Richmond City Council
September 15, 2026

September 15, 2026
DocID #76702v1
City Manager’s Office
Community Development
City Attorney’s Office
DATE: September 15, 2026
TO: Mayor Martinez and Members of the City Council
FROM: Shasa Curl, City Manager
Lina Velasco, Director of Community Development
Avery Stark, Planning Manager
Shannon Moore, Interim City Attorney
SUBJECT: Urgency Ordinance Imposing a 45-Day Moratorium on New Data Centers
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no immediate fiscal impact associated with this action as there are currently no pending applications or approved proposals for data centers within the City. Any future fiscal impacts would depend on the timing, scale, and regulatory framework of potential projects, which
remain uncertain at this time.

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

None.

STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:

Data centers are becoming a more prominent land use in
cities, driven by growing demand for digital infrastructure.

While they can contribute to economic activity and tax
revenue, they also require substantial electricity, water, and land resources. Their expansion raises concerns
about energy capacity, environmental and health
impacts, noise, and compatibility with existing community priorities. A temporary moratorium would allow the City time to evaluate these impacts, engage in a public
planning process to evaluate whether and under what
regulations data centers may be permitted.

RECOMMENDED ACTION: ADOPT an Urgency Ordinance establishing a 45-day temporary moratorium on the establishment of new data
centers within the City of Richmond pending a public
planning process to evaluate whether and under what
AGENDA
REPORT
1395

September 15, 2026
DocID #76702v1
regulations data centers may be permitted utilizing
Government Code Section 65858(b) – City Manager’s
Office/Community Development Department/City
Attorney’s Office (Lina Velasco 510-620-6841).

DISCUSSION:

Data centers are emerging as a more prominent land use in cities nationwide, driven by increasing demand for digital infrastructure to support cloud computing, artificial intelligence, and data storage. While these facilities can generate economic benefits, including construction activity, limited employment opportunities, and potential tax revenue, they also present unique land use considerations. Unlike traditional commercial or industrial uses, data centers operate with high infrastructure demands and relatively low on-site employment, raising questions about their long-term value relative to other potential land uses.

A primary concern associated with data center development is the significant demand for electricity, water, and land resources. Data centers require substantial and continuous power supply to operate servers and cooling systems, which may strain existing energy infrastructure and conflict with local and regional climate goals. Water usage for cooling, particularly in areas facing drought conditions, further complicates sustainability considerations. Additionally, these facilities often require large building footprints, which can limit opportunities for more community-serving or employmentgenerating uses.

Beyond resource consumption, data centers may also create compatibility challenges with surrounding land uses. Potential impacts include noise from mechanical equipment, visual scale and design concerns, and limited activation of the public realm.

These factors can affect nearby residential neighborhoods and may not align with broader community priorities for equitable development, economic vitality, and environmental stewardship. As such, careful planning and policy guidance are necessary to ensure that any future data center development is consistent with the City’s goals and standards.

Given the evolving nature of this industry and the uncertainty in balancing its potential benefits with long-term costs, a temporary moratorium is desired by the City Council to engage in a public planning process to evaluate whether and under what regulations data centers may be permitted. A temporary moratorium would provide the City with time to conduct a comprehensive evaluation of impacts, review best practices from other jurisdictions, and engage stakeholders, including residents, utility providers, and industry representatives. This process would enable the City to evaluate the desirability of the land use and if desired, develop clear policies and regulations to guide future data center proposals in a manner that aligns with community priorities and resource constraints.
1396

September 15, 2026
DocID #76702v1
A proposed urgency ordinance is provided for the Council’s consideration by imposing a temporary 45-day moratorium. The proposed urgency ordinance would require a vote of at least four-fifths of the City Council to pass. A public hearing was noticed in the West County Times for this urgency ordinance. Following a noticed public hearing, the Council may extend the subject moratorium for an additional 22 months and 15 days.

Unless otherwise directed by the Council, and assuming the Council adopts the proposed moratorium, staff intends to return to the Council within the 45-day period to seek an extension of the moratorium. (Gov. Code § 65858.) If adopted by a four-fifth’s vote of the City Council, no new permit, license, or other entitlement for any new data center within the City would be allowed during the moratorium.

SYNERGISTIC POLICIES:

The proposed moratorium would provide the city with time to undertake a public planning process to evaluate whether data centers should be allowed and under what conditions to align with the goals specified in the City’s Energy and Climate Change Element, given that these uses are known to be highly energy-intensive, and to evaluate their potential impact on local energy demand and emissions. In addition, given concerns about noise, environmental impacts, and compatibility with other land uses, evaluating data centers through a public health lens is consistent with the City’s Health in All Policies Strategy. A temporary moratorium would provide time to assess potential impacts on other land uses and ensure that future policies prioritize health equity and environmental justice.

CONCLUSION:

In consideration of these factors, the proposed temporary moratorium is a prudent and proactive approach to land-use planning. This action would allow the City to thoughtfully assess the full range of economic, health, environmental, and community impacts associated with this emerging use, while ensuring consistency with adopted General Plan policies and community priorities. By taking this step, the City can position itself to make informed, balanced decisions that safeguard critical resources, protect neighborhood compatibility, and support long-term sustainability and equitable development goals.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1 – Draft Urgency Ordinance
1397

DocID #76672v1
ORDINANCE NO. ___________

AN URGENCY ORDINANCE, PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65858, OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA ESTABLISHING A 45-DAY TEMPORARY MORATORIUM ON THE

ESTABLISHMENT OF NEW DATA CENTERS WITHIN THE CITY OF RICHMOND PENDING COMPLETION OF A COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW OF THE CITY’S

GENERAL PLAN, ZONING ORDINANCE, RELATED LAND USE REGULATIONS

AND A PUBLIC PLANNING PROCESS TO EVALUATE WHETHER AND UNDER

WHAT REGULATIONS DATA CENTERS MAY BE PERMITTED, AND DECLARING

THE URGENCY THEREOF
WHEREAS, the increasing demand for data centers associated with the expansion of artificial intelligence and cloud computing has resulted in growing development interest throughout the San Francisco Bay Area, warranting careful evaluation of the potential impacts on local land use, electricity demand, water resources, infrastructure, and community priorities before these facilities are approved; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the increasing interest in data center development may have significant implications for electricity demand, water resources, public infrastructure, land use compatibility, noise, air quality, aesthetics, and other factors affecting the public health, safety, and welfare of Richmond residents that warrant further study before data centers are established within the City; and
WHEREAS, the City is evaluating whether its General Plan and Zoning Ordinance adequately regulate data centers as a distinct land use; and WHEREAS, the City's Zoning Ordinance does not contain land use regulations specifically addressing data centers or standards to evaluate and mitigate their potential impacts, including but not limited to energy consumption, water demand, noise, air quality, visual character, neighborhood compatibility, and other effects on surrounding properties and the quality of life of Richmond residents; and
WHEREAS, data centers differ from traditional industrial and office uses because they may involve substantial electrical infrastructure, emergency backup generation, battery energy storage systems, cooling infrastructure, utility demands, operational noise, and other characteristics not specifically addressed by existing City regulations; and WHEREAS, a temporary moratorium will provide the City with time to undertake a public planning process to determine whether data centers should be permitted within Richmond and, if so, consider appropriate amendments to the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and other applicable regulations to ensure that future data center development is consistent with the City's planning objectives and community priorities; and
1398

DocID #76672v1
WHEREAS, Article XI, section 7 of the California Constitution authorizes the City to enact local land use regulations under its police power, and Government Code sections 36937 and 65858 authorize urgency and interim zoning ordinances when the required findings and voting thresholds are satisfied; and
WHEREAS, Government Code section 65858 authorizes the City Council to adopt an interim urgency ordinance prohibiting uses that may conflict with a contemplated general plan, specific plan, or zoning proposal when necessary to protect against a current and immediate threat to the public health, safety, or welfare while the City studies and evaluates if and under what regulations to allow for data center development.

NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of Richmond does hereby ordain as follows:

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

SECTION 2: Purpose and Authority.

In the interest of promoting the health, safety, and welfare of the residents in the City of Richmond, it is the purpose and intent of this ordinance to place a temporary moratorium on the issuance of any new permit, license, or other entitlement for any data center in the City of Richmond. The City Council adopts this ordinance pursuant to Article XI, section 7 of the California Constitution and Government Code sections 36937 and 65858 as an urgency measure prohibiting any use that may conflict with a contemplated general plan, specific plan, or zoning proposal that the city is considering or studying.

SECTION 3: Findings.

A. Data centers present operational characteristics materially different from traditional office, warehouse, research and development, and industrial uses, including but not limited to significant electrical infrastructure demands, emergency backup generation, battery energy storage systems, specialized cooling infrastructure, operational noise, utility demand, and other land use characteristics requiring careful evaluation.

B. The City Council finds that the City's current zoning regulations do not establish a distinct land use classification or development standards governing the establishment and operation of data centers.

C. The City has initiated a planning effort to evaluate whether amendments to the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, development standards, infrastructure and utility policies, environmental review procedures, and related regulations are appropriate to regulate data centers within Richmond or, alternatively, whether such uses should be prohibited. .
1399

DocID #76672v1
D. The City Council finds that there is a current and immediate threat to the public health, safety, or welfare because, absent a temporary moratorium, applications for the establishment, construction, conversion, or expansion of data centers could be submitted, processed, approved, and vested under regulations that do not specifically address the operational, environmental, infrastructure, and public-safety characteristics of such uses. The City Council further finds that approval of additional subdivisions, use permits, variances, building permits, or other applicable entitlements for data center development during the City's study would result in or exacerbate that threat.

E. Data centers may impose large, concentrated, and continuous electrical loads and may require upgrades to substations, transformers, transmission or distribution facilities, and backup generation systems. The City has not yet completed the technical and policy review necessary to determine whether and under what conditions such demands can be accommodated without adversely affecting grid reliability, infrastructure capacity, emergency operations, or existing utility customers.

F. Data centers may also involve substantial potable or recycled water demand, cooling and wastewater infrastructure, lithium-ion batteries, fuel storage, emergency generators, hazardous materials, and continuous mechanical equipment. The City has not yet adopted data-centerspecific standards addressing water efficiency and drought response, fire and hazardousmaterials response, noise, air quality, heat, vibration, and compatibility with nearby residential and other sensitive uses.

G. The City Council further finds that completion of the public planning study described herein is necessary before determining whether to permit data centers and, if allowed, to establish permanent regulations governing the location and operation of data centers within the City.

Considering these findings and all evidence in the record, including, but not limited to, the staff report accompanying this Urgency Ordinance, the City Council finds that this moratorium is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public health, safety, and welfare and satisfies the requirements of Government Code sections 36937 and 65858.

Section 4: Environmental Review/California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

This ordinance is intended to preserve the status quo, and it will not cause a direct physical change in the environment, nor a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. The enactment of this ordinance, therefore, does not constitute the approval of a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), and it is exempt from CEQA. (Pub. Res. Code §21065, CEQA Guidelines §§15060(c)(2)(3); 15061(b)(3); 15064(d); 1537(a); 15378(a))
1400

DocID #76672v1
Section 5: Definitions.

As used herein the following definition shall apply:

A. “Data center” means a facility, campus, building, structure, or portion thereof used primarily or substantially for the housing, operation, or support of computer servers, server racks, datastorage devices, networking equipment, switching equipment, or similar electronic equipment used for commercial remote data storage, processing, or transmission; cloud computing; colocation services; artificial-intelligence model training or inference; high-performance computing; blockchain operations; digital-asset mining; cryptocurrency mining; or other similar high-intensity computing activities. A data center may include associated cooling equipment, generators, fuel storage, battery energy storage systems, fire-suppression systems, substations, and other utility or security infrastructure supporting the primary use.

B. “Subordinate-use data room” or “server room” means an enclosed room, suite, or other accessory space containing computer servers, data-storage equipment, network-switching equipment, telecommunications equipment, and related supporting equipment that is used solely in conjunction with and is incidental and subordinate to a lawfully established primary use on the same lot or site. Such a room may not be used for independent commercial, wholesale, or thirdparty data processing, storage, or transmission and is not a data center for purposes of this ordinance.

Section 6: Application.

A. During the term of this ordinance, the establishment, construction, conversion, or expansion of any data center shall be prohibited in all zoning districts and lands within the City of Richmond. The City shall not accept, process, grant, approve, or issue any application for a use permit, variance, building permit, license, certificate of occupancy, subdivision map, parcel map, tentative map, general plan amendment, zone change, specific plan, development agreement, site plan review, grading permit, or other permit or land use entitlement for any data center.

B. This moratorium does not apply to a subordinate-use data room or server room, as defined herein.

C. Notwithstanding any other provision of this ordinance, any person who lawfully holds an existing permit, license, and/or land use entitlement for an existing and lawfully operating data center in the City of Richmond as of the effective date of this ordinance may continue to operate under the standards governing such permit, license, and/or entitlement under existing law.

Nothing herein shall limit the authority of the City to revoke or suspend any existing license, permit, and/or entitlement as authorized under existing law.

Section 7: Term of Ordinance.
1401

DocID #76672v1
This ordinance shall be in effect from the date of adoption for a period of forty-five (45) days, unless it is extended pursuant to Government Code section 65858or other applicable law, as approved by the City Council.

Section 8: No Mandatory Duty of Care.

This ordinance is not intended to and shall not be construed or given effect in a manner that imposes upon the City or any officer or employee thereof a mandatory duty of care towards persons and property within or without the City, so as to provide a basis of civil liability for damages, except as otherwise imposed by law.

Section 9: Severability.

If any provision of this ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstances is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of the ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this ordinance are severable. This City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this ordinance irrespective of the invalidity of any particular portion thereof and intends that the invalid portions should be severed and the balance of the ordinance be enforced.

Section 10: Effective Date and Publication.

This ordinance, passed by at least a four-fifths vote of the City Council, is declared to be an urgency ordinance for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, and safety and shall take effect and be enforced immediately upon adoption pursuant to Government Code sections 36937 and 65858. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage of this ordinance and shall cause the ordinance, or a summary thereof, to be published or posted as required by Government Code section 36933.
1402

DocID #76672v1
-----------------------------------
I hereby certify that the foregoing Urgency Ordinance of the City Council of Richmond was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting thereof held September 15, 2026 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTENTIONS:

ABSENT:

CLERK OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND
(SEAL)
Approved:

Mayor
Approved as to form:

City Attorney
1403

September 15, 2026
Police Department
DATE: September 15, 2026
TO: Mayor Martinez and Members of the City Council
FROM: Timothy Simmons, Chief of Police
Subject: Contract Amendment with Axon Enterprise and Contract with Assure MSP, Inc. for Law Enforcement and City
Facility Video Technology, Surveillance, and Support
Services
FINANCIAL IMPACT: The estimated first year expenditure of up to $1,000,000 is included in the approved Fiscal Year 2026-2027 Police Department budget, and future years will be budgeted
appropriately. The recommended dual vendor approach
provides a cost benefit compared with continuing the
current configuration or purchasing similar technologies through separate standalone procurements.

Based on updated analysis from the Police Department,
transitioning the ALPR, CCTV, and drone systems from
Flock Safety to Axon is expected to reduce annual costs by approximately $200,000, which results in an estimated savings of about $1,000,000 over five years. The Axon
package also increases available drone capacity by
moving from a single leased drone to six purchased
drones, which adds operational value beyond annual cost comparisons. These efficiencies result from Axon’s
bundled pricing, integration with existing City technology, and the avoidance of duplicated software, installation, and maintenance costs associated with multiple
independent procurements. (Account String:
01191021-400209)
AGENDA
REPORT
1404

September 15, 2026

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

October 18, 2016
December 22, 2020
December 17, 2024
March 3, 2026

STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:

The proposed contracts support two distinct video
technology needs. The amendment with Axon Enterprise
will provide additional funding for the City-wide
automated license plate reader system and continued
maintenance and support of law enforcement technology
and equipment currently in use. The contract with Assure MSP, Inc. will provide Verkada closed-circuit television cameras, related infrastructure, installation, maintenance, and technical support at various City facilities.

Using two vendors allows the City to separately manage
law enforcement technology and general City facility
security systems. This approach helps ensure that law
enforcement data is accessible only to authorized law
enforcement personnel while allowing the City to retain ownership and control of its data.

RECOMMENDED ACTION: APPROVE a contract amendment with Axon Enterprise to continue servicing body-worn cameras, taser devices, interview room equipment, and virtual reality training
equipment, and to add license plate reader and
surveillance equipment, increasing the contract amount
by $3,500,000, for a total amount not to exceed
$12,000,000, for the term of October 1, 2026, through
September 30, 2029, with two one-year extension
options through September 30, 2031; APPROVE a
contract with Assure MSP, Inc. for Verkada closed-circuit television camera equipment and related services at
various City facilities, in an amount not to exceed
$500,000, for the term of October 1, 2026, through
September 30, 2029; AUTHORIZE the City Attorney’s
Office to negotiate and finalize the contracts; and
AUTHORIZE the city manager, or their designee, to
execute the contracts – Police Department (Chief
Timothy Simmons 510-621-1802).

DISCUSSION:

The City of Richmond initially entered into an agreement with Flock Safety in February 2023 to purchase and deploy 30 Automated License Plate Reader (ALPR) cameras.

Since that initial agreement, the City has amended the contract on four occasions to 1405

September 15, 2026
expand the use of Flock Safety technology in support of public safety operations and security at City-owned facilities and infrastructure.

In November 2023, the City Council approved the first amendment to the Flock Safety agreement, authorizing the purchase and deployment of additional ALPR and closedcircuit television (CCTV) cameras. This amendment significantly expanded the City's initial ALPR program and added CCTV technology to the City's public safety camera network.

In April 2024, the City Council approved the second amendment to the Flock Safety agreement to further expand the system through the installation of additional CCTV and ALPR cameras at the Port of Richmond. This expansion was intended to enhance security and situational awareness at the Port and surrounding City infrastructure.

In January 2025, the City Council approved the third amendment to the Flock Safety agreement. This amendment further expanded the City's existing Flock Safety program to include Drone as a First Responder (DFR) technology, as well as additional camera systems to support the security and monitoring of City infrastructure and facilities.

As a result of these successive amendments, what began in 2023 as a deployment of 30 ALPR cameras evolved into a broader technology program consisting of ALPR cameras, CCTV cameras, facility and infrastructure security cameras, and DFR technology.

On March 3, 2026, staff presented a proposed amendment to the City's existing agreement with Flock Safety to extend the applicable contract terms through December 31, 2026. The City Council approved the amendment on March 17, 2026. The purpose of the extension was to allow the City to satisfy existing contractual payment obligations while providing staff with sufficient time to conduct a competitive Request for Proposals (RFP) process and evaluate whether Flock Safety continued to represent the best technological, operational, and financial solution for the City of Richmond.

The contract amendment extending the agreement through December 31, 2026, was executed on May 5, 2026.

The decision to conduct a competitive procurement provided the City with an opportunity to comprehensively evaluate the current marketplace, compare available technologies, assess system performance and reliability, evaluate data management and privacy safeguards, consider interoperability with existing City technology, and determine whether alternative solutions could provide improved capabilities and value to the City.

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS AND VENDOR EVALUATION
On February 26, 2026, City staff completed an RFP for Automated License Plate Reader (ALPR), closed-circuit television (CCTV), and related public safety technology solutions. The RFP was posted on February 27, 2026, with a closing date of March 27, 1406

September 15, 2026
2026. A total of 830 vendors were notified of the solicitation, and an addendum was posted on March 1, 2026.

The City received proposals from six vendors:
 Assure MSP
 Axon Enterprise
 Flock Safety
 IREX
 Motorola Solutions
 Net Electric
Following an initial review of the six proposals, staff shortlisted Assure MSP, Axon Enterprise, and Flock Safety for additional evaluation.

Vendors Not Advanced for Further Evaluation
IREX was not advanced because its proposal lacked sufficient technical specifications for the equipment. Additionally, the proposed cost was approximately $1 million, and the proposal did not include a drone solution.

Motorola Solutions was not advanced primarily due to cost. Its proposal was approximately $3.5 million over five years, with individual drones costing approximately $500,000 each. As part of the City's due diligence, staff also conducted a reference check with a neighboring law enforcement agency, which reported that it was transitioning away from Motorola Solutions.

Net Electric was not advanced because the proposal lacked references, installation services, an integrated software solution, or a drone solution. Additionally, the proposed equipment consisted primarily of commercially available, off-the-shelf items rather than an integrated public safety technology platform.

EVALUATION COMMITTEE
A ten-member evaluation committee representing multiple City departments, including the Richmond Police Department (RPD), and operational perspectives participated in the review process:
 Police Chief Timothy Simmons
 Police Captain Elizabeth Bashan
 Police Sergeant Enrik Melgoza
 Police Sergeant Sarita Ellison
 Police Systems Administrator Luan Trinh
 Police Officer Michael Pagaling
 Interim Chief Assistant City Attorney Kimberly Chin
 Port Director Charles Gerard
 Assistant Deputy Director of Public Works Darin Fitzpatrick  Building Trades Worker (Abatement Team Leader) Fernando Chavez 1407

September 15, 2026
The multidisciplinary composition of the committee was intended to ensure consideration of law enforcement operations, technology, legal compliance, city infrastructure, public works, City facilities, and citywide implementation requirements.

AXON ENTERPRISE
Axon Enterprise was shortlisted because it proposed a comprehensive, turnkey law enforcement solution that would integrate with technology already utilized by the Richmond Police Department (RPD). Under the proposed model, the City would own the deployed equipment and retain ownership and control of the equipment and its data.

The information would be maintained within the City's existing Axon Evidence.com environment, which currently houses all electronic digital evidence.

Axon partners with Skydio Co. for its drone technology and provides an integrated ecosystem encompassing ALPR, CCTV, digital evidence, drones, and other public safety technologies.

The evaluation committee met with Axon representatives on May 11, 2026. Among the advantages identified by the committee were:
 Seamless interoperability with RPD's existing Axon hardware and software infrastructure;
 Integration with the City's existing Evidence.com digital evidence environment;  Bundled pricing opportunities associated with the City's existing Axon relationship;
 Solar-powered equipment options, reducing the need for hardwired electrical installations and associated Public Works workload;
 Integration with Skydio's drone technology;
 Centralized management of law enforcement digital evidence and technology;  A public-facing transparency portal like the transparency functionality currently available through Flock Safety; and
 An internal Axon Ethics Commission that serves in an advisory capacity regarding technology and related ethical considerations.

City staff's evaluation also considered the platform's ability to support applicable California statutory requirements concerning auditing, immigration-related restrictions, and ALPR data management.

Prior to the issuance of the RFP, members of the City's technology team and Crime Analyst Assistant Sofia Ayala met with the Sacramento Police Department, an existing Axon ALPR/CCTV customer. Sacramento Police Department personnel provided favorable feedback regarding their experience with Axon's technology, data security, and customer support.

A primary implementation consideration associated with transitioning to Axon is the initial staff workload required to manage a large-scale technology deployment. This work would include site assessments, encroachment permit review, equipment staging 1408

September 15, 2026
and configuration, installation coordination, system configuration, and employee training.

FLOCK SAFETY
Flock Safety was shortlisted because it is the City's current provider and because the City has already deployed a substantial Flock ALPR and CCTV infrastructure throughout Richmond and at certain City facilities, including the Port of Richmond, Corporation Yard, and portions of the City Hall parking areas.

The evaluation committee met with Flock Safety representatives on May 13, 2026. The committee identified several advantages associated with continuing with Flock Safety:
 Minimal staff resources required to maintain the existing infrastructure compared with a complete system transition;
 Existing Flock drone infrastructure;
 Robust ALPR functionality, including advanced search capabilities;  Ability to facilitate authorized information sharing with other law enforcement agencies;
 Existing employee familiarity with the Flock platform;  Solar-powered mobile trailers that can be rapidly deployed to temporary locations; and
 Functionality is designed to support applicable California ALPR and datamanagement requirements.

The committee also identified several concerns based on the City's experience with the existing system. These included:
 Reliability concerns involving certain CCTV equipment;  Extended delays associated with equipment repairs and replacements;  Difficulty obtaining firm repair or replacement timelines;  Concerns regarding billing practices, including requirements for payment when portions of the contracted equipment had not yet been installed;  Cameras that remained incorrectly positioned following the initial deployment and had not been corrected;
 A camera at the Corporation Yard that, at the time of the evaluation, had reportedly been awaiting repair for approximately eight months; and  Concerning whether certain equipment and software functionality consistently performed as represented, including questions involving the Network Lookup feature.

Although the committee recognized that Flock Safety has continued to improve its platform, staff determined that concerns about reliability, transparency, system performance, and public confidence warranted consideration in the City's overall evaluation.
1409

September 15, 2026

ASSURE MSP / VERKADA
Assure MSP is a managed service provider and authorized installer of Verkada camera equipment. Assure MSP is based in Pleasanton, California, and Verkada is based in San Mateo, California.

The evaluation committee met with representatives from Assure MSP and Verkada on May 7, 2026. The committee found Verkada's camera platform to be robust and userfriendly, particularly for general City facility security applications.

However, the committee determined that the proposed Verkada solution was not the preferred platform for RPD's law enforcement ALPR/CCTV environment. Among the considerations were limitations identified during the evaluation concerning law enforcement auditing requirements, the absence of an integrated drone solution, and the absence of a comparable public-facing transparency portal. Additionally, the vendor's reference described the City of San Mateo's use of the technology in a nonlaw-enforcement capacity.

As with Axon, the implementation of Verkada equipment would require City coordination, including site reviews, permitting, equipment staging, configuration, installation, and training.

On May 27, 2026, Technology Supervisor Eric Tam visited Verkada's headquarters to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the company and its technology.

Following the visit, staff concluded that although Verkada was not the preferred solution for RPD's law enforcement technology needs, the platform was well suited for security applications at City-owned facilities.

Verkada manufactures a variety of camera types and technologies suitable for indoor and facility-based applications, whereas the proposed Axon CCTV cameras are primarily fixed-lens cameras designed for outdoor public safety applications. This distinction provides an opportunity for the City to select technology based upon the operational purpose and environment in which it will be deployed.

FINAL EVALUATION AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION
On June 16, 2026, the evaluation committee reconvened to formally discuss and rate the three shortlisted vendors. To ensure compliance with City purchasing procedures, Finance Department Senior Buyer Ofelia Alvarez attended the meeting and provided guidance regarding the vendor evaluation and rating process.

Based on the competitive procurement process, vendor presentations, reference checks, operational considerations, technology capabilities, legal and policy considerations, implementation requirements, and committee scoring, staff recommends a dual-vendor approach:

1. Axon Enterprise for RPD's law enforcement technology environment, including ALPR, CCTV, drone, and associated public safety technology; and 1410

September 15, 2026

2. Assure MSP/Verkada for security camera systems at non-law-enforcement City facilities, including locations such as Shields-Reid Park, the Civic Center campus, Corporation Yard, and Port of Richmond.

This approach creates an intentional separation between the City's general facilitysecurity camera network and RPD's law enforcement technology environment. Non-lawenforcement City personnel using the Verkada platform would not have access to RPD's Axon Evidence.com environment or law-enforcement information.

RPD staff believes this separation provides an appropriate balance between operational effectiveness, information security, access control, and the differing technology needs of law enforcement and general City facilities.

AXON PROPOSED TECHNOLOGY
The proposed Axon law enforcement package includes:
 110 solar-powered ALPR cameras;
 60 solar-powered dual fixed-lens cameras;
 24 spare cameras;
 6 Skydio X10 drones with docks;
 3 Skydio X10 patrol drones;
 2 R10 indoor drones;
 Axon Dedrone radar and detection capabilities; and
 Auror Retail Crime Hub.

RPD currently maintains an existing agreement with Axon for several public safety products and services, including body-worn cameras, TASER energy weapons, virtualreality training, and digital evidence storage. The proposed amendment would expand the City's Axon environment to include the additional law enforcement technologies described above.

ALPR Data Security and Interagency Sharing
An important consideration in RPD staff's evaluation is the City's ability to maintain control over its ALPR information and determine when, how, and with whom that information is shared.

Like Flock Safety, Axon's ALPR technology has the technical capability to facilitate information sharing between law enforcement agencies. However, once implemented, Axon’s ALPR environment would remain closed to outside agencies unless RPD affirmatively establishes an authorized sharing relationship or conducts a search in response to an authorized request.

Current RPD policy prohibits open or unrestricted sharing of the Department's ALPR data. The law in the State of California prohibits ALPR data from being shared with any agency outside of the state. Accordingly, implementation of Axon would not provide other jurisdictions with automatic access to Richmond's ALPR database. 1411

September 15, 2026
Under RPD's intended operating model, an outside law enforcement agency investigating a qualifying criminal offense would be required to submit an appropriate written request to RPD. An authorized RPD team member would then evaluate the request and, when consistent with law, policy, and authorized law enforcement purposes, conduct the requested search.

This approach allows RPD to retain control over its ALPR information while still providing a mechanism to assist legitimate criminal investigations. The transition to Axon would therefore not result in unrestricted regional database access or provide outside jurisdictions with open access to Richmond's ALPR information.

AXON COST COMPARISON
The proposed Axon ALPR, CCTV, drone, software, and installation package is estimated at approximately $700,000 annually, or approximately $3.5 million over five years.

For comparison, the city currently pays approximately $1 million annually to Flock Safety for a system that includes:
 110 solar-powered ALPR cameras;
 60 CCTV cameras consisting of a combination of solar, hardwired, fixed, and pan-tilt-zoom cameras; and
 One drone.

Based on current estimates, transitioning the City's law enforcement ALPR/CCTV and drone environment from Flock Safety to Axon is projected to reduce annual expenditures by approximately $300,000, representing potential savings of approximately $1.5 million over five years, while substantially increasing the City's drone capabilities and further integrating RPD's public safety technology environment.

CITY FACILITY CAMERA SYSTEM
RPD staff also recommend entering into an agreement with Assure MSP for the installation, maintenance, and support of Verkada security camera equipment at appropriate City facilities.

Potential locations include Shields-Reid Park, the Corporation Yard, the Port of Richmond, the Civic Center campus, and other City-owned facilities where security camera technology is appropriate.

Assure MSP will perform a site survey and design a robust CCTV system with Verkada equipment to meet the unique facility requirements. Afterwards, Verkada will perform the installation, configuration, maintenance, and support of the system.

Verkada provides a range of facility-security capabilities, including advanced analytics and the ability to activate alerts, sirens, or public-address notifications based upon defined conditions such as motion detection, location, or time parameters. Under the 1412

September 15, 2026
proposed arrangement, Assure MSP would provide installation services as well as ongoing maintenance and repair support.

ASSURE MSP, INC. COST COMPARISON
Assure’s Verkada system will utilize CCTV cameras that are both fixed and Pan Tilt Zoom (PTZ) – no Verkada ALPR cameras will be utilized. For coverage at facilities like Shields Reid Park, the estimated 6 cameras and PA system, installation, wiring, and annual maintenance and support is roughly $33,000 for city-owned equipment. Since the new contract obligation will replace Flock’s current infrastructure, City departments utilizing Flock’s system will be able to convert their unspent budgeted balance to support the initial setup of Assure’s cameras. City departments included in the initial rollout will be Shields-Reid Park, the Port, Corporation Yard, and Civic Center Campus.

CONCLUSION
Following a competitive RFP process and multidisciplinary evaluation, RPD staff determined that no single platform provided the optimal solution for both law enforcement operations and general City facility security.

RPD staff therefore recommend utilizing Axon Enterprise for RPD's law-enforcement ALPR, CCTV, drone, and related technology needs, and Assure MSP/Verkada for City facility security cameras.

The recommended approach is intended to improve system reliability and interoperability, strengthen City control over law enforcement data, maintain strict limitations on external access to RPD ALPR information, separate law enforcement information from general City facility-security systems, expand the City's technological capabilities, and reduce the City's estimated law enforcement technology costs by approximately $300,000 annually compared with the existing Flock Safety solution.

Staff requests that the City Council authorize the City Manager to sign:
(1) a contract and/or contract amendment with Axon Enterprise to continue servicing Body Worn Cameras (BWC), Tasers, Interview Room Equipment, VR Training, and to add license plate reader and surveillance equipment in the amount of $3,500,000, for a total contract amount not to exceed $12,000,000 with an expiration of September 30, 2031 that will be finalized by the City Attorney’s Office; and
(2) a three-year contract with Assure MSP Inc. for Verkada’s CCTV solution to be utilized at various City facilities in an amount not to exceed $500,000 for the term October 1, 2026, to September 30, 2029, that will be finalized by the City Attorney’s Office.

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:

Attachment 1 – RFP
Attachment 2 – Addendum No 1
1413

September 15, 2026
Attachment 3 – Bid summary
1414
Request for Proposal
Video Surveillance Technologies
Release Date:

February 27, 2026
Deadline for Submittal:

March 27, 2026, 5:00PM

INTRODUCTION
The City of Richmond’s Police Department is currently soliciting proposals for video surveillance technology, specifically Automated License Plate Reader Technology (ALPR) and Closed-Circuit Television (CCTV).

This request for proposal (RFP) describes the project, the required scope of services, the consultant selection process, and the minimum information that must be included in the proposal. Failure to submit information in accordance with the RFP requirements and procedures may be cause for disqualification. The anticipated term of this contract will be for a period of a minimum of three (3) years and an option to renew for additional time and additional services by means of a mutual agreement of both parties.

Vendors are required to read and understand all information contained within this entire Proposal package. By responding to this RFP, the vendor agrees to read and understand these documents.

ABOUT THE CITY
The City of Richmond is a Charter City located in Contra Costa County, part of the San Francisco Bay Area, with a population of approximately 115,353 residents. Richmond is one of the region’s most diverse communities with 45.5 percent of residents identify as Hispanic or Latino, 16.4 percent identify as Black or African American alone, 21.2 percent identify as White alone (not Hispanic or Latino), and 13.8 percent identify as Asian alone.1 Richmond boasts a multi-modal transit hub that includes BART, Amtrak, and AC Transit, along with marinas, shopping centers, recreational and cultural amenities, and 32 miles of shoreline, making it one of California’s most desirable up-and-coming communities.

Richmond operates under a council-administrator form of government, with a Mayor and six council districts represented by elected Councilmembers. The City employs approximately 850 full-time equivalent and part-time employees. The City of Richmond provides a full range of municipal services including police and fire protection; construction and maintenance of highways, streets and infrastructure; library services; storm water and municipal sewer systems; operation of a wastewater treatment facility; and the administration of recreational activities and cultural events. Additionally, the City operates the Richmond Memorial Convention Center and the Port of Richmond, supporting economic development and regional connectivity.

Community Profile1
 Median Household Income: ~$95,000
 Foreign-born Residents: ~34.5%
 Languages: Approximately 54% of residents speak a language other than English at home  Housing: Median home value ~$668,000; owner-occupied housing ~55%  Transportation: Average commute time ~34 minutes; strong public transit access

1 Quick facts Richmond city, California. U.S. Census Bureau. Based on 2024 estimates. https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/richmondcitycalifornia 1416

PROJECT BACKGROUND / DESCRIPTION
The City of Richmond Police Department currently uses Flock Safety ALPR and CCTV technology, and as part of its standard procurement process, is soliciting proposals from qualified professionals to determine if Flock Safety is still the best solution for the City of Richmond.

Currently the City of Richmond leases about 110 stationary Flock ALPR cameras, and about 65 stationary CCTV cameras consist of about 20 solar powered fixed cameras, and 45 pan, tilt, zoom (PTZ) cameras.

Minimum Requirements:

The respondent will be required to provide:
 110 ALPR cameras
 65 CCTV cameras
 Software:
o Complies with all federal, state (SB-274), and local regulations and ordinances.
o Agency controlled and agency owned data.
o Maximum 30-day retention period for ALPR and CCTV data (auto-delete after 30 days).
 Installation of equipment (respondent will not be required to tap into power on City owned light poles).
 Maintenance and support for all equipment and systems for the duration of the contract.
 Submitting the necessary encroachment permits and related documents to the City of Richmond (permit fees may apply).

Preferred:
 Integration with Axon FUSUS Real Time Crime Center software.  Proposed Software can be integrated with other video surveillance technologies, such as drones.
 PTZ cameras preferred over fixed cameras.
 Solar powered ALPR equipment.
 Solar powered fixed CCTV camera.
 Solar powered PTZ CCTV camera.
 Flash Cam style (with audio messaging, flashing strobe, etc) Optional:
 Portable ALPR equipment (such as in car devices, or portable trailer)  Portable CCTV equipment (such as in car devices, or portable trailer)  Law enforcement drone equipment (indoor and/or outdoor) Optional Drone Technology (Separate Line Item & Evaluation Category) The City is requesting optional pricing and technical information for Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) for law enforcement use. Drone equipment shall be evaluated independently from the 1417

ALPR and CCTV base proposal.

Submission of drone equipment is optional and shall not impact eligibility for award of the base ALPR/CCTV contract. The City reserves the right to award drone equipment to a different vendor, decline to award drone equipment, or conduct a separate procurement at a later date.

A. Minimum Drone Requirements (If Proposed)
- FAA-compliant UAS platform
- Remote ID compliance
- Secure encrypted communications
- CJIS-compliant data transmission (if evidentiary)
- Secure storage of recorded video
- Ability to disable public cloud sharing
- Chain-of-custody controls
- Public Records Act export capability
B. Drone Capabilities (Describe in Detail)
- Indoor and/or outdoor deployment
- Flight time and battery life
- Wind resistance rating
- Night and/or thermal capability (if applicable)
- Obstacle avoidance
- Launch time
- Live-streaming capability
- Integration with Real Time Crime Center software
C. Separate Evaluation Category – Optional Drone Technology (Up to 10 Points) Regulatory Compliance – 3 Points
Operational Capability – 3 Points
Security & Data Protection – 2 Points
Integration & Scalability – 2 Points
Drone equipment will be evaluated independently from the base ALPR/CCTV proposal.

Any deployment of drone technology shall be subject to approval under applicable City surveillance ordinances and policy adoption requirements prior to operational use.

D. Separate Drone Cost Proposal Format
One-Time Costs:
- Drone platform
- Controllers
- Docking stations (if applicable)
- Software license
- Training
- Implementation
Recurring Costs (Years 1–5):
- Subscription
- Maintenance
- Support
- Escalation percentage disclosure required
1418

Vendors may have access to confidential and sensitive data files and may be subject to a Department of Justice and Criminal History background check. Failure to pass the background check shall exclude any employees of the vendor from access to confidential and sensitive files. All employees of vendors who will participate at the level described above in the project will be required to provide a valid issued driver’s license or equivalent photo identification before they will be permitted to begin work on the project.

Respondent software solutions should be web based and Software as a Service (SaaS) in full compliance with California Law Enforcement Telecommunications System (CLETS) CJIS requirements. (Please see www.oag.ca.gov for latest updates)

TECHNICAL ARCHITECTURE, CYBERSECURITY & SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS A. System Architecture:
 Cloud-hosted or hybrid deployment model
 U.S.-based data centers only
 Minimum 99% system uptime SLA
Redundancy and failover capability
B. Cybersecurity Requirements:
 CJIS compliant
 Encryption in transit (TLS 1.2+)
 Encryption at rest (AES-256 or equivalent)
 Role-based access controls
 Multi-factor authentication
 12-month audit log retention minimum
 Breach notification within 72 hours
 SOC 2 Type II report or equivalent
 Documented incident response plan
C. Integration Requirements:
 API availability and documentation
 Compatibility with Axon FUSUS (if applicable)
 Ability to integrate with City-approved systems

PROPOSAL FORMAT GUIDELINES
The proposal should be concise, well organized, and demonstrate the proposer’s qualifications and experience applicable to the Project.

Each proposal will adhere to the following order and content of sections. Proposal should be straightforward, concise and provide “layman” explanations of technical terms that are used. Emphasis should be concentrated on conforming to the RFP instructions, responding to the RFP requirements, and on providing a complete and clear description 1419

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

A. Vendor Cover Letter
A cover letter should summarize key elements of the proposal and shall:
 Confirm that all elements of this RFP have been reviewed and understood.  Include a statement of intent to perform the services as outlined.  Stipulate that the proposal price will be valid for the duration of the contract.  Identify a single person for contact during the RFP review process; and  Cover letter shall be signed by an authorized official of the company.

B. Background and Project Summary Section
Proposer must have the qualifications and skills necessary to perform the services described in this RFP in a competent and professional manner without the advice or direction from the Police Department. The Respondent warrants that all services and solutions provided meets or exceeds the CJIS Requirements.

C. Scope of Services
Proposer solution must have the ability to provide all of the following services and equipment in Minimum Requirements section
D. Cost Information
Mandatory Pricing Worksheet Template (Excel)
Proposers shall complete and submit the City-provided Pricing Worksheet Template in Excel format. The worksheet includes the following mandatory tabs:

Tab 1 – Instructions
Overview and completion requirements.

Tab 2 – One-Time Costs
Hardware, installation, permitting, training, and project management. Extended cost formulas are pre-programmed. Total One-Time Cost auto-calculates.

Tab 3 – Recurring Costs (Years 1–5)
Annual subscription, hosting, maintenance, and support. Proposer must disclose annual escalation percentage.

Tab 4 – Cost Per Camera
Unit cost per ALPR, CCTV Fixed, and CCTV PTZ camera.

Tab 5 – Cost Per Site
Installed cost for new site and relocated equipment site.

Tab 6 – Three-Year Summary
Auto-summary of total One-Time and Years 1–3 recurring costs.

Tab 7 – Five-Year Total Cost of Ownership (TCO)
Auto-summary of total One-Time and Years 1–5 recurring costs. The Five-Year TCO will be used as the primary cost evaluation metric.

E. Contractor Assignment of Sub-Contract
The resulting contract shall not be assigned, transferred, or sublet, in whole or in 1420

part, without the prior written approval of the Police Department. If Offerors intend to subcontract any portion of the resulting contract, they must describe their process for selecting such subcontractor(s) and the quality control measures that the Offeror will employ to ensure that any subcontractor complies with the provisions of Offeror’s contract with the Department.

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

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

G. Statement of Impartiality and Disclosure
This proposal shall include a statement declaring that the proposer’s and subconsultants are not currently, and will not, during the performance of these services, participate in any other similar work involving a third-party with interests currently in conflict or likely to conflict with City of Richmond’s interests.

Additionally, proposer is required to disclose any pending or active investigations or litigation that may affect the reputation or ability of the proposer to carry out the Project.

H. Sanctuary City Contracting and Investment Ordinance 12-18NS_2018, and Resolution 86-21 (Disclosure Statement of Limited Liability Companies Form.

The City of Richmond’s Sanctuary Contracting Ordinance certification requires the City to refrain from doing business with vendors who provide Data Broker or Extreme Vetting services to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Division of the United States Department of Homeland Security (“ICE”). In addition, City of Richmond Resolution 86-21 requires disclosure of beneficial and responsible owners of Limited Liabilities Corporation (LLC).

I. IMPLEMENTATION REQUIREMENTS
Proposer must submit:
 Detailed project schedule
 Deployment phases
 Permitting timeline
 Risk mitigation plan
 Staffing plan
 Estimated time to full operational deployment
1421

PROCESS FOR SUBMITTING PROPOSALS
Questions Concerning Request for Proposals
Please do not contact staff directly regarding this Proposal which will not be answered.

All questions will be answered promptly and must be submitted via the electronic BidsOnline system on the Q&A tab no later than March 13, 2026, 5:00pm PST. If the City finds it necessary to issue an addendum, prospective Offerors will receive e-mail notification of addendum. It is the proposer’s responsibility to periodically check the BidsOnline website www.ci.richmond.ca.us/ bids for any possible Addenda to the RFP that may have been posted.

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

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

Submission of Proposals
Please submit your proposal via the City of Richmond's BidsOnline system. Proposals submitted by facsimile or e-mail are not acceptable and will not be considered.

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

Proposer is responsible for submitting its entire package with all required submittal documents and any modifications or revisions, to reach the City of Richmond’s office as designated in the RFP by the time specified below. Any proposal, modification, or revision received by the City of Richmond after the exact time specified for receipt of proposals is “late” and will not be considered.

The proposal must be received no later than 5:00 p.m. Pacific Time, on March 27, 2026.

The City of Richmond reserves the right to waive inconsequential irregularities. 1422

GENERAL GUIDELINES
This RFP does not commit the City of Richmond to award a contract, to defray any costs incurred in the preparation of a proposal pursuant to this RFP, or to procure or contract for work. The City of Richmond may reject a proposal without providing the reason(s) underlying the declination. A failure to award a contract to the proposer with the lowest cost proposal shall not constitute a valid cause of action against the City of Richmond.

The City shall not be responsible for work done, even in good faith, prior to final approval of the proposed contract. The City may investigate the qualifications of any respondent under consideration, require confirmation of information furnished by the respondent, and require additional evidence or qualifications to perform the Services described in this RFP.

The City reserves the right to:

1. Reject any or all proposals.

2. Issue subsequent Requests for Proposal.

3. Postpone opening for its own convenience.

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

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

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

7. Select one or more Respondents.

8. Accept other than the lowest proposed fees.

9. Waive informalities and irregularities in proposals.

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

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

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

Compliance with City Ordinances
The contractor and all subcontractors shall comply with the City of Richmond Nondiscrimination Clauses in City Contracts Ordinance (Richmond Municipal Code (RMC) Chapter 2.28), Business Opportunity Ordinance (RMC Chapter 2.50), Local 1423

Employment Program Ordinance (RMC Chapter 2.56), Living Wage Ordinance (RMC Chapter 2.60) and Ordinance Banning the Requirement to Provide Information of Prior Criminal Convictions on all Employment Applications (“Ban the Box”) (RMC Chapter

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

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

Withdrawal of Proposals
A respondent may withdraw their proposal before the expiration of the time for submission of proposals by delivering to the Finance Department a written request for withdrawal signed by, or on behalf of, the respondent.

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

PROPOSAL EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCESS
All proposals shall be reviewed to verify that the Respondent has met the minimum requirements. Proposals that have not complied with requirements do not meet minimum content and quality standards or take unacceptable exceptions to the General Terms and Conditions of the Service Agreement, which will be eliminated from further consideration.

Proposals will be reviewed and evaluated by an evaluation committee comprised of City of Richmond personnel.

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

Vendors that meet the minimum qualifications may be invited to a “Phase II” meeting/demonstration for the evaluation committee for further clarification and consideration. The criteria upon which the evaluation of the proposals will be based include, but are not limited to, the following:
1424

Vendor Qualifications and Experience – Up to 15 Points
The Proposer shall demonstrate sufficient experience, organizational capacity, and financial stability to successfully deliver, implement, and support the proposed solution.

Evaluation under this criterion will consider the Proposer’s demonstrated history of successfully providing similar products and/or services to organizations of comparable size, scope, and operational complexity.

The Proposer’s response shall include, at a minimum, the following:

1. Organizational Background
 Legal name of the firm and years in business
 Corporate structure (public, private, subsidiary, etc.)  Location of headquarters and primary offices
 Description of core business and area (s) of specialization

2. Relevant Experience
 Experience working with similar agencies, industries, or public sector entities (if applicable)
 Demonstrated expertise in delivering solutions of similar size and complexity  Outcomes achieved and measurable results (if available)  References (preferably three within a 100-mile radius)

3. Key Personnel
 Identification of key project staff and their roles
 Qualifications, certifications, and years of relevant experience  Resumes of proposed project leads and subject matter experts Scope of Work, Methodology and Proposal – Up to 10 Points This category will evaluate the respondent’s ability to take upon itself the responsibilities set forth in the Scope of Services and produce the required outcome in a timely manner.

Consideration will be given of the overall quality of the proposal, including a demonstrated understanding of the purpose, scope, and objective of the services to be performed. It is the intention of the City of Richmond to award a contract to the Respondent who furnishes satisfactory evidence that the Respondent has the requisite experience and ability to enable the Respondent to execute the work successfully and properly, and to complete services in a timely manner. To determine the degree of responsibility to be credited to the Respondent, the City of Richmond will weigh the evidence that the Respondent has performed other contracts of like nature, magnitude and comparable difficulty and comparable rates of progress.

Usability and User Experience – Up to 25 Points
The proposed solution should be intuitive, efficient, and accessible user experience that minimizes training time and supports high-volume operational environments. The system should enable users to perform core functions accurately and efficiently with minimal complexity.
1425

Evaluation of Usability & User Experience will include, but is not limited to, the following:
 Overall intuitiveness and logical workflow design
 Ease of navigation and task completion
 Screen layout clarity and information hierarchy
 Customization of dashboards, views, and user preferences  Reduction of unnecessary clicks or redundant data entry  Accessibility compliance (e.g., WCAG 2.1 AA standards)  Mobile responsiveness (if applicable)
 Context-sensitive help and tooltips
 Reporting and data visualization usability
 Demonstrated ease of use during product demonstration Cost Proposal – Up to 30 Points
Vendors are encouraged to submit multiple cost proposals to include optional services and equipment.

The Proposer shall submit a complete and itemized Cost Proposal covering all costs necessary to provide the goods and/or services described in this RFP. Pricing should be clear, detailed, and presented in a manner that allows for comprehensive evaluation.

All costs associated with delivery, implementation, training, documentation, project management, travel, taxes (if applicable), and ongoing support shall be included unless otherwise specified.

Proposer shall indicate the period for which pricing shall remain firm, any annual escalation rates, conditions under which pricing may change, and renewal of pricing methodology.

Failure to provide a complete and transparent cost proposal may result in disqualification.

One-Time Costs: Software licensing fees, hardware costs (if applicable), implementation and configuration, data migration services, training, project management, travel and related expenses, etc.

Recurring Costs: Annual or monthly subscription fees, user or site license fees, maintenance and support, hosting or cloud service fee, upgrade, ongoing licenses, etc.

Option Costs: Optional modules or enhancements, additional training, extended warranties, professional services beyond the base scope, etc.

City may elect to conduct negotiations with the highest ranked proposal respondents for purposes of resolving minor differences and information, clarifying necessary details and responsibilities, emphasizing important issues and points, or receiving assurances from respondents.

Selection may be made without further discussion, negotiations, or Offeror’s presentations; therefore, Offeror shall offer the most favorable terms in response to this RFP. Offeror must demonstrate an understanding of the scope of service to be provided and the ability to accomplish the tasks set forth. Offeror should include information that will enable the City to determine the Offeror’s overall qualifications.

The City reserves the right to request additional information or clarification on any matter included in the proposal response, to enable the City to arrive at the final award decision. 1426

Technical Architecture & Security – 20 Points
The Proposer must demonstrate that the proposed solution meets the City’s operational, cybersecurity, data protection, and regulatory compliance requirements. Evaluation under this category will assess the robustness, security posture, reliability, and scalability of the proposed system.

A. System Architecture & Infrastructure (Up to 6 Points) - Deployment model (cloud, hybrid, on-premise)
- U.S.-based data center locations
- Redundancy and failover capabilities
- Disaster recovery procedures (RTO/RPO)
- Minimum 99% uptime SLA
- Scalability for future expansion
- Network and performance standards
- System architecture diagram required
B. Cybersecurity Controls & Risk Management (Up to 6 Points) - CJIS Security Policy compliance
- Encryption in transit (TLS 1.2+)
- Encryption at rest (AES-256 or equivalent)
- Role-based access control (RBAC)
- Multi-factor authentication (MFA)
- 12-month audit log retention minimum
- Documented incident response plan
- Breach notification within 72 hours
- SOC 2 Type II or equivalent certification
- Penetration testing and vulnerability management practices C. Data Protection & Compliance (Up to 4 Points)
- Compliance with California Civil Code §1798.90.5
- CLETS and CJIS compliance
- SB-34 / SB-741 (if applicable)
- City ownership of all data
- No resale or secondary use of data
- Automatic 30-day data deletion
- Public Records Act export capability
- Data portability upon termination
- Written data destruction certification
D. Integration & Interoperability (Up to 4 Points)
- Documented APIs
- Compatibility with Axon FUSUS (if applicable)
- Integration with City-approved systems
- Future interoperability readiness
Evaluation will consider technical soundness, cybersecurity maturity, regulatory compliance, scalability, and completeness of documentation. The City reserves the right to request additional technical clarification prior to final scoring.
1427

Interviews and Final Selection
The City of Richmond will evaluate written proposals in accordance with the evaluation criteria set forth in this RFP. Following completion of the written proposal evaluation, the City will rank the proposals and reserves the right to invite the highest ranked proposers to participate in oral interviews and/or presentations.

After completion of interviews, the City will re-evaluate and re-rank proposers based on interview performance, demonstrated understanding of the scope of work, qualifications, and overall ability to meet the City’s needs. Interview results may confirm or change the initial rankings based on written proposals.

The proposer ranked highest after completion of the interview process will be recommended for award, subject to successful contract negotiations, verification of proposer responsibility, and approval by the City as required. Participation in interviews does not guarantee selection or award of a contract.

The City reserves the right to reject any or all proposals, to waive informalities, and to take any action deemed to be in the best interest of the City.

Pre-Award Negotiations
After the proposals are opened, but prior to award, the City may elect to conduct negotiations with the highest ranked respondent for purposes of:
 Resolving minor differences and information
 Clarifying necessary details and responsibilities
 Emphasizing important issues and points
 Receiving assurances from respondents
 Cost/budget clarifications
If the City cannot successfully negotiate a contract with the highest ranked respondent, the City may begin negotiations with the second highest ranked respondent.

Award
When the Review Panel has completed its work, Police Department personnel will then work with the Respondent to complete the administrative paperwork.

Attachments
A. Insurance Requirements
B. Standard Contract
C. Sanctuary City Compliance Statement
D. Sanctuary City Contracting Ordinance No. 12-18
E. Limited Liability Corporation (LLC) Resolution No. 86-21 F. Limited Liability Corporation Form
- END -
1428
1701 REGATTA BLVD, RICHMOND, CA 94804
www.ci.richmond.ca.us

POLICE DEPARTMENT
ADDENDUM NO. 1
March 9, 2026

VIDEO SURVEILLANCE TECHNOLOGY
This Addendum shall be considered as a part of the RFP documents though it has been issued at the same time and shall be incorporated integrally therewith.

The revised RFP includes an additional request on page 5, under Preferred section to include additional proposed equipment.

Flash Cam Style (with audio messaging, flashing strobe, etc.) _________________________________________________________________ ERIC TAM DATE: 03-09-2026

TECHNOLOGY SUPERVISOR

RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
1429
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1430
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1431
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1432
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1433
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1434
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1435
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1436
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1437
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1438
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1439
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1440
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1441
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1442
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1443
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1444
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1445
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1446
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1447
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1448
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1449
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1450
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1451
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1452
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1453
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1454
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1455
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1456
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1457
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1458
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1459
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1460
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1461
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1462
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1463
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1464
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1465
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1466
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1467
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1468
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1469
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1470
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1471
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1472
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1473
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1474
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1475
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1476
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1477
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1478
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1479
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1480
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1481
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1482
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1483
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1484
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1485
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1486
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1487
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1488
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1489
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1490
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1491
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1492
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1493
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1494
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1495
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1496
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1497
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1498
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1499
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1500
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1501
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1502
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1503
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1504
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1505
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1506
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1507
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1508
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1509
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1510
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1511
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1512
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1513
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1514
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1515
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1516
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1517
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1518
City of Richmond
Video Surveillance Technologies, bidding on 03/27/2026 5:00 PM (PDT)

Printed 02/27/2026
PlanetBids
1519
Video Technology
Equipment
Richmond Police Department
1520

RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Recommended Action
• AUTHORIZE the City Manager to sign a contract and/or contract amendment with Axon Enterprise to continue servicing Body Worn Cameras (BWC), Tasers, Interview Room Equipment, VR Training, and to add license plate reader, closed circuit television (CCTV), and drone as a first responder (DFR)equipment in the amount of $3,500,000, for a total contract amount not to exceed $12,000,000 with an expiration of September 30, 2031, that will be finalized by the City Attorney’s Office.

AND
• AUTHORIZE the City Manager to sign a three-year contract with Assure MSP, Inc. for Verkada’s CCTV solution to be utilized at various City facilities in an amount not to exceed $500,000 for the term October 1, 2026, to September 30, 2029, that will be finalized by the City Attorney’s Office. 1521

RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
ALPR/CCTV/DFR Administrative Record
• February 2023, City Council approved an agreement with Flock to lease and deploy 30 Automated License Plate Reader (ALPR) cameras.
• November 2023, the City Council approved the First Amendment to the Flock Safety agreement, authorizing the lease and deployment of additional ALPR and closed-circuit television (CCTV) cameras. • April 2024, the City Council approved the Second Amendment to the Flock Safety agreement to further expand the system by installing additional CCTV and ALPR cameras at the Port of Richmond • January 2025, the City Council approved the Third Amendment to the Flock Safety agreement. This amendment further expanded the City's existing Flock Safety program to include Drone as a First Responder (DFR) technology, as well as additional camera systems intended to support the security and monitoring of City infrastructure and facilities.
• February 2026, staff requested an additional amendment to the existing agreement with Flock Safety to extend the applicable contract terms through December 31, 2026. The purpose of the extension was to allow the City to satisfy existing contractual payment obligations while providing staff with sufficient time to conduct a competitive Request for Proposals (RFP) process and evaluate whether Flock Safety continued to represent the best technological, operational, and financial solution for the City of Richmond. 1522

RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Request For Proposals (RFP)
• February 26, 2026, staff completed an RFP for Automated License Plate Reader (ALPR), closed-circuit television (CCTV), and related public safety technology solutions. The RFP was posted on February 27, 2026, with a closing date of March 27, 2026. A total of 830 vendors were notified of the solicitation, and an addendum was posted on March 1, 2026.
• Evaluation Committee: A ten-member city evaluation committee representing multiple City departments and operational perspectives participated in the review process. (Police, City Attorney’s Office, Port, Public Works, Abatement)
1523

RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
RFP Continued
• The city received proposals from six vendors:

1. Assure MSP (Selected for city infrastructure needs)

2. Axon Enterprise (Selected for law enforcement needs)

3. Flock Safety (camera reliability & repair & public trust)

4. IREX (did not meet the full needs of the RFP)

5. Motorola Solutions (associated cost and reference checks)

6. Net Electric (did not meet the full needs of the RFP) 1524

RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Axon Enterprise
Video Surveillance Technology 02
Proposed public safety technology
platform
• Automated License Plate Reader (ALPR)
• Closed Circuit Television Camera (CCTV)
• Drone As A First Responder (DFR)
ALPR / Fixed CCTV Camera
Drone as First Responder
1525

RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Axon Outpost
• An Axon Outpost is a fixed, rugged, and solar-powered outdoor camera that combines automated license plate recognition (ALPR), vehicle attribute recognition, and real-time CCTV live video into a single unit.
1526

RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
AXON Outpost ALPR: Camera Function
Video Surveillance Technology 03
• Captures vehicle detections from fixed or mobile cameras, including plate images, vehicle context images, basic vehicle attributes, time, and location. (Does not capture people) • Compares vehicle plates against agency-approved hotlists, such as the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) or agency-created lists.
• Supports authorized investigative searches on the platform using known information such as a plate, partial plate, or vehicle description.
• Provides authorized law enforcement personnel with a review of prior detections of a specific plate within the agency retention period in support of a legitimate investigation. • Tracks individual access, searches, and activity where enabled, and configuration changes with user, action, time, and stated reason.
• Requires a specific offense category to conduct ALPR searches, requiring users to enter an authorized purpose before results are returned.
1527

RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
AXON Outpost ALPR: What the system does NOT do
Video Surveillance Technology 04
• Does not use facial recognition or perform live registered-owner lookups. • Does not place agency ALPR data into a national or pooled database. • Does not share agency ALPR data automatically or by default. • Does not allow agencies that receive shared data to re-share it. • Does not provide federal agencies automatic, standing, or built-in access to agency ALPR data. • Does not automate enforcement. Every alert requires human review before action. • Does not allow Axon to pool, resell, or disclose agency ALPR data except where legally required. • Does not continuously monitor individuals or maintain a real-time location feed on any person. 1528

RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Data Sharing
Video Surveillance Technology 05
• Data Sharing is off by default. If Richmond shares ALPR data, it is explicit, invite-only, publicly visible in the transparency portal, and to the agency. • Sharing does not copy agency ALPR data into a shared repository, transfer ownership of it, or connect it to a national pool.
• Visibility changes only when the agency makes it change. 1529

RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Whom do we share with?
Video Surveillance Technology 06
• The Richmond Police Department will not openly share
its ALPR and CCTV data.
1530

RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Axon Data Access
Video Surveillance Technology 07
• Axon has no standing access to agency ALPR data.

Access occurs only when an agency initiates a specific
support request. When that happens, access is
temporary, limited to the stated purpose, logged, and
auditable by the agency.
1531

RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
What does Richmond use ALPR for?
Video Surveillance Technology 08
• The Richmond Police Department uses license plate
reader data to investigate crimes, including but not
limited to homicide, assaults, missing persons, property crimes, and other authorized criminal investigations.

Vehicle used in a crime
+ =
ALPR Camera Vehicle identification and arrest
1532

RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
How long is ALPR data kept for?
Video Surveillance Technology 09
• ALPR data is automatically purged after 30 days. If license plate data is used as evidence, the specific license plate data is kept indefinitely with the case file in
Evidence.com.
1533

RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Public-Facing Transparency Portal
Video Surveillance Technology 11
• Axon’s public-facing transparency portal discloses RPD’s data retention policies and available aggregate ALPR program information. It publishes only aggregate information, with no plate numbers, images, individual records, or camera locations. If an agency has sharing enabled, the portal can also disclose the partner agencies with whom data is shared. 1534

RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
ALPR Prohibitions?
Video Surveillance Technology 12
• Richmond Police Department does not use license plate reader data for nonlegitimate law enforcement purposes, personal or unauthorized tracking, immigration enforcement, medical tracking, such as abortion-related tracking, or religious tracking. All allegations of misuse will be investigated by the Office of Professional Accountability.
• RPD policy section 433 ALPR regulations.
1535

RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Sensitive Locations
Video Surveillance Technology 13
• License Plate Reader and fixed cameras will not be
installed near churches, medical clinics, schools, or
other sensitive locations.
1536

RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Richmond’s Data Be Part Of A National Database?
Video Surveillance Technology 15
• No!
• Data stays within the City of Richmond unless Richmond chooses to share it. There is no automatic cross-agency access, and the system does not place agency ALPR data into a national or pooled database. Visibility does not expand unless the agency takes deliberate action to add an outside entity.
1537

RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Audits
Video Surveillance Technology 18
• For auditing and transparency purposes, when sharing is enabled, access to shared ALPR data is logged and reviewable. The audit record includes recipient activity against and changes to sharing relationships over time, so the agency can review who had access during a specific period.
****Richmond PD does not share ALPR data***
• For auditing and transparency purposes, the system logs and records are shared with the Community Police Review Commission.
1538

RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Can federal agencies access the data?
Video Surveillance Technology 21
• There is no automatic, standing, or built-in federal access to agency ALPR data through the Axon platform. The City of Richmond owns and controls the data; a lawful request is directed to the agency and its legal counsel for handling. If Axon receives such a request, it will direct it to the owning agency, which is the data owner. 1539
1540

RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Axon Compliance
Video Surveillance Technology 29
trust.axon.com
Compliance certifications
are maintained in Axon
Trust Center.
1541

RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Criminal Justice Information Services (CJIS) Compliant
Video Surveillance Technology 31
• Axon Cloud Services (ACS) is designed and operated to ensure compliance with the FBI CJIS Security Policy (CJISSECPOL).
1542

RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Axon Data Encryption
Video Surveillance Technology 30
• Evidence data is encrypted in transit and while at rest in storage. Axon maintains mature, audited encryption key management procedures.
• Data Encryption in Transit: FIPS 140-2 validated, Certificate #4642; TLS 1.2 implementation with 256-bit connection; RSA 3072-bit key exchange; Perfect Forward Secrecy. • Evidence Data Encryption at Rest: CJIS compliant, AES 256-bit encryption. 1543

RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Drone As a First Responder (DFR)
1544

RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
DFR Continued….
• DFR provides officers with real-time aerial information before they arrive on scene, improving situational awareness and response planning.
• Enhances officer, firefighter, and community safety by identifying weapons, hazards, escape routes, fire conditions, and other potential threats expeditiously.
• Reduced the need for officers to engage in prolonged vehicle or foot pursuits by tracking suspects from the air.
1545

RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
DFR Continued….
• Strengthens police accountability by providing objective aerial overwatch and recorded documentation of rapidly evolving incidents, major events, and critical responses. • Assists firefighting operations by providing aerial views of fire spread, access points, evacuation needs, hot spots, and risks to nearby structures. • 6 DFR docks, which will increase coverage throughout the city, including the Hilltop and Carriage Hills areas. Exploring the placement of docks at existing city locations, such as fire stations.
1546

RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
AXON Unique Features
• Ownership of the equipment VS. leasing the equipment. • Designed as a “closed” system, and sharing requires explicit action. • Solar-powered and does not require hard wiring, allowing for cameras to be easily moved and relocated.
• Integrates all CCTV video feeds into a single view.
• Six drones as first responder nests for citywide coverage VS. only one. 1547

RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Assure/Verkada
+
1548

RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Assure MSP & Verkada
• Assure MSP is a Northern California-based technology integrator specializing in video surveillance, access control, and intelligent monitoring systems. • Headquartered in Pleasanton, Assure MSP has an operational footprint in Bay Area counties such as Contra Costa County, Alameda County, San Mateo County, and Santa Clara County. • Assure MSP is a premier system integrator for the Verkada CCTV platform. • Camera solutions specifically designed for non-law enforcement purposes. 1549

RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Assure MSP & Verkada Continued
• Design a Verkada CCTV solution based on a specific city facility’s needs.
• City Hall
• Libraries
• Vehicle Maintenance and Sign Shop
• Port
• Etc….
1550

RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Assure MSP & Verkada Continued
• Installation, maintenance, repairs, and extended warranty service on all Verkada cameras installed at a city facility. 1551

RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Types of Verkada Cameras
1552

RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Cost Analysis
AXON
• Replacement and continuation of City’s law enforcement ALPR/CCTV program • Ownership of equipment
• No city cost for replacement due to vandalism or accidental damage • Five (5) drones and six (6) docking stations for wider emergency reach • 240 camera views
• Bundling will save over $500,000 and the City will receive $1,780,000 of additional equipment
• The first payment will be made in FY28
• The additional annual cost before tax is $876,313 with the final year expenditure being $1,829,003 which covers the City through FY31
1553

RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Cost Analysis
ASSURE MSP INC.
• Replacement and continuation of City infrastructure ALPR/CCTV program • Vendor specializes in interior camera systems
• Small footprint, utilizes City’s low-voltage data cabling for power and data transmission • Ownership of equipment
• Camera’s range in price from $1031.14 to $1977.14
• Additional costs include set up and mounting hardware • Analyze current CCTV coverage to determine ideal locations • Approval will allow up to $500,000 over three-years
• Shields Reid Park, Civic Center, Port, Library, BTA Community Center, etc. • Estimate for Shield Reid Park is $33,737.22
• Annual license $945.14 per camera
1554

RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
QUESTIONS?
1555

September 15, 2026
City Council
DATE: September 15, 2026
TO: Mayor Martinez and Members of the City Council
FROM: Councilmember Claudia Jimenez (sponsor)
Vice Mayor Doria Robinson (co-sponsor)
Subject: Update on Polluters Pay Settlement Funds’ Community Engagement Process
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with this item.

PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:

September 27, 2024- Intent Resolution No. 105-24
January 27, 2026- Consultant Engagement for
Community Input on Polluters Pay Settlement Funds
April 28, 2026, Update on Community Engagement on
Limited-Term Revenue and Authorization to Negotiate
and Execute a Contract with Dalberg Advisors

STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:

The City of Richmond will receive approximately $550
million over the next ten years from the Polluters Pay
Settlement, presenting a significant opportunity to
address historic harms and invest in the City’s long-term economic, environmental, and community well-being.

Given the scale and impact of these funds, it is critical to engage the community in shaping how this revenue is
invested.

Given how significant this money is for the City of
Richmond, Richmond residents have a right to know the
status of this process and how they can engage and
provide input on their needs and priorities
AGENDA
REPORT
1556

September 15, 2026
RECOMMENDED ACTION: DIRECT the city manager and/or city attorney to provide an update at the City Council meeting on September 22,
2026, on the settlement funds public consultation
process, including the consultant proposal, the public
consultation plan, the timeline and the current state of the funds, and DIRECT city manager and/or the city attorney to continue to provide monthly updates for upcoming city council meetings on the status of the consultant process and funds until the contract deliverables have been met - Councilmember Claudia Jimenez (510-620-6565)/Vice
Mayor Doria Robinson (510-620-6568).

DISCUSSION:

The City of Richmond will receive approximately $550 million over the next ten years from the Polluters Pay Settlement, presenting a significant opportunity to address historic harms and invest in the City’s long-term economic, environmental, and community well-being. Given the scale and impact of these funds, it is critical to engage the community in shaping how this revenue is invested.

On September 27, 2024, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 105-24, which expressed City Council’s intention moving forward to spend the funds received from Chevron in a manner that does not increase the City’s dependence upon Chevron tax revenues, but instead facilitates development of a resilient and just local economy that is independent of the fossil fuel industry.

The City Council, on January 27, 2026, directed the city manager to hire a consultant to work closely with City staff, City Council and community groups to conduct community engagement to solicit feedback on the framework for expenditure for the new general fund revenue from the Polluters Pay Settlement. A request for proposals (RFP) was issued on February 11, 2026, to fulfill this directive.

At the City Council meeting on April 28, 2026, the City Council authorized the City Manager and City Attorney to negotiate and execute a contract with Dalberg Advisors to conduct the community engagement process.

Given how significant this money is for the City of Richmond, City Council would provide direction for City staff to provide an update at the City Council meeting on September 22, 2026, on the settlement funds public consultation process, including the consultant proposal, the public consultation plan, the timeline and the current state of the funds.

City staff would also be directed to continue to provide monthly updates at upcoming City Council meetings on the status of the consultant process and funds until the contract deliverables have been met. Richmond residents have a right to know the status of this process and how they can engage and provide input on their needs and priorities.

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
1557

September 15, 2026
None.
1558