From: James Lloyd
To: Eduardo Martinez; Soheila Bana; Claudia Jimenez; Jamelia Brown; Cesar Zepeda; Doria Robinson; Sue Wilson Cc: City Clerk Dept User; Lina Velasco; Shasa Curl; Shannon Moore; City Attorney"s Office Subject: public comment re item P.1 for tonight"s Council meeting Date: Tuesday, July 21, 2026 11:11:18 AM
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
Dear Richmond City Council,
The California Housing Defense Fund (CalHDF) submits the attached public comment concerning item P.1 on the agenda for the July 21, 2026 Council meeting, proposed amendments to the City's ADU ordinance.
Sincerely,
James M. Lloyd
Director of Planning and Investigations
California Housing Defense Fund
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]
>
CalHDF is grant & donation funded
Donate today - https://calhdf.org/donate/
<https://gcc01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flinkprotect.cudasvc.com%2Furl%3Fa%3Dhttps%253a%252f%252fcalhdf.org%252fdonate%252f%26c%3DE%2C1%2C6PzrBnE5j4zb8YBLiz4lfFJ6zZlvaI0yR3Ig6myL7hvHFoKc6mMcljSIKAKfoANJQdjJZChWqjseq8UQalTgWCgPLo- zIRh1Vr4Ec9VBi7w%2C%26typo%3D1&data=05%7C02%7CSabrina_Lundy%40ci.richmond.ca.us%7Cfadfa30cfdcf45f99abb08dee7536e44%7C8ab93658f71f4926b380e0da1d18115a%7C1%7C0%7C639202542780471578%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=R7DZHyV2qDUbNEwv6qIdU%2B1V9ZsxBWyFioYrRTA8XR0%3D&reserved=0> From: J.T. Harechmak
To: City Clerk Dept User
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Public Comments Agenda Item Q2, Council Meeting 7/21 Date: Monday, July 20, 2026 3:01:23 PM
Attachments: NPH + EBHO Richmond labor Standards Letter July 2026.pdf This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
Good afternoon,
Please find attached a letter from both NPH and EBHO regarding public comment on item Q2 for the Council Meeting on July 21.
Best,
J.T.
--
J.T. Harechmak
Policy Director
he/him
nonprofithousing.org
@nphanc
T
(415) 989-8160
A 49 Stevenson, Suite 500, San Francisco, CA 94105
July 17, 2026
The Honorable Mayor Martinez
and Members of the Richmond City Council
City of Richmond
450 Civic Center Plaza
Richmond, CA 94804
Re: Proposed Resolution Adopting a Labor Standards Policy for Certain Construction Projects — Request for a Stakeholder Process, item Q2 at Council Meeting 7/21/26 Dear Mayor Martinez and Members of the Council:
On behalf of the Non-Profit Housing Association of Northern California (NPH), I write regarding the proposed resolution to adopt a Labor Standards Policy for certain construction projects. NPH and EBHO represent nonprofit affordable housing developers, public agencies, and allied organizations across the Bay Area, including members who build, own, and operate affordable homes for Richmond residents.
Let me be clear at the outset about where we stand. NPH supports strong labor standards on publicly supported construction. We support prevailing wages, registered apprenticeship, health-care contributions for construction workers, and local hire as tools to build quality careers and open pathways into the trades — including for Richmond residents, veterans, and people facing barriers to employment. The objectives this resolution recites are objectives we share, and we appreciate the Council’s commitment to advancing them.
Our concern is narrow and specific, and we offer it in that spirit. As drafted, the resolution would require covered projects to enter a Project Stabilization Agreement under which all contractors recognize a defined list of unions as the exclusive bargaining representatives, become signatory to the applicable Master Labor Agreements, and satisfy their craft needs exclusively through the union hiring halls. It is that union-only exclusivity — as distinct from the robust labor standards we support — that gives us pause, and that we believe warrants a full public airing before the Council acts. We respectfully ask that the Council not adopt the resolution on its current timeline, and instead convene a robust, inclusive stakeholder process to get the policy right.
We raise the following concerns because each bears directly on the Council’s own stated goals:
First, the exclusivity requirement works against Richmond’s local small businesses. A union-only mandate would bar Richmond’s non-union small contractors — many of them the minority-owned and resident-owned firms that the City’s local small business programs exist to support — from bidding on the largest publicly supported projects in their own city. A policy meant to expand local economic opportunity should not, as a practical matter, exclude a substantial share of Richmond’s own contractors from the work.
Second, it may undercut the very local-hire outcomes the resolution seeks. The resolution sets a 30 percent Richmond-resident work-hours goal and rightly points to RichmondBUILD and YouthBUILD. But exclusive reliance on hiring-hall dispatch draws from regional, often out-of-area lists that can place Richmond residents lower in the queue. If the Council’s priority is putting Richmond residents to work, the exclusivity mechanism may pull against that outcome rather than toward it.
Third, the cost implications fall on Richmond residents, not on developers. On subsidized affordable housing, every additional dollar of construction cost is a dollar that does not house a Richmond family. Where bidding is limited to union contractors, the loss of competitive pressure tends to raise costs, and the same public subsidy produces fewer affordable homes. We raise this not as a developer concern but as a direct consequence for the residents these projects are meant to serve.
Fourth, the resolution presents unresolved legal questions that create risk for the City. Conditioning project approval on union-only recognition — particularly where the City’s connection to a project is a below-market land sale or a subsidy rather than direct ownership — raises serious and, in our view, unsettled legal questions, as does a residency-based hiring preference. These questions are far better surfaced and resolved through a deliberate process than litigated after adoption, at cost and delay to Richmond taxpayers and to the housing and jobs everyone in this conversation wants to see built.
What we are asking for is process, not preemption. We urge the Council to convene a stakeholder process that brings labor, affordable housing developers, Richmond’s local contractors, and the City’s workforce and pre-apprenticeship partners to the same table, with the goal of producing a durable labor standards policy that advances quality jobs and local hire without the unintended consequences described above. NPH and our members are ready to participate constructively and in good faith, and to bring forward the experience of organizations building affordable housing in Richmond today.
Thank you for your leadership on affordable housing and for the opportunity to share our perspective. We would welcome the chance to discuss this further and to be a resource as the Council considers next steps.
Respectfully,
J.T. Harechmak
Policy Director
Non-Profit Housing Association of Northern California (NPH)
Lindsay Haddix
Executive Director
East Bay Housing Organization (EBHO)
From: [email protected]
To: City Clerk Dept User; Eduardo Martinez; Claudia Jimenez; Doria Robinson; Jamelia Brown; Sue Wilson; Cesar Zepeda
Cc: Soheila Bana
Subject: Public comments agenda item # Q.5
Date: Monday, July 20, 2026 1:22:51 PM
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
Dear City of Richmond,
Richmond has a weed abatement ordinance, but it is difficult to enforce because property owners can appeal notices, delaying action for months.
Following recommendations from the Wildfire Safety Ad Hoc Committee, Soheila Bana has brought forward a council item that gives staff clear direction to improve enforcement.
Please bring this up at Tuesday’s Council meeting, and pass it, so Richmond can better protect our community from wildfire risks.
Thank you for taking care of your constituents.
With gratitude,
Alan & Simone Odom
4900 Thunderhead Ct.
Richmond, CA 94803
From: Carl Fritzsche
To: City Clerk Dept User; Eduardo Martinez; Sue Wilson; Claudia Jimenez; Doria Robinson; Jamelia Brown; Cesar Zepeda; Soheila Bana
Subject: Please Approve Weed Abatement Enforcement for Defensible Space to Protect Our Community by Lowering Wildfire Risk
Date: Monday, July 20, 2026 8:44:26 PM
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
Dear Richmond City Officials:
Please Approve the Weed Abatement Enforcement for Defensible Space to Protect Our Community by Lowering Wildfire Risk.
We have been lucky the last couple of years but cannot
rely upon luck alone. Please take this action.
Kind regards,
Carl Fritzsche
5300 Coach Drive
Richmond, CA 94803
From: Cynthia Sweet
To: City Clerk Dept User
Subject: PUBLIC COMMENT RE: Q 5
Date: Tuesday, July 21, 2026 10:56:30 AM
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
Please support this item, it is important for our public safety! The house located at 4396 Nelson Drive has an enormous pile (6 ft high, 20 feet long, 6 feet wide) of brush trimmings, branches, etc piled up in the front yard for several weeks now. This is an extreme fire hazard for our whole neighborhood.
Please enforce removal immediately.
Thank you!
From: Daniel Stern
To: Eduardo Martinez; Sue Wilson; Claudia Jimenez; Doria Robinson; Jamelia Brown; Cesar Zepeda; Soheila Bana Cc: City Clerk Dept User
Subject: Please approve item Q. 5.
Date: Tuesday, July 21, 2026 12:54:42 AM
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
Dear Mayor and Council Members of Richmond,
Please support the Weed Abatement Enforcement for Defensible Space, which is an item on the upcoming agenda, to protect our community from wildfires.
Thank you very much,
Dan Stern (he/him)
Richmond, CA
[email protected]
From: [email protected]
To: City Clerk Dept User
Subject: Public comment agenda item #Q5
Date: Monday, July 20, 2026 10:44:54 PM
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
Mayor Martinez and Richmond City Council members,
I am concerned and disappointed by your apparent lack of interest regarding the following item up for discussion and a vote.
Implementing Wildfire Taskforce Recommendation Regarding Enforcing Weed Abatement Ordinance
It is my understanding that Soheila Bana requested that this item be placed on the consent calendar and Mayor Martinez you declined this request. I am puzzled by this decision.
Not only are overgrown weeds unsightly to look at in our neighborhoods they are a wildfire safety hazard for those of us who live in or near the various wildfire hazard zones in the City of Richmond.
Please support this item, it is very important for our public safety. Not to mention making our city look better.
Regards,
Dave Kyllonen
Richmond resident for 34+ years
From: James Buck
To: City Clerk Dept User; Eduardo Martinez; Sue Wilson; Claudia Jimenez; Doria Robinson; Jamelia Brown; Cesar Zepeda
Subject: Weed Abatement Ordinance Agenda Item Q.5
Date: Monday, July 20, 2026 4:05:13 PM
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
As a member of the Carriage Hills/Castro Heights Emergency Preparedness Team I am writing to ask you to please support the Wildfire Taskforce Recommendations for Enforcing the Weed Abatement Ordinance (Agenda Item Q.5).
It's important that defensible space be established
and maintained wherever possible to prevent the spread of wildfires.
James Buck
[email protected]
From: Laurent Liscia
To: Eduardo Martinez; Sue Wilson; Claudia Jimenez; Doria Robinson; Jamelia Brown; Cesar Zepeda; City Clerk Dept User
Subject: Public comments agenda item # Q.5
Date: Tuesday, July 21, 2026 12:37:16 PM
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
Please support this item, it is:
1. Of paramount importance for our public safety
2. Well articulated as a ready-made action plan that only requires the appropriate ordinances
3. The proverbial ounce of prevention which always trumps expensive, last-ditch reactions to catastrophes Thank you.
--
Laurent M. Liscia
lliscia.wixsite.com
<https://us01.z.antigena.com/l/LsU4fcZQLaA2gwwAV_9iMZoMY5RXQ9ev9m6b_BNE_~HSRxhioMBCRo36spJd- ern_xQ9rJp8HcceXDUPEsBkYaSLG9qDAKw_EsXdNXVu8C-IB_369KHq- f_iimMamZaaIVaMooy5mSGwm2xQaBILy_emu7vX4f_Ku3js5V16YD~iJlkeRppITPIpgP62> From: MARGO DEAN
To: City Clerk Dept User
Subject: Public comments agenda item # Q.5
Date: Tuesday, July 21, 2026 2:07:19 AM
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
It stuns me that the leaders of Richmond are unwilling to keep its citizens safe.
Richmond has a weed abatement ordinance, but it is difficult to enforce because property owners can appeal notices, delaying action for months. And now we have a Mayor unwilling to approve an item that will provide clear direction to improve enforcement.
Following recommendations from the Wildfire Safety Ad Hoc Committee, Soheila Bana has brought forward a council item that gives staff the very needed direction that will improve enforcement.
Approve this item at Tuesday’s Council meeting, so Richmond can better protect our community from wildfire risks. Thank you for taking care of your constituents.
Margo Dean
Margo Dean Productions
510-758-5002
www.margodeanproductions.com
From: Vicki Winston
To: City Clerk Dept User
Subject: City Council Meeting, July 21st, Public Comment in Favor of Agenda Item #Q5 Date: Monday, July 20, 2026 4:35:00 PM
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
My name is Vicki Winston, President of the Greenbriar Neighborhood Council. Our neighborhood has been designated
as a High
Wildfire
Risk Area. I am writing in support of and I
ask for your approval
of
Item #Q.5
Greenbriar is designated a FireWise neighborhood. We
depend on the
Fire
Department citations to be enforced expeditiously
to protect us
from the
starting and spreading of wildfires.
The citations that impact
our safety the most are violations of Defensible Space and Weed Abatement.
Regrettably, the
current
process can result in a lengthy appeal. We need
the entire process, including abatement and the
appeals, to take at most
90 days
to help prevent the potential of loss of
lives and property.
Thank you for your consideration and passing of Item #Q.5.
Sincerely,
Vicki Winston, President
Greenbriar Neighborhood Council
510-325-7266
From: Xia Horowitz
To: City Clerk Dept User
Cc: Eduardo Martinez; Sue Wilson; Claudia Jimenez; Jamelia Brown; Cesar Zepeda; Soheila Bana; Doria Robinson Subject: Public comment on agenda item # Q.5
Date: Monday, July 20, 2026 2:24:31 PM
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
Hello,
Regarding the agenda item to implement the Wildfire Task Force recommendations regarding enforcing the weed abatement
ordinance: As a registered voter and resident of Richmond, I believe that this item is important for our public safety, and I am asking you to support it and advance it as soon as possible. Thank you.
Xia Horowitz
Agenda Item Q.5
Implementing Wildfire Taskforce Recommendation Regarding Enforcing Weed Abatement Ordinance
Portal Search...
Meeting Date
Agenda Item
Name
Email
Comment
Position
Status
Attachment
City Council
7/21/2026 5:00 PMAd Hoc Committee Formation for CityCouncil Rules of Procedure and OrderAmendments Claudia Citroen Councilmember Jimenez, as you are wellaware, continues to disregard establishedCouncil procedures by advancing personaland political priorities ahead of urgentmatters affecting Richmond residents. Thisrepeated pattern reflects misplacedpriorities, poor governance, and a troublinglack of accountability. The Mayor's ownpublic admission—"Oh, I must not haveread the consent calendar item carefullyenough"—after I questioned why the RentBoard continues to receive General Fundsupport despite voters approving afinancially self-sustaining Rent Board,should concern every resident. Such anadmission demonstrates inadequatereview of agenda materials before publicvotes are cast. Equally concerning, after Itimely exercised my right under Councilprocedures to pull the item from theconsent calendar for public discussion, itwas later returned to the consent calendarover my objection. That decisiondiminished transparency, limitedmeaningful public deliberation, andweakened public confidence in the integrityof the Council's decision-making process.Consent calendars exist to expediteroutine, noncontroversial administrativematters—not to minimize public discussionof significant policy or funding decisions.When a Councilmember or member of thepublic timely requests that an item receiveseparate consideration, the spirit oftransparent government requires that thematter be fully discussed in open sessionrather than returned to the consentcalendar in a manner that appears to limitpublic participation. This is not an isolatedincident. Time and again, this Councildelays or sidelines urgent matters involvingpublic safety, staffing shortages,infrastructure maintenance, fiscaloversight, and core municipal serviceswhile devoting substantial time and publicresources to discretionary initiatives.Richmond residents expect their electedofficials to address essential governmentfunctions before advancing ideological orspecial-interest priorities. Good governancerequires diligent review of agenda items,respect for established procedures,transparent deliberation, meaningful publicparticipation, and responsible stewardshipof taxpayer funds. Public confidencedepends upon informed decision-making.When elected officials acknowledge theyhave not carefully reviewed agenda itemsbefore voting, it raises legitimate concernsregarding oversight, fiscal accountability,and the integrity of the legislative process. - Approved -
7/22/26, 9:23 AM richmond.escribemeetings.com/Pages/ReportingPrintFriendly.aspx?reporting-reporttype=PublicComment https://richmond.escribemeetings.com/Pages/ReportingPrintFriendly.aspx?reporting-reporttype=PublicComment 1/2 Procedural rules should be appliedconsistently and fairly. Residents whocomply with established Councilprocedures should not reasonably perceivethat those procedures can be circumventedin ways that reduce transparency ormeaningful public review. At a time whenthe City continues to face staffingshortages, infrastructure demands, andcompeting budget priorities, taxpayersdeserve careful scrutiny of everydiscretionary expenditure and everysignificant policy decision. I respectfullyrequest that significant policy and fundingdecisions be removed from the consentcalendar and scheduled under regularbusiness for full public discussion. Thoseitems should be accompanied by completefiscal analyses, clear legal authority, andsufficient supporting documentation toallow both the Council and the public tomake informed decisions. Transparency,accountability, and public trust are notprocedural formalities—they arefundamental obligations of representativegovernment. Richmond residents deserve aCouncil that places public safety, fiscalresponsibility, operational efficiency, andopen government ahead of politics andexpediency. It is time to restore publicconfidence by respecting establishedprocedures, engaging in meaningful publicdeliberation, and ensuring that everysignificant decision receives the carefulreview it deserves. 7/21/2026 5:00 PMResolution Determining Necessity andIntroduction of an Ordinance Ordering theSubmission of a General Obligation BondMeasure for Fire Station Improvements Claudia Council’s lethality and multi year avoidancein addressing the growing workforcechallenges affecting the Richmond FireDepartment alongside many otherdepartments across California needs to bechallenged. It is egregious to observecouncil willingness to allocate millions ofgeneral budgets to privileged park serviceswhile essential infrastructure not onlycontinues to fall apart but most importantlyfails to meet modern building codesstandards. Firefighters are confronted withpersistent staffing shortages, elevated ratesof occupational cancer, and increasingworkplace injuries resulting from thephysically demanding and hazardousnature of their profession. Failure to fullydisclose information regarding local publicsafety risks, inadequate emergency medicaltreatment access, failed disclosure ofrelated overtime figures and substandardfacilities create the challenges listed above.Salaries shared by Richmond firefighterrepresent thousands of additional workhours. Hours which our firefighters spendaway from their families, committed toprotecting the life and property of ourcitizens. It is the city’s obligation to ensureour community receives fully transparentstories rather than cherry picked datapoints. - Approved -
7/22/26, 9:23 AM richmond.escribemeetings.com/Pages/ReportingPrintFriendly.aspx?reporting-reporttype=PublicComment https://richmond.escribemeetings.com/Pages/ReportingPrintFriendly.aspx?reporting-reporttype=PublicComment 2/2