2. A verbal threat.

3. Noncompliance with a law enforcement directive.
(k) If the chemical agent to be deployed is tear gas, only an Incident Commander at the scene of the assembly, protest, or demonstration may authorize its use.

Less lethal impact devices and kinetic energy projectiles shall not be used in the following circumstances:
• On a person who is under restraint
• Targeted at a person’s head, neck or vital organs
• Within 20 feet or a distance that could cause death or serious bodily injury • On a person only engaged in non-compliance or passive resistance • On a person who has made credible threats to harm themselves but is not imminently carrying out this threat

Fiscal Impact: Initial cost Listed above Annual Maintenance Cost: $0 Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: It is the policy of the Richmond Police Department to utilize the less lethal impact devices only for official law enforcement purposes, and pursuant to State and Federal law, including those regarding the use of force.

Training Required: Only personnel trained and having shown proficiency in the use of any control device are authorized to carry the device. Proficiency training must be conducted and documented by a Department approved instructor.

992

RICHMOND POLICE

DEPARTMENT

CALIFORNIA ASSEMBLY BILL 481
Annual Military Equipment Use Report

January 2025 – December 2025
993
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

1 Table of Contents
PRIOR COUNCIL DIRECTION AND POLICE DEPARTMENT RESPONSE ........................... 3 DEFINITIONS ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 4 Background ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 6 Military Equipment Use Policy ................................ ................................ .................... 7 EQUIPMENT INVENTORY BY TYPE ................................ ................................ ................ 8 Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS / Drones) ................................ ............................... 8 Tactical Robot ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 9 Mobile Command Center ................................ ................................ ....................... 9 Breaching Shotguns ................................ ................................ ............................. 10 Shotgun Breaching Munitions ................................ ................................ ............... 10 Rifles ................................ ................................ ................................ ................... 10 Rifle Ammunition ................................ ................................ ................................ . 11 Diversionary Devices (Flashbangs) ................................ ................................ ........ 12 Chemical Agents and Smoke Canisters ................................ ................................ . 12 40mm Launchers and Munitions ................................ ................................ ........... 13 Less Lethal Shotguns and Rounds ................................ ................................ ......... 14 Chemical Shotgun ................................ ................................ ............................... 14 Less Lethal Launcher ................................ ................................ ........................... 14 Summary of Military Equipment ................................ ................................ ................ 15 UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEM (UAS) ................................ ................................ ....... 15 TACTICAL ROBOT ................................ ................................ ................................ . 16 MOBILE COMMAND CENTER ................................ ................................ ................ 17 ARMORED RESCUE CARRIER ................................ ................................ ................ 18 BREACHING SHOTGUNS AND BREACHING MUNITIONS ................................ ......... 19 RIFLES AND AMMUNITION ................................ ................................ .................... 21 DIVERSIONARY DEVICES ................................ ................................ ...................... 24 CHEMICAL AGENTS ................................ ................................ ............................. 25 40MM LAUNCHERS AND MUNITIONS ................................ ................................ .... 27 LESS LETHAL SHOTGUNS AND ROUNDS ................................ ............................... 29 994
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

2 CHEMICAL SHOTGUN ................................ ................................ .......................... 31 LESS LETHAL LAUNCHER ................................ ................................ ..................... 32 MILITARY EQUIPMENT USE SUMMARY ................................ ................................ ....... 34 KNOWN SUSPECT DEMOGRAPHIC DATA (Council Direction) ................................ ...... 35 PATROL RIFLE DEPLOYMENTS *Council Direction ................................ ...................... 37 DRONE AS FIRST RESPONDER (DFR) ................................ ................................ ........ 37 ACQUISITIONS FOR 2026 ................................ ................................ ........................... 39 Consumable Military Equipment................................ ................................ ............... 39 Armored Rescue Vehicle ................................ ................................ .......................... 39 POLICY UPDATES ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 41 707.6 COORDINATION WITH OTHER JURISDICTIONS (CURRENT POLICY) ............... 41 707.6.1 ARMORED RESCUE VEHICLES FROM OTHER JURISDICTIONS (AMMENDMENT) * (At Council Direction) ................................ ............................... 41 UAS POLICY REVISION – POLICY 607 ................................ ................................ ..... 42 Summary of Complaints / Concerns ................................ ................................ .......... 45 Notable Incident: ................................ ................................ ................................ . 45 FISCAL IMPACT ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 46 Estimated Projected Cost for 2026 ................................ ................................ ............ 47 SWAT Team Training Costs ................................ ................................ ........................ 47 Patrol Rifle Program Training Costs ................................ ................................ ............ 47 Sniper Team Training Costs................................ ................................ ....................... 47 The Drone as a First Responder Costs ................................ ................................ ....... 48 Less Lethal Impact Munitions Instructors School ................................ ....................... 48 INCIDENT LIST AND LOCATION SUMMARY* (Council Direction) ................................ . 49 CONCLUSION ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 59 LINKS ................................ ................................ ................................ ......................... 60

995
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

3 PRIOR COUNCIL DIRECTION AND POLICE

DEPARTMENT RESPONSE

During the April 22, 2025, Richmond City Council meeting, the 2024 AB 481 Annual Report was presented by former Chief Bisa French and Captain John Lopez. During that meeting, the City Council provided additional direction to the Police Department regarding future AB 481 reporting, policy development, and community transparency measures. This report reflects the Department’s efforts to address those directives. ❖ First, the City Council directed the Police Department to develop a process to track each time an officer deploys or displays a patrol rifle during an incident. In response, the Department created an electronic reporting form and implemented a reporting process for officers, supervisors, and watch commanders to document those deployments. The resulting data is included in this report. ❖ Second, the City Council directed the Police Department to amend Policy 707.6 and include a dedicated section addressing the use of armored rescue vehicles borrowed from other agencies, including their purpose, authorized uses, operational controls, and reporting requirements. That policy amendment is included in this report and will continue to be reflected in future AB 481 reports. ❖ Third, the City Council unanimously directed that, for the Department’s 2026 community engagement meeting, notice be provided to the Community Police Review Commission, the Mayor’s Office, and the City Council at least two weeks in advance with the intent of enhancing community awareness, encouraging participation and feedback, and assisting in broader public notice of the meeting. ❖ Finally, the City Council also directed that the 2026 annual report include location and demographic information, including race and ethnicity data. In response, the Department collected and included estimated location and demographic data in this annual report to the extent such information was known and available.

This annual report provides a summary of the Department’s military equipment inventory, authorized uses, fiscal impact, complaints, and reported concerns for the period of January 1, 2025, through December 31, 2025.

996
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

4 DEFINITIONS
Pursuant to Government Code section 7070, as added by AB 481, the following definitions apply to the Department’s current military equipment inventory and any potential future acquisitions for operational needs. The categories below are limited to those relevant to the Richmond Police Department’s current inventory or potential operational needs.

Statutory Category Richmond Police Department
Applicability / Equipment Type
Governing Body For purposes of AB 481, the governing body for the Richmond Police Department is the
Richmond City Council.

1. Unmanned, remotely piloted, powered
aerial or ground vehicles
This category applies to the Department’s
inventory of small unmanned aircraft
systems and SWAT robots.

2. Mine resistant ambush protected
vehicles or armored personnel carriers
Not applicable to the Richmond Police
Department.

3. High mobility multipurpose wheeled
vehicles, commonly referred to as
Humvees, two and one half ton trucks, five
ton trucks, or wheeled vehicles with a
breaching or entry apparatus attached
Not applicable to the Richmond Police
Department.

4. Tracked armored vehicles that provide
ballistic protection to their occupants and
utilize a tracked system instead of wheels
for forward motion
Not applicable to the Richmond Police
Department.

5. Command and control vehicles that are
either built or modified to facilitate the
operational control and direction of public
safety units
This category applies to the Department’s
Mobile Command Vehicle.

6. Weaponized aircraft, vessels, or vehicles
of any kind
Not applicable to the Richmond Police
Department.

7. Battering rams, slugs, and breaching
apparatuses that are explosive in nature
This category applies only if the
Department possesses or uses breaching
997
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

5 rounds or explosive breaching tools
covered by the statute.

8. Firearms of .50 caliber or greater Not applicable to the Richmond Police Department.

9. Ammunition of .50 caliber or greater Not applicable to the Richmond Police Department. Standard issue shotgun
ammunition is excluded by statute.

10. Specialized firearms and ammunition
of less than .50 caliber, including assault
weapons as defined in Penal Code
sections 30510 and 30515, except
standard issue service weapons and
ammunition issued to Department
personnel
This category applies to Department patrol
rifles, as applicable.

11. Any firearm or firearm accessory
designed to launch explosive projectiles
Not applicable to the Richmond Police
Department.

12. Flashbang grenades and explosive
breaching tools, tear gas, and pepper balls,
excluding standard service issued
handheld pepper spray
This category applies to the Department’s
noise flash diversionary devices, explosive
breaching tools, tear gas, and pepper ball
systems, as applicable.

13. Taser Shockwave, microwave weapons,
water cannons, and Long Range Acoustic
Devices
Not applicable to the Richmond Police
Department.

14. Projectile launch platforms and
associated munitions, including 40mm
projectile launchers, bean bag, rubber
bullet, and specialty impact munition
weapons
This category applies to the Department’s
40mm launchers, bean bag shotguns, and
specialty impact munitions, as applicable.

15. Any other equipment as determined by
the governing body or a state agency to
require additional oversight
This category is not currently applicable
to the Richmond Police Department.

The descriptions above are provided for reporting purposes and are intended to identify the statutory AB 481 categories applicable to the Richmond Police Department’s current inventory and operational needs.
998
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

6 Background
Assembly Bill 481 was enacted by the California Legislature in 2021 and became effective on January 1, 2022. The law, codified at Government Code sections 7070 through 7075, was adopted to increase transparency, public awareness, and local oversight regarding the funding, acquisition, and use of certain categories of equipment defined by statute as “military equipment. ” For local law enforcement agencies, AB 481 requires the governing body to review and approve a military equipment use policy before an agency may seek funds for, acquire, use, or continue using covered equipment. The law also requires annual reporting, public availability of the policy and report, and an annual review by the governing body for continued authorization.

AB 481 requires that a military equipment use policy identify, at a minimum, each type of military equipment, its purpose and authorized uses, fiscal impact, the legal and procedural rules governing its use, required training, mechanisms for compliance, and procedures for members of the public to submit questions, concerns, or complaints. The law further requires an annual military equipment report and a community engagement meeting within 30 days after the report is publicly released.

In compliance with AB 481, the Richmond City Council previously approved the Richmond Police Department Military Equipment Use Policy pursuant to Ordinance 12.22 N.S. on October 19, 2022, which authorized the Department’s continued use of qualifying equipment subject to annual reporting and review. The Department’s policy designates the Richmond City Council as the governing body for purposes of AB 481 and provides for annual auditing, public reporting, and referral of complaints to the Community Police Review Commission as the independent oversight body.

On April 22, 2025, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 48-25 approving the Department’s annual AB 481 item by unanimous vote. An additional motion, which passed unanimously, directing that for the following year’s community engagement meeting, the Community Police Review Commission, the Mayor’s Office, and the City Council be notified at least two weeks in advance, and that the next annual report include location and demographic information, including race and ethnicity data, to be determined by mutual agreement. This report is submitted in furtherance of those directives and the Department’s continuing obligation to provide transparency, accountability, and legally compliant annual review of its military equipment inventory and use.

999
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

7 Military Equipment Use Policy
Pursuant to AB 481 and Government Code section 7070(d), the Richmond Police Department’s Military Equipment Use Policy, Policy Manual section 707, is a publicly released written policy governing the Department’s funding, acquisition, use, and reporting of military equipment. The policy is intended to ensure transparency, accountability, and compliance with state law and City Council oversight requirements.

At a minimum, the Department’s Military Equipment Use Policy addresses all of the following:

1. A description of each type of military equipment, including the quantity sought, its capabilities, expected lifespan, and manufacturer product description.

2. The purposes and authorized uses for which the Department proposes to use each type of military equipment.

3. The fiscal impact of each type of military equipment, including the initial cost of obtaining the equipment and the estimated annual cost of maintaining it.

4. The legal and procedural rules that govern each authorized use.

5. The training required before use, including any course required by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training, that must be completed before any sworn member is authorized to use a specific type of military equipment in order to protect the public’s welfare, safety, civil rights, and civil liberties and ensure adherence to the policy.

6. The mechanisms to ensure compliance, including identification of any independent persons or entities with oversight authority and, where applicable, any legally enforceable sanctions for policy violations.

7. The procedures for public inquiries, complaints, and concerns, including how members of the public may submit questions, complaints, or concerns regarding the use of specific military equipment and how the Department will ensure a timely response.

The Department’s policy further provides for designation of an AB 481 Coordinator, annual inventory review, annual reporting to the Richmond City Council, public posting of the annual report on the Department website, a community engagement meeting following release of the annual report, and referral of complaints to the Community Police Review Commission as the independent oversight body.

1000
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

8 EQUIPMENT INVENTORY BY TYPE
The following inventory identifies the military equipment maintained by the Richmond Police Department by equipment type and model as of December 31, 2025.

Note: The inventory of certain consumable military equipment, including ammunition, diversionary devices, breaching munitions, chemical agents, smoke canisters, and specialty impact munitions, may fluctuate throughout the year due to operational deployment, training, replacement, expiration, damage, or manufacturer recommended replacement schedules. The quantities listed below reflect the Department’s reported ending inventory for the reporting period of January 1, 2025 through December 31, 2025.

Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS / Drones)

EQUIPMENT NAME AND MODEL QUANTITY QTY SOUGHT FOR NEXT YEAR DJI AVATA 4 0
DJI MINI 2 2 0
DJI M30T 1 0
DJI MATRICE 4 6 0
DJI AIR 3S 1 0
DJI MAVIC 2 ENTERPRISE ADVANCED 1 0

1001
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

9 Tactical Robot

EQUIPMENT NAME AND MODEL QUANTITY QTY SOUGHT FOR NEXT YEAR RECON ROBOTICS 1 1

Mobile Command Center

EQUIPMENT NAME AND MODEL QUANTITY QTY SOUGHT FOR NEXT YEAR 2013 EVI SPARTAN MOBILE

COMMAND CENTER
1 0

1002
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

10 Breaching Shotguns

EQUIPMENT NAME AND MODEL QUANTITY QTY SOUGHT FOR NEXT YEAR REMINGTON 870 POLICE

MAGNUM SHOTGUN
4 0

Shotgun Breaching Munitions

EQUIPMENT NAME AND MODEL QUANTITY QTY SOUGHT FOR NEXT YEAR TESAR 2 / MODEL FE183 150 rounds 150
TESAR 1 / MODEL FE182 175 rounds 150

Rifles

EQUIPMENT NAME AND MODEL QUANTITY QTY SOUGHT FOR NEXT
YEAR
COLT M4 CARBINE 5.56MM 50 10
COLT M16 A2E 5.56MM (SWAT ONLY) 13 0
COLT COMMANDO 5.56MM (SWAT ONLY) 2 0
1003
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

11 DPMS M 160 (SWAT ONLY) 5 0
COLT M16 A2 (SWAT ONLY) 2 0
COLT AR 15 MATCH TARGET COMPETITION
RIFLE
8 0
SIG SAUER MCX RIFLE 5.56MM (TRAFFIC
UNIT)
2 0

Rifle Ammunition

EQUIPMENT NAME AND MODEL QUANTITY QTY SOUGHT FOR

NEXT YEAR
GOLD DOT SOFT POINT 62 GRAIN .223 10,000 rounds 250 cases FMJ 55 GRAIN .223 40,000 rounds 250 cases
FEDERAL TACTICAL TRU 168 GRAIN .308 2,500 rounds 6500
FEDERAL TACTICAL BONDED TIP 168
GRAIN .308
2,500 rounds 500

1004
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

12 Diversionary Devices (Flashbangs)

EQUIPMENT NAME AND MODEL QUANTITY QTY SOUGHT FOR NEXT YEAR DEFENSE TECHNOLOGY MODEL 8933 120 200

Chemical Agents and Smoke Canisters

EQUIPMENT NAME AND MODEL QUANTITY QTY SOUGHT FOR

NEXT YEAR

DEFENSE TECH SPEDE HEAT PYRO
BURNING CS GAS 1072
10 canisters 20

DEFENSE TECH HAN BALL PYRO BURNING
CS GAS 1092
20 canisters 10

DEFENSE TECH FLAMELESS TRI CHAMBER
PYRO INTERNAL CS GAS 1032
10 canisters 20
CTS INDOOR 5230B PYRO INDOOR SAFE CS
GAS 5230B
50 canisters 20

DEFENSE TECH AEROSOL VAPOR NON-
PYRO OC GAS 1056
25 canisters 25

DEFENSE TECH MAXIMUM SMOKE PYRO
HIGH VOLUME 1083
10 canisters 20
CTS 40MM LIQUID FERRET ROUNDS NON-
PYRO CS GAS LAUNCHABLE MUNITION 4330
100 rounds 200
1005
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

13 DEFENSE TECH 40MM DIRECT IMPACT OC
6320
100 rounds 200
PEPPERBALL LIVE PROJECTILES .2% PAVA 375 rounds 0

40mm Launchers and Munitions

EQUIPMENT NAME AND MODEL QUANTITY QTY SOUGHT FOR

NEXT YEAR
PENN ARMS 40MM 6-CYLINDER PUMP MULTI

LAUNCHER
3 0
PENN ARMS 40MM SINGLE SHOT LAUNCHER 7 20
DEFENSE TECH 40MM EXACT IMPACT SPONGE
ROUND 6325
100
rounds
300
DEFENSE TECH 40MM EXACT IMPACT
MARKING 6325 A
50 rounds 250
FEDERAL LABORATORIES 37MM
(DECOMMISSIONED)
2 N/A

1006
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

14 Less Lethal Shotguns and Rounds

EQUIPMENT NAME AND MODEL QUANTITY QTY SOUGHT FOR NEXT
YEAR

REMINGTON MODEL 870 12-GAUGE

SHOTGUN
17 13
CTS 12-GAUGE BEAN BAG SUPER SOCK 500
rounds
500

Chemical Shotgun

EQUIPMENT NAME AND MODEL QUANTITY QTY SOUGHT FOR NEXT
YEAR
REMINGTON MODEL 870 12-GAUGE

SHOTGUN
2 2

Less Lethal Launcher

EQUIPMENT NAME AND MODEL QUANTITY QTY SOUGHT FOR NEXT YEAR FN 303 4 0

1007
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

15 Summary of Military Equipment

UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEM (UAS)
Equipment Type: An unmanned aircraft of any type that is capable of sustaining directed flight, whether preprogrammed or remotely controlled, and all supporting or attached systems designed for gathering information through imaging, recording, or other means.

This category includes the Department’s small, unmanned aircraft systems used to support public safety operations.

Quantity Owned: 15
Lifespan: Approximately 3 to 5 years
Manufacturer Product Description: The Richmond Police Department currently maintains the following unmanned aerial systems:
• DJI Avata – Quantity 4
• DJI Mini 2 – Quantity 2
• DJI M30T – Quantity 1
• DJI Matrice 4 – Quantity 6
• DJI Air 3S – Quantity 1
• DJI Mavic 2 Enterprise Advanced – Quantity 1
Purpose: UAS supports first responders during hazardous or complex incidents that would benefit from an aerial perspective. These uses include, but are not limited to, search and rescue operations, barricaded suspects, high risk tactical operations, disaster response, video or photographic documentation of crime scenes, and, where authorized, Drone as First Responder operations to enhance situational awareness, improve response coordination, and support safe incident assessment.

Uses: Only authorized operators who have completed the required training shall be permitted to operate a UAS. The use of UAS shall remain subject to Department policy, supervisory approval, applicable local, state, and federal law, and consideration of civil rights and privacy protections. Existing Department policy requires the following:

1. All flights shall be approved in advance by a lieutenant. In the absence of management personnel, a sergeant may approve a mission.

2. All flights shall be documented on the designated mission dispatch form, including flight time, mission type, and the name of the approving supervisor or manager. 1008
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

16 3. Supervisors, operators, and observers shall consider civil rights, civil liberties, and the reasonable expectation of privacy before deployment, and all operations shall be conducted in a manner consistent with local, state, and federal law.

4. Authorized missions include post incident crime scene preservation and documentation, explosive ordnance disposal support, hazardous materials incidents, search and rescue missions, public safety and life preservation missions, disaster response and recovery, training, requests from fire authorities for fire response or prevention, situations supported by probable cause as authorized by law, and operations conducted pursuant to a search warrant.

Note: The Department currently utilizes digital flight tracking for UAS operations, including Drone as First Responder deployments, as it provides a more accurate, efficient, and reliable means of documenting flight activity, mission details, and operator accountability. In the event digital tracking is unavailable or not feasible, the mission dispatch form will continue to be used.

TACTICAL ROBOT
Equipment Type: Small unmanned tracked robot of any type that is capable of being remotely controlled, as well as all supporting or attached systems designed for gathering information through imaging, recording, or other means.

Quantity Owned: One (1)
Lifespan: Approximately 5 to 7 years
Equipment Capabilities: Can support first responders in hazardous incidents that would benefit from a ground level perspective. These uses may include barricaded suspects, high risk tactical operations, disaster response, and use in crawl spaces or other confined or isolated areas to assist in searches for suspects or evidence.

Manufacturer Product Description: Small throwable reconnaissance robot designed and manufactured by Recon Robotics for law enforcement and military applications. The robot can be used by law enforcement first responders, dismounted patrols, special weapons and tactics teams, and other special operations teams.

Purpose: Used to remotely gain visual and audio data, open doors, and clear buildings.

Uses: This equipment is a battery powered, remote operated device equipped with cameras and communication capabilities. It is intended for use during high-risk incidents.

Incidents that may qualify for its use include, but are not limited to, high risk warrant services, barricaded subjects, and hostage negotiation or rescue operations. Before 1009
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

17 entering a structure, particularly in a tactically compromised and dangerous situation, knowledge of a subject’s location is critical, and the robot can provide that information without placing personnel at unnecessary risk. Cameras can also help determine whether a subject is armed and whether there are other people inside who may need assistance.

Only assigned SWAT operators who have been trained in its use shall be permitted to operate the small unmanned tracked robot. Use shall be established by the SWAT Team Commander and/or the Incident Commander. The robot shall not be used as force against a person.

Fiscal Impact: Initial Cost $7,500
Annual Maintenance Cost: $0
Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: It is the policy of the Richmond Police Department to utilize the tactical robot only for official law enforcement purposes and in a manner that respects the privacy of the community, pursuant to state and federal law.

Training Required: SWAT officers authorized to operate tracked robots are required to successfully complete SWAT Basic School and practical application training in the use of the robot.

MOBILE COMMAND CENTER
Equipment Type: A completely self-contained command post designed to provide the Incident Commander with a mobile base of operations. Major incidents may present unique management challenges and require an on scene incident command structure to assist senior personnel in coordinating and addressing the circumstances of the incident.

Quantity Owned: One (1)
Lifespan: The Department’s 2012 EVI Spartan Mobile Command Center was purchased in 2013 and has an estimated 20 year lifespan for the chassis and vehicle structure. Periodic upgrades will be necessary to maintain communications and information technology systems.

Equipment Capabilities: This vehicle is designed to function as a stand alone mobile command post for large scale incidents, high risk incidents, and natural or human caused disasters.

Manufacturer Product Description: The 2012 EVI Spartan is a 40 foot non armored vehicle used as an Incident Command Post for planned events and unplanned high-risk incidents.

As a mobile base of operations, it contains specialized command, control, and communications equipment to assist with various missions. 1010
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

18 Purpose: The Mobile Command Center is a vital component of the Department’s response to major emergencies, natural and human caused disasters, and significant special events that require the mobilization and coordination of substantial resources in the field. Its primary purpose is to facilitate the management and coordination of personnel, communications, and equipment resources at complex incidents.

Uses: The Mobile Command Center may be deployed for emergencies, special operations, special events, and other incidents requiring an on scene incident command post. Its use is intended to support command, control, communications, and resource coordination during incidents involving significant field operations.

Fiscal Impact: Initial Cost $402,152.52
Annual Maintenance Cost: $3,000
Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: It is the policy of the Richmond Police Department to use the Mobile Command Center only for official law enforcement and public safety purposes, and in accordance with California law governing the operation of motor vehicles.

Training Required: The driver or operator shall receive training in the safe handling and operation of the vehicle, including operation on a closed training course. Once competence in vehicle handling has been demonstrated, the operator may drive the vehicle throughout the city as authorized. Authorized drivers shall possess a valid California Class B driver license with an air brake endorsement and complete required training on the operation of the Mobile Command Center and its systems.

ARMORED RESCUE CARRIER
Equipment Type: An armored vehicle designed to provide ballistic protection for occupants during high-risk law enforcement operations or other critical incidents.

Quantity Owned:

None
Lifespan:

Not applicable to the Richmond Police Department inventory.

Equipment Capabilities: Armored carriers provide ballistic protection and a safer means of approach, rescue, evacuation, and tactical coordination during high-risk incidents, including barricaded suspects, hostage situations, and high-risk warrant service. 1011
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

19 Manufacturer Product Description: Not applicable to the Richmond Police Department.

The Department does not maintain or own an armored carrier in its inventory.

Purpose: Although the Richmond Police Department does not own or maintain an armored carrier, there are limited circumstances in which armored vehicle support may be necessary to safely resolve a high-risk incident. In those situations, the Department may request mutual aid or operational assistance from an outside agency that provides and operates its own armored carrier.

Uses: Armored carrier support may be requested in limited circumstances, including high risk SWAT operations, barricaded suspect incidents, hostage situations, rescue operations, or other incidents where ballistic protection is necessary to enhance officer and public safety. Any armored carrier used in support of Richmond Police Department operations is operated by the assisting agency’s trained personnel.

Fiscal Impact: None to the Richmond Police Department for ownership or maintenance.

Any use by an assisting agency occurs through mutual aid or operational assistance.

Legal and Procedural Rules Governing Use: The Richmond Police Department does not maintain an armored carrier in its inventory. Pursuant to Department Policy 707.6, military equipment used by members of another jurisdiction providing mutual aid to the Richmond Police Department shall comply with that agency’s respective military equipment use policy while rendering mutual aid.

Training Required: Not applicable to Richmond Police Department personnel for ownership or operation. Any armored carrier used in support of Department operations is operated by trained personnel from the assisting agency.

BREACHING SHOTGUNS AND BREACHING MUNITIONS
Equipment Type: Remington 870 breaching shotguns and TESAR breaching rounds. The Department’s breaching shotgun system is designed to defeat locks, hinges, and other door hardware in order to facilitate safe entry during high risk tactical operations. This category is limited to specialized breaching tools and munitions used by trained SWAT personnel.

Quantity Owned:

Breaching Shotguns: 4
Breaching Rounds: 325
1012
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

20 Lifespan:

Breaching Shotguns: Approximately 25 years, depending on operational usage Breaching Rounds: Approximately 5 years
Equipment Capabilities: This weapon system allows trained breachers to use shotgun breaching rounds to defeat deadbolts, locks, and hinges. The standoff device attached to the end of the barrel assists with proper placement and helps vent gases to prevent overpressure. The system may also be used to defeat windows and sliding glass doors when tactically appropriate.

Manufacturer Product Description:

Remington 870 Police Magnum: A pump action 12-gauge shotgun with a short tactical 14 inch barrel and 3 inch chamber.

TESAR 2 Breaching Rounds: Black cap 2 3/4 inch, 425 grain compressed copper frangible 12-gauge shotgun slug.

TESAR 1 Breaching Rounds: Orange cap 2 3/4 inch, 275 grain compressed copper frangible 12-gauge shotgun slug.

Purpose: Shotgun breaching can be an effective option in SWAT tactics when rapid entry is necessary. An effective breach uses the minimum number of rounds necessary to accomplish the objective while safely defeating fortified doors and locks.

Uses: Breaching shotguns shall only be used on a door, gate, or other entry point in the following circumstances:

1. Barricaded suspect and or hostage situations

2. High risk warrant services

3. When the SRT Commander or SWAT Commander determines their use is necessary to safely resolve an incident
Fiscal Impact: Breaching Shotguns: Initial Cost $550 each Breaching Rounds: Initial Cost $2,000
Annual Maintenance Cost: Breaching Shotguns $100; Breaching Rounds $500 Legal and Procedural Rules Governing Use: It is the policy of the Richmond Police Department to utilize breaching tools only for official law enforcement purposes and pursuant to state and federal law.

Training Required: SWAT officers authorized to use breaching shotguns must successfully complete a SWAT breaching course or in-house training from a breaching instructor. In addition, SWAT officers must complete live fire proficiency training in their application. 1013
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

21 RIFLES AND AMMUNITION
Equipment Type: Semi-automatic, shoulder fired rifles designed to fire rifle caliber ammunition, including Department authorized .223/5.56 caliber and .308 caliber rifle platforms and associated ammunition.

Quantity Owned:

Rifles: 82 total
.223 Ammunition: 50,000 rounds
.308 Ammunition: 5,000 rounds
Lifespan:

Rifles: Approximately 15 years or more, depending on operational use, maintenance, and service life
Ammunition: Varies based on manufacturer guidance, storage conditions, and operational use
Equipment Capabilities: Rifles provide officers with the ability to engage armed suspects at distances generally beyond the effective range of a handgun. Rifles also offer increased accuracy and the ability to defeat soft body armor when necessary, though they are not appropriate for every situation.
.223 ammunition has an effective operational range of approximately 0 to 500 yards. .308 ammunition has an effective operational range of approximately 0 to 1,000 yards.

Purpose: To provide qualified officers with an additional tactical resource to respond more effectively and accurately to incidents involving armed suspects, body armor, or other circumstances requiring greater accuracy, distance, or stopping capability than a handgun may provide.

Uses: Officers may deploy rifles in the following circumstances:

1. When there is an objectively reasonable anticipation of an armed encounter

2. When a situation may require accurate and effective fire at extended distance

3. When an officer reasonably expects the need to meet or exceed a suspect’s firepower

4. When an officer reasonably believes there may be a need to deliver fire on a barricaded suspect or a suspect holding a hostage

5. When an officer reasonably believes a suspect may be wearing body armor 1014
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

22 6. When authorized or requested by a supervisor

7. When needed to euthanize an animal

Manufacturer Product Description:

COLT M4 Carbine 5.56mm
This carbine provides officers the ability to engage armed suspects at distances generally greater than the effective range of a handgun. Colt reliability, performance, and accuracy provide officers with a dependable rifle platform.

Quantity: 50
Initial Cost: $895 each
COLT M16 A2E 5.56mm (SWAT only)
This rifle provides increased accuracy and range for specialized tactical operations.

Quantity: 13
Initial Cost: $1,025 each
COLT Commando 5.56mm (SWAT only)
A short variant of the M16 platform designed for specialized tactical use in confined environments.

Quantity: 2
Initial Cost: $1,199 each
DPMS M 160 5.56mm (SWAT only)
A short rifle platform intended for specialized tactical applications.

Quantity: 5
Initial Cost: $1,199 each
COLT M16 A2 5.56mm (SWAT only)
An authorized rifle platform used for specialized tactical operations.

Quantity: 2
Initial Cost: $1,199 each
COLT AR 15 Match Target Competition Rifle
A Colt Match Target flat top rifle with a 16-inch heavy barrel and removable handle to allow for optics or optical sight mounting.

Quantity: 8
Initial Cost: $1,199 each
1015
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

23 SIG SAUER MCX Rifle 5.56mm
A rifle platform authorized for designated Department use.

Quantity: 2
Initial Cost: $3,394.57
.223 Ammunition
Gold Dot Soft Point 62 grain .223 ammunition and FMJ 55 grain .223 ammunition. Only ammunition meeting Department specifications, approved by the Chief of Police, and issued by the Department may be used in law enforcement operations.

Quantity: 50,000 rounds
Initial Cost: $250 each case
.308 Ammunition
Federal Tactical TRU 168 grain .308 ammunition and Federal Tactical Bonded Tip 168 grain .308 ammunition are law enforcement duty rounds designed for accuracy and barrier penetration under demanding conditions.

Quantity: 5,000 rounds
Initial Cost: $639 each case
Note: The Richmond Police Department previously maintained seventeen MP5 firearms that were acquired for SWAT operations in the 1990s. Those firearms have been decommissioned and removed from the Departments inventory and will not be included in future inventory reporting.

Fiscal Impact:

Listed above
Annual Maintenance Cost: $250
Legal and Procedural Rules Governing Use: It is the policy of the Richmond Police Department to utilize rifles only for official law enforcement purposes and pursuant to state and federal law governing the use of force.

Training Required: Officers shall not carry or use a rifle unless they have successfully completed Department training. This training consists of an initial 40-hour patrol rifle course and successful qualifications with a certified instructor. Officers are thereafter required to complete regular training and qualifications conducted by certified rifle instructors.

1016
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

24 DIVERSIONARY DEVICES
Equipment Type: Canisters designed to emit a loud noise and bright light in order to create a temporary sensory distraction.

Quantity Owned: 120
Lifespan: Approximately 5 years
Equipment Capabilities: Diversionary devices release stored energy in the form of heat, light, pressure, and noise. They are intended to temporarily distract, confuse, and disorient subjects and may also be used as attention getting devices. Light output is approximately 6 to 8 million candelas, with a light duration of approximately 10 milliseconds.

Manufacturer Product Description: This compact version of the 8933 Low Roll body is the newest version of the original reusable non bursting canister designed to limit movement and rolling once deployed. The compact distraction device packs the same power as the full size 12 gram distraction device.

Purpose: A diversionary device is intended to distract dangerous suspects during assaults, hostage rescue, room entry, or other high risk arrest situations. It produces atmospheric overpressure and brilliant white light that may result in short term physiological and psychological sensory distraction, giving officers a tactical advantage.

Uses: Flash and sound diversionary devices may be considered whenever a less lethal diversion would help facilitate entry, enable an arrest, or potentially reduce the risk of injury through the temporary disorientation of potentially dangerous suspects or animals.

Diversionary devices shall only be used for distraction purposes.

Circumstances for the use of flash and sound diversionary devices include:

1. Barricaded suspect and or hostage situations

2. High risk warrant services

3. To disperse potentially violent animals

4. When the SRT Commander or SWAT Commander determines their use is necessary to safely resolve an incident
For purposes of deployment, a barricaded suspect is an individual inside a structure who is actively preventing law enforcement entry and poses a threat to self or others.

High risk warrant service refers to an operation involving a significant risk of violence or harm, requiring specialized equipment and tactics to ensure safety and the lawful service of the warrant.
1017
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

25 The SRT Commander or SWAT Commander may authorize the use of diversionary devices in the circumstances listed above, or when there is a high likelihood of violent confrontation or when a diversionary device is needed to reduce risk to officers or the public.

Fiscal Impact: Initial Cost $6,800 per 120 devices
Annual Maintenance Cost: $0
Legal and Procedural Rules Governing Use:

It is the policy of the Richmond Police Department to utilize diversionary devices only for official law enforcement purposes and pursuant to state and federal law regarding the use of force.

Training Required:

Diversionary Device Trainers must successfully complete a Diversionary Device Course approved by the SWAT Commander. Diversionary Device Trainers are responsible for maintaining and updating SWAT Team training and qualification related to the deployment of diversionary devices. Diversionary Device Trainers shall attend at least one course related to diversionary devices every three years to maintain and update their training skills.

CHEMICAL AGENTS
Equipment Type: Canisters or projectile rounds containing chemical agents that are released when deployed.

Quantity Owned: 700
Lifespan: Approximately 5 years
Equipment Capabilities: Depending on the delivery method, chemical agents may be introduced in close proximity or from a distance. Depending on the type of delivery system and quantity deployed, chemical agents may be used to affect individual suspects, violent crowds, or areas of varying size.

Manufacturer Product Description: Examples of chemical agents include CN, CS, and OC. Delivery methods include ferret rounds, blast dispersion rounds and canisters, burning canisters, and barricade penetrating rounds.

Defense Tech SPEDE HEAT Pyro Burning CS Gas Canister
Quantity: 10
1018
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

26 Defense Tech HAN BALL Pyro Burning CS Gas
Quantity: 20
Defense Tech Flameless Tri Chamber Pyro Internal Burn CS Gas Quantity: 10
CTS Indoor 5230B Pyro Indoor Safe CS Gas with dense cardboard to reduce heat and external flame
Quantity: 50
Defense Tech Aerosol Vapor Non Pyro OC Gas
Quantity: 25
Defense Tech Maximum Smoke Pyro High Volume White Smoke Quantity: 10
CTS 40mm Liquid Ferret Rounds Non Pyro CS Gas Launchable Munition with instantaneous delivery upon rupture
Quantity: 100
Defense Tech 40mm Direct Impact OC
Quantity: 100
PepperBall Live Projectiles .2% PAVA
Quantity: 375
Purpose: Chemical agents are maintained for use during high-risk tactical incidents, crowd management incidents, and other law enforcement situations authorized by Department policy and law. When deployed, their purpose is to help dislodge a suspect from a stronghold location, prevent an armed suspect from accurately firing at officers or members of the public, assist in crowd dispersal when legally justified, and reduce the risk of injury to citizens, officers, and suspects.

Uses: Chemical agents may be used against barricaded suspects, during high-risk tactical incidents, or for crowd control and crowd dispersal in circumstances authorized by Department policy and applicable law. Only the Patrol Sergeant, Incident Commander, or Crisis Response Unit Commander may authorize the delivery and use of tear gas, and only after evaluating the totality of the circumstances and determining that such force reasonably appears justified and necessary. When practicable, fire personnel should be alerted or summoned to the scene before deployment to control fires and assist with medical aid or gas evacuation if needed.

Kinetic energy projectiles and chemical agents for crowd control purposes shall only be deployed by officers who have received POST training for crowd control, and only when the 1019
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

27 use is objectively reasonable to defend against a threat to life or serious bodily injury, or to bring an objectively dangerous and unlawful situation safely and effectively under control, consistent with Penal Code section 13652.

Fiscal Impact: Initial Cost $5,000
Annual Maintenance Cost: $3,000
Legal and Procedural Rules Governing Use: It is the policy of the Richmond Police Department to utilize chemical agents only for official law enforcement purposes and pursuant to state and federal law, including laws governing the use of force.

Training Required: Kinetic energy projectiles and chemical agents for crowd control purposes shall only be deployed by officers who have received POST training for crowd control. Proficiency training must be conducted and documented by a Department approved instructor.

40MM LAUNCHERS AND MUNITIONS
Equipment Type: Extended range impact weapon launchers and associated 40mm munitions designed to deliver less lethal impact rounds and, where authorized, chemical agent munitions.

Quantity Owned:
40mm Launchers: 10
40mm Munitions: 150
Decommissioned 37mm Launchers: 2
Lifespan:
40mm Launchers: Approximately 10 years, depending on operational usage 40mm Munitions: Approximately 5 years
Equipment Capabilities: 40mm launchers are capable of firing a variety of less lethal munitions with an effective range of up to approximately 120 feet, depending on the specific round used. These launchers may deploy sponge impact rounds, marking rounds, and, where authorized, chemical agent munitions. The 40mm platform provides officers with an extended range less lethal option intended to increase distance, accuracy, and tactical flexibility during critical incidents.

Manufacturer Product Description:

Penn Arms 40mm 6 cylinder Pump Multi Launcher
Capable of firing a variety of munitions with a maximum effective range of approximately 1020
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

28 120 feet.

Quantity: 3
Initial Cost: $1,531 each
Penn Arms 40mm single shot launcher
Capable of firing a variety of 40mm munitions with a maximum effective range of approximately 120 feet.

Quantity: 7
Initial Cost: $1,302 each
Defense Tech 40mm Exact Impact Sponge Round 6325
Safe range approximately 5 feet to 131 feet at 325 feet per second.

Quantity: 100
Initial Cost: Included below
Defense Tech 40mm Exact Impact Marking Round 6325 A
Safe range open approximately 5 feet to 131 feet at 315 feet per second and closed approximately 131 feet to 230 feet at 425 feet per second.

Quantity: 50
Initial Cost: Included below
Federal Laboratories 37mm Launcher (Decommissioned)
Long range projectile launcher with an approximate range of 150 yards.

Quantity: 2
Initial Cost: $299 each
Purpose: The Department is committed to reducing the potential for violent confrontations. When used properly, 40mm munitions are less likely to result in death or serious bodily injury and may be used in an effort to de-escalate a potentially deadly situation. Only Department approved 40mm munitions shall be carried and deployed.

Approved munitions may be used to compel an individual to cease actions when such munitions present a reasonable option. Officers are not required or compelled to use 40mm munitions in lieu of other reasonable tactics if the involved officer determines that deployment cannot be done safely.

Uses: The safety of hostages, innocent persons, and officers takes priority over the safety of subjects engaged in criminal or suicidal behavior. Circumstances appropriate for deployment include:

1. When a suspect is armed with a weapon and the tactical circumstances allow for the safe application of approved munitions

2. When a suspect has made credible threats to harm self or others 1021
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

29 3. When a suspect is engaged in riotous behavior or is throwing rocks, bottles, or other dangerous projectiles at people and or officers

4. When there is probable cause to believe the suspect has committed a crime of violence and is refusing to comply with lawful orders
For crowd control purposes, 40mm kinetic energy projectiles shall only be deployed by officers who have received POST training for crowd control and only when the use is objectively reasonable and consistent with Penal Code section 13652.

Fiscal Impact:

Penn Arms 40mm 6 cylinder Pump Multi Launcher: $1,531 each Penn Arms 40mm single shot launcher: $1,302 each
Defense Tech 40mm Exact Impact Rounds: $3,000 total
Annual Maintenance Cost: $0 to nominal routine maintenance Legal and Procedural Rules Governing Use: It is the policy of the Richmond Police Department to utilize 40mm launchers and munitions only for official law enforcement purposes and pursuant to state and federal law regarding the use of force. For crowd control purposes, use must also comply with Penal Code section 13652.

Training Required: Officers shall not carry or deploy 40mm launchers or munitions unless they have successfully completed Department approved training. Kinetic energy projectiles for crowd control purposes shall only be deployed by officers who have received POST training for crowd control. Proficiency training must be conducted and documented by a Department approved instructor.

Note: The Department previously maintained two Federal Laboratories 37mm launchers.

Those launchers have been decommissioned and are no longer part of the Department’s active operational inventory.

LESS LETHAL SHOTGUNS AND ROUNDS
Equipment Type: Less lethal 12-gauge shotguns and associated impact munitions designed to deliver bean bag rounds intended to temporarily incapacitate or gain compliance while reducing the likelihood of death or serious bodily injury when compared to conventional firearms.

Quantity Owned:

Less Lethal Shotguns: 17
Bean Bag Rounds: 500
1022
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

30 Lifespan:

Less Lethal Shotguns: Approximately 15 to 25 years, depending on operational usage Bean Bag Rounds: Approximately 5 years
Equipment Capabilities: Less lethal shotguns are designed to deploy 12 gauge bean bag rounds at an extended distance to gain compliance, stop dangerous behavior, or safely resolve incidents where lethal force may not be appropriate. These systems provide officers with an additional force option that may reduce the risk of serious injury when used in accordance with Department policy and training.

Manufacturer Product Description:

Remington Model 870 12-gauge Shotgun
Pump action 12-gauge shotgun configured for less lethal deployment.

Quantity: 17
Initial Cost: $550
CTS 12-gauge Bean Bag Super Sock
A less lethal impact munition designed to deliver kinetic energy to a subject in order to gain compliance or stop dangerous behavior while reducing the likelihood of serious injury when deployed properly.

Quantity: 500
Initial Cost: $500
Purpose: The Department is committed to reducing the potential for violent confrontations whenever possible. Less lethal shotguns and bean bag rounds provide officers with an additional force option that may be used to gain compliance, control violent or dangerous subjects, and help resolve incidents while reducing the likelihood of death or serious bodily injury.

Uses: Less lethal shotguns and bean bag rounds may be used in circumstances where an objectively reasonable officer believes the subject is violently resisting, poses a threat to officers, the public, or self, or when a less lethal option would help safely resolve the incident. Circumstances appropriate for deployment may include:

1. When a subject is armed with a weapon other than a firearm and the tactical circumstances allow for safe deployment

2. When a subject poses an immediate threat to self or others

3. When a subject is violently resisting or assaultive

4. When a subject is engaged in behavior that presents a danger to the public or officers
1023
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

31 5. When authorized by Department policy, training, and supervisory direction Less lethal shotguns shall be deployed only by officers who have received Department approved training in their use.

Fiscal Impact:

Less Lethal Shotguns: $0
Bean Bag Rounds: $0
Annual Maintenance Cost: $500
Legal and Procedural Rules Governing Use: It is the policy of the Richmond Police Department to utilize less lethal shotguns and bean bag rounds only for official law enforcement purposes and pursuant to state and federal law regarding the use of force.

Training Required: Officers shall not carry or deploy less lethal shotguns or bean bag rounds unless they have successfully completed Department approved training.

Proficiency training shall be conducted and documented by a Department approved instructor.

CHEMICAL SHOTGUN
Equipment Type: A 12 gauge shotgun configured to deploy chemical munitions for the delivery of authorized chemical agents during tactical or other law enforcement operations.

Quantity Owned:

Chemical Shotguns: 2
Lifespan: Approximately 15 to 25 years, depending on operational usage Equipment Capabilities: Chemical shotguns are designed to deploy authorized chemical munitions at a distance in order to introduce chemical agents into a target area. This platform allows officers to create distance from a suspect or hazardous location while delivering chemical agents in a controlled manner consistent with Department policy and training.

Manufacturer Product Description:

Remington Model 870 12 gauge Shotgun
Pump action 12 gauge shotgun configured for chemical munition deployment.

Quantity: 2
Initial Cost: $0
Purpose: Chemical shotguns provide the Department with a platform for the controlled delivery of authorized chemical agents during high risk tactical incidents and other law 1024
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

32 enforcement situations where the use of chemical agents is lawful, reasonable, and consistent with Department policy.

Uses: Chemical shotguns may be used to deploy authorized chemical munitions during incidents involving barricaded suspects, high risk tactical operations, or other circumstances in which chemical agents have been authorized by the appropriate supervisor or incident commander. Use shall remain subject to Department policy, applicable law, and the totality of the circumstances.

Chemical shotguns shall only be deployed by trained personnel authorized to use chemical agents and the associated delivery platform.

Fiscal Impact:

Chemical Shotguns: $0
Annual Maintenance Cost: $0
Legal and Procedural Rules Governing Use: It is the policy of the Richmond Police Department to utilize chemical shotguns only for official law enforcement purposes and pursuant to state and federal law regarding the use of force and the authorized deployment of chemical agents.

Training Required: Officers shall not carry or deploy chemical shotguns unless they have successfully completed Department approved training in the use of chemical agents and the shotgun delivery platform. Proficiency training shall be conducted and documented by a Department approved instructor.

LESS LETHAL LAUNCHER
Equipment Type:

A less lethal launcher designed to deploy projectiles intended to gain compliance, stop dangerous behavior, or safely resolve incidents while reducing the likelihood of death or serious bodily injury when compared to conventional firearms.

Quantity Owned:

FN 303 Launchers: 4
Lifespan: Approximately 10 to 15 years, depending on operational usage, maintenance, and service life
Equipment Capabilities: The less lethal launcher is designed to deliver projectiles with improved accuracy and greater stand off distance than many handheld force options. It provides officers with an additional less lethal option intended to help control violent or 1025
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

33 dangerous subjects while reducing the likelihood of serious injury when deployed in accordance with Department policy and training.

Manufacturer Product Description:

FN 303 Launcher
A compressed air powered launcher designed to fire .68 caliber less lethal projectiles for law enforcement applications.

Quantity: 4
Initial Cost: $0
Purpose: The FN 303 launcher provides the Department with an additional less lethal option to safely resolve incidents involving violent, assaultive, or otherwise dangerous subjects when a less lethal response is reasonable and appropriate under the circumstances.

Uses: The FN 303 launcher may be used when an objectively reasonable officer determines that a less lethal option would assist in gaining compliance, stopping dangerous behavior, or reducing the risk of injury to officers, the public, or the subject.

Circumstances appropriate for deployment may include:

1. When a subject is violently resisting or assaultive

2. When a subject poses an immediate threat to officers, the public, or self

3. When a less lethal option would help safely resolve a dangerous situation

4. When deployment is consistent with Department policy, training, and supervisory direction
The FN 303 launcher shall only be deployed by officers who have successfully completed Department approved training.

Fiscal Impact: FN 303 Launchers: $0
Annual Maintenance Cost: $0
Legal and Procedural Rules Governing Use: It is the policy of the Richmond Police Department to utilize less lethal launchers only for official law enforcement purposes and pursuant to state and federal law regarding the use of force.

Training Required: Officers shall not carry or deploy the FN 303 launcher unless they have successfully completed Department approved training. Proficiency training shall be conducted and documented by a Department approved instructor.

1026
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

34 MILITARY EQUIPMENT USE SUMMARY
This section summarizes the operational use of military equipment by the Richmond Police Department for the reporting period of January 1, 2025 through December 31, 2025. Unless otherwise noted, the data below reflects only the operational deployment of military equipment identified in this Annual Military Equipment Report.

While the Richmond Police Department maintains a variety of military equipment, the mere possession of that equipment does not justify its use in every incident. The Department recognizes that critical incidents are often unpredictable, rapidly evolving, and varied in nature. The following table reflects the Department’s operational use of military equipment by category during this reporting period.

TYPE JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC
YTD
TOTAL
Armored Personnel Carrier* 1 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 2 1 1 1 9
Breaching Shotgun &
Projectiles 2 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 8
Chemical Agents 0 0 0 2 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 5
Diversion Devices (Flashbangs) 4 0 1 3 4 0 0 2 1 4 4 3 26 Less Lethal Impact Devices &
Kinetic Energy Projectiles 1 1 0 6 3 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 13
Mobile Command Center 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Patrol Rifles & Ammunition 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1
Tactical Robot 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Unmanned Aerial System 10 3 8 15 26 4 2 6 17 6 5 2 104
2025 TOTAL 18 4 9 27 35 4 13 9 20 11 10 6 166

Note: The Richmond Police Department does not maintain an armored carrier in its inventory. In limited circumstances, including SWAT search warrants or other high-risk operations, the Department may request assistance from an outside agency that provides and operates its own armored carrier. Pursuant to Department Policy 707.6, military equipment used by members of another jurisdiction providing mutual aid to the Richmond Police Department remains subject to that agency’s respective military equipment use policy while rendering mutual aid.
1027
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

35 KNOWN SUSPECT DEMOGRAPHIC DATA (Council Direction)
At the direction of the City Council, this report includes available demographic information for known suspects, specifically age, race, and sex, along with the location of the incident.

That information is provided in the incident log included at the end of this report.

It is important to note that demographic information cannot be captured for every deployment of military equipment. In some incidents, no suspect is identified. For example, deployments involving suspicious vehicles, suspicious circumstances, area searches, or other calls for service may not result in contact with or identification of any individual. In other cases, a deployment may involve a known incident, but complete demographic information may not be available.

Accordingly, the demographic information presented in this report reflects only those incidents in which an identifiable suspect or involved person was associated with the deployment of military equipment and for which demographic information was known. As a result, this data does not represent every deployment and should not be interpreted as a complete accounting of all military equipment use during the reporting period.

2025 MILITARY EQUIPMENT USE BY TYPE
1028
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

36 SUSPECT SEX TOTAL/PERCENTAGE
FEMALE 7 / 4.9%
MALE 99 / 70.2%
UNKNOWN 29 / 20.5%
N/A 6 / 4.2%

SUSPECT SEX TOTAL/PERCENTAGE
0-17: 12 / 8.5%
18-29: 38 / 26.9%
30-39: 18 / 12.7%
40-49: 19 / 13.4%
50 and over: 7 / 4.9%
UNKNOWN 41 / 29%
N/A 6 / 4.2%

SUSPECT RACE TOTAL/PERCENTAGE
ASIAN 1 / .7%
BLACK 46 / 32.6%
HISPANIC 42 / 29.7%
WHITE 3 / 2.1%
OTHER 3 / 2.1%
UNKNOWN 40 / 28.3%
N/A 6 / 4.2%

Note:
• “Unknown” means suspect demographics not known
• “N/A” means no suspect involved (Missing Person, Impound, Traffic Control) • Demographics include all incidents of equipment use including rifle deployments 1029
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

37 PATROL RIFLE DEPLOYMENTS *Council Direction
Incident Data Summary
At the direction of the City Council, the Richmond Police Department developed a process in 2025 to track patrol rifle deployments during calls for service and other law enforcement operations.

Note: For purposes of this report, a deployment means an officer removed or made a patrol rifle available for potential use based on the circumstances of the incident. A deployment does not necessarily mean the rifle was pointed at, displayed to, or observed by any member of the public.

This reporting process was implemented in February 2025. As a result, January 2025 is reflected as N/A because patrol rifle deployment data was not yet being formally collected under this process. The data below reflects the number of officers reported as deploying patrol rifles by month during the reporting period.

It is also important to note that tallying patrol rifle deployments presented practical challenges in active and evolving incidents or calls for service. Accordingly, the figures below should be understood as approximate counts based on the information reported at the time and may not capture every deployment with exact precision.

DRONE AS FIRST RESPONDER (DFR)
Drone as First Responder, also referred to as DFR, is a public safety program that deploys unmanned aerial systems in advance of, or in coordination with, responding officers during calls for service. Operated by trained personnel, DFR provides real time aerial imagery and situational awareness to officers, supervisors, and dispatch personnel, allowing for more informed decision making before officers arrive on scene.

RIFLE

DEPLOYMENT JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC TOTAL TOTAL 0 19 30 23 89 13 5 20 39 38 22 35 333
1030
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

38 The DFR program is intended to enhance officer and community safety, improve response efficiency, and support effective deployment of resources by providing an immediate overhead perspective of unfolding incidents. DFR may be used in incidents where enhanced situational awareness can improve safety and response outcomes, including crimes in progress or that have just occurred, suspicious persons or vehicles, reports of individuals with weapons, perimeter searches for suspects or missing persons, large gatherings or public disturbances, injury traffic collisions or roadway hazards, and other calls involving volatile, uncertain, or rapidly evolving circumstances.

The Richmond Police Department’s DFR program was expanded as part of a contract amendment with Flock Group approved by the City Council on January 21, 2025. That action included an increase in contract authority and supported expansion of the Department’s camera and portable camera capabilities. As part of Council discussion, the City Council also requested additional reporting on the impact of the camera system on solving crimes and recovering vehicles before and after installation.

Although the contract amendment was approved in January 2025, operational deployment of the DFR program did not begin until later in the year due to the time required for equipment acquisition, system setup, implementation, and training of Department personnel and drone pilots. As a result, no DFR deployments are reflected from January through April 2025.

Consistent with the Department’s commitment to transparency, DFR deployments are publicly accessible through the City’s public facing transparency platform, which allows community members to view general information regarding drone activity, including flight path, duration, and, when applicable, the associated call for service. https://community.richmond.ca.us.aerodome.com/
The table below reflects DFR deployments during the reporting period. DFR deployment totals reflect operational use of the program and are separate from the Department’s broader UAS inventory and other drone related missions.

Drone as First
Responder
(DFR)

JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC TOTAL
Total N/A N/A N/A N/A 25 213 240 153 49 47 9 30 766

1031
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

39 ACQUISITIONS FOR 2026
While some purchases and acquisitions can be anticipated, unplanned replacement of existing AB 481 equipment may be necessary when equipment is damaged beyond repair, reaches the end of its service life, or is no longer operationally reliable. Any such replacement will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis and will remain dependent on operational need, available funding, Department policy, and compliance with AB 481.

Consumable Military Equipment
The Department anticipates that acquisitions of consumable military equipment during the next 12 months will remain generally consistent with current replenishment schedules, operational use, training needs, and replacement cycles. Consumable items, including ammunition, diversionary devices, chemical agents, breaching munitions, and impact munitions, fluctuate throughout the year due to operational deployment, training, expiration, wear, and manufacturer recommended replacement schedules. Future acquisitions of these items are expected to replenish previously approved equipment quantities and will remain subject to Department policy and AB 481 requirements.

Armored Rescue Vehicle
For 2026, the Department anticipates continuing to evaluate the need for access to an Armored Rescue Vehicle for critical incidents and high-risk tactical operations. Although grant opportunities may exist, some available federal funding sources do not align with Richmond’s sanctuary city policy and may therefore be inappropriate or unavailable for this purpose. In August 2025, the Department received a quote of $483,667 for a rescue medic vehicle.

Richmond is a growing city with significant residential, commercial, transportation, industrial, and public gathering locations. The Richmond Police Department has jurisdiction within the City of Richmond, a municipality of approximately 52.51 square miles and a population of more than 116,000 residents. In addition, the Richmond Police Department serves as the primary tactical team for the City of Hercules and the City of El Cerrito, and through mutual aid may be called upon to assist elsewhere in Contra Costa County, Alameda County, and San Francisco County.

An Armored Rescue Vehicle would provide a protected platform for officers, fire personnel, paramedics, crisis negotiators, and victims during high-risk incidents. It is not an offensive tool. It is a life safety tool. It provides 360 degree ballistic protection, allows for safer rescue and evacuation, supports movement in hazardous or difficult terrain, and provides a secure location from which medical professionals may render care in environments they 1032
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

40 otherwise could not safely enter. It also provides officers and negotiators with protected positioning that can support de-escalation, improve communication, and reduce the likelihood that officers must rely on greater force options before other resources have been exhausted.

The need for this capability is not theoretical. Richmond and the surrounding area contain numerous locations and critical infrastructure sites that may require a protected rescue or tactical response, including the Richmond San Rafael Bridge, the Chevron Richmond Refinery, the Richmond BART and Amtrak station, Kaiser Permanente Richmond Medical Center, multiple schools, the waterfront and ferry terminal, the California Department of Public Health Richmond Campus, the Richmond Field Station, and other crowded public and commercial locations. The Department has also responded to multiple critical incidents, including barricaded gunmen, prolonged standoffs, high risk warrant services, and regional evacuation related emergencies, all of which demonstrate the need for a medically capable armored rescue platform that can protect officers, victims, and community members under dangerous conditions.

At present, the Department may request an armored vehicle from another agency when needed. However, mutual aid access is not guaranteed. The assisting agency may already be using its equipment, may not have available operators, or may not be able to respond in a timeframe consistent with the urgency of the incident. That delay can affect officer safety, public safety, rescue operations, and overall incident resolution. Having reliable access to an Armored Rescue Vehicle designed to meet Richmond’s operational needs would strengthen the Department’s ability to respond to active shooters, barricaded suspects, hostage incidents, disaster related evacuations, downed officer rescues, and other critical incidents where ballistic protection and rescue capability are necessary.

For these reasons, the Department believes continued evaluation of acquiring or securing dedicated armored rescue capability remains appropriate and in the best interest of public safety.

1033
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

41 POLICY UPDATES
707.6 COORDINATION WITH OTHER JURISDICTIONS (CURRENT POLICY) Military equipment used by any member of this jurisdiction shall be approved for use and in accordance with this Department policy. Military equipment used by other jurisdictions that are providing mutual aid to this jurisdiction shall comply with their respective military equipment use policies in rendering mutual aid.
707.6.1 ARMORED RESCUE VEHICLES FROM OTHER JURISDICTIONS (AMENDMENT) * (At Council Direction)
The Richmond Police Department does not currently maintain an armored rescue vehicle in its inventory. In limited circumstances, the Department may request the assistance of an armored rescue vehicle owned and operated by another law enforcement agency when such equipment is reasonably necessary to preserve life, protect the public, protect officers, or support the safe resolution of a critical incident.

An armored rescue vehicle from another jurisdiction may be requested for incidents including, but not limited to, high risk warrant service, barricaded suspects, hostage situations, active shooter incidents, rescue operations, evacuations during hazardous conditions, or other critical incidents where ballistic protection, rescue capability, or protected movement is necessary.

Any armored rescue vehicle provided by another jurisdiction shall be operated only by trained personnel from the assisting agency, in accordance with that agency’s military equipment use policy, applicable law, and any mutual aid or operational agreements in place at the time of the incident. Richmond Police Department personnel shall not operate an armored rescue vehicle owned by another agency unless separately authorized, trained, and approved to do so.

When feasible, the decision to request an armored rescue vehicle from another jurisdiction shall be made by the SWAT Commander, Incident Commander, or designee, based on the totality of the circumstances, the threat presented, the need for ballistic protection, rescue capability, or protected movement, and the availability of reasonable alternatives.

Any such use shall be documented and included in the Department’s AB 481 annual reporting, including the purpose of the deployment and the assisting agency, to the extent that information is available.
1034
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

42 UAS POLICY REVISION – POLICY 607
The Richmond Police Department is proposing a revision to Policy Manual section 607, Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) Operations, to better reflect the Department’s current UAS program, including the City Council approved Drone as First Responder (DFR) program, updated operational practices, privacy protections, and AB 481 tracking requirements.

The proposed policy revision is intended to clarify and strengthen the Department’s existing UAS framework in several areas. It reaffirms that UAS operations are conducted to protect life and property when other means or resources are unavailable or less effective, and that all UAS use must remain consistent with constitutional protections, privacy rights, and Federal Aviation Administration requirements.

This policy revision is to ensure that the Department’s UAS policy accurately reflects the current scope of approved UAS operations, including DFR related functions, while maintaining transparency, accountability, and compliance with AB 481, Department policy, and applicable law.

Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) Operations
607 PURPOSE AND SCOPE - The purpose of this policy is to establish guidelines for the use of an unmanned aerial system (UAS) and for the storage, retrieval, and dissemination of images and data captured by the UAS.

DEFINITIONS - Definitions related to this policy include:

Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) – An unmanned aircraft of any type that is capable of sustaining directed flight, whether preprogrammed or remotely controlled (commonly referred to as an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV)), and all of the supporting or attached systems designed for gathering information through imaging, recording or any other means.

POLICY - Unmanned aerial systems may be utilized to enhance the agency’s mission of protecting lives and property when other means and resources are unavailable or less effective. Any use of a UAS will be in strict accordance with constitutional and privacy rights and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulations.

PRIVACY - The use of the UAS potentially involves privacy considerations. Absent a warrant or exigent circumstances, operators and observers shall adhere to FAA altitude regulations and shall not intentionally record or transmit images of any location where a person would have a reasonable expectation of privacy. Operators and observers shall take reasonable precautions to avoid inadvertently recording or transmitting images of areas where there is a reasonable expectation of privacy. Reasonable precautions can include, for example, 1035
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

43 deactivating or turning imaging devices away from such areas or persons during UAS operations.

PROGRAM COORDINATOR - The Chief of Police will appoint a program coordinator who will be responsible for the management of the UAS program. The program coordinator will ensure that policies and procedures conform to current laws, regulations, and best practices and will have the following additional responsibilities:
(a) Coordinating the FAA Certificate of Waiver or Authorization (COA) application process and ensuring that the COA is current.
(b) Ensuring that all authorized operators and required observers have completed all required FAA and agency-approved training in the operation, applicable laws, policies, and procedures regarding use of the UAS.
(c) Developing uniform protocol for submission and evaluation of requests to deploy a UAS, including urgent requests made during ongoing or emerging incidents. Developing an operational protocol governing the deployment and operation of a UAS including, but not limited to, safety oversight, use of visual observers, establishment of lost link procedures, and communication with air traffic control facilities. (d) Ensure UAS deployments are tracked pursuant to AB 481 requirements.. (e) Developing a UAS inspection and maintenance protocol to ensure continuing airworthiness of a UAS, up to and including its overhaul or life limits. (f) Developing protocols to ensure that all data intended to be used as evidence are accessed, maintained, stored, and retrieved in a manner that ensures its integrity as evidence, including strict adherence to chain of custody requirements. Electronic trails, including encryption, authenticity certificates, and date and time stamping, shall be used as appropriate to preserve individual rights and to ensure the authenticity and maintenance of a secure evidentiary chain of custody.
(g) Facilitating law enforcement access to images and data captured by the UAS. (h) Recommending program enhancements, particularly regarding safety and information security.
(i) Ensuring that established protocols are followed by monitoring and providing periodic reports on the program to the Chief of Police.
607.5 USE OF UAS - Only authorized operators who have completed the required training shall be permitted to operate the UAS.
1036
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

44 UAS operators and observers will consider the protection of individual civil rights and the reasonable expectation of privacy as a key component of any decision made to deploy the UAS. Each UAS operator will ensure that the operation of the UAS is consistent with local, state, and federal laws and regulations. The use of vision enhancement technology (e.g., thermal and other imaging equipment not generally available to the public) is permissible only where there is no protectable privacy interest or when in compliance with exigent circumstances, a search warrant, or court order.

UAS operations should only be conducted within FAA regulations. 607.6 PROHIBITED USE - The UAS equipment shall not be used:
(a) To conduct random surveillance activities.
(b) To harass, intimidate, or discriminate against any individual or group. (c) To conduct personal business of any type.

The UAS shall not be weaponized.
607.7 RETENTION OF UAS DATA - Evidentiary video collected by the UAS shall be retained as provided in the established records retention schedule.

1037
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

45 Summary of Complaints / Concerns
The Richmond Police Department is committed to responding to complaints, concerns and/or questions received in a timely manner. During this reporting period, there were 0 formal complaints. The Richmond Police Department did not have any policy violations with the deployment or use of military equipment.

Pursuant to California Government Code §7070(d)(7), members of the public may register complaints or concerns or submit questions about the use of each specific type of military equipment in this policy by any of the following means:

1. Via email to: [email protected]

2. Via phone call to: 510-620-6675

3. Via mail sent to: Richmond Police Department, 1701 Regatta Blvd, Richmond, CA, 94801

Notable Incident:

Officer-Involved Shootings (OIS) and Discharge of Military Equipment Firearm:

On August 4th, 2025, at 5:00 p.m., the Richmond Police Department Communications Center received a 911 call regarding an armed subject who was inside a residence in the 400 block of 1st Street, threatening to kill people. The reporting party indicated the subject was armed with at least one knife at that time. Officers responded, and they could hear a disturbance coming from inside the residence. They were also simultaneously updated by RPD dispatch that the suspect had armed himself with a second edged weapon. Officers approached the front door of the residence and announced their presence. Officers were immediately confronted by a subject who was armed with at least one knife, directly outside the residence. At that time, two officers discharged their firearms, and an officer- involved shooting occurred. The subject, unfortunately, succumbed to his injuries at the scene.

The Contra Costa Law Enforcement Involved Fatal Protocol, a set of guidelines and procedures followed in cases of officer-involved fatalities, was invoked, and the Contra Costa District Attorney's Office responded to investigate the incident. 1038
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

46 FISCAL IMPACT
The Richmond Police Department is budgeted for 147 sworn personnel and 71 professional staff members. The chart below reflects the Department’s military equipment related expenditures for the reporting period of January 1, 2025 through December 31, 2025. These expenditures include the acquisition of new equipment and the replacement of consumable military equipment. Where applicable, annual maintenance and replacement costs are also identified.

Equipment Quantity
Acquired /
Replenished
Acquisitions Maintenance /
Replacement
Total Cost
UAS 7 $46,128.05 $0 $46,128.05
Drone as First Responder (DFR) 2 $299,454.68 $0 $299,454.68 Mobile Command Center 0 $0 $0 $0
Tactical Robot 0 $0 $0 $0
Breaching Shotguns 0 $0 $0 $0
Breaching Rounds 0 $0 $0 $0
Rifles 0 $0 $9,698.00 $9,698.00
Rifle Ammunition 60 $7,324.32 $0 $24,841.98
Diversionary Devices 100 $9,054.38 $0 $9,054.38
Chemical Agents 337 $13,917.84 $0 $16,247.96
Less Lethal Shotguns 0 $0 $0 $0
Less Lethal Rounds 0 $0 $0 $0
Direct Impact Munitions 0 $0 $0 $0
Direct Impact Launchers 0 $0 $0 $0
Grand Total

$405,425.05

1039
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

47 Estimated Projected Cost for 2026
The Richmond Police Department remains committed to providing superior training to its officers, particularly in the use of specialized equipment and tactics that carry significant responsibility and public safety implications. The Department recognizes that military equipment must be used lawfully, judiciously, and only by properly trained personnel. For that reason, Richmond PD invests substantial time and resources into ongoing training, scenario based instruction, qualification, and supervision to ensure officers are prepared to respond safely, effectively, and in a manner consistent with Department policy, applicable law, and the protection of civil rights.

Estimated training costs were calculated using top step salary rates for 2026, including applicable incentives, for officers, sergeants, and lieutenants as follows:

Top step officer rate: $80.85 per hour
Top step sergeant rate: $99.77 per hour
Top step lieutenant rate: $120.34 per hour
Ongoing training is imperative to ensure department personnel are proficient in the use of authorized equipment and tools in accordance with best practices, the law, and department policy. Training programs are developed for numerous ancillary support teams to ensure their adherence to department policies and the law.

SWAT Team Training Costs
The Richmond Police Department SWAT Team consists of approximately 26 members when fully staffed, including 19 officers, 5 sergeants, and 2 lieutenants. Each member trains approximately 240 hours per calendar year. Based on 2026 salary rates, the estimated annual training cost for the SWAT Team is $546,163.20.

Patrol Rifle Program Training Costs
The Patrol Rifle Program consists of approximately 40 officers and 10 sergeants when fully staffed. One 40 hour patrol rifle course is offered each calendar year, with approximately 10 officers attending. Patrol rifle personnel also complete ongoing in service rifle training and qualifications totaling approximately 5 hours per calendar year. Based on 2026 salary rates, the estimated annual training cost for the Patrol Rifle Program is $53,498.50.

Sniper Team Training Costs
The Richmond Police Department Sniper Team consists of approximately 9 members when fully staffed, including 6 officers, 2 sergeants, and 1 lieutenant. Each member trains 1040
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

48 approximately 120 hours per calendar year. Based on 2026 salary rates, the estimated annual training cost for the Sniper Team is $96,837.60.

The Drone as a First Responder Costs
The costs reflected for the Drone as First Responder program include personnel costs associated with the initial onboarding, installation, and implementation phase of the program. Specifically, the Department assigned one officer full time to the DFR program from May 25, 2025 through November 7, 2025 to support program startup, system implementation, coordination, and operational readiness. The salary cost for that officer during the assignment period was $81,685.52.

Less Lethal Impact Munitions Instructors School
The Less Lethal Impact Projectiles Instructor Course is a train the trainer course designed to familiarize attendees with less lethal weapons, impact munitions and deployment tactics. Topics to be covered include instructor development techniques, less lethal force philosophy, case law, policy issues, technology overview, deployment tactics, product demonstrations, and less lethal practical scenarios. This course was attended by one officer from 02/10/25 – 02/12/25. The estimated total cost is $3,418.50.

1041
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

49 INCIDENT LIST AND LOCATION SUMMARY* (Council
Direction)

At the direction of the City Council, this report includes an incident log identifying the offense, general location, and available demographic information associated with certain military equipment deployments. The incident list is intended to provide additional transparency regarding the nature of the calls and the general circumstances in which equipment was deployed during the reporting period.

It is important to note that the locations listed in the incident log are intentionally provided as general block locations or general intersections rather than precise addresses. This approach was used to balance transparency with the need to protect sensitive law enforcement information, preserve investigative integrity where applicable, and avoid unnecessarily disclosing delicate location details involving victims, witnesses, juveniles, tactical operations, or other sensitive incidents. Accordingly, the listed locations should be understood as the general area of occurrence and not the exact location of the event.

It is also important to note that not every incident resulted in a known or identifiable suspect. As reflected in the incident log, some entries contain unknown or unavailable demographic information, and some incidents did not involve a clearly identifiable involved person. For that reason, the incident list should be read as a transparency and reporting tool, not as a complete demographic accounting of every person associated with every deployment.

The following chart summarizes the number of incident log entries by month during the 2025 reporting period.

This list is inclusive of all incidents in which equipment was used excluding DFR.

1042
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

50 Location & Demographics Summary
DATE CASE # OFFENSE/INCIDENT TYPE LOCATION
AGE

GROUP SEX RACE
1/7/2025 25-219

THREATEN CRIME W INTENT TO
TERRORIZE-FEL/422(A)
1000 BLK LASSEN
ST 40-49 MALE BLACK
1/10/2025 250110257 PERSON WITH A GUN
2500 BLK

MACDONALD AVE UNK MALE UNK
1/11/2025 24-9391

CARRY LOADED FIREARM ON/IN
PERSON/VEHICLE:PUBLIC PLACE |
25850 (A)

KELSEY ST &
DUBOCE AVE 18-29 FEMALE BLACK
1/11/2025 24-9391

CARRY LOADED FIREARM ON/IN
PERSON/VEHICLE:PUBLIC PLACE |
25850 (A)

KELSEY ST &
DUBOCE AVE 18-29 MALE BLACK
1/11/2025 24-9391

CARRY LOADED FIREARM ON/IN
PERSON/VEHICLE:PUBLIC PLACE |
25850 (A)

KELSEY ST &
DUBOCE AVE 18-29 MALE BLACK
1/11/2025 24-9391

CARRY LOADED FIREARM ON/IN
PERSON/VEHICLE:PUBLIC PLACE |
25850 (A)

KELSEY ST &
DUBOCE AVE 18-29 MALE BLACK
1/11/2025 24-9391

CARRY LOADED FIREARM ON/IN
PERSON/VEHICLE:PUBLIC PLACE |
25850 (A)

KELSEY ST &
DUBOCE AVE 18-29 MALE BLACK
1/15/2025 25-497
ROBBERY:FIRST
DEGREE:CAB/ETC/INHABITED
DWELLING | 212.5 (A) 0 BLK 16TH ST UNK MALE UNK
1/18/2025 25-246

SHOOT AT INHABITED
DWELLING/VEHICLE/ETC | 246
4200 BLK

ROSEWOOD AVE UNK MALE HISPANIC
1/18/2025 25-246

SHOOT AT INHABITED
DWELLING/VEHICLE/ETC | 246
4200 BLK

ROSEWOOD AVE UNK MALE HISPANIC
1/25/2025 25-796 VEHICLE RECOVERY | 10851R
20TH ST & NEVIN
AVE 30-39 MALE BLACK
1/25/2025 25-793

EXHIBIT/DRAW FIREARM IN PRESENCE
OF MOTOR VEHICLE OCCUPANT | 417.3
4700 BLK
HARTNETT AVE 40-49 MALE BLACK
1043
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

51 DATE CASE # OFFENSE/INCIDENT TYPE LOCATION
AGE

GROUP SEX RACE
1/25/2025 25-791

FELON/ADDICT/POSSESS/ETC FIREARM
| 29800(a)(1)
1200 BLK
HENSLEY ST 18-29 MALE BLACK
1/25/2025 25-791

FELON/ADDICT/POSSESS/ETC FIREARM
| 29800(a)(1)
1200 BLK
HENSLEY ST 18-29 MALE BLACK
1/25/2025 25-604 EVADING PEACE OFFICER | 2800.1 (A)

DORNAN &
BRICKYARD COVE 18-29 FEMALE HISPANIC
1/26/2025 25-815 IMPOUND

STENMARK DR &

DROWLEY DR N/A N/A N/A
2/5/2025 25-1150
ASSAULT W/DEADLY WEAPON:NOT
F/ARM | 245(A)(1) S 28TH & MAINE 50+ MALE HISPANIC
2/7/2025 25-1265
BURGLARY (RESIDENTIAL/FORCE) |
459R
4700 BLK ARNO

CT UNK MALE BLACK
2/7/2025 25-1272

FELON/ADDICT/POSSESS/ETC FIREARM
| 29800(a)(1)
100 BLK S 20TH
ST 50+ MALE BLACK
2/17/2025 25-1607 ROBBERY/FIREARM | 211A
3RD ST &

MACDONALD AVE UNK UNK UNK
2/21/2025 25-1761

ILLEGALLY POSSESS ANY ASSAULT
WEAPON | 30605 (A)
2400 BLK
ABERDEEN WAY 40-49 MALE BLACK
2/21/2025 25-1761

ILLEGALLY POSSESS ANY ASSAULT
WEAPON | 30605 (A)
2400 BLK
ABERDEEN WAY 40-49 MALE BLACK
2/24/2025 25-891 LEWD OR LASCIVIOUS ACTS W/CHILD
UNDER 14 YEARS | 288(A) 700 BLK 5TH ST 20-29 MALE HISPANIC 2/28/2025 25-2032

EMBEZZLE LEASED/RENTED VEHICLE -
FEL | 10855
3000 HILLTOP
MALL RD 40-49 MALE BLACK
3/2/2025 25-2085 MENTAL | 5150
2000 BLK MAINE

AVE N/A N/A N/A
3/6/2025 25-2223 SUSPICIOUS EVENT

FRED JACKSON

WAY & ALAMO
AVE 40-49 FEMALE HISPANIC
3/7/2025 25-2268 RAPE BY FORCE/FEAR/ETC | 261(A)(2)
3400 RICHMOND
PKWY 40-49 MALE BLACK
3/14/2025 24-5870
ATT 187 - FIREARM | 664/187(A)
FIREARM 400 BLK 8TH ST 30-39 MALE BLACK
1044
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

52 DATE CASE # OFFENSE/INCIDENT TYPE LOCATION
AGE

GROUP SEX RACE
3/14/2025 25-2541

TAKE VEHICLE W/O OWNER'S
CONSENT/VEHICLE THEFT | 10851 (A)

B ST & W
BARRETT AVE 0-17 MALE HISPANIC
3/14/2025 25-2541

TAKE VEHICLE W/O OWNER'S
CONSENT/VEHICLE THEFT | 10851 (A)

B ST & W
BARRETT AVE 0-17 MALE OTHER
3/14/2025 25-2541

TAKE VEHICLE W/O OWNER'S
CONSENT/VEHICLE THEFT | 10851 (A)

B ST & W
BARRETT AVE 0-17 MALE HISPANIC
3/17/2025 25-2655 EXHIBIT FIREARM | 417(A)(2) 0 BLK S. 45TH ST UNK UNK UNK 3/17/2025 250317299 OUTSIDE ASSIST

SAN PABLO DAM
RD/HILLCREST RD 18-29 MALE WHITE
3/19/2025 25-2709

TAKE VEHICLE W/O OWNER'S
CONSENT/VEHICLE THEFT | 10851 (A)
38TH ST &
ROOSEVELT 0-17 UNK UNK
3/19/2025 25-2709

TAKE VEHICLE W/O OWNER'S
CONSENT/VEHICLE THEFT | 10851 (A)
38TH ST &
ROOSEVELT 0-17 UNK UNK
3/19/2025 25-2709

TAKE VEHICLE W/O OWNER'S
CONSENT/VEHICLE THEFT | 10851 (A)
38TH ST &
ROOSEVELT 0-17 UNK UNK
3/21/2025 250321009 CRIMINAL THREATS
600 BLK NEVIN
AVE 50+ MALE BLACK
3/24/2025 25-2901 ARREST/BOOKING
4100 BLK
ROSEWOOD AVE 30-39 MALE HISPANIC
4/4/2025 25-1731

SHOOT AT INHABITED
DWELLING/VEHICLE/ETC | 246 600 BLK 19TH ST 18-29 MALE BLACK 4/4/2025 25-3335 STALKING | 646.9(A)
4500 BLK FLORIDA
AVE 18-29 MALE BLACK
4/4/2025 25-3340
DUI ALCOHOL:CAUSING BODILY INJURY
| 23153 (A)

RICHMOND PKWY
& W MACDONALD 18-29 MALE HISPANIC
1045
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

53 DATE CASE # OFFENSE/INCIDENT TYPE LOCATION
AGE

GROUP SEX RACE
4/7/2025 25-3397

INFLICT CORPORAL INJURY ON

SPOUSE/COHABITANT/DATNG
RELATNSHP-FEL | 273.5 (A)
2400 BLK
LANCASTER DR 30-39 MALE BLACK
4/10/2025 25-3564 MISC INFORMATION
1400 BLK

PENNSYLVANIA
AVE 50+ MALE HISPANIC
4/12/2025 25-3617 RAPE BY FORCE/FEAR/ETC | 261(A)(2) 100 BLK S 9TH ST 40-49 MALE UNK 4/14/2025 250414020 GRAND THEFT 12/NEVIN UNK UNK UNK
4/18/2025
25-3839/
250418357 FLAG DOWN
21ST &

MACDONALD AVE UNK UNK UNK
4/21/2025 25-3938 CARJACKING/FIREARM | 215
5400 BLK
CENTRAL AVE 18-29 MALE OTHER
4/21/2025 25-3938 CARJACKING/FIREARM | 215
5400 BLK
CENTRAL AVE 18-29 MALE BLACK
4/21/2025 25-3938 CARJACKING/FIREARM | 215
5400 BLK

CENTRAL AVE UNK UNK UNK
4/22/2025 25-3964

MINOR ILLEGALLY POSSESS LIVE
AMMUNITION | 29650
2000 BLK
POTRERO AVE 0-17 MALE HISPANIC
4/23/2025 25-4089
CULTIVATE MARIJUANA 6+ PLANTS |
11358 (D)
2000 BLK

ROOSEVELT AVE UNK UNK UNK
4/23/2025 25-4081 ROBBERY/ESTES | 211E
900 BLK CUTTING
BLVD 0-17 MALE HISPANIC
4/23/2025 25-4081 ROBBERY/ESTES | 211E
900 BLK CUTTING
BLVD 0-17 MALE HISPANIC
4/25/2025 25-4124
BURGLARY (COMMERCIAL/NO FORCE) |
459C 800 BLK 23RD ST 40-49 MALE HISPANIC
4/25/2025 250425221 PERSON WITH A GUN
1200 BLK
CHANSLOR AVE 18-29 MALE BLACK
5/1/2025 25-4375 Arrest/Booking
4TH ST &
MACDONALD AVE 40-49 MALE BLACK
5/1/2025 25-4370

THREATEN CRIME W INTENT TO
TERRORIZE-MISD/422(A)
700 BLK S 20TH
ST 30-39 MALE HISPANIC
5/2/2025 25-4439 ROBBERY/FIREARM | 211A
1500 BLK
CARLSON BLVD 30-39 MALE HISPANIC
1046
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

54 DATE CASE # OFFENSE/INCIDENT TYPE LOCATION
AGE

GROUP SEX RACE
5/3/2025 25-4453
ASSAULT W/DEADLY WEAPON:NOT
F/ARM | 245(A)(1) 200 BLK 15TH ST 40-49 MALE BLACK
5/4/2025 25-4493

WILLFUL DISCHARGE OF FIREARM IN A
GROSSLY NEGLIGENT MANNER-FEL |
246.3 (A)
4500 BLK
MACDONALD AVE 0-17 MALE HISPANIC
5/4/2025 25-4493

WILLFUL DISCHARGE OF FIREARM IN A
GROSSLY NEGLIGENT MANNER-FEL |
246.3 (A)
4500 BLK
MACDONALD AVE 0-17 MALE HISPANIC
5/4/2025 25-4493

WILLFUL DISCHARGE OF FIREARM IN A
GROSSLY NEGLIGENT MANNER-FEL |
246.3 (A)
4500 BLK
MACDONALD AVE 18-29 MALE HISPANIC
5/5/2025 250506057 SECURITY CHECK
0 BLK W CUTTING

BLVD UNK UNK UNK
5/5/2025 25-4510

THREATEN CRIME W INTENT TO
TERRORIZE-FEL/422(A)
1400 BLK GAYNOR
AVE 40-49 MALE HISPANIC
5/5/2025 25-4534

TAKE VEHICLE W/O OWNER'S
CONSENT/VEHICLE THEFT | 10851 (A)

RICHMOND PKWY
& W BARRETT AVE 18-29 MALE HISPANIC
5/6/2025 250506458 PERSON WITH A GUN
18TH

ST/CHANSLOR

AVE UNK MALE UNK
5/6/2025 250506458 PERSON WITH A GUN
18TH

ST/CHANSLOR

AVE UNK MALE UNK
5/7/2025 25-4593
VANDALISM ($400 OR MORE)-FEL |
594(B)(1)
2800 BLK
HOWARD ST 18-29 MALE UNK
5/7/2025 250507038 SUSPICIOUS PERSON
500 BLK MARINA
WAY 50+ MALE HISPANIC
5/7/2025 25-4598
DISREGARD SAFETY:EVADE POLICE |
2800.2 (A) CA-24 W & I-580 40-49 MALE BLACK
5/7/2025 25-4603
ASSAULT WITH FIREARM ON PERSON |
245(A)(2)
4500 BLK FLORIDA
AVE 18-29 MALE BLACK
1047
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

55 DATE CASE # OFFENSE/INCIDENT TYPE LOCATION
AGE

GROUP SEX RACE
5/8/2025 25-4631

INFLICT CORPORAL INJURY ON

SPOUSE/COHABITANT/DATNG
RELATNSHP-FEL | 273.5 (A)
2400 BLK
ABERDEEN WAY 30-39 MALE BLACK
5/9/2025 25-4698 MISC INFORMATION
800 BLK S 45TH
ST 18-29 MALE BLACK
5/9/2025 25-4698 MISC INFORMATION
800 BLK S 45TH
ST 18-29 MALE BLACK
5/9/2025 25-4698 MISC INFORMATION
800 BLK S 45TH
ST 18-29 MALE BLACK
5/11/2025 250511032 OUTSIDE ASSIST
2900 BLK GROOM

DR UNK UNK UNK
5/11/2025 250511032 OUTSIDE ASSIST
2900 BLK GROOM

DR UNK UNK UNK
5/11/2025 250511032 OUTSIDE ASSIST
2900 BLK GROOM

DR UNK UNK UNK
5/11/2025 25-4750

THREATEN CRIME W INTENT TO
TERRORIZE-FEL/422(A) 700 BLK 9TH ST 30-39 MALE BLACK
5/12/2025 25-4799 MISC INFORMATION
1200 BLK
VIRGINIA AVE 30-39 MALE BLACK
5/15/2025 25-4891
DISREGARD SAFETY:EVADE POLICE |
2800.2 (A)
S 19TH ST &
CUTTING BLVD 18-29 MALE BLACK
5/16/2025 25-242 UNLAWFUL SEXUAL INTERCOURSE
W/MINOR:SPEC CIRC | 261.5 ( C ) 100 BLK S 11TH
ST 60-69 MALE HISPANIC
5/19/2025 25-5020
BATTERY:SPOUSE/EX
SPOUSE/DATE/ETC | 243(E)(1)
3200 BLK
ANNAPOLIS AVE 18-29 MALE BLACK
5/20/2025 24-11469 EMBEZZLEMENT $950+ | 503 900 BLK CUTTING BLVD 30-39 MALE
ASIAN
INDIAN
5/20/2025 24-11469 EMBEZZLEMENT $950+ | 503 900 BLK CUTTING BLVD 30-39 MALE OTHER
5/27/2025 25-5353

FELON/ADDICT/POSSESS/ETC FIREARM
| 29800(a)(1)
400 BLK
CHANSLOR AVE 30-39 MALE HISPANIC
5/27/2025 250527466 RESIDENTIAL BURGLARY
3600 BLK SIERRA
RIDGE AVE 40-49 MALE BLACK
1048
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

56 DATE CASE # OFFENSE/INCIDENT TYPE LOCATION
AGE

GROUP SEX RACE
5/27/2025
250528036
/ 25-5271 SEARCH WARRANT
2800 BLK

KILLARNEY DR/
OOJ 18-29 MALE HISPANIC
6/3/2025 25-5580

INFLICT CORPORAL INJURY ON

SPOUSE/COHABITANT/DATNG
RELATNSHP-FEL | 273.5 (A)
4000 BLK
FLEMING AVE 30-39 MALE BLACK
6/3/2025 24-12954 EXHIBIT FIREARM | 417(A)(2) 5300 BLK
PANAMA AVE 18-29 MALE BLACK
6/24/2025 250625025 SHOTS FIRED (SHOTSPOTTER)
2800 BLK GROOM

DR UNK UNK UNK
6/26/2025 250626416 ALARM VIDEO / OTHER
1100 BLK S 27TH

ST UNK MALE WHITE
6/26/2025 250626416 ALARM VIDEO / OTHER
1100 BLK S 27TH

ST UNK MALE WHITE
6/27/2025 25-6454 MISSING PERSONS
3000 BLK ALTA

MIRA DR N/A N/A N/A
7/2/2025 250702007 SHOTS FIRED (SHOTSPOTTER)
600 BLK S 20TH

ST UNK UNK UNK
7/6/2025 25-6770
ASSAULT W/DEADLY WEAPON:NOT
F/ARM | 245(A)(1) 200 BLK S 8TH ST 18-29 MALE HISPANIC
7/9/2025 250709091 OUTSIDE ASSIST

SAN PABLO AVE &

VALE RD UNK UNK UNK
7/30/2025 250730349 RESIDENTIAL BURGLARY 600 BLK 32ND ST UNK UNK UNK 8/4/2025 25-7764

ADW NOT A FIREARM ON
P.O./FIREFIGHTER:GBI LIKELY | 245(C) 400 BLK 1ST ST 18-29 MALE HISPANIC 8/11/2025 25-6136 BATTERY:SPOUSE/EX
SPOUSE/DATE/ETC | 243(E)(1) 800 BLK CHESLEY
AVE 30-39 MALE HISPANIC
8/13/2025 250813041 TRAFFIC CONTROL

HARBOUR

WAY/MAC N/A N/A N/A
8/18/2025 25-8195
VANDALISM ($400 OR MORE)-FEL |
594(B)(1)
800 BLK CARLSON
BLVD 30-39 MALE HISPANIC
8/20/2025 25-8267

VIOLATE COURT ORDER TO PREVENT
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE | 273.6(A) 400 BLK 23RD ST 40-49 MALE HISPANIC 8/26/2025 250827046 TRESPASSING 800 BLK 23RD ST UNK UNK UNK 8/27/2025 25-8499 AID OUTSIDE AGENCY
1500 BLK OHIO
STREET 40-49 MALE BLACK
8/28/2025 250828274 RESIDENTIAL BURGLARY 600 BLK 27TH ST UNK UNK UNK 1049
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

57 DATE CASE # OFFENSE/INCIDENT TYPE LOCATION
AGE

GROUP SEX RACE
9/2/2025 250901337 SECURITY CHECK 24TH/GAYNOR UNK UNK UNK 9/2/2025 250903022 SHOTS FIRED (SHOTSPOTTER)
4700 BLK

HARTNETT AVE UNK UNK UNK
9/3/2025 25-8714
BURGLARY (COMMERCIAL/FORCE) |
459C
12400 BLK SAN

PABLO AVE UNK UNK UNK
9/3/2025 250903411 PROSTITUTION 24TH ST/LINCOLN UNK FEMALE UNK 9/3/2025 250903411 PROSTITUTION 24TH ST/LINCOLN UNK FEMALE UNK 9/3/2025 250903411 PROSTITUTION 24TH ST/LINCOLN UNK FEMALE UNK 9/11/2025 25-9030 MISC INFORMATION
2200 BLK
CUTTING BLVD 18-29 MALE HISPANIC
9/11/2025 25-9030 MISC INFORMATION
2200 BLK
CUTTING BLVD 18-29 MALE HISPANIC
9/15/2025 250915363 MISSING JUVENILE 100 BLK 13TH ST N/A N/A N/A 9/15/2025 250916011 PERSON WITH A GUN 600 BLK BERK AVE UNK MALE UNK 9/17/2025 25-9189

PETTY THEFT (OTHER/NOT
SPECIFICALLY CLASSIFIED)/484(A) 600 BLK 23RD ST 18-29 MALE HISPANIC 9/17/2025 25-9189

PETTY THEFT (OTHER/NOT
SPECIFICALLY CLASSIFIED)/484(A) 600 BLK 23RD ST UNK UNK UNK 9/17/2025 250918023 SUSPICIOUS CIRCUMSTANCES EVENT
300 BLK S 15TH

ST UNK UNK UNK
9/17/2025 250918033 ALARM AUDIBLE
1000 BLK FLORIDA

AVE UNK UNK UNK
9/17/2025 250918041 ACCIDENT W/ MEDICAL ROUTED
1100 BLK

CUTTING BLVD N/A N/A N/A
9/23/2025 25-9492
BATTERY:SPOUSE/EX
SPOUSE/DATE/ETC | 243(E)(1)
800 BLK GRIFFIN
DR 40-49 MALE BLACK
9/23/2025 250923487 SUSPICIOUS PERSON 300 BLK 44TH ST 50+ MALE BLACK 9/23/2025 250924002 OUTSIDE ASSIST

EDWARD WERTH

DR/HAWTHORNE

DR UNK UNK UNK
9/24/2025 25-9534
ASSAULT W/DEADLY WEAPON:NOT
F/ARM | 245(A)(1)
1000 BLK
CHESLEY AVE 30-39 MALE HISPANIC
9/26/2025 25-1528 SHOOT AT INHABITED
DWELLING/VEHICLE/ETC | 246 3600 BLK SIERRA
RIDGE AVE 30-39 MALE BLACK
1050
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

58 DATE CASE # OFFENSE/INCIDENT TYPE LOCATION
AGE

GROUP SEX RACE
10/10/2025 25-10013 DUI - UNDER 21: OVER 0.01 | 23136(A)

CARLSON & S
37TH ST 0-17 MALE HISPANIC
10/20/2025 25-10297

PROHIBITED PERSON
OWN/POSSESS/ETC AMMUNITION/ETC |
30305 (A)(1) 400 BLK 20TH ST 18-29 MALE BLACK
10/20/2025 25-10298

WILLFULLY DISCHARGE FIREARM IN A
GROSSLY NEGLIGENT MANNER-MISD |
246.3 (A)
100 BLK S 47TH

ST UNK UNK UNK
10/20/2025 251020381 BRANDISHING
800 BLK FLORIDA

AVE UNK MALE HISPANIC
10/22/2025 25-5208 ATT 187 - FIREARM | 664/187(A)

FIREARM
2700 BLK CENTER
AVE 18-29 MALE HISPANIC
10/29/2025 25-3214 DUI ALCOHOL | 23152 (A) 700 BLK AMADOR ST 40-49 FEMALE BLACK
11/5/2025
SW / 25-
9791 SEARCH WARRANT 600 BLK 1ST ST 18-29 MALE HISPANIC
11/6/2025 25-10828

EXHIBIT DEADLY WEAPON OTHER THAN
FIREARM | 417(A)(1)
200 BLK S 13TH
ST 18-29 MALE HISPANIC
11/6/2025 25-9791 CARJACKING/FIREARM | 215 OHIO AVE & 20TH ST 18-29 MALE HISPANIC
11/17/2025 25-11206 MURDER | 187 (A)
1400 BLK BISSELL

AVE UNK UNK UNK
11/22/2025 25-11384
BATTERY:SPOUSE/EX
SPOUSE/DATE/ETC | 243(E)(1)
2400 BLK
LANCASTER DR 30-39 MALE BLACK
11/26/2025 25-11483

POSSESS/ETC FIREARM W/PR VIOLENT
OFFENSE CONVICTION | 29900(a)(1)
12800 BLK SAN
PABLO AVE 40-49 MALE HISPANIC
12/8/2025 251208032 SEARCH WARRANT 400 BLK 6TH ST UNK UNK UNK 12/10/2025 251210253 PERSON WITH A GUN
S 2ND

ST/CUTTING BLVD UNK MALE UNK
12/17/2025 25-12038 ATT 187 - FIREARM | 664/187(A)

FIREARM
800 BLK

CHANSLOR
AVENUE 18-29 MALE BLACK

1051
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

59 CONCLUSION

Since our founding in August of 1905, the Richmond
Police Department has stood watch and protected our
community with Pride & Purpose. Every day, first
responders put their own lives on the line to ensure the community’s safety. It is vital that the City of Richmond ensures that our First Responders have the necessary tools, equipment, and training to protect the community they
have sworn to serve.

Understanding law enforcement is a partnership between
the police and the community, we will continue to serve and do all we can to guard against the harmful actions of a few individuals. The Richmond Police Department is
proud to work in partnership with our diverse community to help solve problems, address root causes of crime, and improve the quality of life in Richmond.

1052
Richmond Police Department
Annual Equipment Use Report - 2025

60 LINKS

For more information on RPD Military Equipment visit:
https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/4248/AB-481---Military-Equipment- Use-Policy

Monthly Incident Summary Logs can be viewed at the following link:
https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/4706/Military-Equipment-Use- Statistics

1053