Agenda, closed session, second session — City Council / Local Redevelopment Authority / Public Financing Authority, February 22, 2022 (part 2 of 4)

Item 8.2 – CC/LRA – 02/22/2022
RIVERBANK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO. 8.2
SECTION 8: PRESENTATIONS
Meeting Date: February 22, 2020
Subject: Presentation Mobile MMS
From: Marisela Garcia, Interim City Manager
Submitted by: Michael Riddell, Public Works Director

RECOMMENDATION
No Action – Presentation Only

SUMMARY
Mobile MMS is a map-based, mobile, activity tracking system that agencies use to manage their plant assets such as treatment plants and their flat assets such as sewer or water pipes. The system provides maintenance, asset, inspection, and compliance management. It specialize in water and wastewater systems but also helps maintain street, storm water, facility, and fleet assets. MMS will help the city in the near term manage Work Orders, Customer Service Requests, and Citizen Requests as well as a full implementation of a Backflow Tracking and Testing system similar to the work that MMS has done for the City of Oakdale.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
$ 28,950.00
There are no attachments to this item.

Page 1 of 1 ends

Item 9.1 – CC/LRA – 02/22/2022
RIVERBANK CITY COUNCIL / LRA AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.1
SECTION 9: CONSENT CALENDAR
Meeting Date: February 22, 2022
Subject: Waiver of Readings
From: Marisela H. Garcia, Interim City Manager
Submitted by: Kathy L. Teixeira, Interim City Clerk

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council / LRA Board approve the waiver of readings of any proposed ordinances and resolutions for consideration, except by title.

SUMMARY
In lieu of reading the entire text of a proposed ordinance or resolution that is introduced for consideration for adoption and approval, by majority vote, the City Council/LRA Board may waive the reading of the text and introduce the ordinance or resolution by title only for the record.

The full text of the proposed ordinances and resolutions, and any related documents that are part of the agenda packet, are available for review by the public on the City’s website and in the City Clerk’s office at City Hall (North) upon distribution to a majority of the City Council/LRA Board; typically 72 hours prior to the scheduled date and time of the meeting.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
There is no financial impact to this item.

ATTACHMENTS
There are no attachments to this report.

Page 1 of 2 ends

Item 9.2 – CC/LRA – 02/22/2022

RIVERBANK CITY COUNCIL / LOCAL REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.2
SECTION 9: CONSENT CALENDAR
Meeting Date: February 22, 2022
Subject: Approval of the following Minutes:

9.2A: The January 4, 2022, Special City Council and Local Redevelopment Authority Board Minutes.

9.2B: The January 11, 2022, City Council and Local
Redevelopment Authority Board Minutes.

9.2C: The January 22, 2022, City Council and Local
Redevelopment Authority Board Minutes.

9.2D: The February 8, 2022, City Council and Local
Redevelopment Authority Board Minutes.

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council / Local Redevelopment Authority Board approve the City Council /LRA Meeting Minutes as presented.

SUMMARY
The Draft Minutes of regular and special City Council and the Local Redevelopment Authority Board meetings have been prepared for review and approval.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
There is no financial impact to this item.

ATTACHMENT

1. The January 4, 2022, Special City Council and Local Redevelopment Authority Board Minutes.

2. The January 11, 2022, City Council and Local Redevelopment Authority Board Minutes.

Page 2 of 2 ends

Item 9.2 – CC/LRA – 01/11/2022

3. The January 22, 2022, City Council and Local Redevelopment Authority Board Minutes.

4. The February 8, 2022, City Council and Local Redevelopment Authority Board Minutes.

Page 1 of 3 ends

CC / LRA Minutes – 01-04-2022

MINUTES
TUESDAY, JANUARY 4, 2022 – 6:00 P.M. (THE AGENDA PACKET IS ONLINE AT HTTP://WWW.RIVERBANK.ORG/AGENDACENTER)

1. CALL TO ORDER - Mayor / Chair Richard O’Brien called the special meeting to order 6:00 p.m.

2. FLAG SALUTE - Mayor / Chair Richard O’Brien led the pledge of allegiance.

3. ROLL CALL
Members of the City Council / Authority Member present in the Chamber:

Council Member / Authority Member District 2 Rachel Hernandez Council Member / Authority Member District 3 Cal Campbell Council Member / Authority Member) District 4 Darlene Barber-Martinez Vice Mayor / Vice Chair (CM-D1) Luis Uribe
Mayor / Chair Richard D. O’Brien

4. CONFLICT OF INTEREST: Any Council/Authority Member or Staff who has a direct Conflict of Interest on any scheduled agenda item to be considered is to declare their conflict at this time.

No conflicts were declared.

5. PUBLIC HEARING: The public hearing notice was published in the Riverbank News on 12/29/2021.

Item 5.1 2nd Public Hearing – Redistricting Process for Riverbank’s Four (4) Councilmember District Boundaries – It is recommended that the City Council receive the redistricting information presented by National Demographics Corporation (NDC) Consultant Doug Yoakam; thereafter conduct the public hearing on this matter, and provide direction on whether to continue with the process of redrawing the district boundaries to create new maps for consideration or to plan to adopt the City’s current district boundaries map as the “Final Redistricting Map”.

The time being 6:04 p.m., Mayor / Chair Richard O’Brien opened the public hearing requesting staff’s report.

City of Riverbank
Regular City Council and
Local Redevelopment Authority
Board Hybrid Meetings
(In-Person: Face Covering Required)
(Virtual via ZOOM)
Council Chambers, 6707 Third St., Suite B
Riverbank, CA 95367

CITY COUNCIL / LRA BOARD
Mayor/Chair
Richard D. O’Brien
Vice Mayor/Chair (CM-D1) Luis Uribe
Council/Authority Members:

District 2 Rachel Hernandez
District 3 Cal Campbell
District 4 Darlene Barber-Martinez

Page 2 of 3 ends

CC / LRA Minutes – 01-04-2022
Consultant Doug Yoakam of National Demographics Corporation (NDC) presented a comprehensive staff report and PowerPoint Presentation. He advised the City Council that the new 2020 census data reflects that the City’s change in district populations is within the 10% deviation of the population standard which indicates the current district boundaries’ populations are relatively balanced. In conclusion he recommended that the City Council provide direction on whether to continue with the process of redrawing the district boundaries to create new maps for consideration or to indicate their plan to adopt the City’s current district boundaries map as the “Final Redistricting Map”.

City Clerk Aguilar provided clarification to the City Council advising them of the mechanisms in place in the Elections Code which allows for the City to adjust district boundaries later under certain parameters.

Mayor O’Brien opened the public hearing to public comment at 6:17 p.m. asking for those wishing to provide public testimony.

Public Comment
Evelyn Halbert questioned the hearing dates and the criteria used to establish boundaries.

Mr. Yoakam advised this is not the final hearing, the law requires four public hearings, and the City of Riverbank will hold the final two hearings on March 8, and March 22 to receive public input before making a final decision on mapping.

There being no further public testimony, Mayor O’Brien closed the public hearing at 6:29 p.m.

ACTION: By motion moved and seconded (Uribe / Barber-Martinez passed 5-0) to plan to adopt the City’s current district boundaries map as the “Final Redistricting Map”, subject to the remaining public hearings scheduled for March 8, 2022, and March 22, 2022.

Motion carried by unanimous City Council and LRA Board roll call vote:

AYES: Uribe, Hernandez Campbell, Barber-Martinez and Mayor / Chair O’Brien
NAYS: None / ABSENT: None / ABSTAINED: None

6. PUBLIC COMMENTS (No action can be taken)
No public comments were received.

Page 3 of 3 ends

CC / LRA Minutes – 01-04-2022

7. ADJOURNMENT OF THE SPECIAL MEETING
There being no further business, Mayor / Chair O’Brien adjourned the special meeting at 6:32 p.m. to the next regular scheduled City Council / LRA Meeting of January 11, 2022.

ATTEST: (Adopted 02/22/2022) APPROVED:

Kathy L. Teixeira Richard D. O’Brien
Interim City Clerk / LRA Recorder Mayor / Chair

Page 1 of 6 ends

CC / LRA Minutes – 01-11-2022

MINUTES
TUESDAY, JANUARY 11, 2022 – 6:00 P.M. (THE AGENDA PACKET IS ONLINE AT HTTP://WWW.RIVERBANK.ORG/AGENDACENTER)

1. CALL TO ORDER - Mayor / Chair Richard D. O’Brien called the meeting to order 6:00 p.m.

2. FLAG SALUTE - Mayor / Chair Richard O’Brien led the pledge of allegiance.

3. ROLL CALL
Members of the City Council / Authority Member present in the Chamber:

Council Member / Authority Member District 2 Rachel Hernandez Council Member / Authority Member) District 3 Cal Campbell Vice Mayor / Vice Chair (CM-D1) Luis Uribe
Mayor / Chair Richard D. O’Brien
Members of the City Council / Authority Member present via ZOOM:

Council Member / Authority Member District 4 Darlene Barber-Martinez

4. INVOCATION – Reverend Charles Neal provided the invocation.

5. AGENDA CHANGES – There were no changes to the agenda.

6. CONFLICT OF INTEREST: Any Council/Authority Member or Staff who has a direct Conflict of Interest on any scheduled agenda item to be considered is to declare their conflict at this time.

No conflicts were declared.

7. PUBLIC COMMENTS (No action can be taken)
At this time, members of the public may comment on any item not appearing on the agenda, and within the subject matter jurisdiction of the City Council/LRA Board. Individual comments will be limited to a maximum of 3 minutes (or as stated by the presiding Officer) and time cannot be yielded to another person. Under State Law, matters presented during the public comment period cannot be discussed or acted upon.

Charles Neal stated his request that the City Council get involved in a solution to resolve the traffic issues related to Rio Altura School.

CITY COUNCIL / LRA BOARD
Mayor/Chair
Richard D. O’Brien
Vice Mayor/Chair (CM-D1) Luis Uribe
Council/Authority Members:

District 2 Rachel Hernandez
District 3 Cal Campbell
District 4 Darlene Barber-Martinez

Page 2 of 6 ends

CC / LRA Minutes – 01-11-2022
Dan Whetstone spoke in opposition of the River Walk project stating concern for the loss of farmland.

Fred Walton spoke in opposition of the River Walk project recommending a different proposal of ranchettes or a relocation of this type of development to a different location.

Mayor O’Brien came to the podium stating he wished to make a public comment commending Brian Scully, City Manager for the City of Riverbank since 2016. Mayor O’Brien citied Mr. Scully’s attributes and accomplishments during his stewardship of the city. In conclusion, Mayor O’Brien presented City Manager Scully with a Certificate of Appreciation.

City Manager Sean Scully accepted the Certificate of Appreciation from Mayor O’Brien expressing his gratitude to the City Council, staff and the community for the opportunity to serve and be a part of the Riverbank team.

Councilmember Barber-Martinez wished City Manager Scully the best in this next chapter and thanked him for his service.

Vice Mayor Uribe stated his appreciation for City Manager Scully’s open-door policy not only to City Council and staff but also the public.

Councilmember Campbell thanked Mr. Scully for his great communication with the City Council noting that Riverbank has come a long way since Mr. Scully’s tenure.

Charles O’Neal stated his appreciation for Mr. Scully’s responsiveness as City Manager to the citizens of Riverbank, stating that Mr. Scully has been an outstanding City Manager for Riverbank.

8. PRESENTATIONS (Informational only)
Item 8.1 StanCOG Presentation – Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy – Council to receive an update and report from the Stanislaus Council of Governments on the Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy.

StanCOG Planner, Israel Ojeda provided a comprehensive PowerPoint presentation update on the Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy.

Following the presentation, Planner Ojeda responded to questions posed by the City Council.

9. CONSENT CALENDAR
All items listed on the Consent Calendar are to be acted upon by a single action of the City Council/LRA Board unless requested by an individual Council/Authority Member or member of the public for special consideration. Otherwise, the recommendation of staff will be accepted and acted upon by motion of the City Council/LRA Board.

Item 9.1 Waive Readings. All Readings of ordinances and resolutions, except by title, are waived.

Page 3 of 6 ends

CC / LRA Minutes – 01-11-2022
Item 9.2 Approval of the following Minutes:

9.2A The September 14, 2021, City Council and Local Redevelopment Authority Board Minutes.

9.2B The October 26, 2021, City Council and Local Redevelopment Authority Board Minutes.

9.2C The November 3, 2021, Special City Council Minutes.

9.2D The November 9, 2021, City Council and Local Redevelopment Authority Board Minutes.

9.2E The December 7, 2021, Special City Council Minutes.

9.2F The December 14, 2021, City Council and Local Redevelopment Authority Board Minutes.

ACTION: By motion moved and seconded (Campbell / Uribe / passed 5-0) to approve Consent Agenda Items 9.1 through 9.2 as presented.

Motion carried by unanimous City Council and LRA Board roll call vote.

AYES: Barber-Martinez, Campbell, Hernandez, Uribe, and Mayor/Chair O’Brien.

NAYS: None / ABSENT: None / ABSTAINED: None

10. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Item 10.1 Riverbank Energy Efficiency Project - Direction on Funding Strategy and Final Project Scope with SitelogIQ – It is recommended that the City Council provide direction on the final project scope of the energy efficiency project as well as provide direction on the desired funding strategy for the project.

City Manager Scully, before turning the meeting over to Jessica Ritter with SitelogIQ, presented the staff report recommending the City Council provide direction on the final project, scope of the energy efficiency project as well as provide direction on the desired funding strategy for the project.

Jessica Ritter with SitelogIQ introduced and turned the meeting over to Dr. Eddie Jordan, Manager of Project Development for SitelogIQ to review the project construction schedule.

Dr. Eddie Jordan, Manager of Project Development for SitelogIQ reviewed the project construction schedule with the City Council.

City Manager Scully, at the request of the City Council reviewed the options before the City Council.

ACTION: By motion moved and seconded (Uribe / Hernandez / passed 5-0) to approve Project Option 1 and Financing Option 2.

Page 4 of 6 ends

CC / LRA Minutes – 01-11-2022
Motion carried by unanimous City Council and LRA Board roll call vote.

AYES: Barber-Martinez, Campbell, Hernandez, Uribe, and Mayor/Chair O’Brien.

NAYS: None / ABSENT: None / ABSTAINED: None

11. NEW BUSINESS
Item 11.1 Nomination and Appointment of the Vice Mayor to Serve for the Year 2022 – It is recommended that the Mayor consider the rotation and nomination of a Vice Mayor to serve for the year 2022 by confirmation of the City Council.

Mayor O’Brien introduced the item and nominated Councilmember Campbell to serve as Vice Mayor for the year 2022 and asked the City Council to approve the appointment for a one-year term by roll call vote.

Councilmember Campbell accepted the nomination.

ACTION: By motion moved and seconded (O’Brien / Uribe / passed 5-0) to approve the appointment of Cal Campbell to serve for the year 2022. Motion carried by unanimous City Council roll call vote.

AYES: Barber-Martinez, Campbell, Hernandez, Uribe, and Mayor/Chair O’Brien
NAYS: None / ABSENT: None / ABSTAINED: None

12. COMMENTS/REPORTS
A brief report on notable attendance of a meeting or conference or other notable topics of City business shall be made. The Brown Act does not allow for discussion or action of items by the City Council/LRA Board during this time.

Item 12.1 Staff Item
City Manager Scully stated it has been his pleasure working with City Clerk Aguilar, Senior Management Analyst Torres-Manriquez and the rest of the Riverbank staff who have been invaluable to him during his tenure as Riverbank’s City Manager.

City Manager Scully stated in response to the communities’ requests that the City obtain more COVID 19 rapid tests, the City will continue checking with the County for availability of additional tests. Once received and available the City will schedule another giveaway.

Item 12.2 Council/Authority Member
Vice Mayor Campbell stated his appreciation to the Mayor and City Council members for allowing him the opportunity to serve as the Vice Mayor.

Councilmember Hernandez thanked City Manager Scully for his service to the City Council and the community.

Page 5 of 6 ends

CC / LRA Minutes – 01-11-2022
Councilmember Uribe reported on upcoming events and meetings including a Groundbreaking Ceremony at Kiwi’s Custom Guns on January 13 at 11:30 a.m.; League of California Subcommittee meetings including the Revenue and Taxation Subcommittee on January 13 as well as Stanislaus’ first 2030 Elected Officials webinar scheduled for January 20 at 1:30 p.m.

Councilmember Barber-Martinez reported the Riverbank Chamber of Commerce has new leadership that are currently planning on a Business Expo on February 24, and Stanislaus Home Alliance has a meeting as well this week. Councilmember Barber-Martinez thanked Stanislaus County as well as the Community Service Resource Deputy Zang for all of their service to our homeless population and wished the residents of Riverbank a Happy New Year and all the best to City Manager Scully in his future endeavors.

Councilmember Barber-Martinez in recognition of Martin Luther King Day on January 17, 2022 shared the following quote from Dr. King
“Everybody can be great...because anybody can serve. You don't have to have a college degree to serve. You don't have to make your subject and verb agree to serve. You only need a heart full of grace. A soul generated by love.”
Item 12.3 Mayor/Chair
Mayor O’Brien requested that the City Manager schedule Operation Stanislaus at the LRA again and that it be coordinated with Aemetis, Inc., Circulus and Riverbank Organic in order to showcase these sustainable businesses at the Riverbank Industrial Complex.

Mayor O’Brien requested an update on the tax sharing agreement with Stanislaus County.

City Manager Scully responded he does not have an update but will provide a written update report before his departure for distribution to the City Council.

City Manager Scully stated he was advised by City Clerk Aguilar that Assistant City Manager Garcia raised her hand during staff comments.

Mayor O’Brien welcomed Assistant City Manager Garcia asking for her comments.

Assistant City Manager Garcia stated on behalf of Riverbank staff she wished to thank City Manager Scully for his leadership, mentorship and most importantly his friendship.

She stated she would also like to thank him for elevating the professionalism amongst staff putting together a team that the City Council can be proud of.

Mayor O’Brien asked when he could expect the year-end report. City Manager Scully responded it is forthcoming to the City Council.

13. CLOSED SESSION
The public will have a limit of 3 minutes to comment on Closed Session item(s) as set forth on the agenda prior to the City Council/LRA Board recessing to Closed Session.

Page 6 of 6 ends

CC / LRA Minutes – 01-11-2022
Item 13.1 CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS (Pursuant to Government Code § 54957.6)
Agency representative: Interim City Manager Marisela Garcia Employee organizations: Riverbank Miscellaneous Employees Riverbank Mid-Management Bargaining Unit
Mayor O’Brien advised that the City Council would not be going into closed session.

Interim City Manager Garcia confirmed staff does not have any updates at this time for the City Council, however, staff expects to have a closed session update at the February 8, City Council meeting.

14. ADJOURNMENT OF THE REGULAR MEETING
There being no further business, Mayor / Chair O’Brien adjourned the regular meeting at 7:25 p.m. to the next regular scheduled City Council / LRA Meeting of January 22, 2022 at 6:00 p.m.

ATTEST: APPROVED:

Kathy L. Teixeira Richard D. O’Brien
Interim City Clerk / LRA Recorder Mayor / Chair

Page 1 of 13 ends

CC / LRA Minutes – 01-25-2022

MINUTES
TUESDAY, JANUARY 25, 2022 – 6:00 P.M. (THE AGENDA PACKET IS ONLINE AT HTTP://WWW.RIVERBANK.ORG/AGENDACENTER)

1. CALL TO ORDER - Mayor / Chair Richard O’Brien called the meeting to order 6:00 p.m.

2. FLAG SALUTE - Mayor / Chair Richard O’Brien led the pledge of allegiance.

3. ROLL CALL
Members of the City Council / Local Redevelopment Authority Members present in the Chamber:

Council Member / Authority Member District 2 Rachel Hernandez Council Member / Authority Member) District 4 Darlene Barber-Martinez Vice Mayor / Vice Chair (CM-D03) Cal Campbell
Mayor / Chair Richard D. O’Brien
Members of the City Council / Local Redevelopment Authority Members present via ZOOM:

Council Member / Authority Member District 1 Luis Uribe

4. INVOCATION – Reverend Randy Richardson provided the invocation.

5. AGENDA CHANGES – There were no changes to the agenda.

6. CONFLICT OF INTEREST: Any Council/Authority Member or Staff who has a direct Conflict of Interest on any scheduled agenda item to be considered is to declare their conflict at this time.

Councilmember Barber-Martinez advised she has a conflict of interest with Agenda Item New Business 11.1 A Resolution Authorizing the City of Riverbank to Jointly Apply for the Homekey Program Funds, et al. and would be abstaining from discussion and action on this item.

7. PUBLIC COMMENTS (No action can be taken)
At this time, members of the public may comment on any item not appearing on the agenda, and within the subject matter jurisdiction of the City Council/LRA Board. Individual comments will be limited to a maximum City of Riverbank
Regular City Council and
Local Redevelopment Authority
Board Hybrid Meetings
(In-Person: Face Covering Required)
(Virtual via ZOOM)
Council Chambers, 6707 Third St., Suite B
Riverbank, CA 95367

CITY COUNCIL / LRA BOARD
Mayor/Chair
Richard D. O’Brien
Vice Mayor/Chair (CM-D3) Cal Campbell
Council/Authority Members:

District 1 Luis Uribe
District 2 Rachel Hernandez
District 4 Darlene Barber-Martinez
DRAFT

Page 2 of 13 ends

CC / LRA Minutes – 01-25-2022
of 3 minutes (or as stated by the presiding Officer) and time cannot be yielded to another person. Under State Law, matters presented during the public comment period cannot be discussed or acted upon.

Charles Neal, Director Stanislaus Consolidated Fire Protection District provided an update to the City Council advising at the January 13, Stanislaus Consolidated Fire Protection District Board Meeting, the Board entered into an agreement with the Modesto Fire Department to provide administrative services to the district.

Jamie Eggers, Bernard Eggers, Tammy Krim, Karen Carado, Fred Walton, Dan Whetstone, all spoke in opposition of River Walk project citing concerns of increased traffic and noise, loss of farmland, a flawed project process, building a flood zone, and adverse impacts to the water supply, sewage system and community services.

8. PRESENTATIONS (Informational only)
Item 8.1 Presentation to Annabelle Aguilar, City Clerk/Elections Official in Appreciation of Her Services to the City of Riverbank.

Mayor O’Brien presented Annabelle Aguilar, City Clerk/Elections Official with an engraved trophy/clock with his appreciation for her 15 years of invaluable service handled with professionalism and expertise to the City of Riverbank.

City Clerk/Elections Official Aguilar addressed the council, and the public, and expressed her appreciation past and present city council members in helping her accomplish her work.

Councilmember Uribe thanked City Clerk Aguilar for her assistance and wished her well in her journey.

Councilmember Barber-Martinez thanked City Clerk Aguilar for her professionalism stating the agendas have always been flawless.

Vice Mayor Campbell and Councilmember Hernandez stated their appreciation.

Interim City Manager Garcia on behalf of City staff she stated her thanks to City Clerk Aguilar for her 15 years of service to the City of Riverbank commending her on the professionalism and growth she brought to the position.

City Attorney Hallinan thanked City Clerk Aguilar stating her attention to detail and professionalism is unparalleled in the 30 years that he has been in his position as a City Attorney in Stanislaus County.

Karen Carado stating it has been her experience as a citizen, that City Clerk Aguilar has always very polite, prompt, efficient and professional in her dealings with the public.

Charles Neal stated he hates to see City Clerk Aguilar leave stating she always served the city in a respectful manner.

DRAFT

Page 3 of 13 ends

CC / LRA Minutes – 01-25-2022

Item 9.1 Waive Readings. All Readings of ordinances and resolutions, except by title, are waived. City of Riverbank Regular City Council and Local Redevelopment Authority Board Hybrid Meetings (In-Person: Face Covering Required) (Virtual via ZOOM) Council Chambers, 6707 Third St., Suite B Riverbank, CA 95367 CITY COUNCIL / LRA BOARD Mayor/Chair Richard D. O’Brien Vice Mayor/Chair (CM-D3) Cal Campbell Council/Authority Members: District 1 Luis Uribe District 2 Rachel Hernandez District 4 Darlene Barber-Martinez
Item 9.2 Acceptance of the Topeka Street Improvements between 3rd and 5th Streets Construction Project Completed by George Reed, Inc., and Authorization to File a Notice of Completion
Item 9.3 Resolution (No. 2022-001) Authorizing the City to Implement Teleconferenced Public Meetings Pursuant to Assembly Bill 361 Allowing the City to Continue a Hybrid Virtual Meeting Environment Item 9.4 Resolution (No. 2022-002) Authorizing the Interim City Manager to Execute New Signature Cards & Facsimile Signatures with WestAmerica Bank and Bank of America
Item 9.5 Resolution (No. 2022-003) Adopting a Formal Financial Policy and Procedure for Returned Checks
Item 9.6 Resolution (No. 2022-004) Authorizing the Addition of the Public Works Superintendent Job Classification to the Public Works Organizational Chart and Allocating up to $9,100 in Additional Funds for a Potential Promotion for Fiscal Year 2021-22.

In response to Councilmember Barber-Martinez request for clarification, for the public, on Item 9.6. Interim City Manager Garcia provided advised the Public Works Superintendent Job Classification is in response to the Public Works Director’s Succession Plan for the Public Works Department consequently providing future continuity of oversight to the Public Works Department.

ACTION: By motion moved and seconded (Campbell / Uribe / passed 5-0) to approve Consent Calendar Items 9.1 through 9.6, as presented.

Motion carried by unanimous City Council and LRA Board roll call vote:

AYES: Barber-Martinez, Campbell, Hernandez, Uribe, and Mayor / Chair O’Brien
NAYS: None / ABSENT: None / ABSTAINED: None

10. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
DRAFT

Page 4 of 13 ends

CC / LRA Minutes – 01-25-2022
Item 10.1 Resolution Rescinding Resolution No. 2021-116 and Authorizing the Application and Adopting the PLHA Plan for the Permanent Local Housing Allocation Program – It is recommended that the City Council consider adopting a Resolution that will rescind Resolution 2021-116 and authorize the City to submit an application and adopt the amended PLHA Plan for the Permanent Local Housing Allocation Program.

Interim City Manager Garcia presented the staff report recommending the City Council consider adopting the Resolution contained in staff’s report rescinding Resolution 2021- 116 and authorize the City to submit an application and adopt the amended PLHA Plan for the Permanent Local Housing Allocation Program.

Mayor O’Brien advised there are no comments from the public, he brought the item back to the City Council for discussion.

ACTION: By motion moved and seconded (Barber-Martinez / Uribe / passed 5-0) to adopt City Council Resolution 2022-005 Rescinding Resolution No. 2021-116 and Authorizing the Application and Adopting the PLHA Plan for the Permanent Local Housing Allocation Program.

Motion carried by unanimous City Council and LRA Board roll call vote:

AYES: Barber-Martinez, Campbell, Hernandez, Uribe, and Mayor / Chair O’Brien
NAYS: None / ABSENT: None / ABSTAINED: None

11. NEW BUSINESS
Due to her previously stated Conflict of Interest Council Member Martinez excused herself and left the City Council Chambers at 6:34 p.m.

Item 11.1 A Resolution Authorizing the City of Riverbank to Jointly Apply for the Homekey Program Funds Not to Exceed $3,200,000 with Central Valley Community Resources, Inc. and for the City Manager to Execute a Standard Agreement and Any Necessary Related Documents to Jointly Participate in the Homekey Program – It is recommended that the City Council consider adoption of a Resolution which will allow the submittal of a joint application between the City of Riverbank and Central Valley Community Resources, Inc. for the State of California Homekey Program.

Interim City Manager Garcia provided a comprehensive staff report with PowerPoint Presentation recommending the City Council adopt a Resolution to allow the submittal of a joint application between the City of Riverbank and Central Valley Community Resources, Inc. for the State of California Homekey Program.

Interim City Manager Garcia advised, in addition to herself, a representative of Central Valley Community Resources, Inc., Arlene Figueroa is available to respond to questions.

Interim City Manager Garcia and Ms. Figueroa responded to questions raised by the City Council.

DRAFT

Page 5 of 13 ends

CC / LRA Minutes – 01-25-2022
Mayor O’Brien advised there being no comments from the public and stating his support for the project he brought the item back to the City Council for discussion.

ACTION: By motion moved and seconded (Campbell / Hernandez / passed 4-0*) to adopt City Council Resolution 2022-006, Authorizing the City of Riverbank to jointly apply for the HomeKey Program Funds not to exceed $3,200,000 with Central Valley Community Resources, Inc., and for the City Manager to Execute a Standard Agreement and Any Necessary Related Documents to Jointly Participate in the Homekey Program.

Motion carried by City Council and LRA Board roll call vote:

AYES: Campbell, Hernandez, Uribe, and Mayor / Chair O’Brien NAYS: None / ABSENT: None / ABSTAINED: Barber-Martinez* Council Member Barber-Martinez returned to the podium at 6:47 p.m.

Item 11.2 A Resolution to Enter into a Municipal Advisory Agreement with McLiney and Company (A Division of SAMCO Capital) for the Issuance of Debt or Lease Obligations Related to the Riverbank Efficiency Project with SitelogIQ and to Authorize the Interim City Manager to Execute Said Agreement – It is recommended that the City Council adopt the proposed resolution to provide authorization to the Interim City Manager to enter into a Municipal Advisory Agreement with McLiney and Company for the issuance of debt or lease obligations related to the Riverbank Energy Efficiency Project with SitelogIQ.

Interim City Manager Garcia presented the staff report stating that the City Council had, at the January 11, 2022 meeting selected a funding strategy for the proposed improvements as part of the Riverbank Energy Efficiency Project with SitelogIQ. Today’s action will allow for the City to enter into a contract with McLiney and Company to direct and coordinate the financing portion of this project. In conclusion staff is recommending that the City Council adopt the proposed resolution to provide authorization to the Interim City Manager to enter into a Municipal Advisory Agreement with McLiney and Company for the issuance of debt or lease obligations related to the Riverbank Energy Efficiency Project with SitelogIQ.

Staff responded to questions raised by the City Council.

Mayor O’Brien advised there being no comments from the public and there being no questions for the Interim City Manager and stating his support for the project he brought the item back to the City Council for discussion.

ACTION: By motion moved and seconded (Uribe / Barber-Martinez / passed 5-0) to adopt City Council Resolution 2022-007, to enter into a Municipal Advisory Agreement with McLiney and Company (A Division of SAMCO Capital) for the issuance of Debt or Lease Obligations related to the Riverbank Efficiency Project with SitelogIQ and to authorize the Interim City Manager to execute said Agreement.

Motion carried by City Council and LRA Board roll call vote:

DRAFT

Page 6 of 13 ends

CC / LRA Minutes – 01-25-2022
AYES: Barber-Martinez, Campbell, Hernandez, Uribe, and Mayor / Chair O’Brien
NAYS: None / ABSENT: None / ABSTAINED: None
Item 11.3 Adjustments to 2022 City Council Meeting Schedule – It is recommended that the City Council by roll call vote: 1) Cancel the meetings of July 12, August 9, November 22, and December 27, for a modified summer schedule and to minimize conflicts with Holiday activities.

Interim City Manager Garcia advised staff is requesting that the City Council cancel the meetings of July 12, August 9, November 22, and December 27, for a modified summer schedule and to minimize conflicts with Holiday activities by a roll call vote.

Mayor O’Brien advised there being no comments from the public, he brought the item back to the City Council for discussion.

ACTION: By motion moved and seconded (Barber-Martinez / Campbell / passed 5-0) to Cancel the meetings of July 12, August 9, November 22, and December 27, for a modified summer schedule and to minimize conflicts with Holiday activities.

Motion carried by City Council and LRA Board roll call vote:

AYES: Barber-Martinez, Campbell, Hernandez, Uribe, and Mayor/Chair O’Brien
NAYS: None / ABSENT: None / ABSTAINED: None
Item 11.4 Annual Consideration of City Council Appointments to Intergovernmental Boards and Committees and Appointments to Internal City Committees for the Year 2022 – It is recommended that the City Council: 1) Review the appointment lists; and 2) Consider the rotation of appointments by volunteer or nomination of a Member of the Council to serve as the representative; and 3) By roll call vote, ratify the appointments for the year 2022.

The City Council discussed annual appointments to Intergovernmental Boards and Committees and appointments to Internal City Committees for the Year 2022 including reinstituting the committee for Sister City Tamazula de Gordiano as well as implementation of the Budget Advisory Committee.

ACTION: By motion moved and seconded (Hernandez / Campbell / passed 5-0) to ratify the appointments for the year 2022 as follows:

Motion carried by City Council and LRA Board roll call vote:

AYES: Barber-Martinez, Campbell, Hernandez, Uribe, and Mayor / Chair O’Brien
NAYS: None / ABSENT: None / ABSTAINED: None
DRAFT
DRAFT

Page 8 of 13 ends

CC / LRA Minutes – 01-25-2022

STANISLAUS HOMELESS ALLIANCE BOARD
(RESOLUTION NO. 2019-032)
Meets: The 1st Wednesday of each month; 5:30 pm
Location: 1010 10th Street (Basement) Modesto
The Alliance is a collaborative board formed to align Homeless service, planning and funding among stakeholders in Stanislaus County. The Board consists of several community leaders of governmental and nongovernmental entities. A primary voting member is appointed by the City Council annually.

Update:

Per the bylaws, east county cities of Oakdale, Hughson, Riverbank and Waterford are to decide among themselves which two (2) cities will represent this region. This seat may eventually be represented by another city in 2021.

Councilmember Darlene Barber-Martinez
(*Primary)
*If, and when, the final decision is made by the
East County cities to assign Riverbank as the
second representative city.

City Manager
(Per bylaws serves as the Alternate)

STANISLAUS OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES

DISASTER COUNCIL
Meets: Once a year or as necessary (tentative April 13th) Location Harvest Hall
Cornucopia Way, Modesto
To make recommendations to local governing agencies on
matters pertinent to development of mitigation, disaster preparedness, response & recovery plans, and programs for any potential local emergency.

Councilmember Rachel Hernandez
(*Primary)
Councilmember Luis Uribe
(Alternate)
(*Note: The appointed Councilmember
serves a 2-year term; ending 12/2022.)
DRAFT

Page 9 of 13 ends

CC / LRA Minutes – 01-25-2022
(NEW) “INTEREST GROUP MEMBER” OF THE STANISLAUS

COUNTY WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT BOARD
(formerly the Stanislaus Business Alliance Board
that ended 6/2016)
http://stanworkforce.com/board
Meets: The 1st Monday of the 1st month of every quarter.

Location: 251 E. Hackett Road, Modesto.

The WDB is a business led public body whose members
are appointed by the Board of Supervisors to oversee
activities funded by the Workforce Innovation and
Opportunity Act. The WBD is responsible for shaping and strengthening local and regional workforce development
efforts to support small, medium, and large business job growth by providing services such as job search
assistance, resume development, career counseling, and
job placement assistance.

Update:

The designated Government Seat of the Board is typically held by a County Representative and when vacant appointed by the predecessor.

The City Council has the option to appoint a Council Member to the “Interest Group” who will be notified of the meetings and provided with agenda materials to participate as an attendee of the meeting; in turn may report back to the City Council. This is how other cities have participated to keep abreast of the Agency and Board’s activities and decisions.

Vice Mayor Cal Campbell
(Primary)
Councilmember Luis Uribe
(Alternate)
(Note: The Stanislaus County Workforce
Development Agency is a County Agency; not
to be confused with Opportunity Stanislaus
Agency, which is a nonprofit organization; a
separate entity.

LOWER STANISLAUS RIVER TRAIL

IMPROVEMENT PLAN COMMITTEE
(RESOLUTION NO. 2013-069)
Meets: TBD
Location: TBD
Representatives of the Cities of Riverbank, Oakdale, and Ripon and the Local Government Commission and the
National Park Service will be working together to enhance public use and stewardship of the lower Stanislaus River. *Vice Mayor Cal Campbell will remain the
appointed Representative.

Councilmember Darlene Barber-Martinez
DRAFT
(Alternate)
DRAFT

Page 11 of 13 ends

CC / LRA Minutes – 01-25-2022
Mayor O’Brien advised there being no comments from the public, he brought the item back to the City Council for discussion.

ACTION: By motion moved and seconded (Barber-Martinez / Uribe passed 5-0) to adopt City Council Resolution 2022-008, appointing Kathy Teixeira as an interim appointment retired annuitant to the vacant position of City Clerk for the City of Riverbank under California Government Code Section 21221(h), effective January 31, 2022
Motion carried by City Council and LRA Board roll call vote:

AYES: Barber-Martinez, Campbell, Hernandez, Uribe, and Mayor / Chair O’Brien
NAYS: None / ABSENT: None / ABSTAINED: None

Item 12.1 Staff
Interim City Manager Garcia announced that Centennial Calendars are now available at City Hall North advising two are available free of charge per household with additional copies available for sale. In addition, tickets are still available for the Centennial Gala scheduled for March 5, 2022, at 6:00 p.m. at the Community Center and may be purchased at City Hall North or from a Historical Society Member for $25.

Item 12.2 Council/Authority Member
Councilmember Hernandez reported on her attendance at the Stanislaus 2030 meeting.

Councilmember Uribe reported 1) the 2022 Stanislaus County Homeless Point and Time Count has been postponed until February 24; he advised interested individuals can obtain information on this event by calling, 209-558-2298 or by emailing [email protected]; 2) Opportunity Stanislaus; and 3) San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. He advised StanCOG has a study in the works, a copy of which the City Council has received, he urged everyone to make a public comment on the StanCOG report advising he has made public comments to StanCOG related to electric car charging station(s) number and location needs within the city of Riverbank.

Councilmember Barber-Martinez stated the recent road upgrades throughout the city have been a much-needed improvement. She then provided an update on the Stanislaus Homeless Alliance advising that volunteers are needed to conduct the unsheltered portion of the Point and Time Count scheduled for February 24th. She advised that Cambridge Academy has been building relationships with the homeless in our area to ensure a smooth transition into our program as soon as housing is available. She also reported she had attended the League of California Cities orientation for the policy board members.

DRAFT

Page 12 of 13 ends

CC / LRA Minutes – 01-25-2022
Vice Mayor Campbell cited recent accidents in the news asking that everyone drive safely, watch what they are doing and, if, while driving you notice someone driving erratically don’t hesitate to report it, you could save a life.

Item 12.3 Mayor/Chair
Mayor O’Brien stated his appreciation of staff’s input for the Annual Review advising he took the opportunity to read the entire document noting it was well done by all departments. He advised the Annual Review shows what has been done and where the City is going and demonstrates that the City of Riverbank did not slow down during COVID; that the City continued to move forward with quality development and programs.

He advised he would share more at the State of the City Address to be held on the 17th of March at 6:30 p.m. at the Riverbank Community Center.

13. CLOSED SESSION
The public will have a limit of 3 minutes to comment on Closed Session item(s) as set forth on the agenda prior to the City Council/LRA Board recessing to Closed Session.

Item 13.1 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED LITIGATION (Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.9(b)) Number of cases: 1 potential case Item
Item 13.2 CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS
(Pursuant to Government Code § 54957.6)
Agency representative: Interim City Manager Marisela Garcia Employee organizations: Riverbank Miscellaneous Employees Riverbank Mid-Management Bargaining Unit
Mayor O’Brien asked whether there was anyone wishing to speak on the items listed on the Closed Session Agenda; there being none, Mayor O’Brien adjourned the City Council to closed session at 7:18 p.m.

14. RECONVENE – REPORT FROM CLOSED SESSION
Mayor O’Brien reconvened the meeting at 7:31 p.m.

Report on Item 13.1 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED LITIGATION: 1 potential case, direction has been provided to staff.

Report on Item 13.2 CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS (Pursuant to Government Code § 54957.6)
Agency representative: Interim City Manager Marisela Garcia Employee organizations: Riverbank Miscellaneous Employees Riverbank Mid-Management Bargaining Unit
Mayor O’Brien reported direction had been provided to staff on Item 13.1 and Item 13.2.

DRAFT

Page 13 of 13 ends

CC / LRA Minutes – 01-25-2022

15. ADJOURNMENT OF THE REGULAR MEETING
There being no further business, Mayor / Chair O’Brien adjourned the regular meeting at 7:25 p.m. to the next regular scheduled City Council / LRA Meeting of January 22, 2022.

ATTEST: (Adopted 02/22/2022) APPROVED:

Kathy L. Teixeira Richard D. O’Brien
Interim City Clerk / LRA Recorder Mayor / Chair
DRAFT

Page 1 of 7 ends

CC / LRA Minutes – 02-08-2022

MINUTES
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 8, 2022 – 6:00 P.M. (THE AGENDA PACKET IS ONLINE AT HTTP://WWW.RIVERBANK.ORG/AGENDACENTER)

1. CALL TO ORDER - Mayor / Chair Richard D. O’Brien called the meeting to order 6:00 p.m.

2. FLAG SALUTE - Mayor / Chair Richard O’Brien led the pledge of allegiance.

3. ROLL CALL
Members of the City Council / Authority Member present in the Chamber:

Council Member / Authority Member District 1 Luis Uribe Council Member / Authority Member District 2 Rachel Hernandez Council Member / Authority Member) District 4 Darlene Barber-Martinez Vice Mayor / Vice Chair (CM-D03) Cal Campbell
Mayor / Chair Richard D. O’Brien

4. INVOCATION – Reverend Charles Neal provided the invocation.

5. AGENDA CHANGES – There were no changes to the agenda.

6. CONFLICT OF INTEREST: Any Council/Authority Member or Staff who has a direct Conflict of Interest on any scheduled agenda item to be considered is to declare their conflict at this time.

No conflicts were declared.

Charles Neal stated his request that the City Council get involved in a solution to resolve the traffic issues related to Rio Altura School.

Karen Carado spoke in opposition to the River Walk project citing concern for the loss of farmland.

CITY COUNCIL / LRA BOARD
Mayor/Chair
Richard D. O’Brien
Vice Mayor/Chair (CM-D1) Luis Uribe
Council/Authority Members:

District 2 Rachel Hernandez
District 3 Cal Campbell
District 4 Darlene Barber-Martinez

Page 2 of 7 ends

CC / LRA Minutes – 02-08-2022

8. CONSENT CALENDAR
All items listed on the Consent Calendar are to be acted upon by a single action of the City Council/LRA Board unless requested by an individual Council/Authority Member or member of the public for special consideration. Otherwise, the recommendation of staff will be accepted and acted upon by motion of the City Council/LRA Board.

Item 8.1 Waive Readings. All Readings of ordinances and resolutions, except by title, are waived.

Item 8.2 Resolution (No. 2022-009) of the City Council of the City of Riverbank, Authorizing Submittal of Application(s) for all CalRecycle Grants for Which the City of Riverbank is Eligible and Authorize the City Manager to Execute Said Application(s).

ACTION: By motion moved and seconded (Uribe / Barber-Martinez / passed 5-0) to approve Consent Calendar Items 8.1 through 8.2 as presented.

Motion carried by unanimous City Council and LRA Board roll call vote:

AYES: Barber-Martinez, Campbell, Hernandez, Uribe, and Mayor / Chair O’Brien
NAYS: None / ABSENT: None / ABSTAINED: None

9. PUBLIC HEARINGS The Public Hearing Notice was published in the Riverbank News on 01/26/2022.

Item 9.1 Public Hearing – Adopting Certain Findings and approving Energy Service Contract for energy related improvements to City facilities with SITELOGIQ, INC. – It is recommended that the City Council hold a Public Hearing and consider adopting a Resolution which authorizes the Interim City Manager to execute a Facility Solutions Master Agreement and Operations & Maintenance Agreement with SitelogIQ, Inc.

Interim City Manager Maricela Garcia presented a comprehensive staff report recommending the City Council open the public hearing, receive public testimony, and consider adopting a resolution authorizing the Interim City Manager to execute a Facility Solutions Master Agreement and Operations & Maintenance Agreement with SitelogIQ, Inc.

Mayor Richard D. O’Brien opened the public hearing at 6:12 p.m. asking for those wishing to speak for or against the project.

There being no public comments Mayor Richard D. O’Brien closed the public hearing at 6:13 p.m. asking for City Council consideration.

ACTION: By motion moved and seconded (Uribe / Hernandez / passed 5-0) to adopt City Council Resolution 2022-010 authorizing the Interim City Manager to execute a Facility Solutions Master Agreement and Operations & Maintenance Agreement with SitelogIQ, Inc.

Motion carried by unanimous City Council and LRA Board roll call vote:

AYES: Barber-Martinez, Campbell, Hernandez, Uribe, and Mayor / Chair O’Brien
NAYS: None / ABSENT: None / ABSTAINED: None

Page 3 of 7 ends

CC / LRA Minutes – 02-08-2022

10. NEW BUSINESS
Item 10.1 A Resolution Authorizing an Additional Appropriation of $100,000 for the Construction of the Public Works Administration Building from the Water and Sewer Operating Funds - It is recommended that the City Council consider adoption of a Resolution allocating an additional $100,000 for the Public Works Administration Building 50% from the Water Operating Fund and 50% from the Sewer Operating Fund for the construction of the Public Works Administration Building.

Public Works Director Riddell presented the staff report requesting that the City Council approve the additional appropriation of $100,000 for the Construction of the Public Works Administration Building from the Water and Sewer Operating Funds.

Public Works Director Riddell responded to questions raised by the City Council.

Mayor O’Brien advised there being no comments from the public, he brought the item back to the City Council for discussion.

ACTION: By motion moved and seconded (Barber-Martinez / Campbell / passed 5-0) to adopt City Council Resolution 2022-011 authorizing an additional appropriation of $100,000 for the construction of the Public Works Administration Building from the Water and Sewer Operating Funds.

Motion carried by City Council and LRA Board roll call vote:

AYES: Barber-Martinez, Campbell, Hernandez, Uribe, and Mayor / Chair O’Brien
NAYS: None / ABSENT: None / ABSTAINED: None
Item 10.2 A Resolution to Award a Contract for Preparation of the Environmental Package for the Regional Recycled Water Project – Phase I to Ascent Environmental, Inc., and Authorize a Budget Appropriation in the amount of $216,000 from the Wastewater Enterprise Fund for Said Contract – It is recommended that the City Council consider adoption of a Resolution to award the contract for preparation of the Environmental Package for the State Water Resources Control Board Clean Water State Revolving Fund Financial Assistance application for the Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project– Phase I to Ascent Environmental, Inc., authorize the City Manager to execute a contract with said firm in the amount of $196,400, authorize a contingency amount of $19,600 (approximately 10%), and authorize a budget appropriation of $216,000 from the Wastewater Enterprise Fund for said contract.

Public Works Director Riddell presented the staff report requesting that the City Council award the contract for preparation of the Environmental Package for the State Water Resources Control Board Clean Water State Revolving Fund Financial Assistance application for the Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project– Phase I to Ascent Environmental, Inc.

Mayor O’Brien advised there being no comments from the public; he would bring the item back to the City Council for discussion.

Page 4 of 7 ends

CC / LRA Minutes – 02-08-2022
ACTION: By motion moved and seconded (Campbell / Uribe / passed 5-0) to adopt City Council Resolution 2022-012 to award the contract for preparation of the Environmental Package for the State Water Resources Control Board Clean Water State Revolving Fund Financial Assistance application for the Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project– Phase I to Ascent Environmental, Inc., authorize the City Manager to execute a contract with said firm in the amount of $196,400, authorize a contingency amount of $19,600 (approximately 10%), and authorize a budget appropriation of $216,000 from the Wastewater Enterprise Fund for said contract.

Motion carried by City Council and LRA Board roll call vote:

AYES: Barber-Martinez, Campbell, Hernandez, Uribe, and Mayor / Chair O’Brien
NAYS: None / ABSENT: None / ABSTAINED: None
Item 10.3 A Resolution to Award a Contract for Preparation of a Financial Security Package and Wastewater Rate Study for the Regional Recycled Water Project – Phase I to Bartle Wells Associates, and Authorize a Budget Appropriation in the amount of $55,000 from the Wastewater Enterprise Fund for Said Contract – It is recommended that the City Council award the contract for preparation of the Financial Security Package for the State Water Resources Control Board Clean Water State Revolving Fund Financial Assistance application and Wastewater Rate Study for the Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project – Phase I to Bartle Wells Associates, Inc., authorize the City Manager to execute a contract with said firm in the amount of $49,600, authorize a contingency amount of $5,400, and authorize a budget appropriation of $55,000 from the Wastewater Enterprise Fund for said contract.

Interim City Manager Garcia presented the staff report recommending that the City Council award a contract for the preparation of a Financial Security Package and Wastewater Rate Study for the Regional Recycled Water Project – Phase I to Bartle Wells Associates and authorize a budget appropriation in the amount of $55,000 from the Wastewater Enterprise Fund subject to the terms and conditions contained in the contract as attached to staff’s report.

Mayor O’Brien asked whether there were any public comments.

Public Comment
Charles Neal inquired what the costs would be for current residents. Mayor O’Brien and Interim City Manager Garcia responded the rate study would examine how the project could be funded by city customers, users of the farm water and other sources.

Evelyn Halbert asked whether new home builders would be paying for this and how will existing users benefit from the Wastewater Treatment Plant. Mayor O’Brien explained all new property owners/builders will be subject to a higher cost than existing users however existing users will have to pay something because not one taxpayer has paid into any fund for upgrades to the existing Wastewater Treatment Plant or the development of a new Wastewater Treatment Plant.

Page 5 of 7 ends

CC / LRA Minutes – 02-08-2022
Mayor O’Brien advised there being no further comments from the public; he brought the item back to the City Council for discussion.

ACTION: By motion moved and seconded (Uribe / Campbell / passed 5-0) to adopt City Council Resolution 2022-013 award a contract for preparation of a Financial Security Package and Wastewater Rate Study for the Regional Recycled Water Project – Phase I to Bartle Wells Associates, and authorize a budget appropriation in the amount of $55,000 from the Wastewater Enterprise Fund for said contract.

Motion carried by City Council and LRA Board roll call vote:

AYES: Barber-Martinez, Campbell, Hernandez, Uribe, and Mayor / Chair O’Brien
NAYS: None / ABSENT: None / ABSTAINED: None

11. COMMENTS/REPORTS
A brief report on notable attendance of a meeting or conference or other notable topics of City business shall be made. The Brown Act does not allow for discussion or action of items by the City Council/LRA Board during this time.

Item 11.1 Staff
Interim City Manager Garcia reported on the following:
o Announced N95 masks, two per individual, not household will be available for distribution to Riverbank residents tomorrow from 4:30 to 5:30 p.m. in the City Council Chambers.
o Tickets are still available for the Centennial Gala scheduled for March 5, 2022, at 6:00 p.m. at the Community Center and may be purchased at City Hall North or from a Historical Society Member for $25.
o Neighborhood Improvement would like to remind everyone that it’s time for weed abatement, reminded everyone to do their part to keep our community mowed and clean.
o Today, Stanislaus County Board of Supervisors ended their local State of Emergency which allowed for staff to expedite purchases or decisions necessary during the pandemic these decisions and expenditures will now revert back to the Board of Supervisors; however, the Public Health Emergency is still in place and will be reviewed every 30 days.

Item 11.2 Council/Authority Member
Councilmember Hernandez reported on the following:
o Met with Zoe Jonick with Civic Spark who is interning with the City and will be working with city residents on the Environmental Justice Element as part of the General Plan Update process.
o LOVE Riverbank is slated to take place on the last weekend in April, she noted she would be reaching out to others for their involvement.

Councilmember Uribe reported on the following:
o Attended a ZOOM meeting with Wade Patton from City Ministry to discuss empowerment and tools to develop our youth council.

Page 6 of 7 ends

CC / LRA Minutes – 02-08-2022
o Met with Chief Ridehour to discuss a school resource officer position and followup on previous discussion related to a community strategy to deal with gangs. o Attending the Stanislaus 2030 meeting on February 16. o The first Riverbank Chamber Business Expo will be held from 5:30 to 7:00 p.m. at the Community Center on February 24 noting all small business owners will be invited.

Councilmember Barber-Martinez reported on the following:
o February is Black History Month and the theme for 2022 is Black Health and Wellness, a focus on all medical practitioners such as birth workers, doulas, midwives, herbalists, etc. the reason for this is to celebrate those who have contributed to the wellness of social and medical holistic betterment of all people. o Central Valley Community Resources will be holding a crab feed on February 12 at the Community Center, an annual fundraiser to benefit the Transitional Housing Placement Program for at-risk young adults ages 18 to 21. o SHAW meeting, Stanislaus Home Alliance is tomorrow.

Vice Mayor Campbell reminded everyone that the weather has been changing over the last several years which is having an effect on the water supply. He stated this is why the City Council is looking at alternative ways to replenish the City’s aquifer as discussed, this evening (Agenda Item 10.3).

Item 11.3 Mayor/Chair
Mayor/Chair O’Brien reported on the following:
o At one point the City of Riverbank lead Stanislaus County in the number of vaccinated residents, now Riverbank is the lowest of all the cities as well as the County. The City of Riverbank has not yet obtained a 50-percent vaccination rate, he encouraged those 60 years of age and older who are at a higher risk to get vaccinated.
o The City needs to push on the General Plan Technical Update addressing water, sewer, boundaries and goals for the future.
o Encouraged the use of both English and Spanish on everything we write and post on the City’s website.
o Attending Environmental Quality Meeting on Friday, February 11,

12. CLOSED SESSION
The public will have a limit of 3 minutes to comment on Closed Session item(s) as set forth on the agenda prior to the City Council/LRA Board recessing to Closed Session.

Item 12.1 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – EXISTING LITIGATION (Government Code §54956.9)
Name of Case: City of Riverbank v. Schneider Electric Buildings America, Inc.

Item 12.2 CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS
(Pursuant to Government Code §54957.6)
Agency representative: Interim City Manager Marisela Garcia Employee organizations: Riverbank Miscellaneous Employees

Page 7 of 7 ends

CC / LRA Minutes – 02-08-2022
Mayor O’Brien asked whether there was anyone wishing to speak on the items listed on the Closed Session Agenda; there being none, Mayor O’Brien adjourned the City Council to closed session at 6:43 p.m.

13. RECONVENE – REPORT FROM CLOSED SESSION
Mayor O’Brien reconvened the meeting at 7:35 p.m.

Item 12.1 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – EXISTING LITIGATION (Government Code §54956.9)
Name of Case: City of Riverbank v. Schneider Electric Buildings America, Inc.

Mayor O’Brien reported direction had been provided to staff.

14. ADJOURNMENT OF THE REGULAR MEETING
There being no further business, Mayor / Chair O’Brien adjourned the regular meeting at 7:36 p.m. to the next regular scheduled City Council / LRA Meeting February 22, 2022.

ATTEST: (Adopted 02/22/2022) APPROVED:

Kathy L. Teixeira Richard D. O’Brien
Interim City Clerk / LRA Recorder Mayor / Chair

Page 1 of 2 ends

Item 9.3 – CC/LRA – 02/22/2022
RIVERBANK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.3
SECTION 9: CONSENT CALENDAR
Meeting Date: February 22, 2022
Subject: A Resolution Authorizing the Senior Project Coordinator Job Classification and Salary Range; and Amending the City of Riverbank Compensation Plan for the Addition
From: Marisela H. Garcia, Interim City Manager
Submitted by: Cheryl Stefani, Human Resources Analyst

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended the City Council consider adopting a Resolution to authorize the Senior Project Coordinator Job Classification and Salary Range; and consider amending the City of Riverbank Compensation Plan for the addition of the classification and salary range.

SUMMARY
The Senior Project Coordinator position differs from the current Project Coordinator position in that it requires increased knowledge and responsibilities necessary for project coordination; a greater skill set for performing job duties; and involves independent decision-making.

BACKGROUND
Over the past decade, the Project Coordinator job classification duties have expanded with the continued growth and development in the City of Riverbank. The job classification has been instrumental in coordinating a wide range of capital project budgets which at times exceed $1,000,000. The ability to keep projects within or under budget has been attained from years of experience and knowledge working in the position. Moreover, the Project Coordinator position has taken on the State of California mandatory commercial recycling and organic recycling programs for the City; and assists the Development Services Administration Manager with the federal project process, Landscape & Lighting District's capital budgets; the storm water outreach program; Active Transportation Grants; and grant preparation for a Transportation Plan.

The Senior Project Coordinator job classification would compensate staff currently performing job duties outside of their current classification. The proposed salary range for the new Senior Project Coordinator classification, the current Project Coordinator position, and the monthly salary differential are as follows:

Page 2 of 2 ends

Item 9.3 – CC/LRA – 02/22/2022
Senior Project Coordinator vs. Project Coordinator
Salary Range Step A Step B Step C Step D Step E
128 - Monthly $5,396.78 $5,666.62 $5,949.95 $6,247.45 $6,559.82 76 - Current $4,811.00 $5,051.55 $5,304.13 $5,569.34 $5,847.81 Difference/Mo. $585.78 $615.07 $645.82 $678.11 $712.01

STRATEGIC PLAN
The approval of the Senior Project Coordinator job classification correlates with two of the City Council’s Strategic Plan Goals to: 1) Attract, Develop, and Retain Quality Staff and 2) Encourage Employee Development.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
The Project Coordinator position reclassification was included in the Fiscal Year 2021- 2022 Annual Operating Budget. It was presented and the funding was approved at the June 22, 2021 City of Riverbank City Council Meeting. The approval of the Senior Project Coordinator job classification will provide a promotional opportunity for current staff performing the job duties outside of their current Project Coordinator job classification.

Additionally, since the funding was approved in the FY 2021-2022, it is also requested the promotion be retroactive to the first full pay period in July 2021. The annual salary increase differential is as follows:

Salary Range Position Annual Difference
128 Proposed Senior Project Coordinator $8,544.12

ATTACHMENT

1. Resolution

2. Senior Project Coordinator Job Description

Page 1 of 2 ends

CC/LRA – 02/22/2022
CC Resolution No. 2022-

CITY OF RIVERBANK
RESOLUTION 2022-___

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RIVERBANK,

CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE ADDITION OF THE SENIOR PROJECT COORDINATOR JOB CLASSIFICATION AND SALARY RANGE; AND AMENDING

THE CITY OF RIVERBANK COMPENSATION PLAN FOR THE ADDITION WHEREAS, due to the growth and development in the City of Riverbank, it has been determined the necessity to approve the new job classification of Senior Project Coordinator and its respective salary range; and consider amending the City of Riverbank Compensation Plan for the addition; and
WHEREAS, the Senior Project Coordinator classification will differ from the current Project Coordinator position in that it requires increased knowledge and responsibilities necessary for project coordination; a great skill set for performing job duties; and involves independent decision-making; and
WHEREAS, the Senior Project Coordinator classification will compensate staff currently performing job duties outside of their current classification. The proposed salary range for the new Senior Project Coordinator classification, the current Project Coordinator position, and the monthly salary differential are as follows:

WHEREAS, the approval of the Senior Project Coordinator job classification correlates with two of the City Council’s Strategic Plan Goals to: 1) Attract, Develop, and Retain Quality Staff and 2) Encourage Employee Development; and WHEREAS, the Project Coordinator position reclassification was included in the Fiscal Year 2021-2022 Annual Operating Budget. It was presented and the funding was approved at the June 22, 2021 City of Riverbank City Council Meeting. The approval of the Senior Project Coordinator job classification will provide a promotional opportunity for current staff performing the job duties outside of their current Project Coordinator job classification. Additionally, since the funding was approved in the FY 2021-2022, it is also requested the promotion be retroactive to the first full pay period in July 2021.

The annual salary increase differential is as follows:

Senior Project Coordinator vs. Project Coordinator
Salary Range Step A Step B Step C Step D Step E
128 - Monthly $5,396.78 $5,666.62 $5,949.95 $6,247.45 $6,559.82 76 - Current $4,811.00 $5,051.55 $5,304.13 $5,569.34 $5,847.81 Difference/Mo. $585.78 $615.07 $645.82 $678.11 $712.01

Page 2 of 2 ends

CC/LRA – 02/22/2022
CC Resolution No. 2022-
Salary Range Position Annual Difference
128 Proposed Senior Project Coordinator $8,544.12
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Riverbank hereby approves and authorizes the new job classification of Senior Project Coordinator and its respective salary of Range 128; and amends the City of Riverbank Compensation Plan to reflect the addition of the classification and salary range.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Riverbank at a regular meeting held on the 22nd day of February, 2022; motioned by Councilmember , seconded by Councilmember , and upon roll call was carried by the following City Council vote of :

AYES:

NAYS:

ABSENT:

ABSTAINED:

ATTEST: APPROVED:
__________________________ __________________________
Kathy Teixeira Richard D. O’Brien
Interim City Clerk Mayor
Attachment: Senior Project Coordinator Job Description

CITY OF RIVERBANK

SENIOR PROJECT COORDINATOR
DEFINITION:

Under general supervision, coordinates and performs a variety of more complex and detailed duties related to the development of projects in assigned departments, including contract administration; coordinates special projects; acts as a project manager on major capital project and development construction projects; may provide lead direction on assigned projects or program areas; performs other related duties as required.

DISTINGUISHING CHARACTERISTICS:

The Senior Project Coordinator is an advanced paraprofessional level class responsible for a variety of planning, coordination, and project management duties in assigned departments. Incumbent works independently and must exercise judgment in the performance of duties and decisions. The incumbent provides ongoing monitoring of service delivery and manages several construction and maintenance contracts. This classification is distinguished from the next higher classification of Development Services Administration Manager in that the latter is a management level and has overall responsibility for Administration in the Development Services Department.

SUPERVISION RECEIVED/EXERCISED:

Receives general supervision from the Development Services Administration Manager. May exercise technical and functional supervision over assigned staff.

ESSENTIAL FUNCTIONS: (include but are not limited to the following) • Participates in the development and implementation of program budgets; analyzes past and future revenue projection, monitors and assist in the administration of the approved budget; analyzes recommendation of projects, project development, reviews Plans & Specifications, administrative operations, assists in the administrative processes and records, monitors contracts and related documentation.
• Helps with grant preparation by providing support to departmental management, facilities and coordinates interdepartmental projects; reviews and provides analytical support for budget, design ideas, timelines and plan review; coordinates and manages assigned special projects, preparation of documentation and coordination.
• Assists with Request for Proposals from the hearing process, screening, interviewing, evaluation, and recommendation of professional consultants; and monitors contracts and related documentation as needed.

Class specifications are only intended to present a descriptive summary of the range of duties and responsibilities associated with specified positions. Therefore, specifications may not include all duties performed by individuals within a classification.

In addition, specifications are intended to outline the minimum qualifications necessary for entry into the class and do not necessarily convey the qualifications of incumbents within the position.

SENIOR PROJECT COORDINATOR

Page 2 ends

• Serves as a liaison to Stanislaus County for the Household Hazardous Waste Mobile Events; coordinates dates and location; creates flyers and buckslips to include in utility billing; provides information for the Newsletter and Activity Guide and updates information on the City website. • Schedules and prepares agendas for meetings; establishes positive working relationships with City management and staff, public, state and local agencies, and utility companies; and represents the City and Development Services department at a variety of meetings with community groups, regional groups, and agencies.
• Prepares operating and capital improvement budgets and tracks expenditures; and analyzes past and future revenue projections.
• Monitors franchise service agreements related to solid waste. • Participates with Landscape and Lighting Districts contract review; site visits; and billing, planning, monitoring, and project coordination.
• Monitors compliance with the State of California AB1826 Mandatory Commercial Organic Waste Recycling, AB341 Mandatory Commercial & Multi-Family Recycling, and AB1383 Public Postsecondary Education.
• Coordinates and performs a variety of duties related to the development of projects in an assigned department, including contract administration.
• Administers and oversees contracts in assigned area; assures quality control standards are met by contracting agency.
• Prepares bid packets; prepares and distributes public notices; collects specifications for projects going out to bid; schedules bid openings; participates in the bid opening process; prepares related staff reports, notice of acceptance, and notice to proceed documents; maintains current bidder lists. • Serves as project manager for assigned projects; prepares change orders; collects monies; prepares notices of completion; performs site visits to ensure the progress of assigned projects. • Oversees and participates in the development of the project budgets and assigned division budgets; prepares reports; monitors project budget; processes, codes and reconciles invoices; prepares forecasts and monitors funds; establishes open accounts for purchases with vendors; and works closely with the Finance Department on budget issues;
• Administers and coordinates grant funded projects including the recycling grant; responsible for ordering supplies and educational material; and monitors spending. • Develops and monitors schedules, methods, and procedures for performing assigned duties; monitors work activities to ensure safe work practices, work quality, and customer service; ensures compliance with applicable rules, policies, and procedures; maintains appropriate work records and documents. • Provides departmental representation with community members, City staff, and vendors on assigned area.
• Purchases office supplies and equipment for assigned department; purchases CMAS products

SENIOR PROJECT COORDINATOR

Page 3 ends

through the state; prepares purchase orders.
• Reviews applications for encroachment and grading permits; collects appropriate signatures; assesses and collects fees; issues receipts for fees collected; issues permits; applies for encroachment permits with CalTrans.
• Handles citizen requests, inquiries, and complaints in assigned area.

PHYSICAL, MENTAL, AND ENVIRONMENTAL WORKING CONDITIONS:

Position requires sitting, standing, walking on level and slippery surfaces, reaching, twisting, turning, bending, stooping, crouching, grasping, and making repetitive hand movement in the performance of daily duties. The position also requires both near and far vision when inspecting work and operating assigned equipment. The need to lift, carry, and push tools, equipment, and supplies weighing 25 pounds or more is also required. Additionally, the incumbent may work outdoors in all weather conditions, including wet, hot, and cold. The incumbent may use cleaning and lubricating chemicals, which may expose the employee to fumes, dust, and air contaminants, and may be exposed to mechanical hazards.

The nature of the work may also require the incumbent to drive motorized vehicles, work in heavy vehicle traffic conditions, and often work with constant interruptions. The incumbent may be required to respond to after hours emergency call-outs and perform routine standby duties.

Some of these requirements may be accommodated for otherwise qualified individuals requiring and requesting such accommodations.

QUALIFICATIONS: (The following are minimal qualifications necessary for entry into the classification.)
Education and/or Experience:

Any combination of education and experience that has provided the knowledge, skills, and abilities necessary for a Senior Project Coordinator. A typical way of obtaining the required qualifications is to possess the equivalent of three years of increasingly responsible experience related to an assigned area and a high school diploma or equivalent. A bachelor's degree with major course work in field related to the assigned area, such as engineering, landscape architecture, horticulture, park administration, or a related field is desirable.

License/Certificate:

Possession of, or ability to obtain, a Class C California driver’s license. Possession of a California Notary Public Certificate is highly desirable.

KNOWLEDGE/ABILITIES/SKILLS: (The following are a representative sample of the KAS’s necessary to perform essential duties of the position.) Knowledge of:

Principles and practices of project administration; contract administration; bid processes; methods and techniques of research and statistical analysis; report preparation; theory, principles, and practices of capital project, parks, and landscape architecture as applied to designs, plans, specifications, and cost estimates; operational characteristics of specialized construction and

SENIOR PROJECT COORDINATOR

Page 4 ends

maintenance tools and equipment; methods and techniques for grant writing and funding source identification; principles and practices of capital project development and cost estimating; principles and practices of budget development and administration; radio dispatch; basic principles of mathematics; applicable federal, state, and local laws, codes, and regulations, including playground regulations; methods and techniques of scheduling work assignments; standard office procedures, practices, and equipment; modern office practices, procedures, and equipment, including a computer and applicable software; methods and techniques for record keeping and report preparation and writing; proper English, spelling, and grammar; occupational hazards and standard safety practices.

Ability to:

Oversees the operations and activities of an assigned project or program area; serve as a project manager over capital construction projects; oversee and administer the City’s contracts; oversee the bid process; develop and implement assigned project budgets; provide administrative support to assigned department; respond to issues and concerns from the community; work independently and as part of a team; make sound decisions within established guidelines; follow written and oral directions; observe safety principles and work in a safe manner; communicate clearly and concisely, both orally and in writing; establish and maintain effective working relationships.

Skill to:

Operate an office computer and a variety of software applications.

Prepared 02/22/2022

Page 1 of 2 ends

Item 9.4 – CC/LRA – 02/22/2022
RIVERBANK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.4
SECTION 9: CONSENT CALENDAR
Meeting Date: February 22, 2022
Subject: Resolution of the City Council of the City of Riverbank, Authorizing Submittal of Notification of Intent to Comply with SB 1383 Requirements
From: Marisela Garcia, Interim City Manager
Submitted by: Kathleen Cleek, Development Services Administration Manager

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council authorize submittal of Notification of Intent to Comply with SB 1383 Requirements.

STAFF SUMMARY
SB 1383 Requirements
CalRecycle, in consultation with the California Air Resources Board, has adopted regulatory requirements, consistent with the mandate of Senate Bill 1383 (Lara, 2016), that are designed to achieve the organic waste reduction goals established in Section 39730.6 of the Health and Safety Code through a 50 percent reduction in the level of the statewide disposal of organic waste from the 2014 level by 2020 and a 75 percent reduction in the level of the statewide disposal of organic waste from the 2014 level by 2025.

Requirements of this regulation include waste diversion of Organics and recyclables amongst residents and businesses, the implementation of an Edible Food Recovery Program, Inspections of generators (both residential and commercial), and other program requirements. More information is available at
www.calrecycle.ca.gov/organics/stop.

Enforcement
CalRecycle will be reviewing jurisdictions’ activities to ensure each jurisdiction throughout the State of California is meeting compliance. CalRecycle will not be able to impose fines on jurisdictions until 2024; however, CalRecycle could impose fines retroactively if it is deemed that a jurisdiction had “violations” during January 1, 2022 – December 31, 2023.

Page 2 of 2 ends

Item 9.4 – CC/LRA – 02/22/2022
Violations would be any activity/program not adopted/implemented by a jurisdiction as of January 1, 2022.

Notice of Intent to Comply
Senate Bill 619 (Laird, 2021), through amendments to Section 42652.5 of the Public Resources Code, created a mechanism called a “Notification of Intent to Comply,” through which a jurisdiction may secure administrative civil penalty relief from any continuing violations of the Regulations for the 2022 calendar year and may be eligible for a broader and longer-term regulatory compliance path, including suspended administrative civil penalties, through a corrective action plan.

On the Notification of Intent to Comply form, the City of Riverbank is requesting a time extension on when compliance will be met for diverting recyclables from the waste stream. Gilton is the City of Riverbank’s franchise hauler as well as the operator of its own solid waste, organics processing and recycling facility. In order to meet compliance with recycling mandates of recyclables and organics diversion from the waste stream, Gilton is expanding their operations with the use of high-tech artificial intelligence and other large pieces of operational equipment to help sort out this material from the waste stream. This equipment will sort faster, more efficiently and be up and running by mid to late 2023.

The Notification of Intent to Comply lists out these details to show that this part of the required programs is heavily dependent on Gilton’s high processing materials recovery facility. For other programs such as organics recycling, which is the main target of SB1383, the City of Riverbank is currently meeting program compliance with all residents and businesses having the ability to place landscape material, food waste, food-soiled paper products, and other paper products into the residential green carts and commercial Organics bins.

With the adoption of the attached Resolution, a Notification of Intent to Comply form can be submitted to CalRecycle for review. With CalRecycle’s approval, the City of Riverbank has more time to implement the required programs and relief from CalRecycle imposing fines onto the City for 2022 non-compliance.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
There are no fiscal impacts associated with the City Council approving the submittal the attached Notification of Intent to Comply to CalRecycle. It may offer relief from CalRecycle issuing fines to the City of Riverbank regarding what CalRecycle may deem as 2022 “SB 1383 Violations.”

ATTACHMENTS

1. Resolution

2. Exhibit A – Notification of Intent to Comply

CITY OF RIVERBANK
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-___

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RIVERBANK,

CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZXING SUBMITTAL OF NOTICE OF INTENT TO COMPLY WITH SB 1383 REQUIREMENTS, SENATE BILL 619
WHEREAS, CalRecycle, in consultation with the California Air Resources Board, has adopted regulatory requirements (Regulations), consistent with the mandate of Senate Bill 1383 (Lara, 2016), that are designed to achieve the organic waste reduction goals established in Section 39730.6 of the Health and Safety Code through a 50 percent reduction in the level of the statewide disposal of organic waste from the 2014 level by 2020 and a 75 percent reduction in the level of the statewide disposal of organic waste from the 2014 level by 2025.

WHEREAS, City of Riverbank is a local jurisdiction required to comply with the Regulations;
WHEREAS, City of Riverbank is or expects to be facing continuing violations of the Regulations commencing during the 2022 calendar year;
WHEREAS, Senate Bill 619 (Laird, 2021), through amendments to Section 42652.5 of the Public Resources Code (Statute), created a mechanism called a Notification of Intent to Comply through which a local jurisdiction may secure administrative civil penalty relief from any continuing violations of the Regulations for the 2022 calendar year and may be eligible for a broader and longer-term regulatory compliance path, including suspended administrative civil penalties, through a corrective action plan.

WHEREAS, City of Riverbank is a local jurisdiction authorized by the Statute to submit a Notification of Intent to Comply for CalRecycle approval; WHEREAS, CalRecycle shall approve a Notification of Intent to Comply that is duly adopted by the jurisdiction by formal written resolution and meets the requirements of the Statute;

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Riverbank declares as follows:

1. The City of Riverbank by and through its City Manager or Interim City Manager hereby formally adopts the Notification of Intent to Comply attached as Exhibit “A.”

2. The City of Riverbank hereby authorizes and directs City Manager or Interim City Manager, on its behalf, to submit the Notification of Intent to Comply attached as Exhibit “A” to CalRecycle for approval pursuant to the Statute.

Page 1 of 3 ends

CC/LRA – 02/22/2022
CC Resolution No. 2022-

3. By submitting the Notification of Intent to Comply pursuant to and subject to the above referenced requirements, the City of Riverbank represents and certifies that it will implement the proposed actions to remedy the violations according to the proposed schedule as approved by CalRecycle and in accordance with the Statute and Regulations.

4. The City of Riverbank by and through its Interim City Manager also acknowledges and agrees to comply with any maximum compliance deadline in any corrective action plan that CalRecycle, in its sole discretion, determines to be necessary and appropriate under the circumstances for the correction of any violation(s) of the Statute and Regulations identified in its Notification of Intent to Comply.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Riverbank at a regular meeting held on the 22nd day of February 2022; motioned by Councilmember ______, seconded by Councilmember _________, and upon roll call was carried by the following City Council vote of :

AYES:

NAYS:

ABSENT:

ABSTAINED:

ATTEST: APPROVED:
___________________________ ______________________________ Kathy L. Teixeira Richard D. O’Brien
Interim City Clerk Mayor
Attachment: Exhibit A

Page 2 of 3 ends

CC/LRA – 02/22/2022
CC Resolution No. 2022-
Please clearly print or type responses. Attach additional pages as necessary.

Jurisdiction Name: City of Riverbank County: Stanislaus Person Completing the Form: Consultant for City of Riverbank First Name: Jennifer Last Name: Halpin
Title: Principal Consultant, Resourceability
Mailing Address: PO Box 1066
City: Merced Zip Code: 95341-1066
Email Address: [email protected]
Phone Number: (209) 761-1004

1. Select using the check boxes below or write in the continuing violations for each applicable regulatory section. For each selection, please describe the specific violations related to the regulatory section.

Example:
☒ (B) 14 CCR section 18984.1 Three-Container Organic Waste Collection Services i. Not implementing mandatory residential foodwaste collection for all residents. Note:

City already provides mandatory greenwaste collection to all residents ii. Not implementing mandatory commercial organics collection for all businesses under 2 cubic yards. Note: City already provides mandatory commercial organics collection to all businesses 2 cubic yard or more.

Disclaimer: The list of possible continuing violations below is not inclusive of all potential violations of the regulations.
(A) 14 CCR section 18984 Combined Organic Waste Collection Services. This requirement is not included since the requirements are further specified in sections 18984.1-18984.11. (B) 14 CCR section 18984.1 Three-Container Organic Waste Collection Services (C) 14 CCR section 18984.2 Two-Container Organic Waste Collection Services (D) 14 CCR section 18984.3 Unsegregated Single Container Collection Services (E) 14 CCR section 18984.4 Recordkeeping Requirements for Compliance with Organic Waste Collection Services
(F) 14 CCR section 18984.5 Container Contamination Minimization (G) 14 CCR section 18984.6 Recordkeeping Requirements for Container Contamination Minimization
(H) 14 CCR section 18984.7 Container Color Requirements (I) 14 CCR section 18984.8 Container Labeling Requirements (J) 14 CCR section 18984.11 Waivers Granted by a Jurisdiction (K) 14 CCR section 18985.1. Organic Waste Recovery Education and Outreach. (L) 14 CCR section 18985.2. Edible Food Recovery Education and Outreach (M) 14 CCR section 18985.3. Recordkeeping Requirements for a Jurisdiction’s Compliance with Education and Outreach Requirements
(N) 14 CCR section 18988.1. Jurisdiction Approval of Haulers and Self-Haulers (O) 14 CCR section 18988.3. Self-haulers of Organic Waste (P) 14 CCR section 18988.4. Recordkeeping Requirements for Compliance with Jurisdiction Hauler Program
(Q) 14 CCR section 18989.1. CALGreen Building Codes
(R) 14 CCR section 18989.2 Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (S) 14 CCR section 18991.1. Jurisdiction Edible Food Recovery Program (T) 14 CCR section 18991.2. Recordkeeping Requirements for Jurisdiction Edible Food Recovery Program
(U) 14 CCR section 18992.1. Organic Waste Recycling Capacity Planning (V) 14 CCR section 18992.2. Edible Food Recovery Capacity (W) 14 CCR section 18993.1. Recovered Organic Waste Product Procurement Target (X) 14 CCR section 18993.2. Recordkeeping Requirements for Recovered Organic Waste Procurement Target
(Y) 14 CCR section 18993.3. Recycled Content Paper Procurement Requirements (Z) 14 CCR section 18993.4. Recordkeeping Requirements for Recycled Content Paper Procurement
(AA) 14 CCR section 18994.2. Jurisdiction Annual Reporting Note: This requirement is not included since jurisdictions are still expected to report to CalRecycle.
(BB) 14 CCR section 18995.1. Jurisdiction Inspection Requirements Note: Section 18995.1(a)(1) should not be included because a jurisdiction should already be completing this action due to the requirements of PRC Chapter 12.9 (commencing with Section 42649.8)
(CC) 14 CCR section 18995.2. Implementation Record and Recordkeeping Requirements (DD) 14 CCR section 18995.3. Jurisdiction Investigation of Complaints of Alleged Violations Note: This requirement is not included since jurisdictions are still expected to investigate complaints.
(EE) 14 CCR section 18995.4. Enforcement by a Jurisdiction Use the check box(es) below to write in the continuing violations for any regulatory section(s) not reflected above and describe the specific violations related to the regulatory section.

Example:
☒ (1) (Type regulatory section number) (Type regulatory section title) i. Describe the specific violations related to the regulatory section (1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)

2. A detailed explanation of the reasons why the jurisdiction is unable to comply, supported by documentation, if applicable.
(C) 14 CCR section 18984.2 Two-Container Organic Waste Collection Services:

Currently, the franchise hauler for the City of Riverbank is also a facility owner that will be operating a High Diversion Organics Processing Facility. There is an existing organics collection program (through residential green carts and commercial organics bins) which accepts the following in the Organics carts/bins: food waste, food-soiled papers and other paper fiber and green waste/landscaping plant material. Until the more sophisticated equipment is installed for high-quantity/higher-quality sorting, smaller volumes of recyclables and Organics are being manually sorted from the solid waste stream (black cart/solid waste bin material).

More sophisticated sorting equipment will include artificial intelligence and other type of technology that Gilton has invested millions of dollars into acquiring to update its facility into a High Diversion Organics (and recycling) Processing Facility. Currently there has been a delay in receiving the necessary equipment. Pease see #3 and #4 for more information. (L) 14 CCR section 18985.2 Edible Food Recovery Education and Outreach:

This needs to be performed to let Tier 1/Tier 2 food generators aware of requirements and of the local food-sharing programs available to them for donation. (Due to health and safety regulations, hot food annd prepared food will not be accepted.) This requirement has not been able to be performed fully due to lack of staff available to do so; the City of Riverbank has requested a consultant to perform this task. Please note, Savemart currently has a program through its corporate office where excess inventory is donated to local food banks. (T) 14 CCR section 18991.1, section 18991.2 and section 18992.2:

Measuring of donations at food generator locations and at the edible food recovery facility may need a uniform, consistent way of being recorded; due to lack of staff time available, explanations of how to weigh/measure edible food amounts at food generator locations has not been able to be performed. Note: Savemart already has its own record-keeping procedure of donated amounts to food banks. See #4.

3. A description of the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on compliance. (C) continued: Part of the delay in receiving the equipment necessary for the sort lines at the Gilton High Diversion Processing Facility is due to COVID-19-related issues, such as reduced staffing across all industries nationally and internationally, which has led to a decrease in supply (production of products/materials/equipment) and in transportation.

4. Provide a description of the proposed actions the jurisdiction will take to remedy the violations with a proposed schedule for completing each action. The proposed actions shall be tailored to remedy the violations in a timely manner. See optional format below. (C) continued: It's anticipated that the equipment needed for the High Diversion Processing Facility will arrive for installation and become operational by the end of 2023, but hopes are that equipment will arrive by the end of 2022.
(L) continued: the City of Riverbank is to hire a consultant to speak with Tier 1/Tier 2 food generator locations to give education/outreach and training on the program requirements. (T) continued: The hired consultant will discuss program needs with the community food-sharing facility to see if assistance can be given to the facility with use of Local Assistance Grant Funds, and will discuss the record-keeping requirements with both the facility and the food generators.

Description of the proposed actions with proposed schedules the jurisdiction will take to remedy the violations. The proposed actions shall be tailored to remedy the violations in a timely manner.

Regulatory Requirement and Description
Action Proposed Schedule
TASK 1: (C) Gilton to receive sophisticated sorting equipment. Date to be completed:
12/31/2023
TASK 2: (C) Installation of the different types of sort line equipment and machinery at the Gilton location.

Date to be completed:
12/31/2023
TASK 3: (C) Sort line/new equipment pieces operational/running to separate remaining recyclables and Organics from solid waste.

Date to be completed:
12/31/2023
Regulatory Requirement and Description
Action Proposed Schedule
TASK 1: (L, T) City of Riverbank will hire a consultant to educate Tier 1/Tier 2 food generators and the edible food recovery facilities on program requirements.

Date to be completed:
6/30/2022
TASK 2: (L, T) With training from the hired consultant, Tier 1/Tier 2 food generators and the food recovery facilities are to record amounts of edible food delivered/accepted, and any other recordkeeping requirements. Date to be completed will hopefully be by the summer, but by 12/31/2022 at the latest.

Date to be completed:
12/31/2022

EXAMPLE
Regulatory Requirement: (B.i.) 14 CCR section 18984.1 Three-Container Organic Waste Collection Services
Description: Not implementing mandatory residential foodwaste collection for all residents. Note:

City already provides mandatory greenwaste collection to all residents Action Proposed Schedule
TASK 1: Purchase two additional collection trucks and modify collection routes
Date to be completed:
4/7/2022
TASK 2: The city will work with its hauler to find a facility to accept mixed organic waste.

Date to be completed:
4/14/2022
Regulatory Requirement: (B.ii.) 14 CCR section 18984.1 Three-Container Organic Waste Collection Services
Description: Not implementing mandatory commercial organics collection for all businesses under 2 cubic yards. Note: City already provides mandatory commercial organics collection to all businesses 2 cubic yard or more.

Action: Proposed Schedule
TASK 1: Purchase two additional collection trucks and modify collection routes
Date to be completed:
4/21/2022
TASK 2: The city will work with its hauler to acquire and distribute appropriate containers to all commercial accounts. The city will obtain monthly reports from the hauler to monitor full distribution of carts.

Date to be completed:
4/28/2022

Page 1 of 4 ends

Item 9.5 – CC/LRA – 02/22/2022
RIVERBANK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.5
SECTION 9: CONSENT CALENDAR
Meeting Date: February 22, 2022
Subject: Consideration of a Resolution Authorizing the City to Implement Teleconferenced Public Meetings Pursuant to Assembly Bill 361 Allowing the City to Continue a Hybrid Virtual Meeting Environment From: Tom Hallinan, City Attorney
Submitted by: Tom Hallinan, City Attorney

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends Council adopt a Resolution authorizing the City to Implement Teleconferenced Public Meetings Pursuant to Assembly Bill 361 Allowing the City to Continue a Virtual Meeting Environment.

SUMMARY
NOTE: This report is generally the same staff report presented at the January 25, 2022 Council meeting. As the resolution only extends the allowance for teleconferenced meetings for a 30-day period it is necessary to re-agendize this item for approval.

On September 16, 2021 Governor Newsom signed Assembly Bill (“AB”) 361 which allows cities to continue to meet remotely during proclaimed states of emergency under modified Ralph M. Brown Act requirements that are similar but not identical to the rules and procedures established by the previous Executive Orders temporarily suspending provisions of the Brown Act. On September 20, 2021, Governor Newsom signed Executive Order N-15-21 to suspend AB 361 until October 1, 2021. Over the past year, City Council meetings have been held with virtual teleconference components.

AB 361, until January 1, 2024, would authorize a local agency to use teleconferencing without complying with the teleconferencing requirements imposed by the Brown Act when a local legislative body holds a meeting during a declared state of emergency by the governor and when state of local health officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing.

On June 11, 2021, Governor Newsom issued Executive Order N-08-21, which among other things rescinded his prior Executive Order N-29-20 and set a date of October 1, 2021, for public agencies to transition back to public meetings held in full compliance with the Brown Act.

Page 2 of 4 ends

Item 9.5 – CC/LRA – 02/22/2022
As the Delta variant has surged in California, the Legislature has taken action to extend the COVID-19 exceptions to the Brown Acts’ teleconference requirements, subject to some additional safeguards. AB 361 allows a local agency to use teleconferencing without complying with the Brown Act provisions in any of the following circumstances:
• The local legislative body holds a meeting during a proclaimed state of emergency by the governor, and state or local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing.
• The local legislative body holds a meeting during a proclaimed state of emergency by the governor for the purpose of determining, by majority vote, whether as a result of the emergency, meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees.
• The local legislative body holds a meeting during a proclaimed state of emergency by the governor and has determined, by majority vote that, as a result of the emergency, meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees.

A local agency that holds a meeting under these circumstances would be required by AB 361 to do all of the following, in addition to giving notice of the meeting and posting agendas as required under the Brown act. These additional requirements are intended to protect the public’s right to participate in the meetings of local agency legislative bodies.

Pursuant to AB 361 local agencies are required to do all of the following in addition to meeting notice requirements under the Brown Act:
• Allow the public to access the meeting and require that the agenda provide an opportunity for the public to directly address the legislative body pursuant to the Brown Act’s other teleconferencing provisions.
• In each instance when the local agency provides notice of the teleconferenced meeting or posts its agenda, give notice for how the public can access the meeting and provide public comment.
• Identify and include in the agenda an opportunity for all persons to attend via a call-in or an internet-based service option; the legislative body need not provide a physical location for the public to attend or provide comments.
• Conduct teleconference meetings in a manner that protects the statutory and constitutional rights of the public.
• Stop the meeting until public access is restored in the event of a service disruption that either prevents the local agency from broadcasting the meeting to the public using the call-in or internet-based service option or is within the local agency’s control and prevents the public from submitting public comments (any actions taken during such a service disruption can be challenged under the Brown Act’s existing challenge provisions).
• Not require comments be submitted in advance (though the legislative body may provide that as an option) and provide the opportunity to comment in real time. • Provide adequate time for public comment, either by establishing a timed public comment period or by allowing a reasonable amount of time to comment.

Page 3 of 4 ends

Item 9.5 – CC/LRA – 02/22/2022
• If the legislative body uses a third-party website or platform to host the teleconference, and the third-party service requires users to register to participate, the legislative body must provide adequate time during the comment period for users to register and may not close the registration comment period until the comment period has elapsed.

AB 361 also provides that if a local agency conducts teleconference meetings in reliance on AB 361, the local agency must make the following findings by majority vote every 30 days to continue using the bill’s exemption to the Brown Act teleconferencing rules:
• The legislative body has reconsidered the circumstances of the emergency; and • Either of the following circumstances exist: The state of emergency continues to directly impact the ability of members to meet safely in person, or State or local officials continue to impose or recommend social distancing measures.

The goal of AB 361 is “to improve and enhance public access to local agency meetings during the COVID-19 pandemic and future applicable emergencies, by allowing broader access through teleconferencing options” consistent with Executive Order N-29-20. AB 361 contains an urgency clause which became effective upon signing with a sunset of January 1, 2024. However, shortly after signing AB 361, Governor Newsom signed Executive Order N-15-21 to suspend AB 361 until October 1, 2021.

At the October 12th City Council meeting, Council considered whether or not to continue with the hybrid meeting format. During that meeting difficulties were experienced in receiving a specific comment on an agenda item. As such, the Council chose to only extend the hybrid meeting allowance for 2 weeks to determine alternate options for accepting comments or dealing with technical issues. At the October 26th Council meeting staff gave out the phone number at the dais for any member of the public that had technical issues providing comment by zoom. Two comments were received via this method, if this resolution is approved staff will continue with this measure until it is no longer needed. Staff is currently in the process of soliciting bids for technological upgrades to the Council Chamber technology setup which will provide improved ability for hybrid and streamed meetings.

Alternatively the Council could choose to no longer allow hybrid meetings in which case Councilmembers would attend in person or would have to follow the original Brown Act requirements for a remote meeting (public posting etc). Some local communities still live stream meetings but do not allow remote public comment as an option.

If the Resolution is adopted the City Council will continue to hold in person meetings with a virtual hybrid component. The City Council will revisit the need to conduct meetings remotely within 30 days of the adoption of this Resolution, it is staff’s intention to reevaluate options for hybrid meetings during that time period for future Council consideration.

Page 4 of 4 ends

Item 9.5 – CC/LRA – 02/22/2022
FINANCIAL IMPACT:

None at this time.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution 2022-XXXX

2. Letter from Stanislaus County Public Health Officer RE: Social Distancing Recommendation

Page 1 of 3 ends

CC/LRA 02/22/2022
CC Resolution No. 2022-

CITY OF RIVERBANK
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-___

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RIVERBANK,

CALIFORNIA, PROCLAIMING A LOCAL EMERGENCY AND AUTHORIZING

REMOTE TELECONFERENCE MEETINGS OF THE LEGISLATIVE BODIES OF THE CITY OF RIVERBANK PURSUANT TO ASSEMBLY BILL 361 AND BROWN ACT

PROVISIONS
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Riverbank (the “City”) is committed to preserving public access and participation in meetings of the City Council; and WHEREAS, all meetings of the City’s legislative bodies are open and public, as required by the Ralph M. Brown Act (Gov. Code, §§ 54950 – 54963), so that any member of the public may attend, participate, and watch the City’s legislative bodies conduct their business; and
WHEREAS, on September 16, 2021, Governor Newsom signed Assembly Bill (“AB”) 361, amending Government Code section 54953, subdivision (e) to allow for remote teleconferencing participation in meetings by members of a legislative body without compliance with the requirements of Government Code section 54953, subdivision (b)(3), subject to the existence of certain conditions; and WHEREAS, a required condition for remote teleconferencing participation in meetings by members of a legislative body is that a state of emergency is declared by the Governor, pursuant to Government Code section 8625, proclaiming the existence of conditions of disaster or of extreme peril to the safety of persons and property within the state caused by conditions as described in Government Code section 8558; and WHEREAS, a proclamation is made when there is an actual incident, threat of disaster, or extreme peril to the safety of persons and property within the jurisdictions that are within the City’s boundaries, caused by natural, technological, or human-caused disasters; and
WHEREAS, it is further required that state or local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing or the legislative body meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health and safety of attendees; and

Page 2 of 3 ends

CC/LRA – 02/22/2022
CC Resolution No. 2022-
WHEREAS, such conditions now exist in the City, specifically, on March 4, 2020, Governor Gavin Newsom proclaimed a State of Emergency to exist in California as a result of the threat of COVID-19; despite sustained efforts, the virus continues to spread and is impacting nearly all sectors of California; and
WHEREAS, the Stanislaus County Public Health Officer issued an order on September 2, 2021 regarding the highly transmissible Delta Variant and recommending face coverings indoors; and
WHEREAS, there has been a significant increase in COVID-19 cases in Stanislaus County due primarily to the Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID19. Emerging evidence indicates that the Delta variant is far more transmissible than prior variants of the virus, may cause more severe illness, and can be spread by fully vaccinated individuals; and
WHEREAS, as a consequence of the declared emergency, the City Council does hereby find that the legislative body of the City shall conduct their meetings without compliance with Government Code section 54953, subdivision (b)(3), as authorized by Section 54953, subdivision (e), and that such legislative bodies shall comply with the requirements to provide the public with access to the meetings as prescribed in Section 54953, subdivision (e)(2); and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code section 54953, subdivision (e)(3), in order to continue to teleconference without compliance with Government Code section 54953, subdivision (b)(3), the City Council shall, not later than 30 days after teleconferencing for the first time pursuant to this Resolution, and every 30 days thereafter, make the following findings by majority vote: The legislative body has reconsidered the circumstances of the state of emergency and any of the following conditions exist: (1) the state of emergency continues to directly impact the ability of the members to meet safely in person or (2) state or local officials continue to impose or recommend measures to promote social distancing; and
WHEREAS, the City reserves the option to hold in-person meetings, consistent with local health officer directives, or to continue a practice of remote meetings that still allow multiple options for public participation.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RIVERBANK DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. Recitals. The Recitals set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated into this Resolution by this reference.

Page 3 of 3 ends

CC/LRA – 02/22/2022
CC Resolution No. 2022-
Section 2. Proclamation of Local Emergency. The City Council hereby proclaims that a local emergency exists throughout the City, and that the legislative body meeting in person could present imminent risks to the health and safety of attendees due to the prevalence of COVID-19 in Stanislaus County and the state, such that the City reserves the right to continue virtual meetings or conduct in-person meetings, consistent with local health guidance or duly issued orders.

Section 3. Remote Teleconference Meetings. The legislative body and designees of the City are hereby authorized and directed to take all actions necessary to carry out the intent and purpose of this Resolution, including conducting open and public meetings in accordance with Government Code section 54953, subdivision (e), and other applicable provisions of the Brown Act.

Section 4. Effective Date of Resolution. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption and shall be effective until the earlier of (i) October 30, 2021, or (ii) such time the City Council makes a subsequent finding by majority vote in accordance with Government Code section 54953, subdivision (e)(3), to extend the time during which the legislative bodies of the City may continue to teleconference without compliance with paragraph (3) of subdivision (b) of section 54953.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Riverbank at a regular meeting held on the ____ day of ______, 2022; motioned by ______________, seconded by ________________, and upon roll call was carried by the following City Council vote of ___:

AYES:

NAYS:

ABSENT:

ABSTAINED:

ATTEST: APPROVED:
________________________________ __________________________ Kathy L. Teixeira Richard D. O’Brien
Interim City Clerk Mayor

Page 1 of 2 ends

Item 10.1 - CC 02/22/2022
RIVERBANK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.1
SECTION 10: PUBLIC HEARING
Meeting Date: February 22, 2022
Subject: Continuation of the Proposition 218 Public Hearing Date for the Adoption of the Proposed Solid Waste Rates to Tuesday, April 12, 2022
From: Marisela H. Garcia, Interim City Manager

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council accept public comment on the proposed Solid Waste Rate increase and continue to the public hearing to April 12, 2022.

SUMMARY
On December 14, 2021 the City Council authorized staff to proceed with the Proposition 218 Public Hearing for the consideration of an increase to Solid Waste Rates. The Public Hearing date was set for Tuesday, February 22, 2022 but due to noticing requirements the Public Hearing must be continued to April 12, 2022.

BACKGROUND
On December 14, 2021 the City Council received the results of the Solid Waste Rate Study (“The Study”) which was performed by Bartle Wells Associates, an independent consultant for the City. The Study entailed an evaluation of the financial information that was provided by Gilton Solid Waste to substantiate the proposed rate increase that was brought forth to the residents as prescribed under Proposition 218.

After a thorough review, Bartle Wells Associates has determined “the cost for Gilton to provide service has increased due to new regulation. BWA finds the proposed rates reflect the cost for the City to provide solid waste service.” Council established a Public Hearing date of Tuesday, February 22, 2022 in order to consider adoption of the proposed rates. Pursuant to Proposition 218, notices with all of the required information were sent to all current property owners and tenants within the City of Riverbank in both English and Spanish. The Notices included information on the need for the rate increase, the proposed rate, and the method by which residents would be able to protest the rate were posted on the City’s website on January 5, 2022 and were

Page 2 of 2 ends

Item 10.1 - CC 02/22/2022
mailed via the United States Postal Service to each property owner and tenant signed up for service on January 6, 2022.

Unfortunately, due to time constraints, the City was not able to publish the required notification in our local paper in order to ensure compliance with all Proposition 218 noticing requirements. Therefore, we are requesting that tonight’s public hearing be continued to April 12, 2022. Protests will still be accepted until the new public hearing date.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
There is no financial impact associated with this report. Should rates be adopted at the April 12, 2022 Public Hearing, rates would be effective as of May 1, 2022.

STRATEGIC PLAN
This report has been prepared to accomplish the following Goal established during the August 10, 2021 Strategic Planning Session:
“Ensure Financial Stability”

ATTACHMENT

1. Proposition 218 Public Notice to Residents
City of Riverbank

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED RATE INCREASES

FOR SOLID WASTE RATES
The State of California put into law an unfunded state mandate that is the most significant waste reduction law in the last 30 years: Senate Bill 1383, Short-Lived Climate Pollutants: Organic Waste Methane Emissions Reductions (SB 1383). Each city in the State of California is mandated under SB 1383 to reduce organic waste from the landfill by 50% in 2022 and by 75% in 2025. These goals were established to decrease methane emissions at landfills.

The City of Riverbank (the City) requested the City’s solid waste provider, Gilton Solid Waste Management, Inc. (Gilton), to determine how best to meet this mandate while providing the best service to our residents and businesses. In order for the City to achieve the required organic waste diversion targets, waste material collected for the City of Riverbank will require increased processing to capture and divert from the landfill the highest amount of organic materials from both residential and commercial waste streams as required by SB 1383. Because of these additional waste processing and landfill diversion requirements, the City needs to adjust our service rates that will enable the City to comply with SB 1383 mandates.

SB 1383 defines “Organic waste” to include:
• Food
• Green Material
• Landscape and Pruning Waste
• Organic Textiles and Carpets
• Lumber
• Wood
• Paper Products
• Printing and Writing Paper
SB 1383 requires each jurisdiction in California to provide Organics collection services to all residents and businesses by January 1, 2022. Gilton will continue to provide a 2-cart weekly residential collection service to collect both the organic material (Organics cart) and trash (MSW cart) at the same time with their ONEPASS split body automated trucks.

Due to SB 1383, the City’s cost to manage solid waste will increase beginning in 2022. Therefore, the City is proposing an increase to Solid Waste Rates. The City’s solid waste contract relies on service charge revenues to meet annual funding needs. As such, the rates need to be set at levels adequate to fund the service. The City will hold a public hearing on the proposed solid waste rate increases as follows:

Date: February 22, 2022
Time: 6:00 PM
Place*: Riverbank City Council Chambers
6707 Third Street, Suite B, Riverbank, CA 95367
* Due to the coronavirus pandemic, the public hearings will be held in person and/or online pursuant to the Governor’s Executive Order N-29-20. If the meeting information needs to be revised, updated information will be available on the City’s website at www.riverbank.org.

City of Riverbank
Solid Waste Service Rate Increases Needed to Address SB 1383 Compliance Costs and Inflation The City has been receiving solid waste collection and disposal services (“solid waste services”) from Gilton for over 40 years. The current rates for solid waste services have not increased since 2018. The rate increase in 2022 is driven by the increase in costs related to complying with the requirements of SB 1383.

Rates in the subsequent four years will pass through changes in the Consumer Price Index, with a maximum pass through of 5%, so that rates will be able to continue to fund the same level of service.

The City and Gilton are committed to providing the highest quality solid waste services at the lowest possible rates for our customers. To meet this commitment, the City engaged an independent rate consultant to undertake an evaluation of the needs of the City’s solid waste services. Based on this evaluation, the City has determined that the proposed rate adjustments, requested by Gilton, are in line with the cost of service. The proposed rates for the monthly solid waste service are structured to recover the cost to collect, process, divert, and dispose of both organic waste and garbage and allocate those costs among the residential and commercial customers. The City is proposing to adopt new solid waste rates over the next five years as shown in the schedule below.

Proposed Solid Waste Rates
The proposed rates effective 3/1/2022 for each customer type are shown in the following table. Rates in the subsequent four years will change based on the inflationary pass-through described in the following section.

Proposed Residential/Non-Residential & Small Business Rates Rate Type
Current
Monthly
Rates
Proposed Monthly
Rates Effective
3/1/2022
Residential - 90 gallon MSW Cart* & Organics Cart** $23.40 $35.25 Residential - 30 gallon MSW Cart & Organics Cart 20.52 32.37 Residential - 90 gallon MSW Cart & Organics Cart - Low Income Senior/Disabled Rate 17.55 29.40
Residential - 30 gallon MSW Cart & Organics Cart - Low Income Senior/Disabled Rate 15.44 27.29
Residential - (2) 90 gallon MSW Carts & Organics Cart 30.85 50.70 Residential - (3) 90 gallon MSW Carts & Organics Cart 38.30 66.15 Residential - (2) 90 gallon MSW Carts & Organics Cart - Low Income Senior/Disabled Rate 24.37 42.82
Non Residential & Small Business - 90 Gallon MSW Cart 23.40 35.25 Non Residential & Small Business - 30 Gallon MSW Cart 20.59 32.44 Non Residential & Small Business - (2) 90 Gallon MSW Carts & Organics Cart 30.85 50.70
Non Residential & Small Business - (3) 90 Gallon MSW Carts & Organics Cart 38.30 66.15
Non Residential & Small Business - (4) 90 Gallon MSW Carts & Organics Cart 45.75 81.60
*MSW Cart = Municipal Solid Waste Cart
**Organics Cart = to replace Green Waste Cart
City of Riverbank
Proposed Commercial Rates
Rate Type
Current
Monthly Rates
Proposed Monthly Rates
Effective 3/1/2022
Commercial - 1 yd Bin 1x per week pickup 57.06 69.41
Commercial - 2 yd Bin 1x per week pickup 90.63 115.33
Commercial - 2 yd Bin 2x per week pickup 165.31 214.71
Commercial - 2 yd Bin 3x per week pickup 240.12 314.22
Commercial - 3 yd Bin 1x per week pickup 124.70 161.75
Commercial - 3 yd Bin 2x per week pickup 226.16 300.26
Commercial - 3 yd Bin 3x per week pickup 316.53 427.68
Commercial - 3 yd Bin 4x per week pickup 426.25 574.45
Commercial - 4 yd Bin 1x per week pickup 162.75 212.15
Commercial - 4 yd Bin 2x per week pickup 299.42 398.22
Commercial - 4 yd Bin 3x per week pickup 417.55 565.75
Commercial - 4 yd Bin 4x per week pickup 500.99 698.59
Commercial - 4 yd Bin 5x per week pickup 615.93 862.93
Commercial - 4 yd Bin 6x per week pickup 739.42 1,035.82 Commercial - 6 yd Bin 1x per week pickup 223.11 297.21
Commercial - 6 yd Bin 2x per week pickup 412.35 560.55
Commercial - 6 yd Bin 3x per week pickup 593.84 816.14
Commercial - 6 yd Bin 4x per week pickup 693.32 989.72
Commercial - 6 yd Bin 5x per week pickup 833.35 1,203.85 Commercial - 6 yd Bin 6x per week pickup $867.31 $1,311.91 Future Pass-Through Adjustments for Inflation
Pursuant to California Government Code 53756, the City is proposing to authorize the pass-through of future costs due to inflation via corresponding increases to the City’s Solid Waste Rates. On July 1, 2023, 2024, 2025 and 2026, the maximum solid waste rate will change to reflect annual changes in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers ("CPI") published by the U.S. Department of Labor for the San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose, CA statistical area. The change will be based on the most recent May to April period compared to the prior May to April period. The pass-through will not exceed five percent (5%) per year.

Written Protest Procedures, Public Hearing and Statute of Limitations The City will hold a public hearing to consider adoption of the proposed rate adjustments on February 22, 2022, starting at 6:00 pm. The meeting will be held at City Council Chambers, 6707 Third Street, Suite B, Riverbank, CA 95367.

The record owner or tenant of any parcel upon which the solid waste service fees are proposed to be imposed (i.e., a customer of record) may submit a written protest to the proposed rate increases; provided, however, only one protest will be counted per identified parcel. Any written protest must: (1) state the protest is being submitted in opposition to the proposed rate increases; (2) provide the location of the identified parcel (by assessor’s parcel number or street address); and (3) include the name and City of Riverbank
signature of the record owner or tenant. Written protests may be mailed or submitted in person to the City Clerk, City of Riverbank, 6707 Third Street, Riverbank, CA 95367, or at the Public Hearing (date and time noted above). All written protests must be received by the City prior to the close of the Public Hearing, which will occur when public testimony on the proposed rates is concluded. Any protest submitted via e-mail or other electronic means will not qualify as a written protest. Please identify on the front of the envelope for any protest, whether mailed or submitted in person, that the enclosed protest is for the Public Hearing on the Proposed Solid Waste Service Fees.

The City Council will hear and consider all written protests submitted and oral comments made at the Public Hearing to the proposed rate increases. Oral comments at the Public Hearing will not qualify as formal protests unless accompanied by a written protest. Upon the conclusion of the Public Hearing, the City Council will consider adoption of the proposed rates for the solid waste service fees described in this Notice. If written protests against the proposed rate increases as outlined above are not presented by a majority of the record owners of parcels upon which the solid waste service fees are proposed to be imposed, the City Council will be authorized to approve the proposed rate increases.

Additionally, pursuant to California Government Code 53759, there will be a 120 day statute of limitations for challenging any new, increased, or extended fee including solid waste, water or sewer service charges adopted, modified, or amended after January 1, 2022.

Who should I call with questions?
For further details regarding the bases and reasons for the proposed rate increases, or for any questions you may have regarding your customer classification, the rates proposed to be imposed on your parcel, or any other questions relating to solid waste services, please call Tammy Alcantor, Assistant Finance Director at (209) 863-7112 or Marisela Garcia, Assistant City Manager/Administrative Services Director, at (209) 863-7110.

YOU MAY USE THIS FORM TO PROTEST THE PROPOSED SOLID WASTE RATE INCREASE I, ________________________________________ protest the proposed Solid Waste Rate increases.

Service Address or Assessor’s Parcel Number: _________________________________________________________ Signature: ______________________________________________________________________________________ Print Name: _____________________________________________________________________________________ Please fill out and deliver or mail to:

City of Riverbank
Attn: City Clerk
6707 Third Street, Suite A
Riverbank, CA 95367

*FORMS MUST BE RECEIVED PRIOR TO THE CLOSE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING ON FEBRUARY 22, 2022* City of Riverbank
NOTIFICACION DE AUDIENCIA PÚBLICA SOBRE EL AUMENTO

DE TARIFAS PROPUESTAS PARA LOS SERVICIO DE DESECHOS SOLIDOS El Estado de California ha puesto en ley un mandato estatal, no financiado, que es la ley de reducción de desechos más importante en los últimos 30 años; proyecto de ley del Senado 1383, Contaminantes Climáticos de Vida Corta; Reducciones de emisiones de metano de desechos orgánicos (SB 1383). Cada ciudad en el estado de California tiene el mandato bajo SB 1383 de reducir los desechos orgánicos del vertedero en un 50% en 2022 y en un 75% en 2025. Estos objetivos se establecieron para disminuir las emisiones de metano en los vertederos.

La Ciudad de Riverbank (la Ciudad) solicitó al proveedor de desechos sólidos, Gilton Solid Waste Management, Inc. (Gilton), que determine la mejor manera de cumplir con este mandato mientras brinda el mejor servicio a nuestros residentes y negocios. Para que la Ciudad logre los objetivos requeridos de desechos orgánicos, el material de desecho recolectado para la Ciudad requerirá un mayor procesamiento para capturar y desviar del vertedero la mayor cantidad de materiales orgánicos de los flujos de desechos residenciales y comerciales según lo requerido por SB 1383. Debido a estos requisitos adicionales de procesamiento de desechos y desvío de vertederos, la Ciudad necesita ajustar sus tarifas de servicio que permitirán a la Ciudad cumplir con los mandatos de SB 1383.

SB 1383 define “Residuos orgánicos” como lo siguiente:
• Alimentación/Comida
• Material verde
• Residuos de jardinería y poda
• Textiles y alfombras orgánicas
• Productos derivados de troncos elaborados en un aserradero • Madera
• Productos de papel
• Papel de impresión y escritura
SB 1383 requiere que cada jurisdicción en California proporcione servicios de recolección de productos orgánicos a todos los residentes y empresas antes del 1 de enero de 2022. Gilton continuara proporcionando un servicio de recolección residencial semanal de 2 carretas para recolectar tanto el material orgánico (carro orgánico) como la basura (carro MSW) al mismo tiempo con sus camiones automatizados de cuerpo dividido ONE-PASS.

Debido a SB 1383, el costo de la Ciudad para manejar los desechos sólidos aumentará a partir de 2022. Por lo tanto, la Ciudad está proponiendo un aumento a las Tarifas de Residuos Sólidos. El contrato de desechos sólidos de la Ciudad depende de los ingresos de cargos por servicios para satisfacer las necesidades anuales de financiamiento. Como tal, las tarifas deben fijarse en niveles adecuados para financiar el servicio. La Ciudad llevará a cabo una audiencia pública sobre los aumentos propuestos en la tarifa de desechos sólidos de la siguiente manera:

Fecha: 22 de febrero, 2022
Hora: 6:00 PM
Lugar*: Sala del Ayuntamiento de Riverbank
6707 Third Street, Suite B, Riverbank, CA 95367
City of Riverbank
* Debido a la pandemia de coronavirus, las audiencias públicas se llevaran a cabo en persona y/o en línea a conformidad con la Orden Ejecutiva del Gobernador N-29-20. Si la información de la reunión necesita ser actualizada, la información actualizada estará disponible en el sitio web de la Ciudad en www.riverbank.org.

Se necesitan aumentos en la tarifa de servicio de desechos sólidos para abordar los costos de cumplimiento de SB 1383 y la inflación
La Ciudad ha estado recibiendo servicios de recolección y eliminación de desechos sólidos de Gilton por más de 40 años. Las tarifas actuales para los servicios de residuos sólidos no han aumentado desde 2018. El aumento de la tarifa en el 2022 es impulsado por el aumento de los costos relacionados con el cumplimiento de los requisitos de SB 1383. Las tarifas en los siguientes cuatro años pasarán por cambios en el Índice de Precios al Consumidor, con un traspaso máximo del 5%, por lo que las tarifas podrán seguir financiando el mismo nivel de servicio.

La Ciudad y Gilton están comprometidos a proporcionar servicios de desechos sólidos de la más alta calidad a las tarifas más bajas posibles para nuestros clientes. Para cumplir con este compromiso, la Ciudad contrató a un consultor independiente de tarifas para llevar a cabo una evaluación de las necesidades de los servicios de desechos sólidos de la Ciudad. Con base en esta evaluación, la Ciudad ha determinado que los ajustes de tarifas propuestas, solicitadas por Gilton, están en línea con el costo del servicio. Las tarifas propuestas para el servicio mensual de residuos sólidos están estructuradas para recuperar el costo de recolectar, procesar, desviar y eliminar tanto los desechos orgánicos como la basura y asignar esos costos entre los clientes residenciales y comerciales. La Ciudad está proponiendo adoptar nuevas tarifas de desechos sólidos en los próximos cinco años, como se muestra en el cronograma a continuación.

Tarifas de residuos sólidos propuestas
Las tarifas propuestas a partir del 3/1/2022 para cada tipo de cliente se muestran en la siguiente tabla. Las tarifas en los cuatro años siguientes cambiarán en función de las transferencias inflacionarias descritas en la siguiente sección.

Tarifas Propuestas para clientes Residenciales/No-Residenciales y para pequeñas empresas Rate Type
Cuotas
Mensuales
Actuales
Cuotas Propuestas
Mensuales
Effectivo 3/1/2022
Residencial - 90 gallon Carro MSW & Carro Organico $23.40 $35.25 Residencial - 30 gallon Carro MSW & Carro Organico 20.52 32.37 Residencial - 90 gallon Carro MSW & Carro Organico - Cuota de Bajos Ingresos 17.55 29.40
Residencial - 30 gallon Carro MSW & Carro Organico - Cuota de Bajos Ingresos 15.44 27.29
Residencial - (2) 90 gallon Carro MSWs & Carro Organico 30.85 50.70 Residencial - (3) 90 gallon Carro MSWs & Carro Organico 38.30 66.15 Residencial - (2) 90 gallon Carro MSWs & Carro Organico - Cuota de Bajos Ingresos 24.37 42.82
No-Residencial y Pequenas Empresas - 90 Gallon Carro MSW 23.40 35.25 No-Residencial y Pequenas Empresas - 30 Gallon Carro MSW 20.59 32.44 No-Residencial y Pequenas Empresas - (2) 90 Gallon Carro MSW & Carro Organico 30.85 50.70
No-Residencial y Pequenas Empresas - (3) 90 Gallon Carro MSW & Carro Organico 38.30 66.15
No-Residencial y Pequenas Empresas - (4) 90 Gallon Carro MSW & Carro Organico 45.75 81.60
City of Riverbank
Tarifas Propuestas para clientes Comerciales
Rate Type
Cuotas
Mensuales
Actuales
Cuotas Propuestas
Mensuales Efectivo
3/1/2022
Comercial - 1 yd Bin 1x per week pickup 57.06 69.41
Comercial - 2 yd Bin 1x per week pickup 90.63 115.33
Comercial - 2 yd Bin 2x per week pickup 165.31 214.71
Comercial - 2 yd Bin 3x per week pickup 240.12 314.22
Comercial - 3 yd Bin 1x per week pickup 124.70 161.75
Comercial - 3 yd Bin 2x per week pickup 226.16 300.26
Comercial - 3 yd Bin 3x per week pickup 316.53 427.68
Comercial - 3 yd Bin 4x per week pickup 426.25 574.45
Comercial - 4 yd Bin 1x per week pickup 162.75 212.15
Comercial - 4 yd Bin 2x per week pickup 299.42 398.22
Comercial - 4 yd Bin 3x per week pickup 417.55 565.75
Comercial - 4 yd Bin 4x per week pickup 500.99 698.59
Comercial - 4 yd Bin 5x per week pickup 615.93 862.93
Comercial - 4 yd Bin 6x per week pickup 739.42 1,035.82 Comercial - 6 yd Bin 1x per week pickup 223.11 297.21
Comercial - 6 yd Bin 2x per week pickup 412.35 560.55
Comercial - 6 yd Bin 3x per week pickup 593.84 816.14
Comercial - 6 yd Bin 4x per week pickup 693.32 989.72
Comercial - 6 yd Bin 5x per week pickup 833.35 1,203.85 Comercial - 6 yd Bin 6x per week pickup $867.31 $1,311.91 Futuros ajustes de transferencia por inflación
A conformidad con el Código de Gobierno de California 53756, la Ciudad propone autorizar la transferencia de costos futuros debido a la inflación a través de los aumentos correspondientes a las Tarifas de Desechos Sólidos de la Ciudad. El 1ro de julio del 2023, 2024, 2025, y 2026, la tarifa máxima de desechos sólidos cambiara para reflejar los cambios anuales en el índice de Precios al Consumidor para Todos los Consumidores Urbanos (“IPC”) publicado por el Departamento de Trabajo de los Estados Unidos para el área estadística de San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose, CA. El cambio se basará en el período más reciente de mayo a abril en comparación con el período anterior de mayo a abril. El traspaso no superará el cinco por ciento (5%) anualmente.

Procedimientos de protesta por escrito, audiencia pública y estatuto de limitaciones La Ciudad llevará a cabo una audiencia pública para considerar la adopción de los ajustes de tarifas propuestas el 22 de febrero de 2022, a partir de las 6:00 pm. La reunión se llevará a cabo en la Sala del Ayuntamiento de Riverbank, 6707 Third Street, Suite B, Riverbank, CA 95367.

El propietario del registro o el inquilino de cualquier parcela sobre la que se proponga imponer las tarifas de servicio de desechos sólidos (es decir, un cliente registrado) puede presentar una protesta por escrito a los aumentos de tarifas propuestas; sin embargo, solo se contará una protesta por parcela identificada. Cualquier protesta por escrito debe: (1) declarar que la protesta se presenta en oposición a City of Riverbank
los aumentos de tarifas propuestas; (2) proporcionar la ubicación de la parcela identificada (por el número de parcela o la dirección postal del asesor); y (3) incluir el nombre y la firma del propietario del registro o inquilino. Las protestas por escrito pueden enviarse por correo o en persona a la Secretaria de la Ciudad, Ciudad de Riverbank, 6707 Third Street, Riverbank, CA 95367, o en la Audiencia Pública (fecha y hora mencionadas anteriormente). Todas las protestas por escrito deben ser recibidas por la Ciudad antes del cierre de la Audiencia Pública, que ocurrirá cuando se concluya el testimonio público sobre las tarifas propuestas. Cualquier protesta presentada por correo electrónico u otros medios electrónicos no calificará como una protesta por escrito. Por favor, identifique en el frente del sobre para cualquier protesta, ya sea enviada por correo o en persona, que la protesta adjunta es para la Audiencia Pública sobre las Tarifas de Servicio de Desechos Sólidos Propuestas.

El Concejo Municipal escuchará y considerará todas las protestas escritas presentadas y los comentarios orales hechos en la Audiencia Pública a los aumentos de tarifas propuestas. Los comentarios orales en la Audiencia Pública no calificarán como protestas formales a menos que vayan acompañados de una protesta por escrito. Al concluir la Audiencia Pública, el Concejo Municipal considerará la adopción de las tarifas propuestas para las tarifas de servicio de desechos sólidos descritas en este Aviso. Si las protestas por escrito contra los aumentos de tarifas propuestas como se describe anteriormente no son presentadas por la mayoría de los propietarios/inquilinos de parcelas a las que se propone imponer las tarifas de servicio de desechos sólidos, el Concejo Municipal estará autorizado a aprobar los aumentos de tarifas propuestas.

Además, de conformidad con el Código de Gobierno de California 53759, habrá un estatuto de limitaciones de 120 días para impugnar cualquier tarifa nueva, aumentada o extendida, incluidos los cargos por servicios de desechos sólidos, agua o alcantarillado adoptados, modificados o enmendados después del 1 de enero de 2022.
¿A quién debo llamar si tengo preguntas?
Para obtener más detalles sobre las bases y razones de los aumentos de tarifas propuestas, o para cualquier pregunta que pueda tener con respecto a su clasificación de clientes, las tarifas propuestas para ser impuestas en su parcela, o cualquier otra pregunta relacionada con los servicios de desechos sólidos, llame al Departamento de Finanzas al (209) 863-7109.

USTED PUEDE USAR ESTA FORMA PARA SOMETER SU PROTESTA AL INCREMENTO DE TARIFAS Yo, ________________________________________ doy protesta al incremento de tarifas.

Domicilio: ______________________________________________________________________________________ Firma: _________________________________________________________________________________________ Nombre: _______________________________________________________________________________________ Llene este formulario y envíelo o entrega en persona a:

City of Riverbank
Attn: City Clerk
6707 Third Street, Suite A
Riverbank, CA 95367

*FORMAS DEBEN SER RECIVIDAS ANTES DEL CIERRE DE LA AUDIENCIA PÚBLICA EL 22 DE FEBRERO 2022*

Page 1 of 8 ends

Item 10.2 – CC/LRA – 02/22/2022
RIVERBANK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.2
SECTION 10: PUBLIC HEARING
Meeting Date: February 22, 2022
Subject: Resolution Approving the Fiscal Year 2021-22 Mid-Year Budget Amendments
From: Marisela H. Garcia, Interim City Manager
Submitted by: Tammy Alcantor, Assistant Finance Director

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council consider approval of the Fiscal Year 2021-22 Mid-Year Budget Amendments.

SUMMARY
The Finance Department has performed a mid-year review of the Fiscal Year 2021-22 budget and is recommending the following: 1) budget amendments based on actual beginning reserve changes and, 2) amendments based on revenue and expenditure trends and department requests.

BACKGROUND
On June 22, 2021 the City Council adopted the FY 2021-22 Annual Operating Budget.

This operating budget was prepared using estimates and projections on anticipated revenues and expenditures and was the result of the collaboration of all of the City’s departments. For the General Fund, the City Council approved a budget reflecting a structural deficit where expenditures were projected to exceed revenues by $685,000 and was projected to end with a reserve of 32%.

An important component of a mid-year budget evaluation is determining whether projections made during the preliminary budget adoption continue to remain true as revenues are received and expenditures have been made. In addition, new information that is received from Stanislaus County and/or the State of California is reviewed for its potential impact to the City’s budget and amendments are requested accordingly.

The following is a major fund analysis of recommended adjustments to revenues and expenditures highlighting those changes that are of significant impact to the budget. A detailed listing of all funds and accounts being adjusted is attached as Exhibit A.

Page 2 of 8 ends

Item 10.2 – CC/LRA – 02/22/2022
General Fund (Fund 101)
Revenues
The mid-year review of all General Fund revenues resulted in a recommended net increase of $779,000, the majority of which represents an increase in Sales Tax Revenue. Significant adjustments were made to the following revenue sources:

Account Adjustment Reasoning
Property Tax Current
Secured
$39,000 Increase based on actual assessed
values.

Sales Tax $500,000 Increase in taxable retail activities VLF Swap Property Tax $90,000 Increase based on actual assessed values.

Building Permit Fees $40,000 New Housing Construction permits COPS/SLESA $40,000 Increase based on current revenue trend.

Plan Check Fees $25,000 Increase in new construction
Expenditures
Expenditure reviews consisted of evaluating all accounts to ensure that the original budget would be sufficient to meet anticipated expenditures through the end of the fiscal year. When evaluating accounts Finance has taken into consideration new information affecting expenditures as well as spending trends. This mid-year evaluation (review) has resulted in a recommended net increase in expenditures for the General Fund of $182,400.

Only Major expenditure adjustments over $10,000 or staffing-related adjustment are reflected below, please see Exhibit A for additional recommended adjustments:

Department Adjustment Reasoning
City Manager $40,400 Cash out leave time of departing
employee.

Admin Services $20,000 Cash out leave time of departing employee.

Development Services $22,000 Consulting assistance to comply with SB 1383 Solid Waste.
$21,300 Salary & Benefit Request for
Construction Inspector I.

Parks $12,000 Purchase new acid tank and lifeguard
chair for community pool
$12,100 Basketball Court resurfacing and
restriping Silva Park, Zerillo Park and
Pioneer Park

Page 3 of 8 ends

Item 10.2 – CC/LRA – 02/22/2022
With the approved amendments, the General Fund is anticipated to end this fiscal year with a reserve of 41% or approximately $4.9 million. An adjustment of +$788,900 has been reflected to the General Fund’s Beginning Reserve. This increase was due to continued increases in Sales Tax as well as to Coronavirus Relief Act Funds which were able to offset city salaries and the Law Enforcement Contract.

Beginning Reserve Amended 07/1/2021 $4,946,055
Amended Revenues $11,743,800
Amended Expenditures $11,832,200
Anticipated Ending Reserve 06/30/2022 $4,857,655 (41%)
Structural Deficit $88,400
General Fund Analysis
The City must take into consideration the continued increase in expenditures, particularly the CalPERS Unfunded Liability which is projected to increase by almost $2 million by 2026. Staff will be discussing the implementation of a Section 115 Trust which will allow the City to set-aside funding for future increases to the city’s pension costs, specifically those from CalPERS.

Staff continues to recommend that the City Council consider appropriating a portion of the reserve to mitigate the impact of future expenditures (i.e. economic impacts such as COVID, unfunded liability, or capital needs).

New Position Requests and Position Reclassification/Promotion The General Fund budget includes the proposal to add additional staffing that is necessary in order to address the new housing and commercial development activity that is currently occurring in the City of Riverbank. In addition, we are proposing a promotion in the Building Division. The proposed new position and reclassification are as follows:

1. Promotion of the Building Inspector II to a Senior Building Inspector. Our Building Inspector has been with the City in this capacity for 17 years. His expertise and knowledge of the City, state, and federal building codes, have made him a valuable asset to the City. The financial impact for Fiscal Year 21-22 is $3,100.

2. New position request for a Construction Inspector I. The City has a Senior Construction Inspector whose duties far exceed his time available. When additional assistance is necessary the City has had to contract out this service which decreases the city’s ability to control how the work is performed. With the increase in capital infrastructure projects and new development, city staff is in need of a second inspector who can provide the proper oversight on these projects. The addition of this position will allow the City to implement its succession plan for Development Services Administration. The financial impact for Fiscal Year 21-22 is $21,300. These costs will be offset by developer fees and grant funding.

Page 4 of 8 ends

Item 10.2 – CC/LRA – 02/22/2022
Gas Tax Fund (Fund 102)
The Gas Tax Fund receives revenues from a variety of Highway User Taxes collected from the State of California via vehicle fuel purchases. Revenues may only be used to fund Street & Roads related maintenance and project expenses.

Revised revenue projections for the City’s Gas Tax Revenues have been received from the State of California. Updated projections are based on the increase in fuel prices experienced and the annual inflationary adjustment to all per-gallon fuel excise taxes.

This will result in an additional $185,000 being received by the City in Gas Tax and SB1 Funding for projects.

Expenditures remain steady for the Gas Tax Account which funds important services such as street maintenance repairs, street sweeping, and street light utilities. Expenditure increases are recommended in the Gas Tax Fund due to increase in light replacements and overtime. A net increase of $8,000 in expenses has been projected for this mid-year revision.

The Gas Tax Fund reserve as of June 30, 2022 will be as follows:

Beginning Reserve Amended 07/1/2021 $585,977
Amended Revenues $1,585,400
Amended Expenditures $1,907,400
Anticipated Ending Reserve 06/30/2022 $263,977 (17%)
Gas Tax Fund Analysis
Unfortunately, operating expenses in this fund continue to outpace the operating Gas Tax Revenues that are received by the city. For this fiscal year, the City’s General Fund will need to subsidize expenditures by approximately $117,000 in order to ensure that there are sufficient funds to continue maintaining our streets to the highest level possible. For the FY 2022-23, the City will be recommending a possible decrease in services in order to avoid the need for further subsidies.

It is important to note, that Reserve funds in the Gas Tax Fund account reflect balances held from the SB1-Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account received from the State of California. These funds are allocated by the City Council via the approval of the SB 1 Expenditure List that is presented to Council on an annual basis. It is normal for this fund to run a deficit as revenues are collected in one fiscal year and projects are completed in another.

Sewer Fund (Fund 106)
The Sewer Fund is a business-type account that has been established to fund the necessary maintenance and improvements of the sewer collection and sewer treatment systems. Revenues are received through user fees from residential, commercial, and industrial entities and may only be used for sewer-related expenditures. The City Council adopted five-year rate increases which went into effect as of November 21, 2015 and has

Page 5 of 8 ends

Item 10.2 – CC/LRA – 02/22/2022
provided funding for operations as well as capital upgrades to our sewer service lines and wastewater treatment facility. The last increase went into effect on July 1, 2019.

The Sewer Fund beginning reserve projection is being amended to $6,790,059. A significant portion of this reserve is related to Sewer Collection improvements that will be made in FY 2022-23 as detailed in the 2015 Rate Study.

Sewer revenue projections for the current fiscal year have been slightly increased by $20,000 for Penalty revenue.

Overall, the Sewer Fund is anticipated to end with a reserve of over 100% providing funds for future projects and addressing deferred maintenance. Future years are anticipated to continue reflecting a structurally balanced budget for operations. A capital improvement listing is being developed as a result of information received from the Smoke Test Study performed last year which will need to be addressed through the consideration of future rate increases.

In summary, the Sewer Fund is anticipated to end as follows:

Beginning Reserve Amended 07/1/2021 $6,790,059
Estimated Revenues $4,834,600
Estimated Expenditures** $3,822,600
Anticipated Ending Reserve 06/30/2022 $7,802,059 (161%) Water Fund (Fund 114)
The Water Fund is a business-type account that has been established to fund the necessary maintenance and improvements of the water distribution system. Revenues are received through user fees from residential, commercial, and industrial entities and may only be used for water-related expenditures.

The Fiscal Year 2021-22 beginning reserve is being adjusted to $2,957,848. This operating reserve is available for annual ongoing maintenance and operations costs of the Water utility fund.

Overall, the Water Fund is anticipated to end with a reserve of 90% providing funds for future projects and addressing deferred maintenance. For this Fiscal Year the Water Fund continues to run a structural deficit based on original revenue projections. Other than the Water Meter Project, the City has been unable to perform any other Capital Improvement Projects listed in the adopted Five-Year Rate Study due to the postponement of consumption billing. As the City continues to collect funds from consumption billing, it is anticipated that a Capital Reserve can be established to begin addressing the projects anticipated in the Study.

Similar to the Sewer Fund, the Finance Department has made an amendment to Water Revenues for additional Penalty/Fines revenue for delinquent accounts. An initial increase of $20,000 in Penalty Revenue has been projected.

Page 6 of 8 ends

Item 10.2 – CC/LRA – 02/22/2022
In summary, the Water Fund is anticipated to end the 2021-22 fiscal year as follows:

Beginning Reserve Amended 07/1/2021 $2,957,848
Estimated Revenues $3,160,800
Estimated Expenditures $3,360,100
Anticipated Ending Reserve 06/30/2021 $2,758,548 (87%)
Public Benefit Fund (Fund 230)
In June 2018, the City Council authorized the creation of the Public Benefit Fund. The intent of the fund was to ensure that all cannabis-related revenues were segregated and easily accounted for in a specific fund. In addition to establishing the fund, the City Council developed an expenditure policy which was focused on allocating the funds received for public safety (including police and code enforcement) and other projects that would provide a public benefit, including recreation.

This fund accounts for cannabis revenue which have come directly from the Development Agreements between the City and three cannabis-related businesses in the City.

Ongoing costs include the funding of a Sheriff Deputy & Community Resource Officer, leasing of the camera system, and a Neighborhood Improvement Officer position.

For the current fiscal year, the Public Benefit fund status as of June 30, 2022 is as follows:

Beginning Reserve Amended 07/1/2021 $1,657,556
Estimated Revenues $360,250
Estimated Expenditures $494,400
Anticipated Ending Reserve 06/30/2022 $1,523,356 (422%) Major adjustments to revenues and expenditures include the following:

Account Adjustment Reasoning
Public Benefit Fee –
Flavors
-$140,000 Adjustment based on re-negotiated
agreement. Credit balance established
in prior fiscal year.

Public Benefit Fee –
Perfect Union
-$63,800 Adjustment based on re-negotiated
agreement. Credit balance established
in prior fiscal year.

Equipment/Projects +$14,500 Funding for electric police patrol bicycles and additional funds for kitchen
enhancements in the police services
building.

Public Benefit Fund Analysis
As Development Agreements are re-negotiated there is an impact to revenues that must be taken into consideration. With fixed costs such as the camera project monthly fee and

Page 7 of 8 ends

Item 10.2 – CC/LRA – 02/22/2022
funding for two law enforcement officers, and a Neighborhood Improvement Officer it is important to consider that the City should designate portions of the reserve to ensure continued funding for these on-going costs.

Future impacts to the fund include:

1. The City has approved a fourth Development Agreement with DT California, LLC (DBA: Aeriz) who has proposed a project to be located at the current Cannery site.

Aeriz has requested an amendment to their Development Agreement which will impact revenues if approved.

2. Future capital projects that include upgraded safety features for Police Services, including the possibility of installing a security fence.

OTHER FUND ACTIVITY
Since Fiscal Year 2014-15 the City of Riverbank has been working on the design of the Patterson & Roselle Traffic Signal. Due to its proximity to the to the BNSF rail line, a significant amount of time has been spent in coordinating efforts with them related to this project along with right-of-way acquisition. The majority of the funding for construction has been obtained via CMAQ and RSTP funding with an additional amount coming from our local system development fee funds. Unfortunately, we are still awaiting word on whether we will be receiving additional CMAQ/RSTP funding to cover the costs for the construction that will occur as a result of BNSF, therefore staff has included a request of $674,300 to be allocated from system development fees in the event the CMAQ/RSTP funds are not approved. This would ensure that the City could bid and construct the project this year.

CONCLUSION
The mid-year budget review is an opportunity for the City Departments to revisit their initial budgets and recommend adjustments based on actual activity that is occurring or on activity that is anticipated to occur. Therefore it is recommended that the City Council approve the mid-year budget amendments as presented in Exhibit A.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
Fund Net Revenue
Adjustment
Net Expenditure
Adjustment
General Fund +$779,000 +$182,400
Gas Tax Fund +$185,000 +$8,000
Sewer Fund +$20,000 +$11,000
Water Fund +$20,000 +$32,600
Neighborhood Improvement Fund +$20,000 +$1,700
Community Center Fund $0 +$11,000
Fleet Services Fund $0 +$4,000
Recreation Fund +$200 +$2,400

Page 8 of 8 ends

Item 10.2 – CC/LRA – 02/22/2022
Workers’ Comp Liability Fund +$17,500 +$1,700
General Liability Fund +$1,400 $0
CDBG Fund +$10,000 $0
Rivercove Landscape & Lighting $0 +$3,900
Crossroads Landscape & Lighting $0 +$4,000
Water Connection Fee Fund +$6,000 $0
Sewer Connection Fee Fund +$4,000 $0
SDF Streets/PW +$35,000 +$674,300
SDF Water +$90,000 $0
SDF Waste Water +$14,000 $0
SDF Storm Drainage +$100,000 $0
SDF Parks +$90,000 $0
SDF Police & General Gov’t +$45,000 $0
System Administration Fund +$30,000 $0
System Development Imaging Fund +$1,000 $0
Public Benefit Fund -$203,800 +$14,500

STRATEGIC PLAN
In August 2021, the City Council established a Strategic Plan Goal to “Ensure Financial Stability”. This report addresses this matter.

ATTACHMENT

1. Resolution

2. Exhibit A: FY 2021-22 Mid-Year Budget Adjustments

Page 1 of 1 ends

CC/LRA – 02/22/2022
CC Resolution No. 2022-

CITY OF RIVERBANK
RESOLUTION 2022-___

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RIVERBANK APPROVING THE FISCAL YEAR 2021-2022 MID YEAR BUDGET ADMENDMENTS WHEREAS, as part of the mid-year budget review, staff has projected that all reserve accounts will remain within or above the parameters as initially forecast; and, WHEREAS, certain critical needs to personnel, supplies, programs, and equipment have arisen in certain operational areas; and, WHEREAS, to satisfactorily meet all current needs of the City, it is recommended that the adjustments presented in Exhibit A: FY 2021-2022 Mid-Year Budget Adjustments be approved.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Riverbank hereby authorizes the budget adjustments presented in Exhibit A: FY 2021- 2022 Mid-Year Budget Adjustments to satisfactorily meet the needs of our residents.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Riverbank at a regular meeting held on the 22nd day of February, 2022; motioned by Councilmember ______, seconded by Councilmember ______, and upon roll call was carried by the following vote of ___:

AYES:

NAYS:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

ATTEST: APPROVED:
________________________ ________________________
Kathy L. Teixeira Richard D. O’Brien
Interim City Clerk Mayor
Attachments:Exhibit A – Mid Year Budget Adjustments
Fund Account Account Name Amendment Justification Amendment Original Amended 101: General Fund
Revenues 100-000.000-400.010 Property Tax Current Secured Increase in revenues based on actual Assessed
Value 39,000 1,313,000 1,352,000
101-000.000-400.050 Sales Tax
Increase in revenues with increase in retail
activities 500,000 3,600,000 4,100,000
101-000.000-400.060 Property Transfer Tax
Reduced revenue due to repayment of prior
year over payment to the City. (25,000) 69,000 44,000
101-000.000-400.090 Motor Vehicle In Lieu Tax Revenues are tracking higher than anticipated 10,000 19,000 29,000 101-000.000-400.100 Homeowners Prop Tax Relief Decrease in revenues based on current trends. (5,000) 15,000 10,000 101-000.000-400.190 VLF Swap - Property Tax
Increase in revenues based on actual Assessed
Value 90,000 2,153,400 2,243,400
101-000.000-450.030 Building Permit Fees Increase in revenues for new construction 40,000 200,000 240,000 101-000.000-501.000 COPS/SLESA Increase based current revenue trend 40,000 110,000 150,000 101-000.000-600.090 Plan Check Fees Increase in revenues for new construction 25,000 50,000 75,000 101-000.000-600.100 Planning & Zoning Fees Increase in revenues for new construction 7,000 15,000 22,000 101-000.000-664.000 Interest Income Decrease in revenues based on current trends. (15,000) 40,000 25,000 101-000.000-675.090 Miscellaneous Revenues Increase due to one-time refund 40,000 5,000 45,000 101-000.000-680.025 Misc. Program Revenue Increase reimbursement JMP staffing 11,000 20,000 31,000 101-000.000-699.000 Transfers In
Increase funding for employee cost from other
departments 22,000 2,257,600 2,279,600
Net General Fund Revenue Adjustments $ 779,000 $ 9,867,000 $ 10,646,000 General Fund Expenditure Amendments
City Manager
101-402.000-701.001 Personnel Regular
Increase due to cash out to employee departing
the City 40,000 173,800 213,800
101-402.000-706.015 Employee Functions
Increase due to additional functions for
employees departing the City. 5,000 3,500 8,500
101-402.000-708.005 Medicare
Increase due to cash out to employee departing
the City 400 2,500 2,900
Finance 101-403.000-701.001 Personnel Regular FT Employee Recruitment completed 5,500 539,900 545,400 101-403.000-701.080 Salary Request FT Employee Recruitment completed (6,900) 6,900 0 101-403.000-703.024 Postage Increase postage costs for UB mailings 5,000 6,000 11,000 101-403.000-708.007 Payroll Taxes FT Employee Recruitment completed 400 2,400 2,800 101-403.000-708.012 Deferred Compensation FT Employee Recruitment completed 1,000 9,900 10,900 Planning
101-405.000-703.025 Office Expense
Increase for replacement of computer
equipment for Staff 1,600 3,000 4,600
101-405.000-706.023 Advertising Additional advertising costs 4,500 2,000 6,500 Building
101-406.000-701.080 Salary Request
Promotion of Building Inpsector I to Sr. Building
Inspector 3,100 0 3,100
EXHIBIT A: FY 2021-22 Mid-Year Budget Adjustments
Budget

Page 1 of 7 ends

Fund Account Account Name Amendment Justification Amendment Original Amended EXHIBIT A: FY 2021-22 Mid-Year Budget Adjustments
Budget
101-406.000-703.025 Office Expense
Increase for Permit Printer, scanner and
replacement computer equipment for Staff 1,500 1,500 3,000 Building Maintenance 101-407.000-701.002 Personnel Part Time Additional part-time staffing hours 1,500 3,500 5,000 101-407.000-702.030 Maintenance Operation Equipment
Increase funding needed for unanticipated
repairs to facilities. 1,500 2,000 3,500
101-407.000-707.003 Equipment/Projects
Increase funding for additional cost on
Community Center Roof 2,500 44,800 47,300
Admin Services
101-408.000-701.001 Personnel Regular
Increase due to cash out to employee departing
the City 20,000 346,300 366,300
Police Department 101-409.000-707.003 Equipment Projects Additional cost for breakroom remodel 7,000 28,000 35,000 Development Services Administration
101-412.000-701.080 Salary Request
Salary & Benefit Costs for Construction
Inspector I 21,300 0 21,300
101-412.000-702.032 Professional/Special Services
Solid Waste Unfunded Mandates (SB 1383
Compliance) Consultant 22,000 7,500 29,500
101-412.000-703.023 Advertising Additional advertising costs 1,000 1,200 2,200 101-412.000-703.025 Office Expense
Increase for replacement of computer
equipment for Staff 6,000 2,000 8,000
Storm Water Admin 101-413.000-706.056 State/County Fees Increase fees SWRCB 600 20,300 20,900 Parks 101-414.000-701.002 Personnel Part Time Additional part-time staffing JMP 11,000 39,100 50,100 101-414.000-706.056 State/County Fees Increase property tax fees 600 3,900 4,500 101-414.000-707.002 Capital Expenditures Purchase new acid tank, new lifeguard chair 12,000 2,500 14,500 101-414.000-707.003 Equipment/Projects
Basketball Court resurfacing and restriping:

Silva Park, Zerillo Park and Pioneer Park 12,100 8,000 20,100 Recreation Subsidy
101-459.000-999.000 Transfers Out Subsidy to Recreation fund for Equip. Purchase 2,200 561,800 564,000 Net General Fund Expenditure Adjustments $182,400 $1,822,300 $2,004,700 Net General Fund Revenue Adjustments 779,000 $
Net General Fund Expenditure Adjustments $182,400
Net Effect to the General Fund Reserve $596,600

Page 2 of 7 ends

Fund Account Account Name Amendment Justification Amendment Original Amended EXHIBIT A: FY 2021-22 Mid-Year Budget Adjustments
Budget
102: Gas Tax Fund
Revenues 102-000.000-400.140 State Gas Tax 2106 Increase based on revised State estimates 10,000 77,300 87,300 102-000.000-400.150 State Gas Tax 2107 Increase based on revised State estimates 30,000 171,200 201,200 102-000.000-400.170 State Gas Tax 2105 Increase based on revised State estimates 20,000 127,500 147,500 102-000.000-400.175 State Gas Tax 2103 Increase based on revised State estimates 40,000 173,600 213,600 102-000.000-600.050 SB1-RMRA Revenue Increase based on revised State estimates 85,000 432,800 517,800 Net Gas Tax Fund Revenue Adjustments 185,000 982,400 1,167,400 Expenditures 102-418.000-701.004 Standby Pay Increase 6,000 10,000 16,000 102-418.000-702.037 Street Light Repair Increase in replacements 2,000 2,000 4,000 Net Gas Tax Fund Expenditure Adjustments 8,000 12,000 20,000 106: Sewer Fund
Revenues 106-000.000-655.000 Fines, Forfeitures, Penalties Increase due reactivating penalties 20,000 60,000 80,000 Net Sewer Fund Revenue Adjustments 20,000 60,000 80,000 Expenditures 106-423.000-999.000 Transfers out Contribution for departing employees cashout. 11,000 1,562,250 1,573,250 Net Sewer Fund Expenditure Adjustments 11,000 1,562,250 1,573,250 114: Water Fund
Revenues 114-000.000-655.000 Fines, Forfeitures, Penalties Increase due reactivating penalties 20,000 40,000 60,000 Net Water Fund Revenue Adjustments 20,000 40,000 60,000 Expenditures 114-433.000-701.003 Personnel Overtime Increase to do unforseen issues 5,000 30,000 35,000 114-433.000-701.004 Standby Pay Increase to do unforseen issues 5,000 27,000 32,000 114-433.000-704.022 Communications Increase in Communication fees 2,000 5,300 7,300 114-433.000-706.056 State/County Fees Increase SWRCB 4,000 30,000 34,000 114-433.000-706.999 Bad Debt Bad Debt Write Off for uncollectible accounts 5,000 0 5,000 114-433.000-708.005 Medicare Increased Medicare costs due to OT 600 3,600 4,200 114-433.000-999.000 Transfer out Contribution for departing employees cashout. 11,000 951,950 962,950 Net Water Fund Expenditure Adjustments 32,600 1,047,850 1,080,450

Page 3 of 7 ends

Fund Account Account Name Amendment Justification Amendment Original Amended EXHIBIT A: FY 2021-22 Mid-Year Budget Adjustments
Budget
117: Neighborhood Improvement Fund
Revenues 117-000.000-655.000 Fines, Forfeitures, Penalties Firework Citation Revenue 20,000 10,000 30,000 Net Neighborhood Improvement Fund Revenue Adjustments 20,000 10,000 30,000 Expenditures 117-411.000-701.001 Personnel Regular FT Employee Recruitment completed 27,237 69,700 96,937 117-411.000-701.080 Salary Request FT Employee Recruitment completed (58,300) 58,300 0 117-411.000-703.025 Office Expense
Increase for replacement of computer
equipment for Staff 1,700 1,500 3,200
117-411.000-708.005 Medicare FT Employee Recruitment completed 457 1,400 1,857 117-411.000-708.006 PERS Retirement FT Employee Recruitment completed 6,276 15,300 21,576 117-411.000-708.007 Payroll Taxes FT Employee Recruitment completed 289 2,300 2,589 117-411.000-708.008 Medical Insurance FT Employee Recruitment completed 16,758 1,800 18,558 117-411.000-708.009 National Retirement FT Employee Recruitment completed 2,840 4,700 7,540 117-411.000-708.010 Self Insurance (Workers Comp) FT Employee Recruitment completed 4,443 10,200 14,643 Net Neighborhood Improvement Fund Expenditures Adjustments 1,700 165,200 166,900 118: Community Center Fund
Expenditures 118-441.008-703.066 JMP Parking Expenses Increase Part Time Personnel cost 11,000 50,000 61,000 Net Community Center Fund Expenditure Adjustments 11,000 50,000 61,000 119: Fleet Services Fund
Expenditures 119-442.000-706.028 Small Tools Replacement of aging tools 4,000 1,300 5,300 Net Fleet Services Fund Expenditure Adjustments 4,000 1,300 5,300 134: Recreation Fund
Revenues 134-000.000-672.001 Pool Concessions Pool concessions for Summer 2021 200 300 500 Net Recreation Fund Revenue Adjustments 200 300 500
Expenditures 134-459.000-701.001 Personnel Regular Position vacancy use of contract employee (35,000) 254,000 219,000 134-459.000-702.032 Professional Service Contract employe for vacancy position 35,000 8,200 43,200 134-459.000-707.002 Capital Expenditures Purchase two inflatables for community pool 2,400 4,000 6,400 Net Recreation Fund Expenditures Adjustments 2,400 266,200 268,600

Page 4 of 7 ends

Fund Account Account Name Amendment Justification Amendment Original Amended EXHIBIT A: FY 2021-22 Mid-Year Budget Adjustments
Budget
137: Workers Comp Liability Fund
Revenues 137-000.000-675.445 Premium Rebate Rebate of previous years premium savings 17,500 43,900 61,400 Net Workers Comp Liability Fund Revenue Adjustments 17,500 43,900 61,400 Expenditures 137-460.000-702.032 Professional Services AED Maintenance 1,700 0 1,700 Net Workers Comp Liability Fund Expenditure Adjustments 1,700 0 1,700 138: General Liability Fund
Revenues 138-000.000-675.445 Premium Rebate Rebate of previous years premium savings 1,400 36,800 38,200 Net General Liability Fund Revenue Adjustments 1,400 36,800 38,200 153: CDBG Fund
Revenues 153-000.000-664.000 Interest Income Interest received from loan payoffs 10,000 12,000 22,000 Net CDBG Program Income Fund Revenue Adjustments 10,000 12,000 22,000 157: Water Connection Fee Fund
Revenues 157-000.000-600.150 Water Connection Fees Connection fees from new construction 6,000 20,000 26,000 Net Water Connection Fund Revenue Adjustments 6,000 20,000 26,000 158: Sewer Connection Fee Fund
Revenues 158-000.000-660.050 Sewer Connection Fees Connection fees from new construction 4,000 20,000 24,000 Net Sewer Connection Fund Revenue Adjustments 4,000 20,000 24,000 175: Rivercove Landscape & Lighting District
Expenses 175-590.000-706.029 Main. of Bldg/Structures/Grds 1/2 cost of Zerillo Park Basketball Resurfacing 3,900 36,800 40,700 Net Assessment District Fund Expenditure Adjustments 3,900 36,800 40,700

Page 5 of 7 ends

Fund Account Account Name Amendment Justification Amendment Original Amended EXHIBIT A: FY 2021-22 Mid-Year Budget Adjustments
Budget
205: Sys Dev Fees-Streets/PW
Revenues 205-000.000-664.000 Interest Income Decrease interest revenues based on rates (5,000) 20,000 15,000 205-000.000-675.330 Developer Fees Fees from new construction 40,000 100,000 140,000 Net SDF Streets/PW Fund Revenue Adjustments 35,000 120,000 155,000 Expenditures 205-473.000-707.068 Sys Development Signals Increase for Patterson/Roselle Signal for ROW 674,300 838,000 1,512,300 Net SDF Streets/PW Fund Expenditure Adjustments 674,300 838,000 1,512,300 206: Sys Dev Fees-Water
Revenues 206-000.000-675.330 Developer Fees Fees from new construction 90,000 150,000 240,000 Net SDF Water Fund Revenue Adjustments 90,000 150,000 240,000 207: Sys Dev Fees-Waste Water
Revenues 207-000.000-675.330 Developer Fees Fees from new construction 14,000 50,000 64,000 Net SDF Waste Water Fund Revenue Adjustments 14,000 50,000 64,000 208: Sys Dev Fees-Storm Drainage
Revenues 208-000.000-675.330 Developer Fees Fees from new construction 100,000 150,000 250,000 Net SDF Storm Drainage Fund Revenue Adjustments 100,000 150,000 250,000 209: Sys Dev Fees-Parks
Revenues 209-000.000-675.330 Developer Fees Fees from new construction 90,000 50,000 140,000 Net SDF Parks Fund Reveneue Adjustments 90,000 50,000 140,000

Page 6 of 7 ends

Fund Account Account Name Amendment Justification Amendment Original Amended EXHIBIT A: FY 2021-22 Mid-Year Budget Adjustments
Budget
210: Sys Dev Fees-Police & General Government
Revenues 210-000.000-675.330 Developer Fees Fees from new construction 45,000 40,000 85,000 Net SDF Police & General Govt Fund Revenue Adjustments 45,000 40,000 85,000 211: System Administration Fee Fund
Revenues 211-000.000-665.010 System Admin Fees Admin Fees from new construction 30,000 40,000 70,000 Net SDF System Admin Fee Fund Revenue Adjustments 30,000 40,000 70,000 212: System Development Imaging Fee Fund
Revenues 212-000.000-600.215 Zoning, GP, Base Map Updates GIS updates for new development 1,000 6,000 7,000 Net SDF System Dev. Imaging Fee Fund Revenue Adjustments 1,000 6,000 7,000 220: Crossroads Landscape & Lighting District
Expenses 220-590.000-706.029 Main. of Bldg/Structures/Grds 1/2 cost of Zerillo Park Basketball Resurfacing 4,000 160,778 164,778 Net Assessment District Fund Expenditure Adjustments 4,000 160,778 164,778 230: Public Benefit Fee Fund
Revenues 230-000.000-600.100 Public Benefit Fee - Flavors Adjustment based on renegotiated agreement (140,000) 360,000 220,000 230-000.000-600.150 Public Benefit Fee - Perfect Union(Cannabis Collective) Adjustment based on renegotiated agreement (63,800) 108,000 44,200 Net Public Benefit Fund Revenue Adjustments (203,800) 468,000 264,200 Expenditures 230-411.000-707.003 Equipment/Projects Two electric police patrol bicycles 8,500 230-441.000-707.003 Equipment/Projects Kitchen enhancement police building 6,000 35,000 49,500 Net Public Benefit Fund Expenditure Adjustments 14,500 35,000 49,500

Page 7 of 7 ends

Page 1 of 2 ends

Item 11.1 - CC 02/22/2022
RIVERBANK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO. 11.1
SECTION 11: NEW BUSINESS
Meeting Date: February 22, 2022
Subject: 2022 Cheese & Wine Festival
From: Marisela H. Garcia, Interim City Manager
Submitted by: Sue Fitzpatrick, Director of Parks and Recreation

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council hear the plans being considered for the 2022 Cheese & Wine Festival and provide input to the Director of Parks and Recreation and Simply Devine Events, LLC for the Coordination of the 2022 Cheese & Wine Festival.

SUMMARY
A brief overview will be provided to the City Council regarding the outcome of the 2021 Cheese & Wine Festival. Potential plans will be presented for City Council review for the 2022 Festival by Tamra Spade, owner of Simply Devine Events, LLC.

BACKGROUND
The Riverbank Cheese and Wine Festival has been held in Riverbank for the past 44 years. The Festival was administered by the Riverbank Chamber of Commerce for many years until it was sold to the Riverbank Rotary Club. The Rotary Club administered the Festival for 8 years and in 2014 made the decision that they were unable to continue the event. The city then purchased the event from the Rotary Club for $15,000.

The City Parks and Recreation Department contracted with Chris Ricci Presents, Inc. for six years for the coordination of the festival. Last year the City contracted with Simply Devine Events, LLC for the first time.

The first year is always a learning experience when implementing this event as there are a great deal of moving parts to this large festival. The Director of Parks and Recreation and Tamra Spade from Simply Devine Events, LLC will discuss last year’s festival and discuss some ideas for the implementation of this year’s festival.

Page 2 of 2 ends

Item 11.1 - CC 02/22/2022

STRATEGIC PLAN
This item is relevant to the City Strategic Plan by Enhancing the Quality of Life through Recreation and Community Events.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
The performance agreement put in place for the 2021 event engaged Simply Devine Events, LLC to provide the event coordination services and established that the costs for those services to be $20,000 and 15% of net revenue over the budgeted profit.

The 2021 festival was well attended, safe and overall successful operationally. Financially the event was self-sustaining as in the past. There was not much revenue generated after expenses but this was due to a variety of factors including COVID challenges, a new contractor and the rise in cost for services and products.

Since the City has taken oversite of the event, the festival has been financially successful and has not required funding from the General Fund. The goal of the department is for the festival to be self-sustaining, safe and enjoyed by the community.

ATTACHMENT
There are no attachments to this report.

Page 1 of 5 ends

Item 11.2 – CC/LRA – 02/22/2022
RIVERBANK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO. 11.2
SECTION 11: NEW BUSINESS
Meeting Date: February 22, 2022
Subject: A Resolution to Award a Contract for the Technical Package, Program Management, and Preliminary Design for the Regional Recycled Water Project – Phase I to Kjeldsen, Sinnock & Neudeck, Inc., and Authorize a Budget Appropriation in the amount of $425,000 from the Wastewater Enterprise Fund for Said Contract
From: Marisela H. Garcia, Interim City Manager
Submitted by: Michael Riddell, Public Works Director

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council award the contract for preliminary design phase, program management, and preparation of the Technical Package for the State Water Resources Control Board Clean Water State Revolving Fund Financial Assistance application for the Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project – Phase I to Kjeldsen, Sinnock & Neudeck, Inc., authorize the City Manager to execute a contract with said firm in the amount of $404,662, authorize a contingency amount of $20,338 (approximately 5%), and authorize a budget appropriation of $425,000 from the Wastewater Enterprise Fund for said contract.

SUMMARY
Upon completion of the City of Riverbank Recycled Water Production Study and Recycled Water Use Study reports and as directed by the City Council, applications for financial assistance for proceeding with the Phase I Regional Recycled Water Project (RRRWP) have been prepared and submitted to the State Water Resources Control Board under the Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF). Additional application documentation has been submitted to the United States Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) for consideration of funding under the Title XVI and funding from other sources has been identified and is being pursued. To complete the CWSRF financial assistance application for project implementation, preparation of the CWSRF Technical Package is necessary, which includes preparation of preliminary design documents and coordination with the consultants conducting the environmental and financial studies and reports.

During this period of applying for financial assistance, technical support and representation of the City in management of the Phase I program is also required, to

Page 2 of 5 ends

Item 11.2 – CC/LRA – 02/22/2022
include coordinating the selection of a design consultant team to ultimately prepare the final construction documents once funding is secured. Based on the City’s Request for Qualifications (RFQ) process for on-call civil engineering services and Kjeldsen, Sinnock, & Neudeck, Inc.’s (KSN) selection as the firm most qualified to provide the City’s con-call water, stormwater, and wastewater engineering, as well as KSN’s successful completion of the Recycled Water Study reports, staff has negotiated a fair and reasonable scope of services and budget with KSN for program management, preliminary design and preparation of the Technical Package, and assistance in selecting the design consultant team for once funding is secured. Tonight’s request is to proceed with awarding the contract to KSN for providing program management, preparation of preliminary design and CWRSF Environmental Package documents, and assisting the City in selecting a design team for the project. Because applications for additional funding sources are currently being pursued, and additional engineering studies and planning may be necessary as the project details are further developed, it is further recommended that the City Council authorize a 5% budget contingency to allow the City Manager to negotiate additional engineering studies or report preparation.

BACKGROUND
The City has completed a feasibility level study of expanding the Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) to produce recycled water as well as provide for capacity to meet expected wastewater treatment needs of the City for the next 30 years. The feasibility study also evaluated treatment process improvements to provide for nitrogen control and improved effluent quality for continued discharge to land of a portion of the flow, not otherwise delivered to recycled water users. Based on input and direction from the City Council, a Phase I program of implementation of the alternatives evaluated in the feasibility study is being developed for implementation, including preparation of financial assistance applications to multiple funding sources. The Phase I recommended program of the RRRWP is envisioned as a program for the production and use of recycled water in southeastern San Joaquin County. Wastewater generated within the City is the proposed source of recycled water in this proposed project and has the potential to capture and reuse wastewater to supplement fresh water sources, including in-lieu recharge of groundwater. The proposed project includes improvements to the City of Riverbank WWTP, and recycled water distribution facilities within the vicinity of the WWTP. It is envisioned that this water will be used to offset water used for agricultural needs. The Phase I project is proposed to include the following facilities improvements:

1. Facilities improvements at the WWTP to provide the level of treatment required to produce recycled water from wastewater originating at the City of Riverbank, including upgrades to the secondary treatment process and addition of tertiary treatment and disinfection; modifications of existing percolation ponds and/or construction of new seasonal storage ponds; and construction of a new distribution pump station. Improvements to the secondary treatment process include biological nutrient removal to reduce effluent nitrogen for continued use of the on-site percolation ponds.

2. Recycled water distribution facilities for agricultural irrigation using recycled water in the vicinity of the City of Riverbank. The distribution of recycled water is expected to be phased with initial phase delivering recycled water directly to

Page 3 of 5 ends

Item 11.2 – CC/LRA – 02/22/2022
one or more individual agricultural users in close proximity to the Riverbank WWTP. A later phase delivering recycled water to the South San Joaquin Irrigation District Lower Lateral #2 may be completed once additional agreements are in place.

It is the City’s goal to have a complete application for financial assistance, including any refinements to the project scope coordinated with the environmental and financial/rate studies occurring concurrently, and preparation of the Technical Package before December 31, 2022.

The projected total capital cost (including allowance for engineering, environmental, permitting, and administration) of the recommended improvements are summarized below.

Facility Component Projected Total
Capital Cost
Headworks and Secondary Improvements to WWTP $39,740,000 Recycled Water Filtration and Disinfection $8,800,000
Phase I Recycled Water Storage, Pumping, and Distribution $16,500,000 Total $65,040,000
The total engineering design cost for the above project scope is budgeted at approximately $5.2M, or about 10% of the construction cost.

Application was made to the State Water Resources Control Board for financial assistance under the CWSRF program. The submitted application included the general application form and project information as well as the priority scoring sheet. To complete the application, and allow for a project scoring that would result in project funding in 2023, the following additional detailed information must be prepared and submitted no later than December 31, 2022:

Technical Package, (which is included with the scope of services for this item) to include review of water rights, water conservation measures, the Project Report (the feasibility studies prepared in 2021), updated project details (as needed for preparation of the other application packages) and worksheets.

Environmental Package, to include CEQA documentation (requiring additional project engineering definition), project evaluation under federal environmental requirements (additional alternatives analysis and archeological/historic preservation review, clean air act review, and biological resources and water quality/wetland resources review). Preparation of this package was authorized by the County Council at the February 8, 2022 meeting.

Financial Security Package, to include City demographic information, funding sources, projected annual operation and maintenance costs, revenue source determinations and associated rate study and rate adoption, and additional

Page 4 of 5 ends

Item 11.2 – CC/LRA – 02/22/2022
financial management policies and projections. Preparation of this package was authorized by the County Council at the February 8, 2022 meeting.

The City Council has authorized the preparation of the Environmental and Financial Security Packages and concurrent development of the Technical Package is planned to allow the City to have a complete CWSRF financial assistance package by December 31, 2022. Ak key element of this scope is to include a more detailed preliminary design to support both environmental and financial analysis and review. This will allow consideration of project finding, including retaining a design consultant for initiation of detailed design in 2023.

In addition to providing for preparation of the Technical Package for the CWSRF financial assistance application, the enclosed negotiated scope of services also provides for the following key assistance in project implementation:
• Program management during this preliminary design and funding application phase, including technical representation of the City with the selected environmental and rate study consultants and with the State Water Resources Control Board, USBR, US EPA, and others.
• Assistance with progress reports and presentations to the City Council on advancement of this important project.
• Preparation of additional technical information expected for the USBR Title XVI application and initial US EPA coordination on WIFIA financial assistance. • Preparation of detailed preliminary design information to further refine the project scope, including any adjustment to the project as needed resulting from environmental and financial review, and to serve as the scope for selection of the design consultant team to take the project design forward for construction. • Assistance to the City for the important process of selecting a qualified design consultant team to take the project design through to preparation of detailed plans and specifications for project bidding and construction starting in 2023, under the requirements of the finding programs secured by the City.

The scope of services contained as Exhibit A to the attached draft Consultant Agreement has been developed to address these requirements. The effort, including the preliminary design effort at a proposed budget of $314,350, is reasonable at less than 8% of the expected total design cost of $5.2M.

Based on City staff’s reviewed and selection of KSN for on-call civil engineering related to the City’s water, wastewater, and stormwater utilities, and the firm’s project understanding, experience with related work, and firm’s project manager experience and qualifications, contracting with KSN is recommended according to the attached draft Consultant Agreement.

STRATEGIC PLAN
The RRRWP and this action addresses the following August 10, 2021 Strategic Plan Goals:

Page 5 of 5 ends

Item 11.2 – CC/LRA – 02/22/2022
Goal 1.3 Continue to seek local, regional and federal grant opportunities to support City projects, programs and initiatives.

Goal 6, Promoting Sustainable Development, by providing for facilities that sustainably support the City’s thoughtful and careful planning.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
Cost of this element of the project is $404,662, with the potential to add an additional $20,338 supporting pursuit of additional funding sources or additional technical studies, to be appropriated from the City’s Wastewater Enterprise Fund.

ATTACHMENT
1) Resolution
2) Kjeldsen, Sinnock & Neudeck, Inc. Consultant Agreement - DRAFT

Page 1 of 2 ends

CC/LRA – 02/22/2022
CC Resolution No. 2022-

CITY OF RIVERBANK
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-___

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RIVERBANK,

CALIFORNIA, TO AWARD A CONTRACT FOR THE TECHNICAL PACKAGE,

PROGRAM MANAGEMENT, AND PRELIMINARY DESIGN FOR THE REGIONAL RECYCLED WATER PROJECT – PHASE I TO KJELDSEN, SINNOCK & NEUDECK, INC., AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A

CONTRACT WITH SAID FIRM, AND AUTHORIZE A BUDGET APPROPRIATION OF $425,000 FROM THE WASTEWATER ENTERPRISE FUND FOR SAID

CONTRACT
WHEREAS, the City has submitted an application to the State Water Resources Control Board for financial assistance in implementing the Regional Recycled Water Project – Phase I; and
WHEREAS, in order to complete the application for financial assistance certain technical documents must be prepared and submitted to the State Water Resources Control Board; and
WHEREAS, preparation of preliminary design engineering is needed to support environmental and financial studies being conducted for this project and to refine the project scope for future preparation of detailed construction plans; and WHEREAS, the City desires to contract for program management and technical representation during the preliminary design and financial assistance application phase; and
WHEREAS, in addition to submitting to the State Water Resources Control Board for financial assistance, the City will also submit applications for funding under other programs to be determined; and
WHEREAS, the scope of services for program management, preliminary design and preparation of the Technical Package under the State Water Resources Control Board Clean Water State Revolving Fund Program will meet these requirements; and WHEREAS, after consideration of statements of qualifications submitted in response to a Request for Qualifications for on-call civil engineering services, it is the City Council’s desire to award the contract for preparation of the Technical Package, program management, and preliminary design to Kjeldsen, Sinnock & Neudeck, Inc. at a cost of $404,662, with an approximate 5% budget contingency amount of $20,338 for potential additional services to be administered by the City Manager, for a total of $425,000 to be allocated from the Wastewater Enterprise Fund.

Page 2 of 2 ends

CC/LRA – 02/22/2022
CC Resolution No. 2022-
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Riverbank hereby awards the Technical Package, Program Management, and Preliminary Design for the Regional Recycled Water Project – Phase I contract to Kjeldsen, Sinnock & Neudeck, Inc, authorizes the City Manager to execute this contract, and appropriates $404,662 from the Wastewater Enterprise Fund.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Riverbank at a regular meeting held on the 22nd day of February, 2022; motioned by Councilmember ________, seconded by Councilmember _________, and upon roll call was carried by the following City Council vote of :

AYES:

NAYS:

ABSENT:

ABSTAINED:

ATTEST: APPROVED:
_________________________ _____________________________ Kathy L. Teixeira Richard D. O’Brien
Interim City Clerk Mayor
Attachment: Consultant Agreement

CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT
City of Riverbank and Kjeldsen, Sinnock & Neudeck, Inc.

Page 1 of 8 ends

CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT
THIS CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is made and entered into this ____ day of February 2022, (the “Effective Date”) by and between the City of Riverbank, a California municipal corporation (“City”), and Kjeldsen, Sinnock & Neudeck, Inc., a California corporation (“Consultant”). City and Consultant may herein be referred to individually as a “Party” and collectively as the “Parties”. There are no other parties to this Agreement.

RECITALS
A. City has issued a request for qualifications (“RFQ”) for on-call civil engineering services and determined that consultant services are required for the preparation of technical documents and program management services in connection with the Regional Recycled Water Project – Phase I (the “Project”).

B. Consultant has submitted a statement of qualifications and a proposed scope of services to City for proposed consultant services, attached hereto and described more fully in Exhibit A (“Services”).

C. Consultant represents that it is qualified, willing and able to provide the Services to City, and that it will perform Services related to the Project according to the rate schedule attached hereto and described more fully in Exhibit B (the “Rates”).

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises and covenants set forth below, the Parties agree as follows:

AGREEMENT

1. Consulting Services. Consultant agrees, during the term of this Agreement, to perform the Services for City in connection with the Project. Any request for services in addition to the Services described in Exhibit A will be considered a request for additional consulting services and not compensated unless the Parties otherwise agree in writing. No subcontract shall be awarded or an outside consultant engaged by Consultant unless prior written approval is obtained from City.

2. Compensation. City shall pay Consultant according to the fee schedule set forth in the Rates, as full remuneration for the performance of the Services, with a total cost not to exceed $404,662.00 for the Services described in Exhibit A. Consultant agrees to maintain a log of time spent in connection with performing the Services. On a monthly basis, Consultant shall provide City, in reasonable and understandable detail, a description of the services rendered pursuant to the Services and in accordance with the Rates. If the work is satisfactorily completed, City shall pay such invoice within thirty (30) days of its receipt. If City disputes any portion of any invoice, City shall pay the undisputed portion within the time stated above, and at the same time advise Consultant in writing of the disputed portion.

CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT
City of Riverbank and Kjeldsen, Sinnock & Neudeck, Inc.

Page 2 of 8 ends

3. Reimbursement. Reimbursable expenses related to travel, lodging, conference calls, reproduction and other costs incurred related to Consultant’s performance of the Services in accordance with the Rates with the total fee not to exceed that stipulated in Paragraph 2.

4. Confidential Information. Consultant understands and agrees that, in the performance of Services under this Agreement or in the contemplation thereof, Consultant may have access to private or confidential information that may be owned or controlled by City and that such information may contain proprietary or confidential details, the disclosure of which to third parties may be damaging to City (“Confidential Information”).

Consultant shall not, either during or after the Term, disclose to any third party any Confidential Information without the prior written consent of City. If City gives Consultant written authorization to make any such disclosure, Consultant shall do so only within the limits and to the extent of that authorization. Such authorization does not guarantee that the City will grant any further disclosure of Confidential Information. Consultant may be directed or advised by the City Attorney on various matters relating to the performance of the Services on the Project or on other matters pertaining to the Project, and in such event, Consultant agrees that it will treat all communications between itself, its employees and its subcontractors as being communications which are within the attorney-client privilege.

5. Term. This Agreement shall become effective on the Effective Date and will continue in effect until the Services provided herein have been completed, unless terminated earlier as provided in Section 6 or 7 below (the “Term”).

6. Termination. City may terminate this Agreement prior to the expiration of the Term (“Termination”), without cause or reason, by notifying Consultant in writing of City’s desire to terminate this Agreement (the “Termination Notice”). Upon receipt of a Termination Notice, Consultant shall immediately cease performing the Services. Consultant will be entitled to compensation, as of the date Consultant receives the Termination Notice, only for Services actually performed.

7. Termination for Cause. Notwithstanding Section 6 above, this Agreement may be terminated by City for cause based on the loss or suspension of any licenses, permits or registrations required for the continued provision of the Services, or Consultant’s malfeasance.

Termination of the Agreement for cause as set forth in this Section shall relieve City from compensating Consultant.

8. Performance by Key Employee. Consultant has represented to City that Neal Colwell will be the person primarily responsible for the performance of the Services and all communications related to the Services. City has entered into this Agreement in reliance on that representation by Consultant.

CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT
City of Riverbank and Kjeldsen, Sinnock & Neudeck, Inc.

Page 3 of 8 ends

9. Property of City. The following will be considered and will remain the property of City:

A. Documents. All reports, drawings, graphics, working papers and Confidential Information furnished by City in connection with the Services (“Documents”).

Nothing herein shall be interpreted as prohibiting or limiting City’s right to assign all or some of City’s interests in the Documents.

B. Data. All data collected by Consultant and produced in connection with the Services including, but not limited to, drawings, plans, specifications, models, flow diagrams, visual aids, calculations, and other materials (“Data”). Nothing herein shall be interpreted as prohibiting or limiting City’s right to assign all or some of City’s interests in the Data.

C. Delivery of Documents and Data. Consultant agrees, at its expense and in a timely manner, to return to City all Documents and Data upon the conclusion of the Term or in the event of Termination.

10. Duties of City. In order to permit Consultant to render the services required hereunder, City shall, at its expense and in a timely manner:

A. Provide such information as Consultant may reasonably require to undertake or perform the Services;

B. Promptly review any and all documents and materials submitted to City by Consultant in order to avoid unreasonable delays in Consultant’s performance of the Services; and C. Promptly notify Consultant of any fault or defect in the performance of Consultant’s services hereunder.

11. Representations of Consultant. City relies upon the following representations by Consultant in entering into this Agreement:

A. Qualifications. Consultant represents that it is qualified to perform the Services and that it possesses the necessary licenses, permits and registrations required to perform the Services or will obtain such licenses or permits prior to the time such licenses or permits are required. Consultant represents and warrants to City that Consultant shall, at Consultant’s sole cost and expense, keep in effect or obtain at all times during the Term of this Agreement, any licenses, permits, and registrations that are legally required for Consultant to practice Consultant's profession at the time the Services are rendered.

B. Consultant Performance. Consultant represents and warrants that all Services under this Agreement shall be performed in a professional manner and shall conform to the customs and standards of practice observed on similar, successfully completed projects by specialists in the Services to be provided. Consultant shall adhere to accepted professional standards as set forth by relevant professional associations and shall perform all Services required under this Agreement in a manner consistent with generally accepted professional customs,

CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT
City of Riverbank and Kjeldsen, Sinnock & Neudeck, Inc.

Page 4 of 8 ends

procedures and standards for such Services. All work or products completed by Consultant shall be completed using the best practices available for the profession and shall be free from any defects. Consultant agrees that, if a Service is not so performed, in addition to all of its obligations under this Agreement and at law, Consultant shall re-perform or replace unsatisfactory Service at no additional expense to City.

12. Compliance with Laws and Standards. Consultant shall insure compliance with all applicable federal, state, and local laws, ordinances, regulations and permits, including but not limited to federal, state, and county safety and health regulations. Consultant shall perform all work according to generally accepted standards within the industry. Consultant shall comply with all ordinances, laws, orders, rules, and regulations, including the administrative policies and guidelines of Client pertaining to the work.

13. Independent Contractor; Subcontracting. Consultant will employ, at its own expense, all personnel reasonably necessary to perform the Services. All acts of Consultant, its agents, officers, employees and all others acting on behalf of Consultant relating to this Agreement will be performed as independent contractors. Consultant, its agents and employees will represent and conduct themselves as independent contractors and not as employees of City. Consultant has no authority to bind or incur any obligation on behalf of City. Except as City may specify in writing, Consultant shall have no authority, express or implied, to act on behalf of City in any capacity whatsoever as an agent. Consultant shall have no authority, express or implied, pursuant to this Agreement to bind City to any obligation whatsoever. Consultant is prohibited from subcontracting this Agreement or any part of it unless such subcontracting is expressly approved by City in writing.

14. Insurance. Consultant and all of Consultant’s contractors and subcontractors shall obtain and maintain insurance of the types and in the amounts described in this paragraph and its subparagraphs with carriers reasonably satisfactory to City.

A. General Liability Insurance. Consultant shall maintain occurrence version commercial general liability insurance or an equivalent form with a limit of not less than Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000) per claim and Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000) for each occurrence.

B. Workers’ Compensation Insurance. Consultant shall carry workers’ compensation insurance as required by the State of California under the Labor Code. Consultant shall also carry employer’s liability insurance in the amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) per accident, with a One Million Dollar ($1,000,000.00) policy limit for bodily injury by disease, and a One Million Dollar ($1,000,000.00) limit for each employee’s bodily injury by disease.

C. Errors and Omissions Liability. Consultant shall carry errors and omissions liability insurance in the amount of no less than One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) per occurrence or greater if appropriate for the Consultant's profession. Architects and engineers coverage is to be endorsed to include contractual liability. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City. At the option of the City, either the

CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT
City of Riverbank and Kjeldsen, Sinnock & Neudeck, Inc.

Page 5 of 8 ends

insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions with respect to the City, elected and appointed councils, commissions, directors, officers, employees, agents, and representatives (“City’s Agents”); or the Consultant shall provide a financial guarantee satisfactory to the City guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claims administration and defense expenses.

D. Other Insurance Requirements. Within five (5) days of the Effective Date, Consultant shall provide City with certificates of insurance for all of the policies required under this Agreement (“Certificates”), excluding the required worker’s compensation insurance.

Such Certificates shall be kept current for the Term of the Agreement and Consultant shall be responsible for providing updated copies and notifying City if a policy is cancelled, suspended, reduced, or voided. With the exception of the worker’s compensation insurance, all of the insurance policies required in this Agreement shall: (a) provide that the policy will not be cancelled, allowed to expire, or materially reduced in coverage without at least thirty (30) days’ prior written notice to City of such cancellation, expiration, or reduction and each policy shall be endorsed to state such; (b) name City, and City’s Agents as additional insureds with respect to liability arising out of Services, work or operations performed by or on behalf of the Consultant; products and completed operations of the Consultant; premises owned, occupied, or used by the Consultant, or automobiles owned, leased, or hired or borrowed by the Consultant. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City; (c) be primary with respect to any insurance or self-insurance programs covering City or City’s Agents and any insurance or self-insurance maintained by City or City’s Agents shall be in excess of Consultant’s insurance and shall not contribute to it; (d) contain standard separation of insured provisions; and (e) state that any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policy including breaches of warranties shall not affect the coverage provided to the City.

15. Indemnification. Consultant hereby agrees to indemnify and hold harmless City, its agents, officers, employees and volunteers, against all liability, obligations, claims, loss, and expense (a) caused or created by Consultant, its subcontractors, or the agents or employees of either, whether negligent or not, pertaining to or related to acts or omissions of Consultant in connection with the Services, or (b) arising out of injuries suffered or allegedly suffered by employees of Consultant or its subcontractors (i) in the course of their employment, (ii) in the performance of work hereunder, or (iii) upon premises owned or controlled by City. Consultant’s obligation to defend, indemnify and hold City and its agents, officers, employees and volunteers harmless is not terminated by any requirement in this Agreement for Consultant to procure and maintain a policy of insurance.

16. Consequential Damages. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, in no event shall City be liable, regardless of whether any claim is based on contract or tort, for any special, consequential, indirect or incidental damages, including, but not limited to, lost profits or revenue, arising out of or in connection with this Agreement or the Services performed in connection with this Agreement.

17. Litigation. In the event that either Party brings an action under this Agreement for the breach or enforcement hereof, or must incur any collection expenses for any amounts due

CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT
City of Riverbank and Kjeldsen, Sinnock & Neudeck, Inc.

Page 6 of 8 ends

hereunder the prevailing Party in such action shall be entitled to its costs including reasonable attorney’s fees, whether or not such action is prosecuted to judgment.

18. Notices. Any notice or communication required hereunder between City or Consultant must be in writing, and may be given either personally, by registered or certified mail (return receipt requested), or by Federal Express, UPS or other similar couriers providing overnight delivery. If personally delivered, a notice shall be deemed to have been given when delivered to the Party to whom it is addressed. Notices given by registered or certified mail shall be deemed to have been given and received on the first to occur of (a) actual receipt by any of the addressees designated below as the party to whom notices are to be sent, (b) on the date delivered as shown on a receipt issued by the courier, or (c) five (5) days after a registered or certified letter containing such notice, properly addressed, with postage prepaid, is deposited in the United States mail. If given by Federal Express or similar courier, a notice or communication shall be deemed to have been given and received on the date delivered as shown on a receipt issued by the courier. Any Party hereto may at any time, by giving ten (10) days written notice to the other Party hereto, designate any other address in substitution of the address to which such notice or communication shall be given. Such notices or communications shall be given to the Parties at the addresses in this paragraph set forth below:

If to City: City of Riverbank
6707 Third Street
Riverbank, CA 95367
Attn: City Clerk
With courtesy copies to: City of Riverbank
6707 Third Street
Riverbank, CA 95367
Attn: City Manager
And to: White Brenner LLP
1414 K Street, 3rd Floor
Sacramento, California 95814
Attention: Douglas L. White, Esq.

If to Consultant: Kjeldsen, Sinnock & Neudeck, Inc.
711 North Pershing Ave.

Stockton, CA 95203
Attention: Neal Colwell

19. General Provisions.

A. Modification. No alteration, modification, or termination of this Agreement shall be valid unless made in writing and executed by all Parties.

CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT
City of Riverbank and Kjeldsen, Sinnock & Neudeck, Inc.

Page 7 of 8 ends

B. Waiver. The waiver by any Party of a breach of any provision hereof shall be in writing and shall not operate or be construed as a waiver of any other or subsequent breach hereof unless specifically stated in writing.

C. Assignment. No Party shall assign, transfer, or otherwise dispose of this Agreement in whole or in part to any individual, firm, or corporation without the prior written consent of the other Party. Subject to the forgoing provisions, this Agreement shall be binding upon, and inure to the benefit of, the respective successors and assigns of the Parties.

D. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the state of California.

E. Venue. Venue for all legal proceedings shall be in the Superior Court of California for the County of Stanislaus.

F. Partial Invalidity. If any provision of this Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void, or unenforceable, the remaining provisions shall nevertheless continue in full force without being impaired or invalidated in any way.

G. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in two or more counterparts, each of which shall constitute an original and all of which shall be deemed a single agreement.

H. Severability. If any term, covenant, or condition of this Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, the remainder of this Agreement shall remain in effect.

I. Audit. City shall have access at all reasonable times to all reports, contract records, contract documents, contract files, and personnel necessary to audit and verify Consultant’s charges to City under this Agreement.

J. Entire Agreement. This Agreement sets forth the entire understanding between the Parties as to the subject matter of this Agreement and merges all prior discussions, negotiations, proposal letters or other promises, whether oral or in writing.

K. Headings Not Controlling. Headings used in this Agreement are for reference purposes only and shall not be considered in construing this Agreement.

L. Time is of the Essence. Time is of the essence in this Agreement for each covenant and term of a condition herein.

CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT
City of Riverbank and Kjeldsen, Sinnock & Neudeck, Inc.

Page 8 of 8 ends

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Agreement as of the last day and date below written.

CITY:

CITY OF RIVERBANK, a California
municipal corporation
By:

Marisela Garcia, Interim City Manager
Date:

CONSULTANT:

Kjeldsen, Sinnock & Neudeck, Inc., a
California corporation
By:

Name:

Date:

Approved as to Form:

Tom Hallinan, City Attorney

EXHIBIT A
Services
P a g e 1 City of Riverbank
Regional Recycled Water Program
Preliminary Design Phase Program
Management
Scope of Services
City of Riverbank
Regional Recycled Water Program
Preliminary Design Phase Program Management
December 15, 2021
Project Background and Understanding
The City of Riverbank is completing the study phase of the Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Program with the City-selected first-phase project to consist of the following elements:

1. Headworks upgrades

2. Conversion of secondary treatment process to provide for nitrogen removal

3. Production of tertiary disinfected recycled water

4. Storage and conveyance to deliver an estimated maximum of approximately 1,800 acre-feet per year of recycled water to up to 600 acres for crop irrigation The Phase I Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project is proposed to construct facilities improvements to produce recycled water for agricultural irrigation in the southeast portion of San Joaquin County, in the vicinity of the City of Riverbank and to provide for treatment upgrades to serve current connections and identified development expected to occur within the next approximately 30 years.

A general information package application has been submitted to the State Water Resources Controls Board (SWRCB) for funding under the Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF). A goal of the City is to have a complete application package under the CWSRF program by the end of 2023, to include:
 Technical package with updates to the project scope and cost estimate coordinated with the City’s financial ability to fund the project, including all applicable technical package attachments (T1 through T13).
 Environmental package with consideration of CEQA, federal environmental coordination, and environmental package attachments E1 – CEQA Documents and E2- Federal Cross-cutter Documents.
 Financial security package to include details regarding the level of financial support requested, City financial information and commitment (including sewer rate study) to pay for debt service at the scale of project the City can accommodate and associated attachments F1 through F12 as applicable.

The City is still also considering additional financial assistance from sources such as the United States Environmental Protection Agency WIFIA program and the United States Bureau of Reclamation Title XVI program.

Scope of Services
To support this effort and objective of having a complete application by December 31, 2022, this scope of services proposes to provide Program Management, management of environmental and financial consultants, and to provide preliminary design engineering services to refine the project scope and budget P a g e 2 City of Riverbank
Regional Recycled Water Program
Preliminary Design Phase Program
Management
concurrent with environmental and financial report preparation. The specific scope of services proposed is as follows.

TASK 1 – PROGRAM MANAGEMENT AND PROJECT COORDINATION
This task is proposed to provide the City with overall program management during 2022 to include coordination with the City, selected consultants, communication with funding agencies, and preparation of progress reports and updated as detailed in the below sub-tasks.

Task 1.01 – Project Coordination and Meetings
KSN will provide project coordination and coordinate and attend meetings as necessary to manage progress towards the goal of having complete information for project financial assistance by the end of December 2022. This task includes:
 Preparing for and conducting monthly meetings with the Project team, including City representatives and the consultant team. KSN will schedule meetings, set the agenda, manage the meetings and deliver to the team meeting notes and action items. Our budget is based on a total of twelve (12) progress meetings.
 Coordination with the environmental and rate and financial consultants on project progress through e-mail, phone, and other correspondence to manage progress under the set timeline. Effort is assumed to be approximately four hours per month.

Task 1.02 – Environmental Consultant Coordination
As manager of the Regional Recycled Water Program, KSN will coordinate with the selected environmental consultant on a regular basis as a means to manage the consultants progress and performance within the required program scope and schedule. Effort under this sub-task is expected to be in addition to overall project coordination and management and is proposed to include:
 Monthly check-in with the environmental consultant on project progress, schedule and budget.  Coordination of information needs, delivery of background information, and preparation of documents under consultants agreement and scope.
 Review of draft documents on behalf of the City.

Task 1.03 – Rate and Financial Consultant Coordination
As manager of the Regional Recycled Water Program, KSN will coordinate with the selected rate and financial consultant on a regular basis as a means to manage the consultants progress and performance within the required program scope and schedule. Effort under this sub-task is expected to be in addition to overall project coordination and management and is proposed to include:
 Monthly check-in with the rate and financial consultant on project progress, schedule and budget.  Coordination of information needs, delivery of background information, and preparation of documents under consultants’ agreement and scope.
 Review of draft documents on behalf of the City.

P a g e 3 City of Riverbank
Regional Recycled Water Program
Preliminary Design Phase Program
Management
Task 1.04 – City Council Presentations and Meetings
During the 2022 development of numerous project details, including detailing project scope and budgets, evaluating environmental constraints and requirements, and alternatives for project funding and financing, we anticipate providing the City Council with project updates. Under this sub-task, KSN will prepare for, attend, and present program updates to the City council. These updates are expected to be separate from specific action items, for example rate study hearing or hearing to consider environmental documents. This task includes:
 Preparing a summary staff report to be included with the Council agenda packet.  A summary PowerPoint presentation highlighting status of key activities and progress.  Attendance at up to three City Council meetings to present information developed under this task.

Task Deliverables: Staff Reports and PowerPoint presentations (prepared in electronic format) Task 1.05 – Prepare WIFIA and USBR Title XVI Documents
The general information package has been submitted applying for financial assistance under the CWSRF and additional efforts under this scope as well as input from the environmental and rate and financial consultants and additional City background information will be submitted to complete that application. In addition to CWSRF financial assistance, the City may be eligible and be able to obtain additional financial support through the United States Environmental Protection Agency Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (WIFIA) program and the United States Bureau of Reclamation Title XVI program for water recycling.

This task includes preparing the following supplemental documents to support application for financial assistance under WIFIA and/or Title XVI:

WIFIA
 Preparation of the WIFIA Letter of Interest Form (with relevant information provided by the City)  Review of the 2022 WIFIA Letter of Interest Checklist and coordination of documents with environmental and rate and financial consultants.
 WIFIA Letter of Interest attachments as prepared under other tasks.

Title XVI
 Preparation of current Recycled Water Production and Use studies into a single report to follow the USBR Title XVI Feasibility Study Report guidelines.
 Submittal of Feasibility Study Report to USBR for review and determination of eligibility of project for funding.

This task does not include providing supplemental WIFIA or Title XVI application documents beyond either WIFIA or Title XVI eligibility determinations as a result of submittal of the above documents.

Task Deliverables: WIFIA Letter of Interest Form, Updated Feasibility Study Report (prepared in electronic format)
P a g e 4 City of Riverbank
Regional Recycled Water Program
Preliminary Design Phase Program
Management
TASK 2 – PRELIMINARY DESIGN
As a means to further review the recommended project details, allow for additional project phasing or scaling to meet financial or environmental constraints, and to define the scope of detailed design for design consultant selection, the below preliminary design engineering is proposed by KSN.

Task 2.01 – Project Scope Refinement Workshop
After initial coordination and review of the proposed project, based on the current Recycled Water Production and Use studies, with the selected environmental and rate and financial consultant teams, KSN will conduct a project scope refinement workshop with the City and consultant team. The objective of the workshop is to reaffirm overall Phase I program objectives, target budget or environmental constraints, and a process to refine the Phase I project scope to meet those objectives and constraints. This task will include preparing for and conducing the workshop to include:
 Developing a summary of the recommended project and its elements base on current planning information. A dynamic spreadsheet-based cost model will be used to facilitate workshop discussions.
 Summarizing known or expected environmental or financial constraints.  Conducting a workshop at the City offices with the consultant team and City representatives to develop the project scope and objective within the identified environmental and financial constraints.
 Prepare a summary memorandum defining the updated project scope recommended for implementation.

Examples of project scope refinement to be developed under this effort could include:
- Project focus on secondary treatment improvements only. - Selection one recycled water use location over another. - Deferring certain improvements to later stages such as influent channel and screen improvements/replacement.
- Scaling or refining the approach and cost associated with modifying existing ponds for seasonal storage.

Task Deliverable: Project Scope Refinement Workshop Results Memorandum (prepared in electronic format)
Task 2.02 – Prepare Preliminary Design Report
Following the Project Scope Refinement Workshop, KSN will prepare a Preliminary Design Report for the proposed project scope. The Preliminary Design Report will be prepared to include the following components and documents.

Task 2.02.01 – Supplemental Influent Sampling
Supplemental influent sampling of the City’s wastewater is recommended to provide a more robust basis of design of the wastewater treatment improvements. This supplemental sampling is needed to better characterize influent wastewater nitrogen, oxygen demanding constituents, solids, and other parameters for process modeling and design. Existing City-operated composite sampling equipment will be used to gather supplemental samples as outlined below. In coordination with City operations staff, the following supplemental influent sampling program will be implemented:

P a g e 5 City of Riverbank
Regional Recycled Water Program
Preliminary Design Phase Program
Management
Winter 2022 Influent Sampling
Mid-winter 2022 (February and March) KSN will coordinate with the City on collection of supplemental influent monitoring data over a 14 day continuous or 28 day alternating sampling program to include the following:
- Influent flow (continuous daily total for each day during the monitoring period) - Influent temperature (grab at the time of collection of samples from the composite sampler) - Influent pH (grab at the time of collection of samples from the composite sampler) - Composite samples for analysis of:
o Chemical oxygen demand (COD), SM 5220B, C, or D
o Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), SM 5210 B
o Total suspended solids (TSS), SM 2540 D
o Volatile suspended solids (VSS), SM 2540 E
o Total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN), SM 4500-N org. B or C
o Total phosphorous, SM 4500-P B/C
o Alkalinity, SM 2320 B
o Soluble COD, filtered through 1.2 – 1.5 um glass fiber filter o Soluble BOD, filtered through 1.2 – 1.5 um glass fiber filter o Soluble TKN, filtered through 1.2 – 1.5 um glass fiber filter o Filtered ammonia, filtered through 0.45 um Millipore filter o Filtered and flocculated COD, per “A Rapid Physical-Chemical Method for the Determination of Readily Biodegradable Soluble COD in Municipal Wastewater", Water Research, 27(1), pp. 195 - 197, 1993.

Late Spring 2022 Influent Sampling
In late spring, after flows have reduced and equalized following winter rains, a second round us supplemental influent monitoring (likely conducted during mid-May to early June) will be conducted using the same process as utilized for the Winter 2022 Influent Sampling defined above.

KSN’s budget for the above supplemental sampling includes collecting samples (using the City’s equipment), sample treatment (filtration and/or flocculation), and cost for laboratory analysis of up to 28 samples. The results of the above sampling will be summarized in a memorandum for use in process modeling, development of the Preliminary Design Report, and for use by the selected design consultant in validating preliminary design process modeling.

Task Deliverable: Supplemental Influent Sampling Results Memorandum (prepared in electronic format)
Task 2.02.02 – Facilities Preliminary Process Design
KSN will conduct preliminary-design level process design calculations, preliminary equipment selection or criteria development, process modeling, and process configuration assessments. This sub-task will include preparing the following information at a preliminary design level:
 Update to flows and loads based on supplemental influent sampling results.  Process modeling for secondary treatment process for oxygen demand reduction, nitrification/denitrification, solids, air requirements, and mixing and recycle requirements.  Process modeling, as applicable, for other process including, secondary clarification, RAS/WAS, filtration, disinfection, and solids treatment.

P a g e 6 City of Riverbank
Regional Recycled Water Program
Preliminary Design Phase Program
Management
 Hydraulic profile and hydraulic calculations through the process from the influent channel through to the recycled water delivery pumping system to determine facilities elevations, pipe sizes, and pumping requirements. The hydraulic profile will be based on topographic and facilities survey provided by the City.
 Mass balance calculations.
 Preliminary Design Criteria for all major processes, updating criteria developed during the study phase based on updated monitoring results and process calculations.  A process flow diagram showing all major process components.  An evaluation of pumping systems defining pump types, capacity, head conditions, and required number.
 Preliminary-design level process selection and configurations (as applicable to the revised project scope) to include up to:
a. Headworks equipment sizing
b. Secondary process (oxidation ditch and clarifiers)
c. Return and waste activated sludge pumping systems (RAS/WAS) d. Tertiary filtration
e. Chemical facilities
f. Disinfection (based on UV)
g. Solids handling and treatment
h. Seasonal storage (converting exiting ponds to seasonal storage, excluding lining) i. Recycled water operational storage
j. Recycled water delivery pumping facilities
k. Recycled water delivery pipeline and points of connections requirements l. Plant water system sizing
m. Control, lab, office building program (if included)
n. Earthwork and site improvements including drainage
o. Construction sequencing plan
Secondary treatment process modeling, including nutrient removal, will be conducted for the proposed oxidation ditch treatment process using GPS-X software or other recognized industry standard modeling software.

Task 2.02.03 – Prepare Preliminary Design Drawings (15% Level) Following completion of the preliminary process design effort described above, a series of preliminary drawings will be prepared depicting the proposed improvements. Preliminary design drawings will be prepared to approximately the 15% level of detail to assist in defining the project requirements and cost.

Depending on the confirmed scope of the project, the preliminary design drawings are expected to include the following:

1. Preliminary Design Title Sheet

2. Preliminary Design Criteria

3. Process Flow Diagram

4. Hydraulic Profile

5. Overall Site Plan

6. Overall Piping Plan

7. Influent Channel and Screening Plan and Section

8. Oxidation Ditch Plan and Sections
P a g e 7 City of Riverbank
Regional Recycled Water Program
Preliminary Design Phase Program
Management

9. Secondary Clarifiers Plan and Sections

10. RAS/WAS Pumping Plan and Section

11. Tertiary Filter Plan and Sections

12. Filter Feed and Backwash Pumping Plan and Sections

13. UV Disinfection Plan and Sections

14. Solids Treatment Facilities Plan and Sections

15. Filter Effluent Pumping Station Plan and Sections

16. Seasonal Storage Plan and Details

17. Seasonal Storage Return Pump Station Plan and Sections

18. Recycled Water Operational Storage Plan and Sections

19. Recycled Water Delivery Pumping Facilities Plan and Sections

20. Recycled Water Delivery Preliminary Pipeline Plans

21. Recycled Water Delivery Connection Typical Plan and Section

22. Preliminary Power Distribution Diagrams

23. Preliminary Process and Instrumentation Diagrams
Preliminary design drawings will be prepared based on a 22x34 inch sheet size, but produced on half-size 11x17 sheets in electronic format for inclusion into the Preliminary Design Report Task 2.02.04 – Prepare Preliminary Design Opinion of Probable Cost The cost models initially developed for the proposed project during the study phase will be updated as the process design and preliminary design drawings are developed. This updated opinion of probable cost will include updates based on current market factors of expected construction cost and will include updated soft costs to complete design, environmental, legal, and construction management and inspection. Costs will be projected to an estimated mid-point of construction to plan for expected cost escalation over time. KSN will also evaluate current market trends and make recommendations regarding cost contingencies to be included in this planning effort to account for market volatility and potential increasing inflation. Detailed cost models will be developed in Microsoft Excel and included as an appendix to the Preliminary Design Report.

Task 2.02.05 – Prepare Preliminary Design Report
A compiled Preliminary Design Report will be prepared combining and documenting the results of this preliminary design effort. The Preliminary Design Report will be prepared in draft form for City review and then finalized for use in defining project scope and requirements. The Preliminary Design Report will be prepared to include:
 Project scope summary and objectives, with reference to results of scope refinement workshop.  Design flows and loads.
 Process selection and preliminary design (documentation of results of sub-task 2.2.2) to include:
• Process flow diagram.
• Hydraulics and hydraulic profile and pumping system requirements and criteria. • Mass balance.
• Preliminary treatment (influent screening).
• Secondary process (oxidation ditch, clarifiers, RAS/WAS pumping).

P a g e 8 City of Riverbank
Regional Recycled Water Program
Preliminary Design Phase Program
Management
• Tertiary filtration process.
• Chemical storage and delivery process.
• Disinfection (UV).
• Solids handling and treatment.
• Seasonal storage.
• Recycled water operational storage.
• Recycled water delivery pumping facilities.
• Recycled water delivery pipelines and points of connection. • Plant water requirements.
• Earthwork and site improvements.
• Support facilities requirements.
• Process monitoring recommendations and requirements.
• Power requirements and instrumentation and system control.  Title 22 Engineering Report requirements (with report to be completed separate from Preliminary Design Report).
 Summary of preliminary design opinion of probable cost.  Construction sequencing preliminary plan.
 Recommendations for geotechnical, structural, and other design-related details for design completion.
 Project schedule
 Appendices to include:
• Scope Refinement Memorandum
• Supplemental Influent Sampling Results Memorandum
• Process Design Calculations
• Preliminary Design (15%) Drawings
• Opinion of Probable Cost Detail Tables
Task Deliverable: Preliminary Design Report in Draft and Final (prepared in electronic format) Task 2.03 – Coordinate with Environmental and Rate and Financial Consultants During development of the preliminary design information, KSN will coordinate with the City-selected environmental and rate and financial consultants on project details relevant to their services. This task is related to developing and sharing technical information for preparation of the environmental and financial security packages of the CWSRF application and/or WIFI and USBR Title XVI documents. This task assumes a total of 48 engineering hours developing and sharing project information such as:

P a g e 9 City of Riverbank
Regional Recycled Water Program
Preliminary Design Phase Program
Management
- Project duration and likely equipment and staffing levels. - Key construction activity volume takeoffs or quantities. - Project footprints and likely disturbed areas.
- Identification of agencies having jurisdiction or permitting authority, e.g., railroad encroachment permitting.
- Review and refinement of Environmental Consultant-prepared project description. - Updates to project costs.
- Development of expected design and construction expenditures.

Task 2.04 – Preliminary Design Review Meetings
In addition to the regular project coordination meetings or special coordination meetings as described in other tasks, two preliminary design review meetings are proposed. The first meeting will be to present preliminary process design analysis results with a focus on system hydraulics, system sizing and configuration, and process selection and criteria. Input from this meeting will be used to develop the project design information.

After submittal of the draft Preliminary Design Report a review workshop is proposed. KSN will coordinate and prepare for this workshop with City staff to review the draft Preliminary Design Report and attachments. Input from the Preliminary Design Report review workshop will be documented in meeting action items and notes, with comments to the draft report incorporated as appropriate.

Task Deliverable: Preliminary Design Report Workshop Review Meeting Notes and Comment Matrix (prepared in electronic format)
Task 2.05 – Prepare Updated Financial Assistance Technical Package After preparation of the final Preliminary Design Report and completion of certain environmental and financial information, KSN will prepare updated technical information for the CWSRF application to complete relevant elements of the Technical Package requirements. Specific Technical Package elements expected to be completed or updated include:
- Technical Package Form.
- T1 – Updated Project Report (based on Preliminary Design Report). - T2 a through d forms.
- T3 – Climate Change Worksheet.
- T4 – Regional Water Quality Control Board Requirements, Waste Discharge Requirements (with reference to Basin Plan amendment requirements related to nitrate) and enforcement orders (if any).
- T6 – Certification for Water Conservation and Water Management. - T12 – Recycled Water Market Assurances.
- T13 – User Connection Schedule.

The Technical Package documents will be prepared and submitted to the SWRCB for review. KSN will respond to questions and comments and provide supplemental information to the SWRCB.

Task Deliverable: Technical Application Package Forms and Documents (prepared in electronic format)
P a g e 10 City of Riverbank
Regional Recycled Water Program
Preliminary Design Phase Program
Management
TASK 3 – DESIGN CONSULTANT SELECTION
Before the project proceeds past the preliminary design stage, it is recommended that the City select and engage the design engineering team to take the project through design and construction-period design services. KSN will provide Program Management support services to facilitate the City selecting and engaging a design engineering team per the below sub-tasks.

Task 3.01 – Prepare Design Consultant RFP
Using the project requirements and details developed in the Preliminary Design Report, KSN will prepare a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the City’s use in soliciting proposals for design engineering services through construction and commissioning. The RFP will be prepared to include:
 City and project background information.
 RFP process and procedures.
 Minimum design engineering team scope of services.
 Proposal review and ranking process.
 RFP reference documents such as City Consultant Agreement Template, Preliminary Design Report, Environmental Documents, etc.

The RFP will be prepared in draft form for City review and finalized for posting on the City’s website for professional services solicitations.

Task Deliverable: Draft and Final RFP for Design Engineering Services (prepared in electronic format)
Task 3.02 – RFP Process Management and Coordination
KSN will support the City with management of the RFP process to include:

1. Preparing for and attending a pre-proposal meeting at the project site.

2. Reviewing and responding to respondent questions and inquiries, including issuing up to two RFP addendum or Q/A response summaries.

3. Coordinating City selection committee review of submitted proposals (to be conducted as a virtual workshop meeting).

4. Coordinating consultant short-list interview process and schedule.

5. Attending consultant interviews (assumed to be no more than four firms and assumed to be inperson in Riverbank).

6. Coordinating City selection committee review of interview results. (to be conducted immediately following the last interview).

Task 3.03 – Design Consultant Contracting Support
Following the City selection committee’s selection of the design engineering team based on submitted proposal and interview rankings, KSN will support the City with contract negotiations to include:

1. Communication with selected design consultant.

2. Review and input to selected consultant’s scope.

P a g e 11 City of Riverbank
Regional Recycled Water Program
Preliminary Design Phase Program
Management

3. Review of selected consultant’s fee proposal, with support in negotiating a fair and reasonable fee for the scope of services to be provided.

4. Coordinate with the selected design consultant in contract document preparation.

5. Prepare draft City Council staff report regarding design consultant selection and consultant agreement approval.

Our effort for this task assumes that contract negotiations will be successful with the highest ranked design consultant team.

Additional Scope Understandings and Assumptions
Our proposed scope of services and budget are based on the following additional limitations, assumptions, and understandings:

1. Services beyond those described above are excluded.

2. Site boundary and topographic survey information for design will be provided by the City’s engineer under separate scope authorization.

3. Geotechnical site investigations and a geotechnical reports will be part of the design consultant’s scope of services and are excluded from this preliminary design scope.

4. Phase I site investigations are excluded from this preliminary design scope.

5. Structural engineering and architectural services, where needed, will be provided as part of the detailed design effort, not the preliminary design provided under this scope.

6. Environmental and rate and financial consultant services are excluded as these services will be provided by others directly to the City.

7. The preparation of parcel splits, acquisitions, chain of title research, expert testimony or other title related services are excluded from this scope of services.

8. Preliminary recycled water distribution pipeline alignments and preliminary plans will be based on available County GIS data and existing aerial imagery.

9. All permit or application fees, if any, will be paid directly by the City.

10. Preparation of Regional Water Quality Control Board permit applications, Report of Waste Discharge, or preparation of Title 22 Engineering report excluded from this preliminary design scope.

Date Prepared: 2/14/2022 Page 1 of 1
Principal Engineer
Associate Engineer
Senior Engineer
Engineer I
Junior Engineer
Tech/GIS/ CAD II
Tech/GIS/ CAD I
Admin III
Direct Expense
Mileage
Expense
Sub Consultant
$265 $240 $210 $180 $147 $130 $100 $110 110% 0.58 110%

1.0 Program Management and Project Coordination 118 24 144 16 32 334 $ 67,830 $ - $ 522 $ - $ 522 $ 68,352 1.01 Project Coordination and Meetings (12 months) 48 48 24 120 $24,000 $418 $418 $24,4181.02 Environmental Consultant Coordination (12 months) 24 24 48 $10,680 $10,6801.03 Rate and Financial Consultant Coordination (12 months) 24 24 48 $10,680 $10,6801.04 City Council Presentations and Meetings (3 Progress Updates) 6 12 18 $3,750 $104 $104 $3,8541.05 Prepare WIFIA and USBR Title XVI Documents 16 24 36 16 8 100 $18,720 $18,7202.0 Preliminary Design 228 24 88 392 445 144 110 12 2712 $ 251,675 $ 1,348 $ 104 $ 122,060 $ 123,512 $ 314,350 2.01 Project Scope Refinement Workshop 6 8 8 22 $3,830 $35 $35 $3,8652.02 Prepare Preliminary Design Report 166 24 88 328 421 136 102 4 1269 $217,477 $633 $60,205 $60,838 $278,315

2.02.1 Supplemental Influent Sampling 4 4 8 16 $2,956 $275 $19,285 $19,560 $22,516

2.02.2 Facilities Preliminary Process Design 104 56 228 286 674 $122,402 $15,620 $15,620 $138,0222.02.3 Prepare Preliminary Design Drawings (15% Level) 34 56 87 104 78 359 $53,199 $275 $16,500 $16,775 $69,9742.02.4 Prepare Preliminary Design Opinion of Probable Cost 16 8 16 16 24 16 96 $18,008 $3,300 $3,300 $21,3082.02.5 Prepare Preliminary Design Report 8 16 16 24 16 16 24 4 124 $20,912 $83 $5,500 $5,583 $26,495

2.03 Coordination with Environmental and Rate and Financial Consultants 24 24 48 $10,680 $10,6802.04 Preliminary Design Review Meetings (two) 16 16 8 40 $8,160 $83 $70 $1,650 $1,802 $9,9622.05 Prepare Updated Financial Assistance Technical Package 16 16 24 8 64 $11,528 $11,5283.0 Design Consultant Selection 48 32 8 20 108 $ 21,856 $ - $ 104 $ - $ 104 $ 21,960 3.01 Prepare Design Consultant RFP 8 16 8 4 36 $6,616 $6,6163.02 RFP Process Management and Coordination 24 8 8 40 $8,680 $104 $104 $8,7843.03 Design Consultant Contracting Support 16 8 8 32 $6,560 $6,560 394 24 112 568 453 160 110 64 3154 $ 341,361 $ 1,348 $ 731 $ 122,060 $ 124,139 $ 404,662 General Note: This costs allocation represents our best estimate at this time and may change subject to future developments during the project. It is possible that some of the estimated manpower requirements for specific task items may increase while others may not require the entire anticipated effort. Charges to this project will be made for actual time spent on the project and will be charged as per the attached Fee Schedule.

PROJECT TOTALS

TASKS AND DESCRIPTIONS
KJELDSEN, SINNOCK & NEUDECK, INC. STAFF HOURS
Total
Labor
Hours
Total Labor
Budget
Rates

OTHER DIRECT COSTS
Other Direct
Costs Budget
Total Budget
(Rounded)
City of Riverbank
Recycled Water Program Preliminary Design Phase Program Management TASK HOURS BREAKDOWN & FEE ESTIMATE - December 20, 2021

EXHIBIT B
Rate Schedule

2021 / 2022 FEE SCHEDULE

PREVAILING WAGE PROJECTS
Effective July 1, 2021
Position Rate
Principal Engineer $ 265.00
Associate Engineer $ 240.00
Senior Engineer $ 210.00
Engineer II $ 190.00
Engineer I $ 180.00
Junior Engineer $ 147.00
Senior Surveyor $ 215.00
Surveyor $ 185.00
Assistant Surveyor $ 155.00
Field Crew-One Man & Vehicle $ 210.00
Field Crew-Two Man & Vehicle $ 320.00
Inspector $ 165.00
Inspector & Vehicle $ 195.00
Senior Project Manager $ 235.00
Project Manager $ 200.00
Assistant Project Manager $ 180.00
Grant Manager $ 155.00
GIS Specialist $ 150.00
GIS/CAD Technician III $ 147.00
GIS/CAD Technician II $ 130.00
GIS/CAD Technician I $ 100.00
Project Accountant $ 141.00
Administrative III $ 110.00
Administrative II $ 95.00
Administrative I $ 80.00

Equipment Hourly Rate
3D Print Cloud Work Station $ 25.00
GPS Receivers-Per Receiver Per Hour $ 25.00
Robotic Total Station $ 35.00
HDS Scanner $ 150.00
Boat $ 55.00
Expenses
Auto Mileage per current Federal Rates
Special Consultants Cost Plus 10%
Reimbursable Expenses Cost Plus 10%
(Printing, Photos, Copies, Travel, Telephone, Fax, Survey Materials, etc.)
Additional charges may apply for overtime services.

Fees are due and payable within 30 days from the date of billing. Fees past due may be subject to a finance charge computed on the basis of 1 1/2% of the unpaid balance per month.

Hourly rates are subject to review and adjustment July 1st of each year.

Page 1 of 3 ends

Item 11.3 – CC/LRA 02/22/2022
RIVERBANK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO. 11.3
SECTION 11: NEW BUSINESS
Meeting Date: February 22, 2022
Subject: Resolution Opposing Initiative 21-0042A1 the Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act
From: Marisela H. Garcia, Interim City Manager

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council consider adopting a resolution in opposition of Initiative 21-0042A1, the Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act.

SUMMARY
The Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act limits voters’ authority, adopts new and stricter rules for raising taxes and fees, and makes it more difficult to hold violators of state and local laws accountable.

BACKGROUND
On Jan. 4, 2022, the California Business Roundtable filed the Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act or AG# 21-0042A1. This measure is far more detrimental to cities than the 2018 “Tax Fairness, Transparency and Accountability Act”, because it would limit vital local and state services to the benefit of wealthy corporations.

An association representing California’s wealthiest corporations — including oil, insurance, banks and pharmaceutical companies — has initiated a proposition aimed for the November 2022 statewide ballot. Their measure would create new loopholes that would allow corporations to avoid paying their fair share of the impacts they have on our communities; while also allowing corporations to evade enforcement when they violate environmental, health, safety and other state and local laws. This proposition would make it difficult for state and local regulators to issue fines and levies on corporations that violate laws intended to protect our environment, public health and safety, and our neighborhoods.

The following details of the initiative highlight the impacts on local government:
1) Limits voter authority and accountability
• Prohibits local voters from providing direction on how local tax dollars should be spent by prohibiting local advisory measures.
• Invalidates the Upland decision that allows a majority of local voters to pass

Page 2 of 3 ends

Item 11.3 – CC/LRA 02/22/2022
special taxes. Taxes proposed by the Initiative are subject to the same rules as taxes placed on the ballot by a city council. All measures passed between January 2022 and November 2022 would be invalidated unless reenacted within 12 months.
2) Restricts local fee authority to provide services
• Sets new standards for fees and charges paid for the use of local and state government property (i.e. franchise fees). The standard may significantly restrict the amount oil companies, utilities, gas companies, railroads, garbage companies, cable companies, and other corporations pay for the use of local public property. Rental and sale of local government property must be “reasonable” which must be proved by “clear and convincing evidence.” • Except for licensing and other regulatory fees, fees and charges may not exceed the “actual cost” of providing the product or service for which the fee is charged. “Actual cost” is the “minimum amount necessary.” The burden to prove the fee or charge does not exceed “actual cost” is changed to “clear and convincing” evidence.
3) Restricts authority of state and local governments to issue fines and penalties for violations of law
• Requires voter approval of fines, penalties, and levies for corporations and property owners that violate state and local laws unless a new, undefined adjudicatory process is used to impose the fines and penalties. 4) Restricts local tax authority to provide services
• Requires voter approval to expand existing taxes (e.g., UUT, use tax, TOT) to new territory (e.g., annexation) or expanding the base (e.g., new utility service). • City charters may not be amended to include a tax or fee. • New taxes can be imposed only for a specific time period. • Taxes adopted after Jan. 1, 2022, that do not comply with the new rules, are void unless reenacted.
• All state taxes require majority voter approval.
• Prohibits any surcharge on property tax rate and allocation of property tax to state.
5) Other changes
• No fee or charge or exaction regulating vehicle miles traveled can be imposed as a condition of property development or occupancy.

STRATEGIC PLAN
This item is directly related to the City Council’s Strategic Plan goal to “Ensure Financial Stability”. The City’s ability to have local control over the adoption of new fees, within the confines of existing law, directly translates to its ability to provide services to residents.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
There is no financial impact associated with the adoption of this Resolution.

Page 3 of 3 ends

Item 11.3 – CC/LRA 02/22/2022

ATTACHMENT

1. Resolution

Page 1 of 2 ends

CC/LRA – 02/22/22
CC Resolution No. 2022-

CITY OF RIVERBANK
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-___

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RIVERBANK, CALIFORNIA, OPPOSING INITIATIVE 21-0042A1 THE TAXPAYER PROTECTION

AND GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY ACT
WHEREAS, an association representing California’s wealthiest corporations is behind a deceptive proposition aimed for the November 2022 statewide ballot; and WHEREAS, the measure creates new constitutional loopholes that allow corporations to pay far less than their fair share for the impacts they have on our communities, including local infrastructure, our environment, water quality, air quality, and natural resources; and
WHEREAS, the measure includes undemocratic provisions that would make it more difficult for local voters to pass measures needed to fund local services and infrastructure, and would limit voter input by prohibiting local advisory measures where voters provide direction on how they want their local tax dollars spent; and WHEREAS, , the measure makes it much more difficult for state and local regulators to issue fines and levies on corporations that violate laws intended to protect our environment, public health and safety, and our neighborhoods; and WHEREAS, the measure puts billions of dollars currently dedicated to state and local services at risk, and could force cuts to public schools, fire and emergency response, law enforcement, public health, parks, libraries, affordable housing, services to support homeless residents, mental health services, and more; and WHEREAS, the measure would also reduce funding for critical infrastructure like streets and roads, public transportation, drinking water, new schools, sanitation, and utilities.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Riverbank opposes Initiative 21-0042A1, the Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act.

THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Riverbank will join the NO on Initiative 21-0042A1 coalition, a growing coalition of public safety, labor, local government, infrastructure advocates, and other organizations throughout the state.

Page 2 of 2 ends

CC/LRA – 02/22/22
CC Resolution No. 2022-
We direct staff to email a copy of this adopted resolution to the League of California Cities at [email protected].

AYES:

NAYS:

ABSENT:

ABSTAINED:

ATTEST: APPROVED:
________________________________ __________________________ Kathy Teixeira Richard D. O’Brien
Interim City Clerk Mayor

Page 1 of 1 ends

Item 8.1 – CC/LRA – 2/22/2022
RIVERBANK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO. 8.1
SECTION 8: PRESENTATIONS
Meeting Date: February 22, 2022
Subject: Presentation on Environmental Justice Program
From: Marisela Garcia, Interim City Manager
Submitted by: Donna Kenney, Planning & Building Manager

RECOMMENDATION
City Council to receive a presentation from CivicSpark Fellow Zoe Jonick.

BACKGROUND
Zoe Jonick is the CivicSpark Fellow working with the Planning Department in coordination with California Health Collaborative on the Environmental Justice Element as part of the General Plan Update process. She is providing a brief presentation on the Environmental Justice Element in which she will highlight key terms: General Plans, Senate Bill 1000, Disadvantaged Communities, and Environmental Justice. Senate Bill 1000, or the Planning for Healthy Communities Act, was passed in 2016 and requires the development and adoption of an Environmental Justice Element for jurisdictions updating their General Plans, when the jurisdictions contain at least one Disadvantaged Community. She will discuss the importance of conducting community engagement in Riverbank and the specific requirements of SB 1000. Additionally, she will explain her Fellow role and project, as well as ways to get informed and involved during the process.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
The Civic Spark Fellow is being funded by a 2021 REAP (Regional Early Action Planning) Grant through StanCOG.

ATTACHMENTS

1. California Environmental Justice Alliance’s (CEJA) SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit (Full). Website: https://caleja.org/wpcontent/uploads/2017/09/SB1000_Toolkit_Final_rev_2018July_web.pdf?utm_sou rce=email&utm_medium=email.

2. CEJA’s SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit: Summary Fact Sheets. https://calgreenzones.org/sb-1000-implementation-toolkit-fact-sheets-new/ Planning for Healthy Communities
SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit
SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit
© October 2017 Revised July 2018
California Environmental Justice Alliance
CEJA Working Group
Amy Vanderwarker / CEJA, Senior Policy Strategist
Tiffany Eng / CEJA, Green Zones Program Manager
Kay Cuajunco / CEJA, Communications Manager
Caroline Farrell / The Center on Race, Poverty & the Environment Michele Hasson / Center for Community Action and Environmental Justice Esther Portillo / Center for Community Action and Environmental Justice José Lopez / Communities for a Better Environment
Carolina Martinez / Environmental Health Coalition
Ashley Werner / Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability Grecia Elenes / Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability Carlton Eley / US Environmental Protection Agency
Linda Helland / Office of Health Equity, California Department of Public Health
Mashael Majid / Urban Habitat
Michele Pritchard / Liberty Hill Foundation
Ben Russak / Liberty Hill Foundation
Don Spivak / Liberty Hill Foundation
Josh Stark / TransForm
Chelsea Tu / Public Advocates
Miguel Angel Vazquez / AICP, Urban Planner, Riverside County Department of Public Health
PlaceWorks
David Early / AICP, LEED AP, Founding Principal and Senior Advisor Charlie Knox / AICP, Principal
Joanna Jansen / AICP, LEED AP, Principal
Mark Hoffman / Associate Principal
Tammy Seale / Associate Principal
Katie Hollenbaugh, AICP, LEED AP / Marketing Director
Greg Goodfellow / Senior Associate
Tanya Sundberg / Senior Associate
Eli Krispi / Associate
Ashley James / Associate
Cliff Lau / Project Planner
Cover photo by Brooke Anderson Photography
Acknowledgements
SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit
Table of Contents
1 Introduction 2

1.1 / Purpose and Use of this Toolkit 2

1.2 / Who We Are 3

1.3 / About Environmental Justice 4

1.4 / Why Plan for Environmental Justice? 6

1.5 / SB 1000: Goals and Topics 8

1.6 / How We Prepared this Toolkit 10

1.7 / Organization of this Toolkit 10
2 An Environmental Justice Planning Process 14

2.1 / When to Prepare an EJ Element 14

2.2 / Stand-Alone EJ Element vs. Integrated Policies 14

2.3 / Existing Regulatory Environment 15

2.4 / Environmental Justice Planning Process 17
3 Identifying Disadvantaged Communities 24

3.1 / Primary Screening Method: CalEnviroScreen 25

3.2 / Screening for DACs through Income and Pollution burden 29 4 Community Engagement 36

4.1 / Community Engagement Strategies 36

4.2 / Principles and Techniques for Community Engagement 40

4.3 / Meetings and Committee Formats 46

4.4 / Methods of Education and Engagement 49

4.5 / Resources for More Ideas 57
i
SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit
5 Goals, Objectives, and Policies 66

5.1 / Reduce Pollution Exposure and Improve Air Quality 70

5.2 / Promote Public Facilities 79

5.3 / Promote Food Access 84

5.4 / Promote Safe and Sanitary Homes 88

5.5 / Promote Physical Activity 93

5.6 / Promote Civil (i.e., “Community”) Engagement in the Public Decision-Making Process 96

5.7 / Prioritize Improvements and Programs that Address the Needs of Disadvantaged Communities 98

5.8 / Equitable Development and Design 100

5.9 / Reduce Impacts of Climate Change 103
6 Case Studies 118

6.1 / National City Health and Environmental Justice Element 120

6.2 / Jurupa Valley Environmental Justice Element 123

6.3 / Southwest Fresno Specific Plan 126

6.4 / Los Angeles’ Clean Up Green Up Ordinance 129

6.5 / Richmond Community Health and Wellness Element 133 7 Potential Funding Sources and Other Types of Assistance 138

7.1 / Local Funds 138

7.2 / Regional Grants 139

7.3 / State Grants 142

7.4 / Federal Grants 147

7.5 / Private Philanthropy 149
ii
SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit
A Appendix A: Senate Bill 1000 Text 155
B Appendix B: Glossary 159
C Appendix C: The 17 Principles of Environmental Justice 165 iii
This page intentionally left blank.

SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit
iv

INTRODUCTION
2 3
4 5
6 7
A
B
C
1 2
SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit
Introduction
Senate Bill 1000 (SB 1000), the Planning for Healthy Communities Act, was signed into law by Governor Jerry Brown on September 24, 2016, mandating that cities and counties adopt an environmental justice (EJ) element or integrate EJ goals, objectives, and policies into other elements of their General Plans.

Motivated by the successful adoption of EJ Elements in National City and Jurupa Valley, the Inland Valley–based Center for Community Action and Environmental Justice (CCAEJ) worked with California State Senator Connie Leyva to develop a bill that would promote the creation of EJ Elements on a statewide level. SB 1000 is the result of this effort, developed with the intent to create healthier cities and counties by protecting sensitive land uses and prioritizing the needs of disadvantaged communities. Both the California Environmental Justice Alliance (CEJA) and CCAEJ were co-sponsors of SB 1000, which successfully became law with the support of dozens of communitybased organizations, planners, local governments, and public health institutions across the state.

This Toolkit was prepared by both CEJA and PlaceWorks to provide guidance on implementing SB 1000’s mandates.

1.1 / Purpose and Use of this
Toolkit
This Toolkit clarifies SB 1000’s requirements and provides a planning process, tools, methodologies, and resources to support local governments and planners as they begin to implement the statutes of SB 1000, which include:
] Identifying disadvantaged communities (DACs) within General Plan planning areas.
] Reducing unique or compounded health risks in disadvantaged communities.
] Promoting community engagement in the public decision-making process.
] Prioritizing improvements and programs for addressing the needs of DACs.

Additionally, this Toolkit has several goals, which are to:
] Provide detailed understanding of the EJ objectives required by SB 1000.
] Provide information in an easily accessible format.
] Identify federal, State, and regional funding sources to support implementation.
] Highlight case studies from five different California cities to illustrate successful examples of EJ planning.
] Recognize the diverse geography of California, ranging between rural, suburban, and urban contexts, by presenting flexible approaches to implementing SB 1000 that are adaptable to local context and community-specific concerns.

Chapter 1 / Introduction
3 1.2 / Who We Are
This Toolkit was prepared by both the California Environmental Justice Alliance and PlaceWorks.

California Environmental Justice Alliance
CEJA is a statewide, community-led alliance with years of on-the-ground experience promoting environmental justice in land use planning to improve environmental health and advance social justice. The alliance unites the powerful local organizing of its members in the communities most impacted by environmental hazards—low-income communities and communities of color—to create comprehensive policies at the state level that can alleviate poverty and pollution. CEJA was a co-sponsor of the SB 1000 legislation.

PlaceWorks
PlaceWorks is a nationally respected, California-based planning and design firm that provides comprehensive planning, design, and environmental review services to both public- and private-sector entities. Formerly known as The Planning Center|DC&E, PlaceWorks’ history dates back over 40 years. PlaceWorks has prepared and updated numerous General Plans for cities and counties across the state.

PlaceWorks has a strong commitment to social justice, healthy communities, and sustainability. PlaceWorks wrote one of the first General Plans in the state with community health as a theme, for the City of Chino, and also worked on the Environmental Health and Justice Element for the National City General Plan. PlaceWorks is a recognized leader in facilitating public involvement in planning projects and strives for public participation programs that are inclusive, informative, and validating for communities in their work.

Furthermore, this Toolkit is intended for use by multiple parties who may be involved in a planning process to develop an EJ Element or EJ policies, such as:
] A local government embarking upon its first-ever EJ Element or integrating EJ policies into its General Plan.
] Community-based organizations orienting themselves to the General Plan update process and looking to further the goals of SB 1000 through effective implementation and engagement.
] Members of the public who wish to actively engage in an EJ planning process.

The information and references provided in this Toolkit aim to complement and be used in conjunction with the most recent General Plan Guidelines published by the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) and/or any additional documents prepared by OPR that provide official State guidance on the statutes of SB 1000.

Although this Toolkit provides thorough guidance for implementing the statutes of SB 1000, it does not constitute legal advice, nor is it a substitute for legal or other professional advice. Readers should consult their own legal counsel regarding the application of the law and this document as it applies to the statutes of SB 1000.
4 SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit

1.3 / About Environmental
Justice
Low-income residents, communities of color, indigenous peoples and tribal nations, and immigrant communities have disproportionately experienced some of the greatest environmental burdens and related health problems throughout the history of our country. This inequity is the result of many factors: inappropriate zoning and negligent land use planning, intersecting structural inequalities, failure to enforce proper zoning or conduct regular inspections, deed restrictions and other discriminatory housing and lending practices, limited political and economic power among certain demographics, the prioritization of business interests over public health, development patterns that tend to concentrate pollution and environmental hazards in certain communities, and the placement of economic and environmental benefits in areas outside of disadvantaged communities. Combined with a lack of economic resources and unjust policy making, these communities (also known as “disadvantaged communities” in law or “environmental justice communities” to EJ groups) continue to face significant barriers to their overall health, livelihood, and sustainability.

Community advocates have pointed to various studies to illustrate the extent of past and present environmental justice problems:
] The 2014 National Patterns in Environmental Injustice and Inequality study observed levels of outdoor nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and found that people of color are exposed to 38 percent more NO2 than their white counterparts. This deadly chemical, which is commonly found in vehicle exhaust and fossil fuel–fired power plants, is known to be a large driver of heart disease and other related health problems.1
] In the Black and Latino communities of Southeast Los Angeles, almost 10,000 homes, day care centers, schools, and parks have been exposed to high levels of lead for decades due to unchecked pollution from the Exide facility, a nearby battery-smelting plant.

Regulators have recently begun cleanup efforts with poisoned homes, but it is a slow process that faces ongoing delays.2 ] Over 1 million residents, or almost 300 communities, have drinking water that does not meet state health standards. The vast majority of these communities are small, farm-working Latino communities in rural areas whose water sources have been contaminated by industrial agriculture and dairies.3
] A 2016 report by Cushing et al found that “regulated GHGemitting facilities—including those that emit the highest levels of both GHGs and PM10—tend to be located in neighborhoods with higher proportions of residents of color and people living in poverty.”4 Specifically, the study found that neighborhoods within

2.5 miles of a facility that emitted localized greenhouse gases have a 22 percent higher proportion of residents of color and 21 percent higher proportion of residents living in poverty than those more than 2.5 miles from such facilities.5
In the face of such pervasive threats, however, communities across the United States have confronted environmental racism and injustice by taking on campaigns that increase their voice in the decisions that affect their lives. This building of political power for environmental justice has produced many victories for communities throughout different urban, suburban, and rural regions. It has resulted in significant benefits, such as the removal of stationary or mobile sources of pollution; the creation of restrictions or prohibitions on new polluting sources; and investments such as parks, affordable public transportation, and affordable housing. These localized assets highlight another important aspect of environmental justice: while it is important to identify the problems and areas that are unfairly impacted by cumulative burdens, EJ is also about gaining equitable access to environmental benefits, investments, and other resources for low-income communities and communities of color.

Such benefits can address the uneven distribution of amenities along race and class lines that reflect long legacies of racism and discrimination in land use planning and development.

Chapter 1 / Introduction
5 As a result of these local EJ campaigns, which have contributed to the larger movement for environmental justice over time, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) and the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) adopted two similar definitions for environmental justice to guide their EJ-focused policymaking:

The fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies. Fair treatment means that no group of people should bear a disproportionate share of the negative environmental consequences resulting from industrial, governmental, and commercial operations or policies. —US EPA6
The fair treatment of people of all races, cultures, and incomes with respect to the development, adoption, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies. — CalEPA7 These definitions highlight two key concepts at the heart of environmental justice: (1) The need to promote social equity (“fair treatment”) in policy making, and (2) The need to involve affected communities in the decisions that impact their lives.

At the same time, however, environmental justice communities and advocates also maintain their own definition of environmental justice that speaks to the vision they want to achieve. They define EJ as “the basic right of people to live, work, go to school, play, and pray in a healthy and clean environment.”8 This expansive definition has been described in terms of three important aspects of justice, all of which are particularly applicable to land use planning: 1) distributive justice, 2) procedural justice, and 3) social justice.9 Distributive justice refers to the inequitable distribution of harms and public benefits in which low-income communities and communities of color are often disproportionately exposed to polluting facilities or lack access to parks, sewer systems, or street lights.10 How communities are zoned plays a critical role in distributive justice. Procedural justice refers to the fairness of the decision-making process, which goes beyond merely having a place at the table, but having the power to participate as equal partners at all stages of decision making.11 Lastly, social justice refers to the reality that race, class, economic, and political factors influence quality of life and the distribution of pollution.12
Likewise, impacted communities often prefer to use the term “environmental justice communities” instead of “disadvantaged communities” when describing areas that are most burdened by pollution and vulnerable to its effects. While EJ communities have long advocated for a cumulative-impacts tool such as CalEnviroScreen that could identify “disadvantaged communities” in public policy, they often feel that the term “EJ communities” more accurately describes the neighborhoods that experience the highest cumulative burdens and should therefore be prioritized for greater protections and investment. This is in part because the term can encompass other important EJ indicators, such as race, that are known to correlate with disproportionate environmental burdens.

Furthermore, although it is important to address the needs of those who have experienced higher levels of pollution, toxins, neglect, and discrimination, the benefits of environmental justice are not limited to those living and working in disadvantaged communities. Very much like ecosystems, our residential neighborhoods, schools, places of employment, manufacturing centers, transportation corridors, and all the spaces in between are interconnected and can sometimes be in conflict with one another. Engaging in planning to meet the needs of our country’s most marginalized, vulnerable, and under-resourced communities is thus necessary to guarantee that all people can thrive and have healthy and safe environments no matter where they live, work, or play.13
6 SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit

1.4 / Why Plan for
Environmental Justice?
The principles of environmental justice are consistent with the democratic values of fairness and equity.14 Therefore, local governments should not strive for environmental justice simply to satisfy requirements or to avoid lawsuits, but view it as a core part of their duty to ensure the health and well-being of the communities that they serve. Planning plays a crucial role in achieving environmental justice and promoting equity, sustainability, and civil rights. When done well, planning for environmental justice can undo direct or indirect harms resulting from discriminatory (as well as outdated) planning and environmental policies; prevent future harms from happening; and promote positive, community-oriented investments in disadvantaged communities.

Second, the American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP) Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct sets forth ethical standards that pertain to environmental justice objectives: 15
1e. We shall give people the opportunity to have a meaningful impact on the development of plans and programs that may affect them. Participation should be broad enough to include those who lack formal organization or influence.
1f. We shall seek social justice by working to expand choice and opportunity for all persons, recognizing a special responsibility to plan for the needs of the disadvantaged and to promote racial and economic integration. We shall urge the alteration of policies, institutions, and decisions that oppose such needs.

Third, local land use planning must comply with State laws as well as adhere to federal mandates that address environmental justice. For example, the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (Gov. Code Sections 12900 et seq.), prohibits a public agency from discriminating on the basis of race, color, national origin, or other protected class status through public land-use practices, decisions, and authorizations.

At the federal level, the Fair Housing Act is an example of an enforceable mandate that local planning efforts must follow. Planning for environmental justice helps ensure that General Plan policies and programs, along with local jurisdictions themselves, achieve compliance and consistency with these laws.

Fourth, intelligent planning creates healthy and vibrant communities while preventing harmful outcomes that can be costly, not only to disadvantaged communities, but to the city or county as a whole. By engaging in planning for environmental justice, a local jurisdiction can help to ensure a legally defensible General Plan, because local governments can also be subject to litigation and/or enforcement actions if found not to be in compliance with State or federal laws.

Fifth, community engagement is a core component of planning for environmental justice. Engaging all groups within a city or county can improve planning decisions and policies and allow jurisdictions to target programs and investments to those who need it most. By working with those most impacted by poverty and pollution, local governments can create an EJ Element or EJ goals and policies that:
] Protect public health and regenerate the environment; ] Identify geographic areas of concern and problems that current research and tools may overlook;
] Build trust and good working relationships with stakeholders, while strengthening community ownership over the process; ] Create a General Plan that demonstrates integrity and compliance with the mandates of State law;
] Demonstrate a commitment to reducing and preventing
disproportionate negative impacts on vulnerable residents and neighborhoods;
] Cultivate stronger local economies due to more efficient investments and healthier and safer environments.16
Sixth, planning for environmental justice can position a local jurisdiction to leverage additional federal, State, and philanthropic resources for Chapter 1 / Introduction
7 planning and implementation projects. EJ-based planning can also position a city or a county to receive grants from the State’s Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF) for projects in the Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities (AHSC) program and Transformative Climate Communities (TCC) program, both of which benefit disadvantaged communities. Chapter 7 suggests a list of potential funding resources.

Finally, environmental justice and land use planning have always been connected. Table 1-1, drawn from OPR’s General Plan Guidelines (2017), illustrates how social equity and EJ topics relate to the State-mandated General Plan elements. As the table demonstrates, the statutory requirements for environmental justice identify housing as a necessary topic while relating closely to the statutory requirements for land use, circulation, and safety. The topic of social equity relates closely to the statutory requirements for all General Plan elements.

We hope that this Toolkit will inspire local governments, planners, and community stakeholders to go above and beyond the basic requirements of SB 1000 to achieve the multiple benefits that can come with planning for environmental justice and addressing the health and well-being of disadvantaged communities.

Table 1-1 Environmental Justice and Social Equity in General Plan Elements Topics/
Elements
Land Use Circulation Housing Conservation Open Space Noise Safety Environmental Justice
Environmental
Justice
r r p r p
Social Equity r r r r r r r r
p Identified in statute
r Closely related to statutory requirements
Source: Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, State of California General Plan Guidelines (2017, August), page 40 8 SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit

1.5 / SB 1000: Goals and
Topics
The General Plan represents a community’s collective vision for the future and provides a blueprint for achieving that vision through sets of goals, policies, and objectives that guide planning decisions for an estimated period of about 25 years. SB 1000 aims to encourage local jurisdictions and community stakeholders throughout California to proactively plan for and address environmental justice concerns at the outset when developing all components of a General Plan.

The Environmental Justice Element or integrated EJ policies must reduce the unique or compounded health risks in disadvantaged communities by addressing at minimum the following topics:
] Pollution Exposure and Air Quality. Policies to prevent and mitigate exposure to hazardous materials and air pollution, remove and restrict toxic pollutants, and protect sensitive populations within and around disadvantaged communities.
] Public Facilities. Policies to promote facilities such as infrastructure, parks, community facilities, active transportation, roads and trails, and health-care facilities and ensure that EJ communities have equitable access to such facilities.
] Food Access. Policies to promote healthy food access for EJ communities through programs and projects, such as grocery supermarkets, farmers’ markets, local agriculture, and mobile vending.
] Safe and Sanitary Homes. Policies to ensure healthy and safe housing, such as addressing the presence of lead-based building materials and asbestos; and policies to increase access to housing, including affordable housing, by eliminating barriers to fair housing and instituting measures to prevent the displacement of lowincome and vulnerable residents and families. ] Physical Activity. Policies to promote spaces for physical activity and ensure access, connectivity, and equitable distribution of physical activity opportunities—such as pedestrian-friendly and bicycle-friendly streetscape environments.
] “Civil” or Community Engagement. Policies and best practices for promoting equitable, inclusive, and meaningful community engagement in local planning processes that benefit EJ
communities. The chapter includes ways to increase participation, inclusion, and accessibility for communities that are often not included in planning and land use decisions. The phrase “community engagement” will be used throughout this toolkit in place of “civil engagement” to distinguish this process from other traditional forms of public engagement, such as voting. ] Improvements and Programs That Address the Needs of
Disadvantaged Communities. This includes policies to identify and reverse systemic funding inequities, such as concentrations of public resources that divert public investments away from disadvantaged communities, and to prioritize improvements and programs that benefit EJ communities by promoting equitable development, ensuring that disadvantaged communities are the primary beneficiaries of investments and that projects and programs do not increase toxic exposures, reduce affordable housing stock, or displace residents and/or local businesses.17 In addition to these SB 1000 requirements, this Toolkit suggests several other topics that a local jurisdiction could consider for inclusion in its EJ Element and/or policies, such as climate vulnerability and resiliency.

Both mandatory and additional topics are described further in Chapter 5: Objectives, Goals, and Policies.

Chapter 1 / Introduction
9 Promoting Social Equity
Social equity is a core value that lies at the heart of all efforts to achieve environmental justice. It includes the crucial concepts of justice and fairness, promotes the inclusion of marginalized and discriminated communities, and takes historical inequities into account when engaging in planning and developing public policy. Those working to comply with SB 1000 should therefore keep social equity in mind during the entire EJ planning process—from design to implementation. It should also be noted that social equity is implied throughout each section of this Toolkit.

Although no single definition of social equity exists in State law, OPR references several definitions put forth by planning-related organizations in their General Plan Guidelines (2017):

The expansion of opportunities for betterment that are available to those communities most in need, creating more choices for those who have few. —American Planning Association
The fair, just, and equitable management of all institutions serving the public directly or by contract; the fair, just and equitable distribution of public services and implementation of public policy; and the commitment to promote fairness, justice, and equity in the formation of public policy. —National Academy of Public Administration PolicyLink, a nationally recognized economic and social equity research institute, acknowledges that, while no single definition of social equity exists,19 one of equity’s key concepts should be described as the “just and fair inclusion into a society in which all can participate, prosper, and reach their full potential. Unlocking the promise of the nation by unleashing the promise in us all.”20
To assist local jurisdictions that are working to comply with SB 1000’s mandates, this Toolkit provides the following EJ planning-related definition of social equity:

Applying the principles of justice, fairness, and inclusion when developing and implementing a General Plan’s vision.

Aligning with Public Health
Promoting public health and achieving healthy communities are also important goals at the center of all work for environmental justice.

The areas where people live, work, and play produce conditions that significantly contribute to a large array of health risks and outcomes.

These conditions are commonly known within the public health community as the “social determinants of health.”21
While planning and public health once shared common roots, the two disciplines diverged over time after establishing health standards and building codes to prevent the spread of infectious diseases in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. As planning has evolved to increasingly address issues related to sustainability and climate resilience, there is a growing recognition that planning and public health can work together to produce thriving, sustainable, equitable, and healthy communities for all.

What are “Unique and Compounded
Health Risks”?
Applying a public health perspective can be useful in identifying “unique and compounded health risks.” Some hazards such as toxins or traffic hazards may be dangerous enough to harm human health in isolation, or one at a time. However, some hazards may not be so dangerous that they are harmful to health by themselves, but when taken into account with other health risks to a community, they are indeed harmful. This is compounded health risk, often referred to as cumulative risk. Today, people are often exposed to multiple health risks, such as ozone and particulate matter, while concurrently living in unhealthy housing conditions and/or experiencing poverty and other socioeconomic stressors that are associated with negative health outcomes.18 These conditions are experienced more often by disadvantaged communities.
10 SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit
Therefore, when working to comply with SB 1000’s mandates, an EJ planning process should include the following topics:
] Health Equity. California law describes “health equity” as “efforts to ensure that all people have full and equal access to opportunities that enable them to lead healthy lives.”22 ] Social Determinants of Health. “The structural determinants and conditions in which people are born, grow, live, work, and age.”23 This includes factors such as race and ethnicity, income, educational attainment, the physical environment, position and place of employment, social support networks, access to health care, etc.24
In keeping with the SB 1000 statute to reduce unique and compounded health risks facing disadvantaged communities, all efforts to integrate environmental justice into a General Plan and/or create a standalone EJ Element should consider and plan for positive health outcomes and the advancement of health equity. Strategies for partnering with local public health departments to coordinate on EJ-related policies and objectives are further discussed in Chapters 2 and 5.

1.6 / How We Prepared this
Toolkit
This Toolkit was prepared by PlaceWorks and CEJA staff on behalf of CEJA’s member organizations. CEJA also convened an internal SB 1000 Small Work Group and an external SB 1000 Toolkit Advisory Committee (consisting of environmental justice planning experts from various nonprofits and government agencies) to review drafts of the Toolkit and provide feedback to be incorporated into the final draft.

Preparation of this Toolkit drew inspiration and resources from various reports, guides, and planning documents created by federal, State, and regional government agencies as well as nongovernmental and community-based organizations.

1.7 / Organization of this
Toolkit
Following this initial chapter, which provides some background on SB 1000 and the purpose of this Toolkit, the remainder of this document is organized into six chapters:
] Chapter 2 provides an environmental justice planning process. ] Chapter 3 describes methods for identifying disadvantaged communities within a local jurisdiction.
] Chapter 4 explores community engagement strategies, including various principles, methods, best practices, and further resources for meaningfully involving local communities in planning. ] Chapter 5 discusses the required goals, objectives, and policies that must be addressed under SB 1000. This chapter also suggests additional EJ-related policies that are not specifically called out in the law but may be of local importance.
] Chapter 6 presents five case studies that highlight some of the ways in which a local jurisdiction may effectively incorporate environmental justice into local land use planning and policies. ] Chapter 7 considers potential sources of funding and technical assistance that may be leveraged to implement the statutes of SB 1000.

Chapter 1 / Introduction
11 Endnotes
1 Clark, L. P., Millet, D. B., & Marshall, J. D. (2014). National patterns in environmental injustice and inequality: outdoor NO2 air pollution in the United States. PLoS ONE, 9(4), e94431. http://doi.org/10.1371/journal. pone.0094431
2 Barboza, T., & Poston, B. (2017, August 06). What we know about California’s largest toxic cleanup: Thousands of L.A. County homes tainted with lead. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved October 01, 2017, from http://www. latimes.com/local/california/la-me-ln-exide-what-we-know-20170806- htmlstory.html
3 Community Water Center / El Centro Comunitario Por El Agua. (n.d.).

California’s drinking water crisis. Retrieved October 01, 2017, from http:// www.communitywatercenter.org/challenge
4 Cushing, L. J., Wander, M., Morello-Frosch, R., Pastor, M., Zhu, A., & Sadd J. (2016, September 14). A preliminary environmental equity assessment of California’s cap-and-trade program. University of Southern California Program for Environmental and Regional Equity. Retrieved September 29, 2017, from https://dornsife.usc.edu/assets/sites/242/docs/Climate_Equity_Brief_CA_Cap_and_Trade_Sept2016_FINAL2.pdf 5 Cushing, L. J., Wander, M., Morello-Frosch, R., Pastor, M., Zhu, A., & Sadd J. (2016, September 14). A preliminary environmental equity assessment of California’s cap-and-trade program. University of Southern California Program for Environmental and Regional Equity. Retrieved September 29, 2017, from https://dornsife.usc.edu/assets/sites/242/docs/Climate_Equity_Brief_CA_Cap_and_Trade_Sept2016_FINAL2.pdf 6 United States Environmental Protection Agency. (n.d.). Learn about environmental justice. Retrieved April 25, 2017, from https://www.epa.gov/ environmentaljustice/learn-about-environmental-justice
7 California Environmental Protection Agency. (n.d.). Environmental justice program. Retrieved April 25, 2017, from https://calepa.ca.gov/envjustice/ 8 Bullard, R. D. (1994) Dumping in Dixie: Race, class, and environmental quality (5th ed.). Boulder, CO: Westview Press. xiii–xvii. 9 See id. at 116 (defining environmental justice as procedural, geographic, and social equity); see also Robert R. Kuehn, A Taxonomy of Environmental Justice, 30 Envtl. L. Rep. 10681, 10681 (2000) (defining environmental justice as distributive, procedural, corrective, and social justice). 10 See Kuehn, supra note 9, at 10683–84 (defining distributive justice and applying the definition to the environmental context).
11 See The Principles, supra note 9 at Principle 7 (“Environmental Justice demands the right to participate as equal partners at every level of decision-making, including needs assessment, planning, implementation, enforcement and evaluation.”).
12 See Kuehn, supra note 9, at 10699.
13 Eley, C. (2016, June 6). Environmental justice through planning. American Planning Association. Retrieved on September 8, 2017, from https://www. planning.org/blog/blogpost/9101589/
14 California Department of Transportation, Division of Transportation Planning, Office of Policy Analysis & Research. (2003). Environmental justice in transportation planning and investments: Desk guide (Publication No. 02-059), 1. Retrieved from http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LocalPrograms/ saferoutes/EnvironmentalJusticeDeskGuideJan2003.pdf
15 American Planning Association American Institute of Certified Planners. (2016, April 1). AICP code of ethics and professional conduct. Retrieved August 14, 2017, from https://www.planning.org/ethics/ethicscode/ 16 Arnold, C. A. (2007). Fair and healthy land use: Environmental justice and planning. American Planning Association Planning Advisory Service. 17 Public Advocates, California Climate Equity Coalition (CCEC). (n.d.). Climate investments: Key elements and principles for FY17-18. 18 Cumulative risk is the “combined risks from aggregate exposures to multiple agents or stressors, which may include chemicals, biological, or physical agents.” (US EPA, 2003. Framework for cumulative risk assessment.

US EPA/ORD/NCEA, Washington, DC. EPA/600/P-02/001F. Retrieved from https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2014-11/documents/ frmwrk_cum_risk_assmnt.pdf). For more guidance on cumulative risk, see https://www.epa.gov/risk/framework-cumulative-risk-assessment 12 SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit
19 Blackwell, A. G.. (2016, October 5). Equity is…. PolicyLink. Retrieved on September 8, 2017, from: http://www.policylink.org/blog/equity-is 20 PolicyLink. (2015). The equity manifesto. Retrieved September 8, 2017, from http://www.policylink.org/about/equity-manifesto
21 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2017, July 28). Social determinants of health: Know what affects health. Retrieved on September 8, 2017, from: https://www.cdc.gov/socialdeterminants/
22 California Government Health and Safety Code, Section 131019.5(a)(2). 23 Marmot, M., Friel, S., Bell, R., Houweling, T. A. J., & Taylor, S. (2008). Closing the gap in a generation: Health equity through action on the social determinants of health. The Lancet, 372(9650), 1661–1669. http://dx.doi. org/10.1016/S0140-6736(08)61690-6
24 Galea, S., Tracy, M., Hoggatt, K. J., DiMaggio, C., & Karpati, A. (2011). Estimated deaths attributable to social factors in the United States. American Journal of Public Health, 101(8), 1456–1465. http://doi.org/10.2105/ AJPH.2010.300086

AN ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE

PLANNING PROCESS
1 3
4 5
6 7
A
B
C
2 14
SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit
An Environmental
Justice Planning
Process
This chapter provides a process to effectively develop and adopt an Environmental Justice (EJ) Element or integrate EJ policies throughout a General Plan.

2.1 / When to Prepare an EJ
Element
SB 1000 requires a local government to prepare an EJ Element or integrate EJ-related policies into other elements when both of the following conditions apply:
] “The concurrent adoption or next revision of two or more other General Plan elements on or after January 1, 2018.”1 For example, if a local jurisdiction is simultaneously updating its Land Use and Circulation elements, it must prepare an EJ Element or integrate EJ policies throughout its General Plan as part of the update. ] When a local jurisdiction identifies one or more disadvantaged communities (DACs) within its General Plan planning area.

Alternatively, a jurisdiction may voluntarily adopt an EJ Element or integrate EJ policies into its General Plan. Self-initiated SB 1000 compliance would benefit a local government by assisting them to identify DACs and proactively adopt EJ policies to benefit DACs.

Self-initiated compliance also demonstrates a local government’s commitment to promoting community health and improving the living conditions for residents, visitors, and employees.

2.2 / Stand-Alone EJ Element
vs. Integrated Policies
SB 1000 allows a local jurisdiction to adopt either 1) a stand-alone EJ Element or 2) a set of EJ-related policies integrated throughout other elements of a General Plan. Advantages and disadvantages of each approach are described here and presented in Table 2-1.

The preparation of a stand-alone EJ Element demonstrates strong commitment to achieving environmental justice goals. Collecting all EJ-focused policies in one place can make implementation easier and help jurisdictions address EJ-related issues more directly. However, more work may be needed to ensure consistency with other General Plan elements, and some challenges in General Plan implementation may arise if full consistency is not achieved. An alternative could be to include EJ components in a comprehensive health and wellness element, such as the Community Health and Wellness Element of the City of Richmond’s General Plan.

Using the second approach of integrating EJ policies throughout a General Plan can better facilitate consistency between EJ-related policies and other policies in each element. However, this approach may make it more difficult to prioritize or locate environmental justice goals and policies since they would be sprinkled throughout the General Plan.

Since this approach does not dedicate an element to EJ, commitment to EJ can be demonstrated through the General Plan introduction by describing the ways in which the plan aims to promote environmental justice, including the roles that community members played in its development.

Local governments should carefully weigh the advantages and disadvantages of these two approaches to determine the most beneficial strategy for achieving their jurisdiction’s vision and goals. Prior to initiating a General Plan update, a local government may conduct an internal review of existing policies to assess the extent of the changes that would be required to meet the goals of SB 1000. Regardless of Chapter 2 / The Environmental Justice Planning Process
15 2.3 / Existing Regulatory
Environment
This section briefly describes other State laws that may be relevant to SB 1000.

California Environmental Quality
Act
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) applies to all “projects” (with the exception of those specifically exempted from the Act) that require approval by a public decision-making body. The term “project” refers to the whole of an action that has the potential, directly or ultimately, to result in a physical change to the environment, and where a public body has the ability to approve or disapprove such actions (i.e., a “discretionary project”).2 This includes all phases of the project (if it has multiple phases) that are reasonably foreseeable, and all related projects (i.e., projects directly linked to the project in question).

A project may be a proposed development or a proposed policy or plan that may result in development or construction physically affecting the environment.

CEQA requires the preparation of an environmental review document for any non-exempt project. The preparation of the environmental document is the responsibility of the entity initiating the project. The process begins with the preparation of an Initial Study (IS), which is a checklist that assesses the potential environmental effects of the project. If all responses to the checklist determine “no impact,” then a Negative Declaration (ND) may be issued. If there are impacts and they can be mitigated to a level of insignificance, then a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) may be issued. In cases where the IS judges one or more impacts to be potentially significant or incapable of being mitigated to a level of insignificance, a full Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is required. Also, if a project is deemed controversial or there is a question about the level of significance of an impact, an EIR is usually required.

Table 2-1: Options for Integrating Environmental Justice into General Plans
Consideration Stand-Alone Element Integrated General Plan Goals and Policies
Primary Focus Demonstrates
importance of EJ as a
stand-alone topic.

Demonstrates interrelationship of EJ and
other General Plan issues.

Inter-Relationships Locates all EJ-related
policies in one place, for
ease of access.

Interrelationships of EJrelated topics to other
Elements may not be
immediately identifiable,
unless illustrated through
a matrix or table.

More directly
demonstrates
interrelationships of EJrelated topics to other
Elements.

EJ policies may not be
immediately identifiable
unless they are marked
individually.

Internal
Consistency of
General Plan
Consistency must be
ensured between the
EJ Element and other
Elements.

Consistency must be
ensured between policies
within each Element.

Ease of Future
Updates
Future updates are easy
if they focus only on EJ
policies, but may require
more work if policies
of other elements are
involved.

Updating EJ policies
would require updating
all affected elements,
but less work to ensure
consistency may be
required due to no
among elements.
which approach is taken, an EJ lens and framework must be used to ensure that all policies adopted in the plan do not negatively impact disadvantaged communities but provide resources and opportunities to help them thrive.
16 SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit
SB 535 (California Global Warming
Solutions Act of 2006: Greenhouse
Gas Reduction Fund)
Funds received through California’s cap and trade program are put into the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF). Senate Bill 535 (De León, 2012) mandates that 25 percent of these funds must benefit disadvantaged communities. This language was subsequently amended so that the funds must go to projects that are actually in disadvantaged communities, not just projects that benefit these areas. SB 535 also directed the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) to identify disadvantaged communities for investment opportunities.

During the implementation process of SB 535, CalEPA designated the top 25 percent of the highest-scoring census tracts in CalEnviroScreen as “disadvantaged communities.”4 For more information on the CalEnviroScreen tool, please refer to Chapter 3 on Identifying Disadvantaged Communities.

AB 1550 (Greenhouse Gases
Investment Plan)
Assembly Bill 1550 (Gomez, 2016) added a mandate that 10 percent of funds be directed to projects in low-income households or communities, thus expanding eligible areas. AB 1550 defines low-income households as “those with household incomes at or below 80 percent of the statewide median income or with household incomes at or below the threshold designated as low-income by the Department of Housing and Community Development’s (HCD) State Income Limits adopted pursuant to Section 50093.”5
AB 170 (San Joaquin Valley Air
Quality Elements)
Assembly Bill 170 (Reyes, 2003) was passed to improve ambient air quality in the San Joaquin Valley and assists jurisdictions in complying with the mandates of the California Clean Air Act.6 The law requires Both the adoption of an EJ Element and the adoption of a General Plan or General Plan Amendment qualify as discretionary projects, and hence are subject to CEQA. In most cases, this will result in the preparation of an EIR.3 Two approaches are available to local governments to complete the CEQA process for an EJ Element or integrated policies. ] If the EJ Element or integrated EJ policies are being prepared as part of a larger General Plan update, then the analysis of the EJ Element or policies would be folded into the larger General Plan EIR or other CEQA review.
] If the EJ Element or integrated policies is being prepared independent of a larger General Plan update, a stand-alone environmental document must be prepared.

In either case, it may be possible for the required CEQA document to “tier” off of an existing EIR prepared for a previous General Plan.

To the extent that a General Plan includes policies that mitigate existing and prevent new impacts, implementation of SB 1000 will likely result in beneficial impacts to the environment, and may be determined to have less than significant impacts. For example, including an EJ Element or EJ-related policies that seek to improve the environment may serve to mitigate impacts identified in the CEQA analysis of any subsequent General Plan update. Therefore, under certain circumstances, including an EJ Element in a General Plan update could help to produce what is called a self-mitigating General Plan. However, trying to produce a self-mitigating General Plan could open up additional problems for a jurisdiction, since a plan is only self-mitigating if it can go beyond simply mentioning EJ-related goals and actually implement the recommended changes. More information about the EIR requirements and process can be found at https://www.califaep.org/policy/ceqa-flowchart.

Chapter 2 / The Environmental Justice Planning Process
17 local governments in the San Joaquin Valley Air District to adopt an air quality element or integrate air quality–related goals, policies, and objectives into General Plan elements. AB 170 overlaps with SB 1000 through the mandated requirements for air quality policies in General Plans.

SB 244 (Planning for
Unincorporated Disadvantaged
Communities)
Senate Bill 244 (Wolk, 2011) addresses equity concerns and infrastructure deficits in disadvantaged unincorporated communities (DUCs), such as “fringe,” “island,” and “legacy” unincorporated communities after they are annexed. Local Agency Formation Commissions (LAFCOs) are charged with the responsibility of identifying DUCs, and local governments are required to use their General Plans to promote the extension of services, public facilities, and infrastructure to DUCs. The goals of SB 244 are similar to those of SB 1000 in that both promote the equitable distribution of resources and programs to disadvantaged communities and aim to promote public facilities. Readers should note that DUCs are not the same as DACs under SB 1000 in that DUCs are defined as unincorporated territories that include 12 or more registered voters or some other standard as determined by the LAFCO.7
SB 379 (Climate Adaptation and
Resiliency Strategies)
Senate Bill 379 (Jackson, 2015) requires cities and counties to review and update the safety elements of their General Plans to include climate adaptation and resiliency strategies. This update must include a vulnerability assessment identifying risks posed by climate change; adaptation and resiliency goals, policies, and objectives; and implementation measures.8 SB 379’s statutes relate closely to SB 1000 in that both involve assessing vulnerabilities of local communities and developing General Plan goals, policies, and objectives to address those vulnerabilities.

2.4 / Environmental Justice
Planning Process
Community Engagement in EJ
Planning
Proactive and meaningful community engagement from the start of a planning process to the implementation of goals and policies is critical to achieving the goals of SB 1000. Environmental injustices often result from failed or inadequate community involvement in land use planning and other planning-related decisions; therefore, a strong and continuous community engagement strategy is central to planning for environmental justice. Early community engagement may also prove to be integral to identifying disadvantaged communities and could help to build trust with communities during the planning process. Chapter 4 provides a framework for developing a meaningful community engagement strategy for EJ planning, which can lead to the following benefits:
] Access to local knowledge and information that is usually unavailable in research databases, including a better understanding of local perspectives related to the practicality and challenges of implementing General Plan policies and programs. ] Increased public support for policies, goals, and outcomes, which reduces the risk of public backlash that could hinder or compromise the adoption and implementation of the plan.
] Development of local leaders who could act as community stewards during implementation of EJ policies and goals. 18 SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit
Planning Process
Figure 2-1, at the end of this chapter illustrates the EJ planning process that this Toolkit suggests to promote the effective implementation of SB 1000. Local governments and planners may use this process to guide preparation of an EJ Element or integrated policies, or to inform the development of their own EJ planning process. A summary of each step is provided below, and they are discussed in greater detail in Chapter 5.

1. Conduct Introductory Public Meeting(s), Identify Disadvantaged Communities, and Document Existing Conditions. As is typical with a General Plan update process, a local jurisdiction that is embarking upon a SB 1000 planning process would host introductory public meeting(s) to announce the General Plan update and provide information about the process, including the various ways in which community members can engage. Introductory meetings offer opportunities for local governments and planners to gather initial input about potential EJ issues and key EJ objectives to be prioritized in the planning process. Introductory meetings also allow community members and stakeholders to express early interest in participating in forthcoming community engagement formats (such as committees) during the planning process.

Second, since SB 1000 requires local governments to prepare an EJ Element or develop EJ policies if a DAC is identified in its General Plan planning area, jurisdictions should embark upon a process early on to identify DACs using the most appropriate and effective tools. In addition to working with community members to identify potential EJ communities, Chapter 3 on Identifying DACs can further assist planners with these efforts.

Third, jurisdictions should also begin by documenting the community health and EJ issues that various communities are facing. Issues related to prior planning decisions, including historical inequities due to zoning policies or discriminatory development patterns, would be key issues to address during an EJ planning process. Documenting EJ issues accurately will ensure that meaningful EJ-related policies are established and would be included in any existing conditions documentation or report typically prepared during the General Plan planning process. The definition of DACs and methods for identifying DACs are presented in Chapter 3 of this Toolkit.

2. Involve and Engage the Community. Early, proactive, and ongoing community engagement is critical for facilitating discussions and gathering input on EJ issues and objectives. These activities would be conducted before and during the development of EJ goals, policies, and objectives, as described in the next step.

Planners should also consider the creation of a community advisory committee to oversee the development of an EJ Element or EJ goals. A dedicated EJ representative could also be included in a general plan advisory committee. Either of these options creates a formal way to consult with EJ experts during the process and can enable better monitoring and implementation. It also establishes the importance of EJ issues for the General Plan process.

For more information on community advisory committees and the principles, strategies, and options for involving communities in the planning process, refer to Chapter 4 on Community Engagement.

3. Develop EJ Goals, Policies, and Objectives. Using findings from the existing conditions analyses and community and other stakeholder feedback, planners will begin developing policies for addressing local EJ issues affecting DACs. This Toolkit strongly recommends developing EJ policies in partnership with community members and thus recommends an ongoing community engagement process from start to finish. EJ policies should provide short- and long-term strategies for addressing existing issues while providing an implementation matrix to identify key actors who would be responsible for each objective. Suggested strategies for analyzing EJ issues and developing EJ policies are described further in Chapter 5.

4. Adopt the Element or Policies. A draft EJ Element, and/or drafts of all affected General Plan elements, is prepared following the development of EJ goals and policies. During this step, environmental clearance will be required for the draft EJ element or affected General Plan elements (see California Environmental Quality Act, Chapter 2 / The Environmental Justice Planning Process
19 above). A typical process for developing a draft element would begin with preparing a draft for administrative review, followed by a draft for public review, then presenting a draft before the Planning Commission and City Council. This may be an iterative process that gathers feedback from community members, stakeholders, government staff, and elected officials. Once feedback is fully incorporated, the draft element(s) are presented before the city council for adoption. A successful vote for adoption would finalize the proposed element(s) and complete the planning process.

5. Continually Evaluate during Implementation. Achieving a truly effective EJ element or EJ goals requires ongoing and robust implementation beyond the planning process. A jurisdictional commitment to seeing recommendations through to action is critical. Thus, it is imperative to evaluate the process with community stakeholders and build in opportunities for periodic review and evaluation.

This can be accomplished through annual or biannual committees or task forces who can evaluate progress. Policies should include implementation processes, such as participating in development review teams. The City of Richmond has developed promising practices toward accomplishing this step, which is discussed in Chapter 6.

Interagency Coordination and
Consistency
Following the adoption of an updated General Plan, there may be inconsistencies between the newly adopted policies of the plan and the guiding plans of other agencies and departments that work within a local government. Therefore, this Toolkit recommends a subsequent internal audit to identify any conflicts and inconsistencies as well as continued interagency coordination as new policies are administered.

One measure that may facilitate coordination between new and existing policies is a requirement to conduct impact analyses on any major development projects in or near DACs during the project review process. This measure can draw from implementation frameworks used by federal agencies to satisfy the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) requirements. For example, the Federal Interagency Working Group on Environmental Justice (EJ IWG) and NEPA Committee developed and presented a number of suggested methodologies that consider EJ-oriented approaches to NEPA analysis in Promising Practices for EJ Methodologies in NEPA Reviews. These methods were derived from current federal agency practices incorporating EJ approaches into their frameworks.9 Another example is the Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) adoption of an EJ strategy to demonstrate the agency’s commitment to integrating EJ principles into DOT programs, policies, and activities. FHWA updates the strategy periodically and provides annual reports on its implementation progress.10
County public health departments can also act as important partners, both when developing EJ Elements and policies and when implementing General Plan objectives. This Toolkit recommends several ways for coordinating planning efforts with local public health departments:
] Use data from the Health Places Index to develop policy priorities and inform existing conditions within the community.
] Jurisdictions could conduct a Health Impact Assessment (HIA). ] Involve public health departments during development review processes, when many departments typically evaluate and comment on a project collaboratively. General Plan EJ policies can encourage or mandate this.
] Include a representative from the county public health department on the General Plan Advisory Committee (GPAC – see Chapter 4).

Local Health Departments
Local health departments can provide local data on environmental exposures or health inequities that the EJ planning process can address.

Most health departments analyze data and publish reports about health conditions, longevity, disparities, and causes of death and illness in the county, often addressing smaller geographies such as census tracts or zip codes.

Local health departments may also have relationships with communitybased organizations and individuals that can help support the 20 SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit
community engagement process for developing the EJ element or EJrelated policies by bringing residents into the process who have had little opportunity to previously participate in land use and transportation planning processes.

Local health department staff are increasingly building their capacity to engage with and provide input to land use and transportation planning processes and plans from a health equity perspective. Representing the health needs of the community, many are interested in building relationships with planners and are able to provide Health Impact Assessments/Analyses that assess potential health benefits, harms, and social equity of policies in General Plans and other planning documents.

Native Americans and Tribal Governments
The recommendations and analyses provided in this Toolkit may be used to support Native American communities and indigenous peoples impacted by EJ issues, but issues that are specific to indigenous communities are not discussed in depth. Local governments and planners should ensure any planning process meaningfully engages with Tribal governments and Native American communities and carry out government-to-government consultation in order to accurately identify specific issues and allow indigenous peoples to partake in developing strategies for addressing EJ concerns in their communities. to minimize environmental impacts, they might be likely candidates for Negative Declarations. However, preparation of EJ Elements is also likely to be part of a larger General Plan amendment or update where either potential significant environmental impacts or controversies may arise in other areas of the General Plan. Therefore, an EIR is the safest and most prudent environmental document to prepare.
4 California Environmental Protection Agency. (n.d.). California climate investments to benefit disadvantaged communities. Retrieved June 13, 2017 from http://www.calepa.ca.gov/envjustice/ghginvest/
5 The Climate Investments for California Communities Act. Cal. Assembly Bill 1550. (2015-2016). Chapter 369 (Cal. Stat. 2016). Retrieved from https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_ id=201520160AB1550
6 Air quality element: San Joaquin Valley. Assembly Bill 170. (2003-2004).

Chapter 472 (Cal. Stat. 2003). Retrieved from https://leginfo.legislature. ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=200320040AB170 7 Planning for unincorporated disadvantaged communities. Cal. Senate Bill 244. (2011-2012). Chapter 513 (Cal. Stat. 2011). Retrieved from ftp:// www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12/bill/sen/sb_0201-0250/sb_244_ bill_20111007_chaptered.html
8 Alliance of Regional Collaboratives for Climate Adaptation. (2016). Introducing SB 379: Climate adaptation and resiliency strategies. Retrieved July 26, 2018 from http://arccacalifornia.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/ SB-379-Fact-Sheet.pdf
9 Federal Interagency Working Group on Environmental Justice & NEPA Committee. (2016, March). Promising practices for EJ methodologies in NEPA reviews. Retrieved from https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/ files/2016-08/documents/nepa_promising_practices_document_2016. pdf
10 Federal Highway Administration. (2017, January 9). Environmental justice.

U.S. Department of Transportation. Retrieved June 14, 2017 from https:// www.fhwa.dot.gov/Environment/environmental_justice/
Endnotes
1 Planning for healthy communities act. Cal. Senate Bill 1000. (2015-2016).

Chapter 587 (Cal. Stat. 2016). Retrieved from https://leginfo.legislature. ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160SB1000 2 CEQA guidelines. Section 15378 (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3).
3 Approving a General Plan update (and therefore an EJ Element or integrated policies) is technically feasible under a Negative Declaration, which is a finding that no significant adverse impact to the environment would occur as a result of the project. Since EJ Elements are intended Chapter 2 / The Environmental Justice Planning Process
21 Reduce Pollution
Exposure
Improve Air Quality
Promote Public
Facilities
Promote Food Access
Promote Safe &
Sanitary Homes
Promote Physical
Activity
Promote Civil
Engagement
Prioritize Investments

RESEARCH ENGAGE DEVELOP ADOPT
Ongoing
Community Engagement
Ongoing
Community Engagement
] Environmental
Justice Objectives
& Policies
] Environmental
Justice Element
or related
Goals, Policies,
& Objectivies
integrated
throughout other
Elements
] Identify
Disadvantaged
Communities
(DACs)
] Document
Existing
Conditions and
known EJ Issues
] Identify
Community
Members and
Stakeholders
for Community
Engagement
(Community
Engagement
Strategy Memo
recommended)
] Who: Community
Members &
Stakeholders
] How: Public
Meetings, Tours,
Workshops, Steering
Committee,
Technical Advisory
Groups, etc.
] What: Discussion
topics would include
reviewing existing
General Plan,
identifying EJ issues,
and developing EJ
policies. Community
members can also
help identify DACs.
1 2 3 4
Figure 2-1 /
Environmental Justice
Planning Process Diagram
This page intentionally left blank.

SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit
22 IDENTIFYING

DISADVANTAGED

COMMUNITIES
1 2
4 5
6 7
A
B
C
3 24
SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit
Disadvantaged Community (DAC)
“An area identified by the California Environmental
Protection Agency (CalEPA) pursuant to Section 39711 of the Health and Safety Code or an area that is a low-income area that is disproportionately affected by environmental pollution and other hazards that can lead to negative health effects, exposure, or environmental degradation.”
The first half of this definition is from the Health and Safety Code and establishes DACs as those identified by CalEPA, which are the top 25 percent of highest scoring census tracts in CalEPA’s CalEnviroScreen. The second half allows local governments to identify DACs using their own methods.

When to Identify DACs
DACs should be identified at the beginning of the EJ and General Plan process since all other parts of the process rely on this basic building block. Identifying DACs at this stage of a General Plan update can occur during introductory meetings and allows for proactive outreach to community members for the community engagement process, early identification of EJ issues, and timely preparation of policies to address them. Community members can also assist in the identification of DACs and planners can consider ways to involve them in this process.

DAC Definition and Overview of
Methodologies
SB 1000 defines the criteria for identifying a DAC:

An area identified by the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) pursuant to Section 39711 of the Health and Identifying
Disadvantaged
Communities
This chapter focuses on identifying disadvantaged communities (DACs) within the General Plan planning area. While SB 1000 specifies CalEnviroScreen from the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) as the primary screening method, it also allows for a secondary approach to identifying DACs (i.e., low-income areas experiencing disproportionate impacts of environmental pollution and other health hazards). This chapter provides guidance on using the CalEnviroScreen tool while also presenting additional methods for identifying DACs.

California’s diverse range of rural, suburban, and urban settings may also call for alternative and custom approaches to identifying DACs in order to address local contexts.

Across other chapters of this Toolkit, the term “environmental justice communities” may be used. As a clarification, EJ communities and DACs are similar concepts, although many community groups prefer the term “EJ communities.” For easy consistency with SB 1000 law text, this Toolkit will primarily use the term “disadvantaged communities,” or DACs.

Identifying DACs involves methodologies and indices that are likely to be refined over time. The tools and methods presented in this Toolkit are the most current versions at the time of writing. Local governments and planners should stay apprised of the latest tools and methods as they, and the issues of environmental justice, develop over time. Additionally, planners should remain mindful of changes in demographics and the geographic distribution of populations as they will likely influence the methods presented in this Toolkit.

Chapter 3 / Determining the Presence of DACs
25 3.1 / Primary Screening
Method: CalEnviroScreen
By defining DACs as areas identified in the Health and Safety Code Section 39711, SB 1000 specifies CalEnviroScreen as the primary screening method for identifying DACs. This section briefly describes CalEnviroScreen’s methods, explains how to use the tool to identify DACs, and provides resources to further aid its use.

Introducing CalEnviroScreen
The California Communities Environmental Health Screening Tool (or CalEnviroScreen, as it is more commonly known), is a science-based tool developed by the Office of Environmental Health Hazards Assessment on behalf of CalEPA to help identify communities that are disproportionately burdened by multiple sources of pollution and vulnerabilities. It uses a “cumulative impact” framework to “identify communities in California most burdened by pollution from multiple sources and most vulnerable to its effects, taking into account socioeconomic characteristics and underlying health status.”3 There have been three iterations of the tool so far, hence the official title is CalEnviroScreen 3.0. All versions have gone through an extensive public process, and the tool’s robust data are drawn from national and state sources.

Environmental justice groups in California have long advocated for the creation of a tool like CalEnviroScreen that comprehensively assesses the range of burdens in a community. Many Californians live in communities or neighborhoods that are impacted by a range of environmental pollution and other health hazards that are compounded by social vulnerabilities such as unemployment and poverty. However, environmental impacts are often regulated and evaluated on an issueby-issue basis, in isolation from other impacts within an area.

CalEnviroScreen uses existing environmental, health, and socioeconomic data to rank all census tracts in California based on 20 different indicators.

The indicators are organized across four component categories:

Ground-Truthing
Information on ground-truthing can be found at
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24347142
Safety Code or an area that is a low-income area that is disproportionately affected by environmental pollution and other hazards that can lead to negative health effects, exposure, or environmental degradation. (emphasis added)
This definition essentially provides two different ways to identify DACs. A suggested process for identifying DACs is illustrated in Figure 3-5. The following pages in this chapter will describe the use of the CalEnviroScreen map, which is developed by CalEPA pursuant to Section 39711 of the Health and Safety Code, and describing various tools for identifying DACs per the second definition of low income areas disproportionately affected by environmental pollution and other hazards.

Role of Ground-Truthing
This Toolkit recommends that local governments complement DAC identification with a method known as “ground-truthing.” Groundtruthing is a “community fact-finding process where residents supplement technical information with local knowledge in order to better inform policy and project decisions.”1 During a ground-truthing process, planners and researchers work in conjunction with community members to verify data in the field, such as location of pollution sources and their proximity to “sensitive receptors.” This community-based survey of existing conditions is then compared to government datasets and used to correct any margins of error to improve screening results.

Ground-truthing research efforts have revealed that government data may occasionally be inaccurate, such as distance data that have margins of error as high as a quarter mile. Ground-truthing also helps in identifying transient or extremely small disadvantaged communities, such as migrant workers or homeless populations.2
26 SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit
pollution exposure, environmental effects, sensitive populations, and socioeconomic factors. These categories are summed into two primary metrics—pollution burden and population characteristics— which CalEnviroScreen multiplies to arrive at the CalEnviroScreen score. In general, the higher the score, the more impacted a community is by pollution burdens and population vulnerabilities. A list of the CalEnviroScreen indicators and the formula can be found in Figure 3-2.

CalEnviroScreen can be easily navigated by local planners without any specialized knowledge in the environmental sciences. When opened by the user, the CalEnviroScreen map displays all California census tracts ranked according to their total CalEnviroScreen score.

In a separate process, CalEPA has designated the top 25 percent of highest scoring tracts in CalEnviroScreen as “disadvantaged communities.”4 The designation process was conducted to comply with Senate Bill 535 (de León). Thus, there are two sets of maps available online: the complete CalEnviroScreen ranking of all census tracts in California on CalEPA’s website, and a map of DACs according to the SB 535 designation.

Ways to Use and Adjust
CalEnviroScreen for Contextual
Needs
Using the top 25 percent of CalEnviroScreen communities to identify DACs is the “off the shelf” use of CalEnviroScreen. However, local governments and planners may also choose to adjust how they use the tool in order to fit their particular context. Since CalEnviroScreen functions as a statewide assessment, the tool may need to be refined to be relevant to the local contexts of rural, suburban, and urban communities when identifying DACs. For example, while CalEnviroScreen’s use of census tracts may be most appropriate in an urban setting, census tracts may not be the most useful unit of spatial analysis to look at areas with low populations, such as rural areas that have very small communities with high pollution burdens.

In other cases, there may be sources of environmental exposure within a region that are not included in CalEnviroScreen. Examples of indicators that are not in CalEnviroScreen but are important EJ issues are lack of access to parks and open space, proximity to oil and gas extraction sites, and climate vulnerability. Alternatively, there may be indicators in the composite CalEnviroScreen score that are not as relevant for certain regions. For example, a community could rank high in one environmental variable, but may not be considered a DAC if its rankings in other CalEnviroScreen variables are low.

Though CalEnviroScreen provides a pre-calculated composite score, the tool’s data is available online and can be used in different ways to be more appropriate in local contexts. A number of options are available for adjusting CalEnviroScreen and the Toolkit recommends the ones outlined below.

Optional Method A: Customizing
Indicators
CalEnviroScreen scores are a combination of multiple indicators.

However, local governments and planners may want to customize the CalEnviroScreen 3.0 Resources
] Main webpage. https://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen/
report/calenviroscreen-30
] Map. https://oehha.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/ index.html?id=4560cfbce7c745c299b2d0cbb07044f5
] Map of Identified DACs (2017). http://
oehha.maps.arcgis.com/apps/View/index.
html?appid=c3e4e4e1d115468390cf61d9db83efc4
] Report and Methodology (2017). https://oehha.ca.gov/
media/downloads/calenviroscreen/report/ces3report.pdf
Chapter 3 / Determining the Presence of DACs
27 Figure 3-1 / CalEnviroScreen Map (OEHHA, 2017)
28 SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit
number or types of CalEnviroScreen indicators that they use to identify DACs. This approach is useful in areas where certain environmental indicators in the tool are not as prevalent. An example is an area without significant air quality concerns: since CalEnviroScreen has a number of air quality-related indicators that impact the composite score, a local government may choose to focus on other, more-relevant indicators.

Further information on some alternative ways to use CalEnviroScreen data can be found in CalEPA’s Approaches to Identifying Disadvantaged Communities.5
Optional Method B: Regional Rankings
CalEnviroScreen data can be used to generate regional rankings instead of the tool’s default statewide ranking. Regional rankings would have the benefit of identifying highly impacted areas within a region that may not necessarily be captured through statewide ranking. Regional rankings are appropriate for regional programs and funding, such as those administered by metropolitan planning organizations or regional air districts. Data for achieving this is available on the CalEnviroScreen website.

Example of Using Regional Rankings: San Diego’s
Climate Action Plan
The City of San Diego’s Climate Action Plan identifies census tracts in the top 30 percent of CalEnviroScreen scores, which may be locally normalized, within San Diego city or county as “underserved communities.” These underserved communities would be prioritized for greater investments through the City’s Capital Improvement Program.6 Optional Method C: Custom Percentage
Threshold to Identify DACs
Local governments and planners may choose to select a different percentage of CalEnviroScreen census tracts when determining the threshold for defining DACs in their area. For example, for areas with many census tracts in the top 25 percent, such as urban Los Angeles, local governments and planners may decide to focus on a smaller subset of census tracts that bear the most pollution burden. Alternatively, if a jurisdiction does not have many census tracts in the top 25 percent, it could use an expanded percentage threshold (e.g. 30 percent).

Figure 3-2 / CalEnviroScreen Methodology and Indicators (source: California Environmental Justice Alliance) Chapter 3 / Determining the Presence of DACs
29 Example of Using a Different Threshold: Active
Transportation Program
The Active Transportation Program previously identified areas ranking in the top 10 percent of CalEnviroScreen 1.1 scores as DACs eligible for funding from combined federal and state transportation programs, to help ensure their participation in active transportation improvements.7,8 Optional Method D: Combining
CalEnviroScreen with Other Tools or
Indicators
CalEnviroScreen can also be used in combination with other screening tools or indicators. Local governments and planners may choose to use the top 25 percent of CalEnviroScreen census tracts as a baseline, but may also overlay another indicator or screening tool that is appropriate for the local context. This ensures that the baseline of DACs is included while creating flexibility to capture additional communities.

Example of Using CalEnviroScreen with Additional
Indicators: Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund and AB
1550
CalEnviroScreen has been used to identify areas eligible for a 25 percent set-aside of Greenhouse Gas Reduction Funds (GGRF) in the state of California, pursuant to SB 535 (de Leon). Assembly Bill 1550 (Gomez) expanded GGRF funding eligibility to include not only CalEnviroScreenidentified communities, but low-income households and communities.

AB 1550 is an example of combining CalEnviroScreen maps with an additional economic indicator to identify a larger range of communities.

More information about the definition of “low-income” per AB 1550 is outlined in Chapter 2 and links to maps can be found in the following section.

3.2 / Screening for DACs
through Income and
Pollution burden
SB 1000 allows for additional identification methods of DACs by identifying areas that are both 1) low-income and 2) disproportionately affected by environmental pollution and other hazards that can lead to negative health effects, exposure, and/or environmental degradation.

These additional definitions were included in the legislation to give jurisdictions the flexibility to adapt DAC identification to their local context. To identify DACs under these two definitions, planners must screen for areas that meet the conditions of both definitions.

Identifying Low-Income Areas
SB 1000 allows for two possible definitions of low-income areas, both of which will need to be identified within the General Plan planning area. CARB has prepared documentation outlining two methods for determining low-income areas—statewide median income and HCD state income limits. These methods were used for the purposes of AB 1550 and can also be applied to SB 1000 since both laws share the same definitions of low-income areas.

By Statewide Median Income
Low-income areas per statewide median income are determined using the most recent American Community Survey (ACS) 5-Year Estimates for California census tracts. Any census tract in the General Plan planning area with a median household income at or below 80 percent of the statewide median household income would be identified as a low-income area. ACS data can be accessed at https://www.census. gov/programs-surveys/acs/.
30 SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit
disproportionate impacts, and the remaining tools provide more regional and/or topic-specific analyses. These tools can also be helpful in assessing existing conditions, as outlined in Chapter 5.

Environmental Justice Screening Method
(Statewide, Comprehensive)
EJSM was developed by the Program for Environmental and Regional Equity (PERE) at the University of Southern California to analyze cumulative impacts (CI) at the census tract level, but it also offers a finer unit of spatial analysis based on the location of sensitive land uses. Compared to CalEnviroScreen, EJSM utilizes additional metrics in its scoring, including race and ethnicity, climate vulnerability risks, and water quality analysis. In total, EJSM summarizes its indicators across four categories: 1) hazard proximity and land use; 2) estimated air pollution exposure and health risk; 3) social and health vulnerability; and 4) climate vulnerabilities. While EJSM calculates a CI score ranging from 4 to 20, no threshold has been established for defining disproportionately impacted or “disadvantaged” communities.

Therefore, this Toolkit suggests that any areas scoring in the top 50th By HCD State Income Limits
The Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) employs its own criteria and thresholds for defining low-income households according to its annually updated State Income Limits.9 Low-income thresholds per HCD State Income Limits can be accessed at http://www.hcd.ca.gov/grants-funding/income-limits/state-andfederal-income-limits.shtml.

CARB’s Low-Income Communities Map
CARB has created a map that identifies low-income communities across California by statewide median income and by HCD State Income Limits. This map helps identifies communities for the purposes of AB 1550 and may also be used in part to identify local DACs in accordance with SB 1000. Information on using CARB’s Low-Income Communities Map can be accessed at https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/capandtrade/ auctionproceeds/communityinvestments.htm.

Identifying Areas
Disproportionately Affected by
Environmental Pollution and
Other Hazards
Unlike identifying low-income areas, SB 1000 does not specify a clear method or threshold for identifying areas “disproportionately affected by environmental pollution and other hazards.”
This section presents a non-exhaustive collection of supplementary screening methods to help identify areas that are disproportionately affected. Any one or a combination of these tools may be used for screening. The methods presented in this section have been widely referenced across the state at the time of writing and share similar approaches with CalEnviroScreen; however, some tools also have different metrics and indices. The Environmental Justice Screening Method (EJSM) offers a comprehensive approach to assessing Figure 3-3 / EJSM scores on map (PERE) Chapter 3 / Determining the Presence of DACs
31 percentile of the CI scores (equal to 12 or above) be considered areas experiencing disproportionate impacts. EJSM maps, which identify disproportionally affected areas for each California region in 2015, can be accessed at https://dornsife.usc.edu/assets/sites/242/docs/ EJSM_Maps_final_for_website.pdf. EJSM’s methodology may be understood through PERE resources found at https://dornsife.usc.edu/ pere/cumulative-impacts/.

EJ Screen by US EPA (Statewide,
Comprehensive)
The United States Environmental Protection Agency’s (US EPA) Environmental Justice Screening and Mapping Tool (EJ Screen) is a web-based screening tool developed to identify areas of concern using a nationally consistent dataset of EJ indices. However, areas identified by EJ Screen are not considered definitive enough to count as disproportionately impacted areas. Planners should note that US EPA does not utilize EJ Screen as a tool for identifying DACs. Local planners may use EJ Screen to identify potential areas of concern as candidates for further analysis. EJ Screen can be accessed at https://www.epa. gov/ejscreen/learn-use-ejscreen.

Regional Opportunity Index by UC Davis
(Statewide, Issue Specific: Economic
Inequity)
The University of California, Davis Center for Regional Change partnered with Rabobank to develop the Regional Opportunity Index (ROI), a tool for identifying vulnerable communities in need of investment based on community characteristics, such as race, age, and gender; and issues including education, economic, housing, mobility, environmental, and civic life indicators. Communities identified through the ROI can help identify potential DACs within local jurisdictions that would require further analysis. The ROI can be accessed at https://interact. regionalchange.ucdavis.edu/roi/index.html
Cumulative Environmental Vulnerabilities
Assessment (Regional: San Joaquin Valley
and Coachella Valley)
The Center for Regional Change at the University of California, Davis, developed the Cumulative Environmental Vulnerabilities Assessment (CEVA) screening method for analyzing cumulative impacts in the San Joaquin Valley and Coachella Valley regions. CEVA uses indicators organized across three components: cumulative environmental hazards index (CEHI), social vulnerability index (SVI), and health index (HI).

Together, these components deliver a CEVA rating at the censusblock group level. Tracts with high SVI and high CEHI scores; high SVI and medium CEHI scores; or medium SVI and high CEHI scores can be identified as disproportionately impacted. Jurisdictions in the San Joaquin Valley or the Coachella Valley regions can access CEVA ratings maps at http://explore.regionalchange.ucdavis.edu/ourwork/ projects/initiatives/environmental-justice. The HI map, which can be cross-referenced with the CEHI/SVI map to determine communities that also contain specific health conditions that make them more susceptible to the effects of environmental hazards, can also be accessed at that link.

CEVA’s methodology, which involves GIS analysis, can be understood further through the report Cumulative Environmental Vulnerabilities in San Joaquin, accessed at http://explore.regionalchange.ucdavis. edu/ourwork/projects/ceva-sjv.

Figure 3-4 / CEVA scoring system (source: UC Davis)
Low SVI
High CEHI
Low SVI
Medium CEHI
Low SVI
Low CEHI
High SVI
Low CEHI
Medium SVI
Medium CEHI
Medium SVI
Low CEHI
High SVI
High CEHI
High SVI
Medium CEHI
Medium SVI
High CEHI
32 SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit
SCAG Sustainability Maps and Tools
(Regional: Southern California)
The Southern California Association of Governments’ (SCAG) Sustainability Program developed a set of maps and tools as part of its regional growth vision. These resources include maps of landfill locations, wildfire threat, gas utility service areas, and electricity generation facilities. While SCAG maps currently do not address cumulative impacts specifically, local jurisdictions may utilize these maps to supplement and inform their own data collection, including an analysis of DACs, for their EJ planning processes. For example, the SCAG map that illustrates wildfire threats could be overlaid with other DAC data to reveal DACs that would be vulnerable to wildfires. SCAG maps can be accessed at http://sustain.scag.ca.gov/Pages/Maps.aspx, and other SCAG tools can be accessed at http://sustain.scag.ca.gov/ Pages/Tools/Tools.aspx.

California Healthy Places Index (Issue
Specific: Social Equity)
The California Healthy Places Index (HPI) was created by the Public Health Alliance of Southern California to identify “cumulative health advantage” for places (at various geographies from the census tract to the entire state) across California. The HPI’s public health framework provides a “ground-truthed” tool for identifying communities facing inequities that are impacting health and uses an evidence-based approach to summarize a wide range of policy-relevant social, economic, and environmental indicators.10 These indicators capture the social determinants of health and are grouped into eight different policy action areas, including: (1) economic; (2) social; (3) education; (4) transportation; (5) neighborhood; (6) housing; (7) clean environment; and (8) healthcare access. Scores for these policy action areas were examined against life expectancy at birth, then weighted and combined to maximize the HPI’s association with this health outcome.11 The tool provides a much needed public health lens that may be used in conjunction with other tools, such as CalEnviroScreen, to identify DACs BAAQMD CARE Program: Identified
Impacted Communities in the San
Francisco Bay Area (Regional: San
Francisco Bay Area)
The Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s (BAAQMD) Community Air Risk Evaluation Program (CARE) identifies disproportionately impacted communities in the San Francisco Bay Area. This CARE program tool analyzes rates of pollution risk and related health impacts for purposes of grant making, enforcement programs, local studies, and other activities to reduce pollution exposure. Zip codes are used as the spatial unit of analysis. CARE calculates a pollution-vulnerability index score (PVI) for each zip code, with PVIs in the highest 15th percentile being identified as disproportionately impacted. The CARE Program map and methodology can be accessed at http://www.baaqmd.gov/ plans-and-climate/community-air-risk-evaluation-care-program.

SCAQMD MATES IV Study (Air Quality,
Regional: South Coast)
The South Coast Air Quality Management District’s (SCAQMD’s) Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study is currently in its fourth iteration (MATES IV). MATES IV includes a monitoring program, an emissions inventory of toxic air contaminants, and a model characterizing carcinogenic risk across the South Coast Air Basin from exposure to air toxics. MATES IV is also notable for measuring ultrafine particle concentrations. The study does not estimate mortality or other health effects from particulate exposures. Local planners may use resources from MATES IV to understand carcinogenic risks across the South Coast Air Basin or adapt the model to study carcinogenic risks in their locality. The MATES IV Carcinogenic Risk interactive map and report can be accessed at http://www.aqmd.gov/home/library/air-qualitydata-studies/health-studies/mates-iv.

Chapter 3 / Determining the Presence of DACs
33 and EJ communities. The HPI website includes a dynamic interactive map to view and explore the data, as well as additional data in decision support layers including other health outcomes, climate hazards, and race. Accompanying the HPI tool are policy guides that offer a menu of practical solutions and concrete actions that jurisdictions can use to improve community conditions and health. HPI Tools and Resources can be accessed at http://healthyplacesindex.org/.

EnviroMapper for Envirofacts by US EPA
(Issue Specific: Environment)
US EPA created the EnviroMapper mapping tool that utilizes US EPA data to identify environmental activities in an area that may affect air, water, and land. Relevant environmental activities include: facilities that can potentially affect the environment, US EPA program systems, the presence of chemicals, and locations of greenhouse gas emissions.

EnviroMapper can be used to develop a better understanding of additional EJ issues that are impacting an area. EnviroMapper can be accessed at https://www.epa.gov/emefdata/em4ef.home.

Mojave Regional Water Quality Studies
The California Water Science Center developed the Mojave Region Water Quality Studies, which evaluate groundwater quality of the Mojave River and Morongo groundwater basins and generated maps showing distribution and concentrations of known water contaminants in the region in groundwater. The study’s methodology may provide guidance on conducting water quality analyses in other jurisdictions and can be accessed at https://ca.water.usgs.gov/mojave/mojavewater-quality.html. 2 To learn more about ground-truthing and its methodologies, please see The Truth, the Whole Truth, and Nothing but the Ground Truth by James Sadd, PhD, et al., accessed at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/ pubmed/24347142.
3 California Environmental Justice Alliance. (n.d.). CalEnviroScreen 3.0: A tool for advancing environmental justice.
4 Office of Environmental Health Hazards Assessment. (2014). SB 535 disadvantaged communities map. Retrieved from https://oehha.maps.arcgis. com/home/item.html?id=dae2fb1e42674c12a04a2b302a080598
5 California Environmental Protection Agency. (2014, August). Approaches for identifying disadvantaged communities. Retrieved from https://www. arb.ca.gov/cc/capandtrade/auctionproceeds/workshops/calepa-approaches-to-identify-disadvantaged-communities-aug2014.pdf 6 California Environmental Justice Alliance. (n.d.). CalEnviroScreen 3.0: A tool for advancing environmental justice.
7 California Strategic Growth Council. (2014, June). Sustainable communities planning grant and incentives program: Round 3 recommendations for funding, 10. Retrieved from http://sgc.ca.gov/meetings/council/2014/ docs/06-03-SGC-Planning-Grant-Recommendation-Presentation.pdf 8 California Department of Transportation. (2017, August). Active transportation program. Retrieved from http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LocalPrograms/atp/ 9 California Department of Housing and Community Development. (2017, June). State income limits for 2017. Retrieved from http://www.hcd. ca.gov/grants-funding/income-limits/state-and-federal-income-limits/ docs/inc2k17.pdf
10 Public Health Alliance of Southern California. (2018). California healthy places index (HPI). Retrieved on April 13, 2018 from http://phasocal.org/ ca-hpi/
11 Public Health Alliance of Southern California. (2017). California healthy disadvantage index factsheet. Retrieved April 13, 2018 from http://phasocal.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/HDI-Fact-Sheet-2017-04-25.pdf Endnotes
1 Liberty Hill Foundation. (2017, February). Greenzones and grassroots: How California’s climate investments benefit Los Angeles County’s disadvantaged communities. Retrieved from https://www.libertyhill.org/sites/libertyhillfoundation/files/GZGR_2017-full-report_0.pdf 34 SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit
Identify Area as a DAC
A Customizing
Indicators
B Regional Rankings
C Custom Percentage
Threshold to Identify
DACs
D Combining
CalEnviroScreen
with Other Tools and
Indicators
A Environmental
Justice Screening
Method (EJSM)
B Regional assessment
tools and methods,
such as CEVA,
BAAQMD Care
Program, SCAQMD,
etc.

C Other topic-specifi c
tools: California

HDI, US EPA
EnviroMapper, and
EJSCREEN, etc.

A At or below 80% of
Statewide Median
Income
B At or below low
income threshold
set by Department
of Housing and
Community
Development (HCD)
Census tracts in the top
25 percent of statewide
CalEnviroscreen scores.

Ways to Identify Disadvantaged Communities (DACs)
+

CALENVIROSCREEN CUSTOM

CALENVIROSCREEN

CUSTOM ANALYSIS
(Conduct both of the analyses below)

1. Identify Low-Income
Areas
(Use one of the two
methods below)
Customized Use of
CalEnviroScreen
(Use one of the
methods below)

2. Determine Which Are
Disproportionately
Impacted Areas
(Use one or more of the
methods below)
Off -the-shelf Map
OR
Figure 3-5 /
2 3
1 6
7 A
B
C

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
5 4
36 SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit
Community
Engagement
A key environmental justice (EJ) principle is involving the communities most impacted by pollution, toxins and other environmental problems so that they can have a say in the decisions that impact their health and well-being. In order to produce a high-quality EJ Element or EJ policies for a General Plan, SB 1000 requires local jurisdictions to promote “civil engagement in the public decision-making process.”1 Input from the community is important because local residents can bring knowledge, information, and ideas that local governments may not be aware of or anticipate. Community members that are affected by environmental issues on the ground can share their firsthand knowledge of the problems and can provide leadership on the solutions, which can lead to more effective planning decisions to remedy those burdens.

This chapter describes ways that planners can design a community engagement strategy for an environmental justice (EJ) planning process.

Specifically, this chapter describes recommended principles, meeting and committee formats, and educational and engagement activities. A list of additional resources can also be found at the end of this chapter.

For recommendations on specific General Plan goals and policies that promote civil (or community) engagement in public decision-making processes, see Chapter 5.

4.1 / Community Engagement
Strategies
The California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) describes three main phases of a community engagement process that result in the adoption of a final draft General Plan:
] Identifying Existing Conditions. Identify community strengths, assets, priorities for future development, and areas for improvement, and start to form a vision for the future of the community.
] Developing Priorities for the Future. Solicit input regarding different options on how the community can grow in the future and policy priorities that can help the community realize its vision for the future.
] Selecting a Framework of Priorities for the Future. Create a framework of policy priorities that result in a final draft General Plan.2
When designing a strategy, it is important to keep in mind the “spectrum” of possible engagement processes with stakeholders. The International Association of Public Participation (IAP2) developed a Public Participation Spectrum©, shown on Figure 4-1, which presents the possible types of engagement along a spectrum of increasing public involvement and decision-making, from “inform” to “empower.” This chapter details the types of engagement along the entire spectrum.

Chapter 4 / Community Involvement
37 ] Lack of familiarity with planning processes (including lack of prior inclusion)
] Barriers or lack of access to information
] History of exclusion and marginalization
] Local history and politics
The following are definitions of community engagement tools discussed in this chapter:

Methods of Engagement
] Charrette. A planning session for a particular development where community members, designers, and project developers may collaborate on vision that determines the end result of a project.
] Focus Groups. Short-term groups (usually only a one-time meeting) that provide feedback based on their perceptions, opinions, beliefs, and attitudes.

Meetings and Committee Formats
] Leadership Development. The constant work to develop new leaders in the community while simultaneously deepening the leadership skills of a community’s elder members. Leadership development includes developing residents’ practical skills, their knowledge base, and their personal practice.
] Mutual Learning. The process whereby information is exchanged in a reciprocal manner in order to facilitate simultaneous learning by each group participating in a decision-making process.
] Roundtable Discussions. Facilitated conversations with multiple stakeholders, such as agencies, technical experts, and community members, to share knowledge and insight for the purpose of improving the development or implementation of a program or project.

When planning for EJ, one of the most meaningful forms of community engagement is “community empowerment,” where historically marginalized communities lead and have ownership over the planning process and its outcomes. Engagement at higher levels along the spectrum moves voices of community members to the forefront and is important to an EJ planning process because:3

1. Community members are holders of local knowledge and listening to their voices can lead to better and more effective planning decisions.

2. A core part of EJ is listening to the people most impacted.

Keeping the IAP2 Spectrum in mind, an effective community engagement process is guided by a strategy that represents all stakeholders—those directly impacted by an EJ issue and the public at large—throughout each phase of the process. Two key requirements for implementing such a strategy are to: 1) Allocate sufficient time and opportunities for engagement. In order to avoid rushing the process and tokenizing community participation, this approach promotes capacity building so that community stakeholders are able to provide meaningful feedback and decisions; and 2) Prioritize strategy in budget. Maintaining an adequate budget for meaningful community engagement is important for promoting equitable access and achieving high-quality public participation. Activities to be included in a budget include resources such as city/county staff time, contractor fees, outreach workers, meeting materials, food, audio-visual equipment, translation and interpretation services, translation equipment, transportation costs, child care, and building maintenance services.

The following sections describe ways in which planners can overcome barriers to participation in order to create an effective community engagement strategy. Some barriers that planners may face when designing such a strategy include:4
] Minimal accessibility (e.g., meeting time and location) ] Lack of resources (such as child care and transportation) ] Language barriers
38 SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit
Partnering with Community-Based
Organizations
As shown on Figure 4-1, collaboration is one type of engagement along the higher end of the spectrum that can increase DAC involvement and leadership. Those in charge of leading an EJ planning process can promote collaboration by working with: 1) community-based organizations who can work with local residents, and/or 2) local residents and other community members through an organized body such as an advisory committee. Since community members must be fully prepared and trained in order to participate in a meaningful way, local governments can improve this process by partnering or contracting with community-based organizations (CBOs). Such partnerships can produce the following benefits:
] CBOs can provide community engagement expertise and maintain a horizontal network within the community—two things that local jurisdictions do not maintain and/or may not be able to provide. ] CBOs can help cultivate the trust that is required for authentic community participation during the planning process and for the successful implementation of an EJ Element after it is adopted. ] CBOs can serve as key partners when trying to leverage potential Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF) investments and other sources of funding that reward cross-sector collaborations. The GGRF provides funding for greenhouse gas reduction strategies that can also produce other environmental, public health, and local economic co-benefits.5
As the Liberty Hill Foundation’s Green Zones and Grassroots Report explains: “Collaborations with grassroots CBOs can give public sector programs access to skilled outreach and participatory practices that can help direct investments to communities that have experienced historic disinvestment.”6 Through their long-standing service to local neighborhoods, CBO staff members often maintain close relationships with individuals and families that live and work in disadvantaged communities. Building on these existing community relationships and expertise, CBOs can inform and educate residents about the topics that the plan will address, such as land use policies, economic strategies, and research data about their community. CBOs can also conduct grassroots organizing activities to raise awareness about the process, collaborate with planners to craft an engagement strategy, and research key topics that the plan will address.7 More examples of ways that planners can partner with CBOs are:
] Adapting information about the issue into a format that is easily accessible.
] Providing translation and interpretation at public meetings and events.
] Co-hosting meetings in locations that are familiar to community members.8
Chapter 4 / Community Involvement
39 Inform Consult Involve Collaborate Empower
Public Participation Goal Public Participation Goal Public Participation Goal Public Participation Goal Public Participation Goal To provide the public with
balanced and objective
information to assist them
in understanding the
problems, alternatives,
and/or solutions.

To obtain public feedback
on analysis, alternatives,
and/or decisions.

To work directly with
the public throughout
the process to ensure
that public concerns
and aspirations are
consistently understood
and considered.

To partner with the
public in each aspect of
the decision, including
the development of
alternatives and the
identification of the
preferred solution.

To place final decisionmaking in the hands of
the public.

Promise to the Public Promise to the Public Promise to the Public Promise to the Public Promise to the Public We will keep you
informed.

We will keep you
informed, listen to, and
acknowledge concerns
and provide feedback
on how public input
influenced the decision.

We will work with you to
ensure that your concerns
and aspirations are
directly reflected in the
alternatives developed
and provide feedback
on how public input
influenced the decision.

We will look to you
for direct advice and
innovation in formulating
solutions and incorporate
your advice and
recommendations into
the decisions to the
maximum extent possible.

We will implement what
you decide.

Example Tools Example Tools Example Tools Example Tools Example Tools ] Fact sheets
] Websites
] Open houses
] Public comment
] Focus groups
] Surveys
] Public meetings
] Workshops
] Deliberate polling
] Citizen Advisory
Committee
] Consensus-building
] Paricipatory decisionmaking
] Citizen juries
] Ballots
] Delegated decisions
Increasing Level of Public Impact
Figure 4-1 / IAP2 Public Participation Spectrum
Source: International Association of Public Participation 40 SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit

4.2 / Principles and
Techniques for Community
Engagement
The principles and related techniques in this chapter focus on involving and collaborating with the community. Since SB 1000 focuses on addressing the EJ needs of disadvantaged communities, it is important to prioritize DAC participation as well as equitable community representation when discussing all of the following principles, tools, and meeting formats. This section describes six principles and five related techniques that planners may consider when designing a community engagement strategy for an EJ planning process.

Principles
] Inclusion
] Access, Transparency, and Responsiveness
] Accountability
] Broad and Balanced Participation
] Honor and Include Local Community Knowledge
] Long-term Commitment
Techniques
] Consensus-oriented Decision Making
] Education
] Interest-based Facilitation
] Meaningful Questions
] Open Outcomes
Community Engagement
Principles
Inclusion
The public process surrounding the preparation of an EJ Element or related policies should be crafted to ensure that all segments of the community are included, with particular emphasis on those who are most affected by EJ issues. In many cases, the people in impacted communities have low socio-economic status and may speak languages other than English, so it can be difficult for these residents to navigate a typical public process without the necessary resources and support from those leading the process. Furthermore, inclusion is an important goal of the EJ planning process because environmental injustices can occur if community voices are not considered when making land use and planning decisions that can affect their health and well-being.

The EJ planning process can promote inclusive and meaningful participation by all groups by ensuring that meetings are accessible in terms of language, time and location; by creating and enforcing meeting agreements (also known as “community agreements” within the nonprofit sector) to promote healthy and respectful conversations; by addressing the public’s concerns or grievances soon after they Chapter 4 / Community Involvement
41 symbols, and color coding can be an understandable alternative to words and can effectively communicate ideas for discussion.

Language should be accessible and easy to understand, and workshops and presentations should not be overly formal or technical. Planners can also partner with a local school district, non-English television stations, or community centers to publicize the planning process and provide translation services when needed. More ideas to make meetings accessible are to:
] Use language, framing, and terms that are community friendly. ] Use creative, interactive, and engaging methods to present and share information so that it is easy to understand—including using “popular education” strategies.9 ] Provide translation (written materials) and interpretation (verbal) services during all activities and discussions. ] Provide child care, food, and other important amenities such as bus passes.
] Hold meetings in places that are easily accessible to the community and at times when people can attend (such as after work hours rather than before noon).10
] Transparency. Planners can be transparent during an engagement process by communicating the overall timeline, different people’s roles, and the decision-making processes that will occur throughout the process. Planners can also communicate the degree to which community feedback will be incorporated into the final decisions. Being transparent in these ways can build trust and create clearer expectations as to whether participants are simply providing advice or are actively making a decision. This is important since community members are often consulted yet their input is often not considered in the final outcomes.
] Responsiveness. Planners can respond to and address community concerns and recommendations soon after they have been voiced.

Processes include public meetings with report backs, written letters, and website announcements.
arise; and by using facilitation methods that support and encourage all participants’ contributions, especially those coming from impacted community groups. Since planning for environmental justice is required to be based on meaningful community engagement, it is important to keep the goal of inclusivity at the front and center throughout the planning process.

Access, Transparency, and Responsiveness
One way that planners can overcome some of the barriers listed in Section 4.1 is to design a community engagement strategy that is accessible, transparent, and responsive. For example, residents from low-income areas, new immigrants, and communities who do not speak English as their primary language may access information from sources that are outside of traditional communication channels used for an engagement process. In order to reach out to and involve all residents, an engagement strategy could focus on achieving the following values:
] Access. Designing outreach materials and events so that they are accessible for all residents requires planners and facilitators to understand the community’s demographics—from who will be attending the meeting to having the right resources (e.g., interpretation and translation services in local languages such as Spanish and Cantonese). In some instances, the use of images, 42 SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit
Accountability
Accountability can be integrated into almost every community engagement principle and technique. For many jurisdictions, past planning-related decisions may have either indirectly or directly contributed to the formation of an EJ issue within a community (see Chapter 1). For this and other reasons, an EJ planning process provides an opportunity to promote greater accountability, such as the responsibility to report, explain, or remedy past actions. Accountability can also mean connecting budgeting decisions and funding to objectives and policies that are adopted into an EJ Element or integrated throughout a General Plan. Another way in which planners can achieve accountability is to schedule regular report-backs to the community in order to explain, for instance, how their input was used to make the final decisions.11 Finally, long-term accountability can be achieved by evaluating the success of a community engagement strategy and taking action to implement necessary improvements to processes and procedures over time.

The following are examples of strategies that can be used to achieve accountability.
] Create a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). It is important to create clear agreements so that each party can be held accountable for its actions. To do this, a MOU can be established with CBOs and other key stakeholders to identify and document each party’s respective roles and level of responsibility in the decision-making process.
] Evaluate the Community Engagement Process. Provide a process through which community members and other participants can give feedback to the EJ planning process’ community engagement strategy. Such evaluations can happen both during and after the engagement strategy and can assist planners in learning what works or what needs to be improved and thus adjusted. The following four outcomes can be used to design the evaluations’ questions:12
] The appropriateness and effectiveness of the design and delivery of the community engagement process, including the “satisfaction” of participants with the process.
] The community’s impacts on public decisions, policies, and actions.
] Changes in residents’ capacity to participate effectively in the planning process.
] Changes to a local jurisdiction’s capacity to effectively develop and implement other engagement efforts in the future.
] Evaluate the SB 1000 Implementation Process. Require an ongoing process to conduct evaluations so that community members and the broader public can provide feedback on the successes and challenges of implementing the EJ Element or EJ-based policies and objectives. Those who are responsible for implementing the plan can also be required to respond to all community feedback in the evaluations and make adjustments to the plan based on that feedback.

Broad and Balanced Participation
The term “broad” participation means that a process includes a wide range of viewpoints from different community stakeholders, and “balanced” participation means that the process reflects the demographic and economic composition of the community.13 Thus, in order to ensure “broad and balanced” participation, it is important to recognize the diversity of needs among all stakeholders in the process, identify potential barriers to participation, then design the process to minimize those barriers to the greatest extent possible. It is especially important to engage low-income renters and the most-vulnerable stakeholders who have the least amount of time available to participate in the decision-making process. Stakeholders in an EJ planning process include, but are not limited to:
] Area-based community groups
] Faith-based groups
] Local business owners and employees
] Local community and civic organizations
Chapter 4 / Community Involvement
43 ] Local residents
] Racial, ethnic, and cultural groups
] Students
Honor and Include Local Community
Knowledge
As the holders of local knowledge, community members are able to: 1) provide critical input that can define the issues and existing conditions, 2) organize and/or lead meetings, and 3) determine the objectives and policy goals of an EJ planning process. A few strategies that planners can use to apply this concept are:
] Hold listening sessions or study circles to help determine specific EJ concerns.14
] Incorporate storytelling activities to build community, facilitate in-depth conversations, and provide qualitative data regarding the issues that people are facing (see Digital Storytelling side box). ] Work with community leaders to facilitate walking or bus tours with elected officials and other stakeholders. Such tours can highlight a wide array of local assets, opportunities, and challenges within EJ communities to promote cross-sharing and mutual understanding between planners and local residents.
] Use creative and diverse communication techniques (art forms, social media, drawings, photos, video, charades/acting out scenarios, etc.) to help people absorb and share information visually.
] Work with CBOs or create CBO/university partnerships to conduct participatory action research projects that can inform the process.15
] Create an inventory of past and current community initiatives to build common understanding among planners and participants.16 Long-Term Commitment
An EJ planning process may occur over several years. Implementation may occur over the next 15 to 20 years. In order to realize the benefits of involving the community in the EJ planning process, trust and longterm relationships must be developed and maintained over time.

Processes to promote long-term commitment include: accountability strategies (e.g., conducting ongoing evaluations of efforts to implement EJ goals and policies), continued community meetings to report back on progress and maintain relationships with local residents and other stakeholders, and the continuation of a general plan advisory committee or a community advisory committee to oversee and monitor SB 1000 implementation.

StoryCenter — Digital Storytelling
Originally created in 1994 as the San Francisco Center for Digital Media, the Center for Digital Storytelling in Berkeley, California became StoryCenter in 2015. Integrating narrative, oral history, filmmaking, and sound in a public workshop process, StoryCenter creates spaces for transforming lives and communities through the listening to and sharing of stories.
44 SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit
Community Engagement
Techniques
Consensus-Oriented Decision Making
Ultimately, the EJ planning process will result in specific decisions that will be implemented during the lifetime of the plan. Similar to the principle of interest-based facilitation, consensus-oriented decision making (CODM) is a dispute resolution approach to the process of making group decisions. Using a CODM approach, all participants are involved in the decision-making process, which helps a group to develop a common vision and goals while developing creative solutions that meet the needs of each participant. The approach seeks to arrive at a final decision that everyone can agree to or at least can have confidence that their input was considered—which can result in decisions that are more inclusive than what might have occurred under a different approach. The CODM approach can be used when working with any community involvement forum (described in Section 4.3) that makes decisions regarding the plan.17 The US Environmental Protection Agency summarizes several techniques that can help planning staff build consensus:
] Design processes to ensure the fair treatment and meaningful participation of all stakeholders.
] Promote the development of a common vision and goals among all partners.
] Utilize facilitators or mediators to assist in the communication and negotiation process.
] Identify, nurture, and promote “win-win” scenarios and mutual gains.18
Education
Education can mean “getting players that are working together to learn more about the problems, about each other’s interests, about what types of solutions or responses to problems are promising and why, and about what the barriers to action may be.”19 Education can also mean community-capacity building, which means “finding a way to provide interested parties such as residents with the skills, information, and resources they need to achieve their goals.”20 Planners and communitybased organizations should consider devoting significant time and resources to educating all stakeholders, gathering information, and assessing a particular community issue. When community members understand the technical aspects of their environment and potential issues or problems, they are better able to develop solutions that can address those concerns and are thus more meaningfully engaged in the planning process. Some techniques that planners can use to educate and build capacity of community stakeholders are:
] Institute training, mentoring, and technical assistance activities, especially for community representatives directly involved in advisory committees or collaborative problem-solving processes. ] Develop long-term processes that build the capacity and leadership of residents over time.21
Chapter 4 / Community Involvement
45 Interest-Based Facilitation
Interest-based facilitation is a dispute resolution approach that utilizes a consensus-building process to make group decisions and requires a neutral facilitator. This approach separates the person from the problem to focus on interests rather than positions. The facilitator can help the group explore all interests among group members, define the issues clearly, brainstorm possibilities and opportunities, and arrive at a solution through some mutually agreed upon standard.

In the context of planning for EJ, this process can be facilitated using the theories of interest-based negotiation, which state that parties are more likely to come to a mutually satisfactory outcome when their respective interests are met—compared to situations in which one “position” wins over the other. An “interest” is a concern or need that stands behind a community issue; a “position” is a specific viewpoint related to how an issue should be addressed through the planning process. For example, a position could be stated as “I’m opposed to new market rate housing,” while an interest could be stated as “I’m often worried about whether or not I have enough money for bus passes.” When the planning process focuses on interests, “win-win” solutions that meet the needs of many interests are possible.22
Meaningful Questions
Questions asked to the community should be answerable through and accountable to the process. Analogous to the range of public impact as shown on Figure 4-1, decision makers and planners should frame questions that support a high level of public participation. Ideally, questions to the community can be most meaningful when they take on the nature of decision making questions, thus steering public participation towards the “Empower” end of the IAP2 Spectrum.

Conversely, questions that are vague or ambiguous may steer public participation more towards the “Inform” end of the Spectrum where community input becomes less clear or directive. For example, a question such as “What do you want here?” can be vague and misleading, and may elicit many unrealistic ideas during an EJ planning. Questions such as “What do you feel is missing from your neighborhood?” or “What are your favorite cities to visit, and what about them might work here?” are more focused, and will likely result in better outcomes.

Questions related to issues that have already been decided are not recommended as they mislead listeners in thinking the topic of the question is still open for decision. For example, if a recently adopted parks master plan maps future park sites, asking community members where they would like to see more parks is both meaningless and ineffectively timed. In this case, planning staff could ask questions more appropriate towards post-adoption activities, such as about potential policies or programs that can be used implement the adopted plan, or how issues related to equitable park access to guide future park development and improvements.23
Finally, planners should clarify and help community members understand the level of public participation and input that is being asked for in the decision-making process and be transparent about how decisions will be made. A community engagement process that is clear, forthcoming, and transparent about how community feedback and recommendations will contribute to the final decisions can help the public establish realistic expectations about the process, build trust, and help improve community feedback.
46 SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit
Open Outcomes
Meetings and other activities should be designed to lead to a variety of outcomes that are suggested by participants. Rather than beginning an EJ planning process with a specific goal in mind, the process should remain open to any outcome that participants might suggest within the parameters established by the types of meaningful questions described above (see Figure 4-1). Both planners and stakeholders may enter public forums and events prepared to offer guidance and helpful ideas, while remaining open-minded at all times with an inclination to listen rather than to speak. This approach can reassure community members that decision makers are genuinely open to hearing, and potentially implementing, aspects of their varied interests (see also Interest-Based Facilitation, above).24

4.3 / Meetings and Committee
Formats
As previously explained, an effective EJ planning process includes clear decision-making rules and delineated roles for all stakeholders.

Developing these rules and roles is a strategic decision that should be made based on an understanding of who will be empowered to make decisions during the process, and should maintain the key principles listed in the last section. The various types of meetings described in this section could be used to oversee the creation of an EJ Element or integrated policies in a General Plan.

Meetings are one-time events that tend to maintain a basic or a lower level of engagement, while committees or advisory groups are convened on an ongoing basis and can provide a higher level of engagement or empowerment. For community-led committees (i.e., not an elected or appointed body), it is advisable to form a group that is able to commit the required time and resources throughout the entire SB 1000 planning and implementation processes as designated stewards of an EJ Element or integrated EJ policies. Additionally, advisory committee(s) formed during the General Plan process can be retained after the adoption of an EJ Element or EJ policies in order to have a body oversee the implementation of those very policies.

Combinations or variations of the following meeting types can also help planners to facilitate an effective process:
] Existing elected or appointed body
] Technical advisory committee
] Representative committee
] Community advisory committee
] General plan advisory committee
] Community meetings
Chapter 4 / Community Involvement
47 Existing Elected or Appointed
Body
Existing bodies in local government include the planning commission, city council, or board of supervisors. It is importation to design the community engagement process in a way that engages each of these bodies appropriately.

As described in Section 4.1, the planning commission is required by State law to make a recommendation to the board or council on whether to adopt the General Plan. The board or council then certifies the General Plan’s CEQA document and adopts the General Plan, in accordance with State law. It is common for other interested commissions or groups to review the final draft General Plan concurrently with the State-required review process. As these bodies have final decision-making authority, it is important to include them regularly at each stage of the process (e.g., kick-off, visioning, selecting a preferred land use alternative). Further, a subcommittee of any of these bodies may be formed to help ensure continuous and meaningful feedback is reflected in the final adopted plan’s goals and policies.25
However, it is generally not advisable to put a planning commission, city council, or board of supervisors directly in charge of an EJ planning process for several reasons. These bodies frequently don’t have time to dedicate to the complexities of EJ planning and often lack the technical expertise or connections to DACs to offer effective oversight. Most importantly, the EJ planning process can include contentious issues that would be best addressed through community forums and away from the politics and visibility of a commission, council, or board meeting.

Therefore, this section describes other meetings and committee formats that are conducive to facilitating a meaningful community engagement process.

Technical Advisory Committee
A technical advisory committee (TAC) includes staff members from the local jurisdiction and outside organizations that are subject-matter experts on topics to be covered in the EJ planning process. Members of a TAC can offer important information to the planning process and can also help to ensure that the resulting EJ Element or integrated policies reflects their respective concerns and interests. A key benefit of forming a TAC is its ability to educate other governmental entities about the EJ Element and its relevance to their work. However, a TAC cannot take the place of other forms of community engagement since it does not typically include community members.26
48 SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit
Representative or Community
Advisory Committee
A representative or “community advisory” committee (CAC) is one that is specifically established to oversee a particular planning process such as a General Plan amendment. It is not a pre-existing decisionmaking body and can include any mix of stakeholders and community members who are interested in contributing to the EJ planning process.

Such a committee can provide consensus-oriented decision-making recommendations to the board of supervisors or city/town council. As an advisory body, the committee’s membership, authority, and scope are defined by the board of supervisors or council.

Since SB 1000 focuses on the needs of disadvantaged communities, DAC representation is especially important to consider when recruiting for CAC members. The number of meetings to be held and the size of the group depend on the level of interest and agency capacity to facilitate the group. However, a size of between 7 and 15 people is suggested in order for members to engage in meaningful discussions and build relationships during the process. In some cases, member(s) of the board of supervisors, planning commission, and/or city council may attend in an ex-officio role in order to connect this body with the final decision-making authority.27
A CAC can provide leadership development opportunities for members and strengthen or build relationships among community members.

Additionally, a CAC can take ownership over outreach tasks and serve as a bridge by leveraging existing relationships within the community in order to provide meaningful input and feedback to decision makers.

Some issues for jurisdictions to consider when forming a CAC are: 1) managing expectations when the committee’s charge is defined, and 2) designing checkpoints throughout the process to conduct evaluations that can provide continuous feedback on the committee’s effectiveness.

Additionally, acknowledging and appreciating the work of volunteers on a regular basis throughout the process encourages consistent and meaningful engagement and can lead to broad community support as the plan is adopted and implemented.28
General Plan Advisory Committee
A general plan advisory committee (GPAC) is a body appointed by the local government with the specific charge of overseeing the creation of a new or updated General Plan. GPACs meet on a regular basis to provide ongoing feedback, oversight, and evaluation for a General Plan process from its inception to publication and adoption.

A GPAC generally consists of a cross-section of residents who represent of various points of view. A GPAC sometimes includes elected or appointed officials (such as council and commission members) and very rarely includes staff from the jurisdiction or other agencies. However, the presence of officials on a GPAC can create the impression that these officials are the leaders of the planning effort, so jurisdictions should think carefully about the implications of appointing officials or staff members to a GPAC.

Community Meetings
Unlike staffing an appointed body or committee, community meetings can be designed to facilitate informal, in-person dialogue that can help build consensus toward decisions that are made for the plan.

Community meetings are also flexible—there are several different formats depending on the community’s needs and goals at each point in the EJ planning process.
] A “town hall” style meeting is useful for disseminating information to the broader public and for planners to listen to public opinions at the beginning of the process. During this type of meeting, facilitators present research and planning-related information to participants, who in turn share their reactions and ideas with the entire group. Similar to other community engagement formats, it is important for presentations to be structured in a clear and concise manner, using visual aids and other resources that accommodate multiple learning styles.

Chapter 4 / Community Involvement
49 ] An interactive small group format is another type of meeting format that can be combined with a “town hall” format. For example, an interactive small group meeting can include a town hall–style introduction, a small-group discussion or activity, and a final discussion where the outcomes of the process are discussed.

This meeting format is useful during the middle of the planning process as alternatives are being considered. For more information on this format, see Section 4.3.

Meetings held at residents’ homes can also be effective for engaging community members who may not be able to attend other types of public meetings. For example, elderly residents, families with small children, isolated communities, or individuals with limited mobility may especially benefit. The meeting may resemble either a town hall–style meeting or small group format and can be tailored based on participant needs.

4.4 / Methods of Education
and Engagement
As shown on Figure 4-2, various education and engagement activities can be used to inform and involve the broader community during an EJ planning process. While meetings and committee formats discussed above relate to formal decision-making bodies, education and engagement activities discussed here are all things that involve the community. In order to comply with SB 1000, all engagement efforts must prioritize the inclusion of people living and working in DACs.

Building upon the principles and strategies mentioned earlier in this chapter, planners, with consideration for a community’s unique needs, strengths, and dynamics, can design engagement activities that best support local communities. These activities include:
] Community-based participatory research
] Community benefits agreements
] Community events
] Design charrettes
] Door-to-door canvassing
] Focus groups
] Interactive workshops
] Online and mobile engagement
] Open houses
] Participatory budgeting
] Promotoras model (described in the Promotoras Model sidebox) ] Surveys
] Tours
50 SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit
] Knowledge of the
Community
] Go Where
People Are
] An Understanding of
Community Resources
] Make the
Process
Accessible
] Customize
to Culture &
Circumstance
] Invest in
Ongoing
Relationships
] Foster
Community
Capacity
] Use Media
Strategically
] Strong Partnerships ] A Culture of
Community
Engagement
Step 1:

Build
Foundations
Step 2:

Know Goal of
Engagement
Activities
Step 3
Design
Activities Using
Best Practice
Strategies
Awareness
Enrollment,
Usage, or
Involvement
Education Motivate
Change Empowerment
Figure 4-2 / A Structure for Effective Community Engagement Source: Sonoma County Department of Health and Human Services (2012) Chapter 4 / Community Involvement
51 In order to ensure that these methods are carried out effectively, this Toolkit recommends the following approaches:
] Go to the places where people already tend to gather (e.g., schools, libraries, churches, community gathering spaces). ] Work with CBOs or other trusted members of the community who engage in outreach and organizing on a regular basis, preferably by contracting with them to carry out the engagement process (see also, Partnering with CBOs).
] Meet in culturally relevant spaces and produce materials that people respond to (i.e., ask “what do people read / watch?”).

For example, publish materials in Spanish and Chinese-language newspapers, radio shows, or public access channels.
] Implement a culturally relevant online strategy by identifying the websites and social media platforms that are most trafficked by the target populations to provide updates on the ongoing planning process (e.g., YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Snapchat).

Community-Based Participatory
Research
Community-based participatory research is a collaborative and equitable method that engages residents of the focus area with research professionals to conduct research on an identified EJ issue. In this method, a selected group of local residents are trained by research professionals to become leaders and engage other residents in sharing their local knowledge about environmental health conditions on the ground, contributing to the process of collecting data to inform and develop policies and/or actions that can help implement an EJ Element.

Community-based participatory research can help identify and determine the unique and specific concerns and visions residents have for their community, which is then presented in an existing conditions report and reflected in adopted goals, policies, and actions. In addition to engaging residents in a way that enables them to share their local knowledge, residents learn about and engage in the decision-making process, which builds their capacity to be leaders in future planning efforts and stewards of the EJ Element or integrated policies. While this process is effective and meaningfully engages residents, it can be time intensive, requiring support from a local jurisdiction or other source of funding/technical assistance. See Chapter 6, Clean Up Green Up Campaign, for an example of this method in practice.

Community Benefits Agreements
A community benefits agreement (CBAs) is defined as “a legally binding contract (or set of contracts) setting forth a range of community benefits regarding a development project, and resulting from substantial community involvement.” 29 CBAs were developed in the late 1990s as a way to ensure that measurable, local benefits such as job opportunities, affordable housing, and health-protective measures are secured for community members who live next to an approved development project.

A CBA is a private contract created through a negotiating process among community coalitions or groups, the developer, and other stakeholders who represent the interests of people who will be impacted by proposed development. The process of negotiating a CBA is related to the local government permitting process because community groups can advocate for elected representatives to require a developer to sign a CBA before the project undergoes the process of approval for land use entitlements. One benefit of a CBA is that due their nature as a private contract, community groups are able to negotiate benefits in a way that is less restrictive than benefits that could be negotiated through the public permitting/environmental review process.

There are two types of CBAs: private and public. Private CBAs are negotiated between and signed by the coalition and the developer; public CBAs are negotiated between and signed by the developer and the local government. To strengthen the enforcement of a CBA, the agreement can be incorporated into a development agreement, which is an enforceable contract between local government and the developer that describes the terms on which the development may proceed and any contractual responsibilities of the local government. One example of this method in practice is the Staples Center CBA in Los Angeles.30 52 SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit
Community Events
Community events, such as church events, farmer’s markets, health fairs, school events, and community gatherings, can be used as venues to involve the community in an EJ planning process. Such events are helpful in attracting participation and eliciting meaningful feedback, because they occur in places where participants feel comfortable. This method can raise awareness of the process among a broad cross-section of the community and can help build partnerships among coalitions who have been working on a specific community concern.

Design Charrettes
A design charrette is a time-intensive, collaborative event that involves all stakeholders to create a detailed plan for an area. A charrette can be hosted over the course of several days, weeks, or months. A charrette is most effective in addressing a specific issue in a community (e.g., park design, new uses in an impacted neighborhood) because it provides an interactive and visual forum to elicit community input. During the charrette, the community can interact with planners, architects, engineers, and artists to help visualize the community’s vision and preferences for the future. These preferences can then be translated into General Plan goals, objectives, and policies.31
The time-intensive nature of this method can pose challenges to broad community engagement. Suggested practices to accommodate busy schedules are to condense the charrette into several smaller sessions or facilitate an abbreviated format.

Door-to-Door Canvassing
Door-to-door canvassing engages residents with each other by utilizing volunteers, especially local residents, to share information about the planning effort with neighbors. This face-to-face interaction can help build relationships among community members. While the process is time intensive, it is an effective method to ensure that the planning process engages those most affected by EJ issues by communicating with them directly and deliberately.

Chapter 4 / Community Involvement
53 Focus Groups
A focus group can be used to engage key community members in the planning process, in which several key people are interviewed regarding planning issues, in content based groups. A focus group allows key people who will have an important impact on the plan to express their views in a candid way, expanding on discussions held at a larger community workshop or meeting. Examples of types of people who might be interviewed in a focus group includes local residents, decision makers, environmental advocates, land owners, developers, business owners, employees, or the education community. The decision of who to include in the focus group depends on the key issues that the EJ planning process will address. A key benefit of a focus group is its ability to uncover strengths and obstacles in specific policies by facilitating indepth discussions.

In order to ensure the process is accessible, transparent, and accountable, focus group members and topics must be carefully considered and a summary of the discussion published. Alternatively, the purpose could be limited to information gathering rather than as a decision-making tool.

Interactive Workshops
Interactive workshops held at key points during the EJ planning process ensure that the community is well informed and able to participate in creating planning outcomes. Planners can choose among a variety of workshop formats based on factors such as the purpose, intended participants, and desired outcomes of the workshop. In order to encourage creative thinking during the workshop, interactive methods are encouraged—such as maps, wooden building blocks, or technologybased protocols. An interactive workshop can help participants understand the current situation and future impacts of land use decisions in their community.

A key strength of workshops is their ability to facilitate dialogue and interaction among small groups. In a workshop format, participants are divided into small groups that work together to solve a discrete problem or complete an exercise. The ideal number of participants for each group is between six and nine participants, which is large enough to allow for a diversity of opinions but small enough that all participants can speak and listen to each other. A trained facilitator, usually an agency staff member, consultant, or other impartial community member, provides community agreements for the discussion. However, a facilitator is not 54 SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit
required, and the group can facilitate itself if given a detailed set of instructions. The “World Café”32 is an example of a participant-led small group format.33
After the discussion, a non-partial spokesperson from each small group reports on the group’s outcomes to the larger group. Once all groups have reported back, the facilitator summarizes the results of the smallgroup discussions and identifies key themes, which can be helpful in deciding next steps and areas to focus on for the rest of an EJ planning process.

Online and Mobile Engagement
Online and mobile engagement uses the Internet for a variant of community engagement purposes, which can range from distributing information about the process, to publicizing meetings, decision points, and related activities, to gathering input on existing conditions, possible future alternatives, and plan policies. Examples of online tools include websites; social media such as Facebook, Twitter, and Nextdoor; online engagement platforms such as MySidewalk, CommunityViz, and PlaceWorks’ online engagement platform; and mobile apps. The key strength of online engagement is its flexibility, enabling community members to decide where, when, and for how long they want to participate. This tool is especially useful for community members who are homebound (e.g., the elderly, parents with young children, care providers) or have busy lives and multiple responsibilities (e.g., commuters). Online and mobile tools can be designed to facilitate dialogue among a large number of people, similar to an in-person meeting or workshop, and can be cost-effective compared to a mobile tour or charrette. However, these tools can exclude those without access to the Internet, and some techniques may require a moderator to manage comments, which can be time and resource intensive.34 Therefore, they are best used to augment conventional, in-person engagement tools.35 Open Houses
The goal of an open house is to present information to the public about the existing conditions in the community, to provide potential alternative scenarios for the future, and to answer questions from participants. During an open house, community members can view plan proposals, data, and maps in a casual environment. Multiple open houses can be held during day, evening, and/or weekend hours to accommodate a range of work and family schedules. Open houses can be held at a church, school, community center, local business, or another location that is easy to reach via transit, foot, or bicycle, so that it is accessible for all community members. At an open house, planners can talk informally about the planning process with visitors. Like all other formats, translated materials and interpreters should be used as necessary.36
Participatory Budgeting
Participatory budgeting can be used as an engagement method either in a public budgeting or planning process. This is a democratic process in which community members decide how to spend part of a public budget. The key steps to implementing this method are: 37

1. Form a steering committee that consists exclusively of low-income residents of a particular community who can make final decisions regarding either the funding amounts allocated within a budget.

This can be the same steering committee that decides on goals, policies, and actions of a General Plan.

2. Community members discuss needs and brainstorm project ideas at meetings and online.

3. Volunteers work together in committees to evaluate and prioritize these ideas and turn them into feasible proposals with concrete costs that are vetted by experts.

4. Residents, regardless of age or citizenship status, vote to decide which final proposals should be funded.

Chapter 4 / Community Involvement
55 5. Winning proposals are implemented by the responsible governmental entity.

6. A local jurisdiction and residents track and monitor the results of implementation.

This process can meaningfully engage the community because it is an opportunity to build the capacity of residents of DACs to lead a decisionmaking process and promotes a significant level of input from the community regarding public decision making. Participatory budgeting is a popular method among locally elected representatives who want to ensure that community voices are acknowledged and reflected in adopted policies and procedures. Another way to implement this method is while preparing a planning grant that supports EJ planning efforts. Using participatory budgeting in this way can help ensure that the EJ planning process has adequate budget for effective community engagement methods discussed in this chapter.

Surveys
A survey is a tool that allows community members to offer ideas for a wide range of topics relevant to the EJ planning effort. A survey is similar to an interview in that it gathers opinions on a range of topics from overall themes and strategies to specific alternatives for specific areas and issues. Surveys can be administered either in a meeting or distributed to individual community members/groups, and can provide the following benefits:
] Gather in-depth responses from a broad, representative sample of the community in a manner that would not be possible during the limited time available during public meetings.
] Encourage responses from residents who may not otherwise be able or willing to participate in public meetings.
] Provide quantitative data that directly informs the goals, policies, and actions to be adopted through an EJ planning process.

In order to gather quantitative data, the survey can include methods such as yes or no questions, or numerical rating/scoring schemes.

Community-based participation example
Promotoras Model
Promotoras are community health workers who work directly with Latino communities to help educate families about a variety of health issues. The ways that promotoras work can serve as a model for community engagement in an EJ planning process.

Distinct from traditional community health workers, promotoras are residents who are selected to be trained as health workers based on their existing community ties and position (i.e., trusted by their peers and neighbors). Once trained, promotoras work directly with families and individuals, and act as a bridge to link the community with health services to increase overall community wellness. They offer services such as home visits, presentations, assistance to doctor’s visits, and interpretation. Additionally, promotoras help agencies better serve the community by advocating for culturally competent service delivery.1
The promotoras model engages residents to become leaders in their own communities, serving as liaisons among community members, planning professionals, and human and social service organizations. The promotoras model has been successfully implemented in the public health field, where it has been used to connect under-serviced residents to preventative and palliative healthcare services, and to identify potential projects for a statewide active transportation program. Similarly, an EJ planning process could include local residents who are trained to assess and organize EJ issues, and who work directly with community members to engage them in the EJ planning process.
1 Latino Leadership Council. (2011). Promotoras: Promoting Health in Our Community.
56 SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit
Analyzing the results of surveys allows planners and elected officials to make better-informed decisions about the main concerns and priorities of the community. Online and mobile tools have made it easier to design, conduct, and evaluate effective surveys, with both free and proprietary online tools available. Things to consider when designing a survey for community engagement are:
] Whether or not the survey is statistically valid. If any willing participant can choose to take a survey, the results would not be considered statistically valid since participation can be skewed toward people who are generally engaged or who have specific points of view regarding the planning process. A survey with a small number of responses might be misunderstood to mean that the results cannot be trusted, and some community members might also feel that it is unfair to preclude people who are outside the random survey sample from participating. In this case, it is recommended to administer a survey in two rounds: one to a randomly selected and statistically valid sample, and the other with availability to anyone who wants to participate.
] A survey provides planners with a snapshot of respondents’ opinions in response to the questions that are read to them, which may preclude planners from understanding whether that option would change during the course of a facilitated discussion.

Therefore, survey results can be good indicators of how the public in aggregate might vote on an issue, but they are a less reliable indication of the respondent’s point of view on an issue. ] Useful survey results rely on objective, neutral questions that do not tend to sway a participant’s answers toward one option over another. Therefore, surveys are not the best tool for gathering specific guidance on an issue. Rather, surveys are one tool that can be combined with others presented here to form a complete picture of the community’s concerns, ideas, and needs for the future.

Given these considerations, surveys can be effectively used at the beginning of an EJ planning process as a way to establish key issues and to learn more about community members’ overall points of view.

Tours
Tours can be organized in other municipalities or within a city, town, or area in order to show policy makers and participants examples from other communities. Tours can help people visualize ideas and solutions for their own community and can highlight certain areas where EJ issues can occur.38 This method is most helpful at the beginning of the EJ planning process, as it provides an opportunity for participants to assess on-the-ground conditions. Additionally, tours can be organized after an analysis of existing conditions is completed in order to “groundtruth” the results. Tours can also be documented on paper or through a software program like ESRI’s Story Maps to allow people to participate in the tours on their own or with mobile devices.

A related activity format is a “walk audit,” in which residents collect information about existing conditions in the community. A walk audit can identify EJ issues, infrastructure, and community safety needs that are not easily identified through other mapping and research methods.39 A walk audit can also help to build stakeholder trust in the process by providing group-learning opportunities.40
Two key planning issues to consider are: 1) If committee members or decision makers attend a tour, then it must comply with the Brown Act, as it is considered a noticed public meeting; and 2) Plan the route in advance and give participants ample time to review materials, such as the route and key attributes of the places visited.41
Chapter 4 / Community Involvement
57 4.5 / Resources for More
Ideas
This section describes several resources that have been referenced throughout this chapter. For each of the following resources, a brief overview of the organization that published the resource, its intent, and key highlights are provided. These resources can be used by planners to tailor a community engagement strategy that responds to the local community context in alignment with the intent and goals of SB 1000.

Green Zones and Grassroots,
Liberty Hill Foundation
The Liberty Hill Foundation is described in Chapter 7. Their Green Zones and Grassroots report — https://www.libertyhill.org/sites/ libertyhillfoundation/files/GZGR_2017-full-report_0.pdf — provides information for state-level environmental agencies to help them meet legislative mandates to provide additional benefits to disadvantaged communities, such as resident cost savings, improved public health (through reduced air pollution), public safety, and related job growth.

It also highlights best practices in community outreach and how to effectively evaluate and prioritize community participation in projects awarded cap-and-trade funding. The report’s recommends best practices in community outreach and for maximizing participation.

Community Outreach
] Door knocking, although time intensive, is the most effective method for program uptake.
] Discussions facilitated by CBOs between administrators and community members can build trust and help evaluate programs. ] Focus groups can uncover strengths and obstacles in specific programs.
] Connect services and incentives to important needs of the community.
] A trusted organization opens many doors that would otherwise remain closed.
] Provide people with a range of options to build interest and optimize door-to-door efforts.
] More time and repetitive visits are necessary for successful business outreach.

Maximizing Participation and Identifying
Community Partners
] Sign MOUs between public agencies or developers and CBOs to provide community outreach, participatory input, holistic analysis, and/or cross-cutting intervention design.
] Adopt a community participation metric that recognizes and rewards increasing levels of community consultation, collaboration, partnership, and leadership.
] Prioritize partnerships with organization(s) possessing expertise in conducting participatory activities and experience in designing multi-benefit projects.42
58 SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit
] Be transparent about motives and power dynamics.
] Share decision making and initiative leadership.
] Engage in continuous reflection and willingness to change course.

Health Equity and Community
Engagement Report, The Bay
Area Regional Health Inequities
Initiative
The BARHII is a collaboration of public health directors, health officers, senior managers, and staff from several local health departments.

The collaboration is working to address the factors that contribute to differences in life expectancy and health outcomes between different racial and socioeconomic groups in the Bay Area. The Health Equity and Community Engagement Report can be accessed at http://barhii. org/download/publications/hecer_regionalsummary.pdf. The report describes how public health departments can reduce health inequities, including developing their capacity to effectively partner with community representatives. Completed in November 2013, the report presents the following best practices, challenges, and recommendations for local health departments, which have been incorporated into this Toolkit:45 ] Relationship building
] Community engagement
] Community capacity building
] Data collection and sharing
] Partnership and collaboration development
] Accessible community-based services
] Upstream practices and policy change
Kounkuey Design Initiative
KDI, founded in 2006 with the goal of understanding how design contributes to alleviating poverty and environmental degradation, is a non-profit design and community development organization that partners with underserved communities in the United States, Africa, and Latin America to physically transform communities, focusing on improving quality of life. This Toolkit suggests incorporating the following KDI approach to community engagement:
] Work collaboratively with a client and the community to identify priority needs.
] Facilitate an iterative community engagement process. ] Design and build buildings, parks, and infrastructure, along with the social and economic programs to support them.
] Build networks of localized projects to create impact at a larger scale.43
The Community Engagement Guide
for Sustainable Communities,
PolicyLink and Kirwin Institute
The Community Engagement Guide, authored by PolicyLink and Kirwin Institute, can be accessed at http://www.kirwaninstitute.osu.edu/ reports/2012/11_2012_CommEngGuideSCI_PolicyLinkKirwan.
pdf. The Guide presents lessons learned from the federal Interagency Partnership for Sustainable Communities’ Sustainable Communities Initiative. The Guide also educates readers about the community engagement process, including innovative and sustainable practices.

This Toolkit incorporates several principles from the Guide to develop a comprehensive community engagement approach:44
] Honor the wisdom, voice, and experience of residents. ] Treat participants with integrity and respect.

Chapter 4 / Community Involvement
59 Partnering with Community-Based
Organizations for More BroadBased Public Engagement, Institute for Local Government
The ILG has provided resources to local governments since its founding in 1955.46 Their 2015 report Partnering with Community-Based Organizations for More Broad-Based Public Engagement can be accessed at http://www.ca-ilg.org/sites/ main/files/file-attachments/partnering_with_comm_based
_orgs_final.pdf. The report helps educate staff who are interested in collaborating with local community-based organizations. It provides guidelines for staff members who are just beginning or who would like to begin enhancing their relationships with more members of their community. This Toolkit recommends incorporating the report’s information about community-based organizations, types of partnerships, and creating and sustaining effective partnerships.47 Best Practices in Action: Strategies
for Engaging Latinos, Seniors,
and Low-Income Residents of
Sonoma County, Sonoma County
Department of Health Services
Published in May 2012, the report can be accessed at http://www. sonoma-county.org/health/community/pdf/report.pdf and is a response to Sonoma County’s first strategic plan, which calls for an assessment of best practices for community engagement, specifically focused on three emerging populations in the county—Latinos, seniors, and low-income residents. The report contains a framework, foundations, and strategies to create and sustain foundations for effective community engagement. It outlines the following best practices and recommendations for the county, which have been incorporated into this Toolkit:48
Best Practices
] Knowledge of the community. Develop a deep understanding of the concerns, values, culture(s), habits, and demographic characteristics of the community.
] An understanding of community resources. Know the communitybased and government organizations and leaders that serve, interact with, and have the trust of this community.
] Strong partnerships. Be known and accepted as a partner in collaboration. This requires a commitment to building and maintaining relationships.
] A culture of community engagement. Prioritize engagement within the organization (at all levels) and support continuous improvement in cultural competency.

Recommendations
] Elevate community engagement as a countywide priority, creating a supportive “learning community” that encourages continuous improvement.
] Foster intra-county collaboration, to share insights, skills, and resources.
] Create and enhance mechanisms for community feedback, to improve information and relationships.
] Develop a more user-friendly County presence in the community, to enhance access as well as trust.
] Make it easier for County departments to develop cultural competency, short term as well as long term.
] Build and sustain strategic partnerships with community organizations, to expand the impact of the County’s goals. 60 SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit
Community Planning Toolkit,
Community Places
Located in Northern Ireland and founded in 1984, Community Places is an independent, non-profit organization that specializes in planning, community engagement, and community planning.49 Published in 2014, the Community Planning Toolkit can be accessed at https://www. communityplanningtoolkit.org/sites/default/files/Engagement0815. pdf, and is a toolkit for planning and designing a community engagement strategy. The toolkit provides recommendations and key questions for staff to ask when designing an engagement strategy, describes methods and techniques for engagement events, and indicates the appropriateness, strengths, and weaknesses for each.50
Sustainable Cities Institute,
National League of Cities
NLC provides training, education, programs, and conferences to inform its members of new regulations, solutions, and challenges to address.51 The NLC’s Sustainable Cities Institute includes resources on Equity and Engagement.52 In partnership with the Knight Foundation, the NLC published a report entitled “Bright Spots in Community Engagement:

Case Studies of U.S. Communities Creating Greater Civic Participation from the Bottom Up” in April 2013, which can be accessed at https://www. knightfoundation.org/media/uploads/publication_pdfs/BrightSpotsfinal.pdf. This Toolkit incorporates the report’s promising practices and models in communities that are successfully engaging citizens in local problem-solving efforts as well as its analysis of successful traits and diverse forms of community engagement.53
New York City Neighborhood
Planning Playbook
In 2014, NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio mandated a ten-year, five-borough plan called Housing New York in order to address the complex issue of housing in the city. The playbook, which can be accessed at http://www1.nyc. gov/assets/hpd/downloads/pdf/community/neighborhood-planningplaybook.pdf, describes a five-phased process whereby communities and planners, working together, employ a people-oriented approach to foster an open and inclusive process. This Toolkit recommends incorporating the playbook’s approach, as it can also be useful when designing an EJ planning process.54
Chapter 4 / Community Involvement
61 Endnotes
1 Planning for healthy communities act. Cal. Senate Bill 1000. (2015- 2016). Chapter 587 (Cal. Stat. 2016), Section (h)(1)(B). Retrieved from https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_ id=201520160SB1000
2 Governor’s Office of Planning and Research. (2017). General plan guidelines. State of California, page 27. 3 Liberty Hill Foundation. (2017). Green zones and grassroots: How California’s climate investments benefit Los Angeles County’s disadvantaged communities. Retrieved from https://www.libertyhill.org/sites/libertyhillfoundation/files/GZGR_2017-full-report_0.pdf 4 Community Places. (2014). Community planning toolkit: Community engagement, page 5. Retrieved from http://www.communityplanningtoolkit.org/sites/default/files/Engagement.pdf 5 Liberty Hill Foundation. (2017). Green zones and grassroots: How California’s climate investments benefit Los Angeles County’s disadvantaged communities. Retrieved from https://www.libertyhill.org/sites/libertyhillfoundation/files/GZGR_2017-full-report_0.pdf 6 Liberty Hill Foundation. (2017). Green Zones and Grassroots: How California’s Climate Investments Benefit Los Angeles County’s Disadvantaged Communities, page 50. Retrieved from https://www.libertyhill.org/sites/ libertyhillfoundation/files/GZGR_2017-full-report_0.pdf 7 Liberty Hill Foundation. (2017). Green Zones and Grassroots: How California’s Climate Investments Benefit Los Angeles County’s Disadvantaged Communities. Retrieved from https://www.libertyhill.org/sites/libertyhillfoundation/files/GZGR_2017-full-report_0.pdf 8 Institute for Local Government. Partnering with community-based organizations for more broad-based public engagement. Retrieved April 21, 2017, from http://www.ca-ilg.org/sites/main/files/file-attachments/partnering_with_comm_based_orgs_final.pdf 9 SAJE. (n.d.). Popular education. Retrieved October 1, 2017, from http:// www.saje.net/popular-education/
10 Federal Highway Administration. (2006, February). How to engage low-literacy and limited-English-proficiency populations in transportation decisionmaking. Retrieved June 08, 2017, from http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/publications/low_limited/index.cfm 11 Early, D. (2015). The general plan in California. Point Arena, CA: Solano Press.
12 Institute for Local Government. (2015, March). Measuring the success of local public engagement. Retrieved September 20, 2017, from http://www. ca-ilg.org/document/measuring-success-local-public-engagement. 13 Early, D. (2015). The general plan in California. Point Arena, CA: Solano Press.
14 Everyday Democracy. (2003). Organizing study circles with young people.

Retrieved June 08, 2017, from https://www.everyday-democracy.org/ resources/organizing-study-circles-young-people
15 PolicyLink. (Ed.). (2012). Community‐based participatory research: A strategy for building healthy communities and promoting health through policy change.

Retrieved from http://www.policylink.org/sites/default/files/CBPR.pdf 16 PolicyLink & Kirwan Institute. (2012). The sustainable communities initiative: The community engagement guide for sustainable communities, page 12. Retrieved from http://www.kirwaninstitute.osu.edu/reports/2012/11_2012_CommEngGuideSCI_PolicyLinkKirwan.pdf 17 Early, D. (2015). The general plan in California. Point Arena, CA: Solano Press.
18 United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2008, June). EPA’s environmental justice collaborative problem-solving model: CPS element 3, consensus building and dispute resolution, page 10. Retrieved from https:// www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-04/documents/ejproblemcollaborativesolvingmodel.pdf 19 MIT Community Problem Solving Lab. (n.d.). Strategy tools. Retrieved April 21, 2017, from http://web.mit.edu/cpsproject/strategy_tools.html 20 MIT Community Problem Solving Lab. (n.d.). Strategy Tools. Retrieved April 21, 2017, from http://web.mit.edu/cpsproject/strategy_tools.html 62 SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit
21 United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2008, June). EPA’s environmental justice collaborative problem-solving model: CPS element 2, community capacity building and leadership development. Retrieved from https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-04/documents/ ejproblemcollaborativesolvingmodel.pdf
22 Early, D. (2015). The general plan in California. Point Arena, CA: Solano Press.
23 Early, D. (2015). The General Plan in California. Point Arena, CA: Solano Press.
24 Early, D. (2015). The General Plan in California. Point Arena, CA: Solano Press.
25 Early, D. (2015). The General Plan in California. Point Arena, CA: Solano Press.
26 Early, D. (2015). The General Plan in California. Point Arena, CA: Solano Press.
27 Early, D. (2015). The General Plan in California. Point Arena, CA: Solano Press.
28 The National League of Cities, Sustainable Cities Institute. (2012). Community engagement: Overview. Retrieved April 21, 2017, from http://www. sustainablecitiesinstitute.org/Documents/SCI/Topic_Overviews/Community%20Engagement-Full%20Overview_New_NLC.pdf 29 Gross, J. (2008). Community Benefits Agreements: Definitions, Values, and Legal Enforceability. Journal of Affordable Housing, 17(35), 37. Retrieved from http://juliangross.net/docs/CBA_Definitions_Values_Enforceability.pdf 30 Pacific Institute. (2010). Advancing community health through community benefits agreements: Four case studies and lessons for the redevelopment of the Oakland army base. Retrieved September 20, 2017, from https:// apen4ej.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/community-benefits-agreements-studies.pdf 31 Schindler, K. (2010, April 30). Charrette use in the planning process. Published on eXtension.org. Retrieved April 20, 2017, from http://articles. extension.org/pages/27933/charrette-use-in-the-planning-process 32 The World Café. (2017). Services and programs. Retrieved April 21, 2017 from www.theworldcafe.com/
33 Early, D. (2015). The general plan in California. Point Arena, CA: Solano Press.
34 Community Places. Community planning toolkit: Community engagement, page 15. Retrieved April 20, 2017, from http://www.communityplanningtoolkit.org/sites/default/files/Engagement.pdf 35 Early, D. (2015). The general plan in California. Point Arena, CA: Solano Press.
36 Governor’s Office of Planning and Research. (2017). General plan guidelines. State of California, page 28. 37 Participatory Budgeting Project. Participatory budgeting scoping toolkit: A guide for officials & staff interested in starting PB. Retrieved from https:// www.participatorybudgeting.org/how-to-start-pb/plan-a-pb-process/ 38 Governor’s Office of Planning and Research. (2017). General plan guidelines, page 36. 39 United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, Connect our Future. (2017). Walking and biking audits and planning. Retrieved October 1, 2017, from http://www.connectourfuture.org/tools/walking-and-bicycle-audits-and-planning/ 40 Governor’s Office of Planning and Research. (2017). General plan guidelines, page 36. 41 Early, D. (2015). The general plan in California. Point Arena, CA: Solano Press.
42 Liberty Hill Foundation. (2017).Green zones and grassroots: How California’s climate investments benefit Los Angeles County’s disadvantaged communities. Retrieved from https://www.libertyhill.org/sites/libertyhillfoundation/files/GZGR_2017-full-report_0.pdf 43 Konkuey Design Initiative. (n.d.). About Kounkuey Design Initiative. Retrieved June 13, 2017, fromhttp://www.kounkuey.org/index.html Chapter 4 / Community Involvement
63 44 PolicyLink and the Kirwan Institute. (2012). The sustainable communities initiative: The community engagement guide for sustainable communities,page 4 . Retrieved from http://www.kirwaninstitute.osu.edu/reports/2012/11_2012_CommEngGuideSCI_PolicyLinkKirwan.pdf 45 The Bay Area Regional Health Inequities Initiative. (2013). Health equity and community engagement report: Best practices, challenges and recommendations for local health departments Bay Area regional summary.

Retrieved from http://barhii.org/download/publications/hecer_regionalsummary.pdf 46 Institute for Local Government. (n.d.). About ILG. Retrieved June 13, 2017, fromhttp://www.ca-ilg.org/about-institute-local-government 47 Institute for Local Government. (2015).Partnering with community-based organizations for more broad-based public engagement: Navigating around common pitfalls. Retrieved from http://www.ca-ilg.org/sites/main/files/ file-attachments/partnering_with_comm_based_orgs_final.pdf 48 Sonoma County Department of Health Services. (May 2012).Best practices in action: Strategies for engaging leaders, senior and low-income residents of Sonoma County. Retrieved from http://www.sonoma-county.org/ health/community/
49 Community Places. (2012). Welcome to community places. Retrieved April 21, 2017, from https://www.communityplaces.info/
50 Community Places. (2014).Community planning toolkit: Community engagement.

Retrieved from http://www.communityplanningtoolkit.org/sites/ default/files/Engagement.pdf
51 National League of Cities. (n.d.).History. Retrieved April 21, 2017, from http://nlc.org/about-nlc/history
52 National League of Cities. (2013).Sustainable cities institute, equity and engagement. Retrieved April 21, 2017, from http://www.sustainablecitiesinstitute.org/topics/equity-and-engagement 53 Knight Foundation, National League of Cities. (2013).Bright Spots in community engagement: Case studies of U.S. communities creating greater civic participation from the bottom up. Retrieved from https://www.knightfoundation.org/media/uploads/publication_pdfs/BrightSpots-final.pdf 54 City of New York. (2015). Neighborhood planning playbook.Retrieved from http://www1.nyc.gov/assets/hpd/downloads/pdf/community/neighborhood-planning-playbook.pdf SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit
This page intentionally left blank.
64 2
3 1
6 7
A
B
C

DEVELOP OBJECTIVES

AND POLICIES
4 5
66 SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit
Goals, Objectives, and
Policies
SB 1000 requires that an Environmental Justice (EJ) Element or integrated EJ-related policies target eight goals and objectives to reduce the unique and compounded health risks in disadvantaged communities (DACs). This chapter describes required SB 1000 objectives and suggests additional objectives that follow SB 1000’s mandate for local governments to include objectives relevant to their community’s context.

Preparing for Policy Development
Section 2.4 in Chapter 2 outlines an EJ planning process that can be used to guide the policy development process:

1. Conduct introductory public meeting(s), identify disadvantaged communities, and document existing conditions

2. Involve and engage the community

3. Develop EJ goals, policies, and objectives

4. Adopt the element or policies

5. Continually evaluate during Implementation
This chapter focuses on Step 3: Develop EJ goals, policies, and objectives. Important considerations for this step are:
] Ensuring that the development of goals, policies, and objectives is consistent with and utilizes recommendations from the community engagement strategy. A strong community engagement process can help identify the most prevalent EJ issues in a community, assist in the prioritization of key objectives, and evaluate existing General Plan policies and any changes that may be needed to improve them. ] Creating a clear timeline for the policy development process. ] Ensuring that baseline assessments of the existing conditions include input from the community. ] Establishing interagency coordination. Planning for EJ demands a cross-disciplinary approach that benefits from sharing knowledge, expertise, and resources. While the SB 1000 effort is likely to be spearheaded by planners, the involvement of multiple departments—public works, economic development, public health, etc.—is needed to research and implement effective EJ policies and programs.

Chapter 5 / Develop Goals, Policies, and Objectives
67 Required Goals and Objectives
SB 1000 specifies eight areas that must be integrated into a stand-alone EJ Element or through integrated EJ goals:

1. Reduce the unique and compounded health risks in DACs.

2. Reduce pollution exposure and improve air quality.

3. Promote public facilities.

4. Promote food access.

5. Promote safe and sanitary homes.

6. Promote physical activity.

7. Promote “civil engagement” in the public decision-making process.

8. Prioritize improvements and programs that address the needs of disadvantaged communities.

This Toolkit suggests two optional objectives that also reduce community health risks and promote environmental justice: equitable development and design, and reducing climate vulnerability. As noted in Chapter 2, Senate Bill 379 now requires cities and counties to include climate adaptation and resiliency strategies in their General Plan’s safety elements. Therefore, climate-related policies should be crossreferenced and consistent between elements. A local jurisdiction may also include goals and objectives that are not discussed in this chapter but respond to a particular community need or goal. Table 5-1 (at the end of the chapter) summarizes the goals, objectives, and policies discussed in this chapter.

SB 1000’s required goals and objectives represent a minimum approach to developing an EJ policy framework. If the actual conditions of an individual community do not demonstrate the need to address all eight issues, the General Plan must give reasons for this. For each of the eight goals and objectives, this chapter provides a basic outline of the objective, tools for evaluating existing conditions, and a potential policy framework to address the issue.

Identifying Sensitive Land Uses and Populations in DACs Of particular importance to SB 1000’s goal to reducing pollution exposure in DACs is knowing where sensitive land uses are located in DACs. The California Air Resources Board’s (CARB’s) Land Use and Air Quality Handbook is a useful resource for identifying sensitive land uses and defines “Sensitive populations” are populations with characteristics such as age and health conditions that make them more vulnerable to pollutant exposure.1 “Sensitive land uses” include schools, parks and playgrounds, daycare centers, nursing homes, hospitals and medical facilities, and residential communities.

Setting Up for EJ Success: Using Clear Policy Language
Use of clear and specific policy language is important to ensuring effective EJ concepts and values in General Plans. For example, rather than stating broadly that “future development will promote public health,” policies could use more concrete language to achieve specific actions, such as “develop and implement an lead removal program to reduce the adverse health impacts of lead-contamination on residents.” As the OPR General Plan Guidelines, 2017 states:

As policy priorities are established, formulating strong policy language is a key first step. For example, rather than “consider implementing” use the word “implement.” Also, instead of using the phrase “consider the development of,” use “develop and implement.” Additionally, to create more accountable policy language use “priority on” rather than “emphasis on” to highlight policy areas of particular focus.2
This level of specificity and clarity will help responsible agencies and departments, as well as private developers and the larger public better understand the intent behind the language of the General Plan, ensuring more success at implement any EJ goals, policies, and objectives. 68 SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit
Table 5-1 SB 1000 Goals, Objectives, and Policies
Goals Objectives and Policies

5.1 / Reduce
Pollution
Exposure,
including
Air Quality
Improvement
] Ensure source reduction (measures to
reduce pollution from the land use and
circulation);
] Ensure separation (separating the source
of pollution from the sensitive land use or
population;
] Implement mitigation (reducing the impact
of the pollution uses on sensitive land uses
or populations).
] Consider amortization ordinances
] Reduce traffic congestion and vehicle trips
] Create land use patterns that will encourage
people to walk, bicycle, or use public transit
] Encourage compact developments
] Reduce emissions related to energy
consumption and stationary sources
] Reduce water contamination (drinking
water, water bodies, stormwater,
watersheds)

5.2 / Promote
Public Facilities
] Provide equitable distribution to and access
from underserved areas
] Meet future demands of underserved
communities
] Ensure regulatory compliance
] Utilize a multi-benefit implementation
approach
] Ensure interagency coordination
] Sustainability – Maintenance and energy

5.3 / Promote
Food Access
] Create opportunities to access affordable
and nutritious foods
] Prioritize the development of healthy food
establishments in economic development
efforts
] Protect and expand urban agriculture
] Scale up local purchasing
] Set up school-based programs that
integrate gardening and nutrition

5.4 / Promote
Safe and Sanitary
Homes
] Address unhealthy housing conditions (lead,
asbestos, overcrowding, mold, pests)
] Address housing affordability
] Promote land use compatibility

5.5 / Promote
Physical Activity
] Improve access and connectivity
] Promote urban greening
] Implement complete streets

5.6 / Promote
Civil, i.e. Civic
or Community
Engagement
in the Public
Decisicionmaking Process
] Promote capacity-building
] Ensure cultural considerations
] Ensure broad and balanced participation
] Accommodate language access
] Maximize use of technology

5.7 / Prioritize
Improvements
and Programs
that Address the
Needs of DACs
] Consider environmental justice issues in the
equitable provision of public amenities that
improve the quality of life
] Support a strong, diverse local business
community
] Creation of priority zones, also known as
Green Zones
Chapter 5 / Develop Goals, Policies, and Objectives
69 ] City of Jurupa Valley, Environmental Justice Element (2014) ] City of Richmond, Community Health and Wellness Element (2012) ] City of Portland, Oregon, Comprehensive Plan Update (2016) ] California Air Resources Board (CARB), Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective (2005), and technical supplement, Strategies to Reduce Air Pollution Exposure near High-Volume Roadways (2017) ] San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, Air Quality Guidelines for General Plans (2005) ] South Coast Air Quality Management District, Guidance Document for Addressing Air Quality Issues in General Plans and Local Planning (2005)
] California Air Pollution Control Officers Association, Model Policies for Greenhouse Gases in General Plans (2009)
] American Planning Association (APA), Planning for Food Access and Community-Based Food Systems: A National Scan and Evaluation of Local Comprehensive and Sustainability Plans (2012)
] Environmental Health Coalition (EHC), Integrating Environmental Justice into General Plans (draft, 2016)—one of the main organizations who supported the development of the first EJ Element in National City.
] Oakland Food Policy Council (OFPC), Transforming the Oakland Food System: A Plan for Action (2010)
] California Emergency Management Agency (CEMA) & California Natural Resources Agency (CRNA), Adaptation Planning Guide (2012)
] California Natural Resources Agency (CRNA), Safeguarding California Plan: 2018 Update (2018)

5.8 / Equitable
Development and
Design
] Promote community-oriented development
] Improve community economic health
] Promote workforce development
] Promote placemaking
] Ensure equitable TOD

5.9 / Reduce
Impacts of
Climate Change
] Minimize greenhouse gas emissions
] Increase renewable energy and access
] Promote energy efficiency
] Develop extreme heat adaptation plans
] Promote flood-resistant development and
retrofits
] Support increased resilience for
transportation, particularly for persons with
limited mobility
] Prioritize disproportionately-vulnerable
populations
] Implement measures to reduce risks to fire
hazards
] Develop preventive and protective
strategies against climate change impacts
References Cited
A number of resources were consulted for the suggested and sample policies, which include adopted General Plans and guidelines. Below is a list of sources cited most in this chapter; a complete list can be found in the endnotes.
] Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, General Plan Guidelines (2017)
] City of National City, Health and Environmental Justice Element (2011)
70 SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit
exposures of pollution within a particular community. The tools outlined in Chapter 3 can also be helpful in some of this assessment.

Air Quality
Healthy air quality (AQ) can be defined as the degree to which ambient air is pollution free. Although air pollution has been regulated for decades, California still has some of the worst air in the country.3 Air pollution can cause many serious health effects. For example, inhaling small particles called particulate matter can lead to asthma attacks and heart and lung disease – the smaller the particle, the farther it can travel into lungs.

Breathing ozone can cause a number of health problems especially for vulnerable populations, while exposure to toxic air contaminants can lead to cancer as well as neurological and reproductive disorders.

DACs can be disproportionately exposed to air pollution due to the prevalence of pollution-emitting sources, which range from heavy industries to major roadways. Air pollutants are generally split into three categories: criteria air pollutants, toxic air contaminants, and greenhouse gases (GHG).

Criteria Air Pollutants are pollutants that harm health and the environment for which the US Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) and California set acceptable concentration levels for ambient air.

Areas that are at or below these levels are in “attainment” of air quality standards, and areas that are above these levels are in “nonattainment.” The six criteria pollutants are ground-level ozone, particulate matter, carbon monoxide, lead, sulfur dioxide, and nitrogen dioxide. California has additional criteria pollutants. Unfortunately, many areas in California have unhealthy levels of ground-level ozone and particulate matter. ] Ground-Level Ozone is created by chemical reactions between nitrogen oxides and volatile organic compounds in sunlight. Breathing ozone can reduce lung function and harm lung tissue.
] Particulate Matter refers to extremely small particles and liquid droplets in the air that can cause serious health effects if inhaled, such as damage to the heart and lungs. Sulfur dioxide and nitrogen

5.1 / Reduce Pollution
Exposure and Improve Air
Quality

5.1.a / Understanding Pollution
Exposure and Environmental
Justice
A fundamental part of achieving environmental justice is reducing pollution exposure in communities that are disproportionately burdened with pollution. Pollution exposure occurs daily in virtually every community when people come into direct contact with air, food, water, and soil contaminants that are often the result of incompatible land uses.

However, not all people react to contaminants or pollution in the same way. Sensitive populations and sensitive land uses are more vulnerable to the impacts of pollution exposure, and DACs often experience multiple sources of pollution that make them more vulnerable. The identification of sources, types, and quantities of pollution is important and necessary to determining appropriate solutions.

Although air quality is just one type of pollution exposure, improving air quality is critical to the health and well-being of all people and the environment. “Reducing pollution exposure” as outlined in SB 1000 refers to a broad range of environmental impacts, but “Improving air quality” is tightly focused on reducing specific air contaminants. Both are critical to achieving environmental justice.

5.1.b / Assess Existing Conditions
This section provides a framework for analyzing different types and sources of pollution: air pollution, water contamination, and hazardous waste exposure. Planners will have to consult regulatory agencies and technical experts as needed to determine the sources, extent, and Chapter 5 / Develop Goals, Policies, and Objectives
71 dioxide emissions can react with other chemicals in the air to form particulate matter. Particulate matter standards are broken down into fine particular matter (PM2.5) and coarse particulate matter (PM10).
] Toxic Air Contaminants are air pollutants that can cause serious health effects from exposure at extremely low levels—a safe level of exposure may not even exist. Toxic air contaminants include:
benzene, asbestos, arsenic, chloroform, and particulate matter from diesel-fueled engines.

Criteria and toxic air pollutants can cause some of the most severe health impacts. They are emitted by three types of sources: stationary sources, area-wide sources, and mobile sources.
] Stationary Sources are sources such as power plants, refineries, and manufacturing facilities that emit air pollutants. Stationary sources emit the majority of organic gases and sulfur oxides in the state. ] Area-Wide Sources are sources of pollution where the emissions are spread over a wide area, such as fugitive dust and farming operations. Area-wide sources emit the majority of coarse and fine particulate matter in the state.
] Mobile Sources include automobiles, motorcycles, trucks, off-road vehicles, boats, and airplanes. Mobile sources emit the majority of nitrous oxides in the state.

Greenhouse Gases include carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and water vapor. GHGs produced by humans are a major contributor to global warming. Reducing GHG emissions will indirectly improve air quality by decreasing the presence of other air pollutants. A recent detailed analysis suggests that transitioning to low-carbon energy in California to reduce GHG emissions 80 percent below 1990 levels would lead to a 55 percent reduction in air pollution mortality rates relative to 2010 levels.4
Pesticides are another type of air contaminant that pose a particular set of health risks that should be evaluated. Pesticides applied in agriculture do not remain stationary and can drift depending on wind patterns.

Pesticides are also applied in urban areas, and people can be exposed in and around their homes.

In order to assess existing AQ conditions and exposure levels, planners should consult with regulatory bodies and technical experts. Planners can refer to CalEnviroScreen, resources at CARB, local air districts, or other supplemental sources to understand AQ conditions in their community. As is the case for all technical assessments of existing conditions, results are strengthened by a ground-truthing process, including community outreach, verification and evaluation, and/ or interviews with organizations and individuals. Ground-truthing is discussed further in Chapter 3.

The following is a list of tools that may be helpful in assessing air quality:
] CARB Pollution Mapping Tool provides an interactive platform that allows users to locate and view emissions of GHGs as well as criteria pollutants from large facilities in California. Users can select facilities by name, location, or industrial sector; view their reported emissions using maps, charts, and tabular formats; and can download data for future use. https://www.arb.ca.gov/ei/tools/pollution_map/pollution_map.htm ] California Environmental Health Tracking Program (CEHTP) Pesticides Use Map. http://www.cehtp.org/page/pesticides/agricultural_pesticide_use_in_california ] EPA Toxic Release Inventory tracks reported use and disposal of toxic chemicals from industrial facilities. It allows users to develop factsheets for particular communities. https://www.epa.gov/toxics-release-inventory-tri-program ] US EPA’s RACT/BACT/LAER Clearinghouse has information on specific air contaminant pollution control measures used by facilities. https://cfpub.epa.gov/rblc/ ] CARB Air Monitoring website maintains real-time data for some monitoring sites. https://www.arb.ca.gov/aaqm/aaqm.htm
72 SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit
Water Contamination
There are many ways in which water contamination can impact DACs.

These include a lack of safe, clean, and affordable drinking water due to contaminated local drinking water sources, and contaminated streams and rivers that make outdoor recreational water activities hazardous.

Surface Water
Contaminated water bodies can produce public health hazards and quality of life concerns, and cleanup or watershed restoration efforts may have bypassed disadvantaged communities. In some DACs, residents rely on fishing for subsistence or as a cultural practice. If local water bodies are contaminated, residents may be consuming contaminated fish that can cause severe health problems.

Another major surface water issue in DACs is the prevalence of uncontrolled stormwater runoff. Many DACs are in low-lying areas, highly urbanized areas with lots of impervious surfaces, or neighborhoods that lack good drainage. Rural and desert regions often lack complete storm drain systems capable of handling and directing stormwater runoff.

This can lead to localized flooding during storm events that negatively impact quality of life and can cause public health crises.

The State Water Resource Control Board (SWRCB) and the Regional Water Quality Control Boards are the regulatory agencies in charge of water quality. Both the SWRCB and the Regional Boards provide data on water conditions, contamination levels, and ecosystem health data.

The SWRCB’s Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program monitors surface water conditions throughout the state. The SWRCB also tracks impaired water bodies—i.e., those that contain contaminants that exceed protective water quality standards. This data can help planners in determining surface water quality conditions that may concern their communities.
] SWRCB Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. http://www. waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/swamp/
] SWRCB Regional Monitoring Programs. http://www.mywaterquality.ca.gov/regional_portals/index.html ] SWRCB Impaired Water Bodies. http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/ water_issues/programs/tmdl/integrated2012.shtml
] SWRCB Storm Water Program. http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/ water_issues/programs/stormwater/
] OEHHA website on fish advisories for consumption. https://oehha.ca.gov/fish/advisories Groundwater Contamination
Many of California’s groundwater basins are contaminated. This creates an EJ issue because many low-income communities and communities of color are served by public water systems that rely on groundwater, which is discussed below. Groundwater can become contaminated by many sources, such as ongoing industrial operations, irrigated agricultural land, confined animal feeding operations, oil and gas production and disposal sites, leaking underground storage tanks, abandoned mines, and Department of Defense sites and Cleanup Program sites. Sites and projects that impact, or have the potential to impact, groundwater quality should be identified. Resources to assess groundwater conditions specifically include:
] SWRCB Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment
(GAMA) program, which has reports on groundwater conditions and contaminants. http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/gama/
] SWRCB GeoTracker online database of sites that may be contributing to groundwater contamination. https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/ ] SWRCB Sustainable Groundwater Management website has information about long-term management of California’s groundwater basins. http://www.water.ca.gov/groundwater/sgm/
Drinking Water Quality and Access
Unsafe drinking water is a prevalent and significant health concern throughout California, especially in many rural DACs. According to the SWRCB, “Over 300 drinking water systems in disadvantaged communities, serving approximately 200,000 people, are unable to Chapter 5 / Develop Goals, Policies, and Objectives
73 provide safe drinking water. These systems include 30 schools and daycare centers that serve over 12,000 children.”5
Drinking water can become contaminated in multiple ways, ranging from reliance on polluted groundwater and a lack sufficient water treatment technologies, to inadequate water infrastructure. Access to safe drinking water also includes affordability. Water bills are an increasing burden in low-income households. When assessing a DACs’ access to clean and safe drinking water, planners could answer the following questions:
] Is a water system providing water that meets state and federal health standards? Both the US EPA and the SWRCB have established maximum contaminant levels for drinking water. ] If not, does the community have access to an emergency supply, such as bottled water?
] Is the contamination from the source or from old or dilapidated infrastructure? ] Is water affordable for the residents served by the water system? Water affordability is defined by the US EPA as no more than 2.5 percent of median household income (MHI).6 Local water costs should be surveyed and cross-referenced against community MHIs. ] Are there many private well owners in the area? Well owners are responsible for their own water treatment. If they are relying on contaminated groundwater—especially if they are low-income—the household may not have the resources or information to properly treat the well water, which presents public health concerns.

Resources to help assess drinking water conditions include:
] SWRCB’s Human Right to Water website contains detailed information on the extent of contaminated drinking water in California, including a map of all public water systems in exceedance of or compliance with state drinking water standards. http://waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/hr2w/index.shtml ] SWRCB’s Division of Drinking Water monitors drinking water and regulates drinking water systems. http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/ drinking_water/programs/documents/ddwem/DDWdistrictofficesmap.pdf ] SWRCB’s Low Income Water Rate Assistance Program provides funding assistance to support low-income communities’ access to safe drinking water. http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/conservation_portal/assistance/ Hazardous Materials and Toxics
Many DACs have multiple potential sources of toxic or hazardous material exposure that are often the result of historical land-use patterns or a concentration of industrial facilities. Sources of hazardous materials and toxics that may lead to exposure include:
] Industrial facilities in operation that may be emitting toxic substances through the course of their operations. ] Brownfields, which are properties that are contaminated, or thought to be contaminated, and are underutilized due to perceived remediation costs and liability concerns. ] Hazardous waste cleanup sites, where hazardous materials are known to have been released.
] Superfund sites, sites designated by the US EPA as some of the nation’s most contaminated land.
] Abandoned mines, which often have large quantities of heavy metals such as lead, arsenic, and mercury in waste rock and tailings. ] Hazardous waste disposal facilities, such as landfills. ] Housing or other sensitive land-uses built on contaminated soils and/or groundwater, often the result of previous industrial land uses that are not properly cleaned up.
74 SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit
The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), the state agency in charge of managing and regulating toxic substances and overseeing hazardous cleanup sites, administers EnviroStor, an online database that monitors and tracks hazardous waste facilities and cleanup sites. Planners may use EnviroStor to identify hazardous sites in their communities that may ultimately need to be addressed through EJ policies. In addition to DTSC’s lists of lists of cleanup sites the EPA maintains the Superfund site list.
] DTSC Envirostor. https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/ ] DTSC Cleanup Sites. http://www.dtsc.ca.gov/SiteCleanup/SCCleanupSites.cfm ] US EPA Superfund Sites. https://www.epa.gov/superfund Citizen Science
“Citizen science” is an approach where the public connects with government agencies over topics of environmental science and protection.7 This is similar to ground-truthing described in Chapter 3.

To support this approach, US EPA has developed a set of tools which communities can use to initiate projects for assessing and monitoring air and water quality within their neighborhoods. US EPA also offers resources and grants to fund community monitoring projects. The SWRCB’s Clean Water Team offers citizen science tools and expertise as well to monitor water quality. Planners can work with communities to provide and educate them about these tools as well as jointly initiate local monitoring projects.
] US EPA Citizen Science for Environmental Protection. https:// www.epa.gov/citizen-science
] US EPA Air Pollution Monitoring Grants. https://www.epa.gov/ air-research/air-pollution-monitoring-communities-grants ] SWRCB Clean Water Team – Citizen Monitoring. https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/swamp/cwt_volunteer. html

5.1.c / Policy Framework for
Reducing Pollution Exposure
Effective pollution reduction policies in DACs include a range of policy types and strategies:

1. Clean up existing sources of pollution.

2. Reduce pollution from specific sources.

3. Separate pollution sources from sensitive land uses.

4. Mitigate the impacts of pollution on existing sensitive land uses.

5. Prevent the development of new pollution sources.

Reduce Air Pollution And Exposure
SB 1000 requires the inclusion of AQ policies in EJ Elements or integrated EJ policies throughout the General Plan. This can be accomplished through the inclusion of AQ policies in the land use, circulation, conservation, and/or EJ Elements. Adoption of a separate AQ element is only required for jurisdictions within the boundaries of the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District.8 A recommended policy framework to structure potential AQ policies can use the following categories:
] Air quality–specific policies
] Air quality–related land use and circulation policies ] Urban design strategies
Air Quality–Specific Policies
In DACs that have large sources of air contamination or extremely poor air quality, planners should consider specific policies to reduce exposure. These include:
] Cap the number of potential pollution sources in DACs.

Chapter 5 / Develop Goals, Policies, and Objectives
75 ] Create new pollution monitoring requirements or stricter permitting standards for new developments in already overburdened areas such as DACs. ] Partner with the local air quality management district to establish a mitigation program to reduce the impact of air pollution in DACs. ] Create targeted permit inspection programs in DACs to help ensure enforcement of air quality permits.
] Require stronger pollution controls at facilities in DACs. ] Develop measures to reduce particulate emissions, such as fugitive dust and PM10, from various sources (e.g., construction, roadways, truck routes, etc.). Measures may include development of public transit and electric vehicle infrastructure.

Land Use and Circulation–Related AQ Policies
Land use and circulation policies for improving AQ can focus on changes to land use patterns, site designs that benefit ambient AQ, and the extension or enhancement of transit infrastructure. The policies below are recommended for land use. The South Coast Air Quality Management District’s (2005) Guidance Document for Addressing Air Quality Issues in General Plans and Local Planning can provide further reference and is found at http://www.aqmd.gov/home/library/documents-supportmaterial/planning-guidance/guidance-document. ] Require buffer zones between the siting of new industrial, fossil fuel extraction, or electric-generating facilities and sensitive land uses, following distances recommended in CARB’s Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective (see additional information, below). ] Require adequate mitigation of air contaminant exposure in any new sensitive land-use developments that are close to mobile or stationary sources of pollution. (See information from CARB’s Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective, below.) ] Adopt an amortization ordinance, which authorizes a process for public agencies to remove a targeted polluting land use from a community. Several ordinances have been adopted by local jurisdictions in California, including the cities of National City and Santa Cruz.

This type of ordinance has been supported by the judicial system as a useful tool to support General Plan and zoning amendments that seek to either ameliorate or remove an existing source of pollution from communities.
] Limit the number of approved variances for facilities that wish to locate in DACs.
] Require that vegetative barriers be included in developments near large stationary and mobile sources of air pollution.

CARB’s Air Quality and Land Use Handbook (Handbook) provides a method for assessing exposure levels located near stationary and mobile sources of pollution. Using the Handbook as a reference, planners can use a three-step process to develop a plan to reduce pollution exposure near sensitive land uses:

1. Locate sources of air pollution, including mobile sources such as freeways and high-traffic-volume roads, and major stationary sources such as distribution centers, rail yards, ports, refineries, and gasoline-dispensing facilities.

2. Generate buffers based on Table 1-1 of the Handbook. Areas within these buffers are at risk of exposure and should be considered pollution burdened.

3. Apply air quality standards from the Handbook to determine at-risk populations. Sensitive land uses are at risk if located within 500 feet of a freeway, urban roads with a capacity of 100,000 vehicles per day, rural roads with a capacity of 50,000 vehicles per day, or a designated truck route.

In 2017, the CARB released a technical supplement to the Handbook called Strategies to Reduce Air Pollution Exposure Near High-Volume Roadways (CARB Technical Advisory). The CARB Technical Advisory focuses on siting sensitive uses near freeways and high-volume 76 SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit
roadways and recognizes the benefits of infill and compact development in terms of public health.

Table 1 of the CARB Technical Advisory summarizes strategies for reducing air pollution exposure near high-volume roadways.9 Section II details the research behind each strategy.10 The strategies are outlined below, and the Technical Advisory is accessible at https://www.arb. ca.gov/ch/rd_technical_advisory_final.pdf
] Traffic emission reduction
] Speed reduction mechanisms, including roundabouts.
] Traffic signal management.
] Speed limit reductions on high-speed roadways (greater than 55 mph).
] Strategies that increase dispersion of traffic emissions—see also Site Design and Infrastructure in the following section. ] Design that promotes air flow and pollutant dispersion along street corridors.
] Solid barriers, such as sound walls.
] Vegetation for pollutant dispersion.
] Strategies that remove pollution from the air
] Indoor high-efficiency filtration.
] Other circulation-specific policies that can help improve air quality include ] Create land use patterns that encourage people to walk, bicycle, or use public transit for a significant number of their daily trips, thus reducing emissions from mobile sources.
] Encourage compact developments in appropriate locations that make the most efficient use of land, concentrate complementary uses together, thereby reducing air pollution caused from vehicle use.
] Encourage development of bicycle and pedestrian facilities to reduce dependency on transportation that emit pollutants. ] Reduce traffic congestion and vehicle trips through more efficient infrastructure and support for trip reduction programs. ] Ensure that new development provides the facilities and programs that improve the effectiveness of transportation control measures and congestion management programs.

Urban Design Strategies
In addition to the land use and circulation policies described above, urban, site, and landscape design can reduce air pollution exposure in communities.

Urban Design and Complete Streets
Effective urban design, layouts, and streetscapes can affect air flow and improve ventilation along street corridors. High-volume roadways flanked by tall structures greater than five stories can lead to buildup of pollution between the buildings. To discourage and prevent pollution buildup along street corridors, the following urban designs and strategies need to be incorporated into the EJ Element or integrated policies:11 ] Vary the form and heights of buildings to avoid creating walls along street corridors that could lead to pollution buildup.
] Introduce complete streets principles to DACs, including: 1) wider, safer, and fully accessible sidewalks between key destinations and transit stops; 2) pedestrian-oriented, visually-appealing landscaping and street trees in order to encourage walking and bicycling; and 3) disincentives for driving, such as increasing walkability, transit options, and bicycle facilities.
] Provide buffer spaces between high-volume roadways/transportation corridors and sensitive land uses using recommended buffers in CARB’s Land Use Handbook and Technical Advisory.

Chapter 5 / Develop Goals, Policies, and Objectives
77 Site Design and Infrastructure
Minimize potential impacts from air pollution among sensitive land uses through feasible and effective measures, such as setbacks, vegetative barriers, ventilation systems, and/or air filters.
] Incorporate well-maintained green space, plantings, and permeable surface area; consider establishing permitting incentives to facilitate construction of vegetative barriers. ] Require notification of potential health risks to existing and potential tenants, occupants, residents, and potential buyers of sensitive land uses located within 500 feet of a freeway.12
] Require installation of on-site air filtration systems in areas of high exposure.
] Require installation of on-site air monitoring equipment to measure air contaminants and provide monitoring results to residents or users on a regular basis. ] Require a community impact assessment or health impact assessment prior to approving a potentially-polluting facility or land use.13 Landscape Design and Vegetative Barriers
Vegetative barriers can prevent or reduce exposure to air as well as noise pollution for sensitive land uses located adjacent to sources of pollution. These barriers include trees and plantings along roadsides and shrubs and plantings along the perimeter of stationary pollution sources.14
Reduce Exposure from Water
Contamination
Suggested strategies to address water contamination and ensure that all DAC residents have access to safe, clean, affordable drinking water include:
] Ensure any water systems with unsafe drinking water have emergency supplies available, such as bottled water or in-home filtration. ] Ensure that low-income domestic well users are aware of and have access to emergency bottled water or tanks in case their wells run dry.
] Prioritize applying for state and federal funding sources to upgrade water infrastructure in communities that have contaminated drinking water. ] Limit the drilling of new wells for industrial uses in areas where groundwater is the primary source of drinking water for nearby households or communities. Drilling should also be limited in areas where groundwater is contaminated or is at low levels as demonstrated by dry wells or wells with low water pressure. ] Ensure sources of drinking water are protected from contamination by creating source water protection policies. For more information, visit https://www.epa.gov/sourcewaterprotection.
] Remediate and clean up identified hazardous sites that impact or potentially impact water quality.
] Support existing and potentially expand water recharging areas to maintain healthy groundwater supplies and limit or eliminate the creation of impermeable surfaces or obstacles for surface water to reach recharging areas.
] Assist small public water systems by building their technical, managerial, and financial capacity to comply with state and federal drinking water regulations and achieve long-term sustainability. 78 SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit
] Work with nearby cities to consolidate public water systems, or extend water service from an existing system to communities that lack access to clean drinking water, such as disadvantaged unincorporated communities. ] Support the construction of wastewater systems wherever practicable, in order to limit groundwater contamination by poorly maintained septic systems and/or the overconcentration of leach-field systems.
] Provide financial assistance to low-income homeowners for septic system repair in order to limit groundwater contamination by poorly maintained septic systems.
] Restore forest health through ecologically sound forest management. Overgrown forests not only pose a risk of catastrophic fire, but can significantly reduce water yield.
] Protect and restore degraded stream and meadow ecosystems to assist in natural water management and improved habitat. Meadows provide a natural storage opportunity, critically important with a changing climate, and properly functioning stream systems reduce downstream sedimentation and enhance critical aquatic habitat. ] Support and expand funding for protecting strategically important lands within watersheds to ensure that conversion of these lands does not have a negative impact on water resources. By working with willing landowners, protection of key lands from conversion will result in a healthier watershed by reducing polluted runoff and maintaining a properly functioning ecosystem.15
Chapter 5 / Develop Goals, Policies, and Objectives
79 5.2 / Promote Public Facilities

5.2.a / Understanding Public
Facilities and Environmental
Justice
SB 1000 refers to public facilities as “public improvements, public services, and community amenities” in accordance with the Government Code Section 66000. This includes a broad range of categories, such as emergency facilities, infrastructure, transportation, school facilities, open space, and government buildings.

Many DACs do not have adequate access to a wide range of necessary facilities, such as health centers and functional wastewater systems.

In some areas, communities that lack such basic infrastructure as sidewalks and street lights might be right next to other communities that have full public services. There may also be a lack of facilities that improve quality of life and improve public health, such as parks and community centers, or the facilities that do exist are dilapidated and in poor condition, presenting potential safety hazards.

These challenges create a range of health and quality-of-life issues. For example, lack of recreational and open spaces is a significant driver of poor physical and mental health. Other issues—such as a failure to meet regulatory codes for wastewater systems, inadequate flood control, or lack of nearby health centers—present acute health risks. Finally, a lack of adequate public facilities or services prevents a community from being able to grow if they so choose.

Both state law and SB 1000 stress the importance of an adequate and equitable distribution of public facilities to “enhance community quality of life and allow a community to reach its full potential.”16 Government Code Section 65302(a) requires land use elements to plan for the use of land for “public buildings and grounds,” such as community centers, libraries, and clinics. All convey important community benefits and can contribute to a better quality of life. Below are a range of EJ-specific issues and strategies related to public facilities that planners could consider.

5.2.b / Assess Existing Conditions
This objective seeks to ensure that DACs have appropriate access to safe, clean, public facilities. Assessing the existing conditions of local public facilities is a three-step process: Develop an inventory of existing facilities; assess public facilities according to access, demand, and compliance; and identify opportunity sites for future public facilities.

Inventory and Map Existing Public Facilities
Planners can start by mapping and creating an inventory of existing public and quasi-public facilities, then assessing the need, access, and distribution of public facilities. This second step is essential for determining deficiencies in levels of service and identifying particular areas where public improvements, services, and facilities are needed.

Public facilities are defined per Government Code Section 66000 as public improvements, public services, and community facilities. Below is a list of such facilities:17
Public Improvements
] Water distribution, treatment, and drainage facilities ] Solid waste, liquid waste, recycling, and composting facilities ] Streets and roads
] Public utilities
] Flood control structures
80 SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit
Public Services
] Transit services and facilities (e.g., rail, bus, and ferry) ] Hospitals and emergency medical/trauma centers
] Capital improvements
] Emergency services and public safety
Community Facilities
] City and county government buildings
] Parks, open space, trails, and greenbelts (see “Promote Physical Activity” in this section) ] Recreation facilities (including senior and youth centers) and community centers ] Daycare centers
] Libraries, museums, cultural centers, science centers Assess Conditions and Distribution of
Public Facilities
Once facilities are identified, planners can begin to assess their adequacy and current conditions. This assessment can be organized according to the following topics:
] Distribution. Is there an equitable distribution of public facilities across communities in a jurisdiction? Areas that are traditionally underserved by public facilities, including DACs and sensitive populations or land uses, should be identified so that public facilities deficits may be established. Barriers to equitable distribution and access should be identified.
] Access. Do residents in DACs have access (vehicular, public transit, or pedestrian/bicycle) to public facilities? The closer and more accessible public facilities, such as schools, parks, libraries and child care facilities are to people’s residences, the more likely they are to walk, bicycle, or take transit to them which can bring great health benefits. Measures to promote public transit and walking/bicycle connectivity, such as more compact street networks with shorter blocks, connected street networks, and fewer vehicular travel lanes on major roads have correlations with reduced obesity, diabetes, high blood pressure, and heart disease among residents.18 ] Vehicular access. Planners should assess how many households do not have access to vehicles to reach public facilities. ] Transit. Assess existing transit routes, levels of service, and affordability, with a focus on DAC access to transit service and daily costs. Types of services may include, but are not limited to, trains, light rail, buses, shuttles, and ferries.
] Pedestrian and Bicycling Access. Assess where appropriate for certain facilities, such as parks or community facilities. Section

5.6 suggests direction for how to promote walking and physical activity through equity mapping analysis. Items to assess include walkable distance, continuous path of travel, and pedestrian amenities along travel routes. A general walkable distance is between quarter to a half mile, while comfortable bicycling distance is within two miles.
] Conditions and Regulatory Compliance. Do public facilities in DACs meet regulatory and safety standards, and are in they in good working condition?
] Environmental Impacts. Are the public facilities contributing to pollution burdens? Are they installed or built with a commitment to minimizing environmental and climate impacts?
] Operational Sustainability and Interagency Coordination. Is there both sustained funding and long-term maintenance infrastructure for the facilities? Are all the agencies that provide various services aware of DAC needs and issues?
Chapter 5 / Develop Goals, Policies, and Objectives
81 ] Future Demand. Are the public facilities planned to meet needs of DACs? Forecasting future demand of public facilities by underserved areas may be needed. ] For specific methods to assess levels of services and future demand specific facilities, OPR’s General Plan Guidelines provides guidance on such topics.

Identify Public Facility Opportunity Sites
Identify and map sites and land that could serve as locations for potential future public facilities. Types of sites could include, and are not limited to, vacant land, publicly owned land, and underutilized parcels. Evaluate the appropriateness of various public facilities on each site with respect to the location of DACs, accessibility, and possible impacts on DACs.

For example, locating sanitation and waste facilities within sensitive range of DACs would increase pollution exposure and therefore be contrary to EJ planning principles and goals.

5.2.c / Policy Framework for
Promoting Public Facilities
Using the assessment framework above, this section provides recommendation to ensure a DAC has appropriate access to clean and safe public facilities and maintains protections for sensitive land uses.

Provide Equitable Distribution
Equitably distributed public facilities will improve the quality of life for sensitive land uses and populations. Several recommended EJ policies, drawn from multiple sources, provide guidance on development of policies for incorporating promotion of public facilities into General Plans:
] Establish or improve public services in existing DACs. (Portland Comprehensive Plan Update, Policy 8.11)
] Coordinate provision of public services to DACs and areas of newly permitted development so that provision of any given service does not stimulate development that significantly hinders the City’s ability to provide other services at uniform levels. (Portland Comprehensive Plan Update, Policy 8.12) ] Ensure the equitable distribution of beneficial public facilities, prioritizing new facilities in traditionally underserved areas. (OPR General Plan Guidelines) ] Increase access to diverse, high-quality parks, green space, recreational facilities and natural environments for traditionally underserved communities. (Jurupa Valley Environmental Justice Element, Policy EJ-3.14)
] Provide a range of health services in locations that are convenient and accessible (walkable) to the community. (National City General Plan, Policy HEJ-6.1)
] Ensure that emergency preparedness and disaster response programs serve all parts of the City/County, and are accessible to communities speaking languages other than English. (Jurupa Valley Environmental Justice Element, EJ-3.17) Ensure Access
] Encourage local transit providers to establish and maintain routes and services that provide the community with convenient access to health service facilities, where feasible. (National City General Plan, Policy HEJ-6.2)
] Encourage businesses to provide and maintain a free shuttle service to health care facilities for residents, where feasible. (National City General Plan, Policy HEJ-6.3)19
] Encourage transit providers to establish and maintain routes to jobs, shopping, schools, parks and healthcare facilities that are convenient to low-income and minority populations. (Jurupa Valley Environmental Justice Element, EJ-3.5) 82 SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit
Ensure Good Working Conditions and Regulatory
Compliance
] Ensure public facilities and services remain in compliance with state and federal regulations. (Portland Comprehensive Plan Update, Policy 8.16) ] Prioritize seeking public funding to upgrade public facilities in underserved communities. ] Ensure public facilities meet state and federal environmental standards. ] Restrict sensitive public facilities, such as schools and hospitals, from being located near infrastructure or industrial facilities that pose a hazard to human health and safety.
] Evaluate public facilities for health hazards or major sources of contamination and create a plan to address any contamination or health hazards identified.

Minimize Environmental Impacts
Local governments should seek to provide public facilities and systems that are low cost and do not lay high energy burdens on DACs over time. Policies that ensure that public facilities balance impacts to the environment and prevent harm to communities are also important. See Section 5.1 (Reducing Pollution Exposure) for ways to provide adequate buffers between polluting land uses and sensitive populations. The following suggested policies can also provide guidance:
] Adopt an energy resources plan, including conservation measures, alternative energy sources, and cost-effective supplies. (OPR General Plan Guidelines) ] Promote the use of green building practices in new and existing developments to maximize energy efficiency and conservation. (National City General Plan, Policy CS-7.1) ] Increase the resilience of high‐risk and critical infrastructure through monitoring, planning, investment, adaptive technology, and continuity planning. (Portland Comprehensive Plan Update, Policy 8.21) ] Reduce the energy and resource use, waste, and carbon emissions from facilities necessary to serve designated land uses. (Portland Comprehensive Plan Update, Policy 8.29)
] Protect, enhance, and restore natural systems and features for their infrastructure service and other values. (Portland Comprehensive Plan Update, Policy 8.30)
Operational Sustainability and Interagency
Coordination
Development of public facilities without adequate interagency coordination may result in service deficiencies. For example, transportation departments that do not coordinate with planning departments may not know to prioritize extension of transit routes to communities most in need. Awareness of goals and priorities between multiple departments and agencies in a local government can help ensure that adopted EJ goals and policies are met. Several sample policies can provide guidance on ensuring interagency coordination:
] Maintain interagency coordination agreements with neighboring jurisdictions and partner agencies that provide urban public facilities and services within the City/County to ensure effective and efficient service delivery. (Portland Comprehensive Plan Update, Policy 8.4)
] Coordinate with jurisdictions and agencies outside of where the City provides services under agreement. (Portland Comprehensive Plan Update, Policy 8.5)
] Public service coordination. Coordinate with the planning efforts of agencies providing public education, public health services, community centers, library services, justice services, flood protection, energy, and technology and communications services, as appropriate. (Portland Comprehensive Plan Update, Policy 8.6) Chapter 5 / Develop Goals, Policies, and Objectives
83 Meet Future Demand
New public facilities that are able to serve the needs of underserved communities should be prioritized, such as new utility lines and infrastructure, transit routes, roads, schools, open space, and emergency services. Incorporating these goals into an EJ Element or EJ policies would help ensure underserved communities continue to grow with other neighborhoods and benefit from future development. 84 SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit

5.3 / Promote Food Access

5.3.a / Understanding Food Access
and Environmental Justice
“Food access” is a complex concept that includes at least three related topics: (1) nutritionally adequate, culturally appropriate, and affordable food; (2) income sufficient to purchase healthy food; and (3) proximity and ability to travel to a food source that offers affordable, nutritionally adequate, and culturally appropriate food.20
Ensuring adequate food access is challenging in many communities in California. Low-income areas, both urban and rural, often lack supermarkets with a large selection of healthy foods. As a result, many residents do not have access to nutritional foods, which in turn exacerbates public health challenges. More than one in four children in California live in households with limited or uncertain access to adequate food.21 People cope with food insecurity by consuming nutrient-poor but calorie-rich foods, or they go hungry, or both, with consequences ranging from micronutrient malnutrition to obesity.22 Food-insecure children are more likely to experience developmental, cognitive, behavioral, and mental health problems. Among pregnant women, food insecurity is also associated with physical and mental health problems, as well as birth complications. Children and communities of color are disproportionately affected by food insecurity.23
Food access is also closely linked to individual food security, defined as one’s ability to obtain enough food to lead an active, healthy life,24 and community food security (CFS), in which all community residents obtain a safe, culturally acceptable, nutritionally adequate diet through a sustainable food system that maximizes community self-reliance and social justice. Promoting food access would directly support CFS. The Community Food Security Council, a nonprofit organization, utilizes five components to assess CFS, including food access:25 ] Access to Food. Assesses a community’s access to food through evaluating existing food source locations and a community’s means of traveling there as well as types of foods available. ] Hunger and Nutrition. Assesses the ability of community members to adequately meet their food needs, measuring factors such as usage of food stamps, WIC vouchers, rent burden, and rates of diet-related diseases. ] Local Agriculture. Assesses existing local agriculture and the potential for it to provide food for the community, while also identifying outlets such as farmers markets and community-supported agriculture. ] Community Resources. Assesses community food production sites, organizations, services, and food production skills of community. ] Food-related Programs, Coordination, and Management. Assesses available funding, policy barriers to CFS, and presence of existing food policies, as well as interagency coordination.

The American Planning Association’s 2012 report, Planning for Food Access and Community-Based Food System, is a good resource for understanding food access.

5.3.b / Assess Existing Conditions
Evaluate Food Access Conditions
Community food access conditions may be evaluated using the following techniques and indicators. Local governments are free to add additional context-appropriate indicators.
] Identify and map existing food outlets, including supermarkets, according to location, type, and cost of foods and produce. ] Identify means of access to food sources, whether by car, transit, or other. Identify barriers to shopping, such as situations where people have to carry groceries home. Measure percentage of local Chapter 5 / Develop Goals, Policies, and Objectives
85 residents lacking cars, including special populations such as homebound seniors. Evaluate level to which transit service meets community food shopping needs. ] Survey cultural preferences to identify food preference of community. Survey available selection of fresh food at existing local supermarkets and other food outlets food outlets. ] Survey existing prices of food at existing local supermarkets and other food outlets.
] Identify opportunity sites that can potentially improve food access.

This could include location of potential supermarkets, local agriculture and farmers markets, mobile food vendors, and/or healthy food advocacy organizations.

Depending on findings, areas may be considered food deserts, which are marked by low access to affordable and healthy food. The 2008 U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Farm Bill defined a food desert as an “area in the United States with limited access to affordable and nutritious food, particularly such an area composed of predominantly lower income neighborhoods and communities.” Other categories of food insecurity include:
] Food swamps. Areas that lack healthy food outlets but have an abundance of unhealthy food sources such as fast-food restaurants. ] Food hinterlands. Areas with low food access and located outside of centrally located food deserts, typically in less dense and dispersed suburban areas.

The USDA developed a Food Access Research Atlas identifying food deserts in the United States at the census tract level: https://www.ers. usda.gov/data/fooddesert.

5.3.c / Policy Framework for
Promoting Food Access
This section provides resources, recommended policies, and sample policies that have been adopted as part of adopted General Plans that can address identified gaps in food access26 as well as policies collected by the American Planning Association in their report, Planning for Food Access and Community-Based Food Systems: A National Scan and Evaluation of Local Comprehensive and Sustainability Plans. 27 Another
resource which provides recommended land use policies is a collection of research and publications by ChangeLab Solutions under Creating Healthier Food Environments on their website.28
Expand Food Access
] Prioritize healthy food supplies in economic development efforts, especially in areas where a healthy food supply, farmer’s market, or community garden is not located within a half to a quarter mile away. (National City Policy HEJ-4.1)
] Encourage the development of healthy food establishments in areas with a high concentration of fast food establishments, convenience stores, and liquor stores. (National City Policy HEJ-4.2) ] Encourage new development and redevelopment to include a healthy food supply or edible garden, or be located within a quarter to a half-mile of a healthy food supply, where feasible and appropriate. (National City Policy HEJ-4.5) ] Encourage and facilitate the establishment and operation of a farmer’s market(s), farm stands, ethnic markets, mobile health food markets, and convenience/corner stores that sell healthy foods including fresh produce. (National City Policy HEJ-4.6) ] Expand the number of low-income Community-Supported Agriculture models to increase fresh food access in low-income areas, while fairly compensating farmers for their products. (APA) 86 SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit
] Ensure that [the majority or percentage] of residents live within a five-minute walk of a basket of fresh produce. (APA)
] Provide healthy food options at all municipal buildings and at city/ county events where food is made available by the city/county. (APA)
] Provide incentives for the production, distribution and procurement of foods from local farms. (APA) ] Review, and revise when necessary, City regulations in order to provide a hospitable regulatory environment for local foods operations including farmers’ markets; home, community, and school gardens; restaurants; on-site and industrial composting; and year-round food production, processing, aggregation, and distribution efforts. (APA) ] Re-evaluate ordinances that regulate where and how locally grown produce can be sold or distributed to the public. (APA) ] Maximize multimodal access to fresh food by encouraging grocery stores, healthy corner stores, and outdoor markets at key transit nodes and within transit-oriented development zones. (APA) ] Identify opportunities to incorporate open spaces suitable for new farmers’ markets into larger development projects. (APA) ] Encourage and simplify the process of developing edible gardens and healthy food facilities within a quarter- or half-mile of housing development sites. (EHC)
] Encourage existing liquor stores, convenience stores, and ethnic markets located in or within one-half mile of DACs to stock fresh produce and other healthy foods. (EHC)
] Expand mobile vending regulations to include as many areas as possible and encourage fresh food vending. (EHC) ] Ensure transportation systems link customers to grocery stores and other sources of healthy foods. (EHC)
] Promote use of food assistance programs at farmers’ markets. (OFPC)
Increase Health and Nutrition
] Restrict the location and amount of fast food restaurants and other food retailers that promote low-nutrient-dense foods through land use and other controls, especially near sensitive land uses. (EHC, APA)
] Mandate that parks and recreation facilities provide healthy food alternatives in vending machines. (EHC)
] Create environments that support breastfeeding during the critical first six months of life. (EHC)
] Require new development to provide and maintain fresh drinking water fountains, where feasible and appropriate. (National City Policy HEJ-4.7) ] Inform low income families and people experiencing homelessness about food assistance programs. (National City Policy HEJ-4.8) ] Promote messages regarding healthy eating habits and food choices. (National City Policy HEJ-5.1) ] Set up school-based programs that integrate gardening and nutrition, and make the connection between healthy food choices and locally-grown fresh produce. (EHC)
Support Local Agriculture and Equitable
Food Production
] Protect and expand and reduce permitting barriers to urban agriculture. ] Allow edible landscaping and community gardens for suitable public and private land, as well as new large-scale residential and mixeduse development projects.29 (EHC) ] Explore opportunities for Community-Supported Agriculture within the community. (National City Policy HEJ-4.10)
Chapter 5 / Develop Goals, Policies, and Objectives
87 ] Reform immigration policies to recognize the importance and needs of temporary agricultural workers. Ensure that farmworkers can anonymously file complaints of employer misconduct, attack abus- es associated with labor contractors, and improve labor law compli- ance and communication. (APA)
] Promote programs and strategies, especially cooperative solutions that create better living conditions for farm laborers, including im- proved labor housing, living wages, affordable healthcare, and hu- man services for workers and their families. (APA)
Develop Food-Related Programs,
Coordination, and Management ] Assess and plan for local food processing, wholesaling, and dis -
tribution facilities to connect local agriculture to markets such as retailers, restaurants, schools, hospitals, and other institutions and encourage these markets to carry and serve locally grown or har- vested foods. (National City Policy HEJ-4.9)
] Expand waste managements contract to include composting and food scrap recycling. (EHC)
] Develop “environmentally preferable purchasing,” or EPP protocols, which refer to “procurement of goods and services that have a re- duced effect on human health and the environment as compared to competing goods and services serving the same purpose.”30 (OFPC) ] Develop a “Fresh Food Financing Initiative,” or FFFI, which is a local and regional initiative program to increase sources of healthy food access in underserved communities, such as supermarkets.31 These may also be known as Healthy Food Financing Initiatives, or HFFI.32 (OFPC)
88 SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit

5.4 / Promote Safe and
Sanitary Homes

5.4.a / Understanding Safe
and Sanitary Homes and
Environmental Justice
There are three important dimensions to understanding barriers to safe and sanitary homes in an EJ context—housing conditions, housing affordability, and land-use compatibility.

Housing Conditions
The condition of housing impacts residents’ health and well-being, and can include a number of factors ranging from toxic building materials, exposure to climate variation such as excess heat or cold, poor air quality, and moisture intrusion from floods or rising sea levels. Residents of DACs may live in structures built before the adoption of building standards and regulations that ensure new homes are free from pollutants such as lead and asbestos. These homes are likely to contain pre-existing conditions that lead to unhealthy living conditions. Toxics, such as lead paint and asbestos, are prevalent in old housing units and have significant health impacts. Many DACs have a higher proportion of old housing stock and are thus disproportionately exposed to these health threats, including associated respiratory conditions. Older housing stock might also have poor ventilation, leading to uncomfortable indoor temperatures and excessive moisture, which can also lead to mold. Other indoor housing conditions that can be common in older and less expensive housing include pests and vermin.33 Finally, overcrowding is a serious issue that impacts safe and sanitary homes. According to the World Health Organization, overcrowding poses health risks by creating unsanitary conditions that can contribute to the spread of disease.34 Housing Affordability
A cost-burdened household is one in which the tenant spends more than 30 percent of their income towards housing, impacting residents’ health by reducing resources available for needs such as health care and healthy food.

Land Use Compatibility
Housing may be next to or near sources of pollution or health hazards.

Proximity to pollution sources impacts housing and residential neighborhoods, which are considered sensitive land uses. Some housing may not have adequate public services and facilities, such as wastewater systems, which creates unsafe housing conditions. Since policies to address incompatible land uses have been discussed in Section 5.1 (Reduce Pollution Exposure) and 5.2 (Promote Public Facilities), they will not be discussed here.

5.4.b / Assess Existing Conditions
Survey Indoor Conditions
Local governments may assess housing conditions in their communities using surveys and existing development records. Planners should pay attention to the following specific issues, which are prevalent in DACs.

Lead Hazards
Lead contamination can be found in paint, dust, soil, and water and is a health hazard, particularly for children under 6 years old and pregnant women. Homes built before 1978 or near a freeway or busy roadway where leaded gasoline and exhaust could contaminate soils should be tested for the presence of lead.35 Lead inspectors and assessors certified by the State of California are available to conduct home inspections.

Resources for understanding how best to test for lead contamination and where to find State-certified Inspectors/Assessors are provided by Chapter 5 / Develop Goals, Policies, and Objectives
89 the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) at https://www. cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CCDPHP/DEODC/CLPPB/Pages/home_test. aspx.

Asbestos Hazards
Local governments may generate an estimate of asbestos hazards by determining location of residential buildings built in or before 1980.

These structures are likely to contain asbestos by way of “presumed asbestos containing materials,” as defined by the Occupational Safety and Hazards Administration.36
Overcrowding
Though overcrowding is generally an underreported issue, the US Census Bureau collects data such as persons per room, per bedroom, unit square footage per person, persons per room by unit square footage per person, and demographics per persons per bedroom.37 This data should not be regarded as definitive but can be used to determine areas that require further assessment for issues of overcrowding.

Mold and Dampness
Household molds are microscopic organisms that grow on organic matter in moist environments, such as when buildings are damp. Inhalation of mold can affect health by causing allergies, irritations, inflammations, associated respiratory infections, and death. CDPH has concluded that the presence of mold creates unhealthy indoor environments in schools, workplaces, and residences, which may also render living spaces and residences substandard to code inspectors.38 Household mold may be prevalent in DACs, and local governments should determine to what extent mold is impacting these communities. CDPH identified four indicators for when mold and dampness may be present and pose health risks: 1) visible water damage, 2) damp materials, 3) visible mold, or 4) mold odor.39 Resources for understanding the issue of mold and dampness is provided by CDPH at https://archive.cdph.ca.gov/ programs/IAQ/Pages/IndoorMold.aspx.

Pests and Rodents
Household pests may take many forms, including cockroaches, mites, rodents, and bedbugs. The presence of pests can cause various health effects. Insects and cockroaches can leave debris that trigger asthma attacks in those who are sensitive to cockroach antigen. Concentrations of dust mites and other allergens can cause asthma attacks in children.40 Rodents can carry viruses and/or bacteria that can cause diseases in humans.41 The presence of pests and their health risks may be more prevalent in DACs if building conditions make them susceptible to pest invasion. Additionally, climate change may worsen the issue of pests and rodents if warmer temperatures and environmental changes increase pest populations and migrations.42 Local governments should determine the extent to which pest populations are impacting DACs in their area. Inspectors licensed by California Structural Pest Control Board are available to conduct assessments. Additional resources for understanding pests can be found on their website at http://www. pestboard.ca.gov/.

Evaluate Housing Affordability
The Maximum Rent Standard—30 percent or more of household income spent on rent—could be used to assess the level at which housing costs are negatively impacting local residents’ lives. Those exceeding the standard could be designated as “cost burdened.”43 The American Community Survey provides data on household rent and income at the Census tract level,44 which could be used to determine if communities are cost burdened. The American Housing Survey provides further information on housing topics related to affordability.

However, some recent studies and articles45 have criticized the standard 30 percent affordability ratio, such as for oversimplifying the issue of housing affordability.46 In recent years, researchers have created additional tools and metrics that can not only measure cost-burdened households, but also affordability in general (e.g., paying for necessary goods such as food, health care, child care, transportation, etc.). A few of these comprehensive tools are:
90 SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit
] Family Budget Calculator by the Economic Policy Institute. http:// www.epi.org/resources/budget/
] The Self-Sufficiency Standard by the University of Washington’s Center for Women’s Welfare. http://selfsufficiencystandard.org/ california
] The Housing and Transportation Affordability Index by the Center for Neighborhood Technology. https://htaindex.cnt.org/
Energy efficiency of homes may also be considered in the topic of housing affordability. Households that are energy inefficient will spend more each month on utility bills, which in turn increases the burden of their housing costs. A few options for analyzing household energy consumption include contacting the local utility company to calculate average utility payments or creating a survey of homes in the community.

5.4.c / Policy Framework for Safe
and Sanitary Homes
Unhealthy Housing Conditions
Policies that can address the range of unhealthy housing conditions fall into the following categories.

Regulate
] Implement lead-screening practices.
] Establish safe work practices for lead workers; establish an easily accessible lead-safe housing registry.
] Incorporate a healthy homes inspection into existing code enforcement inspection procedures to identify and require remedy of pollutants. ] Regulate and incentivize buyers and renters to control lead hazards.

Displacement and Gentrification
Gentrification is a process whereby the value of land and buildings in a particular area increases over time and usually occurs when developers, building owners, and businesses invest in a previously-disinvested area. These investments may also be supported by public subsidies.

Gentrification can result in displacement of existing residents and businesses located within a previously-disinvested community if the price of housing and commercial space increases above the amount that is affordable to those residents. These concepts are important for local governments to consider when implementing SB 1000 as public investments may have the unintended consequence of gentrifying existing communities and place residents and businesses that they intended to benefit at risk of displacement.1
Displacement and gentrification have health impacts. Displaced residents may end up further away from quality employment opportunities, schools, and health-promoting resources such as healthy food access and parks.2 This can lead to loss in sense of community and social capital, increased travel time to services and jobs, and negative health effects resulting from more sedentary behavior. Gentrification can lead to households with high housing costs to spend less on health care, medications, food, or other needs, called the “heat or eat dilemma”; or accepting poor quality housing that has mold or pests that can trigger asthma, or has dangerous appliances that can cause fires or carbon monoxide poisoning. There are potential mental health and performance impacts on both children and adults as well, including behavioral problems, educational delays, 1 California Environmental Justice Alliance. (2015). Community vision is the heart of transformative climate communities. Retrieved April 8, 2017, from http://caleja.org/2017/05/community-vision-is-the-heart-of-transformative-climate-communities/ 2 Pollack, S., Bluestone, B., & Billingham, C. (2010). Maintaining diversity in America’s transit-rich neighborhoods: Tools for equitable neighborhood change. Durkakis Center for Urban and Regional Policy, Northeastern University.

Chapter 5 / Develop Goals, Policies, and Objectives
91 EJ policies can be complementary to these topics by ensuring broad and balanced public participation in the decision making process for future public investments, as well prioritize improvements and programs that benefits DACs in a way that builds their capacity for ownership over both public and private spaces. Several examples of strategies can help prevent displacement from occurring as a result of public investments in DACs.

The Seattle-based Housing Affordability and Livability (HALA) Model is a strategy to address housing affordability within the Seattle. The HALA Model includes four goals: 1) Growth with Affordability, 2) Preservation, Equity and Anti-Displacement, 3) More Resources for Affordable Housing, and 4) Promote Efficient and Innovative Development. The Model provides objectives and recommendations under each goal, and tracks the status of implementation and public input activities. Strategies under the Preservation, Equity and Anti-Displacement Goal include the following:
] Strategic acquisition and financing of existing multi-family housing ] Engage private owners with new financing tools & technical assistance ] Mitigate city code requirements of unreinforced masonry buildings ] Rental inspection ordinance
] Pursue local preservation property tax exemption
] Create a low-cost rehab loan/shallow subsidy program
] “Notice of Sale” ordinance6
6 City of Seattle, WA. (2018). Notice of Intent to Sell. Retrieved April 13, 2018 from https://www.seattle.gov/housing/intent-to-sell school absences, and lower math and reading achievement.3,4,5 To address this, local governments can consider a number of antidisplacement strategies to limit the consequences of gentrification on residents and legacy small businesses:
] Inclusionary zoning
] No net loss of affordable housing (within half-mile of public investments) ] Gentrification studies
] Renter protections, such as rent stabilization and just cause eviction ordinances
] Incentive rezoning regulations that fund inclusionary housing ] Jobs-housing linkage fees
] Foreclosure assistance
] Value capture strategies
] Developments dedicated to affordable housing, including limited-equity housing cooperatives, community land trusts, nonprofit-run housing, or city or county-owned lands that provide affordable housing ] Supporting community-led programs to prevent against displacement, such as tenants’ rights education 3 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2013). Healthy places: Health effects of gentrification. Retrieved from https://www.cdc.gov/healthyplaces/healthtopics/gentrification.htm 4 Bay Area Regional Health Inequities Initiative. (2016). Displacement brief.

Retrieved from http://barhii.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/BARHII-displacement-brief.pdf 5 Causa Justa: Just Cause. (2014). Development without displacement.

Retrieved from http://cjjc.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/development-without-displacement.pdf 92 SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit
] Ensure building and site design provides good moisture control through proper site drainage, roof drainage, natural ventilation (and mechanical where necessary), and sound plumbing systems.47 Provide
] Facilitate remediation via lead-hazard control repairs. ] Prioritize remediation in households where children under the age of six may be present.

Support
] Identify funding for education and remediation of lead and other housing hazards to benefit low-income families.
] Encourage the use of green, healthy building materials that are toxin free. ] Raise awareness about the risks associated with lead-based paint, including by distributing information about best practices to reduce and eliminate sources of indoor air pollution.
] Educate and/or provide resources for weatherization measures that can improve housing conditions. See endnotes for more information.48 ] Support collaborations between public health professionals, environmental health inspectors, and building departments to connect clients with professionals who can assess and address multiple aspects of housing that affect health and safety.

Public Spaces
] In collaboration with schools, require the use of safe cleaning products in all day care and educational facilities to improve indoor air quality and minimize the risk of toxic exposure to children, teachers, and cleaning staff.49,50
Housing Affordability
A General Plan typically addresses the topic of affordability, including energy efficiency, in the housing element, which is adopted separately from other elements and must meet specific requirements of the Housing and Community Development Department. An EJ Element may, however, address housing affordability in several ways:
] Establish protections for low-income renters, including requiring 60-day notice for rent increases and funds programs that focus on outreach, information, and enforcement of tenant protection laws. ] Create requirements to promote the construction of affordable housing in conjunction with market-rate development in DACs. ] Include rent control policies in DACs.
] Create a housing trust fund that leverages developer fees and other fees to fund new affordable housing projects. In a similar vein, San Francisco’s Small Site Acquisition Fund assists the City in acquiring small, multifamily rental buildings in order to convert them into affordable housing.51,52 ] Promote equitable transit-oriented development, described further in Section 5.8, Equitable Development and Design.

Chapter 5 / Develop Goals, Policies, and Objectives
93 5.5 / Promote Physical
Activity

5.5.a / Understanding Physical
Activity and Environmental Justice
The built environment plays a large role in determining whether communities have opportunities for physical activity. This in turn has an extremely large impact on health. Without places to walk, play, and exercise, people can develop a range of health issues.53 The built environment in DACs can be impacted by years of poor land-use planning, neglect, fewer public investments, and little to no long-term planning. This means there are often less opportunities for formal and informal recreation. An EJ framework on physical activity analyzes both the reach of active transportation networks and the distribution of parks, open space, and urban green spaces. “Active transportation” refers to forms of transportation that are non-motorized, thus promoting physical activity.

Promoting physical activity can bring a wide range of positive health benefits, including mortality risk reduction, disease prevention, cardiorespiratory fitness, metabolic health, and cognitive function in children, adolescents, and adults of all genders and across ethnicities.54 Because low-income communities and communities of color are likely to be more dependent on walking, bicycling and public transit, and also experience the highest rates of chronic diseases, they stand to gain the most from shifting to active transportation. Therefore, policies that promote walking and bicycling not only improve public health but social equity as well.

5.5.b / Assess Existing Conditions
Evaluate Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities
The following are recommended indicators to assess pedestrian networks and bicycle facilities within a community:
] Accessibility per ADA Standards and sidewalk hazards—path of travel, crosswalks, and curb ramps.
] Bicycle and pedestrian collision locations and other traffic hazards. ] Public realm amenities—trash receptacles, benches, shade/shade structures, and lighting.
] Landscaping—trees, landscaping, and shading along pedestrian routes.
] Bicycle and pedestrian routes, facilities, and infrastructure. ] Playing fields and spaces allowing for activities that are reflective of local community preferences.

Map Equitable Distribution of Facilities
Conducive to Physical Activity
Planners should identify and map parks, open space, recreational facilities, and other locations where people are active. In addition to creating an inventory of facilities, it is also important to analyze their distribution within a DAC and in comparison to other areas.

The University of Southern California Sustainable Cities Program published the Parks and Park Funding in Los Angeles: An Equity Mapping Analysis, which includes several methods to analyze access to parks and other recreational facilities. The following are recommended indicators:
] Accessibility to parks, open space, and/or recreation facilities by walking within half-mile distance, bicycling, driving, and transit. 94 SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit
] Available amenities at each existing park, open space, and recreation facility. ] Park acres per 1,000 residents.55
] In addition, the Trust for Public Land has developed methods and resources for planners to assess, plan, and employ practices to increase park accessibility. More information can be obtained through their ParkScore website: http://parkscore.tpl.org.
] Planners should also map opportunity sites—vacant and public lots that could provide opportunities for developing new parks, open space, and recreational facilities.

5.5.c / Policy Framework for
Improving Physical Activity
An EJ Element can include goals, objectives, and policies that promote physical activity by investing in new facilities or maintaining existing facilities in disadvantaged communities.

Access and Connectivity
Policies related to access and connectivity are intended to promote accessible, physical activities that meet the needs of all community members. For example, policies can remove barriers to outdoor physical activity and provide the means necessary for all community members to safely walk and bike. Policies can include the following:
] Apply “universal design principles” in the design and review of development and redevelopment projects, where feasible. Universal design is the “design of products and environments to be usable by all people, to the greatest extent possible, without the need for adaptation or specialized design.”56
] Prioritize creation of parks and open space in areas that are determined to be park poor. ] Increase awareness of the importance of physical activity to health. ] Facilitate pedestrian and bicycle access to parks and open space in DACs through infrastructure investments and improvements. ] Partner with local school districts and non-profit organizations to improve access to bicycles, helmets, and related equipment for lower income families, as well as joint use of school properties for parks and recreational facilities.
] Require a complete pedestrian network plan that allows for safe travel between all areas and destinations of the community. ] Require the provision of on-site bicycle facilities in all new development.57 ] Partner with transit agencies to ensure that parks and recreational facilities are accessible to low-income and minority populations.58 Urban Greening
Urban greening can promote physical activity through the beautification of existing surface infrastructure and through new infrastructure, such as community gardens. Separate from traditional recreational facilities, urban green spaces allow areas for informal and formal recreation. Urban greening also has environmental benefits: it can help reduce impacts of climate change by mitigating heat waves, has storm water management benefits, and can also reduce exposure to air contaminants. General Plan policies to support urban greening include:
] Identify specific green infrastructure projects located in DACs. ] Promote collaboration with community-based organizations in developing and maintaining programming. ] Encourage the planting of street trees and other landscaping. ] Identify vacant lots and underutilized public land that can be turned into neighborhood-run community gardens.

Chapter 5 / Develop Goals, Policies, and Objectives
95 Complete Streets
The California Complete Streets Act of 2008 (AB 1358), requires a local jurisdiction to plan for a multimodal transportation network in a General Plan. The term multimodal refers to all modes and users of transportation, such as walking and biking and children, the elderly, and disabled. This law furthers the objective of SB 1000 by aiming to increase the health of residents in a community by promoting physical activity. Therefore, a General Plan adopted after 2008 must include goals, objectives, and policies that promote physical activity through a multimodal transportation network. Policy examples include requiring streets that balance all modes of travel, and traffic-calming measures to improve pedestrian and bicycle safety.59
96 SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit

5.6 / Promote Civil (i.e.,
“Community”) Engagement
in the Public DecisionMaking Process
This section describes community engagement–related objectives and policies that can be included in an EJ Element or in EJ-related policies throughout a General Plan. This section is distinct from Chapter 4, which describes recommended community engagement strategies. However, policies in this section complement and build off the strategies in Chapter 4.

5.6.a / Understanding Community
Engagement and Environmental
Justice
Environmental justice planning seeks to create effective policies that ensure all members of a community can meaningfully participate in any civic decision-making processes. Community engagement, also known as “civil engagement,” must be promoted in a local jurisdiction through the development of objectives and policies that seek to involve members of DACs specifically.

As stressed throughout this document, community engagement is central to achieving EJ. The US EPA Environmental Justice Policy requires the “… meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies.” Creating accessible and culturally appropriate opportunities for lowincome, minority, and linguistically isolated stakeholders to engage in local decision making will help ensure that EJ issues are identified and resolved. These policies also improve methods for identifying, addressing, tracking, and measuring progress toward achieving EJ goals during implementation of the General Plan.60 Finally, these goals can help foster a strong sense of place within a neighborhood and can deepen the investment of stakeholders in working toward neighborhood improvements.

However, community engagement is an important goal across all local planning and decision-making processes. Robust engagement results in better decisions by increasing community access to information about existing conditions and the viability of solutions as well as increases community support for decisions. Local governments are responsible with partnering with communities to ensure their voices are included in decisions that would impact them. Chapter 4 discusses implementing successful engagement during the EJ planning process, while this chapter and section approach the objective from the framework of encouraging community engagement across all aspects of planning and local decision making.

5.6.b / Assess Existing Conditions
Technology, language, cultural differences, and geographic isolation are just some of the barriers that may prevent residents from meaningfully participating in planning processes. In order to assess the level of community engagement in a DAC, planners can look at the following indicators, which are not exhaustive:
] Levels of local civic engagement, as evidenced by voting rates, engagement in public planning processes, and city or county public forums.
] Demographics in the area that may influence engagement, such as language access, age, and educational attainment.

Partnership with community-based organizations can be particularly helpful in understanding and documenting barriers to civic engagement in a DAC. Surveys and interviews with residents can help document any challenges to community engagement as well as highlight areas where residents are very active and engaged.

Chapter 5 / Develop Goals, Policies, and Objectives
97 5.6.c / Policy Framework for
Community Engagement
Promote Capacity Building
Capacity-building refers to the development of expertise and knowledge.

It increases the skills of community residents to participate in local decision-making bodies and engage meaningfully in planning efforts.

Strategies to build capacity include offering relevant workshops and trainings for community members to develop their skills. Jurisdictions should also make planners, staff, and technical experts available to speak with and work with local community members directly.

Eliminate Cultural and Language Barriers
] The EJ Element or integrated policies must include goals and policies to ensure a meaningful cross-cultural participation in local planning and decision-making processes. Examples of such policies include:
] Ensure multi-lingual requirements for public noticing, meetings and facilitation events.
] Require outreach in specific languages that are most commonly spoken in a DAC.
] Require the use of interpreters during all public meetings. ] Organize outreach events and conduct surveys directly to specific demographic groups or DACs.
] Partner with community-based organizations that have relationships, trust, and cultural competency with target communities to outreach for local initiatives and issues.

Promote Broad and Balanced Participation
The General Plan should include measures to promote collaboration with community members and build and maintain effective relationships.

Measures that can support participation in decision making are:
] Ensuring that meetings and other public engagement forums are held at accessible locations and times to include a wide range of residents, especially evenings. Provide child care services and food to support greater public attendance at workshops and meetings. ] Prioritizing outreach for meetings to target communities or communities that will be most impacted by an issue or decision. ] Ensuring any materials are distributed far enough in advance of meetings, workshops, and hearings to allow sufficient time for review and comment. ] Using communication methods that convey complex and/or technical information in an easily understandable manner. ] Facilitating meetings and workshops using diverse methods that can engage all participants and can appeal to multiple styles of learning.

Maximize Technology
The role of technology in communications is a growing consideration for public engagement policies. General Plan policies and programs increasingly promote the use of technology to provide information and elicit meaningful feedback during the public decision-making process.

For example, policies can seek public feedback through both traditional and online forms of communication, including website, email, and mobile phone apps. Online tools for community engagement have expanded in variety and include videos/podcasts, e-comments, online forums, interactive web-based mapping, interactive planning, and tools that allow community members to use data and create their own reports.61 The Institute for Local Government (ILG) provides resources on potential online engagement tools and uses at http://www.ca-ilg.org/ post/technology-tools-and-techniques-improve-public-engagement. 98 SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit

5.7 / Prioritize Improvements
and Programs that Address
the Needs of Disadvantaged
Communities

5.7.a / Understanding Prioritization
of DACs and Environmental Justice
An integral component of EJ planning is proactively prioritizing projects and investments that directly benefit DACs. DACs are often overlooked regarding public investments and development of new amenities, and delayed investments and programs can significantly prolong inequalities. Historically, DACs have experienced lack of investment and opportunities, leading to degraded living conditions and lack of power over decisions that affect their lives. Therefore, achieving an EJ-oriented General Plan should address prioritizing investment and additional opportunities for these communities
Impacted communities may have specific needs that are distinct from those of the greater community, which may require taking special actions to ensure that existing conditions in a DAC are improved and not exacerbated, such as limits on new developments to compensate for already high pollution burdens. These kinds of programs may not be applicable across an entire city or jurisdiction, but may be needed due to the special circumstances DAC. Effective prioritization would ensure that benefits and programs prioritize DACs and implemented in timely fashion.

Lastly, focusing on prioritization of improvements and programs for DACs can also help jurisdictions access public funding that is dedicated to benefitting DACs and prepare governments for potential funding applications.

5.7.b / Assess Existing Conditions
Many community needs will be identified through the processes and steps outlined in this chapter. However, there are additional tools that can help to assess a wider range of socioeconomic issues in a community beyond the topics covered in this chapter.
] Ground-truthing and community engagement are the most essential tools to identify community needs because they allow for direct resident engagement. See Chapters 3 and 4 for more information. ] The National Equity Atlas, developed by PolicyLink, is a data and policy tool that provides a comprehensive set of equity analyses and indicators at the national, State, and local levels. These analyses include equity profiles, reports, and indicators that can be viewed and downloaded online.62 The tool’s method and indicators can be used to help guide the creation of a community-specific method for determining the presence of a DAC.63 For more information, see:
http://nationalequityatlas.org/
] The University of California, Davis, Center for Regional Change partnered with Rabobank to develop the Regional Opportunity Index, a comprehensive tool for identifying areas in greatest need of investment based on indicators that include education, economic, housing, mobility, environmental, and civic life.64 For more information, see: http://interact.regionalchange.ucdavis.edu/roi/. ] The Healthy Places Index (HPI, discussed in Chapter 3) is a tool that can be used to identify community conditions that predict life expectancy. It contains user-friendly mapping and data resources at the census tract level across California. For more information, see:
http://healthyplacesindex.org/
Chapter 5 / Develop Goals, Policies, and Objectives
99 In order to evaluate investments and projects for their equity impacts, local governments and planners may want to incorporate a social equity evaluation process that follows a four-step framework by Public Advocates, a nonprofit law firm and advocacy organization:65

1. Does the proposed project or investment meet an important community need?

2. Does the proposed project or investment provide significant benefits to the local community?

3. Does the proposed project or investment treat low-income residents as the primary beneficiaries?

4. Does the proposed project or investment avoid substantial and/or regulatory burdens for EJ/disadvantaged communities?

5.7.c / Policy Framework for
Prioritizing Disadvantaged
Communities
An EJ Element should include goals, objectives, and policies that prioritize programs and public and private investment in DACs to meet identified community needs. Sample policies include:
] Prioritize public funding applications that meet needs identified in DACs.
] Ensure equitable provision of public amenities that improve the quality of life, as outlined in various sections of this chapter.66 ] Ensure that future improvements in DACs will not produce negative impacts on the community, such as an increase in toxic exposures, a net loss of affordable housing, or the displacement residents and local legacy businesses.
] Collaborate with public, private, and philanthropic entities to establish EJ-related investments. ] Create “priority zones,” DACs that are designated and prioritized for public investments, public services, or increased environmental protections. The Clean Up Green Up case study in Chapter 6 is an example of such a policy.
100
SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit

5.8 / Equitable Development
and Design
This section discusses an approach to physical development with the goal of serving all members of the community equitably. Although not required under SB 1000, this goal complements and supports the goals of reducing community health risks and promoting environmental justice.

5.8.a / Understanding Equitable
Development and Environmental
Justice
The US EPA refers to equitable development as “an approach for meeting the needs of underserved communities through policies and programs that reduce disparities while fostering places that are healthy and vibrant.”67 Inequitable development, policies, and decisions have impacted low-income communities and communities of color over time, leading to fast food, liquor stores, and toxic sites to more likely surround their neighborhoods, while less likely having parks, trees, safe activity spaces, and full service grocery stores. These communities consequently experience disproportionate exposure to harm from incompatible land uses and related health conditions such as obesity, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, respiratory illnesses, and cancers.68 Significant economic and demographic shifts across California are leading to increased housing costs and land values, driving gentrification and displacement in many communities. The increased focus on planning for environmental stewardship and sustainability has contributed to this dynamic. To incorporate equitable development into planning processes, planners must balance the potential negative impacts of popular development types such as Transit-Oriented Development (TOD), which are more environmentally friendly and walkable, in relation to the community needs in the area (e.g. will a TOD increase housing costs?). Equitable Transit-Oriented Development of this section describes this further.

Like all of the SB 1000 objective topics, ensuring equitable development can drive public health improvements in EJ communities by increasing resources available to community members, stabilizing families, households and local businesses, and improving quality of life.

5.8.b / Assess Existing Conditions
Planners should conduct a high-level review of recent major development projects to identify patterns of development that may cause inequalities. Examples of indicators for this type of assessment could include:
] Levels of affordability and the targeted markets of new developments. ] Changes within neighborhood landscapes and within identified areas of local concern, such as schools and community centers. ] Changes in local demographics, such as race, income, and age of residents.
] Changes in rent prices and housing costs.
] Changes in affordable housing stock.
] Changes in local businesses, especially small, legacy business tenure.

Existing comprehensive planning documents and design guidelines should also be reviewed to identify current policy approaches that may be supporting developments that could produce negative long-term impacts on DACS.

Chapter 5 / Develop Goals, Policies, and Objectives
101

5.8.c / Policy Framework for
Equitable Development
The success of an equitable development policy framework requires a strong statement of objectives followed by intentional, supportive polices. To best ensure this, the General Plan would clarify that equitable development is not subordinate to other economic, transportation, land use, and environmental objectives, but rather treating it as equal and integral. While equitable development policies will intersect with other General Plan elements, including them independently as a separate section can help prioritize benefits towards DACs and help prevent unintended consequences of non-equitable development policies.

A policy framework for equitable development could be organized by community-oriented development, community economic health, workforce development, and placemaking.

Community-Oriented Development
] Housing policies that encourage provision of affordable housing. ] Transportation policies that increase accessibility for DACs. ] Cultural and historical preservation policies that recognize specific places of local significance or common cultural practices in DACs. ] Require inclusion of community benefits agreements for new developments in DACs. ] Ensure residents of DACs are meaningfully engaged for input as early as possible when new developments and projects are proposed in their communities as well as throughout the development process. ] As a part of plan and project review, agencies and planners can evaluate whether the plan or project will have a beneficial or harmful effect on equity.

Community Economic Health
Equitable development can be fostered through policies that support a community economic health and a strong, diverse local business community. As part of a commitment to equitable development, local governments are encouraged to assess economic conditions within their communities and develop strategies to their benefit, which will likely vary across different contexts. Potential targets of EJ-related economic health policy include:
] Management of local assets through support for local entrepreneurship and business ownership, including the development of small-business educational programs.
] Policies that target the development and retention of diverse, local small businesses.
] Policies that promote community ownership, such as co-operatives and land banks.
] Policies that support microloans and revolving loan funds. ] Local purchase and supplier diversity programs within public institutions. ] Launch or promote participatory budgeting (PB) processes in local government spending, described further under Section 5.6 of this chapter. The ILG provides resources on PBs at http://www.ca-ilg. org/post/participatory-budgeting.
102
SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit
Workforce Development
] Workforce development and employment are also vital topics that can help promote equitable development. Policies can support increasing living-wage-job opportunities for residents in DACs and residents in the planning area that face chronic unemployment or underemployment, such as:
] Generation of year-round employment opportunities with health care and benefits in key DACs.
] First-source hiring of workers facing barriers to employment. ] Removing barriers to hiring, such as requesting disclosure of criminal records on employment applications. ] Developing paid apprenticeship programs and job training pathways in partnership with unions and employment centers.

Placemaking
Finally, equitable development can be fostered through “placemaking,” or increasing shared ownership of public spaces among all residents, specifically in DACs. EJ policies can support the creation and maintenance of public spaces that meet the needs of the community.69 The creation of compact, walkable residential neighborhoods with a diversity of uses (as well as easy access to services, schools, and parks and a range of housing densities) can help foster a sense of place and vibrancy in communities. EJ policies or an EJ element must ensure that this type of planning is targeted to DACs.

Equitable Transit-Oriented Development
Transit-oriented development (TOD) and mixed-use zoning is an approach of placing higher-density housing near public transit while creating active, livable neighborhoods and has the general goals of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, improving neighborhood conditions, increasing housing choices, and improving community cohesion. However, while TOD is generally beneficial from an urban planning perspective, recent research has also shown that TOD can cause rise in rents and housing costs, leading to potential displacement of existing residents.70 To address this and ensure equitable TOD implementation, local governments and planners can consider policies that limit displacement of existing residents and local businesses as livability improves and property values rise. When implemented in a way that explicitly considers the needs of DACs, transit-oriented development increases access to fresh and healthy foods, job opportunities, affordable housing, transit options, and safe places to walk, “roll”, and recreate for vulnerable communities.

For more information on policies and solutions to address gentrification and guard against displacement, please see the Displacement and Gentrification information box in Section 5.4, Safe and Sanitary Homes.

Chapter 5 / Develop Goals, Policies, and Objectives
103

5.9 / Reduce Impacts of
Climate Change

5.9.a / Understanding
Climate Change Impacts and
Environmental Justice
Climate change is already impacting many communities in California, and many DACs will suffer disproportionate burdens. The impacts of climate change in California will vary by geographic region, but can include extreme heat, flooding, wildfire, drought, and sea-level rise.

Some hazards are individual extreme events (such as a flood or a heat wave), while others (such as sea-level rise) will occur over time.

These hazards can harm people and present risks to buildings and infrastructure, functions and services, and natural ecosystems.

Many DACs are in close proximity to major sources of large GHG emissions or fossil fuel extraction sites. Research has shown that California’s largest stationary sources of greenhouse gas emitters are disproportionately located in low-income communities and communities of color, including power plants and refineries.71 Oil and gas extraction sites, such as oil drilling and fracking, are also disproportionately located in DACs.72
The potential impacts of climate change are long-term and inherently cumulative. As discussed throughout this chapter, DACs are places that have already existing, cumulative environmental burdens that may be exacerbated by climate change impacts. For instance, areas with poor air quality can become even more dangerous during heat waves, while poor drinking water quality can also be exacerbated during a drought.

Low-income community residents may work in jobs such as agriculture and construction where they are more exposed to hazard conditions such as extreme heat, and may also face economic harm if extreme events prevent them from working.

In addition, low-income residents may have few resources to prepare for hazard events or effectively recover after an event occurs. In places where there are limited public transportation systems or where there are many residents without a car, there may be challenges to evacuating during a storm event. There may also be language barriers that prevent someone from accessing all the information they need about services or changing conditions, and services or disaster response may not be provided in languages most commonly spoken in an area. Low-income residents may lack the needed insurance to recover from the impacts of storm, or may lack the resources to move if their property is threatened by sea level rise or flooding. As a result of these factors and others, residents in DACs may be at increased risk of property damage, severe injury, or death due to climate-related hazards.

While renewable energy is expanding in California as a response to climate change, many DACs have yet to benefit. Renewable energy is often prohibitively expensive for low-income residents, and most renewable energy projects are not located in EJ communities.

Given the widespread and disproportionate impacts that climate change is likely to have on DACs, an EJ approach to planning for climate change includes the following main strategies:
] Planning to reduce minimize greenhouse gas emissions. ] Expanding access to renewable energy, increasing energy efficiency and promoting resilient design in the built environment. ] Addressing “climate vulnerability,” or the risks in a community from climate change related natural hazards, including preparation of extreme heat adaptation plans and promoting flood-resistant development and retrofits. 104
SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit

5.9.b / Assess Existing Conditions
An EJ assessment of climate change impacts includes three main areas of assessment for a community:
] Major sources of GHGs
] Major sources of energy use
] Climate vulnerability
Many cities have adopted community-wide climate action plans to establish metrics for community contributions to climate change and to outline measures to reduce those contributions.

Evaluate Sources Greenhouse Gases in the
Community
As part of an assessment, local governments and planners should inventory the sources of GHG emissions in a planning area. This type of inventory will enable planners to develop solutions to mitigate the impacts of these facilities. Many of these sources also have other environmental impacts, such air quality emissions that should also be accounted for in additional environmental assessments. Sources include, but are not limited to: large sources of fossil fuel combustion and processing (such as power plants and refineries) and oil and gas extraction sites (such as fracking, drilling, or natural gas storage facilities).

Another important issue to inventory is the built environment’s contribution to GHG emissions. This can include large traffic patterns and water and energy usage. Without understanding how the local built environment is contributing to GHG emissions, it will not be possible to create solutions.

Evaluate Major Sources of Energy Usage
Climate change is caused by human combustion of fossil fuels primarily for energy usage. To plan for truly climate-resilient communities, neighborhoods will need to reduce energy use and consumption longterm. Planners should assess the main uses of fossil fuel energy in a community, including public buildings, residential and commercial usage, and service provision such as water supply. This will enable planners to identify ways to improve energy efficiency, as well as systems that are particularly vulnerable to any catastrophic climate change impacts.

The assessment should also evaluate the prevalence of renewable energy projects and usage in the planning area, such as number of megawatts in usage, projects, and sources. The assessment should also look at local barriers to expanding renewable energy or energy efficiency, such as outdated building codes or energy programs that present regulatory challenges to more widespread renewable energy options. Finally, the assessment should include an analysis of barriers to accessing renewable for residents, including the costs of renewable energy versus median household incomes, the number of homeowners or additional buildings that are potential installing sites for renewable energy, and existing deficiencies in outreach programs for renewable energy programs, such as lack of appropriate linguistic capacities.

Evaluate Climate Vulnerability
Local governments and planners can measure climate vulnerability for local communities, including DACs, through a process called a vulnerability assessment (VA). The California Natural Resources Agency’s Adaptation Planning Guide is accessible at http://resources. ca.gov/docs/climate/01APG_Planning_for_Adaptive_Communities. pdf. It outlines a recommended approach:
] Identify Hazards. Determine the climate-related hazards in the community (under both current and future conditions), and how these hazards may change over time. Several state and federal resources, such as the Adaptation Planning Guide, the online Cal-Adapt Chapter 5 / Develop Goals, Policies, and Objectives
105
tool, the MyHazards tool, and the U.S. Climate Resilience Toolkit, can help with this process. There may also be local and regional resources available.
] Identify Populations. Select the specific populations present in the community that may be harmed by these hazards, including different populations that are considered disadvantaged persons.

Consider age, physical and mental health, employment, citizenship status, and other socioeconomic factors.
] Analyze Potential Impacts. Using scientific research, relevant reports and studies, and discussions with community members, assess how severe each climate change effect will be for different demographics of the population. Populations already strained by economic or environmental disadvantages, or those with disabilities or related limitations, often have a lower capacity to adapt. ] Evaluate Adaptive Capacity. Adaptive capacity is the ability of the population to resist or recover from the effects of the hazards under current conditions. Assess the adaptive capacity of each effect of climate change for each population, using a similar scale as was used for analyzing impacts (e.g., 1 to 5, with 1 being a complete ability to adapt and 5 being no ability to adapt).
] Determine Vulnerability. Using the impact and adaptive capacity scores, create an overall vulnerability score. There are multiple approaches to this process, including those outlined in the Adaptation Planning Guide, but in general the higher the impact and the lower the adaptive capacity, the more vulnerable the population.

In addition, the California Department of Public Health runs the “California Building Against Resilience Against Climate Effects,” or CALBRACE, initiative to assist counties to better understand and prepare for climate impacts. The initiative includes county-by-county projections for county and regional climate impacts, climate-related health risks, and local populations that could be vulnerable to climate effects. The information is available online at https://archive.cdph. ca.gov/programs/Pages/CalBRACE.aspx.

5.9.c / Policy Framework for
Reducing Climate Change Impacts
Climate change related policies and strategies should address the sources of greenhouse gas emissions, and seek to improve resiliency in vulnerable populations. The climate vulnerability policies and strategies are drawn from two key resources. The policies and strategies from these and other resources should be modified to be appropriate for local contexts:
] California Adaptation Planning Guide (APG): http://resources. ca.gov/climate/safeguarding/local-action/.
] Safeguarding California Plan – 2018 Update: http://resources. ca.gov/climate/safeguarding/#safeguard
California state agencies have also launched several online databases and tools that local governments and planners may employ to assist in developing local climate change adaptation strategies. These include Cal-Adapt (http://cal-adapt.org/) and the Adaptation Clearinghouse (http://resilientca.org/). Planners should freely use these resources and modify recommended strategies to the needs of local context and communities.

Minimize Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Planners and local governments should proactively encourage land uses that do not make extreme contributions to climate change. Strategies to accomplish this are provided below and are mostly drawn from the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association’s Model Policies for Greenhouse Gases in General Plans (2009), accessible at http://www. capcoa.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/CAPCOA-ModelPolicies6-12-09-915am.pdf. ] Adopt and implement a development pattern that utilizes existing infrastructure; reduces the need for new roads, utilities and other public works in new growth areas; and enhances non-automobile transportation.
106
SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit
] Promote infill, mixed-use, and higher density development, and provide incentives to support the creation of affordable housing in mixed use zones.
] Promote greater linkage between land uses and transit, as well as other modes of transportation.
] Promote development and preservation of neighborhood characteristics that encourage walking and bicycle riding in lieu of automobile-based travel. ] Reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT)-related emissions by encouraging the use of public transit through adoption of new development standards that will require improvements to the transit system and infrastructure, increase safety and accessibility, and provide other incentives.
] Implement traffic and roadway management strategies to improve mobility and efficiency, and reduce associated emissions. ] Support bicycle use as a mode of transportation by enhancing infrastructure to accommodate bicycles and riders, and providing incentives. ] Establish parking policies and requirements that capture the true cost of private vehicle use and support alternative modes of transportation. ] Support and promote use of low- and zero-emission vehicles. ] Reduce emissions related to energy consumption and area sources. ] Limit the drilling of new fracking and oil wells, especially near sensitive land-uses. ] Ensure large stationary sources of greenhouse gases are using the most energy efficient and up-to-date equipment.
] Promote electric vehicle incentive programs that include rebates for low-income residents and sale of used electric vehicles, which are more affordable.
] Engage in long-term planning to identify local strategies for phasing out fossil fuel use.

Increase Renewable Energy and Access
Local governments may consider developing renewable energy supply to minimize both contributions to climate change as well as improve resiliency in the face of increase hazards. Strategies to accomplish this include:
] Develop Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) programs, which allows local governments to pool or “aggregate” electricity customers to form a local electricity agency. Community Choice puts communities in control of the procurement of electricity, while the incumbent investor-owned electric utility delivers and services the electricity for customers. CCAs have been developed in Marin County and the City of Lancaster. They are also being developed in Alameda County and the City of San Diego.
] Promote, support, and require, as appropriate and to the extent feasible, the development of solar energy. ] Encourage the development of “community solar” programs, which expand access to utility ratepayers who can’t install their own onsite generation because of cost, ownership, or building constraints.

Programs such as California’s Green Tariff Shared Renewable program create a mechanism where customers can choose to get their energy from “shared” programs.
] Promote distributed generation projects (e.g. co-generation projects) and reduce local policy barriers to their adoption. “Distributed generation” refers to small-scale renewable energy projects that can be installed on buildings in a community. Programs such as the Multifamily Affordable Solar Roofs Program at the California Public Utilities Commission create funding sources specifically for smallscale solar installations in disadvantaged communities. ] Establish policies and programs that facilitate and remove barriers towards the siting of new renewable energy generation.

Chapter 5 / Develop Goals, Policies, and Objectives
107
] Pursue and provide economic incentives and creative financing for renewable energy projects, as well as other support for community members or developers seeking funding for such projects.

Promote Energy Efficiency
Strategies for improving energy efficiency and promoting alternative energies are provided below, all drawn from the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association’s Model Policies for Greenhouse Gases in General Plans:
] Establish green building requirements and standards for new development and redevelopment projects, and will work to provide incentives for green building practices and remove barriers that impede their use. ] Establish policies and standards to increase energy efficiency at new developments, including residential, commercial, and public. ] Establish policies and standards to reduce exterior heat gain and heat island effects.
] Pursue policies and programs to improve energy efficiency of existing buildings. ] Encourage the use of low-emission equipment for all new residential and commercial development.

Develop Extreme Heat Adaptation Plans
Heat response plans help improve resiliency to extreme heat, which can cause significant health problems in vulnerable persons. As extreme heat events are likely to become more common, heat adaptation plans should consider future climate projections. Strategies include:
] Designate community facilities as cooling centers to provide relief from high temperatures. Develop staffing plans to open these facilities to residents when temperatures reach a certain level. Ensure that there are cooling centers in all parts of the community, especially in areas with high levels of vulnerable people. Facilities that have rooftop solar panels or other renewable energy systems can provide cooling without placing additional stress on the electrical grid.
] Create a bulk buying program that allows people to purchase air conditioners at wholesale prices. Work with volunteer and social care groups to help people install air conditioners if they are unable to do so themselves. Consider energy efficiency programs to reduce electricity use and help offset the cost of operating air conditioners. ] Increase the amount of street trees and landscaped areas to reduce the urban heat island effect.
] Ensure that all primary community gathering spaces have air conditioned indoor space or permanent shaded areas. ] Work with major outdoor employers to ensure that there are practices and trainings to help reduce employee exposure to extreme heat.

Promote Flood-Resistant Development
and Retrofits
Floods may increase as a result of climate change, creating hazardous situations for persons in and near flood-prone areas. Vulnerable persons may have less economic opportunity to move out of floodprone areas and may be less able to retrofit or harden their homes to resist floodwaters. Strategies include:
] Require new developments in and near flood-prone areas to use permeable paving, rain gardens, and other low-impact development strategies to slow down floodwaters and promote groundwater infiltration. ] Work with local flood control agencies, the Army Corp of Engineers, and other appropriate organizations to restore concrete flood channels to a more natural state, which can help buffer the community against floodwaters.
108
SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit
] Create an incentive program for landlords to improve drainage and other flood-resistant measures for rental properties and mobile homes.

Support Increased Resilience for
Transportation, Particularly for Persons
with Limited Mobility
Many types of climate-related hazards can harm transportation infrastructure, including roadways, railways, and bridges. Public transportation services can also be disrupted by hazard events, even if the infrastructure is relatively undamaged. Efforts to harden transportation infrastructure and services helps keep these systems functional, which is particularly critical for persons with mobility challenges or limited access to a vehicle. Strategies include:
] Retrofit existing transportation infrastructure, and construct new infrastructure using resilient materials and design features such as expansion joints, heat-resistant asphalt, and flood-resistant road beds.
] To the extent possible, relocate public corporation yards out of hazard-prone areas. Harden corporation yards against hazards, including storing equipment and fuel on higher elevations or in welldrained areas outside of flood plains. ] Work with local transit providers to identify alternative routes and stops if a hazard event prevents normal operation. Emphasize providing access to key commercial districts and medical facilities. ] Develop an evacuation plan for persons with limited mobility, including how to obtain vehicles and drivers in an emergency situation.

Prioritize Disproportionately-Vulnerable
Populations
Communities that experience social, racial, health, and economic inequities will be disproportionately vulnerable to the impacts of climate change and natural disasters in their ability to respond, recover, and adjust.73 This is especially experienced by immigrant communities.

DACs may not only be under-resourced to adequately respond to climate change-related impacts, such as through disaster preparation and response services; but impacts and events are likely to exacerbate their risk of losing access and inability to attain functional needs. For example, following the fires in Sonoma County during 2017, the loss of households from the wildfire immediately impacted low-wage service workers whose living depended on providing house cleaning and gardening services.74 Local governments and planners can develop policies and strategies to help address and prevent negative impacts from climate change on DACs. The California Natural Resources Agency (CRNA) released the 2018 update to its comprehensive climate change adaptation strategy roadmap, Safeguarding California Plan (Safeguarding), which provides an extensive set of strategies for building climate resiliency, which local governments may adapt to the needs of their communities.
] Support prioritizing residential energy efficiency and hazard-resistant retrofit funding and programs to populations with relatively higher exposures to impacts of climate change, vulnerability to impacts of climate change, and health disadvantage. [Safeguarding, P-1.2]
] Identify populations with limited access to emergency communication lines to assist planning for climate-related emergency events, and to address access challenges during nonemergency times to build community adaptive capacities (i.e. improved transportation access and communication lines to underserved areas). [Safeguarding, P-7.4] ] Develop methods to assess the potential for displacement related to climate change and seek tools to preserve and maintain access Chapter 5 / Develop Goals, Policies, and Objectives
109
by vulnerable populations to housing in their communities. [Safeguarding, L-5.6] ] Address programmatic, funding, and financing barriers for energy/water efficiency retrofits for low-income households and small businesses. Coordinate with local and tribal governments to provide low-income and disadvantaged community energy efficiency and demand response services. [Safeguarding, E-6.3]
] Improve outreach and communication protocols to persons lacking access to telecommunication systems, persons with limited English proficiency, and other socially isolated persons. Ensure that information about climate-related hazards is made widely available to all persons in the community. [Safeguarding, EM-3.1]
] Increase participation of low-income, immigrant, non-English-speaking, racially- and ethnically-diverse, and special needs residents in initial CAP planning and implementation. [APG, PHSE-3]
] Prevent or limit significant increases in housing costs or “price-gouging” following disasters, either through ordinances or other measures.75 ] Develop emergency measures that specifically address the needs of vulnerable communities and immigrant groups, such as extending term of occupancy for seasonal farmworker housing, safe parking programs, and temporary housing for displaced persons.76 Local governments should ensure that vulnerable communities with limited access to resources and support systems are prioritized first and foremost with regards to protection against disasters and emergency response measures. ] Consider impacts of disaster, such as fire and smoke on vulnerable communities, and plan responsive measures such as gathering and distributing respirator masks to impacted communities.
] Ensure public information on emergency preparedness, evacuation, shelters, food, water, and recovery are translated and disseminated in languages primarily spoken by the ethnic and immigrant groups in the community.
] Ensure shelters do not require identification for people to stay and to also inform communities that identification is not required for staying in shelters.
] Work with immigrant groups and community-based organizations that represent them to develop alternative funding resources for recovery who may otherwise not qualify for financial assistance from the Federal Emergency Management Agency.77
Implement Measures to Reduce Risks to
Fire Hazards
Each year, thousands of fires burn across California which consume hundreds of thousands of acres. Fires in 2017 proved to be a devastating with over 7,100 fires recorded burning over 500,000 acres.78 In 2016, over 2,800 fires were recorded, burning over 240,000 acres.79 The most notable fires of 2017 include the collectively-known Northern California fires, which destroyed over 8,800 structures80; and the Thomas fire of Ventura and Santa Barbara counties, which destroyed over 1,060 structures.81 The extent of risk and damage to wildfires in California demonstrates the need for local governments to plan for them and ensure that vulnerable communities are best protected against them. Drawing from both the Safeguarding California Plan and the California APG, the following strategies can be used as a base point for development fire hazard prevention policies and measures. ] Develop county and regional fire readiness plans with input and engagement from fire safe councils, fire and land management agencies, Tribes, and individual community members; include provisions for local emergency response through cooperative fire protection agreements with local, State, and federal partners. [Safeguarding, F-7.5]
] Implement fuel breaks, fire safe landscaping, removal of hazardous vegetation, inspections for fire safe clearance around homes, forest health treatment, fire prevention, and fire safe building standards that reduce human loss and property damage from wildland fires. [Safeguarding, F-7.3]
110
SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit
] Restrict or limit development in the wildland urban interface (WUI) to avoid placing communities and people at risk of extreme fire. [Safeguarding, F-7.4]
] Conduct rapid post-fire assessments and project implementation to protect access and functional needs and other communities, to minimize flooding, protect water quality, limit sediment flows, and to reduce other risks. [Safeguarding, F-7.11a]
] Design homes, neighborhoods, and streets to minimize vulnerability to fire hazards in wildland urban interface (WUI) areas. [APG, FR-3] ] Manage fuel load (of fire hazards) through thinning and brush removal. [APG, FR-6] ] Create funding programs that replace roofs with fire-resistant roofing materials, especially for low-income households and/or those living in DACs.82
Develop Preventive and Protective
Strategies Against Climate Change Impacts
In addition to responsive and emergency planning, climate change adaptation and resiliency will also require preventive and protective practices and strategies to ensure communities are most prepared for the climate change-related effects and events. Local governments can take measures to protect existing infrastructure from future climate change-related events, such as sea level rise or fire hazards; or create policies ensuring developments do not occur in high-risk areas. The APG offers a number of strategies local governments and planners can use to help achieve this goal, as well as the Safeguarding California Plan.

A number of strategies are highlighted below:
] Incorporate consideration of climate change impacts as part of infrastructure planning and operations. [APG, IN-1] ] Conduct a Climate impact assessment on community buildings, infrastructure, and key public facilities. [APG, IN-2] ] Facilitate managed retreat from, or upgrade of, the most at-risk areas. [APG, OCR-2] ] Require accounting of sea level rise in all applications for new development in shoreline areas. [APG, OCR-3] ] Ensure that climate change is addressed as a hazard in Local Hazard Mitigation Plans [Safeguarding, P-5.4].
] Implement General Plan safety elements through zoning and subdivisions practices that restrict development in floodplains and landslide hazard areas. [APG, WM-5] ] Facilitate access to local, decentralized renewable energy. [APG, IN3] ] Prioritize the remediation of hazardous material cleanup sites on the coast and in high flood risk areas so that they do not spread contamination later due to flooding. [Safeguarding, O-1.10] Chapter 5 / Develop Goals, Policies, and Objectives
111
Endnotes
1 California Air Resources Board. (2005). Air quality and land use handbook: a community health perspective. Retrieved from https://www.arb.ca.gov/ch/ handbook.pdf
2 California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research. (2017). General plan guidelines, 2017. Retrieved from http://www.opr.ca.gov/planning/ general-plan/
3 American Lung Association. (2017). State of the air. Retrieved from http:// www.lung.org/assets/documents/healthy-air/state-of-the-air/state-ofthe-air-2017.pdf 4 Zapata, C. B., Yang, C., Yeh, S., Ogden, J., & Kleeman, M. J. (2018).

Low-carbon energy generates public health savings in California. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, (18)7, 4817-4830. 5 California State Water Resources Control Board. (2017). Affordable and safe drinking water initiative fact sheet. Retrieved from http://waterboards. ca.gov/water_issues/programs/hr2w/docs/data/fs020817_asdw_act. pdf
6 United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2002, December 30).

Affordability criteria for small drinking water systems: An EPA science advisory board report. Retrieved from http://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=P100JOKY.TXT 7 United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2016). What is citizen science? Retrieved July 26, 2018 from https://www.epa.gov/citizen-science/what-citizen-science 8 Planning for unincorporated disadvantaged communities. Cal. Senate Bill 244. (2011-2012). Chapter 513 (Cal. Stat. 2011). Retrieved from ftp:// www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12/bill/sen/sb_0201-0250/sb_244_ bill_20111007_chaptered.html
9 California Air Resources Board. (2017). Strategies to reduce air pollution exposure near high-volume roadways, page 6. Retrieved from https:// www.arb.ca.gov/ch/rd_technical_advisory_final.pdf
10 California Air Resources Board. (2017). Strategies to reduce air pollution exposure near high-volume roadways, page 6. Retrieved from https:// www.arb.ca.gov/ch/rd_technical_advisory_final.pdf
11 California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research. (2017). General plan guidelines, 2017.
12 Environmental Health Coalition. (2003). Building healthy communities from the ground up: Environmental justice in California, page 11. Berkeley, CA: Inkworks Press. Retrieved from http://www.reimaginerpe.org/files/ healthy-communities.pdf
13 For community impact assessments, see the Federal Highway Administration’s online resources at https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/livability/cia/ index.cfm and Caltrans’ reference Community Impact Assessment (2011) at http://www.dot.ca.gov/ser/vol4/downloads/vol4_entire.pdf 14 United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2016, July). Recommendations for constructing roadside vegetation barriers to improve near-road air quality. Retrieved June 01, 2017, from https://cfpub.epa.gov/si/si_public_file_download.cfm?p_download_id=528612 15 The last three are watershed protection and restoration policies found in California Natural Resource Agency (2016), California Water Action Plan (p. 11), retrieved from http://resources.ca.gov/california_water_action_ plan/. Further resources on watershed protection and management can be found at US EPA’s Healthy Watershed Protection program at https:// www.epa.gov/hwp.
16 California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research. (2017). General plan guidelines, 2017, page 62.
17 California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research. (2017). General plan guidelines, 2017, page 25.
18 Marshall, W. E., Piatkowski, D. P., & Garrick, N. W. (2014). Community design, street networks, and public health. Journal of Transport and Health, 1(4), 326-340. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2014.06.002 19 City of National City, California. (2012). General plan. Retrieved from http://www.nationalcityca.gov/about-us/documents/general-plan 20 American Planning Association. (2012, November). Planning for food access and community-based food systems: a national scan and evaluation of local comprehensive and sustainability plans, page 15. Retrieved June 01, 2017, from https://planning-org-uploaded-media.s3.amazonaws.com/ legacy_resources/research/foodaccess/pdf/foodaccessreport.pdf 112
SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit
21 Kidsdata. (2014). Children living in food insecure households. Retrieved from https://www.kidsdata.org/
22 Bloem, M. W., Semba, R. D., & Kraemer, K. (2010). Castel Gandolfo workshop: An introduction to the impact of climate change, the economic crisis, and the increase in the food prices on malnutrition. The Journal of Nutrition, 140, 132S-135S.
23 California Department of Public Health, Office of Health Equity. (August 2015). Portrait of promise: The California statewide plan to promote health and mental health equity. Retrieved from https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/OHE/CDPH%20Document%20Library/Accessible-CDPH_OHE_ Disparity_Report_Final%20(2).pdf
24 Jensen, A. C., Rabbitt, M. P., Gregory, C. A., & Singh, A. (2016). Household food security in the United States in 2016. United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service (USDA Publication No. ERR-237), page 2. Retrieved from https://www.ers.usda.gov/webdocs/publications/84973/err-237.pdf?v=42979 25 Hamm, M. & Bellows, A. (n.d.). What is community food security? Retrieved June 01, 2017, from http://alivebynature.com/views_cfs_faq.html 26 Environmental Health Coalition. (2003). Building healthy communities from the ground up: Environmental justice in California, page 11. Berkeley, CA: Inkworks Press. Retrieved from http://www.reimaginerpe.org/files/ healthy-communities.pdf
27 American Planning Association. (2012). Planning for food access and community-based food systems: A national scan and evaluation of local comprehensive and sustainability plans. Retrieved from https://planning-org-uploaded-media.s3.amazonaws.com/legacy_resources/research/ foodaccess/pdf/foodaccessreport.pdf
28 ChangeLab Solutions. (2018). Creating Healthier Food Environments.

Retrieved from https://changelabsolutions.org/landing-page/creating-healthier-food-environments 29 City of Chula Vista, California. (2005). City of Chula Vista vision 2020 general plan, page E-25. Retrieved from http://chulavistalibrary.net/departments/development-services/planning/general-plan 30 CalRecycle. (2016). Environmentally preferable purchasing (EPP). Retrieved September 8, 2017, from http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/epp/. See also California Department of General Services (2005), Environmentally preferable purchasing best practices manual, at http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/ epp/Resources/BPM.pdf
31 The Food Trust. (2013). The healthy food financing handbook: From advocacy to implementation. Retrieved from http://thefoodtrust.org/uploads/ media_items/hffhandbookfinal.original.pdf
32 The California Healthy Food Financing Initiative Council is a statewide initiative to increase healthy food access across California and provides funds to support local initiatives: http://www.treasurer.ca.gov/chffic/ 33 Environmental Health Coalition. (2003). Building healthy communities from the ground up: Environmental justice in California, page 11. Berkeley, CA: Inkworks Press. Retrieved from http://www.reimaginerpe.org/files/ healthy-communities.pdf
34 World Health Organization. (2017). Environmental health in emergencies:

What are the health risks related to overcrowding? Retrieved June 01, 2017, from http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/emergencies/qa/ emergencies_qa9/en/
35 California Department of Public Health. (2017, August 23). Testing your home for lead. Retrieved October 6, 2017, from https://www.cdph. ca.gov/Programs/CCDPHP/DEODC/CLPPB/Pages/home_test.aspx 36 United States Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration. (n.d.). Significant changes in the asbestos standard for construction, 29 CFR 1926.1101. Retrieved June 01, 2017, from https://www. osha.gov/dte/library/asbestos/rev_asb.html
37 United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy Development and Research. (2017, September). Measuring overcrowding in housing. Bethesda, MD: Econometrica, Inc. Retrieved June 01, 2017, from https://www.huduser.gov/publications/pdf/measuring_overcrowding_in_hsg.pdf 38 California Department of Public Health. (2017). Mold and dampness.

Retrieved October 6, 2017, from https://archive.cdph.ca.gov/programs/ IAQ/Pages/IndoorMold.aspx
Chapter 5 / Develop Goals, Policies, and Objectives
113
39 California Department of Public Health. (2016). Statement on building dampness, mold, and health. Retrieved from https://archive.cdph.ca.gov/ programs/IAQ/Documents/DMH-Stmt_201602_ENG.pdf
40 National Center for Healthy Housing. (2008). Health hazards, prevention, and solutions: Insects. Retrieved on October 6, 2017, from http://www. nchh.org/WhatWeDo/HealthHazardsPreventionandSolutions/Insects. aspx
41 Los Angeles County Department of Public Health, Vector Management Program. (n.d.). Health advisory: Rodent-borne diseases. Retrieved from http://www.publichealth.lacounty.gov/eh/docs/Specialized/Vector_ Management/roden_Borne.pdf
42 Chartered Institute of Environmental Health. (2008). The impact of climate change on pest populations and public health. Retrieved from http://www. cieh.org/uploadedFiles/Core/Policy/Publications_and_information_ services/Policy_publications/Publications/The_impact_of_climate_ change_on_pest_populations_and_public_health_NOV_08.pdf 43 United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Community Planning and Development. (n.d.). Affordable Housing.

Retrieved June 01, 2017, from https://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/comm_planning/affordablehousing/ 44 United States Census Bureau, Demographic Internet Staff. (2012, May 21). Housing topics. Retrieved June 01, 2017, from https://www.census. gov/topics/housing.html
45 Axel-Lute, M. (2017, April 25). How should we measure affordability? Retrieved June 01, 2017, from https://shelterforce.org/2017/04/25/ how-should-we-measure-affordability/
46 United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy Development and Research. (n.d.). Rental burdens: Rethinking affordability measures. Retrieved June 1, 2017, from https://www.huduser.gov/ portal/pdredge/pdr_edge_featd_article_092214.html
47 United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2013). Moisture control guidance for building design, construction, and maintenance. Retrieved from https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi/P100HF07.PDF?Dockey=P100HF07.PDF 48 Weatherization measures could include installing energy-efficient light bulbs, ceiling fans, and appliances; insulation; microwaves; solar-water heating, and solar photovoltaics; weather-stripping; caulking; water heater blankets; and heating/cooling system repairs. These improvements can reduce persistent colds and headaches, thermal stress on occupants, asthma-related medical care, missed days of work, “heat or eat” choice dilemma, carbon monoxide poisonings, home fires, doctor and emergency room visits, and hospitalizations. (Tonn, B., Rose, E., Hawkins, B., & Conlon, B. (2014). Health and household-related benefits attributable to the weatherization assistance program. Environmental Sciences Division, UT-Battelle, LLC. Oak Ridge, TN: United States Department of Energy.) 49 Environmental Health Coalition. (2003). Building healthy communities from the ground up: Environmental justice in California, page 11. Berkeley, CA: Inkworks Press. Retrieved from http://www.reimaginerpe.org/files/ healthy-communities.pdf
50 City of National City, California. (2012). General plan. Retrieved from http://www.nationalcityca.gov/about-us/documents/general-plan 51 City of San Francisco Supervisor David Chiu. (2014).Board president David Chiu call for tenant right of first refusal legislation. Press Release.

Retrieved June 01, 2017, from http://www.sfbos.org/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=47929 52 Bay City News. (2014, August 12). SF mayor announces loan program for affordable housing. Retrieved June 01, 2017, from http://abc7news.com/ society/sf-announces-loan-program-for-affordable-housing/254478/ 53 California Department of Public Health, Office of Health Equity. (2015, August). Portrait of promise: The California statewide plan to promote health and mental health equity. Retrieved June 01, 2017, from https:// www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/OHE/CDPH%20Document%20Library/ Accessible-CDPH_OHE_Disparity_Report_Final%20(2).pdf
54 California Air Resources Board. (2016, December 16). Physical activity:

City Council / Local Redevelopment Authority / Public Financing AuthorityFebruary 22, 2022

City Council / Local Redevelopment Authority / Public Financing Authority
February 22, 2022