Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 11142017 -CALENDAR FOR THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CONTRA COSTA COUNTY AND FOR SPECIAL DISTRICTS, AGENCIES, AND AUTHORITIES GOVERNED BY THE BOARD BOARD CHAMBERS ROOM 107, ADMINISTRATION BUILDING, 651 PINE STREET MARTINEZ, CALIFORNIA 94553-1229 FEDERAL D. GLOVER, CHAIR, 5TH DISTRICT KAREN MITCHOFF, VICE CHAIR, 4TH DISTRICT JOHN GIOIA, 1ST DISTRICT CANDACE ANDERSEN, 2ND DISTRICT DIANE BURGIS, 3RD DISTRICT DAVID J. TWA, CLERK OF THE BOARD AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR, (925) 335-1900 PERSONS WHO WISH TO ADDRESS THE BOARD DURING PUBLIC COMMENT OR WITH RESPECT TO AN ITEM THAT IS ON THE AGENDA, MAY BE LIMITED TO TWO (2) MINUTES. A LUNCH BREAK MAY BE CALLED AT THE DISCRETION OF THE BOARD CHAIR. The Board of Supervisors respects your time, and every attempt is made to accurately estimate when an item may be heard by the Board. All times specified for items on the Board of Supervisors agenda are approximate. Items may be heard later than indicated depending on the business of the day. Your patience is appreciated. ANNOTATED AGENDA & MINUTES November 14, 2017                  9:30 A.M. Convene, Call to order and opening ceremonies. Inspirational Thought- “Gratitude is not only the greatest of virtues, but the parent of all the others.” ~ Cicero Present: John Gioia, District I Supervisor; Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor; Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Absent: Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor; Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Staff Present:David Twa, County Administrator CONSIDER CONSENT ITEMS (Items listed as C.1 through C.88 on the following agenda) – Items are subject to removal from Consent Calendar by request of any Supervisor or on request for discussion by a member of the public. Items removed from the Consent Calendar will be considered with the Discussion Items.   PRESENTATIONS (5 Minutes Each)   PRESENTATION launching the 2017 "Contra Costa County Cares" Holiday Food Fight. (Larry Sly, Executive Director, Food Bank, and Kate Sibley, Executive Assistant, LAFCO)    AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) PRESENTATION honoring the winners of the Arts and Culture Commission of Contra Costa County 2017 Art Recognition Awards. (Tess Snook-O'Riva, Arts and Culture Commission of Contra Costa County, Chair)    AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 1 Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) DISCUSSION ITEMS   D. 1 CONSIDER Consent Items previously removed.    There were no items removed from consent for discussion.   D. 2 PUBLIC COMMENT (2 Minutes/Speaker)    There were no requests to speak at public comment.   D.3 CONSIDER accepting the report on Winter Storm Preparedness in Contra Costa County, as recommended by the Chief Engineer, Flood Control & Water Conservation District, Countywide. (Tim Jensen, Public Works Department)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) D.4 CONSIDER accepting the report from the Health Services Department on the Homeless Continuum of Care as recommended by the Family and Human Services Committee. (Lavonna Martin, Director of Health, Housing and Homeless Services)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) D. 5 CONSIDER reports of Board members.    There were no items reported today.   Closed Session A. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS 1. Agency Negotiators: David Twa and Richard Bolanos. Employee Organizations: Contra Costa County Employees’ Assn., Local No. 1; Am. Fed., State, County, & Mun. Empl., Locals 512 and 2700; Calif. Nurses Assn.; Service Empl. Int’l Union, Local 1021; District Attorney’s Investigators Assn.; Deputy Sheriffs Assn.; United Prof. Firefighters, Local 1230; Physicians’ & Dentists’ Org. of Contra Costa; Western Council of Engineers; United Chief Officers Assn.; Service Employees International Union Local 2015; Contra Costa County Defenders Assn.; Probation Peace Officers Assn. of Contra Costa County; Contra Costa County Deputy District Attorneys’ Assn.; and Prof. & Tech. Engineers, Local 21, AFL-CIO; Teamsters Local 856. 2. Agency Negotiators: David Twa. Unrepresented Employees: All unrepresented employees. B. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL--EXISTING LITIGATION (Gov. Code, § 54956.9(d)(1)) Seyed-Omid Mousavirad v. Hatcher, et al.; Contra Costa County Superior Court Case No. C16-013821. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 2 Seyed-Omid Mousavirad v. Hatcher, et al.; Contra Costa County Superior Court Case No. C16-013821.    There were no announcements from Closed Session.   ADJOURN    Adjourned today's meeting at 11:00 a.m.   CONSENT ITEMS   Road and Transportation   C. 1 CONTINUE the emergency action originally taken by the Board of Supervisors on March 7, 2017, pursuant to Public Contract Code Sections 22035 and 22050, to repair the Morgan Territory Road Slide Repair Project, as recommended by the Interim Public Works Director, Clayton area. (100% Local Road Funds)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 2 TERMINATE the emergency action originally taken by the Board of Supervisors on February 14, 2017, pursuant to Public Contract Code Sections 22035 and 22050, to repair the Alhambra Valley Road Washout Project, and ACCEPT as complete the contracted work performed by Flatiron West, Inc., for the Alhambra Valley Road Washout Project, as recommended by the Interim Public Works Director, Pinole area. (100% Local Road Funds)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 3 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Interim Public Works Director, or designee, to execute Contract Amendment No. 1 to the contract with Quincy Engineering, Inc., effective October 1, 2017, to increase the payment limit by $150,000 to a new payment limit of $450,000, for professional construction management services, Countywide. (100% Various Pubic Works Funds)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 4 ADOPT Traffic Resolution No. 2017/4463 to prohibit parking at all time, except for those vehicles of individuals with disabilities (blue curb) on a portion of Winslow Street (Road No. 2295AD), as recommended by the Interim Public Works Director, Crockett area. (No fiscal impact)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) Engineering Services 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 3 Engineering Services   C. 5 ADOPT Resolution No. 2017/410 approving the fifth extension of the Subdivision Agreement for subdivision SD03-08791, for a project being developed by ADP Freedom 7, LLC, as recommended by the Interim Public Works Director, El Sobrante area. (No fiscal impact)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 6 ADOPT Resolution No. 2017/411 approving the Road Improvement Agreement, for road acceptance RA17-01253, for a project being developed by Goldman Enterprises, Inc., as recommended by the Interim Public Works Director, North Richmond area. (No fiscal impact)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) Special Districts & County Airports   C. 7 Acting as the Governing Board of the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District, APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Fire Chief, or designee, to execute an agreement, including any amendments, with the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection in an amount not to exceed $18,250 to accept funding for the Volunteer Fire Assistance Program of the Cooperative Forestry Assistance Act of 1978 for the purchase of equipment for the reserve firefighter program. (50% Federal, 50% Local agency match)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 8 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Interim Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with Quincy Engineering, Inc., effective October 1, 2017, to extend the term from September 30, 2017 through December 31, 2017, with no change to the payment limit, for professional engineering services for the Buchanan Field Airport Taxiway Echo & Kilo Improvements Project, Concord area. (90% Federal Aviation Administration Funds, 2% Caltrans Funds, 8% Airport Enterprise Funds)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) Claims, Collections & Litigation   C. 9 DENY claims filed by Bassem Banafa, Richard Chew, Natalie Holt, and Helen Stimson.      AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 4 Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 10 Acting as the Governing Board of the Contra Costa County Housing Authority, DENY claim filed by Marcia Kowlessar.       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) Statutory Actions   C. 11 APPROVE Board meeting minutes for October 2017, as on file with the Office of the Clerk of the Board.       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 12 ACCEPT Board members meeting reports for October 2017.       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) Honors & Proclamations   C. 13 ADOPT Resolution No. 2017/401 launching the 2017 "Contra Costa County Cares" Holiday Food Fight, as recommended by the County Administrator.        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 14 ADOPT Resolution No. 2017/414 honoring the winners of the Arts and Culture Commission of Contra Costa County 2017 Art Recognition Awards, as recommended by the County Administrator.        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 15 ADOPT Resolution No. 2017/415, which affirms Contra Costa County's commitment to racial equity, diversity, and the Government Alliance on Race and Equity (GARE) initiative, as recommended by the Public Protection Committee.       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 5 Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 16 ADOPT Resolution No. 2017/418 recognizing Robin Moore and the Diablo Regional Arts Association for their distinguished service and outstanding contributions to Art in Contra Costa County, as recommended by the County Administrator.       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 17 ADOPT Resolution No. 2017/419 declaring November 20, 2017 the International Transgender Day of Remembrance in Contra Costa County, as recommended by Supervisors Mitchoff and Gioia.        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) Ordinances   C. 18 ADOPT Ordinance No. 2017-28 continuing the established one dollar ($1.00) per document recording fee for the Social Security Number Truncation Program.       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 19 INTRODUCE Ordinance Code 2017-27 amending the County Ordinance Code to exclude from the Merit System the new classification of Animal Services Captain-Exempt, WAIVE READING and Fix December 5, 2017, for adoption.        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) Appointments & Resignations   C. 20 APPROVE the medical staff appointments and reappointments, additional privileges, advancements, and voluntary resignations, as recommended by the Medical Staff Executive Committee and by the Health Services Director.       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 21 ACCEPT the resignation of Cindy McCann, DECLARE a vacancy in the Alternate seat on the Arts    11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 6 C. 21 ACCEPT the resignation of Cindy McCann, DECLARE a vacancy in the Alternate seat on the Arts and Culture Commission of Contra Costa County (AC5), and DIRECT the Clerk of the Board to post the vacancy, as recommended by AC5 and the County Administrator.       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 22 APPOINT members to the 2018 Community Corrections Partnership (CCP) and 2018 CCP-Executive Committee pursuant to Penal Code sections 1230(b)(2) and 1230.1(b), respectively, as recommended by the Public Protection Committee. (No fiscal impact)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 23 APPOINT in lieu of election Jim Price, Arthur John Hanson, and Walter Pierce to serve on the Board of Trustees of Reclamation District 799 (Hotchkiss Tract) for a term of four years, as recommended by the County Administrator.       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 24 APPOINT in lieu of election Robert Lyman, Pete Hansen, and Frank Morgan to serve on the Board of Trustees for Reclamation District 800 (Byron Tract) for a term of four years, as recommended by the County Administrator.        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 25 APPOINT in lieu of election Don Wagenet and Frank Savage to serve on the Board of Trustees of Reclamation District 2024 (Orwood and Palm Tracts) for a term of four years, as recommended by the County Administrator.        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 26 APPOINT in lieu of election Clark Misner and Randall Neudeck to the Board of Trustees for Reclamation District 2025 (Holland Tract), for a term of four years and two years respectively, as recommended by the County Administrator.        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT)    11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 7 C. 27 APPOINT in lieu of election Dave Forkel, Randall Neudeck, and Angela Wright to the Board of Trustees for Reclamation District 2026 (Webb Tract) for a term of four years, two years, and two years respectively, as recommended by the County Administrator.       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 28 APPOINT in lieu of election Robert Davies, William Hall, and Gilbert Orozco to serve on the Board of Trustees of Reclamation District 2059 (Bradford Island) for a term of four years, as recommended by the County Administrator.       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 29 APPOINT in lieu of election Coleman Foley and Thomas E. Baldocchi, Jr. to serve on the Board of Trustees of Reclamation District 2065 (Veale Tract) for a term of four years, as recommended by the County Administrator.       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 30 APPOINT in lieu of election Colby Heaton to the Board of Trustees for Reclamation District 2090 (Quimby Island) for a term of four years, as recommended by the County Administrator.        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 31 APPOINT in lieu of election Sandy Speckman Kiefer to serve on the Board of Trustees of Reclamation District 2117 (Coney Island) for a term of four years, as recommended by the County Administrator.        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 32 APPOINT in lieu of election Eric Schmit to the Board of Trustees for Reclamation District 2137 for a term of four years, as recommended by the County Administrator.       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) Personnel Actions 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 8   C. 33 ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 22106 to reallocate the salary of the Chief Quality Officer - Exempt (unrepresented) classification on the Salary Schedule in the Health Services Department. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 34 ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 22144 to establish the classification of Animal Services Captain-Exempt (unrepresented) and add one full-time position in the Animal Services Department. (32% User Fees, 31% City Revenues, 37% County General Fund)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 35 ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 22187 to establish the class of Communications Equipment Specialist I Trainee (represented) and allocate it to the Salary Schedule; retitle and reallocate the salary of the class of Communications Equipment Specialist (represented) to Communications Equipment Specialist II (represented), and reallocate the salary of the class of Senior Communications Equipment Specialist (represented) on the Salary Schedule. (100% Department of Information Technology user fees)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) Grants & Contracts   APPROVE and AUTHORIZE execution of agreements between the County and the following agencies for receipt of fund and/or services:   C. 36 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Librarian, or designee, to apply for and accept a grant for equipment in the form of two 3-D printers from the California State Library as administered by the Southern California Library Cooperative Technology TNT for Libraries project, for the period September 1, 2017 through December 31, 2019. (No County match)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 37 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Librarian, or designee, to apply for and accept a grant in the amount of $30,000 from the California State Library to provide 12 laptops and one Laptops Anytime Kiosk to the Oakley Library for the period November 1, 2017 through January 31, 2019. (42% Library Fund match)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 9 Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 38 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Librarian, or designee, to apply for and accept a grant in the amount of $15,000 from the Pacific Library Partnership to create STEAM Career Success: A STEAM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Art, & Math) Awareness Outreach Program that will convey the important message of STEAM careers to underserved high school students in Contra Costa County for the period January 1 to December 31, 2018. (No County match)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 39 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Librarian, or designee, to apply for and accept a grant in the form of ten Starling wearable word counting devices from the California State Library for the San Pablo Library for the period October 1, 2017 through September 31, 2018. (No County match)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 40 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Librarian, or designee, to apply for and accept a grant in the amount of $8,020 from the Pacific Library Partnership to provide materials and equipment to the Antioch Library for the period November 1, 2017 through July 1, 2018. (No County match)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 41 ADOPT Resolution No. 2017/393 supporting the East Contra Costa County Habitat Conservancy’s Knightsen Wetland Restoration and Flood Protection Project application to the San Joaquin-Sacramento Delta Conservancy’s Ecosystem Restoration and Water Quality Grant Program for up to $1,500,000 in grant funds, as recommended by the Conservation and Development Director. (No fiscal impact)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 42 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract containing modified indemnification language with the City of Walnut Creek, to pay the County an amount not to exceed $71,629 for homeless outreach services for the Coordinated Outreach, Referral and Engagement Program, for the period July 6, 2017 through June 30, 2018. (No County match)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 43 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to execute a contract with the City    11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 10 C. 43 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to execute a contract with the City and County of San Francisco, including full indemnification of the City and County of San Francisco, to pay the County an amount not to exceed $839,820 as part of the 2017 U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Urban Area Security Initiative Grant for homeland security related projects within the County for the period November 1, 2017 through the end of the grant funding. (100% Federal)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 44 APPROVE the allocation of the 2017 Housing Opportunities for Persons with HIV/AIDS funds, from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), and AUTHORIZE the Conservation and Development Director, or designee, to execute a contract with the City of Oakland to enable the County to administer $664,708 in fiscal year 2017 Housing Opportunities for Persons with HIV/AIDS funds, to provide housing and supportive services for low-income persons with HIV/AIDS, for the period July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2020. (100% HUD)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 45 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with the California Department of Health Care Services, to receive reimbursement to administer and oversee the Mental Health Services Act, Projects for Assistance in Transition from Homelessness and community mental health services grant programs for the period July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018. (No County match)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) APPROVE and AUTHORIZE execution of agreement between the County and the following parties as noted for the purchase of equipment and/or services:   C. 46 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to execute a Products and Services Agreement with Alcohol Monitoring Systems, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $800,000, for the purchase and lease of SCRAMx alcohol monitoring systems, monitoring services and hosted software, for the term of November 1, 2017 through October 31, 2020. (100% Custody Alternative Facility Participant Fees)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 47 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract containing modified indemnification language with META Dynamic, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $35,000 to provide a guidance navigation system, related software, accessories, and certified technicians for tumor locating services in the Surgical Unit at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center and Health Centers, for the period November 1, 2017 through October 31, 2018. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I)        11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 11  AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 48 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent or designee to execute, on behalf of the Interim Public Works Director, a purchase order amendment with Caltronics Business Systems, to extend the lease from December 5, 2017 to December 4, 2019 and increase the payment limit by $110,000 to a new payment limit of $360,000, for three digital copiers, Martinez area. (100% Department User Fees)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 49 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent or designee to execute, on behalf of the Interim Public Works Director, a purchase order amendment with Lehr Auto Electric, Inc., to increase the payment limit by $150,000 to a new payment limit of $800,000 for emergency vehicle parts and accessories, with no change to the original term of February 1, 2016 through January 31, 2018, Countywide. (100% Fleet Internal Service Fund)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 50 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Interim Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a purchase order with Enterprise Rent-A-Car in an amount not to exceed $190,000 for car and light truck rentals, for the period November 1, 2017 through October 31, 2019, Countywide. (100% Fleet Internal Service Fund)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 51 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Administrator, or designee, to execute a contract amendment, effective November 14, 2017, with CherryRoad Technologies, Inc., to increase the payment limit by $337,440 to a new payment limit of $12,029,370, for additional assistance to upgrade the County’s PeopleSoft software system, through January 2018. (100% General Fund)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 52 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract containing modified indemnification language with Laboratory Corporation of America in an amount not to exceed $325,000 to provide outside laboratory testing services for the Contra Costa Regional Medical Center and Health Centers, for the period May 1, 2017 through April 30, 2018. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 12 Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 53 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Cardionet, LLC, in an amount not to exceed $185,000 for remote cardiac monitoring services for Contra Costa Regional Medical Center patients, for the period November 1, 2017 through October 31, 2018. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 54 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Martha D. Newman in an amount not to exceed $250,000 to provide consultation and technical assistance to Contra Costa Regional Medical Center and Health Centers on the Public Hospital Redesign and Incentives of the Medi-Cal program, for the period December 1, 2017 through November 30, 2018. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 55 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment, effective November 1, 2017, with Shelter Inc., to decrease the payment limit by $60,428 to a new payment limit of $1,370,441, to provide supportive housing services for homeless families at a reduced level, with no change in the term of July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018. (100% Employment and Human Services Department)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 56 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the Animal Services Director, a purchase order with MWI Veterinary Supply Co. in an amount not to exceed $900,000 for veterinary pharmaceutical supplies and chemicals, for the period October 1, 2017 through September 30, 2019. (32% User fees, 31% city revenues, 37% County General Fund)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 57 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment, effective July 1, 2017, with Lifelong Medical Care to add acupuncture services for Contra Costa Health Plan members, with no change in the payment limit of $3,000,000 nor in the term of July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018, for primary care, urgent care and specialty medical services to Contra Costa Health Plan members. (100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 13 Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 58 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract containing modified indemnification language with Young Men’s Christian Association of the East Bay in an amount not to exceed $4,000 to develop and implement internship programs for mental health students participating in the Workforce Education and Training Program, for the period November 1, 2017 through October 31, 2018. (100% Mental Health Services Act)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 59 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to execute, on behalf of the Interim Public Works Director, a purchase order with Sam Clar Office Furniture Inc., in the amount of $199,606 for office furniture, for the 40 Muir Road, 2nd Floor, Martinez, Remodel Project. (100% General Fund)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 60 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with STAND! For Families Free of Violence, a non-profit corporation, in an amount not to exceed $108,922 to provide the continued implementation of the Phase III Lethality Assessment Program for Domestic Violence Homicide Prevention for the period December 1, 2017 through September 30, 2018. (100% Federal)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 61 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with BeyondTrust Software, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $142,190 for virtual appliances, software licenses, software maintenance and support, and professional services for the Health Services Information Technology Unit, for the period November 14, 2017 through November 13, 2020. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 62 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with STAND! For Families Free of Violence, a non-profit corporation, in an amount not to exceed $317,125 to provide domestic violence support services to California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKs) participants for the period July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018. (100% Federal)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 14 Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 63 RATIFY the Purchasing Agent’s execution, on behalf of the Public Works Director, of a purchase order with Jon K. Takata, dba Restoration Management Company, in an amount not to exceed $150,000, for emergency mold abatement at the Contra Costa Regional Medical Center Psychiatric Ward, Martinez area. (100% Health Services Enterprise Fund.)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 64 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Healthright 360 in an amount not to exceed $4,700,783, to provide pre-arrest, at-arrest and post-arrest diversion opportunities and coordination services for Antioch residents with behavioral health issues for the Contra Costa Lead Plus Project, for the period November 1, 2017 through August 15, 2020. (100% California Board of State and Community Corrections Grant)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 65 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment, effective November 1, 2017, with Bay Area Surgical Specialists Services, LLC, to increase the payment limit by $900,000 to a new payment limit of $1,200,000 to provide additional ambulatory surgery services for Contra Costa Health Plan members, with no change in the term of March 1, 2016 through February 28, 2018. (100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 66 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with OBHG California, P.C., in an amount not to exceed $350,000 to provide obstetrics and gynecology services for Contra Costa Health Plan members, for the period November 1, 2017 through October 31, 2019. (100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 67 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the Health Services Director, a contract with Brocade Communications Systems, Inc., and a purchase order with Optiv Security, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $52,034 for the renewal of Brocade computer hardware support for the period November 27, 2017 to November 26, 2018. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 15 Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 68 AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, on behalf of the Health Services Director, to 1) execute purchase orders for food to be provided at the Health Care for the Homeless Program Governance Meetings and 2) procure up to 100 $5 gift cards, with all expenses not to exceed $5,000 to use as incentives for focus group program participants of the Health Care for the Homeless Program, for the period November 1, 2017 through January 31, 2019. (100% Health Resources and Services Administration grant)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 69 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the Health Services Director, a purchase order amendment with Watermark Sleepcare, Inc., to increase the payment by $6,000 to a new payment limit of $220,000 for the rental of sleep study devices, testing supplies and repair services at the Contra Costa Regional Medical Center, with no change in the term of November 1, 2016 through October 31, 2017. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 70 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with David S. Gee, M.D., in an amount not to exceed $168,000 to provide consultation and technical assistance to the Contra Costa Health Plan Medical Management team, for the period December 1, 2017 through November 30, 2018. (100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 71 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Mental Health Systems, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $2,014,000 to provide Mental Health Services Act Community Services and Supports Program services to adult clients in Contra Costa County for the period July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018, which includes a six-month automatic extension through December 31, 2018 in an amount not to exceed $1,007,000. (35% Federal Medi-Cal, 65% Mental Health Services Act)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 72 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Interim Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Bates Stringer – Oak Park, LLC, in the amount of $1,275,000, to provide real estate services related to County-owned property at 1700 Oak Park Blvd. in Pleasant Hill for the period from November 1, 2017, through October 31, 2020. (100% General Fund)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 16  AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 73 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Interim Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with JK2 & Associates, Inc., to increase the payment limit by $125,000 to a new payment limit of $220,000, and to extend the termination date from January 31, 2019 to December 31, 2019, for continued real estate planning services for the Oak Park Sale of Surplus (South Pleasant Hill Parcels), Pleasant Hill area. (100% General Fund)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 74 Acting as the Governing Board of the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District, APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Fire Chief, or designee, to execute Amendment No. 1 to Consulting Services Agreement with Loving Campos Associates, Architects, Inc., effective July 24, 2017, to modify sub-consultants with no change to the original term or payment limit of $710,000, to provide architectural services for the new Fire Station No. 70 project at 1800 23rd Street in San Pablo. (100 District Operating Fund)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 75 Acting as the Governing Board of the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District, APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Fire Chief, or designee, to execute Amendment No. 1 to Consulting Services Agreement with Loving Campos Associates, Architects, Inc., effective July 27, 2017, to modify sub-consultants and increase the payment limit by $64,087 to a new payment limit of $520,000, with no change to the original term, to provide architectural services for the new Fire Station No. 16 at 4007 Los Arabis Road in Lafayette. (100% District Operating Fund)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 76 Acting as the Governing Board of the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District, APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, on behalf of the Fire Chief of the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District, to execute a purchase order with Sam Clar Office Furniture in an amount not to exceed $500,000 for the purchase, delivery, and installation of office furniture and equipment to outfit the District's new administrative offices located at 4005 Port Chicago Highway in the City of Concord. (90% Fire District General Fund, 10% EMS Transport Fund)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) Other Actions   C. 77    11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 17 C. 77 CONSENT to the transfer of ownership of Woods Grove Apartments in Pittsburg from BRIDGE Regional Partners, Inc. (BRIDGE) to Reliant-Woods Grove, LP (Reliant); CONSENT to the assignment of BRIDGE’s obligation to repay $800,000 of HOME funds to the County to Reliant; AUTHORIZE accrued interest on the HOME loan to be forgiven; AUTHORIZE the Conservation and Development Director to execute a consent to assignment and related documents, as recommended by the Conservation and Development Director. (100% Federal funds)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 78 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to renew Cardroom License Number 6, known as "California Grand Casino", currently located at 5988 Pacheco Blvd., Pacheco area, for the period November 26, 2017 through November 25, 2018, as recommended by the Sheriff-Coroner. (Lamar V. Wilkinson, Owner)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 79 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with La Clinica De La Raza, effective November 1, 2017, to add Pharmacy 340B Compliance Program requirements with no change in the payment limit of $3,000,000 and no change in the term of July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018. (100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 80 AUTHORIZE a one-time payment of $1,800 for two months of Infant Supplement to a prior 602 WIC Non-Minor Dependent, C.R., as recommended by the Chief Probation Officer. (100% General Fund)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 81 ACCEPT the October 2017 update of the operations of the Employment and Human Services Department Community Services Bureau, as recommended by the Employment and Human Services Director.       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 82 APPROVE Preliminary Working Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis in the Unincorporated Area of Contra Costa County (Framework) reflecting changes requested by the Board on October 24, 2017, and DIRECT the Conservation and Development Director to implement Public Outreach Plan to solicit public input on the Framework, as recommended by the Conservation and Development Director.        11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 18  AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 83 ACCEPT the 2016 Annual Report submitted by the Diablo Municipal Advisory Council, as recommended by Supervisor Burgis.        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 84 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Auditor-Controller, or designee, to pay $2,445 to Xingbo Sun, M.D., for additional podiatry services provided at the Contra Costa Regional Medical Center and Health Centers during September 2017, as recommended by the Health Services Director. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 85 APPROVE Conflict of Interest Code for Making Waves Academy, as recommended by the County Counsel.        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 86 RECEIVE the 2017 Annual Report submitted by the Finance Committee, as recommended by the Finance Committee.       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) C. 87 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Board of Supervisors to submit notice of intent to the Federal Aviation Administration indicating the County's interest and intent to submit an application to partner with the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) to set local rules and regulations for an Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) Integration Pilot Program, as recommended by Supervisor Burgis.       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT) Successor Agency to the Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency   C. 88 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE County Counsel, or her designee, to execute amendments to existing    11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 19 C. 88 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE County Counsel, or her designee, to execute amendments to existing contracts for legal services between Goldfarb & Lipman LLP and the County and Goldfarb & Lipman LLP and the County as successor to the Contra Costa Redevelopment Agency.       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT), District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover (ABSENT)   GENERAL INFORMATION The Board meets in all its capacities pursuant to Ordinance Code Section 24-2.402, including as the Housing Authority and the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency. Persons who wish to address the Board should complete the form provided for that purpose and furnish a copy of any written statement to the Clerk. Any disclosable public records related to an open session item on a regular meeting agenda and distributed by the Clerk of the Board to a majority of the members of the Board of Supervisors less than 72 hours prior to that meeting are available for public inspection at 651 Pine Street, First Floor, Room 106, Martinez, CA 94553, during normal business hours. All matters listed under CONSENT ITEMS are considered by the Board to be routine and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless requested by a member of the Board or a member of the public prior to the time the Board votes on the motion to adopt. Persons who wish to speak on matters set for PUBLIC HEARINGS will be heard when the Chair calls for comments from those persons who are in support thereof or in opposition thereto. After persons have spoken, the hearing is closed and the matter is subject to discussion and action by the Board. Comments on matters listed on the agenda or otherwise within the purview of the Board of Supervisors can be submitted to the office of the Clerk of the Board via mail: Board of Supervisors, 651 Pine Street Room 106, Martinez, CA 94553; by fax: 925-335-1913. The County will provide reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities planning to attend Board meetings who contact the Clerk of the Board at least 24 hours before the meeting, at (925) 335-1900; TDD (925) 335-1915. An assistive listening device is available from the Clerk, Room 106. Copies of recordings of all or portions of a Board meeting may be purchased from the Clerk of the Board. Please telephone the Office of the Clerk of the Board, (925) 335-1900, to make the necessary arrangements. Forms are available to anyone desiring to submit an inspirational thought nomination for inclusion on the Board Agenda. Forms may be obtained at the Office of the County Administrator or Office of the Clerk of the Board, 651 Pine Street, Martinez, California. Applications for personal subscriptions to the weekly Board Agenda may be obtained by calling the Office of the Clerk of the Board, (925) 335-1900. The weekly agenda may also be viewed on the County’s Internet Web Page: www.co.contra-costa.ca.us STANDING COMMITTEES The Airport Committee (Supervisors Karen Mitchoff and Diane Burgis) meets on the fourth Wednesday of the month at 1:30 p.m. at the Director of Airports Office, 550 Sally Ride Drive, Concord. The Family and Human Services Committee (Supervisors John Gioia and Candace Andersen) meets on the fourth Monday of the month at 10:30 a.m. in Room 101, County Administration Building, 651 Pine Street, Martinez. The Finance Committee (Supervisors Karen Mitchoff and John Gioia) meets on the fourth Monday of the month at11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 20 The Finance Committee (Supervisors Karen Mitchoff and John Gioia) meets on the fourth Monday of the month at 9:00 a.m. in Room 101, County Administration Building, 651 Pine Street, Martinez. The Hiring Outreach Oversight Committee (Supervisors Federal D. Glover and Candace Andersen) meets on the first Monday of every other month at 1:00 p.m. in Room 101, County Administration Building, 651 Pine Street, Martinez. The Internal Operations Committee (Supervisors Candace Andersen and Diane Burgis) meets on the second Monday of the month at 1:00 p.m. in Room 101, County Administration Building, 651 Pine Street, Martinez. The Legislation Committee (Supervisors Diane Burgis and Karen Mitchoff) meets on the second Monday of the month at 10:30 a.m. in Room 101, County Administration Building, 651 Pine Street, Martinez. The Public Protection Committee (Supervisors Federal D. Glover and John Gioia) meets on the first Monday of the month at 10:30 a.m. in Room 101, County Administration Building, 651 Pine Street, Martinez. The Transportation, Water & Infrastructure Committee (Supervisors Diane Burgis and Karen Mitchoff) meets on the second Monday of the month at 9:00 a.m. in Room 101, County Administration Building, 651 Pine Street, Martinez. Airports Committee December 13, 2017 11:00 a.m.See above Family & Human Services Committee December 25, 2017 Canceled See above Finance Committee December 25, 2017 Canceled See above Hiring Outreach Oversight Committee TBD See above Internal Operations Committee December 11, 2017 1:00 p.m. See above Legislation Committee December 11, 2017 10:30 a.m. See above Public Protection Committee December 4, 2017 Canceled See above Transportation, Water & Infrastructure Committee December 11, 2017 9:00 a.m. See above PERSONS WHO WISH TO ADDRESS THE BOARD DURING PUBLIC COMMENT OR WITH RESPECT TO AN ITEM THAT IS ON THE AGENDA, MAY BE LIMITED TO TWO (2) MINUTES A LUNCH BREAK MAY BE CALLED AT THE DISCRETION OF THE BOARD CHAIR AGENDA DEADLINE: Thursday, 12 noon, 12 days before the Tuesday Board meetings. Glossary of Acronyms, Abbreviations, and other Terms (in alphabetical order): Contra Costa County has a policy of making limited use of acronyms, abbreviations, and industry-specific language in its Board of Supervisors meetings and written materials. Following is a list of commonly used language that may appear in oral presentations and written materials associated with Board meetings: AB Assembly Bill ABAG Association of Bay Area Governments ACA Assembly Constitutional Amendment ADA Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 AFSCME American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees AICP American Institute of Certified Planners AIDS Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 21 ALUC Airport Land Use Commission AOD Alcohol and Other Drugs ARRA American Recovery & Reinvestment Act of 2009 BAAQMD Bay Area Air Quality Management District BART Bay Area Rapid Transit District BayRICS Bay Area Regional Interoperable Communications System BCDC Bay Conservation & Development Commission BGO Better Government Ordinance BOS Board of Supervisors CALTRANS California Department of Transportation CalWIN California Works Information Network CalWORKS California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids CAER Community Awareness Emergency Response CAO County Administrative Officer or Office CCCPFD (ConFire) Contra Costa County Fire Protection District CCHP Contra Costa Health Plan CCTA Contra Costa Transportation Authority CCRMC Contra Costa Regional Medical Center CCWD Contra Costa Water District CDBG Community Development Block Grant CFDA Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance CEQA California Environmental Quality Act CIO Chief Information Officer COLA Cost of living adjustment ConFire (CCCFPD) Contra Costa County Fire Protection District CPA Certified Public Accountant CPI Consumer Price Index CSA County Service Area CSAC California State Association of Counties CTC California Transportation Commission dba doing business as DSRIP Delivery System Reform Incentive Program EBMUD East Bay Municipal Utility District ECCFPD East Contra Costa Fire Protection District EIR Environmental Impact Report EIS Environmental Impact Statement EMCC Emergency Medical Care Committee EMS Emergency Medical Services EPSDT Early State Periodic Screening, Diagnosis and Treatment Program (Mental Health) et al. et alii (and others) FAA Federal Aviation Administration FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency F&HS Family and Human Services Committee First 5 First Five Children and Families Commission (Proposition 10) FTE Full Time Equivalent FY Fiscal Year GHAD Geologic Hazard Abatement District GIS Geographic Information System HCD (State Dept of) Housing & Community Development HHS (State Dept of ) Health and Human Services HIPAA Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act HIV Human Immunodeficiency Syndrome HOV High Occupancy Vehicle HR Human Resources HUD United States Department of Housing and Urban Development 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 22 IHSS In-Home Supportive Services Inc. Incorporated IOC Internal Operations Committee ISO Industrial Safety Ordinance JPA Joint (exercise of) Powers Authority or Agreement Lamorinda Lafayette-Moraga-Orinda Area LAFCo Local Agency Formation Commission LLC Limited Liability Company LLP Limited Liability Partnership Local 1 Public Employees Union Local 1 LVN Licensed Vocational Nurse MAC Municipal Advisory Council MBE Minority Business Enterprise M.D. Medical Doctor M.F.T. Marriage and Family Therapist MIS Management Information System MOE Maintenance of Effort MOU Memorandum of Understanding MTC Metropolitan Transportation Commission NACo National Association of Counties NEPA National Environmental Policy Act OB-GYN Obstetrics and Gynecology O.D. Doctor of Optometry OES-EOC Office of Emergency Services-Emergency Operations Center OPEB Other Post Employment Benefits OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration PARS Public Agencies Retirement Services PEPRA Public Employees Pension Reform Act Psy.D. Doctor of Psychology RDA Redevelopment Agency RFI Request For Information RFP Request For Proposal RFQ Request For Qualifications RN Registered Nurse SB Senate Bill SBE Small Business Enterprise SEIU Service Employees International Union SUASI Super Urban Area Security Initiative SWAT Southwest Area Transportation Committee TRANSPAC Transportation Partnership & Cooperation (Central) TRANSPLAN Transportation Planning Committee (East County) TRE or TTE Trustee TWIC Transportation, Water and Infrastructure Committee UASI Urban Area Security Initiative VA Department of Veterans Affairs vs. versus (against) WAN Wide Area Network WBE Women Business Enterprise WCCTAC West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 23 RECOMMENDATION(S): CONSIDER accepting the report on Winter Storm Preparedness in Contra Costa County, as recommended by the Chief Engineer, Flood Control and Water Conservation District, Countywide. (Tim Jensen, Public Works Department) FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: To remind our communities throughout the County about awareness and preparations for this winter’s rainy season, the Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (Flood Control District) has the following report: Agency Preparations: The County’s Public Works and Flood Control District crews have been working hard to prepare for this winter, and they treat every winter as a potential heavy winter. Regional flood protection facilities and local drainage systems are ready and expected to perform well during large storms, as they have in the past. Key personnel are available to respond to emergencies at any time. As public agencies, we also value the eyes and ears of our residents to identify potential problems, so we have in place APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Tim Jensen, (925) 313-2390 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: David Twa, CAO, Betsy Burkhart, CCTV, Mike Carlson, Deputy Chief Engineer, Carrie Ricci, Deputy Public Works Director, Tim Jensen, Flood Control, Catherine Windham, Flood Control D.3 To:Contra Costa County Flood Control District Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Interim Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Consider Report on Winter Storm Preparedness in Contra Costa County, Countywide. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 24 BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) 24/7 reporting via phone or e-mail. There are 14 Reclamation Districts responsible for the Delta area’s levees in eastern Contra Costa County. They each perform a critical function to protect lives and property. Their staff has been preparing for this winter via inspections, maintenance, restocking supplies, and training. The levees and pumps are ready, and they have trained personnel on standby to respond to any issues that may arise. During storm events, levees will be closely monitored. Key personnel throughout the County are trained and ready to respond to any emergency at any time. In preparation for this winter, the County’s Office of Emergency Services has been coordinating with local, state, and federal agencies to ensure winter preparedness and disaster response. The various County agencies, such as Sheriff, Fire, Health Services, Public Works, Flood Control District, Reclamation Districts, and Animal Services, are partners in disaster preparedness and response. Coordination among these agencies keeps our County in compliance with the National Weather Service’s “storm ready” rating. Sandbag Stations: Each year the County and cities provide free sand and sandbags to local residents for use in protecting their property from flooding. On January 6, 2017, a sandbag demonstration media event was hosted by Supervisor Gioia. Our next sandbag demonstration media event is planned for late November. Video footage from past events and a sandbag demonstration guide is available on our website. For more information, visit http://www.cccounty.us/5983/Sandbags. Creek and Channel Safety Awareness: The County’s Creek and Channel Safety Awareness Program annual events continue, including; 1) completing the annual outreach to schools in September; 2) putting up student art class posters along flood control channels for the winter; and 3) coordinating with Contra Costa County Fire Protection District’s Swiftwater Rescue operations. On October 25, Walnut Creek Intermediate School hosted their second “Stay Out! Stay Alive!” campaign regarding the flood control channel that traverses its campus. See www.cccounty.us/creekandchannelsafety for more information. Media Outreach: In an effort to get the word out to the public, we have worked with our Public Information Officer to send out regular media blasts all winter on flood or weather-related information that would be useful or interesting to the public. Examples include determining if a property is in a flood-prone area, the location of sandbag stations, activities that people can undertake to protect their property from flooding, emergency preparedness, flood forecasting information, or a message from our Creek and Channel Safety Program. Newsletters: Each Board member has a newsletter and e-mail blast they send out generally once a week. We are providing our winter preparation media outreach information to Board member’s staff to be distributed across the County through their channels. Website: The Flood Control District has a webpage describing what citizens can do to prepare for this winter’s rainy season. The webpage can be found at http://www.cccounty.us/5906/Flood-Preparedness. Flood Forecasting: In our area, localized heavy rains can happen unexpectedly and streams can rise rapidly, so paying attention to the weather and utilizing forecasting resources is important. The Flood Control District monitors 29 rain gauges and fifteen stream elevation gauges to provide information. This past year, we installed 11 more stream gauges with state funding. Our data is used by the National Weather Service to inform their forecasts. We have a custom made forecasting guide we call “7532 Flood!” We provided information about the guide online, discussed it at numerous agency and public meetings, and have produced a short video on the guide. This information helps public agencies and residents predict the potential for flooding in their community. The webpages are compatible with most mobile devices and can be found at http://www.cccounty.us/RainMap. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 25 Resource for Cities: Flood Control District staff has combined the above messages into the flood preparedness webpages as a resource for cities. Staff is also available to provide input on winter preparation messages produced by cities, as well as to speak on winter preparedness at city-hosted meetings. The above information will be sent to media outlets and community sites to coincide with this Board action. Key staff members are available to answer questions, attend community meetings, or be interviewed upon request. The Chief Engineer, Flood Control District recommends that the Board accept the above report, and the personally presented report, on flood preparedness in Contra Costa County. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this Board Order is not adopted, members of the public may not receive important information about flood preparedness and creek and channel safety. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: The Flood Control District will continue to work with schools and youth-based groups within the County to educate children about safety regarding creeks and flood control channels. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 26 RECOMMENDATION(S): ACCEPT the report from the Health, Housing and Homeless Services Division of the Health Services Department with an update on homeless service activities and the Contra Costa Homeless Continuum of Care Annual Report for fiscal years 2015-16 and 2016-17. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact, the report is informational. BACKGROUND: On December 3, 1996, the Board of Supervisors referred to the Family and Human Service Committee oversight of services provided to the homeless in Contra Costa County. Since then the Health Services Department has presented annual updates to the Family and Human Service Committee. On June 26, 2017, the Family and Human Services Committee received a report from the Health Services Department on homeless services (attachment entitled, "Report on Homelessness - As Presented to F&HS with FY 15-16 Annual Report". At this meeting, Health Services Department staff were directed to present APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Enid Mendoza, (925) 335-1039 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: D.4 To:Board of Supervisors From:FAMILY & HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Report on Homeless Services - F&HS Referral No. 5 Continuum of Care Plan for the Homeless 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 27 BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) the report to the full Board of Supervisors in the fall and to include information on the homeless services budget to get a better understanding of current funding sources. The attached report entitled, "Report on Homelessness - Revised with FY 16-17 Annual Report" includes an updated report and annual report that included funding source information. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The Board will not receive an update on homeless service activities in our County and funding sources that support these efforts. ATTACHMENTS Report on Homelessness - Revised with FY 16-17 Annual Report Report on Homelessness - As Presented to F&HS with FY 15-16 Annual Report 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 28 Contra Costa County Homeless Continuum of Care Fiscal Year 2016-17 Annual Report Point in Time Count (PIT) data and Annual Service data are used to understand important characteristics of the population experiencing a housing crisis in Contra Costa County. PIT data is a census of all homeless people encountered on a given night (January 27, 2017) and provides just as snapshot while service data captures all people utilizing CoC programs during the fiscal year 2016-2017. Point In Time Count Data 1,607 homeless individuals on a given night 696 sheltered AND 911 unsheltered 84 families with minors 99 veterans 331 chronically homeless 3,303 males 2,696 females 16 transgender or don’t identify 44% African American 38% White 9% American Indian/ Alaskan Native 6% Multiple races 3% Other Race 17% Latino 2/3 have a disability 32% w/mental health condition 22% w/chronic health condition 640 families with minors 1,710 newly identified 1,045 chronically homeless 418 Veterans 514 seniors (62+) 1/2 unsheltered Homelessness is first a housing issues, and necessary supports and services are critical to help people remain housed. Our system must be nimble and flexible enough to respond through the shared responsibility, accountability, and transparency of the community. —Contra Costa’s Strategic Plan to End Homelessness Letter from the Chair of the Council on Homelessness Reflecting back at the 2016-17 Fiscal Year, I am impressed by the tremendous work and commitment to address and alleviate homelessness within Contra Costa County. The County’s Continuum of Care (CoC) and the Council on Homelessness continued to be leaders in adopting best practices and innovative approaches. It is exciting to know that the CoC successfully launched Phase One of the Coordinated Entry System (CES). CES streamlines the process for homeless individuals and households to access the services needed to secure the right housing, with the right level of services. Phase One focused on building the infrastructure for our crisis response system by creating three dedicated points of entry: 211, CORE (Coordinated Outreach Referral and Engagement) Teams, and CARE (Coordinated Assessment and Resource) Centers that offer enhanced services such as housing navigation services and extended hours that transforms it into a Warming Center to As the CoC has built its capacity to serve more people in crisis, the need for more affordable housing in the Bay Area becomes more obvious. Without a steady supply of new affordable housing, it will be impossible to fully address and alleviate homelessness. Federal and State resources are helpful to provide and maintain affordable housing, however, those sources of funds have been reduced over the last five years and are no longer provided at the scale necessary to address the lack of supply. As we enter the 2017-18 Fiscal Year, the CoC will continue its work to identify creative and effective solutions for establishing more affordable housing opportunities. The CoC will also move into Phase Two of CES to more effectively screen, triage, and provide resources to those newly homeless in efforts to divert them from entering the system of care. On behalf of the Council of Homelessness, I would like to express my gratitude for the service providers and partners working together to end homelessness in our county. Annual Service Data 6,015 homeless + 1,057 at-risk + 1,022 formerly homeless On any given night, there are 1,607 people homeless people in Contra Costa County. 31% of people served by CoC are newly identi- fied each year. Contra Costa County needs 30,939 more affordable rental homes to meet need for very low and extremely low income residents. Median rent in Contra Costa has increased 25% since 2000 while median renter income has decreased 3% when adjusted for inflation. Contra Costa lost 66% of state and federal funding for housing production and preservation from FY 08-09 to FY 15-16. Housing Needs in Contra Costa County Shelter capacity met only 48% of community needs during PIT Count. Spotlight on Services: CORE in Action 30% reported to be homeless for the first time. Sources: 2017 Point In Time Count; California Housing Partnership https:// chpc.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/ContraCostaCounty2017.pdf Contra Costa Continuum of Care Partners A primary emphasis of a coordinated entry system is to engage those not yet served by the CoC—those individuals that never have or no longer access services. This ensures that resources are genuinely allocated to those most vulnerable, based on a housing assessment that determines the breadth and depth of services necessary to sustain housing. CORE is a new component to the CoC that conducts outreach throughout the county. CORE teams have established day and evening hours to screen and triage individuals in encampments and on the streets. They provide referrals or direct linkages, when possible, to emergency shelters, hospitals, and psychiatric emergency care. During the first six months of implementation, CORE served 1,126 unique individuals sleeping outside, including 22 families with 55 children. Gabriel Lemus, CoC Chair 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 29 Coordinated Entry In Contra Costa County A Coordinated Entry System (CES) streamlines access to housing and services while addressing barriers and getting the right resources to the right people, at the right time . Contra Costa County began planning and implementation of CES during FY 16-17. Initial activities included 1) adoption of an evidence-based housing assessment tool to determine risk and prioritization for housing services; 2) CoC -wide housing placement meetings to identify the most vulnerable, based on housing assessment scores, for Permanent Supportive Housing; 3) system-planning for further prioritization for services across the continuum. The CES model in Contra Costa County has three access points (211, CARE Centers, and CORE Outreach) that any individual or family can access to obtain services. These programs identify, assess, and refer people to appropriate services based on needs. Permanent housing may include non-subsidized rentals, permanent supportive housing programs, board and cares, friends and family. Coordinated Entry System is designed to help meet the needs of the most vulnerable. Since the launch of CES, there has been a “population shift.” Program staff have recognized this, and the data demonstrates it. CES by the Numbers People served at CARE Centers: 1,797 People served by CORE: 1,126 Housing assessments completed in 16-17: 1,822 People housed since CES kick-off: 716 211 calls related to housing crisis or assistance: 5,287 Making Progress on the Strategic Plan City Data Every city in Contra Costa County is affected by homeless- ness. While it is more visibly apparent in some communities, the system of care serves people that have lost housing in City PIT-unsheltered Annual Data-Where Lost Housing Richmond 109 1206 Concord 188 629 Antioch 137 460 Pittsburg 83 293 Martinez 93 217 San Pablo 57 186 Walnut Creek 19 120 Bay Point 39 114 Pleasant Hill 25 77 Oakley 16 61 Brentwood 4 49 El Sobrante 13 44 North Richmond 0 40 Rodeo 6 39 Hercules 0 29 Pinole 0 29 El Cerrito 11 19 Lafayette 0 18 Pacheco 6 18 Danville 0 15 San Ramon 0 11 Alamo 0 10 Clayton 0 10 Discovery Bay 1 8 Crockett 0 7 Orinda 0 7 Clyde 0 6 Bethel Island 0 5 Byron 0 5 Knightsen 0 2 Moraga 0 1 Port Costa 0 1 80% of those served by the CoC lost their housing in Contra Costa. Federal and State Funding for Homeless Services In Contra Costa County 2016-1017 In 2014, Contra Costa’s CoC updated it’s Strategic Plan. Forging Ahead Towards Preventing and Ending Homelessness has three key strategies: implementation of an effective Coordinated Entry System, utilizing performance standards to determine needs and program impacts, and establishing effective strategies for communicating to wide range of stakeholders. tinyurl.com/HousingSecurityFund One of the greatest challenges with helping individuals and families regain housing is the costs of credit checks, application fees, and deposits. The Housing Security Fund was developed to give un-housed families a fighting chance in the tight rental market that has gripped the Bay Area. Thanks to efforts by the Multi-faith ACTION Coalition, Richmond Community Foundation, Council on Homelessness, and individual community members, the Housing Security Fund raised more than $18,000 in its first eight months. Housing Security Fund Coordinated Entry Coordinated Entry is being implemented in multiple phases, with an initial focus on enhancing the crisis response system through 211 services, CARE (Coordinated Assessment REsource) Centers, CORE Teams (Coordinated Outreach Referral and Engagement), a warming center, an evidence -based housing assessment tool and housing navigation services. Performance Standards The CoC submits the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Performance Measures annually and uses these measurements to determine need and impact. Performance measures, PIT data, and annual service data guide local efforts and help with advocating for greater housing resources. Full reports may be found at http://cchealth.org/h3/#simple7 Communication Multiple communication strategies were put into place to raise awareness about the housing crisis and its impact on community members. Activities included: H3/CoC website re-design, community presentations quarterly newsletters social media efforts homeless awareness month activities 114 Permanent housing slots for families 34 HUD VASH rental vouchers for veterans 4 CORE outreach teams 5 Housing navigators 4 CARE/CARE Capable Centers 1 Warming Center New housing resources and services established in 2016-17 Housing Navigation Shelter & Case management CARE 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 30 WILLIAM B. WALKER, M.D. HEALTH SERVICES DIRECTOR LAVONNA MARTIN, MPH, MPA DIRECTOR, HEALTH, HOUSING, AND HOMELESS SERVICES CONTRA COSTA HEALTH, HOUSING, AND HOMELESS SERVICES HOMELESS PROGRAM 1350 Arnold Drive, Ste. 202 Martinez, California 94553-4675 PH 925 313-7700 FAX 925 646-9420 TO: Family and Human Services Committee, Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors FROM: Lavonna Martin, MPH, MPA, Health, Housing, and Homeless Services Director RE: Annual Report on the Homeless Continuum of Care DATE: June 26, 2017 RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Accept this report from the Health Services Department; and 2. Forward this report to the Board of Supervisors for acceptance; and, 3. Direct Staff to continue to report on an annual basis to the FHS Committee regarding progress of the effort to end homelessness and the activities of Contra Costa Council on Homelessness. BACKGROUND In November 2014, the Board approved “Forging Ahead Towards Preventing and Ending Homelessness: An Update to Contra Costa’s 2004 Strategic Plan”, that renewed our 2004 plan with the latest data, best practices, and community feedback and reaffirmed our commitment to the Housing First approach. As such, “Forging Ahead” establishes this guiding principle: “Homelessness is first a housing issue, and necessary supports and services are critical to help people remain housed. Our system must be nimble and flexible enough to respond through shared responsibility, accountability, and transparency of the community.” The Strategic Plan Update identifies two goals: 1) Decrease the length of time people experience homelessness by focusing on providing Permanent Housing and Services and; 2) Decrease the percentage of people who become homeless by providing Prevention activities. To achieve these goals, three strategies emerged: 1) Implement a coordinated entry/assessment system to streamline access to housing and services while addressing barriers, getting the right resources to the right people at the right time; 2) Use best, promising , and most effective practices to give the consumer the best possible experience through the strategic use of resources; and 3) Develop the most effective platforms to provide access, support advocacy, and connect to the community about homelessness and available resources. The Homeless Program of the Health, Housing and Homeless Services Division partners with the Homeless Advisory Board and Continuum of Care to develop and carryout an annual action plan that identifies the objectives and benchmarks related to each of the goals and strategies of Forging Ahead. Further, the Homeless Program incorporates the strategic plan goals into its own delivery system of comprehensive services, interim housing and permanent supportive housing as well as contracting with community agencies to provide additional homeless services and housing with the goal of ending homelessness in our community. Attached is a summary of the Contra Costa Homeless Continuum of Care Annual Report that provides a summary of program services, outcomes, and consumer demograhics for Fiscal Year 2015-2016. Additionally, a summary infographic of the 2017 Point in Time Count is included. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 31 CONTRA COSTA HOMELESS CONTINUUM OF CARE 2015-2016 FISCAL YEAR ANNUAL REPORT November 2016 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 32 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE 3 LETTER FROM THE COUNCIL CHAIR PAGE 4 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY HOMELESS CONTINUUM OF CARE AND COUNCIL ON HOMELESSNESS PAGE 4 FISCAL YEAR 15-16 ANNUAL REPORT SUMMARY PAGE 5 2016 POINT IN TIME COUNT – A DECREASE IN NUMBERS PAGE 6 HOMELESS SERVICES IN THE CONTINUUM PAGE 7 THE COUNTY’S HOMELESS POPULATION PAGE 8 CONTINUUM-WIDE PERFORMANCE MEASURES PAGE 10 ZERO 2016 – BY NAME LISTS PAGE 11 COORDINATED ENTRY PAGE 12 A LEGAL AND PERSONAL IDENTITY 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 33 Letter from the Council Chair The 2015-16 Fiscal Year was complete with great accomplishments and innovation as the County’s Continuum of Care (the Continuum) and the Council on Homelessness (the Council) developed new strategies to meet its goals in addressing and preventing homelessness. At the beginning of the year, the Continuum was in the midst of planning and conceptualizing its new Coordinated Entry System: the Continuum’s centralized and coordinated process designed to integrate consumers’ intake, needs assessment, and provision of services, including referrals to permanent housing when appropriate. This resulted in a completely new model that would fortify the Continuum’s referral and outreach system through Coordinated Entry. The Council also continued the work that it started back in 2015 for the Zero: 2016 Campaign; the campaign to end veteran and chronic homelessness. During the year, the Continuum became one of the first to create a “by-name” list of homeless veterans and chronic homeless, which is being recognized as the national standard to achieve a better picture of those who are truly in need and how many veterans and chronic homeless are returning to homelessness. These tools have also been effective in case management for homeless consumers navigating multiple social service, health, and housing agencies. As demonstrated in this report, the strategies to address and prevent homelessness, and the work to implement these strategies, are working. The report provides a summary of the outcomes and performance measures of the various types of programs and services provided by the Continuum partners. Every single performance measure was met! Even more notable was the decrease in numbers of homeless individuals identified in the Point-In-Time Count over the last five years. Contra Costa County still faces struggles with homelessness as the housing market continues to pose challenges to households throughout the region. Additionally, the sluggish rate in the creation of affordable housing only means that homelessness, and the threat of homelessness, will continue. As we move forward into fiscal year 2016-17, it is these types of challenges that make the Continuum’s work even more important. There is much to be proud of in our efforts to address homelessness during FY 2015-16 and FY 2016-17 has already proven to be full of optimism, hope, and success. Gabriel Lemus, Chair Contra Costa Council on Homelessness 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 34 Contra Costa County Homeless Continuum of Care and Council on Homelessness In 1997, the United States Department of Health and Human Services (HUD) required that communities seeking HUD homeless funding apply as a collaborative of local agencies, called a Homeless Continuum of Care. The Contra Costa Homeless Continuum of Care (Continuum) is comprised of service providers, members of the faith community, businesses, funders, education systems, and law enforcement, working in partnership with consumers to find stable housing. The Continuum is governed by the Council on Homelessness (Council), a group of 15 members appointed by the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors. The Council provides guidance in the development and implementation of long range planning and policy of homeless issues in the County. Fiscal Year 15-16 Annual Report Summary As a governing body, the Council on Homelessness references data from the many data sources collected in the Continuum of Care, to represent the landscape of homelessness in Contra Costa County. This data aggregates the individual situations and personal stories of the 6,000 plus homeless people in our Continuum of Care. Data cannot capture everyday struggles, or convey the peace of mind when homeless individuals are housed, or the physical and psychological benefits of a place to call home. However, the data can help to understand the need and impact. It can guide the Council in understanding how many people in the community struggle with mental health issues, chronic disease, or how many families slept on the streets in the middle of winter. This data also illustrates how many people transition from the streets, to shelter, to permanent housing. The numbers are exciting and demonstrate the impact this Continuum has on the lives of the almost 6,500 homeless people in the system of care last year. A significant success for the Continuum is the 28% decrease in the number of people identified in the annual Point in Time Count since 2011. More notable is the Performance Measures data from agencies that provide prevention, intervention, and housing programming, reaching a greater number of people in need each year. Performance Measures for Fiscal Year 15-16 demonstrate improvements in all program types across the system of care. These improvements suggest that system-wide changes in the Continuum are resulting in reduced length of time homeless as people are obtaining housing quicker, and with effective placements such that fewer people return to homelessness. Despite all these accomplishments and improvements across the system, the Continuum continues to struggle in meeting the needs of many people that are homeless in the community. Newly identified homeless enter the system monthly, and lack of affordable housing hinders efforts to keep those at-risk in their homes or find new homes for those already struggling with homelessness. The Continuum and all its partners continue to build the infrastructure for an effective system that meets the needs of the at-risk and homeless population. Data tells us that these efforts are working! Please contact Health, Housing, and Homelessness Services at homelessprograms@hsd.cccounty.us for more information about this report or activities within the Contra Costa Homeless Continuum of Care. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 35 2011-2016 REGIONAL SHIFTS IN UNSHELTERED 2016 Point in Time Count – A Decrease in Numbers On the evening of January 27, 2016, there were 3,500 individuals identified as homeless or at risk of homelessness in Contra Costa County through the Point in Time (PIT) Count. The PIT Count is an annual identification and survey of all homeless people residing in shelters or living on the streets in the county. Slightly less than half (1,730) of the 3,500 individuals were literally homeless and 1,770 were at risk of homelessness. Among the literally homeless, there were 620 people in shelters and another 1,110 were sleeping on the streets. Youth under the age of 18 made up 11% of the homeless population and two- thirds of those youth were residing in shelters the night of the count. Two-thirds of the population are male. There has been a 28% decrease in the number of people identified through PIT in Contra Costa in the last five years. PIT also demonstrated a significant regional shift across the county for unsheltered individuals. More people reported sleeping outside or were found in encampments in East County relative to 2015 data, and fewer in West and Central County. 1,730 homeless * 620 in shelters * 1,110 on streets 1,770 imminently at-risk 9% veterans 7% of households had minors15% chronically homeless 29% mental health issues 3,500 HOMELESS OR IMMINENTLY AT-RISK 2415 2000 2030 1730 2011 2013 2015 2016 2011-2016 POINT IN TIME COUNT: NUMBER OF HOMELESS IDENTIFIED 70% in Central County 60% in West County 30% in East County 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 36 Homeless Services in the Continuum The Continuum serves thousands of at-risk, homeless, and formerly homeless people of all ages and demographics through the many service providers delivering homeless prevention and intervention programs. Each type of service is described below:  Emergency Shelters provide temporary shelter for people that have no safe and healthy sleeping arrangements. Consumers generally come from uninhabitable locations (encampments, streets, or vehicles), are fleeing domestic violence, or lost temporary housing.  Support Services Only programs include a variety of services to assist homeless individuals in “getting back on their feet” and/or simply provide basic health needs. SSOs include drop-in centers and financial and benefits programs.  Transitional Housing is short-term housing for underage youth and families to get them off the streets and into more stable living environments until permanent housing can be established.  Rapid Rehousing programs provide short-term financial assistance and services to help those who are experiencing homelessness to be quickly re-housed and stabilized.  Permanent Supportive Housing links long-term, safe, affordable, community-based housing with flexible, voluntary support services to help the individual or family stay housed and healthy.  Street Outreach provides basic hygiene supplies, housing and shelter referrals, food, and water.  Prevention Programs provide short-term financial assistance to help families and individuals stay in their homes and avoid entering homelessness. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 37 The County’s Homeless Population The Contra Costa Homeless Continuum of Care served almost 8,500 consumers during Fiscal Year 2015- 16 in a variety of homeless programs. Almost 1,000 of these consumers were previously homeless individuals now residing in Permanent Supportive Housing, and another 218 utilized prevention programs. Almost 6,500 individuals were literally homeless and residing in shelters or living on the streets in encampments or their vehicles. The number of people served by the Continuum continues to rise as more agencies and programs become part of the Continuum. The homeless population demographic has changed in a few important ways over the last five years. First, the total number of people reached though programming continues to increase as new programs are developed within the Continuum. Certain higher-risk sub-populations experienced greater increases than others. In FY 15-16, the County’s homeless population had a higher proportion of seniors and individuals with chronic or mental health conditions than in FY 10-11. Other Demographics: 43 is the average age 58% with a Disabling Condition 37% with Mental Health Condition 32% People in Families 19% Employed 32% are Chronically Homeless Adults 9% Veterans Race/Ethnicity: 42% Black/African American 37% White/Caucasian 9% American Indian 17% Latino/Hispanic Gender: 44% Female 55% Male FISCAL YEAR 2015-2016 6,455 Homeless Individuals 796 Households with Minors 31% 8% 16% 37% 21%20% Mental Health Condition Chronic Health Condition Seniors (55+) PERCENT OF HOMELESS POPULUATION IN HIGH- RISK SUB-GROUPS FOR FY 10-11 AND 15-16 10-11 15-16 + 780 + 538 + 785 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 38 Exits to permanent housing increased for emergency shelters, transitional housing, rapid rehousing, and permanent supportive housing and fewer are returning to the streets. Non-returns to homelessness increased for all programs that house consumers (emergency shelters, transitional housing, and rapid rehousing), indicating that people are getting placed into housing opportunities that fit their needs best and can sustain housing. Length of time in emergency shelters and rapid rehousing programs decreased, suggesting the system is moving people out of homelessness quicker. Housing retention for consumers in permanent supportive housing remains high and on target. A third of those served exit our system of care into permanent housing. However, housing outcomes were different across the various sub-populations served by the Continuum. Almost three-quarters of youth exit to permanent housing (along with their families) and 39% of Veterans exit to permanent housing. Chronically homeless and seniors more often end up back on the streets or in shelters. Despite positive outcomes, the number of homeless individuals in the system of care remains high because of a significant “in-flow.” Twenty-nine percent of the people served were newly identified, meaning they had not utilized our Continuum for services in prior years either because they are new to homelessness, or were homeless in another community. Among the newly identified, 28% had lost their housing in a County other than Contra Costa. Continuum Wide Performance Measures Met The Continuum met almost all of its Performance Measures for FY 15-16. Performance Measures are outcome data required by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to track progress and outcomes in HUD-funded Continuum of Care programming. Performance Measures are utilized by the Continuum to track progress in outcomes and improve programing to better meet the population’s needs. In 2015, the Continuum of Care established Performance Measures for all types of homeless programming (Emergency Shelter, Transitional Housing, Rapid Rehousing, Support Services and Outreach, and Permanent Supportive Housing). Performance Measures for three key program types are provided below. The dotted line illustrates targets for each measurement identified by the Continuum. There were improvements in at least two Performance Measure for all Program Types since 2014-15 Fiscal Year. 72% 39% 35% 28% 17% Families with Children Veterans Transition Age Youth* Seniors (55+)Chronically Homeless PERCENT OF SUB-POPULATIONS EXITING TO PERMANENT HOUSING 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 39 Key Performance Measures from Fiscal Year 15-16 are provided below. 53 50 51 42 2012-132013-142014-152015-16Average Length of Stay for Exits to Perm Housing 75% 71%71% 77%2012-132013-142014-152015-16Non-returns to Homelessness 28%28% 27% 31%2012-132013-142014-152015-16Exits to Permanent Housing Target: 30% Target: 75% Target: 50 Days RAPID REHOUSING PERFORMANCE MEASURES 80% 60%64% 87%2012-132013-142014-152015-16Exits to Permanent Housing PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING PERFORMANCE MEASURES 90% 96% 91% 94%2012-132013-142014-152015-16Non-returns to Homelessness 92% 96%99%98%2012-132013-142014-152015-16Housing Retention Target: 65% Target: 98% Target: 93% FY 15-16 EMERGENCY SHELTER PERFORMANCES MEASURES 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 40 Zero:2016 — By Name Lists In January, 2015, Contra Costa joined 70 other communities across the U.S. working to quickly and efficiently reduce the number of veterans and chronically homeless people in need of permanent housing through the national Zero: 2016 campaign organized by Community Solutions. On-going technical assistance provided through the campaign has focused on data around housing placements, as well as understanding in-flow of new and returning homeless veterans and chronically homeless. To best track this data, Contra Costa County has created a “By Name List” of homeless veterans and the chronically homeless in our community. This tool is becoming a national standard to help communities get a clearer picture of who needs help, how many people are being housed and how many people are entering or returning to homelessness each month. During the 15-16 fiscal year, the number of homeless veterans on the By Name List decreased by 31 percent. The Veteran By Name List has become a critical tool for case management with veterans currently in our system. Now case managers meet twice-monthly to discuss every Veteran on the By Name List to identify needs, resources, and next steps to achieving better health and housing. The Continuum will build the Chronic By Name List in the next fiscal year to meet the new HUD chronic definition. 230 225 230 219 217 213 204 185 183 188 171 162 11 12 9 18 7 17 22 30 18 15 17 13 8 13 16 16 14 11 16 13 9 9 22 14 -23 -20 -30 -23 -18 -24 -27 -23 -21 -28 -18 -18 -1 -1 -2 -2 -1 -3 -4 PLACEMENTS MOVED TO INACTIVE INFLOW RETURNED TO HOMELESSNESS 31% decrease in Veteran homelessness over 12 months Veteran By Name List Fiscal Year 15-16 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 41 Coordinated Entry Implementation of the Coordinated Entry System in Contra Costa County is underway with greater agency participation in VI-SPDAY completion. The VI-SPDAT is the Coordinated Entry assessment tool used to identify case management and housing needs. By the end of the 15-16 FY, 32% of adults had completed a VI-SPDAT. The Continuum also developed a model for the Coordinated Entry System that illustrates how consumers move through the system of service providers into permanent housing. sdfsdf Law Enforcemen Community Members Health Care Providers Consumers may self-refer or enter the homeless system of care through referrals from service providers, law enforcement, primary and behavioral health care providers, business owners, and community members. Referral agencies then work with consumers to identify, assess, and prioritize health and housing needs. Service Providers Consumers Warming center Primary and behavioral health services Shelter referrals Benefits enrollment Housing needs assessment Rapid Rehousing screening CORE Team CARE Centers Referrals to service providers Shelter referrals Housing needs assessment Prevention/Diversion Screening Homeless Info Line Day and nighttime outreach Referrals to behavioral health Housing needs assessment Street medicine Benefits enrollment Shelter placement IDENTIFICATION, ASSESSMENT, AND PRIORITIZATION Consumers work with service providers to obtain the most appropriate permanent housing for each household. Some utilize emergency and transitional shelter while working toward permanent housing. Housing services:  Financial Assistance and Services to rapidly rehouse individuals  Housing Navigation  Housing Location Permanent Supportive Housing Board and Care Housing w/out subsidy PERMANENT HOUSING HOUSING PLACEMENT 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 42 A Legal and Personal Identity “Kris” lived in Oakland all of her life, but details about her identity were unclear as she had been raised by her grandmother under a nickname. She worked most of her adulthood as an inn keeper at a motel in Oakland, obtaining a wage (under the table) and room and board through her employer. When that employer passed away, Kris became homeless. Kris entered our system of care unsure of her officially documented name or birthdate and had no personal identification. Without identification Kris was unable to obtain the necessary benefits to gain housing or healthcare. Kris did know that she was raised in Oakland, guessed her age to be 73, and remembered the street she grew up on and the middle school she attended. Contra Costa County Emergency Shelter staff started a six-month effort to learn Kris’ identity. The Oakland School District allowed shelters staff to look through every yearbook from the years she may have attended. They found her senior picture and her real name, and discovered she was actually 93 (20 years older than she’d thought). That was all the information she needed to obtain a Social Security card, Cal Fresh, and Medical benefits with the certified documentation provided by the school district. Finally, Kris was approved for Supplemental Security Income (SSI) for elderly individuals, the last resource necessary to obtain housing. Kris has warmed the hearts of many at the shelter as she has taken it upon herself to “manage” the laundry. She greeted each new shelter consumer with clean towels and linens. Kris has been described as “a mother” and “natural caretaker” to staff and consumers at the shelter. Kris is now living in transitional housing and working with a housing navigator to identify affordable senior housing complexes. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 43 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY 2017 POINT IN TIME COUNT January 25, 2017 On a single night in Contra Costa County……. 1,607 people were homeless This is a 7% decrease from 2016 2/3 are male 43% % 57% Sheltered 84 families 160 minors Population Characteristics: 381 Substance Use Disorder 368 Mental Health Disability 331 Chronically homeless 224 Victims of Domestic Violence 99 Veterans Unsheltered 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 44 RECOMMENDATION(S): CONTINUE the emergency action originally taken by the Board of Supervisors on March 7, 2017, pursuant to Public Contract Code Sections 22035 and 22050, to repair the Morgan Territory Road Slide Repair Project, as recommended by the Interim Public Works Director, Clayton area. Project No. 0672-6U6203 (District III) FISCAL IMPACT: The total cost of the project is not expected to exceed $6,000,000. The project will be funded by Local Road Funds (100%). County staff is actively pursuing reimbursement through the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) as a result of the State and Federal emergency declarations. BACKGROUND: On March 7, 2017, the Board of Supervisors declared an emergency and authorized the Public Works Director to proceed in the most expeditious manner to repair Morgan Territory Road approximately 1 mile south of Marsh Creek Road. The repair work required the installation of two structural retaining wall APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Kevin Emigh, 925.313-2233 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: C. 1 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Interim Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:CONTINUE the emergency action for the Morgan Territory Road Slide Repair project, Clayton area. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 45 BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) systems, excavation and backfill of embankment between the wall systems, reconstruction of pavement, drainage improvements, and pavement striping. Public Works Department staff completed the road repair design and requested prices for the necessary equipment, services, and supplies to perform the emergency repair project as expeditiously as possible. The resulting price quotes were received on May 23, 2017. On June 1, 2017, the Public Works Director signed a construction contract with Flatiron West, Inc., to perform the emergency repair work. The emergency repairs began on July 17, 2017, and will be complete by November 18, 2017. During the construction period, Morgan Territory Road will be closed at the slide site and local traffic will use a temporary access on Leon Drive through the Marsh Creek Detention Facility driveway. The Public Works Director signed an agreement, “License Agreement for Temporary Use of Private Road (Leon Drive)”, with each owner of Leon Drive for public use of the private road as needed for the duration of the construction phase of the emergency repairs. The temporary detour road on Leon Drive must be repaved prior to returning it to the owners in accordance with the signed License Agreement. The County plans to utilize the existing contract with Granite Rock Company to repave Leon Drive in late November/early December after the repairs to Morgan Territory Road are complete. Public Contract Code Section 22050 requires that, for a body that meets weekly, the need to continue the emergency declaration be reviewed at least every 14 days until the local emergency is terminated. Since the conditions that warranted the emergency declaration persist, it is appropriate for the Board to continue the emergency actions regarding the hazardous conditions caused by storm damage. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Non-concurrence at this point in the project could cause delays in completion of the slide repairs. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 46 RECOMMENDATION(S): TERMINATE the emergency action originally taken by the Board of Supervisors on February 14, 2017, pursuant to Public Contract Code Sections 22035 and 22050, to repair the Alhambra Valley Road Washout Project, as recommended by the Interim Public Works Director, Pinole area. Project No. 0672-6U6201 (District I); and ACCEPT as complete the contracted work performed by Flatiron West, Inc., for the Alhambra Valley Road Washout Project, as recommended by the Interim Public Works Director, and DIRECT the Clerk to file a Notice of Completion for the repair contract, Pinole area. Project No. 0672-6U6201 (District I) FISCAL IMPACT: The total cost of the project is not expected to exceed $4,000,000. The project will be funded by Local Road Funds (100%). The project is eligible for prorated reimbursement under the state of emergency declared by Governor Brown on January 23, 2017. BACKGROUND: On February 14, 2017, the Board of Supervisors, pursuant to Public Contract APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Kevin Emigh, 925.313-2233 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: C. 2 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Interim Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:TERMINATE the emergency action for the repair of the Alhambra Valley Road Washout; Notice of Completion of Contract, Pinole area. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 47 BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) Code section 22035 and 22050, declared an emergency and authorized the Public Works Director to proceed in the most expeditious manner to repair the washed out portion of Alhambra Valley Road. The repair work required the construction of a new bridge with wingwalls, slope protection and roadway conform work. The Public Works Department used the professional firm of Drake, Haglan & Associates, Inc., to prepare the repair design of the Alhambra Valley Road washout. On April 27, 2017, Drake, Haglan & Associates, Inc., approved the bridge design plans, special provisions, and engineer’s estimate. On May 2, 2017, Public Works Department Deputy Public Works Director Joe Yee, approved the plans, special provisions, and engineer’s estimate for the repair of the Alhambra Valley Road washout, and requested prices for the necessary equipment, services, and supplies to perform the emergency repair project as expeditiously as possible. The resulting price quotes were received on May 23, 2017. On May 24, 2017, the Public Works Director signed a construction contract with Flatiron West, Inc., to perform the emergency repair work. The emergency repairs began June 12, 2017. A sinkhole opened up in Pinole Valley Road immediately adjacent to the bridge work and has been repaired by the bridge contractor according to the plan prepared by and as directed by the Public Works Department. The Interim Public Works Director reports that the Alhambra Valley Road Washout repair work has been inspected and complies with the approved plans, special provisions and standard specifications and has been accepted as complete as of November 2, 2017. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Contractor and sub-contractors will not receive full payment and a notice of completion will not be recorded. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 48 RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Interim Public Works Director, or designee, to execute Contract Amendment No. 1 to the Consulting Services Agreement (CSA) with Quincy Engineering, Incorporated, effective October 1, 2017, to increase the payment limit by $150,000 to a new payment limit of $450,000, for professional construction management services, Countywide. FISCAL IMPACT: Work performed under this on-call consulting services agreement is funded by developer fees, local, state and federal funds for road, flood control, and airport projects. BACKGROUND: On April 14, 2015, the Public Works Department entered into a CSA with Quincy Engineering, Incorporated after being selected to provide construction management services and after completing a request for qualifications solicitation, technical proposal, and interview process. After completing a request for proposal, Quincy Engineering, Incorporated was selected to provide construction management services for the Alhambra Valley Road Washout Repair project. This project was an emergency repair project and the cost of services exceeded the remaining amount available of the contract. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Kevin Emigh, 925. 313-2233 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: Eric Angstadt, Assistant County Administrator C. 3 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Interim Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Contract Amendment with Quincy Engineering, Incorporated, Countywide. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 49 CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The Consultant would not be paid for services rendered. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 50 RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Traffic Resolution No. 2017/4463 to prohibit parking at all times, except for those vehicles of individuals with disabilities (blue curb) on a portion of Winslow Street (Road No. 2295AD), as recommended by the Interim Public Works Director, Crockett area. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: Public Works Traffic Engineering was contacted by a resident requesting installation of a disabled parking space in front of their residence. Traffic Engineering staff subsequently confirmed the disabled status of the resident, made an assessment of the site and potential neighbors that could be affected by this restriction. It was determined the resident has no driveway, and that no nearby residents would be negatively affected by restricting one parking space for disabled use only. Therefore, Traffic recommends one parking space be restricted to only those vehicles displaying valid disabled persons placards/plates. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Parking will remain unrestricted at this location on Winslow Street. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Monish Sen, (925) 313-2187 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: C. 4 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Interim Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Restrict parking (blue curb) on a portion of Winslow Street (Road No. 2295AD), Crockett area. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 51 AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Traffic Resolution 2017/4463 MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed: Traffic Resolution 2017/4463 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 52 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Adopted this Traffic Resolution on November 14, 2017 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: TRAFFIC RESOLUTION NO. 2017/4463 ABSTAIN: Supervisorial District V SUBJECT: Prohibit parking at all times, except for those vehicles of individuals with disabilities (blue curb) on a portion of Winslow Street (Road No. 2295AD), Crockett area. The Contra Costa Board of Supervisors RESOLVES that: Based on recommendations by the County Public Works Department's Traffic Engineering Division and pursuant to County Ordinance Code Sections 46-2.002 - 46-2.012, the following traffic regulation is established: Pursuant to Sections 22507 and 22511.7 of the California Vehicle Code, parking is hereby prohibited at all times, except for vehicles of individuals with disabilities (blue curb) on the south side of Winslow Street (Road No. 2295AD), beginning at a point 62 feet east of the centerline of Bay Street (Road No. 2295AJ) and continuing easterly a distance of 20 feet, Crockett area. MS:js Orig. Dept: Public Works (Traffic) Contact: Monish Sen, 313-2187 cc: California Highway Patrol Sheriff Department TRAFFIC RESOLUTION NO. 2017/XXXX I hereby certify that this is a true and correct Copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: David Twa, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors and County Administrator By , Deputy 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 53 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 54 RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Resolution No. 2017/410 approving the fifth extension of the Subdivision Agreement for subdivision SD03-08791, for a project being developed by ADP Freedom 7, LLC, as recommended by the Interim Public Works Director, El Sobrante area. (District I) FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: The terminal date of the Subdivision Agreement needs to be extended. The developer has not completed the required improvements and has requested more time. (Approximately 85% of the work has been completed to date.) By granting an extension, the County will give the developer more time to complete his improvements and keeps the bond current. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The terminal date of the Subdivision Agreement will not be extended and the developer will be in default of the agreement, requiring the County to take legal action against the developer and surety to get the improvements installed, or revert the development to acreage. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Lori Lorentini - (925) 313-2352 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: J. Larocque, Sherri Reed, Lori Lorentini, Department of Conversation & Development, ADP Freedom 7 LLC, Platter River Insurance Company, T-June 10, 2018 C. 5 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Interim Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Approving the fifth extension of the Subdivision Agreement for SD03-08791, a project being developed by ADP Freedom 7, LLC, El Sobrante area 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 55 AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Resolution No. 2017/410 Fifth Extension of Subdivision Agreement MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed: Resolution No. 2017/410 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 56 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board Adopted this Resolution on 11/14/2017 by the following vote: AYE: John Gioia Candace Andersen Karen Mitchoff NO: ABSENT:Diane Burgis Federal D. Glover ABSTAIN: RECUSE: Resolution No. 2017/410 IN THE MATTER OF approving the fifth extension of the Subdivision Agreement for subdivision SD03-08791, for a project being developed by ADP Freedom 7, LLC, as recommended by the Interim Public Works Director, El Sobrante area. (District I) WHEREAS the Interim Public Works Director having recommended that he be authorized to execute the fifth agreement extension which extends the Subdivision Agreement between ADP Freedom 7, LLC and the County for construction of certain improvements in subdivision SD03-08791, El Sobrante area, through August 10, 2018. APPROXIMATE PERCENTAGE OF WORK COMPLETE: 85% ANTICIPATED DATE OF COMPLETION: August 2018 BOND NO.: 41202046 DATE: July 16, 2010 REASON FOR EXTENSION: Work delayed due to poor market conditions. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the recommendation of the Interim Public Works Director is APPROVED. Contact: Lori Lorentini - (925) 313-2352 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: J. Larocque, Sherri Reed, Lori Lorentini, Department of Conversation & Development, ADP Freedom 7 LLC, Platter River Insurance Company, T-June 10, 2018 3 2 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 57 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 58 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 59 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 60 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 61 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 62 RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Resolution No. 2017/411 approving the Road Improvement Agreement, for road acceptance RA17-01253 (cross-reference DP16-03008), for a project being developed by Goldman Enterprises, Inc., as recommended by the Interim Public Works Director, North Richmond area. (District I) FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: Improvements have been reviewed and processed by Public Works staff and meets all applicable conditions of approval and County requirements. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The Road Improvement Agreement will not be approved. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Kara Schuh-Garibay, 925. 313-2179 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: J. Larocque, Sherri Reed, Kara Schuh-Garibay, Adrian Veliz, Tickler File-September 14, 2018, Eli Goldman, Developers Surety and Indemnity Company C. 6 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Interim Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Approving the Road Improvement Agreement for road acceptance RA17-01253, North Richmond area. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 63 AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Resolution No. 2017/411 Road Improvement Agreement MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed: Resolution No. 2017/411 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 64 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board Adopted this Resolution on 11/14/2017 by the following vote: AYE: John Gioia Candace Andersen Karen Mitchoff NO: ABSENT:Diane Burgis Federal D. Glover ABSTAIN: RECUSE: Resolution No. 2017/411 IN THE MATTER OF: Approving the Road Improvement Agreement, for road acceptance RA17-01253 (cross-reference DP 16-03008), for a project being developed by Goldman Enterprises, Inc., North Richmond area. (District I) WHEREAS, these improvements are approximately located on Brookside Drive between the intersections with Fred Jackson Way and Central Street, on Central Street between the intersections with Pittsburg Avenue and Brookside Drive and on Pittsburg Avenue between the intersections with Central Street and Fred Jackson Way. The following document was presented for Board approval for Brookside Drive, Central Street, Pittsburg Avenue, road acceptance RA17-01253 (cross-reference DP16-03008) property located in the North Richmond area, Supervisorial District I. A Road Improvement Agreement with Goldman Enterprises, Inc., principal, whereby said principal agrees to complete all improvements, as required in said road improvement agreement, within 2 year(s) from the date of said agreement. Improvements generally consist of road improvements and drainage improvements. Said document was accompanied by security to guarantee the completion of road improvements, as required by Title 9 of the County Ordinance Code, as follows: I. Cash Bond Performance Amount: $7,000 Auditor’s Deposit Permit No. DP 747305 Date: October 13, 2017 Submitted by: Sunborne II. Surety Bond Bond Company: Developers Surety and Indemnity Company Bond Number and Date: 652215S October 3, 2017 Performance Amount: $657,000 Labor & Materials Amount: $332,000 Principal: Goldman Enterprises, Inc. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that said road improvement agreement is APPROVED. All deposit permits are on file with the Public Works Department. Contact: Kara Schuh-Garibay, 925. 313-2179 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: J. Larocque, Sherri Reed, Kara Schuh-Garibay, Adrian Veliz, Tickler File-September 14, 2018, Eli Goldman, Developers Surety and Indemnity Company 3 2 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 65 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 66 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 67 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 68 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 69 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 70 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 71 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 72 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 73 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 74 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 75 RECOMMENDATION(S): Acting as the Governing Board of the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District, APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Fire Chief, or designee, to execute Agreement #7FG17030 and any amendments with the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection to accept funding for the Volunteer Fire Assistance Program of the Cooperative Forestry Assistance Act of 1978, funded by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, in an amount not to exceed $18,250, dated as of the last signatory date on page six of the Agreement through June 30, 2018, for the purchase of equipment for the reserve firefighter program. FISCAL IMPACT: 50% Federal; 50% local agency match requirement. Invoices for purchases must be submitted by June 30, 2018. BACKGROUND: The Contra Costa County Fire Protection District (District) Board of Directors approved consent item C.3 at its May 23, 2017, meeting. This item authorized the Fire Chief, or designee, to apply for and accept the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection Volunteer Fire Assistance Grant. The District received notice that it was awarded grant funds on August APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Jackie Lorrekovich, Chief Admin Svcs (925) 941-3312 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: C. 7 To:Board of Supervisors From:Jeff Carman, Chief, Contra Costa County Fire Protection District Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:2017 Cal Fire Volunteer Fire Assistance Grant 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 76 BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) 3, 2017. The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection requires that the governing body of the District authorize its chairperson or other officer to execute the Agreement between the District and the State of California, Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. The Board Order providing authority to execute the Agreement must be dated after the District received the award notice. The Agreement provides for an award, during the term of this Agreement, under the Volunteer Fire Assistance (VFA) Program of the Cooperative Fire Assistance Act of 1978 during the State Fiscal Year 2017-18 up to and no more than the amount of $18,250. The VFA Grant Program provides funding to organize, train, and equip fire departments in rural areas and rural communities to prevent and suppress fires threatening life, resources, and other improvements. The District plans to purchase wildland personal protective equipment and emergency medical technician equipment for the reserve firefighter program. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The District will not be able to take advantage of this funding opportunity to purchase equipment for the reserve firefighter program. ATTACHMENTS May 23 Board Order Agreement 7FH17030 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 77 RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Fire Chief, or designee, to apply for and accept the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, Volunteer Fire Assistance Grant, funded by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, in an amount not to exceed $20,000, for the purchase of equipment for the reserve firefighter program. FISCAL IMPACT: 50% Federal; 50% local agency match requirement. Invoices for purchases must be submitted by June 30, 2018. BACKGROUND: The VFA Grant Program provides funding to organize, train, and equip fire departments in rural areas and rural communities to prevent and suppress fires threatening life, resources, and other improvements. Cost-share funds will be awarded to local governments to provide assistance to rural areas in upgrading their capability to organize, train, and equip local forces for fire protection. Requests will be considered for communications, wildland firefighting equipment, structural firefighting equipment, wildland firefighting safety, structural firefighting safety, and training. The Contra Costa County Fire Protection District (District) has an on-call reserve firefighting program operating out of Fire Station 19 in Briones. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 05/23/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, Director Candace Andersen, Director Diane Burgis, Director Karen Mitchoff, Director Federal D. Glover, Director Contact: Jackie Lorrekovich, Chief Admin Svcs (925) 941-3312 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: May 23, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C.3 To:Contra Costa County Fire Protection District Board of Directors From:Jeff Carman, Chief, Contra Costa County Fire Protection District Date:May 23, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:2017 Cal Fire Volunteer Fire Assistance Grant 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 78 BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) Reserve firefighters provide fire prevention, fire suppression, and medical support to the Briones Valley area. Additionally, reserves can be expected to respond to major incidents within the District to provide staffing and support for on-scene firefighters. The District will apply for wildland personal protective equipment (PPE) such as helmets, goggles, shrouds, jackets, pants, boots, shelters, wildland packs, face masks, gear bags, radios, pagers, and a basic Emergency Medical Technician (EMT) airway and trauma bag. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The District will not be able to take advantage of this funding opportunity to purchase equipment for the reserve firefighter program. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: No impact. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 79 DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY AND FIRE PROTECTION STATE OF CALIFORNIA Natural Resources Agency Agreement for the Volunteer Fire Assistance Program of the Cooperative Forestry Assistance Act of 1978 THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into ON THE LAST SIGNATORY DATE ON PAGE 6, by and between the STATE of California, acting through the Director of the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection hereinafter called “STATE”, and ___________________________________________ hereinafter called “LOCAL AGENCY”, covenants as follows: RECITALS: 1. STATE has been approved as an agent of the United States Department of Agriculture, (USDA), Forest Service for the purpose of administering the Cooperative Forestry Assistance Act (CFAA) of 1978 (PL 95-313, United States Code, Title 16, Chapter 41, Section 2010 et seq., Volunteer Fire Assistance Program), hereinafter referred to as “VFA”, and 2. The VFA has made funds available to STATE for redistribution, under certain terms and conditions, to LOCAL AGENCY to assist LOCAL AGENCY to upgrade its fire protection capability, and 3. LOCAL AGENCY desires to participate in said VFA. NOW THEREFORE, it is mutually agreed between the parties as follows: 4. APPROVAL: This Agreement is of no force or effect until signed by both parties and approved by the Department of General Services, if required. LOCAL AGENCY may not commence performance until such approval has been obtained. 5. TIMELINESS: Time is of the essence in this Agreement. 6. FORFEITURE OF AWARD: LOCAL AGENCY must return this Agreement and required resolution properly signed and executed to STATE at the address specified in paragraph 11, with a postmark no later than December 1, 2017 or LOCAL AGENCY will forfeit the funds. 7. GRANT AND BUDGET CONTIGENCY CLAUSE: It is mutually understood between the parties that this Agreement may have been written for the mutual benefit of both parties before ascertaining the availability of congressional appropriation of funds, to avoid program and fiscal delays that would occur if the Agreement were executed after that determination was made. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 80 This Agreement is valid and enforceable only if sufficient funds are made available to the STATE by the United States Government for the State Fiscal Year 2017 for the purpose of this program. In addition, this Agreement is subject to any additional restrictions, limitations, or conditions enacted by the Congress or to any statute enacted by the Congress that may affect the provisions, terms, or funding of this Agreement in any manner. The parties mutually agree that if the Congress does not appropriate sufficient funds for the program, this Agreement shall be amended to reflect any reduction in funds. The STATE has the option to invalidate the Agreement under the 30-day cancellation clause or to amend the Agreement to reflect any reduction in funds. 8. REIMBURSEMENT: STATE will reimburse LOCAL AGENCY, from funds made available to STATE by the Federal Government, an amount not to exceed $18,250.00 on a 50/50 matching funds basis, for the performance of specific projects and/or purchase of specific items identified in Exhibit(s) A, Application for Funding, attached hereto. Reimbursement will be only for those projects accomplished and/or items purchased between THE LAST SIGNATORY DATE ON PAGE 6 and JUNE 30, 2018. This sum is the sole and maximum payment that STATE will make pursuant to this Agreement. LOCAL AGENCY must bill STATE at the address specified in paragraph 11, with a postmark no later than September 1, 2018 in order to receive the funds. The bill submitted by LOCAL AGENCY must clearly delineate the projects performed and/or items purchased. A vendor’s invoice or proof of payment to vendor(s) must be included for items purchased. 9. LIMITATIONS: Expenditure of the funds distributed by STATE herein is subject to the same limitations as placed by the VFA, upon expenditure of United States Government Funds. Pursuant to Title 7 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Section 3016.32 subject to the obligations and conditions set forth in that section; title to any equipment and supplies acquired under this Agreement vests with the LOCAL AGENCY. For any equipment items over $5,000, the federal government may retain a vested interested in accordance with paragraph 16 below. 10. MATCHING FUNDS: Any and all funds paid to LOCAL AGENCY under the terms of this Agreement, hereinafter referred to as “VFA Funds”, shall be matched by LOCAL AGENCY on a dollar-for-dollar basis, for each project listed on attachment(s) hereto identified as “Exhibit(s) A”. No amount of unpaid “contributed” or “volunteer” labor or services shall be used or consigned in calculating the matching amount “actually spent” by LOCAL AGENCY. LOCAL AGENCY shall not use VFA Funds as matching funds for other federal grants, including Department of Interior (USDI) Rural Fire Assistance grants, nor use funds from other federal grants, including USDI Rural Fire Assistance grants, as matching funds for VFA Funds. ADDRESSES: The mailing addresses of the parties hereto, for all notices, billings, payments, repayments, or any other activity under the terms of the Agreement, are: 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 81 LOCAL AGENCY: Attention: Telephone Number(s): FAX Number: E-mail STATE: Department of Forestry and Fire Protection Grants Management Unit, Attn: Megan Esfandiary P. O. Box 944246 Sacramento, California 94244-2460 PHONE: (916) 653-3649 FAX (916) 653-8957 12. PURPOSE: Any project to be funded hereunder must be intended to specifically assist LOCAL AGENCY to organize, train, and/or equip local firefighting forces in the aforementioned rural area and community to prevent or suppress fires which threaten life, resources, and/or improvements within the area of operation of LOCAL AGENCY. 13. COMBINING: In the event funds are paid for two or more separate, but closely related projects, the 50/50 cost-sharing formula will be applied to the total cost of such combined projects. 14. OVERRUNS: In the event that the total cost of a funded project exceeds the estimate of costs upon which this Agreement is made, LOCAL AGENCY may request additional funds to cover the Agreement share of the amount exceeded. However, there is no assurance that any such funds are, or may be, available for reimbursement. Any increase in funding will require an amendment. 15. UNDERRUNS: In the event that the total cost of a funded project is less than the estimate of costs upon which this Agreement is made, LOCAL AGENCY may request that additional eligible projects/items be approved by STATE for Agreement funding. However, there is no assurance that any such approval will be funded. Approval of additional projects/items, not listed on the Exhibit A application, made by STATE, will be in writing and will require an amendment. 16. FEDERAL INTEREST IN EQUIPMENT: The Federal Government has a vested interest in any item purchased with VFA funding in excess of $5,000 regardless of the length of this Agreement, until such time as the fair market value is less than $5,000. The VFA percentage used to purchase the equipment will be applied to the sale price and recovered for the Government during the sale. This percentage will remain the same even following depreciation. The Federal Government may not have to be reimbursed if the disposal sale amounts to a fair market value of less than $5,000. LOCAL AGENCY will notify STATE of the disposal of such items. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 82 17. EQUIPMENT INVENTORY: Any single item purchased in excess of $5,000 will be assigned a VFA Property Number by the STATE. LOCAL AGENCY shall forward a copy of the purchase documents listing the item, brand, model, serial number, any LOCAL AGENCY property number assigned, and a LOCAL AGENCY contact and return address to STATE at the address specified in paragraph 11. The STATE will advise the LOCAL AGENCY contact of the VFA Property Number assigned. 18. AUDIT: LOCAL AGENCY agrees that the STATE, the Department of General Services, the Bureau of State Audits, or their designated representative shall have the right to review and to copy any records and supporting documentation pertaining to the performance of this Agreement. LOCAL AGENCY agrees to maintain such records for possible audit for a minimum of three (3) years after final payment, unless a longer period of records retention is stipulated. LOCAL AGENCY agrees to allow the auditor(s) access to such records during normal business hours and to allow interviews of any employees who might reasonably have information related to such records. Further, LOCAL AGENCY agrees to include a similar right of the State of California to audit records and interview staff in any subcontract related to performance of this Agreement. (GC 8546.7, PCC 10115 et seq., CCR Title 2, Section 1896). 19. DISPUTES: In the event of any dispute over qualifying matching expenditures of LOCAL AGENCY, the dispute will be decided by STATE and its decision shall be final and binding. 20. INDEMNIFICATION: LOCAL AGENCY agrees to indemnify, defend, and save harmless, the STATE, its officers, agents, and employees, from any and all claims and losses, accruing or resulting to any and all contractors, subcontractors, suppliers, laborers, and any other person, firm or corporation furnishing or supplying work services, materials, or supplies in connection with the performance of this Agreement, and from any and all claims and losses accruing or resulting to any person, firm or corporation who may be injured or damaged by LOCAL AGENCY in the performance of this Agreement. 21. DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE REQUIREMENTS: LOCAL AGENCY will comply with the requirements of the Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1990 and will provide a drug-free workplace by taking the following actions: a. Publish a statement notifying employees that unlawful manufacture, distribution, dispensation, possession or use of a controlled substance is prohibited and specifying actions to be taken against employees for violations. b. Establish a Drug-Free Awareness Program to inform employees about: 1) the dangers of drug abuse in the workplace; 2) the person's or organization's policy of maintaining a drug-free workplace; 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 83 3) any available counseling, rehabilitation and employee assistance programs; and, 4) penalties that may be imposed upon employees for drug abuse violations. c. Every employee who works on the proposed Agreement will: 1) receive a copy of the company's drug-free workplace policy statement; and, 2) agree to abide by the terms of the company's statement as a condition of employment on the Agreement. Failure to comply with these requirements may result in suspension of payments under the Agreement or termination of the Agreement or both and LOCAL AGENCY may be ineligible for funding of any future State Agreement if the department determines that any of the following has occurred: (1) the LOCAL AGENCY has made false certification, or violated the certification by failing to carry out the requirements as noted above. (GC 8350 et seq.) 22. TERM: The term of the Agreement SHALL COMMENCE ON THE LAST SIGNATORY DATE ON PAGE 6 and continue through June 30, 2018. 23. TERMINATION: This Agreement may be terminated by either party giving 30 days written notice to the other party or provisions herein amended upon mutual consent of the parties hereto. 24. AMENDMENTS: No amendment or variation of the terms of this Agreement shall be valid unless made in writing, signed by the parties and approved as required. No oral understanding or Agreement not incorporated in the Agreement is binding on any of the parties. 25. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR: LOCAL AGENCY, and the agents and employees of LOCAL AGENCY, in the performance of this Agreement, shall act in an independent capacity and not as officers or employees or agents of the STATE or the Federal Government. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 84 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the last signatory date below. STATE OF CALIFORNIA LOCAL AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY AND FIRE PROTECTION By: By: Signature *Signature Dan Sendek Printed Name Printed Name Staff Chief Title **Title Cooperative Fire Programs Last Signatory Date ***Date *Ensure that the officer signing here for LOCAL AGENCY IS THE SAME Officer authorized in the Resolution to execute this Agreement. **Ensure that the title entered here IS THE SAME title used in the Resolution for the Officer who is executing this Agreement. ***Ensure that the date LOCAL AGENCY signs IS THE SAME DATE as the Resolution date OR LATER. FOR STATE USE ONLY CONTRACTOR STATE AGENCY DEPT. OF GEN. SER. CONTROLLER AMOUNT ENCUMBERED BY THIS DOCUMENT $18,250.00 PROGRAM/CATEGORY (CODE AND TITLE) Support FUND TITLE Federal Department of General Services Use Only (OPTIONAL USE) Vendor # PRIOR AMOUNT ENCUMBERED FOR THIS AGREEMENT $0 ITEM 3540-001-0001 CHAPTER 14 STATUTE 2017 FISCAL YEAR 17/18 DGS APPROVAL NOT REQUIRED PER SAM 1215 TOTAL AMOUNT ENCUMBERED TO DATE $18,250.00 OBJECT OF EXPENDITURE (CODE AND TITLE) 17-9214-418.99-92692 I hereby certify upon my own personal knowledge that budgeted funds are available for the period and purpose of the expenditure stated above. T.B.A. NO. B.R. NO. SIGNATURE OF CDF ACCOUNTING OFFICER X DATE 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 85 RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Interim Public Works Director, or designee, to execute Contract Amendment No. 1 to the Consulting Services Agreement (CSA) with Quincy Engineering, Incorporated (Quincy), effective October 1, 2017, to extend the term from September 30, 2017, to a new term of December 31, 2017, for professional engineering services for the Buchanan Field Airport Taxiway Echo & Kilo Improvements Project, Concord area. Project No. 4855-4652-SAS6X5322 / Federal Project No. AIP 3-06-0050-021 (District IV) FISCAL IMPACT: This project, including the CSA, is funded by 90% Federal Aviation Administration Funds, 2.25% Caltrans Funds, 7.75% Airport Enterprise Funds. BACKGROUND: The project consists of the reconstruction of portions of Taxiway E and compass rose pavements, overlay a portion of Taxiway K and install pavement markings at the Buchanan Field Airport in the Concord area of Contra Costa County. The project completion was delayed due to unavailability of materials therefore completion of work will not occur until December. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Kevin Emigh, 925.313-2233 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: C. 8 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Interim Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Contract Amendment with Quincy Engineering, Incorporated, Concord area. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 86 BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) Quincy was selected to provide construction management services for the project after completing a request for qualifications solicitation, technical proposal, and interview process. Public Works has successfully negotiated with Quincy to provide the construction management services. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The Consultant would not be paid for services rendered. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 87 RECOMMENDATION(S): DENY claims filed by Bassem Banafa, Richard Chew, Natalie Holt, and Helen Stimson. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: Baseem Banafa: Personal claim for loss of wages and attorney fees in an amount to exceed $25,000. Richard Chew: Property claim for lost items in undisclosed amount Natalie Holt: Property claim for damage to vehicle in the amount of $500. Helen Stimson: Personal injury claim for a trip and fall in the amount of $240. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Scott Selby 925.335.1400 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stephanie Mello, Deputy cc: C. 9 To:Board of Supervisors From:David Twa, County Administrator Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Claims 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 88 RECOMMENDATIONS Acting as the Governing Board of the Contra Costa County Housing Authority, DENY claim filed by Marcia Kowlessar. BACKGROUND See attached. FISCAL IMPACT No fiscal impact. Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF COMMISSIONERS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Scott Selby 925.335.1400 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 Joseph Villarreal, Executive Director By: Stephanie Mello, Deputy cc: C. 10 To:Board of Supervisors From:Joseph Villarreal, Housing Authority Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Claims 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 89 ATTACHMENTS Claim-Kowlessar 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 90 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 91 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 92 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 93 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 94 RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE Board meeting minutes for October 2017, as on file with the Office of the Clerk of the Board. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: Government Code Section 25101(b) requires the Clerk of the Board to keep and enter in the minute book of the Board a full and complete record of the proceedings of the Board at all regular and special meetings, including the entry in full of all resolutions and of all decisions on questions concerning the allowance of accounts. The vote of each member on every question shall be recorded. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Joellen Bergamini 925.335.1906 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stephanie Mello, Deputy cc: C. 11 To:Board of Supervisors From:David Twa, County Administrator Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:APPROVE the Board meeting minutes for October 2017 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 95 RECOMMENDATION(S): ACCEPT Board members meeting reports for October 2017. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: Government Code section 53232.3(d) requires that members of legislative bodies report on meetings attended for which there has been expense reimbursement (mileage, meals, lodging ex cetera). The attached reports were submitted by the Board of Supervisors members in satisfaction of this requirement. District V have nothing to report. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The Board of Supervisors will not be in compliance with Government Code 53232.3(d). APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Joellen Bergamini 925.335.1906 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stephanie Mello, Deputy cc: C. 12 To:Board of Supervisors From:David Twa, County Administrator Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:ACCEPT Board members meeting reports for October 2017 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 96 ATTACHMENTS District II October 2017 Report District IV October 2017 Report District III October 2017 Report District I October 2017 Report 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 97 Supervisor John Gioia October – 2017 Monthly Meeting Statement Government Code section 53232.3(d) requires that members of legislative bodies report on meetings attended for which there has been expense reimbursement (mileage, meals, lodging, etc.). 1. Meeting Date: October 4, 5, & 6, 2017 Meeting: CSAC Executive Committee Annual Planning Retreat Location: Berkeley, CA 2. Meeting Date: October 20, 2017 Meeting: CSAC Institute Retreat & Planning Location: Burlingame, CA Supervisor Gioia sought reimbursement from the County for meetings that he attended in his capacity as a County Supervisor during the month of October, 2017. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 98 Supervisor Candace Andersen – Monthly Meeting Report October 2017 Date Meeting Location 2 Hiring Outreach Martinez 2 SWAT Orinda 3 Rossmoor Safety Seminar Walnut Creek 3 TRAFFIX Danville 5 EBLC Walnut Creek 5 Mental Health Comm Concord 10 Hydrogen Sta Ribbon Cutting SanRamon 11 CCCERA Concord 11 LAFCO Martinez 11 Juvenile Justice Grand Open Martinez 12 Moraga Kiwanis Moraga 12 East Bay EDA Pleasant Hill 14 Ensuring Opp Housing San Ramon 16 CCCSWA Walnut Creek 16 TVTC Danville 17 Board of Supervisors Martinez 18 Central San 20th Anniversary Martinez 19 CCCTA Concord 20 Citizen Corp San Ramon 23 JPA meeting Walnut Creek 24 Board of Supervisors Martinez 25 CCCERA Concord 26 East Bay EDA Oakland 26 CCCSWA Walnut Creek 27 EBRCS Alameda 30 Family & Human Services Martinez 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 99 Date Meeting Name Location 3-Oct Meeting with County Staff Martinez 3-Oct Phone Meeting with Bob Allen, Urban Habitat Policy and Advocacy Martinez 3-Oct Meeting with Supervisor Andersen and TRAFFIX Staff Martinez 5-Oct Meeting with City of Los Angeles, Mayor Eric Garcetti Los Angeles 6-Oct Delta Counties Coalition Meeting Brentwood 6-Oct Athenian School Convocation & Ribbon Cutting Danville 7-Oct Diablo Regional Arts Association Event Walnut Creek 13-Oct Delta Counties Coalition Meeting Brentwood 14-Oct CASA "Light of Hope" Event Alamo 16-Oct Commander's Call Meeting Pittsburg 17-Oct Board of Supervisors Meeting Martinez 17-Oct Contra Costa Fire Protection District Meeting Martinez 17-Oct Housing Authority Meeting Martinez 18-Oct Meeting with District Attorneys' Association Brentwood 18-Oct Constituent Meeting Brentwood 18-Oct Meeting with Diablo MX Ranch Brentwood 18-Oct Meeting with East Contra Costa Fire Protection District, Chief Helmick Brentwood 19-Oct CCC CSAC Institute Training Martinez 20-Oct Delta Counties Coalition Meeting Brentwood 20-Oct EC2 Economic Development Summit Meeting Antioch 23-Oct Byron Solar Project Site Visit Byron 23-Oct East Contra Costa County Habitat Conservancy Meeting Brentwood 23-Oct New District 3 Office Space Tour Antioch 24-Oct Board of Supervisors Meeting Martinez 25-Oct Phone Meeting with County Legislative Staff Brentwood 25-Oct CALAFCO Conference Mission Beach 26-Oct CALAFCO Conference Mission Beach 27-Oct CALAFCO Conference Mission Beach 28-Oct Brentwood Hometown Halloween Brentwood 30-Oct Meeting with Gus Vina, Brentwood City Manager Brentwood 30-Oct Discovery Bay and Delta Infrastructure Tour with Senator Glazer Oakley 31-Oct Meeting with Employment & Human Services Director, Kathy Gallagher Martinez Supervisor Diane Burgis - October 2017 AB1234 Report (Government Code Section 53232.3(d) requires that members legislative bodies report on meetings attended for which there has been expense reimbursement (mileage, meals, lodging, etc). 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 100 31-Oct Constituent Meeting Martinez 31-Oct Phone Meeting with Contra Costa Health Services, Jennifer Lifshay Brentwood * Reimbursement may come from an agency other than Contra Costa County 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 101 Purpose Business Meeting Business Meeting Business Meeting Business Meeting Business Meeting Community Outreach Community Outreach Business Meeting Community Outreach Business Meeting Business Meeting Business Meeting Business Meeting Business Meeting Business Meeting Business Meeting Business Meeting Business Meeting Business Meeting Business Meeting Business Meeting Business Meeting Business Meeting Business Meeting Business Meeting Business Meeting Business Meeting Business Meeting Community Outreach Business Meeting Business Meeting Business Meeting Supervisor Diane Burgis - October 2017 AB1234 Report (Government Code Section 53232.3(d) requires that members legislative bodies report on meetings attended for which there has been expense reimbursement (mileage, meals, lodging, etc). 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 102 Business Meeting Business Meeting 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 103 Supervisor Karen Mitchoff October 2017 DATE MEETING NAME LOCATION PURPOSE 10/1/17 Meals on Wheels Pancake Breakfast Pleasant Hill Community Outreach 10/4/17 BAAQMD Meeting San FranciscoDecisions on agenda items 10/4/17 ABAG Administrative Committee Meeting San FranciscoDecisions on agenda items 10/4/17 ABAG Regional Planning Committee San FranciscoDecisions on agenda items 10/4/17 CCTA Planning Committee Walnut Creek Decisions on agenda items 10/7/17 DRAA On Broadway Walnut Creek Community Outreach 10/9/17 TWIC Committee Meeting Martinez Decisions on agenda items 10/11/17 Delta Diablo Board of Directors Meeting Antioch Decisions on agenda items 10/12/17 TRANSPAC Pleasant Hill Decisions on agenda items 10/12/17 STAND!'s Rebuilding Lives Luncheon Concord Community Outreach 10/13/17 ABAG Meetings San FranciscoDecisions on agenda items 10/16/17 CCCSWA Meeting Martinez Decisions on agenda items 10/17/17 Board of Supervisors Meeting Martinez Decisions on agenda items 10/18/17 BAAQMD Meeting San FranciscoDecisions on agenda items 10/18/17 CCTA Authority Board Meeting Walnut Creek Decisions on agenda items 10/23/17 Finance Committee Martinez Decisions on agenda items 10/23/17 BART JPA Meeting Walnut Creek Decisions on agenda items 10/24/17 Board of Supervisors Meeting Martinez Decisions on agenda items 10/26/17 BAAQMD Mobile Source Committee San FranciscoDecisions on agenda items 10/26/17 CCCSWA Board Meeting Walnut Creek Decisions on agenda items 10/28/17 Affordable Housing Town Hall Concord Decisions on agenda items 10/30/17 Focus on the Future Conference Concord Regional transportation items 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 104 APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Kate Sibley, (925) 335-1032 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stephanie Mello, Deputy cc: C. 13 To:Board of Supervisors From:David Twa, County Administrator Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:2017 Holiday Food Fight Kick Off 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 105 AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Resolution No. 2017/401 MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed Resolution No. 2017/401 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 106 In the matter of:Resolution No. 2017/401 LAUNCHING THE 2017 "CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CARES" HOLIDAY FOOD FIGHT WHEREAS, the Food Bank of Contra Costa and Solano, which originated as a Contra Costa County project, works heroically on the front line of the daily effort to address this issue, providing food to 121,500 residents of Contra Costa County, a number that has happily decreased since last year as a result of the growing economy; and WHEREAS, one in nine people in this County need the Food Bank's assistance at this time; and WHEREAS, the recent fires in neighboring Napa, Sonoma, and Solano counties will create extra demands on the Food Bank’s budget due to reduced access to produce, as well as needing to serve thousands of displaced people needing extra help as they struggle to regain some semblance of normal life; and WHEREAS, the Food Bank is enabled, by our monetary donations, to purchase and distribute fresh produce, which makes up nearly 60% of everything they dispense to our neighbors; and WHEREAS, approximately 7,000 employees of Contra Costa County, in virtually every department, have since 2002 been holding this annual drive to serve the residents of Contra Costa County who are in need of a helping hand, and have themselves in that time span raised $1.25 million in this effort; and WHEREAS, the 2017 Contra Costa County funds-for-food drive will take place between November 20 and December 31, 2017; and WHEREAS, County employees encourage the public to participate in the 2017 “Counties Care: Peace, Love, and Veggies IV, The Farewell Tour” between the employees of Contra Costa and Solano counties by donating generously and often to the Food Bank of Contra Costa and Solano online in a corresponding “people-to-people” challenge between the counties. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County hereby recognizes this great and constant need in the community, and commends, encourages, and challenges employees and residents of Contra Costa and Solano counties to open their hearts and wallets to assist the Food Bank of Contra Costa and Solano and its client organizations during the coming holiday season; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County hereby officially continues the annual challenge with Solano County and kicks off the 2017 “Counties Care: Peace, Love, and Veggies IV, The Farewell Tour”; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County hereby encourages all citizens of Contra Costa and Solano counties to extend the generous holiday spirit throughout the year to help those less fortunate. ___________________ FEDERAL D. GLOVER Chair, District V Supervisor ______________________________________ JOHN GIOIA CANDACE ANDERSEN District I Supervisor District II Supervisor ______________________________________ DIANE BURGIS KAREN MITCHOFF District III Supervisor District IV Supervisor I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, By: ____________________________________, Deputy 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 107 PR.1, C.13 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 108 APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Enid Mendoza, (925) 335-1039 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stephanie Mello, Deputy cc: C. 14 To:Board of Supervisors From:David Twa, County Administrator Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:2017 Arts Awards 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 109 AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Resolution No. 2017/414 MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed Resolution No. 2017/414 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 110 In the matter of:Resolution No. 2017/414 Honoring the winners of the Arts and Culture Commission of Contra Costa County 2017 Arts Recognition Awards Whereas, Dr. Alan Siegel, Sharon Redman of Vagabond Players, Clarinet Fusion, Richard and Natica Angilly, and Jack Catton; have each advanced the appreciation of the Arts in Contra Costa County: and Whereas, Dr. Alan Siegel has been spearheading the arts as a healing modality to the underserved populations at the Contra Costa Regional Medical Centers, has chaired the Art of Health and Healing Initiative (AHH), housed within the county’s Health Services Department; and with his team has spoken at many conferences from UCSF Cancer Center to the National Organization for the Arts in Health (NOAH); and Whereas, Clarinet Fusion began as a small amateur Clarinet Quartet playing at Assisted Care and Senior Facilities throughout Contra Costa County, and is now developing programs to reach music lovers of all ages all over the world; and has made presentations to the California Music Educators Association to educate teachers and others on the numerous types of clarinets and the breadth of music that is available to them; and has been invited to play concerts throughout the state; and Whereas, Sharon Redman, Founder, Artistic Director, of Vagabond Players, has entertained and enriched the community through Vagabond Player’s productions in senior centers, senior/assisted living facilities and at various small venues for 12 years; has made theatre more accessible to older performers and audiences; has educated seniors artists; educated the community by bringing positive image of aging; and has celebrated the talents of older performers; and Whereas, Richard and Natica Angilly have dedicated and promoted inclusive arts programs through the Contra Costa based “Poetic Dance classes and Poetic Dance Theater” events for more than 30 years; have inspired, encouraged and provided recognition for many emerging artists in the literary and dance fields; and have created collaboration opportunities between poets, dancers, musicians and visual artists both locally and internationally; and Whereas, Jack Catton has been on the Board of Directors of Diablo Ballet and chairs the Fund Development Committee; his efforts and dedication as a substantial contributor to Diablo Ballet’s PEEK Outreach program, and helped make it possible for title-one schools to participate in the performing arts through the Ballet’s year-round, in-school arts education curriculum; and helped facilitate free student performances to underserved students and at risk teenagers in the Juvenile Justice system. Now, Therefore, Be It Resolved that the Board of Supervisors congratulates Dr. Alan Siegel, Clarinet Fusion, Sharon Redman, Richard and Natica Angilly and Jack Catton, for their outstanding achievements and contribution to Contra Costa’s arts and culture. ___________________ FEDERAL D. GLOVER Chair, District V Supervisor ______________________________________ JOHN GIOIA CANDACE ANDERSEN District I Supervisor District II Supervisor ______________________________________ DIANE BURGIS KAREN MITCHOFF District III Supervisor District IV Supervisor I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, By: ____________________________________, Deputy 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 111 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 112 PR.2, C.14 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 113 RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Resolution No. 2017/415 which affirms Contra Costa County's commitment to racial equity, diversity, and the Government Alliance on Race and Equity (GARE) initiative, as recommended by Supervisors Federal Glover and John Gioia. FISCAL IMPACT: None BACKGROUND: The Government Alliance on Race and Equity (GARE) is working to advance racial equity and increase opportunities for all communities. GARE is building the field of practice to advance racial equity within and through government. GARE was launched by the Haas Institute for a Fair and Inclusive Society (HIFIS) at the University of California Berkeley in early 2014. In the Fall of 2015, GARE was established as a joint project of HIFIS and the Center for Social Inclusion (CSI), with GARE formally establishing itself as a program of CSI. CSI is a national tax-exempt non-profit organization that catalyzes community, government, and other institutions to dismantle structural racial inequity and create equitable outcomes for all. CSI crafts and applies tools and strategies to transform our nation’s policies and practices, in order to achieve racial equity. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: L. DeLaney, 925-335-1097 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stephanie Mello, Deputy cc: C. 15 To:Board of Supervisors From:Supervisors John Gioia and Federal D. Glover Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Contra Costa County Resolution Affirming the County's Commitment to Racial Equity, Diversity, and the GARE Initiative 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 114 GARE leverages a multi-sector approach to addressing racial inequity. GARE proactively integrates areas of expertise of each of the partners, working intentionally to build the movement for racial equity across multiple sectors, including academia, government, and community-based organizations. In addition, a Technical Assistance Advisory Group is made up of national leaders on racial equity. These leaders are experts in topics, and provide issue and practice expertise to GARE. GARE recognizes that racial inequities currently exist across all indicators for success, including in education, criminal justice, jobs, housing, public infrastructure and health, regardless of intent, region of the country or size of jurisdiction. GARE also recognizes the reality that government played a central role in the creation and maintenance of racial inequity, and did so explicitly for centuries and has done so for 50+ years implicitly via policies and practices that perpetuate inequities, even when they are color-blind or race-neutral. Government will continue to perpetuate racial inequities unless there are intentional and strategic interventions that lead to transformation. Many current inequities are sustained by historical legacies, structures and systems that repeat patterns of exclusion. Government has the ability to implement policy change at multiple levels and across multiple sectors to drive larger systemic change. Racial equity means we eliminate racial disproportionalities so that race can no longer be used to predict success, and we increase the success of all communities. We set goals and measures to track our progress, with the recognition that strategies must be targeted to close the gaps. Systems and structures that are failing communities of color are actually failing all of us, economically and psychologically. Advancing racial equity is to our collective benefit. GARE's focus is on normalizing conversations about race, operationalizing new policies, practices and organizational 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 115 cultures, and organizing to achieve racial equity. We are seeing more and more jurisdictions that are making a commitment to achieving racial equity, focusing on the power and influence of our own institutions, and working in partnership across sectors and with the community to maximize impact. There is an increasingly strong field of practice. We are organizing in government with the belief that the transformation of government is essential for us to advance racial equity and is critical to our success as a nation. GARE’s strategies include: 1. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 116 BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) Organizing a membership network of jurisdictions that are working to advance racial equity Expanding pathways for new jurisdictions to begin doing racial equity work via work with individual jurisdictions Supporting and building local and regional collaborations that are broadly inclusive and focused on achieving racial equity. Government’s proactive work on racial equity has the potential to leverage significant change, setting the stage for the achievement of racial equity in our communities. Supporting targeted cohorts of jurisdictions and providing best practices, tools and resources is helping to build and sustain current efforts and build a national movement for racial equity. What is an Advancing Racial Equity cohort? Over the last decade, a solid field of practice has developed that advances racial equity and transforms government. Government will not be able to advance racial equity without a fundamental transformation into an effective and inclusive democracy. The field of practice is based on the experiences of early adopters of racial equity within government. Cities and counties across the country have developed and are implementing racial equity initiatives or agendas and using racial equity tools. GARE cohorts will implement proven practices and replicate success, changing the norm of what is expected and possible from government and will increase our collective impact. New jurisdictions can make use of the field of practice and begin and expand work on institutional and structural equity. Based on the experiences of leaders, the new cohorts will participate in a structured curriculum that focuses on strategies that normalize conversations about race, operationalize new policies and cultures, and organize to achieve racial equity. What does a jurisdiction get out of participating in a cohort? As a result of participating in the cohort, each jurisdiction will receive tools and resources, including: A racial equity training curriculum, with cohort participants who are equipped to implement the training with other employees, A Racial Equity Tool to be used in policy, practice, program and budget decisions, A capacity building plan and organizational structure to institutionalize equity within their own jurisdiction, Example policies and practices that help advance racial equity, and A Racial Equity Action Plan Implementation of these tools and resources will vary depending on the opportunities within individual jurisdictions. Technical assistance will be provided by GARE to ensure responsiveness to the local conditions of each jurisdiction. Contra Costa County has participated in GARE during 2016 and 2017 with two cohorts. The 2017 Cohort is comprised of the following: Phil Arnold, Volunteer Team Leader Elvin Baddley, Probation Department Donte Blue, Office of Reentry & Justice Cedrita Claiborne, Health Services Department Lara DeLaney, Office of Reentry & Justice Dianne Dinsmore, Human Resources Director Michelle Fregoso, Employment & Human Services Yolanda Harrell-Jones, Employment & Human Services Connie James, Health Services Department Jamie Jenett, Health, Housing, Homeless Services Division Shannon Ladner-Beasley, Health Services Department 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 117 Sharron Mackey, Health Services Department Daniel Peddycord, Public Health Director AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Resolution No. 2017/415 MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed Resolution No. 2017/415 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 118 In the matter of:Resolution No. 2017/415 AFFIRMING THE COUNTY’S COMMITMENT TO RACIAL EQUITY, DIVERSITY, AND THE GOVERNMENT ALLIANCE ON RACE & EQUITY (GARE) INITIATIVE WHEREAS, on October 18, 2017 former President George W. Bush remarked ““bigotry seems emboldened” in the United States, warning that Americans need to reject “white supremacy.” “Bigotry or white supremacy in any form is blasphemy against the American creed,” Mr. Bush said in his remarks at a forum focused on security; and WHEREAS, these remarks come at time in the United States of America where fears about a rise in bigotry across the country have increased and where incidences of racial intolerance and hatred have led to large-scale protests culminating in violence and, in the case of Charlottesville, Virginia, the death of a counter-protestor; and WHEREAS, the County of Contra Costa (“County”) is home to one of California’s most ethnically, culturally, and socio-economically diverse populations; and WHEREAS, the County believes that diversity of backgrounds, perspectives, and experiences of the American people makes our nation, our communities, and our economy richer and stronger; and WHEREAS, Contra Costa County communities are the most equitable when all residents are fully able to participate in the region’s economic vitality, connect to the region’s assets and resources, and contribute to the region’s readiness for the future, and; WHEREAS, the residents of Contra Costa County should not be limited in their potential to achieve an education, employment, safe and affordable housing, optimal health, a livable wage job, or to live a life free of fear, harassment, intimidation and harm due to the color of their skin, their national origin, cultural background, religion or sexual orientation; WHEREAS, Contra Costa County aspires to be a model for inclusion and equity for all of its residents, including immigrants, refugees, and other newcomers; and WHEREAS, the Government Alliance on Race & Equity (GARE) is a national network of government working to achieve racial equity and advance opportunities for all by supporting targeted cohorts of jurisdictions and providing best practices, tools and resources to build a national movement for racial equity; and WHEREAS, the County has participated in the GARE alliance in both 2016 and 2017 with the formation of two cohorts comprised of County staff and community leaders who have now received: • A racial equity training curriculum, with cohort participants equipped to implement the training with other employees, • A Racial Equity Tool to be used in policy, practice, program and budget decisions, • A capacity building plan and organizational structure to institutionalize equity within our own jurisdiction, • Example policies and practices that help advance racial equity, and • Examples of A Racial Equity Action Plan; and WHEREAS the 2017 GARE cohort is actively working on the development of a Racial Equity Action Plan for Contra Costa County, the implementation of a racial equity training curriculum for County staff, the development of an employee racial equity survey, and strategies to engage community partners in this work; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County affirms its position statement 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 119 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County affirms its position statement on racism: Be it known throughout Contra Costa County to the constituents it serves, the citizens it employs, its business partners, and to people everywhere that we believe that racism, prejudice, bigotry, and discrimination harm all people, and have profoundly negative effects on everyone. Therefore, we publically and fervently denounce any and all manifestations and ideologies of racism. As a County we will not tolerate hateful acts of violence that are perpetrated by extremists who want to intimidate and terrorize people of color in this county and country. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County affirms its commitment to advancing the work of its GARE cohorts by directing that the Office of Reentry & Justice establish a Racial Equity Team consisting of GARE Cohort members, supported by leadership and with leadership representation, to be responsible for the oversight and implementation of an organization-wide Racial Equity Action Plan, which shall be presented to the Board of Supervisors by June 2018. ___________________ FEDERAL D. GLOVER Chair, District V Supervisor ______________________________________ JOHN GIOIA CANDACE ANDERSEN District I Supervisor District II Supervisor ______________________________________ DIANE BURGIS KAREN MITCHOFF District III Supervisor District IV Supervisor I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, By: ____________________________________, Deputy 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 120 C.1 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 121 APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Enid Mendoza, (925) 335-1039 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stephanie Mello, Deputy cc: C. 16 To:Board of Supervisors From:David Twa, County Administrator Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:2017 Special Arts Awards Recognitions for Distinguished Service and Outstanding Contributions to the Arts 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 122 AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Resolution No. 2017/418 MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed Resolution No. 2017/418 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 123 In the matter of:Resolution No. 2017/418 Honoring the winners of the Arts and Culture Commission of Contra Costa County 2017 Special Arts Recognition Awards for Distinguished Service and Outstanding Contributions to the Arts Whereas, Robin Moore and the Diablo Regional Arts Association have each advanced the appreciation of the Arts in Contra Costa County: and Whereas, Robin Moore is being awarded a Commission Special Award for Distinguished Service for providing leadership, commitment, passion, and excellence to hundreds of students and teachers through the Poetry Out Loud Program for more than 10 years; diligently invited and encouraged schools throughout the County to participate; and has enriched the lives of so many people, including the schools, the families of the students, the judges and the community; and Whereas, the Diablo Regional Arts Association (DRAA) is being awarded a Commission Special Award for Outstanding Contribution to the Arts for their Arts Access Program, which has made it possible for over 40,000 students from underserved schools to attend professional, high-quality performances and exhibits at the Lesher Center for the Arts in Walnut Creek; and has contributed to the success of many Performing Arts Organizations through DRAA’s Grant programs. Now, Therefore, Be It Resolved that the Board of Supervisors recognizes and congratulates, Robin Moore and the Diablo Regional Arts Association for their outstanding achievements, commitments, and contributions to Contra Costa’s arts and culture. ___________________ FEDERAL D. GLOVER Chair, District V Supervisor ______________________________________ JOHN GIOIA CANDACE ANDERSEN District I Supervisor District II Supervisor ______________________________________ DIANE BURGIS KAREN MITCHOFF District III Supervisor District IV Supervisor I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, By: ____________________________________, Deputy 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 124 C.16 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 125 APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Colleen Isenberg, 925-521-7100 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stephanie Mello, Deputy cc: C. 17 To:Board of Supervisors From:Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Declaring November 20, 2017 the International Transgender Day of Remembrance in Contra Costa County 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 126 AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Resolution No. 2017/419 MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed Resolution No. 2017/419 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 127 In the matter of:Resolution No. 2017/419 Declaring November 20, 2017 International Transgender Day of Remembrance in Contra Costa County. Whereas, those in society who are perceived to transgress gender norms, regardless of their self-identity or gender expressions are at risk for violence or bullying out of proportion to their numbers; and Whereas, many of these transgender individuals live safe, healthy and fulfilling lives; others have had their lives cut short by violence based on hatred and prejudice, affecting victims, their families, and their communities; and Whereas, gender nonconforming people in Contra Costa County deserve to live free of the threat of oppression, prejudice and violence; and Whereas, many Contra Costa groups and individuals are doing commendable work to support transgender victims of violence, and to prevent violence including The STAND in PRIDE Collaborative of Community Violence Solutions; STAND! for Families Free of Violence; and Rainbow Community Center; and Whereas, the Contra Costa LGBTQQI2-S Inclusion Initiative is helping to promote cultural competence in serving transgender clients and patients; and Whereas, County service providers in behavioral health, medical services, and social services who provide respectful treatment to transgender clients should be celebrated as role models; and Whereas, many transgender and gender variant people and activists show bravery and strength, particularly those working within the intersections of identity and oppression, demonstrating the spirit of survival in advocating for and creating friendly and welcoming spaces for themselves across Contra Costa County, including but not limited to: Diablo Valley Girls; The Brown Boi Project; Gender Spectrum; Contra Costa Health Services; RYSE; Neighborhood House of North Richmond; Center for Human Development's Empowerment Program; Planned Parenthood Shasta-Pacific; Rainbow Community Center's Transgender Support Group and Gender Voice Support Group - among others; and Whereas, the Contra Costa County Health Services LGBT Pride Initiative has provided focused health care training for Transgender patients including the Primary Care for the Transgender Patient on 11/3/14 and LGBT for Behavioral Health Care Psychiatrists on 10/9/14; and Whereas, International Transgender Day of Remembrance provides a meaningful opportunity to honor transgender people, including those who are the victims of violence; to take a stand against intolerable and unacceptable hatred and prejudice, and to acknowledge the many dedicated Contra Costa individuals and groups working to support the transgender community. Now, Therefore, Be It Resolved that the Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County do hereby acknowledge the County's transgender and gender nonconforming youth, seniors, residents, and employees as valued and respected community members, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County declares November 20, 2017 as International Transgender Day of Remembrance in Contra Costa County and encourages a safe and accepting environment for all residents of Contra Costa, with special honor to our transgender and gender nonconforming communities. ___________________ FEDERAL D. GLOVER Chair, District V Supervisor ______________________________________ JOHN GIOIA CANDACE ANDERSEN District I Supervisor District II Supervisor ______________________________________ DIANE BURGIS KAREN MITCHOFF 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 128 District III Supervisor District IV Supervisor I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, By: ____________________________________, Deputy 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 129 C.17 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 130 RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Ordinance No. 2017-28 continuing the established one dollar ($1.00) per document recording fee for the Social Security Number Truncation Program. FISCAL IMPACT: The fee will generate approximately $300,000 per year to pay for the implementation and ongoing operational costs of the state-mandated Social Security Number Truncation Program. BACKGROUND: Government Code section 27301, which went into effect on January 1, 2008, requires the Clerk-Recorder to establish a Social Security Number Truncation Program. Under the state-mandated program, the Clerk-Recorder must redact the first five digits of all social security numbers from all official records recorded with the Clerk-Recorder since January 1, 1980, so that only the last four digits appear on the public record version. Under the program, after January 1, 2018, the Clerk-Recorder may also create a copy in electronic format of each official record recorded before January 1, 1980 and truncate any social security numbers contained in that record. To fund the program, Government Code sections 27304 and 27361(d) authorize the Clerk-Recorder to charge a one-dollar ($1.00) fee for recording the first page of every instrument, paper, or notice required or permitted by law to be recorded. The funds generated by the fee can only be used to pay for the implementation and ongoing operational costs of the program. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Barbara Dunmore (925) 335-7919 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stephanie Mello, Deputy cc: C. 18 To:Board of Supervisors From:Joseph E. Canciamilla, Clerk-Recorder Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Ordinance Continuing the Established Recording Fee for Social Security Truncation Program 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 131 BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) The fee is in addition to all other recording fees charged by the Clerk-Recorder. On May 20, 2008, the Board of Supervisors adopted Ordinance 2008-17, which authorized the Clerk-Recorder to charge the fee. Pursuant to Government Code section 27361(d) and Ordinance 2008-17, the fee cannot be charged after December 31, 2017 unless the Board of Supervisors authorizes the Clerk-Recorder to continue charging the fee. Additionally, the County Auditor must have completed two reviews using generally accepted accounting standards to (1) verify that the funds generated by the fee are used only for the purpose of providing the Social Security Number Truncation Program and conducting the reviews; and (2) estimate any ongoing costs to the county recorder of complying with the program. The County Auditor has completed these reviews. The first review was completed on July 23, 2013 and the second review on August 29, 2017. The review results are available to the public at the Offices of the Clerk-Recorder and the Auditor-Controller. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The Clerk-Recorder would still have to maintain a Social Security Number Truncation Program pursuant to Government Code section 27301, but would have to use other county funding to do so. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Ordinance No. 2017-23 SNN Truncation Fee MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed Ordinance No. 2017-28 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 132 ORDINANCE NO. 2017-28 1 ORDINANCE NO. 2017-28 (uncodified) (Social Security Number Truncation Program Fee) The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors ordains as follows: SECTION I. Authority. This ordinance is enacted pursuant to Government Code sections 27304, 27361(d), and 54985(c)(6). SECTION II. Fee Adoption. On and after the effective date of this ordinance, the one dollar ($1) fee authorized by Government Code section 27361(d) is adopted and shall be charged and collected for recording the first page of every instrument, paper, or notice required or permitted by law to be recorded. SECTION III. Restrictions. The funds generated by the fee authorized by this ordinance shall be used only by the Clerk-Recorder for the purpose of implementing and continuing a social security number truncation program pursuant to Government Code sections 27300 through 27307. SECTION IV. Fee Schedule. The Clerk-Recorder fee schedule shall be revised to be consistent with this ordinance. SECTION V. Effective Date. This ordinance becomes effective 30 days after passage. Within 15 days of passage, this ordinance shall be published once with the names of the supervisors voting for and against it in the East Bay Times, a newspaper published in this County. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 133 ORDINANCE NO. 2017-28 2 PASSED ON ________________________ by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: DAVID TWA, ____________________________ Clerk of the Board of Supervisors Board Chair and County Administrator By: ________________________ [SEAL] Deputy RJH: H:\Clerk-Recorder\Ordinances\SSN fee ordinance 2017 Final2.docx 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 134 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 135 RECOMMENDATION(S): INTRODUCE Ordinance Code 2017-27 amending the County Ordinance Code Section 33-5.329 to exclude from the Merit System the new classification of Animal Services Captain-Exempt, WAIVE READING and Fix December 5, 2017, for adoption. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact with this action. BACKGROUND: The Animal Services Department is requesting to exclude from the Merit System the classification of Animal Services Captain-Exempt. The Animal Services Captain-Exempt position will be responsible for the oversight and management of the animal control field operations division, and supervising Animal Services Lieutenants, Sergeants and Officers engaged in field and center activities. As part of the department's executive team, the Animal Services Captain-Exempt will advise the Animal Services Director on animal control operation issues and participate in strategic planning, development and execution of all Animal Services Department goals and objectives. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If not approved, the Animal Services Field Operations Unit will not have an exempt classification as requested to provide direction and support for animal control services. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Arturo Castillo, (925) 608-8408 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stephanie Mello, Deputy cc: Arturo Castillo C. 19 To:Board of Supervisors From:Beth Ward, Animal Services Director Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:INTRODUCE Ordinance Code 2017-27 amending the County Ordinance Code 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 136 ATTACHMENTS Ordinance No. 2017-27 to Exclude Animal Services Captain from Merit System 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 137 ORDINANCE NO. 2017-27 (Exclude from the Merit System the new classification of Animal Services Captain-Exempt) The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors ordains as follows (omitting the parenthetical footnotes from the official text of the enacted or amended provisions of the County Ordinance Code): SECTION I: Section 33-5.329 of the County Ordinance Code is amended to exclude from the merit system the new classification of Animal Services Captain-Exempt: 33-5.329 - Animal services. (a) The animal services director is excluded and is appointed by the board. (b) The deputy director for animal services is excluded and is appointed by the animal services director. (c) The animal clinic veterinarians and the veterinarian (hourly rate) are excluded and are appointed by the animal services director. (d) The animal services captain-exempt is excluded and is appointed by the animal services director. (Ord. Nos. 2017-27 § 1, 12-05-17; 2012-10 § I, 10-23-12; Ords. 81-70 § 2, 81-32 § I[11, 16], 79-31 § 2, 70-17 §§ 2, 3, 76-62: former §§ 32-2.626, .636) SECTION II: EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance becomes effective 30 days after passage, and within 15 days of passage shall be published once with the names of the supervisors voting for and against it in the ___________________, a newspaper published in this County. PASSED ON ____________________________________ by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 138 ATTEST: DAVID J. TWA, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors and County Administrator By:_________________________ _____________________________ Deputy Board Chair [SEAL] 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 139 RECOMMENDATION(S): Approve the medical staff appointments and reappointments, additional privileges, advancements, and voluntary resignations as recommend by the Medical Staff Executive Committee, at their October 17, 2017 meeting, and by the Health Services Director. FISCAL IMPACT: Not applicable. BACKGROUND: The Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations has requested that evidence of Board of Supervisors' approval for each medical staff member will be placed in his or her credentials file. The recommendations for appointment and reappointment were reviewed by the Credentials Committee and approved by the Medical Executive Committee. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this action is not approved, the Contra Costa Regional Medical Center and Health Centers' medical staff will not be appropriately credentialed and not be in compliance with the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Anna Roth, 925-370-5100 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: Tasha Scott, Marcy Wilhelm, Tami Sloan C. 20 To:Board of Supervisors From:William Walker, M.D., Health Services Director Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Medical Staff Appointments and Reappointments – October, 2017 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 140 ATTACHMENTS Attachment 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 141 MEC Recommendations – October 2017 Definitions: A=Active C=Courtesy Aff=Affliate P/A= Provisional Active P/C= Provisional Courtesy Page 1 A. New Medical Staff Members Michael Brandon, MD Anesthesia Yeun Joo Ching, DDS Dental Johanna Chung, DDS Dental Philip Early, MD Anesthesia Gary Greenberg, MD Anesthesia Genevieve Kinsey, MD Pediatrics Walid Massarweh, MD Internal Medicine Barbara Swarzenski, Md Psychiatry/Psychology Michelle Tsou, DPM Surgery Feisal Yamani, MD Pathology B. Application for Staff Affiliation Shirley Birch, NP Pediatrics C. Advance to Non-Provisional Aaron Besterman, MD Psychiatry/Psychology Monica Eigelberger, MD Surgery (General) Talia Firestein, MD Family Medicine Jane Himmelvo, MD Family Medicine (Detention) Abhilasha Jamwal, MD Pediatrics John “Kip” Jones, MD Psychiatry/Psychology Benjamin King, MD Pediatrics Jason Reinking, MD Emergency Medicine D. Biennial Reappointments Kimberly Butler, MD Family Medicine A Paul Chard, MD Internal Medicine (Gastro) C Dino Elyassnia, MD Surgery (Hand & Plastic) A Alina Faramazyan, MD Psychiatry/Psychology A Steven Harrison, MD Surgery (Ophthalmology) A Laura Hans, MD Pediatrics A Neil Jackson, MD OB/GYN P Scott Josephson, MD Internal Medicine (Neurology) A Edward Lau, MD Psychiatry/Psychology A Minh Hiep Nguyen, MD Critical Care C E. Biennial Renew of Privileges Heather Cedermaz, NP AFF Erin Daisley, FNP AFF Kimberly Humphrey, NP AFF 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 142 MEC Recommendations – October 2017 Definitions: A=Active C=Courtesy Aff=Affliate P/A= Provisional Active P/C= Provisional Courtesy Page 2 F. Voluntary Resignations Harichandran, Dharmini, MD Psychiatry/Psychology Lessin, Susan, MD Internal Medicine McMillan, Monica, MD Emergency Medicine Pramanik, Rajiv, MD Emergency Medicine Tarekegn, Selamawit, MD Hospitalist 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 143 RECOMMENDATION(S): ACCEPT the resignation of Cindy McCann, DECLARE a vacancy in the Alternate seat on the Arts and Culture Commission of Contra Costa County, and DIRECT the Clerk of the Board to post the vacancy. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: The Arts and Culture Commission (AC5) advises the Board of Supervisors in matters and issues relevant to arts and culture to: advance the arts in a way that promotes communication, education, appreciation and collaboration throughout Contra Costa County; to preserve, celebrate and share the arts and culture of the many diverse ethnic groups who live in Contra Costa County; to create partnerships with business and government; and to increase communications and understanding between all citizens through art. Most importantly, the Commission promotes arts and culture as a vital element of the quality of life for all of the citizens of Contra Costa County. Commissioner McCann was appointed to the Alternative Seat for the term of October 20, 2015 to June 30, 2019. She has missed six of the seven AC5 scheduled meetings in 2017. Her absence impacts the Commission's ability to meet quorum rules and conduct meetings as scheduled. The AC5 Chairperson made several attempts to contact Commissioner McCann via telephone and email, with no response. AC5 is requesting the Board of Supervisors to resign Commissioner McCann and vacate the Alternate seat so that a new Commissioner can be appointed. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Kristen Lackey, 925-335-1043 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: C. 21 To:Board of Supervisors From:David Twa, County Administrator Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:RESIGNATION FROM THE ARTS AND CULTURE COMMISSION OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 144 CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The Arts and Culture Commission may lack the number of Commissioners required to meet quorum rules and conduct meetings. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Vacancy Notice 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 145 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 146 RECOMMENDATION(S): 1. APPOINT the individuals identified in Exhibit A to serve on the 2018 Community Corrections Partnership (CCP), pursuant to Penal Code § 1230(b)(2); and 2. APPOINT the individuals identified in Exhibit B to serve on the 2018 Community Corrections Partnership Executive Committee, pursuant to Penal Code § 1230.1(b). FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: The California Legislature passed Assembly Bill 109 (Chapter 15, Statutes of 2011), which transferred responsibility for supervising certain lower-level inmates and parolees from the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) to counties. Assembly Bill 109 (AB 109) took effect on October 1, 2011 and realigned three major areas of the criminal justice system. On a prospective basis, the legislation: • Transferred the location of incarceration for lower-level offenders (specified nonviolent, non-serious, non-sex offenders) from state prison to local county jail and provides for an expanded role for post-release supervision for these offenders; APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Timothy Ewell, 925-335-1036 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: C. 22 To:Board of Supervisors From:PUBLIC PROTECTION COMMITTEE Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:APPOINTMENT OF THE CY2018 COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS PARTNERSHIP (CCP) AND CCP-EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 147 BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) > • Transferred responsibility for post-release supervision of lower-level offenders (those released from prison after having served a sentence for a non-violent, non-serious, and non-sex offense) from the state to the county level by creating a new category of supervision called Post-Release Community Supervision (PRCS); and • Transferred the custody responsibility for parole and PRCS revocations to local jail, administered by county sheriffs. AB109 also created an Executive Committee of the local Community Corrections Partnership (CCP) and tasked it with recommending a Realignment Plan (Plan) to the county Board of Supervisors for implementation of the criminal justice realignment. The Community Corrections Partnership is identified in statute as the following: Community Corrections Partnership 1. Chief Probation Officer (Chair) 2. Presiding Judge (or designee) 3. County supervisor, CAO, or a designee of the BOS 4. District Attorney 5. Public Defender 6. Sheriff 7. Chief of Police 8. Head of the County department of social services 9. Head of the County department of mental health 10. Head of the County department of employment 11. Head of the County alcohol and substance abuse programs 12. Head of the County Office of Education 13. CBO representative with experience in rehabilitative services for criminal offenders 14. Victims’ representative Later in 2011, the Governor signed Assembly Bill 117 (Chapter 39, Statutes of 2011), which served as “clean up” legislation to AB 109. Assembly Bill 117 (AB 117) changed, among other things, the composition of the local CCP-Executive Committee. The CCP-Executive Committee is currently identified in statute as the following: Community Corrections Partnership-Executive Committee 1. Chief Probation Officer (Chair) 2. Presiding Judge (or designee) 3. District Attorney 4. Public Defender 5. Sheriff 6. A Chief of Police 7. The head of either the County department of social services, mental health, or alcohol and drug services (as designated by the board of supervisors) Although AB 109 and AB 117 collectively place the majority of initial planning activities for Realignment on the local CCP, it is important to note that neither piece of legislation cedes powers vested in a county Board of Supervisors’ oversight of and purview over how AB 109 funding is spent. Once the Plan is adopted, the Board of Supervisors can choose to implement that Plan in any manner it may wish. Today’s recommended actions were approved by the Public Protection Committee (PPC) at the November 6, 2017 meeting. The Committee recommends an appointment term of one-year for all non ex-officio seats and plans to make appointment/reappointment recommendations to the Board of Supervisors annually. The PPC continues to acknowledge that, under California law, the Police Chief seat is appointed by the Board of Supervisors and recommends that the appointee be rotated between the cities with the highest number of AB 109 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 148 population (which currently are Richmond, Pittsburg, Antioch and Concord). The PPC is recommending the appointment of Police Chief Guy Swanger from the City of Concord to serve on the CY2018 CCP and CCP-Executive Committees. In addition, the CCP-Community Advisory Board will provide a recommendation for filling the CBO representative seat in the coming months. For this reason, the PPC is not recommending an appointment to that seat (beginning January 1, 2018) at this time. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The Community Corrections Partnership (CCP) and CCP-Executive Committee will not be formally seated for calendar year 2018. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: No impact. ATTACHMENTS Exhibit A - 2018 Community Corrections Partnership & Exhibit B - 2018 Community Corrections Partnership Executive Committee 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 149 EXHIBIT A - 2018 COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS PARTNERSHIP Seat Appointee Term Expiration Chief Probation Officer (Chair)Todd Billeci ex-officio Presiding Judge (or designee)Stephen Nash (designee of Presiding Judge)ex-officio County supervisor, CAO, or a designee of the BOS David J. Twa, County Administrator December 31, 2018 District Attorney Diana Becton ex-officio Public Defender Robin Lipetzky ex-officio Sheriff David O. Livingston ex-officio Chief of Police Guy Swanger, City of Concord December 31, 2018 Head of the County department of social services Kathy Gallagher, Employment and Human Services Director ex-officio Head of the County department of mental health Cynthia Belon, Director of Behavioral Health Services ex-officio Head of the County department of employment Donna Van Wert, Executive Director-Workforce Development Board ex-officio Head of the County alcohol and substance abuse programs Fatima Matal Sol, Director of Alcohol and Other Drugs ex-officio Head of the County Office of Education Karen Sakata, County Superintendent of Schools ex-officio CBO representative with experience in rehabilitative services for criminal offenders Vacant December 31, 2018 Victim's Representative Devorah Levine, Zero Tolerance Program Manager December 31, 2018 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 150 EXHIBIT B - 2018 COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS PARTNERSHIP EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Seat Appointee Term Expiration Chief Probation Officer (Chair)Todd Billeci ex-officio Presiding Judge (or designee)Stephen Nash (designee of Presiding Judge)ex-officio District Attorney Diana Becton ex-officio Public Defender Robin Lipetzky ex-officio Sheriff David O. Livingston ex-officio Chief of Police Guy Swanger, City of Concord December 31, 2018 Representative approved by BOS from the following CCP members:Kathy Gallagher, Employment and Human Services Director December 31, 2018 *Head of County department of Social Services *Head of County department of mental health *Head of County department of alcohol and substance abuse programs 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 151 RECOMMENDATION(S): APPOINT in lieu of election Jim Price, Arthur John Hanson, and Walter Pierce to serve on the Board of Trustees of Reclamation District 799 (Hotchkiss Tract) for a term of four years, commencing in December 2017 and ending in December 2021. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: The Board of Supervisors has received correspondence from Dina Holder, District Secretary for Reclamation District 799, requesting appointment to the Board of Trustees of the District in lieu of elections. Ms. Holder reports that the Board of Trustees of the District, at their regular meeting on July 27, 2017, adopted a resolution to call for an all mailed ballot election to fill the four year terms for three trustees that are set to expire in December 2017. Subsequent to posting the notice calling for nominations, the District received three filing petitions, from Jim Price, Arthur John Hanson, and Walter Pierce. Therefore, the District election scheduled for November 14, 2017 is uncontested and no election will be conducted. At this time, the District respectfully requests that the Board of Supervisors appoint Jim Price, Arthur APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Emlyn Struthers 925.335.1919 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: C. 23 To:Board of Supervisors From:David Twa, County Administrator Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Reclamation District 799 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 152 BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) John Hanson, and Walter Pierce to a four-year term of office on the Board of Trustees of Reclamation District 799. The term will begin in December 2017 and end in December 2021. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The proposed nominees to the Board of Trustees for Reclamation District 799 (Hotchkiss Tract) would not be approved. ATTACHMENTS Reclamation District 799 Letter 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 153 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 154 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 155 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 156 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 157 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 158 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 159 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 160 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 161 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 162 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 163 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 164 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 165 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 166 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 167 RECOMMENDATION(S): APPOINT in lieu of election Robert Lyman, Pete Hansen, and Frank Morgan to serve four-year terms on the Board of Trustees for Reclamation District 800 (Byron Tract) for a term of four years, commencing in December 2017 and ending December 2021. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: The Board of Supervisors has received correspondence from Reclamation District Number 800 (Byron Tract). Reclamation District 800 Secretary Sonnet Rodrigues has respectfully requested that the Board of Supervisors appoint incumbent Trustees Robert Lyman, Pete Hansen, and Frank Morgan in lieu of elections. These appointments will fill open seats on the Reclamation District’s Board of Trustees. Correspondence dated October 2, 2017 from the Reclamation District specifies that nominating petitions were filed for each nominee and that the number of valid petitions did not exceed the number of petitions available. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The proposed nominees to the Board of Trustees for Reclamation District 800 (Byron Tract) would not be approved. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Emlyn Struthers 925.335.1919 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: C. 24 To:Board of Supervisors From:David Twa, County Administrator Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Reclamation District 800 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 168 ATTACHMENTS Reclamation District 800 letter 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 169 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 170 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 171 RECOMMENDATION(S): APPOINT in lieu of election Don Wagenet and Frank Savage to serve on the Board of Trustees of Reclamation District 2024 (Orwood and Palm Tracts), for a term beginning December 2017 and ending December 2021. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: The Board of Supervisors has received correspondence from Dante J. Nomellini, Jr., Secretary and Attorney for Reclamation District 2024 (Orwood and Palm Tracts) requesting appointment to the Board of Trustees in lieu of elections. Mr. Nomellini has respectfully requested that the Board of Supervisors make the appointments in lieu of elections. Correspondence from the firm specifies that pursuant to notice calling for nomination petitions for two positions on the Board of Trustees, the District received two nomination petitions. No petition requesting an election has been received. As a result, pursuant to Water Code sections 50740-50742, no election would be held in the Reclamation District for the vacancies on the Board of District Trustees. At this time the District respectfully APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Emlyn Struthers 925.335.1919 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: C. 25 To:Board of Supervisors From:David Twa, County Administrator Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Reclamation District 2024 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 172 BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) requests that the Board of Supervisors appoint nominee Don Wagenet to the term ending December, 2021, and appoint nominee Frank Savage to the term ending December, 2019 to serve on the Board of Trustees for Reclamation District 2024 (Orwood and Palm Tracts). CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The proposed nominees to the Board of Trustees for Reclamation District 2024 (Orwood and Palm Tracts) would not be approved. ATTACHMENTS Reclamation District 2024 Letter 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 173 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 174 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 175 RECOMMENDATION(S): APPOINT in lieu of election Clark Misner and Randall Neudeck to the Board of Trustees for Reclamation District 2025 (Holland Tract), as listed below: Clark Misner—4 year term Bethel Island, CA 94511 Randall Neudeck—2 year term Sacramento, CA 95814 FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: The Board of Supervisors has received correspondence from Pamela A. Forbus, Assistant Secretary for Reclamation District 2025, requesting appointment to the Board of Trustees in lieu of elections. Ms. Forbus has respectfully requested that the Board of Supervisors make the appointments in lieu of elections. These appointments will fill open seats on the Reclamation District's Board of Trustees. Correspondence from APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Emlyn Struthers 925.335.1919 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: C. 26 To:Board of Supervisors From:David Twa, County Administrator Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Reclamation District 2025 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 176 BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) the firm specifies that at the close of the nomination period on September 14, 2017 there were only two candidates nominated: Clark Misner and Randall Neudeck. As a result, pursuant to Water Code section 50741, no election was held in the Reclamation District for the vacancies on the Board of District Trustees. At this time the District respectfully requests that the Board of Supervisors appoint nominees Clark Misner and Randall Neudeck to serve on the Board of Trustees Reclamation District 2025 (Holland Tract), for terms of four and two years, respectively. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The proposed nominees to the Board of Trustees for Reclamation District No. 2025 (Holland Tract) would not be approved. ATTACHMENTS Reclamation District 2025 Letter 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 177 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 178 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 179 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 180 RECOMMENDATION(S): APPOINT in lieu of election Dave Forkel, Randall Neudeck, and Angela Wright to the Board of Trustees for Reclamation District 2026 (Webb Tract) as listed: Dave Forkel—4 year term Fairfax, CA 94930 Randall Neudeck—2 year term Sacramento, CA 95814 Angela Wright—2 year term Los Angeles, CA 90021 FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: The Board of Supervisors has received correspondence from Pamela A. Forbus, Assistant Secretary for Reclamation District 2026, requesting appointment to the Board of Trustees in lieu of elections. These appointments will APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Emlyn Struthers 925.335.1919 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: C. 27 To:Board of Supervisors From:David Twa, County Administrator Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Reclamation District 2026 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 181 BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) fill open seats on the Webb Tract Reclamation District's Board of Trustees. Correspondence from the firm specifies that at the close of the nomination period on September 14, 2017 there were only three candidates nominated: Dave Forkel, Randall Neudeck, and Angela Wright. As a result, pursuant to Water Code Section 50741, no election was held in the Reclamation District for the vacancies on the Board of District Trustees. At this time the District respectfully requests that the Board of Supervisors appoint nominee Dave Forkel to serve a four-year term, and appoint nominees Randall Neudeck and Angela Wright to serve a two-year term on the Board of Trustees Reclamation District 2026 (Webb Tract). CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The proposed nominees to the Board of Trustees for Reclamation District No. 2026 (Webb Tract) would not be approved. ATTACHMENTS Reclamation District 2026 Letter 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 182 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 183 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 184 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 185 RECOMMENDATION(S): APPOINT in lieu of election Robert Davies, William Hall, and Gilbert Orozco to serve on the Board of Trustees of Reclamation District 2059 (Bradford Island) for a term of four years. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: The Board of Supervisors has received correspondence (attached) from Angelina Tant, District Secretary for Reclamation District 2059 requesting appointment to the Board of Trustees in lieu of elections. Ms. Tant has respectfully requested that the Board of Supervisors make the appointments in lieu of elections. These appointments will fill open seats on the Reclamation District's Board of Trustees. Correspondence from the firm specifies that at the close of the nomination period on September 21, 2017 there were only three candidates nominated: Robert Davies, William Hall, and Gilbert Orozco. As a result, pursuant to Water Code sections 50740-50742, no election would be held in the Reclamation District for the vacancies on the Board of District Trustees. At this time, the District respectfully requests that the Board of Supervisors APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Emlyn Struthers, 925.335.1919 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: C. 28 To:Board of Supervisors From:David Twa, County Administrator Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Reclamation District 2059 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 186 BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) appoint nominees Robert Davies, William Hall, and Gilbert Orozco for a term of four years commencing December 1, 2017 and ending November 30, 2021, to serve on the Board of Trustees Reclamation District 2059 (Bradford Island). CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The proposed nominees to the Reclamation District 2059 would not be approved. ATTACHMENTS Reclamation District 2059 letter 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 187 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 188 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 189 RECOMMENDATION(S): APPOINT in lieu of election Coleman Foley and Thomas E. Baldocchi, Jr. to serve on the Board of Trustees of Reclamation District 2065 (Veale Tract) for a term of four years, ending December 2021. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: The Board of Supervisors has received correspondence from Dante J. Nomellini, Jr., Secretary and Attorney for Reclamation District 2065, Veale Tract requesting appointment to the Board of Trustees in lieu of elections. Mr. Nomellini has respectfully requested that the Board of Supervisors make the appointments in lieu of elections. Correspondence from the firm specifies that no nomination petitions were received and no petition requesting an election was presented to the District. As a result, pursuant to Water Code sections 50740-50742, no election was held in the Reclamation District for the vacancies on the Board of District Trustees. At this time, the District respectfully requests that the Board of Supervisors appoint the incumbents, Coleman Foley and Thomas E. Baldocchi, APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Emlyn Struthers 925.335.1919 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: C. 29 To:Board of Supervisors From:David Twa, County Administrator Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Reclamation District 2065 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 190 BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) Jr., to fill the vacancies since they are qualified and willing to serve during the term ending December 2021. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The proposed nominees to Reclamation District 2065 would not be approved. ATTACHMENTS Reclamation District 2065 Letter 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 191 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 192 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 193 RECOMMENDATION(S): APPOINT in lieu of election the Colby Heaton to the Board of Trustees for Reclamation District 2090 (Quimby Island) for a four-year term as listed: Colby Heaton Roseville, CA 95678 FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: The Board of Supervisors has received correspondence from the Law Offices of Al Warren Hoslett and Pamela A. Forbus, representing the Board of Trustees for Reclamation District Number 2090. Ms. Forbus, as the Assistant Secretary of Reclamation District No. 2090, has respectfully requested that the Board of Supervisors make the appointment in lieu of elections. This appointment will fill one open seat on the Reclamation District’s Board of Trustees. Correspondence from the firm specifies that, on or prior to September 14, 2017, a nominating a petition was filed for one nominee, APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Emlyn Struthers 925.335.1919 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: C. 30 To:Board of Supervisors From:David Twa, County Administrator Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Reclamation District 2090 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 194 BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) and that the number of petitions did not exceed the number of offices to be filled. Notice pursuant to Water Code Section 50741 was published on September 28, 2017, advising that no election would be held in the Reclamation District for the vacancy on the Board of Trustees. At this time, the District respectfully requests that the Board of Supervisors appoint nominee Colby Heaton to serve a four-year term on the Board of Trustees Reclamation District 2090 (Quimby Island). CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The proposed nominee to the Board of Trustees for Reclamation District No. 2090 would not be approved. ATTACHMENTS Reclamation District 2090 Letter 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 195 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 196 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 197 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 198 RECOMMENDATION(S): APPOINT in lieu of election Sandy Speckman Kiefer to serve on the Board of Trustees of Reclamation District 2117 (Coney Island) for a four-year term ending in December 2021. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: The Board of Supervisors has received correspondence from Dante J. Nomellini, Jr., Secretary and Attorney for Reclamation District 2117 (Coney Island) requesting appointment to the Board of Trustees in lieu of elections. Mr. Nomellini has respectfully requested that the Board of Supervisors make the appointment in lieu of elections. Correspondence from the firm specifies that pursuant to notice calling for nomination petitions for one vacancy on the Board of Trustees, the District received one nomination petition from Sandy Speckman Kiefer. No petition requesting an election has been received. As a result, pursuant to Water Code sections 50740-50742, no election would be held in the Reclamation District for the vacancies on the Board of District Trustees. At this time the District respectfully requests that the Board of Supervisors appoint nominee Sandy Speckman Kiefer for the term ending December, 2021 to serve on the Board of Trustees for Reclamation District 2117 (Coney Island). APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Emlyn Struthers 925.335.1919 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: C. 31 To:Board of Supervisors From:David Twa, County Administrator Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Reclamation District 2117 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 199 CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The proposed nominees to Reclamation District 2117 would not be approved. ATTACHMENTS Reclamation District 2117 letter 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 200 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 201 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 202 RECOMMENDATION(S): APPOINT in lieu of election Eric Schmit to the Board of Trustees for Reclamation District 2137 for a four-year term as listed: Edward Schmit, Davis, CA 95616. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: The Board of Supervisors has received correspondence from the Law Offices of Al Warren Hoslett and Pamela A. Forbus, representing the Board of Trustees for Reclamation District Number 2137. Ms. Forbus, as the Assistant Secretary of Reclamation District No. 2137, has respectfully requested that the Board of Supervisors make the appointment in lieu of elections. This appointment will fill one open seat on the Reclamation District’s Board of Trustees. Correspondence from the firm specifies that, on or prior to September 14, 2017, a nominating petition was filed for one nominee, and that the number of petitions did not exceed the number of offices to be filled. Notice pursuant to Water Code Section 50741 was published on September 28, 2017, advising that no election would be held in the Reclamation District for the vacancy on the Board of Trustees. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Emlyn Struthers 925.335.1919 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: C. 32 To:Board of Supervisors From:David Twa, County Administrator Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Reclamation District 2137 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 203 CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The proposed nominee to the Board of Trustees for Reclamation District No. 2137 would not be approved. ATTACHMENTS Reclamation District 2137 Letter 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 204 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 205 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 206 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 207 RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 22106 to reallocate the salary of the Chief Quality Officer - Exempt (VAB2) (unrepresented) classification from salary plan and grade B85-2508 ($14,289) to salary plan and grade B85-2508 ($18,289) on the salary schedule and discontinue vacation buy back eligibility for this classification in the Health Services Department. FISCAL IMPACT: Upon approval, this action has an annual cost increase of approximately $70,560 with pension costs of $17,040 already included. This cost will primarily be offset with Hospital Enterprise Fund I revenues and partially offset by the discontinuance of sale of vacation eligibility for employees in this classification. BACKGROUND: The Health Services Department is requesting to reallocate the salary of the Chief Quality Officer - Exempt classification in order to bring it to a competitive level for retention and recruitment needs. Under the direction of the Chief Executive Officer for the Contra Costa Regional Medical Center and Health Centers, the Chief Quality Officer-Exempt provides senior leadership and is responsible for overseeing the integration of health care system-wide quality improvement projects that promote a culture of safety and continuous process improvement. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Jo-Anne Linares, 957-5240 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Jo-Anne Linares C. 33 To:Board of Supervisors From:William Walker, M.D., Health Services Director Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Reallocate the salary of Chief Quality Officer-Exempt classification in the Health Services Department 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 208 BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) Over the last few years, this classification has evolved significantly and is responsible for an integral part of the Public Hospital Redesign and Initiatives in Medi-Cal (PRIME) project. In order for PRIME to be successful, the incumbent must possess detailed knowledge of regulatory and professional standards related to patient safety and performance improvement, and must be able to ensure that the County hospital is meeting its PRIME goals and objectives in order to remain a thriving and viable system of care. If the Department fails to meet the PRIME goals and objectives, it could risk losing millions of dollars. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this action is not approved, the Department will not be able to appropriately compensate this critical single position classification and may have challenges meeting the program requirements of the PRIME project at the Contra Costa Regional Medical Center and Health Centers. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS P300 No. 22106 HSD MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed P300 22106 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 209 POSITION ADJUSTMENT REQUEST NO. 22106 DATE 6/1/2017 Department No./ Department HEALTH SERVICES - Hospital/Health Budget Unit No. 0540 Org No. 6544 Agency No. A18 Action Requested: Reallocate the classification of Chief Quality Officer - Exempt (VAB2) on the salary schedule in the Health Services Department. Proposed Effective Date: 8/1/2017 Classification Questionnaire attached: Yes No / Cost is within Department’s budget: Yes No Total One-Time Costs (non-salary) associated with request: $0.00 Estimated total cost adjustment (salary / benefits / one time): Total annual cost $70,560.00 Net County Cost $0.00 Total this FY $47,040.00 N.C.C. this FY $0.00 SOURCE OF FUNDING TO OFFSET ADJUSTMENT 100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I Revenues Department must initiate necessary adjustment and submit to CAO. Use additional sheet for further explanations or comments. Dorette McCollumn ______________________________________ (for) Department Head REVIEWED BY CAO AND RELEASED TO HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT Enid Mendoza 7/19/2017 ___________________________________ ________________ Deputy County Administrator Date HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATIONS DATE 11/1/2017 Reallocate the salary of classification Chief Quality Officer-Exempt (VAB2) from salary and plan grade level B85-2508 ($14,289) to salary plan and grade level B85-2508 ($18,289) on the salary schedule in the Health Services Department. (Unrepresented) Amend Resolution 71/17 establishing positions and resolutions allocating classes to the Basic / Exempt salary schedule. Effective: Day following Board Action. (Date) Marta Goc 11/1/2017 ___________________________________ ________________ (for) Director of Human Resources Date COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION: DATE 11/7/2017 Approve Recommendation of Director of Human Resources Disapprove Recommendation of Director of Human Resources Enid Mendoza Other: ____________________________________________ ___________________________________ (for) County Administrator BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ACTION: David J. Twa, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors Adjustment is APPROVED DISAPPROVED and County Administrator DATE BY APPROVAL OF THIS ADJUSTMENT CONSTITUTES A PERSONNEL / SALARY RESOLUTION AMENDMENT POSITION ADJUSTMENT ACTION TO BE COMPLETED BY HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT FOLLOWING BOARD ACTION Adjust class(es) / position(s) as follows: P300 (M347) Rev 3/15/01 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 210 REQUEST FOR PROJECT POSITIONS Department Date 11/7/2017 No. 1. Project Positions Requested: 2. Explain Specific Duties of Position(s) 3. Name / Purpose of Project and Funding Source (do not use acronyms i.e. SB40 Project or SDSS Funds) 4. Duration of the Project: Start Date End Date Is funding for a specified period of time (i.e. 2 years) or on a year-to-year basis? Please explain. 5. Project Annual Cost a. Salary & Benefits Costs: b. Support Costs: (services, supplies, equipment, etc.) c. Less revenue or expenditure: d. Net cost to General or other fund: 6. Briefly explain the consequences of not filling the project position(s) in terms of: a. potential future costs d. political implications b. legal implications e. organizational implications c. financial implications 7. Briefly describe the alternative approaches to delivering the services which you have considered. Indicate why these alternatives were not chosen. 8. Departments requesting new project positions must submit an updated cost benefit analysis of each project position at the halfway point of the project duration. This report is to be submitted to the Human Resources Department, which will forward the report to the Board of Supervisors. Indicate the date that your cost / benefit analysis will be submitted 9. How will the project position(s) be filled? a. Competitive examination(s) b. Existing employment list(s) Which one(s)? c. Direct appointment of: 1. Merit System employee who will be placed on leave from current job 2. Non-County employee Provide a justification if filling position(s) by C1 or C2 USE ADDITIONAL PAPER IF NECESSARY 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 211 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 212 RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Personnel Resolution No. 22144 to establish the classification of Animal Services Captain-Exempt (BJD2) (unrepresented) at salary plan and grade B85-1874 ($7,628-$9,272) and add one (1) full-time position in the Animal Services Department. FISCAL IMPACT: Upon approval, this will result in a cost of approximately $189,140, which includes an annual pension expense of $39,846. After the classification is established and the ordinance code is amended to exempt this class from the merit system, the Department will return to the Board at a future date to eliminate the Animal Services Deputy Director classification since the Captain class will assume those responsibilities. Once all actions are completed, this will result in a cost neutral action since the salary of the new Animal Services Captain-Exempt classification will be the same as the salary of the Animal Services Deputy Director. The position will be funded by 32% User Fees, 31% City Revenue, 37% County General Fund. BACKGROUND: The Animal Services Department has been working toward a new organizational structure over the past year, which has included the establishment of an executive team that supports the Director of Animal Services in the overall administration of the Animal Services Department. In the past, this function was carried out solely by the Deputy Director of Animal Services; however, due to increased needs for services in the community, there has been growth in both the workforce of the department and the volume/types of work being performed. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Arturo Castillo, (925) 608-8470 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Arturo Castillo C. 34 To:Board of Supervisors From:Beth Ward, Animal Services Director Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Establish the classification of Animal Services Captain-Exempt and add one position in the Animal Services Department 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 213 BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) The management responsibilities previously performed by the Deputy Director have become too great for one position to perform, so the department has moved to establish new classes to provide operational management over each division (field operations, community outreach, medical programs, and administration) in order to keep the department functioning properly. The Animal Services Captain-Exempt position will be responsible for the oversight and management of the animal control field operations division, advising the Animal Services Director on animal control operation issues, and supervising Animal Services Lieutenants, Sergeants and Officers engaged in field and center activities. This will be the final class needed to establish the executive team support the Director of Animal Services is seeking. The Department will return to the Board at a later date to eliminate the Deputy Director of Animal Services since the Captain class will replace most of those functions. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If not approved, the Director of Animal Services will not have the executive level classification needed to support animal control and field services. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS P300 Animal Services Captain MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed P300 22144 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 214 POSITION ADJUSTMENT REQUEST NO. 22144 DATE 8/4/2017 Department No./ Department Animal Services Budget Unit No. 0366 Org No. 3333 Agency No. 36 Action Requested: ADOPT Personnel Resolution No. 22144 to establish the classification of Animal Services Captain- Exempt (unrepresented) and add one full-time position in the Animal Services Department. Proposed Effective Date: 9/01/2017 Classification Questionnaire attached: Yes No / Cost is within Department’s budget: Yes No Total One-Time Costs (non-salary) associated with request: $0.00 Estimated total cost adjustment (salary / benefits / one time): Total annual cost $189,140.00 Net County Cost $69,982.00 Total this FY $157,617.00 N.C.C. this FY $58,318.00 SOURCE OF FUNDING TO OFFSET ADJUSTMENT 32% User Fees, 31% City Revenues, 37% County General Fund Department must initiate necessary adjustment and submit to CAO. Use additional sheet for further explanations or comments. Arturo Castillo ______________________________________ (for) Department Head REVIEWED BY CAO AND RELEASED TO HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT Susan Smith 9/5/17 ___________________________________ ________________ Deputy County Administrator Date HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATIONS DATE 10/16/17 Establish the classification of Animal Services Captain-Exempt (BJD2) (unrepresented) at salary plan and grade B85 1874 ($7,628-$9,272) and add one (1) full time position. Amend Resolution 71/17 establishing positions and resolutions allocating classes to the Basic / Exempt salary schedule. Effective: Day following Board Action. January 5, 2018 (Date) Lauren Ludwig 10/16/2017 ___________________________________ ________________ (for) Director of Human Resources Date COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION: DATE 11/8/2017__ Approve Recommendation of Director of Human Resources Disapprove Recommendation of Director of Human Resources Enid Mendoza Other: ___________________________________ (for) County Administrator BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ACTION: David J. Twa, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors Adjustment is APPROVED DISAPPROVED and County Administrator DATE BY APPROVAL OF THIS ADJUSTMENT CONSTITUTES A PERSONNEL / SALARY RESOLUTION AMENDMENT POSITION ADJUSTMENT ACTION TO BE COMPLETED BY HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT FOLLOWING BOARD ACTION Adjust class(es) / position(s) as follows: P300 (M347) Rev 3/15/01 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 215 REQUEST FOR PROJECT POSITIONS Department Date 11/9/2017 No. xxxxxx 1. Project Positions Requested: 2. Explain Specific Duties of Position(s) 3. Name / Purpose of Project and Funding Source (do not use acronyms i.e. SB40 Project or SDSS Funds) 4. Duration of the Project: Start Date End Date Is funding for a specified period of time (i.e. 2 years) or on a year-to-year basis? Please explain. 5. Project Annual Cost a. Salary & Benefits Costs: b. Support Costs: (services, supplies, equipment, etc.) c. Less revenue or expenditure: d. Net cost to General or other fund: 6. Briefly explain the consequences of not filling the project position(s) in terms of: a. potential future costs d. political implications b. legal implications e. organizational implications c. financial implications 7. Briefly describe the alternative approaches to delivering the services which you have considered. Indicate why these alternatives were not chosen. 8. Departments requesting new project positions must submit an updated cost benefit analysis of each project position at the halfway point of the project duration. This report is to be submitted to the Human Resources Department, which will forward the report to the Board of Supervisors. Indicate the date that your cost / benefit analysis will be submitted 9. How will the project position(s) be filled? a. Competitive examination(s) b. Existing employment list(s) Which one(s)? c. Direct appointment of: 1. Merit System employee who will be placed on leave from current job 2. Non-County employee Provide a justification if filling position(s) by C1 or C2 USE ADDITIONAL PAPER IF NECESSARY 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 216 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 217 RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 22187 to: (1) Establish the new classification of Communications Equipment Specialist I - Trainee (PEKA) (represented) on the salary schedule at salary plan and grade level TB5 1483 ($4,925 - $5,430); (2) Revise, retitle and reallocate the salary of the classification of Communications Equipment Specialist (PEWF) (represented) from salary plan and grade level TB5 1482 ($5,172 - $6,287) to Communications Equipment Specialist II (PEVB) (represented) on the salary schedule at salary plan and grade level TB5 1484 ($5,585 - $6,788); (3) Revise and reallocate the salary of the classification of Senior Communications Equipment Specialist (PETB) (represented) to Senior Communication Equipment Specialist (PENA) from salary plan and grade level TB5 1578 ($5,688 - $6,914) to salary plan and grade level TB5 1578 ($6,142 - $7,466) in the Telecommunications division of the Department of Information Technology (DOIT). FISCAL IMPACT: Upon approval, these actions will result in the following: 1. An annual net decrease in salary and benefit costs of approximately ($15,850), including an estimated pension cost of ($2,853) for Recommendation No. 1, when the department utilizes a vacant Communications Equipment APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Scott Sullivan (925) 313-1288 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Joanne Buenger C. 35 To:Board of Supervisors From:David Twa, County Administrator Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Establish New Classification of Communications Equipment Specialist I, Retitle & Reallocate the Classification of Communications Equipment Specialist 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 218 FISCAL IMPACT: (CONT'D) Specialist II position and flexes down to Communications Equipment Specialist I; 2. An annual cost increase of approximately $33,435 for Recommendation No. 2, including an estimated pension costs of $6,018; 3. An annual cost increase of approximately $12,276 for Recommendation No. 3, including an estimated pension costs of $2,210. The costs shall be 100% offset by user fees. BACKGROUND: The Department of Information Technology (DoIT) is a division of the County Administrator's Office. DoIT's Telecommunications Radio and Hilltop division operates, maintains and manages the County's communications systems including microwave and the two-county East Bay Regional Communications (public safety radio) P25 System. They provide installation and maintenance of radio systems for police agencies, special districts, medical facilities and cities. This division currently has a Sr. Communications Equipment Specialist and four (4) Communications Equipment Specialists. Currently, Communications Equipment Specialist has only one classification for both entry and journey level, which is insufficient since this classification is very hard to recruit for, as historically, this has not been a job classification with a large candidate pool. Further, the department needs to update this classification due to the changing technology and higher level of computer skills necessary to perform these job duties. Thus, our request is to establish a Communications Equipment Specialist I entry level job classification that requires the aptitude and desire to be trained to work with the Land Mobile Radio, Computer, and Digital Microwave technologies. Physical abilities for installation and service of antenna systems are also key skills for this classification. Over the past years, the radio and hilltop divisions have expanded to include the two-county East Bay Regional Communication public safety radio P25 system. With the development of P25 Land Mobile Radio (LMR) systems, the skill sets required are substantially different than currently listed in the job class of Communications Equipment Specialist. Wireless communications has evolved to add significant and very specific areas of computer Local Area Network (LAN), Wide Area Network (WAN), software, operating systems, third party support applications knowledge, in addition to the LMR and microwave knowledge. The role and required skills for the Communications Equipment Specialist have increased as a result and require an added dimension of knowledge regarding new technologies. Knowledge of and skill in computer, radio and microwave hardware and software, are essential skills for the higher level classifications. The job specification and the salary range for the current positions are significantly out of alignment compared to peer positions in other comparable agencies. This action will address the incomplete and outdated job specifications as well as the salary requirements for retention and recruitment. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The incumbents will not be properly compensated compared to similar agencies for the same type of work. This will pose problems for both retention of the incumbents as well as recruitment for new candidates. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS P300 22187_Est CESI, Retitle Reallocated CES II, Reallocate Sr CES in DoIT P300 22187 Attachment MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed P300 22187 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 219 POSITION ADJUSTMENT REQUEST NO. 22187 DATE 8/9/2017 Department No./ Department Department of Information Technology Budget Unit No. 0060 Org No. 4285 Agency No. A03 Action Requested: ESTABLISH new classification of Communications Equipment Specialist I, allocate it to the salary schedule, RE-TITLE and REALLOCATE the classification of Communications Equipment Specialist (PEWF) to Communications Equipment Specialist II (PEWF), allocate it to salary schedule, REALLOCATE the classification of Senior Communications Equipment Specailist (PETB), allocate it to the salary schedule. Proposed Effective Date: 9/1/2017 Classification Questionnaire attached: Yes No / Cost is within Department’s budget: Yes No Total One-Time Costs (non-salary) associated with request: $0.00 Estimated total cost adjustment (salary / benefits / one time): Total annual cost $26,692.00 Net County Cost $0.00 Total this FY $22,243.00 N.C.C. this FY $0.00 SOURCE OF FUNDING TO OFFSET ADJUSTMENT Costs are recovered through user fees. Department must initiate necessary adjustment and submit to CAO. Use additional sheet for further explanations or comments. Scott Sullivan ______________________________________ (for) Department Head REVIEWED BY CAO AND RELEASED TO HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT ___________________________________ ________________ Deputy County Administrator Date HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATIONS DATE 10/30/2017 Establish the class of Communications Equipment Specialist I Trainee (represented) and allocate it to the Salary Schedule, retitle and reallocate the class of Communications Equipment Specialist (represented) to Communications Equipment Specialist II (represented), and reallocate the class of Senior Communications Equipment Specialist (represented) on the Salary Schedule. (see attached) Amend Resolution 71/17 establishing positions and resolutions allocating classes to the Basic / Exempt salary schedule. Effective: Day following Board Action. (Date) Marta Goc 10/30/2017 ___________________________________ ________________ (for) Director of Human Resources Date COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION: DATE 11/9/17 Approve Recommendation of Director of Human Resources Disapprove Recommendation of Director of Human Resources /s/ Julie DiMaggio Enea Other: ____________________________________________ ___________________________________ (for) County Administrator BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ACTION: David J. Twa, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors Adjustment is APPROVED DISAPPROVED and County Administrator DATE BY APPROVAL OF THIS ADJUSTMENT CONSTITUTES A PERSONNEL / SALARY RESOLUTION AMENDMENT POSITION ADJUSTMENT ACTION TO BE COMPLETED BY HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT FOLLOWING BOARD ACTION Adjust class(es) / position(s) as follows: P300 (M347) Rev 3/15/01 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 220 REQUEST FOR PROJECT POSITIONS Department Date 11/9/2017 No. 1. Project Positions Requested: 2. Explain Specific Duties of Position(s) 3. Name / Purpose of Project and Funding Source (do not use acronyms i.e. SB40 Project or SDSS Funds) 4. Duration of the Project: Start Date End Date Is funding for a specified period of time (i.e. 2 years) or on a year-to-year basis? Please explain. 5. Project Annual Cost a. Salary & Benefits Costs: b. Support Costs: (services, supplies, equipment, etc.) c. Less revenue or expenditure: d. Net cost to General or other fund: 6. Briefly explain the consequences of not filling the project position(s) in terms of: a. potential future costs d. political implications b. legal implications e. organizational implications c. financial implications 7. Briefly describe the alternative approaches to delivering the services which you have considered. Indicate why these alternatives were not chosen. 8. Departments requesting new project positions must submit an updated cost benefit analysis of each project position at the halfway point of the project duration. This report is to be submitted to the Human Resources Department, which will forward the report to the Board of Supervisors. Indicate the date that your cost / benefit analysis will be submitted 9. How will the project position(s) be filled? a. Competitive examination(s) b. Existing employment list(s) Which one(s)? c. Direct appointment of: 1. Merit System employee who will be placed on leave from current job 2. Non-County employee Provide a justification if filling position(s) by C1 or C2 USE ADDITIONAL PAPER IF NECESSARY 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 221 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 222 P300#22187 AIR #30904 HR Recommendation: 1. Establish the new classification of Communications Equipment Specialist I - Trainee (PEKA)(represented) allocate on the salary schedule at plan and grade level TB5 1483 ($4,925 - $5,430); 2. Revise, re-title and reallocate the classification of Communications Equipment Specialist (PEWF) (represented) from salary plan and grade level TB5 1482 ($5,172 - $6,287) to Communications Equipment Specialist II (PEVB)(represented) on the salary schedule at plan and grade level TB5 1484 ($5,585 - $6,788); 3. Revise and reallocate the classification of Senior Communications Equipment Specialist (PETB) (represented) to Senior Communication Equipment Specialist (PENA) from the salary plan and grade level TB5 1578 ($5,688 - $6,914) to salary plan and grade level TB5 1578 ($6,142 - $7,466) in the Telecommunications division of the Department of Information Technology (DoIT). 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 223 RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Librarian, or designee, to apply for and accept a grant for equipment in the form of two (2) Lulzbot Taz 6 3-D printers from the California State Library as administered by the Southern California Library Cooperative Technology TNT for Libraries project, for the period September 1, 2017 through December 31, 2019. FISCAL IMPACT: No Library Fund match. BACKGROUND: The California State Library, through the Southern California Library Cooperative, is offering 3-D printers to libraries in the state through a 2-year project to increase opportunities for developing technological capacity. Acquisition of the 3-D printers will increase the technological literacy of local communities and position libraries as creative learning spaces. The 2 printers, if awarded, will be moved among Contra Costa County Libraries so that various communities have exposure to the technology. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The library will not be awarded any Lulzbot Taz 6 3-D printers. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: W. Beveridge / 608-7730 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 36 To:Board of Supervisors From:Melinda Cervantes, County Librarian Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Application and Acceptance of California State Library Grant for 3-D Printers 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 224 CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: Having a 3D printer available as regular library equipment will make 3D printing available and help facilitate creativity, design, and STEM/STEAM education as well as spur innovation through providing universal public access to emerging technology. This meets the Children's Report Card objective of Children Ready for and Exceeding in School. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 225 RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Librarian, or designee, to apply for and accept a grant in the amount of $30,000 from the California State Library to provide 12 laptops and one Laptops Anytime Kiosk to the Oakley Library for the period of November 1, 2017 through January 31, 2019. FISCAL IMPACT: The Grant will provide $30,000 in funds and the Library will match 42% or $12,600 in matching funds for a total of $42,600. BACKGROUND: The receipt of this grant will significantly expand technology services for Oakley Library patrons. Using these laptops, the Library will be able to provide robotics and MinecraftEdu programs creating STEAM-based learning activities aligned with Common Core and Next Generation Science Standards. The Library will also use the laptops to provide computer classes to support workforce development needs. Currently, these services cannot be offered due to lack of space and computers. When not in use for programs, the kiosk laptops will be available on an ongoing basis for patrons to use in the Library, increasing the number of computers available to the public significantly. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The community of Oakley will continue to be underserved due to lack of access to technology and space constraints. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Walt Beveridge (925) 608-7730 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 37 To:Board of Supervisors From:Melinda Cervantes, County Librarian Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:$30,000 Grant from California State Library 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 226 CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: During the grant reporting cycle at least 340 children will be impacted with three-day robotics workshops held bi-monthly and weekly MinecraftEdu program. These programs will create learning opportunities for children to collaborate, create, build, problem solve, and learn foundational coding skills. This fulfills the Children's Report Card Outcome of Children Ready for and Succeeding in School by providing the opportunity to learn in a fun, hands-on, participatory learning environment. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 227 RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Librarian, or designee, to apply for and accept a grant in the amount of $15,000 from the Pacific Library Partnership to create STEAM Career Success: A STEAM Awareness Outreach Program. STEAM Career Success will consist of fifteen speaker sessions that will convey the important message of STEAM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Art, & Math) careers to underserved high school students in Contra Costa County for the period of January 1, 2018 to December 31, 2018. FISCAL IMPACT: No Library Fund match. BACKGROUND: The Contra Costa County Library is requesting funds from the Pacific Library Partnership to support the STEAM Career Success: A STEAM Awareness Outreach Program, a creative and innovative outreach program that will provide STEAM career presentations and STEAM profession booklets to high school students in underserved communities. Funds will also be used to create publicity materials and to create unique and individual STEAM Career presentations. STEAM speakers and the outreach team will make fifteen visits to underserved high schools in Concord, Crockett, Pinole, El Sobrante, and Pittsburg to promote awareness of STEAM careers. These communities were chosen after researching the low test score levels and assessing neighborhoods where students have a lower chance of receiving valid career information and opportunities. The projected timeline for APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Walt Beveridge 925-608-7730 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 38 To:Board of Supervisors From:Melinda Cervantes, County Librarian Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Grant from Pacific Library Partnership 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 228 BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) STEAM Career Success is for the period of January 2018- December 2018. The goal is to reach high school students who are underserved or have challenges academically and economically and to provide a high-quality outreach program by using integrated curriculum, extra-curricular activities and real-world applications. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The library will not be able to provide STEAM Career Success, STEAM Career booklets or speakers for the presentations. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: The library will gain overall support from several organizations on this project. Contra Costa County Library will be promoting all of its programs and events throughout each community. This program supports outcome number two, Children and Youth Healthy and Preparing for Productive Adulthood: Children and Youth Healthy and Preparing for Productive Adulthood: STEAM Career Success: A STEAM Awareness Outreach Program, STEAM speaker presentations, and STEAM career booklets will introduce high school students in underserved communities to STEAM careers, which will engage them in integrated learning as they explore the world around them, create innovative solutions to problems and communicate their results while learning about STEAM, which will help them to prepare for their future and for a healthier and productive adulthood. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 229 RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Librarian, or designee, to apply for and accept a grant in the form of ten Starling wearable word counting devices from the California State Library for the San Pablo Library for the period October 1, 2017 through September 31, 2018. FISCAL IMPACT: No Library Fund match. BACKGROUND: If granted, the Starling Pilot Project will award Contra Costa County Library a supply of ten Starlings, as well as staff training and support, to pilot various approaches to sharing and/or loaning Starlings to families. Starlings are wearable word counters that pick up vocal sound waves in order to count the number of words a child is hearing. The number of words can be accessed through a parent’s smartphone app and can demonstrate to the parent the power of words in an effort to inspire them to sustain and expand their early learning and literacy efforts. The Starling pilot project will take place at the San Pablo Library in partnership with the Early Learning Center at Contra Costa College. A project such as this fits in perfectly with the goals of the Library to support early literacy in the community, and the mission of the Early Learning Center to support parents who are enrolled at Contra Costa College. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Alison McKee, 925-608-7790 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 39 To:Board of Supervisors From:Melinda Cervantes, County Librarian Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Grant for 10 Starling Wearable Word Counting Devices 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 230 CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The Library will not be granted the use of the Starlings devices. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: This project supports two of the community outcomes established in the Children's Report Card: Children Ready for and Succeeding in School and Children and Youth Healthy and Preparing for Productive Adulthood. One of the most important early literacy practices is parent engagement. Bridging the word gap experienced by many lower-income children is extremely important, and Starling devices provide a concrete method for measuring the frequency of words spoken to children and assists parents with a method for measuring the increase in the words spoken while engaging in extra time reading, singing and talking to one another. The Starling Pilot Project will allow CCCL to be involved in discovering how technology can be used to help bridge the word gap in communities that stand to gain the most from learning to be their child’s most effective first teacher equipped to successfully prepare their child to succeed in school and graduate so that they’ll be productive adults ready to contribute positively to their communities. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 231 RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Librarian, or designee, to apply for and accept a grant in the amount of $8,020 from the Pacific Library Partnership to provide materials and equipment to the Antioch Library for the period of November 1, 2017 through July 1, 2018. FISCAL IMPACT: No Library Fund match. BACKGROUND: The Pacific Library Partnership (PLP) was established in 2009 as a consolidation of four library systems, BALIS (Bay Area Library and Information System), serving Alameda, Contra Costa, and San Francisco Counties; PLS (Peninsula Library System), serving San Mateo County; MOBAC (Monterey Bay Area Cooperative Library System), serving Monterey, Santa Cruz, and San Benito Counties; and SVLS (Silicon Valley Library System), serving Santa Clara County. There are 42 libraries within PLP, including 33 public libraries and 9 academic libraries. PLP has awarded grants to Contra Costa County Library on many occasions. If awarded, this grant will allow for purchases that will support the pilot warming center that will open in the Antioch Library meeting room in November of 2017. The pilot warming center is a partnership between the Contra Costa County Library and the Contra Costa County Health, Housing and Homeless Services Department and will serve families with children on an invite-only basis. The funds from this grant will allow the library to purchase 5 Chromebooks and associated software, 20 nap mats for children, a variety of early literacy toys and books, and vinyl murals to brighten the meeting room. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Alison McKee, 925-608-7790 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 40 To:Board of Supervisors From:Melinda Cervantes, County Librarian Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Grant of $8,020 from the Pacific Library Partnership 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 232 CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Items for warming center will not be purchased. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 233 RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Resolution No. 2017/393 supporting the East Contra Costa County Habitat Conservancy’s Knightsen Wetland Restoration and Flood Protection Project application to the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Conservancy’s Ecosystem Restoration and Water Quality Grant Program for up to $1,500,000 in grant funds. FISCAL IMPACT: No impact. BACKGROUND: A history of severe flooding and poor storm water quality prompted the Contra Costa County Public Works Department, in conjunction with the Knightsen Community Services District (CSD), to conduct a feasibility study to determine the best approach to address drainage concerns in the Knightsen region. The flooding and the associated contamination of ground and surface waters from contaminants in agricultural tailwater and overflowing septic systems has been an ongoing problem that has negatively impacted human health, agriculture, water quality and habitat. The initial feasibility study completed in 2002 concluded that the most effective approach to alleviate the flooding and address water quality problems is to restore or create wetlands that can accept storm water and identified suitable areas for this work. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Abigail Fateman, DCD-ECCCHC I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 41 To:Board of Supervisors From:John Kopchik, Director, Conservation & Development Department Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Knightsen Wetland Restoration & Flood Protection Project 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 234 BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) > A more recent study has shed new light on the findings of the 2002 flood protection feasibility study and contemplated the possibility of an even more ambitious restoration project. Working with the East Contra Costa County Habitat Conservancy (Conservancy), the San Francisco Estuary Institute released the comprehensive East Contra Costa County Historical Ecology Study in November 2012. This study mapped historical land cover in the area for the first time and led to some surprising findings related to the project area. The study demonstrated that the area previously identified as suitable for restoration (project area) which is now almost entirely cultivated land, once contained a striking mosaic of tidal wetland, alkali wetland/meadow, oak savanna, and rare interior sand dune. While it may not be possible to rewind the clock, the new study identifies the potential for an extensive restoration project that could include multiple types of restored wetlands as well as restored dunes and oak savanna. The Conservancy has been working with the East Bay Regional Park District, Contra Costa County Flood Control District, and the Knightsen Community Services District to design a multi-objective project that will: • Restore habitat for special status species; • Protect the community of Knightsen from flooding and make the region more resilient to climate change; • Protect and improve water quality in Knightsen and surrounding Delta waterways; and • Provide recreational opportunities. In January 2016, the East Contra Costa County Habitat Conservancy worked with the East Bay Regional Park District (EBRPD) to support EBRPD's aquistion of a 645 acre parcel -- a property that was identified in the 2002 study as key to ameliorating Knightsen’s flooding problems. In mid-2016, the Conservancy, with support from the Knightsen Community Services District (KCSD), secured a $240,000 grant of Proposition 1 funds that are administered by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife. These funds are being used to collect baseline biological and hydrologic data that will inform the design of the project. The Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Conservancy has issued a call for proposals for its Delta Conservancy Ecosystem Restoration and Water Quality Grant Program. The East Contra Costa County Habitat Conservancy (“Conservancy”) will be submitting a grant proposal for the Knightsen Wetland Restoration and Flood Protection Project of up to $1,500,000. The grant will supplement the $240,000 already secured for the project from Proposition 1, and fund the completion of the planning process by developing construction plans and securing permitting to bring the project to shovel ready status. The East Contra Costa County Habitat Conservancy is seeking a resolution of support from the County Board of Supervisors for the project, which is a recommended for inclusion with the grant proposal. NOTE: This item was originally intended to be reviewed by the Transportation, Water and Infrastructure Committee (TWIC), however, the Committee's regular November meeting was canceled, necessitating that staff bring this directly to the Board of Supervisors. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the Board of Supervisors does not adopt the resolution in support of the project, the East Contra Costa County Habitat Conservancy's proposal to the Delta Conservancy Ecosystem Restoration and Water Quality Grant Program will be seriously compromised and substantially reduce the competitiveness of the grant application. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Resolution No. 2017/393 MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed Resolution No. 2017/393 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 235 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board Adopted this Resolution on 11/14/2017 by the following vote: AYE: John Gioia Candace Andersen Karen Mitchoff NO: ABSENT:Diane Burgis Federal D. Glover ABSTAIN: RECUSE: Resolution No. 2017/393 In the matter of Resolution No: 2017-393 RESOLUTION OF THE Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors SUPPORTING THE KNIGHTSEN WETLAND RESTORATION AND FLOOD PROTECTION PROJECT. WHEREAS, the Water Quality, Supply and Infrastructure Improvement Act of 2014 (Proposition 1) was approved by voters of the State of California to implement three broad objectives including: more reliable water supplies, the restoration of important species and habitat, and a more resilient, sustainable managed water resources system; and WHEREAS there is a history of severe flooding in the Community of Knightsen in Contra Costa County that has caused damage to property, contamination of drinking water and degradation of Delta water quality; and WHEREAS, the East Contra Costa County Habitat Conservancy worked with the East Bay Regional Park District to support the District's acquisition of a 645-acre parcel in January 2016 with the purpose of restoring habitat, addressing local flood control issues, improving water quality and providing recreation opportunities; and WHEREAS, the East Contra Costa County Habitat Conservancy with support from the Knightsen Community Services District has received funds for the Knightsen Wetland Restoration and Flood Protection Project (Project) and from Proposition 1 funding from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife through a competitive grant process for (FY) 2015-16; and WHEREAS, in Proposition 1, $50 million is appropriated to the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Conservancy “for competitive grants for multi-benefit ecosystem and watershed protection and restoration projects in accordance with statewide priorities (Cal. Water Code sec. 79730 and 79731)”; and WHEREAS, the Knightsen Wetland Restoration and Flood Protection Project is positioned to move forward with a subsequent project phase of design and permitting that is appropriate to compete for funds from the Delta Conservancy’s 2017-18 open grant solicitation; and WHEREAS, this grant award will provide the resources needed to complete the design and initial permitting of a large-scale multi-objective habitat restoration project that is important to the implementation of the East Contra Costa County Habitat Conservancy’s Conservation Strategy and will also provide critical flood protection for the Community of Knightsen. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors does hereby support the East Contra Costa County Habitat Conservancy’s application for up to $1,500,000 in funds from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Conservancy for the Knightsen Wetland Restoration and Flood Control Project. Contact: Abigail Fateman, DCD-ECCCHC I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: 3 2 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 236 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 237 RECOMMENDATION(S): Approve and Authorize the Health Services Director, or his designee, to execute on behalf of the County, Agreement #29-817 with the City of Walnut Creek, to pay the County an amount not to exceed $71,629 for provision of homeless outreach services for the Coordinated Outreach, Referral and Engagement (CORE) Program, for the period from July 6, 2017 through June 30, 2018. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this agreement will allow the County to receive an amount not to exceed $71,629 from the City of Walnut Creek to provide homeless outreach services for not less than 20 hours per week. No additional County funds required. BACKGROUND: The CORE Program locates and engages homeless clients throughout Contra Costa County. CORE teams serve as an entry point into the County’s coordinated entry system for unsheltered persons and work to locate, engage, stabilize and house chronically homeless individuals and families. Approval of Agreement #29-817 will allow the County to assure the City of Walnut Creek that it receives a minimum of 20 hours per week of outreach services, through June 30, 2018. This agreement includes agreeing to indemnify and hold harmless the contractor for claims arising out of the County’s performance under this contract. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Lavonna Martin, 925-313-7704 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: L Walker, M Wilhelm C. 42 To:Board of Supervisors From:William Walker, M.D., Health Services Director Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Agreement #29-817 with the City of Walnut Creek 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 238 CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this agreement is not approved, the County will not receive funding and without such funding, the CORE program may have to operate at a reduced capacity. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 239 RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to execute a contract with the City and County of San Francisco, including full indemnification of the City and County of San Francisco, to pay the County an amount not to exceed $839,820 as part of the 2017 U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) Grant for homeland security related projects within the County for the period November 1, 2017 through the end of the grant funding. (100% Federal) FISCAL IMPACT: No County Costs. $839,820; 100% 2017 Urban Area Security Initiative Grant from the City and County of San Francisco acting as fiscal agent for the Bay Area Urban Area Security Initiative. (CFDA # 97.067) BACKGROUND: The U.S. Department of Homeland Security Urban Area Security Initiative Grant Program funds address the unique planning, equipment, training, and exercise needs of high threat, high density urban areas. This grant assists designated regions in building an enhanced and sustainable capacity to prevent, protect against, respond to, and recover from acts of terrorism. California APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Mary Jane Robb, 925-335-1557 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 43 To:Board of Supervisors From:David O. Livingston, Sheriff-Coroner Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:2017 Urban Area Security Initiative Grant 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 240 BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) is home to five of these urban areas and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security designated the City and County of San Francisco as the fiscal agent for the Bay Area Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI). The County, as a member of the Bay Area UASI, will receive $839,820.00. Funds will be used to enhance public safety capabilities of law enforcement agencies throughout the region. Expand existing systems to participate in other state, regional, and national initiatives. Funding will also be used to purchase enhanced vision and video optic capabilities, including night vision googles for tactical operators, pole cameras, video fiber optics and "through the wall" sensors for SWAT. As the fiscal agent for the grant, the City and County of San Francisco has developed a standard form contract for use with all Bay Area UASI partner agencies requiring full indemnification of the City and County of San Francisco. The County has agreed to previous inter-agency agreements with the City and County of San Francisco, which contained the same language, to participate in regional homeland security efforts and access important Federal funding. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Should the Board decide not to approve entering into this agreement, the County will not receive its share of the 2017 UASI Grant funds; risk management and planning to increase regional response capability will need to be either funded through another source or not performed. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: No impact. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 241 RECOMMENDATION(S): 1. APPROVE the allocation of the 2017 Housing Opportunities for Persons with HIV/AIDS funds as follows: $189,686 to the County Health Services HIV/AIDS program, $431,536 for housing development, and $43,486 for program administration; and 2. APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Conservation and Development Director, or designee, to enter into a fiscal year 2017 funding agreement with the City of Oakland that authorizes the County to administer $664,708 in Housing Opportunities for Persons with HIV/AIDS funds for housing and supportive services for low-income persons with HIV/AIDS, for the period July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2020. FISCAL IMPACT: No General Fund impact. Housing Opportunities for Persons with HIV/AIDS (HOPWA) funds are provided through the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to the City of Oakland, as administering agent. Consistent with HOPWA regulations, $43,486 is designated to cover staff costs associated with program administration. CATALOG OF FEDERAL DOMESTIC ASSISTANCE (CFDA NUMBER): Housing Opportunities for Persons with HIV/AIDS Program - 14.241 APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Kristin Sherk 925-674-7887 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 44 To:Board of Supervisors From:John Kopchik, Director, Conservation & Development Department Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Housing Opportunities for Persons with HIV/AIDS Funding Agreement between the City of Oakland and the County of Contra Costa 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 242 BACKGROUND: The National Affordable Housing Act (Public Law 101-625, approved November 28, 1990) authorizes the Housing Opportunities for Persons with HIV/AIDS Program (HOPWA) to provide states and localities with resources to devise long-term comprehensive strategies for meeting the housing needs of persons with HIV/AIDS and related diseases. The City of Oakland (City) is the HOPWA grant recipient for Alameda and Contra Costa counties. The City allocates HOPWA funds between the counties based on the number of HIV/AIDS cases. Approval of a funding agreement with the City will provide $664,708 in fiscal year 2017 funds to the County. These funds may be used for site acquisition, rehabilitation and new construction of affordable housing; supportive services; housing information services; rent and utility subsidies; and certain other housing related activities for low-income persons with HIV/AIDS in both incorporated and unincorporated areas of the County. County staff from the Department of Conservation and Development (DCD) and staff from the Health Services Department (HSD) coordinate periodically to identify and address the housing-related service needs of low-income persons with HIV/AIDS in Contra Costa County. HOPWA funds are allocated to HSD annually to administer housing services. Funding allocations for both housing development and services are based on factors such as client needs and timely expenditure of HOPWA funds. The recommended allocations for 2017 reflect the anticipated funding needed for HSD to continue its HIV/AIDS program ($189,686) and DCD’s program administration costs ($43,486), and the remainder is allocated for housing for persons with HIV/AIDS ($431,536). The Contra Costa Consortium (County staff and staff from the cities of Antioch, Concord, Pittsburg, and Walnut Creek) will make recommendations to the Board of Supervisors at a later date on the component of funding for housing. HSD HIV/AIDS program activities include housing advocacy and housing information services, including client intake, housing needs assessment, assistance with locating affordable housing, assistance with housing-related benefit applications, development and implementation of client housing plans, emergency assistance funds, follow-up to ensure receipt of benefits and housing, and referral to other services. In fiscal year 2017/18, HSD will continue a Short Term Rental Mortgage and Utility Assistance Program (STRMU) as part of a homeless prevention strategy, intended to reduce the risks of homelessness and to improve access to health care and other needed support. STRMU will involve efforts to restore client self-sufficiency and future independence from housing support by the end of the program's term. This will be accomplished through the use of time-limited housing assistance payments for eligible individuals and by the creation of individual housing service plans that include an assessment of current resources and the establishment of long-term goals for recipient households. Department of Conservation and Development requests that the Board of Supervisors approve the recommended allocations and attached Funding Agreement in its substantially final form. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the Board does not approve the fiscal year 2017 HOPWA funding agreement with the City of Oakland, the County would not receive and administer $664,708 in HOPWA funds, and low-income persons with HIV/AIDS in the County would lose vital housing and supportive services. ATTACHMENTS FY 2017 HOPWA Funding Agreement 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 243 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 244 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 245 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 246 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 247 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 248 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 249 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 250 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 251 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 252 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 253 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 254 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 255 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 256 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 257 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 258 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 259 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 260 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 261 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 262 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 263 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 264 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 265 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 266 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 267 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 268 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 269 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 270 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 271 RECOMMENDATION(S): Approve and authorize the Health Services Director, or his designee, Cynthia Belon, to execute, on behalf of the County, Standard Agreement #29-469-20 (State #17-94518), with the California Department of Health Care Services, to administer and oversee the Mental Health Services Act, Projects for Assistance in transition from Homelessness (PATH) and Community Mental Health Services Grant programs for County’s community mental health services, for the period from July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018. FISCAL IMPACT: Under this Contract, the County shall be reimbursed by the California Department of Health Care Services with Federal Title XIX funds for the cost of federally eligible Short-Doyle/Medi-Cal Specialty Mental Health services rendered to federally eligible Medi-Cal beneficiaries. County shall adhere to the State maximum statewide reimbursement of negotiated rates for Short-Doyle/Medi-Cal (SD/MC) services and Medi-Cal Specialty Mental Health Services for Fiscal Years 2017 through 2018. Reimbursement for Federal Grants shall be subject to Federal cost containment requirements and availability of funds. BACKGROUND: This Mental Health Services Performance Agreement covers County Realignment requirements, including maintenance of effort, access to and use of state hospital, data collection and reporting, and cost reporting on County Mental Health Programs. The County shall provide an array of Mental Health treatment options and case management services to County mental health residents in accordance with the Welfare and Institution Codes section 5600.2 through 5600.9. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Cynthia Belon, 925-957-5201 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Tasha Scott, Marcy Wilhelm C. 45 To:Board of Supervisors From:William Walker, M.D., Health Services Director Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Agreement #29-469-20 with the California Department of Health Care Services 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 272 BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) On July 19, 2016, the Board of Supervisors approved Standard Agreement #29-469-19 with the California Department of Health Care Services for Fiscal Year 2016 through 2017. Approval of this Agreement #29-469-20 will allow the County to receive funding to support the PATH from Homelessness and Community Mental Health Services through June 30, 2018. This Agreement requires the County to indemnify the California Department of Health Care Services. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this agreement is not approved, the County will not receive funding and will not meet the conditions and requirements of the State Department of Health Services. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 273 RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to execute a Products and Services Agreement and associated schedules with Alcohol Monitoring Systems, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $800,000, for the purchase and lease of SCRAMx alcohol monitoring systems, monitoring services and hosted software, for the term of November 1, 2017 through October 31, 2020. FISCAL IMPACT: $800,000; Program fees are collected from individuals based on their ability to pay. BACKGROUND: APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Sandra Brown 925-335-1553 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 46 To:Board of Supervisors From:David O. Livingston, Sheriff-Coroner Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Alcohol Monitoring Systems Inc. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 274 BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) The Office of the Sheriff has been utilizing SCRAM and Remote Breath Alcohol monitor devices for offenders who commit alcohol related offenses since 2009. Alcohol Monitoring Systems, Inc., has been providing sales, leasing, on-going warranty and on-line monitoring of SCRAM and Remote Breath Alcohol monitor devices. Alcohol monitoring programs are utilized for both sentenced and pre-trial release offenders. The use of alcohol monitoring equipment helps reduces the jail population and cost savings associated with housing offenders in-custody. The fee collected from participants are based on individual’s ability to pay and the fees help offset the cost of monitoring. The alcohol monitoring program also plays a key role in helping offender complete their court ordered commitment and allowing them to re-enter the community in a timely manner. Approval of the Products and Services Agreement documents the vendor’s obligations to provide the described products and services to the County. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Replacement cost for potential loss to monitoring equipment due to intentional damage and/or absconders discarding equipment. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: No impact. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 275 RECOMMENDATION(S): Approve and authorize the Health Services Director, or his designee, to execute, on behalf of the County, Contract #26-874-2 with META Dynamic, Inc., a corporation, in an amount not to exceed $35,000, including mutual indemnification, to provide a guidance navigation system, related software, accessories and certified technicians for tumor locating for the Surgical Unit at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center (CCRMC) and Health Centers for the period from November 1, 2017 through October 31, 2018. FISCAL IMPACT: This contract is funded 100% by Hospital Enterprise Fund I. (No rate increase) BACKGROUND: On September 20, 2016, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #26-874-1 with Meta Dynamic, Inc., for the provision of a guidance navigation system, related software, accessories and certified technicians for tumor locating for the Surgical Unit at CCRMC and Health Centers, for the period from November 1, 2016 through October 31, 2017. Approval of Contract #26-874-2 will allow the contractor to continue to provide tumor locating services for CCRMC and Health Centers, through October 31, 2018. This contract includes mutual indemnification to hold harmless both parties for any claims arising out of the performance of this contract. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Anna Roth, 925-370-5101 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: L Walker , M Wilhelm C. 47 To:Board of Supervisors From:William Walker, M.D., Health Services Director Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Contract #26-874-2 with META Dynamic, Inc. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 276 CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved, patients requiring tumor locating procedures will not have access to the contractor’s services. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 277 RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to execute, on behalf of the Interim Public Works Director, an amendment to purchase order No. 54240 with Caltronics Business Systems, increasing the payment limit by $110,000, to a new payment limit of $360,000, and extend the lease for two years for the period of December 5, 2017 to December 4, 2019, for two (2) Caltronics Bizhub Pro-1052’s and one (1) Caltronics Konica C-1060 digital copiers. (District V) FISCAL IMPACT: Print and Mail Services is a zero net County cost operation which charges back County Departments for printing. (100% Department User Fees) BACKGROUND: Caltronics Business Systems offered Print and Mail Services a 30% discount for years 4 & 5 of the original monthly lease agreement on PO 54240. This is a savings of $19,651.44 for the 24 month extension. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this request is not approved, the employees at 651 Pine Street and the downtown Martinez County departments will be required to use the Print and Mail Services Copy Center located in Concord. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Marie Estrada, 925.646-5515 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 48 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Interim Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Approve a Change Order to Purchase Order No. 54240 with Caltronics Business Systems, District V. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 278 ATTACHMENTS Caltronics PO 54240 Caltronics 2 year Extension to PO 54240 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 279 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 280 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 281 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 282 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 283 RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to execute, on behalf of the Interim Public Works Director, a purchase order amendment with Lehr Auto Electric, Inc., to increase the payment limit by $150,000 to a new payment limit of $800,000, for emergency vehicle parts and accessories, with no change to the original term of February 1, 2016 through January 31, 2018, Countywide. FISCAL IMPACT: 100% Fleet Internal Service Fund BACKGROUND: Public Works Fleet Services purchases and outfits all emergency services vehicles for the County. This includes vehicles from the Sheriff, Public Works, Animal Services, Probation, District Attorney and Health Services. The Sheriff’s vehicles take up the vast majority of this commodity. Outfitting includes lights, consoles, electrical switching, electronics, wiring, and other hard parts such as partitions, consoles and trunk slider trays. This commodity was originally bid on BidSync #1301-003 and awarded to Lehr Auto Electric, Inc. This request is to amend the value of the purchase order to allow Fleet to purchase emergency vehicle parts and equipment through the termination date of January 31, 2018. Fleet staff is currently preparing a new bid for this commodity due to replace this purchase order in February 2018. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Stan Burton, (925) 313-7077 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 49 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Interim Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Approve a Purchase Order Amendment with Lehr Auto Electric, Inc. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 284 CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this purchase order is not approved, the purchase of emergency vehicle parts and accessories through Lehr Auto Electric, Inc., will discontinue. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 285 RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Interim Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a purchase order with Enterprise Rent-A-Car in an amount not to exceed $190,000, for car and light truck rentals, for the period of November 1, 2017 through October 31, 2019, Countywide. FISCAL IMPACT: This cost is to be funded through Public Works Fleet ISF budget and user departments. (100% Internal Service Fund) BACKGROUND: Public Works Fleet Services is responsible for county wide vehicle rentals. There are various reasons for requiring vehicle rentals. Departments request rental vehicles to temporarily replace County vehicles with serious problems or damage. Rental vehicles are also requested to fill the need for annual events such as elections or book drives. Fleet Services is requesting a two year purchase order for vehicle rentals. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this agreement is not approved, renting cars and light trucks through Enterprise Rent-A-Car will discontinue. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Stan Burton, (925) 313-7077 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 50 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Interim Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Approve a Purchase Order with Enterprise Rent-A-Car. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 286 RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Administrator, or designee, to execute a contract amendment, effective November 14, 2017, with CherryRoad Technologies, Inc., to increase the payment limit by $337,440 to a new payment limit of $12,029,370, for additional Contractor assistance to upgrade the County’s PeopleSoft software system, through January 2018. FISCAL IMPACT: The $12,029,370 is budgeted under Org #1695 FY 2014-2015, FY 2015-2016, FY 2016-2017 and FY 2017-2018, supported through countywide interdepartmental charges to all departments. BACKGROUND: ↵The PeopleSoft Human Capital Management (HCM) system is currently used to process the County’s payroll, in addition to maintaining human resources and employee benefits records. The original contract with CherryRoad Technologies Inc., provided for the Contractor to perform a fit/gap analysis, infrastructure assessment and initial upgrade tasks to upgrade PeopleSoft HCM version 8.8 to version 9.2, at a cost up to $1,200,000. The contract has, since, been amended nine times: The County and contractor first amended the contract in September 2015 to provide that the Contractor would host nine application test environments, at a cost of up to $150,000. The County and contractor amended the contract a second time in November 2015 to begin the upgrade tasks to upgrade Peoplesoft HCM version 8.8 to version 9.2 at a cost of up to $4,334,950. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Scott Sullivan 925-313-1288 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 51 To:Board of Supervisors From:David Twa, County Administrator Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:CherryRoad Technologies, Inc., Contract Amendment No. 10 to Extend Contractor Resources 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 287 BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) > The County and contractor amended the contract a third time in December 2015 to purchase licenses and implement the Taleo Recruitment and On-boarding application, which will be hosted by Oracle on its servers and interface with the PeopleSoft HCM system at a cost of up to $467,360. The County and contractor amended the contract a fourth time February 2016 to provide that the Contractor acquire an additional resource to assist HR backfill the vacant HR Systems Analyst position at a cost of up to $307,420. The County and contractor amended the contract a fifth time April 2016 to provide that the Contractor acquire an additional resource to lead the organizational change management at a cost of up to $161,120. The County and contractor amended the contract a sixth time June 2016 to extend the Contractor Benefit Administration Analyst resource that supports the Peoplesoft Upgrade project and to extend the hosted test environments at a cost of up to $302,640. The County and contractor amended the contract a seventh time September 2016 to extend the Contractor’s resource support for the Peoplesoft Upgrade project, to extend the Contractor’s hosted test environments, and to implement the Contractor’s Civil Service module at a cost of up to $1,849,890. The County and contractor amended the contract an eighth time March 2017 to extend the Contractor’s resource support for the Peoplesoft Upgrade project, to extend the Contractor’s hosted test environments, to implement the Contractor’s Civil Service module, and for the renewal of the annual subscription of Oracle Cloud Services for the hosted Taleo Recruitment and On-boarding application at a cost of up to $2,084,750. The County and contractor amended the contract a ninth time July 2017 to extend the Contractor’s resource support for the Peoplesoft Upgrade project at a cost of up to $833,800. On October 11, 2017, the upgraded version of the PeopleSoft application – Version 9.2 – went into production use at the County. The proposed tenth amendment to the contract will: (1) increase the Contract payment limit by $337,440; (2) amend the service plan to extend the Contractor’s resource support for the Peoplesoft Upgrade project through January 2018. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Failure to approve the contract amendment would decrease the success of the PeopleSoft 9.2 Upgrade project and result in the continued use of the current antiquated and paper-based system, which would negatively impact the County’s ability to timely and efficiently recruit candidates and on-board new hires. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 288 RECOMMENDATION(S): Approve and authorize the Health Services Director, or his designee, to execute on behalf of the County, Contract #76-556 with Laboratory Corporation of America, a corporation, in an amount not to exceed $325,000, to provide outside laboratory testing services for Contra Costa Regional Medical and Health Centers (CCRMC), for the period from May 1, 2017 through April 30, 2018. FISCAL IMPACT: This contract is funded 100% by Hospital Enterprise Fund I. BACKGROUND: Under Contract #76-556, the contractor will provide outside laboratory testing services, including HER2FISH test for breast cancer treatment, and flow cytometry test for leukemia treatment for the period from May 1, 2017 through April 30, 2018. This contract contains changes to the County Standard General Conditions. Due to extended negotiations with the contractor, the Health Services Department is requesting a retroactive contract start date of May 1, 2017. Approval of the contract will allow the contractor to continue to provide outside laboratory testing services to CCRMC patients. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved, CCRMC patients requiring outside laboratory testing services will not have access to the contractor’s services. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Anna Roth, 925-370-5101 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: K Cyr, M Wilhelm C. 52 To:Board of Supervisors From:William Walker, M.D., Health Services Director Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Contract #76-556 with Laboratory Corporation of America 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 289 RECOMMENDATION(S): Approve and authorize the Health Services Director, or his designee, to execute, on behalf of the County, Contract #26-784-5 with Cardionet, LLC, a limited liability company, in an amount not to exceed $185,000, to provide remote cardiac monitoring services for patients at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center (CCRMC), for the period from November 1, 2017 through October 31, 2018. FISCAL IMPACT: This contract is funded 100% by Hospital Enterprise Fund I. (No rate increase) BACKGROUND: On November 1, 2016, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #26-784-3 (as amended by Amendment Agreement #26-784-4) with Cardionet, LLC, for the provision of cardiac monitoring services, for the period from November 1, 2016 through October 31, 2017. Approval of Contract #26-784-5 will allow the Contractor to continue to provide remote cardiac monitoring services to patients at CCRMC, through October 31, 2018. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved, the CCRMC will not be able to provide remote cardiac monitoring services for its patients. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Anna Roth, 925-370-5101 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: L Walker , M Wilhelm C. 53 To:Board of Supervisors From:William Walker, M.D., Health Services Director Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Contract #26-784-5 with Cardionet, LLC 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 290 RECOMMENDATION(S): Approve and authorize the Health Services Director, or his designee, to execute, on behalf of the County, Contract #26-741-7 with Martha D. Newman, an individual, in an amount not to exceed $250,000, to provide consultation and technical assistance to Contra Costa Regional Medical Center (CCRMC) and Health Centers related to Public Hospital Redesign and Incentives in Medi-Cal (PRIME) program, quality improvement, and strategic methodology for the period from December 1, 2017 through November 30, 2018. FISCAL IMPACT: This contract is funded 100% by Hospital Enterprise Fund I. (No rate increase) BACKGROUND: On November 15, 2016, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #26-741-6 with Martha D. Newman for the provision of consultation and technical assistance to CCRMC for the development of quality metrics, leadership strategies and educational goals for the Delivery System Reform Incentive Payment (DSRIP) Program, for the period from December 1, 2016 through November 30, 2017. Approval of Contract #26-741-7 will allow the contractor to continue to provide CCRMC with consultation and technical assistance in the areas of the PRIME program, quality improvement, and strategic planning and methodology through November 30, 2018. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Anna Roth, 925-370-5101 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: L Walker , M Wilhelm C. 54 To:Board of Supervisors From:William Walker, M.D., Health Services Director Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Contract #26-741-7 with Martha D. Newman 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 291 CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved, the County will not have access to the contractor’s expertise in quality improvement projects, including the PRIME program. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 292 RECOMMENDATION(S): Approve and authorize the Health Services Director, or his designee, to execute, on behalf of the County, Contract Amendment Agreement #25-066-11 with Shelter Inc., a non-profit corporation, effective November 1, 2017, to amend Contract #25-066-10, to decrease the payment limit by $60,428, from $1,430,869 to a new payment limit of $1,370,441 for supportive housing services for homeless families, with no change in the original term of July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018. FISCAL IMPACT: This amendment is funded 100% by the Employment and Human Services Department. BACKGROUND: On July 11, 2017, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #25-066-10 with Shelter Inc. for the provision of supportive housing services for homeless families in Contra Costa County, for the period from July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018. Due to a reduction from the State to the County to operate the program, the Homeless Program received a decrease in funds from the Employment & Human Services Department to support the contract with Shelter Inc. Approval of Contract Amendment Agreement #25-066-11 will allow the Contractor to continue to provide supportive housing services for homeless families at a reduced level, through June 30, 2018. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Lavonna Martin, 925-313-7704 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: McHuen, Deputy cc: L Walker , M Wilhelm C. 55 To:Board of Supervisors From:William Walker, M.D., Health Services Director Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Amendment #25-066-11 with Shelter Inc. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 293 CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this amendment is not approved, homeless families in Contra Costa County will not receive the housing assistance services provided by the contractor. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 294 RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the Animal Services Director, a purchase order with MWI Veterinary Supply Co. in an amount not to exceed $900,000 for veterinary pharmaceutical supplies and chemicals for the Animal Services Department, for the period October 1, 2017 through September 30, 2019. FISCAL IMPACT: Upon approval of this action, the department estimates costs to be $450,000 per year. These expenses will be funded 32% by User Fees, 31% by City Revenues, and 37% by County General Fund. BACKGROUND: The department's in-house medical program requires access to a large variety of pharmaceutical and chemical supplies for the thousands of animals it cares for each year. The Purchasing Department conducted a formal competitive bid process in 2017 on behalf of Animal Services and awarded MWI Veterinary Supply Co. the purchase order for FY 2017/2018 and FY 2018/2019. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Failure to approve this purchase order would severely impact the ability of the Department to provide required medical care for the animals in the County's two shelters. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Yolanda Long, 925-608-8413 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 56 To:Board of Supervisors From:Beth Ward, Animal Services Director Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Purchase Order with MWI Veterinary Supply Co. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 295 RECOMMENDATION(S): Approve and authorize the Health Services Director, or his designee, to execute, on behalf of the County, Contract Amendment Agreement #27-169-14 with Lifelong Medical Care, a corporation, effective July 1, 2017, to amend Contract #27-169-13 to add acupuncture services for Contra Costa Health Plan members, with no change in the Payment Limit of $3,000,000 or the original term of July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018. FISCAL IMPACT: This amendment is funded 100% by Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund ll. BACKGROUND: On July 18, 2017, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #27-169-13 with Lifelong Medical Care for the provision of primary care, urgent care and specialty medical services to Contra Costa Health Plan (CCHP) members, for the period from July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018. Approval of Contract Amendment Agreement #27-169-14 will allow the Contractor to provide additional specialty care services through June 30, 2018. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this amendment is not approved, certain specialty health care services for its members under the terms of their Individual and Group Health plan membership contracts with the County will not be provided. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Patricia Tanquary 925-313-6004 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: A Floyd, M Wilhelm C. 57 To:Board of Supervisors From:William Walker, M.D., Health Services Director Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Amendment #27-169-14 with Lifelong Medical Care 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 296 RECOMMENDATION(S): Approve and authorize the Health Services Director, or his designee, to execute, on behalf of the County, Contract #74-413-7 with Young Men’s Christian Association of the East Bay, a non-profit corporation, in an amount not to exceed $4,000, including modified indemnification language, to provide development and implementation of internship programs for students participating in the Workforce Education and Training (WET) Program for the period from November 1, 2017 through October 31, 2018. FISCAL IMPACT: This contract is funded 100% by the Mental Health Services Act. (No rate increase) BACKGROUND: On November 1, 2016, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #74-413-6 with Young Men’s Christian Association of the East Bay, for the development and implementation of internship programs for students participating in the WET Program to obtain licenses in fields related to mental health and clinical practice, for the period from October 1, 2016 through September 30, 2017. Approval of Contract #74-413-7 will allow the contractor to continue developing and implementing internship programs for students participating in the WET Program through October 31, 2018. This contract includes modifications to the indemnification language in the General Conditions. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Cynthia Belon, 925- 957-5201 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: L Walker, M Wilhelm C. 58 To:Board of Supervisors From:William Walker, M.D., Health Services Director Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Contract #74-413-7 with Young Men’s Christian Association of the East Bay 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 297 CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved, interns will not receive education and training services provided by Young Men’s Christian Association of the East Bay. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 298 RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to execute, on behalf of the Interim Public Works Director, a purchase order with Sam Clar Office Furniture Inc., in the amount of $199,606 for office furniture, for the 40 Muir Road, 2nd Floor, Martinez, Remodel Project. (District V) FISCAL IMPACT: 100% General Fund. BACKGROUND: There isn't enough space at 255 Glacier Drive to address current staffing needs. Capital Project Management and Real Estate Services will be relocating to 40 Muir Road. The 2nd Floor of 40 Muir Road is undergoing a renovation and will house the Public Works staff currently located at 255 Glacier Drive. The 2nd Floor has no furniture and will need to support approximately 36 full time employees and their furniture needs. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Without the Board of Supervisors approval, Public Works staff will not be able to relocate to this new location. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Ramesh Kanzaria, 925. 313-2000 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 59 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Interim Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Approve and Authorize a Purchase Order with Sam Clar Office Furniture, Inc., for the 40 Muir, 2nd Floor, Martinez, Remodel Project. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 299 RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with STAND! For Families Free of Violence, a Non-Profit Corporation, in an amount not to exceed $108,922 to provide the continued implementation of the Phase III Lethality Assessment Program for Domestic Violence Homicide Prevention for the period of December 1, 2017 through September 30, 2018. FISCAL IMPACT: The funds to cover this contract, in an amount not to exceed $108,922, are covered 100% by a Federal Department of Justice Grant. There is no County match requirement. CFDA #16.590 BACKGROUND: The Contra Costa Alliance to End Abuse (Alliance), formerly Zero Tolerance for Domestic Violence Initiative, applied for and received funds from the U.S. Department of Justice, Office on Violence Against Women (OVW), Domestic Violence Homicide Prevention Demonstration (Project) in 2013. The Project has been implemented in phases – an assessment phase (Phase I) and an implementation phase (Phase II). OVW completed Phase I in September, 2014 and selected the Alliance as one of four sites to participate in Phase II of the Project and implement the Lethality Assessment Program (LAP), a recognized promising practice. In 2016, OVW renewed funding in order for the Alliance to continue implementation of the LAP model (Phase III). The Alliance is engaging Stand! For Families Free From Violence to assist in carrying out activities consistent with the funding application. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: V. Kaplan, (925) 608-4963 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 60 To:Board of Supervisors From:Kathy Gallagher, Employment & Human Services Director Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Contract with STAND! For Families Free of Violence 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 300 CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Valuable services will not be provided. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 301 RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or his designee, to execute a Software and Services Agreement #23-619 with BeyondTrust Software Inc., in the amount of $142,190 for the purchase of virtual appliances, software licenses, software maintenance and support and professional services, for the period from November 14, 2017 through November 13, 2020. FISCAL IMPACT: This agreement is funded 100% by Hospital Enterprise Fund I. BACKGROUND: The purchase of the Beyond Trust software and implementation services will enable the Health Services Department's (HSD) Information Technology (IT) Unit to control and audit access to privileged electronic accounts, such as: shared administrative accounts, application accounts, local administrative accounts and service accounts, enabling the management of privileges and control applications on physical and virtual desktops and servers. The software records all user and administrator activity, providing a comprehensive audit trail. In addition, the software will provide a “least-privilege” solution which enables IT to remove administrator privileges, enforce standard user permissions, simplify the enforcement of least-privilege policies, maintain application access control and log privileged activities. This application will simplify compliance reporting across the entire IT infrastructure, helping to eliminate privilege abuse, and preventing data breaches. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: David Runt, 925-335-8700 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Tasha Scott, Marcy Wilhelm, Allyson Eggert C. 61 To:Board of Supervisors From:William Walker, M.D., Health Services Director Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Software and Services Agreement #23-619 with BeyondTrust Software Inc. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 302 CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the Beyond Trust Software, Inc. privilege manager component is not implemented, HSD IT will not have the ability to reduce the risk of accidental or intentional privilege misuse on physical or virtual servers and desktops, thereby preventing IT from closing security gaps, improving operational efficiency and achieving compliance objectives. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 303 RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with STAND! For Families Free of Violence, a Non-Profit Corporation, in an amount not to exceed $317,125 to provide domestic violence support services to California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKs) participants for the period of July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018. FISCAL IMPACT: The funds allocated for this contract, in an amount not to exceed $317,125, are 100% Federal. BACKGROUND: STAND! For Families Free of Violence provides a wide array of domestic violence services tailored to meet the specific needs of the Workforce Services Bureau. Services include California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKS) domestic violence liaisons at Employment and Human Services Department offices, technical assistance, consultation, and domestic violence identification and skills training, on-site capacity building, and linkages for domestic violence victims to community resources. STAND! For Families Free of Violence was selected through a competitive bid process (Request For Proposals #1152). 20-161-0 APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Vickie Kaplan, (925) 608-4963 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 62 To:Board of Supervisors From:Kathy Gallagher, Employment & Human Services Director Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Contract with STAND! For Families Free of Violence 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 304 CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: CalWORKS clients will be unable to receive domestic violence services. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: This contract supports all of the community outcomes established in the Children's Report Card by providing information and services to assist those who are victims or at risk of domestic violence: (1) Children Ready for and Succeeding in School; (2) Children and Youth Healthy and Preparing for Productive Adulthood; (3) Families that are Economically Self Sufficient; (4) Families that are Safe, Stable and Nurturing; and (5) Communities that are Safe and Provide a High Quality of Life for Children and Families. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 305 RECOMMENDATION(S): RATIFY the Purchasing Agent’s execution, on behalf of the Public Works Director, of a purchase order with Jon K. Takata, dba Restoration Management Company, in an amount not to exceed $150,000, for emergency mold abatement at the Contra Costa Regional Medical Center Psychiatric Ward, Martinez area. (100% Health Services Enterprise Fund.) FISCAL IMPACT: This cost is to be funded through Health Services Facilities budget. (100% Health Services Enterprise Fund) BACKGROUND: During a Center of Medicare & Medicaid Services inspection (CMS) of CCRMC Psychiatric Ward, mold was found at the base of a wall growing from a leaking pipe. Restoration Management was called in to abate this issue and rebuild the wall. Facilities Services requested a purchase order to cover the estimated $55k required to abate the area. During the demolition process, they found several rotting steel studs and mold along additional sections of the wall. Due to this they ended up having to demolish several feet of wall, an entire restroom, close down the Emergency Room entrance and reroute traffic. Restoration Management has quoted us for the added work required to repair this issue. This quote is an additional $95,000. Restoration Management hopes this project will be completed by November 30, 2017. Facilities Services is requesting the purchase order # 09835 be increased to $150,000 to cover these costs. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Stan Burton, 925.313-7078 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 63 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Interim Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Approve a purchase order amendment with Jon K. Takata Corporation, d/b/a Restoration Management Company, Martinez area. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 306 CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this agreement is not approved, then mold abatement at the Contra Costa Regional Medical Center will discontinue. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 307 RECOMMENDATION(S): Approve and authorize the Health Services Director, or his designee, to execute, on behalf of the County, Contract #74-550 with Healthright 360, a non-profit corporation, in an amount not to exceed $4,700,783, to provide pre-arrest, at-arrest and post-arrest diversion opportunities and coordination services for Antioch residents with behavioral health issues for the Contra Costa Lead Plus (CoCo Lead+) Project, for the period from November 1, 2017 through August 15, 2020. FISCAL IMPACT: This contract is funded 100% by the California Board of State and Community Corrections Grant (Proposition 47). BACKGROUND: The CoCo Lead+ Project is a County program funded by the California Board of State and Community Corrections, Proposition 47, “The Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Act”, to ensure services for adults with behavioral issues who are committing non-serious, non-violent crimes are available through prevention, diversion and support programs. The contractor will be the primary subcontractor who will serve on operating and policy teams and the local advisory committee, develop agreements, hold administrative responsibility for all aspects of community-based activities, develop policies and protocols with all partners regarding diversion and project services, hire and train staff, facilitate coordination to reduce both barriers and gaps, develop data system and protocols to support evaluation, develop and implement a communications plan, and partner with County’s Health Services Department and the County Administrator’s Office to subcontract funds in amounts and for purposes identified. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Cynthia Belon, 925-957-5501 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: L Walker , M Wilhelm C. 64 To:Board of Supervisors From:William Walker, M.D., Health Services Director Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Contract #74-550 with Healthright 360 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 308 Approval of Contract 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 309 BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) #74-550 will allow the contractor to initiate the CoCo LEAD+ project which will provide pre-arrest, at-arrest and post-arrest diversion opportunities and coordination services for Antioch residents with behavioral health issues through August 15, 2020. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this agreement is not approved, Antioch residents with behavioral health issues committing non-violent and non-serious crimes will not receive prevention, diversion and support services by the contractor. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 310 RECOMMENDATION(S): Approve and authorize the Health Services Director, or his designee, to execute, on behalf of the County, Contract Amendment Agreement #77-011-1 with Bay Area Surgical Specialists Services, LLC, a Limited Liability Company, effective November 1, 2017, to amend Contract #77-011, to increase the payment limit by $900,000, from $300,000 to a new payment limit of $1,200,000, to provide additional ambulatory surgery services for Contra Costa Health Plan (CCHP) members with no change in the original term of March 1, 2016 through February 28, 2018. FISCAL IMPACT: This amendment is funded 100% by Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II. (No rate increase) BACKGROUND: On February 9, 2016, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #77-011 with Bay Area Surgical Specialists Services, LLC for the provision of ambulatory surgery center services for CCHP members, for the period from March 1, 2016 through February 28, 2018. Approval of Contract Amendment Agreement #77-011-1 will allow the Contractor to provide additional ambulatory surgery center services to CCHP members, through February 28, 2018. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this amendment is not approved, certain specialty health care services for its members under the terms of their Individual and Group Health Plan membership contracts with the County will not be provided. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Patricia Tanquary, 925-313-6004 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: A Floyd, M Wilhelm C. 65 To:Board of Supervisors From:William Walker, M.D., Health Services Director Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Amendment #77-011-1 with Bay Area Surgical Specialists Services, LLC 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 311 RECOMMENDATION(S): Approve and authorize the Health Services Director, or his designee, to execute, on behalf of the County, Contract #27-994-1 with OBHG California, P.C., a corporation, in an amount not to exceed $350,000, to provide obstetrics and gynecology services for Contra Costa Health Plan members for the period from November 1, 2017 through October 31, 2019. FISCAL IMPACT: This contract is funded 100% by Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II. (No rate increase) BACKGROUND: In February 2016, the County Administrator approved, and the Purchasing Services Manager executed Contract #27-994 with OBHG California, P.C., for the provision of obstetrics and gynecology services for Contra Costa Health Plan members, for the period from November 1, 2015 through October 31, 2017. Approval of Contract #27-994-1 will allow the Contractor to continue providing obstetrics and gynecology services for CCHP members, through October 31, 2019. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved, Contra Costa Health Plan members will not receive the benefits of obstetrics and gynecology services from the contractor. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Patricia Tanquary, 925-313-6004 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: A Floyd, M Wilhelm C. 66 To:Board of Supervisors From:William Walker, M.D., Health Services Director Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Contract #27-994-1 with OBHG California, P.C. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 312 RECOMMENDATION(S): Approve and authorize the Purchasing Agent, on behalf of the Health Services Department, to execute (1) Master Agreement for Services with Brocade Communications Systems, Inc., and (2) Purchase Order with Optiv Security, Inc., in the amount of $52,034 for renewal of Brocade computer hardware support for the period of November 27, 2017 to November 26, 2018. FISCAL IMPACT: 100% Funding is included in the Hospital Enterprise Fund I Budget. BACKGROUND: Health Services uses Brocade hardware to handle all network traffic coming into the two data centers in Martinez and Pittsburg. This renewal for hardware support is for equipment which is also the infrastructure responsible for supporting over 50 other clinical and ancillary sites. Additionally, this hardware supports the 24-7 operations of the Contra Costa Regional Medical Center, and its Electronic Medical Records (EMR) system, EPIC. Optiv is Brocade’s authorized third-party reseller. The master agreement for services requires the County to indemnify Brocade against claims arising out of the County’s breach of the agreement. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: David Runt, 925-335-8700 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Tasha Scott, Marcy Wilhelm, Allyson Eggert C. 67 To:Board of Supervisors From:William Walker, M.D., Health Services Director Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Purchase Order with Optiv Security, Inc. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 313 CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Failure to maintain support for this equipment increases the risk of an unexpected failure, and possibly an extended outage. This could impact productivity at some locations, including patient care at the hospital and health clinic locations. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 314 RECOMMENDATION(S): Authorize the Purchasing Agent on behalf of the Health Services Department, to purchase food for the Program Governance Meetings totaling $4,500 (15 people at $20 each for 15 months) and gift card incentives totaling $500 for the Health Care for the Homeless Program participants, for the period from November 1, 2017 through January 31, 2019. FISCAL IMPACT: Funded 100% by the U.S. Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) Grant funds. No County funds required. BACKGROUND: The Health Care for the Homeless Program received a grant from Health Resources and Services Administration to provide health care for the homeless population in Contra Costa County. A requirement of the grant is to establish and maintain Program Governance through a Co-Application Governing Board for Health Care for the Homeless program evaluation and CEO/Program Director evaluation. Additionally, another component of the grant is to conduct monthly focus groups with participants in the program and to offer incentives to those who participate. The Health Service Department anticipates purchasing 100 $5 gift cards as incentives and providing food at the Program Governance meetings. Included in the approved grant budget is a line item for food/incentives at an annual amount of $5,000. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Dan Peddycord, 925-313-6712 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Tasha Scott, Marcy Wilhelm, Bill Sorrell C. 68 To:Board of Supervisors From:William Walker, M.D., Health Services Director Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Purchase Gift Cards for the Health Care for the Homeless Project 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 315 BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) Approval of these purchases will cover food for the governance meetings and gift cards for the Health Care for the Homeless Program, through January 31, 2019. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If these purchases are not approved, the Health Care for the Homeless Program would not be fulfilling the goals outlined in the HRSA Grant. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 316 RECOMMENDATION(S): Approve and authorize the Purchasing Agent, on behalf of the Health Services Department, to execute an amendment to Purchase Order #F06590 with Watermark Sleepcare, Inc. to add $6,000 for a new total not to exceed $220,000 for the rental of sleep study devices and testing supplies and repairs at the Contra Costa Regional Medical Center (CCRMC) with no change in the original term of November 1, 2016 through October 31, 2017. FISCAL IMPACT: 100% funding is included in the Hospital Enterprise Fund I budget. BACKGROUND: Watermark Sleepcare, Inc. has provided for the rental of sleep study devices and testing supplies and repairs at the Contra Costa Regional Medical Center (CCRMC) for some time. The patient load for these services continues to grow and requires additional funds to be added to the current purchase order. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this Purchase Order is not approved, the CCRMC will be unable to pay the vendor for purchases. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Anna Roth, 925-370-5101 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Tasha Scott, Marcy Wilhelm, Margaret Harris C. 69 To:Board of Supervisors From:William Walker, M.D., Health Services Director Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Amendment to Purchase Order with Watermark Sleepcare, Inc. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 317 RECOMMENDATION(S): Approve and authorize the Health Services Director, or his designee, to execute, on behalf of the County, Contract #77-005-2 with David S. Gee, M.D., an individual, in an amount not to exceed $168,000, to provide consultation and technical assistance to the Contra Costa Health Plan Medical Management team for the period from December 1, 2017 through November 30, 2018. FISCAL IMPACT: This contract is funded 100% by Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II. (No rate increase) BACKGROUND: On November 8, 2016, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #77-005-1 with David S. Gee, M.D, for the provision of consultation and technical assistance to the Health Plan Medical Management team, including reviewing utilization procedures for pharmacy benefits and providing strategies to improve care to Contra Costa Health Plan Members, for the period from December 1, 2016 through November 30, 2017. Approval of Contract #77-005-2 will allow the contractor to continue providing consultation and technical assistance to the Contra Costa Health Plan Medical Management team through November 30, 2018. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved, the Contra Costa Health Plan Management Team will not receive the benefits of consultation and technical assistance from the contractor. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Patricia Tanquary, 925-313-6004 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: E Suisala, M Wilhelm C. 70 To:Board of Supervisors From:William Walker, M.D., Health Services Director Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Contract #77-005-2 with David S. Gee, M.D. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 318 RECOMMENDATION(S): Approve and authorize the Health Services Director, or his designee, to execute, on behalf of the County, Novation Contract #74-503-2 with Mental Health Systems, Inc., a non-profit corporation, in an amount not to exceed $2,014,000, to provide mental health services for the Mental Health Services Act (MHSA) Community Services and Supports Program, for the period from July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018, which includes a six-month automatic extension through December 31, 2018 in an amount not to exceed $1,007,000. FISCAL IMPACT: This contract is funded 35% by Federal Medi-Cal and 65% by Mental Health Services Act. BACKGROUND: This contract meets the social needs of the County’s population by implementing the MHSA Community Services and Supports Program, including providing community-based services, personal services coordination, medication support, crisis intervention, and other mental health services to eligible adult clients in Contra Costa County. On October 20, 2015, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #74-503 with Mental Health Systems, Inc., for the period of October 1, 2015 through June 30, 2017, which included a six-month automatic extension through December 31, 2017, for the provision of mental health support services to adults in Contra Costa County. Approval of Novation Contract #74-503-2 will allow the contractor to continue to provide services through June 30, 2018. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Cynthia Belon, 925-957-5201 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: L WALKER , M WILHELM C. 71 To:Board of Supervisors From:William Walker, M.D., Health Services Director Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Novation Contract #74–503-2 with Mental Health Systems, Inc. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 319 CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved, there will be fewer services provided to eligible adult clients in Contra Costa County through the MHSA Community Services and Support Program. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 320 RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Interim Public Works Director, or his designee, to execute a contract with Bates Stringer – Oak Park, LLC, in an amount not to exceed $1,275,000, subject to approval by the County Administrator and approval as to form by the County Counsel, to provide real estate services related to the County-owned property located at 1700 Oak Park Blvd. in Pleasant Hill for the period from November 1, 2017, through October 31, 2020. FISCAL IMPACT: The costs incurred by the County under this contract will be paid from the County’s General Fund. The General Fund will be reimbursed upon the sale of the subject property to a builder. Costs are expected to be incurred over a three-year period. BACKGROUND: The County owns approximately eight acres of unimproved property located at 1700 Oak Park Blvd., in Pleasant Hill. The Mt. Diablo Unified School District owns approximately two acres of adjacent unimproved property. The County and the school district have agreed to work together on any sale of the ten-acre parcel in order to maximize the property’s value. The County and the school district are considering transferring approximately three acres of the ten-acre parcel to the City of Pleasant Hill for use as the site of a new library. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Karen Laws (925) 313-2228 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 72 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Interim Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Contract with Bates Stringer – Oak Park, LLC, for real estate services related to County-owned property at 1700 Oak Park Blvd, Pleasant Hill. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 321 BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) > Under the contract with Bates Stringer - Oak Park, LLC, the Contractor will work with County staff and related County consultants to obtain entitlements that would be needed to construct homes on the remaining seven acres of the property. It is expected that the cost of obtaining the entitlements will be more than offset by the increased value of the property when it is offered for sale. Under the contract, the Contractor will work with the City of Pleasant Hill to obtain land use approvals and with State and Federal agencies to obtain necessary resource permits. The process of obtaining the necessary permits and entitlements is expected to include the following steps: Rezoning the Property. This will require an update to the City’s Planned Unit Development zoning for the site to conform to contemporary City zoning requirements. Creating a vesting tentative subdivision map. Obtaining design review approval for the proposed development. Obtaining permits associated with the creek on the eastern border of the Property. Obtaining a lot line adjustment. Completing a CEQA analysis. Engaging in community outreach, to ensure the planned development meets the community’s needs. To complete the required tasks, the Contractor will engage a number of sub-consultants. Services to be provided by these professionals include the following: engineering services, legal services, arborist services, landscape architectural services, traffic engineering services, geotechnical and environmental site assessment services, biological resource services and environmental permitting services. All costs incurred by Bates-Stringer in hiring the sub-consultants will be paid out of the total sum available under the Bates-Stringer contract with the County. The Contractor will also work with County staff and County consultants to market and sell the property to a home builder. The contract will begin November 1, 2017, and end October 31, 2020. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the County does not engage Bates Stringer – Oak Park, LLC, the County could potentially realize less from the sale of the property. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 322 RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Interim Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with JK2 & Associates, Inc., effective October 1, 2017, to increase the payment limit by $125,000 to a new payment limit of $220,000, and to extend the termination date from January 31, 2019 to December 31, 2019, for continued real estate planning services for the Oak Park Sale of Surplus (South Pleasant Hill Parcels), Pleasant Hill area. (District IV) FISCAL IMPACT: 100% General Fund BACKGROUND: The County owns 3 properties in the South Pleasant Hill area. One 10 acre parcel on Oak Park Boulevard south of the Pleasant Hill Middle School is currently vacant (the School District has an ownership interest in 2 of the 10 acres). The County also owns the Pleasant Hill Library and Administrative offices on a 4.8 acre parcel south and west of the Pleasant Hill Middle School. In February 2014, the Board of Supervisors authorized County staff to work with the City of Pleasant Hill regarding the disposition of the County parcels. County staff has been in discussions with City staff on the allowable uses and development of the property. In preparation of placing the parcels on the market for sale, JK2 & Associates was selected to assist staff with real estate planning services for the County’s parcels. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Karen Laws (925) 313-2228 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 73 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Interim Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Contract amendment with JK2 & Associates, Inc., for real estate planning services for the Oak Park Sale of Surplus (South Pleasant Hill Parcels) 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 323 CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Staff will not be able to move forward with the planning process, which would delay placing parcels on the market. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 324 RECOMMENDATION(S): Acting as the Governing Board of the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District, APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Fire Chief, or designee, to execute Amendment No. 1 to Consulting Services Agreement with Loving Campos Associates, Architects, Inc., effective July 24, 2017, to modify sub-consultants with no change to the original term or payment limit of $710,000, to provide architectural services for the new Fire Station No. 70 project at 1800 23rd Street in San Pablo. FISCAL IMPACT: APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Aaron McAlister, Assistant Fire Chief 925-941-3503 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 74 To:Contra Costa County Fire Protection District Board of Directors From:Jeff Carman, Chief, Contra Costa County Fire Protection District Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Amendment No. 1 to Consulting Services Agreement for Architectural Services for New Fire Station 70 in San Pablo 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 325 FISCAL IMPACT: (CONT'D) Budgeted; 100% Contra Costa County Fire Protection District Capital Outlay Fund BACKGROUND: In late 2015, the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District (District) initiated the process for the design of a replacement facility for Fire Station 70 (FS 70) in San Pablo, currently located at 13928 San Pablo Avenue. The current station is comprised of modular buildings installed in 1992 subsequent to the permanent station facility being abandoned due to damage sustained from the Loma Prieta earthquake. The current station was designed for a crew of three personnel and is now housing a crew of five personnel with the addition of Squad 70. In early discussions with the City of San Pablo, an alternate site at 1800 23rd Street was made available to relocate the station. Since those discussions, preliminary site plans were developed and the project appeared feasible for the new location. The City of San Pablo has pledged $2.5 million in funds to assist in the construction and relocation of the station. A funding and construction agreement is currently being negotiated and is anticipated to be finalized within the next two months. The new station will be built to house two full three-person crews for potential expansion of services in the future and will include modern seismic standards as well as being able to meet ADA requirements. The station will be built to provide protection for the community over the next fifty years and would allow for the facility to provide personnel with the components, systems, and features found in a modern fire station. This Consulting Services Agreement (CSA) is administered by the County Public Works Department on behalf of the District. Since the execution of the Agreement, programming and subsequent design development required changes to the originally specified sub-consultants to better serve the needs and scope of work required for the project. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the amendment is not approved, the required scope of work and consultants will not be utilized. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 326 RECOMMENDATION(S): Acting as the Governing Board of the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District, APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Fire Chief, or designee, to execute Amendment No. 1 to the Consulting Services Agreement with Loving Campos Associates, Architects, Inc., Effective July 27, 2017, to modify sub-consultants and increase the payment limit by $64,087 to a new payment limit of $520,000, with no change to the original term, to provide architectural services for the new Fire Station No. 16 at 4007 Los Arabis Road in Lafayette. FISCAL IMPACT: APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Aaron McAlister, Assistant Fire Chief 925-941-3503 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 75 To:Board of Supervisors From:Jeff Carman, Chief, Contra Costa County Fire Protection District Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Amendment No. 1 to Consultant Services Agreement for Architectural Services Fire Station 16 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 327 FISCAL IMPACT: (CONT'D) Budgeted; 100% Contra Costa County Fire Protection District Capital Outlay Fund BACKGROUND: In late 2011, the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District (District) initiated the process for the design of a replacement facility for Fire Station 16 (FS 16) in Lafayette at the present location on Los Arabis Road. At that time, the station was comprised of a small residential style fire station built in the 1950s that was abandoned shortly after the Loma Prieta Earthquake. Subsequent to the closure, a double-wide mobile home was used for the crew living quarters. Approximately $3 million was appropriated for the replacement of FS 16. In 2012, due to budget shortfalls and the eventual closure of FS 16, the project was placed on an indefinite hold. The funds were then designated to be used for the District’s contribution toward the building of Fire Station 46 (FS 46), a joint project with the Moraga-Orinda Fire Protection District. When the FS 46 project was dissolved, the District determined the most appropriate solution for the community of West Lafayette and for the overall service of the District was to rebuild FS 16. New site plans have been developed, engineers and contractors have surveyed the site and the existing fire station structure, and multiple analyses have been performed to determine the feasibility of reconstruction, remodel of the existing structure, or tear down and rebuild from the ground up. While it is possible to re-use the existing fire station structure, it was determined that the value of that structure is very low to the overall project and the cost to provide the required code upgrades and seismic retrofits would outweigh the utility of rehabilitating the old structure. The new station will be built to include modern seismic standards as well as being able to meet ADA requirements. The station will be built to provide protection for the community over the next fifty years and would allow for the facility to provide personnel with the components, systems, and features found in a modern fire station. On behalf of the District, the County Public Works Department requested Statements of Qualifications ("SOQs") for architectural services for fire station design projects, including the rebuilding of Fire Station 16. The Public Works Department received 18 SOQs from interested firms and five firms were shortlisted. A selection committee comprised of County and District staff conducted interviews and ranked the shortlisted firms. Loving Campos Associates Architects, Inc. (LCA) was one of the top ranking firms. On November 8, 2016, the Board approved a Consulting Services Agreement with LCA in an amount not to exceed $455,913. This Consulting Services Agreement (CSA) was administered by the Public Works Department on behalf of the District. Since the execution of the Agreement, programming and subsequent design development required changes to the originally specified sub-consultants to better serve the needs and scope of work required for the project. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the amendment is not approved, the required scope of work and consultants will not be utilized. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 328 RECOMMENDATION(S): Acting as the Governing Board of the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District, APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, on behalf of the Fire Chief of the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District, to execute a purchase order with Sam Clar Office Furniture in an amount not to exceed $500,000 for the purchase, delivery, and installation of office furniture and equipment to outfit the District's new administrative offices located at 4005 Port Chicago Highway in the City of Concord. FISCAL IMPACT: The current quoted amount for furniture, delivery, and installation is $494,867.66. Funding for this purchase will be 90% from the Fire District's General Fund (202000) and 10% from the Fire District's Transport Fund (204000). BACKGROUND: APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Aaron McAlister 925-941-3503 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 76 To:Board of Supervisors From:Jeff Carman, Chief, Contra Costa County Fire Protection District Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Purchase Order with Sam Clar Office Furniture 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 329 BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) The Contra Costa County Fire Protection District (District) Administration and Fire Prevention Bureau has been located at 2010 Geary Road in Pleasant Hill since the 1975. The District's Emergency Medical Services Division currently operates out of a temporary structure. The population served by the District has grown and so has the mission and scope of services provided by the District. The present buildings are no longer adequate for the needs of the District. In July 2017 the Board authorized the Fire Chief to execute a lease for the space located at 4005 Port Chicago Highway in the City of Concord, and the tenant improvements are now in progress. Once the the tenant improvements are completed, it will be necessary to outfit the building with furniture so that the offices are fully functional. The new furniture is ergonomically designed and is fully compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Without this action, the District would have to identify alternative means to provide furniture for the new offices. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 330 RECOMMENDATION(S): 1. CONSENT to the transfer of ownership of Woods Grove Apartments in Pittsburg from BRIDGE Regional Partners, Inc. to Reliant - Woods Grove, LP; 2. APPROVE the associated legal documents including a First Amendment to County HOME Loan Agreement, Assignment and Assumption Agreement, Subordination Agreements and Termination of Affordability Covenant; 3. FORGIVE the accrued interest on the HOME loan; and 4. AUTHORIZE the Conservation and Development Department Director to execute and deliver the documents listed above. FISCAL IMPACT: No impact to the General Fund. There is an existing HOME Investment Partnerships Act loan on Woods Grove Apartments that will be assigned to Reliant - Woods Grove LP. BRIDGE is requesting forgiveness of approximately $160,000 in accrued interest on the HOME loan. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Kara Douglas 925-674-7880 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 77 To:Board of Supervisors From:John Kopchik, Director, Conservation & Development Department Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Approval of Transfer of Ownership of Woods Grove Apartments in Pittsburg 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 331 BACKGROUND: Woods Grove is an existing 80-unit apartment complex at 850 East Leland Road in Pittsburg. In 2010, the County loaned BRIDGE Regional Partners Inc. (BRIDGE) $800,000 of HOME Investment Partnerships Act (HOME) funds for the rehabilitation of the apartments. In exchange for the loan, BRIDGE designated 11 units as "HOME-assisted." These units are required to be affordable to and occupied by families with incomes at or less than 30 percent of the area median income for 55 years. BRIDGE used the HOME funds for energy efficiency improvements to reduce utility costs. BRIDGE had hoped to finance additional rehabilitation with low-income housing tax credits (LIHTC). However, the LIHTC qualifications changes, BRIDGE was not able to use this financing and the repairs were not done. BRIDGE has entered into a purchase and sale agreement with Reliant - Woods Grove LP (Reliant). Both parties request the County approve the transfer of ownership and allow the existing County documents to be assigned to, and assumed by Reliant. The HOME Regulatory Agreement will remain and will be assigned to and assumed by Reliant. In addition, Reliant is requesting some modifications to the loan agreement to reflect the current financing and ownership. The modifications also clarify that references to the rehabilitation of the property mean the work to be undertaken by Reliant, update certain definitions, and eliminate requirements that have already been met by BRIDGE. Reliant intends to rehabilitate the property by replacing the roofs and windows, painting the exterior, upgrading and installing energy efficient site lighting, converting eight units to be compliant with Americans with Disability Act standards, and upgrading kitchen and bathrooms as necessary. The work is expecting to begin in late winter/early spring 2018 and conclude by December 2018. In October 2010, BRIDGE recorded an Affordability Covenant to confirm that 100 percent of the units (with the exception of the manager's unit) at Woods Grove Apartments were affordable to low income households. In order to complete the sale to Reliant, BRIDGE must terminate its Affordability Covenant. The title company is requiring the County's consent to the termination of that agreement. Finally, BRIDGE is seeking forgiveness of approximately $160,000 of accrued interest on the HOME loan. BRIDGE made significant investments of its own funds to Woods Grove through a combination of loans and corporate advances. BRIDGE will not be fully repaid its own funds through the sale of the property. Reliant is willing to assume only the principal of the HOME loan, and not the accrued interest. The HOME program regulations allow HOME funds to be provided to affordable housing developers as either grants or loan, and do not require interest payments. The County typically provides HOME funds in the form of a loan so that the County has a recorded lien on the property. This gives the County the opportunity to participate in discussions with other lenders if the borrower is in default under any of its agreements. Should the property have surplus cash-flow, the borrower makes loan payments to the County and the funds are used for additional affordable housing development. Often when properties are sold and rehabilitation work is done, the new owner seeks additional County funds to assist with the rehabilitation work. In this case, the seller is requesting that the County forgive the accrued interest to reduce the purchase price and facilitate the sale to the buyer. Department of Conservation and Development requests that the Board of Supervisors approve the attached documents in their substantially final form. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the Board of Supervisors does not approve the transfer of ownership and related actions, the property will not be sold to Reliant, and BRIDGE will continue to seek another owner. The planned rehabilitation work will be further delayed. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: Woods Grove provides 80 units of housing affordable to families. This activity supports Goal 3 of the Children's Impact Statement: Families are Economically Self-Sufficient. ATTACHMENTS11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 332 ATTACHMENTS Assignment and Assumption Agreement First Amendment to Loan Agreement Termination of Affordability Covenant Subordination Agreement Subordination Agreement (Subordinate Bonds) 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 333 @BCL@5C02D6F7.docx 1 Recording requested by And when recorded return to: Reliant – Woods Grove, LP c/o Reliant Group Management, LLC 601 California Street, Suite 1150 San Francisco, CA 94108 _____________________________________________________________________________ ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION AND CONSENT TO ASSIGNMENT AGREEMENT (Woods Grove Apartment, 850 East Leland Road, Pittsburg, CA) This Assignment and Assumption and Consent to Assignment Agreement (“Agreement”) is dated as of _______________, 2017, and is among BRIDGE REGIONAL PARTNERS, INC., a California nonprofit public benefit corporation (“Assignor”), RELIANT –WOODS GROVE, LP, a California limited partnership (“Assignee”) and the COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, a political subdivision of the State of California (“County”). RECITALS A. The County has made a loan to Assignor in the principal amount of Eight Hundred Thousand Dollars ($800,000) of HOME funds (the “Loan”) to fund rehabilitation costs for the property located at 850 East Leland Road in Pittsburg, California, as more fully described on Exhibit A (the “Property”). B. The terms of the Loan are set forth in a HOME Loan Agreement dated September 1, 2010, between Assignor and the County (the “Loan Agreement”). The Loan is evidenced by a Promissory Note dated September 1, 2010, made by Assignor for the benefit of the County (the “Note”), a copy of which is attached as Exhibit B. The Note is secured by a Deed of Trust with Assignment of Rents, Security Agreement, and Fixture Filing, dated as of October 15, 2010, and recorded in the Official Records of Contra Costa County on October 29, 2010, as Instrument No. 2010-241349 (the “Deed of Trust”). As consideration for the Loan, the Property is also encumbered by a Regulatory Agreement and Declaration of Restrictive Covenants between Assignor and the County dated as of October 15, 2010, and recorded in the Official Records of Contra Costa County on October 29, 2010, as Instrument No. 2010-241348 (the “Regulatory Agreement”). Together, the Loan Agreement, the Note, the Deed of Trust and the Regulatory Agreement are the “Loan Documents.” C. Assignor and Assignee desire that the Property be transferred to Assignee. The date the transfer of the Property from Assignor to Assignee is effective is the “Effective Date.” 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 334 @BCL@5C02D6F7.docx 2 Under the terms of the Loan Agreement, any transfer of the Property that is made without the prior written consent of the County is a default under the Loan Agreement. D. Assignor and Assignee desire that the Loan Documents be assigned to Assignee. The Note is not assumable without the prior written consent of the County. The County desires to consent to the transfer of the Property and the Loan Documents from Assignor to Assignee. For valuable consideration, the receipt and adequacy of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties therefore agree as follows: AGREEMENT 1. Defined Terms. Capitalized terms used but not defined in this Agreement have the meaning ascribed to them in the Loan Agreement. 2. Assignment and Assumption. Effective on the Effective Date, Assignor hereby transfers and assigns to Assignee all of Assignor’s right and obligations under the Loan Documents. Assignee hereby assumes all of Assignor’s rights and obligations under the Loan Documents from and after the Effective Date and agrees to pay the loan evidenced by the Note to the County in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth in the Note. Assignor has no liability under the Loan Documents for any matters arising from and after the Effective Date. Assignee has no liability under the Loan Documents for any matters arising prior to the Effective Date. From and after the Effective Date, all references to “Borrower” in the Loan Documents shall be deemed a reference to the Assignee. 3. Representations and Warranties. Assignee represents and warrants that: a. Assignee’s intended use of the Property is the same as the Assignor’s intended use of the Property and is not inconsistent with the use permitted under the Regulatory Agreement. b. Assignee is capable of operating a multifamily building as housing affordable to very-low and low income households as contemplated by the terms of the Regulatory Agreement and has the appropriate business experience and management ability to so operate the Property. c. Assignee’s financial condition is sufficient to support the obligations of Borrower under the Loan Agreement and any encumbrances secured by the Property. 4. Representations and Warranties of Assignor and County. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 335 @BCL@5C02D6F7.docx 3 Each of Assignor and County represent and warrant to Assignee that: a. The Loan Documents are in full force and effect and have not been modified. b. The entire principal balance of the Loan has been disbursed to Assignor. c. There are no Events of Default by either party or, to the best of their respective knowledge, no events which, with the giving of notice or the passage of time, would constitute an Event of Default by either party under the Loan Documents. 5. Representation and Warranty of Each Party. Each party represents and warrants to each other that it has the legal power and authority to enter into this Agreement and each has received all necessary approvals to do so. 6. Consent of County. a. The County is entering into this Agreement and consenting to the Assignment in reliance on the representations and warranties of Assignor and Assignee. b. The County hereby consents to the assignment and assumption of the Property and the Loan Documents from Assignor to Assignee. c. The County hereby releases Assignor from any and all obligations and liabilities under or with respect to the Loan Documents that accrue or arise on or after the Effective Date. 7. Loan Documents Unchanged. This Agreement does not amend the Loan Documents except as set forth in Section 10 below to update the address for notices to Borrower. Except for the address for Borrower set forth in Section 10, below, if there is any confusion or contradiction between any term of the Loan Documents and this Agreement, the terms of the Loan Documents will prevail. 8. Governing Law. This Agreement is governed by the laws of the State of California with venue in the Superior Court of the County of Contra Costa. 9. Survival. The provisions of this Agreement shall survive both the execution and delivery of this Agreement. 10. Notices. From and after the Effective Date, all notices given to Borrower under the Loan Documents will be delivered to: Reliant – Woods Grove, LP c/o Reliant Group Management, LLC 601 California Street, Suite 1150 San Francisco, California 94108 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 336 @BCL@5C02D6F7.docx 4 11. Recording. Assignee shall cause this Agreement to be recorded in the office of the Contra Costa County Clerk-Recorder. 12. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts. Signatures on Following Page 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 337 @BCL@5C02D6F7.docx 5 The parties are executing this Agreement as of the date set forth in the introductory paragraph. ASSIGNOR: BRIDGE Regional Partners, Inc., a California nonprofit public benefit corporation By: ___________________________ Printed Name: ___________________________ Title: ___________________________ ASSIGNEE: Reliant – Woods Grove, LP, a California limited partnership By: ___________________________ Printed Name: ___________________________ Title: ___________________________ COUNTY: The County of Contra Costa, a political subdivision of the State of California By: ___________________________ Printed Name: ___________________________ Title: ___________________________ 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 338 @BCL@5C02D6F7.docx 6 A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document. State of California ) ) ss. County of _________________________) On ___________________ before me, _________________________________, Notary Public, personally appeared ___________________________________________________________________, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. _______________________________________ Place Notary seal above Signature of Notary Public 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 339 @BCL@5C02D6F7.docx 7 A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document. State of California ) ) ss. County of _________________________) On ___________________ before me, _________________________________, Notary Public, personally appeared ___________________________________________________________________, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. _______________________________________ Place Notary seal above Signature of Notary Public 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 340 @BCL@5C02D6F7.docx 8 A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document. State of California ) ) ss. County of _________________________) On ___________________ before me, _________________________________, Notary Public, personally appeared ___________________________________________________________________, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. _______________________________________ Place Notary seal above Signature of Notary Public 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 341 @BCL@5C02D6F7.docx 9 EXHIBIT A Legal Description of the Property THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN BELOW IS SITUATED IN THE CITY OF PITTSBURG, COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: Lot 10, Block 5, Official Map of Camp Stoneman, filed June 28, 1966, in Book 111 of Maps at Page 36, Contra Costa County Records. APN: 088-230-001 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 342 @BCL@5C02D6F7.docx 10 EXHIBIT B Copy of Promissory Note 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 343 077820\9167983v2 FIRST AMENDMENT TO COUNTY HOME LOAN AGREEMENT This first amendment to County Home Loan Agreement (“First Amendment”) is dated as of _______________, 2017, and is between the County of Contra Costa, a political subdivision of the State of California (“County”), and Reliant – Woods Grove, LP, a California limited partnership (“Borrower”). RECITALS A. The County and the Borrower are parties to the County Home Loan Agreement, dated September 1, 2010, pursuant to which the County loaned Eight Hundred Thousand Dollars ($800,000) (the “Loan”) to BRIDGE Regional Partners, Inc. (“BRIDGE”) to be used in the rehabilitation of an 80-unit affordable housing complex located at 850 East Leland Road, Pittsburg, California (the “Agreement”). B. Borrower became the “Borrower” under the Agreement pursuant to an Assignment and Assumption and Consent to Assignment Agreement dated __________, 2017, between the County, Borrower and BRIDGE (the “Assignment and Assumption Agreement”). Under the Assignment and Assumption Agreement, BRIDGE assigned, and Borrower assumed, all of Borrower’s rights and obligations under the Loan Documents. C. County and Borrower now desire to amend the HOME Loan Agreement to (i) clarify that references to the rehabilitation of the Property in the Agreement apply to the rehabilitation of the Property in the time period that follows this First Amendment, (ii) update certain definitions, (iii) modify the terms related to rehabilitation of the Property, (iv) eliminate the requirement for matching funds, and (v) permit a cure of an Event of Default by Borrower’s limited partner. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises contained herein, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and adequacy of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: AGREEMENT 1. All capitalized terms used but not defined in this First Amendment have the meanings set forth in the Agreement. 2. All references to the “rehabilitation” of the Property in the Agreement are deemed to include the rehabilitation of the Property by Borrower after the date of the First Amendment. 3. Section 1.1(b) of the Agreement is deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: (b) “Approved Scope of Work” means the work being done to rehabilitate the Property, which work has been approved by the County and is described in Exhibit A-1. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 344 077820\9167983v2 4. Section 1.1(e) of the Agreement is deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: (e) “Borrower” has the meaning set forth in the introductory paragraph to the first amendment to this Agreement. 5. Section 1.1(i) of the Agreement is deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: (i) “Deed of Trust means the Deed of Trust with Assignment of Rents, Security Agreement, and Fixture Filing, dated as of October 15, 2010, recorded in the official records of Contra Costa County on October 29, 2010, as Instrument No. 2010-231549. 6. Section 1.1(w) of the Agreement is deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: (w) “Note” means the promissory note dated September 1, 2010, made by BRIDGE for the benefit of the County, the performance obligations of which has been assigned to, and assumed by, Borrower. 7. Section 1.1(z) of the Agreement is deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: (z) “Regulatory Agreement” means the Regulatory Agreement and Declaration of Restrictive Covenants between BRIDGE and the County, dated as of October 15, 2010, and recorded in the Official Records of Contra Costa County on October 29, 2010, as Instrument No. 2010-241348. 8. Section 1.1 of the Agreement is further amended to include the following definition: (ff) “Partnership Agreement” means that certain Amended and Restated Partnership Agreement of Borrower dated as of _______, 2017, as the same may be amended from time to time. (gg) “Subordinate Bonds” means the [$3,250,000 California Housing Finance Authority Multifamily Housing Revenue Bonds, Series _____,] the proceeds of which are being loaned to Borrower. 9. Section 2.6 of the Agreement is deleted in its entirety. 10. Section 2.7 of the Agreement is deleted in its entirety. 11. Section 2.8 of the Agreement is deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: Section 2.8 Repayment Schedule. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 345 077820\9167983v2 (a) Special Definitions. The following definitions apply for the purposes of this Section 2.8: (i) "Annual Operating Expenses" for each calendar year means the following costs reasonably and actually incurred for operation and maintenance of the Development as confirmed by an annual independent audit performed by a certified public accountant using generally accepted accounting principles: (1) property taxes and assessments imposed on the Development; (2) debt service currently due on a non-optional basis (excluding debt service due from residual receipts or surplus cash of the Development) on loans associated with development or rehabilitation of the Development and approved by the County; (3) debt service currently due on the Subordinate Bonds, which is payable from residual receipts; (4) on-site service provider fees for tenant social services, provided the County has approved, in writing, the plan and budget for such services before such services begin, which approval may not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed and will be deemed granted if the County fails to approve or disapprove the plan and budget within 15 days after submittal; (5) property management fees and reimbursements, not to exceed fees and reimbursements which are standard in the industry and are made to a property management company approved by the County, as provided in the Regulatory Agreement; (6) premiums for property damage and liability insurance; (7) utility services not paid for directly by tenants, including water, sewer, and trash collection; (8) maintenance and repair; (9) any annual license or certificate of occupancy fees required for operation of the Development; (10) security services; (11) advertising and marketing; (12) cash deposited into reserves for capital replacements of the Development required in connection with the Senior Loans or as set forth in the 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 346 077820\9167983v2 Borrower’s Partnership Agreement in an amount not to exceed $500 per unit per year (or any greater amount approved in writing by the County); (13) cash deposited into an operating reserve in an amount not to exceed 3% of Annual Operating Expenses or the amount required in connection with the permanent financing (or any greater amount approved in writing by the County) but with the operating reserve capped at six (6) months gross rent from the Development (as such rent may vary from time to time); (14) deferred developer fee, as set forth in Borrower’s Partnership Agreement; (15) asset management fees payable to Borrower’s limited partner and partnership management fees payable to Borrower’s general partners, which payments, together, may not exceed $32,000 per year; (16) extraordinary operating costs specifically approved in writing by the County; (17) payments of deductibles in connection with casualty insurance claims not normally paid from reserves, the amount of uninsured losses actually replaced, repaired or restored, and not normally paid from reserves, and other ordinary and reasonable operating expenses approved in writing by the County and not listed above. Annual Operating Expenses do not include the following: depreciation, amortization, depletion or other non-cash expenses, and any amount expended from a reserve account. (ii) "Borrowers' Share of Residual Receipts" means fifty percent (50%) of the Residual Receipts. (iii) "Gross Revenue" for each calendar year means all revenue, income, receipts, and other consideration actually received from operation and leasing of the Development. Gross Revenue includes, but is not limited to: (1) all rents, fees and charges paid by tenants; (2) Section 8 payments or other rental subsidy payments received for the dwelling units; (3) deposits forfeited by tenants; (4) all cancellation fees; (5) price index adjustments; 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 347 077820\9167983v2 (6) and any other rental adjustments to leases or rental agreements; (7) net proceeds from vending and laundry room machines; (8) the proceeds of business interruption or similar insurance and not paid to senior lenders; (9) the proceeds of casualty insurance not used to rebuild the Development and not paid to senior lenders; and (10) condemnation awards for a taking of part or all of the Development for a temporary period. Gross Revenue does not include tenants' security deposits, loan proceeds, capital contributions or similar advances. (iv) "Lenders' Share of Residual Receipts" means fifty percent (50%) of the Residual Receipts. (v) "Residual Receipts" for each calendar year means the amount by which Gross Revenue (as defined above) exceeds Annual Operating Expenses (as defined above). (b) Annual Payments. Commencing on May 1 of the year following the first full year after execution of this Agreement, and on May 1 of each year thereafter for the Term of the Loan, Borrower shall make repayments of the outstanding principal and accrued interest on the Loan equal to the Lenders' Share of Residual Receipts. The County shall credit such payments first against accrued interest and then against outstanding principal. Borrower shall submit to County a report of Residual Receipts (including an independent auditor's report regarding the auditor's review of Annual Operating Expenses) at the same time it submits its annual payment. The Borrower shall provide the County with any documentation reasonably requested by the County to substantiate the Borrower’s determination of Residual Receipts. (c) Payment in Full. Borrower shall pay all principal and accrued interest on the Loan, in full, on the earliest to occur of (i) the date of any Transfer not authorized by the County, (ii) the date of an Event of Default, and (iii) the expiration of the Term. (d) Prepayment. Borrower may prepay the Loan at any time without premium or penalty. However, the Regulatory Agreement and the Deed of Trust will remain in effect for the entire Term, regardless of any prepayment. 12. Section 3.1 of the Agreement is deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: Section 3.1 Permits and Approvals. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 348 077820\9167983v2 Borrower must obtain all permits and approvals necessary for the rehabilitation of the Development as required by law. 13. Section 3.2 of the Agreement is deleted in its entirety. 14. Section 3.3 of the Agreement is deleted in its entirety. 15. Section 3.4 of the Agreement is deleted in its entirety. 16. Section 3.5 of the Agreement is deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: Section 3.5 Commencement of Rehabilitation. Borrower shall cause the commencement of rehabilitation of the Development to occur no later than April 1, 2018, or such later date that the County approves. 17. Section 3.6 of the Agreement is deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: Section 3.6 Completion of Rehabilitation. Borrower shall diligently prosecute rehabilitation of the Development to completion, and shall cause the completion of rehabilitation of the Development to occur no later than December 31, 2018, or such later date that the County approves. 18. Section 3.7 of the Agreement is deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: Section 3.7 Rehabilitation Pursuant to Plans and Laws; Prevailing Wages. (a) Borrower shall rehabilitate the Development in conformance with the plans and specifications approved by the City's Building Inspection Department to the extent approvals are required. (b) Borrower shall cause all work performed in connection with the Development to be performed in compliance with: (i) all applicable laws, ordinances, rules and regulations of federal, state, county or municipal governments or agencies now in force or that may be enacted hereafter, including without limitation and to the extent applicable, the prevailing wage provisions of the federal Davis-Bacon Act and implementing rules and regulations, as further set forth in subsection (c) below, and state prevailing wages pursuant to California Labor Code Section 1770 et seq., and the regulations pursuant thereto, as further set forth in subsection (d) below; (ii) the property standards set out in 24 C.F.R. Section 5.701 et seq. and 24 C.F.R. Section 92.251; and 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 349 077820\9167983v2 (iii) all directions, rules and regulations of any fire marshal, health officer, building inspector, or other officer of every governmental agency now having or hereafter acquiring jurisdiction. The work will proceed only after procurement of each permit, license, or other authorization that may be required by any governmental agency having jurisdiction, and Borrower shall be responsible to the County for the procurement and maintenance thereof, as may be required of Borrower and all entities engaged in work on the Development. (c) To the extent that the prevailing wage requirements of the federal Davis- Bacon Act (40 U.S.C. 3141-3148) apply to the rehabilitation of the Property, the Borrower shall cause rehabilitation of the Development performed after the date of First Amendment to this Agreement to be in compliance with the prevailing wage requirements of the federal Davis- Bacon Act (40 U.S.C. 3141-3148). The Borrower shall indemnify, hold harmless and defend (with counsel reasonably acceptable to the County) the County against any claim for damages, compensation, fines, penalties or other amounts arising out of the failure or alleged failure of any person or entity (including the Borrower, its contractor and subcontractors) to pay prevailing wages as determined pursuant to the prevailing wage provisions of the federal Davis-Bacon Act and implementing rules and regulations in connection with the rehabilitation of the Development or any other work undertaken or in connection with the Property after the date of the First Amendment to this Agreement. The requirements in this Subsection survive repayment of the Loan and the reconveyance of the Deed of Trust. (d) With respect to the rehabilitation of the Development after the date of the First Amendment to this Agreement, to the extent that the California Labor Code Section 1720 et seq. requiring the payment of prevailing wages, and California Labor Code Sections 1777.5 et seq. regarding the employment of apprentices, and the implementing regulations of the Department of Industrial Relations (the "DIR") applies to the rehabilitation of the Development, Borrower shall comply with, and cause its contractors to comply with, California Labor Code Section 1720 et seq. requiring the payment of prevailing wages, and California Labor Code Sections 1777.5 et seq. regarding the employment of apprentices, and the implementing regulations of the DIR. Notwithstanding the foregoing, nothing in this Agreement or the First Amendment shall be construed or interpreted to be a contract under California Labor Code Section 1720(f) requiring the payment of prevailing wages under California Labor Code Section 1720 et seq. nor the employment of apprentices, under California Labor Code Sections 1777.5 et seq. regarding the employment of apprentices, and the implementing regulations of the DIR. With respect to the rehabilitation of the Development after the date of the First Amendment to this Agreement, the Borrower shall indemnify, hold harmless and defend (with counsel reasonably acceptable to the County) the County against any claim for damages, compensation, fines, penalties or other amounts arising out of the failure or alleged failure of any person or entity (including Borrower, its contractor and subcontractors) to pay prevailing wages as determined pursuant to California Labor Code Section 1720 et seq., to employ apprentices pursuant to California Labor Code Section 1777.5 et seq., and implementing regulations of the DIR or to comply with the other applicable provisions of California Labor Code Sections 1720 et seq., 1777.5 et seq., and the implementing regulations of the DIR in connection with the rehabilitation of the Development or any other work undertaken or in connection with the Property, to the extent such laws apply to the Development. The requirements in this Subsection survive the repayment of the Loan, and the reconveyance of the Deed of Trust. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 350 077820\9167983v2 19. Section 3.10 of the Agreement is deleted in its entirety. 20. Section 3.11 of the Agreement is deleted in its entirety. 21. Section 3.13 of the Agreement is deleted in its entirety. 22. Section 3.15 of the Agreement is deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: Section 3.15 Approved Scope of Work. As of the date of this Agreement, the County has approved the Approved Scope of Work set forth in Exhibit A-1. Borrower shall notify the County in a timely manner of any changes in the Approved Scope of Work. Changes to the Approved Scope of Work, other than additions to the Scope of Work, are subject to the approval of the Director of the County’s Department of Conservation and Development, in his reasonable discretion. 23. Section 4.1 of the Agreement is deleted in its entirety. 24. Section 4.2 of the Agreement is deleted in its entirety. 25. Section 4.14(a) of the Agreement is deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: (a) For purposes of this Agreement, "Transfer" means any sale, assignment, or transfer, whether voluntary or involuntary, of (i) any rights and/or duties under this Agreement, and/or (ii) any interest in the Development, including (but not limited to) a fee simple interest, a joint tenancy interest, a life estate, a partnership interest, a leasehold interest, a security interest, or an interest evidenced by a land contract by which possession of the Development is transferred and Borrower retains title. The term "Transfer" excludes (i) the leasing of any single unit in the Development to an occupant in compliance with the Regulatory Agreement, (ii) a lease that enables cable and/or laundry services to be available at the Development, (iii) transfers of limited partner interests in the Borrower, (iv) transfers of interests within the limited partner of Borrower, and (v) transfers of general partner interests to affiliates of the limited partner of Borrower. 26. Section 5.1(h) is deleted and replaced with the following: (h) At the time of the recordation of the Assignment and Assumption Agreement, Borrower will have good and marketable fee title to the Development and there will exist thereon or with respect thereto no mortgage, lien pledge or other encumbrance of any character whatsoever other than liens for current real property taxes and liens in favor of the County or approved in writing by the County. 27. Article 6 of the Agreement is amended to include the following: Section 6.5 Cure by Borrower’s Limited Partner. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 351 077820\9167983v2 The cure of an Event of Default under this Agreement by Borrower’s limited partner will be deemed to be a cure by Borrower. 28. Section 7.9 of the Agreement is deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: Section 7.9 Notices, Demands and Communications. All notices required or permitted by any provision of this Agreement must be in writing and sent by registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, or delivered by express delivery service, return receipt requested, or delivered personally, to the principal office of the Parties as follows: County: County of Contra Costa Department of Conservation and Development 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 Attention: Assistant Deputy Director Borrower: Reliant – Woods Grove, LP c/o Reliant Group Management, LLC 601 California Street, Suite 1150 San Francisco, CA 94108 Attention: J. Caskie Collet With a copy to: R4 WGCA Acquisition LLC c/o R4 Capital LLC 780 Third Avenue, 10th Floor New York, New York 10017 Attention: Marc Schnitzer Such written notices, demands and communications may be sent in the same manner to such other addresses as the affected Party may from time to time designate by mail as provided in this Section. Receipt will be deemed to have occurred on the date shown on a written receipt as the date of delivery or refusal of delivery (or attempted delivery if undeliverable). 29. All other terms of the Agreement remain unchanged. 30. Borrower hereby affirms all of the representations and warranties made in Article 5 of the Agreement, as amended by this First Amendment. 31. This First Amendment is governed by the laws of the State of California. [Remainder of Page Intentionally Left Blank] 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 352 077820\9167983v2 32. This First Amendment may be executed in multiple originals, each of which is deemed to be an original. County and Borrower are executing this First Amendment as of the date set forth in the introductory paragraph. BORROWER: Reliant – Woods Grove, LP, a California limited partnership By: Name: Its: COUNTY: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of California By: Name: Its: APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: Deputy County Counsel 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 353 Exhibit A-1 Approved Scope of Work 1. New Roofs 2. New Windows 3. Exterior Paint 4. Upgraded / energy efficient site lighting 5. Conversion of 8 units to Handicapped Units with compliant ADA parking and path of travel 6. Upgraded Kitchens and Bathrooms, as necessary 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 354 Termination of Affordability Covenant Recording Requested by and when recorded return to: First American Title Insurance Company 100 Mission Street, Suite 1600 San Francisco, CA 94105 ______________________________________________________________________________ TERMINATION OF AFFORDABILITY COVENANT This Termination of Affordability Covenant (“Termination”) is executed as of November __, 2017, to be effective upon the date of recordation of this Termination in the Official Records of Contra Costa County, California. BRIDGE Regional Partners, Inc., a California nonprofit public benefit corporation, (“BRP”) hereby terminates and releases that certain Affordability Covenant executed by BRP as of October 15, 2010, recorded October 29, 2010 as Document number 2010-0241351-00 in the Official Records of Contra Costa County, California (the “Affordability Covenant”). This Termination may be executed in as many counterparts as may be deemed necessary and convenient, and by the different parties hereto on separate counterparts, each of which, when so executed, shall be deemed an original, but all such counterparts shall constitute one and the same instrument. BRIDGE Regional Partners, Inc., a California nonprofit public benefit corporation By: _____________________________ Name: __________________________ Title: ___________________________ [County signature on next page] 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 355 Termination of Affordability Covenant The County of Contra Costa, California, hereby consents to this termination and release of the Affordability Covenant executed by BRP as of October 15, 2010, recorded October 29, 2010 as Document number 2010-0241351-00 in the Official Records of Contra Costa County, California and to the recordation of this Termination in the Official Records of said County. Contra Costa County By: ______________________________ Name and Title: ____________________ 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 356 Termination of Affordability Covenant A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document. State of California ) County of ______________________ ) On ____________________, before me, ____________________________, a Notary Public, personally appeared _______________________________, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 357 Termination of Affordability Covenant 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 358 ) APN: 088-230-001 WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO: Kutak Rock LLP 1760 Market Street, Suite 1100 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103 Attention: Andrew P. Schmutz, Esquire SUBORDINATION AGREEMENT NOTICE: THIS SUBORDINATION AGREEMENT RESULTS IN YOUR SECURITY INTEREST IN THE PROPERTY BECOMING SUBJECT TO, AND OF LOWER PRIORITY THAN, THE LIEN OF SOME OTHER OR LATER SECURITY INSTRUMENTS. THIS SUBORDINATION AGREEMENT (this “Agreement”) is dated November __, 2017, for identification purposes only and is effective upon recording, by and among U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as trustee (together with its successors and assigns, “Senior Lender”), RELIANT-WOODS GROVE, LP, a California limited partnership (together with its successors and assigns, “Borrower”), and the COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, a political subdivision of the State of California (together with its successors and assigns, “Subordinated Lender”). W I T N E S S E T H : WHEREAS, Subordinated Lender has made a loan that has been assumed by Borrower in an aggregate principal amount of $800,000 (“Subordinate Loan”) pursuant to a County HOME Loan Agreement dated September 1, 2010 (“Subordinate Loan Agreement”), in connection with the rehabilitation of the 80-unit multifamily housing development known as Woods Grove Apartments, which it is situated in Pittsburg, California; WHEREAS, the repayment obligations of the Borrower under the Subordinate Loan is evidenced by a promissory note (“Subordinate Note”) executed and delivered thereby; WHEREAS, the Subordinate Loan is secured by a Deed of Trust With Assignment of Rents, Security Agreement, and Fixture Filing, which was recorded in the Official Records of Contra Costa County, California, as Instrument No. 2010-0241349 (“Subordinate Trust Deed”) against the real property in the City of Pittsburg, County of Contra Costa and State of California described in Exhibit A hereto (“Property”); WHEREAS, the Subordinated Lender requires Borrower maintain in effect as a covenant certain affordability restrictions, which were imposed upon the Property pursuant to a Regulatory Agreement and Declaration of Restrictive Covenants recorded in the Official Records of Contra Costa County, California, as Instrument No. 2010-0241348 (“County Regulatory Agreement”); 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 359 Woods Grove Subordination Agreement (Contra Costa County) 2 WHEREAS, the Subordinated Lender requires Borrower to enter into an Assignment and Assumption and Consent to Assignment Agreement to be recorded concurrently herewith in the Official Records of Contra Costa County, California. Together, the Subordinate Note, Subordinate Loan Agreement, Subordinate Trust Deed, County Regulatory Agreement, Note and all other documents evidencing or securing the Subordinate Note, the “Subordinate Loan Documents”; WHEREAS, , the Property is being acquired and rehabilitated, in part, with the proceeds of those certain Limited Obligation Multifamily Housing Revenue Bonds (Woods Grove Apartments), 2017 Issue K-1 issued by the California Housing Finance Agency (the “Issuer” ) in the original principal amount of $[8,000,000] (the “Senior Bonds”) pursuant to an Indenture of Trust of even date herewith between California Housing Finance Agency (the “Issuer” and Senior Lender, as trustee (as amended, modified or supplemented from time to time, the “Indenture”) WHEREAS, the proceeds of the Senior Bonds are being loaned to the Borrower (the “Loan”) pursuant to the terms of a Loan Agreement dated as of the date hereof between Issuer and the Borrower (as amended, modified or supplemented from time to time, the “Loan Agreement”); WHEREAS, the Borrower’s obligations under the Loan Agreement are evidenced by a promissory note dated as of the date of issuance of the Bonds (as amended, modified or supplemented from time to time, the “Note”); WHEREAS, Borrower’s obligations under the Loan Agreement are secured by, among other things, a Deed of Trust, Assignment of Rents and Leases, Security Agreement and Fixture Filing, granted by Borrower against the Property and naming Senior Lender, as assignee of Issuer, as beneficiary, to be recorded concurrently herewith in the Official Records of Contra Costa County, California (“Trust Deed” and, together with the Indenture, the Loan Agreement, the Note and all other documents evidencing or securing the Bonds or the Note, the “Loan Documents”); WHEREAS, the conditions of Senior Lender making the Loan include the subordination of the Subordinated Liens to the Senior Liens, and the subordination of the Subordinated Indebtedness to the Senior Indebtedness, all as more fully described herein; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and undertakings contained herein, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree to establish the relative priority of the documents described in the foregoing recitals as follows: 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 360 Woods Grove Subordination Agreement (Contra Costa County) 3 1. Definitions. For purposes of this Agreement, the following terms shall have the following meanings: 1.1 “Senior Indebtedness” means all obligations of any type or nature secured by the Senior Liens, presently or hereafter due from Borrower, its successors and assigns, to Senior Lender, or its successors, assigns or participants, including without limitation, the Loan, those obligations under the Loan Agreement, the Notes, and all other principal, interest, charges, and expenses under or incidental to any indebtedness secured by the Senior Liens. 1.2 “Senior Liens” means all liens, mortgages, Trust Deed, security interests, and collateral assignments of any type or nature, previously given or hereafter granted by Borrower to Senior Lender, including without limitation, those liens, assignments and security interests granted in the Trust Deed and the other Loan Documents. 1.3 “Subordinated Indebtedness” means all obligations of any type or nature secured by the Subordinated Liens, presently or hereafter due from Borrower to Subordinated Lender, including without limitation, those obligations contained in the Subordinate Loan Documents, together, in each instance, with all interest and other charges or expenses incidental to any of the foregoing. 1.4 “Subordinated Liens” means all liens, mortgages, and security interests of any type or nature, previously or hereafter granted by Borrower to Subordinated Lender, including without limitation, liens and security interests granted in the Subordinate Trust Deed. 2. Consent of Subordinated Lender. Notwithstanding any of the terms of the Subordinate Loan Documents to the contrary, the Subordinated Lender hereby consents to the creation, now or hereafter, of the Senior Indebtedness and the Senior Liens and to the execution and delivery by Borrower of any and all documents and instruments in connection therewith, including without limitation, the Trust Deed, and to the performance by Borrower of any and all of its obligations under or in connection therewith or resulting therefrom. Subordinated Lender agrees that no such action shall constitute an event of default or an event, which with the passage of time, or giving of notice, or both, would become an event of default under any document or instrument relating to the Subordinated Indebtedness or Subordinated Liens. 3. Subordination of Subordinated Liens; Subordination of Subordinated Indebtedness and Subrogation Rights. 3.1 In consideration of (among other actions) Senior Lender making the Loan, the Subordinated Liens are hereby subordinated to the Senior Liens and the Senior Liens shall at all times be first, prior, and superior to the Subordinated Liens in all respects. The terms and provisions of any document creating or relating to a Subordinated Lien are hereby amended to provide that so long as any of the Senior Liens remain unpaid, the Subordinated Liens therein granted are subordinate to the Senior Liens and that none of 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 361 Woods Grove Subordination Agreement (Contra Costa County) 4 the terms and provisions of such documents or instruments evidencing the Subordinated Liens shall affect or limit in any way the rights or remedies provided to the holder of the Senior Indebtedness under the Senior Liens. 3.2 Subordinated Lender agrees that if by reason of its exercise of any other right or remedy under the Subordinated Liens or otherwise in respect of the Subordinated Indebtedness, it acquires by right of subrogation or otherwise a lien on the Property which (but for this subsection) would be senior to the lien of the Senior Liens, then, in that event, such lien shall be subject and subordinate to the lien of the Senior Liens. 3.3 In consideration of (among other actions) Senior Lender making the Loan, the Subordinated Indebtedness is hereby subordinated to the Senior Indebtedness and repayment of the Senior Indebtedness shall at all times be first, prior, and superior to the Subordinated Indebtedness in all respects. Subordinated Lender hereby agrees that as long as any of the Senior Indebtedness remains unpaid, repayment of the Subordinated Indebtedness is subordinate to the Senior Indebtedness and that none of the respective terms and provisions of such documents or instruments evidencing or creating the Subordinated Indebtedness shall effect or limit the rights or remedies provided to the Senior Lender in respect of the Senior Indebtedness. 4. Subordination of Subordinated Indebtedness; Distributions and Payments of Net Cash Flow; Priority Among Subordinated Liens. 4.1 The terms and provisions of any document creating or relating to the Subordinated Indebtedness are hereby deemed amended for purposes of this Agreement to provide that so long as any of the Senior Indebtedness remains unpaid, the Subordinated Indebtedness is subordinate to the Senior Indebtedness and that none of the terms and provisions of such documents or instruments evidencing or creating the Subordinated Indebtedness shall effect or limit in any way the rights or remedies provided to the Senior Lender in respect of the Senior Indebtedness. 4.2 Provided that in each instance amounts then due and payable in respect of the Senior Indebtedness (including, without limitation, funding of required reserves) have been paid in full and there exists no default or event of default under the documents evidencing or creating the Senior Indebtedness or securing the Senior Indebtedness pursuant to the Senior Liens (including without limitation the Loan Documents), and subject to Section ___ of the Loan Agreement, Net Cash Flow (as defined in the Loan Agreement) shall be utilized, to the extent available, to pay the Subordinated Indebtedness. Unless and until Senior Lender has declared Borrower in default and all applicable notice and cure periods have expired, Borrower will pay any and all amounts outstanding to Subordinated Lender as such amounts become due and payable under the Subordinate Loan Documents. 5. Insolvency Proceedings Against Borrower. The insolvency or bankruptcy of Borrower shall not affect this Agreement, and the same shall remain in full force and effect. In 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 362 Woods Grove Subordination Agreement (Contra Costa County) 5 any insolvency or bankruptcy proceeding for the complete liquidation of Borrower or any of its general partners, Senior Lender is hereby assigned the right to collect the Subordinated Indebtedness and apply it to the Senior Indebtedness and Subordinated Lender shall not receive any distribution from the bankruptcy estate of Borrower or its general partner (as the case may be) unless and until the Senior Indebtedness has been satisfied in full. The Subordinated Lender agrees that during the term of this Agreement it will not, without, in each case, the Senior Lender’s prior, written consent: (i) commence, or join with any other creditor in commencing any bankruptcy reorganization, arrangement, insolvency or liquidation proceedings with respect to the Borrower; (ii) make any election, give any consent, commence any action or file any motion, claim, obligation, notice or application or take any other action in any insolvency proceeding by or against the Borrower or any other obligor with respect to the Subordinate Loan Documents; or (iii) challenge the validity or amount of any claim submitted in such proceeding by Senior Lender in good faith or any valuations of the Property or any other Collateral, or any portion of the foregoing, or other Senior Indebtedness collateral submitted by Senior Lender in good faith, in such proceeding or take any other action in such proceeding, which is adverse to Senior Lender’s enforcement of its claim or receipt of adequate protection (as that term is defined in the Bankruptcy Code). 6. Assignment; Encumbrances and Transfers. Subordinated Lender represents and warrants that, as of the date of this Agreement, no part of the Subordinated Indebtedness or Subordinated Liens of which it is the party in interest has been sold, assigned, encumbered, endorsed or transferred to or for the benefit of others. Subordinated Lender agrees not to sell, assign, transfer, or endorse or otherwise encumber the Subordinated Indebtedness of which it is the party in interest, no matter how evidenced, to any party unless prior to any such sale, assignment, transfer, endorsement, or encumbrance satisfactory written evidence (which evidence may take the form of a legal opinion) is provided to Senior Lender that the terms of this Agreement (or substantially similar agreement entered into concurrently with such any proposed sale, assignment, transfer, endorsement or encumbrance) shall bind all such successors, assigns, transferees, and endorsees of Subordinated Lender and all subsequent interest holders (beneficial or otherwise) of the affected Subordinated Liens. 7. Additional Documentation; Cooperation. Subordinated Lender further agrees to cooperate with Senior Lender from time to time and execute and deliver such instruments and to take such other actions (to the extent permitted by law) as may reasonably be requested by Senior Lender in order to enable Senior Lender to enforce its rights under this Agreement. Subordinated Lender shall not, without the prior written consent of Senior Lender, take any action that has the effect of increasing any portion of the Subordinated Indebtedness. 8. No Liability. 8.1 The parties hereto agree that Senior Lender shall not be liable for any action or failure to act under or in connection with any of the documents or instruments creating the Senior Liens or the Senior Indebtedness, it being understood that the decision of whether and when to act and the manner of proceeding under such instruments and documents shall not be affected in any manner by the existence of the Subordinated 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 363 Woods Grove Subordination Agreement (Contra Costa County) 6 Indebtedness and the Subordinated Liens. It is further agreed that such obligations as may be imposed under the documents and instruments creating the Senior Liens or under applicable laws shall run exclusively to the benefit of Senior Lender and may be enforced or waived only by Senior Lender and not by the Subordinated Lender or the holders of the Subordinated Liens or Subordinated Indebtedness. 8.2 The parties hereto agree that Subordinated Lender shall not be liable for any action or failure to act under or in connection with any of the documents or instruments creating the Subordinated Liens or the Subordinated Indebtedness except to the extent set forth in such documents, it being understood that the decision of whether and when to act and the manner of proceeding under such instruments and documents shall not be affected in any manner by the existence of the Senior Indebtedness and the Senior Liens, except to the extent set forth in this Agreement. It is further agreed that such obligations as may be imposed under the documents and instrument creating the Subordinated Liens or under applicable laws shall run exclusively to the benefit of Subordinated Lender and may be enforced or waived only by Subordinated Lender and not by the Senior Lender or the holders of the Senior Liens or Senior Indebtedness. 9. Insurance and Condemnation. Subordinated Lender agrees that if it receives any insurance or condemnation proceeds in respect of any of the assets of Borrower subject to the Senior Liens, Subordinated Lender shall immediately so notify Senior Lender in writing and shall deliver such proceeds to or on the order of the Senior Lender so long as any Senior Indebtedness remains unpaid. Notwithstanding this Section, the Senior Lender will release the proceeds, awards and compensation described above to the Borrower to be used to reconstruct the improvements on the Property provided that the Senior Lender reasonably determines that rebuilding is financially feasible in accordance with and subject to the applicable provisions of the Loan Documents. Subordinated Lender agrees it shall have no right to participate in the adjustment of the proceeds of insurance payable as the result of any casualty to the Improvements, or to participate in any manner whatsoever in activities relating to restoration or reconstruction of the Improvements, and Senior Lender shall have the exclusive right to receive, administer and apply all such proceeds as set forth in the Loan Documents. 10. Irrevocability of Agreement. Subordinated Lender agrees that, without prior notice to or further prior assent by Subordinated Lender but subject, in each instance, to the terms and provisions of the agreements creating the Senior Indebtedness and Senior Liens (a) the liability of Borrower in respect of the Senior Indebtedness may, in whole or in part, be renewed, extended, modified, or released by Senior Lender and the documents and instruments creating or evidencing the Senior Indebtedness or the Senior Liens may be amended or supplemented, as Senior Lender may deem advisable (including without limitation, an amendment to add as obligations secured by the Senior Liens) as long as the amount of the Senior Indebtedness is not increased, (b) any collateral and/or security interests in respect of the Senior Indebtedness (other than the Property) may, from time to time, in whole or in part, be assigned, transferred, exchanged, sold, encumbered or surrendered by Senior Lender, and (c) any deposit balance or balances to the credit of Borrower may, from time to time, in whole or in part, be surrendered or released by Senior Lender to Borrower, all without impairing or in any way affecting the 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 364 Woods Grove Subordination Agreement (Contra Costa County) 7 subordination contained in this Agreement; nor shall the subordination herein contained be impaired or affected in any way by any other action, inaction, or omission in respect of the Senior Indebtedness, the Senior Liens or this Agreement. Subordinated Lender further agrees that it will not consent to any amendment, modification of, supplement to, or waiver or consent with respect to, the Subordinated Liens or the Subordinated Indebtedness or any other documents executed or delivered in connection therewith that would increase the amount of the Subordinated Indebtedness or require additional rent restrictions upon the Property, reduce the rental income or increase the operating costs without the prior, written consent of the Senior Lender. 11. Default and Remedies. 11.1 The Borrower shall, immediately upon receipt from the Subordinated Lender, provide to the Senior Lender copies of any notice of default or breach (prospective or otherwise) and notice of the pursuit or waiver of any available remedy in respect thereof. Subordinated Lender hereby agrees to give notice to Senior Lender of any default under the Subordinate Loan Documents within five business days of notice to Borrower. Senior Lender hereby agrees to give notice to Subordinated Lender of any default under the Senior Loan Documents within five business days of notice to Borrower. 11.2 Subordinated Lender declares, agrees, and acknowledges that it will not, without the prior written consent of Senior Lender: (i) sue the Borrower or any other obligor under any of the Subordinate Loan Documents; (ii) accelerate or accept prepayment in full or in part of the Subordinate Indebtedness; (iii) commence any action to foreclose or exercise any power of sale under the Subordinate Mortgage; (iv) accept a deed or assignment in lieu of foreclosure for the Property or any part or portion thereof; (v) seek or obtain a receiver for the Property or any part or portion thereof; (vi) take possession or control of the Property, or collect or accept any rents from the Property; (vii) take any action that would terminate any leases or other rights held by or granted to or by third parties with respect to the Property; (viii) initiate or join any other creditor in commencing any Proceeding with respect to the Borrower or any other obligor; (ix) incur any obligation to the Borrower or any other obligor other than as provided in the Subordinate Loan Agreement, (x) exercise any other remedies under the Subordinate Loan Documents; or (xi) take any other enforcement action against the Borrower or any other obligor or against the Property or any part or portion thereof. 11.3 Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 11.2 above, the Subordinated Lender may, without the consent of the Senior Lender, exercise the remedy of pursuing specific performance of the County Regulatory Agreement. 11.4 Subordinated Lender agrees that Senior Lender shall have, as determined in accordance with and subject to the terms of the Loan Documents, upon the occurrence of an Event of Default under and as defined in the Loan Documents, the right to (i) accelerate or accept prepayment in full or in part of the Senior Indebtedness; (ii) 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 365 Woods Grove Subordination Agreement (Contra Costa County) 8 commence any action to foreclose or exercise any power of sale under the Senior Mortgage; (iii) accept a deed or assignment in lieu of foreclosure for the Property or any part or portion thereof; (iv) seek or obtain a receiver for the Property or any part or portion thereof; (v) take possession or control of the Property, and collect and accept rents from the Property; (vi) sue the Borrower or any other obligor under any of the Loan Documents; (vii) exercise any rights of set-off or recoupment that Senior Lender may have against the Borrower or any other obligor; (viii) exercise any other remedies under the Loan Documents; or (ix) take any other enforcement action against the Property or any part or portion thereof, all without any responsibility or liability to Subordinated Lender with respect to the Property, the Borrower, the [General Partner][Managing Member] or any other obligor. 11.5 Subordinated Lender agrees that Senior Lender shall have absolute power and discretion, without notice to Subordinated Lender, to deal in any manner with the Senior Indebtedness, including interest, costs and expenses payable by the Borrower to Senior Lender, and any security and guaranties therefor, including, but not by way of limitation, release, surrender, extension, renewal, acceleration, compromise or substitution; provided that Senior Lender shall not increase the principal amount of the indebtedness to which the Subordinate Loan Documents are subordinate (other than increases resulting from protective advances or payment of Senior Lender’s costs) without the prior written consent of Subordinated Lender, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. 11.6 Subordinated Lender further agrees that if at any time Subordinated Lender should commence any foreclosure proceeding, or commence any action to execute on any lien obtained by way of attachment or otherwise on the Property, or otherwise take any action prohibited under Section 11.2, Senior Lender shall (unless Senior Lender has consented to such action or remedy) be entitled to have the same vacated, dissolved and set aside by such proceedings at law or otherwise as Senior Lender may deem proper, and this Agreement shall be and constitute full and sufficient grounds therefor and shall entitle Senior Lender to become a party to any proceedings at law or otherwise in or by which Senior Lender may deem it proper to protect its interests hereunder. 11.7 The Senior Lender agrees that the Subordinated Lender shall have the right (but not the obligation) to cure any or all defaults under the Loan Documents within the cure periods afforded to the Borrower under the Loan Documents. The cure right provided to the Subordinated Lender pursuant to this Section shall not be construed, directly or indirectly, to prevent Senior Lender from enforcing all remedies available to Senior Lender under the Senior Liens. 11.8 Subordinated Lender agrees that in the event of any foreclosure of the Trust Deed, the restrictive covenants, conditions, and restrictions set forth in the Subordinated Liens shall be extinguished and be of no force or effect on the purchaser pursuant to such foreclosure proceeding in order to ensure, in each instance, that Senior 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 366 Woods Grove Subordination Agreement (Contra Costa County) 9 Lender realizes the practical benefits of its senior position and interests hereunder and under the Senior Liens. 12. Miscellaneous. 12.1 This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns, including any party substituted as a beneficiary under the Trust Deed. This Agreement shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of California, without regard to the choice of law provisions thereof. 12.2 If any of the provisions or terms of this Agreement shall for any reason be held invalid or unenforceable, such invalidity or unenforceability shall not affect any other of the terms hereof, and this Agreement shall be construed as if such unenforceable term had never been contained herein. 12.3 All notices and other communications hereunder shall be deemed to have been duly given, made, or served, if in writing and delivered personally or mailed by first class mail, postage prepaid, to the respective parties to this Agreement as follows: (a) If to Borrower: Reliant-Woods Grove, LP c/o Reliant Group Management, LLC 601 California Street, Suite 1150 San Francisco, CA 94108 Attn: J. Caskie Collet (b) If to Subordinated Lender: County of Contra Costa Department of Conservation and Development 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 Attention: Assistant Deputy Director (c) If to Senior Lender: U.S. Bank National Association, as trustee 1420 Fifth Avenue, 7th Floor Seattle, Washington 98101 Attention: Global Corporate Trust Services With a copy to: R4 Servicer LLC 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 367 Woods Grove Subordination Agreement (Contra Costa County) 10 155 Federal Street, Suite 1004 Boston, Massachusetts 02110 Attention: Greg Doble E-mail: gdoble@r4cap.com The designation of the person to be so notified or the address of such person for the purposes of such notice may be changed from time to time by similar notice in writing, except that any communication with respect to a change of address shall be deemed to be given and made when received by the party to whom such communication was sent. No other method of notice is precluded by this Section 12.3. 12.4 This Agreement represents the entire agreement between the parties hereto on the subject matter hereof and, except as expressly provided herein, shall not be affected by reference to any other documents. Neither this Agreement nor any provision hereof may be changed, waived, discharged, or terminated orally, but such may be accomplished only by an instrument in writing signed by the party against whom enforcement of the change, waiver, discharge, or termination is sought. 12.5 [Reserved] 12.6 The Borrower, Senior Lender and Subordinated Lender each agrees that, in the event of any conflict or inconsistency between the terms of the Senior Liens, the Senior Indebtedness, the Subordinated Liens or the Subordinated Indebtedness (as the case may be) and the terms of this Agreement, the terms of this Agreement shall govern and control as to: (a) the relative priority of interests between the Senior Lender and the Subordinated Lender; (b) the timing of the exercise of remedies by the Senior Lender and the Subordinated Lender under the Senior Liens and the Subordinated Liens, respectively; and (c) solely as between the Senior Lender and the Subordinated Lender, the notice requirements, and the other rights and obligations which the Senior Lender and the Subordinated Lender have agreed to as expressly provided in this Agreement. Borrower acknowledges that the terms and provisions of this Agreement shall not, and shall not be deemed to: extend Borrower’s time to cure any default in respect of the Senior Indebtedness or the Subordinated Indebtedness, as the case may be; give the Borrower the right to notice of any default in respect of the Senior Indebtedness or the Subordinated Indebtedness, as the case may be other than that, if any, provided, respectively under the documents evidencing the Senior Indebtedness or the Subordinated Indebtedness; or create any other right or benefit for Borrower as against Senior Lender or Subordinated Lender or any of them. [Remainder of page left blank intentionally.] 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 368 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties are executing this Subordination Agreement as of the date and year first above written. RELIANT-WOODS GROVE, LP, a California limited partnership By: [Gung Ho-Woods Grove, LLC, a California limited liability company, its co-general partner] By: __________________________ Name: Title: By: [Rainbow Housing Assistance Corporation, a California corporation, its managing general partner] By: __________________________ Name: Title: 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 369 CALIFORNIA ACKNOWLEDGEMENT State of California County of __________________________) On _______________________ before me, (insert name and title of the officer) personally appeared , who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature __________________________________ (Seal) 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 370 COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, a political subdivision of the State of California as Subordinated Lender By: ____________________________ Name Title 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 371 CALIFORNIA ACKNOWLEDGEMENT State of California County of __________________________) On _______________________ before me, (insert name and title of the officer) personally appeared , who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature __________________________________ (Seal) 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 372 CALIFORNIA ACKNOWLEDGEMENT State of California County of __________________________) On _______________________ before me, (insert name and title of the officer) personally appeared , who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature __________________________________ (Seal) 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 373 U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as trustee, as Senior Lender By: __________________________ Name: Deborah Kuykendall Title: Vice President 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 374 CALIFORNIA ACKNOWLEDGEMENT State of California County of __________________________) On _______________________ before me, (insert name and title of the officer) personally appeared , who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature __________________________________ (Seal) 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 375 EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 376 APN: 088-230-001 WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO: Reliant CAP VIII, LLC 601 California St., Suite 1150 San Francisco CA 94108 SUBORDINATION AGREEMENT (Subordinate Bonds) NOTICE: THIS SUBORDINATION AGREEMENT RESULTS IN YOUR SECURITY INTEREST IN THE PROPERTY BECOMING SUBJECT TO, AND OF LOWER PRIORITY THAN, THE LIEN OF SOME OTHER OR LATER SECURITY INSTRUMENTS. THIS SUBORDINATION AGREEMENT (this “Agreement”) is dated November __, 2017, for identification purposes only and is effective upon recording, by and among U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as trustee (together with its successors and assigns, “Senior Lender”), RELIANT-WOODS GROVE, LP, a California limited partnership (together with its successors and assigns, “Borrower”), and the COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, a political subdivision of the State of California (together with its successors and assigns, “Subordinated Lender”). W I T N E S S E T H : WHEREAS, Subordinated Lender has made a loan that has been assumed by Borrower in an aggregate principal amount of $800,000 (“Subordinate Loan”) pursuant to a County HOME Loan Agreement dated September 1, 2010 (“Subordinate Loan Agreement”), in connection with the rehabilitation of the 80-unit multifamily housing development known as Woods Grove Apartments, which it is situated in Pittsburg, California; WHEREAS, the repayment obligations of the Borrower under the Subordinate Loan is evidenced by a promissory note (“Subordinate Note”) executed and delivered thereby; WHEREAS, the Subordinate Loan is secured by a Deed of Trust With Assignment of Rents, Security Agreement, and Fixture Filing, which was recorded in the Official Records of Contra Costa County, California, as Instrument No. 2010-0241349 (“Subordinate Trust Deed”) against the real property in the City of Pittsburg, County of Contra Costa and State of California described in Exhibit A hereto (“Property”); WHEREAS, the Subordinated Lender requires Borrower maintain in effect as a covenant certain affordability restrictions, which were imposed upon the Property pursuant to a Regulatory Agreement and Declaration of Restrictive Covenants recorded in the Official Records of Contra Costa County, California, as Instrument No. 2010-0241348 (“County 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 377 Woods Grove Subordination Agreement (Contra Costa County) 2 Regulatory Agreement”); WHEREAS, the Subordinated Lender requires Borrower to enter into an Assignment and Assumption and Consent to Assignment Agreement to be recorded concurrently herewith in the Official Records of Contra Costa County, California. Together, the Subordinate Note, Subordinate Loan Agreement, Subordinate Trust Deed, County Regulatory Agreement, Note and all other documents evidencing or securing the Subordinate Note, the “Subordinate Loan Documents”; WHEREAS, , the Property is being acquired and rehabilitated, in part, with the proceeds of those certain Limited Obligation Multifamily Housing Revenue Bonds (Woods Grove Apartments), 2017 Subordinate Issue K issued by the California Housing Finance Agency (the “Issuer” ) in the original principal amount of $3,500,000 (the “Bonds”) pursuant to an Indenture of Trust of even date herewith between California Housing Finance Agency (the “Issuer” and Senior Lender, as trustee (as amended, modified or supplemented from time to time, the “Indenture”) WHEREAS, the proceeds of the Bonds are being loaned to the Borrower (the “Loan”) pursuant to the terms of a Financing Agreement dated as of the date hereof between Issuer and the Borrower (as amended, modified or supplemented from time to time, the “Loan Agreement”); WHEREAS, the Borrower’s obligations under the Loan Agreement are evidenced by a promissory note dated as of the date of issuance of the Bonds (as amended, modified or supplemented from time to time, the “Note”); WHEREAS, Borrower’s obligations under the Loan Agreement are secured by, among other things, a Subordinate Multifamily Deed of Trust, Assignment of Rents, Security Agreement and Fixture Filing, granted by Borrower against the Property and naming Senior Lender, as assignee of Issuer, as beneficiary, to be recorded concurrently herewith in the Official Records of Contra Costa County, California (“Trust Deed” and, together with the Indenture, the Loan Agreement, the Note and all other documents evidencing or securing the Bonds or the Note, the “Loan Documents”); WHEREAS, the conditions of Senior Lender making the Loan include the subordination of the Subordinated Liens to the Senior Liens, and the subordination of the Subordinated Indebtedness to the Senior Indebtedness, all as more fully described herein; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and undertakings contained herein, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree to establish the relative priority of the documents described in the foregoing recitals as follows: 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 378 Woods Grove Subordination Agreement (Contra Costa County) 3 1. Definitions. For purposes of this Agreement, the following terms shall have the following meanings: 1.1 “Senior Indebtedness” means all obligations of any type or nature secured by the Senior Liens, presently or hereafter due from Borrower, its successors and assigns, to Senior Lender, or its successors, assigns or participants, including without limitation, the Loan, those obligations under the Loan Agreement, the Notes, and all other principal, interest, charges, and expenses under or incidental to any indebtedness secured by the Senior Liens. 1.2 “Senior Liens” means all liens, mortgages, Trust Deed, security interests, and collateral assignments of any type or nature, previously given or hereafter granted by Borrower to Senior Lender, including without limitation, those liens, assignments and security interests granted in the Trust Deed and the other Loan Documents. 1.3 “Subordinated Indebtedness” means all obligations of any type or nature secured by the Subordinated Liens, presently or hereafter due from Borrower to Subordinated Lender, including without limitation, those obligations contained in the Subordinate Loan Documents, together, in each instance, with all interest and other charges or expenses incidental to any of the foregoing. 1.4 “Subordinated Liens” means all liens, mortgages, and security interests of any type or nature, previously or hereafter granted by Borrower to Subordinated Lender, including without limitation, liens and security interests granted in the Subordinate Trust Deed. 2. Consent of Subordinated Lender. Notwithstanding any of the terms of the Subordinate Loan Documents to the contrary, the Subordinated Lender hereby consents to the creation, now or hereafter, of the Senior Indebtedness and the Senior Liens and to the execution and delivery by Borrower of any and all documents and instruments in connection therewith, including without limitation, the Trust Deed, and to the performance by Borrower of any and all of its obligations under or in connection therewith or resulting therefrom. Subordinated Lender agrees that no such action shall constitute an event of default or an event, which with the passage of time, or giving of notice, or both, would become an event of default under any document or instrument relating to the Subordinated Indebtedness or Subordinated Liens. 3. Subordination of Subordinated Liens; Subordination of Subordinated Indebtedness and Subrogation Rights. 3.1 In consideration of (among other actions) Senior Lender making the Loan, the Subordinated Liens are hereby subordinated to the Senior Liens and the Senior Liens shall at all times be first, prior, and superior to the Subordinated Liens in all respects. The terms and provisions of any document creating or relating to a Subordinated Lien are hereby amended to provide that so long as any of the Senior Liens remain unpaid, the Subordinated Liens therein granted are subordinate to the Senior Liens and that none of 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 379 Woods Grove Subordination Agreement (Contra Costa County) 4 the terms and provisions of such documents or instruments evidencing the Subordinated Liens shall affect or limit in any way the rights or remedies provided to the holder of the Senior Indebtedness under the Senior Liens. 3.2 Subordinated Lender agrees that if by reason of its exercise of any other right or remedy under the Subordinated Liens or otherwise in respect of the Subordinated Indebtedness, it acquires by right of subrogation or otherwise a lien on the Property which (but for this subsection) would be senior to the lien of the Senior Liens, then, in that event, such lien shall be subject and subordinate to the lien of the Senior Liens. 3.3 In consideration of (among other actions) Senior Lender making the Loan, the Subordinated Indebtedness is hereby subordinated to the Senior Indebtedness and repayment of the Senior Indebtedness shall at all times be first, prior, and superior to the Subordinated Indebtedness in all respects. Subordinated Lender hereby agrees that as long as any of the Senior Indebtedness remains unpaid, repayment of the Subordinated Indebtedness is subordinate to the Senior Indebtedness and that none of the respective terms and provisions of such documents or instruments evidencing or creating the Subordinated Indebtedness shall effect or limit the rights or remedies provided to the Senior Lender in respect of the Senior Indebtedness. 4. Subordination of Subordinated Indebtedness; Distributions and Payments of Net Cash Flow; Priority Among Subordinated Liens. 4.1 The terms and provisions of any document creating or relating to the Subordinated Indebtedness are hereby deemed amended for purposes of this Agreement to provide that so long as any of the Senior Indebtedness remains unpaid, the Subordinated Indebtedness is subordinate to the Senior Indebtedness and that none of the terms and provisions of such documents or instruments evidencing or creating the Subordinated Indebtedness shall effect or limit in any way the rights or remedies provided to the Senior Lender in respect of the Senior Indebtedness. 4.2 Provided that in each instance amounts then due and payable in respect of the Senior Indebtedness (including, without limitation, funding of required reserves) have been paid in full and there exists no default or event of default under the documents evidencing or creating the Senior Indebtedness or securing the Senior Indebtedness pursuant to the Senior Liens (including without limitation the Loan Documents), and subject to Section ___ of the Loan Agreement, Net Cash Flow (as defined in the Loan Agreement) shall be utilized, to the extent available, to pay the Subordinated Indebtedness. Unless and until Senior Lender has declared Borrower in default and all applicable notice and cure periods have expired, Borrower will pay any and all amounts outstanding to Subordinated Lender as such amounts become due and payable under the Subordinate Loan Documents. 5. Insolvency Proceedings Against Borrower. The insolvency or bankruptcy of Borrower shall not affect this Agreement, and the same shall remain in full force and effect. In 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 380 Woods Grove Subordination Agreement (Contra Costa County) 5 any insolvency or bankruptcy proceeding for the complete liquidation of Borrower or any of its general partners, Senior Lender is hereby assigned the right to collect the Subordinated Indebtedness and apply it to the Senior Indebtedness and Subordinated Lender shall not receive any distribution from the bankruptcy estate of Borrower or its general partner (as the case may be) unless and until the Senior Indebtedness has been satisfied in full. The Subordinated Lender agrees that during the term of this Agreement it will not, without, in each case, the Senior Lender’s prior, written consent: (i) commence, or join with any other creditor in commencing any bankruptcy reorganization, arrangement, insolvency or liquidation proceedings with respect to the Borrower; (ii) make any election, give any consent, commence any action or file any motion, claim, obligation, notice or application or take any other action in any insolvency proceeding by or against the Borrower or any other obligor with respect to the Subordinate Loan Documents; or (iii) challenge the validity or amount of any claim submitted in such proceeding by Senior Lender in good faith or any valuations of the Property or any other Collateral, or any portion of the foregoing, or other Senior Indebtedness collateral submitted by Senior Lender in good faith, in such proceeding or take any other action in such proceeding, which is adverse to Senior Lender’s enforcement of its claim or receipt of adequate protection (as that term is defined in the Bankruptcy Code). 6. Assignment; Encumbrances and Transfers. Subordinated Lender represents and warrants that, as of the date of this Agreement, no part of the Subordinated Indebtedness or Subordinated Liens of which it is the party in interest has been sold, assigned, encumbered, endorsed or transferred to or for the benefit of others. Subordinated Lender agrees not to sell, assign, transfer, or endorse or otherwise encumber the Subordinated Indebtedness of which it is the party in interest, no matter how evidenced, to any party unless prior to any such sale, assignment, transfer, endorsement, or encumbrance satisfactory written evidence (which evidence may take the form of a legal opinion) is provided to Senior Lender that the terms of this Agreement (or substantially similar agreement entered into concurrently with such any proposed sale, assignment, transfer, endorsement or encumbrance) shall bind all such successors, assigns, transferees, and endorsees of Subordinated Lender and all subsequent interest holders (beneficial or otherwise) of the affected Subordinated Liens. 7. Additional Documentation; Cooperation. Subordinated Lender further agrees to cooperate with Senior Lender from time to time and execute and deliver such instruments and to take such other actions (to the extent permitted by law) as may reasonably be requested by Senior Lender in order to enable Senior Lender to enforce its rights under this Agreement. Subordinated Lender shall not, without the prior written consent of Senior Lender, take any action that has the effect of increasing any portion of the Subordinated Indebtedness. 8. No Liability. 8.1 The parties hereto agree that Senior Lender shall not be liable for any action or failure to act under or in connection with any of the documents or instruments creating the Senior Liens or the Senior Indebtedness, it being understood that the decision of whether and when to act and the manner of proceeding under such instruments and documents shall not be affected in any manner by the existence of the Subordinated 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 381 Woods Grove Subordination Agreement (Contra Costa County) 6 Indebtedness and the Subordinated Liens. It is further agreed that such obligations as may be imposed under the documents and instruments creating the Senior Liens or under applicable laws shall run exclusively to the benefit of Senior Lender and may be enforced or waived only by Senior Lender and not by the Subordinated Lender or the holders of the Subordinated Liens or Subordinated Indebtedness. 8.2 The parties hereto agree that Subordinated Lender shall not be liable for any action or failure to act under or in connection with any of the documents or instruments creating the Subordinated Liens or the Subordinated Indebtedness except to the extent set forth in such documents, it being understood that the decision of whether and when to act and the manner of proceeding under such instruments and documents shall not be affected in any manner by the existence of the Senior Indebtedness and the Senior Liens, except to the extent set forth in this Agreement. It is further agreed that such obligations as may be imposed under the documents and instrument creating the Subordinated Liens or under applicable laws shall run exclusively to the benefit of Subordinated Lender and may be enforced or waived only by Subordinated Lender and not by the Senior Lender or the holders of the Senior Liens or Senior Indebtedness. 9. Insurance and Condemnation. Subordinated Lender agrees that if it receives any insurance or condemnation proceeds in respect of any of the assets of Borrower subject to the Senior Liens, Subordinated Lender shall immediately so notify Senior Lender in writing and shall deliver such proceeds to or on the order of the Senior Lender so long as any Senior Indebtedness remains unpaid. Notwithstanding this Section, the Senior Lender will release the proceeds, awards and compensation described above to the Borrower to be used to reconstruct the improvements on the Property provided that the Senior Lender reasonably determines that rebuilding is financially feasible in accordance with and subject to the applicable provisions of the Loan Documents. Subordinated Lender agrees it shall have no right to participate in the adjustment of the proceeds of insurance payable as the result of any casualty to the Improvements, or to participate in any manner whatsoever in activities relating to restoration or reconstruction of the Improvements, and Senior Lender shall have the exclusive right to receive, administer and apply all such proceeds as set forth in the Loan Documents. 10. Irrevocability of Agreement. Subordinated Lender agrees that, without prior notice to or further prior assent by Subordinated Lender but subject, in each instance, to the terms and provisions of the agreements creating the Senior Indebtedness and Senior Liens (a) the liability of Borrower in respect of the Senior Indebtedness may, in whole or in part, be renewed, extended, modified, or released by Senior Lender and the documents and instruments creating or evidencing the Senior Indebtedness or the Senior Liens may be amended or supplemented, as Senior Lender may deem advisable (including without limitation, an amendment to add as obligations secured by the Senior Liens) as long as the amount of the Senior Indebtedness is not increased, (b) any collateral and/or security interests in respect of the Senior Indebtedness (other than the Property) may, from time to time, in whole or in part, be assigned, transferred, exchanged, sold, encumbered or surrendered by Senior Lender, and (c) any deposit balance or balances to the credit of Borrower may, from time to time, in whole or in part, be surrendered or released by Senior Lender to Borrower, all without impairing or in any way affecting the 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 382 Woods Grove Subordination Agreement (Contra Costa County) 7 subordination contained in this Agreement; nor shall the subordination herein contained be impaired or affected in any way by any other action, inaction, or omission in respect of the Senior Indebtedness, the Senior Liens or this Agreement. Subordinated Lender further agrees that it will not consent to any amendment, modification of, supplement to, or waiver or consent with respect to, the Subordinated Liens or the Subordinated Indebtedness or any other documents executed or delivered in connection therewith that would increase the amount of the Subordinated Indebtedness or require additional rent restrictions upon the Property, reduce the rental income or increase the operating costs without the prior, written consent of the Senior Lender. 11. Default and Remedies. 11.1 The Borrower shall, immediately upon receipt from the Subordinated Lender, provide to the Senior Lender copies of any notice of default or breach (prospective or otherwise) and notice of the pursuit or waiver of any available remedy in respect thereof. Subordinated Lender hereby agrees to give notice to Senior Lender of any default under the Subordinate Loan Documents within five business days of notice to Borrower. Senior Lender hereby agrees to give notice to Subordinated Lender of any default under the Senior Loan Documents within five business days of notice to Borrower. 11.2 Subordinated Lender declares, agrees, and acknowledges that it will not, without the prior written consent of Senior Lender: (i) sue the Borrower or any other obligor under any of the Subordinate Loan Documents; (ii) accelerate or accept a prepayment in full or in part of the Subordinate Indebtedness; (iii) commence any action to foreclose or exercise any power of sale under the Subordinate Mortgage; (iv) accept a deed or assignment in lieu of foreclosure for the Property or any part or portion thereof; (v) seek or obtain a receiver for the Property or any part or portion thereof; (vi) take possession or control of the Property, or collect or accept any rents from the Property; (vii) take any action that would terminate any leases or other rights held by or granted to or by third parties with respect to the Property; (viii) initiate or join any other creditor in commencing any Proceeding with respect to the Borrower or any other obligor; (ix) incur any obligation to the Borrower or any other obligor other than as provided in the Subordinate Loan Agreement, (x) exercise any other remedies under the Subordinate Loan Documents; or (xi) take any other enforcement action against the Borrower or any other obligor or against the Property or any part or portion thereof. 11.3 Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 11.2 above, the Subordinated Lender may, without the consent of the Senior Lender, exercise the remedy of pursuing specific performance of the County Regulatory Agreement. 11.4 Subordinated Lender agrees that Senior Lender shall have, as determined in accordance with and subject to the terms of the Loan Documents, upon the occurrence of an Event of Default under and as defined in the Loan Documents, the right to (i) accelerate or accept prepayment in full or in part of the Senior Indebtedness; (ii) 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 383 Woods Grove Subordination Agreement (Contra Costa County) 8 commence any action to foreclose or exercise any power of sale under the Senior Mortgage; (iii) accept a deed or assignment in lieu of foreclosure for the Property or any part or portion thereof; (iv) seek or obtain a receiver for the Property or any part or portion thereof; (v) take possession or control of the Property, and collect and accept rents from the Property; (vi) sue the Borrower or any other obligor under any of the Loan Documents; (vii) exercise any rights of set-off or recoupment that Senior Lender may have against the Borrower or any other obligor; (viii) exercise any other remedies under the Loan Documents; or (ix) take any other enforcement action against the Property or any part or portion thereof, all without any responsibility or liability to Subordinated Lender with respect to the Property, the Borrower, the [General Partner][Managing Member] or any other obligor. 11.5 Subordinated Lender agrees that Senior Lender shall have absolute power and discretion, without notice to Subordinated Lender, to deal in any manner with the Senior Indebtedness, including interest, costs and expenses payable by the Borrower to Senior Lender, and any security and guaranties therefor, including, but not by way of limitation, release, surrender, extension, renewal, acceleration, compromise or substitution; provided that Senior Lender shall not increase the principal amount of the indebtedness to which the Subordinate Loan Documents are subordinate (other than increases resulting from protective advances or payment of Senior Lender’s costs) without the prior written consent of Subordinated Lender, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. 11.6 Subordinated Lender further agrees that if at any time Subordinated Lender should commence any foreclosure proceeding, or commence any action to execute on any lien obtained by way of attachment or otherwise on the Property, or otherwise take any action prohibited under Section 11.2, Senior Lender shall (unless Senior Lender has consented to such action or remedy) be entitled to have the same vacated, dissolved and set aside by such proceedings at law or otherwise as Senior Lender may deem proper, and this Agreement shall be and constitute full and sufficient grounds therefor and shall entitle Senior Lender to become a party to any proceedings at law or otherwise in or by which Senior Lender may deem it proper to protect its interests hereunder. 11.7 The Senior Lender agrees that the Subordinated Lender shall have the right (but not the obligation) to cure any or all defaults under the Loan Documents within the cure periods afforded to the Borrower under the Loan Documents. The cure right provided to the Subordinated Lender pursuant to this Section shall not be construed, directly or indirectly, to prevent Senior Lender from enforcing all remedies available to Senior Lender under the Senior Liens. 11.8 Subordinated Lender agrees that in the event of any foreclosure of the Trust Deed, the restrictive covenants, conditions, and restrictions set forth in the Subordinated Liens shall be extinguished and be of no force or effect on the purchaser pursuant to such foreclosure proceeding in order to ensure, in each instance, that Senior 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 384 Woods Grove Subordination Agreement (Contra Costa County) 9 Lender realizes the practical benefits of its senior position and interests hereunder and under the Senior Liens. 12. Miscellaneous. 12.1 This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns, including any party substituted as a beneficiary under the Trust Deed. This Agreement shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of California, without regard to the choice of law provisions thereof. 12.2 If any of the provisions or terms of this Agreement shall for any reason be held invalid or unenforceable, such invalidity or unenforceability shall not affect any other of the terms hereof, and this Agreement shall be construed as if such unenforceable term had never been contained herein. 12.3 All notices and other communications hereunder shall be deemed to have been duly given, made, or served, if in writing and delivered personally or mailed by first class mail, postage prepaid, to the respective parties to this Agreement as follows: (a) If to Borrower: Reliant-Woods Grove, LP c/o Reliant Group Management, LLC 601 California St., Suite 1150 San Francisco CA 94108 Attn: J. Caskie Collet (b) If to Subordinated Lender: County of Contra Costa Department of Conservation and Development 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 Attention: Assistant Deputy Director (c) If to Senior Lender: U.S. Bank National Association, as trustee 1420 Fifth Avenue, 7th Floor Seattle, Washington 98101 Attention: Global Corporate Trust Services With a copy to: Reliant CAP VIII, LLC 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 385 Woods Grove Subordination Agreement (Contra Costa County) 10 601 California St., Suite 1150 San Francisco CA 94108 Attention: J. Caskie Collet The designation of the person to be so notified or the address of such person for the purposes of such notice may be changed from time to time by similar notice in writing, except that any communication with respect to a change of address shall be deemed to be given and made when received by the party to whom such communication was sent. No other method of notice is precluded by this Section 12.3. 12.4 This Agreement represents the entire agreement between the parties hereto on the subject matter hereof and, except as expressly provided herein, shall not be affected by reference to any other documents. Neither this Agreement nor any provision hereof may be changed, waived, discharged, or terminated orally, but such may be accomplished only by an instrument in writing signed by the party against whom enforcement of the change, waiver, discharge, or termination is sought. 12.5 [Reserved] 12.6 The Borrower, Senior Lender and Subordinated Lender each agrees that, in the event of any conflict or inconsistency between the terms of the Senior Liens, the Senior Indebtedness, the Subordinated Liens or the Subordinated Indebtedness (as the case may be) and the terms of this Agreement, the terms of this Agreement shall govern and control as to: (a) the relative priority of interests between the Senior Lender and the Subordinated Lender; (b) the timing of the exercise of remedies by the Senior Lender and the Subordinated Lender under the Senior Liens and the Subordinated Liens, respectively; and (c) solely as between the Senior Lender and the Subordinated Lender, the notice requirements, and the other rights and obligations which the Senior Lender and the Subordinated Lender have agreed to as expressly provided in this Agreement. Borrower acknowledges that the terms and provisions of this Agreement shall not, and shall not be deemed to: extend Borrower’s time to cure any default in respect of the Senior Indebtedness or the Subordinated Indebtedness, as the case may be; give the Borrower the right to notice of any default in respect of the Senior Indebtedness or the Subordinated Indebtedness, as the case may be other than that, if any, provided, respectively under the documents evidencing the Senior Indebtedness or the Subordinated Indebtedness; or create any other right or benefit for Borrower as against Senior Lender or Subordinated Lender or any of them. [Remainder of page left blank intentionally.] 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 386 Woods Grove Subordination Agreement (Contra Costa County) ) IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties are executing this Subordination Agreement as of the date and year first above written. RELIANT-WOODS GROVE, LP, a California limited partnership By: [Gung Ho-Woods Grove, LLC, a California limited liability company, its co-general partner] By: __________________________ Name: Title: By: [Rainbow Housing Assistance Corporation, a California corporation, its managing general partner] By: __________________________ Name: Title: 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 387 Woods Grove Subordination Agreement (Contra Costa County) ) CALIFORNIA ACKNOWLEDGEMENT State of California County of __________________________) On _______________________ before me, (insert name and title of the officer) personally appeared , who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature __________________________________ (Seal) 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 388 Woods Grove Subordination Agreement (Contra Costa County) COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, a political subdivision of the State of California as Subordinated Lender By: ____________________________ Name Title 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 389 Woods Grove Subordination Agreement (Contra Costa County) CALIFORNIA ACKNOWLEDGEMENT State of California County of __________________________) On _______________________ before me, (insert name and title of the officer) personally appeared , who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature __________________________________ (Seal) 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 390 Woods Grove Subordination Agreement (Contra Costa County) CALIFORNIA ACKNOWLEDGEMENT State of California County of __________________________) On _______________________ before me, (insert name and title of the officer) personally appeared , who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature __________________________________ (Seal) 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 391 Woods Grove Subordination Agreement (Contra Costa County) U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as trustee, as Senior Lender By: __________________________ Name: Deborah Kuykendall Title: Vice President 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 392 Woods Grove Subordination Agreement (Contra Costa County) CALIFORNIA ACKNOWLEDGEMENT State of California County of __________________________) On _______________________ before me, (insert name and title of the officer) personally appeared , who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature __________________________________ (Seal) 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 393 EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 394 RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to renew Cardroom License Number 6, known as "California Grand Casino" currently located at 5988 Pacheco Blvd., Pacheco, California, for the period of November 26, 2017 through November 25, 2018. FISCAL IMPACT: $10,000; $500 application fee plus $500 per table for licensing of nineteen (19) card tables. 100% Revenue. BACKGROUND: In accordance with County Ordinance No. 82-44, Chapter 52-3, Article 52-3.3, Section 52-3.321, an application has been submitted by Mr. Lamar V. Wilkinson for the renewal of Cardroom License Number 6, known as "California Grand Casino". The Office of the Sheriff conducted a background investigation of the applicant. The investigation produced no adverse information, which would preclude approval of this application. This Cardroom License will be issued to Mr. Lamar V. Wilkinson, owner of the cardroom establishment. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Negative action will result in Cardroom License Number 6 not being renewed and expiring on November 25, 2017. Once expired, the Cardroom will no longer be able to operated until such time that a new license has been approved. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Sandra Brown, 925-335-1553 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 78 To:Board of Supervisors From:David O. Livingston, Sheriff-Coroner Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Renewal of Cardroom License 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 395 CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: No impact. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 396 RECOMMENDATION(S): Approve and authorize the Health Services Director, or his designee, to execute, on behalf of the County, Contract Amendment #27-456-13 with La Clinica De La Raza, a non-profit corporation, effective November 1, 2017, to amend Contract #27-456-12 , to add Pharmacy 340B Compliance Program requirements with no change to the payment limit of $3,000,000, and no change in the original term of July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018. FISCAL IMPACT: This amendment is funded 100% by Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II. (No rate increase) BACKGROUND: On July 11, 2017, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #27-456-12 with La Clinica De La Raza, for the provision of primary care and ophthalmology services for Contra Costa Health Plan (CCHP) members, for the period from July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018. Approval of Contract Amendment Agreement #27-456-13 will require the contractor to adhere to the Pharmacy 340B Compliance Program and continue to provide primary care and ophthalmology services, to CCHP members, through June 30, 2018. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this amendment is not approved, the contractor will not be required to adhere to the Pharmacy 340B Compliance Program and the County could be liable for insufficient reporting of discounted medication to the State. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Patricia Tanquary, 925- 313-6004 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: L Walker , M Wilhelm C. 79 To:Board of Supervisors From:William Walker, M.D., Health Services Director Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Contract Amendment #27-456-13 with La Clinica De La Raza 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 397 RECOMMENDATION(S): AUTHORIZE a one-time payment of $1,800 for two months of Infant Supplement to a prior 602 WIC Non-Minor Dependent, C.R., as recommended by the Chief Probation Officer. FISCAL IMPACT: The $1,800 one-time payment will paid from the General Fund. BACKGROUND: During May 2017 and June 2017, C.R. was a 602 WIC Ward of the Court and a Non-Minor Dependent eligible to receive a $900 per month Infant Supplement. A Board Order authorizing a one-time payment of $1,800 is needed by the Probation Department in order for the Auditor-Controller to issue payment in this case. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Kimberly Martell, (925) 313-4154 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 80 To:Board of Supervisors From:Todd Billeci, County Probation Officer Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Non-Minor Dependent Infant Supplement Payment 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 398 RECOMMENDATION(S): ACCEPT the October 2017 update of the operations of the Employment and Human Services Department, Community Services Bureau, as recommended by the Employment and Human Services Department Director. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: The Employment and Human Services Department submits a monthly report to the Contra Costa Board of Supervisors (BOS) to ensure ongoing communications with the County Administrator and BOS regarding any and all issues pertaining to the Head Start Program and Community Services Bureau. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Elaine Burres, 925-608-4960 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 81 To:Board of Supervisors From:Kathy Gallagher, Employment & Human Services Director Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Update of the Operations of the Employment and Human Services Department, Community Services Bureau 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 399 ATTACHMENTS CSB Oct 2017 CAO Report CSB 2017 HS Fiscal CSB Oct 2017 EHS Fiscal CSB Oct 2017 EHS CC Partnership 1 CSB Oct 2017 EHS CC Partnership 2 CSB Oct 2017 LIHEAP CSB Oct 2017 Credit Card Report CSB Oct 2017 Menu 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 400 Camilla Rand, M.S. Director 1470 Civic Court, Suite 200 Concord, CA 94520 Tel 925 681 6300 Fax 925 313 8301 www.cccounty.us/ehsd To: David Twa, Contra Costa County Administrator From: Kathy Gallagher, EHSD Director Subject: Community Services Monthly Report Date: October 2017 News /Accomplishments Seventeen (17) CSB student workers are officially enrolled in the Teacher Apprenticeship program. The first class was held on Monday, October 16th. The students had an orientation and tutorial on how to use laptops that were issued to them by CSB Business Systems to be used for their school work. Fridays will be tutoring days when participants are supported with homework by CSB managers and supervisors. CSB hired three (3) Practice Based Coaching (PBC) coaches to work with lead teachers (directly operated and partner lead teachers) using the Teachers Learning and Collaborating (TLC) approach. A kick-off meeting for Site Supervisors was held on October 27th from 11:00 am – 1:00 pm. PBC coaches will begin working with the proposed 20-24 selected participants in November up to 18 months. We are currently developing our TLC plan. CSB has started an exciting new partnership with MILLS College that will provide students with field internships at selected childcare sites. This partnership will assist CSB in expanding its exposure to education theories and it will yield learning objectives for the student interns in regards to child development theory and practice. Crescent Park’s toddler room is now in operation with 8 children, and Bayo Vista’s toddler room is also in operation with 6 children. We hope to open Balboa, Las Deltas, and Brookside in early November 2017. Teachers are completing first assessments for children that were enrolled in July 2017. Results will be included in our outcomes report, and used to develop the 2017-18 School Readiness Goals. All CSB Head Start and Early Head Start sites are preparing for a series of family engagement activities such as “Back to School Night”, “Community Work Day” and “Food Day” in the month of November – December 2017. Everyone is invited to take part. We have had a series of Early Closures in September which gives opportunity for Center- based individualized meeting and training, Refresher Comprehensive Services training. An orientation for the Policy Council (PC) was conducted on September 30, 2017 at Crowne Plaza Hotel. The orientation was attended by parent representatives from center-based, partner and delegate sites. The election for the new PC officers took place on October 18, 2017. Bayo Vista Children’s Center in collaboration with the Contra Costa County Sheriff’s Department, is offering radKIDS to its children and families. radKIDS is a personal empowerment Safety Education program for parents and children. The purpose of the program is to enhance the ability of children and parents to utilize knowledge, skills, and 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 401 cc: Policy Council Chair Family & Human Services Committee Maureen Burns Vermette , ACF 2 power to protect themselves from violence and harm. Deputy Sam Noble, a certified radKIDS trainer, from the Contra Costa County Sheriff’s Department introduced the first radKIDS session during a parent meeting at Bayo Vista. Bayo Vista is the first pilot site. The goal is to gradually introduce this safety education program at all CSB sites. On September 22nd, CSB introduced the CSEFEL Teaching Pyramid in 5 preschool classrooms at Bayo Vista, GMIII and Riverview centers. The Teaching Pyramid is a comprehensive approach designed to help educators promote social-emotional competence, address challenging behaviors in young children, and develop safe and nurturing group environments for all children. This approach will complement the “Second Step” curriculum that has been used widely in all CSB classrooms. The rest of the classrooms will be slowly taking part in the Teaching Pyramid implementation when it is offered in Contra Costa County in fall 2018. The Community Action Program’s RFI #644 was released to the public on October 27th with applications due on Friday, November 17th. This RFI is meant to select subcontractors to provide safety net services throughout the county. An informational session will be held on November 9th to assist applicants with any questions they may have. CSB welcomes KinderCare and Baby Yale as new childcare partners and is excited to expand services with the YMCA to implement the newly awarded Early Head Start Child Care Partnership grant. The Partner Unit held its Annual Partners training on Thursday, October 19th which was well attended and received. The day was punctuated with wellness activities including hula hooping! I. Status Updates: a. Caseloads, workload (all programs) Head Start enrollment: 98% Early Head Start enrollment: 100.23% Early Head Start Child Care Partnership enrollment: 100% Early Head Start Child Care Partnership # 2 enrollment (Start-up year)*: 18% of funded enrollment; 100% for current capacity Head Start Average Daily Attendance: 87.9% Early Head Start Average Daily Attendance: 87.1% Early Head Start Child Care Partnership Attendance: 87.1% Stage 2: 350 families and 553 children CAPP: 147 families and 244 children In total: 497 families and 797 children Incoming transfers from Stage 1: 20 families and 33 children LIHEAP: 8 households have been assisted Weatherization: 20 units 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 402 cc: Policy Council Chair Family & Human Services Committee Maureen Burns Vermette , ACF 3 b. Staffing: During the month of October CSB conducted interviews to fill vacant various teaching and clerical positions. The Bureau is anticipating interviews for feeling also vacancies within the Comprehensive Services Assistant Manager (CSAM), ASA III, Intermediate Clerk, Site Supervisor classifications. II. Emerging Issues and Hot Topics: The Governor signed AB 435 last week which is great news for Contra Costa. This bill will allow the county to develop a pilot subsidized childcare plan that will allow our child care community to pool state funds allocated to subsidized child care at the local level and use them in a more coordinated way to the benefit of families and providers. Our bill was modeled after successful pilots in San Francisco, San Mateo and Alameda Counties. With their local flexibility, those counties have been able to reimburse child care providers at a higher rate, serve more children, and extend eligibility to 24 months so families have fewer hoops to jump through to maintain their child’s child care placement. Over the next several months, we’ll be working hard to flesh out our local plan for how to use this new flexibility, and hope to implement it in January 2019. * EHS-CCP2 enrollment listed above is for our new grant and only some of the classrooms are in operation at this time. Full operation is not anticipated for this grant until December 2017 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 403 1 2 3 4 5 DESCRIPTION Total Remaining % YTD Actual Budget Budget YTD a. PERSONNEL 2,707,297$ 4,203,352$ 1,496,055$ 64% b. FRINGE BENEFITS 1,657,314 2,586,739 929,425 64% c. TRAVEL - - - 0% d. EQUIPMENT - 101,600 101,600 0% e. SUPPLIES 67,535 281,200 213,665 24% f. CONTRACTUAL 3,389,038 6,880,965 3,491,927 49% g. CONSTRUCTION - - - 0% h. OTHER 712,800 1,371,343 658,543 52% I. TOTAL DIRECT CHARGES 8,533,984$ 15,425,199$ 6,891,215$ 55% j. INDIRECT COSTS 527,966 878,928 350,962 60% k. TOTAL-ALL BUDGET CATEGORIES 9,061,950$ 16,304,127$ 7,242,177$ 56% In-Kind (Non-Federal Share)2,592,637$ 4,076,032$ 1,483,394$ 64% CONTRA COSTA COUNTY COMMUNITY SERVICES BUREAU 2017 HEAD START PROGRAM September 2017 Expenditures 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 404 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Jan-17 Apr-17 Jul-17 thru thru thru Total YTD Total Remaining % Mar-17 Jun-17 Sep-17 Actual Budget Budget YTD a. Salaries & Wages (Object Class 6a) Permanent 1011 875,671 785,929 768,688 2,430,288 3,126,172 695,884 78% Temporary 1013 103,918 105,930 67,161 277,009 1,077,180 800,171 26% a. PERSONNEL (Object class 6a)979,588 891,859 835,850 2,707,297 4,203,352 1,496,055 64% Fringe Benefits 599,025 527,720 530,568 1,657,314 2,586,739 929,425 64% b. FRINGE (Object Class 6b)599,025 527,720 530,568 1,657,314 2,586,739 929,425 1,657,314 d. EQUIPMENT (Object Class 6d) 4. Other Equipment - - - - 101,600 101,600 - d. EQUIPMENT (Object Class 6d)- - - - 101,600 101,600 - e. SUPPLIES (Object Class 6e) 1. Office Supplies 7,053 7,122 7,627 21,802 50,100 28,298 44% 2. Child and Family Services Supplies (Includesclassroom Supplies)12,704 1,694 7,680 22,078 28,200 6,122 78% 4. Other Supplies Health and Safety Supplies - - - - 74,000 74,000 0% Computer Supplies, Software Upgrades, Computer Replacement 1,850 2,267 11,631 15,748 93,400 77,652 17% Health/Safety Supplies 765 107 37 909 5,000 4,091 18% Mental helath/Diasabilities Supplies 82 359 - 440 600 160 73% Miscellaneous Supplies 742 1,856 1,456 4,054 21,200 17,146 19% Emergency Supplies - - 29 29 4,500 4,471 1% Household Supplies 93 1,364 1,018 2,475 4,200 1,725 59% TOTAL SUPPLIES (6e)23,288 14,769 29,477 67,535 281,200 213,665 24% f. CONTRACTUAL (Object Class 6f) 1. Adm Svcs (e.g., Legal, Accounting, Temporary Contracts)4,593 25,396 26,076 56,064 85,000 28,936 66% Estimated Medical Revenue from Medi-Cal (Org 1432 - credit)- - - - (363,031) (363,031) 0% Health Consultant 11,250 11,021 14,000 36,272 45,700 9,428 79% 5. Training & Technical Assistance - PA11 Interaction - - - - 3,000 3,000 0% Diane Godard ($50,000/2)6,250 5,050 - 11,300 11,500 200 98% Josephine Lee ($35,000/2)2,550 3,975 - 6,525 14,300 7,775 46% Susan Cooke ($60,000/2)- - - - 15,000 15,000 7. Delegate Agency Costs First Baptist Church Head Start PA22 132,151 448,817 254,714 835,681 2,101,965 1,266,284 40% First Baptist Church Head Start PA20 - - - - 8,000 8,000 0% 8. Other Contracts FB-Fairgrounds Partnership (Wrap)11,605 18,920 12,460 42,985 74,213 31,228 58% FB-Fairgrounds Partnership 28,800 42,300 27,450 98,550 183,600 85,050 54% FB-E. Leland/Mercy Housing Partnership - - - - - - Martinez ECC (18 HS slots x $225/mo x 12/mo)18,000 27,000 17,325 62,325 108,000 45,675 58% YMCA of the East Bay (20 HS slots x $225/mo x 12/mo) 9,000 - - 9,000 9,000 - 100% YMCA Richmond CDC, Lucas Ave.(48 slots x 12 x $350) $201,600 - - - - 100,800 100,800 0% YMCA 8th CDC, Lucas Ave.(48 slots x 12 x $350) $201,600 - - - - 100,800 100,800 0% YMCA Giant Rd. CDC (16 slots x 12 x $350) $67,200 - - - - 33,600 33,600 0% YMCA Rodeo CDC(24 slots x 12 x $350) $100,800 - - - - 50,400 50,400 0% Child Outcome Planning and Administration (COPA/Nulinx) 4,715 2,518 - 7,233 17,500 10,267 41% Enhancement/wrap-around HS slots with State CD Program 2,488 1,040,642 1,179,973 2,223,103 4,281,618 2,058,515 52% f. CONTRACTUAL (Object Class 6f)231,403 1,625,638 1,531,998 3,389,038 6,880,965 3,491,927 49% h. OTHER (Object Class 6h) 2. Bldg Occupancy Costs/Rents & Leases 88,469 86,976 53,619 229,064 316,200 87,136 72% (Rents & Leases/Other Income)- - (1,325) (1,325) - 1,325 4. Utilities, Telephone 61,337 72,769 49,820 183,926 275,000 91,074 67% 5. Building and Child Liability Insurance 2,770 - - 2,770 3,500 731 79% 6. Bldg. Maintenance/Repair and Other Occupancy 2,129 9,819 9,041 20,989 35,000 14,011 60% 8. Local Travel (55.5 cents per mile effective 1/1/2012)5,919 10,233 5,770 21,922 36,000 14,078 61% 9. Nutrition Services - - - - - Child Nutrition Costs 74,312 95,198 6,289 175,799 450,000 274,201 39% (CCFP & USDA Reimbursements)(95,310) (51,318) 1 (146,627) (200,000) (53,373) 73% 13. Parent Services - - - - Parent Conference Registration - PA11 - - 828 828 1,000 172 83% Parent Resources (Parenting Books, Videos, etc.) - PA11 - - - - 700 700 0% PC Orientation, Trainings, Materials & Translation - PA11 1,577 2,376 144 4,097 5,700 1,603 72% Policy Council Activities - - - - - - Parent Activities (Sites, PC, BOS luncheon) & Appreciation 619 47 2,992 3,658 2,000 (1,658) 183% Child Care/Mileage Reimbursement 2,163 2,223 797 5,183 12,700 7,517 41% 14. Accounting & Legal Services - - - - Auditor Controllers 973 - - 973 1,500 527 65% Data Processing/Other Services & Supplies 2,906 3,403 2,870 9,179 15,400 6,221 60% 15. Publications/Advertising/Printing - - - - Outreach/Printing 75 - - 75 100 25 75% Recruitment Advertising (Newspaper, Brochures)7,142 - - 7,142 9,000 1,858 79% 16. Training or Staff Development - - - - - - Agency Memberships (WIPFLI, Meeting Fees, NHSA, NAEYC, etc.)2,612 6,543 3,591 12,746 8,598 (4,148) 148% Staff Trainings/Dev. Conf. Registrations/Memberships - PA11 9,672 13,477 10,086 33,235 20,000 (13,235) 166% 17. Other - Site Security Guards 6,274 8,944 254 15,472 32,000 16,528 48% Dental/Medical Services - - - - 1,000 1,000 0% Vehicle Operating/Maintenance & Repair 10,879 18,701 8,152 37,732 77,000 39,268 49% Equipment Maintenance Repair & Rental 12,746 13,505 17,910 44,162 167,000 122,838 26% Dept. of Health and Human Services-data Base (CORD)839 - - 839 12,000 11,161 7% Other Operating Expenses (Facs Admin/Other admin)13,510 21,614 15,839 50,963 89,945 38,982 57% h. OTHER (6h)211,613 314,511 186,677 712,800 1,371,343 658,543 52% I. TOTAL DIRECT CHARGES (6a-6h)2,044,917 3,374,497 3,114,569 8,533,984 15,425,199 6,891,215 55% j. INDIRECT COSTS 184,523 238,804 104,639 527,966 878,928 350,962 60% k. TOTALS (ALL BUDGET CATEGORIES)2,229,440 3,613,301 3,219,209 9,061,950 16,304,127 7,242,177 56% Non-Federal Share (In-kind)337,367 645,666 1,609,604 2,592,637 4,076,032 1,483,394 64% CONTRA COSTA COUNTY COMMUNITY SERVICES BUREAU 2017 HEAD START PROGRAM September 2017 Expenditures 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 405 1 2 3 4 5 DESCRIPTION Total Remaining % YTD Actual Budget Budget YTD a. PERSONNEL 318,266$ 532,702$ 214,436$ 60% b. FRINGE BENEFITS 183,753 368,092 184,339 50% c. TRAVEL - - - 0% d. EQUIPMENT - - - 0% e. SUPPLIES 5,748 29,700 23,952 19% f. CONTRACTUAL 1,494,641 2,422,286 927,645 62% g. CONSTRUCTION - - - 0% h. OTHER 35,069 76,344 41,275 46% I. TOTAL DIRECT CHARGES 2,037,476$ 3,429,124$ 1,391,648$ 59% j. INDIRECT COSTS 67,576 109,420 41,844 62% k. TOTAL-ALL BUDGET CATEGORIES 2,105,052$ 3,538,544$ 1,433,492$ 59% In-Kind (Non-Federal Share)617,774$ 884,636$ 266,862$ 70% CONTRA COSTA COUNTY COMMUNITY SERVICES BUREAU 2017 EARLY HEAD START PROGRAM September 2017 Expenditures 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 406 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Jan-17 Apr-17 Jul-17 thru thru thru Total YTD Total Remaining % Mar-17 Jun-17 Sep-17 Actual Budget Budget YTD Expenditures a. Salaries & Wages (Object Class 6a) Permanent 1011 122,999 72,767 87,630 283,396 455,298 171,902 62% Temporary 1013 14,255 7,803 12,812 34,870 77,404 42,534 45% a. PERSONNEL (Object class 6a)137,254 80,570 100,441 318,266 532,702 214,436 60% b. FRINGE (Object Class 6b)78,063 50,085 55,605 183,753 368,092 184,339 50% e. SUPPLIES (Object Class 6e) 1. Office Supplies 425 (2,263) 174 (1,664) 4,500 6,164 -37% 2. Child and Family Serv. Supplies/classroom Supplies 1,821 2,183 198 4,202 12,000 7,798 35% 4. Other Supplies - - - - - Computer Supplies, Software Upgrades, Comp Replacemnt- 348 2,411 2,758 7,000 4,242 39% Health/Safety Supplies - - - - 2,500 2,500 0% Miscellaneous Supplies 44 250 - 294 1,200 906 24% Household Supplies - 8 149 158 2,500 2,342 e. SUPPLIES (Object Class 6e)2,290 525 2,933 5,748 29,700 23,952 19% f. CONTRACTUAL (Object Class 6f) 2. Health/Disabilities Services - - - - - Health Consultant 4,822 2,263 6,000 13,085 18,300 5,215 72% 5. Training & Technical Assistance - PA11 - - - - Interaction - - - - 10,500 10,500 0% Josephine Lee ($35,000/2)2,550 2,235 - 4,785 14,000 9,215 34% 8. Other Contracts - FB-Fairgrounds Partnership 9,800 9,800 14,000 33,600 61,600 28,000 55% FB-E. Leland/Mercy Housing Partnership 21,000 21,000 30,000 72,000 132,000 60,000 55% Apiranet - 222,000 32,400 254,400 416,400 162,000 61% Crossroads - - - - 42,000 42,000 0% Martinez ECC 11,200 11,200 (77,900) (55,500) 2,500 58,000 -2220% Child Outcome Planning & Admini. (COPA/Nulinx)680 - - 680 3,000 2,320 23% Enhancement/wrap-around HS slots with State CD Prog.348,052 380,976 442,563 1,171,591 1,721,986 550,395 68% f. CONTRACTUAL (Object Class 6f)398,104 649,475 447,063 1,494,641 2,422,286 927,645 62% h. OTHER (Object Class 6h) 2. Bldg Occupancy Costs/Rents & Leases 327 366 393 1,086 1,500 414 72% (Rents & Leases/Other Income)- - - - - - 4. Utilities, Telephone 526 578 318 1,422 4,000 2,578 36% 5. Building and Child Liability Insurance - - - - - - 6. Bldg. Maintenance/Repair and Other Occupancy 132 306 1,758 2,196 1,500 (696) 146% 8. Local Travel (55.5 cents per mile)1,179 1,517 870 3,566 6,300 2,734 57% 9. Nutrition Services - - - - - - Child Nutrition Costs 239 282 - 521 600 79 87% (CCFP & USDA Reimbursements)(307) (74) 0 (381) (500) (119) 13. Parent Services - - - PC Orientation, Trainings, Materials & Translation - PA11351 778 312 1,440 1,700 260 85% Policy Council Activities - - 748 748 900 152 83% Child Care/Mileage Reimbursement 262 1,006 186 1,453 1,500 47 97% 14. Accounting & Legal Services - - - Auditor Controllers - - - - 1,000 1,000 0% Data Processing/Other Services & Supplies 651 651 601 1,903 2,300 397 83% 15. Publications/Advertising/Printing - - - Recruitment Advertising (Newspaper, Brochures)- - - - 100 100 16. Training or Staff Development - - - Agency Memberships (WIPFLI, Meeting Fees, NHSA, NAEYC)6 1,500 1,575 3,081 10,200 7,119 30% Staff Trainings/Dev. Conf. Registrations/Memberships - PA115,725 3,521 1,832 11,078 28,244 17,166 39% 17. Other - - - Vehicle Operating/Maintenance & Repair 3,310 240 1,228 4,778 10,000 5,222 48% Equipment Maintenance Repair & Rental 72 73 65 210 2,000 1,790 11% Other Operating Expenses (Facs Admin/Other admin)708 632 628 1,967 5,000 3,033 39% Other Departmental Expenses - - - - - - h. OTHER (6h)13,180 11,376 10,512 35,069 76,344 41,275 46% I. TOTAL DIRECT CHARGES (6a-6h)628,892 792,031 616,554 2,037,476 3,429,124 1,391,648 59% j. INDIRECT COSTS 25,592 26,900 15,083 67,576 109,420 41,844 62% k. TOTALS - ALL BUDGET CATEGORIES 654,484 818,932 631,637 2,105,052 3,538,544 1,433,492 59% Non-Federal Match (In-Kind)163,621 204,733 249,420 617,774 884,636 266,862 70% CONTRA COSTA COUNTY COMMUNITY SERVICES BUREAU 2017 EARLY HEAD START PROGRAM September 2017 Expenditures 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 407 1 2 3 4 5 DESCRIPTION Total Remaining % YTD Actual Budget Budget YTD a. PERSONNEL 86,175$ 299,555$ 213,380$ 29% b. FRINGE BENEFITS 52,846 216,733 163,887 24% c. TRAVEL - - - 0% d. EQUIPMENT - - - 0% e. SUPPLIES 2,125 4,800 2,675 44% f. CONTRACTUAL 53,000 456,920 403,920 12% g. CONSTRUCTION - 0% h. OTHER 28,578 50,813 22,235 56% I. TOTAL DIRECT CHARGES 222,725$ 1,028,821$ 806,096$ 22% j. INDIRECT COSTS 14,702 62,557 47,855 24% k. TOTAL-ALL BUDGET CATEGORIES 237,427$ 1,091,378$ 853,951$ 22% In-Kind (Non-Federal Share)31,710$ 272,845$ 241,135$ 12% CONTRA COSTA COUNTY COMMUNITY SERVICES BUREAU EARLY HEAD START- CC PARTNERSHIP September 2017 Expenditures 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 408 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Actual Actual Actual Total YTD Total Remaining % Jul-17 Aug-17 Sep-17 Actual Budget Budget YTD Expenditures a. Salaries & Wages (Object Class 6a) Permanent 1011 34,512 29,859 21,804 86,175 299,555 213,380 29% Temporary 1013 - - - - - - a. PERSONNEL (Object class 6a)34,512 29,859 21,804 86,175 299,555 213,380 29% b. FRINGE BENEFITS (Object Class 6b) Fringe Benefits 21,278 17,513 14,056 52,846 216,733 163,887 24% b. FRINGE (Object Class 6b)21,278 17,513 14,056 52,846 216,733 163,887 24% e. SUPPLIES (Object Class 6e) 1. Office Supplies - 6 55 61 1,000 939 6% 2. Child and Family Serv. Supplies/classroom Supplies - 40 - 40 1,200 1,160 3% 4. Other Supplies Computer Supplies, Software Upgrades, Comp Replacemnt - 1,089 - 1,089 1,200 111 91% Miscellaneous Supplies - - - - 100 100 0% Household Supplies 927 5 3 936 1,300 364 72% e. SUPPLIES (Object Class 6e)927 1,140 58 2,125 4,800 2,675 44% f. CONTRACTUAL (Object Class 6f) 1. Adm Svcs (e.g., Legal, Accounting, Temporary Contracts)- - - - 12,000 12,000 0% 8. Other Contracts - - - - 312,000 312,000 0% Contra Costa Child Care Council - - - - 20,000 20,000 0% First Baptist (20 slots x $450)- - - - 3,000 3,000 0% Child Outcome Planning and Administration (COPA/Nulinx)- 33,000 20,000 53,000 109,920 56,920 48% Enhancement/wrap-around HS slots with State CD Prog.- - - - - - f. CONTRACTUAL (Object Class 6f)- 33,000 20,000 53,000 456,920 403,920 12% h. OTHER (Object Class 6h) 2. Bldg Occupancy Costs/Rents & Leases 2,272 1,284 1,204 4,760 3,800 (960) 125% (Rents & Leases/Other Income)- - - - - - 4. Utilities, Telephone 241 1,266 1,703 3,210 4,000 790 80% 5. Building and Child Liability Insurance - - - - - - 6. Bldg. Maintenance/Repair and Other Occupancy - 434 711 1,145 1,400 255 82% 8. Local Travel (54 cents per mile)174 510 17 702 4,200 3,498 17% 13. Parent Services - - - - - - 0% Parent Activities (Sites, PC, BOS luncheon) & Appreciation - - - - - - Child Care/Mileage Reimbursement - - - - - - 14. Accounting & Legal Services Legal (County Counsel)- - - - 1,000 1,000 0% Auditor Controllers - - - - 1,000 1,000 0% Data Processing/Other Services & Supplies - 134 134 269 1,000 731 27% 15. Publications/Advertising/Printing - - - - - - Outreach/Printing - - - - 400 400 Recruitment Advertising (Newspaper, Brochures)- - - - - - 16. Training or Staff Development Agency Memberships (WIPFLI, Meeting Fees, NHSA, NAEYC)- - - - - - Staff Trainings/Dev. Conf. Registrations/Memberships - PA11 10,364 4,353 29 14,746 25,907 11,161 57% 17. Other - - Vehicle Operating/Maintenance & Repair - 11 676 688 4,000 3,312 17% Equipment Maintenance Repair & Rental 1,276 6 1,187 2,468 3,000 532 82% Other Operating Expenses (Facs Admin/Other admin)- 352 238 590 1,106 516 53% h. OTHER (6h)14,328 8,351 5,899 28,578 50,813 22,235 56% I. TOTAL DIRECT CHARGES (6a-6h)71,045 89,863 61,816 222,725 1,028,821 806,096 22% j. INDIRECT COSTS - 8,994 5,708 14,702 62,557 47,855 24% k. TOTALS - ALL BUDGET CATEGORIES 71,045 98,857 67,524 237,427 1,091,378 853,951 22% Non-federal Match In-Kind - 14,829 16,881 31,710 272,845 241,135 12% CONTRA COSTA COUNTY COMMUNITY SERVICES BUREAU EARLY HEAD START- CC PARTNERSHIP September 2017 Expenditures 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 409 1 2 3 4 5 DESCRIPTION Total Remaining % YTD Actual Budget Budget YTD a. PERSONNEL 76,560$ 859,703$ 783,143$ 9% b. FRINGE BENEFITS 49,528 655,766 606,238 8% c. TRAVEL - - - 0% d. EQUIPMENT 388 225,000 224,612 0% e. SUPPLIES 29,029 382,500 353,471 8% f. CONTRACTUAL 9,375 1,559,100 1,549,725 1% g. CONSTRUCTION - 0% h. OTHER 15,411 681,655 666,244 2% I. TOTAL DIRECT CHARGES 180,291$ 4,363,724$ 4,183,433$ 4% j. INDIRECT COSTS 15,578 183,117 167,539 9% k. TOTAL-ALL BUDGET CATEGORIES 195,869$ 4,546,841$ 4,350,972$ 4% In-Kind (Non-Federal Share)7,192$ 1,136,710$ 1,129,518$ 1% CONTRA COSTA COUNTY COMMUNITY SERVICES BUREAU EARLY HEAD START- CC PARTNERSHIP #2 September 2017 Expenditures 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 410 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Mar-17 Jul-17 thru thru Total YTD Total Remaining % Jun-17 Sep-17 Actual Budget Budget YTD Expenditures a. Salaries & Wages (Object Class 6a) Permanent 1011 24,236 52,324 76,560 759,356 682,796 10% Temporary 1013 - - - 100,347 100,347 0% a. PERSONNEL (Object class 6a)24,236 52,324 76,560 859,703 783,143 9% b. FRINGE BENEFITS (Object Class 6b)- - Fringe Benefits 14,651 34,877 49,528 655,766 606,238 8% b. FRINGE (Object Class 6b)14,651 34,877 49,528 655,766 606,238 8% d. EQUIPMENT (Object Class 6d) 1. Office Equipment - 388 388 125,000 124,612 0% 2. Vehicle Purchase - - - 100,000 100,000 0% d. EQUIPMENT (Object Class 6d)- 388 388 225,000 224,612 0% e. SUPPLIES (Object Class 6e) 1. Office Supplies - 18 18 2,000 1,982 1% 2. Child and Family Serv. Supplies/classroom Supplies 24,158 3,118 27,275 262,000 234,725 10% 3. Other Supplies - - - Computer Supplies, Software Upgrades, Comp Replacemnt - 1,724 1,724 12,000 10,276 14% Health/Safety Supplies - - - 105,500 105,500 0% Miscellaneous Supplies - - - 500 500 0% Household Supplies - 13 13 500 487 3% e. SUPPLIES (Object Class 6e)24,158 4,872 29,029 382,500 353,471 8% f. CONTRACTUAL (Object Class 6f) 1. Adm Svcs (e.g., Legal, Accounting, Temporary Contracts)- - - 18,000 18,000 0% 1. Health/Disabilities Services - - - - - Health Consultant - - - 19,500 19,500 0% 2. Training & Technical Assistance - PA11 - - - - - Interaction - - - 10,000 10,000 0% Josephine Lee - - - 30,000 30,000 0% UCSF Benioff 9,375 - 9,375 21,600 12,225 43% 3. Other Contracts Crossroads (20 slots x 12 x $500)- - - 120,000 120,000 0% Martinez EEE (16 slots x 12 x $500)- - - 96,000 96,000 0% Loss of Subsidy - - - 194,000 194,000 0% Child Outcome Planning and Administration (COPA/Nulinx)- - - 3,000 3,000 0% Enhancement EHS slots with State Child Dev. Program - - - 1,047,000 1,047,000 0% f. CONTRACTUAL (Object Class 6f)9,375 - 9,375 1,559,100 1,549,725 1% h. OTHER (Object Class 6h)- - 1. Bldg Occupancy Costs/Rents & Leases - 230 230 36,000 35,770 1% 2. Utilities, Telephone - 78 78 5,000 4,922 2% 3. Bldg. Maintenance/Repair and Other Occupancy - 102 102 433,300 433,198 0% 4. Local Travel (54 cents per mile)29 219 248 7,000 6,752 4% 5. Parent Services - - - Parent Conference Registration - PA11 - - - 1,000 1,000 0% PC Orientation, Trainings, Materials & Translation - PA11 - - - 5,000 5,000 0% Policy Council Activities - - - 3,000 3,000 0% Parent Activities (Sites, PC, BOS luncheon) & Appreciation - - - 3,200 3,200 0% Child Care/Mileage Reimbursement - - - 1,600 1,600 0% 6. Accounting & Legal Services - - - Audit - - - 500 500 0% Auditor Controllers - - - 500 500 0% Data Processing/Other Services & Supplies - 425 425 2,500 2,075 17% 7. Publications/Advertising/Printing - - - Outreach/Printing - 172 172 1,000 828 17% Recruitment Advertising (Newspaper, Brochures)- 243 243 1,000 757 24% 8. Training or Staff Development - - - Agency Memberships (WIPFLI, Meeting Fees, NHSA, NAEYC)- 456 456 22,108 21,652 2% Staff Trainings/Dev. Conf. Registrations/Memberships - PA116,175 6,085 12,260 60,500 48,240 20% 9. Other - - - Site Security Guards - - 2,000 2,000 0% Dental/medical Services - - 500 500 0% Vehicle Operating/Maintenance & Repair - - - 7,800 7,800 0% Equipment Maintenance Repair & Rental - 738 738 6,000 5,262 12% Health and Safety Improvements - - - 3,000 3,000 0% Other Operating Expenses (Facs Admin/Other admin)205 254 459 79,147 78,688 1% h. OTHER (6h)6,409 9,002 15,411 681,655 666,244 2% I. TOTAL DIRECT CHARGES (6a-6h)78,827 101,464 180,291 4,363,724 4,183,433 4% j. INDIRECT COSTS 9,679 5,899 15,578 183,117 167,539 9% k. TOTALS - ALL BUDGET CATEGORIES 88,506 107,362 195,869 4,546,841 4,350,972 4% Non-federal Match In-Kind - 7,192 7,192 1,136,710 1,129,518 1% CONTRA COSTA COUNTY COMMUNITY SERVICES BUREAU EARLY HEAD START- CC PARTNERSHIP #2 September 2017 Expenditures 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 411 CAO Monthly Report CSBG and Weatherization Programs Year-to-Date Expenditures As of September 30, 2017 1.2017 LIHEAP WX Contract # 17B-3005 Term: Oct. 1, 2016 - Dec. 31, 2017 Amount: WX $ 963,937 Total Contract 963,937$ Expenditures (456,999) Balance 506,938$ Expended 47% 2.2017 LIHEAP ECIP/EHA 16 Contract # 17B-3005 Term: Oct. 1, 2016 - Dec. 31, 2017 Amount: EHA 16 $ 876,184 Total Contract 876,184$ Expenditures (690,131) Balance 186,053$ Expended 79% 4.2017 COMMUNITY SERVICES BLOCK GRANT (CSBG) Contract # 17F-2007 Term: Jan. 1, 2017 - December 31, 2017 Amount: $ 846,479 Total Contract 846,479$ Expenditures (498,369) Balance 348,110$ Expended 59% fldr/fn:CAO Monthly Reports/WX YTD Exp-CAO Mo Rprt 09-2017 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 412 A - 5 Authorized Users C. Rand, Bureau Dir xxxx8798 Month:September 2017 K. Mason, Div Mgr xxxx2364 C. Reich, Div Mgr xxxx4959 Credit Card:Visa/U.S. Bank S. Kim, Sr. Business Systems Analyst xxxx1907 C. Johnson, AD xxxx0220 J. Rowley, AD xxxx2391 P. Arrington, AD xxxx3838 I. Renggenathen, AD xxxx2423 R. Radeva, PSA III xxxx1899 Corporate Acct. Number xxxx5045 Acct. code Stat. Date Card Account #Amount Program Purpose/Description 2100 09/22/17 xxxx1907 104.24 Indirect Admin Costs Office Exp 2100 09/22/17 xxxx8798 16.96 EHS-Child Care Partnership #2 Office Exp 2100 09/22/17 xxxx3838 478.25 HS Parent Services Office Exp 2100 09/22/17 xxxx1899 50.04 HS Basic Grant Office Exp 2100 09/22/17 xxxx1899 50.05 EHS Basis Grant Office Exp 2100 09/22/17 xxxx0220 176.04 Child Care Svs Program Office Exp 2100 09/22/17 xxxx5045 2.00 Indirect Admin Costs Office Exp 877.58 2102 09/22/17 xxxx8798 995.63 HS Basic Grant Books, Periodicals 2102 09/22/17 xxxx8798 995.62 EHS-Child Care Partnership #2 Books, Periodicals 1,991.25 2132 09/22/17 xxxx1907 106.50 HS Basic Grant Minor Computer Equip 2132 09/22/17 xxxx1907 34.99 Indirect Admin Costs Minor Computer Equip 141.49 2150 09/22/17 xxxx2423 (32.64) Child Nutrition Food Services Food (32.64) 2200 09/22/17 xxxx2423 650.00 Bayo Vista Site Costs Memberships 2200 09/22/17 xxxx2391 200.00 EHS-Child Care Partnership Memberships 850.00 2303 09/22/17 xxxx4959 919.40 Comm. Svc Block Grant Other Travel Employees 2303 09/22/17 xxxx1907 5.41 Head Start T & TA Other Travel Employees 2303 09/22/17 xxxx1907 3.60 EHS T & TA Other Travel Employees 2303 09/22/17 xxxx2364 22.80 HS Basic Grant Other Travel Employees 2303 09/22/17 xxxx2364 15.20 EHS-Child Care Partnership #2 Other Travel Employees 2303 09/22/17 xxxx1899 297.51 EHS-Child Care Partnership Other Travel Employees 2303 09/22/17 xxxx1899 0.51 EHS-Child Care Partnership Other Travel Employees 1,264.43 2467 09/22/17 xxxx4959 113.69 HS Basic Grant Training & Registration 2467 09/22/17 xxxx4959 8.21 EHS-Child Care Partnership Training & Registration 2467 09/22/17 xxxx4959 105.47 EHS-Child Care Partnership #2 Training & Registration 2467 09/22/17 xxxx2364 95.09 HS Basic Grant Training & Registration 2467 09/22/17 xxxx2364 63.40 EHS-Child Care Partnership #2 Training & Registration 2467 09/22/17 xxxx1899 199.00 EHS-Child Care Partnership Training & Registration 584.86 2477 09/22/17 xxxx1907 10.97 HS Basic Grant Educational Supplies 2477 09/22/17 xxxx2423 69.88 Brookside Site Costs Educational Supplies 2477 09/22/17 xxxx2423 21.99 Verde Site Costs Educational Supplies 2477 09/22/17 xxxx3838 14.73 Balboa Site Costs Educational Supplies 2477 09/22/17 xxxx2391 522.43 EHS-Child Care Partnership Educational Supplies 640.00 2479 09/22/17 xxxx1899 424.00 Indirect Admin Costs Other Special Dpmtal Exp 424.00 2490 09/22/17 xxxx4959 54.02 EHS-Child Care Partnership #2 Misc Services/Supplies 2490 09/22/17 xxxx4959 32.41 EHS Basis Grant Misc Services/Supplies 2490 09/22/17 xxxx4959 21.61 EHS-Child Care Partnership Misc Services/Supplies 2490 09/22/17 xxxx1907 25.60 Crescent Park Site Costs Misc Services/Supplies 2490 09/22/17 xxxx2364 33.37 HS Basic Grant Misc Services/Supplies 167.01 Total 6,907.98 COMMUNITY SERVICES BUREAU SUMMARY CREDIT CARD EXPENDITURE Agency: Community Services Bureau 10/30/2017 Page 1 of 1 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 413 OCTOBER 2017 – COMMUNITY SERVICES BUREAU PRESCHOOL MENU MEATLESS MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY 2 BREAKFAST ½ c. Fresh Apple ⅓ c. Corn Chex Cereal LUNCH ½ ea. SUNBUTTER & JELLY ½ oz. Mozzarella Cheese ¼ c. Vegetable Soup 1 ea. Fresh Kiwi 1 sl. Whole Wheat Bread PM SNACK 1 pkg. Fish Crackers ½ c. 1% Low-Fat Milk 3 BREAKFAST ½ c. Fresh Strawberries ⅓ c. Cheerios LUNCH 1 ea. CHICKEN CHALUPAS (refried beans & cheese) ¼ c. Lettuce & Tomatoes/Sour Cream ¼ c. Fresh Pear 1 ea. Whole Grain Corn Tortilla PM SNACK 1 pkg. Graham Crackers ½ c. 1% Low-Fat Milk 4 BREAKFAST 1 ea. Fresh Banana ½ ea. Whole Wheat Bagel/Cream Cheese LUNCH ⅜ c. PINTO BEANS ¼ c. Spinach Salad With Cranberries ¼ c. Fresh Apple 1 sq. Whole Grain Mexicali Cornbread PM SNACK 2 pkgs. Whole Grain Wheat Crackers ½ c. 1% Low-Fat Milk 1 tbsp. Hummus 5 BREAKFAST ½ c. Fresh Orange ½ ea. Whole Wheat English Muffin With Cinnamon LUNCH 1 c. CHILI RICE (ground turkey, cheddar cheese, tomatoes, corn, & brown rice) ¼ c. Fresh Pear PM SNACK ⅛ c. Low-Fat Plain Yogurt ½ c. Diced Peaches/Pineapple 6 BREAKFAST 1 ea. Fresh Banana ⅓ c. Cornflake Cereal LUNCH 1 oz. TURKEY HAM & ½ oz. SWISS CHEESE (Mayo & Mustard Dressing) ¼ c. Broccoli Florets With Ranch Dressing 1 sl. Fresh Cantaloupe 1 sl. Whole Wheat Bread PM SNACK 1 pkg. Animal Crackers ½ c. 1% Low-Fat Milk 9 BREAKFAST ½ c. Fresh Orange ⅓ c. All Bran Cereal LUNCH ½ c. BLACK BEAN CHILI ¼ c. Baby Carrots (No Dressing) ¼ c. Fresh Strawberries 5 ea. Whole Grain Corn Tortilla Chips PM SNACK 2 pkg. Whole Grain Wheat Crackers ½ oz. Cheddar Cheese Stick 10 BREAKFAST ½ c. Fresh Apple ⅓ c. Rice Chex Cereal LUNCH ½ c. TURKEY SPAGHETTI CASSEROLE 1 sl. Honey Dew Melon PM SNACK 1 ea. Fresh Banana ½ c. 1% Low-Fat Milk 11 BREAKFAST ½ c. Pineapple Tidbits ½ ea. 100 % Whole Wheat Bagel/Cream Cheese LUNCH 1-serv. CHICKEN CHILAQUILES WITH WHOLE GRAIN CORN TORTILLA ¼ c. Jicama Sticks ¼ c. Mango Chunks PM SNACK ½ c. Fresh Apple 1 tbsp. Sunbutter 12 BREAKFAST 1 ea. Fresh Banana ⅓ c. Corn Chex Cereal LUNCH ⅜ c. CAJUN RED BEANS ¼ c. Spring Salad Mix With Italian Dressing ¼ c. Fresh Peach ¼ c. Brown Rice PM SNACK ½ c. Broccoli Florets & Bell Pepper Strips/Ranch Dressing 6 ea. Wheat Thin Crackers 13 BREAKFAST ½ c. Fresh Strawberries ¼ c. Low-Fat Plain Yogurt/Granola LUNCH 1 ea. CRUNCHY HAWAIIAN CHICKEN WRAP (diced chicken, broccoli, carrots, pineapple, & spinach) 1 sl. Fresh Cantaloupe 1 sl. Whole Wheat Bread PM SNACK ⅓ c. Lets Go Fishing Trail Mix (corn chex, pretzels, fish & cheese crackers) ½ c. 1% Low-Fat Milk 16 BREAKFAST ½ c. Fresh Pear ⅓ c. Rice Chex Cereal LUNCH ¾ c.VEGETABLE CHILI (kidney beans, tomatoes, bulgur wheat, yogurt, & cheddar cheese) 1 ea. Fresh Kiwi 1 ea. Whole Wheat Tortilla PM SNACK 2 pkgs. WheatWorth Crackers Cottage Cheese with Crush Pinapple 17 BREAKFAST ½ c. Unsweetened Applesauce ½ ea. Whole Wheat English Muffin/Sunbutter LUNCH ⅜ c. CHICKEN CURRY CASSEROLE WITH BROWN RICE (diced chicken, carrots, celery, onion, yogurt, brown rice) ¼ c. Spinach Salad ¼ c. Fresh Peach PM SNACK ½ c. Tomato & Zucchini Salad/Italian Dressing 6 ea. Wheat Thin Crackers 18 BREAKFAST 1 ea. Fresh Banana ⅓ c. Kix Cereal LUNCH 1½ oz. TURKEY TACOS WITH CHEESE ¼ c. Shredded Lettuce & Tomatoes ¼ c. Mango Chunks 2 ea. Whole Grain Mini Corn Tortilla PM SNACK 1 ea. Fresh Orange 1 ea. Hard Boiled Egg 19 BREAKFAST ½ c. Fresh Strawberries ½ sl. Whole Wheat Cinnamon Bread LUNCH ⅜ c. SEASONED BLACKEYE PEAS ¼ c. Mixed Salad Greens/Raspberry Dressing ¼ c. Fresh Orange 1 sq. Whole Wheat Cornbread (homemade) PM SNACK ½ c. Cucumbers & Carrot Sticks/Dill Scallion Dip 2 pkgs. Wheat Crackers 20 BREAKFAST ½ c. Fresh Plum ⅓ c. Cheerios LUNCH 1 oz. ROASTED TURKEY & ½ oz. CHEESE (Mayo & Mustard Dressing) ¼ c. Leafy Green Lettuce & Tomato Slice ¼ c. Fresh Apple ½ ea. Whole Wheat Bun PM SNACK – ANTS ON A LOG ¼ c. Celery Sticks 1 tbsp. Sunbutter (Raisins) ½ c. 1% Low-Fat Milk 23 BREAKFAST ½ c. Fresh Apple ⅓ c. Corn Chex Cereal LUNCH 1 c. *CHEESY QUINOA & VEGETABLES (broccoli & shredded carrots) ¼ c. Fresh Strawberries PM SNACK ½ ea. Raisin Bread 1 tbsp. Sunbutter 24 BREAKFAST ½ c. Fresh Orange ½ ea. Whole Wheat Bagel/Cream Cheese LUNCH 1 ½ oz. BBQ TURKEY ¼ c. Spinach Salad/Raspberry Dressing ¼ c. Fresh Plum ½ ea. Whole Wheat Hamburger Bun PM SNACK - VEGGIE WRAP 1 ea. Whole Wheat Tortilla ½ c. Baby Spinach & Shredded Carrots 1 tbsp. Hummus 25 BREAKFAST ½ c. Pineapple Chunks ½ ea. Whole Wheat English Muffin/Sunbutter LUNCH 1 c. *JAMMIN JAMBALAYA (diced chicken, tomatoes, okra & brown rice) ¼ c. Rainbow Cabbage Slaw 1 sl. Fresh Cantaloupe PM SNACK ½ c. Fresh Apple ½ oz. Cheddar Cheese Slice 26 BREAKFAST 1 ea. Fresh Banana ⅓ c. Cornflake Cereal LUNCH 1 ea. MEXICAN PIZZA (refried beans, tomato paste, salsa, & mozzarella cheese) ¼ c. Jicma Sticks ¼ c. Fresh Peach 1 ea. Whole Wheat Tortilla PM SNACK ½ c. Broccoli & Cauilfower Florets/Ranch Dressing 6 ea. Hard Pretzels 27 BREAKFAST ½ c. Fresh Plum ½ sl. Whole Wheat Cinnamon Toast LUNCH 1½ ozs. TUNA SALAD ¼ c. Baby Carrots (No Dressing) ¼ c. Fresh Strawberries 1 sl. Whole Wheat Bread PM SNACK ¼ c. Homemade Pico De Gallo 5 ea. Whole Grain Corn Tortilla Chips ½ c. 1% Low-Fat Milk 30 BREAKFAST ½ c. Fresh Orange ⅓ c. All Bran Cereal LUNCH ⅜ c. CUBAN BLACK BEANS ¼ c. Carrot & Pineapple Salad 1 ea. Fresh Kiwi ¼ c. Brown Rice PM SNack 2 pkgs. Ritz Crackers 1 tbsp. Sunbutter 31 BREAKFAST ½ c. Fresh Apple ⅓ c. Kix Cereal LUNCH 1 oz. TURKEY HAM & ½ oz. CHEDDAR CHEESE (Mayo & Mustard Dressing) ¼ c. Sweet Potato Fries ¼ c. Fresh Pear 1 sl. Whole Wheat Bread PM SNACK ½ c. Zucchini & Tomatoes ⅛ c. Cottage Cheese Dip ALL BREAKFAST & LUNCH SERVED WITH 1% LOW-FAT MILK *Indicates vegetable included in main dish WATER IS OFFERED THROUGHOUT THE DAY 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 414 RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE Preliminary Working Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis in the Unincorporated Area of Contra Costa County (Framework), reflecting changes requested by the Board on October 24, 2017, and 1. DIRECT the Director of the Department of Conservation and Development to implement Public Outreach Plan to solicit public input on the Framework. 2. FISCAL IMPACT: Preparation of regulations on the commercial cultivation, distribution, transport, storage, manufacturing, processing, and sale of medical cannabis and medical cannabis products, and of adult-use cannabis and adult-use cannabis products, as authorized by the Control, Regulate, and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act, and on cultivation for personal use, is expected to cost approximately $100,000 to $150,000 in staff time and consulting fees. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Jamar Stamps, (925) 674-7832 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Ruben Hernandez , Aruna Bhat, Kristine Solseng C. 82 To:Board of Supervisors From:John Kopchik, Director, Conservation & Development Department Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis in the Unincorporated Area and Public Outreach Plan. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 415 BACKGROUND: On October 24, 2017, the Board received presentations from County staff and consultants on the development of cannabis regulations, financial analysis and the Preliminary Working Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis in the Unincorporated Area of Contra Costa County (“Draft Framework”). The Board provided input on the Draft Framework for staff to incorporate and indicated the importance of public input. This Board Order includes a revised Draft Framework (Exhibit A (clean version) and Exhibit B (track changes version)). The Board also provided guidance on public outreach. Based on that input staff developed a draft Public Outreach Plan (Exhibit C). The Draft Framework, once approved, will be used in future public outreach efforts. Staff will also offer field visits for Board Members. On October 24, the Board requested that staff confirm the following: Maximum number of cannabis plants. Under state law, the maximum number of cannabis plants that may be cultivated for personal use is six. State law requires that local agencies allow up to six cannabis plants to be cultivated indoors at a private residence, or inside a fully-enclosed and secured accessory structure to a private residence located on the grounds of the private residence, subject to any reasonable regulations the local agency may enact. A local agency may, but is not required to, allow outdoor cultivation at a private residence. (H&S Code, § 11362.2.) Accordingly, Ordinance No. 2017-24, adopted by the Board on October 24, allows six or fewer cannabis plants to be cultivated indoors at a private residence, or inside a fully-enclosed and secured accessory structure to a private residence located on the grounds of the private residence. Outdoor cultivation is prohibited under the ordinance. Under state medical cannabis laws, a qualified patient or primary caregiver may maintain no more than six mature or 12 immature cannabis plants per qualified patient. (H&S Code, § 11362.77.) A local agency may allow the cultivation of cannabis plants for medical purposes, but the courts have held that a local agency may also ban this type of cultivation. Under Ordinance No. 2017-24, the indoor cultivation of six or fewer cannabis plants may be for personal use or medical purposes. Eligibility for grant funding . Local agencies may regulate or ban commercial cultivation of cannabis, personal outdoor cultivation of cannabis, and the retail sale of cannabis or cannabis products. If a local agency bans all commercial cultivation, personal outdoor cultivation of cannabis, or the retail sale of cannabis or cannabis products, the agency is not eligible for state grants to assist with law enforcement, fire protection, or other local programs addressing public health and safety associated with the implementation of Proposition 64. (R&T Code, § 34019.) Staff will follow development of the regulations concerning the grant program to learn the details of how the state will interpret and enforce these provisions. Voter approval of cannabis tax in unincorporated area. Counties are authorized to impose a tax on the privilege of cultivating, manufacturing, producing, process, preparing, storing providing, donating, selling, or distributing marijuana or marijuana products. (R&T Code, § 34021.5.) If a county establishes a tax on one or more of those activities, the tax is imposed on state licensees. The Board of Supervisors by ordinance sets the tax rate and specifies the activities subject to the tax. The tax may be imposed for general governmental purposes or for purposes specified in the ordinance. If the Board specifies that the tax applies in the unincorporated area, then the electorate voting on the tax would be registered voters in the unincorporated area. Information on cannabis transaction limits in other states. Contra Costa Health Services has prepared a table comparing state limits on cannabis transactions (Exhibit D). 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 416 CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the Board does not act in the affirmative on the above recommendations, County staff will not disseminate the Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis in the Unincorporated Area of Contra Costa County and the Public Outreach Plan will not be implemented. ATTACHMENTS Exhibit A - Preliminary Cannabis Regulatory Framework 11-14-17 clean version Attachment 1 to Exhibit A-Preliminary Maps Attachment 2 to Exhibit A - Report from Health Services Exhibit B - Preliminary Cannabis Regulatory Framework 11-14-17 compared to 10-24-17 Exhibit C- Draft Public Outreach Exhibit D - Comparison of State Limits on Cannabis Transactions 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 417 Exhibit A  PRELIMINARY WORKING DRAFT FRAMEWORK FOR REGULATING CANNABIS IN THE UNINCOPORATED AREA OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY November 14, 2017 PREPARED FOR THE CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS BY THE CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 (925) 674-7775 (NOTE: Yellow highlighted text marks ideas or components in an early stage of formulation and on which public input would be particularly appreciated.) 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 418 Contra Costa County Preliminary Working Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis October 24, 2017   1    I. Introduction In response to California voter approval of Proposition 64 (Adult Use of Marijuana Act) in November 2016, the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors has directed the County staff1, to initiate the process of preparing regulations for the establishment of commercial cannabis businesses in the unincorporated areas of the County. The regulations will also address cultivation of cannabis for personal use at home. This working draft document is intended to provide an overview of potential cannabis regulations being formulated for the unincorporated areas of the County, including aspects still very far from being settled, based on guidance from the County Board of Supervisors at the April 25, July 18, and October 24, 2017 meetings. This document is being used to solicit further detailed public input on this matter. In addition to preparation of land use and health regulations for commercial cannabis uses, the Board has also initiated the process of analyzing and preparing a potential taxing program for the various commercial cannabis uses. It is anticipated that no commercial cannabis uses would be authorized until such time as a cannabis tax ballot measure has been approved by County voters. A County cannabis tax initiative could be considered by voters at the next General Election in November 2018, so regulations permitting commercial cannabis uses are not expected to become effective until that time at the earliest. No decision has been made by the Board on the regulatory framework contemplated in this document. Currently, and unless or until new regulations are approved by the Board of Supervisors, the commercial cultivation, distribution, storage, manufacturing, processing, and sale of medical cannabis and adult use cannabis and the outdoor cultivation of cannabis for personal use are prohibited within the unincorporated areas of the County. II. Types of Commercial Cannabis Uses Under Consideration The County is considering regulating and permitting the establishment of various commercial cannabis uses. No decisions have been made and it is possible that some or all categories of use will not be permitted. Types of use under consideration include:                                                              1 Staff from the following County Departments have been involved:  County Administrators Office, County Counsel, Sheriff’s  Office, District Attorney, Health Services Department (HSD), Probation, Treasurer‐Tax Collector, Agriculture, and Conservation  and Development (DCD). DCD is taking the lead with respect to developing land use regulations. HSD is taking the lead with  developing health regulations.  11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 419 Contra Costa County Preliminary Working Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis October 24, 2017   2     Cultivation-Cultivation refers to the growing of cannabis for commercial use, including artificial, mixed light and natural light cultivation (i.e. indoor, greenhouse and outdoor).  Retail Sales/Delivery- Retail sales of cannabis refers to the sale of cannabis to retail customers from a storefront that sells only cannabis products. Retail delivery refers to deliveries from a storefront or other permitted site to customers.  Manufacturing/Processing- Involves the processing of cannabis or cannabis products into various marketable forms, including edibles, oils, tinctures, etc. The County may be well-positioned to attract and retain these types of businesses because the County has significant industrial land and a strong industrial base.  Distribution Center- A cannabis distribution center refers to a site where cannabis or cannabis products are warehoused and distributed to licensed cannabis retailers. The retail sale of cannabis or cannabis products is not permitted from cannabis distribution centers.  Testing- A cannabis testing facility is a facility where cannabis and cannabis products are tested for potency, quality, and health and safety requirements. III. Land Use Permitting Process All applications for commercial cannabis uses are proposed to be subject to the County Land use Permitting Process (Article 26-2.20 of County Code). Under the land use permitting process, applications for all commercial cannabis uses would be subject to the following procedures:  Review of application for completeness.  Solicitation of comments from other County, State, and community agencies/organizations.  Review of project for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act.  Mailing of public hearing notice to all property owners within 300-feet of property where use is proposed.  Public hearing before the County Zoning Administrator.  Discretionary decisions would be made by the County Zoning Administrator who could approve or deny applications. Zoning Administrator decisions can be appealed 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 420 Contra Costa County Preliminary Working Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis October 24, 2017   3    to the County Planning Commission and decisions by the Planning Commission can be appealed to the County Board of Supervisors. Each permitted use would be subject to specific conditions intended to protect public health, safety and welfare (further discussion of key examples of protections is provided below). The permits would be subject to suspension or termination if performance standards are not met or public health, safety or welfare was threatened. The regulations could incorporate automatic expiration of cannabis permits after a set number of years and require re-approval of permits, including a new application review process. Periodic permit review hearings or review procedures could also be included. It is important to note that additional permits from the County (as well as a state license) may be required. For example, Environmental Health may require additional applications and permits, consistent with the handling and sales of consumer goods (see Section IX). Building permits may also be required. IV. Potential Cap on Number of Permits In order to help ensure the establishment of safe, orderly and accessible commercial cannabis businesses, the Board may wish to consider placing a cap on the number of permits to be issued for some or all of the commercial cannabis uses to be permitted. Establishment of a “ramp-up” program where the cap on the number of permits is increased on an annual basis may also be considered by the Board, which would enable enforcement needs and community effects to be assessed and resource allocation to be adjusted in a deliberative manner. Considerations on potential caps for each of the use types are as follows: [[ULTIMATE OR INTERIM LIMIT, IF ANY, FOR EACH COMMERCIAL USE TO BE DETERMINED BY THE BOARD ]]  Commercial Cultivation- [No limit] OR [A maximum of (10?)-(50?)-(100?) (more?)] permits for the commercial cultivation of cannabis, including indoor, mixed light and outdoor cultivation.  Retail Sales- [No limit] OR [A maximum of (3?)-(6?)-(9?)-(12?) (more?)] permits for the retail sale of commercial cannabis and cannabis products. For delivery-only retail the cap could be increased or eliminated altogether.  Manufacturing- [No limit] OR [A maximum of (5?)-(10?)-(15?)-(20?) (more?)] permits for manufacturing of cannabis and cannabis products. Given that the County could have competitive advantages in the sectors of manufacturing, distribution and testing, and that community impacts may be well addressed with 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 421 Contra Costa County Preliminary Working Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis October 24, 2017   4    proper siting, staff suggests the Board consider a high (or no) ultimate cap on these sectors (interim caps for a “ramp-up”may have merit).  Distribution Center- [No limit] OR [A maximum of (?)-(?)-(?)] permits for cannabis and cannabis products distribution center.  Testing Facility- [No limit] OR a maximum of (?)-(?)-(?) permits for cannabis and cannabis products testing facility. V. Applicant Selection Process As described in Section II, in order to ensure the establishment of safe and accessible commercial cannabis uses, all applications for commercial cannabis uses would be subject to the County’s land use permitting (LUP) process and any other applicable regulations (e.g. Environmental Health permits and building permits). If the Board establishes ultimate or interim caps on the number of businesses to be permitted for any use category (see Section IV), the County will establish a selection process to determine how available permits will be allocated. If a selection process is needed, the Board has expressed an interest in utilizing a “request for proposal” (RFP) process and scoring system. Utilizing the RFP and scoring process, the County would solicit proposals for establishment of a commercial cannabis use. The proposals would be scored utilizing a pre-defined and approved scoring system. The proposals with the highest scores would then be invited to submit a formal land use permit application, the application would be processed under the County LUP process and would be subject to denial, or conditional approval, by the County Zoning Administrator, County Planning Commission or Board of Supervisors. If a permit was denied, the highest ranked proposal just below the initial cut-off could be invited to apply until the cap on permits is reached. The screening process could be done in phases. For instance, the County could initially invite submission of concise and simple pre-proposals (less detailed and costly to complete than full proposals), review and rank the pre-proposals, then invite the proponents with the highest ranking pre-proposals to submit full proposals which would be screened again to determine who would be invited to submit a formal land use permit application (this is similar to some grant selection processes). Please note, applications for a land use permit for commercial cannabis uses would only be accepted for qualifying properties located within the appropriate zoning district and outside of any approved buffer areas (see Sections VI and VII, below). (Document continues on next page) 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 422 Contra Costa County Preliminary Working Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis October 24, 2017   5    VI. Eligible Locations The County has prepared a matrix and Preliminary Cannabis Use Maps [include link to maps here] identifying the zoning districts where specific commercial cannabis uses could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit. The draft matrix and maps are still under review by the Board. The draft matrix is below. The draft maps are in an attachment.   CULTIVATION PROCCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES  LEGEND Artificial  Light  Mixed  Light  Natural  Light  Distribution  Center Manufacturing Testing   Retail  Delivery  Only      Retail  StorefrontZONING  DISTRICT  Agricultural  Zoning  Districts (A‐ )  Land Use  Permit  Land  Use  Permit  Land Use  Permit   Land Use Permit        Area‐Wide  Planned Unit  Development  (P‐1)   Land Use  Permit  Land  Use  Permit  Land Use  Permit  Land Use  Permit Land Use Permit  Land  Use  Permit  Land Use  Permit  Land Use  Permit  Retail‐ Business (R‐B)             Land Use  Permit  Land Use  Permit  General  Commercial  (C)        Land Use  Permit Land Use Permit  Land  Use  Permit  Land Use  Permit  Land Use  Permit  Controlled  Manufacturing  (C‐M), Light  Industrial (L‐I),  Heavy  Industrial (H‐I)  Land Use  Permit  Land  Use  Permit  Land Use  Permit  Land Use  Permit Land Use Permit  Land  Use  Permit  Land Use  Permit  Land Use  Permit  Potential  Sustainability  Requirements  Renewable Energy  and Sustainable  Water Supply  Sustainable  Water  Supply     Potential limits  on   number of   employees/trips  outside ULL        Key  Considerations  and  Limitations by  Use  Maximum 22, 000 sf Max 2 acres only within  ULL Potential limits  on number of  employees/trips  outside ULL  only  within  ULL  only  within  ULL  only within  ULL  Ag Districts:  maximum 10,000 sf  structure or in  existing structure  Greenhouse  only in non‐ ag districts  Cultivators  may  distribute  own produce  to retailers  500 ft from  another  retail  location  Note: Microbusinesses (operations that grow, process and sell cannabis products to retail customers at a small-scale site) are also under consideration where cultivation is allowed. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 423 Contra Costa County Preliminary Working Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis October 24, 2017   6    Properties with incompatible zoning could apply to be rezoned, but this is a long and complex process requiring Board approval. Outside of the Area-Wide P-1 zoning districts that cover the former Redevelopment Areas (and that may be eligible for cannabis uses per the above matrix), other lands that are zoned P-1 (Planned Unit Development) could go through a process other than rezoning to become eligible for cannabis uses if they have a compatible General Plan designation. They could apply for a Development Plan modification to include a cannabis use as an eligible use, which would require separate approval but not necessarily by the Board. VII. Buffer Zones In addition to being located within compatible zoning districts, commercial cannabis uses may also be subject to buffer requirements in order to protect certain sensitive uses from potential cannabis influence or to prevent cannabis businesses from being located to close to each other. Under current State law a buffer of 600 feet is required between any cannabis business licensed by the State and any K-12 school, day care center or youth center. A County ordinance may increase this buffer distance. A County ordinance may also establish buffers between cannabis businesses and other sensitive uses, such as parks. For comparison purposes, the County Code currently restricts the establishment of new tobacco retail establishments within 1,000 feet of any school, playground, park or library and within 500 feet of any existing tobacco retailer. Buffers for the County’s cannabis ordinance could range in distance. The appropriate distance could be determined based on a variety of factors such as use, location, parcel size and type of sensitive sites the County chooses to identify. The Preliminary Cannabis Use Maps [include link to maps here] show two alternatives, one that includes 500 foot buffers from residential zoning districts along with 1000 foot buffers from schools, community parks/playgrounds, libraries, drug treatment centers, and homeless shelters and one that includes the 1000-foot buffers but omits the 500-foot buffers to residential zoning districts. Other buffer scenarios are being considered. VIII. Security and Nuisance Abatement Requirements In order to ensure that commercial cannabis uses are operated in a safe and secure manner, commercial uses are proposed to be subject to substantial security measures to be incorporated into the regulations. Examples of security measures may include (the below are examples only—many additional measures could be considered during development of the detailed regulations): 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 424 Contra Costa County Preliminary Working Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis October 24, 2017   7     Require that cannabis establishments be constructed in a manner that minimizes odors to surrounding uses, and promotes quality design and construction, and consistency with the surrounding properties.  Require design measures and an enforceable security plan to ensure the applicant will secure the premises twenty-four hours per day, seven days per week. Examples of specific measures include: security cameras; background checks for employees; establishing limited access areas accessible only to authorized personnel; storing all finished cannabis products in a secured and locked room; preventing off-site impacts to adjoining or near properties; and limiting the amount of cash on the premises. Examples of operational conditions of approval include:  Requiring permitted facilities (other than retail space in storefronts) to be closed to the general public; prohibiting transporter deliveries and pick-ups between the hours of, for example, 7:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m.  Odors shall be contained on the property on which the commercial cannabis activity is located.  No production, distribution, storage, display or wholesale of cannabis and cannabis- infused products shall be visible from the exterior of the building where the commercial cannabis activity is being conducted. IX. Public Health Safeguards Contra Costa Health Services recommends that the Board adopt a local health ordinance that establishes permitted activity, and the conditions under which consumer products which contain cannabis can be manufactured and sold to consumers. Adopting a local health ordinance will also allow county staff to inspect, regulate and enforce appropriate state and local laws pertaining to the cannabis industry. The primary reasons for crafting a local regulatory health ordinance are:  Provide authority for local environmental health staff to inspect and enforce the numerous state laws pertaining to: i) the manufacturing of food and beverage products that contain cannabis (termed “edible cannabis products”); and ii) the retail sale and dispensing of cannabis products including, but not limited to, leaf, bud, edibles, beverages, tinctures, candies, etc. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 425 Contra Costa County Preliminary Working Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis October 24, 2017   8     Provide local authority to establish, inspect, and enforce additional rules and restrictions on the manufacturing and sale of consumer products which contain cannabis.  Provide local authority to restrict use of cannabis in public places and smoking of cannabis in multi-unit housing. Currently, the County has a second hand smoke ordinance that bans the smoking of cannabis products in the unincorporated area of the County in all of the same places where tobacco smoking is prohibited. In addition, the County is poised to consider a revised ordinance that would add multi-unit residences to the locations where both tobacco and cannabis smoking would be prohibited. The current and proposed smoking prohibitions are inclusive of the use of electronic smoking devices (vaping). In addition, the County could consider an outright ban on the use of cannabis in any form at certain pubic events and venues. Specific examples of the kinds of safeguards that are being considered for inclusion in new regulations include the following:  Consider limiting the sale of edible cannabis products to those where dosing is a maximum of 10mg THC/dose and packaged as a single dose. Consumers would be allowed to purchase up to the limit allowed in state law.  Prohibit sale of flavored leaf and bud.  Consistent with recent legislation in Colorado, consider prohibiting the sale of edible products that mimic the shape and appearance of animals, humans, or fruit, including gummy bears.  Prohibit sale of flavored e-juices.  Prohibit all self-service vending of all cannabis and products which contain cannabis. A report from Contra Costa Health Services with detailed recommendations and analysis of health issues is available here [include link to the report originally provided by HSD to the Board on October 24, 2017]. X. Cost Recovery The County may consider establishing fees on cannabis businesses to cover County costs associated with application review and monitoring compliance with permit conditions. XI. Taxation A ballot measure to seek approval for taxes on certain commercial cannabis uses is under consideration. It is anticipated that no commercial cannabis uses would be authorized until such time as a cannabis tax ballot measure has been approved by County voters. A County cannabis tax initiative could be considered by voters at the next General Election in November 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 426 Contra Costa County Preliminary Working Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis October 24, 2017   9    2018. The tax measure could provide funding for a variety of public purposes, including but not limited to enhanced public safety, improved public health, drug treatment and education, and enhanced code enforcement capability. XII. Personal Cultivation In addition to providing comprehensive regulations for the establishment of commercial cannabis uses, the County cannabis ordinance could also address cultivation for personal use. Under current County cannabis regulations, limited indoor cultivation is permitted. The current regulations for personal indoor cultivation has been provided below.  Indoor Personal Use Cultivation- Under the County’s current cannabis regulations, six or fewer cannabis plants may be cultivated indoors at a private residence, or inside a fully-enclosed and secured accessory structure to a private residence located on the grounds of the private residence, if all of the following conditions are met: 1. The private residence or accessory structure, and all lighting, plumbing, and electrical components used for cultivation, must comply with applicable zoning, building, electrical, and plumbing codes and permitting requirements. 2. All living cannabis plants, and all cannabis in excess of 28.5 grams produced by those plants, must be kept in a locked room and may not be visible from an adjacent property, right-of-way, street, sidewalk, or other place accessible to the public. 3. The private residence must be lawfully occupied by the person who cultivates the cannabis plants within the private residence or within the accessory structure. If the private residence is not owner-occupied, written permission from the owner of the private residence must be obtained before cannabis plants may be cultivated. The final regulations could continue the current restrictions on cultivation for personal use or they could be expanded to allow for limited outdoor cultivation for personal use and/or allow for exceptions. Outdoor personal cultivation could raise more odor or security concerns with neighbors but may be less expensive and use less energy. The County is also keeping an eye on state regulations in this area as Proposition 64 prevents access to certain grant funds by those local agencies that ban commercial cultivation, or personal outdoor cultivation, or retail sales of cannabis, and the standards for enforcing these restrictions have not yet been defined.  Outdoor Personal Use Cultivation- Examples of restrictions on outdoor cultivation for personal use that could be considered in lieu of outright prohibition include: 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 427 Contra Costa County Preliminary Working Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis October 24, 2017   10    1. Not more than three marijuana plants are cultivated outdoors at one time. 2. The plants are not visible from a public right-of-way or adjacent parcel. 3. No part of the plants being cultivated are within five feet of any property line.  Discretionary permit process could be considered to allow for exceptions to limitations on personal cultivation. The Board could consider whether the limitations on personal cultivation are hard and fast limits with no exceptions or whether to allow a discretionary permit process to enable certain specified exceptions. For instance, outdoor personal cultivation could be permitted or denied through such a process. The process would require notification to neighbors and a public hearing and decisions would be appealable. XIII. Enforcement In order to ensure the orderly establishment of commercial cannabis uses and to prevent and discourage the establishment of unregulated cannabis uses, robust enforcement capacity should be a component of the regulatory program. County staff is working to more fully explore the most effective enforcement mechanisms and to better identify enforcement roles and resource needs. XIV. Additional sections? Additional sections may be added to address other aspects of the potential regulations deemed important to include in a summary document such as this Framework. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 428 Walnut Creek Richmond Antioch Concord Oakley Danville Pittsburg Hercules Orinda Pinole Lafayette Martinez San Ramon Walnut Creek Brentwood Moraga Pleasant Hill Clayton El Cerrito San Pablo Map1A City Limits Parcels within 500 feet of Residential Zoning Sensitive Sites include schools, community parks/playgrounds, libraries, drug treatment centers, and homeless shelters. Parcels within 1,000 feet of a Sensitive Site Map Created on 10/17/2017 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development ** See Staff Report for recommendations regarding limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees. NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary. The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$ CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALESArtificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Maximum 22,000 sf: Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure Testing Renewable EnergySustainable Water Supply Sustainable Water Supply Retail Delivery Only Retail Storefront Maximum 2 acres Greenhouse only in non-ag districts Only within ULL Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers Distribution Center Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL 500 ft from another retail location Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* LEGENDZONING DISTRICT Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- ) Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential Retail- Business (R-B) General Commercial (C) Potential Sustainability Requirements Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I) Key Considerations and Limitations by Use Manufacturing Preliminary Cannabis Land Use Matrix and MapUnincorporated Contra Costa County Sensitive Site and Residential Buffers !Child Care Facilities Areas with Incompatible Zoning District orGeneral Plan Land Use Designation µ11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 429 Walnut Creek Richmond Antioch Concord Oakley Danville Pittsburg Hercules Orinda Pinole Lafayette Martinez San Ramon Walnut Creek Brentwood Moraga Pleasant Hill Clayton El Cerrito San Pablo Map1B City Limits Sensitive Site Buffers Sensitive Sites include schools, community parks/playgrounds, libraries, drug treatment centers, and homeless shelters.Parcels within 1,000 feet of a Sensitive Site Map Created on 10/17/2017 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development ** See Staff Report for recommendations regarding limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees. NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary. The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$ CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALESArtificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Maximum 22,000 sf: Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure Testing Renewable EnergySustainable Water Supply Sustainable Water Supply Retail Delivery Only Retail Storefront Maximum 2 acres Greenhouse only in non-ag districts Only within ULL Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers Distribution Center Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL 500 ft from another retail location Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* LEGENDZONING DISTRICT Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- ) Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential Retail- Business (R-B) General Commercial (C) Potential Sustainability Requirements Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I) Key Considerations and Limitations by Use Manufacturing Preliminary Cannabis Land Use Matrix and MapUnincorporated Contra Costa County !Child Care Facilities Areas with Incompatible Zoning District orGeneral Plan Land Use Designation µ11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 430 LAFAYETTE §¨¦680 §¨¦680 Diablo RdDa n v i l l e B l v d Rudgear Rd Mir a n d a A v e Livorna Rd El Cerro Blvd H a r t z A v e Blackha w k R d Stone V a l l e y R d D a n v i l l e B l v d CastleHill SanMiguel Diablo Alamo DANVILLE Mount DiabloState Park Las TrampasRegional Wilderness Diablo FoothillsRegional Park SugarloafOpen Space Las Trampas-DiabloRegional Trail DiabloCountry Club RossmoorGolf Course Round HillGolf Course Map2A City Limits Parcels within 500 feet of Residential Zoning Sensitive Site and Residential Buffers Sensitive Sites include schools, community parks/playgrounds, libraries, drug treatment centers, and homeless shelters. Parcels within 1,000 feet of a Sensitive Site µ0 1 20.5 Miles Map Created on 10/17/2017 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development ** See Staff Report for recommendations regarding limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees. NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary. The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$ CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALESArtificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Maximum 22,000 sf: Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure Testing Renewable Energy Sustainable Water Supply Sustainable Water Supply Retail Delivery Only Retail Storefront Maximum 2 acres Greenhouse only in non-ag districts Only within ULL Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers Distribution Center Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL 500 ft from another retail location Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* LEGENDZONING DISTRICT Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- ) Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential Retail- Business (R-B) General Commercial (C) Potential Sustainability Requirements Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I) Key Considerations and Limitations by Use Manufacturing Areas with Incompatible Zoning District orGeneral Plan Land Use Designation Preliminary Cannabis Land Use Matrix and MapAlamo and Diablo Areas 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 431 Ha r t z A v e §¨¦680CastleHill Diablo Alamo DANVILLE MountDiabloMount DiabloState Park Las TrampasRegional Wilderness Diablo FoothillsRegional Park SugarloafOpen Space Las Trampas-DiabloRegional Trail DiabloCountry Club RossmoorGolf Course Round HillGolf Course §¨¦680Da n v i l l e B l v d Rudgear Rd Mir a n d a A v e Livorna Rd El Cerro Blvd Blackha w k R dGreen Valley RdStone V a l l e y R d Diablo Rd Dan v i l l e B l v d Map2B City Limits Sensitive Site Buffers Sensitive Sites include schools, community parks/playgrounds, libraries, drug treatment centers, and homeless shelters.Parcels within 1,000 feet of a Sensitive Site µ0 1 20.5 Miles Map Created on 10/17/2017 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development ** See Staff Report for recommendations regarding limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees. NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary. The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$ CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALESArtificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Maximum 22,000 sf: Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure Testing Renewable EnergySustainable Water Supply Sustainable Water Supply Retail Delivery Only Retail Storefront Maximum 2 acres Greenhouse only in non-ag districts Only within ULL Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers Distribution Center Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL 500 ft from another retail location Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* LEGENDZONING DISTRICT Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- ) Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential Retail- Business (R-B) General Commercial (C) Potential Sustainability Requirements Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I) Key Considerations and Limitations by Use Manufacturing Areas with Incompatible Zoning District orGeneral Plan Land Use Designation Preliminary Cannabis Land Use Matrix and MapAlamo Area 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 432 PittsburgÄÅ4 ÄÅ4 W Leland Rd Willow Pass Rd Bailey RdEvora RdW Leland R d N Parkside Dr BayPoint Clyde MallardReservoir Military OceanTerminal Concord PittsburgPower Plant Allied/GeneralChemical ChippsIsland MallardIsland Diablo CreekGolf Course UnitedSportsmen Delta ViewGolf Course Map3A City Limits Parcels within 500 feet of Residential Zoning Sensitive Site and Residential Buffers Sensitive Sites include schools, community parks/playgrounds, libraries, drug treatment centers, and homeless shelters. Parcels within 1,000 feet of a Sensitive Site µ0 0.75 1.50.375 Miles Map Created on 10/17/2017 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development ** See Staff Report for recommendations regardomg limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees. NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary. The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$ CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALESArtificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Maximum 22,000 sf: Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure Testing Renewable EnergySustainable Water Supply Sustainable Water Supply Retail Delivery Only Retail Storefront Maximum 2 acres Greenhouse only in non-ag districts Only within ULL Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers Distribution Center Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL 500 ft from another retail location Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* LEGENDZONING DISTRICT Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- ) Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential Retail- Business (R-B) General Commercial (C) Potential Sustainability Requirements Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I) Key Considerations and Limitations by Use Manufacturing Areas with Incompatible Zoning District orGeneral Plan Land Use Designation Preliminary Cannabis Land Use Matrix and MapBay Point Area 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 433 ÄÅ4 ÄÅ4 W Leland Rd Willow Pass Rd Bailey RdEvora RdW Leland R d N Parkside Dr BayPoint Clyde MallardReservoir Military OceanTerminal Concord PittsburgPower Plant Allied/GeneralChemical ChippsIsland MallardIsland Diablo CreekGolf Course UnitedSportsmen Delta ViewGolf Course Map3B City Limits Sensitive Site Buffers Sensitive Sites include schools, community parks/playgrounds, libraries, drug treatment centers, and homeless shelters.Parcels within 1,000 feet of a Sensitive Site µ0 0.75 1.50.375 Miles Map Created on 10/17/2017 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development ** See Staff Report for recommendations regardomg limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees. NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary. The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$ CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALESArtificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Maximum 22,000 sf: Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure Testing Renewable EnergySustainable Water Supply Sustainable Water Supply Retail Delivery Only Retail Storefront Maximum 2 acres Greenhouse only in non-ag districts Only within ULL Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers Distribution Center Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL 500 ft from another retail location Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* LEGENDZONING DISTRICT Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- ) Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential Retail- Business (R-B) General Commercial (C) Potential Sustainability Requirements Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I) Key Considerations and Limitations by Use Manufacturing Areas with Incompatible Zoning District orGeneral Plan Land Use Designation Preliminary Cannabis Land Use Matrix and MapBay Point Area 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 434 BethelIsland Dutch Slough JerseyIsland HollandTract ShermanIsland Dutch SloughTidal Marsh Restoration The Golf Clubat Bethel Island BigBreak Map4A City Limits Parcels within 500 feet of Residential Zoning Sensitive Sites include schools, community parks/playgrounds, libraries, drug treatment centers, and homeless shelters. Parcels within 1,000 feet of a Sensitive Site µ0 0.65 1.30.325 Miles Map Created on 10/17/2017 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development ** See Staff Report for recommendations regarding limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees. NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary. The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$ CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALESArtificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Maximum 22,000 sf: Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure Testing Renewable EnergySustainable Water Supply Sustainable Water Supply Retail Delivery Only Retail Storefront Maximum 2 acres Greenhouse only in non-ag districts Only within ULL Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers Distribution Center Potential limit onnumber of employees/trip outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL 500 ft from another retail location Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* LEGENDZONING DISTRICT Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- ) Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential Retail- Business (R-B) General Commercial (C) Potential Sustainability Requirements Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I) Key Considerations and Limitations by Use Manufacturing Areas with Incompatible Zoning District orGeneral Plan Land Use Designation Preliminary Cannabis Land Use Matrix and MapBethel Island Area Sensitive Site and Residential Buffers 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 435 BethelIsland Dutch Slough JerseyIsland HollandTract Dutch SloughTidal Marsh Restoration The Golf Clubat Bethel Island BigBreak Map4B City Limits Sensitive Site Buffers Sensitive Sites include schools, community parks/playgrounds, libraries, drug treatment centers, and homeless shelters.Parcels within 1,000 feet of a Sensitive Site µ0 0.65 1.30.325 Miles Map Created on 10/17/2017 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development ** See Staff Report for recommendations regarding limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees. NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary. The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$ CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALESArtificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Maximum 22,000 sf: Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure Testing Renewable EnergySustainable Water Supply Sustainable Water Supply Retail Delivery Only Retail Storefront Maximum 2 acres Greenhouse only in non-ag districts Only within ULL Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers Distribution Center Potential limit onnumber of employees/trip outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL 500 ft from another retail location Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* LEGENDZONING DISTRICT Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- ) Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential Retail- Business (R-B) General Commercial (C) Potential Sustainability Requirements Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I) Key Considerations and Limitations by Use Manufacturing Areas with Incompatible Zoning District orGeneral Plan Land Use Designation Preliminary Cannabis Land Use Matrix and MapBethel Island Area 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 436 Ca m i n o T a s s a j a r a Diablo Rd Blackhawk RdSycamore Valley Rd Blackha w k R d Diablo Blackhawk DANVILLE Sycamore Valley RegionalOpen Space Preserve DiabloCountry Club Lakeside Courseat Blackhawk Falls Courseat Blackhawk Map5A City Limits Parcels within 500 feet of Residential Zoning Sensitive Sites include schools, community parks/playgrounds, libraries, drug treatment centers, and homeless shelters. Parcels within 1,000 feet of a Sensitive Site µ0 0.7 1.40.35 Miles Map Created on 10/17/2017 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development ** See Staff Report for recommendations regarding limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees. NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary. The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$ CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALESArtificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Maximum 22,000 sf: Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure Testing Renewable EnergySustainable Water Supply Sustainable Water Supply Retail Delivery Only Retail Storefront Maximum 2 acres Greenhouse only in non-ag districts Only within ULL Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers Distribution Center Potential limits onnumber of employees/tripoutside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL 500 ft from another retail location Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* LEGENDZONING DISTRICT Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- ) Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential Retail- Business (R-B) General Commercial (C) Potential Sustainability Requirements Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I) Key Considerations and Limitations by Use Manufacturing Areas with Incompatible Zoning District orGeneral Plan Land Use Designation Preliminary Cannabis Land Use Matrix and MapBlackhawk Area Sensitive Site and Residential Buffers 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 437 Ca m i n o T a s s a j a r a Diablo Rd Blackhawk RdSycamore Valley Rd Blackha w k R d Diablo Blackhawk DANVILLE Sycamore Valley RegionalOpen Space Preserve DiabloCountry Club Lakeside Courseat Blackhawk Falls Courseat Blackhawk Map5B City Limits Sensitive Site Buffers Sensitive Sites include schools, community parks/playgrounds, libraries, drug treatment centers, and homeless shelters.Parcels within 1,000 feet of a Sensitive Site µ0 0.7 1.40.35 Miles Map Created on 10/17/2017 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development ** See Staff Report for recommendations regarding limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees. NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary. The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$ CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALESArtificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Maximum 22,000 sf: Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure Testing Renewable EnergySustainable Water Supply Sustainable Water Supply Retail Delivery Only Retail Storefront Maximum 2 acres Greenhouse only in non-ag districts Only within ULL Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers Distribution Center Potential limits onnumber of employees/tripoutside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL 500 ft from another retail location Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* LEGENDZONING DISTRICT Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- ) Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential Retail- Business (R-B) General Commercial (C) Potential Sustainability Requirements Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I) Key Considerations and Limitations by Use Manufacturing Areas with Incompatible Zoning District orGeneral Plan Land Use Designation Preliminary Cannabis Land Use Matrix and MapBlackhawk Area 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 438 DiscoveryBay Byron G3Quarry Vasco CavesRegional Park Byron Airport Discovery BayCountry ClubÄÅ4 V a s c o R d B y r o n H w y Camino Diablo Concord Ave Marsh Creek Rd Walnut BlvdByron HwyPreliminary Cannabis Land Use Matrix and MapByron Area µ 0 0.75 1.50.375 Miles Map Created on 10/5/2017 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development ** See Staff Report for recommendations regardinglimitations on the number of permits issued and theprocess to select permitees. PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES Maximum 22,000 sf: Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure Sustainable Water Supply Max 2 acres Greenhouse only in non-ag districts Only within ULL Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers Distribution Center Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL 500 ft from aother retaillocation Manufacturing Key Considerations and Limitations by Use Renewable EnergySustainable Water Supply Land Use Permit* LEGENDZONING DISTRICT Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- ) Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1) Retail- Business (R-B) General Commercial (C) Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I) Potential Sustainability Requirements Artificial Light CULTIVATION Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Mixed Light Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Natural Light Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Testing Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Retail Delivery Only Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Only within ULL Retail Storefront Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Map 6A Sensitive Site and Residential Buffers Sensitive Sites include schools, community parks/playgrounds, libraries, drug treatment centers, and homeless shelters.Parcels within 500 feet of Residential Zoning Parcels within 1,000 feet of a Sensitive Site Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation City Limits NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary. The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$ 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 439 DiscoveryBay Byron G3Quarry Vasco CavesRegional Park Byron Airport Discovery BayCountry ClubÄÅ4 V a s c o R d B y r o n H w y Camino Diablo Concord Ave Marsh Creek Rd Walnut BlvdByron HwyPreliminary Cannabis Land Use Matrix and MapByron Area µ 0 0.75 1.50.375 Miles Map Created on 10/5/2017 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development ** See Staff Report for recommendations regardinglimitations on the number of permits issued and theprocess to select permitees. PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES Maximum 22,000 sf: Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure Sustainable Water Supply Max 2 acres Greenhouse only in non-ag districts Only within ULL Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers Distribution Center Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL 500 ft from aother retaillocation Manufacturing Key Considerations and Limitations by Use Renewable EnergySustainable Water Supply Land Use Permit* LEGENDZONING DISTRICT Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- ) Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1) Retail- Business (R-B) General Commercial (C) Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I) Potential Sustainability Requirements Artificial Light CULTIVATION Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Mixed Light Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Natural Light Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Testing Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Retail Delivery Only Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Only within ULL Retail Storefront Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Map 6B Sensitive Site Buffers Sensitive Sites include schools, community parks/playgrounds, libraries, drug treatment centers, and homeless shelters. Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation City Limits NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary. The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$ Parcels within 1,000 feet of a Sensitive Site 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 440 Contra CostaCentre PG&EPipeline Facility CountrywoodShopping Center Seven HillsSchool Crossroadsat Pleasant Hill Palmer Schoolfor Boys and Girls Pleasant Hill / Contra Costa CentreBART Station YgnacioPlaza BrandmanUniversity Iron Horse Trail Heather FarmPark WaldenPark Len HesterPark Diablo HillsGolf Course §¨¦680 §¨¦680 B a n c r o f t R d Oak RdHookston Rd Geary Rd Oak Park Blvd Treat BlvdN Main StOak RdPreliminary Cannabis Land Use Matrix and MapContra Costa Centre Area µ 0 0.15 0.30.075 Miles Map Created on 10/5/2017 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development ** See Staff Report for recommendations regardinglimitations on the number of permits issued and theprocess to select permitees. PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES Maximum 22,000 sf: Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure Sustainable Water Supply Max 2 acres Greenhouse only in non-ag districts Only within ULL Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers Distribution Center Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL 500 ft from aother retaillocation Manufacturing Key Considerations and Limitations by Use Renewable EnergySustainable Water Supply Land Use Permit* LEGENDZONING DISTRICT Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- ) Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1) Retail- Business (R-B) General Commercial (C) Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I) Potential Sustainability Requirements Artificial Light CULTIVATION Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Mixed Light Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Natural Light Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Testing Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Retail Delivery Only Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Only within ULL Retail Storefront Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Map 7A Sensitive Sites include schools, community parks/playgrounds, libraries, drug treatment centers, and homeless shelters. Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation City Limits NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary. The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$ Sensitive Site and Residential Buffers Parcels within 500 feet of Residential ZoningParcels within 1,000 feet of a Sensitive Site 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 441 Contra CostaCentre PG&EPipeline Facility CountrywoodShopping Center Seven HillsSchool Crossroadsat Pleasant Hill Palmer Schoolfor Boys and Girls Pleasant Hill / Contra Costa CentreBART Station YgnacioPlaza BrandmanUniversity Iron Horse Trail Heather FarmPark WaldenPark Len HesterPark Diablo HillsGolf Course §¨¦680 §¨¦680 B a n c r o f t R d Oak RdHookston Rd Geary Rd Oak Park Blvd Treat BlvdN Main StOak RdPreliminary Cannabis Land Use Matrix and MapContra Costa Centre Area µ 0 0.15 0.30.075 Miles Map Created on 10/5/2017 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development ** See Staff Report for recommendations regardinglimitations on the number of permits issued and theprocess to select permitees. PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES Maximum 22,000 sf: Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure Sustainable Water Supply Max 2 acres Greenhouse only in non-ag districts Only within ULL Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers Distribution Center Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL 500 ft from aother retaillocation Manufacturing Key Considerations and Limitations by Use Renewable EnergySustainable Water Supply Land Use Permit* LEGENDZONING DISTRICT Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- ) Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1) Retail- Business (R-B) General Commercial (C) Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I) Potential Sustainability Requirements Artificial Light CULTIVATION Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Mixed Light Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Natural Light Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Testing Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Retail Delivery Only Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Only within ULL Retail Storefront Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Map 7B Sensitive Site Buffers Sensitive Sites include schools, community parks/playgrounds, libraries, drug treatment centers, and homeless shelters. Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation City Limits NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary. The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$ Parcels within 1,000 feet of a Sensitive Site 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 442 Discovery Bay BlvdÄÅ4Sellers AveByron HwyDelta Rd Sunset Rd Chestnut St Balfour Rd Marsh Creek Rd Brentwood Blvd Byron HwyDiscoveryBay Old River Knightsen Dredgers Cut Indian Slough Holland CutRoosevelt Cut BaconIsland HollandTract PalmTract OrwoodTract VealeTract VictoriaIsland ByronTract AgriculturalCore WoodwardIsland FayIsland RhodeIslandDutch SloughTidal Marsh Restoration Discovery BayCountry Club Preliminary Cannabis Land Use Matrix and MapDiscovery Bay and Knightsen Areas µ 0 0.75 1.50.375 Miles Map Created on 10/5/2017 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development ** See Staff Report for recommendations regardinglimitations on the number of permits issued and theprocess to select permitees. PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES Maximum 22,000 sf: Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure Sustainable Water Supply Max 2 acres Greenhouse only in non-ag districts Only within ULL Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers Distribution Center Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL 500 ft from aother retaillocation Manufacturing Key Considerations and Limitations by Use Renewable EnergySustainable Water Supply Land Use Permit* LEGENDZONING DISTRICT Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- ) Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1) Retail- Business (R-B) General Commercial (C) Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I) Potential Sustainability Requirements Artificial Light CULTIVATION Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Mixed Light Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Natural Light Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Testing Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Retail Delivery Only Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Only within ULL Retail Storefront Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Map 8A Sensitive Sites include schools, community parks/playgrounds, libraries, drug treatment centers, and homeless shelters. Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation City Limits NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary. The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$ Sensitive Site and Residential Buffers Parcels within 500 feet of Residential ZoningParcels within 1,000 feet of a Sensitive Site 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 443 Discovery Bay BlvdÄÅ4Sellers AveByron HwyDelta Rd Sunset Rd Chestnut St Balfour Rd Marsh Creek Rd Brentwood Blvd Byron HwyDiscoveryBay Old River Knightsen Dredgers Cut Indian Slough Holland CutRoosevelt Cut BaconIsland HollandTract PalmTract OrwoodTract VealeTract VictoriaIsland ByronTract AgriculturalCore WoodwardIsland FayIsland RhodeIslandDutch SloughTidal Marsh Restoration Discovery BayCountry Club Preliminary Cannabis Land Use Matrix and MapDiscovery Bay and Knightsen Areas µ 0 0.75 1.50.375 Miles Map Created on 10/5/2017 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development ** See Staff Report for recommendations regardinglimitations on the number of permits issued and theprocess to select permitees. PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES Maximum 22,000 sf: Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure Sustainable Water Supply Max 2 acres Greenhouse only in non-ag districts Only within ULL Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers Distribution Center Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL 500 ft from aother retaillocation Manufacturing Key Considerations and Limitations by Use Renewable EnergySustainable Water Supply Land Use Permit* LEGENDZONING DISTRICT Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- ) Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1) Retail- Business (R-B) General Commercial (C) Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I) Potential Sustainability Requirements Artificial Light CULTIVATION Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Mixed Light Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Natural Light Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Testing Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Retail Delivery Only Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Only within ULL Retail Storefront Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Map 8B Sensitive Site Buffers Sensitive Sites include schools, community parks/playgrounds, libraries, drug treatment centers, and homeless shelters. Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation City Limits NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary. The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$ Parcels within 1,000 feet of a Sensitive Site 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 444 §¨¦80 §¨¦80 23rd StGiant RdSa n P a b l o A v e Pi n o l e V a l l e y R d V a l l e y V i e w R dAppian WayBlume Dr Rumrill Blvd El Portal Dr San Pablo Dam R d Market Av eGiant HwyCastro Ranc h R dFitzgerald DrManor Rd Brooksi d e D r San Pablo AveSa n P a b l o D a m R dRichmond PkwyElSobrante Rollingwood SANPABLO PINOLE Contra CostaCollege (West) HilltopMall Rolling HillsMemorial Park St JosephCemetery PinolePark Wildcat CanyonRegional Park Sobrante RidgeRegional Preserve Kennedy GroveRegional Recreation Area Map9A City Limits Parcels within 500 feet of Residential Zoning Sensitive Sites include schools, community parks/playgrounds, libraries, drug treatment centers, and homeless shelters. Parcels within 1,000 feet of a Sensitive Site µ0 0.65 1.30.325 Miles Map Created on 10/17/2017 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development ** See Staff Report for recommendations regarding limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees. NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary. The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$ CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALESArtificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Maximum 22,000 sf: Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure Testing Renewable EnergySustainable Water Supply Sustainable Water Supply Retail Delivery Only Retail Storefront Maximum 2 acres Greenhouse only in non-ag districts Only within ULL Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers Distribution Center Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL 500 ft from another retail location Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* LEGENDZONING DISTRICT Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- ) Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential Retail- Business (R-B) General Commercial (C) Potential Sustainability Requirements Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I) Key Considerations and Limitations by Use Manufacturing Areas with Incompatible Zoning District orGeneral Plan Land Use Designation Preliminary Cannabis Land Use Matrix and MapEl Sobrante Area Sensitive Site and Residential Buffers 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 445 §¨¦80 §¨¦80 23rd StGiant RdSa n P a b l o A v e Pi n o l e V a l l e y R d V a l l e y V i e w R dAppian WayBlume Dr Rumrill Blvd El Portal Dr San Pablo Dam R d Market Av eGiant HwyCastro Ranc h R dFitzgerald DrManor Rd Brooksi d e D r San Pablo AveSa n P a b l o D a m R dRichmond PkwyElSobrante Rollingwood SANPABLO PINOLE Contra CostaCollege (West) HilltopMall Rolling HillsMemorial Park St JosephCemetery PinolePark Wildcat CanyonRegional Park Sobrante RidgeRegional Preserve Kennedy GroveRegional Recreation Area Map9B City Limits Sensitive Site Buffers Sensitive Sites include schools, community parks/playgrounds, libraries, drug treatment centers, and homeless shelters.Parcels within 1,000 feet of a Sensitive Site µ0 0.65 1.30.325 Miles Map Created on 10/17/2017 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development ** See Staff Report for recommendations regarding limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees. NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary. The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$ CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALESArtificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Maximum 22,000 sf: Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure Testing Renewable EnergySustainable Water Supply Sustainable Water Supply Retail Delivery Only Retail Storefront Maximum 2 acres Greenhouse only in non-ag districts Only within ULL Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers Distribution Center Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL 500 ft from another retail location Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* LEGENDZONING DISTRICT Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- ) Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential Retail- Business (R-B) General Commercial (C) Potential Sustainability Requirements Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I) Key Considerations and Limitations by Use Manufacturing Areas with Incompatible Zoning District orGeneral Plan Land Use Designation Preliminary Cannabis Land Use Matrix and MapEl Sobrante Area 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 446 Ar l ing ton AveColusa AveMoeser Ln Santa Fe AveArl i n g t o n A v e Col u s a A v e Kensington BERKELEY ALBANY PG&E Power LineBuffer Preliminary Cannabis Land Use Matrix and MapKensington Area µ 0 0.15 0.30.075 Miles Map Created on 10/5/2017 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development ** See Staff Report for recommendations regardinglimitations on the number of permits issued and theprocess to select permitees. PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES Maximum 22,000 sf: Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure Sustainable Water Supply Max 2 acres Greenhouse only in non-ag districts Only within ULL Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers Distribution Center Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL 500 ft from aother retaillocation Manufacturing Key Considerations and Limitations by Use Renewable EnergySustainable Water Supply Land Use Permit* LEGENDZONING DISTRICT Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- ) Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1) Retail- Business (R-B) General Commercial (C) Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I) Potential Sustainability Requirements Artificial Light CULTIVATION Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Mixed Light Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Natural Light Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Testing Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Retail Delivery Only Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Only within ULL Retail Storefront Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Map 10A Sensitive Sites include schools, community parks/playgrounds, libraries, drug treatment centers, and homeless shelters. Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation City Limits NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary. The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$ Sensitive Site and Residential Buffers Parcels within 500 feet of Residential ZoningParcels within 1,000 feet of a Sensitive Site 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 447 Ar l ing ton AveColusa AveMoeser Ln Santa Fe AveArl i n g t o n A v e Col u s a A v e Kensington BERKELEY ALBANY PG&E Power LineBuffer Preliminary Cannabis Land Use Matrix and MapKensington Area µ 0 0.15 0.30.075 Miles Map Created on 10/5/2017 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development ** See Staff Report for recommendations regardinglimitations on the number of permits issued and theprocess to select permitees. PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES Maximum 22,000 sf: Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure Sustainable Water Supply Max 2 acres Greenhouse only in non-ag districts Only within ULL Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers Distribution Center Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL 500 ft from aother retaillocation Manufacturing Key Considerations and Limitations by Use Renewable EnergySustainable Water Supply Land Use Permit* LEGENDZONING DISTRICT Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- ) Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1) Retail- Business (R-B) General Commercial (C) Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I) Potential Sustainability Requirements Artificial Light CULTIVATION Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Mixed Light Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Natural Light Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Testing Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Retail Delivery Only Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Only within ULL Retail Storefront Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Map 10B Sensitive Site Buffers Sensitive Sites include schools, community parks/playgrounds, libraries, drug treatment centers, and homeless shelters. Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation City Limits NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary. The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$ Parcels within 1,000 feet of a Sensitive Site 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 448 ÄÅ4§¨¦680 §¨¦680 ÄÅ4ÄÅ4 Pache c o B l v d Howe RdMorello AveSol a n o W a y Olivera Rd Cent e r A v e P a c h e c o B l v d VineHill MtView MallardReservoir MARTINEZ ShellRefinery CA State Riding and Hiking Trail MartinezGun Club Map11A City Limits Parcels within 500 feet of Residential Zoning Sensitive Sites include schools, community parks/playgrounds, libraries, drug treatment centers, and homeless shelters. Parcels within 1,000 feet of a Sensitive Site µ0 0.4 0.80.2 Miles Map Created on 10/17/2017 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development ** See Staff Report for recommendations regarding limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees. NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary. The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$ CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALESArtificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Maximum 22,000 sf: Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure Testing Renewable EnergySustainable Water Supply Sustainable Water Supply Retail Delivery Only Retail Storefront Maximum 2 acres Greenhouse only in non-ag districts Only within ULL Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers Distribution Center Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL 500 ft from another retail location Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* LEGENDZONING DISTRICT Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- ) Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential Retail- Business (R-B) General Commercial (C) Potential Sustainability Requirements Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I) Key Considerations and Limitations by Use Manufacturing Areas with Incompatible Zoning District orGeneral Plan Land Use Designation Preliminary Cannabis Land Use Matrix and MapUnincorporated Martinez and Clyde Areas Sensitive Site and Residential Buffers 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 449 ÄÅ4§¨¦680 §¨¦680 ÄÅ4ÄÅ4 Pache c o B l v d Howe RdMorello AveSol a n o W a y Olivera Rd Cent e r A v e P a c h e c o B l v d VineHill MtView MallardReservoir MARTINEZ ShellRefinery CA State Riding and Hiking Trail MartinezGun Club Map11B City Limits Sensitive Site Buffers Sensitive Sites include schools, community parks/playgrounds, libraries, drug treatment centers, and homeless shelters.Parcels within 1,000 feet of a Sensitive Site µ0 0.4 0.80.2 Miles Map Created on 10/17/2017 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development ** See Staff Report for recommendations regarding limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees. NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary. The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$ CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALESArtificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Maximum 22,000 sf: Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure Testing Renewable EnergySustainable Water Supply Sustainable Water Supply Retail Delivery Only Retail Storefront Maximum 2 acres Greenhouse only in non-ag districts Only within ULL Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers Distribution Center Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL 500 ft from another retail location Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* LEGENDZONING DISTRICT Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- ) Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential Retail- Business (R-B) General Commercial (C) Potential Sustainability Requirements Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I) Key Considerations and Limitations by Use Manufacturing Areas with Incompatible Zoning District orGeneral Plan Land Use Designation Preliminary Cannabis Land Use Matrix and MapUnincorporated Martinez and Clyde Areas 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 450 §¨¦80 §¨¦80San Pablo AveGiant HwyAppian WayPinole Valley RdGiant RdBlume DrSan Pablo AveFitzgerald DrRich m o n d P k w y Atl a s R d Appi an Wa y Hillto p D r TaraHills BayView MontalvinManor PINOLE Pinole PointBusiness Park Point PinoleRegional Shoreline RichmondGolf Course San PabloBay Map12A City Limits Parcels within 500 feet of Residential Zoning Sensitive Sites include schools, community parks/playgrounds, libraries, drug treatment centers, and homeless shelters. Parcels within 1,000 feet of a Sensitive Site µ0 0.45 0.90.225 Miles Map Created on 10/17/2017 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development ** See Staff Report for recommendations regarding limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees. NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary. The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$ CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALESArtificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Maximum 22,000 sf: Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure Testing Renewable EnergySustainable Water Supply Sustainable Water Supply Retail Delivery Only Retail Storefront Maximum 2 acres Greenhouse only in non-ag districts Only within ULL Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers Distribution Center Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL 500 ft from another retail location Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* LEGENDZONING DISTRICT Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- ) Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential Retail- Business (R-B) General Commercial (C) Potential Sustainability Requirements Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I) Key Considerations and Limitations by Use Manufacturing Areas with Incompatible Zoning District orGeneral Plan Land Use Designation Preliminary Cannabis Land Use Matrix and MapMontalvin Manor, Bay View, and Tara Hills Area Sensitive Site and Residential Buffers 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 451 §¨¦80 §¨¦80San Pablo AveGiant HwyAppian WayPinole Valley RdGiant RdBlume DrSan Pablo AveFitzgerald DrRich m o n d P k w y Atl a s R d Appi an Wa y Hillto p D r TaraHills BayView MontalvinManor PINOLE Pinole PointBusiness Park Point PinoleRegional Shoreline RichmondGolf Course San PabloBay Map12B City Limits Sensitive Site Buffers Sensitive Sites include schools, community parks/playgrounds, libraries, drug treatment centers, and homeless shelters.Parcels within 1,000 feet of a Sensitive Site µ0 0.45 0.90.225 Miles Map Created on 10/17/2017 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development ** See Staff Report for recommendations regarding limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees. NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary. The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$ CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALESArtificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Maximum 22,000 sf: Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure Testing Renewable EnergySustainable Water Supply Sustainable Water Supply Retail Delivery Only Retail Storefront Maximum 2 acres Greenhouse only in non-ag districts Only within ULL Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers Distribution Center Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL 500 ft from another retail location Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* LEGENDZONING DISTRICT Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- ) Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential Retail- Business (R-B) General Commercial (C) Potential Sustainability Requirements Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I) Key Considerations and Limitations by Use Manufacturing Areas with Incompatible Zoning District orGeneral Plan Land Use Designation Preliminary Cannabis Land Use Matrix and MapMontalvin Manor, Bay View, and Tara Hills Area 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 452 Parr Blv d Market Ave Rumrill BlvdChesley Ave Giant RdFred Jackson WayRichmond PkwyNorthRichmond West CountyLandfill San PabloBay Preliminary Cannabis Land Use Matrix and MapNorth Richmond Area µ 0 0.15 0.30.075 Miles Map Created on 10/5/2017 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development ** See Staff Report for recommendations regardinglimitations on the number of permits issued and theprocess to select permitees. PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES Maximum 22,000 sf: Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure Sustainable Water Supply Max 2 acres Greenhouse only in non-ag districts Only within ULL Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers Distribution Center Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL 500 ft from aother retaillocation Manufacturing Key Considerations and Limitations by Use Renewable EnergySustainable Water Supply Land Use Permit* LEGENDZONING DISTRICT Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- ) Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1) Retail- Business (R-B) General Commercial (C) Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I) Potential Sustainability Requirements Artificial Light CULTIVATION Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Mixed Light Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Natural Light Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Testing Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Retail Delivery Only Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Only within ULL Retail Storefront Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Map 13A Sensitive Sites include schools, community parks/playgrounds, libraries, drug treatment centers, and homeless shelters. Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation City Limits NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary. The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$ Sensitive Site and Residential Buffers Parcels within 500 feet of Residential ZoningParcels within 1,000 feet of a Sensitive Site 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 453 Richmond PkwyParr Blvd Market Ave Rumrill BlvdFred Jackson WayChesley Ave C a s t r o S t Giant Rd13th St11th StRumrill BlvdRichmond PkwyC a s t r o S t Preliminary Cannabis Land Use Matrix and MapNorth Richmond Area µ 0 0.15 0.30.075 Miles Map Created on 10/5/2017 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development ** See Staff Report for recommendations regardinglimitations on the number of permits issued and theprocess to select permitees. PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES Maximum 22,000 sf: Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure Sustainable Water Supply Max 2 acres Greenhouse only in non-ag districts Only within ULL Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers Distribution Center Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL 500 ft from aother retaillocation Manufacturing Key Considerations and Limitations by Use Renewable EnergySustainable Water Supply Land Use Permit* LEGENDZONING DISTRICT Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- ) Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1) Retail- Business (R-B) General Commercial (C) Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I) Potential Sustainability Requirements Artificial Light CULTIVATION Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Mixed Light Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Natural Light Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Testing Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Retail Delivery Only Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Only within ULL Retail Storefront Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Map 13B Sensitive Site Buffers Sensitive Sites include schools, community parks/playgrounds, libraries, drug treatment centers, and homeless shelters. Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation City Limits NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary. The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$ Parcels within 1,000 feet of a Sensitive Site 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 454 Pacheco Contra CostaTop Soil BuchananField AirportCenter Central Contra Costa Sanitary DistrictWastewater Treatment Plant Pleasant HillShopping Center PachecoCemetery Public WorksMaintenance Division ConcordStation Country SquareCenter Animal ServicesMartinez Shelter CaliforniaGrand Casino California Highway PatrolContra Costa Area Waterbird WayFueling Station CCCFPDFire Station # 9 ConcordDMV PachecoCommunity Center PachecoStation DVCPlaza PG&E ImhoffSubstation CCCSD FacilityBuffer Buchanan FieldsGolf Course §¨¦680 P a c h e c o B l v d Concord AveChilpancingo Pkwy Di a m o n d B l v d Preliminary Cannabis Land Use Matrix and MapPacheco Area µ 0 0.15 0.30.075 Miles Map Created on 10/5/2017 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development ** See Staff Report for recommendations regardinglimitations on the number of permits issued and theprocess to select permitees. PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES Maximum 22,000 sf: Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure Sustainable Water Supply Max 2 acres Greenhouse only in non-ag districts Only within ULL Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers Distribution Center Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL 500 ft from aother retaillocation Manufacturing Key Considerations and Limitations by Use Renewable EnergySustainable Water Supply Land Use Permit* LEGENDZONING DISTRICT Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- ) Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1) Retail- Business (R-B) General Commercial (C) Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I) Potential Sustainability Requirements Artificial Light CULTIVATION Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Mixed Light Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Natural Light Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Testing Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Retail Delivery Only Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Only within ULL Retail Storefront Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Map 14A Sensitive Sites include schools, community parks/playgrounds, libraries, drug treatment centers, and homeless shelters. Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation City Limits NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary. The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$ Sensitive Site and Residential Buffers Parcels within 500 feet of Residential ZoningParcels within 1,000 feet of a Sensitive Site 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 455 Pacheco Contra CostaTop Soil BuchananField AirportCenter Central Contra Costa Sanitary DistrictWastewater Treatment Plant Pleasant HillShopping Center PachecoCemetery Public WorksMaintenance Division ConcordStation Country SquareCenter Animal ServicesMartinez Shelter CaliforniaGrand Casino California Highway PatrolContra Costa Area Waterbird WayFueling Station CCCFPDFire Station # 9 ConcordDMV PachecoCommunity Center PachecoStation DVCPlaza PG&E ImhoffSubstation CCCSD FacilityBuffer Buchanan FieldsGolf Course §¨¦680 P a c h e c o B l v d Concord AveChilpancingo Pkwy Di a m o n d B l v d Preliminary Cannabis Land Use Matrix and MapPacheco Area µ 0 0.15 0.30.075 Miles Map Created on 10/5/2017 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development ** See Staff Report for recommendations regardinglimitations on the number of permits issued and theprocess to select permitees. PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES Maximum 22,000 sf: Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure Sustainable Water Supply Max 2 acres Greenhouse only in non-ag districts Only within ULL Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers Distribution Center Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL 500 ft from aother retaillocation Manufacturing Key Considerations and Limitations by Use Renewable EnergySustainable Water Supply Land Use Permit* LEGENDZONING DISTRICT Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- ) Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1) Retail- Business (R-B) General Commercial (C) Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I) Potential Sustainability Requirements Artificial Light CULTIVATION Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Mixed Light Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Natural Light Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Testing Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Retail Delivery Only Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Only within ULL Retail Storefront Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Map 14B Sensitive Site Buffers Sensitive Sites include schools, community parks/playgrounds, libraries, drug treatment centers, and homeless shelters. Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation City Limits NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary. The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$ Parcels within 1,000 feet of a Sensitive Site 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 456 PortCosta Rodeo Crockett HERCULES Phillips 66Refinery Philips 66Carbon Plant C&H Pure CaneSugar Refinery NorthshoreBusiness Park Crockett HillsRegional Park Carquinez StraitRegional ShorelineRodeo Creek Trail San PabloBay §¨¦80 ÄÅ4San Pablo AvePomona St Parker AveWi l l o w A v e San Pablo Ave Map15A City Limits Parcels within 500 feet of Residential Zoning Sensitive Sites include schools, community parks/playgrounds, libraries, drug treatment centers, and homeless shelters. Parcels within 1,000 feet of a Sensitive Site µ0 0.75 1.50.375 Miles Map Created on 10/17/2017 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development ** See Staff Report for recommendations regarding limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees. NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary. The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$ CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALESArtificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Maximum 22,000 sf: Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure Testing Renewable EnergySustainable Water Supply Sustainable Water Supply Retail Delivery Only Retail Storefront Maximum 2 acres Greenhouse only in non-ag districts Only within ULL Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers Distribution Center Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL 500 ft from another retail location Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* LEGENDZONING DISTRICT Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- ) Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential Retail- Business (R-B) General Commercial (C) Potential Sustainability Requirements Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I) Key Considerations and Limitations by Use Manufacturing Areas with Incompatible Zoning District orGeneral Plan Land Use Designation Preliminary Cannabis Land Use Matrix and MapRodeo, Crockett, and Port Costa Areas Sensitive Site and Residential Buffers 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 457 PortCosta Rodeo Crockett HERCULES Phillips 66Refinery Philips 66Carbon Plant C&H Pure CaneSugar Refinery NorthshoreBusiness Park Crockett HillsRegional Park Carquinez StraitRegional ShorelineRodeo Creek Trail San PabloBay §¨¦80 ÄÅ4San Pablo AvePomona St Parker AveWi l l o w A v e San Pablo Ave Map15B City Limits Sensitive Site Buffers Sensitive Sites include schools, community parks/playgrounds, libraries, drug treatment centers, and homeless shelters.Parcels within 1,000 feet of a Sensitive Site µ0 0.75 1.50.375 Miles Map Created on 10/17/2017 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development ** See Staff Report for recommendations regarding limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees. NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary. The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$ CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALESArtificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Maximum 22,000 sf: Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure Testing Renewable EnergySustainable Water Supply Sustainable Water Supply Retail Delivery Only Retail Storefront Maximum 2 acres Greenhouse only in non-ag districts Only within ULL Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers Distribution Center Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL 500 ft from another retail location Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit*Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* LEGENDZONING DISTRICT Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- ) Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential Retail- Business (R-B) General Commercial (C) Potential Sustainability Requirements Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I) Key Considerations and Limitations by Use Manufacturing Areas with Incompatible Zoning District orGeneral Plan Land Use Designation Preliminary Cannabis Land Use Matrix and MapRodeo, Crockett, and Port Costa Areas 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 458 §¨¦680 §¨¦680ÄÅ24 Olympic BlvdN Ma in S tOakland BlvdN Ca l i fo rn ia B lvd Mt Diablo Blvd Olympic B l v d N Ca l i fo rn ia B lvd S Ca l i forn ia B lvd CastleHill Saranap WALNUTCREEK Preliminary Cannabis Land Use Matrix and MapSaranap Area µ 0 0.2 0.40.1 Miles Map Created on 10/5/2017 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development ** See Staff Report for recommendations regardinglimitations on the number of permits issued and theprocess to select permitees. PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES Maximum 22,000 sf: Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure Sustainable Water Supply Max 2 acres Greenhouse only in non-ag districts Only within ULL Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers Distribution Center Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL 500 ft from aother retaillocation Manufacturing Key Considerations and Limitations by Use Renewable EnergySustainable Water Supply Land Use Permit* LEGENDZONING DISTRICT Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- ) Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1) Retail- Business (R-B) General Commercial (C) Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I) Potential Sustainability Requirements Artificial Light CULTIVATION Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Mixed Light Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Natural Light Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Testing Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Retail Delivery Only Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Only within ULL Retail Storefront Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Map 16A Sensitive Sites include schools, community parks/playgrounds, libraries, drug treatment centers, and homeless shelters. Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation City Limits NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary. The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$ Sensitive Site and Residential Buffers Parcels within 500 feet of Residential ZoningParcels within 1,000 feet of a Sensitive Site 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 459 §¨¦680 §¨¦680ÄÅ24 Olympic BlvdN Ma in S tOakland BlvdN Ca l i fo rn ia B lvd Mt Diablo Blvd Olympic B l v d N Ca l i fo rn ia B lvd S Ca l i forn ia B lvd CastleHill Saranap WALNUTCREEK Preliminary Cannabis Land Use Matrix and MapSaranap Area µ 0 0.2 0.40.1 Miles Map Created on 10/5/2017 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development ** See Staff Report for recommendations regardinglimitations on the number of permits issued and theprocess to select permitees. PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES Maximum 22,000 sf: Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure Sustainable Water Supply Max 2 acres Greenhouse only in non-ag districts Only within ULL Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers Distribution Center Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL 500 ft from aother retaillocation Manufacturing Key Considerations and Limitations by Use Renewable EnergySustainable Water Supply Land Use Permit* LEGENDZONING DISTRICT Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- ) Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1) Retail- Business (R-B) General Commercial (C) Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I) Potential Sustainability Requirements Artificial Light CULTIVATION Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Mixed Light Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Natural Light Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Testing Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Retail Delivery Only Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Only within ULL Retail Storefront Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Land Use Permit* Map 16B Sensitive Site Buffers Sensitive Sites include schools, community parks/playgrounds, libraries, drug treatment centers, and homeless shelters. Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation City Limits NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary. The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$ Parcels within 1,000 feet of a Sensitive Site 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 460 1    Adult Use Recreational Marijuana – AUM (Prop 64) Contra Costa Health Services (CCHS) Policy & Regulatory Considerations: For October 24, 2017 Board Report     History    On July 18, 2017, the Board of Supervisors received a report on local policy and regulatory  considerations in the wake of voter approved Proposition 64 (Prop 64), which legalized adult  recreational use of marijuana.  Prop 64 allows local city and county governments to permit or prohibit all  aspects of the commercial cannabis industry as well as apply local regulations over and above what state  law requires.  Senate Bill 92, a budget trailer bill, codifies a number of regulatory requirements related  to cannabis and seeks to create a uniform regulatory framework between the medical and recreational  markets of the commercial cannabis industry.  Under this framework, the state assumes the primary and  nearly exclusive role in regulating and enforcement, essentially abdicating local control back to the  state.  This is one of the reasons it is important for local jurisdictions to consider adopting a local set of  land use and regulatory requirements. Doing so will allow  the local  jurisdiction to establish conditions  and permit the types of commercial activity it deems  is in the best interest of the county as well as  provide the authority to inspect these operators and enforce those regulations.     Of particular interest to Contra Costa Health Services is the ability to locally regulate the manufacture  and sale of consumer products, especially edible products.  While many aspects of local regulation may  be addressed through land use rules, Contra Costa Health Services recommends that the Board adopt a  local health ordinance that establishes permitted activity, and the conditions under which consumer  products which contain cannabis can be manufactured and sold to consumers.  Adopting a local health  ordinance will also allow county staff to inspect, regulate and enforce appropriate state and local laws  pertaining to the cannabis industry.      In light of the newness of regulating the commercial cannabis industry and the evolving landscape of  cannabis regulation, Contra Costa Health Services recommends a cautionary approach to local  regulation that emphasizes protections for consumers, the public, and at‐risk groups such as youth and  individuals challenged with substance use disorders.  As such, there are five primary areas of interest in  crafting a local regulatory health ordinance.    1. Providing authority for local environmental health staff to inspect and enforce the  numerous state laws pertaining to the manufacturing of food and beverage products  that contain cannabis (termed “edible cannabis products”).    2. Provide authority for local environmental health staff to inspect and enforce the  numerous state laws pertaining to the retail sale and dispensing of cannabis products  including, but not limited to, leaf, bud, edibles, beverages, tinctures, candies, etc.     11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 461 2      3. Provide local authority to establish, inspect, and enforce additional rules and restrictions  on the manufacturing and sale of consumer products which contain cannabis.    4. Provide local authority to restrict use of cannabis in public places and smoking of  cannabis in multi‐unit housing.    Outline of recommended local regulations pertaining to these areas of interest.     Related to Manufacturing of Products Which Contain Cannabis:  o Strict compliance with all state laws, including maximum potency per dose, child  proof packaging, and product labeling/packaging that are not attractive to youth.   o Establish safe buffer zone of 500 feet from sensitive areas.   o Annual renewal of operators permit.  o All personnel who handle or prepare or package edible cannabis products should  be required to successfully complete an accredited food handling course.   o Restrict extraction methods to use of non‐volatile solvents.  o Consider restrictions or prohibit mobile extraction manufacturing.  o Require annual training on occupational exposure and reporting requirements.  o Require compliance with county industrial safety ordinance if volatile solvents  are allowed and used.  o Require compliance with labeling and storage of post‐extraction cannabis oils.  o Require compliance with sanitation requirements for food and beverage  preparation, handling, and storage.   o Require retention of all sales records.  o No guard dogs or firearms on premise.  o Certified “Organic”    Need State or local requirements to determine what constitutes  “organic”, including grown herbicide and pesticide free.     Related to Sale of Cannabis and Products Which Contain Cannabis:  o Establish a buffer zone of 1,000 feet from sensitive areas and 500 feet from  another cannabis retailer. (Consistent with  Tobacco Control Ordinance)  o Annual renewal of operators permit.   o All personnel who handle or prepare or package edible cannabis products should  be required to be at least 21 years of age and successfully complete an  accredited food handling course.  o Consider limiting the sale of edible cannabis products to those where dosing is a  maximum of 10mg THC/dose and packaged as a single dose. Consumers would  be allowed to purchase up to the limit allowed in state law.   o Prohibit sale of flavored leaf and bud. (Consistent with Tobacco Control  Ordinance)  11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 462 3    o Consistent with recent legislation in Colorado, consider prohibiting the sale of  edible products that mimic the shape and appearance of animals, humans, or  fruit, including gummy bears.   o Prohibit sale of flavored e‐juices. (Consistent with Tobacco Control Ordinance)  o Prohibit all product advertising on exterior (storefront) of retail establishment  and within 2,000 feet of a sensitive area.  o Prohibit all self‐service vending of all cannabis and products which contain  cannabis.   o Compliance with all relevant sanitation requirements for the holding, storage,  and sale of consumer edible cannabis products.   o Prohibit smoking or use of electronic smoking devices in all public places, parks,  and service areas, including sidewalks.  o Restrict product sales to cannabis only related products. Hence no other food,  beverages, sundries, etc.    o Restrict store and product sales to the hours of 9:00am to 8:00pm.  o Require compliance with all state rules related to labeling and packaging,  including no child attractive product labeling/packaging.  o Prohibit on‐site use and sampling.   o Require retention of sales records.  o No guard dogs or firearms permitted on premises.  o Require that age (21 and older) be verified at the point of sale for every sale and  every consumer.  o  Require that signage be clearly posted on the premises indicating that no person  under the age of 21 may enter the establishment and no sales to persons under  the age of 21 will be permitted.   o Consumer warnings:  Require vendor to post and hand out to every consumer a  warning related to use during pregnancy or while nursing as well as a warning  related to access by minors.   o Sales limit of recreational cannabis is limited in state Law to 1 ounce (oz.)  (28.5 gm) per day and an additional 8 gm of concentrated cannabis.  o Sales limit of 8 oz. per day for medical cannabis proposed under MCRSA is  believed to be far too permissive by a number of health professionals.  A 1 to2  oz. daily limit is more in line with other States. For example, New Mexico  imposes an 8 oz. limit over a 3‐month period.  We recommend that sales be  limited to that of recreational, 1 oz. per day (28.5 gm)   o Mobile Delivery can be restricted or prohibited, including the mobile delivery by  entities that originate from outside of the county.  However, enforcement of a  prohibition would be difficult.  Should the county allow mobile delivery, staff  recommends that we apply all of the same requirements and product  restrictions as for a fixed location.    Chapter 9 of Prop 64 reads: “A local jurisdiction shall not prevent the delivery of  marijuana or marijuana products on public road by a licensee acting in  compliance with this  division and local law as adopted under Section 26200”    11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 463 4    o Establish a cap on total number of retail dispensaries to no more than 1 per  15,000 residents, inclusive of mobile delivery from locations that originate from  the unincorporated area of the County.  Fewer are initially recommended, 1 per  25,000.        Public Use:  o Adopt similar restrictions on public and facility use consistent with current  tobacco policy; however extends restriction to public sidewalks, places of  employment and public spaces between businesses. The county’s  comprehensive Secondhand Smoke Ordinance includes no smoking of marijuana  in all the places where smoking is prohibited. Currently this includes smoking or  vaping in public places, any business open to the public, and within 20 feet of  doorways, dining areas, service areas, and parks.  Recommend that smoking and  vaping restriction be extended to multi‐unit residences.     Some other importance facts: (*additional FAQ’s are attached in the appendix)  How much marijuana (cannabis) can I have in my possession? If you are 21 or older (or have a current qualifying physician’s recommendation or a valid county issued medical marijuana identification card), you can buy and possess up to 1 ounce (28.5 grams) of cannabis and up to 8 grams of concentrated cannabis. You can also plant, harvest, dry, and process up to six cannabis plants in your private residence or on the grounds of your residence.    Where can I use Marijuana (cannabis)?  You can use cannabis on private property. You cannot use, smoke, eat, or vape adult-use cannabis in public places. Property owners and landlords can ban the use and possession of cannabis on their premises. According to State Law, you cannot use cannabis within 1,000 feet of a school, day care center, or youth center while children are present.    Can I carry Marijuana (cannabis) around with me?  Yes, you can carry up to 1 ounce (28.5 grams) of cannabis and up to 8 grams of concentrated cannabis. It is against the law for you to have an open container of cannabis in a vehicle while driving or riding in the passenger seat. If you have cannabis in a vehicle, it must be in a sealed package. Otherwise, it must be kept in the trunk of the vehicle. Even if you have a valid physician’s recommendation or a valid county- issued medical marijuana identification card, it is illegal to smoke cannabis in an operating vehicle.    Can I leave California with Marijuana (cannabis)?  No. It is illegal to bring your cannabis across state lines, even if you are traveling to another state where cannabis is legal.    Can I get a DUI if I drive while I’m high?  11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 464 5    Yes. If you are under the influence of cannabis while operating a car, boat, or other vehicle, a law enforcement officer can pull you over and conduct a sobriety test.    What about medicinal cannabis use?  Under medical cannabis laws, if you have a qualifying physician’s recommendation or a valid county- issued medical marijuana identification card you can: • Use cannabis if you are 18 and older, and • Possess up to 8 oz. of dried cannabis and up to six mature or 12 immature cannabis plants unless the physician’s recommendation specifies a higher amount. • With a valid county-issued medical marijuana identification card, you do not have to pay sales tax when you buy cannabis, but you do have to pay other taxes. Can I overdose on marijuana (cannabis)?  A fatal overdose is unlikely. However, smoking or eating high concentrations of THC can severely affect your judgment, perception, and coordination, and may lead to poisoning, overdose, fatal injuries, and accidents.   What are some other Health and Social impacts of cannabis use?    There are a number of significant health effects related to cannabis use. A recent October 2017 report  from the Rocky Mountain High Intensity Drug Traffic Area (HIDTA) revealed that marijuana‐related  traffic deaths, where a driver tested positive for marijuana, more than doubled in the period from 2013  through 2016.  In addition marijuana use among youth increased 12 percent in the 3‐year average  (2013‐2105) since Colorado legalized recreational marijuana compared to the 3‐year average (2010‐ 2012) prior to legalization and that use among college students increased 16 percent during this same  time period.  The HIDA report also revealed that the yearly number of marijuana related hospitalizations  increased 72 percent after the legalization of recreational marijuana (2009‐2012 versus 2013‐2015).  In  addition to the risk of addiction and substance abuse, other health impacts include cardiovascular risk,  risk to pregnant and nursing women, risk of driving under the influence and behavioral health and  cognitive risk to youth.  The attached appendix addresses some of the health impacts of cannabis use.     Attachment 1:  Marijuana and Pregnancy    Attachment 2:  Marijuana and Driving     Attachment 3: Youth and Cannabis    Attachment 4:  What Parents Need to Know    Attachment 5:  HIDTA Report of October 2017    More information can be found at:      cdph.ca.gov/Programs/DO/letstalkcannabis/Pages/LetsTalkCannabis.aspx    11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 465 6    Role of CCHS—Divisions     Division of Environmental Health     The Division of Environmental Health (DEH) will assume the primary role of licensing/permitting  including plan review, regulatory Inspections, and enforcement of products manufactured and sold at  retail.  This is particularly germane to foods, beverages, cosmetics, tinctures, oils, and other consumer  products infused with cannabinoids.  This may include issues such as product labeling, prohibitions on  flavored products, storefront advertising, and compliance with other aspects of the Health and Safety  Code.  These functions may eventually also be performed for cities, if state law provides regulatory  authority to local DEH, similar to other food and beverage products or if the cities and county mutually  agree to create local laws which sanction and enable this activity. This would include permitting for  special events where the event sponsors propose to offer use or consume products on site that are  infused with cannabinoids.  In addition DEH anticipates having a role with owner/employee education,  as well as with public health investigations associated with cases and clusters of illness or toxicity.  DEH  also anticipates having a regulatory role in the manufacturing of products infused with cannabis.   Licensing/permitting and inspection fees are anticipated to cover the majority of the associated cost.   Having a health permit and licensing process will allow DEH to be able to respond to illegal operations,  concerns about food facilities comingling food with edible cannabis products, and other concerns and  complaints.     Division of Hazardous Materials    This division will have an ongoing permitting and inspection role with aspects of raw material extraction  and manufacturing, particularly for those businesses utilizing volatile or highly flammable solvents.  The  regulatory oversight would be for the handling of hazardous materials and the generation of hazardous  waste as codified in state law.  If volatile or highly flammable solvents are allowed and used and the  manufacturing site that uses these solvents are required to abide by the County’s Industrial Safety  Ordinance, a fee for the implementation of the Industrial Safety Ordinance will be required.    Division of Public Health    The Public Health Division will be the key player in investigating outbreaks of clusters of illness  associated with exposure to, use of, and/or consumption of products containing cannabis.  Additionally  the division anticipates an increase in demand for public information, including periodic reports on the  public health impacts of recreational use of marijuana and issuing periodic health advisories.  The  division also administrates the medical marijuana identification card Program and anticipates a surge in  demand for medical marijuana ID cards as members of the public seek to avoid taxation associated with  the recreational regulatory structure.  Currently, the Public Health Division processes approximately 200  cards per year.  Prop 64 limited the fees that can be charged to administrate the medical marijuana ID  program to $100 per client, which is less than the true cost of administering this program.  In addition,  individuals on MediCal are eligible for a 50‐percent discount and the card is processed free for those  individuals who are medically indigent.  Revenue to cover the anticipated increase impact for services  could partially be covered by the adoption of a cannabis retail license if renewed on an annual basis,  and/or from tax revenue generated from the growth and/or sales of product.  Identifying a source of  revenue to cover the cost of public education, reports and data tracking is an important consideration.   Even if the County happens to prohibit all commercial aspects of recreational marijuana, the Public  Health Division anticipates an increased volume of illness and/or toxicity clusters, the need for public  11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 466 7    information, health advisories and an increase in demand for clinical and counseling services that may  impact both Behavioral Health as well as CCRMC’s inpatient and outpatient services.     Division of Behavioral Health    While the Division of Behavioral Health may not have a regulatory role, it anticipates a surge in demand  treatment for substance use disorder services to address cannabis‐related disorders and school officials,  probation and parents as they seek treatment resources to address  the impact of cannabis‐related  disorders among youth.   Additionally, Prop 64 in Sections 11362.3 and 11362.4 and in accordance with Section 26200 of the  Business and Profession Code requires mandatory free drug education programs and/or counseling  based on evidence based practices and principles.  These practices must be specific to the use and abuse  of cannabis and other controlled substances for persons under the age of 18 who were found under the  influence of marijuana or smoked marijuana in public in places.  At the present time, Behavioral Health’s  Alcohol and Other Drugs (AOD) staff have started to receive inquiries for free education and counseling  services from schools, probation, courts, and parents regarding youth who need such services.  While  some AOD prevention services are available, they are limited due to available resources and they are  not specific to marijuana.  AUMA is unclear about the funding for the free education and counseling;  nonetheless, the services should be made available.    Division of EMS    Similar to the Behavioral Health Division, EMS anticipates a surge in demand for service as adult  recreational use increases and as youth experiment with cannabis.  This will likely result in an increase in  emergency medical calls and transports related to cannabis use.  Impacts are especially predicated  among individuals who are not familiar with cannabis in the edible form and subsequently become  overly intoxicated or overdose due to the accumulated concentration of over consuming edible cannabis  products.  EMS also anticipates an increase in motor vehicle accidents where the operators of vehicles  are under the influence of cannabis.  Some early data from other states suggest that transports to  hospital emergency rooms related to cannabis roughly doubles subsequent to legalization of adult  cannabis use.     Data on EMS system impacts is limited however.  The Colorado State Rocky Mountain High Intensity  Drug Trafficking Area (RMHIDTA) issued a report in 2014 comprehensively tracking the impact of  legalized marijuana in the state of Colorado which included important observations.    Impact Area RMHIDTA Findings Contra Costa EMS  Impaired Driving According to the  Colorado RMHIDTA  findings: Traffic fatalities  involving operators  testing positive for  marijuana increased 100  percent between 2007  (prior to legislation) and  2012 (post legislation).  The Colorado experience and HHS data suggest that  impaired driving is likely to increase both fatal and non‐ fatal collisions.  EMS System resources are utilized in  both fatal and non‐fatal auto collisions incidents. In  2015 CCEMS system saw over 1,588 critical trauma  patients.  381 (24 percent of all CCEMS critical trauma)  of those injuries were associated with auto collisions.  The California Office of Traffic Safety reported in 2014  that the total collisions in Contra Costa County resulting  11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 467 8    According a 2017 CDC  Fast Facts1 13 percent of  nighttime, weekend  drivers have marijuana  in their system.  in injury or fatality were 4,390.2 These incidents  typically require EMS System utilization. CCEMS  anticipates that with legalization EMS utilization may  substantially increase.   Impaired Driving According to the  Colorado RMHIDTA  findings: 25‐40 percent  of DUI arrests involved  marijuana alone.3  Emergency Department and Psychiatric Emergency  Services may experience a substantial increase in  transports, similar to the Colorado experience.  In  addition, 5,150 calls and medical screening associated  with marijuana is likely to increase.  Without the  resource of sobering centers and the ability of EMS to  partner with health care systems on alternatives, the  EMS System may experience significant stress resulting  in potential delays in response time and extended EMS‐ ED transfer of care times.  Ambulance unit hours may  need to be increased to support current response  requirements at an added cost to the county.  Emergency Room  Marijuana  Admissions  According to the  Colorado RMHIDTA  findings: Between 2011  and 2013, Colorado  experienced a  57‐percent increase in  marijuana related  emergency room visits.   Hospitalizations related  to marijuana have  increased 82 percent  from 2008 to 2013. A  rate of approximately  176 to 331 per 100,000  (population) for ED  admissions and 123 to  190 per 100,000  population rate increase  hospitalizations.  In 2015 there were over 425,000 emergency  department visits in Contra Costa County, over 94,000  responses and over 73,000 transports to area hospitals.   Assuming a Contra Costa population of 1,100,000, it is  anticipated that 1,760 to 3,310 additional emergency  department visits resulting in 1,230 to 1,900 additional  hospitalizations may occur.  It is unknown how many of  these emergency department visits would require 9‐1‐1  services but it is anticipated that a significant portion of  these event may.  Summary and Recommendations     Significant efforts to mitigate the impact of adverse consequences known to occur with  legalization of marijuana should be taken.                                                               1 CDC Fast Facts: What You Need to Know About Marijuana Use and Driving https://www.cdc.gov/marijuana/pdf/marijuana-driving-508.pdf 2 California Office of Traffic Safety http://www.ots.ca.gov/Media_and_Research/Rankings/default.asp 3 Rocky Mountain High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area, “Executive Summary: Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact” Vol.2/August 2014 https://www.in.gov/ipac/files/August_2014_Legalization_of_MJ_in_Colorado_the_Impact(1).pdf 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 468 9     Impacts are known to significantly increase the need for expanded services for EMS  stakeholders requiring additional funding to monitor, mitigate and expand EMS system services.   Children, especially those less than five years old, are known to be at greatest risk for poisoning  and hospitalization.   Delays in response time associated with an increase in EMS System volume and a surge of  emergency department patients driving under the influence.     Funding support to expand child injury prevention efforts aligned with the EMS for Children  System of Care could reduce the risk of marijuana related exposures/poisonings at home and in  schools.  Links to resources consulted:    1. http://efficientgov.com/blog/2017/01/06/marijuana‐legalization‐impacts‐ems/   2. http://www.thecannabist.co/2016/01/14/pot‐emergency‐room‐marijuana‐er/42939/   3. https://www.in.gov/ipac/files/August_2014_Legalization_of_MJ_in_Colorado_the_Impact(1).pd f   4. http://www.jems.com/ems‐insider/articles/2017/01/implications‐of‐legalized‐marijuana‐for‐ ems‐agencies.html  5. http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/pediatrics/135/3/584.full.pdf  6. http://kids.data.org  7. http://www.ots.ca.gov/Media_and_Research/Rankings/default.asp  8. https://www.cdc.gov/marijuana/pdf/marijuana‐driving‐508.pdf    11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 469 What You Need to Know About Marijuana Use and Pregnancy 2017 Fast Facts • Using marijuana during pregnancy may increase your baby’s risk of developmental problems.1–7 • About one in 25 women in the U.S. reports using marijuana while pregnant.8 • The chemicals in any form of marijuana may be bad for your baby – this includes edible marijuana products (such as cookies, brownies, or candies).9 • If you’re using marijuana and are pregnant or are planning to become pregnant, talk to your doctor. Marijuana use during pregnancy can be harmful to your baby’s health. The chemicals in marijuana (in particular, tetrahydrocannabinol or THC) pass through your system to your baby and can negatively affect your baby’s development.1–7 Although more research is needed to better understand how marijuana may affect you and your baby during pregnancy, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends against using marijuana during your pregnancy. What are the potential health effects of using marijuana during my pregnancy? • Some research shows that using marijuana while you are pregnant can cause health problems in newborns— including low birth weight and developmental problems.10,11 • Breathing marijuana smoke can also be bad for you and your baby. Marijuana smoke has many of the same chemicals as tobacco smoke and may increase the chances for developmental problems in your baby.12,13 Can using marijuana during my pregnancy negatively impact my baby after birth? • Research shows marijuana use during pregnancy may make it hard for your child to pay attention or to learn, these issues may only become noticeable as your child grows older.1–7 Does using marijuana affect breastfeeding? • Chemicals from marijuana can be passed to your baby through breast milk. THC is stored in fat and is slowly released over time, meaning an infant could be exposed for a longer period of time. • However, data on the effects of marijuana exposure to the infant through breastfeeding are limited and conflicting. • To limit potential risk to the infant, breastfeeding mothers should reduce or avoid marijuana use.11, 14–16 Smoking During Pregnancy: https://www.cdc. gov/reproductivehealth/maternalinfanthealth/ tobaccousepregnancy/index.htm Treating for Two: https://www.cdc.gov/pregnancy/meds/ treatingfortwo/index.html For more information, visit: 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 470 What You Need to Know About Marijuana Use and Pregnancy References 1. Mark, K., A. Desai, and M. Terplan, Marijuana use and pregnancy: prevalence, associated characteristics, and birth outcomes. Arch Womens Ment Health, 2016. 19(1): p. 105-11. 2. Fried, P.A., B. Watkinson, and R. Gray, Differential effects on cognitive functioning in 9- to 12-year olds prenatally exposed to cigarettes and marihuana. Neurotoxicol Teratol, 1998. 20(3): p. 293-306. 3. Leech, S.L., et al., Prenatal substance exposure: effects on attention and impulsivity of 6-year-olds. Neurotoxicol Teratol, 1999. 21(2): p. 109-18. 4. Goldschmidt, L., et al., Prenatal marijuana exposure and intelligence test performance at age 6. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry, 2008. 47(3): p. 254-63. 5. Campolongo P, Trezza V, Ratano P, Palmery M, Cuomo V. Developmental consequences of perinatal cannabis exposure: behavioral and neuroendocrine effects in adult rodents. Psychopharmacology (Berl) 2011;214:5–15. 6. Warner, T.D., D. Roussos-Ross, and M. Behnke, It’s not your mother’s marijuana: effects on maternal-fetal health and the developing child. Clin Perinatol, 2014. 41(4): p. 877-94. 7. Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. Monitoring Health Concerns Related to Marijuana in Colorado: 2014. 2015 [cited 2016 July 11, 2016]. 8. Ko JY, Farr SL, Tong VT, Creanga AA, Callaghan WM. Prevalence and patterns of marijuana use among pregnant and nonpregnant women of reproductive age. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015; 213(2):201.e1-201.e10. 9. Berger, E., Legal marijuana and pediatric exposure pot edibles implicated in spike in child emergency department visits. Ann Emerg Med, 2014. 64(4): p. A19-21. 10. Conner SN1, Bedell V, Lipsey K, Macones GA, Cahill AG, Tuuli MG. Maternal Marijuana Use and Adverse Neonatal Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol. 2016 Oct;128(4):713-23. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000001649. 11. Wang, G.S., G. Roosevelt, and K. Heard, Pediatric marijuana exposures in a medical marijuana state. JAMA Pediatr, 2013. 167(7): p. 630-3. 12. Wu, T.C., et al., Pulmonary hazards of smoking marijuana as compared with tobacco. N Engl J Med, 1988. 318 (6): p. 347-51 13. Gunn JKL, Rosales CB, Center KE, et al. Prenatal exposure to cannabis and maternal and child health outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open 2016;6:e009986.doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2015-009986. 14. Reece-Stremtan S, Marinelli KA. Guidelines for breastfeeding and substance use or substance use disorder, revised 2015. ABM Clinical Protocol #21. Academy of Breastfeeding Medicine. Breastfeed Med 2015;10:135–41. 15. Perez-Reyes M, Wall ME (1982) Presence of Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol in human milk. N Engl J Med 307:819–820. 16. Monte, A.A., R.D. Zane, and K.J. Heard, The implications of marijuana legalization in Colorado. JAMA, 2015. 313(3): p. 241-2. 1-800-CDC-INFO (232-4636) • www.cdc.gov 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 471 What You Need to Know About Marijuana Use and Driving 2017 Fast Facts • The number of self-reported marijuana users is increasing. In 2014, there were 7,000 new users of marijuana per day.4 7,000 • 13% of nighttime, weekend drivers have marijuana in their system; this is up from 9% in 2007.5 • After alcohol, marijuana is the drug most often linked to drugged driving.6 Because driving is such a common activity, it’s easy to forget how you really must stay alert to stay safe. While it may seem like your body goes on automatic when accelerating or changing lanes, your brain is actually in high gear. Drugs and alcohol interfere with the brain’s ability to function properly. Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), which is the main active ingredient in marijuana, affects areas of the brain that control your body’s movements, balance, coordination, memory, and judgment.1-3 How does marijuana affect driving? Driving while impaired by any substance, including marijuana, is dangerous. Marijuana, like alcohol, negatively affects a number of skills required for safe driving. • Marijuana can slow your reaction time and ability to make decisions.1-3, 7-9 • Marijuana use can impair coordination, distort perception, and lead to memory loss and difficulty in problem-solving.1-3, 7-9 • The risk of impaired driving associated with marijuana in combination with alcohol appears to be greater than that for either by itself.2, 9 What do we know about marijuana use and the risk of car crashes? Although we know marijuana negatively affects a number of skills needed for safe driving, and some studies have shown an association between marijuana use and car crashes, it is unclear whether marijuana use actually increases the risk of car crashes. This is because: • An accurate roadside test for drug levels in the body doesn’t exist. • Marijuana can remain in a user’s system for days or weeks after last use (depending on how much a person uses and how often they use marijuana). • Drivers are not always tested for drug use, especially if they have an illegal blood alcohol concentration level because that is enough evidence for a driving-while- impaired charge. • When tested for substance use following a crash, drivers can have both drugs and alcohol or multiple drugs in their system, making it hard to know which substance contributed more to the crash. Is there a legal limit for marijuana impairment while operating a vehicle? Laws vary from state to state. If you intend to drive, the safest option is not to have any alcohol or drugs in your system at all. CDC’s Impaired Driving: Get the Facts: http://www. cdc.gov/motorvehiclesafety/impaired_driving/impaired- drv_factsheet.html Drug Facts: Drugged Driving: https://www.drugabuse. gov/publications/drugfacts/drugged-driving Cannabis: http://www.samhsa.gov/atod/cannabis National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Impaired Driving Fact Sheet: http://www.nhtsa.gov/ Impaired For more information, visit: 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 472 What You Need to Know About Marijuana Use and Driving References 1. Lenné MG, Dietze PM, Triggs TJ, Walmsley S, Murphy B, Redman JR. The effects of cannabis and alcohol on simulated arterial driving: Influences of driving experience and task demand. Accid Anal Prev. 2010;42(3):859-866. doi:10.1016/j.aap.2009.04.021. 2. Hartman RL, Huestis MA. Cannabis effects on driving skills. Clin Chem. 2013;59(3):478-492. doi:10.1373/clinchem.2012.194381. 3. Hartman RL, Brown TL, Milavetz G, et al. Cannabis effects on driving lateral control with and without alcohol. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2015;154:25-37. doi:10.1016/j. drugalcdep.2015.06.015. 4. Azofeifa A, Mattson ME, Schauer G, McAfee T, Grant A, Lyerla R. National Estimates of Marijuana Use and Related Indicators — National Survey on Drug Use and Health, United States, 2002–2014. MMWR Surveill Summ 2016;65(No. SS-11):1–25. DOI: http://dx.doi. org/10.15585/mmwr.ss6511a1HYPERLINK “https://www.cdc.gov/Other/disclaimer.html”. 5. Berning, A., Compton, R., Wochinger, K., Results of the 2013–2014 National Roadside Survey of alcohol and drug use by drivers. 2015, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration: Washington, DC. (DOT HS 812 118). 6. Center for Behavioral Health Statistics and Quality (CBHSQ). Behavioral Health Trends in the United States: Results from the 2014 National Survey on Drug Use and Health. Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration; 2015. HHS Publication No. SMA 15-4927, NSDUH Series H-50. 7. Lenné MG, Dietze PM, Triggs TJ, Walmsley S, Murphy B, Redman JR. The effects of cannabis and alcohol on simulated arterial driving: Influences of driving experience and task demand. Accid Anal Prev. 2010;42(3):859-866. doi:10.1016/j.aap.2009.04.021. 8. Hartman RL, Huestis MA. Cannabis effects on driving skills.Clin Chem. 2013;59(3):478-492. doi:10.1373/clinchem.2012.194381. 9. Hartman RL, Brown TL, Milavetz G, et al. Cannabis effects on driving lateral control with and without alcohol. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2015;154:25-37. doi:10.1016/j. drugalcdep.2015.06.015. 1-800-CDC-INFO (232-4636) • www.cdc.gov 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 473 California Cannabis Health Information Initiative Youth and Cannabis It is legal for adults 21 or older to possess, consume and cultivate cannabis in California. Sale of cannabis from licensed retail outlets will become legal January 1, 2018. If you are 18 or older, you can use cannabis if you have a current qualifying physician’s recommendation or a valid county-issued medical marijuana identification card. Here are some important facts you should know. Cannabis Affects Your Health • Like cigarettes, smoking cannabis is harmful to your lungs. The smoke from cannabis has many of the same toxins and chemicals found in cigarette smoke, and when inhaled it can increase your risk of developing lung problems.1 • Regular cannabis use has been linked to anxiety, depression, and suicide, especially for teens with a family history of mental illness.2,3,4 • Cannabis use increases the risk of schizophrenia, although it is not common. The more cannabis you use, the higher the risk.5 • Using cannabis as a teen can lead to cannabis dependence and increase your risk for using or abusing other substances and illegal drugs.6,7 Cannabis Affects Your Brain • Your brain is still developing. Using cannabis regularly in your teens and early 20s may lead to physical changes in your brain.8 • Research shows that when you use cannabis your memory, learning, and attention are harmed. Some studies suggest a permanent impact as well.9 Most Teens Are Not Using Cannabis • In 2016, most high school students in California reported they were not using cannabis. Only about 15 percent (less than 1 in 5) reported using cannabis in the past 30 days.10 Cannabis Impacts Your Goals • The harmful effects of cannabis on your brain may impact your educational and professional goals and how successful you are in life.11 Research shows that if you start using cannabis before you are 18 or use cannabis regularly you may be at higher risk for: − Skipping classes 11 − Getting lower grades 12 − Dropping out of school 13 − Unemployment or not getting the job that you’d like to have 7,14 Youth and Cannabis Last Update September 1, 2017 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 474 California Cannabis Health Information Initiative Cannabis Affects Your Driving • Cannabis can negatively affect the skills you need to drive safely, including reaction time, coordination, and concentration.15 • Driving under the influence of cannabis increases your risk of getting into a car crash.16 If You Break the Law • If you are under 21 and caught in possession of cannabis you will be required to complete drug education or counseling and community service (unless you have a current qualifying physician’s recommendation or a valid county-issued medical marijuana identification card).17 1 Jeanette M. Tetrault, Kristina Crothers, Brent A. Moore, Reena Mehra, John Concato, and David A. Fiellin. 2007. “Effects of marijuana smoking on pulmonary function and respiratory complications: A systematic review.” Ar- chives of Internal Medicine. 167:221-228. (Reviewed in: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine. 2017. The health effects of cannabis and cannabinoids: The current state of evidence and recommendations for research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. P. 181-195). 2 Shaul Lev-Ran, Bernard Le Foll, Kwame McKenzie, Tony P. George, and Jurgen Rehm. 2013. “Bipolar disorder and co-occurring cannabis use disorders: Characteristics, co-morbidities and clinical correlates.” Psychiatry Research. 209(3):459-465. (Reviewed in: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine. 2017. The health effects of cannabis and cannabinoids: The current state of evidence and recommendations for research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. P. 308). 3 Theresa H.M. Moore, Stanley Zammit, Anne Lingford-Hughes, Thomas R.E. Barnes, Peter B. Jones, Margaret Burke, and Glyn Lewis. 2007. “Cannabis use and risk of psychotic or affective mental health outcomes: A systemat- ic review.” Lancet. 370(9584):319-328. (Reviewed in: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine. 2017. The health effects of cannabis and cannabinoids: The current state of evidence and recommendations for research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. P. 289-326). 4 Guilherme Borges, Courtney L. Bagge, and Ricardo Orozco. 2016. “A literature review and meta-analyses of cannabis use and suicidality.” Journal of Affective Disorders. 195(63-74). (Reviewed in: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine. 2017. The health effects of cannabis and cannabinoids: The current state of evidence and recommendations for research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. P. 311-312). 5 Arianna Marconi, Marta Di Forti, Cathryn M. Lewis, Robin M. Murray, Evangelos Vassos. 2016. “Meta-analysis of the association between the level of cannabis use and risk of psychosis.” Schizophrenia Bulletin. 42(5):1262- 1269. (Reviewed in: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine. 2017. The health effects of cannabis and cannabinoids: The current state of evidence and recommendations for research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. P. 289-326). 6 Chuan-Yu Chen, Megan S. O’Brien, and James C. Anthony. 2005. “Who becomes cannabis dependent soon after onset of use? Epidemiological evidence from the United States: 2000-2001.” Drug and Alcohol Dependence. 79(1):11-22. (Reviewed in: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine. 2017. The health effects of cannabis and cannabinoids: The current state of evidence and recommendations for research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. P. 342-343). 7 Chenshu Zhang, Judith S. Brook, Carl G. Leukefeld, and David W. Brook. 2016. “Trajectories of marijuana use from adolescence to adulthood as predictors of unemployment status in the early forties.” American Journal on Addictions. 25(3):203-209. (Reviewed in: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine. 2017. The health effects of cannabis and cannabinoids: The current state of evidence and recommendations for research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. P. 280-281). 8 Albert Batalla, Sagnik Bhattacharyya, Murat Yucel, Paolo Fusar-Poli, Jose Alexandre Crippa, Santiago Nogue, Marta Torrens, et al. 2013. “Structural and Functional Imaging Studies in Chronic Cannabis Users: A Systematic Review of Adolescent and Adult Findings.” PLoS ONE. 8(2): e55821. (Reviewed in: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine. 2017. The health effects of cannabis and cannabinoids: The current state of evidence and recommendations for research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. P. 271-275). (Reviewed in: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine. 2017. The health effects of cannabis and cannabinoids: The current state of evidence and recommendations for research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. P. 271-275). 9 Samantha J. Broyd, Hendrika H. van Hell, Camilla Beale, Murat Yucel, and Nadia Solowij. 2016. “Acute and Chronic Effects of Cannabinoids on Human Cognition-A Systematic Review.” Biological Psychiatry. 79:557-567. (Re- viewed in: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine. 2017. The health effects of cannabis and cannabinoids: The current state of evidence and recommendations for research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. P. 271-275). 10 California Department of Public Health and Tobacco Control Program, 2016 California Student Tobacco Survey. 2016. 11 National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. The health effects of cannabis and cannabinoids: The current state of evidence and recommendations for research. Washington, DC: The National Acade- mies Press. doi:10.17226/24625. pp. 267, 285) 12 Amelia M. Arria, Laura M. Garnier-Dykstra, Emily T. Cook, Kimberly M. Caldeira, Kathryn B. Vincent, Rebecca A. Baron, and Kevin E. O’Grady. 2013. “Drug Use patterns in young adulthood and post-college employment.” Drug and Alcohol Dependence. 127(1):23-30. (Reviewed in: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine. 2017. The health effects of cannabis and cannabinoids: The current state of evidence and recommendations for research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. P. 277). 13 John Macleod, Rachel Oakles, Alex Copello, Ilana Crome, Matthias Egger, Mathew Hickman, Thomas Oppenkowski, et al. 2004. “Psychological and social sequelae of cannabis and other illicit drug use by young people: A systematic review of longitudinal, general population studies.” Lancet. 363(9421):1579-1588. (Reviewed in: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine. 2017. The health effects of cannabis and cannabinoids: The current state of evidence and recommendations for research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. P. 271-275). 14 David M. Fergusson and Joseph M. Boden. 2008. “Cannabis use and later life outcomes.” Addiction. 103(6):p. 969-76; discussion 977-8. (Reviewed in: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine. 2017. The health effects of cannabis and cannabinoids: The current state of evidence and recommendations for research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. P. 276-279 (education); 280-281 (unemployment)). 15 Percy Bondallaz, Bernard Favrat, Haithem Chtioui, Eleonora Fornari, Philippe Maeder, and Christian Giroud. 2016. “Cannabis and its effects on driving skills.” Forensic Sci Int. 268:92-102. 16 Ole Rogeberg and Rune Elvik. 2016. “The effects of cannabis intoxication on motor vehicle collision revisited and revised.” Addiction. 111(8):1348-1359. (Reviewed in: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine. 2017. The health effects of cannabis and cannabinoids: The current state of evidence and recommendations for research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. pp. 228-230). 17 Senate Bill No. 94, Sess. of 2017 (Cal. 2017). https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180SB94. Youth and Cannabis Last Update September 1, 2017 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 475 California Cannabis Health Information Initiative What Parents and Mentors Need to Know about Cannabis It is legal for adults 21 or older to possess, consume and cultivate cannabis in California. Sale of cannabis from licensed retail outlets will become legal January 1, 2018. If you are 18 or older, you can use cannabis if you have a current qualifying physician’s recommendation or a valid county-issued medical marijuana identification card. Pre-teens, teens and youth in their early 20s often seek out new experiences and engage in risky behaviors, such as using cannabis. Here are some important facts you should know about cannabis and some tips for talking to youth. Cannabis Can Affect a Young Person’s Brain • The brains of young people do not fully develop until they reach their mid-20s. Regular cannabis use during the early years of life can lead to harmful physical changes in the brain.3 • Research shows that when youth use cannabis their memory, learning, and attention are harmed. Some studies suggest a permanent impact as well.4 Other Negative Effects of Cannabis on Youth • Driving under the influence of cannabis increases the risk of getting into a car crash. Cannabis can negatively affect the skills that are needed to drive safely, including reaction time, coordination, and concentration.5,6 • The harmful effects of cannabis on a young person’s brain may impact their educational and professional goals and how successful they are in life.7 Research shows that youth who start using before 18 or who use cannabis regularly may be at higher risk for: –Skipping classes7 –Getting lower grades9 –Dropping out of school10 –Unemployment or having less fulfilling jobs later in life10,11 • Mental health problems may include: –Anxiety, depression, suicide, and schizophrenia 12,13,14,15,16 –Cannabis dependence and a higher risk for using or abusing other substances and illegal drugs17 • Like tobacco, smoking cannabis is harmful to the lungs. The smoke from cannabis has many of the same toxins and chemicals found in tobacco smoke, and when inhaled can increase the risk of developing lung problems.18 Young People and Cannabis Use • In 2016, most high school students in California reported they were not using cannabis. Only about 15 percent (less than 1 in 5) reported using cannabis in the past 30 days. What Parents and Mentors Need to Know about Cannabis Last Update September 1, 2017 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 476 California Cannabis Health Information Initiative • However, most youth do not believe cannabis is harmful. Eight out of 10 youth in California, aged 12-17, reported believing using cannabis once a month was not risky.2 Tips for Encouraging Youth Not to Use Cannabis19 • Talk openly and provide guidance about the risks of using cannabis. –Youth who have supportive parents, teachers, and other adults are less likely to use cannabis and illegal drugs. –Stay positive. –Focus on how using cannabis can get in the way of achieving goals such as graduating high school, getting into college or getting a good job. Do not focus on negative outcomes. • Listen carefully to the questions and thoughts youth have. • Set shared guidelines and expectations for healthy behaviors. –Youth are less likely to use cannabis when parents set clear limits and house rules. • Be aware of your own attitudes and behaviors. –You are a role model. If you use cannabis in front of young people, they are more likely to use it too. Recognizing if a Youth is Using Cannabis20 • Look for behavioral changes related to cannabis use such as: mood swings, spending less time with friends, skipping school, loss of interest in sports or other favorite activities and changes in grades and sleeping habits. • Young people under the influence of cannabis may lack coordination, giggle for no reason, act silly, have red eyes and short-term memory loss. What to Do if a Youth is Using Cannabis19 • Stay calm. Overreacting may lead youth to rebel, feel resentment or take greater risks. • Talk about your concerns and give positive reasons for wanting youth to stop using cannabis. • Keep the conversation open for problem solving. • Remind youth of the ground rules you set earlier, or set new ground rules and consequences. • If needed, seek help from trusted adults and resources in your community. • Call 911 and get help if there is a medical or mental health emergency. What Parents and Mentors Need to Know about Cannabis Last Update September 1, 2017 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 477 California Cannabis Health Information Initiative 1 California Department of Public Health and Tobacco Control Program, 2016 California Student Tobacco Survey. 2016. 2 Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Center for Behavioral Health Statistics and Quality. 2015. National Survey on Drug Use and Health. 3 Albert Batalla , Sagnik Bhattacharyya, Murat Yucel, Paolo Fusar-Poli, Jose Alexandre Crippa, Santiago Nogue, Marta Torrens, et al. 2013. “Structural and Functional Imaging Studies in Chronic Cannabis Users: A Systematic Review of Adolescent and Adult Findings.” PLoS ONE. 8(2): e55821. (Reviewed in: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine. 2017. The health effects of cannabis and cannabinoids: The current state of evidence and recommendations for research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. P. 271-275). 4 Samantha J. Broyd, Hendrika H. van Hell, Camilla Beale, Murat Yucel, and Nadia Solowij. 2016. “Acute and Chronic Effects of Cannabinoids on Human Cognition-A Systematic Review.” Biological Psychiatry. 79:557- 567. (Reviewed in: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine. 2017. The health effects of cannabis and cannabinoids: The current state of evidence and recommendations for research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. P. 271-275). 5 Percy Bondallaz, Bernard Favrat, Haithem Chtioui, Eleonora Fornari, Philippe Maeder, and Christian Giroud. 2016. “Cannabis and its effects on driving skills.” Forensic Sci Int. 268:92-102. 6 Ole Rogeberg and Rune Elvik. 2016. “The effects of cannabis intoxication on motor vehicle collision revisited and revised.” Addiction. 111(8):1348-1359. (Reviewed in: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine. 2017. The health effects of cannabis and cannabinoids: The current state of evidence and recommendations for research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. pp. 228-230). 7 National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. The health effects of cannabis and cannabinoids: The current state of evidence and recommendations for research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. (P. 267, 285) 8 Amelia M. Arria, Laura M. Garnier-Dykstra, Emily T. Cook, Kimberly M. Caldeira, Kathryn B. Vincent, Rebecca A. Baron, and Kevin E. O’Grady. 2013. “Drug Use patterns in young adulthood and post-college employment.” Drug and Alcohol Dependence. 127(1):23-30. (Reviewed in: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine. 2017. The health effects of cannabis and cannabinoids: The current state of evidence and recommendations for research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. P. 277). 9 John Macleod, Rachel Oakles, Alex Copello, Ilana Crome, Matthias Egger, Mathew Hickman, Thomas Oppenkowski, et al. 2004. “Psychological and social sequelae of cannabis and other illicit drug use by young people: A systematic review of longitudinal, general population studies.” Lancet. 363(9421):1579-1588. (Reviewed in: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine. 2017. The health effects of cannabis and cannabinoids: The current state of evidence and recommendations for research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. P. 271-275). 10 David M. Fergusson and Joseph M. Boden. 2008. “Cannabis use and later life outcomes.” Addiction. 103(6):p. 969-76; discussion 977-8. (Reviewed in: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine. 2017. The health effects of cannabis and cannabinoids: The current state of evidence and recommendations for research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. P. 276-279 (education); 280-281 (unemployment)). 11 Chenshu Zhang, Judith S. Brook, Carl G. Leukefeld, and David W. Brook. 2016. “Trajectories of marijuana use from adolescence to adulthood as predictors of unemployment status in the early forties.” American Journal on Addictions. 25(3):203-209. (Reviewed in: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine. 2017. The health effects of cannabis and cannabinoids: The current state of evidence and recommendations for research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. P. 280-281). 12 Theresa H.M. Moore, Stanley Zammit, Anne Lingford-Hughes, Thomas R.E. Barnes, Peter B. Jones, Margaret Burke, and Glyn Lewis. 2007. “Cannabis use and risk of psychotic or affective mental health outcomes: A systematic review.” Lancet. 370(9584):319-328. (Reviewed in: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine. 2017. The health effects of cannabis and cannabinoids: The current state of evidence and recommendations for research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. P. 289-326). 13 Arianna Marconi, Marta Di Forti, Cathryn M. Lewis, Robin M. Murray, Evangelos Vassos. 2016. “Meta-analysis of the association between the level of cannabis use and risk of psychosis.” Schizophrenia Bulletin. 42(5):1262-1269. (Reviewed in: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine. 2017. The health effects of cannabis and cannabinoids: The current state of evidence and recommendations for research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. P. 289-326). 14 Karina Karolina Kedzior and Lisa Tabata Laeber. 2014. “A positive association between anxiety disorders and cannabis use or cannabis use disorders in the general population- A meta-analysis of 31 studies.” BMC Psychiatry. 14:136. (Reviewed in: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine. 2017. The health effects of cannabis and cannabinoids: The current state of evidence and recommendations for research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. P. 314-315). 15 Shaul Lev-Ran, Bernard Le Foll, Kwame McKenzie, Tony P. George, and Jurgen Rehm. 2013. “Bipolar disorder and co-occurring cannabis use disorders: Characteristics, co-morbidities and clinical correlates.” Psychiatry Research. 209(3):459-465. (Reviewed in: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine. 2017. The health effects of cannabis and cannabinoids: The current state of evidence and recommendations for research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. P. 308). 16 Guilherme Borges, Courtney L. Bagge, and Ricardo Orozco. 2016. “A literature review and meta-analyses of cannabis use and suicidality.” Journal of Affective Disorders. 195(63-74). (Reviewed in: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine. 2017. The health effects of cannabis and cannabinoids: The current state of evidence and recommendations for research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. P. 311-312). 17 Chuan-Yu Chen, Megan S. O’Brien, and James C. Anthony. 2005. “Who becomes cannabis dependent soon after onset of use? Epidemiological evidence from the United States: 2000-2001.” Drug and Alcohol Dependence. 79(1):11-22. (Reviewed in: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine. 2017. The health effects of cannabis and cannabinoids: The current state of evidence and recommendations for research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. P. 342-343). 18 Jeanette M. Tetrault, Kristina Crothers, Brent A. Moore, Reena Mehra, John Concato, and David A. Fiellin. 2007. “Effects of marijuana smoking on pulmonary function and respiratory complications: A systematic review.” Archives of Internal Medicine. 167:221-228. (Reviewed in: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine. 2017. The health effects of cannabis and cannabinoids: The current state of evidence and recommendations for research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. P. 181-195). 19 American Academy of Pediatrics, Healthy Children. “Drug Abuse Prevention Starts with Parents.” Accessed August 14, 2017. https://www.healthychildren.org/English/ages-stages/teen/substance-abuse/Pages/ Drug-Abuse-Prevention-Starts-with-Parents.aspx 20 National Institute on Drug Abuse; National Institutes of Health; U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. 2016. “Marijuana: Facts Parents Need to Know.” What Parents and Mentors Need to Know about Cannabis Last Update September 1, 2017 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 478 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 479 PREPARED BY: ROCKY MOUNTAIN HIDTA STRATEGIC INTELLIGENCE UNIT 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 480 DRAFT The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 Table of Contents P a g e | i Table of Contents Executive Summary ............................................................................................ 1 Purpose ..................................................................................................................................1 Introduction .......................................................................................................... 7 Purpose ..................................................................................................................................7 The Debate ............................................................................................................................8 Background ...........................................................................................................................8 Preface ....................................................................................................................................8 Colorado’s History with Marijuana Legalization ...........................................................9 Medical Marijuana 2000-2008 .................................................................................................... 9 Medical Marijuana Commercialization and Expansion 2009-Present ............................... 10 Recreational Marijuana 2013-Present...................................................................................... 11 SECTION 1: Impaired Driving and Fatalities ............................................ 13 Some Findings ....................................................................................................................13 Differences in Data Citations ............................................................................................14 Definitions by Rocky Mountain HIDTA ........................................................................14 Data for Traffic Deaths ......................................................................................................15 Total Number of Statewide Traffic Deaths ........................................................................... 15 Traffic Deaths Related to Marijuana When a Driver Tested Positive for Marijuana ..... 16 Percent of All Traffic Deaths that were Marijuana-Related when a Driver Tested Positive for Marijuana ............................................................................................................................ 17 Average Number of Traffic Deaths Related to Marijuana when a Driver Tested Positive for Marijuana ............................................................................................................................ 18 Drug Combinations for Drivers who Tested Positive for Marijuana, 2016 .................... 18 Traffic Deaths Related to Marijuana When an Operator Tested Positive for Marijuana.19 Percent of All Traffic Deaths that were Marijuana-Related when an Operator Tested Positive for Marijuana ............................................................................................................. 20 Average Number of Traffic Deaths Related to Marijuana when an Operator Tested Positive for Marijuana ............................................................................................................. 21 Drug Combinations for Operators who Tested Positive for Marijuana, 2016 ................. 21 Data for Impaired Driving ................................................................................................22 Number of Positive Cannabinoid Screens ............................................................................ 22 ChemaTox and Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (Data Combined 2009-2013) ........................................................................................................ 23 ChemaTox Data Only (2013-May2016) ................................................................................. 23 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 481 DRAFT The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 Table of Contents P a g e | ii Colorado State Patrol Number of Drivers Under the Influence of Drugs (DUIDs) ....... 24 Marijuana as a Percent of All DUI and DUIDs .................................................................... 25 Denver Police Department Percent of DUIDs Involving Marijuana ................................ 26 Larimer County Sheriff’s Office Percent of DUIDs Involving Marijuana........................ 26 Total Number of Accidents in Colorado .............................................................................. 27 Related Costs ......................................................................................................................27 Case Examples ....................................................................................................................28 Sources .................................................................................................................................31 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use ............................................................... 33 Some Findings ....................................................................................................................33 Surveys NOT Utilized .......................................................................................................33 Healthy Kids Colorado Survey (HKCS) ............................................................................... 33 Current Marijuana Use for High School and Middle School Students in Colorado.34 Monitoring the Future (MTF) Study ..................................................................................... 35 Centers for Disease Control Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS) ................................... 35 2015 YRBS Participation Map .......................................................................................... 35 Use Data ..............................................................................................................................36 Youth Ages 12 to 17 Years Old ............................................................................................... 36 Average Past Month Use of Marijuana Youth Ages 12 to 17 Years Old .................... 36 Past Month Marijuana Use Youth Ages 12 to 17 Years Old ........................................ 36 Prevalence of Past 30-Day Marijuana Use Youth Ages 12 to 17 Years Old ............... 37 Past Month Usage, 12 to 17 Years Old, 2014/2015......................................................... 38 Average Past Month Use Youth Ages 12 to 17 Years Old, 2014/2015 ........................ 39 Past Month Marijuana Use Youth Ages 12 to 17 Years Old, 2014/2015 ..................... 39 Colorado Probation Percent of All Urinalysis Tests Positive for Marijuana Youth Ages 10 to 17 Years Old ........................................................................................ 40 School Data .........................................................................................................................41 Impact on School Violation Numbers ................................................................................... 41 All Drug Violations, 2015-2016 School Year .................................................................. 41 Drug-Related Suspensions/Expulsions .......................................................................... 42 Percent of Total Referrals to Law Enforcement in Colorado....................................... 42 Number of Reported School Dropouts ........................................................................... 43 Colorado School Resource Officer Survey .....................................................................43 Impact on Marijuana-Related Incidents, 2017 ...................................................................... 44 Predominant Marijuana Violations, 2017 ............................................................................. 44 Student Marijuana Source, 2017 ............................................................................................. 45 School Counselor Survey ..................................................................................................45 Impact on Marijuana-Related Incidents, 2015 ...................................................................... 46 Predominant Marijuana Violations, 2015 ............................................................................. 46 Student Marijuana Source, 2015 ............................................................................................. 47 Case Examples ....................................................................................................................47 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 482 DRAFT The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 Table of Contents P a g e | iii Some Comments from School Resource Officers ................................................................ 49 Some Comments from School Counselors ........................................................................... 51 Sources .................................................................................................................................53 SECTION 3: Adult Marijuana Use ............................................................... 55 Some Findings ....................................................................................................................55 Use Data ..............................................................................................................................56 College Age 18 to 25 Years Old .............................................................................................. 56 Average Past Month Use of Marijuana College Age 18 to 25 Years Old ................... 56 Past Month Marijuana Use College Age 18 to 25 Years Old ....................................... 56 Prevalence of Past 30-Day Marijuana Use College Age 18 to 25 Years Old .............. 57 Past Month Usage, 18 to 25 Years Old, 2014/2015......................................................... 58 Average Past Month Use College Age 18 to 25 Years Old, 2014/2015 ....................... 59 Past Month Marijuana Use College Age 18 to 25 Years Old, 2014/2015 .................... 59 Adults Age 26+ Years Old ....................................................................................................... 60 Average Past Month Use of Marijuana College Ages 26+ Years Old......................... 60 Past Month Marijuana Use Adults Age 26+ Years Old ................................................ 60 Prevalence of Past 30-Day Marijuana Use College Adults Age 26+ Years Old ........ 61 Past Month Usage, 26+ Years Old, 2014/2015 ................................................................ 62 Average Past Month Use Adults Ages 26+ Years Old, 2014/2015 .............................. 63 Past Month Marijuana Use Adults Ages 26+ Years Old, 2014/2015 ........................... 63 Colorado Adult Marijuana Use Demographics ................................................................... 64 Case Examples ....................................................................................................................64 Sources .................................................................................................................................66 SECTION 4: Emergency Department and Hospital Marijuana-Related Admissions ................................................................................ 67 Some Findings ....................................................................................................................67 Definitions ...........................................................................................................................68 Emergency Department Data ...........................................................................................68 Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment ................................................ 68 Average Emergency Department Rates Related to Marijuana ................................... 69 Emergency Department Rates Related to Marijuana ................................................... 70 Emergency Department Visits Related to Marijuana ................................................... 71 Hospitalization Data ..........................................................................................................72 Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment ................................................ 72 Average Hospitalization Rates Related to Marijuana .................................................. 72 Hospitalization Rates Related to Marijuana .................................................................. 73 Average Hospitalizations Related to Marijuana ........................................................... 74 Hospitalizations Related to Marijuana ........................................................................... 74 Additional Sources................................................................................................................... 75 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 483 DRAFT The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 Table of Contents P a g e | iv Children’s Hospital Marijuana Ingestion Among Children Under 9 Years Old ...... 75 Cost ......................................................................................................................................75 Case Examples ....................................................................................................................76 Sources .................................................................................................................................80 SECTION 5: Marijuana-Related Exposure ................................................. 81 Some Findings ....................................................................................................................81 Definitions ...........................................................................................................................81 Data ......................................................................................................................................82 Average Number of Marijuana-Related Exposures, All Ages ........................................... 82 Marijuana-Related Exposures ................................................................................................ 82 Marijuana-Related Exposures by Age Range ...................................................................... 83 Average Percent of All Marijuana-Related Exposures, Children Ages 0 to 5 Years Old ........................................................................................................................ 83 Number of Marijuana Only Exposures Reported ............................................................... 84 Case Examples ....................................................................................................................84 Sources .................................................................................................................................85 SECTION 6: Treatment ................................................................................... 87 Some Findings ....................................................................................................................87 Data ......................................................................................................................................87 Treatment with Marijuana as Primary Substance Abuse, All Ages ................................. 87 Drug Type for Treatment Admissions, All Ages ................................................................. 88 Percent of Marijuana Treatment Admissions by Age Group ............................................ 89 Marijuana Treatment Admissions Based on Criminal Justice Referrals .......................... 90 Comments from Colorado Treatment Providers ..........................................................90 Case Examples ....................................................................................................................91 Sources .................................................................................................................................92 SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana ......................................... 93 Some Findings ....................................................................................................................93 Definitions ...........................................................................................................................94 Data on Marijuana Investigations ...................................................................................95 RMHIDTA Colorado Task Forces: Marijuana Investigation Seizures.............................. 95 RMHIDTA Colorado Task Forces: Marijuana Investigative Plant Seizures .................... 96 RMHIDTA Colorado Task Forces: Marijuana Investigative Felony Arrests ................... 96 Data on Highway Interdictions .......................................................................................97 Average Colorado Marijuana Interdiction Seizures ........................................................... 97 Colorado Marijuana Interdiction Seizures ........................................................................... 98 Average Pounds of Colorado Marijuana from Interdiction Seizures ............................... 98 States to Which Colorado Marijuana Was Destined, 2016 ................................................. 99 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 484 DRAFT The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 Table of Contents P a g e | v Top Three Cities for Marijuana Origin ................................................................................. 99 Case Examples of Investigations ...................................................................................100 Case Examples of Interdictions ......................................................................................103 Sources ...............................................................................................................................107 SECTION 8: Diversion by Parcel ................................................................ 109 Some Findings ..................................................................................................................109 Data from U.S. Postal Service .........................................................................................109 Average Number of Parcels Containing Marijuana Mailed from Colorado to Another State .......................................................................................................................................... 109 Parcels Containing Marijuana Mailed from Colorado to Another State ........................ 110 Average Pounds of Colorado Marijuana Seized by the U.S. Postal Inspection Service ...................................................................................................................................... 110 Pounds of Colorado Marijuana Seized by the U.S. Postal Inspection Service .............. 111 Number of States Destined to Receive Marijuana Mailed from Colorado .................... 111 Private Parcel Companies ...............................................................................................112 Case Examples ..................................................................................................................113 Sources ...............................................................................................................................115 SECTION 9: Related Data ............................................................................ 117 Topics .................................................................................................................................117 Some Findings ..................................................................................................................117 Crime .................................................................................................................................118 Colorado Crime ...................................................................................................................... 118 City and County of Denver Crime ...................................................................................... 119 Crime in Denver ..................................................................................................................... 120 Denver Police Department Unlawful Public Display/Consumption of Marijuana ...... 120 Boulder Police Department Marijuana Public Consumption Citations ......................... 121 Case Examples ........................................................................................................................ 121 Revenue .............................................................................................................................124 Colorado’s Statewide Budget, Fiscal Year 2017 ................................................................. 124 Total State Revenue from Marijuana Taxes, Calendar Year 2016 ................................... 124 Case Example.......................................................................................................................... 125 Event Planners’ Views of Denver ..................................................................................126 Negative Meeting Planner Perceptions, 2014..................................................................... 126 Homeless ...........................................................................................................................128 Suicide Data ......................................................................................................................130 Average Toxicology of Suicides Among Adolescents Ages 10 to 19 Years Old (With Known Toxicology) ......................................................................................................130 Average Toxicology Results by Age Group, 2013-2015 ...............................................131 THC Potency .....................................................................................................................132 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 485 DRAFT The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 Table of Contents P a g e | vi National Average THC Potency Submitted Cannabis Samples ...................................... 132 National Average THC Potency Submitted Hash Oil Samples....................................... 133 Alcohol Consumption .....................................................................................................134 Colorado Average Consumption of Alcohol ..................................................................... 134 Colorado Consumption of Alcohol ..................................................................................... 134 Medical Marijuana Registry ...........................................................................................135 Percent of Medical Marijuana Patients Based on Reporting Conditions, 2016 ............. 136 Colorado Licensed Marijuana Businesses as of August 1st, 2017 ..............................137 Business Comparisons, June 2017 ..................................................................................137 Colorado Business Comparisons, June 2017 ...................................................................... 137 Demand and Market Size ...............................................................................................138 Demand ................................................................................................................................... 138 Market Size ............................................................................................................................. 138 Marijuana Enforcement Division Reported Sales of Marijuana in Colorado..........139 2017 Price of Marijuana ...................................................................................................139 Local Response to Medical and Recreational Marijuana in Colorado .....................140 2016 Local Jurisdiction Licensing Status ............................................................................. 142 Sources ...............................................................................................................................143 SECTION 10: Reference Materials ............................................................. 147 Reports and Articles ........................................................................................................147 Impaired Driving ................................................................................................................... 147 Youth Marijuana Use ............................................................................................................. 151 Adult Marijuana Use ............................................................................................................. 152 Emergency Department and Hospital Marijuana-Related Admissions......................... 155 Marijuana-Related Exposure ................................................................................................ 157 Treatment ................................................................................................................................ 157 Related Data ............................................................................................................................ 158 Sources ...............................................................................................................................163 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 486 DRAFT The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 Executive Summary P a g e | 1 Executive Summary Purpose Rocky Mountain High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area (RMHIDTA) is tracking the impact of marijuana legalization in the state of Colorado. This report will utilize, whenever possible, a comparison of three different eras in Colorado’s legalization history:  2006 – 2008: Medical marijuana pre-commercialization era  2009 – Present: Medical marijuana commercialization and expansion era  2013 – Present: Recreational marijuana era Rocky Mountain HIDTA will collect and report comparative data in a variety of areas, including but not limited to:  Impaired driving and fatalities  Youth marijuana use  Adult marijuana use  Emergency room admissions  Marijuana-related exposure cases  Diversion of Colorado marijuana This is the fifth annual report on the impact of legalized marijuana in Colorado. It is divided into ten sections, each providing information on the impact of marijuana legalization. The sections are as follows: Section 1 – Impaired Driving and Fatalities:  Marijuana-related traffic deaths when a driver was positive for marijuana more than doubled from 55 deaths in 2013 to 123 deaths in 2016.  Marijuana-related traffic deaths increased 66 percent in the four-year average (2013-2016) since Colorado legalized recreational marijuana compared to the four-year average (2009-2012) prior to legalization. o During the same time period, all traffic deaths increased 16 percent. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 487 DRAFT The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 Executive Summary P a g e | 2  In 2009, Colorado marijuana-related traffic deaths involving drivers testing positive for marijuana represented 9 percent of all traffic deaths. By 2016, that number has more than doubled to 20 percent. Section 2 – Youth Marijuana Use:  Youth past month marijuana use increased 12 percent in the three-year average (2013-2015) since Colorado legalized recreational marijuana compared to the three-year average prior to legalization (2010-2012).  The latest 2014/2015 results show Colorado youth ranked #1 in the nation for past month marijuana use, up from #4 in 2011/2012 and #14 in 2005/2006.  Colorado youth past month marijuana use for 2014/2015 was 55 percent higher than the national average compared to 39 percent higher in 2011/2012. Section 3 – Adult Marijuana Use:  College age past month marijuana use increased 16 percent in the three-year average (2013-2015) since Colorado legalized recreational marijuana compared to the three-year average prior to legalization (2010-2012).  The latest 2014/2015 results show Colorado college-age adults ranked #2 in the nation for past-month marijuana use, up from #3 in 2011/2012 and #8 in 2005/2006.  Colorado college age past month marijuana use for 2014/2015 was 61 percent higher than the national average compared to 42 percent higher in 2011/2012.  Adult past-month marijuana use increased 71 percent in the three-year average (2013-2015) since Colorado legalized recreational marijuana compared to the three-year average prior to legalization (2010-2012).  The latest 2014/2015 results show Colorado adults ranked #1 in the nation for past month marijuana use, up from #7 in 2011/2012 and #8 in 2005/2006.  Colorado adult past month marijuana use for 2014/2015 was 124 percent higher than the national average compared to 51 percent higher in 2011/2012. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 488 DRAFT The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 Executive Summary P a g e | 3 Section 4 – Emergency Department and Hospital Marijuana-Related Admissions:  The yearly rate of emergency department visits related to marijuana increased 35 percent after the legalization of recreational marijuana (2011-2012 vs. 2013-2015).  Number of hospitalizations related to marijuana: o 2011 – 6,305 o 2012 – 6,715 o 2013 – 8,272 o 2014 – 11,439 o Jan-Sept 2015 – 10,901  The yearly number of marijuana-related hospitalizations increased 72 percent after the legalization of recreational marijuana (2009-2012 vs. 2013-2015). Section 5 – Marijuana-Related Exposure:  Marijuana-related exposures increased 139 percent in the four-year average (2013-2016) since Colorado legalized recreational marijuana compared to the four-year average (2009-2012) prior to legalization.  Marijuana-Only exposures more than doubled (increased 210 percent) in the four-year average (2013-2016) since Colorado legalized recreational marijuana compared to the four-year average (2009-2012) prior to legalization. Section 6 – Treatment:  Marijuana treatment data from Colorado in years 2006 – 2016 does not appear to demonstrate a definitive trend. Colorado averages 6,683 treatment admissions annually for marijuana abuse.  Over the last ten years, the top four drugs involved in treatment admissions were alcohol (average 13,551), marijuana (average 6,712), methamphetamine (average 5,578), and heroin (average 3,024). 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 489 DRAFT The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 Executive Summary P a g e | 4 Section 7 – Diversion of Colorado Marijuana:  In 2016, RMHIDTA Colorado drug task forces completed 163 investigations of individuals or organizations involved in illegally selling Colorado marijuana both in and out of state. o These cases led to:  252 felony arrests  7,116 (3.5 tons) pounds of marijuana seized  47,108 marijuana plants seized  2,111 marijuana edibles seized  232 pounds of concentrate seized  29 different states to which marijuana was destined  Highway interdiction seizures of Colorado marijuana increased 43 percent in the four-year average (2013-2016) since Colorado legalized recreational marijuana compared to the four-year average (2009-2012) prior to legalization.  Of the 346 highway interdiction seizures in 2016, there were 36 different states destined to receive marijuana from Colorado. o The most common destinations identified were Illinois, Missouri, Texas, Kansas and Florida. Section 8 – Diversion by Parcel:  Seizures of Colorado marijuana in the U.S. mail has increased 844 percent from an average of 52 parcels (2009-2012) to 491 parcels (2013-2016) in the four-year average that recreational marijuana has been legal.  Seizures of Colorado marijuana in the U.S. mail has increased 914 percent from an average of 97 pounds (2009-2012) to 984 pounds (2013-2016) in the four-year average that recreational marijuana has been legal. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 490 DRAFT The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 Executive Summary P a g e | 5 Section 9 – Related Data:  Crime in Denver increased 6 percent from 2014 to 2016 and crime in Colorado increased 11 percent from 2013 to 2016.  Colorado annual tax revenue from the sale of recreational and medical marijuana was 0.8 percent of Colorado’s total statewide budget (FY 2016).  As of June 2017, there were 491 retail marijuana stores in the state of Colorado compared to 392 Starbucks and 208 McDonald’s.  66 percent of local jurisdictions have banned medical and recreational marijuana businesses. Section 10 – Reference Materials: This section lists various studies and reports regarding marijuana. THERE IS MUCH MORE DATA IN EACH OF THE TEN SECTIONS. THIS PUBLICATION MAY BE FOUND ON THE ROCKY MOUNTAIN HIDTA WEBSITE; GO TO WWW.RMHIDTA.ORG AND SELECT REPORTS. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 491 DRAFT The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 Executive Summary P a g e | 6 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 492 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 Introduction Page | 7 Introduction Purpose The purpose of this annual report is to document the impact of the legalization of marijuana for medical and recreational use in Colorado. Colorado serves as an experimental lab for the nation to determine the impact of legalizing marijuana. This is an important opportunity to gather and examine meaningful data and identify trends. Citizens and policymakers nationwide may want to delay any decisions on this important issue until there is sufficient and accurate data to make informed decisions. The Debate There is an ongoing debate in this country concerning the impact of legalizing marijuana. Those in favor argue that the benefits of removing prohibition far outweigh the potential negative consequences. Some of the cited benefits include:  Eliminate arrests for possession and sale, resulting in fewer people with criminal records and a reduction in the prison population  Free up law enforcement resources to target more serious and violent criminals  Reduce traffic fatalities since users will switch from alcohol to marijuana, which does not impair driving to the same degree  No increase in use, even among youth, because of strict regulations  Added revenue generated through taxation  Eliminate the black market Those opposed to legalizing marijuana argue that the potential benefits of lifting prohibition pale in comparison to the adverse consequences. Some of the cited consequences include:  Increase in marijuana use among youth and young adults  Increase in marijuana-impaired driving fatalities  Rise in number of marijuana-addicted users in treatment  Diversion of marijuana 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 493 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 Introduction Page | 8  Adverse impact and cost of the physical and mental health damage caused by marijuana use  The economic cost to society will far outweigh any potential revenue generated Background As of 2016, a number of states have enacted varying degrees of legalized marijuana by permitting medical marijuana and eight permitting recreational marijuana. In 2010, legislation was passed in Colorado that included the licensing of medical marijuana centers (dispensaries), cultivation operations, and manufacturing of marijuana edibles for medical purposes. In November 2012, Colorado voters legalized recreational marijuana allowing individuals to use and possess an ounce of marijuana and grow up to six plants. The amendment also permits licensing marijuana retail stores, cultivation operations, marijuana edible manufacturers, and testing facilities. Washington voters passed a similar measure in 2012. Preface It is important to note that, for purposes of the debate on legalizing marijuana in Colorado, there are three distinct timeframes to consider: the early medical marijuana era (2000-2008), the medical marijuana commercialization era (2009 – current) and the recreational marijuana era (2013 – current).  2000 – 2008: In November 2000, Colorado voters passed Amendment 20 which permitted a qualifying patient, and/or caregiver of a patient, to possess up to 2 ounces of marijuana and grow 6 marijuana plants for medical purposes. During that time there were between 1,000 and 4,800 medical marijuana cardholders and no known dispensaries operating in the state.  2009 – Current: Beginning in 2009 due to a number of events, marijuana became de facto legalized through the commercialization of the medical marijuana industry. By the end of 2012, there were over 100,000 medical marijuana cardholders and 500 licensed dispensaries operating in Colorado. There were also licensed cultivation operations and edible manufacturers. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 494 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 Introduction Page | 9  2013 – Current: In November 2012, Colorado voters passed Constitutional Amendment 64 which legalized marijuana for recreational purposes for anyone over the age of 21. The amendment also allowed for licensed marijuana retail stores, cultivation operations and edible manufacturers. Retail marijuana businesses became operational January 1, 2014. Colorado’s History with Marijuana Legalization Medical Marijuana 2000 – 2008 In November 2000, Colorado voters passed Amendment 20 which permitted a qualifying patient and/or caregiver of a patient to possess up to 2 ounces of marijuana and grow 6 marijuana plants for medical purposes. Amendment 20 provided identification cards for individuals with a doctor’s recommendation to use marijuana for a debilitating medical condition. The system was managed by the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE), which issued identification cards to patients based on a doctor’s recommendation. The department began accepting applications from patients in June 2001. From 2001 – 2008, there were only 5,993 patient applications received and only 55 percent of those designated a primary caregiver. During that time, the average was three patients per caregiver and there were no known retail stores selling medical marijuana (dispensaries). Dispensaries were not an issue because CDPHE regulations limited a caregiver to no more than five patients. In late 2007, a Denver district judge ruled that CDPHE violated the state’s open meeting requirement when it set a five-patient-to-one-caregiver ratio and overturned the rule. That opened the door for caregivers to claim an unlimited number of patients for whom they were providing and growing marijuana. Although this decision expanded the parameters, very few initially began operating medical marijuana commercial operations (dispensaries) in fear of prosecution, particularly from the federal government. The judge’s ruling, and caregivers expanding their patient base, created significant problems for local prosecutors seeking a conviction for marijuana distribution by caregivers. Many jurisdictions ceased or limited filing those types of cases. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 495 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 Introduction Page | 10 Medical Marijuana Commercialization and Expansion 2009 – Present The dynamics surrounding medical marijuana in Colorado began to change substantially after the Denver judge’s ruling in late 2007, as well as several incidents beginning in early 2009. All of these combined factors played a role in the explosion of the medical marijuana industry and number of patients: At a press conference in Santa Ana, California on February 25, 2009, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder was asked whether raids in California on medical marijuana dispensaries would continue. He responded “No” and referenced the President’s campaign promise related to medical marijuana. In mid-March 2009, the U.S. Attorney General clarified the position saying that the Department of Justice enforcement policy would be restricted to traffickers who falsely masqueraded as medical dispensaries and used medical marijuana laws as a shield. Beginning in the spring of 2009, Colorado experienced an explosion to over 20,000 new medical marijuana patient applications and the emergence of over 250 medical marijuana dispensaries (allowed to operate as “caregivers”). One dispensary owner claimed to be a primary caregiver to 1,200 patients. Government took little or no action against these commercial operations. In July 2009, the Colorado Board of Health, after public hearings, voted to keep the judge’s ruling of not limiting the number of patients a single caregiver could have. They also voted to change the definition of a caregiver to a person that only had to provide medicine to patients, nothing more. On October 19, 2009, U.S. Deputy Attorney General David Ogden provided guidelines for U.S. Attorneys in states that enacted medical marijuana laws. The memo advised to “Not focus federal resources in your state on individuals whose actions are in clear and unambiguous compliance with existing state law providing for the medical use of marijuana.” By the end of 2009, new patient applications jumped from around 6,000 for the first seven years to an additional 38,000 in just one year. Actual cardholders went from 4,800 in 2008 to 41,000 in 2009. By mid-2010, there were over 900 unlicensed marijuana dispensaries identified by law enforcement. In 2010, law enforcement sought legislation to ban dispensaries and reinstate the one-to-five ratio of caregiver to patient as the model. However, in 2010 the Colorado 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 496 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 Introduction Page | 11 Legislature passed HB-1284 which legalized medical marijuana centers (dispensaries), marijuana cultivation operations, and manufacturers for marijuana edible products. By 2012, there were 532 licensed dispensaries in Colorado and over 108,000 registered patients, 94 percent of which qualified for a card because of severe pain. Recreational Marijuana 2013 – Present In November of 2012, Colorado voters passed Amendment 64 which legalized marijuana for recreational use. Amendment 64 allows individuals 21 years or older to grow up to six plants, possess/use 1 ounce or less, and furnish an ounce or less of marijuana if not for the purpose of remuneration. Amendment 64 permits marijuana retail stores, marijuana cultivation sites, marijuana edible manufacturers and marijuana testing sites. The first retail marijuana businesses were licensed and operational in January of 2014. Some individuals have established private cannabis clubs, formed co- ops for large marijuana grow operations, and/or supplied marijuana for no fee other than donations. What has been the impact of commercialized medical marijuana and legalized recreational marijuana on Colorado? Review the report and you decide. NOTES:  DATA, IF AVAILABLE, WILL COMPARE PRE- AND POST-2009 WHEN MEDICAL MARIJUANA BECAME COMMERCIALIZED AND AFTER 2013 WHEN RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA BECAME LEGALIZED.  MULTI-YEAR COMPARISONS ARE GENERALLY BETTER INDICATORS OF TRENDS. ONE-YEAR FLUCTUATIONS DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT A NEW TREND.  PERCENTAGE COMPARISONS MAY BE ROUNDED TO THE NEAREST WHOLE NUMBER.  PERCENT CHANGES ADDED TO GRAPHS WERE CALCULATED AND ADDED BY ROCKY MOUNTAIN HIDTA.  THIS REPORT WILL CITE DATASETS WITH TERMS SUCH AS “MARIJUANA-RELATED” OR “TESTED POSITIVE FOR MARIJUANA.” THAT DOES NOT NECESSARILY PROVE THAT MARIJUANA WAS THE CAUSE OF THE INCIDENT. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 497 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 Introduction Page | 12 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 498 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page | 13 SECTION 1: Impaired Driving and Fatalities Some Findings  Marijuana-related traffic deaths when a driver tested positive for marijuana more than doubled from 55 deaths in 2013 to 123 deaths in 2016.  Marijuana-related traffic deaths increased 66 percent in the four-year average (2013-2016) since Colorado legalized recreational marijuana compared to the four-year average (2009-2012) prior to legalization. o During the same time period, all traffic deaths increased 16 percent.  In 2009, Colorado marijuana-related traffic deaths involving drivers testing positive for marijuana represented 9 percent of all traffic deaths. By 2016, that number has more than doubled to 20 percent.  Consistent with the past, in 2016, less than half of drivers (44 percent) or operators (48 percent) involved in traffic deaths were tested for drug impairment.  The number of toxicology screens positive for marijuana (primarily DUID) increased 63 percent in the four-year average (2013-2016) since Colorado legalized recreational marijuana compared to the four-year average (2009-2012) prior to legalization.  The 2016 Colorado State Patrol DUID Program data includes: o 76 percent (767) of the 1004 DUIDs involved marijuana. o 38 percent (385) of the 1004 DUIDs involved marijuana only. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 499 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page | 14 Differences in Data Citations The Denver Post article “Exclusive: Traffic fatalities linked to marijuana are up sharply in Colorado. Is legalization to blame?” cited the number of drivers identified in fatal crashes who tested positive for marijuana. There were 47 positive drivers in 2013 and 115 positive drivers in 2016, which represents a 145 percent increase. RMHIDTA cites the number of fatalities when a driver tested positive for marijuana. There were 55 fatalities in 2014 and 123 fatalities in 2016 when a driver was positive for marijuana, which represents a 124 percent increase. There have been some fatality numbers for “cannabinoid positive drivers” cited that use slightly higher figures than those used by RMHIDTA. After careful analysis of complete data obtained from CDOT, RMHIDTA is confident the numbers cited in this report are accurate. Definitions by Rocky Mountain HIDTA Driving Under the Influence of Drugs (DUID): DUID could include alcohol in combination with drugs. This is an important measurement since the driver’s ability to operate a vehicle was sufficiently impaired that it brought his or her driving to the attention of law enforcement. The erratic driving and the subsequent evidence that the subject was under the influence of marijuana helps confirm the causation factor. Marijuana-Related: Also called “marijuana mentions,” is any time marijuana shows up in the toxicology report. It could be marijuana only or marijuana with other drugs and/or alcohol. Marijuana Only: When toxicology results show marijuana and no other drugs or alcohol. Fatalities: Any death resulting from a traffic crash involving a motor vehicle. Operators: Anyone in control of their own movements such as a driver, pedestrian or bicyclist. Drivers: An occupant who is in physical control of a transport vehicle. For an out-of- control vehicle, an occupant who was in control until control was lost. Personal Conveyance: Non-motorized transport devices such as skateboards, wheelchairs (including motorized wheelchairs), tricycles, foot scooters, and Segways. These are more or less non-street legal transport devices. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 500 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page | 15 Data for Traffic Deaths NOTE:  THE DATA FOR 2012 THROUGH 2015 WAS OBTAINED FROM THE COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (CDOT). CDOT AND RMHIDTA CONTACTED CORONER OFFICES AND LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES INVESTIGATING FATALITIES TO OBTAIN TOXICOLOGY REPORTS. THIS REPRESENTS 100 PERCENT REPORTING. PRIOR YEAR(S) MAY HAVE HAD LESS THAN 100 PERCENT REPORTING TO THE COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, AND SUBSEQUENTLY THE FATALITY ANALYSIS REPORTING SYSTEM (FARS). ANALYSIS OF DATA WAS CONDUCTED BY ROCKY MOUNTAIN HIDTA.  2016 FARS DATA WILL NOT BE OFFICIAL UNTIL JANUARY 2018. SOURCE: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) and Colorado Department of Transportation  In 2016 there were a total of 608 traffic deaths of which: o 390 were drivers o 116 were passengers o 79 were pedestrians o 16 were bicyclists o 5 were in personal conveyance o 2 had an unknown position in the vehicle 535 554 548 465 450 447 472 481 488 547 608 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016Number of DeathsTotal Number of Statewide Traffic Deaths 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 501 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page | 16 Traffic Deaths Related to Marijuana When a DRIVER Tested Positive for Marijuana Crash Year Total Statewide Fatalities Fatalities with Drivers Testing Positive for Marijuana Percentage Total Fatalities 2006 535 33 6.17% 2007 554 32 5.78% 2008 548 36 6.57% 2009 465 41 8.82% 2010 450 46 10.22% 2011 447 58 12.98% 2012 472 65 13.77% 2013 481 55 11.43% 2014 488 75 15.37% 2015 547 98 17.92% 2016 608 123 20.23% SOURCE: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS), 2006-2011 and Colorado Department of Transportation 2012-2016  In 2016 there were a total of 123 marijuana-related traffic deaths when a driver tested positive for marijuana. Of which: o 100 were drivers o 19 were passengers o 2 were pedestrians o 2 were bicyclists  “In 2016, of the 115 drivers in fatal wrecks who tested positive for marijuana use, 71 were found to have Delta 9 tetrahydrocannabinol, or THC, the psychoactive ingredient in marijuana, in their blood, indicating use within hours, according to state data. Of those, 63 percent were over 5 nanograms per milliliter, the state’s limit for driving.” 1 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 502 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page | 17 SOURCE: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS), 2006-2011 and Colorado Department of Transportation 2012-2016 SOURCE: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS), 2006-2011 and Colorado Department of Transportation 2012-2016 33 32 36 41 46 58 65 55 75 98 123 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016Number of DeathsTraffic Deaths Related to Marijuana when a Driver Tested Positive for Marijuana Legalization Commercialization 6.17%5.78%6.57% 8.82% 10.22% 12.98%13.77% 11.43% 15.37% 17.92% 20.23% 0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016Percent of DeathsPercent of All Traffic Deaths that were Marijuana-Related when a Driver Tested Positive for Marijuana Legalization Commercialization 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 503 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page | 18 SOURCE: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS), 2006-2011 and Colorado Department of Transportation 2012-2016 SOURCE: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS), 2006-2011 and Colorado Department of Transportation 2012-2016 0 20 40 60 80 100 2006-2008 Pre-Commercialization 2009-2012 Post-Commercialization 2013-2016 Legalization 34 53 88 Average NumberAverage Number of Traffic Deaths Related to Marijuana when a Driver Tested Positive for Marijuana 36% 36% 21% 7% Marijuana Only Marijuana and Alcohol Marijuana and Other Drugs (No Alcohol) Marijuana, Other Drugs and Alcohol *Toxicology results for all substances present in individuals who tested positive for marijuana Drug Combinations for Drivers who Tested Positive for Marijuana*, 2016 56% Increase 66% Increase 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 504 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page | 19 Traffic Deaths Related to Marijuana* When an OPERATOR Tested Positive for Marijuana Crash Year Total Statewide Fatalities Fatalities with Operators Testing Positive for Marijuana Percent of Total Fatalities 2006 535 37 6.92% 2007 554 39 7.04% 2008 548 43 7.85% 2009 465 47 10.10% 2010 450 49 10.89% 2011 447 63 14.09% 2012 472 78 16.53% 2013 481 71 14.76% 2014 488 94 19.26% 2015 547 115 21.02% 2016 608 147 24.18% SOURCE: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS), 2006-2011 and Colorado Department of Transportation 2012-2016  In 2016 there were a total of 147 marijuana-related traffic deaths of which: o 100 were drivers o 19 were passengers o 21 were pedestrians o 7 were bicyclists 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 505 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page | 20 SOURCE: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS), 2006-2011 and Colorado Department of Transportation 2012-2016 SOURCE: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS), 2006-2011 and Colorado Department of Transportation 2012-2016 37 39 43 47 49 63 78 71 94 115 147 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016Number of DeathsTraffic Deaths Related to Marijuana when an Operator Tested Positive for Marijuana Commercialization Legalization 6.92%7.04%7.85% 10.10%10.89% 14.09% 16.53% 14.76% 19.26% 21.02% 24.18% 0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00% 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016Percent of DeathsPercent of All Traffic Deaths that were Marijuana-Related when an Operator Tested Positive for Marijuana Commercialization Legalization 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 506 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page | 21 SOURCE: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS), 2006-2011 and Colorado Department of Transportation 2012-2016 SOURCE: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS), 2006-2011 and Colorado Department of Transportation 2012-2016 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 2006-2008 Pre-Commercialization 2009-2012 Post-Commercialization 2013-2016 Legalization 40 59 107 Average NumberAverage Number of Traffic Deaths Related to Marijuana when an Operator Tested Positive for Marijuana 48% Increase 81% Increase 35% 35% 23% 7% Marijuana Only Marijuana and Alcohol Marijuana and Other Drugs (No Alcohol) Marijuana, Other Drugs and Alcohol *Toxicology results for all substances present in individuals who tested positive for marijuana Drug Combinations for Operators who Tested Positive for Marijuana*, 2016 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 507 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page | 22 Data for Impaired Driving NOTE: IF SOMEONE IS DRIVING INTOXICATED FROM ALCOHOL AND UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF ANY OTHER DRUG (INCLUDING MARIJUANA), ALCOHOL IS ALMOST ALWAYS THE ONLY INTOXICANT TESTED FOR. WHETHER OR NOT HE OR SHE IS POSITIVE FOR OTHER DRUGS WILL REMAIN UNKNOWN BECAUSE OTHER DRUGS ARE NOT OFTEN TESTED. SOURCE: Colorado Bureau of Investigation and Rocky Mountain HIDTA  The above graph is Rocky Mountain HIDTA’s conversion of the following ChemaTox data as well as data from the Colorado Bureau of Investigation’s state laboratory. NOTE: THE ABOVE GRAPHS INCLUDE DATA FROM CHEMATOX LABORATORY WHICH WAS MERGED WITH DATA SUPPLIED BY COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT - TOXICOLOGY LABORATORY. THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE SCREENS ARE DUID SUBMISSIONS FROM COLORADO LAW ENFORCEMENT. NOTE: COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT DISCONTINUED TESTING IN JULY 2013. THE COLORADO BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION BEGAN TESTING ON JULY 1, 2015. 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 787 1,629 2,352 2,430 2,513 2,853 2,392 2,034 522 1,395 Number of Positive ScreensNumber of Positive Cannabinoid Screens CDPHE and ChemaTox*ChemaTox CBI** *Data from the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment was merged with ChemaTox data from 2009 to 2013. CDPHE discontinued testing in July 2013. **The Colorado Bureau of Investigation began toxicology operations in July 1, 2015 . 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 508 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page | 23 ChemaTox and Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (Data Combined 2009-2013) SOURCE: Sarah Urfer, M.S., D-ABFT-FT; ChemaTox Laboratory ChemaTox Data Only (2013-August 2017) SOURCE: Sarah Urfer, M.D., D-ABFT-FT, ChemaTox Laboratory 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 509 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page | 24 SOURCE: Colorado State Patrol, CSP Citations for Drug Impairment by Drug Type  In 2016, 76 percent of total DUIDs involved marijuana and 38 percent of total DUIDs involved marijuana only 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 Marijuana Only Involving Marijuna All DUIDs 354 674 874 333 641 842 385 767 1004 Number of DUIDsColorado State Patrol Number of Drivers Under the Influence of Drugs (DUIDs) 2014 2015 2016 *Driving Under 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 510 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page | 25 SOURCE: Colorado State Patrol, CSP Citations for Drug Impairment by Drug Type  In 2016, Colorado State Patrol made about 300 fewer DUI and DUID cases than in 2015.  However, marijuana made up 17 percent of the total in 2016 compared to 13 percent of the total in 2015 and 12 percent of the total in 2014. NOTE: “MARIJUANA CITATIONS DEFINED AS ANY CITATION WHERE CONTACT WAS CITED FOR DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE (DUI) OR DRIVING WHILE ABILITY IMPAIRED (DWAI) AND MARIJUANA INFORMATION WAS FILLED OUT ON TRAFFIC STOP FORM INDICATING MARIJUANA & ALCOHOL, MARIJUANA & OTHER CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES, OR MARIJUANA ONLY PRESENT BASED ON OFFICER OPINION ONLY (NO TOXICOLOGICAL CONFIRMATION).” - COLORADO STATE PATROL 0.0% 2.0% 4.0% 6.0% 8.0% 10.0% 12.0% 14.0% 16.0% 18.0% 2014 2015 2016 12.2% 13.4% 17.2%PercentMarijuana as a Percent of All DUI and DUIDs* 28% Increase10% Increase *Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol and Driving Under the Influence of Drugs 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 511 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page | 26 SOURCE: Denver Police Department, Traffic Operations Bureau via Data Analysis Unit SOURCE: Larimer County Sheriff’s Office, Records Section 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 2013 2014 2015 2016 37% 55% 49% 52%Percentage of DUIDsDenver Police Department Percent of DUIDs Involving Marijuana 50% 52% 54% 56% 58% 60% 62% 64% 2013 2014 2015 2016 55% 60% 63% 57%Percent PositiveLarimer County Sheriff's Office Percent of DUIDs Involving Marijuana 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 512 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page | 27 SOURCE: Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT)  Per CDOT, the total number of traffic accidents in Colorado for 2016 was not available at the time of this report’s publication. NOTE: ROCKY MOUNTAIN HIDTA HAS BEEN ASKED ABOUT THE TOTAL NUMBER OF TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS SEEN IN COLORADO SINCE LEGALIZATION AND IS, THEREFORE, PROVIDING THE DATA. ROCKY MOUNTAIN HIDTA IS NOT EQUATING ALL TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS WITH MARIJUANA LEGALIZATION. Related Costs Economic Cost of Vehicle Accidents Resulting in Fatalities: According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration report, The Economic and Societal Impact of Motor Vehicles Crashes, 2010, the total economic costs for a vehicle fatality is $1,398,916. That includes property damage, medical, insurance, productivity, among other considerations. 2 Cost of Driving Under the Influence: The cost associated with the first driving-under- the-influence (DUI) offense is estimated at $10,270. Costs associated with a DUID (driving-under-the-influence-of-drugs) are very similar to those of a DUI/alcohol. 3 124,846 117,228 111,899 104,748 101,627 99,011 100,994 100,832 107,604 115,455 120,700 0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 120,000 140,000 160,000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015Number of Accidents Total Number of Traffic Accidents in Colorado 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 513 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page | 28 Case Examples Traffic Fatalities Linked to Marijuana are up Sharply in Colorado: Since the legalization of recreational marijuana, the number of fatal accidents involving drivers who tested positive for marijuana has “increased at a quicker rate than the increase of pot usage in Colorado since 2013.” Many family members and loved ones of victims involved in these fatal accidents are speaking out about the inability for authorities to properly test for impairment. “‘I never understood how we’d pass a law without first understanding the impact better,’ said Barbara Deckert, whose fiancée, Ron Edwards, was killed in 2015 in a collision with a driver who tested positive for marijuana use below the legal limit and charged only with careless driving. ‘How do we let that happen without having our ducks in a row? And people are dying.’” On January 13, 2016 just past 2 a.m., “Cody Gray, 19, and his running buddy, Jordan Aerts, 18, were joyriding around north Denver in a car they had stolen a few hours earlier. Ripping south along Franklin Street, where it curves hard to the right onto National Western Drive, Gray lost control, drove through a fence and went straight onto the bordering railroad tracks. The car rolled and Gray was ejected. Both died.” Corina Triffet, mother of Cody Gray, did not know that an autopsy done revealed that her son had 10ng/mL , twice the legal limit, of THC in his system when he died, until the Denver Post contacted her. “There’s just no limit on what they can take, whether it’s smoking it or edibles,” said Triffet and “I just can’t imagine people are getting out there to drive when they’re on it. But my son apparently did, and there it is.” Too little is understood about how marijuana impairs a person’s ability to operate a vehicle. Due to this lack of understanding the Denver Post stated, “Even coroners who occasionally test for the drug bicker over whether to include pot on a driver’s death certificate.” “’No one’s really sure of the broad impact because not all the drivers are tested, yet people are dying,’ said Montrose County Coroner Dr. Thomas Canfield. ‘It’s this false science that marijuana is harmless, … but it’s not, particularly when you know what it does to your time and depth perception, and the ability to understand and be attentive to what’s around you.’” 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 514 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page | 29 Colorado now mandates that traffic fatalities within the state be analyzed to see what role drugs played in the crashes. State police are re-analyzing samples from suspected drunk drivers in 2015 and a Denver Post source stated, “more than three in five also tested positive for active THC.” However, testing remains expensive and most departments will stop testing when a driver tests positive for alcohol impairment. 1 20-Year-Old Colorado Man Kills 8-Year-Old Girl While Driving High: A former star athlete at Mead High School accused of fatally running over an 8-year-old Longmont girl on her bike told police he thought he'd hit the curb — until he saw the girl's stepfather waving at him, according to an arrest affidavit released July 29, 2016. Kyle Kenneth Couch, 20, turned right on a red light at the same time Peyton Knowlton rolled into the crosswalk on May 20, 2016. The girl was crushed by the rear right tire of the Ford F-250 pickup, and died from her injuries. Couch, of Longmont, surrendered to police Friday on an arrest warrant that included charges of vehicular homicide and driving under the influence of drugs. One blood sample collected more than two hours after the collision tested positive for cannabinoids, finding 1.5 nanograms of THC per milliliter of blood. That's below Colorado's legal limit of 5 nanograms per milliliter. But Deputy Police Chief Jeff Satur said the law allows the DUI charge when those test results are combined with officer observations of impaired behavior and marijuana evidence found inside Couch's pickup. The presumptive sentencing range for vehicular homicide, a Class 3 felony, is four to 12 years in prison. Couch attends Colorado Mesa University where, in 2015, he appeared in six games as a linebacker as a red shirt freshman for the football team. In 2013, Couch became the first athlete from Mead High School to win a state title when he captured the Class 4A wrestling championship at 182 pounds. He was named the Times-Call's Wrestler of the Year that season and was able to defend his crown a year later, winning the 4A title at 195 pounds to cap his senior season with a 49-1 record. Couch, now 20, has been arrested on suspicion of vehicular homicide and driving under the influence of marijuana in connection with the death of 8-year-old Peyton Knowlton. 4 Valedictorian and Friends Die in Fatal Crash after Using Marijuana: An 18 year old recent valedictorian of St. John’s Military School, Jacob Whitting, was driving his truck with his friends when he “lost control and ran off the road, rolling down an embankment and into a creek.” Whitting, along with 2 of the 3 other passengers, ages 16 and 19, died in the crash. According to the toxicology report, all three deceased teenagers had taken Xanax and marijuana. Whitting’s toxicology “recorded THC levels at higher than 5 nanograms or more of active THC (delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol) per milliliter of blood, which under Colorado law is considered impaired while driving.” 5 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 515 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page | 30 Man Killed, Woman and Two Children Injured after Vehicle Careens off I-76: Anthony Griego, 28, “was driving very aggressively and speeding, and had been trying to pass a semi-truck using the shoulder when he lost control,” according to Colorado State Patrol, just before 7 a.m. on December 27, 2016. “Troopers say Griego lost control, blew thought a guardrail, went airborne and flipped the truck nearly 20 feet down onto the road below.” Both Griego and the adult female passenger were not wearing seatbelts and were ejected from the vehicle. Griego died at the scene. The female passenger suffered a shattered pelvis, broke her spine in three places, and was in a coma. The two children passengers, 7 year-old Jazlynn, had a punctured lung and, 6 year-old Alexis, had a fractured skull and broken collar bone. An autopsy of Griego showed he had 19ng/mL of THC in his system at the time of the crash. That is nearly 4 times the legal limit. 6, 7 “I fell asleep” Boulder Teen Pleads Guilty to Vehicular Homicide: Quinn Hefferan faces up to two years in the Colorado Department of Youth Corrections for killing Stacy Reynolds (30) and Joe Ramas (39) on May 7th 2016. Hefferan, who was 17 years old at the time of the accident, told the judge he “had split a joint with his friends” and fell asleep at the wheel while trying to make his midnight curfew. Hefferan rear ended the couple “at speeds upwards of 45 miles per hour... police did not find any evidence the teen driver tried to brake before the crash.” According to the toxicology report, he had 4 times the legal limit of THC in his system. Cassie Drew, a friend of the couple says, “It’s not about resentment or getting back, or feeling angry. [Hefferan’s] life is forever changed and we recognize that, we recognize how much this will impact him and his family.” 8, 9 Middle School Counselor Killed by High Driver as She Helped Fellow Motorist: On July 10, 2016, a counselor at Wolf Point Middle School, in Montana, was hit by a car and killed by an impaired driver in Colorado as she stopped to help another driver. The Jefferson County coroner in Colorado identified the woman as Jana Elliott, 56. She died of multiple blunt force trauma injuries. Elliott is identified as a counselor for the sixth grade in Montana. The driver who hit Elliott, identified as Curtis Blodgett, 24, is being charged with vehicular homicide for allegedly smoking marijuana prior to the crash, according to The Denver Post. Blodgett allegedly admitted he had smoked marijuana that day. Detectives are working to determine whether Blodgett was legally impaired at the time of the crash. “How much he had in his system and what he had in his system will determine whether additional charges could be filed,” Lakewood Police Spokesman Steve Davis told The Post (subsequent testing revealed Blodgett had 4.8 ng/mL of THC in his system). 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 516 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page | 31 According to the Lakewood Police Department Traffic Unit, Elliott was driving on US Highway 6 when a vehicle traveling in the left lane lost the bicycle it was carrying on its top. The driver of the vehicle stopped to retrieve the bike and Elliott stopped along the shoulder as well to help. After they retrieved the bicycle and were preparing to drive away, another vehicle rear ended Elliott’s vehicle at a speed of 65 mph. Elliott was killed in the crash. 10 Suspected DUI Driver Runs A Red Light: On August 30th, 2017, at around 5:30 a.m. a driver in a Toyota 4Runner ran a red light and crashed into a public transit bus. Two people were injured in the crash. Police investigating the crash found “marijuana in the 4Runner and the crash is being investigated as a possible DUI for alcohol and marijuana.” The typically busy intersection in Wheat Ridge, CO had to be closed down for several hours during rush hour. 11 For Further Information on Impaired Driving See Page 147 Sources 1 David Migoya, “Exclusive: Traffic fatalities linked to marijuana are up sharply in Colorado. Is legalization to blame?” The Denver Post, August 25th, 2017, <http://www.denverpost.com/2017/08/25/colorado-marijuana-traffic-fatalities/>, accessed August 25th, 2017. 2 National Center for Statistics and Analysis, “The Economic and Societal Impact Of Motor Vehicle Crashes,” National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, DC, revised May 2015, <https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/812013>, accessed August 31st, 2017. 3 Cost of a DUI brochure, <https://www.codot.gov/library/brochures/COSTDUI09.pdf/view>, accessed February 19, 2015. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 517 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page | 32 4 Amelia Arvesen, Times-Call, July 29, 2016, “Driver accused of killing Longmont girl riding bike thought he’d hit curb,” <http://www.timescall.com/news/crime/ci_30185142/driver-accused-killing-longmont- girl-bike-thought-hed,” accessed July 29, 2016. 5 Yesenia Robles, “Autopsy shows teens in fatal Conifer crash had traces of Xanax and marijuana in their system,” The Denver Post, July 7th 2016, <http://www.denverpost.com/2016/07/07/teens-conifer-crash-traces-drugs-thc/>, accessed August 28th, 2017. 6 Allison Sylte, “Man killed, woman and two children injured after vehicle careens off I-76,” 9NEWS, December 27, 2016, <http://www.9news.com/traffic/man- killed-woman-and-two-children-injured-after-vehicle-careens-off-i-76/379100251>, accessed September 25, 2017. 7 Macradee Aegerter, “CSP: Driver who went off elevated section of I-76 may have been high,” FOX31 Denver, December 28, 2016, <http://kdvr.com/2016/12/28/csp- marijuana-may-have-been-contributing-factor-in-deadly-crash/>, accessed September 25, 2017. 8 Michell Byars, “’I fell asleep’: Boulder teen pleads guilty to vehicular homicide, DUI in crash that killed 2,” The Daily Camera, December 16th, 2016, <http://www.dailycamera.com/news/boulder/ci_30665690/quinn-hefferan-boulder-fatal- crash-dui>, accessed August 23, 2017. 9 Lauren DiSpirito, “Teen Accused Of Being Stoned In Crash That Killed Boulder Couple,” CBS Denver, June 11th 2016, <http://Denver.cbslocal.com/2016/06/11/stacey- reynolds-joe-rama-fatal-crash/>, accessed August 23rd, 2017. 10 Aja Goare, “Wolf Point school counselor killed by car while helping other driver in Colorado,” KTVS.com, July 13, 2016, <http://www.ktvq.com/story/32440083/wolf-point-school-counselor-killed-by-car-while- helping-other-driver-in-colorado>, accessed July 13, 2016. 11 Chuck Hickey, “Police: Suspected DUI driver runs red light, crashed into RTD bus in Wheat Ridge,” Fox 31 Denver, August 30th 2017, <http://kdvr.com/2017/08/30/rtd-bus-3-vehicles-involved-in-wheat-ridge-crash/>, accessed August 30th, 2017. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 518 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page | 33 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Some Findings  Youth past month marijuana use increased 12 percent in the three-year average (2013-2015) since Colorado legalized recreational marijuana compared to the three-year average prior to legalization (2010-2012).  The latest 2014/2015 results show Colorado youth ranked #1 in the nation for past month marijuana use, up from #4 in 2011/2012 and #14 in 2005/2006.  Colorado youth past month marijuana use for 2014/2015 was 55 percent higher than the national average compared to 39 percent higher in 2011/2012.  The top ten states with the highest rate of current marijuana youth use were all medical marijuana states, whereas the bottom ten were all non-medical- marijuana states. Surveys NOT Utilized  Rocky Mountain HIDTA did not use the following datasets in this report because of the following reasons: Healthy Kids Colorado Survey (HKCS) The HKCS shows a 7.6 percent increase in student marijuana use from 2013 (19.7 percent) to 2015 (21.2 percent). According to a front page article in The Denver Post (June 21, 2016), the increase was not statistically significant and thus “Pot use among Colorado teens flat.” In fact, The Denver Post released an editorial on June 22, 2016 titled “Colorado’s good news on teen pot use.” An analysis of the data paints a different picture of student marijuana use in Colorado. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 519 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page | 34 Some concerns with the HKCS include:  Jefferson County (the 2nd largest school district), Douglas County (the 3rd largest school district), El Paso County (Colorado Springs, 2nd largest metro area), and Weld County results were listed as N/A which means data not available due to low participation in the region. NOTE: This is a similar reason why HKCS results were considered unweighted by the national YRBS survey.  In 2015 the HKCS survey had a response rate of 46 percent, which is well below the 60 percent rate required by YRBS. Even though HKCS samples a large number of students, their participation rate is below the industry standard for weighted data.  From 2013 to 2015, marijuana use: o High School – increased 14 percent among seniors and 19 percent among juniors. o Middle School – increased 96 percent for 7th Graders and 144 percent among 6th Graders. SOURCE: Colorado Department Public Health and Environment, Healthy Kids Colorado Survey For a detailed analysis and additional data, go to www.rmhidta.org and click on the Reports tab to read “Colorado Youth Marijuana Use: Up – Down – Flat? Examine the Data and You Decide!” 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 6th 7th 8th 9th 10th 11th 12th 0.9 4.5 8.7 13.7 19.0 22.1 24.3 2.2 8.8 8.8 12.4 18.8 26.3 27.8 Percent of PrevalenceHealthy Kids Colorado Survey: Current Marijuana Use for High School and Middle School Students in Colorado 2013 2015 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 520 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page | 35 Monitoring the Future (MTF) Study Although Colorado cited Monitoring the Future data in a response letter to Attorney General Jeff Sessions, the study is designed to be nationally-representative and not state-representative. MTF does not provide usable estimates for the specific state of Colorado because of the state’s relatively small size. Colorado is only 1.6 percent of the total U.S. population; thus, the sampling would only be 1.6 percent of Colorado schools (400) or about 6 schools per year. Since 2010, the survey sampled an average of 4.6 Colorado schools. In 2014 and 2015, there were four schools surveyed each year of which three were eighth grade. Therefore, the MTF study is not useful for state data pertaining to Colorado for school-age drug use data and trends. Centers for Disease Control Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS) In 2015, Colorado fell short of the required 60 percent participation rate and was, therefore, not included with weighted data in this survey. Additionally, upon further review, it was discovered that since 1991 the state of Colorado has only been represented in the High School YRBS survey with weighted data four times. Since 1995, Colorado has only been represented in the Middle School YRBS survey by weighted data twice. States that participated in the 2015 Middle School and High School YRBS surveys are represented in dark purple in the below maps. It should be noted, in 2015, high schools in the following ten states were not included with weighted high school data: Utah, Colorado, Kansas, Texas, Louisiana, Georgia, Iowa, Wisconsin, Ohio, and New Jersey. Washington, Oregon, and Minnesota did not participate in the survey. Centers for Disease Control Youth Risk Behavior Survey 2015 YRBS Participation Map Middle Schools High Schools SOURCE: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Adolescent and School Health, YRBS Participation Maps and History http://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/data/yrbs/participation.htm 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 521 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page | 36 Use Data Youth Ages 12 to 17 Years Old SOURCE: SAMHSA.gov, National Survey on Drug Use and Health 2014 and 2015 SOURCE: SAMHSA.gov, National Survey on Drug Use and Health 2014 and 2015 0.00% 2.00% 4.00% 6.00% 8.00% 10.00% 12.00% 2010-2012 Pre-Recreational Legalization 2013-2015 Post-Recreational Legalization 10.60% 11.85%Average PercentAverage Past Month Use of Marijuana Youth Ages 12 to 17 Years Old 12% Increase 6.74 6.67 6.67 7.03 7.38 7.64 7.55 7.15 7.22 7.20 7.60 8.15 9.13 10.17 9.91 10.72 10.47 11.16 12.56 11.13 0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 14/15Average PercentAnnual Averages of Data Collection Past Month Marijuana Use Youth Ages 12 to 17 Years Old National Average Colorado Average Commercialization Legalization 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 522 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page | 37 SOURCE: SAMHSA.gov, National Survey on Drug Use and Health, Substate Region Estimates 2006-2014 NOTE: SUB-STATE DATA IS ONLY AVAILABLE FROM THE NATIONAL SURVEY ON DRUG USE AND HEALTH IN THE ABOVE TIMEFRAMES. 0.00% 2.00% 4.00% 6.00% 8.00% 10.00% 12.00% 14.00% United States Colorado Denver Metro6.72%8.75%9.57%7.19%10.05%10.54%7.48%10.06%10.99%7.22%11.74%12.38%Average PercentPrevalence of Past 30-Day Marijuana Use Youth Ages 12 to 17 Years Old 2006-2008 2008-2010 2010-2012 2012-2014 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 523 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page | 38 SOURCE: SAMHSA.gov, National Survey on Drug Use and Health 2014 and 2015 NOTE: *California, Massachusetts, Maine and Nevada voted to legalize recreational marijuana in November 2016 **States that had legislation for medical marijuana signed into effect during 2015 0.00%2.00%4.00%6.00%8.00%10.00%12.00% Utah Alabama Nebraska Mississippi Iowa **Louisiana Oklahoma Virginia Tennessee North Carolina **Ohio West Virginia Hawaii **North Dakota Minnesota Kentucky South Dakota Kansas **Arkansas Idaho Illinois Missouri South Carolina Wyoming **Florida New Jersey Texas Georgia **Pennsylvania *Nevada Delaware New York Wisconsin Arizona Michigan Indiana *California Connecticut New Mexico Montana Washington Maryland *Massachusetts Oregon New Hampshire *Maine Rhode Island Alaska Vermont Colorado Past Month Usage, 12 to 17 Years Old, 2014/2015 As of 2015: Legalized Recreational/Medical Marijuana Legalized Medical Marijuana Non-Legalized Medical Marijuana 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 524 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page | 39 SOURCE: SAMHSA.gov, National Survey on Drug Use and Health 2014 and 2015 Past Month Marijuana Use Youth Ages 12 to 17 Years Old, 2014/2015 Top 10 (Medical/Recreational States) Bottom 10 (Non-Medical or Recreational States) National Average = 7.20% 1. Colorado – 11.13% 41. North Carolina – 5.97% 2. Vermont – 10.86% 42. Tennessee – 5.90 % 3. Alaska – 10.64% 43. Virginia – 5.44% 4. Rhode Island – 10.19% 44. Oklahoma – 5.42% 5. Maine – 10.01% 45. Louisiana – 5.33% 6. New Hampshire – 9.44% 46. Iowa – 5.30% 7. Oregon – 9.42% 47. Mississippi – 5.29% 8. Massachusetts – 9.22% 48. Nebraska – 5.26% 9. Maryland – 9.20% 49. Alabama – 5.16% 10. Washington – 9.17% 50. Utah – 4.54% SOURCE: SAMHSA.gov, National Survey on Drug Use and Health 2014 and 2015 0.0% 2.0% 4.0% 6.0% 8.0% 10.0% 12.0% Non-Medical Marijuana States Medical Marijuana States Recreational/Medical Marijuana States 6.19% 8.25% 10.09%Average PercentAverage Past Month Use Youth Ages 12 to 17 Years Old, 2014/2015 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 525 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page | 40 SOURCE: Division of Probation Services/State Court Administrator’s Office 0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00 35.00 40.00 45.00 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 22.24 24.90 25.26 26.15 26.59 28.31 28.37 31.91 33.77 34.40 34.83 Percent PositiveColorado Probation Percent of All Urinalysis Tests Positive for Marijuana Youth Ages 10 -17 Years Old Commercialization Legalization 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 526 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page | 41 School Data Impact on School Violation Numbers  “Note that Senate Bill 12-046 and House Bill 12-1345 targeted reform of ‘zero tolerance’ policies in schools, and appear to have decreased expulsions, suspensions and referrals to law enforcement.” – Colorado Department of Public Safety, Marijuana Legalization in Colorado: Early Findings, A Report Pursuant to Senate Bill 13-283, March 2016 Data for the 2016-2017 school year were not available by the time of release for this report. SOURCE: Colorado Department of Education, 10-Year Trend Data: State Suspension and Expulsion Incident Rates and Reasons NOTE: THE COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION BEGAN COLLECTING MARIJUANA VIOLATIONS SEPARATELY FROM ALL DRUG VIOLATIONS DURING THE 2015-2016 SCHOOL YEAR. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 527 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page | 42 SOURCE: Colorado Department of Education, 10-Year Trend Data: State Suspension and Expulsion Incident Rates and Reasons  In school year 2015/2016, 62 percent of all drug expulsions and suspensions were for marijuana violations. SOURCE: Colorado Department of Education, 10-Year Trend Data: State Suspension and Expulsion Incident Rates and Reasons  In school year 2015/2016, 73 percent of all drug related referrals to law enforcement were for marijuana violations. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 528 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page | 43 SOURCE: Colorado Department of Education NOTE: ROCKY MOUNTAIN HIDTA HAS BEEN ASKED ABOUT THE NUMBER OF SCHOOL DROPOUTS IN COLORADO NUMEROUS TIMES AND IS, THEREFORE, PROVIDING THE DATA. ROCKY MOUNTAIN HIDTA IS NOT ATTRIBUTING THE NUMBER OF DROPOUTS TO MARIJUANA LEGALIZATION. Colorado School Resource Officer Survey In June 2017, 76 school resource officers (SRO) participated in a survey concerning marijuana in schools. The majority were assigned to high schools and had a tenure of three years or more as a SRO. They were asked for their professional opinion on a number of questions. The questions and their responses are shown in the following pages. 10,200 10,400 10,600 10,800 11,000 11,200 2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016 10,664 10,546 11,114 10,530 Number of DropoutsNumber of Reported School Dropouts 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 529 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page | 44 Question: Since the legalization of recreational marijuana, what impact has there been on marijuana-related incidents at your school? SOURCE: Colorado Association of School Resource Officers (CASRO) and Rocky Mountain HIDTA Question: What were the most predominant marijuana violations by students on campus? SOURCE: Colorado Association of School Resource Officers (CASRO) and Rocky Mountain HIDTA 86% 4% 10% Increase Decrease No Change Impact on Marijuana-Related Incidents, 2017 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50% Student sharing marijuana with other students Student selling marijuana to other students Student in possession of marijuana infused edibles Student in possession of marijuana Student under the influence during school hours 2% 5%6% 36% 44%Percent of SRO ResponsesPredominant Marijuana Violations, 2017 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 530 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page | 45 Question: Where do the students get their marijuana? SOURCE: Colorado Association of School Resource Officers (CASRO) and Rocky Mountain HIDTA School Counselor Survey  Since the 2015 survey, the Colorado School Counselor Association has elected not to participate in any further surveys. In August 2015, 188 school counselors participated in a survey concerning the legalization of marijuana in schools. The majority were assigned to high schools with an average tenure of ten years. They were asked for their professional opinion on a number of question. The questions and their responses are shown in the following pages. 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% Medical Marijuana Cardholders Medical Marijuana Dispensaries Medical Marijuana Caregivers Parents Black Market Friend Who Obtained it Legally 7%5% 2% 23%26% 39%Percent of SRO ResponsesStudent Marijuana Source, 2017 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 531 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page | 46 Question: Since the legalization of recreational marijuana, what impact has there been on marijuana-related incidents at your school? SOURCE Colorado School Counselor Association (CSCA) and Rocky Mountain HIDTA Question: What were the most predominant marijuana violations by students on campus? SOURCE Colorado School Counselor Association (CSCA) and Rocky Mountain HIDTA 68%2% 30%Increased Decreased No Change Impact on Marijuana-Related Incidents, 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% Student selling marijuana to other students Student sharing marijuana with other students Student in possession of marijuana infused edibles Student in possession of marijuana Student under the influence during school hours 5%6% 9% 30% 51%Percent of Counselor ResponsesPredominant Marijuana Violations, 2015 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 532 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page | 47 Question: Where do the students get their marijuana? SOURCE Colorado School Counselor Association (CSCA) and Rocky Mountain HIDTA Case Examples My son and his Marijuana: “It was February 6th at 3:15 a.m. when my oldest son woke me and urgently whispered that his brother had just tried to take his own life. I couldn’t comprehend that my second-born, a high achieving, gifted young man had just attempted suicide by hanging. Thankfully, his brother discovered him and saved his life before we lost him. It changed our family forever. Later that morning after the assessment and intake procedure, the hospital social worker explained that my son’s prescription for Adderall combined with his heavy marijuana use had caused a psychotic break called marijuana induced psychosis. She said this was quite common among young people today. I felt blindsided as I had no idea my son was using marijuana. Sadly, in-patient treatment was not successful, nor was out-patient treatment. Our lives began to revolve around our son’s addiction and the never-ending appointments, meetings, confrontations, stress, and bizarre drama that we never Student Marijuana Source, 2015 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 533 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page | 48 imagined we would experience. It was both frustrating and heartbreaking to listen as my son frequently described his passionate commitment to marijuana and observe his inability to see how negatively it impacted – even controlled him. We learned we were not fighting a behavior but a mind-set that was cemented into his belief system. Marijuana had become his life, his religion, and his identity. In spite of a multitude of problems and ongoing depression that continue to prevent him from living successfully, his belief that marijuana will solve all of his troubles remains ingrained in him and leaves our family feeling fearful and often hopeless to help him.” 1 Teen Shot While Trying to Sell Marijuana: While attempting to sell marijuana to a car filled with four other teenagers, an 18 year old in Greeley, Colorado was shot with a handgun. The seller had been leaning into the car window when the occupants shot him and quickly drove away. The wound sustained by the teenager was not life threatening. 2 One Teen Wounded, Another Killed While Trying to Steal Marijuana: Shortly after 2 a.m. on Sunday, October 9th, 2016, Denver Police received a call from a 14-year-old boy stating that he and his friend had been shot. Both boys had been trying to steal marijuana plants from a backyard when the resident was alerted to their presence and fired multiple shots at the boys. Both boys were struck as they were trying to escape the backyard, the 14-year-old was wounded and the 15-year old boy was killed. The home owner was arrested and held for investigation of murder, attempted murder and investigation of felony marijuana cultivation. 3 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 534 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page | 49 Some Comments from School Resource Officers They End Up Sick: o “A student came to after-prom after eating some marijuana edibles. She later got very sick and was transported by ambulance to the hospital. She later admitted to being given the edibles by another student.” o “A student asked another to get them marijuana. Student brought some edibles, later that week, and then the other student shared the edibles with 5 other people, who became sick. All students were disciplined. It is very common for students to bring edibles and share with others, and they end up sick from eating too much.” o “8th grader brought marijuana brownies to school, gave them to friends and then overdosed on them and ended up in the hospital.” Organized and Well-planned Distribution: o “Students sometimes put Marijuana in Cheetos bags and sell to each other.” o “Our agency just processed a 12 year old student for distribution of MJ. The child admitted to stealing ‘unnoticeable’ amounts of MJ from several different relatives, who purchased the recreational MJ legally, then sold it to other students. The 12 year old suspect had also recruited other students to sell the MJ. The crime was eventually reported by the sister of one of the accomplices.” o “Student, age 16 (10th grade) recently came with father from California (father wanted to start a grow operation) frequently peddled marijuana on and around campus. Eventually, school/police alerted that he was packing a gun.” o “Student has a medicinal marijuana card, became marijuana dealer to fellow students, arrested and is being prosecuted for distribution.” o “A student baked THC brownies and sold them at school (10-12 grades). Students were charged [with distribution] of marijuana, it was organized and well-planned in school distribution (9-11 grades). Burglarized Dispensary: “Five male students were found on school grounds with an overabundance of dabs and shatter that was still in the packaging from a dispensary that had been burglarized the previous weekend by five masked individuals that were caught on surveillance tape.” 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 535 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page | 50 Student Commits Suicide: “Sophomore caught selling marijuana to students on campus. He was distributing for another student. That student was obtaining high quality marijuana on the black market. Original was charged and committed suicide 3 days later. Other subject made suicidal statements and received treatment.” Fine for Their Kids to Use: “Multiple students at my ‘affluent’ middle school obtain marijuana and use marijuana with their families who all seem to have their own marijuana grows. Most of these parents think their ‘medicine’ is fine for their kids to use.” Social Media Delivery Service: “Students using social media to order up their hash/marijuana/shatter and have it delivered to their local park or fast food joint. No names exchanged and very difficult to prove a case. Was able to get a warrant on a suspect with the help of MED (Marijuana Enforcement Division). “ Attempting to Official a Game: “Referee in possession and smelling like marijuana while attempting to official a game.” Leave Campus and Come Back High:  “Students will leave campus and smoke either in their home, parks, or cars and come back after lunch. Adult dealers have trolled [the] parking lot for students looking to buy marijuana. Lots of marijuana use at juvenile parties on the weekend.”  “Most of our marijuana offenses in the schools are at the middle school and high school level where students leave campus, get high and come back to school. Some are caught with possession of marijuana and some are only consuming.” Young Students Stealing from Parents:  “Ten year old in possession and consuming in school using parents pot and pipe”  “6th grader stealing and then bringing mom’s medical marijuana to school, sharing with friends and smoking in bathrooms before school.”  “5th grader stealing recreational marijuana from parents and bringing it to school, showing it to all his friends and then smoking it at school.” 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 536 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page | 51 Some Comments from School Counselors Halls Reek of Pot After Lunch:  “Many kids come back from lunch highly intoxicated from marijuana use. Halls reek of pot, so many kids are high that it is impossible to apprehend all but the most impaired.”  “They go off campus and smoke during lunch with friends. They will run home with friends during lunch and smoke then.”  “There have been several instances of students in their cars on lunch or during their off hours ‘hotboxing’ or smoking marijuana. Most students are seniors but on occasion, seniors will provide marijuana to 9th or 10th grade students.”  “2014/2015 school year, several students caught coming back from off-campus lunch under the influence of marijuana.”  “Had a student come back from lunch, teacher believed that they were high. Student was escorted to the office, student admitted they were indeed high to the administrator.”  “Students are often referred after lunch (open campus) after they have been riding around smoking marijuana with their friends.”  “More and more students are coming back to school high after lunch.”  “In April 2015, students were going out for a break. 2-3 students smoked marijuana about a block away from school. They smelled like pot when they got back.” Just a Plant: “In March of 2015 a fifth grade boy offered marijuana to another fifth grader on the playground. In October of 2014 a kindergarten girl described the pipe in her grandmother’s car and the store where you go to buy pipes. In May of 2015 a first grade girl reported that her mom smokes weed in the garage. ‘It’s not a drug, it’s just a plant.’” Arrives at School Stoned:  “At the beginning of the second semester, three middle school boys were routinely arriving late at school, and noticeable intoxicated.”  “We have middle school students who either come to school high, or have it on them in a bag. Or they have pipes on them.”  “In May 2015, a teacher witnessed 2 seniors smoking marijuana while driving to school. One student admitted to having done so; the other denied it.”  “Teaching a lesson in class during first period that started 7:30 AM and 2 students were already high in class.” 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 537 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page | 52  “A male 13 y/o student fell asleep in several classes. He was interviewed by the school counselor and the RSO (sic). He was assessed as being high and admitted that he uses marijuana often before school. He steals it from his older brother.”  “12 yr. old, sixth grader, was suspected of coming to summer school high. When confronted he told the teacher that he smoked it at home the night before but denied being high at the time. Later, he confirmed that he had smoked early that morning. The marijuana came from his mother’s stash.” New Use of Bathrooms:  “2 students were smoking marijuana in the restroom last year.”  “8th grade male student had marijuana in his locker, classmates reported it. 8th grade female student smoked a joint in a school bathroom during school hours. Shared it with a friend.”  “7th grade girl last year had hidden marijuana and a pipe in the girl’s restroom and told several friends who began getting bathroom break passes from various classrooms. Security noted an increased traffic flow to and from that restroom and found the weed and soon after the violators.” It’s Legal:  “3 or 4 times in the last school year, students have come to school under the influence after meeting at homes where parents were absent, sharing marijuana off campus and then bringing it on campus. 7th and 8th grade students have been involved, and most often their reaction when caught is ‘it’s legal’.”  “I met with at least 5 students last year alone that have been showing significant signs of drug use or were caught and they all said they will not stop using weed on a daily basis. Their justification was it’s fine because it’s legal. If it’s legal it’s not as bad as what adults say about the risks.” Grades Decline: “I would like to say that in general our Marijuana incidents have not gone up. We have a savvy population that knows to keep it away from school. However, I have seen a huge spike in talking with kids about it in my sessions. Last year I had two very intelligent students (above 4.0) that used marijuana 2-6 times a week. Both of them had grades decline and significant social emotional issues spike in the spring of their Senior Year. They also both had violations at school.” Dad Allows Pot Smoking: “We had reports of two students (brothers) appear to be high at school. Our officer assessed both of them and discovered that their father, who had a medical marijuana card, was having them both “smoke a bowl” before school. He thought it would make their school day easier.” 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 538 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page | 53 Parents High: “At our elementary school, we have noticed an increased number of parents showing up to school high. Kids have also brought [marijuana] to school to show their friends.” Difficulty in Assessment: “For school personnel, it is more difficult to evaluate what substance a student is under the influence of. We can smell alcohol and smoked marijuana but the edibles and vapes are hard to detect.” Drug Canine Use: “I would like to just offer that we need policy that allows for more use of drug dogs and not having to forewarn students or parents when these dogs will be present. Students and especially dealers, the ones we need to catch, are very vigilant in making adjustments when these resources are used.” For Further Information on Youth Marijuana Use See Page 151 Sources 1 Jo McGuire, “One Mom’s Story: Marijuana and My Kid,” Jo McGuire Inc., August 29th, 2017, < https://jomcguire.wordpress.com/>, accessed August 29th, 2017. 2 Nate Miller, “Sheriff’s office seeks public’s help to learn more about northeast Greeley shooting,” The Tribune, May 16, 2017, <http://www.greeleytribune.com/news/crime/sheriffs-office-seeks-publics-help-to-learn- more-about-northeast-greeley-shooting/>, accessed September 12, 2017. 3 Kirk Mitchell, “Denver man arrested after allegedly shooting, killing teen in marijuana-filled backyard,” Denver Post, October 10, 2016, <http://www.denverpost.com/2016/10/10/marijuana-grow-house-slaying-denver-man- arrested/>, accessed September 12, 2017. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 539 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 2: Youth Marijuana Use Page | 54 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 540 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 3: Adult Marijuana Use Page | 55 SECTION 3: Adult Marijuana Use Some Findings  College age past month marijuana use increased 16 percent in the three-year average (2013-2015) since Colorado legalized recreational marijuana compared to the three-year average prior to legalization (2010-2012).  The latest 2014/2015 results show Colorado college-age adults ranked #2 in the nation for past-month marijuana use, up from #3 in 2011/2012 and #8 in 2005/2006.  Colorado college age past month marijuana use for 2014/2015 was 61 percent higher than the national average compared to 42 percent higher in 2011/2012.  Adult past-month marijuana use increased 71 percent in the three-year average (2013-2015) since Colorado legalized recreational marijuana compared to the three-year average prior to legalization (2010-2012).  The latest 2014/2015 results show Colorado adults ranked #1 in the nation for past month marijuana use, up from #7 in 2011/2012 and #8 in 2005/2006.  Colorado adult past month marijuana use for 2014/2015 was 124 percent higher than the national average compared to 51 percent higher in 2011/2012. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 541 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 3: Adult Marijuana Use Page | 56 Use Data College Age 18 to 25 Years Old SOURCE: SAMHSA.gov, National Survey on Drug Use and Health 2014 and 2015 SOURCE: SAMHSA.gov, National Survey on Drug Use and Health 2014 and 2015 0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 2010-2012 Pre-Recreational Legalization 2013-2015 Post-Recreational Legalization 27.04% 31.50%Average PercentAverage Past Month Use of Marijuana College Age 18 to 25 Years Old 16% Increase 16.42 16.34 16.45 17.42 18.39 18.78 18.89 18.91 19.32 19.7 21.43 22.21 23.44 24.28 26.35 27.26 26.81 29.05 31.24 31.75 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 14/15Average PercentAnnual Averages of Data Collection Past Month Marijuana Use College Age 18 to 25 Years Old National Average Colorado Average Legalization Commercialization 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 542 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 3: Adult Marijuana Use Page | 57 SOURCE: SAMHSA.gov, National Survey on Drug Use and Health, Substate Region Estimates 2006-2014 NOTE: SUB-STATE DATA IS ONLY AVAILABLE FROM THE NATIONAL SURVEY ON DRUG USE AND HEALTH IN THE ABOVE TIMEFRAMES. 0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00% 35.00% United States Colorado Denver Metro16.42%21.87%24.38%17.71%25.38%26.12%18.71%27.22%30.88%19.13%29.86%31.98%Average PercentPrevalence of Past 30-Day Marijuana Use College Age 18 to 25 Years Old 2006-2008 2008-2010 2010-2012 2012-2014 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 543 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 3: Adult Marijuana Use Page | 58 SOURCE: SAMHSA.gov, National Survey on Drug Use and Health 2013 and 2014 NOTE: *California, Massachusetts, Maine and Nevada voted to legalize recreational marijuana in November 2016 **States that had legislation for medical marijuana signed into effect during 2015 0.00%5.00%10.00%15.00%20.00%25.00%30.00%35.00%40.00% Utah Iowa Idaho Mississippi Alabama **North Dakota Oklahoma Texas Wyoming Kansas Tennessee Hawaii **Louisiana Kentucky Nebraska **Arkansas South Dakota *Nevada Wisconsin Virginia Georgia West Virginia Arizona New Jersey **Pennsylvania North Carolina Minnesota Missouri **Ohio Illinois *California New Mexico Indiana **Florida South Carolina Delaware Washington New York Michigan Montana Maryland Connecticut Alaska Oregon *Massachusetts Rhode Island New Hampshire *Maine Colorado Vermont As of 2015: Legalized Recreational/Medical Marijuana Legalized Medical Marijuana Non-Legalized Medical Marijuana Past Month Usage, 18 to 25 Years Old, 2014/2015 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 544 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 3: Adult Marijuana Use Page | 59 SOURCE: SAMHSA.gov, National Survey on Drug Use and Health 2014 and 2015 Past Month Marijuana Use College Age 18 to 25 Years Old, 2014/2015 Top 10 (Medical/Recreational States) Bottom 10 (Non-Medical or Recreational States) National Average = 19.99% 1. Vermont – 34.95% 41. Kansas – 15.73% 2. Colorado – 31.75% 42. Wyoming – 15.64% 3. Maine – 29.72% 43. Texas – 15.08% 4. New Hampshire – 29.12% 44. Oklahoma – 14.87 % 5. Rhode Island – 28.89% 45. North Dakota – 14.77% 6. Massachusetts – 27.39% 46. Alabama – 14.33% 7. Oregon – 26.29% 47. Mississippi – 13.91% 8. Alaska – 25.02% 48. Idaho – 13.69% 9. Connecticut – 24.99% 49. Iowa – 12.67% 10. Maryland – 24.87% 50. Utah – 11.07% SOURCE: SAMHSA.gov, National Survey on Drug Use and Health 2014 and 2015 0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00% Non-Medical Marijuana States Medical Marijuana States Recreational/Medical Marijuana States 16.81% 23.19% 26.23%Average PercentAverage Past Month Use College Age 18 to 25 Years Old, 2014/2015 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 545 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 3: Adult Marijuana Use Page | 60 Adults Age 26+ Years Old SOURCE: SAMHSA.gov, National Survey on Drug Use and Health 2014 and 2015 SOURCE: SAMHSA.gov, National Survey on Drug Use and Health 2014 and 2015 0.00% 2.00% 4.00% 6.00% 8.00% 10.00% 12.00% 14.00% 2010-2012 Pre-Recreational Legalization 2013-2015 Post-Recreational Legalization 7.91% 13.55%Average PercentAverage Past Month Use of Marijuana Adults Ages 26+ Years Old 71% Increase 4.1 4.02 4.06 4.42 4.68 4.8 5.05 5.45 6.11 6.55 5.32 5.88 6.88 7.31 8.86 8.19 7.63 10.13 12.45 14.65 0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00 18.00 20.00 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 14/15Average PercentAnnual Averages of Data Collection Past Month Marijuana Use Adults Age 26+ Years Old National Average Colorado Average Legalization Commercialization 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 546 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 3: Adult Marijuana Use Page | 61 SOURCE: SAMHSA.gov, National Survey on Drug Use and Health, Substate Region Estimates 2006-2014 NOTE: SUB-STATE DATA IS ONLY AVAILABLE FROM THE NATIONAL SURVEY ON DRUG USE AND HEALTH IN THE ABOVE TIMEFRAMES. 0.00% 2.00% 4.00% 6.00% 8.00% 10.00% 12.00% 14.00% United States Colorado Denver Metro4.12%6.29%7.33%4.58%8.91%10.19%4.92%9.22%10.93%5.83%11.60%12.33%Average PercentPrevalence of Past 30-Day Marijuana Use Adults Age 26+ Years Old 2006-2008 2008-2010 2010-2012 2012-2014 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 547 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 3: Adult Marijuana Use Page | 62 SOURCE: SAMHSA.gov, National Survey on Drug Use and Health 2014 and 2015 NOTE: *California, Massachusetts, Maine and Nevada voted to legalize recreational marijuana in November 2016 **States that had legislation for medical marijuana signed into effect during 2015 0.00%2.00%4.00%6.00%8.00%10.00%12.00%14.00%16.00% Iowa Utah Mississippi Alabama **North Dakota Texas Nebraska Wyoming **Louisiana Tennessee Oklahoma Virginia Wisconsin Idaho West Virginia South Dakota New Jersey North Carolina Kentucky **Arkansas Kansas Minnesota **Ohio Georgia **Florida Delaware **Pennsylvania Illinois South Carolina Missouri *Nevada Indiana Arizona Hawaii Maryland Connecticut New York *California Michigan New Mexico *Massachusetts Montana New Hampshire Washington Rhode Island Oregon Vermont *Maine Alaska Colorado Past Month Usage, 26+ Years Old, 2014/2015 As of 2015: Legalized Recreational/Medical Marijuana Legalized Medical Marijuana Non-Legalized Medical Marijuana 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 548 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 3: Adult Marijuana Use Page | 63 SOURCE: SAMHSA.gov, National Survey on Drug Use and Health 2014 and 2015 Past Month Marijuana Use Adults Ages 26+ Years Old, 2014/2015 Top 10 (Medical/Recreational States) Bottom 10 (Non-Medical or Recreational States) National Average = 6.76% 1. Colorado – 14.65% 41. Tennessee – 4.81% 2. Alaska – 12.83% 42. Louisiana – 4.71% 3. Maine – 11.84% 43. Wyoming – 4.71% 4. Vermont – 11.61% 44. Nebraska – 4.53% 5. Oregon – 10.99% 45. Texas – 4.32% 6. Rhode Island – 10.39% 46. North Dakota – 3.93% 7. Washington – 9.74% 47. Alabama – 3.86% 8. New Hampshire – 9.65% 48. Mississippi – 3.81% 9. Montana – 9.41% 49. Utah – 3.75% 10. Massachusetts – 9.21% 50. Iowa – 3.30% SOURCE: SAMHSA.gov, National Survey on Drug Use and Health 2014 and 2015 0.00% 2.00% 4.00% 6.00% 8.00% 10.00% 12.00% 14.00% Non-Medical Marijuana States Medical Marijuana States Recreational/Medical Marijuana States 5.10% 8.01% 12.05%Average PercentAverage Past Month Use Adults Ages 26+ Years Old, 2014/2015 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 549 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 3: Adult Marijuana Use Page | 64 Colorado Adult Marijuana Use Demographics1 According to the Colorado Behavior Risk Factor Surveillance System, 2016:  13.6 percent of adults (18+ years old) are current users of marijuana o Nearly half of current users (47 percent) report using marijuana daily  1 out of 5 current users (20 percent) report driving after using marijuana  Top demographics of those who report current marijuana use: o Between 18 to 25 years old  Next highest are those 26 to 34 years old o Black, Non- Hispanic individuals  Next highest are Multiracial (Non-Hispanic) individuals o Gay/Lesbian/Bisexual adults o Males  The Southwest region of Colorado reports the highest current marijuana use o The Southeast and Northwest regions are tied for second highest NOTE: THE BEHAVIORAL RISK FACTOR SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM (BRFSS) COLLECTS DATA ON ADULT, INDIVIDUAL-LEVEL BEHAVIORAL HEALTH RISK FACTORS. QUESTIONS SPECIFICALLY REGARDING MARIJUANA USE WERE NOT ADDED UNTIL 2014. – MONITORING HEALTH CONCERNS RELATED TO MARIJUANA IN COLORADO: 2016, COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT Case Examples Young Professional Commits Suicide at 23, Parents Question if THC is to Blame: Marc Bullard, a young professional with no apparent signs of depression or mental illness committed suicide in April 2016. He had recently graduated college “near the top of his college class,” and had been hired at a consulting firm in Denver. “In December of 2015, he was on top of the world explaining in a video documenting his success that, ‘It’s been a good year..’ and that he was looking forward to making plans for 2016.” After his death, his parents began reading Marc’s personal diaries and found that he had been writing entries such as: I found out I was dabbing too much which I already knew and had cut back in February. But apparently if you overdo it, you can get almost like poison and experience some negative effects. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 550 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 3: Adult Marijuana Use Page | 65 Marc’s parents began to question “whether his death [was] related to his use of high potency THC.” Before Marc’s death neither of them had even heard of dabbing. Marc’s father Mike explained “I had the mindset, well, it’s just marijuana, it’s not going to hurt anything.” While Marc’s death certificate does not say marijuana was the cause of death, it “lists a contributing factor to ‘use of concentrated marijuana products.’”2 Parents Charged with Child Abuse for Identical Deaths of Two Babies: In Aurora, Colorado a couple was booked into jail on two counts of misdemeanor child abuse. Charges were filed against the couple after their second child died under similar circumstances as their first child who died two years previously. According to police reports, both babies “died while sleeping in bed with the parents” and both parents “appear[ed] to be intoxicated or under the influence.” During the investigation of the first child’s death there were “indications of alcohol and marijuana use.” The cause of death as shown on autopsy reports for each child was listed as undetermined, however per the Arapahoe County Coroner Dr. Kelly Lear-Kaul this is “because suffocation leaves no trace.” 3 Man Shoots Wife and Kills Neighbor in a “Marijuana and Caffeine-Fueled Paranoid State”: While home for lunch, Dr. Kenneth Atkinson heard shots being fired next door at his neighbor’s home. He went outside to see what was going on and “found his neighbor, Elizabeth Lyons, lying in a driveway, covered in blood.” Elizabeth Lyons had been shot in the back by her husband Kevin Lyons. Dr. Atkinson attempted to attend to Mrs. Lyons’ wounds when Kevin Lyons shot at him striking him in the leg. Dr. Atkinson attempted to call 911 but “more shots rang out as Lyons fired at Atkinson’s head at point-blank range, fatally wounding him.” Lyons was sentenced to life in prison plus 352 years in May 2017. Lyons’ public defender stated in defense of his actions that “Lyons suffered repeated head injuries – from sports, a car wreck and other activities – that, combined with substance abuse and difficult circumstances in his life, including marital and financial problems, left him delusional. Lyons was also in a marijuana and caffeine-fueled paranoid state on the day of the shooting.” 4 For Further Information on Adult Marijuana Use See Page 152 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 551 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 3: Adult Marijuana Use Page | 66 Sources 1 Colorado Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System 2016, “Marijuana Use in Colorado,” Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. 2 John Ferrugia, “Marijuana in Colorado: A warning about dabbing,” 9News, <http://www.9news.com/news/health/marijuana-in-colorado-a-warning-about- dabbing/346018775>, accessed September 12, 2017. 3 Rob Low, March 7, 2017, “Aurora parents charged with child abuse for identical deaths of 2 babies,” Fox 31News, <http://kdvr.com/2017/03/07/parents- charged-with-child-abuse-for-identical-deaths-of-2-babies/>, accessed April 19, 2017. 4 Jesse Paul, “Kevin Lyons apologizes for Centennial shooting rampage that killed beloved doctor, gets life in prison plus 352 years,” Denver Post, <http://www.denverpost.com/2017/06/05/kevin-lyons-centennial-shooting-rampage- killed-kenneth-atkinson/>, accessed September 12, 2017. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 552 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 4: Emergency Department and Hospital Marijuana-Related Admissions Page | 67 SECTION 4: Emergency Department and Hospital Marijuana- Related Admissions Some Findings  The yearly rate of emergency department visits related to marijuana increased 35 percent after the legalization of recreational marijuana (2011-2012 vs. 2013- September 2015).  Number of hospitalizations related to marijuana: o 2011 – 6,305 o 2012 – 6,715 o 2013 – 8,272 o 2014 – 11,439 o Jan-Sept 2015 – 10,901  The yearly number of marijuana-related hospitalizations increased 72 percent after the legalization of recreational marijuana (2009-2012 vs. 2013-September 2015). 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 553 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 4: Emergency Department and Hospital Marijuana-Related Admissions Page | 68 Definitions Marijuana-Related: Also referred to as “marijuana mentions.” Data could be obtained from lab tests, patient self-admission or some other form of validation obtained by the provider. Being marijuana-related does not necessarily prove marijuana was the cause of the emergency department admission or hospitalization. International Classification of Disease (ICD): A medical coding system used to classify diseases and related health problems.  **In 2015, ICD-10 (the tenth modification) was implemented in place of ICD-9. Although ICD-10 will allow for better analysis of disease patterns and treatment outcomes for the advancement of medical care, comparison of trends before and after the conversion can be made difficult and/or impossible. The number of codes increased from approximately 13,600 codes to approximately 69,000 codes. For the above reasons, hospitalization and emergency department data is only provided pre-conversion to ICD- 10.1 Emergency Department Data Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment NOTE: "POSSIBLE MARIJUANA EXPOSURES, DIAGNOSES, OR BILLING CODES IN ANY OF LISTED DIAGNOSIS CODES: THESE DATA WERE CHOSEN TO REPRESENT THE HD AND ED VISITS WHERE MARIJUANA COULD BE A CAUSAL, CONTRIBUTING, OR COEXISTING FACTOR NOTED BY THE PHYSICIAN DURING THE HD OR ED VISIT. FOR THESE DATA, MARIJUANA USE IS NOT NECESSARILY RELATED TO THE UNDERLYING REASON FOR THE HD OR ED VISIT. SOMETIMES THESE DATA ARE REFERRED TO AS HD OR ED VISITS ‘WITH ANY MENTION OF MARIJUANA.’” - COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT, MONITORING HEALTH CONCERNS RELATED TO MARIJUANA IN COLORADO: 2014 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 554 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 4: Emergency Department and Hospital Marijuana-Related Admissions Page | 69 SOURCE: Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment NOTE: DATA NOT AVAILABLE PRE-2011. EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT DATA FROM 2011 AND 2012 REFLECTS INCOMPLETE STATEWIDE REPORTING. INFERENCES CONCERNING TRENDS, INCLUDING 2011 AND 2012, SHOULD NOT BE MADE. 0 200 400 600 800 1,000 (2011-2012) Pre-Recreational Legalization (2013-Sept 2015) Post-Recreational Legalization 660 889 **Rates Per 100,000Average Emergency Department Rates Related to Marijuana* 35% Increase *Rates of Emergency Department (ED) Visits with Possible Marijuana Exposures, Diagnoses, or Billing Codes per 100,000 ED Visits by Year in Colorado **Only 9 months of comparable 2015 data, see ICD definition on page 68 (2013-Sept 2015**) 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 555 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 4: Emergency Department and Hospital Marijuana-Related Admissions Page | 70 SOURCE: Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, Monitoring Health Concerns Related to Marijuana in Colorado: 2016 NOTE: DATA NOT AVAILABLE PRE-2011. EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT DATA FROM 2011 AND 2012 REFLECTS INCOMPLETE STATEWIDE REPORTING. INFERENCES CONCERNING TRENDS, INCLUDING 2011 AND 2012, SHOULD NOT BE MADE. 618 701 873 1,039 754 ** 0 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 2011 2012 2013 2014 Jan - Sept 2015Rates Per 100,000Emergency Department Rates Related to Marijuana* Legalization Jan -Sept 2015** *Rates of Emergency Department (ED) Visits with Possible Marijuana Exposures, Diagnoses, or Billing Codes per 100,000 ED Visits by Year in Colorado **Only 9 months of comparable 2015 data, see ICD definition on page 68 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 556 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 4: Emergency Department and Hospital Marijuana-Related Admissions Page | 71 SOURCE: Colorado Hospital Association, Emergency Department Visit Dataset. Statistics prepared by the Health Statistics and Evaluation Branch, Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment NOTE: DATA NOT AVAILABLE PRE-2011. EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT DATA FROM 2011 AND 2012 REFLECTS INCOMPLETE STATEWIDE REPORTING. INFERENCES CONCERNING TRENDS, INCLUDING 2011 AND 2012, SHOULD NOT BE MADE. 0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 2011 2012 2013 2014 8,197 9,982 14,148 18,255 10,476**Number of VisitsEmergency Department Visits Related to Marijuana Jan -Sept 2015** **Only 9 months of comparable 2015 data, see ICD definition on page 6 8 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 557 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 4: Emergency Department and Hospital Marijuana-Related Admissions Page | 72 Hospitalization Data Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment NOTE: "POSSIBLE MARIJUANA EXPOSURES, DIAGNOSES, OR BILLING CODES IN ANY OF LISTED DIAGNOSIS CODES: THESE DATA WERE CHOSEN TO REPRESENT THE HD AND ED VISITS WHERE MARIJUANA COULD BE A CAUSAL, CONTRIBUTING, OR COEXISTING FACTOR NOTED BY THE PHYSICIAN DURING THE HD OR ED VISIT. FOR THESE DATA, MARIJUANA USE IS NOT NECESSARILY RELATED TO THE UNDERLYING REASON FOR THE HD OR ED VISIT. SOMETIMES THESE DATA ARE REFERRED TO AS HD OR ED VISITS ‘WITH ANY MENTION OF MARIJUANA.’” - COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT, MONITORING HEALTH CONCERNS RELATED TO MARIJUANA IN COLORADO: 2014 SOURCE: Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 (2010-2012) Pre-Recreational Legalization (2013-Sept 2015) Post-Recreational Legalization 1,330 2,416 **Rates Per 100,000Average Hospitalization Rates Related to Marijuana* 82% Increase *Rates of Hospitalization (HD) Visits with Possible Marijuana Exposures, Diagnoses, or Billing Codes per 100,000 HD Visits by Year in Colorado **Only 9 months of comparable 2015 data, see ICD definition on page 68 (2013-Sept 2015**) 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 558 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 4: Emergency Department and Hospital Marijuana-Related Admissions Page | 73 SOURCE: Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, Monitoring Health Concerns Related to Marijuana in Colorado: 2014 810 818 911 963 1,260 1,313 1,417 1,779 2,443 3,025** 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Jan - Sept 2015Rates Per 100,000Hospitalization Rates Related to Marijuana* *Rates of Hospitalization (HD) Visits with Possible Marijuana Exposures, Diagnoses, or Billing Codes per 100,000 HD Visits by Year in Colorado **Only 9 months of comparable 2015 data, see ICD definition on page 68 Legalization Jan - Sept 2015** 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 559 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 4: Emergency Department and Hospital Marijuana-Related Admissions Page | 74 SOURCE: Colorado Hospital Association, Hospital Discharge Dataset. Statistics prepared by the Health Statistics and Evaluation Branch, Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment SOURCE: Colorado Hospital Association, Hospital Discharge Dataset. Statistics prepared by the Health Statistics and Evaluation Branch, Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment 0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 2006-2008 Pre- Commercialization 2009-2012 Post- Commercialization 2013-2015** Legalization 4,070 5,933 10,204**Average Number of HospitalizationsAverage Hospitalizations Related to Marijuana 72% Increase 46% Increase 2013-September 2015** **Only 9 months of comparable 2015 data, see ICD definition on page 68 0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 2,5392,8603,1403,3963,8814,1443,8763,8954,4384,6946,0196,3056,7158,27211,43910,901**Number of HospitalizationsHospitalizations Related to Marijuana **Only 9 months of comparable 2015 data, see ICD definion on page 68 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 560 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 4: Emergency Department and Hospital Marijuana-Related Admissions Page | 75 Additional Sources SOURCE: George Sam Wang, MD, Marie-Claire Le Lait, MS, Sara J. Deakyne, MPH, Alvin C. Bronstein, MD, Lalit Bajaj, MD, MPH, Genie Roosevelt, MD, MPH, July 25, 2016 Cost Cost of Emergency Room: The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services estimates the average cost of an emergency room visit in 2014 was $1,533.00.” 2 0 5 10 15 20 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 1 3 10 9 7 16 16 Number of ChildrenColorado Children's Hospital, Marijuana Ingestion Among Children Under 9 Years Old 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 561 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 4: Emergency Department and Hospital Marijuana-Related Admissions Page | 76 Case Examples Elderly Male with Altered Mental Status: “I had an elderly male come to the [emergency department] with a family chief complaint of ‘altered mental status’ or stroke. The patient was essentially catatonic (awake but not responsive and not following commands). He had a very expensive stroke work up (including an EKG, CT, labs, etc.). Work up was negative and then family stated that he ate [marijuana] butter on his toast in the morning and then became catatonic. He had consumed at least 200 mg of THC. He was observed for many hours and improved. His [emergency department] visit costs probably topped $10,000.” 3 Elderly Woman with Nausea and Vomiting: “I had an elderly female who came to the [emergency department] with a chief complaint of significant nausea and vomiting. The patient had come to visit a family member who happened to work at a pot shop. They thought it would be fun to get ‘grandma high’ and gave her edibles. She ate too much and spent 12 hours in the emergency department vomiting and screaming (probably some psychosis induced at the time).” 3 Marijuana Laced with Methamphetamine: “I had a young woman who was in her last trimester of pregnancy, she came to the ED for ‘anxiety.’ Her urine drug screen was positive for methamphetamines and [marijuana]. The patient states that the MJ (street) sellers, dip their products in cocaine or methamphetamines to make them ‘better.’ She was using both and was pregnant. She justified the use of MJ for her anxiety and did not want to hear about how the MJ would or could affect her child.” 3 High on Marijuana while Riding a Bicycle: “A 16 [year old] male came after being struck by a car while riding a bike. He had been smoking marijuana. He was morbidly obese (over 300 pounds), not in school and getting his MJ from his parents who thought ‘it’s ok because it’s legal.’” 3 Unresponsive after an Edible Overdose: “I just had a case last week of a young patient who ate a full bag of the chocolates, 100 mcg of THC per chocolate. She presented unresponsive, GCS of 6. (Only slightly withdrew to painful stimuli, otherwise unresponsive). She went to the ICU and there was just observed until she woke up. She stayed in the ED for over 8 hours with no change before going to the ICU. There were no other substances on her drug screens that were positive.” 4 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 562 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 4: Emergency Department and Hospital Marijuana-Related Admissions Page | 77 Dangers of Marijuana Experienced Firsthand: A May 2017 article written by Dr. Brad Roberts described his experience of returning to his home town of Pueblo, CO in order to serve the community he grew up in. I recently finished my residency in emergency medicine and began to practice in Pueblo, Colorado. I grew up there, and I was excited to return home. However, when I returned home, the Pueblo I once knew had drastically changed. Where there were once hardware stores, animal feed shops, and homes along dotted farms, I now found marijuana shops—and lots of them. Among the various observations the newly minted doctor noted: Multiple different types of patients are coming into the emergency department with a variety of unexpected problems such as marijuana-induced psychosis, dependence, burn injuries, increased abuse of other drugs, increased homelessness and its associated problems, and self-medication with marijuana to treat their medical problems instead of seeking appropriate medical care. Dr. Roberts recalled a few specific incidents in which marijuana was directly involved in the patient’s visit to the emergency department. Among the specific incidents were cases in which a teenage girl had to be restrained after dabbing highly potent THC. Additionally, a young man reported that after smoking marijuana “all day, every day” and he was “seeing ghosts” that were telling him to kill himself (he tried to hang himself three times). Lastly, two young men presented with severe burns due to a butane hash oil explosion they created when trying to make concentrated THC. The greatest concern that I have is the confusion between medical and recreational marijuana. Patients are being diagnosed and treated from the marijuana shops by those without any medical training. I have had patients bring in bottles with a recommended strain of cannabis and frequency of use for a stated medical problem given at the recommendation of a marijuana shop employee. My colleagues report similar encounters, with one reporting seeing two separate patients with significantly altered sensorium and with bottles labeled 60 percent THC. They were taking this with opioids and benzodiazepines. After discussing a variety of significantly adverse health effects of marijuana use, Dr. Roberts stated “We need to provide immediate treatment and assistance in stopping use. If we are going to use this as a medication, then we should use it as we use other medications. It should have to undergo the same scrutiny, Food and Drug Administration approval, and regulation that any other medication does.”5 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 563 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 4: Emergency Department and Hospital Marijuana-Related Admissions Page | 78 Pot-Related ER Visits Increase among Visitors to Colorado: In February 2017, Matt Kroschel of CBS Denver described how “some of Colorado’s mountain towns helped push Summit County to the top of the list for emergency room visits related to people getting high.” Summit County reported 21 marijuana-related emergency room visits (per 1,000 people) from 2011-2013. In 2014-2015, that number increased to 56 visits per 1,000 people. Dr. Marc Doucette of St. Anthony Summit Medical Center stated, “We certainly do see patients that come in with adverse effects related to marijuana.” In response to the recent statistics released by the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, Doucette said, “I was a little surprised to see that but it speaks to the fact that most of our population, especially in the ski season, are out-of-state patients and tourists.” Discussing the types of patients and cases presenting to the emergency room, Dr. Doucette reported “Often we see complications related to edible products.” “Hospital officials say they did notice the uptick in people coming in for help following the legalization of marijuana in the state in 2014. They say most of those cases were patients visiting from outside of Colorado.” 6 ER Visits for Kids Rise Significantly after Pot Legalized in Colorado: In 2017, researchers reported “the number of teenagers sent to emergency rooms more than quadrupled after marijuana was legalized in Colorado – mostly for mental health symptoms.” Dr. George Sam Wang, a Colorado physician, was the lead researcher who authored a study which examined Colorado youth, marijuana use and associated emergency room visits. According to a May 2017 article published by NBC News, “639 teenagers who went to one hospital system in Colorado in 2015 had either cannabis in their urine or told a doctor they’d been using cannabis. That’s up from 146 in 2005, before the use of marijuana was legalized in Colorado.” “In 2016 Wang found that the average rate of marijuana-related visits to the children’s hospital doubled after legalization. Poison center calls about marijuana went from nine in 2009 to 47 in 2015.” In the 2017 interview by NBC News, Dr. Wang explained that “The perception of risk has gone down quite a bit.” In the same interview, he goes on to say that “People believe marijuana is safe – but it is not.” 7 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 564 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 4: Emergency Department and Hospital Marijuana-Related Admissions Page | 79 Mysterious Illness Tied to Marijuana Use on the Rise in States with Legal Weed: An Indianapolis physician recently diagnosed a condition in a patient, Lance Crowder, who had been experiencing severe abdominal pain and vomiting for over two years. None of the local physicians had been able to diagnose the problem, until now. Over the past several years there has been an increase in the number of emergency room visitors presenting with the same exact signs and symptoms as Lance, known as cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome (CHS). Dr. Kennon Heard of Aurora, Colorado co-authored a study published in 2015 which showed that when medical marijuana became widely available, emergency room visit diagnoses for CHS in two Colorado hospitals nearly doubled. “It is certainly something that, before legalization, we almost never saw,” Heard said in an interview. “Now we are seeing it quite frequently.” “CHS has only been recognized for about the past decade, and nobody knows exactly how many people suffer from it. But as more states move towards the legalization of marijuana, emergency room physicians like Dr. Heard are eager to make sure both doctors and patients have CHS on their radar.” 8 For Further Information on Emergency Department Visits and Hospitalizations See Page 155 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 565 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 4: Emergency Department and Hospital Marijuana-Related Admissions Page | 80 Sources 1 American Academy of Professional Coders, “ICD-10 FAQ,” <https://www.aapc.com/icd-10/faq.aspx>, accessed August 1, 2017. 2 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey 2014, “Emergency Room Services-Median and Mean Expenses per Person With Expense and Distribution of Expenses by Source of Payment: United States,” U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. 3 Karen Randall, DO, “MJ ER Visits/Exposure,” e-mail message, September 14, 2017. 4 Brad Roberts, MD, “MJ ER Visits/Exposure,” e-mail message, September 15, 2017. 5 Brad Roberts, MD, “Dangers of Marijuana Experienced Firsthand,” May 15, 2017, <http://www.acepnow.com/article/dangers-marijuana-experienced-firsthand/>, accessed August 9, 2017. 6 Matt Kroschel, “Pot-Related ER Visits Increase Among Visitors To Colorado,” February 14, 2017, < http://denver.cbslocal.com/2017/02/14/pot-related-er-visits- increase-among-visitors/>, accessed September 12, 2017. 7 Maggie Fox, “ER Visits for Kids Rise Significantly After Pot Legalized in Colorado,” NBC News, May 5, 2017, <http://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/er- visits-kids-rise-significantly-after-pot-legalized-colorado-n754781>, accessed May 4, 2017. 8 Jonathan Lapook, “Mysterious illness tied to marijuana use on the rise in states with legal weed,” KKTV/CBS, December 28, 2016, <http://www.kktv.com/content/news/Mysterious-illness-tied-to-marijuana-use-on-the- rise-in-states-with-legal-weed-408565045.html>, accessed August 2, 2017. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 566 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 5: Marijuana–Related Exposure Page | 81 SECTION 5: Marijuana-Related Exposure Some Findings  Marijuana-related exposures increased 139 percent in the four-year average (2013-2016) since Colorado legalized recreational marijuana compared to the four-year average (2009-2012) prior to legalization.  Marijuana-related exposures in children (ages 0 to 5) nearly tripled in the four- year average (2013-2016) since Colorado legalized recreational marijuana compared to the four-year average (2009-2012) prior to legalization.  For adults 26 years of age or older, nearly triple the amount of yearly marijuana- related exposures occurred in 2013-2016 as compared to 2009-2012.  Marijuana only exposures more than doubled (increased 210 percent) in the four-year average (2013-2016) since Colorado legalized recreational marijuana compared to the four-year average (2009-2012) prior to legalization. Definitions Marijuana-Related Exposure: Any phone call to the Rocky Mountain Poison and Drug Center in which marijuana is mentioned. Marijuana Only Exposure: Marijuana was the only substance referenced in the call to the poison control center. Data 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 567 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 5: Marijuana–Related Exposure Page | 82 SOURCE: Rocky Mountain Poison and Drug Center SOURCE: Rocky Mountain Poison and Drug Center Report, Colorado Marijuana Statistics for 2016 0 50 100 150 200 250 2006-2008 Pre-Commercialization 2009-2012 Post-Commercialization 2013-2016 Recreational Legalization 59 84 201 Average NumberAverage Number of Marijuana-Related Exposures, All Ages 42% Increase 139% Increase 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Marijuana Cases 45 70 62 44 95 86 110 127 223 231 224 Youth (0-18) Cases 21 26 26 27 45 39 50 67 92 117 101 45 70 62 44 95 86 110 127 223 231 224 21 26 26 27 45 39 50 67 92 117 101 0 50 100 150 200 250 Number of ExposuresMarijuana-Related Exposures Commercialization Legalization 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 568 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 5: Marijuana–Related Exposure Page | 83 SOURCE: Rocky Mountain Poison and Drug Center SOURCE: Rocky Mountain Poison and Drug Center 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 0-5yrs 6-12yrs 13-14yrs 15-17yrs 18-25yrs 26+ yrs 4 1 3 11 20 1313 2 6 17 17 24 37 12 9 31 32 68 Number of Exposures2006-2008 Pre-Commercialization 2009-2012 Post-Commercialization 2013-2016 Legalization Average Marijuana-Related Exposures by Age Range 0.00% 2.00% 4.00% 6.00% 8.00% 10.00% 12.00% 14.00% 16.00% 18.00% 20.00% 2006-2009 2010-2012 2013-2016 3.59%4.66% 7.07%6.78% 15.22% 18.26%Average PercentAverage Percent of All Marijuana-Related Exposures, Children Ages 0 to 5 Years Old National Colorado 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 569 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 5: Marijuana–Related Exposure Page | 84 SOURCE: Rocky Mountain Poison and Drug Center Case Examples Rocky Mountain Poison and Drug Center: 1 “Caller asking if there is such thing as a withdrawal phenomenon with marijuana? Her daughter is home from college and she is having major anxiety since being home and not smoking her daily weed. She also wants to know if it will ‘hurt her brain’ while in college if she smokes regularly? She was advised that yes, withdrawal has been described after heavy use. And that yes, there could be effects to her brain.” “Caller concerned – had out of town guests staying at her house. Made a favorite pie one day when they were out, and substituted marijuana oil for the normal amount of oil. She did not intend for her guests to eat her pie. Guests ate a significant amount one day when she was upstairs and developed paranoia, confusion, and feeling ‘stoned.’ The effects wore off the next day.” 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 28 29 27 25 34 25 32 37 18 53 40 61 88 151 153 142 Number of Exposures ReportedNumber of Marijuana Only* Exposures Reported Commercialization Legalization *Marijuana was the only substance referenced in the call to the poison control center 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 570 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 5: Marijuana–Related Exposure Page | 85 “Caller ate a couple marijuana gummys [sic] while at work, not knowing they were MJ-containing. Developed lightheadedness and dizziness, which resolved the next day without any treatment.” “Caller asking if marijuana can be transferred to baby who is breast-feeding.” “Caller says her spouse ingested an edible containing THC and felt nauseous. Then took an OTC [over the counter] medicine to counteract the queasiness, and then felt worse (foggy, dizzy, confused). PC referred caller to an Emergency Department because of her worsened status.” Colorado dog dazed and confused: In late 2016, Colorado resident Heidi Sodetz took her two golden retrievers for a run on Tenderfoot Mountain. According to the resident, one of the dogs began to act strangely approximately an hour after the run. Lenni was “…barely moving, not responsive and even peed herself on the carpet, something she never does.” The dog was taken to the Buffalo Mountain Animal Hospital in Silverthorne, CO to investigate what was happening. Based on the signs and symptoms, the local veterinarian was immediately suspicious of THC being in the dog’s blood. The dog tested positive for THC, the psychoactive ingredient in marijuana. According to the owner, who claims to not use the drug, “the only plausible explanation was that Lenni had eaten a marijuana edible that someone had dropped on the trail.” Dr. Michelle Gross, Lenni’s primary care provider said “For me, lately it’s been about one or two a month, but it used to be maybe once a year.” Coincidentally, there were two additional dogs being treated for marijuana exposure at the same facility at the same time. 2 For Further Information on Exposures See Page 157 Sources 1 Rocky Mountain Poison and Drug Center, August 2017. 2 Jack Queen, “Colorado dog dazed and confused after eating marijuana edibles found on trail,” Summit Daily, <http://www.summitdaily.com/news/marijuana/in- colorado-marijuana-edibles-increasingly-sending-dogs-to-the-animal-er/>, accessed September 12th, 2017. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 571 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 5: Marijuana–Related Exposure Page | 86 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 572 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 6: Treatment Page | 87 SECTION 6: Treatment Some Findings  Marijuana treatment data from Colorado in years 2006 – 2016 does not appear to demonstrate a definitive trend. Colorado averages 6,683 treatment admissions annually for marijuana abuse.  Over the last ten years, the top four drugs involved in treatment admissions were alcohol (average 13,551), marijuana (average 6,712), methamphetamine (average 5,578), and heroin (average 3,024). Data SOURCE: Center for Behavioral Health Statistics and Quality, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Treatment Episode Data Set (TEDS) Based on administrative data reported by States to TEDS through July 6, 2017 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 20165,9886,4786,8877,1947,3056,5186,9496,5506,8576,6646,120Number of AdmissionsTreatment with Marijuana as Primary Substance of Abuse, All Ages 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 573 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 6: Treatment Page | 88 SOURCE: Colorado Department of Health Services, Office of Behavioral Health, 2005-2016 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Alcohol 10,168 11,721 12,094 13,382 13,873 13,292 13,422 14,834 14,008 14,381 12,810 13,415 Marijuana 5,558 5,708 6,144 6,900 7,074 6,903 6,687 7,056 6,877 6,907 6,267 6,307 Meth 5,081 5,066 5,109 4,939 4,543 4,451 4,361 5,002 5,723 6,924 6,859 7,871 Cocaine 2,934 3,481 3,459 3,685 3,031 2,521 2,368 2,276 1,748 1,657 1,484 1,377 Heroin 1,519 1,369 1,349 1,487 1,728 1,785 2,225 2,746 3,223 4,491 5,063 6,142 Prescription 749 875 1,014 1,274 1,526 1,734 1,929 2,345 2,270 2,306 1,771 1,935 Other 324 330 420 131 121 91 125 151 152 177 192 555 0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 16,000 Number of AdmissionsDrug Type for Treatment Admissions, All Ages 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 574 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 6: Treatment Page | 89 SOURCE: Center for Behavioral Health Statistics and Quality, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Treatment Episode Data Set (TEDS) Based on administrative data reported by States to TEDS through July 6, 2017 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 12-17 31.2 28.2 28.3 28.7 29 27.7 24.1 22.4 19.8 18.8 22.5 18-20 13 13.3 13 14 12.9 11.9 12.1 11.2 9.4 9.4 9.4 21-25 20 20.2 19.6 20.2 20.5 19.9 20.5 20.9 22.4 21.3 19.2 26+35.8 38.3 39.1 37.1 37.6 40.5 43.3 45.5 48.7 50.5 48.8 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Percent of AdmissionsPercent of Marijuana Treatment Admissions by Age Group 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 575 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 6: Treatment Page | 90 SOURCE: Colorado Department of Health Services, Office of Behavioral Health, 2005-2016 Comments from Colorado Treatment Providers “…Symptoms Are So Debilitating…”: “Many patients minimize the consequences of cannabis use, yet they consistently report that they have become isolated, paranoid and unable to effectively interact with the outside world. In treatment, there has been a consistent increase in psychosis associated with patients who use cannabis. Thought broadcasting, thought insertion, ideas of reference and command hallucinations are not uncommon. These symptoms often occur in the absence of any other psychiatric disorder. The symptoms appear to decrease over time, with more time in recovery, but it is unclear whether the symptoms are long lasting. Since these symptoms are so debilitating, it is crucial to learn more about the long term effects of cannabis use.” 1 “…Lives Have Been Completely Disrupted…”: “In my professional experience, have definitely seen more cannabis use in the individuals I am treating. I've also seen an increasing number of young men coming into treatment with symptoms of mania, psychosis and dangerous behaviors associated with cannabis use. Their lives have been completely disrupted due to the cannabis use. Unfortunately, abstinence from the cannabis use alone is not enough to make the symptoms go away. They require mood stabilizing and anti-psychotic medications to get to a point that they can communicate 821 805 660 826 985 1,015 997 1,054 1,238 1,015 706 1,202 1,204 1,204 1,291 1,347 1,307 1,328 1,448 1,320 1,287 1,062 0 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 1,400 1,600 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015Number of AdmissionsMarijuana Treatment Admissions Based on Criminal Justice Referrals Ages 17 and Under Ages 18-25 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 576 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 6: Treatment Page | 91 coherently enough and trust others enough to participate in therapy. I do think this is related to the increased availability and potency, and this is consistent with the scientific literature. On a personal note, my 10 and 11 year old children know what cannabis smoke smells like, identifying cannabis in the area rather than wondering if it is a skunk. Public use occurs everywhere. Children call each other, ‘vapers,’ in their less kind moments, and children with anything green are made fun of. One of my 11 year old's friends since preschool was allegedly expelled for selling cannabis on the 5th grade campus. As a parent, I'm terrified for the future of our children.” 2 “…Psychosis and Cannabis is Well Documented…”: “We recently reviewed data for patients receiving treatment in the residential portion of our substance abuse treatment center, CeDAR. What we found was that patients who met criteria for a cannabis use disorder were markedly younger than those that did not, were much more likely to have other substance use disorders (an average of 2.8 substance use disorder diagnoses vs 1.9 substance use disorder diagnoses when cannabis use disorder was excluded) and there was a trend towards more mental health pathology in this data set as well. Anecdotally, I and my colleagues have seen the number of patients with cannabis use disorder admitted to our facility increase over time. The amount of cannabis that patients describe consuming is also increasing, while the age they report first starting to use is decreasing. Overall the severity of cannabis use disorder we see appears more severe as do the psychosocial sequelae of this addiction. The link between psychosis and cannabis is well documented and it is becoming routine to admit young men who have used cannabis since early adolescence and who present with psychosis. Many of these patients may suffer long standing neuropsychiatric symptoms as the result of cannabis use. The burden of this illness is disproportionately falling on our younger population.” 3 Case Examples Colorado Doctor’s Warning to Vermont: Dr. Karen Randall, a practicing emergency medicine physician out of Pueblo, CO, described her first-hand experience of how marijuana has affected her community in Pueblo. Dr. Randall tells Vermont voters how the marijuana industry originally lured her community into becoming “the Napa Valley of Pot” by promising jobs and tax income but instead her community received an influx of homeless and low income jobs where workers are a burden on the Medicaid system 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 577 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 6: Treatment Page | 92 and other government assistance programs. Furthermore, she describes how “the number of youth testing positive for marijuana plus methamphetamine and/or heroin” has increased in her hospital as marijuana use becomes “normalized in public by some parents.” According to Dr. Randall, in 2016, “257 of 300 community physicians signed an open petition in the paper in support of reversing the marijuana stance in [Pueblo] county.” She urges Vermont voters to ask “local professionals how they feel” about the issue before voting.4 For Further Information on Treatment See Page 157 Sources 1 Bari K Platter, MS, RN, PMHCNS-BC, Clinical Nurse Specialist, Center for Dependency, Addiction and Rehabilitation (CeDAR), University of Colorado Health, Aurora, Colorado, August 2016. 2 Laura F. Martin, M.D. Distinguished Fellow of the American Psychiatric Association, American Board of Addiction Medicine Diplomate Medical Director, Center for Dependency, Addiction and Rehabilitation (CeDAR), Associate Professor, Department of Psychiatry, University of Colorado School of Medicine, August 2016. 3 Ruth Marie Huhn, M.D., Board Certified Attending Psychiatrist at the Center for Dependency, Addiction and Rehabilitation (CeDAR), Instructor, Department of Psychiatry, University of Colorado School of Medicine, August 2016. 4 Dr. Karen Randall, VTDIGGER, “Karen Randall: Marijuana legalization from a Colorado community member,” <https://vtdigger.org/2017/06/20/karen-randall- marijuana-legalization-colorado-community-member/#.WcFCX8KWy71> accessed September 19, 2017. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 578 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page | 93 SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Some Findings  In 2016, RMHIDTA Colorado drug task forces completed 163 investigations of individuals or organizations involved in illegally selling Colorado marijuana both in and out of state. o These cases led to:  252 felony arrests  7,116 pounds (3.5 tons) of marijuana seized  47,108 marijuana plants seized  2,111 marijuana edibles seized  232 pounds of concentrate seized  29 different states to which marijuana was destined  Highway interdiction seizures of Colorado marijuana increased 43 percent in the four-year average (2013-2016) since Colorado legalized recreational marijuana compared to the four-year average (2009-2012) prior to legalization.  Highway interdiction seizures of Colorado marijuana increased 20 percent from 288 in 2013, when recreational marijuana was legalized, to 346 in 2016.  Of the 346 highway interdiction seizures in 2016, there were 36 different states destined to receive marijuana from Colorado. o The most common destinations identified were Illinois, Missouri, Texas, Kansas and Florida. o Approximately half of all seizures (48 percent) containing Colorado marijuana originated from Denver. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 579 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page | 94 Definitions Colorado Marijuana Investigations: RMHIDTA Colorado drug task forces investigating individual or organizations involved in illegally selling Colorado marijuana, both within and outside of the state. These investigations only include those reported by the ten RMHIDTA drug task forces. Colorado Marijuana Interdictions: Incidents where state highway patrol officers stopped a driver for a traffic violation and subsequently found Colorado marijuana destined for other parts of the country. These interdiction seizures are reported on a voluntary basis to the National Seizure System (NSS) managed by the El Paso Intelligence Center (EPIC). These are random traffic stops, not investigations, and do not include local law enforcement data.  A Colorado document contained the following statement in one of their presentation slides: “Data prior to 2014 is not comparative due to changes in the reporting. The RMHIDTA began entering seizure data into the NSS beginning January 1, 2014 and that resulted in a spike of seizures being reported. There has not been a discernable upward trend in seizures since retail sales began in 2014.” This statement is inaccurate and misleading. The data used in the Rocky Mountain HIDTA report is only highway patrol seizures and not from any of the task forces or drug units. This is the same dataset that RMHIDTA has been using since 2005. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 580 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page | 95 Data on Marijuana Investigations NOTE: THE CHARTS ONLY INCLUDE COMPLETED INVESTIGATIONS REPORTED BY THE TEN RMHIDTA DRUG TASK FORCES. IT IS UNKNOWN HOW MANY OF THESE TYPES OF INVESTIGATIONS WERE COMPLETED BY NON-RMHIDTA DRUG UNITS OR TASK FORCES.  The RMHIDTA drug task force unit commanders feel that the Colorado marijuana investigations completed in 2016 only impacted a relatively small portion of actual operations involved in illegally selling Colorado marijuana both in and out of state. In 2016, ten RMHIDTA Colorado drug task forces completed 163 investigations of individuals or organizations involved in illegally selling Colorado marijuana both within and outside of the state. The task forces seized approximately 3.5 tons of marijuana; 47,108 plants; 2,111 edibles; and 232 pounds of concentrate. There were 252 felony marijuana arrests and 29 different states identified as to where the Colorado marijuana was being sent. SOURCE: Rocky Mountain HIDTA Performance Management Process (PMP) Data 1,489.53 425.00 1,028.62 7,115.61 0.00 2,000.00 4,000.00 6,000.00 8,000.00 10,000.00 2013 2014 2015 2016Pounds SeizedRMHIDTA Colorado Task Forces: Marijuana Investigation Seizures 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 581 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page | 96 SOURCE: Rocky Mountain HIDTA Performance Management Process (PMP) Data  Marijuana Concentrate Seizures o 2016: 232.12 pounds of hash oil (1,099 percent increase from 2015). o 2015: 19.36 pounds of hash oil. o Data not collected prior to 2015.  Marijuana Edible Seizures o 2016: 2,111 individual edible items (633 percent increase from 2015). o 2015: 288 individual edible items. o Data not collected prior to 2015. SOURCE: Rocky Mountain HIDTA Performance Management Process (PMP) Data 7,290 5,215 14,979 47,108 0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 2013 2014 2015 2016Number of Plants SeizedRMHIDTA Colorado Task Forces: Marijuana Investigative Plant Seizures 138 81 130 252 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 2013 2014 2015 2016Number of ArrestsRMHIDTA Colorado Task Forces: Marijuana Investigative Felony Arrests 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 582 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page | 97 Data on Highway Interdictions NOTE: THE CHARTS ONLY INCLUDE CASES WHERE COLORADO MARIJUANA WAS ACTUALLY SEIZED AND REPORTED. IT IS UNKNOWN HOW MANY COLORADO MARIJUANA LOADS WERE NOT DETECTED OR, IF SEIZED, WERE NOT REPORTED.  A 2014 survey of approximately 100 interdiction experts estimates that 10 percent or less of marijuana being trafficked is ceased by state highway patrol agencies. SOURCE: El Paso Intelligence Center, National Seizure System, as of August 28th, 2017 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 2006-2008 Pre-Commercialization 2009-2012 Post-Commercialization 2013-2016 Legalization 52 242 347 Number of SeizuresAverage Colorado Marijuana Interdiction Seizures 365% Increase 43% Increase 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 583 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page | 98 SOURCE: El Paso Intelligence Center, National Seizure System, as of August 28th, 2017 SOURCE: El Paso Intelligence Center, National Seizure System, as of August 28th, 2017  In the four years (2013-2016) of legalized recreational marijuana in Colorado, highway patrol seizures have resulted in over 6 tons of Colorado marijuana being seized (12,873 pounds). 54 41 57 58 92 281 321 274 288 360 394 346 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016Number of SeizuresColorado Marijuana Interdiction Seizures Legalization Commercialization 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 2006-2008 Pre- Commercialization 2009-2016 Post- Commercialization 2,515 3,627 Average PoundsAverage Pounds of Colorado Marijuana from Interdiction Seizures 44% Increase 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 584 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page | 99  There were 15 seizures for which the destination was unknown. Originating City Rank Number of Seizures from Originating City Percent 1. Denver 166 48% 2. Colorado Springs 34 10% 3. Aurora 13 4% * Of the 346 seizures, only 283 seizures had an origin city identified. The numbers above represent the top three cities from which Colorado marijuana originated. The percent was calculated from known origin cities. SOURCE: El Paso Intelligence Center, National Seizure System, as of August 28th, 2017. States to which Colorado Marijuana was Destined, 2016 (Total Reported Incidents per State) Top Three Cities for Marijuana Origin 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 585 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page | 100 Case Examples of Investigations NOTE: THE EXAMPLES BELOW ARE ONLY A SMALL SAMPLE OF THE MANY INVESTIGATIONS INVOLVING COLORADO MARIJUANA CITED BY VARIOUS DRUG UNITS. Dozens of Indictments in Largest Illegal Marijuana Trafficking Ring Bust since Legalization: Colorado Attorney General Cynthia Coffman announced that the largest illegal marijuana trafficking investigation has resulted in arrests in late June of 2017. The trafficking organization spanned five states, and the investigation resulted in 62 people having files charged against them. More than 20 law enforcement organizations were involved in the investigation and/or takedown which included the Denver Police Department and the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration. According to Coffman, this single investigation is a prime example of how the marijuana black market continues to flourish in Colorado. During raids, agents seized 2,600 marijuana plants and another 4,000 lbs. of marijuana. As a whole, the trafficking ring produced an estimated 100 lbs. of marijuana a month, which is sold for approximately $2,000 per pound on the black market in Colorado. 1 Indictment in Colorado Pot Biz’s Largest Fraud Case Ever: Scott Pack was indicted by a grand jury in what attorney Matthew Buck referred to as “the largest fraud case in the history of Colorado’s marijuana industry.” The large operation that distributed Colorado grown marijuana across state lines ended in the indictment of sixteen people. Among those indicted was Renee Rayton, a former Marijuana Enforcement Division employee. According to attorney Matthew Buck, “There are potentially victims for as much as $10 million. Scott Pack’s company is one of the larger marijuana companies in Colorado. They own a significant number of licenses, and through a series of shell companies, they hold the leases on many buildings across the state.” In the Westword article published June of 2017, Buck continued to describe the details of the indictment, and said “[Scott Pack] had a sophisticated understanding of how to use loopholes to get around state law.” 2 Arrests Made in South Pueblo County Marijuana Grow: According to a press release by the Pueblo County Sheriff’s Office, three individuals were arrested on April 13th, 2016 in connection with an illegal marijuana grow operating from within a Pueblo, CO home. In total, 180 marijuana plants were found growing in the home being occupied by the three individuals. The three individuals had been living in Florida, but were originally from Cuba. One of the three individuals had recently purchased the home in February of 2016. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 586 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page | 101 Although the press release did not specifically state that the marijuana was being illegally trafficked outside the state, several indicators suggest that the marijuana was intended to leave Colorado. Twelve people, all from Florida, have been arrested in seven separate illegal marijuana grow operations discovered in Pueblo County on March 30th and April 14th, 2016. Five of the twelve individuals were originally from Cuba. 3 Individuals Indicted for an Illegal Home-grow Also Possess Legal Marijuana Licenses: In March 2017, 16 people were indicted for participating in a massive illicit marijuana home-grow operation. Of the 16, eight are recorded as having active or expired licenses to work in the legal marijuana business including the ringleader, Michael Alan Stonehouse, who acts as a consultant for the marijuana industry in Colorado. According to authorities, the group cultivated their marijuana in properties in Colorado Springs, Castle Rock, Elbert County and Denver and then diverted the marijuana to Illinois, Arkansas, Minnesota and Missouri to make a higher profit. 4 All in the Family Marijuana Operation: Weld County Drug Task Force received a crime tip that a family was involved in cultivating and distributing marijuana from properties located in Weld County. Information was that they were shipping the marijuana out of state as motor cycle parts using “runners” utilizing parcel post. A search warrant was served on the rural properties of the father and mother where officers discovered 101 marijuana plants and marijuana in vacuum sealed bags. However, the mother and father were able to show they had medical marijuana licensing allowing them to have 50 marijuana plants each and 16 ounces of edibles. A search warrant on the son’s and daughter-in-law’s rural residence did not have any documentation and led to the seizure of 379 marijuana plants, 70 pounds of marijuana, 13 pounds of edibles, 6 shot guns, 6 rifles, and 6 pistols. One of the “runners” was at the scene and arrested for having multiple pounds of dried marijuana in vacuum sealed containers and edibles hidden in his vehicle. 5 Laotian Marijuana Operation: Southern Colorado Drug Task Force managed by DEA began an investigation of a Laotian drug trafficking organization that had relocated to Colorado from Arkansas and California. This organization had 12 different cultivation marijuana sites located in 5 different counties in southeast Colorado. Task force officers served search warrants seizing 2,291 marijuana plants, 2,393 pounds of processed marijuana. Also seized were 4 hand guns and 6 long guns. 5 Rental House Remodel: In February 2016, Western Colorado Drug Task Force arrested two Cubans from Florida for illegally growing marijuana for distributions. These two rented a $750,000 house and modified it to cultivate marijuana at a cost of about 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 587 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page | 102 $50,000. Both subjects obtained medical marijuana cards with a doctor’s recommendation for 99 plants each. Agents seized the “first round of plants” (63), equipment for a butane hash-oil lab and a hand gun. 5 Florida and Colorado Connection: Southern Colorado Drug Task Force managed by DEA executed search warrants in the Pueblo area targeting a drug trafficking organization that had relocated from Florida to Colorado for sole purpose of setting up a large scale marijuana grow operation. As a result of a search warrant, officers seized 1,900 marijuana plants, 17 pounds of processed marijuana, 2 butane hash oil extraction labs and 9 fire arms. There was an independent seizure in Texas that the group was responsible for which included 12 pounds of marijuana and marijuana shatter. The search warrant resulted in 7 arrests. 5 Marijuana and Guns: Southwest DTF with DEA targeted a drug trafficking organization responsible for cultivation and distribution of hundreds of pounds of marijuana outside the state of Colorado. Search warrants were served on a number of residents where officers discovered marijuana cultivation as well as 480 pounds of packaged marijuana, 13 fire arms and numerous expired “medical” marijuana licensing documents. 5 Large BHO Lab Seized: West Metro Drug Task Force served a search warrant on a residence in Jefferson County. Officers seized 2 large butane hash oil labs along with 5 five-gallon butane tanks, 271 marijuana plants, hash and numerous guns. Officers also discovered documentation confirming the distribution of hash and marijuana to Florida. 5 Florida Cuban Drug Trafficking Organization: In May 2016, Southern Colorado Drug Task Force executed search warrants at 5 different residential locations operated by a group of Cubans from Florida. These grow operations were in Pueblo County and offices seized a total of 214 marijuana plants, 55 pounds of processed marijuana and over $100,000 in grow equipment. 5 Mississippi Connection: In August 2016, Western Colorado Drug Task Force arrested two suspects from Mississippi who recently moved to Colorado to cultivate marijuana and to distribute it back to Mississippi. They rented an upscale house and made major modifications including theft of electrical power. About 50 percent of the living space of the home was used to cultivate marijuana. Agents seized 306 marijuana plants and turned the three young children who were living in the house over to Child Protective Services. 5 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 588 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page | 103 Marijuana Bust in Northeast Colorado Springs: In July of 2017, federal agents hauled at least 180 marijuana plants out of a private residence in northeast Colorado Springs. Although authorities did not disclose many details of the investigation, they did disclose that one person was taken into custody, and that they had prior knowledge of the illegal marijuana grow inside the home. The home was currently being rented, and the owner lived out of state. It wasn’t stated whether or not marijuana was being trafficked outside of Colorado, but a 180 marijuana plant operation is certainly enough to contribute significantly to an illegal trafficking operation. 6 Colorado Deputy Finds 180 Pounds of Marijuana Mixed in with Tractor Trailer’s Onion Load: In December of 2016, a Sheriff’s Deputy with Prowers County in southeastern Colorado made an interesting discovery. The truck was pulled over after remaining in the passing lane while traveling from Brighton, CO to Naples, Florida. The driver of the vehicle consented to the search of the vehicle after the deputy issued a warning for the driving infraction. Upon further investigation, the deputy found over 180 lbs. of marijuana mixed in among a load of onions being hauled by a tractor-trailer. In total, there were three trash bags containing marijuana, and eight packages of plastic wrapped marijuana concealed in the trailer. 7 Case Examples of Interdictions Tractor-Trailer Marijuana Transport: May 2017, Florida Highway Patrol stopped a semi-truck and trailer traveling southbound through Alachua, FL. Upon search of the vehicle, 170 lbs. of marijuana was located and seized by state troopers. The vehicle was traveling from Colorado to Florida. 8 Motorhome Carrying 100 Pounds of Pot Seized in Tennessee: In August of 2016, a Tennessee Highway Patrol trooper pulled over a vehicle after observing several indicators of possible criminal activity. After requesting backup and obtaining permission to search the vehicle, law enforcement officials found several duffel bags and boxes filled with marijuana. The various containers of marijuana were located in the bedroom area of the motorhome. In total, the various bags and boxes contained approximately 100 pounds of illegally trafficked marijuana. The driver admitted that he obtained the marijuana in Colorado and he was headed to Florida. 9 Texas DPS Seizes Load Destined for Florida: January 2016, the Texas Department of Public Safety stopped a passenger van traveling southbound US-81. The state trooper 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 589 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page | 104 developed reasonable suspicion of criminal activity, and searched the vehicle based on verbal consent provided by the driver. Upon search of the vehicle, over 72 lbs. of marijuana was located in the vehicle. The trip originated in Colorado Springs, CO and was destined for Jacksonville, Florida. 8 Reckless Driving Leads to Over 76 lbs of Marijuana: February 2016, Colorado State Patrol stopped a vehicle due to several public complaints of reckless driving. Initially, the driver of the vehicle would not pull over, but eventually pulled to the side of the road. Upon further investigation, the trooper discovered over 76 lbs. of marijuana and over $20,000 inside the vehicle. Although the driver’s travel plans were not made clear, the driver was a Florida resident. 8 Colorado Marijuana Variety Headed to Illinois: April 2017, two Illinois residents who recently left Colorado were stopped by Nebraska State Patrol while speeding eastbound along I-80. Upon contact with the driver and passenger, the smell of marijuana was immediately detected by the state trooper. After both occupants admitted that there was marijuana in the vehicle, a thorough search was conducted. Over 4 ounces of marijuana, a limited amount of hash oil infused marijuana, 161 THC infused edibles, marijuana seeds, THC vaporizer oil cartridges, marijuana wax and several items of paraphernalia were discovered in the vehicle. 8 Illinois: May 2017, a Dodge Charger was stopped for speeding while traveling eastbound along I-80 in Nebraska. The smell of marijuana was immediately detected as the state trooper approached the vehicle. Upon a probable cause search, the four Illinois residents inside the vehicle were found to be in possession of approximately 1.5 lbs. of marijuana, over a hundred THC edibles, nearly two ounces of THC “shatter,” 5 grams of THC “wax,” 8 freshly rolled “joints,” several recently smoked “joints,” and other items of paraphernalia. 8 Indiana “Marijuana Head” with Colorado Marijuana: April 2017, a Kansas Highway Patrol Trooper stopped a vehicle traveling from Colorado to Indiana with THC “Shatter,” THC “Budder,” 54 THC cartridges, 6 lbs. of marijuana, various other marijuana items and a loaded .40 caliber handgun. The suspect claimed all the marijuana was for the consumption of those within the vehicle, and he went on to explain that he is a “marijuana head” and that he had been smoking marijuana since he was a kid. 8 Colorado Marijuana to Iowa: February 2016, Colorado State Patrol stopped a vehicle traveling from Brighton, Colorado to Des Moines, Iowa. The stop resulted in the arrest of the driver from Des Moines, Iowa, passenger from Clearlake, Iowa and the seizure of 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 590 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page | 105 8 lbs. of marijuana, 85.05 grams marijuana concentrate, and a S/W M&P 9mm handgun. The vehicle was initially stopped for a signal violation. The marijuana was located inside a large clothing duffel bag in the vehicle’s trunk.10 Colorado Marijuana Plants to Kentucky: May 2017, a vehicle was stopped in eastern Colorado while traveling eastbound from Boulder, Colorado to Lexington, Kentucky. After the driver provided his consent to search the vehicle, Colorado State Patrol located 288 individual marijuana plants inside the vehicle. 8 Colorado Marijuana to Maryland: November 2016, an Ohio State Highway Patrol Trooper stopped a vehicle traveling eastbound along I-80. The driver was a Colorado resident traveling to Maryland. After the driver displayed several indications of criminal activity, a canine was allowed to perform an “exterior sniff” of the vehicle. The canine alerted to the presence of an illegal substance. After a thorough search, law enforcement found a variety of cannabis products in the vehicle (chocolate bars, gummies, etc.). Upon questioning, the driver said that he’s from Colorado where it’s legal to have marijuana. 11 Maryland: June 2017, an Ohio State Highway Patrol Trooper stopped a car-hauler traveling eastbound along I-70. Upon investigation, the State Trooper became suspicious of both vehicles being transported on the car-hauler. After driver consent and a subsequent external canine search, a probable cause search was performed and approximately 5 lbs. of marijuana along with 108 vials of liquid THC were discovered in one of the vehicles being transported. The vehicle was being shipped from Denver, Colorado to Bethesda, Maryland. There were no indications that the driver of the car- hauler knew he was illegally transporting marijuana. 12 Minnesota – Medical Marijuana for Distribution: April 2017, a vehicle was stopped while traveling eastbound along I-80 in North Platte, Nebraska. The driver immediately claimed to be a medical marijuana patient who had been diagnosed with multiple sclerosis. Upon further investigation, the driver was found to be in possession of a substantial amount of marijuana, THC liquid vials, and other edible THC products that were packaged in a way that made the state trooper suspicious that the marijuana was intended for distribution. Several of the bags of THC edibles were actually labeled with individual’s names. It is assumed that these individual were the intended recipients of the marijuana infused products. The vehicle was traveling from Colorado to Minnesota.8 Destination Unknown: March 2017, Missouri State Highway Patrol stopped a vehicle from Colorado which was southbound I-29. The Colroado driver would not discolse 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 591 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page | 106 where he was traveling to. After several indicators of criminal behavior were noted, a search of the vehicle yielded 26 lbs. of marijuana concelaed inside a red duffel bag on the back seat. 13 Missouri: May 2017, Kansas Highway Patrol stopped a car hauler traveling from Denver, Colorado to Missouri. A subsequent search of one of the vehicles being hauled yielded 50 lbs. of high-grade marijuana. 14 New York Distribution: January 2016, Ohio State Patrol stopped a vehicle traveling eastbound along I-70 in Madison County, Ohio. After displaying suspicious behavior when interacting with the state trooper, a canine search was performed on the vehicle. The canine indicated a positive response on the vehicle, and a full search ensued. During the search, 123 lbs. of marijuana were discovered in rubber totes in the rear storage area of the vehicle along with a vacuum sealer machine. The vehicle was traveling from Colorado to New York. 8 Flying to Buy Colorado Marijuana: April 2016, a Kansas Highway Patrol Trooper stopped an eastbound vehicle traveling along I-70. Upon investigation, the sole occupant was found to be in possession of 4.3 lbs. of marijuana, 158 marijuana edibles, and 8 ounces of a THC infused drink. The driver had flown from his home in Pennsylvania and through a third-party had obtained a one way rental from Aurora, Colorado. After buying the recreational marijuana products, the driver was transporting the product to his home state (Pennsylvania). 8 Note: Flying to Colorado and driving back home is a common method for illegally transporting marijuana out of state. South Carolina Dealer Uses Rental Vehicle: March 2017, Kansas Highway Patrol stopped a vehicle traveling eastbound along I-70 in Goodland, Kansas. After a short roadside investigation, the driver of the vehicle was found to be in possession of 13 lbs. of marijuana, 101 THC vapor cartridges, and 378 fl. oz. of THC infused beverages (20 individual drinks). The driver had rented the vehicle four days prior. He had driven from South Carolina to Colorado, and was headed back to South Carolina when he had been stopped in Kansas. 8 Note: Rental vehicles are commonly used to buy and transport Colorado marijuana out of state. Marijuana and Concentrate to Iowa: In February 2017, Kansas Highway Patrol stopped a vehicle traveling from Loveland, Colorado to Iowa. A search of the vehicle yielded 25 lbs. of marijuana and 1 lb. of THC shatter. 15 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 592 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page | 107 Sources 1 Chuck Hickey, “Dozens of indictments in largest illegal marijuana trafficking ring bust since legalization,” KDVR-TV Channel 2 Denver, June 28, 2017, <http://kdvr.com/2017/06/28/62-people-12-businesses-indicted-in-largest-illegal- marijuana-ring-bust-in-colorado-history/>, accessed June 28, 2017. 2 Michael Roberts, “Scott Pack Indicted in Colorado Pot Biz’s Largest Fraud Case Ever, Attorney Says,” Westword, June 14, 2017, <http://www.westword.com/news/scott- pack-indicted-in-huge-colorado-marijuana-fraud-case-9156890>, accessed August 11, 2017. 3 Pueblo County Sheriff’s Office, April 14, 2016, “Arrests Made in South Pueblo County Illegal Marijuana Grow,” <http://www.sheriff.co.pueblo.co.us/pio/?p=2405>, accessed July 26, 2017. 4 Jesse Paul, “Eight of 16 people indicted in Colorado marijuana trafficking operation listed as having state pot licenses,” The Denver Post, March 24, 2017, <http://www.denverpost.com/2017/03/24/denver-marijuana-smuggling-operation- medical-marijuana-licenses/http://www.denverpost.com/2017/03/24/denver-marijuana- smuggling-operation-medical-marijuana-licenses/>, accessed April 19, 2017. 5 Rocky Mountain HIDTA Task Force Quarterly Reports, Calendar Year 2016-2017. 6 Danielle Kreutter, “Marijuana bust in northeast Colorado Springs,” July 12, 2017, <http://www.kktv.com/content/news/DEA-search-warrant-in--434154383.html>, accessed July 26, 2017. 7 Jesse Paul, “Colorado deputy finds 180 pounds of marijuana mixed in with tractor- trailer’s onion load,” The Denver Post, December 8, 2016, <http://www.denverpost.com/2016/12/08/colorado-deputy-finds-180-pounds-of- marijuana-mixed-in-with-tractor-trailers-onion-load/>, accessed December 8, 2016. 8 El Paso Intelligence Center, National Seizure System. Data pull August 28th, 2017. 9 The Associated Press, “Motorhome carrying 100 pounds of pot seized in Tennessee,” August 28, 2016, <http://www.denverpost.com/2016/08/28/motorhome-100- pounds-marijuana-seized-tennessee/>, accessed August 28, 2016. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 593 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 7: Diversion of Colorado Marijuana Page | 108 10 RMHIDTA Quarterly Report. Colorado Criminal Interdiction, 1st Quarter 2016. 11 Ohio State Highway Patrol Report of Investigation, via e-mail dated July 31st, 2017; accessed August 1st, 2017. 12 Ohio State Highway Patrol Report of Investigation, via e-mail dated July 13th, 2017; accessed July 22nd, 2017. 13 Midwest HIDTA Interdiction Bulletin 2017-47. 14 Midwest HIDTA Interdiction Bulletin 2017-84. 15 Midwest HIDTA Interdiction Bulletin 2017-26. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 594 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 8: Diversion by Parcel Page | 109 SECTION 8: Diversion by Parcel Some Findings  Seizures of Colorado marijuana in the U.S. mail has increased 844 percent from an average of 52 parcels (2009-2012) to 491 parcels (2013-2016) in the four-year average that recreational marijuana has been legal.  Seizures of Colorado marijuana in the U.S. mail has increased 914 percent from an average of 97 pounds (2009-2012) to 984 pounds (2013-2016) in the four-year average that recreational marijuana has been legal. Data from U.S. Postal Service NOTE: THESE FIGURES ONLY REFLECT PACKAGES SEIZED; THEY DO NOT INCLUDE PACKAGES OF COLORADO MARIJUANA THAT WERE MAILED AND REACHED THE INTENDED DESTINATION. INTERDICTION EXPERTS BELIEVE THE PACKAGES SEIZED WERE JUST THE “TIP OF THE ICEBERG.” SOURCE: United States Postal Inspection Service, Prohibited Mailing of Narcotics 0 100 200 300 400 500 (2009-2012) Pre-Recreational Legalization (2013-2016) Post-Recreational Legalization 52 491 Average Number of ParcelsAverage Number of Parcels Containing Marijuana Mailed from Colorado to Another State 844% Increase 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 595 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 8: Diversion by Parcel Page | 110 SOURCE: United States Postal Inspection Service, Prohibited Mailing of Narcotics SOURCE: United States Postal Inspection Service, Prohibited Mailing of Narcotics 0 200 400 600 800 1000 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 0 15 36 158 207 320 581 854 Number of ParcelsParcels Containing Marijuana Mailed from Colorado to Another State Legalization 0 200 400 600 800 1000 (2009-2012) Pre-Recreational Legalization (2013-2016) Post-Recreational Legalization 97 984 Average PoundsAverage Pounds of Colorado Marijuana Seized by the U.S. Postal Inspection Service 914% Increase 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 596 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 8: Diversion by Parcel Page | 111 SOURCE: United States Postal Inspection Service, Prohibited Mailing of Narcotics SOURCE: United States Postal Inspection Service, Prohibited Mailing of Narcotics 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 0 57.20 68.20 262.00 493.05 469.91 1,247.00 1,725.51 Number of PoundsPounds of Colorado Marijuana Seized by the U.S. Postal Inspection Service Legalization 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 0 10 24 29 33 38 40 41 Number of Different StatesNumber of States Destined to Receive Marijuana Mailed from Colorado Legalization 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 597 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 8: Diversion by Parcel Page | 112 Private Parcel Companies  There are courier delivery service companies, with locations throughout the country, from which Colorado marijuana destined for other states has been seized. Unlike the U.S. Postal Service, a central data system does not exist for these various private couriers. Several HIDTA regions were asked about parcel interdictions of marijuana from Colorado during calendar year 2016. The following data were provided by those HIDTA regions, although they do not represent 100% reporting for any state or region: Chicago: There were a total of 23 separate parcel interdictions in which Colorado marijuana, edibles, and/or marijuana concentrates (THC/wax) were seized by law enforcement. Totaling more than 47 lbs. of product, Chicago region law enforcement estimates the street value of products seized to be approximately $420,000. Houston: 6 packages of Colorado marijuana, weighing 5.3 lbs. Midwest: 18 packages of Colorado marijuana weighing 9.3 lbs. North Florida: 25 packages of Colorado marijuana, hashish and concentrated THC were seized, totaling 64 lbs. Ohio: 15 packages of Colorado marijuana, hash oil, concentrated THC wax and edibles were seized, weighing approximately 30 lbs. Washington/Baltimore: 25 packages containing over 37 lbs. of Colorado marijuana and/or THC concentrates were seized. Rocky Mountain: (packages destined outside of Colorado) 75 packages in total, which included 132 lbs. of marijuana products, and 89 individual edible products (brownies, candies, bars, etc.), and 6 live plants. When asked where the packages were destined, it was reported that these marijuana packages are being shipped all over the United States and out of the country. The furthest destination noted was the United Kingdom. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 598 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 8: Diversion by Parcel Page | 113 Case Examples From the Mountains to the Beach: In March of 2016, over 11 lbs. of high-grade marijuana was seized as it was being transported by FedEx Express. The marijuana was sent from Aspen, Colorado to Neptune Beach, Florida. 1 $12,000 Worth of Marijuana in the Mail: In December of 2016, over 6 lbs. of marijuana was seized as it was being transported by United Parcel Service (UPS). The marijuana was mailed from Grand Junction, Colorado to Riviera Beach, Florida. 1 New Year’s Gift from Longmont, CO: In January of 2017, over 6.5 lbs. of high-grade marijuana were seized as it was being transported by FedEx Express. The marijuana was mailed from Longmont, Colorado to Jacksonville Beach, Florida. 1 Sending “Green” from Evergreen, CO: In March of 2017, 13 lbs. of high-grade marijuana was seized as it was being transported by UPS. The marijuana was mailed from Evergreen, Colorado to Atlantic Beach, Florida. 1 Headed to the Atlantic: In June of 2017, over 8.5 lbs. of high-grade marijuana was seized as it was being transported by FedEx Ground. The marijuana was sent from Littleton, Colorado to Jacksonville Beach, Florida. 1 Arvada Man Gets One Year in Prison for Mailing Edibles: On February 18, 2017, 27 year-old Stephen Paul Anderson was sentenced to serve a year and one day in federal prison and three years of community supervised release for sending boxes of illegal marijuana edibles through the U.S. Postal Service. Anderson, who moved from Texas to Colorado, was manufacturing highly concentrated THC oil in his basement using an open flame fueled by a propane tank. This method of extracting oil has led to multiple fires and explosions throughout the Denver area. 2 Seizure of Marijuana-Filled Parcels Increasing: Police Chief Aaron Jimenez (St. Ann Police, Missouri) was recently interviewed by a St. Louis news media outlet. The article mentioned, “pounds upon pounds of high-grade marijuana are being shipped to the St. Louis area from states where the drug is legal.” Jimenez explained how it was not always that way. “We might’ve had 5 to 10 maybe in a year, but since I’ve started the narcotics unit here, I can tell you within the last year, these guys probably get one or two a week.” U.S. Postal Inspector Dan Taylor said, “Just here in the St. Louis area, our postal inspectors have seized over 1,200 pounds of marijuana, from the mail, in the last year. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 599 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 8: Diversion by Parcel Page | 114 We’ve become very good at identifying these packages.” It is worth noting that this amount of seized marijuana equates to over 32 pounds a day. According to police, “marijuana is most commonly sent from Colorado and California, but the packages nearly always have fake names and addresses.” 3 Second Bust of Illegal Grow, Same Two People Arrested on the Same Property: “Nearly 150 marijuana plants, packaged marijuana and firearms were seized from a property that has been busted before for illegally growing marijuana. The two arrested were the same two busted nearly a year ago.” While the El Paso Sheriff’s office led the operation, agents from the Drug Enforcement Administration assisted with the investigation and seizure of the marijuana plants, cash, grow equipment, and four firearms. Of note, investigators found several packages of processed marijuana located in numerous United States Postal Services boxes, which appeared to be nearly ready to ship. According to the August article published by KKTV, the Colorado Springs news outlet, “The DEA estimates there was between $25,000 to $30,000 worth of lighting equipment inside the single grow house. The marijuana seized has an estimated value greater than $125,000.” 4 Home Improvement Goods: In November of 2016, the North Metro Task Force (NMTF) intercepted a package to be shipped via UPS that contained 18.5lbs of marijuana packaged in a Home Depot bucket. The package was being shipped to an address in Stanley, North Carolina. The investigation has resulted in the arrest of two suspects. 5 Heading South: In November of 2016, the North Metro Task Force (NMTF) intercepted a UPS shipment that contained 7.5lbs of marijuana and marijuana edibles. The two packages within the shipment were addressed to Dallas, Texas, and Magnolia, Texas. 5 April Fools’ Delivery: In April of 2017, the North Metro Task Force (NMTF) intercepted a package shipped via UPS that contained over 23lbs of marijuana. The package was being shipped to an address in Malden, Massachusetts. With the help of the Malden Police Department, a coordinated investigation took place which resulted in the arrest of a single suspect. 5 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 600 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 8: Diversion by Parcel Page | 115 Sources 1 North Florida HIDTA Information Bulletins, Package Interdiction Summaries. Received July 25th, 2017. 2 Kirk Mitchell, “Arvada man who used post office to distribute marijuana edibles sentenced to a year and a day,” The Denver Post, February 22, 2017, <http://www.denverpost.com/2017/02/22/arvada-man-usps-marijuana-edibles/>, accessed April 19, 2017. 3 Rebecca Roberts, “Seizure of marijuana filled parcels increasing,” Fox 2 Now/St. Louis, June 17, 2017, <http://fox2now.com/2014/06/17/seizure-of-marijuana-filled- parcels-increasing/>, accessed August 17, 2017. 4 Khloe Keeler, “2nd bust of illegal grow, same 2 people arrested on the same property,” KKTV/11 News, August 8, 2017, <http://www.kktv.com/content/news/Illegal-grow-bust-guns-and-marijuana-seized-in- El-Paso-County-438387943.html>, accessed August 10, 2017. 5 Rocky Mountain HIDTA Task Force Quarterly Reports, Calendar Year 2016-2017. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 601 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 8: Diversion by Parcel Page | 116 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 602 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 9: Related Data Page | 117 SECTION 9: Related Data Topics  Crime  Revenue  Event Planners’ Views of Denver  Homeless  Suicides  THC Potency  Marijuana Use and Alcohol Consumption  Medical Marijuana Registry  Licensed Marijuana Businesses  Business Comparisons  Demand and Market Size  Reported Sales of Marijuana  Price of Marijuana  Local Response to the Medical and Recreational Marijuana Industry in Colorado NOTE: SOME OF THE DATA REPORTED IN THIS SECTION IS BECAUSE THERE HAVE BEEN SO MANY INQUIRIES ON THE PARTICULAR SUBJECT, SUCH AS CRIME AND SUICIDES. THIS IS NOT TO INFER THAT THE DATA IS DUE TO THE LEGALIZATION OF MARIJUANA. Some Findings  Crime in Denver increased 6 percent from 2014 to 2016 and crime in Colorado increased 11 percent from 2013 to 2016.  Colorado annual tax revenue from the sale of recreational and medical marijuana was 0.8 percent of Colorado’s total statewide budget (FY2017).  As of June 2017, there were 491 retail marijuana stores in the state of Colorado compared to 392 Starbucks and 208 McDonald’s.  66 percent of local jurisdictions have banned medical and recreational marijuana businesses. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 603 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 9: Related Data Page | 118 Crime SOURCE: Colorado Bureau of Investigation, http://crimeinco.cbi.state.co.us/ Colorado Crime From 2009 to 2012 From 2013 to 2016 Property Crime Increased 4.1% Increased 8.3% Violent Crime Increased 1.2% Increased 18.6% All Crime Increased 3.4% Increased 10.8% SOURCE: Colorado Bureau of Investigation, http://crimeinco.cbi.state.co.us/ 0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 120,000 140,000 160,000 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Property Crimes 132,212 131,141 132,623 131,800 136,483 138,275 133,927 141,634 149,713 Violent Crimes 41,914 43,680 43,589 43,875 44,209 45,583 47,911 51,478 54,052Number of CrimesColorado Crime 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 604 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 9: Related Data Page | 119 SOURCE: City and County of Denver, Denver Police Department, Crime Statistics and Maps, April 2016 0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000 40,000 2009 2010 2011 2012 *2013 *2014 *2015 *2016 6,604 6,655 6,881 7,255 8,722 10,103 10,566 10,699 30,371 29,551 31,719 32,553 32,078 31,534 33,714 34,168 Number of Crimes City and County of Denver Crime Property Crimes Violent Crimes *In May 2013 the Denver Police Department implemented the Unified Summons and Complaint (US&C) process. This process unifies multiple types of paper citations, excluding traffic tickets, into an electronic process. That information is transmitted to the Denver Sheriff, County Court, City Attorney and District Attorney through a data exchange platform as needed. As a result of this process a reported offense is generated which was previously not captured in National Incident Based Reporting System (NIBRS). 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 605 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 9: Related Data Page | 120 Crime in Denver (City and County) 2013 2014 2015 2016 *All Reported Crimes (To include all categories listed below) 55,115 ** 61,276 64,317 64,736 *Denver Crime From 2014 to 2016 Crimes Against Persons Increased 6% Crimes Against Property Increased 8% Crimes Against Society Increased 31% All Other Offenses Decreased 9% All Denver Crimes Increased 6% * Actual number of crimes in Denver ** New process began in May 2013 and 2013 data is not comparable to 2014-2016 SOURCE: City and County of Denver, Denver Police Department, Crime Statistics and Maps, April 2016 SOURCE: Denver Police Department, Traffic Operations Bureau/Vice/Drug Bureau via Data Analysis Unit 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 8 184 770 762 590 Number of Arrests/CitationsDenver Police Department Unlawful Public Display/Consumption of Marijuana 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 606 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 9: Related Data Page | 121 SOURCE: Boulder Police Department, Records and Information Services NOTE: THE CITY OF BOULDER DID NOT HAVE A MUNICIPAL STATUTE SPECIFIC TO PUBLIC CONSUMPTION OF MARIJUANA UNTIL MID-2013. Case Examples “Marijuana is the Gateway Drug to Homicide”: After indicting thirteen people involved in illegally distributing around 200 pounds of marijuana District Attorney Dan May stated in a public announcement, “Colorado Springs Police Department… had 22 homicides in Colorado Springs last year, 2016. Eight of those were directly marijuana.” During the public announcement May explained that authorities are overwhelmed having to deal with the crime that is associated with marijuana and claimed that “marijuana is the gateway drug to homicide.” 1 Homicides have “Marijuana Nexus”: Colorado Springs is Colorado’s second largest urban area located in El Paso County. Neither the city nor the county permit the sale of recreational marijuana but both allow medical marijuana. Even so, the Colorado Springs Police Department stated 11 of the 59 homicides that occurred in Colorado Springs between 2015 and early 2017 have a “marijuana nexus.” According to the 0 50 100 150 200 2013 2014 2015 2016 72 129 151 199 Number of CitationsBoulder Police Department Marijuana Public Consumption Citations 17% Increase79% Increase 32% Increase 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 607 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 9: Related Data Page | 122 report, “In most cases robbery of marijuana was a motive or the victim was killed during a marijuana narcotics transaction.” 2 Pot Deal Ends in Gunfire when Buyer Realizes they Bought Broccoli: Local Colorado drug dealers, Tercell Davis and Sababu Colbert-Evans, “accepted $10,000 for a marijuana sale, but Davis substituted broccoli for the pot.” Both parties had already driven off when the buyers realized they had actually purchased broccoli instead of marijuana. The buyers noticed they had been duped and arranged another meeting with Davis using a different name. The next night they all met up again and “an argument broke out, and Colbert-Evans and Davis fired 11 shots at the fleeing would-be buyers. One was hit in the torso.” 3 Texas Trio Charged with Murder during Marijuana Robbery: Three individuals from Texas were charged with first-degree murder while attempting to rob David Gaytan in May 2017. The shooting that lead to the death of David Gaytan occurred at a mobile home park in Lightner Creek, Colorado. District Attorney Christian Champagne, in a response to the shooting, stated, Colorado voters have clearly stated they are in favor of legalized marijuana… which makes the state a target for people with nefarious intent from other states. It’s a problem; I don’t know where the solution is…, I think it’s important that we send a message that we’re taking it very seriously, and people who come from other states to commit crimes in our community are going to be dealt with very seriously, and that’s how we’re approaching it. 4 At Least Eleven Pot-Related Homicides Since Legalization: In response to the recent conviction of Shawn Geerdes, an owner of a shared marijuana grow who murdered his business partner, a local Colorado District Attorney indicated that there have been “at least eleven pot-related homicides since legalization.” District Attorney George Brauchler claimed that “since the passage of Amendment 64, jurisdictions across the state have noted significant violent crime related to marijuana cultivation and distribution.” In addition to homicide, he noted that there are additional crimes such as “robbery, burglary, and attempted-murder cases in our community also motivated by marijuana.” 5 Triple Homicide at Illegal Marijuana Grow: 24-year-old Garrett Coughlin was charged with six counts of first degree murder after being accused of killing 3 people in Boulder County. Police believed “the home was specifically targeted” by Coughlin on April 13, 2017. Witnesses told investigators they “saw Coughlin with large amounts of marijuana packaged in a manner consistent with the marijuana owned by the victims, as well as 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 608 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 9: Related Data Page | 123 large amounts of cash following the homicides.” Over 100 plants were found at the murder location.6, 7 A Troubling Weakness in Colorado Marijuana Enforcement: Former Colorado Marijuana Enforcement Officer, Renee Rayton, was recently indicted due to her involvement in shipping millions of dollars worth of marijuana outside the state. Within weeks after leaving her state employment she was working for a shell company, Harmony & Green. “Harmony & Green…bought legal pot cultivation licenses and tricked investors into helping finance the scheme.” In addition to breaking state and federal law by shipping marijuana outside of Colorado, Rayton also breached a specific policy that prevents “former regulators from working in the industries they oversaw for six months.” During her time with Harmony & Green, Rayton reportedly bragged about knowing someone at the Colorado Department of Revenue who would help the company “get legal.” According to investigators assigned to the case, it is doubtful that she was unaware of the “duplicitous practices that were lining her pocket,” given her vast regulatory field experience. Although Colorado’s Enforcement Division was correct in asking the Colorado Bureau of Investigation to conduct an independent investigation, this example of an Enforcement Officer gone bad highlights the complexities and challenges involved in regulating recreational marijuana. This case made it pretty clear that the “Department of Revenue should launch a review of its enforcement division’s practices and ensure, through education and otherwise, that its regulators can be trusted.”8 County Official Arrested Over Illegal Pot Grow: According to investigators, Ted Archibeque, the elected Eagle County surveyor, and his brother Thomas Archibeque are “suspected of knowingly allowing the cultivation/manufacturing of marijuana” at an illegal grow. Local officials and the DEA served a warrant to a property owned by Ted Archibeque and found “28 growing plants and 65 pounds of processed marijuana” they also observed “what appeared like recent construction of multiple greenhouses and an airfield.” According to Kris Friel, an Eagle County spokeswoman, “Ted is still the county surveyor” because as an elected position “there is no provision for placing the surveyor on administrative suspension.” 9 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 609 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 9: Related Data Page | 124 Revenue SOURCE: Governor’s Office of State Planning and Budgeting SOURCE: Department of Revenue, Monthly Marijuana Taxes, Licenses and Fees Transfers and Distribution, 2016 NOTE: FIGURES DO NOT INCLUDE ANY CITY TAXES; THE STATE DOES NOT ASSESS OR COLLECT THOSE TAXES. Colorado's Statewide Budget, Fiscal Year 2017 Marijuana Tax Revenue* (Medical and Recreational) = 0.8% *Revenue from marijuana taxes as a portion of Colorado's total statewide budget 0 50,000,000 100,000,000 150,000,000 200,000,000 2.9% Regular Sales 10% Special Sales 15% Excise Total 2016 Taxes 23,986,490 83,750,123 59,420,537 167,157,150 12,462,467 NA NA 12,462,467DollarsTotal Revenue from Marijuana Taxes, Calendar Year 2016 Retail Marijuana Taxes Medical Marijuana Taxes 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 610 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 9: Related Data Page | 125 Case Example Falling Marijuana Prices Mean Trouble for States that Have Legalized: As more time elapses since marijuana legalization, prices for marijuana are expected to continue to drop. However, states like Colorado “that tax legal marijuana sales based solely on price” may begin to have budgetary issues. “The progression of marijuana prices over time in Colorado perfectly parallels the pattern in Washington after that state legalized: Prices briefly spiked due to initial supply shortages, but then began dropping as the marijuana industry matured and expanded. Wholesale prices in Colorado tumbled 24.5 percent over the past year to $1,471 per pound.” While prices dropping may be good for consumers it may not be good for Colorado as “sinking prices translate automatically into sinking tax revenue per sale.” In order for Colorado to compensate for this reduction and ensure that tax revenue remains the same, it will need to “have substantially increased sales volume.” However, increasing consumption comes with its own risks “such as more auto accidents by drivers who are stoned, an increase in heavy cannabis users dropping out of school, and so on. If the state adopts measures to cut soaring consumption, it will by definition lose tax revenue, potentially making the recreational marijuana system unable to pay for its own regulatory costs.” 10 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 611 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 9: Related Data Page | 126 Event Planners’ Views of Denver SOURCE: VISIT DENVER, Impacts of the Downtown Environment on the Tourism Industry and Visitor Perceptions report VISIT DENVER is the marketing organization for the city and it measures, records and reports hundreds of data points, to include safety trends and feedback received from convention and leisure visitors. Based on data collected they came away with three key takeaways: 1. “The downtown environment is the #1 complaint from meeting planners, far surpassing any other categories. The severity of this issue has increased and as of 2014 nearly 50% of meeting planners negatively commented on homeless, youth, panhandling, safety, cleanliness, and drugs including public marijuana consumption.” 2. “Denver ranks very high on walkability, affordability, facilities, and other factors. However, Denver as a ‘safe city’ ranks significantly lower according to interviews with key convention planners conducted by an independent third- party.” 3. “Denver is losing visitors and valuable convention business as a result of these overall safety (or perception of safety) issues. Unfortunately, word is beginning to spread among meeting planners about the safety challenges Denver is facing. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 612 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 9: Related Data Page | 127 As the market organization for the city, we fear not being able to brand Denver away from this growing reputation.” Comments made by the Colorado Convention Center clients and visitors to Denver:  “I’m sorry but I would never consider putting attendees in danger by holding a convention in your city. We are staying at Embassy Suites downtown on 16th, and last night witnessed a group of about 30 teenagers attack a man walking along 16th street. I am told this is not an unusual occurrence. The homeless situation is very sad, and public streets reek of weed. The Denver police should be more alert to large groups of minors congregating on city streets attacking tourists. My feedback from this meeting will be to never locate here again; I have felt much safer in downtown NYC, Philly, Seattle, and Chicago.”  “I am a 5th generation Colorado native. I am downtown for a national convention and within 10 minutes of walking to the Convention Center I was so disheartened: I didn’t feel safe and it was 2:00 in the afternoon. I passed drunks, disheveled people, smelled weed being smoked in the open. It was disgusting and I thought so this is where the current government is taking us. I use [sic] to be so proud of Denver and Colorado; today I was heart sick and embarrassed, knowing I’d be apologizing to colleagues coming from other states that didn’t have sanctuary cities, legalized pot etc. Mayor Hancock, you need to rethink what you’re doing before the Denver that was beautiful and safe is gone.”  “This client chose to contract with the Hyatt Regency San Antonio. I would like to share with you why Denver dropped off his list. This client does a lot of business in Denver and was disappointed to see, in his opinion, how things have changed in the city since marijuana was legalized. He says he sees lots of people walking around looking ‘out of it’ and does not want to expose his attendees to this. I hope you don’t mind the honestly [sic] but I wanted you to know exactly ‘why’.”  “Greetings, we wanted to pass along some comments based on a national meeting we hosted for our industry in Denver in July [2015]. It was held with delegates arriving as early as July 11 and continued through July 15. This is a meeting of industry executives and business owners from around the entire country. The meeting was headquartered at the Sheraton downtown. The chairman commented, ‘We will most likely not return to Denver based on the current situation with all the street people.’ This was followed up by comments from the President who echoed these comments about a reluctance to return to Denver based on the condition of the City and the abundance of homeless people walking the mall and in and about the downtown area. The 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 613 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 9: Related Data Page | 128 attendees were also less than complementary with Denver and in particular the downtown area. Some of the comments received from attendee in survey after the conference were: o ‘Denver seems less safe now that pot is legalized.’ o ‘Don’t have a meeting in downtown Denver…what a depressing downtown area.’ o ‘The neighborhood had way too many vagrants. I don’t remember Denver being that bad.’ o ‘Poor area, lots of crime as we sat outside on a patio on the 16th Street mall on Sunday evening having a beer, I turned my head to look at a television, when I turned back a street person was drinking my beer. I am sure this is not an image Denver wants portrayed around the country.’” Homeless How Recreational Weed is attracting People, but Spiking the State’s Homeless Rate: An article written in the summer of 2016 described the journey of a young man from a small town in Texas to the Southern Colorado town of Pueblo. In the first half of a two- part article, Devin Butts describes his journey to Colorado which was made largely due to the current recreational marijuana laws. “He’d come to Colorado…because he’d decided that cannabis would be the only indulgence he would keep as he tore himself away from all the other, far more dangerous substances and habits he was used to.” Devin is not alone in his journey to Colorado; in fact, there are many others that have followed a similar fate and ended up in one of Colorado’s overcrowded homeless shelters while trying to make a new future. At Denver’s St. Francis Center day shelter, executive director Tom Luehrs said a survey conducted by a grad student last year found that between 17 and 20 percent of the 350 or so new people the center was seeing each month said they’d come to the area in part because of medical marijuana. If anything, said Luehrs and his colleagues, that figure is low. At the nearby Salvation Army Crossroads Shelter, an informal survey of 500 newcomers in the summer of 2014 determined that nearly 30 percent were there because of cannabis. 11 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 614 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 9: Related Data Page | 129 Marijuana Legalization: Pot Brings Poor People to Colorado, but What’s Being Done To Help Them?: In the second part of a summer 2016 article written to describe the journey of a young man to Colorado, Devin Butts describes his newfound perspective. Devin, along with hundreds of other individuals who relocated to Colorado in pursuit of marijuana-related opportunities, found that the journey isn’t quite what he was hoping for – especially with regards to finding employment. The vice president of communications and public policy for the Colorado Coalition for the Homeless spoke about hourly wage requirements to live in Denver, which is bad news for marijuana migrants looking for work. According to Cathy Alderman, “Workers need to make at least $19 an hour to afford housing in the Denver area. But marijuana trimmers usually start at around $10 an hour, and budtenders working in the dispensaries often don’t make much more than that.” This news, along with the fact that Colorado’s housing market has been skyrocketing, seems to indicate significant challenges for those hoping to move to Colorado in pursuit of greater futures. Relatedly, an unexpected consequence of the legalization of recreational marijuana is the surge in the homeless population in many Colorado cities. Recently, the city of Aurora pledged $4.5 million in cannabis revenue to homeless programs – certainly an unforeseen cost. Although this might seem to be a step in the right direction in order to help those in need, it might also signal a trend in government spending and population dependency at least partially brought-on by the legalization of recreational marijuana. 12 Denver on ‘breaking point’ with homeless population: A Salvation Army Captain recently spoke with reporters about the growing homeless population. Captain Eric Wilkerson said that the cause is most likely what many Denver citizens suspect, the cause is marijuana. “People are coming here from out of state to smoke weed,” a trend that hasn’t gone unnoticed by many of Colorado’s residents. Additionally, “The city of Denver is not denying legal marijuana has resulted in an increase in homelessness.” In an email from a local social services employee, it was said that “While there isn’t a formal study on the issue, many service providers for those experiencing homelessness tell us, anecdotally, that 20 (percent) to 30 percent of people they encounter who are moving to Colorado tell them that they are moving here, in part, because of legalized marijuana or to try to find work in the industry.” Although the city of Denver has pledged large sums of money to those in need of affordable housing, a local branding and marketing expert expressed her concern that we get ahead of this growing trend as the last thing she wants is for her city to have the perception of a “homeless problem.” 13 Legalized Marijuana Turns Colorado Resort Town into Homeless Magnet: Several people holding cardboard signs can be seen lining the sidewalks and streets of Durango, CO. Durango is a picturesque, upscale community where many businesses 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 615 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 9: Related Data Page | 130 rely on tourism. The city has recently become overrun with transients and panhandlers, many of them people between the ages of 20-30. One resident and business owner mentioned “most of the kids here are from out of state, and I would say it has a lot to do with the legalized pot.” The small city has also experienced an increase in crime, placing its property crime rate 12 percent higher than the national average.14 Suicide Data SOURCE: Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE), Colorado Violent Death Reporting System 0.00%5.00%10.00%15.00%20.00% Marijuana Alcohol Amphetamine Cocaine Opioid Antidepressant 16.30% 8.70% 4.70% 2.30% 4.70% 4.70% 17.40% 11.70% 2.30% 1.90% 6.60% 4.20% 13.50% 12.00% 3.80% 0.00% 0.00% 3.80% Percent Average Toxicology of Suicides Among Adolescents Ages 10 to 19 Years Old (With Known Toxicology) 2006-2008 Pre-Commercialization 2009-2012 Post-Commercialization 2013-2015 Legalization 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 616 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 9: Related Data Page | 131 SOURCE: Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE), Colorado Violent Death Reporting System  Marijuana is the only substance where youth, ages 10 to 19, have a higher percentage than adults, ages 20 and older. 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% Marijuana Alcohol Amphetamine Cocaine Opiod Antidepressant 16.3% 8.7% 4.7%2.3% 4.7%4.7% 15.8% 38.6% 6.8% 2.8% 20.0%17.4%Percent of SuicidesAverage Toxicology Results by Age Group, 2013-2015 Ages 10 to 19 Ages 20+ 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 617 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 9: Related Data Page | 132 THC Potency SOURCE: Potency Monitoring Program, Quarterly Report Number 135, National Center for Natural Products Research (NCNPR) at the University of Mississippi, under contract with the National Institute on Drug Abuse.  The average potency for buds/flower in Colorado is 17.1 percent. 15 3.96% 4.51% 5.01% 4.91% 4.60% 5.34% 6.11% 7.20% 7.15% 8.14% 8.02% 8.76% 9.58% 9.93% 9.75% 10.36% 11.13% 12.27% 11.99%12.09% 11.04% 0.00% 2.00% 4.00% 6.00% 8.00% 10.00% 12.00% 14.00%199519961997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012201320142015Average THC PercentNational Average THC Potency Submitted Cannabis Samples 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 618 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 9: Related Data Page | 133 SOURCE: Potency Monitoring Program, Quarterly Report Number 135, National Center for Natural Products Research (NCNPR) at the University of Mississippi, under contract with the National Institute on Drug Abuse.  The average potency for concentrates in Colorado is 62.1 percent. 15 13.23% 12.82% 18.20% 15.78% 16.21% 28.58% 19.44% 22.51% 15.54% 31.32% 6.40% 18.74% 24.85% 6.73% 12.71% 36.16% 35.28% 53.52% 49.98% 50.79% 55.85% 0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00%199519961997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012201320142015Average THC PercentNational Average THC Potency Submitted Hash Oil Samples 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 619 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 9: Related Data Page | 134 Alcohol Consumption  It has been suggested that legalizing marijuana would reduce alcohol consumption. Thus far that theory is not supported by the data. SOURCE: Colorado Department of Revenue, Colorado Liquor Excise Tax SOURCE: Colorado Department of Revenue, Colorado Liquor Excise Tax 130,000,000 132,000,000 134,000,000 136,000,000 138,000,000 140,000,000 142,000,000 144,000,000 Pre-Legalization 2010-2012 Post-Legalization 2013-2016 136,364,158 143,777,836 GallonsColorado Average Consumption of Alcohol 130,000,000 132,000,000 134,000,000 136,000,000 138,000,000 140,000,000 142,000,000 144,000,000 146,000,000 148,000,000 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 135,824,179 136,778,438 136,489,856 143,468,372 141,184,231 142,970,403 147,488,339 GallonsColorado Consumption of Alcohol Legalization 5% Increase 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 620 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 9: Related Data Page | 135 Medical Marijuana Registry 16 Medical Marijuana Registry Identification Cards  December 31, 2009 – 41,039  December 31, 2010 – 116,198  December 31, 2011 – 82,089  December 31, 2012 – 108,526  December 31, 2013 – 110,979  December 31, 2014 – 115,467  December 31, 2015 – 107,534  December 31, 2016 – 94,577 Profile of Colorado Medical Marijuana Cardholders:  Age of cardholder o 63 percent male, with an average age of 43 years o 0.3 percent between the ages of 0 and 17 o 46 percent between the ages of 18 and 40  21 percent between the ages of 21 and 30  Reporting medical condition of cardholder o 93 percent report severe pain as the medical condition o 6 percent collectively report cancer, glaucoma and HIV/AIDS o 3 percent report seizures 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 621 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 9: Related Data Page | 136 SOURCE: Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, Medical Marijuana Statistics NOTE: TOTAL DOES NOT EQUAL 100 PERCENT AS SOME PATIENTS REPORT USING MEDICAL MARIJUANA FOR MORE THAN ONE DEBILITATING MEDICAL CONDITION. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Cachexia Cancer Glaucoma HIV / AIDS Muscle Spasms Seizures Sever Nausea Severe Pain 1%4%1%1% 25% 3% 13% 93%Percent of PatientsPercent of Medical Marijuana Patients Based on Reporting Conditions, 2016 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 622 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 9: Related Data Page | 137 Colorado Licensed Marijuana Businesses as of August 1st, 2017 17 Medical Marijuana:  759 marijuana cultivation facilities  507 medical marijuana centers (dispensaries)  255 infused products (edibles) businesses  14 testing facilities Recreational Marijuana:  701 marijuana cultivation facilities  498 marijuana retail stores  273 infused product (edibles) businesses  13 testing facilities Business Comparisons, June 2017  Figures for business comparisons were all acquired by June of 2017 for comparable data. SOURCE: Colorado Department of Revenue; Starbucks Coffee Company, Corporate Office Headquarters; McDonalds Corporation, Corporate Office Headquarters 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 McDonalds Starbucks Retail Marijuana Stores Medical Marijuana Dispensaries 208 392 491 513 Licensed BusinessesColorado Business Comparisons, June 2017 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 623 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 9: Related Data Page | 138 Demand and Market Size 18 The Colorado Department of Revenue published a report in July 2014 called, “Market Size and Demand for Marijuana in Colorado.” A follow-up to this report showed data for 2015. Some of the information included: Demand  In 2015, the established demand for marijuana by Colorado residents 21 years and older is 134.7 metric tons (296,962.67 pounds) of marijuana.  In 2015, the estimated demand for marijuana by out-of-state visitors 21 years and older is 14.0 metric tons (30,864.7 pounds). Market Size  There are an estimated 569,000 Colorado adult regular marijuana users (at least once per month).  Heavy users who consume marijuana nearly daily make up less than 25 percent of the user population but account for 76.4 percent of the demand for marijuana. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 624 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 9: Related Data Page | 139 Marijuana Enforcement Division Reported Sales of Marijuana in Colorado 19, 20 In 2015:  144,537 pounds of medical marijuana flower  106,932 pounds of recreational marijuana flower  2,261,875 units of medical edible products  5,280,297 units of recreational edible products In 2016:  159,998 pounds of medical marijuana flower  175,642 pounds of recreational marijuana flower  2,117,838 units of medical edible products  7,250,936 units of recreational edible products  A single ounce of marijuana, depending on the solvent type and production method, can produce “between 347 and 413 edibles of 10 mg [THC] strength.”15 2017 Price of Marijuana Marijuana prices as of July 2017 are based off a compilation of medical and recreational prices from local dispensaries and averaged: Area Gram Ounce State Average $11.00 $191.00 Denver $11.00 $159.00 Boulder $13.00 $213.00 Fort Collins $11.00 $235.00 Colorado Springs* $8.00 $157.00 *Colorado Springs does not allow selling of recreational marijuana within city limits. SOURCE: “Colorado marijuana prices for July 2017,” Marijuanarates.com, Accessed August 29, 2017 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 625 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 9: Related Data Page | 140 Local Response to Medical and Recreational Marijuana in Colorado Recreational Marijuana Business and Local Jurisdiction Response: 21, 22 SOURCE: Colorado Counties, Inc.; as of August 4th, 2017 *NOTE: THIS MAP SHOWS THE REGULATORY STATUSES OF UNINCORPORATED AREAS WITHIN EACH COUNTY. MUNICIPALITIES WITHIN EACH COUNTY SET POLICY WITHIN THEIR BOUNDARIES.  64 counties* o 61 percent have prohibited or have a moratorium (39) o 39 percent have allowed (25) * Broomfield and Denver are both a city and county but included only once in county data.  243 municipalities (cities and incorporated areas) have taken action on the issue o 72 percent have prohibited (167) or have a moratorium (8) o 28 percent have allowed (68) * 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 626 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 9: Related Data Page | 141 Medical Marijuana Business and Local Jurisdiction Response: 21, 22 SOURCE: Colorado Counties, Inc.; as of July 31, 2017 *NOTE: THIS MAP SHOWS THE REGULATORY STATUSES OF UNINCORPORATED AREAS WITHIN EACH COUNTY. MUNICIPALITIES WITHIN EACH COUNTY SET POLICY WITHIN THEIR BOUNDARIES.  64 counties* o 59 percent have prohibited or have a ban on new businesses (38) o 41 percent have allowed (26) * Broomfield and Denver are both a city and county but included only once in county data.  177 municipalities have taken action on the issue o 65 percent have prohibited (115) o 35 percent have allowed (62) 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 627 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 9: Related Data Page | 142 Local Jurisdictions Reporting Marijuana Licensing Status as of December 31, 2016 20 Medical and Retail Marijuana Banned 212 Medical Marijuana Licenses Only 18 Retail Marijuana Licenses Only 11 Medical and Retail Marijuana Licenses 79 SOURCE: Marijuana Enforcement Division, 2016 Annual Update For Further Related Data See Page 158 66%6% 3% 25% 2016 Local Jurisdiction Licensing Status Medical and Retail Banned Medical Only Retail Only Medical and Retail Allowed 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 628 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 9: Related Data Page | 143 Sources: 1 Colorado Springs, Colo. (KKTV), “Black market marijuana bust leaves bruises on Colorado’s marijuana industry,” July 25, 2017, <http://www.kktv.com/content/news/Black-market-marijuana-bust-leaves-bruises-on- Colorados-marijuana-industry-436622893.html>, accessed July 31, 2017. 2 Blair Miller, “Colorado Springs Police: 18 Percent of Homicides Since 2015 Have ‘Marijuana Nexus’; No State Data.” Denver Channel, March 15th, 2017, <http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/local-news/colorado-springs-police-18- percent-of-homicides-since-2015-have-marijuana-nexus-no-state-data>, accessed August 29th, 2017. 3 Kieran Nicholson, “Bogus pot deal, involving broccoli, and gunfire at Aurora mall gets man 16 years in prison,” Denver Post, <http://www.denverpost.com/2017/07/25/aurora-marijuana-deal-broccoli-town-center- gunfire-sentenced/>, accessed September 12th, 2017. 4 Shane Benjamin, “Texas trio charged with first-degree murder in Lightner Creek shooting,” Durango Herald, <https://durangoherald.com/articles/164814-texas-trio- charged-with-first-degree-murder-in-lightner-creek-shooting>, accessed September 12th, 2017. 5 George Brauchler, “At Least Eleven Pot-Related Homicides Since Legalization, DA Says,” Westword, < http://www.westword.com/news/marijuana-related-homicides-in- colorado-since-legalization-9345285>, accessed September 12th, 2017. 6 Mitchel Byars, “Suspect in Coal Creek Canyon Triple Homicide To Appear in Court Thursday,” Daily Camera, <http://www.dailycamera.com/boulder-county- news/ci_30994865/suspect-coal-creek-canyon-triple-homicide-appear- court?source=pkg>, accessed September 11, 2017. 7 Mitchel Byars, “Garrett Coughlin Charged With 6 Murder Counts in Coal Creek Canyon Killings,” Daily Camera, <http://www.dailycamera.com/boulder-county- news/ci_30996366/suspect-coal-creek-canyon-triple-homicide-charged-six?source=pkg>, accessed September 11, 2017. 8 The Denver Post Editorial Board, “A troubling weakness in Colorado Marijuana enforcement,” June 16, 2017, The Cannabist, 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 629 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 9: Related Data Page | 144 <http://www.thecannabist.co/2017/06/16/colorado-marijuana-enforcement-indictment-wakeup- call/82104/>, accessed September 21, 2017. 9 Jesse Paul, “Eagle County official and his brother arrested in connection with illegal marijuana grow,” The Denver Post, December 8, 2016, <http://www.denverpost.com/2016/12/08/eagle-county-official-brother-arrested-illegal- marijuana-grow/>, accessed September 22, 2017. 10 Keith Humphreys, “Falling marijuana prices mean trouble for states that have legalized,” The Washington Post, January 18th, 2017, <http://www.thecannabist.co/2017/01/18/marijuana-price-drops-state-revenue/71657/>, accessed August 3rd, 2017. 11 Joel Warner, “Marijuana Legalization in Colorado: How Recreational Weed Is Attracting People, But Spiking The State’s Homeless Rate {PART ONE}, International Business Times, June 20, 2016, <http://www.ibtimes.com/marijuana-legalization- colorado-how-recreational-weed-attracting-people-spiking-2374204>, accessed October 9, 2016. 12 Joel Warner, “Marijuana Legalization: Pot Brings Poor People To Colorado, But What’s Being Done To Help Them? {PART TWO}, International Business Times, June 21, 2016, <http://www.ibtimes.com/marijuana-legalization-pot-brings-poor-people- colorado-whats-being-done-help-them-2378769>, accessed October 9, 2016. 13 Joe St. George, “Salvation Army: Denver on ‘breaking point’ with homeless population, Fox31 Denver, July 7, 2016, <http://kdvr.com/2016/07/07/salvation-army- denver-on-breaking-point-with-homeless-population/>, accessed October 9, 2016. 14 Joseph J. Kolb, “Legalized marijuana turns Colorado resort town into homeless magnet,” FoxNews.com, May 17, 2017, <http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/05/17/legalized-marijuana-turns-colorado-resort- town-into-homeless-magnet.html>, accessed May 17, 2017. 15 Marijuana Policy Group, “Marijuana Equivalency in Portion and Dosage (as of August 10th, 2015),” <https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/sites/default/files/MED%20Equivalency_Final%2008 102015.pdf>, accessed May 12th, 2017. 16 Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, “Medical Marijuana Registry Program Update (as of December 31st, 2016),” 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 630 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 9: Related Data Page | 145 <https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/sites/default/files/CHED_MMR_Report_December_ 2016.pdf> accessed May 12th, 2017. 17 Colorado Department of Revenue, “Licensees – Marijuana Enforcement Division (As of August 1st, 2017),” < https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/enforcement/licensees- marijuana-enforcement-division>, accessed August 31, 2017. 18 Marijuana Policy Group, “The Economic Impact of Marijuana Legalization in Colorado,” Marijuana Enforcement Division, received August 1, 2017. 19 Marijuana Enforcement Division, “MED 2015 Annual Update,” Colorado Department of Revenue, September 26, 2016. 20 Marijuana Enforcement Division, “MED 2016 Annual Update,” Colorado Department of Revenue, August 2, 2017. 21 Colorado Municipal League, “Municipal Retail Marijuana Status,” <http://www.cml.org/rmj-action-visual/, accessed 8/29/2017>. 22 Colorado Counties Inc., <ccionline.org>, August 28, 2017. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 631 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 9: Related Data Page | 146 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 632 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 10: Reference Materials Page | 147 SECTION 10: Reference Materials Reports and Articles Impaired Driving Higher Levels of THC: In Colorado, the legal limit of THC in a driver’s blood is 5ng/mL. However, according to the Denver Post, “THC levels in drivers killed in crashes in 2016 routinely reached levels of more than 30 ng/mL… [t]he year before, levels only occasionally topped 5 ng/mL.” This trend has coroners concerned because some are “uncertain about listing the presence of THC on a death certificate because of doubts on what constitutes impairment.” Police Chief Jackson of Greenwood Village, CO attributes the rise in THC levels of drivers to the rise in THC potency in marijuana oils and concentrates. He states, “This is not your grandfather’s weed.” 1 Cannabis-Impaired Driving is a Public Health and Safety Concern: According to a 2015 study which aimed to examine some of the issues surrounding cannabis impaired driving, “The percentage of weekend nighttime drivers with measureable Δ9- tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) in blood or oral fluid increased to 12.6%, a 48% increase since 2007.” With the recent recreational legalization of marijuana in multiple states, this is likely a national trend we will see continue in the years to come. 2 Controlled Cannabis Vaporizer Administration with and without Alcohol: Researchers behind a 2015 study examined the vaporization of cannabis both with and without blood alcohol present in the systems of thirty-two regular cannabis smokers. As noted in the Clinical Chemistry article, smoking is the most common administration route of cannabis but the use of vaporization is increasing rapidly. The conclusions section of the study stated that the significantly higher blood THC concentration values in combination with blood alcohol “possibly explain[s] increased impairment observed from cannabis-alcohol combinations.” The conclusions of this study further underscore the complexities and issues that need to be closely examined, especially when considering drugged driving legislation. 3 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 633 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 10: Reference Materials Page | 148 Correlates of Marijuana Drugged Driving and Openness to Driving While High: A 2015 study funded and independently conducted by RTI International, a nonprofit research and technical services organization, examined 865 Colorado and Washington residents who self-reported using marijuana in the past 30 days. Two behaviors were looked at among the group of study participants; any instances of driving while high in the last year, and driving within 1 hour of using marijuana 5 or more times in the past month. Researchers found that the “Prevalence of past-year driving while under the influence of marijuana was 43.6% among respondents.” Additionally, “The prevalence of driving within 1 hour of using marijuana at least 5 times in the past month was 23.9%.” Furthermore, it was concluded that “Interventions for reducing the incidence of marijuana DUI are likely to be more successful by targeting safety perceptions related to marijuana DUI rather than knowledge of DUI laws.” 4 A 2-Year Study of THC Concentrations in Drivers: A recent study aimed to examine police and Drug Recognition Expert (DRE) evaluations with regards to driving under the influence of marijuana. Researchers hoped to determine whether or not a correlation exists between whole-blood THC concentrations and field sobriety test performance. “As suspected, the findings of this study did not find a correlation between performance on field sobriety tests and the concentration of THC tested in whole-blood samples.” This information further adds to the discussion around marijuana use and permissible driving limits. Much more research is needed in order to come up with appropriate marijuana driving laws/legislation throughout the country. Furthermore, the researchers concluded that, “The driving behaviors seen in THC- impaired drivers are similar to those seen in alcohol-impaired drivers.” Contrary to anecdotal accounts of “high” drivers being slow and cautious drivers, the most often observed driving behaviors of study participants included speeding, the inability to maintain lane position, and running red lights or stop signs. 5 57 Percent of Marijuana Users in Colorado Admit Driving within 2 Hours: A survey conducted by the Colorado Department of Transportation discovered that 57 percent of people who reported using marijuana drove within two hours after consumption. The survey also indicated that, on average, those participants who reported consuming marijuana and then driving within 2 hours did so on 11.7 of 30 days. By comparison, 38 percent of respondents who drank alcoholic beverages reported driving within 2 hours after consumption and only reported doing so on 2.8 of 30 days. 6 DRE Examination Characteristics of Cannabis Impairment: The frequently-debated 5ng/mL blood THC per se cutoff has been the source of much controversy since 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 634 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 10: Reference Materials Page | 149 legalized marijuana has hit the scene. In 2016, a study of Drug Recognition Expert (DRE) characteristics of cannabis impairment further highlighted the “limited relevance” of the 5ug/L cutoff. “Combined observations on psychophysical and eye exams produced the best cannabis-impairment indicators.” Additionally, “No significant differences were detected between cases with blood THC >5ng/mL versus <5ng/mL.” More specifically the finger-to-nose test was seen as the best indicator of cannabis impairment, with the values of sensitivity, specificity, predictive value and efficiency being considered. 7 Smoked Cannabis Psychomotor and Neurocognitive Effects in Occasional and Frequent Smokers: A group of researchers interested in examining the severity of psychomotor performance, cognition, and driving ability differences among frequent and occasional users of cannabis found substantial differences among the frequent users and the occasional users. During the study, “fourteen frequent (equal or greater than 4x/week) and 11 occasional (less than 2x/week) cannabis smokers entered a secure research unit approximately 19 hours prior to smoking one 6.8% THC cigarette.” Cognitive and psychomotor performance was measured in a variety of ways at certain intervals of time both prior to and after the drug use. Researchers concluded that there are “significant differences between occasional and frequent cannabis smokers in psychomotor, subjective and physiological effects following cannabis smoking, with weaker effects in frequent smokers suggesting tolerance development. Impairment domains included those that play a key role in driver’s ability to accurately control a car or to react to events on the road.” 8 Time Profile of Serum THC Levels in Occasional and Chronic Marijuana Users after Acute Drug Use: Although it is commonly accepted that cannabis consumption has the ability to influence cognitive and psychomotor functions, the rules on how to assess the ability to drive while under the influence of cannabis are not very clear. “The psychoactive compound delta-9- tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) impairs cognition, psychomotor behavior and driving performance in a dose-related manner approximately.” After researching the time profile related to cannabis consumption and the related physiologic affects (through observation of human volunteers), it is apparent that there is “great individual variability of the kinetic profile of THC in blood…” The research article goes on to describe that “Low blood concentrations of THC close to the limit of detection… are justified in an effective traffic legislation.” 9 Effect of Blood Collection Time: Drug testing is a highly scrutinized topic when it comes to marijuana use and the operation of motor vehicles. This topic has been made even more controversial as several states have legalized marijuana for medical and/or 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 635 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 10: Reference Materials Page | 150 recreational use. Therefore, a group of researchers examined the impact of blood collection time on toxicological evaluation for THC. Researchers found that blood THC concentrations at the time of driving cannot be reliably determined due to individual variances. 10 Drivers Killed in Crashes More Likely to be on Drugs than Alcohol: A recent study using data available from 2015 indicates that “[d]rivers who are killed in car crashes are now more likely to be on drugs than alcohol.” Drugs were present in 43 percent of drivers in fatal accidents compared to 37 percent with alcohol above the legal limit. Additionally, 36 percent of the drivers tested had marijuana present in their system at the time of the accident. In general, traffic fatalities are rising and can be attributed to factors such as improved economy, more distracted drivers, and more drugged drivers. 11 Drug-impaired Driving: In this report, Dr. James Hedlund, under contract with the Governors Highway Safety Association (GHSA), described “the current state of knowledge on drug-impaired driving, including what little is known about the costs and effectiveness of these actions, and identifies actions states can take to reduce drug- impaired driving.” The report cites a variety of sources, including the Fatality Analysis and Reporting System (FARS) and various roadside surveys conducted in multiple states. Through these data sources, Dr. Hedlund determined “marijuana is by far the most common drug that is used.” He also described that while drug-impaired driving is more complex than alcohol-impaired driving, “43% of fatally-injured drivers with known test results tested positive for drugs or marijuana in 2015, more than tested positive for alcohol”. The report pointed out additional differences between alcohol- impaired driving and drug-impaired driving and made recommendations for states to enact education programs, legislation, and officer training programs. 12 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 636 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 10: Reference Materials Page | 151 Youth Marijuana Use Marijuana Use up among Teens since Legalized in Colorado, Washington: Researchers at the University of California Davis and Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health conducted a study involving teens’ perception of marijuana use before and after recreational marijuana was legalized in their state. The study, which used nation-wide data of nearly 254,000 students who participated in the Monitoring the Future survey, showed that legalization of recreational marijuana significantly reduced perceptions of marijuana’s harmfulness by 14 percent in 8th graders and 16 percent in 10th graders in Washington state but not in Colorado. Researchers attribute the lack of change in perception in Colorado to the state’s robust medical marijuana industry that was established prior to recreational legalization. Youth were exposed to substantial advertising from the medical marijuana industry and therefore Colorado has had lower rates of perceived harmfulness and higher rates of use compared to Washington state and other states. The researchers recommend that states considering legalizing recreational marijuana should also consider investing in substance abuse prevention programs for adolescents. 13 Pot Smoking Common among Pregnant Teens: A recent national survey given to approximately 14,400 pregnant women aged 12-44, found “more than twice as many pregnant 12- to 17-year-olds use marijuana as their non-pregnant peers.” This constituted 14% of the surveyed mothers-to-be. Teen pregnancies are already “associated with smaller babies,” but there may be other risks to a pregnancy caused by marijuana use. According to Dr. Judy Chang, associate professor of obstetrics, gynecology and reproductive sciences at the University of Pittsburgh, “some of the studies that do exist suggest that there are risks to the pregnancy from pot use.” Some of those risks may include “scrawnier babies, kids who have some problems with their thinking and learning abilities, [and] kids who find it harder to do more complicated brain tasks when they are teenagers.” Additional evidence may suggest that “there could be a risk of causing brain damage in a developing baby,” and that the tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) “may also influence neural development and brain maturation,” which could lead to a “long-term risk for addiction.” 14 Unintentional Pediatric Exposures to Marijuana in Colorado, 2009-2015: Colorado researchers examined the effects of the legalization of marijuana on youth in Colorado by analyzing data regarding pediatric marijuana exposures. Specifically, researchers set out to compare the incidence of pediatric marijuana exposures before and after recreational marijuana legalization. Additionally, this study compared Colorado data with nationwide data. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 637 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 10: Reference Materials Page | 152 It was found that cases for pediatric marijuana exposure increased significantly and at a higher rate than the rest of the United States. “Almost half of the patients seen in the children’s hospital in the 2 years after legalization had exposures from recreational marijuana, suggesting that legalization did affect the incidence of exposures.” 15 Pediatricians Warn against Use of Pot: A report released in 2017 from the American Academy of Pediatrics describes why many doctors are now “beefing up warnings about marijuana’s potential harms for teens amid increasingly lax laws and attitudes on pot use.” This report states that the group “opposes medical and recreational marijuana use for kids.” A youth’s brain continues to develop through their early 20s, so “the potential short-term and long-term effects of a mind-altering drug” are of great concern. Some of these effects may even be permanent. This is particularly true for frequent users who begin at an early age. “Teens who use marijuana at least 10 times a month develop changes in brain regions affecting memory and the ability to plan” as well as lowered IQ scores in some cases. Also some studies have shown that “starting marijuana use at a young age is more likely to lead to addiction than starting in adulthood.” These doctors stress that messaging is particularly important because according to government data “kids 12-17 increasingly think marijuana use is not harmful.” 16 Adult Marijuana Use Study Finds Increase in Illicit Pot Use, Abuse in States that Allow Medical Marijuana: “In a study published in the Journal of American Medical Association (JAMA) Psychiatry, researchers noted a significant increase in illegal cannabis use and so-called cannabis-use disorders in states with medical marijuana laws” Although a small minority of the population might potentially benefit from medical marijuana use, this study aims to quantify how much non-medical, illicit use is taking place over a multi-year timespan. The research study defined illegal or illicit use as “obtaining marijuana not from a prescription or a dispensary with the intent of getting high.” Those with cannabis-use disorders are described as having withdrawal symptoms, developing a tolerance for the drug, having cravings for the drug, and suffering impaired functioning in daily activities. The lead author of the study, Dr. Deborah Hasin of the Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health said “[Americans have] come to see cannabis as a harmless drug or harmless substance.” More education is certainly needed on the risks associated with marijuana use. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 638 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 10: Reference Materials Page | 153 The study examined cannabis use and cannabis use disorder from 1991-1992 through 2012-2013 timeframes. In the Washington Times article, Dr. Hasin said “I was somewhat surprised with rates that increased so sharply in Colorado and California, who most experienced increase in dispensaries in 2009 and 2010.” 17 Drug Positivity in U.S. Workforce Rises to Nearly Highest Level in a Decade: According to the world’s leading provider of diagnostic drug testing services, “The percentage of employees in the combined U.S. workforce testing positive for drugs has steadily increased over the last three years to a 10-year high.” The three primary diagnostic tests offered by Quest Diagnostics include oral, urine and hair follicle drug tests. Speaking to oral fluid testing, which provides a 24-48 hour history, the positivity rate increased 47 percent in the past three years. According to the diagnostics corporation, “The increase was largely driven by double-digit increases in marijuana positivity during this time period. In 2015, there was a 25 percent relative increase in marijuana detection as compared to 2014.” Additionally, “Almost half (45 percent) of individuals in the general U.S. workforce with a positive drug test for any substance in 2015 showed evidence of marijuana use. 18 Marijuana is Not Safe to Smoke: A study conducted by UC Davis academics found multiple bacterial and fungal pathogens in marijuana that can cause serious infections. The weed tested originated from Northern California dispensaries where the Department of Public Health is working on guidelines for marijuana testing to ensure marijuana is safe. George Thompson III, an associate professor of clinical medicine at the university who helped conduct the study, stressed that “there really isn’t a safe way to smoke marijuana buds, even for those who are healthy”. Inhaling marijuana smoke leads the pathogens directly into the lungs where they can cause serious illness and even death. 19 These College Students Lost Access to Legal Pot – and Started Getting Better Grades: A recent study out of the Netherlands found that “college students with access to recreational cannabis on average earn worse grades and fail classes at a higher rate.” Due to a new policy change to cannabis cafes, noncitizens were barred from buying recreational marijuana from the cafes. Due to this policy change, an experiment regarding college students and marijuana use was conducted. “The research on more than 4,000 students… found that those who lost access to legal marijuana showed substantial improvement in their grades. Specifically, those banned from cannabis cafes had a more than 5 percent increase in their odds of passing their courses.” 20 More U.S. Women Report Using Marijuana during Pregnancy, Amid Uncertainty on Potential Harms: About 4 percent of pregnant women ages 18 to 44 reported using 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 639 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 10: Reference Materials Page | 154 marijuana during pregnancy. The study conducted between 2002 and 2014 showed an increase of 62 percent from numbers in 2002 to numbers in 2014. Pregnant women are turning towards marijuana to help alleviate nausea caused during pregnancy even though it is discouraged by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Studies show links between prenatal marijuana exposure and impaired functions such as impulse control, visual memory, and attention during school years. Other studies showed smoking marijuana during pregnancy may also lead to restricted fetal growth during pregnancy as well as increased frontal cortical thickness among school-aged children. 21 Pregnant Women Turn to Marijuana, Perhaps Harming Infants: Doctors and researchers are concerned that due to “an increased perception of the safety of cannabis use, even in pregnancy,” it is becoming more common for people to “presume that cannabis has no consequences for developing infants.” Evidence on the effects of prenatal marijuana use has been limited up to this point, which may contribute to the false perception of safety by some. However, preliminary research indicates that marijuana’s psychoactive ingredient, tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), can cross the placenta and reach the fetus potentially harming development. In addition, because THC is stored in fat and can linger there for weeks or months, breast milk can contain THC. Despite evidence being limited, several studies linking maternal marijuana use have found “changes in the brains of fetuses, 18 to 22 weeks old.” Additional studies conducted in Pittsburgh and Ottawa show that children whose mothers used marijuana heavily in the first trimester may have difficulty “understand[ing] concepts in listening and reading,” and had “lower scores in reading, math and spelling… than their peers.” Much of the research that has been done in this area was done when marijuana was far less potent. An epidemiologist with the University of Washington stated “all those really good earlier studies on marijuana effects aren’t telling us what we need to know now about higher concentration levels.” Not much is known about the lingering effects of marijuana, and whether or not the fetus’s exposure is limited to the time a mother feels high. Both the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists advise expecting mothers against the use of cannabis during pregnancy citing cognitive impairment and academic underachievement as areas of concern. 22 Causal Relationship Identified between Marijuana Use and Numerous Fetal Issues during Pregnancy: Since 2002, there has been a 62% increase in pregnant marijuana users. “Estimates suggest that marijuana use complicates 2% to 5% of all pregnancies” in the United States. The amount of studies regarding marijuana use is limited due to the drug’s complicated legal status. However, “evidence has identified a causal 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 640 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 10: Reference Materials Page | 155 relationship between marijuana use and decreased birth weight, increased spontaneous abortion, impaired neurodevelopment, and functional deficits among children and adults who were exposed [to marijuana] in utero.” It is not yet known how exactly fetal development is effected by marijuana which leads obstetricians and gynecologists to “urge their patients who are pregnant or contemplating pregnancy to discontinue marijuana use.” Further concern for the effects of marijuana during pregnancy are warranted “due to its lipophilic nature, [it] can easily cross the blood brain barrier and enter the placenta.” Additionally, the nature of Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) is such that it can remain in maternal blood for weeks and “[a]s a result, occasional use of marijuana during pregnancy, as little as once per month, results in fetal exposure that persists throughout the pregnancy.” 23 Emergency Department and Hospital Marijuana-Related Admissions Marijuana Abuse Linked to Increased Myocardial Infarction (MI) Risk: Cardiology News recently published an article about marijuana being linked with an “eye-opening doubled risk of acute MI.” Myocardial infarction (MI) is more commonly known as a heart attack. The March 2017 article summarized the results of a study led by Dr. Ahmad Tarek Chami: “The link was strongest by far in young adult marijuana abusers, with an adjusted 3.2-fold increased risk of MI in 25- to 29-year-olds with marijuana abuse noted in their medical records, compared with age-matched controls and a 4.56-fold greater risk among the 30- to 34-year-old cannabis abusers.” The study examined over 200,000 patients with cannabis abuse noted in their medical records, and spanned a five year period (October, 2011 through September, 2016). Dr. Chami observed that “Our study raises the possibility [of] an association between cannabis and MI independent of age, hypertension, diabetes, smoking, and abuse of other substances.” Admittedly, there is much need for further research on this topic. “The cannabis plant contains more than 60 cannabinoids. Although marijuana is widely prescribed for treatment of nausea, anorexia, neuropathic pain, glaucoma, seizure disorders, and other conditions, the long-term effects of marijuana on the cardiovascular system are largely unknown.” 24 Marijuana Use and Schizophrenia: New Evidence Suggests Link: New research on marijuana use and its connection to schizophrenia shows that “not only are people who are prone to schizophrenia more likely to try cannabis, but that cannabis may also increase the risk of developing symptoms.” Cannabis use has been shown to be more common among individuals with psychosis than it is with the general population. This 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 641 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 10: Reference Materials Page | 156 may be particularly troubling as people with schizophrenia who use cannabis “are more likely to be hospitalized than those with the condition who do not use the drug.” Further research is needed to determine if there is a definitive genetic link between marijuana use and schizophrenia. 25 Colorado Cannabis Legalization and Its Effect on Emergency Care: With the early commercialization of marijuana in Colorado dating back to the year 2000, and recreational marijuana being voted into law in 2012, Colorado provides a unique opportunity to educate physicians on the different considerations related to increased marijuana-related emergency department visits. This document not only summarizes the epidemiologic effect of legalization, but also discusses the effect of legalization on emergency care. Specifically, researchers discuss acute marijuana intoxication, cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome, and pediatric exposures in an effort to educate healthcare providers everywhere. With Colorado leading the way regarding marijuana legalization, Colorado physicians are leading the way with regards to recognizing and addressing the associated healthcare trends noted in the population. 26 Trends and Correlates of Cannabis-involved Emergency Department Visits 2004 to 2011: This study published in the Journal of Addiction Medicine utilized data obtained from the Drug Abuse Warning Network over the period of 2004 to 2011. Trends in cannabis-involved emergency department visits were examined for both cannabis-only and cannabis-polydrug instances. Cannabis-polydrug instances are those in which other drugs were detected in the patient’s body, in addition to cannabis. The findings of this study suggest that there is a notable increase in the number of emergency department visits for both cannabis-only and cannabis-polydrug users. In particular, this study highlights the increased numbers for youth and non-Hispanic blacks. 27 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 642 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 10: Reference Materials Page | 157 Marijuana-Related Exposure Cannabis Use Causing Alarming Increase in Emergency Hospital Visits and Childhood Poisoning: Dr. Mark S. Gold, a world renowned expert on addiction-related diseases, summarizes a study published in late 2016 that aimed to examine trends and correlates of cannabis-involved emergency department visits in the United States from 2004-2011. “The ED visit rate increased for both cannabis-only use (51 to 73 visits per 100,000) and cannabis-polydrug use (63 to 100 per 100,000) in those aged 12 and older. Of note, the largest increase occurred in adolescents aged 12-17, and among persons who identified as non-Hispanic black.” Dr. Gold goes on to highlight the findings of the study which state that “The odds of hospitalization increased with older age users, as compared to adolescent admissions. These data suggest a heavier burden to both the patient and to the health care system as a result of increasing cannabis use among older adults. The severity of the “burden” is associated with the prevalence of cannabis use, specific cannabis potency and dose (which is increasing over time), the mode of administration, and numerous individual risk factors.” 28 Treatment Cannabinoid Hyperemesis Syndrome: Cannabinoid Hyperemesis Syndrome, a relatively new clinical condition, is “characterized by chronic cannabis use, cyclic episodes of nausea and vomiting, and frequent hot bathing.” A 2011 study published by the National Institutes of Health explores various aspects of this clinical condition including the associated epidemiology, pharmacology, clinical presentation, and treatment options. This condition has grabbed the attention of emergency room physicians across the country as many physicians fail to diagnose the condition. According to the study, “further initiatives are needed to determine this disease prevalence and its other epidemiological characteristics, natural history, and pathophysiology.” 29 Use and Diversion of Medical Marijuana among Adults Admitted to Inpatient Psychiatry: Many states, including Colorado, have legalized the medical use of marijuana, but it is unclear how much medical marijuana is being diverted from those medical marijuana patients. Furthermore, marijuana is linked to anxiety, depressive, psychotic, neurocognitive, and substance use disorders, but it is also unclear how many psychiatric patients use marijuana. In this study, a group of Colorado researchers aimed to determine the prevalence of medical marijuana use and diversion among psychiatric 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 643 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 10: Reference Materials Page | 158 inpatients in Colorado. Over 600 participants responded to an anonymous 15-item survey administered at discharge. It was concluded that “medical marijuana use is much more prevalent among adults hospitalized with a psychiatric emergency than in the general population.” It was also found that “diversion is common.” 30 Related Data Everything You Need to Know about Pot’s Environmental Impact: Indoor marijuana grows are estimated to use a total of one percent of all electricity used in the United States every year. One percent is “about the same amount of electricity consumed by every computer in every home and apartment in the country annually… In order to power all those light fixtures, as well as dehumidifiers and heating and ventilation systems, indoor grow operations use about eight times the amount of energy per square foot as a normal commercial building. That’s on par with a modern data center.” In addition to the electricity needed to sustain a marijuana grow, the plants require a significant amount of water to grow. “Some estimates suggest that pot plants use six gallons of water per day per plant over the summer. For reference, it takes about four gallons of water to run an energy-efficient dishwasher once.” 31 High Time to Assess the Environmental Impacts of Cannabis Cultivation: In an attempt to understand the impact that the cultivation of marijuana has on the environment, researchers “have identified potentially significant environmental impacts due to excessive water and energy demands and local contamination of water, air, and soil with waste products such as organic pollutants and agrochemicals [fungicides, pesticides, etc.].” Additionally, they pointed out that, cannabis plants require “high temperatures…, strong light…, highly fertile soil, and large volumes of water (…around twice that of wine grapes).” Naturally, due to these needs for proper cultivation in either an indoor or outdoor grow requires a significant amount of maintenance and energy. “It has been estimated that the power density of marijuana cultivation facilities is equal to that of data centers.” Typically, with new industries, it is the responsibility of U.S. Federal agencies such as the “U.S. Department of Agriculture, Environmental Protection Agency, National Institutes of Health, and Occupation Safety and Health Administration” to research and fund research for what that industry’s environmental impact will be and how to reduce the footprint. However, when it comes to the marijuana industry due to “[t]he ambiguous legal status of marijuana in the U.S… [it] has made it historically difficult for those agencies to actively fund research in this field.”32 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 644 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 10: Reference Materials Page | 159 Cartels are Growing Marijuana Illegally in California – and there’s a War Brewing: “Even as California embraces the booming legal marijuana market… it is also seeing an explosion in illegal cultivation, much of it on the state’s vast and remote stretches of public land.” Growing marijuana on public lands is creating “insidious side effects: The lethal poisons growers use to protect their crops and campsites from pests are annihilating wildlife, polluting pristine public lands, and maybe even turning up in your next bong hit.” Some of these poisons are so powerful that they have been “banned in the U.S., Canada and the EU” and “farmers in Kenya have used [them] to kill lions.” These toxicants are often used by growers as a means to “keep rodents and other animals from eating the sugar-rich sprouting plants, from gnawing on irrigation tubing, and from invading their campsites in search of food.” According to Craig Thompson, a wildlife ecologist working for the U.S. Forest Service “People don’t tend to grasp the industrial scale of what’s going on. There are thousands of these sites in places the public thinks are pristine, with obscene amounts of chemicals at each one. Each one is a little environmental disaster.” In addition to toxicants, these illegal grows present another environmental problem due to water consumption. “In a controlled setting, a marijuana plant uses about six gallons of water per day… Illegal grows, of course, are another story [its] estimated that trespass grows use 50 percent more water because of less efficient irrigation systems and added stressors like pests, pathogens, and drier weather at higher elevations. Worse, some trespass growers leave their irrigation systems running around the clock throughout the year, even when nothing is growing.” 33 Thousands of Marijuana Plants Found on Forest Land in Pueblo County: According to Fox31 Denver, there were more than 7,400 marijuana plants discovered in an illegal grow which included two separate fields. Both of the fields were on U.S. Forest Service land near Rye, Colorado. The July 2017 article stated, “Narcotics detectives said it was the second-largest operation uncovered in Pueblo County to date and the fifth found in fields on or near the San Isabel National Forest in the past five years. The four previous grows are believed to be connected to a Mexican cartel. Detectives are investigating whether Friday’s grow is connected to previous grows.” Pueblo County Sheriff Kirk Taylor reported, “These grows are not indigenous to Colorado and the water and fertilizers required for these grow operations represent a clear environmental hazard for our beautiful Colorado mountains,” Two of the past incidents within the San Isabel National Forest include an August 2012 operation in which over 9,400 plants were involved, and an October 2015 operation in which 2,400 plants were involved. There are countless other illegal grow operations within U.S. Forest Service land, but limited resources prevent any further action to stop these grows and prevent further environmental impact. 34 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 645 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 10: Reference Materials Page | 160 Marijuana Grows Leaving More Colorado Homes Filled with Mold: It is unclear how many homes throughout Colorado are being used to grow marijuana, but Denver Detective Brian Matos estimated it could be as high as “one in every 10 homes in [Denver].” When people grow marijuana plants indoors they bring moisture into the home which is likely to cause mold problems especially if it is a large grow. In many cases, these grows are illegal and the homeowner is simply using the home for the purpose of growing marijuana without any concern for the damage caused. The damage is often compared to that of meth labs, but environmental lawyer Timothy Gablehouse disagrees, “Since [meth] labs are smaller now, contamination from meth is usually confined to small areas of the home where it was smoked.” Whereas, marijuana grow contamination and destruction can be seen throughout the home. According to the Denver Post, “Illegal growers also sometimes dig into the foundation to tap a power line before the line can reach the meter to ensure they don’t have to pay for the electricity they are using.” This practice is often associated with punching holes through the walls or ceilings for ventilation. The DEA tells the Denver Post that illegal grows are often “expensive properties in upper-middle-class, high-income neighborhoods.” Sometimes these homeowners lay a fresh coat of paint on the home and resell the home to unsuspecting buyers. This was the case of David and Christine Lynn who recently purchased a $388,000 home that turned out to be a former grow and are currently suing the previous homeowners. 35 Mid-Year Update, by the Colorado Department of Revenue, Marijuana Enforcement Division: This report includes information on marijuana business licensing status, number of plants cultivated for medical and recreational purposes, volume of marijuana sold within both recreational and medical markets, units of infused edibles and non-edibles sold, mandatory retail testing for edibles, enforcement activity and administrative actions taken by the state’s licensing authority from January through June 2016. 36 Cannabinoid Dose and Label Accuracy in Edible Medical Cannabis Products: A study including 3 California and Washington cities sought to determine the accuracy of dosage labels on edible medical cannabis products. Nine dispensaries selling baked goods, beverages, and candy or chocolate were selected for the study. Individuals with a physician’s letter were assigned to purchase a “large variety of products… within budget ($400/city).” The resulting 75 purchased products were tested by researchers to determine whether the indicated levels of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD) of the edible products were accurate, within 10%. Of the purchased products, which included 47 different brands, 17% were determined to be accurately labeled, 23 percent were under labeled, and 60 percent 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 646 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 10: Reference Materials Page | 161 were over labeled for THC content. Forty-four products (59 percent) were found to have detectable levels of CBD, of which only 13 were labeled to include CBD. None of the 13 labels for CBD were accurate, 4 were under labeled, and 9 were over labeled. Inaccurate labeling of products may lead consumers to get more of an effect than desired or not enough to produce the desired medical benefit. 37 Tracking the Money That’s Legalizing Marijuana and why it Matters: The National Families in Action (NFIA) released a report in the early part of 2017 regarding the financial support behind marijuana related ballot initiatives. The NFIA tracked the majority of the financial support on these initiatives for the past two decades to three private parties worth billions of dollars. The report outlines how much money per initiative is contributed by the three billionaires compared to other sources. Additionally, the report gives reasons for why the financial contributions of three individuals matter for the overall legalization of marijuana in the nation. 38 Seed to Sale Tracking for Commercial Marijuana: This report examines the concept of seed to sale tracking for marijuana plants. Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) tracking is discussed along with some of the positives and negatives of Inventory Tracking Systems. 39 Houston HIDTA Marijuana Legalization Threat Assessment, “Why Marijuana Legalization is NOT a Good Idea for Texas”: This document, put together by the Houston Investigative Support Center, intends to provide easy access to salient facts regarding the serious negative consequences of marijuana legalization in the United States. Topics addressed include public health and safety ramifications, as well as economic and social impacts of marijuana legalization. 40 Is the Marijuana Industry Actually Making Money for Alaska? One of the most compelling arguments for marijuana legalization is the amount of tax revenue that marijuana would generate. However, with legalization also comes the need for regulation, which also requires money to maintain. In Alaska, the amount of money generated for the 2017 fiscal year was $1.75 million, but the amount of money budgeted for regulation by The Alcohol and Marijuana Control Office was $1.9 million. The goal is that, eventually, the tax revenue generated from the marijuana industry will fully fund the agency. Until then, however, general fund money has to be used to supplement the rest of the budget. From 2015 through 2018 a total of “$4.57 million has been budgeted from the state’s general fund to regulate marijuana.” It is the goal of The Alcohol and Marijuana Control Office that by the year 2020 the agency will be self- supported. 41 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 647 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 10: Reference Materials Page | 162 Working Paper on Projected Costs of Marijuana Legalization in Rhode Island: This paper was written in an effort to inform Rhode Island legislators about the potential economic impact of marijuana legalization in Rhode Island. The paper indicates that “although a full cost accounting of marijuana legalization would be impossible at present, enough data exists to make rough-and-ready estimates of certain likely direct and short-term costs.” Some of the costs covered by the paper include administrative and enforcement costs for regulators, costs from drugged driving, health costs from emergency room visits, potential costs related to homelessness, and costs to employers. Costs reported in this paper are projections based off of figures from states with full marijuana legalization. 42 Monitoring Health Concerns Related to Marijuana in Colorado: This 2016 report was published by the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment in order to address the changes in marijuana use patterns, provide a systematic literature review, and address possible marijuana related health effects in the state of Colorado. The report covers findings addressed by such surveys as the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance Survey (BRFSS), Child Health Survey (CHS), Healthy Kids Colorado Survey (HKCS), and the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS). In addition to the survey data, the report covers possible marijuana related health effects in Colorado, specifically looking at data from the Rocky Mountain Poison and Drug Center (RMPDC) and the Colorado Hospital Association (CHA). 43 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 648 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 10: Reference Materials Page | 163 Sources: 1 David Migoya, “Exclusive: Traffic fatalities linked to marijuana are up sharply in Colorado. Is Legalization to blame?” The Denver Post, August 25th, 2017, <http://www.denverpost.com/2017/08/25/colorado-marijuana-traffic-fatalities/ >, accessed August 26th, 2017. 2 Marilyn A. Huestis, “Cannabis-Impaired Driving: A Public Health and Safety Concern,” Clinical Chemistry, September 28, 2015, <http://clinchem.aaccjnls.org/content/61/10/1223>, accessed September 29, 2016. 3 Hartman, RL, Brown TL, Milavetz G, Spurgin A, Gorelick DA, Gaffney G, Huestis MA, “Controlled Cannabis Vaporizer Administration: Blood and Plasma Cannabinoids with and without Alcohol,” Clinical Chemistry, May 27, 2015, <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26019183>, accessed September 29, 2016. 4 Davis KC, Allen J, Duke J, Nonnemaker J, Bradfield B, Farrelly MC, et al. (2016) Correlates of Marijuana Drugged Driving and Openness to Driving While High: Evidence from Colorado and Washington. PLoS ONE 11(1): e0146853. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0146853. 5 Sewell, R. Andrew, James Poling, and Mehmet Sofuoglu. “The Effect of Cannabis Compared with Alcohol on Driving.” The American journal on addictions / American Academy of Psychiatrists in Alcoholism and Addictions 18.3 (2009): 185–193. PMC. Web. 7 Feb. 2017. 6 Anica Padilla, “Study: 57 percent of marijuana users in Colorado admit driving within 2 hours,” KDVR/Fox 31 Denver, March 9, 2017, <http://kdvr.com/2017/03/09/study-57-percent-of-marijuana-users-in-colorado-admit- driving-within-2-hours/>, accessed March 21, 2017. 7 Hartman RL, Richjan JE, Hayes CE, Huestis MA, “Drug Recognition Expert (DRE) examination characteristics of cannabis impairment,” April 22, 2016, <https://www.ncbi.mlm,nih.gov/pubmed/27107471>, accessed September 20, 2016. 8 Desrosiers NA, Ramaekers JG, Chauchard E, Gorelick DA, Huestis MA, “Smoked cannabis’ psychomotor and neurocognitive effects in occasional and frequent smokers,” March 4, 2015,<https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25745105>, accessed July 29, 2017. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 649 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 10: Reference Materials Page | 164 9 Balikova M, Hlozek T, Palenicek T, Tyls F, Viktorinova M, Melicher T, Androvicova R, Tomicek P, Roman M, Horacek J, “Time profile of serum THC levels in occasional and chronic marijuana smokers after acute drug use – implication for driving motor vehicles,” 2014, <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24625019>, accessed July 29, 2017. 10 Hartman RL, Brown TL, Milavetz G, Spurgin A, Gorelick DA, Gaffney GR, Huestis MA, “Effect of Blood Collction Time on Measured Δ9-Tetrahydrocannibinol Concentrations: Implications for Driving Interpretation and Drug Policy,” January 2016, <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26823611>, accessed July 29, 2017. 11 Melanie Zanona, “Study: Drivers Killed in Crashes More Likely to be on Drugs than Alcohol,” The Hill, April 26th, 2017, <http://thehill.com/policy/transportation/330648-drivers-in-fatal-crashes-more-likely-to- be-on-drugs-than-alcohol>, accessed August 17th, 2017. 12 James Hedlund, “Drug-impaired Driving: A Guide for States,” Governors Highway Safety Association (GHSA), April 2017 Update, <https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact =8&ved=0ahUKEwjLrNHUirfWAhUI2oMKHVVWBuIQFggoMAA&url=http%3A%2F% 2Fwww.ghsa.org%2Fsites%2Fdefault%2Ffiles%2F2017- 04%2FGHSA_DruggedDriving2017_FINAL.pdf&usg=AFQjCNFoM3Mj52HFSwYS1m- yFYNYaoBGEA> , Accessed September 22, 2017. 13 Janice Wood, “Marijuana Use Up Among Teens Since Legalized in Colorado, Washington,” PsychCentral, December 27, 2016, <https://psychcentral.com/news/2016/12/27/marijuana-use-up-among-teens-since- legalized-in-colorado-washington/114378.html>, accessed December 29, 2016. 14 Alan Mozes, “Pot smoking common among pregnant teens,” Healthday, April 28, 2017, < http://www.cbsnews.com/news/pot-smoking-common-among-pregnant-teens/>, accessed April 24, 2017. 15 George Sam Wang, MD; Marie-Claire Le Lait, MS; Sara J. Deakyne, MPH; et al, “Unintentional Pediatric Exposures to Marijuana in Colorado, 2009-2015,” September 6, 2016, <http://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/article-abstract/2534480>, accessed August 3, 2017. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 650 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 10: Reference Materials Page | 165 16 Lindsey Tanner, “Pediatricians warn against teen pot use amid increasingly lax laws,” The Associated Press, as published in The Denver Post, February 27, 2017, <http://www.denverpost.com/2017/02/27/pediatricians-warn-against-pot-use/>, accessed March 7, 2017. 17 Laura Kelly, “Study finds increase in illicit pot use, abuse in states that allow medical marijuana,” The Washington Times, April 26, 2017, <http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/apr/26/study-finds-increase-in-illicit- pot-use-abuse-in-s/>, accessed August 17, 2017. 18 Quest Diagnostics, “Drug Positivity in U.S. Workforce Rises to Nearly Highest Level in a Decade, Quest Diagnostics Analysis Finds,” Press Release, September 25, 2016, <http://ir.questdiagnostics.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=82068&p=irol- newsArticle&ID=2202029>, accessed September 15, 2016. 19 Dennis Romero, “Marijuana Is Not Safe to Smoke, Researchers Say,” LA Weekly, February 14, 2017, <http://www.laweekly.com/news/marijuana-is-not-safe-to-smoke- researchers-say-7927826>, accessed March 2, 2017. 20 Keith Humphreys, “These College Students Lost Access to Legal Pot – and Started Getting Better Grades,” The Washington Post, July 25th 2017, <https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/07/25/these-college-students- lost-access-to-legal-pot-and-started-getting-better-grades/?utm_term=.5b072778f294>, accessed August 9th 2017. 21 Samantha Smith, “More U.S. women report using marijuana during pregnancy, amid uncertainty on potential harms,” The Cannabist, February 9, 2017, <http://www.thecannabist.co/2016/12/19/study-women-marijuana-use- pregnancy/69672/>, accessed May 17, 2017. 22 Catherine Saint Louis, “Pregnant Women Turn to Marijuana, Perhaps Harming Infants,” The New York Times, February 2, 2017, <https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/02/health/marijuana-and-pregnancy.html?_r=1>, accessed March 8, 2017. 23 Mark Gold, MD, “Researchers & NIDA Warn Marijuana Use Could Be Toxic and Is Contraindicated in Pregnancy,” Rivermend Health, September 15th, 2017, <https://www.rivermendhealth.com/resources/researchers-nida-warn-marijuana-use- toxic-contraindicated- 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 651 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 10: Reference Materials Page | 166 pregnancy/?utm_source=RYCUNewsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=RYC U>, accessed September 18th, 2017. 24 Bruce Jancin, “Marijuana abuse linked to increased MI risk,” Cardiology News, March 31, 2017, <http://www.mdedge.com/ecardiologynews/article/134784/acute- coronary-syndromes/marijuana-abuse-linked-increased-mi-risk>, accessed August 9, 2017. 25 Yvetter Brazier, “Marijuana Use and Schizophrenia: New evidence suggests link,” Medical News Today, December 25, 2016, <http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/314896.php>, accessed April 24, 2017. 26 Howard S. Kim, MD and Andrew A. Monte, MD, “Colorado Cannabis Legalization and Its Effect on Emergency Care,” Annals of Emergency Medicine, July 2016, <http://www.bumc.bu.edu/emergencymedicine/files/2016/08/MJ-legalization-and- impact-on-EM-care.pdf>, accessed August 9, 2017. 27 Zhu, He PhD; Wu, Li-Tzy ScD, RN, MA, “Trends and Correlates of Cannabis- involved Emergency Department Visits: 2004 to 2011,” Journal of Addiction Medicine: November/December 2016 – Volume 10 – Issue 6 – p 429-436, <http://journals.lww.com/journaladdictionmedicine/Abstract/2016/12000/Trends_and_C orrelates_of_Cannabis_involved.9.aspx>, accessed April 17th, 2017. 28 Mark Gold, MD, “Cannabis Use Causing Alarming Increase in Emergency Hospital Visits and Childhood Poisoning,” Rivermend Health, <https://www.rivermendhealth.com/resources/cannabis-use-causing-alarming-increase- emergency-hospital-visits-childhood-poisoning/>, accessed April 17, 2017. 29 Jonathan A. Galli, MD; Ronald Andari Sawaya, MD; and Frank K. Friedenberg, MD, “Cannabinoid Hyperemesis Syndrome”, Department of Gastroenterology, Temple University School of Medicine, December 2011, <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3576702/pdf/nihms353647.pdf>, accessed August 2, 2017. 30 Abraham M. Nussbaum, Christian Thurstone, Laurel McGarry, Brendan Walker and Allison L. Sabel, “Use and diversion of medical marijuana among adults admitted to inpatient psychiatry,” The American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, <http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.3109/00952990.2014.949727?needAccess=true& >, accessed August 11, 2017. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 652 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 10: Reference Materials Page | 167 31 Clayton Aldern, “Everything you need to know about pot’s environmental impact,” Grist, April 19, 2016, <http://grist.org/living/everything-you-need-to-know- about-pots-environmental-impact/>, accessed July 31, 2017. 32 K. Ashworth and W. Vizuete, “High Time to Assess the Environmental Impacts of Cannabis Cultivation,” Environmental Science and Technology, February 17, 2017, <http://pubs.acs.org/doi/ipdf/10.1021/acs.est.6b06343>, accessed July 31, 2017. 33 Julian Smith, “Cartels are growing marijuana illegally in California – and there’s a war brewing,” Business Insider, April 08, 2017, <https://finance.yahoo.com/news/cartels- growing-marijuana-illegally-california-194700553.html>, accessed August 3, 2017. 34 Sarah Schueler, “Thousands of marijuana plants found on forest land in Pueblo County,” Fox 31 News/Denver, July 3, 2017, <http://kdvr.com/2017/07/03/thousands-of- marijuana-plants-found-on-forest-land-in-pueblo-county/>, accessed August 16, 2017. 35 Tom McGhee, “Marijuana grows leaving more Colorado homes filed with mold,” The Denver Post, July 31, 2017, < http://www.denverpost.com/2017/07/31/marijuana-leaving- colorado-homes-mold/> accessed September 11, 2017. 36 Brohl, Kammerzell, Koski and Burack, “Colorado Marijuana Enforcement Division: 2016 Mid Year Report (January 1-June 30, 2016),” <https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/sites/default/files/Final%20Mid%20year%202016.pdf >, accessed April 19, 2017. 37 Ryan Vandrey, PhD; Jeffrey C. Raber, PhD; Mark E. Raber; et al, “Cannabinoid Dose and Label Accuracy in Edible Medical Cannabis Products,” The JAMA Network, June 2015, <http://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2338239>, accessed March 13, 2017. 38 National Families in Action, “Tracking the Money That’s Legalizing Marijuana And Why It Matters,” <https://www.dalgarnoinstitute.org.au/images/resources/pdf/cannabis- conundrum/Tracking_Marijuana_Money.pdf>, accessed April 20, 2017. 39 National Marijuana Initiative, “Seed To Sale Tracking For Commercial Marijuana,” March 2017, <https://hidtanmidotorg.files.wordpress.com/2017/03/seed-to-sale_march- 2017.pdf>, accessed March 2017. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 653 The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact Vol. 5/October 2017 SECTION 10: Reference Materials Page | 168 40 Houston HIDTA Investigative Support Center, December 2016, <https://hidtanmidotorg.files.wordpress.com/2016/10/2016-houston-hidta-marijuana- legalization-threat-assessment.pdf>, accessed December 2016. 41 Laurel Andrews, “Is the Marijuana Industry Actually Making Money for Alaska?” Alaska Dispatch News, August 12th, 2017, < https://www.adn.com/alaska- marijuana/2017/08/12/is-the-marijuana-industry-actually-making-money-for-alaska/>, accessed August 17th, 2017. 42 Smart Approaches to Marijuana, “Working Paper on Projected Costs of Marijuana Legalization in Rhode Island,” April 2017, < https://learnaboutsam.org/wp- content/uploads/2017/04/10Apr2017-report-re-RI-costs.pdf>, accessed June 2017. 43 Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, “Monitoring Health Concerns Related to Marijuana in Colorado: 2016,” <https://localtvkdvr.files.wordpress.com/2017/01/monitoring_health_concerns_report_fi nal.pdf>, accessed March 2017. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 654 Exhibit B  (tracks changes since 10‐24‐17)  PRELIMINARY WORKING DRAFT FRAMEWORK FOR REGULATING CANNABIS IN THE UNINCOPORATED AREA OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY November 14October 24, 2017 PREPARED FOR THE CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS BY THE CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 (925) 674-7775 (NOTE: Guidance on refining this document is requested of the Board of Supervisors at the October 24, 2017 meeting. Yellow highlighted text marks ideas or components in an early stage of formulation and on on which 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 655 Contra Costa County Preliminary Working Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis October 24, 2017   1    publicBoard input would beis particularly appreciatedneeded.) 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 656 Contra Costa County Preliminary Working Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis October 24, 2017   2    I. Introduction In response to California voter approval of Proposition 64 (Adult Use of Marijuana Act) in November 2016, the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors has directed the County staff1, to initiate the process of preparing regulations for the establishment of commercial cannabis businesses in the unincorporated areas of the County. The regulations will also address cultivation of cannabis for personal use at home. This working draft document is intended to provide an overview of potential cannabis regulations being formulated for the unincorporated areas of the County, including aspects still very far from being settled, based on guidance from the County Board of Supervisors at the April 25, 2017 and July 18, and 2017 meetings as well as additional concepts to be discussed by the Board on October 24, 2017 meetings. . Once refined by the Board, a future version of this document is beingmay be used to solicit further detailed public input on this matter. In addition to preparation of land use and health regulations for commercial cannabis uses, the Board has also initiated the process of analyzing and preparing a potential taxing program for the various commercial cannabis uses. It is anticipated that no commercial cannabis uses would be authorized until such time as a cannabis tax ballot measure has been approved by County voters. A County cannabis tax initiative could be considered by voters at the next General Election in November 2018, so regulations permitting commercial cannabis uses are not expected to become effective until that time at the earliest. No decision has been made by the Board on the regulatory framework contemplated in this document. Currently, and unless or until new regulations are approved by the Board of Supervisors, the commercial cultivation, distribution, storage, manufacturing, processing, and sale of medical cannabis and adult use cannabis and the outdoor cultivation of cannabis for personal use are prohibited within the unincorporated areas of the County. II. Types of Commercial Cannabis Uses Under Consideration The County is considering regulating and permitting the establishment of various commercial cannabis uses. No decisions have been made and it is possible that some or all categories of use will not be permitted. Types of use under consideration include:                                                              1 Staff from the following County Departments have been involved:  County Administrators Office, County Counsel, Sheriff’s  Office, District Attorney, Health Services Department (HSD), Probation, Treasurer‐Tax Collector, Agriculture, and Conservation  and Development (DCD). DCD is taking the lead with respect to developing land use regulations. HSD is taking the lead with  developing health regulations.  11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 657 Contra Costa County Preliminary Working Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis October 24, 2017   3     Cultivation--“Cultivation” refers to the growing of cannabis for commercial use, including artificial, mixed light and natural light cultivation (i.e. indoor, greenhouse and outdoor).  Retail Sales/Delivery- “Retail sales”of cannabis refers to the sale of cannabis to retail customers from a storefront that sells only cannabis products. Retail delivery refers to deliveries from a storefront or other permitted site to customers. The establishment of delivery-only retail may have fewer potential impacts on neighborhoods and may be preferred in some, many or all instances.  Manufacturing/Processing- Involves the processing of cannabis or cannabis products into various marketable forms, including edibles, oils, tinctures, etc. The County may be well-positioned to attract and retain these types of businesses because the County has significant industrial land and a strong industrial base.  Distribution Center- A cannabis distribution center refers to a site where cannabis or cannabis products are warehoused and distributed to licensed cannabis retailers. The retail sale of cannabis or cannabis products is not permitted from cannabis distribution centers.  Testing- A “cannabis testing” facility is a facility where cannabis and cannabis products are tested for potency, quality, and health and safety requirements. III. Land Use Permitting Process All applications for commercial cannabis uses are proposed to be subject to the County Land use Permitting Process (Article 26-2.20 of County Code). Under the land use permitting process, applications for all commercial cannabis uses would be subject to the following procedures:  Review of application for completeness.  Solicitation of comments from other County, State, and community agencies/organizations.  Review of project for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act.  Mailing of public hearing notice to all property owners within 300-feet of property where use is proposed.  Public hearing before the County Zoning Administrator. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 658 Contra Costa County Preliminary Working Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis October 24, 2017   4     Discretionary decisions would be made by the County Zoning Administrator who could approve or deny applications. Zoning Administrator decisions can be appealed to the County Planning Commission and decisions by the Planning Commission can be appealed to the County Board of Supervisors. Each permitted use would be subject to specific conditions intended to protect public health, safety and welfare (further discussion of key examples of protections is provided below). The permits would be subject to suspension or termination if performance standards are not met or public health, safety or welfare was threatened. The regulations could incorporate automatic expiration of cannabis permits after a set number of years and require re-approval of permits, including a new application review process. Periodic permit review hearings or review procedures could also be included. It is important to note that additional permits from the County (as well as a state license) may be required. For example, Environmental Health may require additional applications and permits, consistent with the handling and sales of consumer goods (see Section IX). Building permits may also be required. IV. Potential Cap on Number of Permits In order to help ensure the establishment of safe, orderly and accessible commercial cannabis businesses, the Board may wish to consider placing a cap on the number of permits to be issued for some or all of the commercial cannabis uses to be permitted. Establishment of a “ramp-up” program where the cap on the number of permits is increased on an annual basis may also be considered by the Board, which would enable enforcement needs and community effects to be assessed and resource allocation to be adjusted in a deliberative manner. Considerations on potential caps for each of the use types are as follows: [[ULTIMATE OR INTERIM LIMIT, IF ANY, FOR EACH COMMERCIAL USE TO BE DETERMINED BY THE BOARD ]]  Commercial Cultivation- [No limit] OR [A maximum of (10?)-(50?)-(100?) (more?)] permits for the commercial cultivation of cannabis, including indoor, mixed light and outdoor cultivation.  Retail Sales- [No limit] OR [A maximum of (3?)-(6?)-(9?)-(12?) (more?)] permits for the retail sale of commercial cannabis and cannabis products. For delivery-only retail the cap could be increased or eliminated altogether.  Manufacturing- [No limit] OR [A maximum of (5?)-(10?)-(15?)-(20?) (more?)] permits for manufacturing of cannabis and cannabis products. Given that the 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 659 Contra Costa County Preliminary Working Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis October 24, 2017   5    County could have competitive advantages in the sectors of manufacturing, distribution and testing, and that community impacts may be well addressed with proper siting, staff suggests the Board consider a high (or no) ultimate cap on these sectors (interim caps for a “ramp-up”may have merit).  Distribution Center- [No limit] OR [A maximum of (?)-(?)-(?)] permits for cannabis and cannabis products distribution center.  Testing Facility- [No limit] OR a maximum of (?)-(?)-(?) permits for cannabis and cannabis products testing facility. V. Applicant Selection Process As described in Section II, In order to ensure the establishment of safe and accessible commercial cannabis uses, all applications for commercial cannabis uses would be subject to the County’s land use permitting (LUP) process and any other applicable regulations (e.g. Environmental Health permits and building permits). existing land use permitting process in addition to any additional processes that may be required by the future cannabis ordinance. Applications for a land use permit for commercial cannabis uses would only be accepted on qualifying properties located within the appropriate zoning district and outside of any approved buffer area. Only then could an application for a land use permit be submitted. If the Board establishes ultimate or interim caps on the number of businesses to be permitted for any use category (see Section IV), the County, we will establishneed to define a selection process to determine how the ability to apply for available permits will be allocated. If a selection process is needed, the Board has expressed an interest in utilizing a “request for proposal” (RFP) processThree options are identified below and scoring systemare evaluated in the attached Table 1. Utilizing[[SELECTION PROCESS, IF ANY, WOULD BE DETERMINED BY BOARD]] (A) First come, first served, through the RFP and scoringotherwise standard land use permitting process, the County would solicit proposals for establishment of a commercial cannabis use. The proposals would be scored utilizing a pre-defined and approved scoring system. The proposals with the highest scores would then be invited to submit a formal land use permit. Once an application, is deemed complete, the number of available permits would be reduced by one. The application would be processed under the County LUP process andlike any other land use permit. Applications would be subject to denial,approved or conditional approval,denied by the County Zoning Administrator, County Planning Commission (or Board of Supervisors. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 660 Contra Costa County Preliminary Working Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis October 24, 2017   6    If a permit was denied, the highest ranked proposal just below the initial cut-off could be invited to apply until the capother hearing body, if appealed) based on permits is reached. The screening process could be done in phases. the ability to make the required land use permit findings and any other specific findings that could be required by the future cannabis ordinance. Once a sufficient number of applications is deemed complete, the County would stop accepting applications, unless and until one or more complete applications was denied. OR (A)(B) “Request for Proposal” process where applicants submit a proposal for the establishment and operation of a specific commercial cannabis use. The proposal would then be scored utilizing a scoring system established by code. Proposals with the highest scores would be allowed to submit a land use permit application, and the applications would then be processed under the current land use permitting process as well as any additional processes that may be required by the future cannabis ordinance. The proposal process could be done in phases. For instance, the County could initially invite submission of concise and simple pre-proposals (shorter and less detailed and costly to completecomplex than full proposals), review and rankscreen the pre- proposals, then invite thesome proponents with the highest ranking pre-proposals to submit full proposals which would be screened again to determine who would be invited to submit a formal land use permit application may apply (this is similar to some grant selection processes). If a permit was not issued to a selected proposal, a proposal just below the initial cut could be invited to apply. Establishing screening process and criteria and any appeals process could be a significant effort. Please note, applications for a land use permit for commercial cannabis uses would only be accepted for qualifying properties located within the appropriate zoning district and outside of any approved buffer areas (see Sections VI and VII, below). OR (C) “Lottery” selection process where complete applications (or proposals) are placed in a lottery and selected at random. Selected applications would be processed under the current land use permitting process as well as any additional processes that may be required by the future cannabis ordinance. If a selected application was ultimately denied, another application could be drawn from the lottery. (Document continues on next page) 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 661 Contra Costa County Preliminary Working Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis October 24, 2017   7    VI. Eligible Locations The CountyDepartment of Conservation and Development has prepared a matrix and Preliminary Cannabis Use Maps [include link to maps here] identifying the zoning districts where specific commercial cannabis uses could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit. The draft matrix and maps are still under review by the Board. The draft matrix is below. The draft maps are in an attachment.   CULTIVATION PROCCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES  LEGEND Artificial  Light  Mixed  Light  Natural  Light  Distribution  Center Manufacturing Testing   Retail  Delivery  Only      Retail  StorefrontZONING  DISTRICT  Agricultural  Zoning  Districts (A‐ )  Land Use  Permit*  Land  Use  Permit*  Land Use  Permit*   Land Use Permit*        Area‐Wide  Planned Unit  Development  (P‐1)   Land Use  Permit*  Land  Use  Permit*  Land Use  Permit*  Land Use  Permit* Land Use Permit*  Land  Use  Permit*  Land Use  Permit*  Land Use  Permit*  Retail‐ Business (R‐B)             Land Use  Permit*  Land Use  Permit*  General  Commercial  (C)        Land Use  Permit* Land Use Permit*  Land  Use  Permit*  Land Use  Permit*  Land Use  Permit*  Controlled  Manufacturing  (C‐M), Light  Industrial (L‐I),  Heavy  Industrial (H‐I)  Land Use  Permit*  Land  Use  Permit*  Land Use  Permit*  Land Use  Permit* Land Use Permit*  Land  Use  Permit*  Land Use  Permit*  Land Use  Permit*  Potential  Sustainability  Requirements  Renewable Energy  and Sustainable  Water Supply  Sustainable  Water  Supply     Potential limits  on   number of   employees/trips  outside ULL       500 feet  from  another  retail  location  Key  Considerations  and  Limitations by  Use  Maximum 22, 000 sf Max 2 acres only within  ULL Potential limits  on number of  employees/trips  outside ULL  only  within  ULL  only  within  ULL  only within  ULL  Ag Districts:  maximum 10,000 sf  structure or in  existing structure  Greenhouse  only in non‐ ag districts  Cultivators  may  distribute  own produce  to retailers  500 ft from  another  retail  location  11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 662 Contra Costa County Preliminary Working Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis October 24, 2017   8    Note: Microbusinesses (operations that grow, process and sell cannabis products to retail customers at a small-scale site) are also under consideration where cultivation is allowed. Properties with incompatible zoning could apply to be rezoned, but this is a long and complex process requiring Board approval. Outside of the Area-Wide P-1 zoning districts that cover the former Redevelopment Areas (and that may be eligible for cannabis uses per the above matrix), other lands that are zoned P-1 (Planned Unit Development) could go through a different process other than rezoning to become eligible for cannabis uses if they have a compatible General Plan designation. They could apply for a Development Plan modification to include a cannabis use as an eligible use, which would require separate approval but not necessarily by the Board. VII. Buffer Zones In addition to being located within compatible Sites with eligible zoning districts, commercial cannabis uses may are proposed to also be subject to specific buffer requirements in order to protect certain from sensitive uses from potential cannabis influence or to prevent cannabis businesses from being located to close to each other. Under current State law a buffer of 600 feet is required between any cannabis business licensed by the State and any K-12 school, day care center or youth center. A County ordinance may increase this buffer distance. A County ordinance may also establish buffers between cannabis businesses and other sensitive uses, land uses such as parks. For comparison purposes, the County Code currently restricts the establishment of new tobacco retail establishments within 1,000 feet of any school, playground, park or library and within 500 feet of any existing tobacco retailer. Buffers for the County’s cannabisschools, parks, playgrounds, libraries and drug and alcohol recovery centers. The proposed ordinance could range in distance. The appropriate distance could be determined based on a variety of factors such as use, location, parcel size and type of sensitive sites the County chooses to identify. The Preliminary Cannabis Use Maps [also include link to maps here] show two alternatives, one that includes 500 foot buffers from residential zoning districts along with 1000 footland uses. The proposed buffers for commercial cannabis uses are as follows:  1,000 feet from schoolsany sensitive site including school, community parks/playgrounds, libraries, drug treatment centers, and homeless shelters and one that includes the 1000-foot. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 663 Contra Costa County Preliminary Working Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis October 24, 2017   9     For retail storefronts, 500-feet from another retail storefront. Different buffers are also under consideration, including distances larger and smaller than 1,000 feet as well as buffers but omits the 500-foot buffers to from other features such as residential zoning districts. Other buffer scenarios are being consideredHowever, 500 foot buffers from residential zoning districts would significantly reduce the number of eligible sites and such buffers should be reserved for the uses least compatible with residential (such as volatile manufacturing processes) unless a policy priority is to maintain significant separation of commercial cannabis uses and residential areas. VIII. Security and Nuisance Abatement Requirements In order to ensure that commercial cannabis uses are operated in a safe and secure manner, commercial uses are proposed to be subject to substantial security measures to be incorporated into the regulations. Examples of security measures may include (the below are examples only—many additional measures could be considered during development of the detailed regulations):  Require that cannabis establishments be constructed in a manner that minimizes odors to surrounding uses, and promotes quality design and construction, and consistency with the surrounding properties.  Require design measures and an enforceable security plan to ensure the applicant will secure the premises twenty-four hours per day, seven days per week. Examples of specific measures include: security cameras; background checks for employees; establishing limited access areas accessible only to authorized personnel; storing all finished cannabis products in a secured and locked room; preventing off-site impacts to adjoining or near properties; and limiting the amount of cash on the premises. Examples of operational conditions of approval include:  Requiring permitted facilities (other than retail space in storefronts) to be closed to the general public; prohibiting transporter deliveries and pick-ups between the hours of, for example, 7:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m.  Odors shall be contained on the property on which the commercial cannabis activity is located.  No production, distribution, storage, display or wholesale of cannabis and cannabis- infused products shall be visible from the exterior of the building where the commercial cannabis activity is being conducted. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 664 Contra Costa County Preliminary Working Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis October 24, 2017   10    IX. Public Health Safeguards Contra Costa Health Services recommends that the Board adopt a local health ordinance that establishes permitted activity, and the conditions under which consumer products which contain cannabis can be manufactured and sold to consumers. Adopting a local health ordinance will also allow county staff to inspect, regulate and enforce appropriate state and local laws pertaining to the cannabis industry. The primary reasons for crafting a local regulatory health ordinance are:  Provideing authority for local environmental health staff to inspect and enforce the numerous state laws pertaining to: i) the manufacturing of food and beverage products that contain cannabis (termed “edible cannabis products”); and ii) the retail sale and dispensing of cannabis products including, but not limited to, leaf, bud, edibles, beverages, tinctures, candies, etc.  Provide local authority to establish, inspect, and enforce additional rules and restrictions on the manufacturing and sale of consumer products which contain cannabis.  Provide local authority to restrict use of cannabis in public places and smoking of cannabis in multi-unit housing. Currently, the County has a second hand smoke ordinance that bans the smoking of cannabis products in the unincorporated area of the County in all of the same places where tobacco smoking is prohibited. In addition, the County is poised to consider a revised ordinance that would add multi-unit residences to the locations where both tobacco and cannabis smoking would be prohibited. The current and proposed smoking prohibitions are inclusive of the use of electronic smoking devices (vaping). In addition, the County could consider an outright ban on the use of cannabis in any form at certain pubic events and venues. Specific examples of the kinds of safeguards that are being considered for inclusion in new regulations include the following:  Consider limiting the sale of edible cannabis products to those where dosing is a maximum of 10mg THC/dose and packaged as a single dose. Consumers would be allowed to purchase up to the limit allowed in state law.  Prohibit sale of flavored leaf and bud.  Consistent with recent legislation in Colorado, consider prohibiting the sale of edible products that mimic the shape and appearance of animals, humans, or fruit, including gummy bears.  Prohibit sale of flavored e-juices.  Prohibit all self-service vending of all cannabis and products which contain cannabis. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 665 Contra Costa County Preliminary Working Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis October 24, 2017   11    A report from Contra Costa Health Services with detailed recommendations and analysis of health issues is available here [include link to the report originally provided by HSD to the Board on October 24, 2017]. X. Cost Recovery The County may consider establishing Fees on cannabis businesses could be considered to cover County costs associated with application review and monitoring compliance with permit conditions. XI. Taxation A ballot measure to seek approval for taxes on certain commercial cannabis uses is under consideration. It is anticipated that no commercial cannabis uses would be authorized until such time as a cannabis tax ballot measure has been approved by County voters. A County cannabis tax initiative could be considered by voters at the next General Election in November 2018. The tax measure could provide funding for a variety of public purposes, including but not limited to enhanced public safety, improved public health, drug treatment and education, and enhanced code enforcement capability.[Insert more information here as this aspect progresses] XII. Personal Cultivation In addition to providing comprehensive regulations for the establishment of commercial cannabis uses, the County cannabis ordinance could also address cultivation for personal use. Under current County cannabis regulations, limited indoor cultivation is permitted. The current regulations for personal indoor cultivation has been provided below.  Indoor Personal Use Cultivation- Under the County’s current cannabis regulations, six or fewer cannabis plants may be cultivated indoors at a private residence, or inside a fully-enclosed and secured accessory structure to a private residence located on the grounds of the private residence, if all of the following conditions are met: 1. The private residence or accessory structure, and all lighting, plumbing, and electrical components used for cultivation, must comply with applicable zoning, building, electrical, and plumbing codes and permitting requirements. 2. All living cannabis plants, and all cannabis in excess of 28.5 grams produced by those plants, must be kept in a locked room and may not be visible from an 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 666 Contra Costa County Preliminary Working Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis October 24, 2017   12    adjacent property, right-of-way, street, sidewalk, or other place accessible to the public. 3. The private residence must be lawfully occupied by the person who cultivates the cannabis plants within the private residence or within the accessory structure. If the private residence is not owner-occupied, written permission from the owner of the private residence must be obtained before cannabis plants may be cultivated. The final regulations could continue the current restrictions on cultivation for personal use or they could be expanded to allow for limited outdoor cultivation for personal use and/or allow for exceptions. Outdoor personal cultivation could raise more odor or security concerns with neighbors but may be less expensive and use less energy. The County is also keeping an eye on state regulations in this area as Proposition 64 prevents access to certain grant funds by those local agencies that ban commercial cultivation, or personal outdoor cultivation, or retail sales of cannabis, and the standards for enforcing these restrictions have not yet been defined. variances.  Outdoor Personal Use Cultivation- Examples of restrictions on outdoor cultivation for personal usecultivation that could be considered in lieu of outright prohibition include: 1. Not more than three marijuana plants are cultivated outdoors at one time. 2. The plants are not visible from a public right-of-way or adjacent parcel. 3. No part of the plants being cultivated are within five feet of any property line. 4. DiscretionaryNo more than three marijuana plants per parcel are allowed to be cultivated outdoors, regardless of the number of qualified patients residing on the parcel.  Variance or land use permit process could be consideredapplication to allow for exceptions to limitations on personal cultivation. The Board could consider whether the limitations on personal cultivation are hard and fast limits with no exceptions or whether to allow a discretionary permit process to enable certain specified exceptions. For instance, outdoor personal cultivation could be permitted or denied through such a process. Or certain exceedances on the limitations on number of plants could be considered on a case by case basis in this manner. The process would require notification to neighbors and a public hearing and decisions would be appealable. XIII. Enforcement 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 667 Contra Costa County Preliminary Working Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis October 24, 2017   13    In order to ensure the orderly establishment of commercial cannabis uses and to prevent and discourage the establishment of unregulated cannabis uses, robust enforcement capacity should be a component of the regulatory program. CountyAdditional work is needed by staff is working to more fully explore the most effective enforcement mechanisms and, to better identify enforcement roles and identify resource needs. XIV. Additional sections? Additional sections may be added to address other aspects of the potential regulations deemed important to include in a summary document such as this Framework. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 668 EXHIBIT C: DRAFT PUBLIC OUTREACH PLAN   FOR CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CANNABIS REGULATIONS    The County will continue to implement public outreach and engagement efforts as work  proceeds to develop regulations related to cannabis.  The Preliminary Working Draft  Framework for Regulating Cannabis in the Unincorporated Area of the County (Draft  Framework) will be utilized to summarize the County’s initial ideas and options and to  solicit specific input from the public and agency partners.  Below is a list of key outreach  and engagement strategies, which may be revised by the Board in the future if new or  better strategies are identified.       Continue to maintain and update a list of persons and groups interested in the  County’s process for developing cannabis regulations and provide notification to  the people on the list of key events, including Board of Supervisors meetings on  this topic.     Continue to maintain and refine a web page that includes the Draft Framework  and other background information and documents related to the County’s  cannabis regulation process, status updates, County staff contact(s), ability to  submit a request to be added to the contact list and a public comment form, to  allow for easy public access to information and opportunities to comment.     Develop District‐specific presentation materials housed at District offices,  including large format maps.      Provide one or more updates to the Contra Costa Mayors Conference  (Supervisor Andersen provided an update at the November Mayors Conference).     Provide presentations/updates to City Councils and collect any input (upon  request).     Continue to utilize regular meetings with city staff, including the Contra Costa  Transportation Authority Planning Directors meetings, to provide updates to city  staff and receive any feedback.     Provide the Draft Framework to each of the County’s Municipal Advisory  Committees (MACs) and to the Alcohol and Other Drugs Advisory Board and seek  their input.     Work with each District Office to convene community meetings and/or All‐MAC  meetings to present the Draft Framework and receive input.     Coordinate with the County’s Office of Communications and Media on best  practices for accomplishing the goals of this Outreach Plan.    11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 669 EXHIBIT D:  TRANSACTION/DISPENSING LIMITS FOR CANNABIS RETAIL SALES (prepared by CCHS)  RECREATIONAL    * In Alaska “A retail marijuana store may not sell in a single transaction . . . marijuana or marijuana  products if the total amount of marijuana, marijuana products, or both marijuana and marijuana  products sold contains more than 5,600 milligrams of THC.”   https://www.commerce.alaska.gov/web/Portals/9/pub/MCB/StatutesAndRegulations/MarijuanaRegulations.pdf  ** In California:   As of the drafting of this report staff have not been able to affirm if the Bureau of Cannabis Control  will establish lower transaction limits for edibles. The 800 servings is a mathematical equivalent of  8gm of concentrate    CDPH in California is affirming that their recommendation will be a maximum standard for THC  content at 10mg THC per edible/beverage serving with a maximum of 100mgTCH per multi‐serving  package, per Asif Maan Ph.D.   Chief, Manufactured Cannabis Safety Branch  California Department of Public Health  STATE        Flower/Bud Concentrate Edibles Per  dose/serving  THC limits  Liquid  (Beverage)  Alaska*  AAC 306‐005‐990  1oz = 28 gm 7gm  5mg THC  50 mg per  package or 10  servings    Colorado   (adopted a potency  equivalency  framework in 2016 ::  1 oz. of flower =  8gms of concentric =  800mg of edibles  1oz = 28 gm      8gm 80 servings @  10mg THC each  =  800  milligrams  total  10mg THC 800 milligrams  total, which  generally implies  80 servings.  Washington  WAR 314‐55‐095  1oz = 28gm 7gm 16oz. total  weight   10mg THC   100mg per  package of 10  servings)  72 oz. total  weight  Oregon  OAR 333‐007‐0210  1oz 5gm 16oz total  5mg THC  50 mg per  package of 10  servings  72 oz. total  weight  California**  Prop 64,   1oz. = 28.5gm 8gm 800 servings @  10mg THC per  dose.   10mg THC per  dose/serving  with a max of  100mg per  multi‐serving  package    11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 670 RECOMMENDATION(S): Receive the 2016 Annual Report submitted by the Diablo Municipal Advisory Council (DMAC), as recommended by Supervisor Diane Burgis. FISCAL IMPACT: None. BACKGROUND: On December 16, 2008, the Board of Supervisors adopted policies for Municpal Advisory Councils requiring all MAC's to submit annual reports. The reports attached include summaries of action in 2016 and the 2017 objectives. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Alicia Nuchols, 925-252-4500 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 83 To:Board of Supervisors From:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Diablo MAC Annual Report 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 671 ATTACHMENTS Diablo MAC Annual Report 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 672 1 The Diablo Municipal Advisory Council serves as an advisory body to the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors and the County Planning Agency. 2016 Annual Report to the Board of Supervisors Prepared by: Office of Supervisor Diane Burgis, Alicia Nuchols Submitted by: Ray Brant, Chairperson Activities and Accomplishments The goal of the Diablo Municipal Advisory Council (MAC) in 2016 was to continue to work effectively and efficiently with the residents of Diablo and with Contra Costa County. During the 2016 calendar year, the Diablo MAC activities and efforts included:  Received, reviewed and provided comments on the various land use- planning applications within the community of Diablo. Members in 2016  Ray Brant, Chair  Vince Chow  Jeff Mini  Kathy Torru  Don Hoffman  Richard Breitwieser, Secretary and legal counsel Attendance at Meetings for 2016: January - All Members present February – All Members present March – All Members present April – All Members present May – All Members present June – Meeting cancelled Diablo Municipal Advisory Council Ray Brant, Chair Supervisor Diane Burgis District III Alicia Nuchols, District Representative 3361 Walnut Blvd., Ste 140 Brentwood, CA 94513 (925) 252-4500 Alicia.Nuchols@bos.cccounty.us 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 673 Diablo MAC 2016 Annual Report and 2017 Work Plan 2 July - All Members present August- Member Chow absent September – All Members present October – Members Mini & Chow absent November – Member Torru absent December - No Meeting (Combined Nov/Dec meetings) Work Plan and Objectives for 2017 The Diablo Municipal Advisory Council (MAC) priorities for 2017 will be to review land use planning matters that come before the Diablo community. Diablo MAC Members will continue to work on: 1.) Land Use Planning matters before the Diablo community The Diablo MAC meets on the second Tuesday of each month at 7:30 P.M. at Diablo Country Club located at 1700 Club House Road, Diablo. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 674 RECOMMENDATION(S): Approve and authorize the Auditor-Controller, or his designee, to pay $2,445 to Xingbo Sun, M.D., an individual, for the provision of podiatry services, including, consultation, clinic coverage, training, and medical/surgical procedures at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center (CCRMC) and Health Centers for the period from September 1, 2017 through September 30, 2017. FISCAL IMPACT: Funded 100% by Hospital Enterprise Fund I. BACKGROUND: On October 18, 2016, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #76-561 (as amended by Amendment Agreement #76-561-1) with Xingbo Sun, M.D., for the provision of podiatry services, including consultation, clinic coverage, training, and medical/surgical procedures for the period from October 1, 2016 through September 30, 2017. At the time of negotiations, the payment limit was based on target levels of utilization. However, the utilization during the term of the agreement was higher than originally anticipated. The provider is entitled to payment for the reasonable value of its services under the equitable relief theory of quantum meruit. That theory provides that where a contractor has been asked to provide services without a APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Samir Shah, M.D., 925-370-5525 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: K Cyr, M Wilhelm C. 84 To:Board of Supervisors From:William Walker, M.D., Health Services Director Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Payment for services provided by Xingbo Sun, M.D. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 675 BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) valid contract, and the contractor does so to the benefit of the County, the Contractor is entitled to recover the reasonable value of those services. Xingbo Sun, M.D., provided podiatry services at CCRMC and Health Centers that exceeded the contract payment limit at the request of the Department. The Department is requesting that the Contractor be paid the amount owing of $2,445. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this board order is not approved, the contractor will not be paid for podiatry services provided in good faith. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 676 RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE Conflict of Interest Code for the Making Waves Academy ("Charter School"). FISCAL IMPACT: None. BACKGROUND: The Charter School has adopted its first Conflict of Interest Code and submitted the new code, attached as Exhibit A, to the Board for approval pursuant to Government Code section 87306 and 87306.5. The adoption of a Conflict of Interest Code for the Charter School satisfies the requirements for such a code under State law. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: None. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Cynthia Schwerin, 925 335-1800 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Cynthia Schwerin, Deputy County Counsel, David Twa, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors, Wayne Strumpfer, Attorney for Making Waves Academy C. 85 To:Board of Supervisors From:Sharon L. Anderson, County Counsel Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Conflict of Interest Code for the Making Waves Academy 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 677 ATTACHMENTS Ex. A - Conflict of Interest Code 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 678 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 679 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 680 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 681 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 682 RECOMMENDATION(S): RECEIVE the 2017 Annual Report submitted by the Finance Committee. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: On June 18, 2002, the Board of Supervisors adopted Resolution No. 2002/377, which requires that each regular and ongoing board, commission, or committee shall annually report to the Board of Supervisors on its activities, accomplishments, membership attendance, required training/certification (if any), and proposed work plan or objectives for the following year. This report fulfills this requirement for the Finance Committee. All Finance Committee reports from 2009 onward and attachments can be found on the County website at http://ca-contracostacounty.civicplus.com/index.aspx?NID=2286. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Lisa Driscoll, County Finance Director (925) 335-1023 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Jami Napier, Chief Assistant Clerk of the Board C. 86 To:Board of Supervisors From:FINANCE COMMITTEE Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:2017 ANNUAL REPORT OF THE FINANCE COMMITTEE 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 683 BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) > In 2017, the Finance Committee received reports and/or made recommendations to the Board of Supervisors concerning issues related to: Regular Capital Facility Updates and Specific Building Projects; Funding shortfall in the Wildcat/San Pablo Creeks Levee Remediation project in North Richmond; Issuance of 2017 Tax Allocation Revenue Bonds by the Successor Agency; Policy for the review of Compensation Agreements submitted to the County, including all entities governed by the Board of Supervisors, by Successor Agencies to former Redevelopment Agencies throughout the County; Funding an immigrants rights program in Contra Costa County; Establishing a Transient Occupancy Tax for short-term rentals such as Airbnb; Department of Conservation and Development's recommendations regarding additional requests for FY 2017/18 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Infrastructure/Public Facility Projects; Increasing the basic assessment rate for County Service Area EM-1; and Single Audit for the Fiscal Year ending June 30, 2016. At year end, the Finance Committee had pending referrals on: Continuing to implement and evaluate the Real Estate Asset Management Plan (RAMP), and Continuing to evaluate and develop additional funding for the County's Emergency Medical Services system of care. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 684 RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Board of Supervisors to submit notice of intent to the Federal Aviation Administration indicating the County's interest and intent to submit an application to partner with the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) to set local rules and regulations for an Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) Integration Pilot Program, as recommended by Supervisor Diane Burgis. FISCAL IMPACT: None. BACKGROUND: The United Aerial Systems (UAS) Integration Pilot Program was designed to partner state and local governments with industry stakeholders and will allow county governments to determine what local rules and regulations will best cater to their communities while bringing innovative technology within their county lines. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The deadline for submitting the notice of intent is November 28, 2017. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Lea Castleberry, (925) 252-4500 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 87 To:Board of Supervisors From:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Federal Aviation Administration 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 685 RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE County Counsel, or designee to execute on behalf of Contra Costa County and the County in its capacity as the Successor Agency to the Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency, amendments to existing agreements for specialized professional legal services with Goldfarb & Lipman to create categories of billing rates, rather than a billing rate for each individual service provider. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact. The amendment replaces a list that sets forth the names and rates of individual attorneys and implements billing rates based on the service provider’s billing category. BACKGROUND: The contracts being amended are for legal services related to the County’s affordable housing programs. Each contract includes an exhibit that identifies by name every attorney with Goldfarb & Lipman. Since the contracts were executed, and subsequently amended, some of the names have changed. Each contract, as amended, will establish billing rates based on job classifications. The contracts are also being amended to (i) provide for the payment of reasonable costs and expenses in the same manner that they are paid under other attorney contracts, and (ii) eliminate references to “org” numbers. The process used by staff to assign legal expenses to a particular source of funds will not change. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 11/14/2017 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Kate Andrus, Deputy County Counsel, 335-1824 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: November 14, 2017 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Kara Douglas, Assistant Deputy Director, Conservation and Development, Kate Andrus, Deputy County Counsel C. 88 To:Board of Supervisors From:Sharon L. Anderson, County Counsel Date:November 14, 2017 Contra Costa County Subject:Amendment to Contracts with Goldfarb & Lipman LLP 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 686 CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Payment for work performed, and expenses incurred, by the firm may be wrongfully delayed for withheld. 11-14-17 BOS Minuttes 687