Union City City Council
July 26, 2022

AGENDA

CITY OF UNION CITY/

SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING
Tuesday, July 26, 2022
7:00 PM
City Hall- Council Chamber
34009 Alvarado-Niles Road
Union City, CA 94587
Meeting will Also be Held Via Teleconference. To access meeting, please see Teleconference Guidelines.

1. CALL TO ORDER

1.a. Pledge of Allegiance

1.b. Roll Call
Mayor Carol Dutra-Vernaci
Vice Mayor Jaime Patiño
Councilmember Emily Duncan
Councilmember Pat Gacoscos
Councilmember Gary Singh

2. UNFINISHED BUSINESS - None

3. PROCLAMATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS

3.a. Update on the Status of the Cargill Mixed Sea Salt Pipeline Project Impacting Union City Boulevard, Notice of Preparation, Presented by East Bay Discharge Authority (EBDA)

3.b. Update of the Union City Boulevard Bike Lanes Project, City Project No. 17-29, Presented by Kimley-Horn

3.c. Update on Human Resources Department Operational Plan and Onboarding Presentation, Lilybell Nakamura, Human Resources City Council/RSA Agenda 1 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
Director

4. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
An individual speaker shall have three minutes to address the Council on non-agenda items under the Oral Communications section of the agenda. The Mayor may, in their discretion, lower the time limit to less than three minutes based on the number of speakers and/or business to be conducted by the City Council.

Members of the public who wish to speak to the Council under the first Oral Communications section are requested to complete a speaker card, giving their name and city of residence. If a speaker wants further notification from the City, the speaker may include a mailing address. Neither a speaker card or identification of name, city of residence or mailing address are not required to provide public comment but are requested for record keeping purposes.

5. CONSENT CALENDAR
All matters listed on the Consent Calendar are considered routine in nature and will be enacted by one motion. If discussion is required on a specific item, it will be removed from the Consent Calendar and considered separately.

5.a. Waived Further Reading of Proposed Ordinance
(This permits reading the title only in lieu of reciting the entire text of any proposed Ordinance.)

5.b. Approve the Minutes of the City Council Meetings Held on July 12, 2022

5.c. Adopt a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Amendment No. 2 to Agreement, C5460, with Bay Area Tree Specialists, in the Amount of $500,000, for the 2022-2023 Tree Pruning Project, City Project No. 20-10, for a Total Contract Amount of $1,160,000

5.d. Adopt a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the Sea Salt Pipeline and Bike Lanes Project Construction and Cost Sharing Agreement Between the City of Union City and Cargill, Incorporated, for the Union City Boulevard Bike Lanes Project, City Project No. 17-29, and Increasing the Revenue Projections in the Gas Tax Fund by $405,000

5.e. Adopt a Resolution Authorizing the Award of the Construction Contract to Ray's Electric, in the Amount of $170,334, for the Enhancement of Pedestrian Infrastructure (Safe Routes to School (SRTS) Improvements) at James Logan High School
and Guy Emanuele, Jr. Elementary School Project, City Project No. 21-27, and Appropriating an Additional $8,367 of Gas Tax Funds (Fund 2510), Bringing the Total Project Cost to $187,367

5.f. Adopt a Resolution Approving the City's Investment Policy City Council/RSA Agenda 2 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

5.g. Adopt a Resolution Endorsing the Alameda County Home Together 2026 Draft Implementation Plan

5.h. Adopt a Resolution Approving an Amendment to the
Classification Plan and Adopting a Side Letter Between with the City of Union City and Service Employees International Union Local 1021 (SEIU) To Create Technical Support Specialist I and Technical Support Specialist II Positions for the Information Technology Services Department and Approving an
Amendment to the City’s Compensation Plan and Salary
Schedule

5.i. Adopt a Resolution Approving the Migration of the Police Department’s Cellular Service from Verizon to FirstNet by AT&T, for a One-Time Equipment Cost of $6,755.98, a OneTime Credit of $18,275.00, and a Monthly Service Charge Of $4,028.15, For A Total Two-Year Cost of $85,156.58, and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Agreements to
Purchase the New Equipment and Services

5.j. Adopt a Resolution Approving the Replacement of Computers and Peripherals for City Staff and Police Vehicles Through Provider Dell Technologies, for a Total Four-Year Lease Cost of Approximately $545,000.00, Through Bank Of America, and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the Purchase and Lease Agreements

6. PUBLIC HEARINGS - None

7. CITY MANAGER REPORTS

7.a. Provide Feedback on the Sixth Cycle (2023-2031) Draft Housing Element and Related General Plan and Zoning
Amendments and Authorize Submittal to the State Department of Housing and Community Development

7.b. Adopt a Resolution Approving an Amendment to the
Compensation and Benefit Plan for Unrepresented Employees

8. SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY -
None

9. AUTHORITIES AND AGENCIES - None

10. CITY COMMISSION / COMMITTEE REPORTS - None

11. SCHEDULED ORAL COMMUNICATION - None

12. ITEMS REFERRED BY COUNCIL

13. GOOD OF THE ORDER

14. CLOSED SESSION - None

15. ADJOURNMENT
A complete agenda packet is available for review at City Hall or on our City Council/RSA Agenda 3 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
website www.unioncity.org
Any writings or documents provided to a majority of City Council members regarding any item on this agenda will be made available for public inspection at the City Clerk's Counter at City Hall, located at 34009 Alvarado-Niles Road, Union City, California, during normal business hours.

Assistance will be provided to those requiring accommodations for disabilities in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990.

Interested person must request the accommodation at least two working days in advance of the meeting by contacting the City Clerk at (510) 675- 5348.

TELECONFERENCING GUIDELINES FOR THE CITY OF UNION CITY REGULAR COUNCIL

MEETING
COVID-19 Notice: Consistent with State of California Executive Order No. 29-20 dated March 17, 2020, the City Council will be participating in public meetings via phone/video conferencing. The City Council Chambers will not be open to the public. Members of the public can observe and address the Council using the below technological processes.

How to watch the meeting remotely:

1. Comcast TV Channel 15 (UCTV 15)

2. Live stream https: https://www.unioncity.org/199/City-Meetings-Video How to Address Council:

Written Comment: To provide written comment on an item on the agenda or to address the Council about an issue during Public Comment, you may send an email to [email protected]. Please include the phrase "public comment" in the subject line and note the agenda item number that you want to address. Written comments received before 3:00 p.m. will be e-mailed to the City Council and made publicly available. Comments received after 3:00 p.m. will be read into the record for up to the first 300 words (approximately 3 minutes consistent with the time limit provided for public speakers) and added to the official record.

Public Comment via Teleconference: Members of the public may address the Council on a matter on the agenda or during the Public Input portion of the meeting. Raise your virtual hand to notify the host that you would like to speak during that portion.

Instructions on Raising your Hand in Zoom Webinar:

1.Click Raise Hand in the webinar controls. The host will be notified that you've raised your hand.

2.If the host allows you to talk, you may be prompted to unmute yourself. While unmuted, your profile picture and name is displayed to the host and panelists. Only your name is displayed to other attendees.

3.Click Raise Hand in the webinar controls to lower it, if needed. This will not mute yourself if you are unmuted.

City Council/RSA Agenda 4 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
Zoom Shortcuts:

Windows: You can also use the AltY keyboard shortcut to raise or lower your hand.

Mac: You can also use the OptionY keyboard shortcut to raise or lower your hand.

Please click the link below to join the webinar:
http://citycouncil-live.unioncity.org/
Passcode: Mr6%qH6P
Or Telephone:

Dial (for higher quality, dial a number based on your current location):

US: +1 213 338 8477 or +1 301 715 8592 or +1 408 638 0968 or +1 646 518 9805 Webinar ID: 928 8582 6000
Passcode: 52282697
ADA Accessibility: If you require a reasonable modification or accommodation for a disability, please email the
City Clerk at [email protected] a minimum of two (2) business days prior to the Council meeting. 3511412.1
City Council/RSA Agenda 5 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
Update of the Status of Cargill
Mixed Sea Salt Pipeline Project
impacting Union City Blvd.,
Notice of Preparation (NOP)
July 26, 2022 City Council of Union City Meeting
Item 3.a. – PRESENTATION BY EAST BAY DISCHARGE AUTHORITY (EBDA) AND CARGILL INCORPORATED
Jacqueline Zipkin, General Manager
Don Brown, Director of NA Government Relations
City Council/RSA Agenda 6 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
155,000
employees
A trusted partner for food, agriculture, financial and
industrial customers in more than 125 countries.

At a glance
More than 150 years
of experience
Working in 70
countries
Animal nutrition
and protein
Financial
and
industrial
Agriculture Food
2 City Council/RSA Agenda 7 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
Cargill and the Bay Area
3 City Council/RSA Agenda 8 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
Solar Sea Salt Production –
Long History in the South Bay
4 City Council/RSA Agenda 9 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
Cargill’s solar sea salt facility
in Newark is the only largescale manufacturer of foodgrade sea salt in the United States
5 City Council/RSA Agenda 10 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
Nourishing, protecting and enriching the Bay Area community where we live and work.

Cargill’s Community Commitment
6 • Cargill provides 200 union and management jobs at its Newark facility. • Whether participating in volunteer events at the refuge, collecting and sorting food for those in need, or investing in local STEM programs for local students, Cargill employees demonstrate their commitment to the local community. • Over the last five years, Cargill’s Bay Area operation has donated more than $1.5 million and hundreds of volunteer hours to local nonprofits. • Nonprofit include Second Harvest Food Bank, San Francisco Bay Wildlife Society, Ducks Unlimited, LOV of Newark, Abode Services Fremont and many others. • Cargill was recently recognized by Ducks Unlimited for a partnership to deliver a program that brings Bay Area middle school and high school students out to the San Pablo Bay National Wildlife Refuge.

City Council/RSA Agenda 11 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
Solar Sea Salt Production Process
7 Magnesium Chloride Sodium Chloride
Concentration ponds
Crystallization ponds
Desalting ponds
FMC ponds
Pickle ponds
MSS ponds
Coyote Slough intake
City Council/RSA Agenda 12 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
Cargill’s proactive approach
Addressing Sea Level Rise
8 • Climate change and sea level rise will impact all
of us.
• The time to act is now so we can protect the
Bay and the communities where we live and
work.
• Cargill is addressing sea level rise and
protecting the Bay for future generations by
enhanced processing and removing the natural
mixed sea salts from our Newark facility.
• Cargill is partnering with EBDA to safely return
the mixed sea salts back to the Bay.

City Council/RSA Agenda 13 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
Options Considered for Mixed Sea Salt Post-Harvest
Land-based options
• Leave it place (local cap-inplace)
• Risk due to proximity to the Bay;
permitting challenges
• Truck to landfill
• High GHG emissions; additional local
traffic; long time frame
• Truck or train to underground
injection control well
• High GHG emissions; additional local
traffic
Bay/Ocean-based options
• Barge to deep-water ocean
• High GHG emissions; requires legislative
act
• Direct discharge to the South Bay
• Dramatic increase in Bay water use
• Discharge to the Bay by connecting
to EBDA pipeline system
• Limited GHG emissions
• Marginal increase in Bay water use
• Use EBDA’s existing
infrastructure/permit
9 City Council/RSA Agenda 14 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
Proposal Overview
10 City Council/RSA Agenda 15 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
Enhanced Processing and Removal of Mixed Sea Salts
11 New
Pipeline
EBDA
Conveyance
System
Bay water WWTP discharges
Processing
of MSS
Dissolution EBDA permitted
deep-water
outfall
Commercial
Product
1-2 mgd
50-60 mgd
City Council/RSA Agenda 16 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
Proposal Overview
12 Cargill would construct pipeline and connection to EBDA • Route and connection point will be discussed later in this presentation • Cargill will execute Project Labor Agreement with Building Trades for pipeline construction
Average of 1-2 MGD of brine would be discharged to EBDA year-round Brine discharges would be paused in the event of EBDA capacity constraints • Wet weather
• Process upset
Demonstrated ability to comply with EBDA’s NPDES permit • Water quality would be monitored to ensure compliance City Council/RSA Agenda 17 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
Mixed Sea Salt Brine Discharge to EBDA System
13 Cargill Salt
New Pipeline
City Council/RSA Agenda 18 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
Cargill Goals: Adaptation, Resilience, and Sustainability 14 • Enhance product recovery from
MSS
•Improve resilience of Cargill MSS
ponds to sea level rise
• Sustainable discharge of MSS
brine utilizing EBDA’s existing
effluent and deep-water outfall
City Council/RSA Agenda 19 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
EBDA Drivers and Potential Benefits
15 • Sustainably manage discharge generated within EBDA’s service area
• Utilize excess capacity available in EBDA’s existing infrastructure • Receive financial compensation that will offset EBDA expenses to the benefit of the Member Agencies’ ratepayers
• Benefit from new or improved infrastructure that will be more corrosion-resistant and resilient to higher salt levels • Support efforts to improve resilience of SF Bay from sea level rise by facilitating removal of salts from Cargill’s MSS ponds adjacent to the Bay
City Council/RSA Agenda 20 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
Pipeline, Construction & Route Specifics
• Cargill working with UC public works staff and
consultant on the pipeline route and construction
specifics
• 16” high-density polyethylene (HDPE) pipeline
constructed within Union City’s public streets
• Pipeline buried 4-6’ underground
• Both open trench and trenchless drilling will be used to minimize impacts
• Proposed route provides for concurrent construction
of bike lane along Union City Blvd and installation of
3” conduit for fiber optic cable, if needed
• Brine in pipeline under low pressure coupled with
corrosion resistant HDPE material minimizes risk of
leakage/spill
- - - Project Limits of UCB Bike Lanes Project
16 City Council/RSA Agenda 21 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
Cargill conducted outreach to a broad range of stakeholders in the Bay Area Stakeholder Outreach
17 Agencies
• Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC)
• Regional Water Quality Control Board - San Francisco Bay • National Wildlife Refuge
Environmental organizations
• San Francisco Baykeeper, Save The Bay
Business organizations
• Silicon Valley Leadership Group, East Bay Leadership Council, Bay Planning Coalition City, county, state and federal lawmakers
Building & Construction Trades Council of Alameda County City Council/RSA Agenda 22 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
EBDA is serving as Lead Agency
CEQA Process
18 Initial Notice of Preparation (NOP) posted in May, with CEQA Scoping Meeting held on June 1, 2022
• Seven (7) comment letters received
Reissued NOP with updated pipeline route on July 8, 2022 • 30-day comment period closes Tuesday, August 9, 2022
Tribal consultations are ongoing
Expect to circulate Draft EIR in October
• Information and documents can be found at https://ebda.org/projects/cargill-partnership/ City Council/RSA Agenda 23 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
Pre-construction timeline highly dependent on CEQA process Project Timeline (tentative)
19 June 2022
CEQA Scoping
meeting held –
EBDA is Lead
Agency
8 July
2022
Revised CEQA
Notice of
Preparation
(NOP) issued –
Hayward route
SummerFall 2022
Negotiations with
cities on
franchise
agreements
begin
7 Oct.
2022
CEQA Draft EIR
issued for 45-day
public review and
comment period
28 Oct.
2022
Draft EIR
Public/Agency
Meeting
21 Nov.
2022
45-day draft EIR
comment period
ends
27 Feb.
2023
EBDA
Commission
Certifies EIR
Feb. 2023
Cargill executes
agreements with
cities, EBDA,
other parties
Summer
2023
Pipeline
construction
begins
2024–
2025
Construction
concludes
City Council/RSA Agenda 24 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
City Council/RSA Agenda 25 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
Agenda Item
City Council/RSA Agenda 26 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
Human Resources
Operational Plan and
Onboarding Presentation
City Council/RSA Agenda 27 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
2 • Provide information on the Role Human
Resources
• Introduce HR’s Operational Plan
• View the New Hire Onboarding Presentation
Objectives
City Council/RSA Agenda 28 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
3 • What is Human Resources?
• Areas of Responsibility
• HR Operational Plan
• Achievements and Initiatives
• Onboarding Presentation
Agenda
City Council/RSA Agenda 29 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
What Is Human Resources?
City Council/RSA Agenda 30 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
5 What comes to mind when you think of HR?
City Council/RSA Agenda 31 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
6 HR Definition
City Council/RSA Agenda 32 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
7 HR Myths - Recruitment
City Council/RSA Agenda 33 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
8 HR Myths – Employee and Labor Relations
City Council/RSA Agenda 34 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
9 HR Areas of Responsibility

1. Recruitment and Selection

2. Classification and
Compensation

3. Employee and Labor Relations

4. Benefits Administration

5. Disability and Leaves
Management

6. Onboarding and Off-boarding

7. Human Resource Information
Systems

8. Personnel Transactions

9. Employee Engagement

10. Compliance/Risk Management and
Safety
City Council/RSA Agenda 35 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
10 Recruitment and Selection
• Develop and implement a
recruitment strategy
• Job postings
• Review applications and send
notices
• Create and administer exams and
corresponding rating sheets
• Conduct hiring interviews,
reference and background checks,
pre-employment medical exams
• Manage pre-hire paperwork
City Council/RSA Agenda 36 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
11 Classification and Compensation
• Perform job analysis and evaluation
• Develop and revise job descriptions
• Conduct salary surveys,
compensation studies and desk
audits
• Ensure fair and competitive
compensation system based on
duties and scope of positions
• Maintain standardized and equitable
classification system with career
path
City Council/RSA Agenda 37 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
12 Employee and Labor Negotiations
• Develop and revise policies
• Conduct workplace investigations
• Meet and Confer over mandatory
subjects of bargaining
• Negotiate collective bargaining
agreements
• Prepare proposals, tentative
agreements and Memorandum of
Understanding
• Present Closed Session reports
• Manage employee performance
• Respond to Grievances
City Council/RSA Agenda 38 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
13 Benefits and Leave Administration
• Administer employee benefits • Medical, Dental, Vision • Retirement Benefits
• Disability Insurance
• Flexible Spending Accounts/Commuter Benefits
• Employee Assistance Program
• Manage employee leaves
• Family Medical Leave (FML)/CA Family Rights Act
(CFRA) • Pregnancy Disability Leave (PDL) • Worker’s Compensation • Temporary Modified Work
• Military Leave
• COVID-19 CA Supplemental Paid Sick Leave
City Council/RSA Agenda 39 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
14 What Human Resources is
City Council/RSA Agenda 40 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
HR Operational Plan
(in progress)
City Council/RSA Agenda 41 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
16 City’s 5-year Strategic Plan Goals
Goal A. Financial Stability and Sustainability - Foster fiscal health through disciplined long-term planning, cost control, heightened efficiency, increased revenue and cost recovery.

Goal B. Governance and Organization Effectiveness - Produce high-quality services to the community through a commitment to local government best practices and employee development, support and retention.

Goal C. Economic, Community Development and Public Safety - Institute forwardthinking business, land use development, housing, social services, and public safety strategies that promote community growth and innovation.

Goal D. Environmental Sustainability and Infrastructure - Create a healthy, sustainable community and maintain and improve the City’s infrastructure.

Goal E. Communication and Outreach - Build strong connections with community partners, residents and employees.

City Council/RSA Agenda 42 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
17 Goal A. Financial Stability and Sustainability
Achievements
• Negotiated sustainable contracts
• Held off filling positions in 2020
due to the pandemic
• Reviewed current staffing levels
and make appropriate
adjustments
Future Initiatives
• Review current contracts and identify
duplicative or unused services
• Recommend and implement cost
saving strategies in areas of Disability
and Leave Management
• Implement the use of technology to
eliminate unnecessary administrative
work or save staff time
City Council/RSA Agenda 43 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
18 Goal B. Governance and Organization
Effectiveness
Achievements
• Created a form and implemented
a formal exit interview process
• Worked with IT to implement and
begin using a new Learning
Management System, KnowBe4
• Developed and implemented
recruitment plan process to
actively source qualified
candidates
Future Initiatives
• Recommend and implement cost
saving strategies in areas of Disability
and Leave Management
• Review and update the City’s personnel
policies to ensure they reflect best
practices in diversity and inclusion
• Conduct market study of competitive
salary and benefits to support
recruitment and retain talented staff
City Council/RSA Agenda 44 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
19 Goal C. Economic, Community Development
and Public Safety
Achievements
• Assembled COVID-19
Subcommittee and implemented
the COVID-19 Prevention
Program (CPP)
• Provide employee training on
COVID-19
• Conducted 300+ contact tracing
calls and notices for employee
positive cases and direct
contacts
• Created and new classifications
for the Homelessness Program
Future Initiatives
• Develop a multi-department approach
to help address complex
homelessness issues through
coordination with staff, community
organizations and other jurisdictions
• Further develop and execute
recruitment strategies to attract and
hire qualified individuals to fill critical
vacancies
• Work with Emergency Services
Coordinator to train employees on
FEMA’s Incident Command System
City Council/RSA Agenda 45 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
20 Goal D. Environmental Sustainability and
Infrastructure
Achievements
• Explored new HRIS to eliminate
paper
• Revised various processes to
reduce use of paper
• Created job descriptions and
recruited for recycling
classifications
Future Initiatives
• Implement Citywide Telecommuting
Policy
• Update HRIS system to improve
efficiencies, eliminate redundancies,
and reduce the use of paper
• Revise paper benefit forms with online
fillable forms
City Council/RSA Agenda 46 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
21 Goal E. Communication and Outreach
Achievements
• Updated HR information on the
City’s website and intranet
• Developed HR Newsletter
• COVID-19 Intranet
• Developed a new Onboarding
presentation
Future Initiatives
• Continue to provide and make
improvements to the HR information
on the City’s website
• Assist with and work with the City
Manager’s Office in conveying
progress and outcomes from the City’s
Strategic Plan to employees and the
community at large.

City Council/RSA Agenda 47 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
22 HR in a Nutshell?
City Council/RSA Agenda 48 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
City Council/RSA Agenda 49 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

CONGRATULATIONS
&
WELCOME!
City Council/RSA Agenda 50 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
25 INTRODUCTIONS
City Council/RSA Agenda 51 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
26 AGENDA

1. About Union City

2. City Council

3. Mission, Vision, Values

4. Departments

5. Office Locations

6. Senior Management Team

7. Human Resources (HR)

8. Labor Organizations

9. Employee Relations

10. Expectations of Employees

11. Resources

12. Onboarding Forms
City Council/RSA Agenda 52 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
27 Incorporated in 1959, we proudly maintain our smalltown feel while living in the center of the Bay Area, with San Francisco & Silicon Valley just minutes
away.
• Alameda County
• 75,000 residents
• New Haven Unified School District serves about
13,000 students
• 300+ FTEs

ABOUT UNION CITY
City Council/RSA Agenda 53 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
28 Ethnic Background
• Asian: 53.2%
• Hispanic or Latino (of any race): 20.9%
• White: 15.5%
• Black or African American: 4.9%
• Two or More Races: 3.7%
• Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 1.5%
• American Indian or Alaska Native: 0.5%
• Other Race: 0.2%

ABOUT UNION CITY
City Council/RSA Agenda 54 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
29 Mayor and City Council serve as governing body
over City administration.
• Provide direction to City Manager and City staff on
policies that aim to ensure for responsiveness,
effective and high-quality service delivery to our
residents.

Mayor Carol Dutra-Vernaci is in her 3rd term as Union
City Mayor.
• Made history on December 11, 2012 when she was
sworn in as the first woman mayor of Union City.

CITY COUNCIL
City Council/RSA Agenda 55 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
30 CITY COUNCIL
Mayor
Carol
Dutra-Vernaci
Councilmember
Emily Duncan
Councilmember
Pat Gacoscos
Councilmember
Jaime Patino
Councilmember
Gary Singh
City Council/RSA Agenda 56 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
31 Mission
To create and provide effective, quality services that foster high quality of life and economic vitality.

Vision
To foster an environment where City employees are inspired, recognized and thrive. Values
• Sustainability
• Accountability
• Professionalism
• Integrity
The 2020-2025 Strategic Plan was adopted on October 8, 2019.

MISSION, VISION, AND VALUES
City Council/RSA Agenda 57 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
32 1. Sustainability
Plan for the long term in all that we do to ensure financial, environmental, and community well-being.

2. Accountability
Serve as responsible stewards of public resources and trust.

3. Professionalism
Deliver high-quality services to members of the community while investing in employee development.

4. Integrity
Demonstrate devotion to honesty, transparency, and acting in the best interest of the community.

VALUES
City Council/RSA Agenda 58 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
33 The 2020-2025 Strategic Plan was adopted on October 8, 2019. Goal A. Financial Stability and Sustainability - Foster fiscal health through disciplined long-term planning, cost control, heightened efficiency, increased revenue and cost recovery.

Goal B. Governance and Organization Effectiveness - Produce high-quality services to the community through a commitment to local government best practices and employee development, support and retention.

Goal C. Economic, Community Development and Public Safety - Institute forward-thinking business, land use development, housing, social services, and public safety strategies that promote community growth and innovation.

Goal D. Environmental Sustainability and Infrastructure - Create a healthy, sustainable community and maintain and improve the City’s infrastructure.

Goal E. Communication and Outreach - Build strong connections with community partners, residents and employees.

CITY’S 5-YEAR STRATEGIC PLAN
City Council/RSA Agenda 59 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
34 DEPARTMENTS

1. City Manager’s Office (CMO)

2. City Attorney (through Meyers-Nave)

3. Community & Recreation Services (CRS)
• Youth and Family Services (YFS)

3. Economic & Community Development (ECD)

4. Finance

5. Human Resource Services (HRS)

6. Information Technology Services (ITS)

7. Police (PD)

8. Public Works (PW)
*Fire Department contracted through Alameda County
City Council/RSA Agenda 60 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
35 OFFICE LOCATIONS
City Hall and Police Department
Alvarado-Niles Rd.

City Council/RSA Agenda 61 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
36 OFFICE LOCATIONS
Police Resource Center
Alvarado Blvd.

Police Union Landing Substation
Dyer St.

City Council/RSA Agenda 62 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
37 OFFICE LOCATIONS
Kennedy Center (CRS)
Decoto Rd.

Ruggieri Senior Center (CRS)
Alvarado-Niles Rd.

City Council/RSA Agenda 63 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
38 OFFICE LOCATIONS
Holly Center (CRS)
Alvarado Blvd.

Mark Green Sports
Center (CRS)
Union City Blvd.

City Council/RSA Agenda 64 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
39 OFFICE LOCATIONS
Youth & Family Services (CRS)
H St.

Corporation Yard (PW)
7 th St.

City Council/RSA Agenda 65 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
40 City
Manager
Joan Malloy
Deputy City
Manager
Vacant
Interim CRS
Director
Corina Hahn
ECD Director
Carmela Campbell
Finance Director
Jackie Acosta
HR Director
Lilybell Nakamura
IT Director
Mario Vallejo
Police Chief
Jared Rinetti
PW Director
Marilou Ayupan
City
Attorney
Kris Kokotaylo

SENIOR MANAGEMENT TEAM (SMT)
City Council/RSA Agenda 66 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
41 HUMAN RESOURCES (HR) TEAM
HR Main Line: (510) 675-5366 E-mail: [email protected]
HR Director
Lilybell Nakamura
Admin. Specialist
Conf.

Rona Galvan
HR Technician
Jaime Rabe
HR Analyst I
Alicia Reyes
HR Manager
Vacant
City Council/RSA Agenda 67 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
42 HR AREAS OF RESPONSIBILITY

1. Recruitment and Selection

2. Classification and
Compensation

3. Personnel Transactions

4. Benefits Administration

5. Onboarding and Off-boarding

6. Disability and Leaves Management

7. Human Resource Information
Systems

8. Employee and Labor Relations

9. Employee Engagement

10. Risk Management/Compliance
City Council/RSA Agenda 68 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
43 LABOR ORGANIZATIONS

1. Police Management Group (PMA)

2. Police Officers Association (POA)

3. Management Employees’ Group (MEG)

4. Professional Employees’ Group (PEG)

5. Service Employees International Union (SEIU)
• Unrepresented Department Heads, Management, and NonManagement • Unrepresented Police Positions
• Unrepresented Seasonal Employees
City Council/RSA Agenda 69 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
44 LABOR AND EMPLOYEE RELATIONS

1. Foster a work environment that values cooperation & open communication

2. Resolve miscommunication & workplace issues at the lowest possible level

3. Ensure employees are treated equitably across the City

4. Resolve performance, attendance, and conduct issues

5. Negotiate union contracts on behalf of the City
City Council/RSA Agenda 70 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
45 EXPECTATIONS OF EMPLOYEES
• Accountability of actions
• Mutual respect
• Knowledge & fulfillment of your duties
• Reliability & attendance
• Teamwork
• Initiative to enhance City services
City Council/RSA Agenda 71 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
46 DISASTER SERVICE WORKER (DSW)
• What does disaster service mean?
Disaster service means all activities authorized and carried out pursuant to the California Emergency Services Act
• Who is included in the disaster service worker status? All public employees are included in the disaster service worker status which are all persons employed by any county, city, state agency or public district. • How are public employees assigned disaster service activities? Public employees may be assigned disaster service activities by law to assist the agency in carrying out its responsibilities during times of disaster. • Additional information:

California Emergency Services Act
California Government Code Section 3100-3109
California Governor's Office of Emergency Services
City Council/RSA Agenda 72 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
47 STAY CONNECTED WITH THE CITY
Follow us on our social media platforms below.
(Click icons to see up to date information)
City Council/RSA Agenda 73 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
48 Our organization uses Sharepoint for our intranet, called The Union. It’s a secure place to store, organize, share, and access information.

The Union (Sharepoint)
Use Sharepoint to access: • Active Directory
• HR Policies and Forms
• Covid-19 Information
• Announcements

RESOURCES
• Payroll Schedule
• Holiday Schedule
• Timesheet (BLANK)
City Council/RSA Agenda 74 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

ONBOARDING FORMS
City Council/RSA Agenda 75 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
50 ONBOARDING FORMS

1. I-9 and two forms of ID

2. W-4 Tax Form

3. EDD State Tax Form

4. Pre-designation of Personal
Physician (optional)

5. Direct Deposit Authorization and
voided check or direct deposit
statement

6. Social Security Statement

7. Employee Information

8. EEO-1 Voluntary Self Identification
Form

9. Oath of Office

8. DMV Pull Notice

9. Recipient of Designation for Pay
Warrant

10.City Property Form
ALL NEW HIRES MUST COMPLETE FORMS 1-10
City Council/RSA Agenda 76 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
51 POLICIES AND TRAINING

1. Employee Handbook

2. Personnel Rules

3. Exposure Control Plan

4. Safety Orientation

5. Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault

6. Employee Group MOU

7. Alcohol & Drug Abuse

8. Discrimination & Harassment

9. FMLA

10.Sick Leave

11.Use of E-Mail & Technology

12.Mandated Reporting

13.Covid Protocols Acknowledgement

14.Covid Self-Attestation
ALL NEW HIRES MUST COMPLETE FORMS 1-11
City Council/RSA Agenda 77 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
52 QUESTIONS
City Council/RSA Agenda 78 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
53 CITY HALL TOUR
Conference Room
Council Chambers
Lunch/Break Room
Restrooms
International Room
Doors/Entry
PD entrance
City Council/RSA Agenda 79 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
Agenda Item
ATTACHMENTS:

Description Type
Desk Item Attachment
City Council/RSA Agenda 80 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

MINUTES

CITY OF UNION CITY/

SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING
Tuesday, July 12, 2022
7:00 PM
City Hall- Council Chamber
34009 Alvarado-Niles Road
Union City, CA 94587

1. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Dutra-Vernaci called the meeting to order at 7:18 p.m.

1.a. Pledge of Allegiance – Mayor Dutra-Vernaci led the salute to the flag.

1.b. Roll Call Present: Councilmembers Duncan, Gacoscos, Singh, Vice Mayor Patiño, Mayor Dutra-Vernaci

Absent: None

2. UNFINISHED BUSINESS - None

3. PROCLAMATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS

3.a. Proclamation Recognizing July is Parks and Recreation Month The proclamation was accepted by Recreation Supervisor Trish Heuer,

3.b. Fourth of July After-Action Oral Report, Police Chief Jared Rinetti Chief Rinetti provided the informational report and responded to questions from Council. Councilmembers provided comment.

4. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Public comment was given by Subru Bhat, Gurpreet Bhella, Camila Villanueva and Jesse Garrett.

City Council/RSA Agenda 81 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

5. CONSENT CALENDAR
It was moved by Councilmember Singh and seconded by Councilmember Gacoscos to adopt consent calendar items 5.a. through 5.e. The motion was carried by a unanimous roll call vote.

5.a. Waived Further Reading of Proposed Ordinance
(This permits reading the title only in lieu of reciting the entire text of any proposed Ordinance.)

5.b. Approved the Minutes of the City Council Meetings Held on June 28, 2022

5.c. Adopted Resolution No. 5972-22 Designating Voting Delegate and Alternate Delegate for League of California Cities Annual Conference – September 7-9, 2022 in Long Beach

5.d. Adopted Resolution No. 5973-22 Receiving and Accepting the Measure B, Measure BB and Measure F Vehicle Registration Fee Audit Reports

5.e. Adopted Resolution No. 5974-22 Finding that There is a Proclaimed State of Emergency; Finding that Meeting in Person Would Present Imminent Risks to the Health or Safety of Attendees as a Result of the State of Emergency; and Resolution No. 5975-22 Authorizing Remote Teleconferenced Meetings of the Legislative Bodies of the City of Union City for the 30-day Period Beginning July 12 Pursuant to AB 361 and Adopt a Resolution Confirming the Continued Existence of a Local Emergency Due to COVID-19

6. PUBLIC HEARINGS

6.a. Conduct a Public Hearing and Adopt a Resolution Confirming the Assessment and Order the Levy for the Landscape and Lighting Maintenance District No. 3 for Fiscal Year 2022/23
City Engineer Farooq Azim presented the staff report and responded to questions from Council.

Mayor Dutra-Vernaci opened the public hearing. There was no public comment. Mayor Dutra-Vernaci closed the public hearing.

Councilmembers provided comment. It was moved by Councilmember Duncan and seconded by Councilmember Singh to adopt Resolution No. 5976-22 Confirming the Assessment and Order the Levy for the Landscape and Lighting Maintenance District No. 3 for Fiscal Year 2022/23. The motion was carried by a unanimous roll call vote.

6.b. Conduct a Public Hearing and Adopt a Resolution Approving Site Development Review (SD-21-002) for the Development of Two (2) 5- Story Buildings Containing 123 Affordable Rental Housing Units on Planning Area 3 Located at 33945 7th Street (APN 087-0021-013-1 and 087- 0021-013-2 (Portion))
City Council/RSA Agenda 82 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
Contract Planner Leslie Carmichael presented the staff report and responded to questions from Council.

Mayor Dutra-Vernaci opened the public hearing.

Letha Clark, Development Manager for applicant USA Properties was present and responded to questions from Council.

Mayor Dutra-Vernaci closed the public hearing.

Councilmembers provided additional comment. It was moved by Councilmember Singh and seconded by Councilmember Gacoscos to adopt Resolution No. 5977-22 Approving Site Development Review (SD-21-002) for the Development of Two (2) 5-Story Buildings Containing 123 Affordable Rental Housing Units on Planning Area 3 Located at 33945 7th Street (APN 087-0021-013-1 and 087-0021-013-2 (Portion)). The motion was carried by a unanimous roll call vote.

7. CITY MANAGER REPORTS

7.a. Consider for Adoption a Resolution Calling for an Election to be Held on November 8, 2022, for Voter Consideration of the Extension of an Existing, Voter-Approved Local One-Half Cent Transactions and Use (Sales) Tax for an Additional Nine Years With no Increase in Tax Rate for the Continued Maintenance of City Services; Establishing Policies and Procedures in Connection with such an Election; Requesting the Board of Supervisors of the County of Alameda to Consolidate the General Municipal Election with the General Election to be Held on November 8, 2022, Requesting Certain Services of the Registrar of Voters of Alameda County with Respect to the Consolidated General Municipal Election; and Providing for Submittal of Ballot Arguments and Rebuttals and Authorizing the Filing of an Impartial Analysis City Attorney Kristopher J. Kokotaylo presented the staff report. There were no questions from the Council.

It was moved by Mayor Dutra-Vernaci and seconded by Councilmember Duncan to adopt Resolution No. 5978-22 Calling for an Election to be Held on November 8, 2022, for Voter Consideration of the Extension of an Existing, Voter-Approved Local One-Half Cent Transactions and Use (Sales) Tax for an Additional Nine Years With no Increase in Tax Rate for the Continued Maintenance of City Services; Establishing Policies and Procedures in Connection with such an Election; Requesting the Board of Supervisors of the County of Alameda to Consolidate the General Municipal Election with the General Election to be Held on November 8, 2022, Requesting Certain Services of the Registrar of Voters of Alameda County with Respect to the Consolidated General Municipal Election; and Providing for Submittal of Ballot Arguments and Rebuttals and Authorizing the Filing of an Impartial Analysis; and appointing Councilmember Singh and herself to author the arguments and rebuttals. The motion was carried by a unanimous roll call vote.

8. SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY - None

9. AUTHORITIES AND AGENCIES - None

10. CITY COMMISSION / COMMITTEE REPORTS - None
City Council/RSA Agenda 83 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

11. SCHEDULED ORAL COMMUNICATION - None

12. ITEMS REFERRED BY COUNCIL
Vice Mayor Patiño reported on his attendance of the League of California Cities meeting where he was appointed to the Board of Directors.

Councilmember Gacoscos reported the meeting for the Housing Authority was canceled and she was unable to attend the meeting of the Alameda County Library Commission.

Councilmember Singh reported on his attendance of the Union City Chamber of Commerce.

Mayor Dutra-Vernaci reported on her attendance of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, the Alameda County Transportation Commission, the U.S.

Conference of Mayors meeting regarding the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.

13. GOOD OF THE ORDER
Vice Mayor Patiño stated he will attend the City Council meeting of July 26 via teleconference.

Councilmember Singh reported streetlights out along a portion of Alvarado Niles Boulevard from Royal Ann to the Crown Plaza and dead trees on Dyer and Meridien Court.

Mayor Dutra-Vernaci stated she will attend the City Council meeting of July 26 via teleconference.

14. CLOSED SESSION - None

15. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Dutra-Vernaci adjourned the meeting at 9:40 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,
Anna M. Brown, CMC
City Clerk
City Council/RSA Agenda 84 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
Agenda Item
DATE: 7/26/2022
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: MARILOU AYUPAN, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO AGREEMENT C5460, WITH BAY
AREA TREE SPECIALISTS, IN THE AMOUNT OF $500,000, FOR THE 2022-2023 TREE PRUNING PROJECT, CITY PROJECT NO. 20-10, FOR A TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT OF $1,160,000
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute Amendment No. 2 to Agreement C5460, with Bay Area Tree Specialists, in the amount of $500,000, for the 2022-2023 Tree Pruning Project, City Project No. 20-10, for a totalamount of $1,160,000.

STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT
The action is identified strategy in the Strategic Plan.

Goal D, Strategy 2: Environmental Sustainability and Infrastructure – Implement the City’s capital improvement plan.

BACKGROUND
Union City has thousands of City-maintained trees in parks, public streets and around City facilities. On a rotating basis, trees are inspected, trimmed, pruned, and on rare occasions, removed based upon criteria that strives to protect the tree as an urban forest investment, with a focus on safety and aesthetics. Each year, the Public Works Grounds Division reviews the tree pruning needs of the City and makes recommendations as to which trees should be pruned. A project is then prepared and advertised for bids.

On September 22, 2020, the City Council of Union City, under Resolution No. 5659-20, awarded a Construction Agreement, C5460, to Bay Area Tree Specialists, of San Jose, CA, for the 2020-2021 Tree Pruning Project, City Project No. 20-10, for their lowest-cost responsive proposal, in the amount of $246,125, with a construction contingency of $53,875, for a total construction budget of 300,000. The project was bid City Council/RSA Agenda 85 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
with an option to complete additional tree maintenance work over an additional year once FY 2021-2022 funds became available.

On July 13, 2021, the City Council of Union City, under Resolution No. 5796-21, authorized the City Manager to execute Amendment No. 1 to C5460, with Bay Area Tree Specialists, in an amount not-to-exceed $360,000 (construction budget with contingencies) for a total contract amount not-to-exceed to $660,000 for FY 2021- 2022.

DISCUSSION
Staff continues to be satisfied with the Contractor’s performance, responsiveness and their willingness to continue to provide tree pruning, trimming and removal services at various locations with the Union City.

On June 14, 2022, Public Works’ woodchipper suffered catastrophic engine failure. The woodchipper is used daily and is a vital callout and emergency response piece of equipment. The estimated wait time for a replacement of a woodchipper is currently six (6) months or longer at time of procurement. Public Works staff will be seeking funding and authorization to purchase a new woodchipper in the next few months, while renting a woodchipper in the interim. As a result, the Public Works Grounds Division will have to heavily utilize Bay Area Tree Specialists to perform both routine and emergency services for the City for the foreseeable future, which will incur significant extra costs for the City.

Therefore, staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution approving Amendment No. 2 to Agreement C5460, with Bay Area Tree Specialists, in an amount not-to-exceed $500,000, for the 2022-2023 Tree Pruning Project, City Project No. 20-10, for a total not-to-exceed amount of $1,160,000.

Bay Area Tree Specialists will be used to complete additional neighborhood block pruning with a significant allowance to utilize Bay Area Tree Specialists during storm events to assist Grounds crews with fallen branches or trees blocking vehicle and pedestrian rights-of-way. This allows the City to better utilize Public Works crews and resources during these unforeseen events. Stump grinding is performed by City crews and is, therefore, not included in the scope of the contract.

FISCAL IMPACT
The approved Two-Year Budget for FY 2021-2022 and FY 2022-2023 identifies for FY 2022-2023 a total amount of $315,000 for the Tree Pruning Project with $150,000 from Gas Tax (Fund 2510) and $165,000 from the Street Lighting and Landscape District (Fund 2591). That leaves a $185,000 shortfall. Staff recommends that this shortfall be funded from the available fund balance in the Street Lighting and Landscape District Fund (Account 2591).

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Counciladopt resolution that includes the following:

1. Authorizing the City Manager to execute Amendment No. 2 to Contract C5460, with Bay Area Tree Specialists, increasing the contract amount by $500,000, to a total contract amount not-to-exceed $1,160,000, for the 2022-2023 Tree Pruning Project, City Project No. 20-10.

2. Appropriate $185,000 from the Street Lighting and Landscape District fund balance to Account Number 2591-3199-92310-54111 (Street Lighting and Landscape District Fund – PW General – 2022-2023 Tree Pruning Project – Contractual Services).

City Council/RSA Agenda 86 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
Prepared by:

Jesus Banuelos, Park/Grounds Supervisor
Submitted by:

Marilou Ayupan, Public Works Director
ATTACHMENTS:

Description Type
Resolution - Tree Contract Resolution
Exhibit A -Amendment No. 2 Exhibit
City Council/RSA Agenda 87 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
RESOLUTION NO. _______

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UNION CITY AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO AGREEMENT C5460, WITH BAY AREA TREE SPECIALISTS, IN THE AMOUNT OF $500,000, FOR THE 2022-2023 TREE PRUNING PROJECT, CITY PROJECT NO. 20-10, FOR A TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT OF $1,160,000
WHEREAS, the City of Union City is responsible for maintaining trees in parks, public streets and City facilities, and each fiscal year the City Council budgets funds to address these needs; and
WHEREAS, city trees are annually inspected, trimmed, pruned and at times larger, mature trees are removed when the roots are uplifting sidewalks, pavement and residential properties creating uneven surfaces; and
WHEREAS, on September 22, 2020, the City Council of Union City, under Resolution No. 5659-20, awarded a Construction Agreement, C5460, to Bay Area Tree Specialists of San Jose, CA, for the 2020-2021 Tree Pruning Project, City Project No. 20-10, for their lowest-cost responsive proposal, in the amount of $246,125, with a construction contingency of $53,875, for total construction budget of $300,000; and
WHEREAS, on July 13, 2021, the City Council of Union City, under Resolution No. 5796-21, authorized the City Manager to execute Amendment No. 1 to Agreement C5460 with Bay Area Tree Specialists, in the amount of $360,000, for the 2021-2022 Tree Pruning Project, City Project No. 20-10, for a total contract amount not-to-exceed $660,000; and WHEREAS, on June 14, 2022, Public Works’ woodchipper suffered catastrophic engine failure and, as a result, the Public Works Grounds Division will need to heavily utilize Bay Area Tree Specialists to perform both routine and emergency services for the City for the next year; and
WHEREAS, the City has been satisfied with the performance of Bay Area Tree Specialists and they have expressed a willingness to continue providing tree pruning services; and
WHEREAS, Amendment No. 2 with Bay Area Tree Specialists for the 2022-2023 Tree Pruning Project, City Project No. 20-10, in the amount of $500,000, includes the City’s annual tree pruning and removal work and additional tree pruning and removal work to assist the Public Works Grounds Division; and
WHEREAS, the approved Two-Year Budget for FY 2021-2022 and FY 2022-2023 identifies for FY 2022-2023 a total of $315,000 for the 2022-2023 Tree Pruning Project, with $150,000 from Gas Tax (Fund 2510) and $165,000 from the Street Lighting and Landscape District (Fund 2591); and
City Council/RSA Agenda 88 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
WHEREAS, an additional budget of $185,000 is required for this $500,000 Amendment No. 2 and the additional funds are available in the fund balance of the Street Lighting and Landscape District Fund (Fund 2591).

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Union City that the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute Amendment No. 2 to Agreement C5460, with Bay Area Tree Specialists, for the 2022-2023 Tree Pruning Project, City Project No. 20-10, in the amount of $500,000 (as attached in Exhibit A); and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Union City hereby approves the appropriation of $185,000 from the fund balance of the Street Lighting and Landscape District Fund (Fund 2591) for the 2022-2023 Tree Pruning Project, City Project No. 20-10, to fund the project budget shortfall.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Union City at a regular meeting held on the 26
th day of July 2022, by the following vote:

City Council/RSA Agenda 89 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
Second Amendment to the Contractual Services Agreement
Between City of Union City and Bay Area Tree Specialists

SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE

CONTRACTUAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
THIS SECOND AMENDMENT is effective as of this 12
th day of July, 2022 by and between
THE CITY OF UNION CITY, a municipal corporation (“City”), and BAY AREA TREE SPECIALISTS ("Contractor”), collectively referred to as the "Parties".

W I T N E S S E T H:

WHEREAS, on September 22, 2020, the City Council awarded a project to the Contractor and the Parties entered into a Construction Agreement (“Agreement”) (C5460) to complete the 2020- 21 Tree Pruning & Removal Project, City Project No. 20-10 (“Project”) wherein the Contractor agreed to furnish all equipment, tools, labor and materials to complete the construction of the project within one calendar year from the date specified in the City’s Notice to Proceed (“Time for Completion”); and
WHEREAS, the Project, as bid, provided for a Contract extension over an additional one-year duration at the City’s option; and
WHEREAS, the City chose to exercise said option on July 12, 2021, executing the First Amendment to the Construction Agreement (“First Amendment”) for an additional year of service and increasing the contract amount by $350,000, for a total contract amount not to exceed $660,000; and
WHEREAS, the City desires to continue utilizing Contractor services and the Parties desire to amend the Agreement to continue providing tree pruning and removal services over an additional calendar year, utilizing $500,000 in additional project funding; and WHEREAS, the City and Contractor desire to enter into this Amendment.

NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties hereto do mutually agree as follows:

1. The services to be provided, as set forth in the original bid of the Agreement and as amended by the First Amendment, is hereby further amended to include the services contained in Exhibit A of this Second Amendment, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.

2. Section 5 of the Agreement, "CONTRACT PRICE AND PAYMENT", is hereby amended to reflect payment based upon a sum increase of Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($500,000.00). The total compensation under the Agreement including this Amendment shall not exceed a total contract amount of One Million One Hundred Sixty Thousand Dollars ($1,160,000.00). The first sentence shall now read:

City Council/RSA Agenda 90 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
Second Amendment to the Contractual Services Agreement
Between City of Union City and Bay Area Tree Specialists

City hereby agrees to pay Consultant a sum not to exceed One Million One Hundred Sixty Thousand ($1,160,000.00) not withstanding any contrary indications that may be contained in Consultant' s proposal, for services to be performed and reimbursable costs incurred under this Agreement.

3. Section 3 of the Agreement, “TIME FOR COMPLETION”, is hereby amended to read:

The Contractor must complete the Work in accordance with the Contract Documents within three calendar years from the date specified in the City’s Notice to Proceed (“Time for Completion”).

4. All other provisions of the Agreement, remain unchanged except as modified by this First Amendment.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and the Contractor have executed this Amendment effective as of the date hereinabove written.

THE CITY OF UNION CITY BAY AREA TREE SPECIALISTS
By By
Joan Malloy Richard Smith
City Manager Owner
Attest:
___________________________
Anna M. Brown
City Clerk
Approved as to Form:
____________________________
Kristopher J. Kokotaylo
City Council/RSA Agenda 91 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
Second Amendment to the Contractual Services Agreement
Between City of Union City and Bay Area Tree Specialists

City Attorney
Exhibit A
Bid Schedule for FY 2022-2023
Tree Pruning and Removal Project
Tree Removal Units
Item
Price
Tree Removal - Medium (12"-17.9") EA $900.00
Tree Removal - Large (18"-23.9") EA $1,480.00
Tree Removal - Very Large (24" and greater) EA $3,370.00 Grid Work Units
Item
Price
Tree Pruning - Small (0"-11.9") EA $90.00
Tree Pruning - Medium (12"-17.9") EA $170.00
Tree Pruning - Large (18"-23.9") EA $300.00
Tree Pruning - Very Large (24" or greater) EA $390.00
Add-Ons Units
Item
Price
Tree Pruning - Small (0"-11.9") EA $100.00
Tree Pruning - Medium (12"-17.9") EA $180.00
Tree Pruning - Large (18"-23.9") EA $325.00
Tree Pruning - Very Large (24" or greater) EA $430.00
Total TBD NOT TO EXCEED $500,000.00
5130035.1
City Council/RSA Agenda 92 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
Agenda Item
DATE: 7/26/2022
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: MARILOU AYUPAN, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO

EXECUTE THE SEA SALT PIPELINE AND BIKE LANES PROJECT

CONSTRUCTION AND COST SHARING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY

OF UNION CITY AND CARGILL, INCORPORATED, FOR THE UNION CITY BOULEVARD BIKE LANES PROJECT, CITY PROJECT N0. 17-29, AND INCREASING THE REVENUE PROJECTIONS IN THE GAS TAX FUND BY $405,000 Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute the Sea Salt Pipeline and Bike Lanes Project Construction and Cost Sharing Agreement between the City of Union City and Cargill, Incorporated, for the Union City Boulevard Bikes Lanes Project, City Project 17-29, and increasing the revenue projections in the Gas Tax Fund (Fund 2510) by $405,000.

STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT
This agenda item is in alignment with the following:

Goal D, Strategy 1: Environmental Sustainability and Infrastructure - Continue the build-out of the City’s Bicycle and Pedestrian network, with an emphasis on closing gaps, addressing safety concerns, and increasing connectivity to the Station District.

Goal D, Strategy 2: Environmental Sustainability and Infrastructure – Implement the City’s capital improvement plan.

BACKGROUND
The East Bay Dischargers Authority (EBDA) is a Joint Powers Public Agency (JPA) consisting of five local agencies (City of San Leandro, Oro Loma Sanitary District, Castro Valley Sanitary District, City of Hayward, and Union Sanitary District). EBDA owns and operates three effluent pump stations, a dichlorination facility, and a combined effluent pipeline/force main and outfall system to manage treated effluent from its member agencies’ wastewater treatment plants and discharges the effluent through its common outfall and diffuser into a deep-water portion of the central San Francisco Bay (Bay) under a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System City Council/RSA Agenda 93 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
(NPDES) permit.

Cargill Incorporated (Cargill) operates a solar sea salt production plant (Solar Salt Facility) in Newark. The facility commercially harvests two sea salts for the Bay water - sodium chloride (NaCl) and magnesium chloride (MgCl2).

No additives or chemicals are used to produce these salts; evaporation through solar and wind energy drive the process. Water from the Bay is introduced into concentrator ponds, where most of the water evaporates, creating concentrated brine. Once the brine achieves saturation, it is transferred into crystallizers, where additional evaporations result in the production of NaCl crystals (table salt). The harvested NaCl is further processed and packaged to customer’s specifications. The brine exiting the NaCl crystallizers is further evaporated through a series of ponds to achieve a concentrated magnesium chloride brine product, also known as the liquid bittern, which is harvested to produce additional commercial products used as road de-icing and dust suppressant. Within the immediate ponds a variety of salt compounds are crystallized and settle in the ponds. Some additional NaCl is recovered and recycled in the process. Salts that have not yet been recovered as commercial products are referred to as mixed sea salt (MSS); they include smaller residues of unharvested sodium chloride and magnesium chloride, as well as other salts that naturally exist at a lower concentration in sea water. The remaining excess MSS that is not sold as an alternative salt product is stored in the ponds adjacent to the Bay at the Solar Salt Facility in Newark. Currently, there are approximately 6 million tons of MSS stored in these ponds.

In late 2020, the East Bay Dischargers Authority (EBDA), Cargill, and Union Sanitary District (USD) approached Union City to discuss a proposed sixteen (16) mile underground pipeline to transport mixed sea salt (MSS) brine from Cargill’s Solar Salt Facility in Newark to EBDA’s discharge system downstream of Oro Loma Sanitary District/Castro Valley Sanitary District Water Pollution Control Plant in San Lorenzo to eventually reduce and eliminate the stockpiles of MSS. This brine transport pipeline is proposed within the cities of Newark, Fremont, Union City, Hayward, and San Lorenzo with the pipeline alignment along Union City Boulevard in Union City.

At the March 9, 2021, City Council meeting, under Item 3. Proclamations and Presentations, Jackie Zipkin, EBDA’s General Manager, gave an overview of the proposed Cargill brine pipeline project. The purpose of the transport pipeline project is Cargill’s proactive approach to sea-level rise and to protect the Bay for future generations by processing and removing the stockpiles of natural MSS from its Newark facility.

DISCUSSION
For the past year, Union City and Cargill have worked together to develop and prepare this Sea Salt Pipeline and Bike Lanes Project Construction and Cost Sharing Agreement. On May 6, 2021, Union City and Cargill entered into a Reimbursement Agreement in the amount of $33,000 to pay for City Attorney (Meyers Nave) and Public Work’s Consultant (Richard Tanaka) costs for their initial time and effort. Amendment No. 1 of the Reimbursement Agreement, in the amount of $60,000, allowed for an additional budget to finalize the Cost Sharing Agreement and for the preparation of a Franchise Agreement, which allows a privately-owned pipeline to be located with Union City Boulevard rights-of-way.

Kimley-Horn Associates, the engineering consultant for the Union City Boulevard Bike Lanes Project, City Project No. 17-29, has completed 95% of design and provided project files and CAD drawings to Jacobs, the engineering consultant for the Cargill Pipeline Project. The bike lanes 95% plans have been coordinated with City’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC) for the past two years with the initial bike lanes project presentation at the October 21, 2019 BPAC meeting, followed by a November 16, 2021 BPAC meeting. At the most recent April 19, 2022 BPAC meeting, the Design Team presented an updated bikes lanes and pedestrian improvement project in order to ensure the project meets the recently approved 2021 Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, City Project No. 17-30. The 2021 Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan includes Complete Streets designs, National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO) policy, roadway drainage, and enhanced street lighting.

Most of the Complete Street’s design has been incorporated into the Union City Boulevard Bike Lanes plans and the current engineering effort is updating the drainage plans, lighting plans, construction staging, and traffic handling plans.

City Council/RSA Agenda 94 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
On July 8, 2022, EBDA released the Notice of Preparation (NOP) of the CEQA Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Cargill Mixed Sea Salt Processing and Brine Discharge Project for public review and comment and the project EIR. Public comments are due by August 5, 2022 on the EIR, which is scheduled for approval and certification by the end of December 2022. See Attachment 1 for Notice of Preparation (NOP).

The Sea Salt Pipeline and Bike Lanes Project Construction and Cost Sharing Agreement between the City of Union City and Cargill identifies the responsibilities and costs for combining these two projects into one (1) construction contract. The overall advantage of combining these two (2) projects into a combined project is to coordinate a one-time only major roadway construction project along Union City Boulevard that will minimize public inconvenience, traffic delays, disruption to neighborhoods and local commuters, construction noise, and dust. This project partnership promotes public agency collaboration and supports projects that provide environmental benefits, including protecting the Bay. See Attachment 2 for Agreement Summary.

In the Cost Sharing Agreement, Cargill agrees to pay the City’s Consultant Team for the additional work for the Bike Lane Project including Project Management (Richard Tanaka) in an amount not-to-exceed $75,000, Final Design (Kimley-Horn) in an amount not-to-exceed $180,000 and Construction Inspection (TBD) in an amount notto-exceed $150,000. This additional work is equivalent to a not-to-exceed amount of $405,000 and will allow the City to recover combined costs associated with the City’s projects and Cargill’s Sea Salt Pipeline project.

In addition to the $405,000 identified above, the proposed Cost Sharing Agreement requires Cargill to pay $620,000 towards asphalt cover overlay and striping costs once the City Council awards the Bike Lanes Project Construction Contract in 2023. This reflects an estimated 50% of the asphalt cover overlay and striping costs for half of Union City Boulevard from the Alameda Creek Flood Control Channel Bridge to Smith Street. Cargill is also required to pay a share of the combined construction contract items of work based on the awarded construction contract for common bid items such as mobilization, clearing and grubbing, traffic control, stage construction, construction surveying and storm water pollution controlestimated at about $800,000.

The updated, refined Union City Boulevard Bike Lanes Project Construction estimate is $16.2 million, which includes the Alameda County Transportation Commission (ACTC) Project Funding Agreement No. A17-0125 grant for $7.8 million (Construction Phase). The remaining $8.4 million will be funded with Measure B/BB, SB-1 and Gas Tax funds. Because the refined, updated bike and pedestrian design meets current Metropolitan Transportation Commission’s (MTC) Complete Streets Checklist and is overwhelming supported by the BPAC, Bike Fremont and Bike East Bay, Union City has submitted a $5.0 million grant application for the Construction Phase to ACTC for the 2024 Comprehensive Improvement Program (CIP) funds. The total construction cost for the combined, Union City Boulevard Bike Lanes Project and Sea Salt Brine Pipeline Project is estimated at $19.2 million.

The Sea Salt Pipeline and Bike Lanes Project Construction and Cost Sharing Agreement schedule discusses that the two (2) project plans will be combined into one (1) construction contract by late December 2022 with construction beginning Summer 2023 and the project completed by Summer 2025.

FISCAL IMPACT
Union City will receive a total amount not-to-exceed $405,000 as identified in the Cost Sharing Agreement for the Union City Boulevard Bike Lanes Project, City Project No. 17-29, which includes $75,000 for Project Management, $180,000 for Final Design and $150,000 for Construction Inspection. These funds will be used to administer the Union City Boulevard Bike Lanes Project. The receipt of these funds from Cargill will necessitate an increase in the revenue projection in Account Number 2510-91729-45120 (Gas Tax Fund – Contributions from Outside/Private Sources) by $405,000.

In addition, Cargill willcontribute $620,000 for pavement restoration, to be paid within 60 days of the award of the construction contract, as wellas cost share for common bid items during construction for an estimated $800,000.

City Council/RSA Agenda 95 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
There is no fiscal impact to the General Fund.

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Counciladopt a resolution:

1. Authorizing the City Manager to execute the Sea Salt Pipeline and Bike Lanes Project Construction and Cost Sharing Agreement between the City of Union City and Cargill, Incorporated, for the Union City Boulevard Bike Lanes Project, City Project 17-29, and

2. Increasing the revenue projection in Account Number 2510-91729-45120 (Gas Tax Fund – Contributions from Outside/Private Sources) by $405,000.

Prepared by:

Marilou Ayupan, Public Works Director
Submitted by:

Marilou Ayupan, Public Works Director
ATTACHMENTS:

Description Type
Attachment 1 - NOP for Cargill MSS Pipeline Attachment
Attachment 2 - Summary of CargillAgreement Attachment
Resolution - CargillAgreement Resolution
Exhibit A - Draft Agreement Exhibit
City Council/RSA Agenda 96 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
East Bay Dischargers Authority
Cargill Mixed Sea Salt Processing and Brine Discharge Project Notice of Preparation 1

EAST BAY DISCHARGERS AUTHORITY

REVISED

NOTICE OF PREPARATION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT

FOR THE

CARGILL MIXED SEA SALT PROCESSING AND BRINE DISCHARGE

PROJECT
SCH NO. 2022050436
Date: July 8, 2022
To: Responsible Agencies, Trustee Agencies, and Interested Persons RE: Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Cargill Mixed Sea Salt Processing and Brine Discharge Project, SCH No. 2022050436

INTRODUCTION
On May 20, 2022 the East Bay Dischargers Authority (EBDA) issued a Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the proposed project described below (State Clearinghouse [SCH] No. 2022050436). A scoping meeting was conducted on June 1, 2022. This NOP is being re-issued due to a change in the location of part of the project (specifically, a portion of the pipeline alignment). All comments on the original NOP will be considered; if you already commented and have no new comments as a result of the change in the project, you need not comment again.

PROJECT BACKGROUND AND SUMMARY
EBDA is a Joint Powers Public Agency (JPA) consisting of five local agencies (City of San Leandro, Oro Loma Sanitary District, Castro Valley Sanitary District, City of Hayward, and Union Sanitary District). EBDA owns and operates three effluent pump stations, a dechlorination facility, and combined effluent pipeline/force main and outfall system to manage treated effluent from its member agencies’ wastewater treatment plants and discharge the effluent through its common outfall and diffuser into a deep-water portion of the central San Francisco Bay (Bay) under a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit.

Cargill, Incorporated (Cargill) operates a solar sea salt production facility (Solar Salt Facility) in Newark, California. The facility commercially harvests two salts from Bay water, sodium chloride (NaCl) and magnesium chloride (MgCl2). No additives or chemicals are used to produce these salts; evaporation through solar and wind energy drive the process.

Water from the Bay is introduced into concentrator ponds, where most of the water evaporates, creating a concentrated brine. Once this brine achieves saturation, it is transferred into crystallizers, where additional evaporation results in the production of NaCl crystals (table salt). The harvested NaCl is further processed and packaged to individual customer’s specifications. The brine exiting the NaCl crystallizers is further evaporated through a series of ponds to achieve a concentrated magnesium chloride brine product, also known as liquid bittern, City Council/RSA Agenda 97 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
East Bay Dischargers Authority
Cargill Mixed Sea Salt Processing and Brine Discharge Project Notice of Preparation 2 which is harvested to produce additional commercial products used for road de-icing and dust suppressant. Within the intermediate ponds a variety of salt compounds are crystallized and settle in the ponds. Some additional NaCl is recovered and recycled in the process. Salts that have not yet been recovered as commercial products are referred to as mixed sea salts (MSS); they include small residues of unharvested sodium chloride and magnesium chloride, as well as other salts that naturally exist at lower concentrations in sea water. The remaining excess MSS that is not sold as an alternative salt product is stored in ponds adjacent to the Bay at the Solar Salt Facility. Currently, there are approximately 6 million tons of MSS stored in these ponds.

Facing the potential long-term threat of sea level rise from the Bay, Cargill is proposing to implement innovative technology to enhance extraction of additional salts from the MSS inventory. The proposed project exclusively involves the construction and operation of new infrastructure to facilitate the enhanced harvesting method, tailored to the MSS in ponds 12 and 13 at the Solar Salt Facility, and to dissolve the residual MSS in Bay water to produce a brine that could be pumped into EBDA’s combined effluent conveyance system. Once in EBDA’s conveyance system, the brine would be blended with and further diluted by EBDA Member Agency effluent and then discharged back into the Bay in accordance with EBDA’s NPDES permit. Through this process, the volume of brine and precipitated salts stored in ponds closest to the Bay at the Solar Salt Facility in Newark would be reduced. Therefore, with implementation of the proposed project, Cargill would be accelerating and enhancing the recovery of commercial product from MSS and, as an ancillary benefit, proactively addressing threats associated with sea level rise by reducing the amount of concentrated salts stored in close proximity to the Bay.

The proposed project would involve modifications within a limited portion of Cargill’s Solar Salt Facility, including new pipelines and pumping facilities in and around ponds 12 and 13, and construction of approximately 16 miles of new underground pipeline, primarily off site and within roadway rights-of-way, to connect the Solar Salt Facility to EBDA’s outfall system on the site of the Oro Loma Sanitary District/Castro Valley Sanitary District Water Pollution Control Plant in the community of San Lorenzo.

It is anticipated that the MSS brine would be discharged to the EBDA system at an average rate ranging from 0.9 million gallons per day (MGD) to up to 2 MGD (taking approximately 20 to 10 years respectively). Discharge of the MSS brine by Cargill to the EBDA system would be subject to an agreement between EBDA and Cargill. The EBDA JPA term expires on June 30, 2040. Therefore, the proposed project would either terminate on or before that date or could continue under a renegotiated agreement.

In accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code [PRC] Section 21000 et seq.), EBDA has determined that the proposed project will require preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR). EBDA will serve as the lead agency for CEQA compliance.

SECOND NOTICE OF PREPARATION AVAILABILITY AND REVIEW PERIOD EBDA has prepared this second NOP to provide the public, interested parties, and public agencies with updated information about the proposed project and its potential environmental effects, and solicit comments on the scope and proposed content of the EIR, including any additional comments resulting from the change in the project pipeline route.

This second NOP initiates a 30-day CEQA scoping process. A hard copy of the NOP is available for public review at:

East Bay Dischargers Authority
2651 Grant Avenue
San Lorenzo, CA 94580
The NOP is also available for public review online at: https://ebda.org/projects/cargill-partnership/ EBDA welcomes public and agency input during this review. However, if you or your agency has already provided written comments in response to the previous NOP, and none of those comments would change considering the City Council/RSA Agenda 98 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
East Bay Dischargers Authority
Cargill Mixed Sea Salt Processing and Brine Discharge Project Notice of Preparation 3 proposed changes to the project, those comments do not need to be resubmitted. All comments received on the original NOP have been reviewed and will be considered and addressed in the Draft EIR.

PROVIDING COMMENTS ON THIS SECOND NOTICE OF PREPARATION Agencies and interested parties may provide EBDA with written and/or email comments on topics to be addressed in the EIR. Because of time limits mandated by State law, comments must be received by 5:00 p.m. on August 9, 2022.

Please send all comments on the NOP by mail or email to:

East Bay Dischargers Authority
2651 Grant Avenue
San Lorenzo, CA 94580
Attn: Jacqueline Zipkin, General Manager
Phone: (510) 278-5910
E-mail: [email protected]
Comments provided by email should include “Cargill MSS Processing and Brine Discharge Project NOP Scoping Comment” in the subject line, and the name and physical address of the commenter in the body of the email. If you are from an agency that will need to consider the EIR when deciding whether to issue permits or other approvals for the project, please provide the name of a contact person. A new scooping meeting will not be held.

All comments on environmental issues received during the public comment period will be considered and addressed in the Draft EIR, which is anticipated to be available for public review in summer 2022.

Focus of Input
EBDA relies on responsible and trustee agencies to provide information relevant to the analysis of resources falling within their jurisdiction. EBDA encourages input for the proposed EIR, with a focus on the following topics:
 Scope of Environmental Analysis. Guidance on the scope of analysis for this EIR, including identification of specific issues that will require closer study due to the location, scale, and character of the proposed project.  Mitigation Measures. Ideas for feasible mitigation, including mitigation that could potentially be imposed by EBDA and that would avoid, eliminate, or reduce potentially significant or significant impacts.  Alternatives. Suggestions for alternatives to the proposed project that could potentially reduce or avoid potentially significant or significant impacts.
 Interested Parties. Identification of public agencies, public and private groups, and individuals that EBDA should notice regarding the proposed project and associated EIR.

PROJECT LOCATION
Proposed project features are located in the eastern San Francisco Bay Area, including portions of San Lorenzo, an unincorporated community in Alameda County, and portions of the Cities of Hayward, Union City, Fremont, and Newark. Specifically, project improvements would be constructed at Cargill’s Solar Salt Facility, located at 7220 Central Avenue in Newark, California, and primarily within roadway rights-of-way between the Solar Salt Facility and the Oro Loma Sanitary District/Castro Valley Sanitary District Water Pollution Control Plant in San Lorenzo. The MSS are primarily situated in Ponds 12 and 13 of Cargill’s Solar Salt Facility, which are located within the United States Fish and Wildlife Service’s (USFWS) Don Edwards San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge. In 1979, Cargill transferred this real property, along with additional acreage, through a condemnation process and retained perpetual rights to continue sea salt manufacturing operations within 8,000 acres of the Refuge, including Ponds 12 and 13. The project location and proposed features are shown in Figure 1 below.

City Council/RSA Agenda 99 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
East Bay Dischargers Authority
Cargill Mixed Sea Salt Processing and Brine Discharge Project Notice of Preparation 4

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed project would enable the enhanced processing and removal of MSS in existing Cargill ponds by harvesting additional liquid bittern, a concentrated magnesium chloride brine, from the MSS matrices in these ponds as commercial product, dissolving the residual MSS solids in the ponds using Bay water, and transferring the resulting brine to EBDA’s combined effluent pipeline for discharge into the Bay under EBDA’s NPDES permit. Harvesting the liquid bittern and final disposition of the residual MSS brine would not require the use of any chemicals. It is anticipated that the MSS brine would be discharged to the EBDA system at an average rate ranging from 0.9 million gallons per day (MGD) up to 2.0 MGD.

The change in the project pertains to the alignment of the pipeline transporting the MSS brine, as described below.

The proposed project has an onsite component of pipelines and pumping facilities within the existing Solar Salt Facility and an offsite component that would involve construction of approximately 16 miles of new underground pipeline primarily within roadway rights-of-way to connect the Solar Salt Facility into EBDA’s system just downstream of the Oro Loma Sanitary District/Castro Valley Sanitary District Water Pollution Control Plant in San Lorenzo.

The proposed project consists of the following components, as shown in Figure 1:
 Dissolution Water Pond and Plummer Creek Pump Station. A new pump station would be installed to pump water indirectly from Plummer Creek to a new dissolution water pond.  Dissolution Water Pump Station and Distribution System. A new dissolution water pump station would be constructed as a cast-in-place slab-on-grade facility located at the Dissolution Water Pond and connected to an onsite high-density polyethylene piping distribution system installed above grade along the internal slope of the existing berms to deliver dissolution water to micro-trenches excavated in the crystallized salt layer above the Bay mud in Ponds 12 and 13 for MSS processing.
 Two MSS Brine Pump Stations. New MSS brine pump stations would be constructed at Ponds 12 and 13 consisting of cast-in-place concrete wet wells connected to cast-in-place slab-on-grade pump stations to pump the resultant brine out of the processing ponds and into the offsite brine discharge pipeline.  MSS Liquid Brine Recovery. During the processing of Pond 12, sections of the pond would be temporarily isolated using vinyl sheet piling to enable liquid bittern recovery. Two new pipelines would be installed along the internal slope of the berm on the northern shore of Pond 12: (1) a 12-inch header pipe to deliver dissolution water to Pond 12; and (2) a 4-inch pipe to transfer liquid bittern from Pond 12 to Pond 13, where it would be further processed and harvested as commercial product.
 Rainwater Decanting. A new weir box structure, which includes a weir plate (barrier) to control the flow of water, and a pipe would be installed at the northeastern corner of Pond 13 to enable decanting of rainwater from the surface of Pond 13 to supplement dissolution water for Pond 12.  MSS Brine Transport Pipeline. A MSS brine transport pipeline, up to 16 inches in diameter, would extend north primarily along roadway rights-of-way for approximately 16 miles from the Solar Salt Facility to the Oro Loma Effluent Pump Station (OLEPS), located adjacent to and immediately downstream of the Oro Loma Sanitary District/Castro Valley Sanitary District Water Pollution Control Plant in San Lorenzo. Figure 1 shows the location of the proposed pipeline, as well as the previously proposed alignment and two options through the City of Hayward that were identified in the original NOP. The proposed pipeline alignment is the same as described in the previous NOP except within the City of Hayward. The proposed alignment through the City of Hayward has been moved to the east to avoid a large segment of Hesperian Blvd, and the two optional alignments in Hayward have been eliminated from consideration.

The MSS brine transport pipeline would be constructed primarily using open-cut methods, except where the pipeline would cross creeks, channels, canals, drains, rail lines, and major roadways. In these locations, trenchless construction methods (i.e., horizontal directional drilling, micro-tunneling) would be used.

City Council/RSA Agenda 100 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
East Bay Dischargers Authority
Cargill Mixed Sea Salt Processing and Brine Discharge Project Notice of Preparation 5 Pipeline appurtenances would include isolation valves, air release/vacuum valves, blowoff valves, tracer wire, and a “pig” delivery system. Pigs, or pipeline inspection gauges, are maintenance projectiles used for cleaning and inspecting pipelines.

Construction of the pipeline would affect portions of the following roadways and public facilities in Newark, Fremont, Union City, Hayward, and San Lorenzo: Newark Slough Trail (San Francisco Bay Trail), Thornton Ave, Paseo Padre Pkwy, Ardenwood Blvd, Union City Blvd, Hesperian Blvd, Industrial Blvd, Arden Rd, Corporate Ave, Investment Blvd, Production Ave, Clawiter Rd, W. Winton Ave, Corsair Blvd, Skywest Golf Course, and the Oro Loma Sanitary District/Castro Valley Sanitary District Water Pollution Control Plant.

To minimize future disruption to the streets in the City of Hayward, an agreement to install a 4-inch HDPE fiber optic cable conduit and 12-inch HDPE recycled water pipeline (“purple pipe”) at the same time trenching and installation of the underground MSS brine transport pipeline would occur, along the segment of pipeline alignment within the City of Hayward, is also being explored.  Discharge to the EBDA System. The MSS brine transport pipeline would tie into EBDA’s combined effluent conveyance system immediately downstream of the Oro Loma Sanitary District/Castro Valley Sanitary District Water Pollution Control Plant in San Lorenzo, either by connection directly to the OLEPS, or to the pump discharge manhole approximately 75 feet north of the OLEPS. The MSS brine would then be combined with the treated wastewater effluents from the other agencies that discharge into the EBDA system before being discharged back to the Bay.

Project construction is estimated to start in summer of 2023 and would take approximately 12-18 months to complete. Pump station construction would occur concurrently with pipeline construction and would require approximately 8 months to complete. Construction of the on-site Pond 12 and Pond 13 processing facilities would be phased, with the facilities required for Pond 12 processing being completed in the first year and facilities for Pond 13 processing being installed approximately 6 years later.

Staging areas would be provided on Cargill property and along the MSS Brine Transport Pipeline alignment at locations approved by the local jurisdiction.

POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
As required by CEQA, the EIR will describe existing conditions and evaluate the potential environmental effects of the proposed project and a reasonable range of alternatives, including the no-project alternative. It will address direct, indirect, and cumulative effects. The EIR will identify feasible mitigation measures, if available, to reduce potentially significant impacts. At this time, EBDA has identified a potential for environmental effects in the areas identified below:
 Air Quality;
 Biological Resources;
 Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources;
 Geology and Soils;
 Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Climate Change
 Hazards and Hazardous Materials;
 Hydrology and Water Quality;
 Noise and Vibration, and
 Recreation.

The EIR will evaluate all environmental topic areas included in the State CEQA Guidelines, including the topics identified above. Feasible and practicable mitigation measures will be recommended to reduce any identified potentially significant and significant impacts.

ALTERNATIVES TO BE EVALUATED IN THE EIR
In accordance with the State CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR Section 15126.6), the EIR will evaluate a range of reasonable alternatives to the proposed project that are capable of meeting most of the objectives and would avoid or City Council/RSA Agenda 101 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
East Bay Dischargers Authority
Cargill Mixed Sea Salt Processing and Brine Discharge Project Notice of Preparation 6 substantially lessen one or more significant effects of the project. The EIR will also identify any alternatives that were considered but rejected by the lead agency as infeasible and briefly explain the reasons why.

Two action alternatives are currently under consideration by EBDA and Cargill (Figure 2). The first action alternative, referred to as the “In-Pipe Alternative” would involve the same improvements at the Solar Salt Facility as those included in the proposed project, but instead of constructing 16 miles of new underground pipeline along the proposed MSS brine transport pipeline alignment shown in Figure 1, the In-Pipe Alternative would involve construction of approximately 7.5 miles of new underground pipeline connecting the Solar Salt Facility to EBDA’s system just downstream of the Union Sanitary District Alvarado Wastewater Treatment Plant in Union City and then installation of approximately 4 miles of slip-liner within EBDA’s existing combined conveyance pipeline to prevent corrosion in EBDA’s system. The 4 miles of slip-liner within the EBDA combined conveyance pipeline would start approximately 3 miles downstream of the MSS brine transport pipeline connection to the EBDA system and extend to the Oro Loma Sanitary District/Castro Valley Sanitary District Water Pollution Control Plant in San Lorenzo. In addition to laydown areas along the 7.5-mile new underground pipeline route, this alternative would require access pits periodically along the 4-mile slip-liner section of EBDA’s system. The second action alternative under consideration by EBDA and Cargill, referred to as the “Bayside Parallel Pipe Alternative,” also would involve the same improvements at the Solar Salt Facility as those included in the proposed project, but under this alternative, the MSS brine transport pipeline would consist of approximately 17 miles of new underground pipeline that would skirt the edges of existing or former Cargill-owned or operated salt ponds and then run almost parallel to EBDA’s existing pipeline until connecting into EBDA’s system downstream of the Oro Loma Sanitary District/Castro Valley Sanitary District Water Pollution Control Plant in San Lorenzo. This alternative would rely on directional drilling in several areas to minimize impacts to wetlands and sensitive habitat. The EIR will also provide an analysis of the No Project Alternative and will identify the environmentally superior alternative from among the alternatives evaluated in the EIR.

City Council/RSA Agenda 102 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
East Bay Dischargers Authority
Cargill Mixed Sea Salt Processing and Brine Discharge Project Notice of Preparation 7 Source: Data provided by AECOM and Jacobs in 2021 and 2022, adapted by Ascent Environmental, Inc. in 2022 Figure 1 Project Location and Proposed Project Features City Council/RSA Agenda 103 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
East Bay Dischargers Authority
Cargill Mixed Sea Salt Processing and Brine Discharge Project Notice of Preparation 8 Source: Data provided by Jacobs in 2022, adapted by Ascent Environmental, Inc. in 2022 Figure 2 Project Alternatives
City Council/RSA Agenda 104 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

Prepared July 2, 2022

EXHIBT A

SEA SALT PIPELINE AND BIKE LANES PROJECT CONSTRUCTION AND COST SHARING

AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF UNION CITY AND CARGILL, INCORPORATED,

FOR CARGILL MIXED SEA SALT PROCESSING AND BRINE DISCHARGE PROJECT AND UNION CITY BOULEVARD BIKE LANES PROJECT, CITY PROJECT NO. 17-29

AGREEMENT SUMMARY
Purpose: To identify responsibilities and costs for combining the Sea Salt Pipeline and Bike Lane Construction projects into one (1) construction contract. The overall advantage of combining these two projects is to coordinate a one-time only major roadway construction project along UCB that will minimize public inconvenience, traffic delays, disruption to neighborhoods and local commuters, construction noise, and dust. Combining the projects into one construction contract also promotes public agency collaboration and supports local and regional projects that provide environmental benefits and protect the San Francisco Bay. The majority of proposed 16-inch pipeline will be in the same trench as the new pavement section in the northbound direction adjacent to the existing landscaped median needed to accommodate the Class II buffer bike lanes.

Terms of the Agreement:
1) COORDINATING, DESIGN & PERMITTING OF THE COMBINED PROJECT. a. Design of the combined project to be completed by December 31, 2022 i. Union City will be responsible for packaging both projects into one single construction document.
ii. Cargill will provide design of Cargill’s 16-inch pipeline and fiber optic conduit for City’s use.
iii. Union City will be responsible for advertisement and construction of the combined project.
b. Project ready to bid by March 15, 2023
i. Cargill is required to provide final determination, “approval” by March 1, 2023 ii. If not, City will advertise the project without Cargill’s pipeline project. 2) CONSTRUCTION.
a. Construction Contracts:
i. Package A: Union City Boulevard Bike Lanes Project
ii. Package B: Mixed Sea Salt Brine Pipeline Project
iii. Package C: Union City’s Communication/Fiber Optic (if needed) b. City will provide project management, construction management and inspection of the combined project.
c. Cargill will be provided the opportunity to review construction of the pipeline project d. Completion and acceptance by March 1, 2025
City Council/RSA Agenda 105 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

July 2, 2022
Agreement Summary
3) COST SHARING
a. City will be responsible for the Package A and C costs. b. Cargill will be responsible for the Package B costs. c. Cargill will pay for the following:
i. $620,000 towards pavement restoration, to be paid to City within 60 days of award of construction contract
ii. Project management in an amount not-to-exceed $75,000 as incurred iii. Design fee to combine projects in an amount not-to-exceed $180,000 as incurred
iv. Construction inspection of Cargill’s pipeline in an amount not-to-exceed $150,000 as incurred
v. Cost of Package B as incurred
vi. Pro-rata share of common bid items such as mobilization, traffic control, stage construction, clearing & grubbing, construction survey, and storm water pollution control (estimated at $400,000), as incurred (total pro-rata share estimated at $800,000)
4) OTHER TERMS OF AGREEMENT
a. Cargill’s indemnification to City
b. Insurance requirement
c. Termination during design phase – both parties rights d. Termination after notice to bid – cannot be terminated e. Terms – Three (3) years after execution
City Council/RSA Agenda 106 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

RESOLUTION NO. ____________

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UNION CITY

AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE SEA SALT PIPELINE AND

BIKE LANES PROJECT CONSTRUCTION AND COST SHARING AGREEMENT

BETWEEN THE CITY OF UNION CITY AND CARGILL, INCORPORATED, FOR THE UNION CITY BOULEVARD BIKE LANES PROJECT, CITY PROJECT NO. 17-29, AND INCREASING THE REVENUE PROJECTIONS IN THE GAS TAX FUND BY $405,000 WHEREAS, the East Bay Dischargers Authority (EBDA) is a Joint Powers Public Agency (JPA) consisting of five local agencies (City of San Leandro, Oro Loma Sanitary District, Castro Valley Sanitary District, City of Hayward and Union Sanitary District). EBDA owns and operates three effluent pump stations, a dichlorination facility, and a combined effluent pipeline/force main and outfall system to manage treated effluent from its member agencies’ wastewater treatment plants and discharges the effluent through its common outfall and diffuser into a deep-water portion of the central San Francisco Bay (Bay) under a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit; and
WHEREAS, Cargill Incorporated (Cargill) operates a solar sea salt production plant (Solar Salt Facility) in Newark. The facility commercially harvests two sea salts for the Bay water - sodium chloride (NaCl) and magnesium chloride (MgCl2). No additives or chemicals are used to produce these salts; evaporation through solar and wind energy drive the process. Water from the Bay is introduced into concentrator ponds, where most of the water evaporates, creating concentrated brine. Once the brine achieves saturation, it is transferred into crystallizers, where additional evaporations result in the production of NaCl crystals (table salt); and WHEREAS, the harvested NaCl is further processed and packaged to customers’ specifications. The brine exiting the NaCl crystallizers is further evaporated through a series of ponds to achieve a concentrated magnesium chloride brine product, also known as the liquid bittern, which is harvested to produce additional commercial products used road de-icing and dust suppressant. Within the immediate ponds a variety of salt compounds are crystallized and settle in the ponds. Some additional NaCl is recovered and recycled in the process; and WHEREAS, salts that have not yet been recovered as commercial products are referred to as mixed sea salt (MSS); they include smaller residues of unharvested sodium chloride and magnesium chloride, as well as other salts the naturally exist at a lower concentration in sea water.

The remaining excess MSS that is not sold as an alternative salt product is stored in the ponds adjacent to the Bay at the Solar Salt Facility in Newark; and
WHEREAS, in late 2020, the East Bay Dischargers Authority (EBDA), Union Sanitary District and Cargill, Incorporated, met with Union City to discuss a proposed sixteen (16) mile mix sea salt (MSS) brine transport pipeline within Union City Boulevard right-of-way that would process and remove stockpiles of sea salt from Cargill’s Solar Salt Facility in Newark to EBDA’s discharge system downstream of Oro Loma Sanitary District/Castro Valley Sanitary District Water Pollution Control Plant in San Lorenzo to reduce and eliminate the six (6) million tons of mix sea salt stockpiles (the Brine Pipeline Project); and
City Council/RSA Agenda 107 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
WHEREAS, with anticipated sea-level rise, the purpose of the Brine Pipeline Project is to prevent solar MSS stockpiles from returning to the Bay and impacting the wild-life plants and species that inhabit the shoreline, wetlands and Bay waters; and WHEREAS, at the March 9, 2021, City Council meeting, the General Manager of EBDA made a presentation on the Brine Pipeline Project including the coordination with the Union City Boulevard Bike Lanes Project, City Project No. 17-29, because the proposed underground transport pipeline will be located along Union City Boulevard within the same project limits; and WHEREAS, the City and Cargill desire to combine efforts related to the Brine Pipeline Project and Union City Boulevard Bike Lanes Projects; and WHEREAS, the Sea Salt Pipeline and Bike Lanes Project Construction and Cost Sharing Agreement between the City of Union City and Cargill identifies Union City’s and Cargill’s responsibilities and costs for combining these two projects into one (1) construction contract; and WHEREAS, the advantage of combining these two (2) projects is to coordinate a one-time only major roadway construction project along Union City Boulevard that will minimize public inconvenience, traffic delays, disruption to neighborhoods and local commuters, construction noise, and dust and to promote public agency collaboration and to support projects that provide environmental benefits and protect the San Francisco Bay; and WHEREAS, the Sea Salt Pipeline and Bike Lanes Project Construction and Cost Sharing Agreement would require Cargill to pay various costs associated with both projects; and WHEREAS, the Sea Salt Pipeline and Bike Lanes Project Construction and Cost Sharing Agreement identifies that the two (2) project plans will be combined into one (1) construction contract by late December 2022 with construction beginning Summer 2023 and completed by Summer 2025; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Union City authorizes the City Manager to execute the Sea Salt Pipeline and Bike Lanes Project Construction and Cost Sharing Agreement, in a form approved by the City Attorney, between the City of Union City and Cargill, Incorporated, for the Union City Boulevard Bike Lanes Project, City Project No.17-29, and increases the revenue projections in the Gas Tax Fund by $405,000 (see Exhibit A).

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager is authorized to take all actions necessary to administer the Sea Salt Pipeline and Bike Lanes Project Construction and Cost Sharing Agreement, including any proposed amendments, in a form approved by the City Attorney, and take all actions necessary to implement the intent of this Resolution.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of Union City hereby increases the revenue projections in Account Number 2510-91729-45120 (Gas Tax Fund – Contributions from Outside/Private Sources) by $405,000.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Union City at a regular meeting held on the 26th day of July 2022, by the following vote:
5160063.1
City Council/RSA Agenda 108 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

SEA SALT PIPELINE AND BIKE LANES CONSTRUCTION AND COST SHARING

AGREEMENT AMONG CITY OF UNION CITY AND CARGILL, INCORPORATED This Sea Salt Pipeline and Bike Lanes Construction and Cost Sharing Agreement (the “Agreement”) is entered into as of July 26, 2022, (the “Effective Date”) by and between the CITY OF UNION CITY, a California municipal corporation (“Union City”) and Cargill, Incorporated, a Delaware corporation (“Cargill”) (collectively, the “Parties” and individually, a “Party”).

RECITALS
A. Cargill operates a solar salt facility in Newark, California, which entails the management of over 12,000 acres of salt ponds and land in the San Francisco Bay Area. Cargill wishes to remove residual salts contained in its salt ponds during the solar evaporation process, known as “mixed-sea salts” or “MSS,” in light of climate change and the attendant sea level rise that is projected to occur in San Francisco Bay. To that end, Cargill proposes to recover additional commercial product from the MSS in its salt ponds, dissolve the MSS in Bay water, and transfer the resulting MSS brine solution from Cargill’s Newark facility by pipeline to connect with an existing outfall alignment at the East Bay Discharger Authority’s (“EBDA”) wastewater conveyance pipeline at the Oro Loma Sanitary District Water Pollution Control Plant located at 2655 Grant Avenue, San Lorenzo, California (the “Oro Loma Plant”). At the Oro Loma Plant, this MSS brine solution would then be blended with treated wastewater effluents discharged through EBDA’s conveyance system and discharged into San Francisco Bay at EBDA’s Bay Outfall and Diffuser facility pursuant to EBDA’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (“NPDES”) permit issued by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (“RWQCB”), as further detailed in the project description attached hereto as “Exhibit “A” (the “MSS Processing Project Scope of Work”) (collectively, the “MSS Processing Project”).

B. The pipeline proposed by Cargill for the MSS Processing Project (the “Complete MSS Pipeline”) would traverse from Cargill’s Newark facility through the City of Newark (“Newark”), the City of Fremont (“Fremont”), Union City, the City of Hayward (“Hayward”) and the unincorporated portion of Alameda County, as further detailed in Exhibit “A”. Cargill proposes the construction of a single 16-inch high-density polyethylene (“HDPE”) pipeline within Union City’s public right-of-way from the Alameda Creek Flood Control Channel Bridge, at Union City’s boundary with the City of Fremont, along Union City Boulevard to Union City’s boundary with Hayward at Old Alameda Creek (the “MSS Pipeline Segment”) as further detailed in the scope of work attached hereto as Exhibit “B” (the “MSS Pipeline Segment Scope of Work”) (collectively, the “MSS Pipeline Segment Project”).

C. Cargill has submitted an application to Union City in accordance with Section 6231 of the Franchise Act of 1937 (Public Utility Code Sections 6201 et seq.) (the “Act”) for a franchise from Union City to authorize the use of Union City’s public right-of-way for Cargill to construct, install, maintain and operate the MSS Pipeline Segment (the “Franchise Agreement”). Nothing herein shall require Union City to approve Cargill’s application for a Franchise Agreement under the Act. Union City reserves its absolute discretion to grant or deny Cargill’s proposed franchise, or to grant an alternative to Cargill’s proposed franchise as provided under the Act, and shall take no action on Cargill’s application unless and until appropriate documents required by the City Council/RSA Agenda 109 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) for the MSS Processing Project have been prepared, reviewed and approved as set forth in Section 3 below, with EBDA acting as the lead agency and Union City acting as a responsible agency under CEQA, so that Union City may rely upon such documents to support any discretionary decisions it may make regarding Cargill’s franchise application and/or the MSS Pipeline Segment Project. Union City’s disapproval of Cargill’s franchise application or the MSS Pipeline Segment Project shall not be a breach of this Agreement, and Union City may exercise its discretion regarding Cargill’s franchise application without penalty of any kind under this Agreement.

D. Union City is simultaneously and independently planning the design and construction of the Union City Boulevard Bike Lanes Project, City Project No. 17-29, which would provide for the creation of Class II bike lines within Union City’s public right-of-way along Union City Boulevard in each direction between the Alameda Creek Flood Control Channel Bridge, at Union City’s boundary with the City of Fremont, to the intersection of Union City Boulevard and Smith Street, and which would consist of the following elements, as detailed in the scope of work attached hereto as Exhibit “C” (the “Bike Lanes Scope of Work”): (i) the reconstruction of approximately 10 feet of existing landscape median on each side of Union City Boulevard along the Bike Lane Route to accommodate new, buffered Class II bike lanes, (ii) after the street widening is complete for the accommodation of a new bike lane, the resurfacing of the existing pavement with hot-mix asphalt, and (iii) the restriping of Union City Boulevard to accommodate two 11-foot vehicles lanes and 7-foot Class II bike lanes in either direction with a 4-foot buffer in between, from the Alameda Creek Flood Control Channel Bridge to Smith Street (collectively, the “Bike Lanes Project”).

E. Union City also wishes to install a 3-inch HDPE conduit for fiber for future public utility use approximately one foot below the pavement subgrade of the Union City Boulevard right-of-way and consisting of approximately 9,500 liner feet of 3-inch conduit and pull wire and approximately 28 Type 6E pulled boxes as detailed in the scope of work attached hereto as Exhibit “D” (the “Fiber Project Scope of Work”) (collectively, the “Fiber Project”).

F. In order to minimize disruptions to Union City Boulevard and the public, and to achieve cost efficiencies and economies of scale, the Parties have discussed the potential benefits of coordinating the construction of that portion of the MSS Pipeline Segment which, if approved, would run within the Union City Boulevard right-of-way from the Alameda Creek Flood Control Channel Bridge to Smith Street (the “Coordinated MSS Pipeline Segment,” with the project to construct the Coordinated MSS Pipeline Segment referred to herein as the “Coordinated MSS Pipeline Segment Project”) with the construction of the independent Bike Lanes Project and Fiber Project. The portion of the MSS Pipeline Segment running from Smith Street to Old Alameda Creek (the “Extended MSS Pipeline Segment”) would be constructed by Cargill separately and pursuant to the terms and conditions of the Franchise Agreement. The terms and conditions of this Agreement do not apply to the planning, design, permitting and construction of the Extended MSS Pipeline Segment.

City Council/RSA Agenda 110 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

G. Though the Bike Lanes Project, the Fiber Project and the Coordinated MSS Pipeline Segment Project (collectively, the “Coordinated Projects”) lend themselves to the efficiency of coordinated construction, no one project is a reasonably foreseeable consequence of the others.

None of the Coordinated Projects will change the scope or nature of the others or their environmental effects and each has its own distinct purpose to serve different public and private needs and interests. Coordinating construction, if the Coordinated Projects are approved, creates opportunities to minimize disruptions and to avoid having to repair or replace infrastructure recently installed as part of one project as part of a separate and subsequent project. The Coordinated Projects are unrelated except for the coordination of planning, design and construction contemplated in this Agreement.

H. The Parties therefore wish to enter into this Agreement to coordinate the planning, design, and permitting of the Coordinated Projects and, if the Coordinated Projects are approved by all authorities with jurisdiction over such projects, including compliance with CEQA and approval by EBDA of the MSS Process Project as provided herein, to provide a framework for coordinating the construction of the Coordinated Projects under one construction contract and the sharing of costs related thereto as provided in this Agreement.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements herein contained and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:

AGREEMENT

1. Schedule. A preliminary schedule for performance under this Agreement is attached hereto as Exhibit “F” to this Agreement (the “Agreement Schedule”), which may be updated and revised by agreement of the Parties from time to time. Each of the Parties agrees to exercise commercially reasonable efforts to perform its respective obligations under this Agreement according to the Agreement Schedule.

2. Design and Permitting. In order to determine the feasibility of coordinating the construction of the Coordinated Projects, Union City and Cargill agree to share with each other the preliminary engineering designs for Bike Lanes Project, the Fiber Project and the Coordinated MSS Pipeline Project and to pursue permitting for the Coordinated Projects as provided herein. a. Bike Lanes Project. Union City will cause the preliminary and final engineering design of the Bike Lanes Project to be prepared according to the Agreement Schedule and based upon the Bike Lanes Scope of Work, will share this design with Cargill, and will be responsible for obtaining any permits required by public agencies with jurisdiction over the Bike Lanes Project, including compliance with CEQA.
b. Fiber Project. Union City will provide design guidelines/criteria for the Fiber Project based upon the Fiber Project Scope of Work to Cargill according to the Agreement City Council/RSA Agenda 111 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

Schedule. Cargill will in turn cause the preliminary engineering design of the Fiber Project to be prepared based upon the design guidelines/criteria provided by Union City. Union City will provide comments to Cargill based upon its review of the preliminary engineering design for the Fiber Project prepared by Cargill’s design engineer. Once Union City’s comments have been incorporated into the preliminary design for the Fiber Project, Cargill will cause the final engineering design for the Fiber Project to be prepared according to the Agreement Schedule, and the final design will be included in the Package B Construction Plans (as defined in Section 5(b) below). Union City will be responsible for obtaining any permits required by public agencies with jurisdiction over the Fiber Project, including compliance with CEQA. c. Coordinated MSS Pipeline Segment Project. Cargill will cause the preliminary and final engineering design of the Coordinated MSS Pipeline Segment Project to be prepared according to the Agreement Schedule and based upon the MSS Pipeline Segment Scope of Work, as this scope of work may be updated or amended. Cargill will further be responsible for obtaining any permits required by public agencies with jurisdiction over the Coordinated MSS Pipeline Segment Project, and compliance with CEQA and the Franchise Agreement, if issued by Union City. Cargill shall be solely responsible for the cost to relocate any existing utility if necessary for the construction of the Coordinated MSS Pipeline Segment Project, or the cost to redesign and relocate the Coordinated MSS Pipeline Segment Project in order to avoid the existing utilities. As noted above, the Franchise Agreement, and not this Agreement will apply to the planning, permitting and design of the Extended MSS Pipeline Segment. Cargill will not be required to obtain an encroachment permit or any other permits from Union City (other than the Franchise Agreement) if the Coordinated MSS Pipeline Segment Project is constructed as one of the Coordinated Projects as provided in this Agreement. Cargill may retain the General Contractor (as defined in Section 7(a) below) to obtain any necessary permits required for construction of the Coordinated MSS Pipeline Segment Project if Cargill is separately invoiced for such costs by the General Contractor, or, if both Parties agree, the Parties may retain the General Contractor to pursue any necessary permits required for construction of the Coordinated Projects, with Cargill to pay for the cost of obtaining permits for construction of the Coordinated MSS Pipeline Segment Project and Union City to pay for the cost of obtaining permits for construction of the Bike Lanes Project and Fiber Project; provided, however, that if the General Contractor obtains permits for each of the Coordinated Projects, and it is infeasible to separately allocate the cost of obtaining permits for each of the Coordinated Projects, Cargill shall pay for a percentage of such costs equal to the percentage of the cost of the Common Bid Items Cargill is responsible for paying as determined in Exhibit “E” below and Union City shall pay for the remainder of such costs.

3. CEQA Compliance.
a. EBDA will serve as the lead agency under CEQA for review of the MSS Processing Project, including the Coordinated MSS Pipeline Segment Project, and prepare the appropriate documents required by CEQA for the project. Union City shall act as a responsible agency under CEQA for the MSS Processing Project and will participate in the process of preparing the appropriate documents required by CEQA for the project so that Union City may rely on it to support any discretionary decisions it may need to make regarding the MSS Pipeline Segment Project.

City Council/RSA Agenda 112 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

b. Union City will serve as the lead agency for the review(s) under CEQA of the Bike Lanes Project and the Fiber Project and prepare any appropriate documents required by CEQA for the two projects.
c. Nothing herein shall require either Party to approve or proceed with the final design or construction of any aspect of the Coordinated Projects. Union City retains its full discretion to disapprove the Coordinated Projects, approve an alternative to the Coordinated Projects, or approve the Coordinated Projects subject to conditions of approval including, but not limited to mitigation measures for environmental impacts of the Coordinated Projects under CEQA. Union City’s disapproval of the Coordinated Projects, approval of an alternative to the Coordinated Projects, or approval of the Coordinated Projects subject to conditions of approval shall not be considered a breach of this Agreement and Union City may exercise its discretion without penalty of any kind under this Agreement.
d. Should EBDA exercise its discretion to approve an alternative to the MSS Processing Project or to approve the MSS Processing Project subject to conditions of approval, the Parties will meet and confer to determine whether amendments to this Agreement are necessary or desired.

4. Design Modifications. If and when: (i) final determinations have been made by Union City to undertake the Bike Lanes Project and the Fiber Project, and by EBDA to permit and undertake the MSS Processing Project, including after Union City and EBDA have exercised their respective roles as lead and/or responsible agencies under CEQA, (ii) appropriate documents required by CEQA for the Bike Lanes Project, Fiber Project and MSS Processing Project have been prepared, reviewed and approved as set forth in Section 3 above, (iii) EBDA and Cargill have entered into a written agreement (the “EBDA/Cargill Agreement”) providing for the construction of the MSS Processing Project, including the Complete MSS Pipeline, and for the discharge of brine solutions from Cargill’s Newark salt making facility into the EBDA treated wastewater system, and (iv) Cargill has received all permits and other approvals required by public agencies with jurisdiction over the MSS Processing Project in order to construct the project, including the Franchise Agreement with Union City and other franchise agreements as needed for the MSS Processing Project (collectively, “Final Determinations”), the Parties shall meet and confer in good faith for a period not to exceed five (5) business days (the “Design Review Period”) to determine whether changes to the engineering design for each of the Coordinated Projects prepared under Section 2 of this Agreement are necessary in order to coordinate the construction of the Coordinated Projects and in light of any final documents required by CEQA for each of the Coordinated Projects (“Design Modifications”). If, at the end of the Design Review Period, the Parties are able to agree upon such Design Modifications, Union City will, within ten (10) business days of the end of the Design Review Period, cause such Design Modifications to be prepared and incorporated into the final engineering design for the Bikes Lanes Project and Fiber Project, and Cargill will, within ten (10) business days of the end of the Design Review Period, cause such Design Modifications to be prepared and incorporated into the final engineering design for the MSS Pipeline Segment Project, including the Coordinated MSS Pipeline Segment Project (the final engineering design for each of the Coordinated Projects as established pursuant to this Section 4 is referred to herein as the “Final Design” for each of the Coordinated Projects). If, at the end City Council/RSA Agenda 113 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

of the Design Review Period, the Parties are unable to agree upon such Design Modifications, the Design Review Period shall be automatically extended until the Parties are able to reach agreement, unless and until either Party elects in writing to terminate this Agreement, in which case this Agreement shall terminate and Section 15 below shall apply. If Final Determinations with respect to the Bike Lanes Project, the Fiber Project and/or the MSS Processing Project have not been made by, or one or more such Final Determinations are no longer in full force and effect as of March 1, 2023, either Party may elect to terminate this Agreement, in which case this Agreement shall terminate and Section 15 below shall apply; otherwise, this Agreement shall continue and remain in effect. The Parties acknowledge and agree that the City may advertise and solicit bids for the Combined Bid Package as defined in and pursuant to Section 6(c) below prior to March 1, 2023, but shall not award a contract prior to such date.

5. Construction Plans. If and when Final Determinations have been made (the “Final Determinations Date”), a Final Design has been prepared for each of the Consolidated Project, and Union City, exercising its full and sole discretion, has granted the Franchise Agreement to Cargill, the Parties shall cause the preparation of construction plans as provided herein and according to the Agreement Schedule.
a. Bike Lanes Project. Union City will provide for the preparation of construction plans for the Bike Lanes Project based upon the Final Determinations and Final Design for the project (the “Package A Construction Plans”). b. MSS Pipeline Project. Cargill will provide for the preparation of construction plans for the Coordinated MSS Pipeline Segment Project and Fiber Project, based upon the Final Determinations and Final Design for the MSS Processing Project and Fiber Project (the “Package B Construction Plans”).

6. Bid Schedules and Bid Packages.
a. Bid Schedules.
i. Package A Bid Schedule. Once the Package A Construction Plans have been prepared, Union City will be responsible for preparing a bid schedule based upon the Package A Construction Plans for the Bike Lanes Project according to the Agreement Schedule (the “Package A Bid Schedule”).
ii. Package B Bid Schedule. Once the Package B Construction Plans have been prepared, Cargill will be responsible for preparing a bid schedule based upon the Package B Construction Plans for the Coordinated MSS Pipeline Segment Project and Fiber Project according to the Agreement Schedule (the “Package B Bid Schedule”). iii. Package C Bid Schedule. Once the Package A and Package B Construction Plans have been prepared, Union City will be responsible for the preparation of a bid schedule based upon the Package A Construction Plans and Package B Constructions Plans for the following line items which would be common to the Bike Lanes Project, Fiber Project and Coordinated MSS Pipeline Segment Project (the “Common Bid Items”), as set forth in further City Council/RSA Agenda 114 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

detail as Item Nos. 1, 2, 6, 7, 9 through 14, 44, 45, 50, 71 through 78 and 80_in the Engineer’s Opinion of Probable Construction Costs attached hereto as Exhibit “E”: (i) mobilization, (ii) job site management, (iii) construction area signs, (iv) storm water pollution control, (v) clearing and grubbing, (vi) traffic control, (vii) construction survey, and (viii) stage construction, and (ix) asphalt concrete overlay and final roadway striping (the “Package C Bid Schedule”). Once prepared, Union City will send the Package C Bid Schedule to Cargill for approval, with such approval not to be unreasonably denied, conditioned or delayed. b. Bid Packages.
i. Bid Package A. After preparing the Package A Bid Schedule, Union City will be responsible for preparing a bid package for the Bike Lanes Project based upon the Package A Construction Plans and Package A Bid Schedule to include plans and specifications for the project and to be shared with Cargill (the “Bid Package A”). Bid Package A will also include the Common Bid Items set forth in the Package C Bid Schedule required for the Coordinated Projects.
ii. Bid Package B. After preparing the Package B Bid Schedule, Cargill will be responsible for preparing a bid package for the Coordinated MSS Pipeline Segment Project and Fiber Project based upon the Package B Construction Plans and Package B Bid Schedule to include plans and specifications for the project and to be shared with the Union City (“Bid Package B”).
iii. Combined Bid Package A and B. Once Bid Package A and Bid Package B have been prepared by Union City and Cargill, respectively, Union City will combine the two bid packages into one construction package, including all necessary plans, specifications, bid documents, proposed construction contract and notice to contractor for the Bike Lanes Project, Fiber Project and Coordinated MSS Pipeline Segment Project) (the “Combined Bid Package”).

Once prepared by Union City, Union City will send the Combined Bid Package to Cargill for approval, with such approval not to be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed. If Cargill does not approve the Combined Bid Package, the Parties will meet and confer for a period of up to five (5) business days to attempt to reach agreement on a revised Combined Bid Package. If the Parties are unable to agree upon a revised Combined Bid Package after such five (5) day period, the Parties may agree to meet and confer for an additional five (5) day period or this Agreement may be terminated by any Party without cause as provided in Section 15(a) below.

c. Construction Contract Bidding and Award. When and if Cargill has approved the Combined Bid Package, Union City will advertise and solicit bids for the Combined Bid Package in consultation with Cargill, receive bid inquiries, forward all submittals and requests for information from bid respondents pertaining to the Coordinated MSS Pipeline Segment Project to Cargill for review and to provide responses to bid inquiries, and coordinate the review and approval of such bid inquiries with Cargill. Once bids have been publicly opened, Union City will provide to Cargill the bid results and a breakdown of costs based upon the lowest responsible and responsive bid. The Parties will meet and confer in good faith for a period of up to ten (10) business days to attempt to reach agreement upon whether to award the construction contract for the Coordinated Projects to the lowest responsible bidder. If the Parties do not agree upon the award City Council/RSA Agenda 115 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

of the contract after such ten (10) business day period, the Parties shall either cause Union City to readvertise and resolicit bids for the Combined Bid Package or meet and confer for an additional ten (10) business day period to attempt to agree upon a course of action. If the Parties are unable to agree after such additional ten (10) business day period, this Agreement may be terminated by either Party without cause as provided in Section 14(a) below or the Parties shall continue to meet and confer until reaching agreement upon a course of action. The Parties understand and acknowledge that California Public Contract Code requires Union City to award the construction contract for the Coordinated Projects to the lowest responsible bidder, or to reject all bids.

7. Construction.
a. Rights and Responsibilities. If and when a construction contract is awarded to a general contractor (the “General Contractor”) for the construction of the Coordinated Projects (the “Combined Construction Contract”), Union City will be responsible for: (i) managing and administering the Combined Construction Contract, including requiring that the General Contractor and any subcontractors comply with all applicable laws, including environmental, health and safety laws, and that the General Contractor complete construction of the Coordinated Projects in accordance with the Agreement Schedule, (ii) overall inspection and quality control for the construction of the Coordinated Projects, including confirmation that such construction conforms with the Combined Construction Contract and Combined Bid Package, including the Coordinated Project construction plans, specifications and drawings, (iii) overall project management, General Contractor communications, and communication and coordination with Cargill on the Coordinated Projects’ status and management, and (iv) reviewing and paying monthly General Contractor pay requests. Cargill shall be identified as a third-party beneficiary in the Combined Construction Contract. Cargill will provide design oversight and input pertaining to the Coordinated Union City MSS Pipeline Project and will have the right to review all General Contractor pay invoices within two (2) business days of receipt of the same from Union City. In the event that Cargill rejects or disputes a pay invoice, Cargill and Union City shall meet and confer regarding the pay invoice. Union City shall have the sole authority to decide whether or not to approve a pay invoice, however, Cargill shall have no obligation to pay or reimburse Union City for a pay invoice for Work (as defined in Section 8(a) below) that is not in compliance with the Combined Construction Contract, including any approved change order. Cargill and its contractors will also have the right to inspect construction of the Coordinated MSS Pipeline Segment Project, including for quality control and compliance with the Coordinated MSS Pipeline Segment Project construction plans, specifications and Drawings, in coordination with Union City.

Union City shall not unreasonably deny Cargill’s request to inspect the construction of the Coordinated MSS Pipeline Segment. Cargill shall provide any relevant comments pertaining to its inspection of the construction of the Coordinated MSS Pipeline Segment to Union City, which shall be responsible for all communication with the General Contractor. Any change orders requested in connection with the Coordinated Union City MSS Pipeline Project or proposed changes to the Union City MSS Pipeline Scope of Work or plans, drawings or specifications for the Coordinated Union City MSS Pipeline Project from what is contained in the Combined Bid Package, must be approved in writing by Cargill. In addition, Cargill shall be solely responsible for the cost to relocate any existing utility if necessary for the construction of the Coordinated MSS Pipeline Segment Project, or the cost to redesign and relocate the Coordinated MSS Pipeline Segment Project in order to avoid the existing utilities.

City Council/RSA Agenda 116 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

b. Notice to Proceed. Union City shall not issue a notice to proceed to the General Contractor to initiate construction of the Coordinated Projects under the Combined Construction Contract unless and until Union City and Cargill confirm in writing that all Final Determinations, as defined in Section 4 above, remain in full force and effect (the “Notice to Proceed”).
c. Insurance. Union City will in the Combined Construction Contract require that the General Contractor cause the Work (as defined in Section 8(a) below) to be covered under the insurance coverages described in Exhibit “G” attached hereto, with the Parties to this Agreement and their respective officers, employees, agents and contractors covered as additional insureds under such insurance coverage.
d. Bonds. Concurrently with execution of the Combined Construction Contract, Union City shall cause the General Contractor to furnish both a Performance Bond and a Labor and Material Payment Bond in favor of Union City and Cargill as security for the faithful performance and payment of any of the General Contractor’s obligations under the Combined Construction Contract for the Work. The bonds shall be delivered to Union City and Cargill prior to commencement of the Work. The bonds shall: (a) be in amounts at least equal to the total costs for the Combined Project as set forth in the Combined Construction Contract; (b) provide that no changes or additions to the drawings and specifications or clarification instructions given to the General Contractor for the Coordinated Projects shall exonerate or discharge the surety under such bond; (c) provide that if the General Contractor fails to complete the Work in accordance with the Agreement Schedule, subject to force majeure as defined in the Combined Construction Contract, the surety shall either contract with another contractor to complete the Work, or fund up to the penal amount of the bond for the completion of the Work pursuant to the terms and conditions of the Combined Construction Contract and this Agreement; and (d) be issued by sureties qualified to do business in the State of California and named in the current list of “Surety Companies Acceptable on Federal Bonds,” as published in the Federal Register by the Audit Staff Bureau of Accounts, U.S. Treasury Department. Upon expiration of the Warranty Period, Union City, EBDA and Cargill shall release the Performance Bond and the Labor and Material Payment Bond.

8. Warranty and Guaranty.
a. Warranty. As part of the Combined Construction Contract, Union City will require that the General Contractor provide a warranty bond, in a form reasonably approved by the Parties, to warrant that: (i) any materials, supplies, products and equipment furnished under the Combined Construction Contract will be new unless otherwise specified, and (ii) the work performed under the Combined Construction Contract (the “Work”) will be of good workmanship and quality, free from faults and defects and in conformance with the Bike Lane Scope of Work, the Fiber Scope of Work and the MSS Pipeline Segment Scope of Work, the drawings and specifications for the Coordinated Projects, the standards in the industry, and applicable law (the “Warranty”). The warranty bond shall warrant the Work for a period of one (1) year from Final Completion of the Work (as defined in Section 9(b) below (the “Warranty Period”) and shall be in the amount of not less than ten percent (10%) of the Combined Construction Contract.

City Council/RSA Agenda 117 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

b. Guarantee of the Work. As part of the Combined Construction Contract, Union City will require the General Contractor to make, at its own expense, all repairs or replacements necessitated by defects in the Work’s materials or workmanship and pay for any damage to other works resulting from such defects, which becomes evident within the Warranty Period or within such longer period of time as may be prescribed by law or by the terms of any applicable special guarantee required by the drawings and specifications for the Coordinated Projects. Union City shall cause the General Contractor to further assume responsibility for a similar guarantee for all work and materials provided by subcontractors or manufacturers of materials and/or equipment. Until such time as the warranty bond is in place and approved by the Parties, Union City will require that the General Contractor remain obligated for repairs and replacement under the Combined Construction Contract.
c. Notice of Defective Work. During the Warranty Period, Union City shall cause the General Contractor, under its warranty bond, upon the receipt of notice in writing from Union City or Cargill, to promptly make all repairs arising out of defective materials, workmanship, or equipment related to the Coordinated MSS Pipeline Segment Project or related improvements. Cargill is hereby authorized to make such repairs, and the General Contractor and its surety shall be liable for the cost thereof, if within five (5) business days after giving of such notice to the General Contractor and/or its surety has failed to make or undertake the repairs with due diligence. In case of emergency, where in the opinion of Cargill, delay could cause serious loss or damage, repairs may be made without notice being sent to the General Contractor, and the General Contractor shall be liable for the cost thereof. Union City shall have no liability for such repairs, but shall provide reasonable assistance to Cargill in Cargill’s effort to recover the cost of such repairs from the General Contractor and/or its surety.

9. Final Completion and Acceptance.
a. Substantial Completion. Union City will cause the General Contractor to provide written notice upon achieving substantial completion of the Work. Upon receipt of the General Contractor’s notice of substantial completion of the Work, Union City shall promptly thereafter inspect the construction of the Bike Lane Project and Fiber Project, and Cargill shall promptly thereafter inspect the construction of the Coordinated MSS Pipeline Segment Project and in coordination with one another develop a list of any deficiencies for correction (the “Punch‐ List”). Union City shall direct the General Contractor to promptly correct any deficiencies identified on the Punch‐List. Any failure to include an item on the Punch‐List will not alter the responsibility of the General Contractor to complete the Work in accordance with that portion of the MSS Pipeline Segment Scope of Work applicable to the Coordinated MSS Pipeline Project, or the plans, drawings and specifications for the Coordinated MSS Pipeline Segment Project approved by Cargill.
b. Final Completion. “Final Completion” is defined herein as completion of the Work, as applicable, including correction of Punch‐List items, by the General Contractor.

Union City will require that the General Contractor notify it in writing upon achieving Final Completion for the Work (“Final Completion Notice”), which notice Union City will promptly forward to Cargill. Final Completion for the Work shall be deemed achieved, unless within ten (10) days following the Parties’ receipt of the Final Completion Notice, Union City notifies the City Council/RSA Agenda 118 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

General Contractor, or Cargill notifies Union City, in writing that specific Punch‐List items remain incomplete and provides an updated Punch‐List. Upon Final Completion of the Work and General Contractor’s provision of the warranty bond as required by Section 8(a): (i) Union City will promptly process and provide written acceptance of the Coordinated Projects and the Work, (ii) Union City will assume ownership of and all risk of loss, ongoing maintenance and operational responsibilities for the Bike Project and the Fiber Project and related improvements, (iii) Union City will, in coordination with Cargill, review and pay the final pay request for the Work submitted by the General Contractor, including any retainage required under the Combined Construction Contract, once the applicable mechanics and materialman’s lien period for the Work has expired, (iv) Cargill will have the right, in coordination with the City, to inspect and accept the Coordinated MSS Pipeline Segment, including the opportunity to test the Coordinated MSS Pipeline Segment according to Cargill’s protocols and specifications, and Union City shall not unreasonably deny Cargill’s request to inspect the construction of the Coordinated MSS Pipeline Segment; provided, however, that Cargill shall provide any relevant comments or concerns regarding its inspection to Union City, which shall be responsible for all communication with the General Contractor, (v) Cargill will assume ownership of and all risk of loss, ongoing maintenance and operational responsibilities for the Coordinated MSS Pipeline Segment pursuant to any Franchise Agreement granted by Union City to Cargill, and (vi) the Coordinated MSS Pipeline Segment will connect to and become of the Complete MSS Pipeline once completed, and be incorporated into EBDA’s existing system for the conveyance, treatment and handling of wastewater, as provided in the separate EBDA/Cargill Agreement.

10. Cost Sharing.
a. Project Management. Union City has retained Richard K. Tanaka (“Tanaka”) as a consultant to Union City under a separate Consulting Services Agreement effective as of March 1, 2021, to assist Union City with the environmental review of the Bike Lane Project and Fiber Project under CEQA, and for design and construction support services for the Coordinated Projects. Cargill has agreed to reimburse Union City for a portion of Tanaka’s fee for such services in an amount not to exceed $75,000, to be billed and paid by Cargill as set forth in Section 11 below. Cargill is also reimbursing Union City for fees charged by Tanaka in connection with the preparation of this Agreement, which fees are addressed pursuant to a separate agreement between Cargill and Union City.
b. Project Design Services. Union City has retained the firm of Kimley-Horn to provide engineering design services for the Bike Lane Project. In light of the budget line items common to the Coordinated Projects, Cargill has agreed to reimburse Union City for a portion of Kimley-Horn’s fees for such services in an amount not to exceed $180,000, to be billed and paid by Cargill as set forth in Section 11 below.
c. Construction Administration and Inspection. Cargill has agreed to pay Union City for the administration of the Combined Construction Contract, inspection services and other services as set forth in this Agreement in an amount not to exceed $150,000, to be billed and paid by Cargill as set forth in Section 11 below.

City Council/RSA Agenda 119 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

d. Common Bid Items. In light of the shared, common line items associated with the construction of the Coordinated Projects, should they proceed together as set forth herein, Cargill has agreed to pay for a portion of the Common Bid Items (as defined in Section 6(a)(iii) above) as set forth herein. Cargill shall pay ten percent (10%) of the actual cost of the construction survey (Item No 6 of the Engineer’s Opinion of Probable Costs set forth in Exhibit “E, defined as the “Construction Survey” in this Agreement). Cargill shall also pay a portion of the asphalt cover overlay and stripping costs (Item Nos 44, 45,50 and 80 of the Engineer’s Opinion of Probable Costs set forth in Exhibit “E and defined in this Agreement as the “AC Overlay/Striping Costs”) in accordance with Section 10(e) below. The cost of all other Common Bid Items, other than the construction survey and AC Overlay/Stripling Costs, shall be paid by Cargill and Union City based upon the cost of the Bike Lanes Project and Fiber Project, on the one hand, and the Coordinated MSS Pipeline Segment Project, on the hand, as set forth in the final, awarded Combined Construction Contract. The cost sharing of the Common Bid Items is set forth and discussed in further detail in Exhibit “E” attached hereto. Cargill shall pay its share of costs for the Common Bid Items as provided in this Section 10(d) in the manner set forth in Section 11 below. e. Asphalt Cover Overlay and Striping Costs. Because the Coordinated MSS Pipeline Segment Project, if constructed on its own, would require Cargill to pay for the cost of restoring half of Union City Boulevard from the Alameda Creek Flood Control Channel Bridge to Smith Street, after trenching and installation of the Coordinated MSS Pipeline Segment and backfill, and restoration of half of this segment of Union City Boulevard would also be required in connection with the Bike Lanes Project, Cargill and Union City have agreed that it would be reasonable and appropriate to split the AC Overlay/Striping Costs charged by the General Contractor for such half of Union City Boulevard. Cargill and Union City have therefore agreed that Cargill shall pay a fee of $620,000 based on AC Overlay/Striping Costs, which is equal to fifty percent (50%) of the estimated AC Overlay/Stripling Costs for half of Union City Boulevard from the Alameda Creek Flood Control Channel Bridge to Smith Street as set forth in the Engineer’s Opinion of Probable Costs set forth in Exhibit “E”. Cargill’s share of the costs for AC Overlay/Striping Costs shall not increase or decrease based upon the actual costs for such work. Cargill shall pay its share of costs for AC Overlay/Striping Costs as provided in this Section 10(e) in the manner set forth in Section 11 below.
f. Coordinated MSS Pipeline Segment Project Costs. Cargill will pay for 100% of those line items for the cost of construction of the Coordinated MSS Pipeline Segment Project set forth as Item Nos. 90 through 95 in the Engineer’s Opinion of Probable Costs in Exhibit “E” attached hereto and in the manner provided in Section 11 below. g. Bike Lane Project and Fiber Project Costs. Union City will pay for 100% of those line items for the cost of construction of the Bike Lane Project and Fiber Project as set forth as Items Nos. 15 through 43, 46 through 49, 51 through 70, 79 through 85 and 87 through 89 set forth in the Engineer’s Opinion of Probable Costs in Exhibit “E” attached hereto. h. Separate Costs. Union City and Cargill will be solely responsible for any costs incurred by each Party except as otherwise provided in Sections 10 (a) through (g) above.

City Council/RSA Agenda 120 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

11. Payments. Union City will invoice Cargill not more frequently than once a month for the costs Cargill has agreed to pay as set forth in Section 10 above, and as such costs are incurred by Union City, with a line-by-line itemization of such costs by Union City and, otherwise, copies of invoices from the relevant contractors. Cargill acknowledges that some of the costs Cargill has agreed to pay as set in Section 10 above have already been incurred by the City.

Cargill’s payment of any costs incurred by the General Contractor for Common Bid Items and separate costs for the construction of the Coordinated MSS Pipeline Segment Project is subject to Cargill’s right to review and approve pay requests submitted by the General Contractor under Section 7(a) above. Cargill shall reimburse Union City for such costs within sixty (60) days of Cargill’s approval of invoices for such costs. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Cargill shall pay Union City $620,000 for Cargill’s predetermined share of AC Overlay/Striping Costs as calculated and shown in Exhibit “E” within sixty (60) days of the award of the Combined Construction Contract. This $620,000 payment represents a mutually agreed upon estimate of Cargill’s share of the AC Overlay/Striping Costs, which shall not increase or decrease based upon the actual AC Overlay/Striping Costs.

12. Indemnification.
a. By Cargill. At Cargill’s sole cost and expense and with counsel reasonably approved by Union City, at rates actually paid by Union City to attorneys retained by it in the ordinary course of business in the defense of similar actions, Cargill shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless Union City and its successors and assigns, employees, agents, directors, officers, representatives and affiliates (the “Union City Indemnified Parties”) from and against any and all losses, liabilities, damages, claims, suits, fines, penalties, costs or expenses (including but not limited to attorneys’ fees) (collectively “Claims”) of any kind arising out of, connected with, or related to: (i) the performance of this Agreement by Cargill, its agents, employees, representatives and contractors (the “Cargill Parties”) caused by or resulting from the active or passive negligence, error or omission, intentional wrongdoing or willful misconduct of any of the Cargill Parties; (ii) the breach by Cargill of any obligation or covenant contained in this Agreement; (iii) any legal challenge to the Coordinated MSS Pipeline Segment Project, and/or (iv) noncompliance by any of the Cargill Parties with applicable laws in connection with the performance of this Agreement. The Union City Indemnified Parties shall have a direct right of action against Cargill even if no third party has asserted a claim. The indemnification obligations do not apply to such Claims caused by the sole or active negligence or willful misconduct of the Union City Indemnified Parties. Cargill’s obligation under this indemnification provision will survive any termination of this Agreement.

13. Insurance
a. During the term of this Agreement, Cargill shall provide, pay for and maintain with companies satisfactory to Union City the types of insurance described herein. All insurance shall be from responsible companies duly authorized to do business in the State of California and having a financial rating in Best’s Insurance Guide of A- Class VI or better. All liability policies shall provide that Union City is an additional insured as to the coverage required under this Agreement and shall provide the severability of interest provision. The required coverage must be evidenced by properly executed certificates of insurance which must be City Council/RSA Agenda 121 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

manually signed by the authorized representative of the insurance company providing coverage to Cargill. Thirty (30) days advanced written notice by registered or certified mail must be given of any cancellation, intent not to renew or reduction in the policy coverage. b. The limits of coverage of insurance required shall be not less than the following:

COVERAGE TYPE OF INSURANCE MINIMUM LIMITS
A Commercial General
Liability
Premises Liability; Products
and Completed Operations;
Contractual Liability;
Personal Injury and
Advertising Liability
$1,000,000 per occurrence; Bodily Injury
and Property Damage
$2,000,000 in the aggregate; Commercial
general coverage shall be at least as broad as
Insurance Services Office Commercial
General Liability occurrence form CG 0001
(most recent edition) covering
comprehensive General Liability on an
“occurrence” basis
B Commercial or Business
Automobile Liability
All owned vehicles, hired or
leased vehicles, non-owned,
borrowed and permissive
uses. Personal Automobile
Liability is acceptable for
individual contractors with
no transportation or hauling
related activities
$1,000,000 per occurrence;
Any Auto; Bodily Injury and Property
Damage. Automobile coverage shall be at
least as broad as Insurance Services Office
Automobile Liability form CA 0001 (most
recent edition), Code 1 (any auto). No
endorsement shall be attached limiting the
coverage.

City Council/RSA Agenda 122 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

C Workers’ Compensation
(WC) and Employers
Liability (EL)
Required for all contractors
with employees
WC: Statutory Limits
EL: $100,000 per accident for bodily injury
or disease. Cargill may rely on a selfinsurance program to meet those requirements, but only if the program of
self-insurance complies fully with the
provisions of the California Labor Code.

The insurer shall waive all rights of
subrogation against Union City and its
officers, officials, employees, and volunteers
for loss arising from work performed under
this Agreement

c. Each of the following shall be included in the insurance coverage or added as a certified endorsement to the policy:

i. All required insurance shall be maintained during the entire term of the Agreement with the following exception: Insurance policies and coverage(s) written on a claims-made basis shall be maintained during the entire term of the Agreement and until three (3) years following termination and acceptance of all work provided under the Agreement, with the retroactive date of said insurance (as may be applicable) concurrent with the commencement of activities pursuant to this Agreement.
ii. All insurance required above with the exception of Commercial Automobile Liability, Workers’ Compensation and Employers Liability, shall name as an additional insured: City of Union City, its City Council, and all City officers, agents, employees, volunteers and representatives.
iii. For any claims related to this Agreement or the work hereunder, Cargill’s insurance covered shall be primary insurance with respect to any claims or losses arising from Cargill’s sole negligence as respects Union City, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by Union City, its officers, officials, employees, or volunteers shall be excess of Cargill’s insurance and shall not contribute with it. iv. Each insurance policy required by this Section 13 shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be canceled by either party, except after 30 days’ prior written notice has been provided to Union City.

City Council/RSA Agenda 123 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

v. Cargill shall provide certificate(s) of insurance and applicable insurance endorsements, in form and satisfactory to Union City, evidencing that all required insurance coverage under this Section 13 is in effect.
d. All Policies Requirements.
i. Acceptability of insurers. All insurance required by this Section 13 is to be placed with insurers with a Bests' rating of no less than A:VII. Insurance shall be maintained through an insurer with a minimum A.M. Best Rating of A- or better, with deductible amounts acceptable to Union City. Acceptance of Cargill’s insurance by Union City shall not relieve or decrease the liability of Cargill under this Agreement. Any deductible or self-insured retention amount or other similar obligation under the policies required under this Section 13 shall be the sole responsibility of Cargill.
ii. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Cargill shall disclose to and obtain the written approval of Union City for the self-insured retentions and deductibles applicable to the policies required under this Section 13. At the option of Union City, either: the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects Union City, its officers, employees, and volunteers, or Cargill shall provide a financial guarantee satisfactory to Union City guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses.
iii. Wasting Policies. No policy required by this Section 13 shall include a “wasting” policy limit (i.e., limit that is eroded by the cost of defense). iv. Waiver of Subrogation. Cargill hereby agrees to waive subrogation which any insurer or contractor may require from Cargill by virtue of the payment of any loss.

Cargill agrees to obtain any endorsements that may be necessary to affect this waiver of subrogation. The Workers’ Compensation policy shall include a waiver of subrogation in favor of the Union City for all work performed by Cargill, its employees, agents, and subcontractors. e. Remedies. In addition to any other remedies Union City may have if Cargill fails to provide or maintain any insurance policies or policy endorsements to the extent and within the time herein required under this Section 13, Union City may, at its sole option, exercise any of the following remedies, which are alternatives to other remedies Union City may have and are not the exclusive remedy for Cargill’s breach: (i) obtain such insurance and deduct and retain the amount of the premiums for such insurance from any sums due under the Agreement, or (ii) terminate this Agreement pursuant to Section 15 below.

14. Default. In the event of a material breach by a Party of any term or covenant contained in this Agreement, the non‐defaulting Party may give written notice of such default to the defaulting Party, which notice shall include the acts required to cure the same with reasonable specificity. The defaulting Party shall have a period of seven (7) days after receipt of such notice within which to cure such default, provided the defaulting Party commences and diligently pursues cure to completion, which period may be extended as may be reasonably required if cure cannot be achieved within such seven (7) day period. In the event the defaulting Party fails to cure such City Council/RSA Agenda 124 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

default within the period provided in this Section 14, one or more of the non‐defaulting Parties may at their election, terminate this Agreement as provided in Section 15 below and/or pursue all remedies available at law or in equity in the event of a breach of this Agreement by the defaulting Party.

15. Termination.
a. Prior to Bid Advertising. Prior to Union City’s action to advertise and solicit bids for the Combined Bid Package pursuant to Section 6(c) above, this Agreement may be terminated by either Party without cause or as otherwise provided in this Agreement by giving written notice to the other Party not less than twenty (20) days prior to such termination. b. After Notice to Bid. After Union City’s action to advertise and solicit bids for the Combined Bid Package pursuant to Section 6(c) above, this Agreement may not be terminated by either Party except in the event of an uncured default by the other Party pursuant to Section 14 of this Agreement, in which event the date of termination shall be the expiration of the period to cure provided in Section 14, or except as provided in Section 4 or in Section 6(c) above. c. Upon Termination. All costs charged to Cargill under Section 10 of this Agreement up to the date of termination by Cargill shall be due and payable by Cargill within ninety (90) days of the receipt of invoices from Union City for such costs which have been approved by Cargill, and Cargill shall have no further obligation to reimburse for or pay any costs under this Agreement.

16. Notices. Any notice, request, demand, instruction or other document (each of which is herein called a “Notice”) to be given hereunder shall be in writing and shall be delivered to the person at the appropriate address set forth below by personal service (including express or courier service), by electronic mail, or by certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, as follows:

If to Cargill: Cargill, Incorporated
15407 McGinty Road West MS 24
Wayzata, Minnesota 55391
Attention: Tim Oolman
Email: [email protected]
With a copy to: Cargill, Incorporated
Law Department
15407 McGinty Road West MS 24
Wayzata, Minnesota 55391
Attention: Salt Group Lead Lawyer
Telephone: (952) 742-5185
Email: [email protected]
City Council/RSA Agenda 125 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

If to Union City: City of Union City, California
34009 Alvarado-Niles Road
Union City, California 94587
Attention: Public Works Director
Telephone: (510) 675-5306
Email: [email protected]

With a copy to: City Attorney
City of Union City, California
34009 Alvarado-Niles Road
Union City, California 94587
Attn: City Attorney
Email: [email protected]

17. Assignment. This Agreement may not be assigned by any Party without the written consent of the other Parties.

18. Successors and Assigns. This Agreement, and all the terms, covenants and conditions hereof, will apply to and bind the successors and assigns of each Party.

19. Disputes.
a. Good Faith. This Agreement requires the Parties to work together in good faith to achieve the intent of this Agreement. In the event that a dispute arises as to the proper interpretation of the respective obligations and responsibilities of the Parties under this Agreement, or as to any other aspect of this Agreement, the Parties agree that they each will assign the appropriate individuals to meet and make good faith efforts in order to arrive at a resolution of the dispute.
b. Mediation. If after employing the informal resolution process above, the Parties are unable to resolve a dispute arising under this Agreement, any Party may request an independent mediator, agreeable to all Parties, to facilitate further negotiation with the costs shared equally between and among the Parties. However, nothing herein will prevent any Party from exercising any rights it may have to enforce the terms of this Agreement at law or in equity.

20. Ownership of Materials. All reports, documents, or other materials developed or discovered by any Party or any other person engaged directly or indirectly by any Party to perform the services requiring under this Agreement will be and remain the mutual property of all Parties without restriction or limitation upon the use thereof. Each Party will make available to the other Parties such other records under its control as may be reasonably required for the Parties to perform under this Agreement.

21. Term of Agreement. The term of this Agreement will be for the later of a period of three (3) years from the Effective Date or until the Warranty Period has expired.

City Council/RSA Agenda 126 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

22. Modifications. This Agreement may be amended, superseded, cancelled, renewed, or extended, and their terms or covenants hereof may be waived, only by a written instrument executed by the Parties hereto or in the case of a waiver, by the Party waiving compliance. The Parties reserve the right by mutual written consent to amend, modify, supersede, and cancel this Agreement, or waive the terms or conditions hereof, without the consent of any other third party (natural or otherwise).

23. Complete Agreement. This Agreement, including exhibits hereto, represent the full and complete understanding of the Parties and supersede any previous agreements, representations or understandings, oral or written, with respect to the subject matter hereof. This Agreement may be modified or altered only by a written instrument signed by the Parties.

24. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original and all of which together shall constitute one and the same agreement.

25. Authority. Each Party represents that the individual signing this Agreement on its behalf has the authority to do so and that it has full right and lawful authority to enter into this Agreement and to undertake and perform its obligations under this Agreement.

26. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California without regard to its conflicts of laws provisions.

27. Attorneys’ Fees. If any action is brought by any Party against any other Party, relating to or arising out of this Agreement, the transaction described herein or the enforcement hereof, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover from the other party reasonable attorneys’ fees, costs and expenses incurred in connection with the prosecution or defense of such action or any appeals therefrom. The provisions of this Section 27 shall survive the entry of any and shall not merge, or be deemed to have merged, into any judgment.

28. No Waiver. The failure of a Party hereto at any time or times to require performance of any provision hereof will in no manner affect its right at a later time to enforce the same. No waiver by a Party hereto of the breach of any term or covenant by another Party hereto contained in this Agreement or in any other such instrument, whether by conduct or otherwise, in any one or more instances, will be deemed to be, or construed as, a further or continuing waiver of any breach, or a waiver of the breach of any other term or covenant contained herein.

29. Mutual Negotiations. This Agreement has been the subject of negotiations by the Parties, and this Agreement will not be construed for or against any Party merely because of such Party’s involvement in its initial preparation and negotiation.

30. Headings. The section headings and titles in this Agreement are for convenience of reference only. Such headings and titles will not be construed as modifying, limiting or expanding in any manner the terms and provisions of this Agreement.

31. Third Party Beneficiary. This Agreement is between and among the Parties hereto exclusively, and no third parties are intended to be benefited hereby.

City Council/RSA Agenda 127 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
City Council/RSA Agenda 128 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have caused this Agreement to be executed as of the Effective Date.

CARGILL, INCORPORATED, a Delaware corporation
By: ________________________________
Name: Sonya M. Roberts
Title: President, Cargill Salt Division of Cargill, Incorporated

Date: ______________________________
THE CITY OF UNION CITY, a California municipal corporation By: _______________________________
Name:

Title:

Date: ______________________________
Approved as to Form:

By: _________________________________
Name:

Title:

Date: ______________________________
City Council/RSA Agenda 129 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

LIST OF EXHIBITS:

A – MSS Processing Project Scope of Work
B – MSS Pipeline Segment Scope of Work
C - Bike Lanes Scope of Work
D - Fiber Project Scope of Work
E - Engineer's Opinion of Probable Costs
F - Agreement Schedule
G - Insurance

City Council/RSA Agenda 130 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

Exhibit A
MSS Processing Project Scope of Work
Cargill, Incorporated is planning a Mixed Sea Salts Processing Project at its solar sea salt production facility located at 7220 Central Avenue, Newark, California (the “Facility”). The proposed project has onsite components of pipelines and pumping facilities within the Facility and offsite components involving an approximately 17-mile underground pipeline, referred to in the Agreement as the “Complete MSS Pipeline.” These proposed project components would enable the enhanced processing of mixed sea salt (“MSS”) within existing Cargill salt ponds by harvesting magnesium chloride brine (liquid bittern) product from MSS matrices in the industrial salt ponds, dissolving the residual MSS solids in the ponds using San Francisco Bay (the “Bay”) water, and transferring the resulting brine to EBDA’s combined effluent pipeline that ultimately discharges wastewater into the Bay under an existing National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (“NPDES”) permit held by EBDA.

EBDA is a joint powers agency consisting of five local agencies (City of San Leandro, Oro Loma Sanitary District, Castro Valley Sanitary District, City of Hayward, and Union Sanitary District) that collectively manages and discharges secondary treated wastewater in the greater East Bay.

The EBDA pipeline conveys the treated effluent through a dechlorination facility in San Leandro and then discharges the effluent via a common outfall and diffuser to a deep-water portion of the Bay.

Cargill’s Facility evaporates Bay water in a series of solar evaporation ponds for commercial production of sodium chloride crystals and magnesium chloride brine (otherwise known as liquid bittern). Other salts contained in sea water that are not harvested as these products precipitate in downstream ponds. These solids are called mixed sea salts, or MSS. Approximately 6 million tons of MSS, including entrained magnesium chloride (liquid bittern) product, are currently within the Solar Salt Facility. The proposed project would enable the enhanced processing and removal of the MSS.

The MSS are primarily situated in Cargill’s Ponds 12 and 13, which are within the Don Edwards San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge (“Refuge”), owned by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (“USFWS”). Cargill transferred this real property, along with additional acreage, through a condemnation process in 1979 and retained perpetual rights to continue sea salt operations within 8,000 acres, including Ponds 12 and 13.

The proposed project has an on-site component of pipelines and pumping facilities within the Facility and Refuge to enable harvesting of the liquid bittern product, dissolution of residual MSS solids in Bay water, and transfer of the resulting MSS brine into the Complete MSS Pipeline.

The Complete MSS Pipeline, to be constructed outside the Facility, would generally lie underground. The proposed alignment for the MSS Processing Project, referred to herein as the “Streets” alignment, consists mostly of road right-of-way owned by the City of Hayward, the City City Council/RSA Agenda 131 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

of Union City, the City of Fremont and the City of Newark, along with sections traversing through vacant lands owned by various public agencies for approximately 15.6 miles, as shown in red in the attached Figure 1.

The Complete MSS Pipeline would consist of 16-inch HDPE underground pipe. The proposed pipeline would extend in a northerly direction from the Facility via the Streets alignment to tie into the EBDA conveyance system at the Oro Loma Sanitary District Water Pollution Control Plant located at 2655 Grant Avenue, San Lorenzo, California (the “Oro Loma Plant”). At the Oro Loma Plant, this MSS brine solution would then be blended with treated wastewater effluents discharged through EBDA’s conveyance system, shown in purple in Figure 1, and discharged into San Francisco Bay at EBDA’s Bay Outfall and Diffuser facility, shown in blue in Figure 1, pursuant to EBDA’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (“NPDES”) permit issued by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (“RWQCB”).

Proposed pipeline appurtenances include isolation valves, air release/vacuum valves, blowoff valves, tracer wire, and a pig delivery system1
for pipeline cleanout. Isolation valves would be
located upstream of the Highway 84 crossing, at the connection point with the existing EBDA conveyance system and potentially at other locations to be determined in connection with the final design of the system. Air release/vacuum valves would be located at high points along the Complete MSS Pipeline. The valves would typically be housed in an above-grade structure located on a concrete pad in the median or behind the curb and sidewalk. Blowoff valves are used to drain the pipeline for repairs and maintenance and are located at major low points along the pipeline.

These valves are also typically at-grade and would likely be placed in the road pavement near sanitary sewer manholes to the extent possible. The possibility of connecting these valves to the sanitary sewer system will be considered during final design of the project. To assist in locating the pipes, tracer wire would be installed along the entire length of the below-grade Complete MSS Pipeline and tracer wire boxes (at-grade cast iron boxes) would be located approximately every 500 feet along the alignment.

A portion of the Complete MSS Pipeline for the “Streets” alignment, referred to in the Agreement as the Coordinated MSS Pipeline Segment, is proposed to be constructed at the same time as a portion of the proposed Union City Boulevard Bike Lanes Project (as described in Exhibit “C” of the Agreement). Extensive roadwork would occur on Union City Boulevard between Alvarado Boulevard and the Alameda Creek Flood Control Channel Bridge to improve bicycle and pedestrian access. To avoid disruption of this road multiple times over a relatively short period, the Union City Boulevard Bike Lanes Project would include bike lane reconstruction of the road and also accommodate the trenching for the 16-inch MSS Pipeline Segment and a 3-inch future utility conduit for fiber optics.

As noted, the proposed Complete MSS Pipeline would tie into EBDA’s common outfall at the Oro Loma Plan in San Lorenzo, California, a 60-inch reinforced concrete force main approximately 10 feet deep, via either the Streets. The currently proposed tie-in location is at EBDA Pump Station 1 Pigging in the maintenance of pipelines refers to the practice of using pipeline inspection gauges or 'pigs' to perform various operations on a pipeline without stopping the flow of the product in the pipeline. These operations include but are not limited to cleaning and inspection of the pipeline.

City Council/RSA Agenda 132 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

located within the Ora Loma Treatment Facility (shown in Figure 1). The tie-in connection includes a pre-cast meter vault and pig receiving station with above-ground piping. The MSS brine discharge could be capable of interruption during periods of exceptionally high stormwater discharge rates into the EBDA system. The MSS brine from the offsite pipeline would be blended with EBDA’s secondary treated wastewater at this location. Figure 1 to Exhibit A

City Council/RSA Agenda 133 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

Figure 1 to Exhibit A

City Council/RSA Agenda 134 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

Exhibit B
MSS Pipeline Segment Scope of Work
The MSS Pipeline Segment Project would consist of the installation of a 16-inch HDPE pipeline within the Union City Boulevard right-of-way from the Alameda Creek Flood Control Channel Bridge, at Union City’s boundary with the City of Fremont, along Union City Boulevard to Union City’s boundary with the City Hayward at Old Alameda Creek, for the “Streets” alignment referred to in the MSS Processing Project Scope of Work. The MSS Pipeline Segment Project would be one segment of an approximately 15.6-mile pipeline to be used for transporting salt brine from Cargill’s Solar Salt Facility in Newark, California to the EBDA Conveyance System at the Oro Loma Plant in San Lorenzo, California. A description of the full project is attached as Exhibit A to this Agreement. Pipeline appurtenances along Union City Boulevard would include above grade air release/vacuum valves at high points, at-grade blowoff valves at major low points to drain the pipe for repairs and maintenance, and at-grade tracer wire boxes to assist in locating the pipe. The full pipeline comprising the MSS Processing Project would also include isolation valves and a pig delivery system for pipeline cleanout.

City Council/RSA Agenda 135 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

Exhibit C
Bike Lanes Scope of Work
The Bike Lane Project proposes to construct over two (2) miles of new bicycle facilities along Union City Boulevard (“UCB”) including empty conduits for future utility uses from Smith Street to the southern city limits at the Alameda Creek Flood Control Channel Bridge. This project will complete the gap along UCB providing continuous bike facilities between the existing Class II bike lanes from south of Alvarado Boulevard to existing enhanced Class II bikes lanes along Ardenwood Boulevard in the City of Fremont. The project will include “Complete Street” improvements along UCB at the intersections of Regents Boulevard, Dyer Street and Rocklin Drive, including better access to Delaine Eastin Elementary School for students who bike or walk to school. The project includes addition of a right-hand turn lane to improve pedestrian and bicyclist safety at the intersection of UCB at Rocklin Drive. The right-hand turn land would separate right turning vehicles at Delaine Eastin Elementary School from through lane traffic and would be installed within the existing roadway footprint.

The project would include construction of approximately two miles of buffered bicycle lanes in each direction on UCB from a location 600 feet south of Alvarado Boulevard to the southern city limits at the Alameda Creek Flood Control Channel Bridge. The constructed bike lanes would incorporate a median buffer between the travel lane and the bike lane. The project would include reconstruction of some median curbs, intersection improvements, enhances pedestrian and bicycle crossings, ADA upgrades, signal modifications, and rehabilitation of existing pavement.

The existing UCB consists of approximately 8 to 10’ sidewalks and two 12’ vehicle lanes in both directions along with a 38’ median. There are no existing bike lanes. The proposed project would generally narrow the existing median to approximately 22’ to accommodate 7’ bike lanes with 4’ buffers within the existing right of way (“ROW”) and pavement footprint. (Figure 2).

Figure 2: Existing and Proposed Union City Blvd Typical Section.

City Council/RSA Agenda 136 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

Project components by location are described below
 Along UCB within the project corridor:
o A portion of the existing median would be removed and utilized to add buffered Class II bike lanes on both northbound and southbound UCB
o Northbound and southbound UCB will be restriped with two 11 ft. lanes, to create room for the bike lanes
o Striping for each intersection and bus stop along UCB in the project area include:
green bike conflict markings, green bike track intersection marking, bike legend, and bike and buffer transition areas.
 The Intersection of Regents Boulevard and UCB:
o Installation ADA curb ramp and sidewalks
o Installation of Thermal Detection Camera
 The Intersection of Jean Drive and UCB:
o Restriping of Jean Drive to create a right-hand turn lane on to southbound UCB o Installation of Thermal Detection Camera
 The Intersection of Dyer Street and UCB:
o Restriping eastbound Dyer St to create a right-hand turn lane on to southbound UCB o Installation ADA curb ramp and sidewalks
o Installation of Thermal Detection Camera
 The Intersection of Delores Drive and UCB:
o Installation of Thermal Detection Camera
 Between Rocklin Drive and Delores Drive:
o Creation of an 11 ft. right-hand turn lane on existing southbound UCB to westbound Rocklin Drive, towards Delaine Eastin Elementary School o Creation of about 700 ft long shared use path along southbound UCB to improve multi modal access near Delaine Eastin Elementary School  The Intersection of Rocklin Drive and UCB:
o At Rocklin Drive, an approximately 1,500 linear foot, 11’ right turn lane would be installed within the existing footprint in the southbound direction. At this location, a 6’ planter strip is proposed as a buffer between the shared use path and vehicular traffic. This right turn lane would support access to Delaine Eastin Elementary School and reduce congestion during peak school hours.
o Installation of ADA curb ramp and sidewalks
o Installation of Thermal Detection Camera
o Installation of No Right Turn message signs on signal pole to be active during pedestrian and bicycle detection phases
 The Intersection of Lowry Road and UCB:
o Installation of Thermal Detection Camera
This project would occur within public ROW and city-owned property. No ROW acquisitions would be required for the proposed project.

City Council/RSA Agenda 137 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

Exhibit D
Fiber Project Scope of Work
Fiber Optic Project Scope includes installation of a 3-inch conduit with pull wire in a joint trench with the Coordinated MSS Pipeline Segment (as defined in the Agreement), approximate length of 9,500 feet, along with 28 Type 6E pull boxes located in the median area. 3-inch conduit shall be place in a joint trench with a minimum horizontal offset of 6 inches or more from the 16” Union City MSS Pipeline, as determined in connection with the final design of the project, and with a vertical minimum depth clearance of 12 inches below pavement subgrade.

City Council/RSA Agenda 138 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

Exhibit E
Engineer’s Opinion of Probable Costs as of June 23, 2021 Item
No. Description EstimatedQuantity Unit Unit Price Total

MISCELLANEOUS
1 MOBILIZATION   1 LS $320,000.00 $320,000
2 TRAFFIC CONTROL SYSTEM 1 LS $120,000.00 $120,000
3 MONUMENT PRESERVATION (PRE‐CONSTRUCTION) 15 EA $1,000.00 $15,000 4 MONUMENT PRESERVATION (POST‐CONSTRUCTION) 15 EA $800.00 $12,000 5 PROJECT FUNDING IDENTIFICATION SIGNS 2 EA $1,200.00 $2,400 6 CONSTRUCTION SURVEYING 1 LS $110,000.00 $110,000
7 CLEARING & GRUBBING   1 LS $220,000 $220,000
8 CONTRACTOR POTHOLING 30 EA $1,100.00 $33,000
MISCELLANEOUS SUBTOTAL= $832,400

STORM WATER POLLUTION CONTROL
9 PREPARE WATER POLLUTION CONTROL PROGRAM 1 LS $14,000.00 $14,000 10 CONSTRUCTION SITE MANAGEMENT    1 LS $20,000.00 $20,000 11 INLET PROTECTION 44 EA $800.00 $35,200
12 FIBER ROLL 9,000 LF $20.00 $180,000
13 COVER 1 LS $10,000.00 $10,000
14 FINAL CLEANUP 1 LS $5,000.00 $5,000
MISCELLANEOUS SUBTOTAL= $264,200

ROADWAY
15 ROADWAY EXCAVATION 900 CY $65.00 $58,500
16 REMOVE CONCRETE (CURB, GUTTER, SIDEWALK) 17,500 SF $10.00 $175,000 17 REMOVE CONCRETE PAVERS & BASE 1,430 SF $15.00 $21,450 18 REMOVE MEDIAN (GRAVEL, BASE, SUBSOIL, AC
BERM) 8,200 CY $65.00 $533,000
19 SCARIFY AND RECOMPACT AB (6" DEPTH) 2,950 CY $35.00 $103,250 20 FIELD INLET 3 EA $5,000.00 $15,000
21 STORM DRAIN CLEANOUT   3 EA $1,500.00 $4,500
22 6" PERFORATED PLASTIC PIPE UNDERDRAIN 187 LF $50.00 $9,350 23 8" PVC SD PIPE 167 LF $75.00 $12,525
24 12" PVC SD PIPE 3 LF $100.00 $300
25 BIORETENTION AREA   965 SF $45.00 $43,425
26 MODIFY INLET 1 EA $1,000.00 $1,000
27 HOT MIX ASPHALT (TYPE A) 11,340 TON $130.00 $1,474,200 28 CLASS 2 AGGREGATE BASE 74 CY $150.00 $11,042
29 DECOMPOSED GRANITE 27,400 SF $5.00 $137,000
30 DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACE 350 SF $10.00 $3,500
31 MINOR CONCRETE (CITY STANDARD CURB &
GUTTER) 730 LF $50.00 $36,500
32 MINOR CONCRETE (SPILL CURB & GUTTER) 20 LF $50.00 $1,000 33 MINOR CONCRETE (MODIFIED 8" CITY STANDARD
CURB & GUTTER) 38 LF $65.00 $2,470
34 MINOR CONCRETE (CALTRANS TYPE A1‐8 CURB) 19,565 LF $40.00 $782,600 City Council/RSA Agenda 139 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

Item
No. Description EstimatedQuantity Unit Unit Price Total 35 MINOR CONCRETE (CALTRANS TYPE A1‐6 CURB) 550 LF $35.00 $19,250 36 MINOR CONCRETE (ROLLED CURB) 640 LF $60.00 $38,400
37 MINOR CONCRETE (CITY BIO‐SWALE CURB &
GUTTER) 203 LF $100.00 $20,300
38 MINOR CONCRETE (BIORETENTION CURB) 203 LF $90.00 $18,270 39 MINOR CONCRETE (SIDEWALK) 10,485 SF $20.00 $209,700
40 MINOR CONCRETE (DRIVEWAY) 410 SF $25.00 $10,250
41 MINOR CONCRETE (MAINTENANCE VEHICLE PAD) 5,520 SF $25.00 $138,000 42 MINOR CONCRETE (VALLEY GUTTER) 315 SF   $30.00 $9,450 43 MEDIAN COBBLESTONE TREATMENT 25,700 SF $30.00 $771,000 ROADWAY SUBTOTAL= $4,660,232

SIGNING AND STRIPING
44 THERMOPLASTIC PAVEMENT MARKING (WHITE) 2,708 SF $6.00 $16,248 45 THERMOPLASTIC PAVEMENT MARKING (GREEN) 9,345 SF $15.00 $140,175 46 6" THERMOPLASTIC STRIPE (WHITE) 350 LF $3.00 $1,050
47 12" THERMOPLASTIC STRIPE (WHITE) 4,100 LF $10.00 $41,000 48 12" THERMOPLASTIC STRIPE (YELLOW) 1,675 LF $12.00 $20,100 49 DETAIL 9 STRIPING 5,960 LF $3.00 $17,881
50 DETAIL 24 STRIPING 20,210 LF $5.00 $101,050
51 DETAIL 27B STRIPING 17,220 LF $3.00 $51,660
52 DETAIL 39 STRIPING 17,535 LF $3.00 $52,605
53 DETAIL 38 STRIPING 4,935 LF $3.00 $14,805
54 DETAIL 39A STRIPING 910 LF $3.00 $2,730
55 BIKE TURN BOX 945 SF $15.00 $14,175
56 BIKE SYMBOL W/ GREEN BACKGROUND 18 EA $1,500.00 $27,000 57 ROADSIDE SIGN AND POST 1 EA $500.00 $500
58 DURA CURB POSTS 861 EA $244.00 $210,084
59 LOW OBLONG BUMPS 1,722 EA $53.00 $91,266
60 MEDIAN NOSE TREATMENT 17 EA $20.00 $340
61 CHANNELIZER (SURFACE MOUNTED) 16 EA $35.00 $560
62 RELOCATE ROADSIDE SIGN 22 EA $500.00 $11,000
63 REMOVE SIGN PANEL 16 EA $150.00 $2,400
64 INSTALL NEW SIGN ON EXISTING POST 14 EA $200.00 $2,800 65 REMOVE SIGN & POST 56 EA $60.00 $3,360
SIGNING AND STRIPING SUBTOTAL= $822,789

UTILITIES, ELECTRICAL, AND LIGHTING
66 RELOCATE UTILITY BOX 21 EA $3,000.00 $63,000
67 ADJUST UTILITY TO GRADE 22 EA $1,000.00 $22,000
68 REMOVE AND SALVAGE EXISTING DETECTOR
HANDHOLES AND PULL BOXES 11 EA $1,000.00 $11,000
69 RELOCATE GAS MARKER 1 LS $2,000.00 $2,000
70 REMOVE & SALVAGE EXISTING STREET LIGHT POLE &
FOUNDATION 2 EA $3,500.00 $7,000

UTILITIES,

ELECTRICAL,

AND LIGHTING
SUBTOTAL= $105,000

STAGE CONSTRUCTION
City Council/RSA Agenda 140 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

Item
No. Description EstimatedQuantity Unit Unit Price Total 71 CHANNELIZER (SURFACE MOUNTED) 1354 EA  $             40.00   $54,160 72   CHANGEABLE MESSAGE SIGNS 4 EA  $      20,000.00   $80,000 73 PLASTIC K‐RAIL 8000 LF  $             30.00   $240,000 74 TYPE III BARRICADE 50 EA  $           250.00   $12,500 75 CONSTRUCTION AREA SIGNS 1 LS  $      20,000.00   $20,000 76 TEMPORARY TRAFFIC STRIPE (WHITE) 14,346 LF $               1.50   $21,520 77 TEMPORARY TRAFFIC STRIPE (YELLOW) 22,516 LF $               1.50   $33,774 78 TEMPORARY PAVEMENT MARKING (WHITE) 480 SF $               5.00   $2,400 STAGE CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL= $464,354

LANDSCAPING
79 LANDSCAPING 1 LS $29,400.00 $29,400
LANDSCAPING SUBTOTAL $29,400

TRAFFIC SIGNALS
80 TRAFFIC SIGNAL MODIFICATION AT REGENTS BLVD 1 LS $83,400.00 $83,400 81 TRAFFIC SIGNAL MODIFICATION AT JEAN DR 1 LS $166,300.00 $166,300 82 TRAFFIC SIGNAL MODIFICATION AT DYER ST 1 LS $141,900.00 $141,900 83 TRAFFIC SIGNAL MODIFICATION AT DELORES DR 1 LS $106,300.00 $106,300 84 TRAFFIC SIGNAL MODIFICATION AT ROCKLIN DR 1 LS $218,500.00 $218,500 85 TRAFFIC SIGNAL MODIFICATION AT EASTIN DR 1 LS $117,400.00 $117,400

TRAFFIC SIGNAL
SUBTOTAL= $833,800

PAVEMENT REHABILITATION ALLOCATION
86 2# Mill and Overlay 636,857 SF $3.50 $2,229,000
87 Crack Seal (Assume Length of Improvement) 10,560 LF $1.00 $10,560 88 Roadway Asphalt Base Repair 51,170 SF $15.00 $767,550

PAVEMENT

REHABILITATION
ALLOCATION= $3,007,110

FIBER OPTIC
88 3" HDPE Conduit in Joint Trench w/ 16” HDPE Pipe 9,500 LF $15.00 $142,500 89 28 Type 6E Pull Boxes 28 Ea $3,000.00 $84,000
FIBER OPIC= $226,500

BRINE PIPELINE
90 16”HDPE Pipe w/ tracer wire and detection tape 12,300 LF $85.80 $1,055,340 91 Dewatering 5.6 Mo $42,220.00 $236,432
92 Trench Excavation/Backfill 1 LS $1,417,200.00 $1,417,200 93 Air Release Valves 5 Ea $6,100.00 $30,500
94 Blowoff Valves 3 Ea $20,800.00 $62,400
95 Gate Valve 1 Ea $9,100.00 $9,100

BRINE PIPELINE
SUBTOTAL $2,810,972
Total $14,056,756
City Council/RSA Agenda 141 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

Union City shall cause the Engineer’s Opinion of Probable Costs shown above in this Exhibit “E” to be updated and finalized prior to advertisement of the Combined Bid Package. The updated and finalized Engineer’s Opinion of Probable Costs will be promptly distributed by Union City to Cargill once available. Once the bids are opened, if Union City and Cargill decide to award the Combined Construction Contract as provided in Section 6(c) of the Agreement, the final cost of the Combined Construction Contract will be calculated based on the lowest responsive and responsible bidder and will be provided to Cargill, including a Schedule of Values of such costs in the format set forth above in the Engineer’s Opinion of Probable Costs and a breakdown of costs to be shared by Union City and Cargill as provided in this Agreement.

The cost of Common Bid Items, as defined in Section 6(a)(iii) of this Agreement will be shared between Union City and Cargill as follows:
i. Construction Survey. Cargill shall pay ten percent (10%) and the City shall pay ninety percent (90%) of the actual cost of the Construction Survey (Item No. 6 above). ii. Asphalt Overlay/Striping Costs. Cargill shall pay Union City a $620,000 fee based on one-half of the northbound construction of the AC Overlay/Striping Costs (Items Nos. 44, 45, 50, and 80 above). Cargill’s payment of this contribution shall occur in accordance with Section 11 of the Agreement. The amount of this payment is predetermined based upon an estimate of the Cargill’s share of these costs, and shall not be based upon actual invoices received. iii. All other Common Bid Items. The sharing of the cost of all other Common Bid Items between Union City and Cargill shall be as set forth herein. Union City’s share of the Common Bid Items (other than the AC Overlay/Striping Costs and Construction Survey) will be equal to the cost of the Bike Lane Project and Fiber Project as a percentage of the combined cost of the Bike Lane Project, Fiber Project, and Coordinated MSS Pipeline Segment Project. Cargill’s share of the Common Bid Items (other than the AC Overlay/Striping Costs and Construction Survey) will be equal to the cost of the MSS Pipeline Segment Project as a percentage of the combined cost of the Bike Lane Project, Fiber Project and Coordinated MSS Pipeline Segment Project.

Based on the current estimated cost of the Bike Lane Project and Fiber Project at $7,260,757 and the Coordinated MSS Pipeline Segment Project at $2,810,972, the current estimate of Union City’s share of the Common Bid Items is 72.1% and Cargill’s share is 27.9%. The actual share of the Common Bid Items paid by Union City and Cargill will be based upon the amount of final, awarded Combined Construction Contract.

All dollar amounts shown below are based upon estimates and for illustrative purposes only.

Actual shared costs according to the sharing percentages set forth herein will be based upon the final cost of the awarded Combined Construction Contract for each line item.

City Council/RSA Agenda 142 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

TABLE OF COST SHARING OF COMMON BID ITEMS
Item Estimated
% City*
Estimated
Cost City**
Estimated%
Cargill*
Estimated Cost
Cargill**
Mobilization (Item No. 1) 72.1% $230,690 27.9% $89,310
Traffic Control (Item No. 2) 72.1% $86,509 27.9% $33,491 Construction Survey (Item
No. 6)
90% $99,000 10% $11,000
Clearing and Grubbing (Item
No. 7)

72.1% $158,600 27.9% $61,401
Storm Water Pollution
Control (Item Nos. 9 through
14)

72.1% $190,463 27.9% $73,737
Stage Construction (Item
Nos. 71 through 78)

72.1% $334,755 27.9% $129,598
*With the exception of the Construction Survey, the percentages shown in these columns are estimates only and will be adjusted based upon the final, awarded Combined Construction Contract.
** With the exception of the Construction Survey, dollar amounts shown in these columns are estimates only and will be adjusted based upon the final, awarded Combined Construction Contract.

City Council/RSA Agenda 143 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

Exhibit F
Agreement Schedule
The following schedule is tentative as of January 18, 2022. This schedule may not be modified except pursuant to the written consent of Union City, EBDA and Cargill.

No MILESTONE DATE
1 Approval by Union City for Design Consultant Amendment July 13, 2021 2 City Design Consultant (CDC) to begin 100% PS&E for Bike Lane July 19, 2021 3 Approval of the agreement by Union City and Cargill
CDC to complete 100% PS&E for Bike Lane Project
May 30, 2022
City to provide Cargill with design guidelines for Fiber Project, including materials and typical sections
Upon execution of the
Agreement
4 Cargill to provide 95% design plan- Alignment Set August 31, 2022 5 Cargill to provide 100% unchecked PS&E for MSS Project October 1, 2022 6 CDC to complete 100% combined PS&E November 10, 2022
7 Cargill review of 100% combined PS&E November 20, 2022 8 City review of 100% combined PS&E, including Cargill’s comments
December 1, 2022
9 Final comments to CDC December 5, 2022
10 CDC complete Final PS&E for City’s Review December 15, 2022 11 Cargill & City completes final review December 20, 2022 12 CDC incorporates and produces PS&E for advertisement January 10, 2023 13 CEQA Complete for MSS Processing Project Prior to Bid Open 14 City issues addendum to Bid Package, if Necessary to modify MSS Processing Project based on comments/inputs from CEQA process Prior to March 10, 2023
15 Bid open March 24, 2023
16 Contract award April 11, 2023
17 Notice to Proceed – construction commences May 5, 2023 18 Construction complete November 20, 2025
19 Project Close-out March 1, 2025
City Council/RSA Agenda 144 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

Exhibit G
Insurance
City of Union City will require the construction contractor to have insurance coverages, with Union City as the insured, as follows:
1) Commercial general liability coverage in an amount no less than $5,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage and naming Cargill, Incorporated as an additional insured.
2) Automobile liability coverage for any auto in amount no less than $2,000,000 and naming Cargill, Incorporated as an additional insured.
3) Workers’ compensation insurance as required by the State of California. 4) Employer’s liability insurance no less than 1,000,000 for each employee.

City Council/RSA Agenda 145 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
Agenda Item
DATE: 7/26/2022
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: MARILOU AYUPAN, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE AWARD OF THE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO RAY’S ELECTRIC, IN THE AMOUNT OF $170,334, FOR THE ENHANCEMENT OF PEDESTRIAN INFRASTRUCTURE (SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL (SRTS) IMPROVEMENTS) AT JAMES LOGAN HIGH SCHOOL AND GUY EMANUELE, JR. ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
PROJECT, CITY PROJECT NO. 21-27, AND APPROPRIATING AN
ADDITIONAL $8,367 OF GAS TAX FUNDS (FUND 2510), BRINGING THE TOTAL PROJECT COST TO $187,367
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the award of the construction contract to Ray’s Electric, in the amount of $170,334, for the Enhancement of Pedestrian Infrastructure (Safe Routes to School (SFTS) Improvements) at James Logan High School and Guy Emanuele, Jr. Elementary School Project, City Project No. 21-27, and appropriating an additional $8,367 of Gas Tax Funds (Fund 2510), bringing the total project cost to $187,367.

STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT
This agenda item is in alignment with the following:

Goal D, Strategy 2: Environmental Sustainability and Infrastructure – Implement the City’s capital improvement plan.

BACKGROUND
On December 14, 2021, the City Council of Union City, under Resolution No. 5868-21, accepted an $81,000 Grant from Alameda County Transportation Commission (ACTC), PFA No. A22-0017, for the Enhancement of Pedestrian Infrastructure (Safe Routes to School (SRTS) Improvements) at James Logan High School and Guy Emanuele, Jr. Elementary School Project, City Project No. 21-27, and appropriated $98,000 as the required Local Match, with $48,000 coming from the Gas Tax Fund (Fund 2510) and $50,000 coming from the Measure BB Bike & Pedestrian Fund (Fund 2546), for a total project cost of $179,000.

City Council/RSA Agenda 146 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

DISCUSSION
This project includes the following improvements:

1. At James Logan High School – Reconstruct the existing Meyer Drive crosswalk located on a curve by relocating it to a more visible location, installing a raised medians and traffic control devices to slow down vehicles and design the new pedestrian crosswalk to meet today’s design criteria and ADA (American with Disabilities Act) standards.

2. At Guy Emanuele, Jr. Elementary School – Enhance the existing crosswalk at the entrance of the teacher’s parking lot and across 8
th Street at Decoto Road.

On June 7, 2022, plans and specifications for the project were released and advertised for bids. The City received two (2) bids that were opened on June 30, 2022, as noted on Exhibit A, Bid Summary. The lowest responsive and responsible base bid submitted was in the amount of $170,334 by Ray’s Electric of Oakland, California.

The low bid is approximately 16% higher than the engineer’s construction total estimate. This increase is likely related to the rise in inflation, in labor and equipment costs, and ongoing supply chain issues. Staff believes that the bids received were competitive, since both bids were in the same range.

Following the standard practice of allocating a contingency amount to address any unforeseen conditions that may require additional work, the Public Works Department recommends a seven percent (7%) construction contingency to ensure a successful project. Additionally, three percent (3%) of the construction cost is recommended to be set aside for design support during construction. Therefore, the total estimated cost for the Construction Phase is as follows:

Construction Contract $170,334
Contingency (7%) 11,923
Design Support (3%) 5,110
Total Construction Cost $ 187,367
Ray’s Electric has recently completed quality projects for the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), as well as various Bay Area cities, including the City of Oakland and the City of Sunnyvale, and staff has received positive feedback from their references. Public Works staff, therefore, recommends the award of the construction contract to Ray’s Electric.

FISCAL IMPACT
Only $179,000 is currently budgeted for this project, therefore, an additional $8,367 needs to be appropriated from available Gas Tax Funds. There is no impact to the General Fund.

RECOMMENDATION
Public Works Department staff recommend that the City Counciladopt the attached resolution with the following recommendations:

1. Authorizing the award of the construction contract to the low bidder, Ray’s Electric, in the amount of $170,334, for the Enhancement of Pedestrian Infrastructure (Safe Routes to School (SRTS) Improvements) at James Logan High Schooland Guy Emanuele, Jr. Elementary School Project, City Project No. 21-27; and

2. Appropriating an additional $8,367 of Gas Tax funds (Fund 2510) to Account Number 2510-3199- City Council/RSA Agenda 147 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
92127-54111 (Gas Tax Fund – PW General – Enhancement of Pedestrian Infrastructure (Safe Routes to School (SRTS) Improvements) at James Logan High School and Guy Emanuele, Jr. Elementary School Project – Contractual Services).

Prepared by:

Trieu Tran, Civil Engineer II
Submitted by:

Marilou Ayupan, Public Works Director
ATTACHMENTS:

Description Type
Attachment A - Bid Summary Attachment
Attachment B- SRTS Project Plans Attachment
Resolution Resolution
City Council/RSA Agenda 148 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

CITY OF UNION CITY

BID SUMMARY
PROJECT: Safe Routes to Schools Improvements - James Logan High School and Guy Emanuele, Jr. Elementary School
Project No. 21-27
Project Manager: Trieu Tran
DATE: June 30, 2022
TIME: 2:00 p.m.

LOCATION: City Council Chambers
No BIDDERS BID AMOUNT
*CORRECTED

BID AMOUNT

1. FBD Vanguard Construction, Inc $203,453.30 $203,453.30

2. Ray’s Electric $170,334.00 $170,334.00

3. 4.

5. 6.

7. 8.

9. I, Anna M. Brown, City Clerk of the City of Union City, do hereby certify that on June 30, 2022 I received and opened two (2) bids for the above-mentioned project. * Note: All bid amounts will be verified by the Engineer. Any corrections will be shown in the column above.

Anna M. Brown
City Clerk
City Council/RSA Agenda 149 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

CITY OF UNION CITY

PUBLIC WORKS
34009 ALVARADO-NILES ROAD
UNION CITY, CA 94583
T 510.675.5305 F 510.489.9468
Safe Routes to School Improvements
James Logan High School and Guy
Emanuele, Jr Elementary School

DRAWN BY
DATE

CHECKED BY

APPROVED BY
NAME

REVISION
SCALE: No Scale
SHEET T-1
1 OF 8

LOCATION MAP VICINITY MAP
JC
TA
3/2022
3/2022
TA 3/2022
City Council/RSA Agenda 150 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

SCHOOL XING
XING
SCHOOL

JAMES LOGAN HIGH SCHOOL

MEYERS DRIVE
"M1"

DRAWN BY
DATE

CITY OF UNION CITY

PUBLIC WORKS
34009 ALVARADO-NILES ROAD
UNION CITY, CA 94583
T 510.675.5305 F 510.489.9468 SCALE:

SHEET

CHECKED BY

APPROVED BY
NAME

REVISION
Safe Routes to School Improvements
OF
JC
TA
TA
03/2022
8 03/2022
03/2022
1" = 10'
Meyers Drive Layout
L-1
2 ALIGNMENT CURVE TABLE
City Council/RSA Agenda 151 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
STOP
STOP
STOP

DRAWN BY
DATE

CITY OF UNION CITY

PUBLIC WORKS
34009 ALVARADO-NILES ROAD
UNION CITY, CA 94583
T 510.675.5305 F 510.489.9468 SCALE:

SHEET

CHECKED BY

APPROVED BY
NAME

REVISION
Safe Routes to School Improvements
OF
JC
TA
TA
03/2022
8 03/2022
03/2022
1" = 40'
Decoto Road
Signing and Striping Plans
S-1
3 City Council/RSA Agenda 152 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

DRAWN BY
DATE

CITY OF UNION CITY

PUBLIC WORKS
34009 ALVARADO-NILES ROAD
UNION CITY, CA 94583
T 510.675.5305 F 510.489.9468 SCALE:

SHEET

CHECKED BY

APPROVED BY
NAME

REVISION
Safe Routes to School Improvements
OF
JC
TA
TA
03/2022
8 03/2022
03/2022
1" = 40'
S-2
Decoto Road 4
Signing and Striping Plans
City Council/RSA Agenda 153 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
XING
SCHOOL
SLOW
XING

SCHOOL SLOW

DRAWN BY
DATE

CITY OF UNION CITY

PUBLIC WORKS
34009 ALVARADO-NILES ROAD
UNION CITY, CA 94583
T 510.675.5305 F 510.489.9468 SCALE:

SHEET

CHECKED BY

APPROVED BY
NAME

REVISION
Safe Routes to School Improvements
OF
JC
TA
TA
03/2022
8 03/2022
03/2022
1" = 30'
Meyers Drive
Signing and Striping Plans
S-3
5 City Council/RSA Agenda 154 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
STOP
STOP
STOP

DRAWN BY
DATE

CITY OF UNION CITY

PUBLIC WORKS
34009 ALVARADO-NILES ROAD
UNION CITY, CA 94583
T 510.675.5305 F 510.489.9468 SCALE:

SHEET

CHECKED BY

APPROVED BY
NAME

REVISION
Safe Routes to School Improvements
OF
JC
TA
TA
03/2022
8 03/2022
03/2022
1" = 30'
Decoto Road
Electrical Details
YOUR
SPEED
E-1
6 City Council/RSA Agenda 155 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

DRAWN BY
DATE

CITY OF UNION CITY

PUBLIC WORKS
34009 ALVARADO-NILES ROAD
UNION CITY, CA 94583
T 510.675.5305 F 510.489.9468 SCALE:

SHEET

CHECKED BY

APPROVED BY
NAME

REVISION
Safe Routes to School Improvements
OF
JC
TA
TA
03/2022
8 03/2022
03/2022
1" = 10'
Meyer Drive
Electrical Details
E-2
7 City Council/RSA Agenda 156 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

DRAWN BY
DATE

CITY OF UNION CITY

PUBLIC WORKS
34009 ALVARADO-NILES ROAD
UNION CITY, CA 94583
T 510.675.5305 F 510.489.9468 SCALE:

SHEET

CHECKED BY

APPROVED BY
NAME

REVISION
Safe Routes to School Improvements
OF
JC
TA
TA
03/2022
8 03/2022
03/2022
No Scale
Construction Details
CD-1
8 City Council/RSA Agenda 157 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
RESOLUTION NO. _________

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UNION CITY AUTHORIZING THE AWARD OF THE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO RAY’S ELECTRIC, IN THE AMOUNT OF $170,334, FOR THE ENHANCEMENT OF

PEDESTRIAN INFRASTRUCTURE (SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL (SRTS) IMPROVEMENTS) AT JAMES LOGAN HIGH SCHOOL AND GUY EMANUELE, JR.

ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PROJECT, CITY PROJECT NO. 21-27, AND
APPROPRIATING AN ADDITIONAL $8,367 OF GAS TAX FUNDS (FUND 2510), BRINGING THE TOTAL PROJECT COST TO $187,367
WHEREAS, on December 14, 2021, the City Council of Union City, under Resolution No. 5868-21, accepted an $81,000 Grant from Alameda County Transportation Commission (ACTC), PFA No. A22-0017, for the Enhancement of Pedestrian Infrastructure (Safe Routes to School (SRTS) Improvements) at James Logan High School and Guy Emanuele, Jr. Elementary School Project, City Project No. 21-27, and appropriated $98,000 as the required Local Match, with $48,000 coming from the Gas Tax Fund (Fund 2510) and $50,000 coming from the Measure BB Bike & Pedestrian Fund (Fund 2546), for a total project cost of $179,000; and WHEREAS, on June 30, 2022, the City received two (2) bids for the proposed work and Ray’s Electric, of Oakland, California, was deemed the lowest responsive and responsible bidder with a bid totaling $170,334; and
WHEREAS, a review of the firm’s qualifications finds Ray’s Electric to be an experienced and appropriately licensed contractor; and therefore, staff finds that it is in the City’s best interest that the City Council award the Enhancement of Pedestrian Infrastructure (Safe Routes to School (SRTS) Improvements) at James Logan High School and Guy Emanuele, Jr. Elementary School Project, City Project No. 21-27, to Ray’s Electric, in the amount of $170,334; and WHEREAS, the low bid is approximately 16% above the Engineer’s estimate, likely due to rising inflation, lack of readily available materials and labor, and ongoing supply chain limitations, all factors that would not change and guarantee a lower bid if the construction contract was re-advertised; and
WHEREAS, in addition to the contract award, an increase of 10% of the construction cost, in the amount of $17,033, is needed for construction contingency and design support, for a total project cost of $187,367; and
WHEREAS, the Project is currently funded with $81,000 of ACTC grant funds in the Capital Projects Fund (Fund 4100), $48,000 of Gas Tax funds (Fund 2510) and $50,000 of Measure BB Bike & Pedestrian funds (Fund 2546), totaling $179,000, and an additional $8,367 is needed for a total project cost of $187,367; and

WHEREAS, the additional $8,367 can be appropriated from the available Gas Tax Fund (Fund 2510) fund balance.

City Council/RSA Agenda 158 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Union City hereby authorizes the award of the construction contract to Ray’s Electric, of Oakland, California, in the amount of $170,334, for the Enhancement of Pedestrian Infrastructure (Safe Routes to School (SRTS) Improvements) at James Logan High School and Guy Emanuele, Jr.

Elementary School Project, City Project No. 21-27.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Union City hereby approves a construction budget, with contingencies and construction support, in the total amount of $187,367, for the Enhancement of Pedestrian Infrastructure (Safe Routes to School (SRTS) Improvements) at James Logan High School and Guy Emanuele, Jr. Elementary School Project, City Project No. 21-27.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Union City hereby appropriates an additional $8,367 of Gas Tax funds (Fund 2510) to Account Number 2510-3199- 92127-54111 (Gas Tax Fund – PW General – Enhancement of Pedestrian Infrastructure (Safe Routes to School (SRTS) Improvements) at James Logan High School and Guy Emanuele, Jr.

Elementary School Project – Contractual Services).

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Union City at a regular meeting held on the 26
th day of July 2022, by the following vote:

City Council/RSA Agenda 159 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
Agenda Item
DATE: 7/26/2022
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: JACKIE ACOSTA, FINANCE DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE CITY'S INVESTMENT POLICY
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution approving the City’s Investment Policy as recommended by California Government Code Section 53646.

STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT
The action is not an identified strategy in the Strategic Plan.

BACKGROUND
While not required, it is recommended and considered a best practice to have the local governing body review and approve the local agency’s Investment Policy on an annual basis. The City Council last approved the City’s Investment Policy on June 22, 2021.

DISCUSSION
California Government Code Section 53646 (a)(2) states, “In the case of any other localagency, the treasurer or chief fiscal officer of the localagency may annually render to the legislative body of that localagency and any oversight committee of that localagency a statement of investment policy, which the legislative body of the localagency shallconsider at a public meeting. Any change in the policy shallalso be considered by the legislative body of the localagency at a public meeting." The City's Investment Policy sets forth the City's investment objectives, risk preferences, authorized investments and other investment-related priorities. A thoughtfuland comprehensive investment policy not only provides a level of accountability for investment officials, but it also promotes public trust in investment decisions. Developing, reviewing and monitoring the City's Investment Policy serves as an important tool of communication between the investment official, City City Council/RSA Agenda 160 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
management and the City Council.

There are no substantive changes being proposed to the City's Investment Policy.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact related to approving the City’s Investment Policy.

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution approving the City’s Investment Policy as recommended by California Government Code Section 53646.

Prepared by:

Jackie Acosta, Finance Director
Submitted by:

Jackie Acosta, Finance Director
ATTACHMENTS:

Description Type
Resolution Approving the City's Investment Policy Resolution City Council/RSA Agenda 161 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
RESOLUTION NO. XXXX-22

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UNION CITY APPROVING THE CITY OF UNION CITY’S INVESTMENT POLICY
WHEREAS, Government Code Section 53646 recommends that public agencies have their investment policy reviewed and approved annually by the local governing body at a public meeting; and
WHEREAS, Government Code Section 53646 also states that any change in the investment policy shall be considered by the governing body of the local agency at a public meeting; and
WHEREAS, the last time the City Council approved the City’s Investment Policy was June 22, 2021; and
WHEREAS, no substantive changes are being proposed to the City’s Investment Policy.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Union City hereby approves the City’s Investment Policy, attached hereto as Exhibit A.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Union City at a regular meeting held on the 26th day of July 2022, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED:

CAROL DUTRA-VERNACI
Mayor
ATTESTED: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________ ____________________________
ANNA M. BROWN KRISTOPHER J. KOKOTAYLO
City Clerk City Attorney
City Council/RSA Agenda 162 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

CITY OF UNION CITY

INVESTMENT POLICY
Effective Date: July 1, 2022
Policy Statement
Under authority granted by the City Council, the Finance Director is responsible for investing the surplus funds of the City. The intent of this Investment Policy is to formalize the framework for the investment activities that shall be exercised to ensure the effective and judicious fiscal and investment management of the City’s funds. The City’s portfolio shall be designed and managed in a manner that will provide a market rate of return consistent with the public trust and the prioritized objectives of safety, liquidity and yield.

Governing Authority
The City’s investment program shall be managed in conformance with federal, state and other legal requirements, including California Government Code (Government Code), Sections 16429.1 through 16429.4, 53600 through 53686 (“State Law”). This Investment Policy is endorsed and adopted by the City Council with an effective date as indicated above. This Investment Policy shall replace all previous versions.

Scope
This Investment Policy applies to all financial assets of the City as accounted for in the annual comprehensive financial statements. Policy statements outlined in this Policy focus on the City' s pooled surplus funds but will also apply to all other funds under the Finance Director’s span of control unless specifically exempted by resolution.

Proceeds arising from the issuance of debt shall be invested in accordance with the provisions of their governing bond documents and in a manner consistent with the City’s general investment philosophy as outlined in this Investment Policy. Retirement, pension funds, deferred compensation funds, and funds invested in irrevocable trusts dedicated to future payment of retirement and post-employment benefit obligations (“IRS Code Section 115 Trusts”) are also not governed by this Investment Policy, but rather by the policies, trust documents, and federal or State statutes explicitly applicable to such funds.

City Council/RSA Agenda 163 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
City of Union City
Investment Policy

Dated: July 1, 2022
Objectives
The prioritized objectives of the City’s investment program are to: 1) preserve principal (Safety), 2) ensure sufficient liquidity to meet operational and capital needs (Liquidity), and 3) generate a market rate of return (Return), as described below.

Safety
Safety or preservation of principal is the foremost objective of the investment program.

Investments shall be undertaken in a manner that seeks to ensure the preservation of capital in the overall portfolio and to mitigate credit risk (the risk of loss due to the failure of the security issuer or backer) and market risk (the risk that the market value of securities in the portfolio will fall due to changes in general interest rates).

Liquidity
An adequate percentage of the portfolio should be maintained in liquid short-term securities which can be converted to cash, if necessary, to meet disbursement requirements that might be reasonably anticipated. Since all possible cash demands cannot be anticipated, the portfolio will consist largely of securities with active secondary or resale markets. A portion of the portfolio may be placed in money market mutual funds or local government investment pools which offer same-day liquidity for short-term funds.

Yield or Return on Investment
The City's investment portfolio shall be designed with the objective of attaining a market rate of return throughout budgetary and economic cycles, taking into account the City' s investment risk constraints and liquidity needs. Return on investment is of secondary importance compared to the safety and liquidity objectives described above. The core of the investments is limited to relatively low risk securities in anticipation of earning a fair return relative to the risk being assumed. Securities shall not be sold prior to maturity with the following exceptions:
• Liquidity needs requires that the security be sold;
• A security with declining credit may be sold at the first notice of downgrading to minimize the loss of principal;
• A security swap that will improve the quality yield, or target duration in the portfolio.

Managing Portfolio and Investment Risks
Safety of principal is the foremost investment objective of the City. Each investment transaction shall seek to ensure that capital losses are avoided, whether from securities default, broker/dealer default, or erosion of market value. The overall program shall be designed and managed with a degree of professionalism that is worthy of the public trust. In a diversified portfolio, it must be recognized that occasional measured losses are inevitable and must be considered within the context of the overall portfolio’s investment return, provided that adequate diversification has City Council/RSA Agenda 164 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
City of Union City
Investment Policy

Dated: July 1, 2022
been implemented. The City shall seek to preserve principal by mitigating credit risk and market risk as set forth below.

Mitigating Credit Risk
Credit risk is the risk that a security or a portfolio will lose some or all of its value due to a real or perceived change in the ability of the issuer to repay its debt. The City shall seek to mitigate credit risk by adopting the following strategies:
• Adhering to the diversification requirements set forth in the Authorized Securities and Transactions section of this policy which limit the amount of the total portfolio that may be invested in any single issuer.
• Utilizing an active management strategy that allows for the sale of securities prior to their scheduled maturity dates for purposes of improving the portfolio’s credit quality, liquidity, or yield in response to changing market conditions or City circumstances. • Reviewing downgraded securities. Should the credit rating of a security owned by the City be downgraded to a level below that required by this Investment Policy, the City will review the credit situation and determine if such securities should be sold or retained in the portfolio based upon its remaining term to maturity, the credit outlook for the issuer, and other relevant facts and circumstances.
• Monitoring any downgraded securities. If the decision is made to retain a downgraded security, it will be closely monitored by the City and reported on quarterly to the City Council.

Mitigating Market Risk
Market risk is the risk that the value of a security or portfolio will fluctuate due to changes in the general level of interest rates. The City understands that while longer-term portfolios have the potential to generate higher investment returns over time, they also exhibit a greater volatility of return. In addition, the City further recognizes certain types of securities, including variable rate securities, securities with principal paydowns prior to maturity, and securities with embedded call options, will affect the market risk characteristics of the portfolio differently. Accordingly, the City will mitigate market risk by adopting the following strategies:
• The City shall maintain sufficient balances in short-term investments to provide liquidity for expected and contingent expenditures.
• Liquidity funds shall be maintained in short-term investments such as LAIF, deposit accounts collateralized in accordance with State Law, and money market funds and instruments with minimal market risk.
• Longer-term securities shall be scheduled to mature in advance of known expenditure requirements whenever possible.
• The City shall avoid the purchase of securities for the sole purpose of short-term speculation.
• The maximum stated final maturity of any security in the portfolio shall be five years, except as otherwise stated in this Investment Policy.
• The weighted average maturity of the portfolio shall not exceed 3 years.

City Council/RSA Agenda 165 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
City of Union City
Investment Policy

Dated: July 1, 2022
• The maximum percentage of callable securities (excluding securities with “make whole” call provisions) held in the portfolio shall be 30%.
• The weighted average duration of the actively managed portion of the portfolio, i.e. non liquidity funds, shall be calculated and maintained at a rate based upon the City’s risk tolerances and investment objectives.

Standard of Care
The standard of prudence to be used by City investment officials shall be the “Prudent Investor Standard” and shall be applied in the context of managing the overall portfolio. As set forth in the California Government Code 53600.3, the Prudent Investor Standard states:
“…all governing bodies of local agencies or persons authorized to make investment decisions on behalf of those local agencies investing public funds pursuant to this chapter are trustees and therefore fiduciaries subject to the prudent investor standard. When investing, reinvesting, purchasing, acquiring, exchanging, selling, or managing public funds, a trustee shall act with care, skill, prudence, and diligence under the circumstances then prevailing, including, but not limited to, the general economic conditions and the anticipated needs of the agency, that a prudent person acting in a like capacity and familiarity with those matters would use in the conduct of funds of a like character and with like aims, to safeguard the principal and maintain the liquidity needs of the agency.

Within the limitations of this section and considering individual investments as part of an overall strategy, investments may be acquired as authorized by law.” Consistent with the objectives set forth in this Investment Policy, in addition to safeguarding invested principal and ensuring sufficient liquidity for the City, a prudent investor should also seek optimize to return or yield subject to these constraints.

Ethics and Conflicts of Interest
Investment officials involved in the investment process shall refrain from personal business activities that could conflict with proper execution of the investment program or could impair or create the appearance of an impairment of their ability to make impartial investment decisions.

Employees and investment officials shall disclose to the City Manager any business interests they have in financial institutions that conduct business with the City and they shall subordinate their personal investment transactions to those of the City. The Finance Director and his/her designee shall file a Statement of Economic Interests each year pursuant to Government Code Section 87203 and regulations of the Fair Political Practices Commission.

City Council/RSA Agenda 166 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
City of Union City
Investment Policy

Dated: July 1, 2022
Delegation of Authority
The management responsibility for the City' s investment program is delegated to the Finance Director. The Finance Director, or his/her designee, shall participate in or conduct investment transactions and manage the operation of the investment portfolio. No person may engage in an investment transaction unless so authorized under the terms of this Investment Policy.

The Finance Director shall develop written administrative procedures and internal controls, consistent with this Investment Policy, for the operation of the City's investment program. Such procedures shall be designed to prevent losses of public funds arising from fraud, employee error, misrepresentation by third parties, or imprudent actions by employees of the City.

The City may engage the support services of one or more outside investment advisors in regard to its investment program, so long as it can be clearly demonstrated that these services produce a net financial advantage or necessary financial protection of the City' s financial resources. Such external managers may be granted discretion to purchase and sell investment securities in accordance with this Investment Policy. Such managers must be registered under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940.

Authorized Securities and Transactions
All investments and deposits of the City shall be made in accordance with State Law. Any revisions or extensions of applicable code sections in State Law will be assumed to be part of the Investment Policy immediately upon being enacted.

Authorized investments may include:

Investment Type
Maximum
Maturity at
Time of
Purchase
Maximum
Specified
% of Portfolio
at
Time of
Purchase Minimum Quality Requirements
Municipal bonds and
obligations 5 years 30% ”A” credit rating or higher at time of purchase US Treasury obligations 5 years None None
Federal agency obligations 5 years None None
State of California
bonds and obligations 5 years None None
Bankers’ acceptances
180 days 40%1
”A1” credit rating or higher at time of purchase;
if the issuer has issued long-term debt, it must
be rated “A” without regard to modifiers
1 No more than 10% of the surplus funds may be in Bankers’ acceptances of any one commercial bank City Council/RSA Agenda 167 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
City of Union City
Investment Policy

Dated: July 1, 2022
Investment Type
Maximum
Maturity at
Time of
Purchase
Maximum
Specified
% of Portfolio
at
Time of
Purchase Minimum Quality Requirements
Commercial paper
270 days
25% of the
agency’s
money2
“A-1” credit rating or higher at time of
purchase; if the issuer has issued long-term
debt, it must be rated “A” without regard to
modifiers
Negotiable certificates of
deposit 5 years 30% None
All other bank/time
deposits3 5 years None None
Repurchase agreements 1 year None4 None
Reverse repurchase
agreements and securities
lending agreements
92 days 20% None5
Medium-term corporate
notes
5 years 30% A rating
Mutual funds N/A 20%6 Multiple7
Money market mutual
funds N/A 20% Multiple8
Collateralized bank deposits 5 years None None
Mortgage pass-through and
asset-backed securities 5 years 20% “AA” credit rating or higher at time ofpurchase9 Local government
investment pools N/A None None
State of California Local
Agency Investment Fund
(LAIF)
N/A None None
2 Commercial paper issuers must be US corporations with total assets in excess of $500 million. Purchases may not represent more than 10% of the outstanding paper of the issuing corporation. 3 This category may also include federally insured time deposits, collateralized time deposits, and certificate of deposit placement services (CDARS) 4 The collateralization level required for repurchase agreements will be 102% of market value of principal and accrued interest. The City must have a Master Repurchase Agreement signed with the bank or dealer. 5 Reverse repurchase agreements must be made with primary dealers of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and the securities used for the agreements must have been held by the issuer for at least 30 days. 6 No more than 10% of the City’s surplus funds may be invested in any one mutual fund. 7 Must receive the highest ranking by 2 of the nationally recognized rating agencies or the fund must retain an investment advisor who is registered with the SEC (or exempt from registration), has assets under management in excess of $500 million, and has at least 5 years of experience investing in instruments authorized by State Government Code Sections 53601 and 53635. 8 Must receive the highest ranking by 2 of the nationally recognized rating agencies or the fund must retain an investment advisor who is registered with the SEC (or exempt from registration) and has at least 5 years of experience managing money market funds with assets under management in excess of $500 million. 9 Issuer must have an A rating or better for the issuer’s debt as provided by a nationally recognized rating agency.

City Council/RSA Agenda 168 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
City of Union City
Investment Policy

Dated: July 1, 2022
It is the intent of the City that the foregoing list of authorized securities and transactions is strictly interpreted. However, any investment that subsequently fails to meet the requirements listed in the table above may be held to maturity if, in the opinion of the Finance Director, it is in the City's best interest to do so. If the decision is made to retain such a security, it will be closely monitored by the Finance Director and reported to the City Council on a monthly basis. When the investment matures or is liquidated, the proceeds shall be reinvested only as provided by this Investment Policy.

Under Resolution No. 3262-06, dated October 16, 2006, City Council authorized the use of any portion of the City's pooled cash to fund the Employee Housing Assistance Program. Home loans approved under this program shall be secured by a Deed of Trust and shall bear a variable rate of interest at the same rate as City funds deposited with the Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF).

Prohibited Investments and Practices
Provided below are certain prohibited investments and investment practices intended to help safeguard invested balances:
• Investments not specifically described as Authorized Securities and Transactions in this Policy are prohibited.
• In accordance with California Government Code Section 53601.6, investments in inverse floaters, range notes, mortgage-derived interest-only strips, and any security that could result in zero interest accrual if held to maturity are prohibited. • The purchase or sale of securities on margin is prohibited. • The purchase of securities denominated in foreign currencies is prohibited. • The purchase or sale of securities done solely to speculate on the direction of future interest rates is prohibited.

Any investment currently held that does not meet the guidelines of this policy shall be exempted from the requirements of this policy. At maturity or liquidation, any such monies shall be reinvested only as provided for in this Policy.

Portfolio Maturities and Liquidities
To the extent possible, investments shall be matched with anticipated cash flow requirements and known future liabilities. The City will not invest in securities maturing more than five years from the date of purchase. The weighted average maturity of the portfolio shall not be more than three years. Reserve funds and other funds with longer-term investment horizons may be invested in securities exceeding five years if the maturities are made to coincide as nearly as practical with City Council/RSA Agenda 169 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
City of Union City
Investment Policy

Dated: July 1, 2022
the expected use of funds, and the City Council has, by resolution, granted authority to make such an investment.

Portfolio Performance
The investment portfolio shall be designed to attain a market rate of return throughout budgetary and economic cycles, taking into account prevailing market conditions, risk constraints for eligible securities and cash flow requirements. The performance of the City' s investments shall be compared to the average yield on the Local Agency Investment Fund, assuming the State does not adversely affect LAIF's returns due to budget constraints.

Selection of Brokers/Dealers
The Finance Director shall maintain a list of broker/dealers approved for investment purposes and it shall be the policy of the City to purchase securities only from those authorized firms. These may include “primary” dealers orregional dealers that qualify underthe Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Rule 15c3-1 (uniform net capital rule).

Institutions eligible to transact investment business with the City must be licensed by the State of California as a broker/dealer as defined in Section 25004 of the California Corporations Code and may include:
• Primary Government Dealers as designated by the Federal Reserve Bank; • Regional broker/dealers qualified under SEC Rule 15c3-1; • National or state-chartered banks;
• The Federal Reserve Bank; or
• Direct issuers of securities eligible for purchase.

Each authorized broker/dealer shall be required to submit and periodically update a Cityapproved Broker/Dealer Information Request form that includes the firm's most recent financial statements. The Finance Director shall maintain a list of the broker/dealers that have been approved by the City, along with each firm's most recent broker/dealer Information Request form. Each broker/dealer shall receive a copy of the Investment Policy and a list of those authorized to execute investment transactions. Each firm must acknowledge receipt of such materials to qualify for the approved list of broker/dealers.

The City may purchase commercial paper from direct issuers even though they are not on the approved broker/dealerlist as long as the investment meets the criteria set forth in the Authorized Securities and Transactions section of this Investment Policy.

City Council/RSA Agenda 170 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
City of Union City
Investment Policy

Dated: July 1, 2022
Selection of Banks
The Finance Director shall maintain a list of banks approved to provide depository and other banking services for the City. To be eligible, a bank must be a member of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), must qualify as a depository of public funds in the State of California as defined in California Government Code Section 53630. 5 and shall secure deposits in excess of FDIC insurance coverage in accordance with California Government Code Section 53652.

Safekeeping and Custody
Third-Party Safekeeping
To protect against fraud, embezzlement, or losses caused by collapse of an individual securities dealer and to enhance access to securities and interest payments, all securities owned by the City shall be held in safekeeping by a third-party bank trust department acting as agent for the City under the terms of a duly executed custody agreement. In connection with the City’s annual independent audit, securities held in custody are audited to verify investment holdings. All exceptions to this safekeeping policy must be approved by the Finance Director in written form and included in monthly reporting to City Council.

Delivery-Versus-Payment
All trades of marketable securities shall be cleared and settled on a standard delivery-versuspayment (“DVP”) basis to ensure that securities are deposited in the City’s safekeeping account prior to the release of funds.

Internal Controls
The Finance Director is responsible for establishing and maintaining an internal control structure designed to ensure that the assets of the City are protected from loss, theft or misuse. The internal control structure shall be designed to provide reasonable assurance that these objectives are met.

The concept of reasonable assurance recognizes that the cost of a control should not exceed the benefits likely to be derived and the valuation of costs and benefits requires estimates and judgments by management.

Accordingly, the Finance Director shall establish a process for an annual independent review by an external auditor to assure compliance with policies and procedures. The internal control shall address the following points:
• Control of collusion;
• Separation of transaction authority from accounting and recordkeeping; • Custodial safekeeping;
• Avoidance of physical delivery of securities;
• Clear delegation of authority to subordinate staff members; City Council/RSA Agenda 171 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
City of Union City
Investment Policy

Dated: July 1, 2022
• Written confirmation of transactions for investment and wire transactions; and • Development of wire transfer agreement with the lead bank and third-party custodian.

Reporting
The Finance Director shall submit investment reports monthly to the City Council which should include a list of the portfolio’s holdings by investment asset class, name of institution, purchase date, maturity date, call date, par value, amount of deposit or cost of security, amortized book value, current market value of securities, coupon and effective yield. In addition, the report will indicate the portfolio’s duration, total weighted average maturity and yield. The report will be signed and mandated in compliance with California Government Code Sections 53607 and 53646.

Investment Earnings
With the exception of monies held in certain restricted and special funds, the City commingles its investable assets to maximize interest earnings and to increase efficiencies with respect to investment pricing, safekeeping, and administration. Investment income will be allocated to the various funds based on their respective percentage of participation in the total fund and in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and State Law.

Policy Review
The City of Union City' s Investment Policy shall be adopted by Council resolution. It shall be reviewed at least annually by the Finance Directorto ensure its consistency with the City's overall investment objectives and its relevance to current law and economic trends. The Investment Policy, including any recommended amendments, shall be submitted to City Council annually for approval and adoption by resolution.

City Council/RSA Agenda 172 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
Agenda Item
DATE: 7/26/2022
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: CARMELA CAMPBELL, ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY

DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: ADOPT A RESOLUTION ENDORSING THE ALAMEDA COUNTY HOME TOGETHER 2026 DRAFT IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
Staff recommends the City Council adopt the attached resolution (Attachment 1) endorsing the Alameda County Home Together 2026 Draft Implementation Plan to be eligible to receive future funding to address homelessness. The Home Together Plan is attached as Exhibit A and an Executive Summary of the Plan is also attached (Attachment 2).

STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT
This agenda item is in alignment with the following:

Goal C, Strategy 3: Develop a multi-departmental approach to address homelessness through coordination with staff, community organizations and Alameda County.

BACKGROUND
The Alameda County Home Together 2026 Implementation Plan is a five-year homelessness response community-wide plan for Alameda County which lays out the goals, strategies, and investments needed to dramatically reduce homelessness by 2026 and reverse racial disparities in homelessness through fully centering equity. The Home Together Plan was largely informed by the 2020 Centering Racial Equity in Homeless System Design (CRE) report prepared by community partners, homelessness response system modeling and extensive interviews and focus groups with persons of color who have experienced homelessness in Alameda County. The process modeled the elements and needs of an optimal system to respond to homelessness while reducing racial disparities and identified gaps in housing resources and programs. The plan makes recommendations for addressing homelessness in Alameda County through new investments, system improvements and enhanced coordination efforts.

On November 9, 2021, the City Council was provided with an informational report on homelessness and a request for Council feedback. In the report, the Home Together 2026 was presented to Council as part of the City Council/RSA Agenda 173 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
approach that Alameda County was utilizing to combat homelessness. A link to that staff report is provided below:
https://unioncity.novusagenda.com/agendapublic/CoverSheet.aspx?ItemID=3133&MeetingID=479

DISCUSSION
Staff is requesting the City Council adopt a Resolution endorsing the Alameda County Home Together 2026 Implementation Plan ("Plan"). In order to be eligible to receive future funding made available through Alameda County to help combat homelessness, Cities must endorse the Plan. On April 28, 2022, the Continuum of Care Leadership Board endorsed the Plan and on May 10, 2022, the Alameda County Board of Supervisors endorsed the Plan as a Countywide strategy for ending homelessness in Alameda County.

The Plan that lays out the goals, strategies and investments needed to dramatically reduce homelessness by 2026 within Alameda County and reverse racial disparities in homelessness through fully centering equity. The Plan’s overarching goals and time frame align with Vision 2026, which is the County’s comprehensive effort to set a course for the next decade that anticipates community challenges and maximizes the County’s ability to meet residents’ needs in a rapidly changing world. One of the primary objectives of Vision 2026 is to “ensure the availability of diverse and affordable housing for all residents with the goal of eliminating homelessness in Alameda County.”
The Plan builds upon many sources and efforts, particularly the 2020 Centering Racial Equity in Homeless System Design report (CRE) prepared by community partners and informed by system modeling and extensive interviews and focus groups with persons of color who have experienced homelessness. The CRE process modeled what an optimal system to respond to all homelessness and reduce racial disparities would look like and what gaps need to be filled. The Plan is also responsive to requirements laid out in the California Comeback Plan to draw down key State housing and health funding. The Home Together Plan is informed by and consistent with other localand regionalefforts, including the All Home RegionalAction Plan, as wellas Plan Bay Area 2050.

On any given night over 8,000 people experience homelessness in the County, a number that grows to approximately 15,000 people over the course of a year. More than 90% of homeless households in the County are adults without minor children, including nearly 10% who are between the ages of 18 and 24.

The homeless population does not reflect the demographics of the County. Much like the overall Nation, dramatic racial disparities exist in the County, in which African Americans experience homelessness at more than four times their representation in the population (47% vs. 11%) and Native Americans, multiracial people and Hawaiian Native/Pacific Islanders are all vastly overrepresented in homelessness, among those newly homeless and in the rates at which they return to homelessness even after getting into housing.

These disparities call out the need to invest both more and differently in creating program models and pathways that meet the needs of those overrepresented. Specific populations such as transition age youth, veterans, seniors, survivors of intimate partner violence, people with mental health needs and people with previous involvement in the criminal justice system have additional risks and vulnerabilities leading to homelessness and require responses to their needs and plans for targeted resources to address them.

A systemwide needs analysis, conducted in 2019-2020 and updated in 2021, points to significant gaps in the current system in the type and availability of housing resources. Today, only an estimated 36% of those in need can be supported by local resources or are able to find housing or leave homelessness on their own. Each year, thousands of people remain homeless and each year new people who become homeless join them. Without significant effort and investment, homelessness willcontinue to grow.

City Council/RSA Agenda 174 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
Importantly, focus groups and research on racialequity strategies informed the modeling and the proposed pathways to ensure the deep disparities in the system are addressed through new investments at every level.

These investments include creating extensive new program models and pathways out of homelessness, using affordable housing dedicated for people experiencing homelessness, permanent supportive sousing (PSH) for people who need more supports, targeted behavioral health services, improved and expanded homelessness prevention, transitional housing for youth and shallow and flexible rentalassistance to fill gaps for people with limited incomes in addition to expanding current program models such as Rapid Rehousing and PSH.

The 2021 planning update explored different scenarios related to levels of anticipated new homelessness and of investment to determine the gaps in the current system and what it will take to fill them. Alameda County selected to sponsor a scenario approach that seeks to reduce new entries to homelessness by preventing it when possible, and to create a more robust response system with enough resources at the end of five years to provide a housing exit to every person who does become homeless.

Overall, more than 24,000 additional housing exits are needed over five years to reach a point at which the numbers of people who become homeless in a year and the numbers who leave homelessness in that time are in balance. These 24,000 interventions include everything from short-term prevention to permanent subsidies and housing with services, depending on the needs of the households.

In addition to the significant need for housing, due to the high rate of unsheltered homeless individuals (currently estimated at 79%), the Plan includes a significant increase in overall shelter in the first two years, followed by a slow decline in shelter as more housing resources become available and less shelter is needed.

Some of the planned added shelter will be able to be converted to much needed housing in later years, as has been demonstrated by successful Project Roomkey to Project Homekey transitions, creating permanent housing by renovating hotels used as shelters during the pandemic. By Year 5 of the program, the amount of shelter needed on an ongoing basis is expected to be slightly less than what is available today if all housing resources are in place.

The totalcost of increasing the shelter and housing inventory for the entire county over the coming five years to fully meet the need would be $2.5 billion. This includes roughly $430 million for additional shelter, $1.68 billion for permanent housing such as dedicated affordable housing and permanent supportive housing, and $388 million for prevention, rapid rehousing and shallow (more limited) subsidies within the homelessness response system. This does not include the one-time development costs for new buildings, but covers operations and services, and subsidies to help people rent existing housing. Similar to their proportion of the homeless population, the new investments are roughly 10% ($194 million) for inventory and resources for households with minor children, and 90% ($2.3 billion) for the inventory and resources to serve adult only households, including transition age youth.

To reach these goals while decreasing racial disparities, the Plan recommends specific action steps in four categories:
1) Prevent Homelessness for County Residents
a. Address racial disparities in mainstream/upstream systems to prevent disproportionate inflow of African Americans into homelessness
b. Focus resources for prevention on people most likely to lose their homes c. Rapidly resolve episodes of homelessness through Housing Problem Solving d. Prevent racially disproportionate returns to homelessness 2) Connect People to Shelter and Needed Resources
a. Provide neighborhood-based access where people are most likely to lose housing b. Lower programmatic barriers to crisis services such as prevention, problem solving, and shelter
City Council/RSA Agenda 175 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
c. Prevent discharge from mainstream systems to homelessness d. Significantly increase the availability of shelter, especially non-congregate models, to serve vulnerable adults and families with children and to reduce unsheltered homelessness. e. Provide accessible behavioral health services to people with serious mental illness or substance use needs and who are unsheltered, in shelter, or in supportive housing programs. 3) Increase Housing Solutions
a. Add units and subsidies for permanent supportive housing b. Create units with more intensive health services for seniors and medically fragile residents c. Create dedicated affordable housing subsidies for people who do not need intensive services d. Create shallow subsidies for those who need more limited assistance e. Add new slots of rapid rehousing for those who can take over their full rent given time f. Ensure new housing funding is distributed according to need g. Reduce entry barriers to housing and ensure racialequity in referrals and placements. 4) Strengthen Coordination, Communication and Capacity
a. Use data to improve outcomes and track racialequity impacts b. Improve messaging and information availability
c. Build infrastructure to support new and expanded programs Taken together, the significant increase in investment and the creation of new models and pathways out of homelessness will lead to decreases in new homelessness, improved racialequity in outcomes, shorter time being homeless, and a reduced rate at which people return to homelessness. Specific measurable targets for reducing homelessness altogether, and for achieving greater equity in results, are included in the Plan.

The County willadopt the plan and vision at a time when the future is uncertain. New resources, both one-time and ongoing, received in 2021 and anticipated in the future provide the foundation for achieving this plan, but alone are not enough to realize its vision. The response to COVID-19 has shown that the community can pull together and can work at speeds not seen before, which is a strong foundation to build from. However, continuing challenges include uncertainties from COVID-19, unpredictable housing markets, future State, Federaland local budgets, and an overtaxed public and non-profit sector with significant capacity needs. All these challenges require continuing the current level of unprecedented collaboration and coordination and building on the progress made to unify the community response and build an aligned response system centered in racialequity. The Implementation Plan is looking to be adopted by the end of the year.

To receive future Alameda County funding made available through Alameda County, the City of Union City must endorse the Home Together 2026 Implementation Plan.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact to the General Fund. By taking this action, the City Council is not committing or allocating any funding. However, in order to be eligible to receive future funding to address homelessness from Alameda County, the City must endorse the Home Together 2026 Implementation Plan.

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the City Council adopt the attached resolution endorsing the Alameda County Home Together 2026 Draft Implementation Plan.

City Council/RSA Agenda 176 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
Prepared by:

FRANCISCO GOMEZ JR., HOUSING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MANAGER Submitted by:

FRANCISCO GOMEZ JR., HOUSING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MANAGER ATTACHMENTS:

Description Type
Attachment 1 - Resolution - Endorsing theAlameda County Home Together 2026 Implementation Plan
Resolution
Exhibit A - Home Together 2026 Draft Implementation Plan Exhibit Attachment 2 - Home Together 2026 Executive Summary Attachment City Council/RSA Agenda 177 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
RESOLUTION NO. XXXX-22

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UNION CITY ENDORSING THE ALAMEDA COUNTY HOME TOGETHER 2026 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN WHEREAS, the Home Together 2026 Implementation Plan (Home Together 2026) is a community-wide plan for Alameda County which lays out the goals, strategies, and investments needed to dramatically reduce homelessness by 2026 and reverse racial disparities in homelessness through fully centering equity; and
WHEREAS, on any given night over 8,000 people experience homelessness in Alameda County, a number that grows to approximately 15,000 people over the course of a year; and WHEREAS, more than 90% of the households in Alameda County are adults without children, including nearly 10% who are between the ages of 18 and 24; and WHEREAS, dramatic racial disparities exist in Alameda County as in the nation as a whole, and the homeless population does not reflect the demographics of the county; and WHEREAS, in Alameda County, African Americans experience homelessness at more than four times their representation in the population (47% vs. 11%); and WHEREAS, in Alameda County, Native Americans, multiracial people and Hawaiian Native/Pacific Islanders are all vastly overrepresented in homelessness, among those newly homeless and in the rates at which they return to homelessness even after getting into housing; and
WHEREAS, Home Together 2026 builds and is informed by existing local and regional plans, including the 2020 Centering Racial Equity in Homeless System Design report (CRE), All Home Regional Action Plan, and Plan Bay Area 2050; and
WHEREAS, Home Together 2026 is also responsive to requirements laid out in the California Comeback Plan necessary to receive critical State housing and health funding; and WHEREAS, the homeless system modeling conducted in 2019-20 and updated in 2021 points to significant gaps in the current system in terms of both housing resources and program types; and
WHEREAS, only an estimated 36% of those experiencing homelessness can be supported by the current system’s resources or are able to find housing or leave homelessness on their own; and
WHEREAS, without significant effort and investment including prevention, shelter expansion, increasing housing solutions, and strengthening the system’s overall capacity, homelessness in Alameda County will continue to grow; and City Council/RSA Agenda 178 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
Resolution No. XXXX-21

WHEREAS, the total estimated cost of needed investments over the coming five years to fully meet the need is $2.5 billion, including approximately $430 million for additional shelter, $1.68 billion for permanent housing such as dedicated affordable housing and permanent supportive housing, and $388 million for prevention, rapid rehousing and shallow subsidies; and WHEREAS, additional funding will be needed for the one-time development costs for new buildings; and
WHEREAS, to achieve the needed expansion level will take a significant investment of new resources; and
WHEREAS, there are anticipated increases in Federal and in State resources dedicated to expanding affordable housing and ending homelessness; and WHEREAS, there is still a significant gap that will need to be filled locally; and WHEREAS, in order to receive future funding made available through the County, Cities must endorse the Home Together 2026 plan, which is labeled Exhibit A and attached hereto and made a part hereof.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Union City hereby endorses the Alameda County Home Together 2026 Implementation Plan.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Union City at a regular meeting held on the 26th day of July 2022, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED:

CAROL DUTRA-VERNACI
Mayor
ATTESTED: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________ _________________________
ANNA M. BROWN KRISTOPHER J. KOKOTAYLO
City Clerk City Attorney
City Council/RSA Agenda 179 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
Home Together 2026
DRAFT Implementation Plan
A 5-year Implementation Framework to Dramatically Reduce Homelessness, Centering Racial Equity in Alameda County
Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY..................................................................................................................................i

1. Background and Introduction..............................................................................................................1

2. Population Description ........................................................................................................................2 Racial Disparities in the Homeless Population ........................................................................................3 Special Populations..................................................................................................................................4 Transition Age Youth ...........................................................................................................................4 Veterans...............................................................................................................................................5 Older Adults.........................................................................................................................................5 People Impacted by Intimate Partner Violence (IPV)..........................................................................6 People with Mental Health Needs.......................................................................................................6 People Impacted by Criminal Justice System Involvement .................................................................7

3. Needs Assessment and Housing Pathways..........................................................................................7 Additional Needs and Resources for Special Populations.......................................................................9 Transition Age Youth ...........................................................................................................................9 Veterans.............................................................................................................................................11 Older Adults.......................................................................................................................................11 People Impacted by Intimate Partner Violence.................................................................................12 People with Mental Health Needs.....................................................................................................12 People Impacted by Criminal Justice System Involvement ...............................................................13

4. Modeling Results and Investments....................................................................................................14 Additions to Housing Inventory.............................................................................................................16 Additions to Shelter Inventory ..............................................................................................................17 New Investment Needed.......................................................................................................................17

5. Four Core Goal Areas and System Performance Measures...............................................................18 1) Prevent Homelessness for our Residents......................................................................................18 Corresponding System Performance Measures............................................................................21 2) Connect People to Shelter and Needed Resources.......................................................................21 City Council/RSA Agenda 180 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
Corresponding System Performance Measures............................................................................23 3) Increase Housing............................................................................................................................23 Corresponding System Performance Measures............................................................................24 4) Strengthen Coordination, Communication and Capacity..............................................................24 Corresponding Performance Measures.........................................................................................25

7. Resources, Gaps and Allocation Plan.................................................................................................26

8. Tracking and Monitoring ...................................................................................................................27

9. Conclusion..........................................................................................................................................28 APPENDICES...............................................................................................................................................30 A. Glossary of Terms..........................................................................................................................30 B. Summary Table of System Performance Measures - In Process ...................................................30 C. Summary Table of Numeric Inventory Goals by Year - In Process.................................................30 D. Detail on County Allocation Plan - In Process................................................................................30 E. System Model Methodology - In Process......................................................................................30 F. Contributors - In Process................................................................................................................30 City Council/RSA Agenda 181 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
i

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This Home Together 2026 Implementation Plan (the Plan) is a community-wide plan for Alameda County which lays out the goals, strategies and investments needed to dramatically reduce homelessness by 2026 and reverse racial disparities in homelessness through fully centering equity.

The Plan’s overarching goals and time frame align with Alameda County’s Vision 2026 which holds as one of its primary objectives to “ensure the availability of diverse and affordable housing for all residents with the goal of eliminating homelessness in Alameda County.” Home Together 2026 builds upon many sources and efforts, particularly the 2020 Centering Racial Equity in Homeless System Design report (CRE) prepared by community partners and informed by system modeling and extensive interviews and focus groups with persons of color who have experienced homelessness. The CRE process modeled what an optimal system to respond to all homelessness and reduce racial disparities would look like and what gaps need to be filled. Home Together 2026 is also responsive to requirements laid out in the California Comeback Plan to draw down key State housing and health funding. It is informed by and consistent with other local and regional efforts, including the All Home Regional Action Plan, Plan Bay Area 2050 and local City plans to address homelessness. Companion County and City specific implementation plans that align with the Home Together Community Plan speak to the specific roles of local jurisdictions in co-leading efforts to address homelessness, and the key roles of county agencies, community partners and specific resources.

On any given night over 8,000 people experience homelessness in Alameda County, a number that grows to approximately 15,000 people over the course of a year. More than 90% of homeless households in Alameda County are adults without minor children, including nearly 10% who are between the ages of 18 and 24.

The homeless population does not reflect the demographics of the county. Dramatic racial disparities exist in Alameda County as in the nation as a whole, in which African Americans experience homelessness at more than four times their representation in the population (47% vs. 11%) and Native Americans, multiracial people and Hawaiian Native/Pacific Islanders are all vastly overrepresented in homelessness, among those newly homeless and in the rates at which they return to homelessness even after getting into housing. These disparities call out the need to invest both more and differently in creating program models and pathways that meet the needs of those overrepresented. Special populations such as transition age youth, Veterans, seniors, survivors of intimate partner violence, people with mental health needs and people who have had involvement with the criminal justice system have additional risks and vulnerabilities leading to homelessness and require responses to their needs and plans for targeted resources to address them.

A systemwide needs analysis conducted in 2019-20 and updated in 2021 points to significant gaps in the current system in the type and availability of housing resources. Today, only an estimated 36% of those in need can be supported by local resources or are able to find housing or leave homelessness on their own. Each year, thousands of people remain homeless and each year new people who become homeless join them. Without significant effort and investment, homelessness will continue to grow.

City Council/RSA Agenda 182 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
ii
Importantly, focus groups and research on racial equity strategies informed the modeling and the proposed pathways to ensure the deep disparities in our system are addressed through new investments at every level. These investments include creating extensive new program models and pathways out of homelessness, using affordable housing dedicated for people experiencing homelessness, PSH for people who need more supports, targeted behavioral health services, improved and expanded homelessness prevention, transitional housing for youth and shallow and flexible rental assistance to fill gaps for people with limited incomes in addition to expanding current program models such as Rapid Rehousing and Permanent Supportive Housing (PSH)..

The 2021 planning update explored different scenarios related to levels of anticipated new homelessness and of investment to determine the gaps in the current system and what it will take to fill them. The community selected to sponsor a scenario approach that seeks to reduce new entries to homelessness by preventing it when possible, and to create a more robust response system with enough resources at the end of five years to provide a housing exit to every person who does become homeless.

Building a system where people are rehoused quickly
Figure 1. Impact of Increased Investment on Homeless System Outcomes Source: CA-502 System Model, Abt Associates, 1/20/2022
Overall, more than 24,000 additional housing exits are needed over five years to reach a point at which the numbers of people who become homeless in a year and the numbers who leave homelessness in that time are in balance. These 24,000 interventions include everything from short-term prevention to permanent subsidies and housing with services, depending on the needs of the households.

In addition to the significant need for housing, because of the high rate of unsheltered homelessness (an estimated 79% people experiencing homelessness in Alameda County are unsheltered) the Plan includes a significant increase in shelter in the first two years, followed by a slow decline in shelter as more housing resources become available and less shelter is needed. Some of the planned added shelter will be able to be converted to much needed housing in later years, as has been demonstrated by successful Project Roomkey to Project Homekey transitions, creating permanent housing by 0 2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
Year 1
(2022)
Year 2
(2023)
Year 3
(2024)
Year 4
(2025)
Year 5
(2026)
Annual HH in the System
HHs served in pathways to housing
Unmet need
City Council/RSA Agenda 183 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
iii
renovating hotels used as shelters during the pandemic. By Year 5 the amount of shelter needed on an ongoing basis is expected to be slightly less than what is available today if all housing resources are in place
The total cost of increasing the shelter and housing inventory over the coming five years to fully meet the need would be $2.5 billion. This includes roughly $430 million for additional shelter, $1.68 billion for permanent housing such as dedicated affordable housing and permanent supportive housing, and $388 million for prevention, rapid rehousing and shallow (more limited) subsidies within the homelessness response system. This does not include the one-time development costs for new buildings, but covers operations and services, and subsidies to help people rent existing housing.

Similar to their proportion of the homeless population, the new investments are roughly 10% ($194 million) for inventory and resources for households with minor children, and 90% ($2.3 billion) for the inventory and resources to serve adult only households, including transition age youth.

To reach these goals while decreasing racial disparities, the Home Together Plan recommends specific action steps in four categories:
1) Prevent Homelessness for our Residents
a. Address racial disparities in mainstream/upstream systems to prevent disproportionate inflow of African Americans into homelessness
b. Focus resources for prevention on people most likely to lose their homes c. Rapidly resolve episodes of homelessness through Housing Problem Solving d. Prevent racially disproportionate returns to homelessness 2) Connect People to Shelter and Needed Resources
a. Provide neighborhood-based access where people are most likely to lose housing b. Lower programmatic barriers to crisis services such as prevention, problem solving, and shelter c. Prevent discharge from mainstream systems to homelessness d. Significantly increase the availability of shelter, especially non-congregate models, to serve vulnerable adults and families with children and to reduce unsheltered homelessness. e. Provide accessible behavioral health services to people with serious mental illness or substance use needs and who are unsheltered, in shelter, or in supportive housing programs. 3) Increase Housing Solutions
a. Add units and subsidies for permanent supportive housing b. Create units with more intensive health services for seniors and medically fragile residents c. Create dedicated affordable housing subsidies for people who do not need intensive services d. Create shallow subsidies for those who need more limited assistance e. Add new slots of rapid rehousing for those who can take over their full rent given time f. Ensure new housing funding is distributed according to need g. Reduce entry barriers to housing and ensure racial equity in referrals and placements 4) Strengthen Coordination, Communication and Capacity
a. Use data to improve outcomes and track racial equity impacts b.  Improve messaging and information availability
c. Build infrastructure to support new and expanded programs City Council/RSA Agenda 184 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
iv
Taken together, the significant increase in investment and the creation of new models and pathways out of homelessness will lead to decreases in new homelessness, improved racial equity in outcomes, shorter time being homeless, and a reduced rate at which people return to homelessness. Specific measurable targets for reducing homelessness altogether, and for achieving greater equity in results, are included in the plan.

The community of Alameda County adopts this plan and vision at a time when the future is uncertain.

New resources, both one-time and ongoing, received in 2021 and anticipated in the future provide the foundation for achieving this plan, but alone are not enough to realize its vision. The response to COVID-19 has shown that the community can pull together and can work at speeds we have not seen before, a strong foundation to build from. However, we face continuing challenges including uncertainties from COVID-19, unpredictable housing markets, future State, Federal and local budgets, and an overtaxed public and non-profit sector with significant capacity needs. All these challenges require continuing the current level of unprecedented collaboration and coordination and building on the progress made to unify the community response and build an aligned response system centered in racial equity.

Home Together 2026 adopts bold, ambitious, and measurable goals for Alameda County, both for reducing homelessness and for achieving greater equity. To bring these new programs and solutions into being will take committing every available dollar in ways that uphold performance and invest in working and desired models. With these commitments and agreements for joint accountability we will, by 2026, be Home, Together.

City Council/RSA Agenda 185 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
1 1. Background and Introduction
This Home Together Implementation Plan (the Plan) is a community-wide plan for Alameda County which lays out the goals and strategies needed to dramatically reduce homelessness by 2026 and combat racial disparities in homelessness through fully centering equity. The Plan’s overarching goals and time frame align with Alameda County’s Vision 2026 which holds as one of its primary objectives to “ensure the availability of diverse and affordable housing for all residents with the goal of eliminating homelessness in Alameda County.” The Home Together Plan covers a five-year time frame, beginning January 2022 and ending December 2026.

This Plan builds on a variety of processes and planning that has occurred during the last two years, including:
• The racial equity analysis and system modeling process that is detailed in the January 2020 Centering Racial Equity in Homeless System Design (CRE) report • Racial Equity Action Lab (convened by the Bay Area Regional Health Inequities Initiative) which centered lived expertise input and process recommendations on implementing CRE • The Home Together Plan adopted by the Alameda County Board of Supervisors in August of 2020
Home Together 2026 provides a strategic roadmap for implementing the Centering Racial Equity recommendations generated during 2019-2020. This Community-wide Plan includes five-year targets for the creation of significant quantities of new housing and shelter in order to meet the unmet need of all people experiencing homelessness by 2026. A companion Home Together County Action Plan speaks to the specific role of the County in co-leading efforts to address homelessness with cities and community partners, and the key roles of specific county agencies and resources. Cities within Alameda County have participated in the community process for this overarching Community Plan and are encouraged to develop and adopt similar jurisdictional implementation plans to align with the Community plan. CRE and recent strategy sessions to create this plan have been informed by a diverse group of stakeholders.

The initial Centering Racial Equity report, and this Plan, were supported by in-depth needs analysis conducted by national technical assistance provider Abt Associates. The recommendations were informed by an extensive community input process which included participation of system leaders, program participants, service providers and other partners in homelessness response. The process included research using local data and multiple focus groups with people of color who were currently or recently homeless regarding their race-impacted experiences. The CRE report resulted in recommendations for significant system additions but did not include action steps to implement the recommendations.

As the Home Together Community Plan was developed it became clear that some updating to the original needs analysis was necessary. The COVID-19 Pandemic, which began shortly after the CRE modeling was completed, has changed the landscape of resources, and some data used from 2019 was able to be updated with more complete information from the countywide Homeless Management Information System (HMIS). While some updates were made, there was also a strong commitment to maintain the critical assumptions and decisions that were widely discussed in the CRE planning process.

To consider changes and updates to the model, a planning group was jointly convened by County’s Office of Homeless Care and Coordination (OHCC) and EveryOne Home (EOH), the CoC backbone City Council/RSA Agenda 186 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
2 organization. The Strategic Planning Implementation Committee met bi-weekly from July 2021 – November 2021 to inform the community plan. The group included city and county staff, people with lived expertise, service providers, nonprofit organizations, advocates, and CoC Leadership Board members.1 Various technical staff also met with Abt Associates to review modeling updates.

The primary changes to the system modeling are:

1. The decision to propose more shelter in addition to permanent housing, to rapidly reduce unsheltered homelessness. This was not addressed in the original modeling but was highly recommended by the Implementation Committee and jurisdictional partners;

2. The decision to model for a decrease in new entries into homelessness by the end of the planning period, with an increased investment in prevention;

3. Updates to length of time spent in shelter to more accurately reflect current conditions and impacts of future investments; and

4. Updates to certain cost assumptions based on current data.

In addition to implementing recommendations from the CRE report and updated system model, this Home Together Plan is responsive to requirements laid out in the California Comeback Plan for community plans to draw down key State housing and health funding. It is also informed by and consistent with other local and regional efforts, including the All Home Regional Action Plan, and Plan Bay Area 2050.

2. Population Description
Alameda County’s most recent Point in Time Count (PIT) which included an unsheltered count was conducted in 2019 and estimated a total of 8,022 persons were experiencing homelessness on a single day.2 Based on an annualization of the PIT, it is estimated that 15,786 people in 13,135 households experienced homelessness in Alameda County in 2019.3
Homelessness occurs across the County, though it is concentrated most in the north and mid portions. 4 More than three-fourths of people experiencing homelessness (78%) report residing in Alameda County before becoming homeless.5
Table 1: Annual Estimates and Geographic Distribution of People and Households Experiencing Homelessness in Alameda County
1 See Appendix X for list of Home Together Contributors, including the Strategic Planning Implementation Committee
2 Alameda County conducts a homeless point in time count (PIT) every two years. Due to COVID-19, the scheduled PIT count for 2021 was postponed to 2022.
3 EveryOne Counts! Alameda County Homeless Count & Survey. Applied Survey Research (ASR). 2019. 4 Oakland-Berkeley-Alameda County Continuum of Care. Centering Racial Equity in Homeless System Design.

January 2021. https://everyonehome.org/centering-racial-equity/ 5 EveryOne Counts! Alameda County Homeless Count & Survey. Applied Survey Research (ASR). 2019.

City Council/RSA Agenda 187 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
3 Source: Oakland-Berkeley-Alameda County Continuum of Care. Centering Racial Equity in Homeless System Design. January 2021.

Adult only households represent one or more adult(s) experiencing homelessness together without minor children. Most such households are a single individual. Adult only households are estimated at 12,005 annually and make up 91% of households that are homeless over a year.

Families with minor children are estimated at 985 annually, representing 7.5% of homelessness households.6 Child-only households (that is minor children who are homeless without any adults) are

1.5% of the county’s homeless population.

Males make up more than 60% of the homeless population. Nearly three-fourths of the homeless population is between the ages of 25-59, though a growing percentage of people experiencing homelessness (14%) are seniors and nearly 10% are between 18 and 24, referred to as transition age youth (TAY).7
Table 2: Gender Table 3: Age
Gender of people experiencing
homelessness
Age of people experiencing
homelessness
Male identifying 61% Under 18 4%
Female identifying 35% 18-24 9%
Transgender 2% 25-59 73%
Non-binary 2% 60 and older 14%
Source: EveryOne Counts! Alameda County Homeless Count & Survey. Applied Survey Research (ASR). 2019.

Racial Disparities in the Homeless Population
While homelessness is widespread in Alameda County, it disproportionately impacts people of color, especially African Americans. The 2019 Homelessness Point in Time Count shows that people of color make up more than 2 out of 3 (69%) people experiencing homelessness in Alameda County. The groups most disproportionately affected are people identifying as Black or African American, and American Indian or Alaska Native. Black people account for 47% of the homeless population, compared to 11% of the general population in Alameda County.Native Americans make up four percent of the homeless 6 Oakland-Berkeley-Alameda County Continuum of Care. Centering Racial Equity in Homeless System Design.

January 2021. https://everyonehome.org/centering-racial-equity/ 7 EveryOne Counts! Alameda County Homeless Count & Survey. Applied Survey Research (ASR). 2019 City Council/RSA Agenda 188 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
4 population, compared with one percent of county residents. Homelessness also disproportionately affects Native Hawaiians/Pacific Islanders and Multiracial people in Alameda County.8 Figure 2: Racial Distribution of General Population and Homeless Population Source: Oakland-Berkeley-Alameda County Continuum of Care. Centering Racial Equity in Homeless System Design. January 2021.

Households with only adults are even more disproportionately likely to be Black (58%) and Native American (three percent) in comparison with the general population of Alameda County (11% Black, one percent Native American).9
The many specific needs and experiences of people of color experiencing homelessness are described in the CRE report, often in the words of people interviewed. Without addressing the impact of race in our society, homelessness will continue to disproportionately impact African Americans and other people of color. Creating a mix of housing and services in order to reduce these enormous disparities is a major focus of this plan.

Special Populations
Several special populations of people who experience homelessness merit particular attention due to particular vulnerabilities, overrepresentation in the population, and/or specific needs and resources for addressing their needs. These include transition age youth, veterans, people impacted by intimate partner violence and people impacted by the criminal justice system.

Transition Age Youth
Youth ages 18-24 were 9% of the overall population experiencing homelessness in Alameda County in the 2019 PIT count (702 individuals). Unaccompanied children, under age 18, represented less than 1% of the homeless population (29 individuals).10 These numbers represent a point in time and only tally youth who were counted as sheltered in the homeless system or as unsheltered. During the 2019-2020 school year, schools in Alameda County reported 4,445 “homeless students” attended public schools in Alameda County, a number that includes young people under 18 who were doubled 8 Oakland-Berkeley-Alameda County Continuum of Care. Centering Racial Equity in Homeless System Design.

January 2021. https://everyonehome.org/centering-racial-equity/ 9 Oakland-Berkeley-Alameda County Continuum of Care. Centering Racial Equity in Homeless System Design. January 2021. https://everyonehome.org/centering-racial-equity/
10 EveryOne Counts! Alameda County Homeless Count & Survey. Applied Survey Research (ASR). 2019.

City Council/RSA Agenda 189 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
5 up or in hotel settings as well as those in shelter or unsheltered situations. 11 Youth who experience homelessness in Alameda County are very disproportionately African American, identify as LGBTQ and experience mental health issues at much higher rates than County or State residents.12
Table 4: Characteristics of Alameda County Homeless Youth Characteristic % County Population % Homeless TAY Population African-American 11% (Alameda County Youth) 63%
LGBTQ 10% (Alameda County) 42%
Experiencing mental health
issues
25% (CA) 43%
Source: Alameda County Youth Homelessness Demonstration Program. Application July, 2021.

The 2019 PIT Count shows that 82% of TAY experiencing homelessness in Alameda County are unsheltered.13
Veterans
Historically, Veterans have experienced homelessness at much higher rates than their proportion of the population. Recent resources and efforts have brought down the population of homeless Veterans, however they continue to be a significant part of the population. During the 2019 Homeless PIT Count in Alameda County, 692 veterans were experiencing homelessness, representing 9% of the county’s homeless population. Of those, 690 were single individuals, and seventy-nine percent (79%) of veterans were unsheltered.
14 Many U.S. veterans experience conditions that place them at increased risk for homelessness, including higher rates of PTSD, traumatic brain injury, sexual assault, and substance abuse. Veterans experiencing homelessness are more likely to be unsheltered, and often remain unsheltered for extended periods of time.

Older Adults
Data from the 2019 PIT Count found that 14% of Alameda County’s Homeless Population was over the age of 60. Thirteen percent of 2019 PIT Count survey respondents indicated that they were between 50 and 64 years old when they first experienced homelessness, and 3% were over the age of 65. 15 11 Alameda County Youth Homelessness Demonstration Program. Application July, 2021. 12Alameda County Youth Homelessness Demonstration Program. Application July, 2021. 13 EveryOne Counts! Alameda County Homeless Count & Survey. Applied Survey Research (ASR). 2019. 14 EveryOne Counts! Alameda County Homeless Count & Survey. Applied Survey Research (ASR). 2019. 15 EveryOne Counts! Alameda County Homeless Count & Survey. Applied Survey Research (ASR). 2019.

City Council/RSA Agenda 190 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
6 Recent national research predicts that the number of older adults experiencing homelessness will increase significantly over the next decade.16 This population has unique and often complex needs that require consideration in homeless system design.17
People Impacted by Intimate Partner Violence (IPV)
Histories of domestic violence and partner abuse are prevalent among individuals experiencing homelessness and can be the primary cause of homelessness. Survivors often lack the financial resources required for housing, as their employment history or dependable income may be limited.

For individuals in families with children surveyed in the 2019 PIT Count, the most frequently reported cause of homelessness was family or domestic violence (26%). Six percent (6%) of respondents from the 2019 Homeless PIT Count survey reported currently experiencing domestic violence or abuse.

There was no difference observed between unsheltered and sheltered respondents (6% each).

Domestic violence did vary by gender, as 4% of male respondents reported current experience compared to 10% of females. While there were very few transgender and gender non-conforming respondents, 8% and 3% reported currently experiencing domestic violence, respectively.

Twenty-six percent (26%) of 2019 PIT Count respondents reported a history of ever experiencing physical, emotional, or sexual abuse by a relative or by a person with whom they have lived, such as a spouse, partner, sibling, parent, or roommate. This also varied by gender, with 17% of male, 40% of female, 39% of transgender, and 16% of gender non-conforming respondents experiencing domestic violence in their lifetime.

People with Behavioral Health Needs
According to the 2019 PIT Count, adults with serious mental illness (SMI) comprised nearly one-third (32%) of Alameda County’s homeless population, compared to 29% in 2017 and 18% in 2015. As reflected in the overall homeless population, close to 80% of homeless adults with SMI were unsheltered.
12% of PIT survey respondents cited the primary event or condition that led to their current homelessness as mental health issues and 10% said substance use issues. 21% of survey respondents indicated that mental health services might have helped them retain their housing. Unsheltered veterans frequently cited mental health issues as the primary cause of their homelessness (18%).

An analysis of people experiencing unsheltered homelessness in Alameda County indicates that nearly half (48%) of those contacted by street outreach are vulnerable due to advanced age and/or one or more health or behavioral health conditions including mental health and substance use disorders.18 Structural racism and racial disparities in homelessness contribute to and exacerbate mental health needs. A wide body of research points to links between racial discrimination and negative effects on 16 “The Emerging Crisis of Aged Homelessness: Could Housing Solutions Be Funded by Avoidance of Excess Shelter, Hospital, and Nursing Home Costs?” (2019) | Culhane et al | University of Pennsylvania. https://aisp.upenn.edu/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Emerging-Crisis-of-Aged-Homelessness-1.pdf 17 Geriatric Conditions in a Population-Based Sample of Older Homeless Adults (2017) | Kushel et al | The Gerontologist, Volume 57, Issue 4, August 2017, Pages 757–766. https://academic.oup.com/gerontologist/article/57/4/757/2631974 18 Analysis of SHIE and HMIS data for unsheltered persons with a street outreach contact.

City Council/RSA Agenda 191 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
7 mental health. 19 Additional research also links the adverse impacts of experiencing homelessness such as stress, anxiety, isolation, and sleep loss to worsening mental health problems.20 People Impacted by Criminal Justice System Involvement
Homelessness and incarceration are often correlated. Individuals without stable housing are at greater risk of criminal justice system involvement, particularly those with mental health issues, veterans, and youth. Individuals with past incarceration face significant barriers to exiting homelessness due to stigmatization and policies affecting their ability to gain employment and access housing opportunities.

Research has found that formerly incarcerated people were almost ten times more likely to experience homelessness than the general public.
21 Nine percent (9%) of respondents to the 2019 Homeless PIT Count survey reported being on probation at the time of the survey, and 3% reported being on parole.

3. Needs Assessment and Housing Pathways
People experiencing homelessness have a variety of needs but the one commonality among all is the need for a home. The CRE found that Alameda County’s homeless response system does not have the interventions needed to permanently rehouse all people experiencing homelessness, and that reducing disparities and improving outcomes for the racial and ethnic groups most impacted by homelessness will require adding new types of programs to the homeless response system, increasing all programs’ availability, and improving program design and delivery. Opportunities identified to increase racial equity in the homeless response system include:22
• Increasing the availability of homeless housing and subsidy models for people with extremely low incomes and a range of service needs;
• Creating a variety of more flexible resources including homelessness prevention and rapid resolution resources and target these resources to those who can resolve their homelessness without indefinite supports;
• Increasing access to housing and other programs by lowering entry and participation barriers that unnecessarily impact privacy or independence, and ensuring resources are spread throughout the county; and
• Communicate clearly about available resources, eligibility criteria and the process for accessing resources.

The process to inform the CRE identified a set of pathways that would be available in an optimal homeless system to allow every person to exit homelessness, recognizing different levels of need – from those who can self-resolve to those who will need ongoing subsidies and services. The pathways envisioned for adults and for families are similar but somewhat different, based on the generally lower 19 American Public Health Association. Structural Racism is a Public Health Crisis. APHA Policy Statement. October 24, 2020. https://www.apha.org/policies-and-advocacy/public-health-policy-statements/policy-database/2021/01/13/structural-racismis-a-public-health-crisis 20 Mental health problems are often a consequence—not a cause—of homelessness. KALW San Francisco. Published December 7, 2016. https://www.kalw.org/show/crosscurrents/2016-12-07/mental-health-problems-are-often-aconsequence-not-a-cause-of-homelessness#stream/0 21 EveryOne Counts! Alameda County Homeless Count & Survey. Applied Survey Research (ASR). 2019. 22 Oakland-Berkeley-Alameda County Continuum of Care. Centering Racial Equity in Homeless System Design. January 2021.

P.26-28. https://everyonehome.org/centering-racial-equity/ City Council/RSA Agenda 192 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
8 vulnerability but greater economic needs of families. These pathways are designed to respond to the root causes of homelessness and barriers to housing stability. These resource pathways must be available in a high-performing homeless response system to end homelessness for Black and Native American adults, who encounter the greatest barriers to housing and disproportionately return to homelessness.23
In order to better define the Dedicated Affordable resource described in the CRE report, a working group began meeting in March 2021 and met four times between March and June. Dedicated Affordable is identified in the CRE as “a form of deeply subsidized housing for homeless people that does not require a disability to qualify.”
System modeling “anticipates that 28% of households with only adults and 30% of households with minor children could end their homelessness with a deep housing subsidy and limited support services.”24 Focus group participants preferred Dedicated Affordable “to other housing interventions because it allowed them to pay rent and live independently from what was interpreted as required services.” Given the newness of this resource and the very large need for it, the group did not recommend being so specific that someone must fit a very particular definition to get help.

Table 5: Housing Pathways in an Optimal Homeless System – Adult Only Households Pathway Intended Group Optimal %
Served
Self-resolvers People who only briefly touch the
system and then exit
10%
Homeless Prevention/Rapid Resolution -
Short term
People w/ jobs who need short-term
assistance
10%
Homeless Prevention /Rapid Resolution -
Long-term subsidy
People w/ jobs who need subsidy to
afford rent; Young Adults (YA)
10%
Transitional Housing for Youth w/ Shallow
Subsidy
Young adults (18-24) who need support
and subsidy
2%
Rapid Re-Housing - Temporary Subsidy People who can increase income to afford rent; Young Adults
13%
Rapid Re-Housing w/ Permanent Supportive
Housing backstop (service needs)
People in RRH who need services in PSH;
Young Adults
1%
Rapid Re-Housing w/ Shallow Subsidy
backstop (economic needs)
People in RRH who can't sustain on their
own
1%
Dedicated Affordable Housing w/Emergency
Shelter
Zero income & ELI people who can't
increase income; Seniors
10%
Dedicated Affordable Housing unsheltered Zero income & ELI people who can't increase income; Seniors
18%
Permanent Supportive Housing People with disabilities who need services
15%
Permanent Supportive Housing for Seniors
and others w/ higher needs
People who need help with daily living
skills, more support
10%
Source: CA-502 System Model, Abt Associates, 1/20/2022
23 Oakland-Berkeley-Alameda County Continuum of Care. Centering Racial Equity in Homeless System Design. January 2021. https://everyonehome.org/centering-racial-equity/
24 Oakland-Berkeley-Alameda County Continuum of Care. Centering Racial Equity in Homeless System Design. January 2021. https://everyonehome.org/centering-racial-equity/
City Council/RSA Agenda 193 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
9 Pathways for families with minor children were designed in the REIA process to be responsive to the root causes of homelessness and barriers to housing stability - particularly for the Black and Native American households over-represented in the homeless population. These resource pathways represent the community’s best thinking about the resources needed to produce greater equity in a high functioning homeless response system. The table below shows the percent of homeless households with minor children in each resource pathway in an optimal homeless system.25 Table 6: Housing Pathways in an Optimal Homeless System – Households with Minor Children Pathway Intended Group Optimal
% Served
Self-resolvers People who briefly touch the system and then exit 10% Homeless Prevention/Rapid Resolution People w/ jobs who need short-term assistance 10% Rehousing with Shallow Subsidy People in RRH who need services; Young adults 40% Rehousing with Dedicated Affordable People in RRH who can't sustain on their own 20% Dedicated Affordable Housing w/ Services Zero & ELI people who can't increase income 10% Permanent Supportive Housing People with disabilities who need services 10% Source: CA-502 System Model, Abt Associates, 1/20/2022
During the 2021 System Modeling update, additional shelter was added to model how unsheltered homelessness could be reduced in a shorter time frame while scaling up the permanent housing in the system. This temporary “surge” in shelter would temporarily result in some only-adult households receiving shelter and services without an identified housing resource connected to that stay. The system was modeled to show what would be needed by year 5 (2026) to eliminate this “shelter only” pathway – along with any unmet need in our homeless system, and ensure that housing exit resources are available for all households in the homeless system.

Additional Needs and Resources for Special Populations
The housing pathways and resources described above are intended to meet the needs of all of Alameda County’s homeless populations. Some paths are specifically targeted to certain subpopulations such as permanent supportive housing for seniors, which recognizes additional health and care needs of older people, and transitional housing for young adults which recognizes their transitional period of life.

Needs assessments conducted for each of these populations point to certain additional needs that the strategies of this plan seek to encompass within the overall framework of inventory growth to meet the need.

Transition Age Youth
Transition Age Youth (TAY) is an important subpopulation with particular needs due to their stage in development and includes youth who have been impacted by homelessness and interactions with the foster care system, the juvenile justice system, or both. Some shelter and housing inventory is set aside 25 Oakland-Berkeley-Alameda County Continuum of Care. Centering Racial Equity in Homeless System Design.

January 2021. https://everyonehome.org/centering-racial-equity/ City Council/RSA Agenda 194 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
10 to meet young people’s unique needs and Alameda County’s System Model for households with only adults includes specific pathways for TAY.26
Youth experiencing homelessness in Alameda County report a need for greater access to all resources, increased supports to maneuver through, and transition from program to program within the homelessness response system, and increased youth development trainings for providers. Youth and providers have indicated that the homelessness system should be improved to be more welcoming to youth, that stronger housing and employment connections for youth are needed so that youth can find and sustain housing, and that increased access to youth dedicated permanent housing and long-term subsidies would significantly build capacity to serve youth.

In work done to identify specific needs of youth for the Youth Homelessness Demonstration program (YHDP) application, the following issues were identified as contributing to youth homelessness:27 • Lack of affordable housing
• Lack of supports and resources to successfully transition out of institutional systems such as foster care and the juvenile justice system into permanent housing • Stigma, trauma and marginalization that creates barriers to accessing resources and maintaining housing
• Risk of return to homelessness from time-limited programs, especially for African-American and parenting youth
• Close to 50% of youth experiencing homelessness report struggling with symptoms related to PTSD or other mental health issues making it difficult for them to navigate the homelessness system and maintain their current housing
• Many LGBTQ youth report leaving homes and communities that felt unsafe due to their gender identity or sexual orientation
• High risk for commercial and sexual exploitation
• Unaccompanied Immigrant Youth face particular challenges. Since 2014, 4,000+ UIY have been apprehended at the border and released to sponsors in Alameda County, many of whom do not remain in their initial placements
• Racial disparities are even higher in the homeless youth population than in the total population of people experiencing homelessness
In September 2021, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) awarded Alameda County CoC a $6.5 million Youth Homelessness Demonstration Program (YHDP) grant. The funding will be used to create an in-depth plan to meet the needs of youth at-risk of or experiencing homelessness and to work towards ending youth homelessness in the community. Additional resources already available in the county for TAY include the THP Plus28 program and dedicated Continuum of Care grants. The State of California requires that communities set-aside at least 8-10% (in different funding 26 Oakland-Berkeley-Alameda County Continuum of Care. Centering Racial Equity in Homeless System Design. January 2021. https://everyonehome.org/centering-racial-equity/
27 Alameda County Youth Homelessness Demonstration Program. Application July, 2021. 28 Transitional Housing Program for young adults who exited foster care (including those supervised by Probation) on or after their 18th birthday and are not yet 24 years of age.

City Council/RSA Agenda 195 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
11 rounds) of their Homeless, Housing Assistance Program (HHAP) funds for the needs of Transition Age Youth. Alameda County and the CoC have used initial HHAP funding on increasing system access, additional interim housing, and services paired with housing subsidies dedicated to TAY.

Veterans
Veterans experience additional needs and challenges based on their Veteran status and, for many, their experiences in the military leading to challenges such as Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). In the 2019 PIT Count survey, unsheltered veterans most frequently cited mental health issues as the primary cause of their homelessness (18%), while sheltered veterans most frequently cited a rent increase (13%). Unsheltered veterans attributed their homelessness to job loss at nearly twice the rate as sheltered veterans (15% and 8% respectively).

The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) provides a broad range of benefits and services to Veterans of the U.S. Armed Forces. These benefits may involve different forms of financial assistance, including monthly cash payments to disabled veterans, health care, education, and housing benefits.

Assistance to obtain these resources is critical, and not all Veterans qualify.

In addition to these supports, the VA and HUD partner to provide targeted housing and support services to veterans currently experiencing homelessness or at risk of experiencing homelessness.

These include the VASH (Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing) and SSVF (Supportive Services for Veteran Families) programs which provide permanent subsidies with services, and transitional subsidies, shallow subsidies and prevention support to veterans and their families. These resources provide a critical piece of the homeless response system for most veterans, though some must still rely on general population resources as they are precluded from accessing VA supports based on discharge status and length of service.

Older Adults
As mentioned above, older adults are a significant and growing part of the population experiencing homelessness in Alameda County and around the country. Geriatric conditions are common among older adults experiencing homelessness, and their health and risk of adverse impacts are comparable to housed adults who are 20 years older.29 Services and housing that address geriatric conditions are needed for older homeless adults.

Recognizing that older adults often have additional and specific service needs, Permanent Supportive Housing (PSH) for Seniors is included as a future inventory need for the homeless system as a more service-intensive version of PSH for formerly homeless adults who can no longer live independently.

Stakeholders in the CRE process determined that our ideal homeless system should include enough inventory to serve 10% of adult-only households with PSH for Seniors.30 In addition, the model recognizes that many older adults live on fixed incomes which are often low and stagnant compared to housing costs. Dedicated affordable housing for older adults can ensure that many formerly homeless seniors will be able to live independently on their fixed incomes. The System Model includes pathways for Seniors to access Dedicated Affordable Housing from both sheltered and unsheltered homeless living situations.
29 Geriatric Conditions in a Population-Based Sample of Older Homeless Adults (2017) | Kushel et al | The Gerontologist, Volume 57, Issue 4, August 2017, Pages 757–766. https://academic.oup.com/gerontologist/article/57/4/757/2631974 30 Oakland-Berkeley-Alameda County Continuum of Care. Centering Racial Equity in Homeless System Design. January 2021. https://everyonehome.org/centering-racial-equity/
City Council/RSA Agenda 196 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
12 People Impacted by Intimate Partner Violence
Persons fleeing or impacted by Intimate partner violence have similar needs to others experiencing homelessness for housing and services but have other challenges and needs that make their engagement with the homeless response system even more challenging.

Most victims of IPV don’t have access to unmonitored technology, making seeking help and client follow-ups difficult.

The COVID 19 pandemic has impacted IPV providers and programs significantly and the population fleeing violence that they serve.
• Crisis hotlines have seen a 30-70% increase in calls 31 • Some providers are reporting increases of up to 150% in requests for mental health services (from 44,000 to 109,000)
• Women have been disproportionately impacted by COVID-19 induced unemployment and by challenges of school closures and lack of childcare
• To address health concerns and follow COVID-19 protocols, shelter capacity including in Domestic Violence shelters has been decreased and has left some providers to serve between 30-50% fewer clients
These impacts have made access to the kind of support survivors need, including temporary crisis assistance, affordable housing and permanent supportive housing even more difficult. The Alameda County Health Care Services Agency (Alameda County Office of Homeless Care and Coordination), Building Futures, Family Violence Law Center, and Eden I&R 211 have created a program design to establish a parallel and connected Coordinated Entry System for survivors of domestic violence, sexual assault, and human trafficking in Alameda County so they can better access needed support services, health care, and housing resources to begin to live a life free from abuse and homelessness.

Resources for programs that meet the needs of survivors include dedicated shelters and transitional programs. Since COVID-19, Project Roomkey was created to use hotels to provide non-congregate shelter for people who are homeless and at high risk for complications from the disease. The Marina Village Inn in the City of Alameda provided 51 rooms of temporary shelter for women and children to allow for decompression of DV shelters (to comply with COVID-19 protocols.) These guests, as other Roomkey guests, are now prioritized for permanent housing.

The 2021 HUD-funded Emergency Housing Voucher program, also part of the COVID relief effort, includes partnership with Victim Services Providers and set aside 87 vouchers for survivors of violence, who will also be provided tenancy sustaining support services for clients with disabilities who face challenges to getting and keeping housing, including coaching for independent living and community integration.

People with Behavioral Health Needs
Significant mental health needs impact nearly one third of the population experiencing homelessness and a much larger number can be expected to have some mental health needs. In the 2019 PIT Count, 31 Family Violence Law Center. Presentation to the Alameda County Boad of Supervisors. ”Gender-Based Violence COVID-19 Coordinated Response. October 25, 2021.

City Council/RSA Agenda 197 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
13 the most frequently reported health condition among survey respondents was psychiatric or emotional conditions (39%), followed by post-traumatic stress disorder (30%) and drug or alcohol abuse (30%).

California’s Department of Health Care Services (DHCS) recently conducted a needs assessment for behavioral health care services statewide and surveyed consumers and family member on needed housing supports. Many of the comments corresponded closely to the Alameda County CRE report findings. Unmet needs cited as priorities included:
• Additional housing capacity, due to low vacancy rates and lack of affordability • Additional permanent supportive housing options for adults that provide wraparound behavioral health services, such as recovery services and access to supports, such as adult FullService Partnerships that provide intensive services and supports and coordinate access to housing, education, and employment for people with severe mental illness • Additional capacity in longer-term adult residential facilities, sober living and recovery residences
• Address barriers to building or siting housing for individuals living with mental health issues and individuals living with SUD, and housing provider unwilling to accept behavioral health clients32 People Impacted by Criminal Justice System Involvement
Focus groups of people with lived expertise of homelessness convened to inform Alameda County’s original Homeless System Model discussed how incarceration impacted their ability to find and keep housing. While incarceration is a barrier to housing and employment for anyone, the well-documented mass incarceration of Black, Latinx, and other people of color means that incarceration is a barrier to housing disproportionately impacting people of color. Focus group participants also highlighted the impact of structural racism in systems such as mass incarceration, and how involvement in these systems makes it difficult to increase income.33
Currently, the Probation Department receives direct funding for RRH and transitional housing programs for people in reentry.

In May 2020, the Alameda County Board of Supervisors directed the Alameda County Health Care Services Agency/ Behavioral Health Department to develop a plan to reduce the number of incarcerated individuals with behavioral health conditions within the jail. The multi-year plan, estimated to cost $50 million, includes extensive stakeholder engagement, internal County Department research and consultation. One primary area of focus is to strengthen connections between and across sectors to close any gaps and improve post-release service participation. Strategies include expansion of access to urgent care and crisis services, expansion of forensic linkage programs, and development of a TAY full-service partnership. The plan will prioritize the care of “high utilizers” of county behavioral health and county forensic services to ensure that justice involved people are connected to appropriate treatment and facilities, and increase short term, permanent housing and board and care facilities. 32 State of California Department of Health Care Services, Assessing the Continuum of Care for Behavioral Health Services in California Data, Stakeholder Perspectives, and Implications January 10th, 2022
33 Oakland-Berkeley-Alameda County Continuum of Care. Centering Racial Equity in Homeless System Design. January 2021. https://everyonehome.org/centering-racial-equity/
City Council/RSA Agenda 198 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
14 4. Modeling Results and Investments
Every year, new people experience homelessness in Alameda County but the homelessness response system does not currently have enough capacity to keep up with this annual inflow. This means that the increasing homeless population includes many people who could not get the assistance they needed to end their homelessness. In 2020 to 2021, we saw that 36% (4,358) of adult only households experiencing homelessness exited homeless services, and that 64% (7,647) remained. For households with minor children, 33% (321) of households exited the system in 2020-2021, while 67% (664) households remained.

The system modeling used the information about current outcomes and the suggested pathways designed by the Racial Equity Analysis/ CRE process make estimates of the programs and inventory needed to achieve an optimal homeless system that has the capacity to serve all of the existing need within 5 years. The update used this information to explore three potential scenarios:

1. Scenario 1 Steady Continued Increases in the Annual Number of People Experiencing Homelessness: Growth at the same level as the four years prior to 2019 PIT Count (on average 20% per year). To meet the needs takes a very significantly increased response.

2. Scenario 2 Dramatic Increase in the Number of People Experiencing Homelessness: New homelessness grows at an unprecedented rate in year one of the model (2022) due to the impacts of COVID and as eviction moratoria are lifted, and then rates of inflow into homelessness continue as predicted in Scenario 1. Meeting this need takes an extraordinary level of response that is not likely to be achievable.

3. Scenario 3 Gradual Decrease in the Number of People Experiencing Homelessness: New homelessness experiences a similar increase to the past several years in year 1 (2022) (a 20% increase), and then begins to decrease to a 10% increase in year 2 (2023) and continues to decrease by -10% in years 4 (2025) and 5 (2026), achieving a net decrease by year 5. Meeting this need takes a significantly increased response including a focus on prevention, though the total resources needed are not as large as the other two scenarios.

The System Modeling for this plan focuses on Scenario 3, as this scenario a reflects the community’s desire to increase prevention and address homelessness before it starts whenever possible to reduce the rate of new homelessness. If new homelessness increases beyond the modeling predictions, the gap between what our existing system is able to offer and what is needed to serve all homeless households in our system will be greater, and more costly to fill.

Homelessness continues to grow unless we invest in prevention and housing Figure 3 below demonstrates that even with Scenario 3 (a projected decrease in new homelessness over 5 years), our current level of investment will not be enough to operate a system that is able to serve all of the need among households experiencing homelessness and to stop homelessness from growing (red line below). However, with a significant increase in investment into the homeless system (green line below), by year 5 (2026) our system is able to serve all of the need among homeless households (leaving 0% unmet need).

City Council/RSA Agenda 199 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
15 Figure 3. Impact of Investment level on trends in homelessness Source: CA-502 System Model, Abt Associates, 1/20/2022
Increased investments result in people finding housing quickly, not remaining homeless With the required increase in investment and a small decrease in inflow, in 5 years (by 2026) the total number of households served in Alameda County’s homeless system annually decreases by over 3,800 from 2021. In this scenario there is capacity to serve and assist 9,200 households into permanent housing by the homeless response system in year 5. This brings the unmet need in the homeless system to 0. Having no unmet need does not mean that new people do not become homeless but rather that for every new household that experiences homelessness there is a resource path to get them out of homelessness and into housing within an average of 90 days.

Figure 4: Impact of Increased Investment on Homeless System Outcomes Source: CA-502 System Model, Abt Associates, 1/20/2022
0 2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
18,000
20,000
Year 0
(2021)
Year 1
(2022)
Year 2
(2023)
Year 3
(2024)
Year 4
(2025)
Year 5
(2026)

1.a Current trajectory, current response

3.a Prevent new homelessness, current housing response

3.b Prevent new homelessness, increase housing
0 2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
Year 1
(2022)
Year 2
(2023)
Year 3
(2024)
Year 4
(2025)
Year 5
(2026)
Annual HH in the System
HHs served in pathways to housing
Unmet need
City Council/RSA Agenda 200 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
16 Table 7. Impact of Investments on Homeless System Over 5 Years 5-Year Investment Impact Dashboard, All Homeless Households (Adult Only + Households with Minor Children) Scenario 3 / Increased Investment
Year 0
(2021)
Year 1
(2022)
Year 2
(2023)
Year 3
(2024)
Year 4
(2025)
Year 5
(2026)
New Homeless 4,000 4,800 5,300 5,300 4,700 4,300
Annual HH in the
System 13,000 14,000 14,700 14,400 12,600 9,200
HHs served in pathways
to housing 4,700 5,600 6,500 7,400 8,310 9,200
Unmet need 8,300 8,400 8,200 7,000 4,200 0
% Unmet need 64% 60% 56% 49% 33% 0%
Source: CA-502 System Model, Abt Associates, 1/20/2022
Additions to Housing Inventory
In order to “right size” and develop a system which will allow us to reduce homelessness, additional housing inventory is needed so that households experiencing homelessness are able to leave homelessness for permanent housing. The table below details the specific inventory growth in different interventions and housing types needed to meet existing and anticipated future need among homeless households.

Table 8. 5-year Homeless System Inventory Needs
5-Year Inventory Needs, All Homeless Households (Adult Only + Households with Minor Children) Scenario 3 / Increased Investment
Numbers below are cumulative, not new additions needed year over year Baseline
Inventory
(2021)
Year 1
(2022)
Year 2
(2023)
Year 3
(2024)
Year 4
(2025)
Year 5
(2026)
HP/Rapid
Resolution
56 140 160 190 260 230
Crisis Response
(ES, TH, SH)
1,785 34 2,760 3,410 3,140 1,810 1,390
TH for Youth 153 100 120 140 200 170
Rapid Re-Housing 535 1,180 1,370 1,560 2,180 1,940
Permanent Housing Resources
PSH 3,215 3,790 4,500 5,290 6,490 7,410
PSH-Seniors 0 520 1,090 1,690 2,530 3,190
Dedicated
Affordable Hsg
0 1,570 3,320 5,240 7,870 10,070
Shallow Subsidy 0 830 1,740 2,750 4,090 5,240
Source: Source: CA-502 System Model, Abt Associates, 1/20/22 The table above also shows that in 2021 (the base year, or Year 0) Alameda County had 3,215 permanent housing units for households experiencing homelessness, and in order to serve all of the current and projected need of homeless households, our system will need an inventory of 25,910 permanent housing units by year 5 (2026) of the implementation plan. 34 Note that a decreased inventory of shelter is reflected here, and in the 2021 System Modeling, to account for shelter decompression that occurred due to COVID-19 regulations.

City Council/RSA Agenda 201 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
17 Additions to Shelter Inventory
One of the updates that was made to the System Model in 2021 was to temporarily add additional shelter in order to reduce existing unsheltered homelessness. This temporary surge in shelter during the first two years of the Plan while the system’s permanent housing resources are also scaled up.

Figure 5: Impact of Shelter Inventory on Households on Unsheltered Homelessness* Source: Source: CA-502 System Model, Abt Associates, 1/20/22 *For Adult Only Households
New Investment Needed
The total cost of scaling up both the shelter and housing inventory as well as the additional resource pathways over the coming five years is $2.5 billion. This includes roughly $430 million for additional shelter, $1.68 billion for permanent housing such as dedicated affordable and permanent supportive housing, and $388 million for prevention, rapid rehousing and shallow (more limited) subsidies. It does not include the development costs for new buildings, however includes coverage operations and services, and subsidies to help people rent existing housing.

Similar to their proportion of the homeless population, the investments are roughly 10% ($194 million) for inventory and resources for households with minor children, and 90% ($2.3 billion) for the inventory and resources to serve adult only households, including transition age youth.

Table 9. 5 Year Operations Cost for Homeless System Inventory 5-Year Inventory Costs (operations only, not development) All Homeless Households (Adult Only + Households with Minor Children) Scenario 3 / Increased Investment
Year 1
(2022)
Year 2
(2023)
Year 3
(2024)
Year 4
(2025)
Year 5
(2026) 5-Year Total
Prevention & Rapid
Resolution
$2,502,000 $3,022,000 $3,533,000 $5,055,000 $4,680,000 $18,792,000 Crisis Response
(Shelter/Interim)
$85,667,000 $109,121,000 $103,566,000 $61,480,000 $48,402,000 $408,236,000 Transitional for Youth $3,796,000 $4,549,000 $5,344,000 $7,777,000 $7,107,000 $28,573,000 City Council/RSA Agenda 202 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
18 Rapid Re-Housing $26,166,000 $31,374,000 $36,824,000 $52,978,000 $48,683,000 $196,025,000 Permanent Supportive $95,786,000 $117,213,000 $142,068,000 $179,312,000 $210,917,000 $745,296,000 Supportive Housing Seniors
& Medically Fragile
$15,630,000 $33,557,000 $53,819,000 $83,004,000 $107,846,000 $293,856,000 Dedicated Affordable $33,099,000 $72,010,000 $116,971,000 $180,761,000 $238,329,000 $641,170,000 Shallow Subsidy $9,050,000 $19,666,000 $31,881,000 $48,613,000 $64,196,000 $173,406,000 Total $271,696,000 $390,512,000 $494,006,000 $618,980,000 $730,160,000 $2,505,354,000 Source: Source: CA-502 System Model, Abt Associates, 1/20/22 Service Needs for People That Remain Unhoused
Although not represented in in the System Modeling, there are many critical services and resources that serve people who are unhoused. These include Coordinated Entry, Street Outreach, housing navigation, landlord liaison programs, among others. It is also important for nonprofit agencies providing these services also have access to capacity building resources to ensure that African American residents and other populations disproportionately impacted by homelessness are effectively and equitably served in Alameda County’s homeless system. These programs contribute to outcomes such as shortening the length of time that households remain homeless, improving health outcomes and behavioral health support, and increasing exits to housing.

5. Four Core Goal Areas and System Performance Measures Drawing from the recommendations to reduce racial disparities in the CRE report, and the need for resources demonstrated by the system model and the feedback of people experiencing homelessness, Home Together 2026 seeks to reduce homelessness and increase equitable housing solutions with four strategics areas of focus. Each area below includes a number of action steps to be taken to promote the goals in keeping with model and overall reduction strategy.

These core goal areas largely correspond to critical system performance measures required by HUD and by the State of California which will be tracked and reported on annually. In addition, the Alameda County community has determined to also measure its impact on rates of unsheltered homelessness and racial disparities in homelessness. Specific targets for reductions and improvements for each of the performance measures below will be set in consultation with the community and with the State of California during FY 21-22.

The sum of the activities undertaken in this Plan are expected to result in 1- An overall decrease in the number of people who experience homelessness 2- A reduction in racial disparities within the homeless population which reduces the overrepresentation of African Americans, Native Americans, Multi-racial people and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islanders.
1) Prevent Homelessness for our Residents
While many of the people experiencing homelessness in Alameda County have been homeless for long periods of time or have had multiple episodes of homelessness every year people experience homelessness for the first time and seek assistance from the homelessness response system which lacks adequate resources to meet the needs of people already homeless. Data from the 2019 PIT count indicates approximately 31% of the people who are homeless at a point in time have become homeless for the first time.

City Council/RSA Agenda 203 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
19 Racial disparities among newly homeless households are even more extreme than among the homeless population overall, especially for African Americans, Native Americans, Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islanders and multiracial people.

Table 10. Racially disparate rates of new Homelessness
African
Americans
Native
Americans
Multiracial Native HI/Pacific
Islander
Percent of County Population 11% 1% 5% 1%
Percent of newly homeless 58% 5% 6% 2%
Rate of new homelessness 5.3 5 1.2 2
Source: Oakland-Berkeley-Alameda County Continuum of Care. Centering Racial Equity in Homeless System Design. January 2021.

Prevention assistance is typically administered outside the homelessness response system covered by social services and community development funding streams. Research shows that while many lowincome people experience housing crises that could lead to homelessness, people most likely to become homeless have specific risk factors including extremely low incomes, histories of homelessness, and living in highly impacted neighborhoods.35 To be effective, resources to prevent homelessness must target those with the greatest likelihood of becoming homeless. To reduce new incidents of homelessness, we must direct resources to those closest to becoming homeless without assistance, and to those who have lost housing but can recover it with timely support.

Another contributing factor to continuing homelessness is that some households assisted into permanent housing through the homelessness response system may lose their housing again when program resources run out or circumstances change. Returns to homelessness in Alameda County are higher among African Americans and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islanders.

Table 11. Disparities in Rates of Return to Homelessness, FFY 2019 System Average African Americans Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islanders
Rate of Return to
Homelessness
18% 21% 23%
Source: Oakland-Berkeley-Alameda County Continuum of Care. Centering Racial Equity in Homeless System Design. January 2021.

Home Together proposes to reduce the rates of return to homelessness by half from 21% in 2022 (Year 1 of the Plan) to 9% in 2026 (Year 5 of the Plan).
36 To address racial disparities in new homelessness
and returns to homelessness, programs will be targeted and tailored to specific household needs and the county’s providers and administrators will target and track these disparities.

Four activity areas specifically target reductions in new homelessness and returns to homelessness. 35 Center for Evidence-based Solutions to Homelessness. Homelessness Prevention, A Review of the Literature.

January 2019.
36 Source: Adult Only Household Model. CA-502 System Model, Abt Associates. 1/20/22. Note rates are for Adult Only households.

City Council/RSA Agenda 204 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
20 1.Address racial disparities in mainstream/upstream systems to prevent disproportionate inflow of African Americans into homelessness
a. Partner with school districts, social services agencies, child welfare, community health organizations and others to connect people to prevention and economic supports in a timely manner and through trusted sources.
b. Work with law enforcement and criminal justice institutions to create housing planning and homelessness prevention resources.
c. Ensure that workforce services are accessible to and structured to support people whose housing is unstable.

2.Focus resources for homelessness prevention on people most likely to lose their homes a. Work with government and private funders to increase targeted prevention for people most likely to become homeless. Highlight risk factors including extremely low incomes, histories of homelessness, and living in neighborhoods with high rates of poverty and evictions.
b. Tailor outreach and prioritization to reach those at highest risk and coordinate these efforts in all areas of the county.
c. Implement and expand shallow subsidy availability for people with fixed or limited income with housing insecurity. Provide capped rental assistance to relieve rent burden and reduce the risk of becoming homeless.

3. Rapidly resolve episodes of homelessness through Housing Problem Solving a. Add resources to flexible funding pools for Housing Problem Solving, a practice of helping people newly homeless or on the verge of homelessness to identify rapid solutions to their situation with light financial support
b. Offer Problem Solving training and funding throughout system so that providers can quickly assist people when and where they seek help.

4. Prevent racially disproportionate returns to homelessness To reduce disparities based on race, learnings from the CRE process demonstrate that providing ongoing or renewed support to people who have been homeless will improve equitable housing outcomes. Some specific areas highlighted as effective include:
a. Target time-limited Rapid Rehousing resources to serve households with an ability to increase income. Given the high cost of rent in Alameda County, time-limited resources should be matched with people who have a feasible plan to pay market-rate rent or identify a replacement subsidy.
b. Partner with educational, vocational and employment services to ensure that people moving toward employment have strong support in obtaining and maintaining employment. Build connections to educational programs with career pathways, supported employment for people who are formerly homeless, and job placement assistance for people seeking new roles.
c. Establish a flexible funding pool for preventing homelessness, including shallow subsidy option.

City Council/RSA Agenda 205 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
21 Corresponding System Performance Measures
Progress on this goal area will be tracked using two system performance measures and corresponding measures of increased racial equity.
2a. Reduce the number who become homeless for the first time 2b. Reduce the racial disparities among people overrepresented within who becomes homeless for the first time, African Americans, Native Americans, Multi-racial people and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islanders.
3a. Reduce the number of persons who return to homelessness after exiting homelessness. 3b. Reduce the racial disparities among people overrepresented within who return to homelessness, African Americans, and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islanders. 2) Connect People to Shelter and Needed Resources
To reduce homelessness and create additional and more rapid pathways to housing, people experiencing homelessness need access to shelter and critical service supports while in crisis and while in the transition to housing. This will require expanding and supporting the network of agencies that serve as entry points for the system and provide housing problem solving and navigation services. It also necessitates reducing the barriers to entry to services for people experiencing homelessness. Additionally, this will involve working closely with mainstream services such as hospitals, jails and foster care to help people in those systems avoid homelessness.

In 2020 and 2021, Alameda County’s system of care significantly expanded access points and undertook improvements to the coordinated entry process which connects people in need to shelter and housing.

Changes were made to increase the availability of Housing Problem Solving services targeting creative housing solutions, allowing Housing Resource Centers (designated access points) to support everyone who is experiencing homelessness who accesses their services. A separate crisis queue and process for shelter and transitional housing resources was established to shorten the time people in need wait for shelter. Greater transparency was also built into the process with access points providing real-time communication to participants about available housing resources, their likelihood of receiving a match, and support with appropriate next steps. Continued oversight and improvement of coordinated entry is a priority for the future and monthly Regional Housing Coordination meetings and Learning Communities are focused on improving coordination of care and increasing collaboration.

While this plan focuses primarily on expanding housing to end homelessness, it also plans for a significant increase in shelter to provide people safe places to be off the street and to connect to the rest of the system’s resources. During the 2019 PIT Count, nearly 80% of the population experiencing homelessness in Alameda County were unsheltered. During the COVID-19 pandemic the community rapidly stood up over 1,000 temporary shelter units in non-congregate settings such as hotels and trailers. People sheltered in these sites were connected to housing at much higher rates than those in traditional (congregate) shelter and unsheltered settings.

An analysis of the unsheltered population using homelessness data and health system data indicates at least 48% of unsheltered people contacted by a street outreach program have one or more vulnerabilities such as advanced age, a health or mental health condition, and/or barriers to housing like eviction history or criminal justice system contacts. Vulnerable unsheltered people in the county are also more likely to be African American than any other race or ethnic group. Shelter resources will be added to the portfolio of resources in the county for vulnerable adults and children, while still City Council/RSA Agenda 206 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
22 focusing most resources on housing additions to ensure movement from shelter to housing. It is the goal of the Home Together plan to gradually repurpose non-congregate shelter sites to be used as housing.

Behavioral health services are a critical component of service delivery in all areas of homelessness response. Efforts are being made to increase clinical support available through Street Health, Shelter Health, and other teams as part of Healthcare for the Homeless programs, and in housing planning, and tenancy sustaining services, preventing returns to homelessness. Connections to mental health services are built into pathways to housing in the homeless system through Emergency Shelter, Rapid ReHousing and Permanent Supportive Housing.

1. Provide neighborhood-based access where people are most likely to lose housing a. Expand resources in neighborhood-based access points, targeting neighborhoods with the highest numbers of people with insecure housing situations. b. Add access point outreach staff to connect people to these services in the field. c. Set up monthly training for 211 operators
d. Develop the capacity for 211 to track and follow up with people seeking resources

2. Lower programmatic barriers to crisis services such as prevention, problem solving and shelter a. Add additional laundry, hygiene, and storage options b. Ensure that emergency shelters reduce unnecessary program requirements c. Improve communication to advertise the availability of these resources d. Provide training systemwide on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion, Harm Reduction, Housing Strategies, and other foundational topics

3. Prevent discharge from mainstream systems to homelessness a. Increase medical and mental health respite with defined housing; pathways; HCSA estimated need of 250-300 added beds length of stay.
b. Stabilize and expand board and care portfolio through new state funding and land trust to correspond with behavioral health system gaps analysis. c. Implement exit strategy for all homeless criminal justice clients with shelter, housing, and supportive services. Evidence indicates a promising model in low-barrier non-congregate shelter for people exiting criminal justice settings, paired with housing navigation and tenant-based vouchers.
d. Connect transition age youth leaving foster care to youth-dedicated rapid and supportive housing programs through ongoing dedication of resources targeted to youth nearing exit from care.

4. Significantly increase the availability of shelter, especially non-congregate models, to serve vulnerable adults and families with children and to reduce unsheltered homelessness a. Add 1,625 temporary additional shelter beds, especially non-congregate models, to serve vulnerable adults and families with children.
b. Focus resources on a short-term increase in shelter to double the amount of shelter currently available and reduce unsheltered homelessness
City Council/RSA Agenda 207 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
23 c. As new housing comes online, transition non-congregate shelters to permanent housing or remove from system

5. Provide accessible behavioral health services to people with serious mental illness or substance use needs and who are unsheltered, in shelter, or in supportive housing programs.

Corresponding System Performance Measures
Progress on this goal area will be tracked using the above measures related to new and returning homelessness, and these two measures of reductions in unsheltered homelessness. 3a. Reduce the number who are unsheltered at a point in time 3b. Reduce the racial disparities among people overrepresented among those who are unsheltered. 4a. Increase successful placements from street outreach to indoor locations 4b. Monitor for racial disparities placements from street outreach and address any disparities 3) Increase Housing Solutions
The system modeling and interviews with people experiencing homelessness indicate that the single most important step to reduce homelessness dramatically and permanently is to create permanent housing opportunities for people experiencing homelessness throughout the county. Our System Modeling shows that the homelessness response system is starting (in 2021) with an inventory of 3,215 permanent housing units, and that by year 5 (2026), our system will need a total of 25,695permanent housing units and subsidies. (See Table 7 above “5 Year Inventory Needs”) Some permanent housing units will become available each year through unit turnover (at an estimated rate of 8%), and the rest of the need will be for new housing inventory. The total cost of operating permanent housing from year 1 (2022) through year 5 (2026) is estimated to be $1.68 billion. This cost is for operations only and does not reflect additional development costs.

New projects to increase inventory include expansions in exiting models like rapid rehousing and permanent supportive housing as well as significant investment in newer models such as dedicated affordable housing and shallow subsidies that allow people to have housing that allows them independence and autonomy, a strategy recommended to be more effective in reducing racial disparities.

Today’s pipeline of projects show that new projects will increase the inventory by 1,500 in the first two years, but resources must be identified for thousands more units. New one-time resources are anticipated from both the Federal and State governments which will assist with this goal, but ongoing local resources will be needed to meet the ambitious targets that necessary to bend the curve.

1. Add units and subsidies for permanent supportive housing.

2. Create units for frail seniors and others with more intensive health services. a. Provide services funding for PSH and PSH plus through expansions of Medi-Cal and CAL-AIM.

3. Create dedicated affordable housing subsidies for people who do not need intensive services.

City Council/RSA Agenda 208 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
24 a. The CRE report and system model includes adding new capacity to provide affordable housing without time limits for 30% of the adult only households and 28% of family households
b. Add capacity within the system to support new dedicated affordable units including staff for a new flexible subsidy program for providing operation support (Local Operating Subsidy Program) additional Coordinated Entry staffing and lighter and variable supportive services

4. Create shallow subsidies for those who need more limited assistance.

5. Add new slots of rapid rehousing for those who can take over the full rent given time. a. Couple these resources with expansions in employment programs Table X: Number of units and subsidy types needed by 2026 Supportive
Housing Units
Supportive
Housing for
Older/Frail
Dedicated
Affordable
Shallow
Subsidies
Rapid Rehousing
slots
Total units &
subsidy slots
4,195 3,190 10,070 5,240 2,000 24,695

6. Ensure new housing funding is distributed according to need. The numbers of people and the significant subpopulations in each region are different. As much as possible, housing resources should be distributed based on the regional needs.

7. Reduce entry barriers to housing ensure racial equity in referrals and placements Corresponding System Performance Measures
Progress on this goal area will be tracked using two system performance measures and corresponding measures of increased racial equity.
5a. Increase the number of people exiting homelessness into permanent housing 5b. Monitor for any emerging disparities and maintain racial equity within people exiting homelessness into permanent housing.
6a. Reduce the length of time a person experiencing homelessness remains homeless 6b. Monitor for racial disparities in length of time homeless and address disparities 4) Strengthen Coordination, Communication and Capacity
This plan emerges at a time of great uncertainty. While new resources are anticipated, how much will become available when, and what may happen with COVID-19 and other factors which may impact homelessness, are unknown. For this reason, this Plan must be closely tracked and refined over time and its projections will be updated as new resources become available. A community-wide commitment to improve and use the communities HMIS data for tracking and accountability is a central tenet of the Plan.

Improved communication about efforts and impacts are also key to keeping the buy-in of the partners and the confidence of the community. This includes expanding the range of partners to other system of care that overlap with the homelessness response system and ensuring that both housed and unhoused people have access to the best information about current and anticipated resources.

Finally, the network of programs and providers will have to be strengthened and grow to reach the Plan goals. Alameda County benefits from a strong network of nonprofit agencies committed to addressing City Council/RSA Agenda 209 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
25 homelessness and delivering services and housing to those in need. But these agencies are stretched to close to capacity, are often under resourced and do not fully represent the communities that experience homelessness. Resources must be targeted to strengthen providers partners ability to recruit and retain staff and to expand access to resources and contracts for organizations that serve, employ and are led by historically marginalized communicates and people of color.

1. Use data to improve outcomes and track racial equity impacts a. Improve HMIS coverage and confidence in HMIS to be the primary method for future data tracking
b. Consider potential to increase frequency of Point in Time Count to annual (currently biennial) so that impacts are seen more quickly
c. Improve tracking on resources and inventory to support ongoing evaluation and reporting d. Regularly review system and program outcomes disaggregated by race e. Work to integrate RBA processes

2. Improve messaging and information availability
a. Centralize homeless related resource information and provide regular system updates to a wide variety of partners
b. Provide an annual plan update on progress and challenges with proposed modifications to the following year’s action plan
c. Complete a full inventory of current and anticipated resources for all key partners and identify the funding gap and strategies to fill it

3. Build infrastructure to support new and expanded programs a. Develop and strengthen career pathways in housing and service provider organizations b. Support service providers and other nonprofit organizations serving homeless populations to improve their ability to hire and retain staff
c. Expand provider networks to incorporate historically marginalized communities and more organizations serving communities of color, and support increased capacity within these networks
d. Ensure public and community agencies have staffing to meet expanded contracting and capacity needs
e. Ensure behavioral health access and resources are available to smaller provider organizations
Corresponding Performance Measures
There are no State required system performance measures that correspond to this goal area. The community will use the improved data collection process to track progress on all of the other outcomes for this plan. The partners will also track resources and investments to meet the Plan goals and to identify outstanding gap areas.

In addition, community partners will collect data to track the capacity of the system partners and especially to expansion of resources to provider organizations serving historically marginalized communities and communities of color.

City Council/RSA Agenda 210 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
26 7. Resources, Gaps and Allocation Plan
Today, homelessness in Alameda County is addressed through a wide variety of both homelesstargeted and general population resources from Federal, State, local specific and general funds and private sources. In FY 20-21, the estimated Maintenance of Effort (MOE) budget for funds identified and allocated toward the homelessness response system just for the County exceeded $110 million.

This does not include funding that cities invest directly in their own efforts or in nonprofit programs, nor private dollars that nonprofit organizations raise. It is estimated that all together the resources in the homelessness response system annually are closer to $170 million, apart from one-time COVID funds. While this is significant, it is still much lower than the roughly half billion dollars per year needed to meet the Plan targets.

Figure 6. FY 20-21 Homelessness Budget by County Department and Category Figure 7. FY 19-20 City Homelessness Budgets
To achieve the needed expansion level will take a significant investment of new resources. Some of these are anticipated to come from anticipated increases in Federal and particularly in State resources dedicated to expanding affordable housing and ending homelessness. 48 Coordinated
System*
$7.0
13%
Health &
Supportiv e
Services
$4.8
9%
Outreach
$2.7
5%
Prev ention
$0.8
2%
Shelter &
Housing
$37.9
71%
FY 19-20 City Homelessness Budgets
Emeryv ille
$0.3
1%
Dublin
$0.1
0% Alameda
$1.1
2%
Oakland
$25.3
48%
Union City
$0.5
1%
Hayward
$3.9
7%
Albany
$0.7
1%
Pleasanton
$0.6
1%
Liv ermore
$0.6
1%
San Leandro
$0.1
0%
Berkeley
$16.2
31%
Fremont
$3.8
7%
($ in millions)
Total Budget: $53.2 million
* Coordinated System includes
Coordinated Entry for simplification,
although crosses categories
Note: Total includes County allocations to Cities
By City By
Category
City Council/RSA Agenda 211 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
27 With resources from a notable budget surplus, the State of California has committed to a one-time investment of more than $12 billion in homelessness and another $10 million in affordable housing.

Alameda County and the City of Oakland both anticipate receiving a significant increase from this in funds for the HHAP, Homekey and new programs such as the Encampment Resolution Funds and Family Homelessness Challenge Grants.

These new funds will build on investments already in the pipeline from the State’s No Place Like Home program and Alameda County’s Measure A1 which contribute to new housing units set to open in the first few years of the Plan.

Due to the advent of COVID-19, a range of onetime funds to provide shelter and housing have also already been put to work. The federal FEMA program, State Project Roomkey and matching local funds opened hundreds of hotel rooms for people impacted by or at risk of COVID and the State’s Project Homekey and federal Emergency Housing Vouchers have helped transition some of these hotels to permanent housing while providing housing vouchers for 900 people. The investment from these programs expanded capacity for more than 1,300 people in permanent housing, just from the initial allocations through 2021.

Altogether, this unprecedented infusion will help to jump start the plan goals for both housing and shelter expansion, but the one-time nature of most the funding and the growing gap in the later years of the plan still leave a significant gap that will need to be filled locally.

In addition to the need for significantly more funding and resources to expand housing and program capacity, resources will need to be distributed throughout the County, aligned to these joint goals and with built-in accountability. In 2021, representatives from cities and county agencies proposed a method for allocating funds that pass through the county, intended for homelessness response.

Because the County is a direct recipient of many funds and has the ability to support efforts throughout the entire geography, Alameda County will coordinate a countywide effort to leverage city and county resources. The cities will play a critical role, both through the provision of local and some dedicated federal and state resources and as overseers of land use planning for shelters and permanent housing.

Together these partners will work to align efforts and stretch both the existing resources and new funding as it emerges.

Project funding through this collaborative allocation plan will be tied to the programs meeting the performance goals outlined in this Plan or that show a plan for targeted capacity for small, emerging and/or BIPOC led (and serving) agencies or new, innovative programs.

Completing a full inventory of current and anticipated resources is a next step to access State funding and to track investments in the Plan. Once completed, the resource tracking will be incorporated as an appendix to this plan and reported on annually. The County and city partners will create action plans with two-year cycles including anticipated investments and timelines for unit and program creation, which will be updated and reported during each two year cycle.

8. Tracking and Monitoring
Close tracking and monitoring of the impacts of the implementation of programs and strategies in the Home Together Plan are critical to achieving reductions in homelessness in Alameda County.

Data for these measures will be consistently disaggregated by race to enable tracking for equity impacts and improvements as well as overall system improvements.

City Council/RSA Agenda 212 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
28 Data sources used for these estimates include the annual Housing Inventory Count (HIC) and CoC partner inventory pipeline estimates, the Point in Time Count (PIT) and data from the Homeless Management Information System (HMIS), including Coordinated Entry.

While some of the data used for planning came from the PIT count, data from HMIS continues to improve, and will be used as the primary data source for monitoring. The PIT Count provides an additional check on the accuracy of assumptions about Alameda County’s homeless population. Over the next five-years the CoC will also be focused on improving tracking of existing and pipeline housing and shelter inventory and resources, with the goal of having the ability to capture data on new units and resources as they come into the system.

The Homeless System Model will be used as a dynamic tool to continue to evaluate how conditions on the ground match modeling predictions. The CoC Board, through its subcommittees, will have a lead role in overseeing the system modeling, expanding data collection and improving data quality and consistency, evaluating and monitoring data inputs for the model as well as for reporting on local and state requirements.

Updated data measures and system modeling evaluation will be used for internal and policy guidance, to provide services that fit the needs of individuals and families experiencing homelessness, and for communicating to stakeholders. In order to streamline and make data accessible about the homeless system and the impact of the Home Together implementation Plan, public facing dashboards highlighting the system and racial equity measures above will be developed and posted to the EOH and HCSA (OHCC) websites.

9. Conclusion
The Home Together 2026 Plan is the result of bold visioning and commitment across all county stakeholders to look critically at what is happening today and recognize that without significant new investment and effort, homelessness will not decrease and will in fact continue to grow. The human cost of continued widespread homelessness, and the vast racial disparities in who is most impacted, is not acceptable. The situation requires unprecedented coordination, commitment and investment.

To reverse the trend and make dramatic progress on reducing homelessness, Home Together 2026 adopts bold, ambitious, and measurable goals for Alameda County, both for reducing homelessness and for achieving greater racial equity. The Plan builds from results of system modeling and racial equity analysis to lay out new pathways and program models. To bring these new programs and solutions into being will take committing every available dollar from the County and its partners in ways that uphold performance and invest in working and desired models. The Countywide allocation plan envisions alignment between the County, cities and other funders to make these investments possible.

The community adopts this plan and vision at a time when the future is uncertain. New resources, both one time and ongoing, received in 2021 and anticipated in the future provide the foundation for achieving the Plan, but alone are not enough to realize its vision. The response to COVID-19 has shown that the community can pull together and can work at speeds we have not seen before, a strong foundation to build from. However, we face continuing challenges include uncertainties from COVID19, unpredictable housing markets and future State, Federal and local budgets, and an overtaxed public and non-profit sector with significant capacity needs.

All of these unique opportunities and challenges require continuing the level of unprecedented collaboration and coordination, building on the progress made since COVID-19 to unify the community City Council/RSA Agenda 213 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
29 response and build an aligned response system. With these commitments and agreements for joint accountability we will, by 2026, be Home, Together.

City Council/RSA Agenda 214 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
30 APPENDICES
A. Glossary of Terms
B. Summary Table of System Performance Measures - In Process C. Summary Table of Numeric Inventory Goals by Year - In Process D. Detail on County Allocation Plan - In Process
E. System Model Methodology - In Process
F. Contributors - In Process
APPENDIX A. Glossary of Terms
Key Terms and Definitions
Adult Only Household: represents one or more adult(s) experiencing homelessness together without minor children.

Continuum of Care (CoC): a regional or local planning body that coordinates housing and services funding for homeless families and individuals.

Coordinated Entry System: Alameda County’s Coordinated Entry System is used to connect residents experiencing homelessness to resources in our county’s homeless system.

Emergency Shelter: Any facility that provides temporary shelter for people experiencing homelessness.

Homeless Management Information System (HMIS): A Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) is a local information technology system used to collect client-level data and data on the provision of housing and services to homeless individuals and families and persons at risk of homelessness.

First time homelessness (or new homelessness): A person or household who has lost housing and become homeless for the first time.

Homeless System Model: A model for the optimal homeless system that effectively and equitably allocates resources and prioritizes investments to end homelessness.

Homeless: People who are residing in emergency shelter, transitional housing, on the street, or in another place not meant for human habitation.

Household with minor children: represents one or more adult(s) experiencing homelessness together with minor children.

Housing Inventory Count (HIC): Required by HUD, the HIC is a point-in-time inventory of all of the dedicated beds and units within a Continuum of Care’s homeless services system, categorized by type of project and population served.

Inflow: the number of people entering the homeless services system each year. Inflow is not synonymous with the number of people newly experiencing homelessness, as it also captures people with previous episodes of homelessness and homeless people with unmet needs carrying over from the previous year.

City Council/RSA Agenda 215 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
31 Non-congregate shelter: locations where each individual or household has living space that offers some level of privacy such as hotels, motels, or dormitories.

Housing Navigation: housing navigation involves helping a household that is homeless develop a housing plan, address the barriers identified during the plan, and acquire documentation and complete forms required for housing.

Housing Pathway: The set of programs and resources expected to be used by a household experiencing homelessness in order to be temporarily sheltered and to become permanently housed. The modeling for the Home Together Plan uses assumption about a variety of different housing pathways to determine the resource needs and gaps.

Housing Problem Solving: Housing problem solving is an approach to help homeless households use their strengths, support networks, and community resources to find housing.

Housing Resource Center: Dedicated Housing Resource Centers (also referred to as “Access Points”) are located throughout Alameda County and are locations where people experiencing homelessness can connect with available resources and services.

Older Adults: adults aged 55 and older; also referred to as Seniors.

Permanent Supportive Housing (PSH): Permanent subsidies based on income and services to keep tenants in stable housing.

Point in Time (PIT) Count: An unduplicated one-night estimate of both sheltered and unsheltered homeless populations (to be distinguished from the number of people experiencing homelessness annually).

Project Homekey: Through Project Homekey the state awards funding that allows municipalities to purchase and rehabilitate hotels, motels, vacant apartment buildings and other properties, and convert them into permanent, long-term housing.

Project Roomkey: Established in March 2020 as part of the state response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the purpose of Project Roomkey is to provide non-congregate shelter options for people experiencing homelessness, protect human life, and minimize strain on health care system capacity.

Racial Equity: The systemic fair treatment of people of all races that results in equitable opportunities and outcomes for everyone. All people are able to achieve their full potential in life, regardless of race, ethnicity, or the community in which they live.

Racism: a belief that race is a fundamental determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority or inferiority of a particular race; behavior or attitudes that reflect and foster this belief. Racism takes many forms, including:

Rapid Re-Housing (RRH): Time-limited rental subsidy and support services with the intention of the household taking over lease and sustaining on their own.

Sheltered homelessness: A person experiencing homelessness who is living in a supervised publicly or privately operated shelter designated to provide temporary living arrangement.

Results Based Accountability: A framework that uses a data-driven, decision- making process to help communities and organizations identify population level results and monitor their programs' performance in order to determine how to improve their impact on the clients they serve.

City Council/RSA Agenda 216 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
32 Returns to homelessness : The rate at which people who have been homeless and become rehoused loss that housing and return to the homelessness response system.

Shallow Subsidy: A housing subsidy that is typically less than the amount of a full or deep subsidy such as a Housing Choice Voucher, and which is usually calculated at a flat monthly amount or a specific percent of rent.

Shallow subsidies can be time limited or can be indefinite.

Street Health Outreach: Street Health teams provide access to care that meets the unique needs of people experiencing homelessness through regularly scheduled outreach services offered to unsheltered people living in homeless encampments, vehicles, and RVs. Street Health teams engage people living on the streets with highly accessible, patient-centered care. They strive to build relationships that lead to long-term health through connections to primary care, social services, housing, and other resources.

Structural Racism: A system in which public policies, institutional practices, cultural representations, and other norms work in various, often reinforcing ways to perpetuate racial group inequity.

System Performance Measure: Measures defined by HUD to evaluate and improve homeless assistance programs by understanding how programs are functioning as a whole and identifying where improvements are necessary.

Transition Age Youth (TAY): youth between the ages of 18 and 24.

Unsheltered homelessness: A person with a primary nighttime residence that is a public or private place not designed for or ordinarily used as a regular sleeping accommodation for human beings, including a car, park, abandoned building, bus or train station, airport, or camping ground.

Acronyms Used in the Home Together 2026 Plan
BIPOC: Black, Indigenous and People of Color
CoC: Continuum of Care
CRE: Centering Racial Equity in Homeless System Design report DHCS: California’s Department of Health Care Services
EOH: EveryOne Home
HCSA: Health Care Services Agency
HHAP: Homeless, Housing Assistance Program
HIC: Housing Inventory Count
HMIS: Homeless Management Information System
HRC: Housing Resource Center
HUD: US Department of Housing and Urban Development
IPV: Intimate Partner Violence
LGBTQ: stands for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer/questioning OHCC: Alameda County’s Office of Homeless Care and Coordination PIT: Point-In-Time
City Council/RSA Agenda 217 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
33 PSH: Permanent Supportive Housing
PTSD: Post-traumatic stress disorder
RBA: Results Based Accountability
RRH: Rapid Re-Housing
SMI: Serious Mental Illness
SUD: Substance Abuse Disorder
TAY: Transition Age Youth
TH: Transitional Housing
THP: Transitional Housing Program
UIY: Unaccompanied Immigrant Youth
VA: U.S. Department of Veteran’s Affairs
YHDP: Youth Homelessness Demonstration Program
City Council/RSA Agenda 218 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
TOGETHER 2026
5-year plan to end homelessness in Alameda County

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
City Council/RSA Agenda 219 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
2 Home Together 2026
Executive
summary
City Council/RSA Agenda 220 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
3 Home Together 2026
This Home Together 2026
Community Plan (the Plan) lays
out the goals, strategies and
investments needed to dramatically
reduce homelessness in Alameda
County by 2026 and combat racial
disparities in homelessness by
fully centering equity. The Plan’s
overarching goals and time frame
align with Alameda County’s Vision
2026, which holds as one of its
primary objectives to “ensure the
availability of diverse and affordable
housing for all residents with the
goal of eliminating homelessness in
Alameda County.”
Alameda County
Alameda County is home to more than 1.6
million residents and includes 14 cities and
six unincorporated communities. Nonprofit
organizations, public entities, and a range of
interested parties, including those with direct
experience of homelessness, work together in
a Continuum of Care (the Oakland-BerkeleyAlameda County Continuum of Care, or CoC) to seek new resources and coordinate housing and
services funding for addressing homelessness.

The CoC is led by a representative Leadership
Board, supported by a number of committees
and staffed by EveryOne Home.

The County’s Office of Homeless Care and
Coordination (OHCC), formed in early 2020
within the Health Care Services Agency,
participates in CoC Leadership and coordinates
with residents, providers, other County agencies
and local jurisdictions around strategic planning
and service delivery. Cities across Alameda
County participate in the CoC and dedicate
local resources to funding, siting and supporting
shelters, housing, and services within their
communities. This Plan seeks to serve as
a playbook for all of these parties working
together, recognizing that each jurisdiction will
need to make specific decisions regarding the
resources under their authority. Specific annual
action plans are developed for the county and
for cities in conjunction with this framework.

Foundations
for this plan
This Plan builds upon many sources and efforts,
particularly the 2020 Centering Racial Equity in
Homeless System Design report (CRE) prepared
by partners in the Continuum of Care and
informed by a homelessness response system
needs analysis and focus groups with persons
of color who have experienced homelessness.

The CRE process modeled what an optimal
system to respond to all homelessness and
reduce racial disparities would look like and
what gaps need to be filled. The Plan is also
responsive to requirements laid out in the
California Comeback Plan to draw down key
state housing and health funding. It is informed
by and consistent with other local and regional
efforts, including the All Home Regional Action
Plan, Plan Bay Area 2050 and local city plans
to address homelessness. Companion county
and city-specific plans that align with the Home
Together 2026 Community Plan will speak to
the specific roles of local jurisdictions in coleading efforts to address homelessness, and the key roles of County agencies, community
partners and specific resources.

The community of Alameda County adopts
this plan and vision at a time when the future is
uncertain. New resources received, both onetime and ongoing, provide the groundwork for supporting this plan and its outcomes,
but alone are not enough to realize its vision.

The response to COVID-19 has shown that
this community can pull together and work
at speeds we have not seen before, a strong
foundation to build from.

City Council/RSA Agenda 221 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
4 Home Together 2026
However, we face continuing challenges
including uncertainties from COVID-19,
unpredictable housing markets, future state,
federal and local budgets, and a strained
public and non-profit sector with significant
capacity needs. All of these challenges require
continuing the current level of unprecedented
collaboration and coordination, building on
the progress made to unify the community
response and forge an aligned response
system centered in racial equity.

Homelessness in
Alameda County
On any given night over 8,000 people
experience homelessness in Alameda County,
a number that grows to approximately 15,000
people over the course of a year. More than 90%
of homeless households in Alameda County are
adults without minor children.

The homeless population does not reflect the
demographics of the county. Dramatic racial
disparities exist in Alameda County as in the
nation, in which African Americans experience
homelessness at more than four times their
representation in the population (47% vs.
11%). Native Americans, multiracial people
and Hawaiian Native/Pacific Islanders are also
vastly overrepresented in homelessness, among
those newly homeless, and in the rates at
which they return to homelessness even after
getting housing. These disparities call out the
need to invest, both more and differently, in
creating solutions that meet the needs of those
overrepresented. Special populations such as
transition age youth, veterans, older adults,
survivors of intimate partner violence, people
with behavioral health needs and people who
have had involvement with the criminal justice
system have additional risks and vulnerabilities
leading to homelessness and require targeted
resources and responses specific to their needs.

Homelessness
response system
needs analysis
A systemwide needs analysis conducted
in 2019-20 and updated in 2021 points to
significant gaps in the current homelessness
response system in the type and availability
of housing resources to help people leave
homelessness. Today, only an estimated 36%
of those experiencing homelessness can be
supported to end their homelessness with
local resources or are able to find housing
on their own. Each year, thousands of people
remain homeless and new people who become
homeless join them. Without significant effort
and investment this trajectory will continue,
and homelessness will continue to grow in
Alameda County.

Importantly, focus groups with local
stakeholders and people of color who have
experienced homelessness and research on
racial equity strategies informed the needs
analysis. This expertise was used to develop the
proposed new program models and pathways
out of homelessness through new investments
at every level. Housing investments needed to
address the deep disparities include:
• Create significant additional affordable
housing dedicated specifically for people
experiencing homelessness
• Develop supportive housing for people who
need increased supports, such as older and
frail adults
• Grow the supply of transitional housing
for youth
• Fund shallow and flexible rental assistance to
fill gaps for people with limited incomes
4,195 Additional supportive
housing units
3,190 New supportive housing units
for older/frail adults
10,070 New dedicated affordable units
or subsidies
5,240 New shallow subsidies
1,645 Additional rapid rehousing slots
24,340 Total units & subsidy slots
Estimated number of
housing solutions, by
type, needed by 2026
Source: CA-502 System Model, Abt Associates, 1/20/2022
City Council/RSA Agenda 222 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
5 Home Together 2026
• Expand current program models such as
Rapid Rehousing and supportive housing1
• Expand targeted behavioral health services
throughout the system
• Improve and expand targeted homelessness
prevention
The 2021 update to the analysis explored
different scenarios related to anticipated
new homelessness and levels of investment
to determine what will be required to fill
significant system gaps. The scenario selected
for this Plan seeks to reduce new entries to
homelessness by prevention when possible,
and to create a more robust response system
with enough housing resources at the end
of five years to provide a pathway out of
homelessness to every person who does enter
the homelessness response system.
1 This Plan uses the term “supportive housing” to refer to all housing types that include ongoing subsidy and continuously available services, often referred to as “permanent supportive housing” or “PSH” in other contexts.

Building a system
where people are
rehoused quickly
Overall, increased investment in prevention
and the addition of more than 24,000 housing
opportunities in a variety of program models
are needed to reach a point within five years
at which the number of people who become
homeless in a year and the number who are
able to leave homelessness in that time are in
balance. These 24,000+ interventions include
everything from short-term support to prevent
homelessness to ongoing rental subsidies and
supportive housing with services.

In addition to the significant need for
housing, because 79% of people experiencing
homelessness in Alameda County are
unsheltered, the Home Together 2026
Community Plan proposes a significant increase
in shelter in the first two years, followed by
a slow decline in shelter as more housing
resources become available and less shelter
is needed. Some added shelter will be able to
be converted to much needed housing in later
years, as has been demonstrated by successful
Project Roomkey to Project Homekey transitions,
which have created new permanent housing by
renovating hotels used as shelters during the
COVID-19 pandemic. By Year 5 the amount of
shelter needed on an ongoing basis is expected
to be slightly less than what is available today if
all housing resources are in place.

The total cost of increasing the shelter and
housing inventory over the coming five years
to fully meet the need would be approximately
$2.5 billion. This includes roughly $430 million
for additional shelter capacity, $1.68 billion
for permanent housing such as dedicated
affordable housing and supportive housing, and
$388 million for prevention, rapid rehousing
and shallow (more limited) subsidies. This does
not include the one-time development costs
for acquiring or constructing new buildings, but
covers operations and services, and subsidies
to help people rent existing housing. The new
investments should be made in alignment
with the household types experiencing
homelessness; roughly 10% ($194 million) is
needed for expanded inventory and resources
for households with minor children, and 90%
($2.3 billion) for the inventory and resources to
serve adult only households, including transition
age youth (ages 18–24 years). A range of
federal, state and locally generated resources
are needed to fill the gap. Without a significant
federal investment in targeted Housing Choice
Vouchers or similar rental assistance, meeting
the dedicated affordable housing goal will be
particularly challenging.
0 4,000
8,000
12,000
16,000
Year 1
(2022)
Year 2
(2023)
Year 3
(2024)
Year 4
(2025)
Year 5
(2026)
Unmet needs
Annual HH in the system
HHs served in pathways to housing
Impact of increased investment
on homeless system outcomes
Source: CA-502 System Model, Abt Associates, 1/20/2022
City Council/RSA Agenda 223 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
6 Home Together 2026
Goals and strategies
To reach the expansion goals while decreasing
racial disparities, the Home Together 2026
Community Plan recommends specific action
steps in four categories.

Taken together, the significant increase in
investment and the creation of new program
models and pathways out of homelessness
will lead to decreases in new homelessness,
improved racial equity in outcomes, shorter
lengths of time being homeless, and a reduced
rate at which people return to homelessness.

The Home Together 2026 Community Plan
adopts bold, ambitious, and measurable
goals for Alameda County, both for reducing
homelessness and for achieving greater equity.

To bring these new programs and solutions into
being will take every partner committing every
available dollar from various sources in ways
that uphold performance and invest in working
and desired models. With these commitments
and agreements for joint accountability we will,
by 2026, be home, together.
1 3
2 4
Prevent
homelessness
for our residents
Increase
housing
solutions
Connect people
to shelter and
needed resources
Strengthen
coordination,
communication
and capacity

1. Address racial disparities in
mainstream/upstream systems to
prevent racially disproportionate inflow
into homelessness

2. Focus resources for prevention on
people most likely to lose their homes

3. Rapidly resolve episodes of
homelessness through Housing
Problem Solving

4. Prevent racially disproportionate
returns to homelessness

1. Add units and subsidies for supportive
housing, including new models for frail/
older adults

2. Create dedicated affordable housing
subsidies for people who do not need
intensive services

3. Create shallow subsidies for those who
can exit or avoid homelessness with
more limited assistance

4. Add new slots of rapid rehousing for
those who can pay full rent over time

5. Ensure new housing funding is
distributed across the county according
to need

6. Reduce entry barriers to housing and
ensure racial equity in referrals and
placements

1. Expand access in key neighborhoods
and continue improvements to
Coordinated Entry

2. Lower programmatic barriers to crisis
services such as prevention, problem
solving, and shelter

3. Prevent discharge from mainstream
systems to homelessness

4. Significantly increase the availability
of shelter, especially non-congregate
models, to serve vulnerable adults and
families with children and to reduce
unsheltered homelessness

5. Provide accessible behavioral health
services to people with serious mental
illness or substance use needs and
who are unsheltered, in shelter, or in
supportive housing programs

1. Use data to improve outcomes and
track racial equity impacts

2. Improve messaging and information
availability

3. Build infrastructure to support and
monitor new and expanded programs
City Council/RSA Agenda 224 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
7 Home Together 2026
© 2022 Alameda County. All rights reserved. (05-22)
City Council/RSA Agenda 225 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
Agenda Item
DATE: 7/26/2022
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: JOAN MALLOY, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE

CLASSIFICATION PLAN AND ADOPTING A SIDE LETTER BETWEEN

WITH THE CITY OF UNION CITY AND SERVICE EMPLOYEES
INTERNATIONAL UNION LOCAL 1021 (SEIU) TO CREATE TECHNICAL

SUPPORT SPECIALIST I AND TECHNICAL SUPPORT SPECIALIST II

POSITIONS FOR THE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SERVICES
DEPARTMENT AND APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CITY’S

COMPENSATION PLAN AND SALARY SCHEDULE
Staff recommends that the City Counciladopt the attached Resolution to amend the Classification Plan and adopt a side letter between the City of Union City and the Service Employees International Union Local 1021 (SEIU) to create Technical Support Specialist I and Technical Support Specialist II positions for the Information Technology Services (ITS) Department and to approve an amendment to the City’s Compensation Plan and Salary Schedule. These new positions will provide timely Help Desk response and other production and technological support to employees.

STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT
This action supports Strategy 8 of Goal B, Governance and Organization Effectiveness, in ensuring salaries and benefits are competitive in order to recruit, attract and retain talented employees.

BACKGROUND
The ITS Department currently utilizes contractual services to provide the necessary first level network helpdesk and production support. In the adopted Biennial Operating Budget for FiscalYears 2021-22 and 2022-23, the City Councilauthorized permanent full-time positions to improve stability, training, and management of services provided by the ITS Department. These positions willeliminate the need for contractual services in this regard.

The amended Classification Plan and side letter will formally establish the positions.

City Council/RSA Agenda 226 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

DISCUSSION
The ITS positions of Technical Support Specialist I and Technical Support Specialist II are criticalcustomer facing positions for the ITS Department. The individuals in these positions manage the daily influx of support request submitted online, over the phone, and by in-person office visits. As the most common interaction point of the ITS Department, it is important that these individuals exemplify the core values of customer service, have a deep understanding of the ITS processes and procedures, and have the technical know-how to solve the most common customer issues. By establishing these positions, as planned in the Biennial Operating Budget for Fiscal Years 2021-22 and 2022-23, the City is able to properly train and manage the employees to meet the needs of the City.

The new positions willallow for better career advancement opportunities within the ITS Department. The new positions will serve as the entry level positions and provide experience to advance to the higher-level position of Systems Analyst and Senior Systems Analyst. The growth opportunity encourages continued individual growth and better retention of advancing employees.

FISCAL IMPACT
The compensation range for the new position are as follows: Technical Support Specialist I range is $66,144- $79,040/annually and Technical Support Specialist II range is $73,216-$87,776/annually and are included in the Authorized Positions List of the Biennial Operating Budget for Fiscal Years 2021-22 and 2022-23 and funded by the General Fund. (In the Authorized Positions List of the adopted Budget the positions are identified as the Info System Support Tech II.)

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Counciladopt the attached Resolution to amend the Classification Plan and adopt a side letter between the City of Union City and the Service Employees International Union Local 1021 (SEIU) to create Technical Support Specialist I and Technical Support Specialist II positions for the ITS Department and to approve an amendment to the City’s Compensation Plan and Salary Schedule.

Prepared by:

Lilybell Nakamura, Human Resources Director
Submitted by:

Lilybell Nakamura, Human Resources Director
ATTACHMENTS:

Description Type
Resolution -Adding Technical Support Specialist 1 and II to SEIU Resolution Side Letter with SEIUreAddition of TSS I-II positions Attachment City Council/RSA Agenda 227 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
RESOLUTION NO.

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

UNION CITY APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE

CLASSIFICATION PLAN AND ADOPTING A SIDE LETTER

BETWEEN THE CITY OF UNION CITY AND SERVICE
EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION LOCAL 1021 (SEIU)

TO CREATE THE POSITIONS OF TECHNICAL SUPPORT

SPECIALIST I AND TECHNICAL SUPPORT SPECIALIST II
AND APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CITY’S

COMPENSATION PLAN AND SALARY SCHEDULE IN

CONFORMANCE WITH CALIFORNIA CODE OF
REGULATIONS, TITLE 2, SECTION 570.5
WHEREAS, the adopted Biennial Operating Budget for Fiscal Years 2021-22 and 2022-23 authorized funding for the positions of Technical Support Specialist I and Technical Support Specialist II in the Information Technology Services (ITS) Department; and
WHEREAS, the City has undertaken an inquiry and recommends that the City Council establish the Technical Support Specialist I and Technical Support Specialist II positions as classifications represented by the Service Employees International Union Local 1021 (“SEIU”); and
WHEREAS, the current Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Union City (the “City”) and SEIU, effective January 1, 2022 through December 31, 2024, is currently in effect (the “MOU”); and
WHEREAS, the City Manager or her designee has met and conferred in good faith with the representatives of SEIU related to the above matters; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the proposed establishment of the Technical Support Specialist I and Technical Support Specialist II positions and proposed side letter and has determined that the requirements of the City of Union City Personnel Rules are met and the terms and conditions of the proposed side letter are proper and in the best interests of the City.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Union City hereby authorizes the creation of the Technical Support Specialist I and Technical Support Specialist II positions, effective July 27, 2022, and updates the titles in the Authorized Positions List from Info System Support Tech II to Technical Support Specialist II.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council hereby approves and adopts a side letter to the MOU, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, effective City Council/RSA Agenda 228 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
July 27, 2022 and authorizes the City Manager to execute the side letter and to take such further actions as may be necessary to implement the side letter to the MOU including any necessary non-substantive modifications.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council hereby approves an amendment to the City’s Compensation Plan, to include the following salary schedule for the Technical Support Specialist I and Technical Support Specialist II position effective July 27, 2022.

Technical Support Specialist I Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 annually 66,144.00 69,472.00 72,800.00 76,128.00 79,040.00 monthly 5,512.00 5,789.33 6,066.67 6,344.00 6,586.67
Technical Support Specialist II Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 annually 73,216.00 76,960.00 80,704.00 84,448.00 87,776.00 monthly 6,101.33 6,413.33 6,725.33 7,037.33 7,314.67
5159974.1
City Council/RSA Agenda 229 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
Side Letter to the
Memorandum of Understanding
Between
The City of Union City
and
Service Employees International Union Local 1021
The City of Union City (“City”) and the Service Employees International Union Local 1021 (“SEIU”) (collectively the “Parties”) enter into this side letter to the Parties’ Memorandum of Understanding effective January 1, 2022 through December 31, 2024, to add new positions.

WHEREAS the City seeks to establish the new Technical Support Specialist I and Technical Support Specialist II positions; and
WHEREAS, the City and SEIU desire to have SEIU serve as the sole and exclusive bargaining representative for the Technical Support Specialist I and Technical Support Specialist II positions; and
WHEREAS the Parties wish to enter into a side letter clarifying and memorializing the Parties’ agreement.

NOW, THEREFORE the Parties agree to amend Section 1.1 of the Memorandum of Understanding to add the full-time classification of Technical Support Specialist I and Technical Support Specialist II positions.
3777465.1
City Council/RSA Agenda 230 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
Agenda Item
DATE: 7/26/2022
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: MARIO VALLEJO, INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE MIGRATION OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT’S CELLULAR SERVICE FROM VERIZON TO FIRSTNET BY AT&T, FOR A ONE-TIME EQUIPMENT COST OF $6,755.98, A ONE-TIME CREDIT OF $18,275.00, AND A MONTHLY SERVICE CHARGE OF $4,028.15, FOR A TOTAL TWO-YEAR COST OF $85,156.58, AND AUTHORIZING THE

CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AGREEMENTS TO PURCHASE THE NEW

EQUIPMENT AND SERVICES
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached Resolution approving the migration of the Police Department’s cellular service from Verizon to FirstNet by AT&T, for a one-time equipment cost of $6,755.98, a one-time credit of $18,275.00, and a monthly service charge of $4,028.15, for a total two-year cost of $85,156.58, and authorizing the City Manager to execute agreements to purchase the new equipment and services.

STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT
The cellular service migration of the Police Department to FirstNet is consistent with Goal A: Financial Stability and Sustainability through disciplined long-term planning, cost control, heightened efficiency, increased revenue and cost control.

BACKGROUND
The Police Department has 97 Verizon cellular devices that are used by the sworn and non-sworn staff. In recent years, cellular congestion on Verizon’s local macro towers has caused data slowness in different areas of the City.

IT performed cellular speed tests and data download speeds ranged from a low two to five megabits per second.

Staff met with AT&T and was provided test phones on the FirstNet service to compare our performance.

Due to the communication challenges during the response to the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the 9/11 Commission recommended the establishment of a single interoperable network for public safety. Congress established the First Responder Network Authority (FirstNet) in 2012 and based its mission on public safety’s express concerns and desires. The FirstNet network is based on a unique hybrid of shared AT&T and dedicated FirstNet assets, supported by people, processes, systems, and equipment designed to provide customers with the first nationwide, City Council/RSA Agenda 231 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
public safety grade LTE network.

DISCUSSION
The FirstNet service provides a robust cellular service with dedicated cellular infrastructure for use by Public Safety. City staff tested the FirstNet service and performance surpassed the performance of our current provider.

The FirstNet service provides priority and preemption service for our Public Safety personnel during emergency events, when many cellular providers can become congested by the increase in voice calls.

To move to the FirstNet service, all 97 cellular devices must be replaced with FirstNet ready devices that allow connectivity to the Band 14 radio spectrum licensed to the First Responder Network Authority (FirstNet). Special pricing was provided in the agreement which will allow the majority of new iPhones to be purchased for the price of $0.99. The cellular devices currently in use by PD will be redeployed to city staff that are using legacy iPhones that no longer support the current Apple operating system.

Staff worked with the FirstNet team on the migration and FirstNet will provide a credit of $18,275.00 which will be applied to subsequent monthly billings to offset the new equipment cost. In addition, the migration to FirstNet will result in a cellular service cost reduction of $768.00 per year when compared to our current service.

FISCAL IMPACT
Adoption of the resolution will authorize the purchase of the new cellular devices and services at a total two-year cost of $85,156.58. The one-time equipment cost of $6,755.98 and the monthly service charge of $4,028.15 in FY 2022-2023 will be funded from IT Account Number 1110-1701-15003-54206. As there are sufficient funds budgeted to cover the initial one-time equipment cost and the monthly service charges, there will be no fiscal impact to the FY 2022-2023 Adopted Budget.

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached Resolution approving the migration of the Police Department’s cellular service from Verizon to FirstNet by AT&T, for a one-time equipment cost of $6,755.98, a one-time credit of $18,275.00, and a monthly cost of $4,028.15, for a total two-year cost of $85,156.58 and authorizing the City Manager to execute agreements to purchase the new equipment and services.

Prepared by:

Mario J. Vallejo, Information Technology Director
Submitted by:

Mario J. Vallejo, Information Technology Director
ATTACHMENTS:

Description Type
Attachment - FirstNet Proposal Attachment
Resolution - Police Migration to FirstNet Cellular Service Resolution City Council/RSA Agenda 232 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
Regualr
Price Ea.

Discounted
Price Ea. Qty.

Total Device
One Time
Payment Contract Term
$729.99 $0.99 74 $73.26 2 YR
$779.99 $79.99 1 $79.99 2 YR
$879.99 $179.99 3 $539.97 2 YR
$999.99 $299.99 1 $299.99 2 YR
$1,099.99 $748.99 6 $4,493.94 2 YR
$509.99 $0.99 14 $13.86 2 YR
$529.99 $454.99 1 $454.99 2 YR
$999.99 $399.99 2 $799.98 2 YR
Qty.
85 17
Qty.

Qty.
85 17
$6,755.98
$4,028.15
$18,275.00
$85,156.58
$17,000
NETGEAR NIGHTHAWK PRO 5G
APPLE WATCH S7 45 SG AL BLK SP
APPLE IPAD 11 IN 128GB
Total
IPHONE 13 PRO MAX 256 GRAPHITE
$75 Data Activation Credit $75
$200 Phone Activation Credit $200
$1,275
$18,275.00
Monthly Cost: $4,028.15
Incentives & Credits
Description Per Line
Unlimited Data-Only Device $37.00 $629.00
Unlimited Smartphone $39.99 $3,399.15
Description Monthly Price Per Line
Monthly Total (before taxes &
surcharges)
Rate Plan & Features
One Time Cost: $6,755.98
Description
IPHONE 12 PRO MAX 128 GRAPHITE
IPHONE 12 64 BLACK
IPHONE 12 128 BLACK
IPHONE 12 SPACE GRAY 256GB
Equipment Cost
AT&T Business Proposal
Union City
Fan: 58071857
Fan Discount: NPPGOV
Cost Over 2 Year Term
Description Per Line Total
Equipment Cost
Monthly Cost
Incentives and Credits
Daisy Muneton
Business Sales Executive
(209) 247-5238
Total Equipment One-Time Cost
*Taxes based on Full Retail Price
Total Monthly Recurring Charges
Unlimited Talk, Text and Data
*Rate plan includes NPP Government Service Discount. Taxes and surcharges are not included.

Total One-Time Credits
*Bill Incentives Credits can take up to 180 days to post on statement Total Contract Term Cost
5/25/2022 5:36 PM
City Council/RSA Agenda 233 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
RESOLUTION NO.

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UNION CITY APPROVING THE MIGRATION OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT’S
CELLULAR SERVICE FROM VERIZON TO FIRSTNET BY AT&T, FOR A ONETIME EQUIPMENT COST OF $6,755.98, A ONE-TIME CREDIT OF $18,275.00, AND A MONTHLY SERVICE CHARGE OF $4,028.15, FOR A TOTAL TWOYEAR COST OF $85,156.58, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO

EXECUTE AGREEMENTS TO PURCHASE THE NEW EQUIPMENT AND

SERVICES
WHEREAS, the Police Department has 97 Verizon cellular devices that are used by the sworn and non-sworn staff and in recent years cellular congestion has caused data slowness in different areas of the City; and
WHEREAS, FirstNet cellular service was established in 2012 by Congress after being recommended by the 9/11 Commission and provides a robust cellular service with dedicated cellular infrastructure for use by Public Safety; and WHEREAS, Police’s current cellular devices will be replaced with FirstNet ready devices which allow connectivity to the Band 14 radio spectrum licensed to the First Responder Network Authority (FirstNet); and
WHEREAS, FirstNet will provide a credit of $18,275.00 which will be applied to subsequent monthly billings to offset the new equipment cost and the migration to FirstNet will result in a cellular service cost reduction of $768.00 per year when compared to our current service; and
WHEREAS, the one-time equipment cost of $6,755.98 and the monthly service charges of $4,028.15 in FY 2022-2023 will be funded from IT Account Number 1110- 1701-15003-54206.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Union City authorizes the migration of the Police Department’s cellular service from Verizon to FirstNet by AT&T, for a one-time equipment cost of $6,755.98, a one-time credit of $18,275.00, and a monthly service charge of $4,028.15, for a total two-year cost of $85,156.58 and authorizes the City Manager to execute agreements to purchase the new equipment and services.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Union City at a regular meeting held on the 26th day of July 2022, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

City Council/RSA Agenda 234 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
APPROVED:

CAROL DUTRA-VERNACI
Mayor
ATTESTED: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________ ____________________________
ANNA M. BROWN KRISTOPHER J. KOKOTAYLO
City Clerk City Attorney
City Council/RSA Agenda 235 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
Agenda Item
DATE: 7/26/2022
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: MARIO VALLEJO, INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE REPLACEMENT OF

COMPUTERS AND PERIPHERALS FOR CITY STAFF AND POLICE

VEHICLES THROUGH PROVIDER DELL TECHNOLOGIES, FOR A TOTAL FOUR-YEAR LEASE COST OF APPROXIMATELY $545,000.00, THROUGH

BANK OF AMERICA, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO

EXECUTE THE PURCHASE AND LEASE AGREEMENTS
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached Resolution approving the replacement of computers and peripherals for City staff and police vehicles through provider Dell Technologies, for a total four-year lease cost of approximately $545,000.00, through Bank of America, and authorizing the City Manager to execute the purchase and lease agreements.

STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT
Although this agenda item does not have alignment with a specific Strategic Plan goal, approval of the agenda item will support staff productivity and data security.

BACKGROUND
To normalize annual replacement costs for City computers and accessories, the City began a program in 2008 to lease computer equipment. This prevents spiking of costs in any one year and allows the City to remain current in its equipment; thereby lessening maintenance costs on aging items.

In 2016, the Mobile Data Terminals (MDT) and mounting hardware for Police vehicles were leased at a cost of $307,624.75 through HP Financial Services. The lease matured in June of 2021. In 2018, the City leased, via two separate orders, the currently deployed HP computers and computer peripherals for City staff for a total cost of $430,811.00 through reseller Portola. The lease for the first order matured in June of 2019 and the second lease matured in April of 2022. Manufacturer support of the computers stopped after the leases matured.

City Council/RSA Agenda 236 Tuesday, July 26, 2022

DISCUSSION
The cyber-attack in 2019 and the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on employees required staff to re-evaluate the computer needs of the City. Employees need more flexibility to work outside the office and computers need to meet new security requirements like biometric multifactor authentication to keep City data safe. For Police MDTs, officers need the capability to be more mobile and access critical dispatch data in or out of their vehicles.

Staff performed a feature, performance, and cost evaluation of three separate computer vendors and determined that Dell Technologies best met the needs of the City. The new computer order will include seventy-eight (78) desktops, one hundred sixty-two (162) laptops, forty-nine (49) hardened laptops, one hundred seventy-nine (179) docking stations, and fifty-two (52) monitors. This order moves our ratio of laptops compared to stationary desktops from 38.5% in 2018 to 68.2%. The increase in laptops will be used to provide better mobility for users that currently have stationary desktops and provide power laptops for users that require mobility but run intensive computing applications. The environmentally hardened laptops will be used for PD vehicles and Public Works inspectors. Existing computer monitors used by staff that are in good condition will not be replaced. The new Dell monitors will be used for new employees, to provide secondary monitors where required, and to allow for a surplus monitor inventory for future needs and replacements.

The Dell NASPO Computer Equipment PA - California contract (#C000000181156), through NASPO Value Point, was used to obtain reduced contracted pricing. Attached to the staff report is the Dell Technologies quote of $511,078.24. With financing, the total cost is approximately $545,000.00. Staff and the City Attorney have examined the cooperative purchasing agreement and are satisfied that it meets the requirements of the Government Code sections 6500, 6502 et. al., and that allcompetitive bidding requirements have been met.

FISCAL IMPACT
Adoption of the resolution will authorize the purchase of new computers and peripherals, in the approximate total amount of $545,000.00, including financing costs. The Master Lease Purchase Agreement with Bank of America, authorized by the City Council on April 12, 2022, will be used to finance the purchase. Semi-annual payments of approximately $68,125.00, starting in FY 2022-2023, will be paid via the Capital Facilities Improvements Fund Account Number 4110-8888-81005-58310. As there are sufficient funds already budgeted to cover the lease payments, there will be no fiscal impact to the FY 2022-2023 Adopted Budget.

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached Resolution approving the replacement of computers and peripherals for City staff and police vehicles through provider Dell Technologies, for a total four-year lease cost of approximately $545,000.00, through Bank of America, and authorizing the City Manager to execute the purchase and lease agreements.

Prepared by:

Mario J. Vallejo, Information Technology Director; Jackie Acosta, Finance Director Submitted by:

Mario J. Vallejo, Information Technology Director
ATTACHMENTS:

Description Type
City Council/RSA Agenda 237 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
Attachment - Dell Technologies Quote 3000126382131.1 Attachment Resolution - 2022 City Dell Computer Lease Resolution
City Council/RSA Agenda 238 Tuesday, July 26, 2022
A quote for your consideration
Based on your business needs, we put the following quote together to help with your purchase decision. Below is a detailed summary of the quote we’ve created to help you with your purchase decision.

To proceed with this quote, you may respond to this email, order online through your Premier page, or, if you do not have Premier, use this Quote to Order.

Quote No. 3000126382131.1
Total $511,078.24
Customer # 338526
Quoted On Jul. 13, 2022
Expires by Aug. 12, 2022
Contract Name
Dell NASPO Computer
Equipment PA - California
Contract Code C000000181156
Customer Agreement # MNWNC-108/7157034003
Deal ID 22530207
Sales Rep Charlie Ballon
Phone (800) 456-3355, 80000
Email [email protected]
Billing To ACCOUNTS PAYABLE

CITY OF UNION CITY
34009 ALVARADO NILES RD
UNION CITY, CA 94587-4452
Message from your Sales Rep
Please contact your Dell sales representative if you have any questions or when you're ready to place an order. Thank you for shopping with Dell!
Regards, Charlie Ballon
Shipping Group
Shipping To

RECEIVING DEPT

CITY OF UNION CITY
34009 ALVARADO NILES RD
UNION CITY, CA 94587-4452
(510) 675-5685
Shipping Method
Standard Delivery Free Cost
Product Unit Price Quantity Subtotal
OptiPlex 7000 MFF $999.02 78 $77,923.56
Dell Latitude 5430 Rugged $2,159.82 49 $105,831.18
Dell 27 Monitor - P2722H, 68.6cm (27") $233.99 28 $6,551.72 Dell 27 Video Conferencing Monitor - C2723H, 68.47cm
(27.0")
$319.48 24 $7,667.52
Dell Thunderbolt 4 Dock- WD22TB4 $295.35 179 $52,867.65