Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 04102018 -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 April 10, 2018            9:00 A.M. Convene and announce adjournment to closed session in Room 101. 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. 9:30 A.M. Call to order and opening ceremonies. Inspirational Thought- "In a world where you can be anything, be kind." ~unknown Present: John Gioia, District I Supervisor; Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor; Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor; Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Absent: Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Staff Present:David Twa, County Administrator Sharon Anderson, County Counsel  There were no announcements from closed session.     CONSIDER CONSENT ITEMS (Items listed as C.1 through C.94 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 recognizing April 2018 as Alcohol Awareness Month. (Supervisor Mitchoff)    Speaker: Antwon Cloird, resident of Richmond.   PRESENTATION proclaiming April 8-14, 2018 National Crime Victims' Rights Week. (Diana Becton, District Attorney)    Speaker: Antwon Cloird, resident of Richmond.   PR.3 PRESENTATION by Contra Costa County Historical Society to update the Board of Supervisors on activities. (Supervisor Mitchoff)      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)    Phyllis Gordon, CCC Womens Commission, spoke on today being National Equal Pay Day. She noted that April 10th marks 3.5 months, the amount of additional time it takes for a woman to make what a man made the previous year. Ms. Gordon provided the Supervisors with a cookie with a "bite" taken out of it, symbolizing the inequity in pay; Rudy Rodriguez, resident of Walnut Creek thanked the Board for its continued support of the Rapid Response program and the Contra Costa Immigrants Rights Alliance (CCIRA); The following people reported alleged violations of the California Trust Act by Sheriff Livingston, who recently began publishing the release date of all incarcerated persons, and request the Board schedule a Truth Forum: Yadira Sanchez, California Immigrant Youth Justice Alliance (CIYJA); Cheryl Sudduth, Contra Costa Immigrant Rights Alliance (CCIRA); Sandy V., Contra Costa Immigrant Rights Alliance; David Buenrostro, CIYJA; Tony Bravo, CCIRA; Dick Offerman, resident of Pleasant Hill; Nicole Zapata, resident of Walnut Creek; Lynn MacMichael, resident of Lafayette; Maricruz Lopez; Caroline Wong, By Any Means Necessary (BAM); The following people did not speak, but left written commentary for the Board's consideration (attached): Mary-Helen Binger, resident of Walnut Creek; Nancy Newhart, resident of Pleasant Hill; Bill Yarborough, resident of Clayton. Patty Hoyt, CCC MEDS Coalition, informed that April 28, 2018 is the DEA National Prescription Drug Take Back Day to dispose of unwanted prescription drugs safely, and that there are many dropoff locations in the county (informational flyer attached). Visit DEATakeBack.com to find a collection site near you. Matt Schuler, Assistant Sheriff, in charge of custody services, said the Sheriff is in support of the Truth Matt Schuler, Assistant Sheriff, in charge of custody services, said the Sheriff is in support of the Truth Act Forum and is researching workable dates to schedule it, when he can attend. He said that the release date publication was not in response to immigration issues, but part of the Reentry Strategic Plan. It was proposed that quick release was causing a gap in services offered to them. Chair Mitchoff noted that the ICE detention module at the West County Detention Facility is a separate facility from the jail, and that the County Administrator is contacting every County department to determine any contact with ICE in the calendar year 2017. A Truth Forum will be scheduled some time after June 30, when attendance by the Sheriff is possible.   D.3 CONSIDER accepting the 2017 Industrial Safety Ordinance Annual Report submitted by the Health Services Department. (Randy Sawyer, Chief Environmental Health and Hazardous Materials Officer)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) D.4 Acting as the Governing Board of Contra Costa County and the Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, CONSIDER adopting Resolution No. 2018/93 to adopt an update to the Contra Costa County Hazard Mitigation Plan, Countywide. (Marcelle Indelicato, Office of Emergency Services)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) D. 5 CONSIDER reports of Board members.    Supervisor Glover's office has moved to 190 East 4th Street in Pittsburg, a location with larger parking area and close to the Northern Waterfront Initiative Project. The Chamber of Commerce will host a ribbon-cutting ceremony and mixer at the new office on April 26, 2018 beginning at 5 p.m. (http://www.mypittsburgchamber.org/calendar.html#!event/2018/4/26/ribbon-cutting-mixer) Chair Mitchoff and Supervisor Andersen accepted a challenge to ride a bike on Bike To Work Day, May 10, 2018. The Chair challenges Supervisors Gioia, Burgis, and Glover to join them and ride a bike to a destination of their choice.   ADJOURN   CONSENT ITEMS   Road and Transportation   C. 1 ACCEPT the 2017 Annual Report of real estate acquisition acceptances dated January 1, 2017 through December 31, 2017, approved by the Public Works Director as submitted, Antioch, Bay Point, Brentwood, Clayton, Knightsen, Martinez, Pinole, Rodeo, and Walnut Creek areas. (No fiscal impact)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 2 APPROVE the Curb Ramp Project and take related actions under the California Environmental Quality Act, Alamo and Kensington areas. (100% Gas Tax Funds)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 3 AWARD and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a construction contract with American Pavement Systems, Inc., in the amount of $2,958,537, for the 2018 Asphalt Rubber Cape Seal Project, Bay Point, Clyde, Martinez, and Walnut Creek areas. (100% SB1 Gas Taxes)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) Engineering Services   C. 4 ADOPT Resolution No. 2018/115 approving the fifth extension of the Subdivision Agreement (Right-of-Way Landscaping) for subdivision SD08-09165, for a project being developed by Shapell Homes, a Division of Shapell Industries, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, as recommended by the Public Works Director, San Ramon (Dougherty Valley) area. (No fiscal impact)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 5 ADOPT Resolution No. 2018/116 accepting completion of private improvements for minor subdivision MS16-00001 for a project developed by Pacific Crest Builders, Inc., as recommended by the Public Works Director, Walnut Creek area. (No fiscal impact)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 6 ADOPT Resolution No. 2018/117 accepting Grant Deed of Development Rights for subdivision SD05-08947, for a project being developed by James Scott Busby and Margaret Mary Busby, as recommended by the Public Works Director, Martinez area. (No fiscal impact)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 7 ADOPT Resolution No. 2018/118 accepting an Offer of Dedication for Park Purposes for subdivision SD05-08971, for a project being developed by Shapell industries, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, as recommended by the Public Works Director, San Ramon (Dougherty Valley) area. (No fiscal impact)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 8 ADOPT Resolution No. 2018/119 approving the Agreement for Improvement Warranty for park acceptance PA15-00044 (cross-reference subdivision SD05-08971), for the project being developed by Shapell industries, Inc. a Delaware Corporation, San Ramon (Dougherty Valley) area. (No fiscal impact)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 9 ADOPT Resolution No. 2018/123 accepting Offer of Dedication for Roadway Purposes and Relinquishment of Abutter's Rights for subdivision SD05-08947, for a project being developed by James Scott Busby and Margaret Mary Busby, as recommended by the Public Works Director, Martinez area. (No fiscal impact)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 10 ADOPT Resolution No. 2018/124 accepting Offer of Dedication for Roadway Purposes for development permit DP16-03008, for a project being developed by Goldman Enterprises, Inc., as recommended by the 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, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 11 ADOPT Resolution No. 2018/125 accepting completion of improvements and approving the Final Map for subdivision SD05-08947 for a project developed by James Scott Busby and Margaret Mary Busby, as recommended by the Public Works Director, Martinez area. (No fiscal impact)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 12 ADOPT Resolution No. 2018/126 accepting completion of landscape improvements for a Subdivision Agreement (Right-of-Way Landscaping) for park acceptance PA14-00042 (cross-reference subdivision SD05-08971), for a project being developed by Toll Brothers, Inc., as recommended by the Public Works Director, San Ramon (Dougherty Valley) area. (No fiscal impact)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 13 ADOPT Resolution No. 2018/127 accepting completion of landscape improvements for park acceptance PA15-00044 (cross-reference subdivision SD05-08971), for a project being developed by Shapell Industries, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, as recommended by the Public Works Director, San Ramon (Dougherty Valley) area. (No fiscal impact)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) Special Districts & County Airports   C. 14 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Director of Airports, or designee, to execute a month-to-month hangar rental agreement with John Cicero for a Large T-hangar at Buchanan Field Airport effective April 1, 2018 in the monthly amount of $548.33, Pacheco area. (100% Airport Enterprise Fund)         AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 15 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Director of Airports, or designee, to execute a month-to-month hangar rental agreement with Archer Two Aviation, LLC. for a Shade hangar at Buchanan Field Airport effective March 23, 2018 in the monthly amount of $177.07. (100% Airport Enterprise Fund)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 16 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Director of Airports, or designee, to execute a long-term lease with Montecito Commercial Group, LLC, for the lease of approximately 3.21 acres of unimproved County-owned property located at Buchanan Field Airport at the south end of Sally Ride Drive, with rent equal to $1,000 per month during the anticipated two-year construction period, followed by initial ground rent of $4,247.08 per month for the first year, with annual increases thereafter, and adopt mitigated negative declaration and take related California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) actions. (100% Airport Enterprise Fund)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 17 AUTHORIZE the Chief Engineer, Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, or designee, to execute and record the Memorandum of Unrecorded Grant Agreement/Deed Restriction with the Contra Costa Resource Conservation District and the California Natural Resources Agency to protect public interest in the Pinole Creek Fish Passage Project, effective April 10, 2018, in perpetuity, Pinole area. (100% Flood Control Zone 9 Funds)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) Claims, Collections & Litigation   C. 18 DENY claims filed by CSAA – Subrogee for Faisal Malik, Julie Enea, Kerri & Michael Harris, Cristell Hoover, EH, a minor by Cristell Hoover her guardian, Shannon O. Murphy Sr. and Lavanya Shahani. DENY late claim filed by Mario Torres.       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) Statutory Actions   C. 19 ACCEPT the Fiscal Year 2017/18 Community Facilities District Administration Report on County of Contra Costa Community Facilities District No. 2001-1 (Norris Canyon). (No fiscal impact)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 20 APPROVE Board meeting minutes for March 2018, as on file with the Office of the Clerk of the Board.    C. 20 APPROVE Board meeting minutes for March 2018, 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, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) Honors & Proclamations   C. 21 ADOPT Resolution No. 2018/133 proclaiming April 8-14, 2018 National Crime Victims' Rights Week, as recommended by the District Attorney.       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 22 ADOPT Resolution No. 2018/143 declaring April 2018 as Alcohol Awareness Month in Contra Costa County, as recommended by Supervisor Mitchoff.        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) Appointments & Resignations   C. 23 ACCEPT the resignation of Cesar Zepeda, DECLARE a vacancy in the District I Public Sector seat on the Economic Opportunity Council, and DIRECT the Clerk of the Board to post the vacancy, as recommended by Supervisor Gioia.        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 24 APPOINT Darran Mazaika to the District IV Alternate seat on the Contra Costa County Fire District Advisory Commission, as recommended by Supervisor Mitchoff.       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 25 ACCEPT the resignations of Amo Virk (Business Seat) and Gayle Walls-Burns (Veteran's Seat), DECLARE vacancies for both seats, and DIRECT the Clerk of the Board to post the vacancies for the Business and Veteran Member Seats as recommended by the Advisory Council on Equal Employment Opportunity.       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 26 APPROVE the medical staff appointments and reappointments, additional privileges, changes to emergency medicine privileges, medical staff advancements, and voluntary resignations as recommend by the Medical Staff Executive Committee and the Health Services Director.         AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) Appropriation Adjustments   C. 27 APPROVE Appropriation and Revenue Adjustment No. 5062 authorizing the transfer of wage and benefit appropriations between the Workforce Services Bureau (decreasing Department 0504 expenditures) and the Aging and Adult Services Bureau (increasing Department 0503 expenditures) to reflect the transfer of seven full-time positions engaged in SSI Advocacy activities, effective April 1, 2018. (Cost Neutral)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) Intergovernmental Relations   C. 28 ADOPT a "Support" position on Senate Bill 914 (Dodd), a bill that would authorize counties to use the Construction Manager At-Risk method of contracting for the erection, construction, alteration, repair, or improvement of any infrastructure, excluding roads, as recommended by the Transportation, Water, and Infrastructure Committee.        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 29 ADOPT Resolution No. 2018/130, which establishes SUPPORT for Proposition 69, a constitutional amendment (Assembly Constitutional Amendment 5) to prevent new transportation funds from being diverted for non-transportation purposes, and OPPOSITION to the potential November ballot proposition (Proposed Initiative 17-0033) that would repeal the new Senate Bill 1 (2017) transportation funds and make it more difficult to raise state and local transportation funds in the future, as recommended by the Transportation, Water, and Infrastructure Committee. (No current fiscal impact, possible future impacts)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 30 APPROVE a position of "Support" for the Coalition Against Bigger Trucks initiative opposing increases in truck length and weight, and AUTHORIZE the Chair of the Board of Supervisors to sign a letter communicating the County's position, as recommended by the Transportation, Water, and Infrastructure Committee. (No fiscal impact)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 31 AUTHORIZE the Chair of the Board of Supervisors to sign a letter to the County's Congressional representatives providing support to continue the funding for the U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board, as recommended by the Contra Costa County Hazardous Materials Commission.        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) Personnel Actions   C. 32 ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 22262 to cancel one permanent-intermittent Substance Abuse Counselor position and add one Substance Abuse Counselor position (represented) in the Health Services Department. (No additional cost)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 33 ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 22248 to add one Children’s Services System Support Specialist position (represented) and cancel one vacant Eligibility Worker III position (represented) in the Children and Family Services Bureau of the Employment and Human Services Department. (44% Federal, 39% State, 17% County)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 34 ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 22261 to reassign seven filled positions and incumbents (represented) from Department 0504 (Workforce Services Bureau) to Department 0503 (Aging and Adult Services Bureau) in the Employment and Human Services Department. (Cost neutral)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 35 ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 22266 to add one Health Services Reimbursement Accountant position (represented) 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, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 36 ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 22263 to add one Automated Call Distribution Coordinator II position (represented) and cancel one Network Administrator I position (represented) 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, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) Leases   C. 37 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a lease with Pleasant Hill Executive Park Association, for a term of 10 years for 9,563 square feet of office space for the Health Services Department – First Hope/ First Break Program at 391 Taylor Blvd, Suite 100, Pleasant Hill, at an initial annual rent of $214,596 for the first year with annual increases thereafter, with one five-year renewal term, under the terms and conditions set forth in the lease. (100% Mental Health Services Act Funds)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor  AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) Grants & Contracts   APPROVE and AUTHORIZE execution of agreements between the County and the following agencies for receipt of fund and/or services:   C. 38 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment effective August 1, 2017 with the City of Concord, Community Development Block Grant, to incorporate updated contract language that the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development requires to use Community Development Block Grant funds for the Adult Interim Housing Program, for the period August 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, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 39 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment effective August 1, 2017 with the City of Concord, Community Development Block Grant, to incorporate updated contract language that the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development requires to use Community Development Block Grant funds for the Coordinated Outreach, Referral Engagement program, for the period August 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018. (20% County match)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 40 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with the California Department of Health Care Services to make technical adjustments to the budgets and increase the amount payable to the County by $3,500,000 to a new payment limit of $23,572,025 for continuation of the Drug Medi-Cal Substance Abuse Treatment Services Program, with no change in the term through June 30, 2020. (No County match)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 41 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment effective March 1, 2018 with the West Contra Costa Unified School District, to increase the payment limit by $210,000 to a new payment limit of $280,000 for additional school-based mobile clinic services in the West Contra Costa Unified School District for the period March 1, 2017 through August 31, 2020. (No County match)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 42 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Librarian, or designee, to apply for and accept a grant in an amount not to exceed $14,799 from the Pacific Library Partnership Innovation and Technology Grant Program to install and maintain a Power Tower Station for the period November 1, 2017 through October 31, 2018. (No County match)         AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 43 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with the National Association of County and City Health Officials, to pay the County an amount not to exceed $7,500 to enhance the emergency planning and response system of the Contra Costa Medical Reserve Corps for the period February 12 through August 31, 2018. (No County match)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 44 ADOPT Resolution No. 2018/129 approving and authorizing the Sheriff-Coroner or designee, to apply for and accept the Office of the Attorney General, California Department of Justice, Division of Law Enforcement Tobacco Law Enforcement Grant Program in an amount not to exceed $97,100 for law enforcement operations to decrease juvenile access and use of tobacco products for the period June 1, 2018 through June 30, 2020. (100% State)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 45 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Chief Information Officer, or designee, to execute a contract with the State of California, Department of Justice, to pay the County an amount not to exceed $47,736 for access to County's Law and Justice Information Systems for the period July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2020. (No County cost)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 46 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to execute a contract with the California Department of Fish and Game, including modified indemnification language, for use of the Sheriff's Range Facility commencing with execution of the contract through June 30, 2020. (100% User Fee revenue)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 47 ADOPT Resolution No. 2018/109 approving and authorizing the Sheriff-Coroner or designee, to apply for and accept a California Division of Boating and Waterways Surrendered and Abandoned Vessel Exchange Grant in an initial allocation of $300,000 for the abatement of abandoned vessels and the vessel turn in program on County waterways for the period beginning October 1, 2018 through the end of the grant funding availability. (90% State, 10% In-kind match)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 48 ADOPT Resolution No. 2018/134 approving and authorizing the Sheriff-Coroner or designee, to apply    C. 48 ADOPT Resolution No. 2018/134 approving and authorizing the Sheriff-Coroner or designee, to apply for and accept Boating Safety and Enforcement Equipment Grant Funds from the California State Parks, Division of Boating and Waterways in an amount not to exceed $96,427 for the purchase and installation of diving equipment and training for the Sheriff's Dive team. (100% State)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 49 ADOPT Resolution No. 2018/142 approving and authorizing the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to apply for and accept a grant from the California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control, in an initial amount of $62,525 to fund proactive enforcement targeting the unauthorized sale of alcoholic beverage by businesses within the County for the period July 1, 2018 through the end of the grant funding. (No County match)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (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. 50 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to enter into worksite contractual/financial agreements with employers participating in the Contra Costa Works Subsidized Employment Program to allow for reimbursement of not less than $10 per hour and not to exceed $20 per hour for each of the CalWORKs clients worksited with employers during the period July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018. (85% Federal, 15% State)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 51 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute worksite contractual/financial agreements with employers participating in the Expanded CCWORKS Subsidized Employment Program to allow for reimbursement of not less than $10 per hour but not to exceed $20 per hour for CalWORKs clients during the period July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018. (96% Federal, 4% State)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 52 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute an Interagency Agreement with the City of Oakland in an amount not to exceed $30,000 to provide Oakland Workforce Development Staff training and professional development for the period of December 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018. (100% Federal)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 53 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute a    C. 53 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with Ombudsman Services of Contra Costa County, Inc., a non-profit corporation, effective March 15, 2018, to increase the payment limit by $25,176 to a new payment limit of $271,017 for additional ombudsman services to seniors in long-term care with no change to the original contract term of July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018. (52% State; 48% Federal)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 54 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to execute on behalf of the Public Works Director, a purchase order, with Netronix Integration, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $300,000 for the period April 1, 2018 through March 31, 2020 for access control products, Countywide. (100% General Fund)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 55 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Mark Scott Construction, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $1,500,000 for the period April 1, 2018 through March 31, 2021, to provide on-call fire, water and mold mitigation services, Countywide. (100% General Fund)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 56 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Sharjo, Inc., (d/b/a ServiceMaster Restoration Services) in an amount not to exceed $1,500,000 for the period April 1, 2018 through March 31, 2021, to provide on-call fire, water and mold mitigation services, Countywide. (100% General Fund)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 57 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, on behalf of the Employment and Human Services Department, to pay the California Department of Social Services an amount not to exceed $198,894 to reimburse the State for payments to the Private Adoptions Agency Program serving youth who would otherwise be in foster care during the 2016-17 fiscal year. (100% State)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 58 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Chief Probation Officer, or designee, to execute a contract with Contra Costa County Office of Education (CCCEO) in an amount not to exceed $212,270 to provide assistance to individuals as they transition from the County’s adult detention facilities for the period of January 1, 2018 through June 30, 2019. (100% State Realignment Funds)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT)    C. 59 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute an amendment to the Interagency Agreement with Ambrose Recreation and Parks District, a public entity, effective May 1, 2018, to increase the payment limit by $45,273 to a new payment limit of $144,818 and to extend the term from June 30, 2018 to a new term ending December 31, 2018 for the provision of Promoting Safe and Stable Families Program Services. (100% Federal)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 60 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Minh Nguyen, M.D., in an amount not to exceed $174,720 to provide outpatient psychiatric care services to patients in West County for the period April 1, 2018 through March 31, 2019. (100% Mental Health Realignment)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 61 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Prometheus Laboratories, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $300,000 to provide outside laboratory testing services for Contra Costa Regional Medical Center and Health Centers for the period November 1, 2017 through October 31, 2020. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 62 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Medical Anesthesia Consultants Medical Group, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $150,000 to provide anesthesia staffing services at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center and Health Centers for the period April 1, 2018 through March 31, 2021. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 63 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Auditor-Controller, or designee, to pay each of up to eleven In-Home Supportive Services Public Authority Advisory Committee members $24 per meeting, not to exceed three meetings per month, in stipends to defray meeting attendance costs for the period July 1, 2018 through June 30, 2019 for a total cost not to exceed $6,427, as recommended by the Employment and Human Services Department Director. (50% Federal, 50% State)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 64 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to execute, on behalf of the Chief Information Officer, a purchase order with AT&T, and a third-party master lease agreement with Key Government Finance, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $946,000, for the period May 1, 2018 through May 31, 2022, for the purchase of computer equipment, Countywide. (100% Department User Fees)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 65 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute an amendment to the Consulting Services Agreement with Ross Drulis Cusenbery Architecture, Inc., to extend termination date by 24 months with no other change to the other terms or payment limit, to provide architectural, engineering, and other technical support services during further design and construction phases support for the new Emergency Operations Center/Public Safety Building. (No fiscal impact)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 66 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute an amendment to the Consulting Services Agreement with KMD Architects, to increase the payment limit by $300,000, to a new payment limit of $3,400,000, for additional architectural, engineering and other technical support services for the new County Administration Building. (100% General Fund)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 67 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Mission Recruiting, LLC, in an amount not to exceed $300,000 to provide physician recruitment services for Contra Costa Regional Medical Center and Health Centers for the period May 1, 2018 through April 30, 2019. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 68 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Infectious Disease Doctors Medical Group, APC, in an amount not to exceed $260,000 to provide infectious disease consulting and training at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center and Health Centers for the period May 1, 2018 through April 30, 2019. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 69 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with John Roark, M.D., in an amount not to exceed $250,000 to provide gastroenterology services at Contra Costa Regional Medical and Health Centers for the period May 1, 2018 through April 30, 2020. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 70 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to execute on behalf of the Public Works Director, a purchase order amendment, with Jon K Takata Corp (dba Restoration Management Company), to increase the payment limit by $37,000 to a new payment limit of $135,000 for mold abatement and repair at 1391 Shell Avenue, Martinez area. (100% General Fund)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor  AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 71 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Matt Colchico d/b/a Summit Building Services, in an amount not to exceed $3,500,000 to provide custodial services in certain leased buildings and certain County-owned buildings, for the period April 1, 2018 through March 31, 2021, Countywide. (100% General Fund)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 72 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the Health Services Director, a purchase order with Groupware Technology, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $153,755 for PureStorage FlashArray hardware and support for the period April 21, 2018 through April 20, 2019. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 73 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the Health Services Director, a purchase order amendment with Lifenet Health, to increase the payment limit by $60,000 to a new payment limit of $159,900 for medical supplies, instruments and allografts (human tissue) for the Contra Costa Regional Medical Center, for the period January 1, 2017 through December 31, 2018. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 74 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the Health Services Director, a purchase order with Sam Clar Office Furniture, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $104,504 for furniture for the relocation of the Emergency Medical Services Division. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 75 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with S/T Health Group Consulting, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $113,200 to provide pharmacy audit services to Contra Costa Health Plan members for the period April 1, 2018 through March 31, 2020. (100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund III)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 76 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Eileen M. Linder Optometrist, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $150,000 to provide optometry services to Contra Costa Health Plan members for the period May 1, 2018 through April 30, 2020. (100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund III)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 77 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the Health Services Director, a purchase order with Med One Capital, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $474,518 for lease of a medication packaging system for the Pharmacy Division at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center, for the period March 1, 2018 through February 28, 2023. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 78 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Phamatech, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $246,960 for Child Welfare mandated drug testing services for the period of July 1, 2018 through June 30, 2019. (30% County, 70% State)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 79 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Community Violence Solutions, a non-profit corporation, in an amount not to exceed $144,024 for the provisions of services to victims of human trafficking in Contra Costa County for the period of April 1, 2018 through September 30, 2018. (100% Federal)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 80 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute an Interagency Agreement with Contra Costa County Office of Education, a public entity, in an amount not to exceed $50,000 to provide tutoring services to children in foster care for the period of July 1, 2018 through June 30, 2019. (30% County, 70% State)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 81 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the Health Services Director, a purchase order with AT&T Corp., in the amount of $107,477 to purchase audio visual equipment for the relocation of the Emergency Medical Services Division. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 82 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to purchase, on behalf of the Health Services Director, transportation vouchers in aggregate amount not to exceed $33,433 for homeless patients to health-related appointments through the Health Care for the Homeless Program for the period February 1, 2018 through January 31, 2019. (100% U.S. Health Resources and Services Administration Grant funds)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 83 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent or designee to execute, on behalf of the Chief Information Officer, a purchase order amendment with Tessco Technologies to extend the term from June 30, 2018 through June 30, 2020 with no change to the payment limit of $150,000, for telecommunications and radio parts and supplies. (100% Charges to User Departments)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) Other Actions   C. 84 APPROVE a restructuring of the membership of the Arts and Culture Commission of Contra Costa County by adding two At-Large Seats, ADOPT revised bylaws of the Arts and Culture Commission as recommended by the Commission, and DECLARE vacancies in the At-Large 3, At-Large 4, District V, and Alternate Seats of the Arts and Culture Commission. (No fiscal impact.)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 85 APPROVE referrals to the Transportation, Water and Infrastructure Committee for action in 2018, as recommended by the Committee. (No fiscal impact)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 86 ADOPT Resolution No. 2018/110 ratifying a Memorandum of Understanding entered into by the Sheriff-Coroner with the California State Parks Division of Boating and Waterways and approve and authorize the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to apply for and accept reimbursement funding for critical skills training from the California State Parks Division of Boating and Waterways with an initial request of $25,000 for the period beginning June 5, 2017 through the end of reimbursement funding availability. (100% State)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 87 ACCEPT and APPROVE the revised Head Start Policy Council Bylaws for the Community Services Bureau, as recommended by the Employment & Human Services Department.       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 88 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with University of Phoenix to provide supervised field instruction to nursing students in the County’s Public Health Division, for the period March 1, 2018 through June 30, 2021. (Non-financial agreement)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT)    C. 89 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the El Sobrante Library to be closed until further notice while clean up and restoration of the facility is completed following the recent fire, as recommended by the County Librarian. (100% Library Fund)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 90 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Auditor-Controller, or designee, to distribute the 2016-17 State Highway property rental pursuant to the provisions of Section 104.10 of the Streets and Highways Code, as recommended by the County Auditor-Controller. (83% County Road Fund, 6% City of Lafayette, 11% City of Pittsburg)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 91 APPROVE the list of providers recommended by Contra Costa Health Plan's Peer Review and Credentialing Committee and the Health Services Director, as required by the State Departments of Health Care Services and Managed Health Care, and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 92 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Auditor-Controller, or designee, to pay $60,000 to Aspiranet, for services rendered on behalf of the Employment and Human Services Department, as recommended by the Employment and Human Services Director. (100% Federal)        AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 93 CONTINUE the emergency action originally taken by the Board of Supervisors on November 16, 1999, and most recently approved by the Board on March 27, 2018, regarding the issue of homelessness in Contra Costa County, as recommended by the Health Services Director. (No fiscal impact)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT) C. 94 ADOPT Resolution No. 2018/140 to temporarily close part day, part year Center Based pre-school and Home Based programs, abolish project positions and lay off employees in the Employment and Human Services Department, Community Services Bureau, and in August, 2018 re-establish positions, 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, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District III Supervisor Diane Burgis (ABSENT)   GENERAL INFORMATION 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 Diane Burgis and Karen Mitchoff) meets quarterly on the second Wednesday of the month at 11:00 a.m. at Director of Airports Office, 550 Sally Ride Drive, Concord. The Family and Human Services Committee (Supervisors Candace Andersen and John Gioia) 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 at 9:00 a.m. in Room 101, County Administration Building, 651 Pine Street, Martinez. The Hiring Outreach Oversight Committee (Supervisors Candace Andersen and Federal D. Glover) 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 Diane Burgis and Candace Andersen) 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 Karen Mitchoff and Diane Burgis) 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 John Gioia and Federal D. Glover) 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 Karen Mitchoff and Candace Andersen) 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 June 13, 2018 11:00 a.m.See above Family & Human Services Committee April 23, 2018 10:30 a.m.See above Finance Committee April 23, 2018 9:00 a.m. See above Hiring Outreach Oversight Committee June 4, 2018 1:00 p.m.See above Internal Operations Committee May 14, 2018 1:00 p.m. See above Legislation Committee May 14, 2018 10:30 a.m.See above Public Protection Committee April 12, 2018 Special Meeting 9:00 a.m. See above Transportation, Water & Infrastructure Committee May 14, 2018 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 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 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 RECOMMENDATION(S): Presentation from the Contra Costa County Historical Society to update the Board of Supervisors on their activities. Presenting will be Priscilla Couden, Executive Director and John Mercurio, Board President. FISCAL IMPACT: None. BACKGROUND: The Contra Costa County Historical Society's mission is to preserve for the benefit of the people of our County, the relics of our past. With the help of the internet, more people have access to the wonderful stories of the people who lived in our County, so many years ago. The Society hopes that the website we manage will bring the people of Contra Costa's present, closer to those who lived, worked and died in our County and who are, our History. The Contra Costa County History Center maintains custody of and provides access to a major archival collection documenting the history of the County. The History Center is not a "museum" that exhibits artifacts of history. Rather, we are an archive- a treasure trove of records, letters, pictures, maps and books- the thousand and one records that tell the story of our past. It is intended as a focus for scholarly activity, offering valuable resources available for serious students and writers of history and a place where teachers can find prime source material on the County's past to share with their students. The Center serves as a place where the mementos, memories and written pictorial records of Contra Costa County's past can be collected to which residents and former residents can offer APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS Contact: Lia Bristol, (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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: , Deputy cc: PR.3 To:Board of Supervisors From:Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Presentation by Contra Costa County Historical Society to Update the BOS on Activities photos, letters and records for consideration as part of the Society's collection. Finally, the Center is a working facility where the records of yesteryear will be safeguarded for all time for the enrichment of future generations. BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) The Contra Costa County Historical Society's History Center is located at: 724 Escobar St. Martinez, CA Phone: 925-229-1042 Normal hours of operation are: Tuesdays, 9:00 AM to 4:00 PM Wednesdays, 9:00 AM to 4:00 PM Thursdays, 9:00 AM to 4:00 PM 3rd Saturday of the month, 10:00 AM to 2:00 PM From time to time, they may be open for special events, such as exhibit open houses, or if there is an event in downtown Martinez. They are staffed largely by volunteers, so we may not always be open the entire time. To be sure we are open, please call ahead. We are also available via email at: info@cocohistory.com RECOMMENDATION(S): ACCEPT the Industrial Safety Ordinance Annual Report. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: Chapter 450-8 of the County Ordinance Code known as the Industrial Safety Ordinance Risk Management Chapter requires Health Services to submit annual reports to the Board of Supervisors. The ordinance outlines what is to be included in this report. Attached is a copy of this report. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: No report available for the public that summarizes 2017 Industrial Safety Ordinance activities. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Randy Sawyer, 925-335-3210 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Tasha Scott, Marcy Wilhelm, Randy Sawyer D.3 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Annual Industrial Safety Ordinance Report ATTACHMENTS 2017 INDUSTRIAL SAFETY ORDINANCE ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REVIEW AND EVALUATION REPORT INDUSTRIAL SAFETY ORDINANCE ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REVIEW AND EVALUATION REPORT January 9, 2018 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS A Division of Contra Costa Health Services By Contra Costa Health Services Hazardous Materials Programs 2 Table of Contents Executive Summary .........................................................................................................................................................3 Public Participation ............................................................................................................................................4 Audits.....................................................................................................................................................................4 Major Chemical Accidents or Releases .........................................................................................................4 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................................5 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................................................5 Annual Performance Review and Evaluation Report .................................................................................8 Effectiveness of Contra Costa Hazardous Materials Programs’ Implementation of the Industrial Safety Ordinance .......................................................................................................................................................................9 Effectiveness of the Procedures for Records Management.....................................................................9 Number and Type of Audits and Inspections Conducted .......................................................................10 Number of Root Cause Analyses and/or Incident Investigations Conducted by Hazardous Materials Program ............................................................................................................................................11 Hazardous Materials Programs’ Process for Public Participation ........................................................11 Effectiveness of the Public Information Bank ...........................................................................................11 Effectiveness of the Hazardous Materials Ombudsperson ....................................................................14 Other Required Program Elements Necessary to Implement and Manage the Industrial Safety Ordinance ...........................................................................................................................................................14 Regulated Stationary Sources Listing ........................................................................................................................14 The Status of the Regulated Stationary Sources’ Safety Plans and Programs...................................14 Locations of the Regulated Stationary Sources Safety Plans ................................................................15 Annual Accident History Report and Inherently Safer Systems Implemented as Submitted by the Regulated Stationary Sources ........................................................................................................................15 Status of the Incident Investigations, Including the Root Cause Analyses Conducted by the Regulated Stationary Sources ........................................................................................................................17 Major Chemical Accidents or Releases .......................................................................................................17 Legal Enforcement Actions Initiated by Contra Costa Hazardous Materials Programs ..................19 Penalties Assessed as a Result of Enforcement ......................................................................................................19 Total Fees, Service Charges and Other Assessments Collected Specifically for the Industrial Safety Ordinance .....................................................................................................................................................................19 Total Personnel and Personnel Years Used by Hazardous Materials Program to Implement the Industrial Safety Ordinance ............................................................................................................................................................20 Comments from Interested Parties Regarding the Effectiveness of the Industrial Safety Ordinance ......20 The Impact of the Industrial Safety Ordinance on Improving Industrial Safety .............................................21 City of Richmond Industrial Safety Ordinance........................................................................................................23 3 Executive Summary A landmark Industrial Safety Ordinance requiring regulated facilities in Contra Costa County to implement comprehensive safety programs was adopted by the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors on December 15, 1998. The requirements of the Industrial Safety Ordinance (ISO) aimed to prevent chemical accidents are some of the most stringent in the United States, if not the world. The goal is for facilities to implement a multitude of safety programs in order to prevent incidents that could have detrimental impacts to the surrounding communities. Additionally, ISO mandated participation from all stakeholders, including industries, agencies, elected officials and the public at large. Six stationary sources in Contra Costa County, including three oil refineries and three chemical facilities are required to comply with these requirements. Two facilities within the City of Richmond are required to comply with the same requirements as required by the Richmond Industrial Safety Ordinance (RISO). Both ordinances are administered by Contra Costa Hazardous Materials Programs (CCHMP), a division of Contra Costa Health Services, the county health department. CCHMP is required to annually evaluate and report on the performance of the ISO to the Board of Supervisors. Over the last 18-year period, there were Community Warning System (CWS) Level II and CWS Level III incidents that caused some concern; however, there is an overall observable trend of fewer and less severe incidents in the County. The ISO defines Major Chemical Accidents or Releases (MCAR) and there was only one MCAR incidents at an Industrial Safety Ordinance facility in this reporting period. CCHMP believes that any MCAR event serves as a reminder that implementation of mature prevention programs are challenging and we all have to stay vigilant in ensuring continuous safe facility operations. CCHMP’s Accidental Release Prevention (ARP) Program engineers have oversight of the ISO and are continuing to explore ways to improve the audit process to get a better understanding of the overall implementation of the ISO and the prevention program elements at the facilities. In 2014, the Board of Supervisors adopted amendments to the ISO as recommended by CSB. In 2015, CCHMP piloted procedure walkdowns and field verifications of Piping and Instrumentation Diagrams (P&IDs) and implemented these field activities to audits at the ISO facilities further improving the thoroughness and completeness of the audit/inspections. CCHMP staff continues to work with other agencies such as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the California Occupational Safety and Health Administration and the U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board (CSB) and other local program agencies for sharing of incident results, regulatory interpretations, inspection results and training. CCHMP worked closely with Department of Industrial Relations, California Office of Emergency Services and California Environmental Protection Agency to develop new petroleum refinery safety regulations for the California Accidental Release Prevention Program (Program 4) and the Process Safety Management requirement for Refineries. The two regulations closely mirrors the requirements of the ISO. CCHMP believes these new regulations will further improve safety programs at all California petroleum refineries as demonstrated here in Contra Costa County. . Randy Sawyer, Hazardous Materials Director 4 Public Participation Contra Costa Hazardous Materials Programs has an established public outreach process and is continually looking at ways to improve. The following community-engagement efforts took place in this reporting period: • Public outreach information booths at existing venues –Shell Martinez Refinery’s Safety Plan at the John Muir Birthday/Earth Day celebration at the John Muir National Historic Site in Martinez on April 22, 2017. –Both Phillips 66 Refinery and Air Liquide Large Industries’ Safety Plan and Safety Audits were shared at the Rodeo-Hercules Fire District Open House on October 14, 2017. • Presentations to Interested Groups –To be scheduled with corresponding Community Advisory Panel (CAP). • Attend public meetings after major incidents: –There were no severity III incidents during this reporting period. • Most recent audit findings summarized in an easily read format in English and Spanish • Information on regulated businesses in an easily read format in English and Spanish • Industrial Safety Ordinance Information Sheet in English and Spanish The Board of Supervisors also requested that staff provide copies of the Annual Report to communities through the Community Advisory Panels (CAP). This 2017 Annual Report is available on our website and will be sent to CAP representatives for distribution. Audits Audits of the regulated businesses are required at least once every three years to ensure that the facilities have the required programs in place and are implementing the programs. We completed one County ISO and one Richmond ISO audit in 2017: • Phillips 66 —January 2017 • Chemtrade Richmond Works —July 2017 Major Chemical Accidents or Releases There was one Major Chemical Accident or Release (MCAR) for the County Industrial Safety Ordinance (ISO) facilities in December 2016 at the Shell Oil Refinery. Conclusion The severity of the Major Chemical Accidents or Releases in Contra Costa County has a declining trend since the implementation of the Industrial Safety Ordinance with minor irregularities in 2004, 2010 and 2012. The implementation of the Industrial Safety Ordinance has improved safety programs and operations at the facilities that are regulated. Additionally, CCHMP has sought assistance from stakeholders, including the regulated facilities, workers and community members and included additional measures as recommended by the U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board that will further reduce likelihood of chemical accidents at these industrial facilities. Introduction 1The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors adopted the Industrial Safety Ordinance due to significant accidents that occurred at oil refineries and chemical plants in Contra Costa County in the 1990s. The effective date of the Industrial Safety Ordinance was January 15, 1999. The ordinance applies to oil refineries and chemical 1 5 plants with specified North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes that were required to submit a Risk Management Plan to the U.S. EPA and are program level 3 stationary sources as defined by the U. S. EPA Risk Management Program. The ordinance specifies the following: • Stationary sources had one year to submit a Safety Plan to Contra Costa Hazardous Materials Programs (CCHMP) stating how the stationary source is complying with the ordinance, except the Human Factors portion (completed January 15, 2000) • CCHMP to develop a Human Factors Guidance Document (completed January 15, 2000) • Stationary sources had one year to comply with the requirements of the Human Factor Guidance Document that was developed by CCHMP (compliance date: January 15, 200) • For Major Chemical Accidents or Releases, the stationary sources are required to perform a root cause analysis as part of their incident investigations (ongoing) • CCHMP may perform its own incident investigation, including a root cause analysis (ongoing) • All of the processes at the stationary source are covered as program level 3 or now for petroleum refineries program level 4 processes as defined by the California Accidental Release Prevention (CalARP ) Program • The stationary sources are required to consider Inherently Safer Systems for new processes or facilities and for mitigations identified in a process hazard analysis • CCHMP will review all of the submitted Safety Plans and audit/inspect all of the stationary sources’ Safety Programs within one year of the receipt of the Safety Plan (completed January 15, 2001) and every three years after the initial audit/inspection (ongoing) 6 Contra Costa Hazardous Materials Programs completed and issued the first Contra Costa County Safety Program Guidance Document on January 15, 2000. The stationary sources were required to comply with the Human Factors section of this guidance document by January 15, 2001. CCHMP performed a specialized audit for all the stationary sources for their Human Factors programs and for Inherently Safer Systems in 2002. The 2006 amendments to the Industrial Safety Ordinance require or expand the following: 1. Expand the Human Factors Program to include Maintenance 2. Expand the Management of Organizational Change to include Maintenance and all of Health and Safety positions 3. Require the stationary sources to perform Safety Culture Assessments one year after CCHMP develop guidance on performing a Safety Culture Assessment (completed November 2009) 4. Require the stationary sources to perform Security Vulnerability Analysis Hazardous Materials Programs staff has worked with the stationary sources to develop a Safety Culture Assessment Guidance Document, which was finalized and issued on November 10, 2009. Staff began reviewing these Safety Culture Assessments in December 2010. Additionally, staff issued a revised Safety Program Guidance Document to reflect the ISO amendments, and clarifications based on the audit findings in July 2011. The Board of Supervisors approved an amendment to the Industrial Safety Ordinance in June 2014 to address recommendations by CSB set forth in the Chevron refinery fire interim investigation report (August 2012) which further broadens the goals of the regulation by requiring the following: 1. Use of process safety performance indicators in the evaluation of the performance of process safety systems and to provide required contents in the annual performance review and evaluation report that is provided to the board of supervisors 2. Expand the implementation of inherently safer systems to be implemented to the greatest extent feasible and as soon as administratively practicable. Stationary source is now required to evaluate and document inherently safer system analysis: a. Every five years for existing covered processes, b. In the development and analysis of recommended action items identified in a process hazard analysis, c. As part of a management of change review, whenever a major change is proposed at a facility that could reasonably result in a major chemical accident or release, d. When an incident investigation report recommends a major change that could reasonably result in a major chemical accident or release, e. When a root cause analysis report recommends a major change that could reasonably result in a major chemical accident or release, and f. During the design of new processes, process units and facilities. 3. Conduct, document and complete a safeguard protection analysis for all processes by June 30, 2019, and every five years thereafter. 7 Regulated Stationary Sources Listing The six stationary sources now covered by the Industrial Safety Ordinance are: 1. Air Liquide Rodeo Hydrogen Plant 2. Air Products at the Shell Martinez Refining Company 3. Air Products at the Tesoro Golden Eagle Refinery 4. Shell Martinez Refining Company 5. Phillips 66 Rodeo Refinery 6. Tesoro Golden Eagle Refinery The Air Liquide Rodeo Hydrogen Plant began operation in July 2009 and is located adjacent to the Phillips 66 Rodeo Refinery. The facility produces purified hydrogen for Phillips 66 Refinery and other industrial customers, and also produces steam and electricity for the Phillips 66 Refinery. The Chemtrade West Bay Point Works is no longer in the CalARP or ISO program and equipment have been removed from the site since May 2015. Two facilities are covered by Richmond’s ISO that are the Chevron Richmond Refinery and Chemtrade West Richmond Works. The Status of the Regulated Stationary Sources’ Safety Plans and Programs All of the stationary sources regulated by the Industrial Safety Ordinance were required to submit their Safety Plans to CCHMP by January 15, 2000 and to have their Safety Programs completed and implemented. The stationary sources were also required to have a Human Factors Program in place that follows the County’s Safety Program Guidance Document by January 15, 2001. The status of each of the regulated stationary sources is given in Table I and includes the following: • When the latest updated Safety Plan was submitted • When the Notice of Deficiencies was issued • When the plan was determined to be complete by Hazardous Materials Programs • When the public meeting was held on the Safety Plan • When the audits were complete • When the public meetings were held on the preliminary audit findings • When the Human Factors to the Safety Plan were revised • When the Notice of Deficiencies was issued for the Human Factors revised Safety Plan • When the Human Factors Safety Plan was determined to be complete • When the Audit/Inspection was completed • When the Human Factors Audit preliminary findings public meeting was held 8 Table IIndustrial Safety Ordinance Stationary Source Status NAME Safety Plan (SP) Received Notice of Deficiencies (NOD) Issued-SP Safety Plan Complete SP Public Meeting Date Audit/ Inspection Audit Public Meeting Air Liquide Rodeo Hydrogen Plant 7/10/09 7/14/2010 11/3/2013 1/23/2017 12/13/2012 1/3/2013 3/1/2013 11/12/2013 7/21/2013 10/5/2013 10/14/2017 6/1/2010 5/28/2013 2/29/2016 10/8/11 10/5/2013 10/14/2017 Air Products— Shell & Tesoro 1/14/00 1/16/01 (HF update) 6/26/03 7/14/05 12/01/06 6/20/2008 6/30/2010 6/30/2014 6/15/00 5/10/01 (HF update) 8/24/07 3/14/2011 7/11/2014 8/30/00 6/19/01 (HF update) 9/14/07 7/1/2008 7/14/2014 9/13/00 5/8/03 9/23/07 6/19/2010 4/21/2012 4/15/2015 11/22/00 5/3/02 (HF) 2/27/04 1/22/07 7/20/09 4/16/2012 3/30/2015 5/8/03 9/24/06 9/23/07 6/19/2010 4/20/2013 4/23/2015 4/23/2016 Phillips 66 (formerly 1/15/00 1/12/01 (HF update) 8/10/05 8/7/09 8/7/2012 8/7/2015 3/14/00 9/10/01 (HF update) 3/28/06 11/22/2010 6/5/2017 5/30/00 3/18/02 (HF update) 8/9/02 11/5/07 1/27/2011 7/3/2013 8/4/2017 6/15/00 5/9/02 10/7 & 10/13/07 10/8/2011 10/5/2013 7/21/2013 10/14/2017 6/30/00 11/5/01 (HF) 8/1/03 8/15/06 10/6/08 8/1/11 4/28/2014 1/4/2017 4/9/02 6/22/04 7/8/04 10/7 & 10/13/07 7/18/10, 10/9/10 10/8/11 7/21/2013 10/5/2013 10/24/2015 10/14/2017 Shell Martinez Refinery 1/14/00 1/16/01 (HF update)7/22/02 1/11/06 9/3/2010 9/3/2013 8/26/2016 7/19/00 11/9/01 (HF update) 3/21/03 8/15/06 10/25/2011 4/9/01 1/3/02 (HF update) 9/15/03 11/2/06 3/27/2012 3/30/2017 5/8/03 9/24/06 9/23/07 4/21/2012 4/18/2015 4/22/2017 10/31/00 4/29/02 (HF) 11/26/04 10/23/06 4/30/09 2/13/2012 5/11/2015 5/8/03 9/24/2006 9/23/07 6/19/2010 4/20/2013 4/23/2016 Tesoro Golden Eagle Refinery 1/14/00 1/12/01 (HF update) 6/21/02 6/22/07 12/11/09 6/1/2012 6/30/2015 8/16/00 9/18/01 (HF update) 7/30/07 8/6/2012 1/31/01 12/14/01 (HF update) 6/21/03 11/5/07 6/4/10 8/27/2012 5/6/03 9/23/07 6/10/10 9/6/2012 4/22/2017 9/15/00 12/3/01 (HF) 9/8/03 11/07/05 8/18/08 4/18/2011 1/6/2014 10/5/2016 5/6/03 9/24/06 9/23/07 6/10/2010 9/6/2012 4/18/2015 9 Locations of the Regulated Stationary Sources Safety Plans Each of the regulated stationary sources was required to submit a Safety Plan to Hazardous Materials Program on January 15, 2000 and an updated Safety Plan that includes the implementation of the stationary source’s Human Factors Program by January 15, 2001. The regulated stationary sources are required to update their Safety Plan at least once every three years. These plans are available for public review at the Hazardous Materials Programs Offices at 4585 Pacheco Blvd., Suite 100, Martinez. When Hazardous Materials Programs determines that the Safety Plan is complete, and prior to going out for a 45-day public comment period, Hazardous Materials Programs staff will place the plan in the library(ies) closest to the regulated stationary source so it is easily accessible for review by the general public. Table II lists the regulated stationary sources with the location of each Safety Plan. Table IILocation of Safety Plans—Libraries Regulated Stationary Source Location 1 Location 2 Location 3 Air Liquide Large Industries Hazardous Materials Programs Office Rodeo Public Library Crockett Public Library Air Products at Shell Hazardous Materials Programs Office Martinez Public Library Air Products at Tesoro Hazardous Materials Programs Office Martinez Public Library Shell Refining-Martinez Hazardous Materials Programs Office Martinez Public Library Phillips 66 (formerly ConocoPhillips) Rodeo Refinery Hazardous Materials Programs Office Rodeo Public Library Crockett Public Library Tesoro Golden Eagle Refinery Hazardous Materials Programs Office Martinez Public Library Effectiveness of Contra Costa Hazardous Materials Programs’ Implementation of the Industrial Safety Ordinance Contra Costa Hazardous Materials Programs has developed policies, procedures, protocols and questionnaires to implement the California Accidental Release Prevention (CalARP) Program and the Industrial Safety Ordinance. The policies, procedures, protocols and questionnaires for these programs are listed below: • Audits/Inspections Policy • Conducting the Risk Management Plan/Safety Plan Completeness Review Protocol • Risk Management Plan Completeness Review Questionnaires • Safety Plan Completeness Review Questionnaires • Conducting Audits/Inspections Protocol • Safe Work Practices Questionnaires • CalARP Program Audit Questionnaires • Safety Program Audit Questionnaires 10 • Conducting Employee Interviews Protocol • Employee Interview Questionnaires • Procedure Field verification protocol • Piping and Instrumentation Diagram Field Verification protocol • Public Participation Policy • Dispute Resolution Policy • Reclassification Policy • Covered Process Modification Policy • CalARP Internal Performance Audit Policy • Conducting the Internal Performance Audit • CalARP Internal Audit Performance Audit Submission • Fee Policy • Notification Policy • Unannounced Inspection Policy • Risk Management Plan Public Review Policy Hazardous Materials Programs has developed the Contra Costa County CalARP Program Guidance Document and the Contra Costa County Safety Program Guidance Document (including the Safety Culture Assessment). An updated Contra Costa County Safety Program Guidance Document, which incorporated updates from the ISO amendments and additional clarifications from all the audits, was issued July 22, 2011, to the regulated facilities. These documents give guidance to the stationary sources for complying with the Industrial Safety Ordinance. The policies, procedures, protocols and questionnaires are available through Hazardous Materials Programs office. The guidance documents can be downloaded through Health Services’ website: http://cchealth.org/hazmat/calarp/guidance-document.php and http://cchealth.org/groups/hazmat/industrial_safety_ordinance_guidance.php Currently, CCHMP staff is working with the regulated facilities and labor representatives to revise the Safety Program Guidance Document to provide additional guidance and set expectations for compliance that incorporate additional ISO amendment requirements. Effectiveness of the Procedures for Records Management Hazardous Materials Program has set up digital files for each stationary source. The files include the following folders: 1. Annual status reports 2. Audits & Inspections 3. Communications 4. Completeness Review 5. Emergency Response 6. Incident Investigation 7. Trade Secret Information Digital copies of the files are stored on the Hazardous Materials Programs network and are accessible to the Accidental Release Prevention Programs Engineers, Supervisor and the Environmental Health and Hazardous Materials Chief. Portable document format (PDF) versions of these files are also stored on the Hazardous Materials Programs network and available for public access and viewing at the office. The Accidental Release Prevention Program files contain regulations, policies, information from the U.S. EPA, the Governor’s Office of Emergency Services, the U.S. Chemical 11 Safety and Hazards Investigation Board, and other information pertinent to the engineers. The risk management and safety plans are received in hard copies and are kept at the Hazardous Materials Programs office. Number and Type of Audits and Inspections Conducted The Hazardous Materials Programs staff was required to audit and inspect all stationary sources regulated under the Industrial Safety Ordinance within one year after the initial submittal of their Safety Plans. Hazardous Materials Programs reviewed all of the Safety Plans and audited/inspected all of the stationary sources’ Safety Programs within that year (2000). CCHMP performed focused audits of the stationary sources for their Human Factors Programs (this was not included in the original audit/inspection since the stationary sources were not required to have their Human Factors Program in place until January 2001) and Inherently Safer Systems in 2001 and 2002. Additional focused audits were performed to look at how two stationary sources would manage organizational change in case there was a strike and non-striking personnel were used instead of the striking personnel (2002). CCHMP completed the second round of audits for all of the Industrial Safety Ordinance stationary sources in 2003 and 2004 and began a third round of audits in the autumn of 2005, which were completed in the spring of 2007. The fourth round of audits was completed in August 2009. Air Liquide submitted a Risk Management Plan and Safety Plan to Hazardous Materials Program in July 2009 and was audited for the first time in June 2010 and subsequently in 2013 and 2016 CCHMP began the fifth round of audits of ISO facilities in spring of 2011 and completed these audits in spring of 2012CCHMP began the sixth round of audits of ISO facilities in 2013 and completed these audits in summer of 2015. CCHMP started the seventh round of audit in fall of 2016 and will complete the ISO facilities audits by spring of 2018. When CCHMP ARP engineers review a Safety Plan, a Notice of Deficiencies is issued that documents what changes to a Safety Plan the stationary source is required to make before the Safety Plan is determined to be complete. The stationary source has 60 to 90 days to respond to the Notice of Deficiencies. When the stationary source has responded to this Notice of Deficiencies, the ARP engineer will review the responses. The ARP engineer will work with the stationary source until the Safety Plan contains the required information for it to be considered complete. When the Safety Plan is deemed complete, the ARP engineer will open a public comment period on the Safety Plan and will make the plan available in a public meeting or venue as well as at the public library closest to the stationary source. The ARP engineer will respond to all written comments in writing and, when appropriate, use the comments in upcoming audit/inspection of the regulated stationary sources. At the conclusion of a facility audit/inspection, an ARP engineer will issue a Preliminary Audit Findings report. The stationary source will have 90 days to respond to these findings. The ARP engineer will review the response from the stationary source regarding the findings from the audit. After the review and the ARPE Engineer is in agreement with the action plan developed by the stationary source to come into compliance with the regulations, the ARPE Engineer will issue the Preliminary Audit Findings for public comment and will make available the findings in a public meeting or venue as well as at the public library closest to the stationary source. The ARP engineer will consider any public comments that were received during the public comment period and if appropriate will revise the Preliminary Audit Findings. When this is complete, the ARP engineer will issue the Final Audit Findings and will respond in writing to any written public comments received. Table I lists the status of each stationary source’s Safety Plan, audit and inspections 12 of their Safety Programs and the public meetings. Number of Root Cause Analyses and/or Incident Investigations Conducted by Hazardous Materials Program CCHMP has not performed any root cause analyses or incident investigations in the past year. A historical listing of Major Chemical Accidents or Releases starting in 1992 is on the Health Services website at http://cchealth.org/groups/ hazmat/accident_history.php. This list includes major accidents that occurred prior to the adoption of the Industrial Safety Ordinance. Annual Performance Review and Evaluation Report The Industrial Safety Ordinance specifies that the contents of the annual performance review and evaluation report contain the following: • A brief description of how CCHMP is meeting the requirements of the ordinance as follows: –The program’s effectiveness in getting regulated businesses to comply with the ordinance –Effectiveness of the procedures for records management –Number and type of audits and inspections conducted by Hazardous Materials Programs as required by the ordinance –Number of root cause analyses and/or incident investigations conducted by Hazardous Materials Programs –Hazardous Materials Programs’ process for public participation –Effectiveness of the Public Information Bank –Effectiveness of the Hazardous Materials Ombudsperson –Other required program elements necessary to implement and manage the ordinance • A listing of stationary sources covered by the ordinance, including for each: –The status of the stationary source’s Safety Plan and Program –A summary of the stationary source’s Safety Plan updates and a listing of where the Safety Plans are publicly available –The annual accident history report submitted by the regulated stationary sources and required by the ordinance –A summary, including the status, of any root cause analyses and incident investigations conducted or being conducted by the stationary sources and required by the ordinance, including the status of implementation of recommendations –A summary, including the status, of any audits, inspections, root cause analyses and/or incident investigations conducted by Hazardous Materials Programs, including the status for implementing the recommendations –Description of Inherently Safer Systems implemented by the regulated stationary source –Legal enforcement actions initiated by Hazardous Materials Programs, including administrative, civil and criminal actions • Total fees, service charges and other assessments collected specifically for the support of the ordinance • Total personnel and personnel years used by the jurisdiction to directly implement or administer the ordinance • Comments that raise public safety issues from interested parties regarding the effectiveness of the local program • The impact of the ordinance in improving industrial safety 13 Hazardous Materials Programs’ Process for Public Participation In 2005, CCHMP worked with the community and developed materials that would describe the Industrial Safety Ordinance using a number of different approaches. The community representatives suggested that the Hazardous Materials Programs staff look at existing venues that are attended by the public that the Hazardous Materials Programs staff can share and receive comments on the stationary source’s Safety Plans and Preliminary Audit Findings. Additionally, based on Board recommendation in 2012, CCHMP are making presentations to Community Advisory Panel members and sharing the ISO annual reports. Effectiveness of the Public Information Bank The Hazardous Materials Programs section of Health Services website http://cchealth.org/groups/hazmat includes the following information: • Industrial Safety Ordinance –Description of covered facilities –Risk Management Chapter discussion »Copy of the ordinance –Land Use Permit Chapter discussion »Copy of the ordinance –Safety Program Guidance Document –Frequently Asked Questions –Public Outreach strategies • California Accidental Release Prevention (CalARP) Program –Contra Costa County’s California Accidental Release Prevention Program Guidance Document –Program Level description –Discussion on Public Participation for both CalARP Program and the Industrial Safety Ordinance –A map locating the facilities that are subject to the CalARP Program and are required to submit a Risk Management Plan to Hazardous Materials Program. The map links to a description of each of the facilities and the regulated substances handled –A link to the Office of Emergency Services (OES) website for the CalARP regulation • Hazardous Materials Inventories and Emergency Response Program –Descriptions –Forms • Underground Storage Tanks –Description of the program –Copies of the Underground Storage Tanks Health & Safety Code sections –Underground Storage Tanks forms • Green Business Program –Description of the Green Business Program with a link to the Association of Bay Area Government’s website on the Green Business Program • Hazardous Materials Incident Response Team –Including information of the Major Chemical Accidents or Releases that have occurred –The County’s Hazardous Materials Incident Notification Policy 14 • A link to the Phillips 66 and Chevron Fenceline Monitors • Unannounced Inspection Program –Lists the facilities that are subject to unannounced inspections under the Unannounced Inspection Program • Hazardous Materials Interagency Task Force –Includes a matrix of who has what hazardous materials and regulatory responsibilities –Minutes from past meetings –Presentations from past meetings • Incident Response – Accident history that lists summaries of major accidents from industrial facilities in Contra Costa County from 1992 to the most recent –Additional resource links for more information • Incidents –Information on the June 15, 2012 Phillips 66 incident, including the follow-up reports and the public meetings –Information on the August 6, 2012 Chevron Crude Unit fire, including the follow-up reports and the public meetings –Relevant 72-hours and 30-day incident report for MCAR events Effectiveness of the Hazardous Materials Ombudsperson The County Board of Supervisors created the Hazardous Materials Ombudsperson position in 1997. This position was filled in April 1998. The Board believed that the ombudsperson would be a conduit for the public to express their concerns about how Hazardous Materials Programs personnel are performing their duties. Attachment A is a report from the Hazardous Materials Ombudsperson on the effectiveness of the position for this reporting period. Other Required Program Elements Necessary to Implement and Manage the Industrial Safety Ordinance The California Accidental Release Prevention (CalARP) Program is administered in Contra Costa County by CCHMP. The Industrial Safety Ordinance expands on this program. Stationary sources are required to submit a Risk Management Plan that is similar to the Safety Plans that are submitted. An ARP engineer reviews these Risk Management Plans and performs the CalARP Program audit simultaneously with the Industrial Safety Ordinance audit. Hazardous Materials Program staff also performs unannounced inspections of CalARP program stationary sources that are also required to submit a Risk Management Plan to the U.S. EPA. These inspections aim to exercise how a facility will respond to an incident, including notifying emergency response agencies and CCHMP. 15 Annual Accident History Report and Inherently Safer Systems Implemented as Submitted by the Regulated Stationary Sources The Industrial Safety Ordinance requires the stationary sources to update the information on their accident history in their Safety Plans and include how they have used inherently safer processes within the last year. Table III summarizes Inherently Safer Systems that have been implemented by the different stationary sources during the same period. Attachment B includes the individual reports from the stationary sources that also includes the required reporting of four common process safety performance indicators. 16 Table IIIInherently Safer Systems Contra Costa County Facilities Regulated Stationary Source Inherently Safer System Implemented Design Strategy Approach Air Liquide Large Industries No new inherently safer systems have been implemented Air Products at Shell No new inherently safer systems have been implemented Air Products at Tesoro No new inherently safer systems have been implemented Phillips 66 (formerly ConocoPhillips) —Rodeo Refinery Eliminated equipment from process (1 time)Inherent Minimize Reduced potential of exposure by changing layout or design, equipment Passive Moderate Simplified unit design and chemical by changing/re- routing equipment (2 times) Passive Simplify Reduced potential of exposure by changing equipment layout or design Passive Moderate Shell Martinez Refinery Eliminated equipment from process (4 times)Inherent Minimize Reduced potential of exposure by changing design, equipment metallurgy (12 times) Passive Moderate Tesoro Golden Eagle Refinery Reduced potential of the hazardous condition by equipment design features (3 times) Passive Moderate Status of the Incident Investigations, Including the Root Cause Analyses Conducted by the Regulated Stationary Sources The Industrial Safety Ordinance requires the regulated stationary sources to do an incident investigation with a root cause analysis for each of the major chemical accidents or releases as defined by the following: “Major Chemical Accident or Release” means an incident that meets the definition of a Level 3 or Level 2 incident in the Community Warning System incident level classification system defined in the Hazardous Materials Incident Notification Policy, as determined by Contra Costa Health Services; or results in the release of a regulated substance and meets one or more of the following criteria: • Results in one or more fatalities • Results in greater than 24 hours of hospital treatment of three or more persons • Causes on–and/or off-site property damage (including cleanup and restoration activities) initially estimated at $500,000 or more. On-site estimates shall be performed by the regulated stationary source. Off-site estimates shall be performed by appropriate agencies and compiled by Health Services • Results in a vapor cloud of flammables and/or combustibles that is more than 5,000 pounds The regulated stationary source is required to submit a report to Hazardous Materials Programs 30 days after the root cause analysis is complete. There was one Major Chemical Accidents or Releases that occurred within this reporting period in Contra Costa County at an ISO facilities. The Shell Martinez Refinery experienced a partial power outage on 17 December 19, 2016 which resulted in flaring and CWS 2 activation. The status of this incident investigation is listed in Table IV below. This and other final RCA reports for previous MCAR incident reports are available at the Hazardous Materials Programs office and website. Table IV MCAR Status Facility MCAR Date CWS Severity MCAR Description Onsite Impact Offsite Impact Shell Martinez Refinery– Partial Power Outage 12/19/2016 2 At approximately 13:15, on December 19, 2016, one of the refinery’s three main electrical substations main breakers tripped during maintenance/ troubleshooting of the subsystem causing loss of power to two 12kV distribution substations. This resulted in a loss of power to multiple units in LOP, OPCEN, Utilities and Logistics Vine Hill area. The multiple unit shutdown caused excessive flaring at the LOP and Flexicoker flares. Multiple units tripped offline and depressured to LOP and Flexicoker flares. No injuries or equipment damage was reported. Multiple odor and noise complaints were raised by the nearby community. No injuries were reported. Major Chemical Accidents or Releases Hazardous Materials Programs analyzed the Major Chemical Accidents or Releases (MCAR) that occurred since the implementation of the Industrial Safety Ordinance. The analysis includes the number of MCARs and the severity of the MCARs. Three different levels of severity were assigned: • Severity Level III—A fatality, serious injuries or major on-site and/or off-site damage occurred • Severity Level II—An impact to the community occurred, or if the situation was slightly different the accident may have been considered major, or there is a recurring type of incident at that facility • Severity Level I —A release where there was no or minor injuries, the release had no or slight impact to the community, or there was no or minor onsite damage Below are charts showing the number of MCARs from January 1999 through October 2017 for all stationary sources in Contra Costa County, the MCARs that occurred at stationary sources regulated by the County’s Industrial Safety Ordinance, and a chart showing the MCARs that have occurred at the County and the City of Richmond’s Industrial Safety Ordinance stationary sources. NOTE: The charts do not include any transportation MCARs that have occurred. 18 19 A weighted score has been developed giving more weight to the higher severity incidents and a lower weight to the less severe incidents. The purpose is to develop a metric of the overall process safety of facilities in the County, the facilities that are covered by the County and the City of Richmond Industrial Safety Ordinances, and the facilities that are covered by the County’s Industrial Safety Ordinance. A severity level III incident is given 9 points, severity level II is given 3 points and severity level I is given 1 point. Below is a graph of this weighted scoring. 20 Legal Enforcement Actions Initiated by Contra Costa Hazardous Materials Programs As part of the enforcement of the Industrial Safety Ordinance and the CalARP Program, Hazardous Materials Programs staff issue, Notices of Deficiencies on the Safety and Risk Management Plans and issues Audit Findings on what a stationary source is required to change to come into compliance with the regulations. Table I shows the action that has been taken by Hazardous Materials Programs. Hazardous Materials Programs staff has not taken any action through the District Attorney’s Office for noncompliance with the requirements of the Industrial Safety Ordinance. Penalties Assessed as a Result of Enforcement No penalties have been assessed in this period for noncompliance with the Industrial Safety Ordinance. Total Fees, Service Charges and Other Assessments Collected Specifically for the Industrial Safety Ordinance The fees charged for the Industrial Safety Ordinance are to cover the time that the ARP engineers use to enforce the ordinance, the position of the Hazardous Materials Ombudsperson, outreach material and to cover a portion of the overhead for the Hazardous Materials Programs. The fees charged for administering this ordinance for the past fiscal year 2016–2017 $521,798 and for the next fiscal year 2016–17 is $550,021. Total Personnel and Personnel Years Used by Hazardous Materials Program to Implement the Industrial Safety Ordinance The ARP engineers have reviewed resubmitted Safety Plans, prepared and presented information for public meetings, performed audits of the stationary sources for compliance with both the California Accidental Release Prevention Program and Industrial Safety Ordinance and did follow-up work after a Major Chemical Accident or Release. The following is a breakdown of the time that was spent on the County’s and the City of Richmond’s Industrial Safety Ordinances: • Two ISO/CalARP Program facility audits were performed since the last ISO report this year. It takes four to five engineers four weeks to perform the on-site portion of an ISO/CalARP Program audit. The audit process encompasses off-site time that includes report preparation, a quality assurance review process, working with the facility to address any questions and assessing the facility’s proposed remedies for completeness, preparing communication materials and posting public notices, attending a public forum to share audit findings, addressing any questions from the public and issuing the final report. The total time taken to perform these audits each year was 3,600 hours. Approximately one-third of the time was dedicated to the Industrial Safety Ordinance, for a total of 1, 200 hours. This year larger teams included recently hired ARP engineers, as part of their training, participated in the ISO audits for a total of 850 additional hours. • Reviewing information for the website—180 hours • Reviewing Safety Plans and following up with the facilities on any deficiencies—650 hours • Review and participate in investigation, root cause analysis and proposed recommendations—500 hours • Prepare material for presentations and public meetings – total approximately 450 personnel hours. • Total of 3,828 hours is the approximate personnel time spent on the Industrial Safety Ordinance. This is not including the Ombudsperson time spent helping prepare for the public meetings, working with the engineers on questions arising from the Industrial Safety Ordinance, and answering questions from the public on the Industrial Safety Ordinance. 21 In 2015 and 2016, CCHMP worked with the ISO-working group which included regulated facilities, employee and community representatives to address changes in the Safety Plan Guidance document to accommodate recommendations from CSB. Additionally, CCHMP worked extensively with both the Department of Industrial Relations and CalEPA on improved Safety regulations for refineries in California as a result of the Governor’s Intra-Agency Task Force Report. Comments from Interested Parties Regarding the Effectiveness of the Industrial Safety Ordinance No comments were received on the County’s or the City of Richmond’s Industrial Safety Ordinances during the last year. The Impact of the Industrial Safety Ordinance on Improving Industrial Safety Four programs are in place to reduce the potential of an accidental release from a regulated stationary source that could impact the surrounding community. The four programs are the Process Safety Management Program administered by Cal/OSHA, the federal Accidental Release Prevention Program administered by the U.S. EPA, the California Accidental Release Prevention Program administered locally by CCHMP, and the Industrial Safety Ordinance, which is also administered by CCHMP. Each of the programs is very similar in requirements. On October 1, 2017, California petroleum refineries are required to comply with requirements of CalARP Program 4 and OSHA PSM for refineries. Both are based on the ISO. CalARP Program 3 differs from the Federal Accidental Release Prevention Program in the following ways: • The number of chemicals regulated • The threshold quantity of these chemicals • An external events analysis, including seismic and security and vulnerability analysis, is required • Additional information in the Risk Management Plan • CCHMP is required to audit and inspect stationary sources at least once every three years • The interaction required between the stationary source and CCHMP The ISO differs from CalARP Program 3, which the chemical facilities are required to follow, in the following ways: • Stationary sources are required to include a root cause analysis with the incident investigations for Major Chemical Accidents or Releases • The stationary sources are required to consider inherently safer systems for existing processes, in the development and analysis of recommended action items identified in a process hazard analysis, as part of a management of change review, as part of incident investigation or root cause analysis development of recommendation, and during the design of new processes, process units and facilities. • All of the processes at the regulated stationary sources are covered • The implementation of a Human Factors Program evaluation of latent conditions in existing units, operating and maintenance procedures and in root cause analysis • Managing changes in the organization for operations, maintenance and emergency response • A requirement that the stationary sources perform a Security and Vulnerability Analysis and test the effectiveness of the changes made as a result of the Security and Vulnerability Analysis • The stationary sources perform Safety Culture Assessments • Conduct, document and complete safeguard protection analysis for process hazard analysis to reduce catastrophic releases • Use and report of process safety performance indicators in the annual performance review and evaluation report 22 Major Program difference of ISO from CalARP Program 4 and PSM for Refineries is that the Program 4 requirements include: • Mechanical Integrity must include assessment of Damage Mechanism Review base on operating history and industry experience • Process Hazard Analysis must include review of Damage Mechanism Review report compiled as part of process safety information • Contractor and any subcontractors use a skilled and trained workforce pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 25536.7 • Require a Management system with specific requirement for managing and communicating recommendations from the prevention program elements • Require a Stop Work procedure and an anonymous hazard reporting system The Safety Culture Assessment guidance chapter was finalized in November 2009. The Industrial Safety Ordinance Guidance Document was updated to reflect all the updates in September 2010. The Accidental Release Prevention Engineers have participated with the Center for Chemical Process Safety on developing the second edition of Inherently Safer Chemical Processes, a book that is referenced in the ordinance and with the Center for Chemical Process Safety on developing process safety metrics for leading and lagging indicators. CCHMP is currently participating in the third edition of CCPS: Inherently Safer Chemical Processes to further clarify and promote the practice and consideration of Inherently Safer System. All of these requirements have lowered the probability of an accident occurring. Contra Costa County was recognized as an alternative model for doing process-safety inspections by the Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board in its report on a 2005 refinery accident in Texas City. The report states, “Contra Costa County and the U.K. Health and Safety Executive conduct frequent scheduled inspections of PSM and major hazard facilities with highly qualified staff.” This was done to compare to the number of OSHA process safety management audits. The Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board also mentions Contra Costa County in a DVD, Anatomy of a Disaster: Explosion at BP Texas City Refinery, on the resources given to audit and ensure facilities are complying with regulations. Carolyn W. Merritt, the Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board Chair at that time, also recognized Contra Costa County in testimony to the House of Representatives Committee on Education and Labor chaired by U.S. Rep. George Miller. U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer, during a 2007 hearing to consider John Bresland’s nomination to the Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board as the Chair (replacing Carolyn Merritt), asked Mr. Bresland about the Contra Costa County program for process safety audits of refineries and chemical companies. In its final investigation report on an incident that occurred in 2008 at the Bayer CropScience Institute in West Virginia, the CSB recommended that regulatory agencies in the area audit their chemical facilities using Contra Costa County’s auditing process. CCHMP staff and a representative from the local United Steelworkers Union were part of a panel when the Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board presented this report to the Kanawha Valley community. Contra Costa Hazardous Materials Programs in June 2010 was asked to give testimony at the hearing on “Work Place Safety and Worker Protections in the Gas and Oil Industry” before the U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Subcommittee on Employment and Workplace Safety. The testimony was on the success of the Accidental Release Prevention Programs that are in place in Contra Costa County. The hearing was specific on two 23 major incidents that occurred in Anacortes, WA. at a Tesoro Refinery and the Deepwater Horizon incident in the Gulf of Mexico. A link to the testimony is posted on the Health Services website (http://www.help.senate.gov/hearings/ production-over-protections-a-review-of-process-safety-management-in-the-oil-and-gas-industry) and the written testimony can be found at http://www.help.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Sawyer.pdf? In September 2012, Contra Costa Hazardous Materials Programs was asked to be a presenter at the “Expert Forum on the Use of Performance-based Regulatory Models in the U.S. Oil and Gas Industry: Offshore and Onshore” in Texas City, Texas to share the regulatory experience at Contra Costa County. And give testimony on how local, state and Federal agencies can work together and have an unprecedented alignment on regulations that is required for the same facilities. This informational meeting was spearheaded by Federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration and attended by Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement, United States Coast Guard, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, United Steelworkers, American Petroleum Institute, academia and industry representatives. CCHMP staff also testified at a hearing on “Oversight of Federal Risk Management and Emergency Planning Programs to Prevent and Address Chemical Threats, Including the Events Leading up to the Explosions in West, TX and Geismar, LA”; before the Committee on Environment and Public Works, United States Senate, June 27, 2013. Following is a link to the transcript of the hearing: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CHRG-113shrg95874/pdf/CHRG-113shrg95874.pdf City of Richmond Industrial Safety Ordinance The City of Richmond on December 18, 2001 passed its version of the Industrial Safety Ordinance, which became effective January 17, 2002. Richmond’s Industrial Safety Ordinance (RISO) mirrors the County’s Industrial Safety Ordinance. Richmond’s Industrial Safety Ordinance covers two stationary sources: Chevron Richmond Refinery and General Chemical West Richmond Works. CCHMP administers the Richmond ISO for the City. Chevron and Chemtrade (formerly General Chemical) West Richmond Works submitted their Safety Plans to Hazardous Materials Programs in 2003, which have been reviewed and were considered complete. The public comment period for these plans ended in January 2004. Public meetings held in 2004 in North Richmond and Richmond discussed Chevron and Chemtrade West Richmond Works (Chemtrade) audit findings. The second Richmond Industrial Safety Ordinance/CalARP Program audits for these facilities occurred in 2006 and public meetings were held in June 2007 at Hilltop Mall at “Lessons from Katrina,” the 2007 Neighbor Works Week Homeownership Faire & Disaster Preparedness Expo. CCHMP followed up on the January 15, 2007 fire at the Chevron Refinery. The follow-up included a public meeting, City Council meetings, meetings with Chevron on the investigation and the root cause analysis. Chevron Richmond Refinery was audited for the third time for RISO/CalARP program in April 2008. The report was finalized and results were available at the Recycle More Earth Day Event in Richmond in June 2009. Copies of the audit results are available at the Richmond Library and a summary of the audit is also available on Hazardous Materials Programs’ website. CCHMP performed an RISO/CalARP program audit at General Chemical Richmond in January 2009, January 2012 and in September 2014. CCHMP performed the RISO/CalARP program audit at Chevron Richmond Refinery in April 2008, February 2011, and October 2013. CCHMP also made presentation to Point Richmond Neighborhood Council at the Point Richmond Firehouse about General Chemical Richmond Works and Chevron Richmond Refinery’s audit history, incidents and general Industrial Safety Ordinance information on January 25, 2012. The 2013 final audit report for Chevron and the 2014 final audit report for Chemtrade Richmond (formerly General Chemical) was shared on Food Day in Richmond in October 2015. The sixth RISO/CalARP audit at Chevron was completed in August 2016 and in July 2017 for Chemtrade Richmond. The detail status and location of the Safety plan and audits is listed in Table V. 24 Name/ Location of copies Safety Plan (SP) Received Notice of Deficiencies (NOD) Issued-SP Safety Plan Complete SP Public Meeting Date Audit/ Inspection Audit Public Meeting Chevron Richmond/ Point Richmond and Richmond Main Public Library 1/21/03 6/21/04 9/29/06 9/25/09 9/24/12 4/23/03 11/8/2012 10/10/03 6/22/04 5/21/07 11/4/09 11/12/13 10/14/03 6/24/04 6/2/07 9/25/10 10/5/13 1/11/01 (Non- RISO) 9/29/03 2/13/06 4/14/08 2/8/2011 10/3/2013 7/18/2016 6/24/04 6/2/07 4/25/09 9/24/11 10/24/2015 Chemtrade Richmond Works/Point Richmond and Richmond Main Public Library 1/17/03 6/21/04 4/17/09 8/5/14 4/11/03 2/18/10 7/10/2015 10/10/03 4/17/06 5/26/10 10/14/03 6/2/07 9/25/10 5/1/2016 5/29/01 (Non-RISO) 4/24/06 8/18/03 1/5/09 1/5/2012 9/8/2014 7/17/2017 6/24/04 6/2/07 9/25/10 10/5/13 10/24/2015 CCHMP worked with U.S. EPA, Cal OSHA, BAAQMD and CSB in their independent investigation of the August 6, 2012 fire at the No. 4 Crude Unit. CCHMP co-hosted two public meetings in conjunction with the City of Richmond to share information regarding this severity level III incident. CCHMP, City of Richmond and representatives of the agencies performing the investigation shared preliminary results and addressed public issues and concerns. Written comments were gathered and are posted on the Health Services’ website. CCHMP hired a third party to perform a safety evaluation of the Chevron Richmond Refinery after the August 6, 2012 fire. The evaluation reviewed the safety culture of the refinery, the process safety management systems, and human factors. The final report is complete and is posted on the county’s website. CCHMP staff worked closely with the City of Richmond staff in preparation of the Richmond Industrial Safety Ordinance amendment (adopted in Jan 2013) that made the Richmond Industrial Safety Ordinance consistent with the Contra Costa County Industrial Safety Ordinance (with the amendments). In 2014, CCHMP again worked with the City of Richmond staff to amend the Richmond Industrial Safety Ordinance and the County Industrial Safety Ordinance aimed to address recommendations by the US Chemical Safety and Investigation Board following the August 6, 2012 Chevron fire to further improve process safety operations in Contra Costa County refineries and chemical facilities. CCHMP presented the 2014 annual RISO report to the Richmond City Council on April 28, 2015. Copies of the 2014 RISO report were submitted to the Richmond City Council and posted on cchealth.org. Select community members/ organizations were also included in the distribution. CCHMP received annual performance update from Chevron and Chemtrade RW in June 2017. The complete annual status is included as Attachment C. A summary of Inherently Safer Systems from both facilities are summarized in Table V below. Table V Richmond Industrial Safety Ordinance Stationary Source Status 25 Inherently Safer Systems Richmond Facilities Regulated Stationary source Inherently Safer System Implemented Design Strategy Approach Chevron Reduce the inventory of hazardous substance by eliminating piping and equipment (45 times) Inherent Minimization Reduced potential of exposure and hazard by metallurgy upgrade and equipment design (57 times) Passive Moderate Chemtrade Richmond Works Reduced potential of exposure and hazard by metallurgy upgrade and equipment design (2 times) Passive 1Moderate 26 ATTACHMENT A HAZARDOUS MATERIALS OMBUDSMAN REPORTHazardous Materials Ombudsperson Evaluation NOVEMBER 2016 THROUGH OCTOBER 2017 27 I. INTRODUCTION On July 15, 1997 the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors authorized creation of an Ombudsman position for the County’s Hazardous Materials Programs. The first Hazardous Materials Ombudsman began work on May 1, 1998. The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors adopted an Industrial Safety Ordinance on December 15, 1998. Section 450-8.022 of the Industrial Safety Ordinance requires the Health Services Department to continue to employ an Ombudsman for the Hazardous Materials Programs. Section 450-8.030(B)(vii) of the Industrial Safety Ordinance requires an annual evaluation of the effectiveness of the Hazardous Materials Ombudsman, with the first evaluation to be completed on or before October 31, 2000. The goals of section 450-8.022 of the Industrial Safety Ordinance for the Hazardous Materials Ombudsman are: 1. To serve as a single point of contact for people who live or work in Contra Costa County regarding environmental health concerns, and questions and complaints about the Hazardous Materials Programs. 2. To investigate concerns and complaints, facilitate their resolution, and assist people in gathering information about programs, procedures, or issues. 3. To provide technical assistance to the public. The Hazardous Materials Ombudsman currently accomplishes these goals through the following program elements: 1. Continuing an outreach strategy so that the people who live and work in Contra Costa County can know about and utilize the program. 2. Investigating and responding to questions and complaints, and assisting people in gathering information about programs, procedures, or issues. 3. Participating in a network of environmental programs for the purpose of providing technical assistance. This evaluation covers the period from November 2016 through October 2017 for the Hazardous Materials Ombudsman program. The effectiveness of the program shall be demonstrated by showing that the activities of the Hazardous Materials Ombudsman meet the goals established in the Industrial Safety Ordinance. II. PROGRAM ELEMENTS 1. Continuing an Outreach Strategy This period efforts were focused on maintaining the outreach tools currently available. Copies of the Ombudsman Brochure were translated into Spanish and were distributed to the public at meetings, presentations, public events, and through the mail. A contact person was also established in Public Health that could receive calls from the public in Spanish and serve as an interpreter to respond to these calls. In addition to explaining the services provided by the position, the brochure also provides the phone numbers of several other related County and State programs. The web page was maintained for the program as part 28 of Contra Costa Health Services web site. This page contains information about the program, links to other related web sites, and information about upcoming meetings and events. A toll-free phone number is published in all three Contra Costa County phone books in the Government section. 2. Investigating and Responding to Questions and Complaints, and Assisting in Information Gathering During this period, the Hazardous Materials Ombudsman received 258 information requests. This was a 165% increase over the number of calls received the previous year. Over 95 percent of these requests occurred via the telephone, and have been requests for information about environmental issues. Requests via e-mail are slowly increasing, mainly through referrals from Health Services main web page. Most of these requests concern problems around the home such as asbestos removal, household hazardous waste disposal, pesticide misuse, mold and lead contamination. This year, the large increase in the number of calls was because of a large increase in questions during the winter months about mold due the heavy rainfall Contra Costa County experienced this winter. The Ombudsman conducted a workshop with the Environmental Health Department for local Building Code Enforcement staff about new laws concerning mold. Information requests about environmental issues received via the telephone were generally responded to within one business day of being received. Many of the information requests were answered during the initial call. Some requests required the collection of information or written materials that often took several days to compile. Telephone requests were responded to by telephone unless written materials needed to be sent as part of the response. Complaints about the Hazardous Materials Programs can also be received via telephone and in writing. Persons that make complaints via telephone are also asked to provide those complaints in writing. 3. Participating in a Network of Environmental Programs for the Purpose of Providing Technical Assistance. Technical assistance means helping the public understand the regulatory, scientific, political, and legal aspects of issues. It also means helping them understand how to effectively communicate their concerns within these different arenas. This year, the Ombudsman continued to staff a number of County programs and participate in other programs to be able to provide technical assistance to the participants and the public. • CAER (Community Awareness and Emergency Response)—This non-profit organization addresses industrial accident prevention, response and communication. The Ombudsman participated in the Emergency Notification subcommittee of CAER. • Hazardous Materials Commission—In 2001, the Ombudsman took over as staff for the Commission. As staff to the Commission, the Ombudsman conducts research, prepared reports, drafts letters and provides support for 3 monthly Commission meetings. During this period the Commission sent letters to the Board of Supervisors concerning brownfield redevelopment and sea level rise impacts on hazardous materials storage. 29 In addition, during this period the Ombudsman represented the Commission at meetings of the Contra Costa County Prescription Drug Abuse Prevention Task Force and the Northern Waterfront Economic Development Initiative. The Ombudsman also coordinated a workshop on cybersecurity for Contra Costa businesses and helped to develop a brochure on pipeline emergency preparedness. The Ombudsman also assisted the Alamo Improvement Association in applying for, and receiving, a Federal Department of Transportation Grant to conduct public awareness around pipeline safety issues. • Integrated Pest Management Advisory Committee—During this period the Ombudsman represented the Health Department on the County Integrated Pest Management Advisory Committee. This Committee brings Department representatives and members of the public together to help implement the County’s Integrated Pest Management policy. • Asthma Program—The Ombudsman participated in the Public Health Department’s asthma program as a resource on environmental health issues. The Ombudsman represented the Asthma program in two regional collaboratives related to asthma issues, particularly diesel pollution—the Ditching Dirty Diesel Collaborative and the Bay Area Environmental Health Collaborative. The Ombudsman served on the Technical Advisory Board for RAMP, the Regional Asthma Management Prevention program. • Climate Change During this period the Ombudsman began a pilot project with the Public Health Nursing program to encourage clients to apply to the County’s Weatherization program. The Ombudsman worked closely with staff from the Storm water program to develop a Greening and Resilience Plan for North Richmond that will implement selected objectives of the County’s Climate Action Plan. The Ombudsman also represented the Public Health Department in regional and state efforts to address the impacts of Climate Change, including a Bay Conservation and Development Commission-led effort to address sea level rise issues in Contra Costa County, a City of Richmond initiative to address climate change, and a State Health Department effort around heat vulnerability. The Ombudsman co-chaired the Bay Area Regional Health Inequities Initiative’s Built Environment committee which addresses climate change. • Bay Delta Stakeholder Advisory Group for Contaminated Fish Consumption The Ombudsman served on the California Department of Public Health’s Bay Delta Stakeholder Advisory Group for Contaminated Fish Consumption. This is a two year effort to develop updated and effective public messaging for the new fish consumption advisories for the Bay Delta that have been developed by the State. The Hazardous Materials Ombudsman also attended workshops, presentations, meetings and trainings on a variety of environmental issues to be better able to provide technical assistance to the public. Topics included Environmental Justice, Indoor Air Quality, emergency management practices, health mitigations for consumption of contaminated fish, and land-use planning for greenhouse gas reduction. III. PROGRAM MANAGEMENT The Hazardous Material Ombudsman continued to report to the Public Health Director on a day-to-day basis during this period, while still handling complaints and recommendations about the Hazardous Materials Programs through the Health Services Director. The Ombudsman also was a member of Health Services Emergency Management Team and participates on its HEEP management team, and served in the Department Operations Center during the North Bay fires. 30 IV. GOALS FOR THE 2017-2018 PERIOD In this period, the Ombudsman will provide essentially the same services to Contra Costa residents as was provided in the last period. The Ombudsman will continue respond to questions and complaints about the actions of the Hazardous Materials Programs; answer general questions that come from the public and assist them in understanding regulatory programs; staff the Hazardous Materials Commission; represent the Public Health Department on the Ditching Dirty Diesel Collaborative, the Bay Area Regional Health Inequities Initiative, the Bay Area Environmental Health Collaborative, the Integrated Pest Management Advisory Committee, the Bay Delta Stakeholder Advisory Group; and participate in the CAER Emergency Notification committee. The Ombudsman will represent the Hazardous Materials Commission in the Northern Shoreline Economic Development Initiative and the Contra Costa Prescription Abuse Prevention Coalition, and help the Alamo Improvement Association implement their pipeline safety workshops. The Ombudsman will continue to be part of the Health Department’s HEEP team and be part of the Emergency Management Team. During this period the Ombudsman will continue to work with the Public Health Department on Climate Change issues by completing the pilot weatherization program with the Public Health Nurses, being on the County-wide work group implementing the Climate Action Plan, by working with the Storm water program to implement the North Richmond Greening and Resiliency Initiative, and by providing input on the BCDC East County ART project and regional ART project. The Ombudsman will continue to work with collaboratives at the regional and state level and, by reaching out to other agencies and interested parties in Contra Costa County, promote addressing health equity issues in climate change planning efforts. 31 32 2016–17 ATTACHMENT B COUNTY REGULATED SOURCES ANNUAL PERFORMANCEWith accident history and inherent safety implementation 33 Annual Performance Review and Evaluation Submittal June 30, 2017 *Attach additional pages as necessary 1. Name and address of Stationary Source: Air Liquide Rodeo Hydrogen Plant, 1391 San Pablo Ave., Rodeo, California 94572 2. Contact name and telephone number (should CCHMP have questions): Jared Wittry, Plant Manager—Phone number (510) 245-7285 x 2204 3. Summarize the status of the Stationary Source’s Safety Plan and Program (450-8.030(B)(2)(i)): Revalidation of the initial PHA was completed in January of 2017. The audit conducted in 2016 provided guidance to improve the safety program at the Rodeo Facility. The revised safety plan was submitted in November 2016 as part of the 3 year review and incorporated the NODs received by the county in May 2016. The audit conducted in May of 2016 provided more guidance for the improvement of the safety program at the Rodeo Facility and progress is being made to address the additional NODs based on all the new programs implimented at the Rodeo SMR. We are currently submitting quarterly reports to the county on our current progress.. 4. Summarize Safety Plan updates (i.e., brief explanation of update and corresponding date) (450-8.030(B)(2)(ii)): Since the audit in May of 2016, we continue to meet monthly to address recommendations from the audit and improve the safety systems at the Rodeo SMR. As an organization, we have centralized many of the life critical procedures and have begun to introduce the Procedural PHAs at other facilities with success. We revamped the MOC process and included changes to the process base on recommendations from the May 2016 audit. 5. List of locations where Safety Plans are/will be available for review, including contact telephone numbers if the source will provide individuals with copies of the document (450- 8.030(B)(2)(ii)): CCHMP Office at 4585 Pacheco Boulevard, Suite 100, Martinez; Rodeo Public Library; Crockett Public Library (libraries closest to the stationary source). 6. Provide any additions to the annual accident history reports (i.e. updates) submitted pursuant to Section 450-8.016(E)(2) of County Ordinance 98-48 (450-8.030(B)(2)(iii)) (i.e., provide information identified in Section 450-8.016(E)(1) for all major chemical accidents or releases occurring between the last annual performance review report and the current annual performance review and evaluation submittal (12-month history)): There have been no incidents since the previous annual review. 7. Summary of each Root Cause Analysis (Section 450-8.016(C)) including the status of the analysis and the status of implementation of recommendations formulated during the analysis (450-8.030(B)(2)(iv)): There have been no incidents since the previous annual review. 8. Summary of the status of implementation of recommendations formulated during audits, inspections, Root Cause Analyses, or Incident Investigations conducted by the Department (450-8.030(B)(2)(v)): A new MOC system and software was implemented at all Air Liquide Facilities. 34 9. Summary of inherently safer systems implemented by the source including but not limited to inventory reduction (i.e., intensification) and substitution (450-8.030(B)(2)(vi)): 10. Summarize the enforcement actions (including Notice of Deficiencies, Audit Reports, and any actions turned over to the Contra Costa County District Attorney’s Office) taken with the Stationary Source pursuant to Section 450-8.028 of County Ordinance 98-48 (450-8.030(B)(2) (vii)): There were no enforcement actions during this period. 11. Summarize total penalties assessed as a result of enforcement of this Chapter (450-8.030(3)): No penalities have been assessed against this facility. 12. Summarize the total fees, service charges, and other assessments collected specifically for the support of the ISO (450-8.030(B)(4)): The total Industrial Safety Ordinance program fees for these nine facilities was $550,021. (NOTE: These fees include those for the County and City of Richmond ISO facilities). 13. Summarize total personnel and personnel years utilized by the jurisdiction to directly implement or administer this Chapter (450-8.030(B)(5)): 3828 hours were used to audit/inspect and issue reports on the Risk Management Chapter of the Industrial Safety Ordinance. 14. Copies of any comments received by the source (that may not have been received by the Department) regarding the effectiveness of the local program that raise public safety issues(450-8.030(B)(6)): None 15. Summarize how this Chapter improves industrial safety at your stationary source (450- 8.030(B)(7)): This chapter reinforces the need to maintain, follow, and continuously improve our structured safety program to help ensure the safety of our employees and the community in which we operate. Even though the facility is small, we completed a safety culture assessment which highlighted the emphasis put on safety and industrial safety improvement at the facility. 16. List examples of changes made at your stationary source due to implementation of the Industrial Safety Ordinance (e.g., recommendations from PHA’s, Compliance Audits, and Incident Investigations in units not subject to CalARP regulations; recommendations from RCA’s) that significantly decrease the severity or likelihood of accidental releases. Air Liquide has implemented a new MOC program and software. All new employees will complete Human Factors training with area safety representative. We are currently working to improve the ISO internal audit protocol that focuses more on the ISO audit protocol and not just CalARP, etc. 17. Summarize the emergency response activities conducted at the source (e.g., CWS or TEN activation) in response to major chemical accidents or releases: None 18. Common Process Safety Performance Indicators: 35 Overdue inspection for piping and pressure vessels based on total number of circuits Past due PHA recommended actions, includes seismic and LCC recommended actions 2016 Overdue Repeat January 0 0 February 0 0 March 0 0 April 0 0 May 0 0 June 0 0 July 0 0 August 0 0 September 0 0 October 0 0 November 0 0 December 0 0 2016 Overdue Repeat January 0 0 February 0 0 March 0 0 April 0 0 May 0 0 June 0 0 July 0 0 August 0 0 September 0 0 October 0 0 November 0 0 December 0 0 Total number of circuits: 48 Total number of annual planned circuit inspections: 6 36 Past due investigation recommended actions for API/ACC Tier 1 and Tier 2 incidents 2016 Overdue Repeat January 0 0 February 0 0 March 0 0 April 0 0 May 0 0 June 0 0 July 0 0 August 0 0 September 0 0 October 0 0 November 0 0 December 0 0 Year 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 No. Tier 1 LOPC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Incident rate for Tier 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Industry rate*0.03 0.03 0.06 0.04 N/A N/A N/A No. Tier 2 LOPC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Incident rate for Tier 2 0 0 0 0 0 API/ACC TIER 1 & TIER 2 INCIDENTS AND RATES STARTING 2011 *Petroleum refineries to report publically available refiner mean for API Tier 1 and Tier 2. Chemicl plants to report publically available mean only for ACC Tier 1. 37 Annual Performance Review and Evaluation Submittal August 8, 2017 *Attach additional pages as necessary 1. Name and address of Stationary Source: Air Products—Shell Martinez Refinery, 110 Waterfront Road, Martinez, CA 94553 2. Contact name and telephone number (should CCHMP have questions): Harold Allen 925-372-9302 x15 3. Summarize the status of the Stationary Source’s Safety Plan and Program (450-8.030(B)(2)(i)): The stationary sourse’s safety plan is complete per the CCHS requirement. The program was audited in March 2015 by CCHS as part of the three year CCHS site audit, and in September 2016 as part of an unannounced inspection. 4. Summarize Safety Plan updates (i.e., brief explanation of update and corresponding date) (450-8.030(B)(2)(ii)): The three year periodic audit completed in 2015 by CCHS required some updates to the site safety plan. These are completed. 5. List of locations where Safety Plans are/will be available for review, including contact telephone numbers if the source will provide individuals with copies of the document (450- 8.030(B)(2)(ii)): CCHMP Office at 4585 Pacheco Boulevard, Suite 100, Martinez; Martinez Library (library closest to the stationary source). 6. Provide any additions to the annual accident history reports (i.e. updates) submitted pursuant to Section 450-8.016(E)(2) of County Ordinance 98-48 (450-8.030(B)(2)(iii)) (i.e., provide information identified in Section 450-8.016(E)(1) for all major chemical accidents or releases occurring between the last annual performance review report and the current annual performance review and evaluation submittal (12-month history)): There were no major accidents or releases to report. 7. Summary of each Root Cause Analysis (Section 450-8.016(C)) including the status of the analysis and the status of implementation of recommendations formulated during the analysis (450-8.030(B)(2)(iv)): There are no outstanding recommendations. 8. Summary of the status of implementation of recommendations formulated during audits, inspections, Root Cause Analyses, or Incident Investigations conducted by the Department (450-8.030(B)(2)(v)): Final recommendations from the 3 year CCCHS audit are complete. 9. Summary of inherently safer systems implemented by the source including but not limited to inventory reduction (i.e., intensification) and substitution (450-8.030(B)(2)(vi)): There were none implemented. 38 10. Summarize the enforcement actions (including Notice of Deficiencies, Audit Reports, and any actions turned over to the Contra Costa County District Attorney’s Office) taken with the Stationary Source pursuant to Section 450-8.028 of County Ordinance 98-48 (450-8.030(B)(2) (vii)): There were no enforcement actions during this period. 11. Summarize total penalties assessed as a result of enforcement of this Chapter (450-8.030(3)): No penalities have been assessed against this facility. 12. Summarize the total fees, service charges, and other assessments collected specifically for the support of the ISO (450-8.030(B)(4)): The total CalARP Program fees for the eight facilities subject to the Industrial Safety Ordinance was $750,648. The total Industrial Safety Ordinance program fees for these nine facilities was—$550,021. (NOTE: These fees include those for the County and City of Richmond ISO facilities). 13. Summarize total personnel and personnel years utilized by the jurisdiction to directly implement or administer this Chapter (450-8.030(B)(5)): 3828 hours were used to audit/inspect and issue reports on the Risk Management Chapter of the Industrial Safety Ordinance. 14. Copies of any comments received by the source (that may not have been received by the Department) regarding the effectiveness of the local program that raise public safety issues(450-8.030(B)(6)): None. 15. Summarize how this Chapter improves industrial safety at your stationary source (450-8.030(B)(7)): Air Products is committed to the safer operation of our facilities and has implemented applicable requirements outlined in the ISO and CalARP regulations. Both the ISO and Human Factors programs are an integral part of our five year Operating Hazard Review revalidations and on going management of change process. There have been no incidents resulting in an offsite impact. The Chapter has helped reinforce the need to maintain and follow a structured safety program to help ensure the safety of our empoloyees and the communities in which we operate. 16. List examples of changes made at your stationary source due to implementation of the Industrial Safety Ordinance (e.g., recommendations from PHA’s, Compliance Audits, and Incident Investigations in units not subject to CalARP regulations; recommendations from RCA’s) that significantly decrease the severity or likelihood of accidental releases. The Air Products facility is tracking various metrics (leading and lagging). These include those called out in ISO API/ACC Tier 1 and 2 events, past due PHA recommendations and past due incident investigation recommendations. A baseline was developed and metrics are tracked for the facility on a company share site. 17. Summarize the emergency response activities conducted at the source (e.g., CWS or TEN activation) in response to major chemical accidents or releases: There were no emergency response activities to this site since the previous Annual Performance review. 18. Common Process Safety Performance Indicators: 39 Overdue inspection for piping and pressure vessels based on total number of circuits Past due PHA recommended actions, includes seismic and LCC recommended actions 2016 Overdue Repeat January 0 0 February 0 0 March 0 0 April 0 0 May 0 0 June 0 0 July 0 0 August 0 0 September 0 0 October 0 0 November 0 0 December 0 0 2016 Overdue Repeat January 0 0 February 0 0 March 0 0 April 0 0 May 0 0 June 0 0 July 0 0 August 0 0 September 0 0 October 0 0 November 0 0 December 0 0 Total number of circuits: 1,195 Total number of annual planned circuit inspections: 969 40 Past due investigation recommended actions for API/ACC Tier 1 and Tier 2 incidents 2016 Overdue Repeat January 0 0 February 0 0 March 0 0 April 0 0 May 0 0 June 0 0 July 0 0 August 0 0 September 0 0 October 0 0 November 0 0 December 0 0 1Petroleum refineries to report publically available refinery rate for API Tier 1 and Tier 2 classification. Chemical plants to report publically available mean only for ACC Tier 1 2Petroleum refineries to report publically available refinery mean for API Tier 1 and Tier 2 classification. Chemical plants to report publically available mean only for ACC Tier 1. Year 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 No. Tier 1 LOPC 0 0 0 0 0 0 Incident rate for Tier 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Refinery or Industry rate1 Refinery or Industry mean2 No. Tier 2 LOPC 0 0 0 0 0 0 Incident rate for Tier 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 Refinery or Industry rate1 Refinery or Industry mean2 API/ACC TIER 1 & TIER 2 INCIDENTS AND RATES STARTING 2011 41 Annual Performance Review and Evaluation Submittal August 8, 2017 *Attach additional pages as necessary 1. Name and address of Stationary Source: Air Products—Tesoro Golden Eagle Refinery, 150 Solano Way, 3rd & F Streets, Martinez, CA 94553 2. Contact name and telephone number (should CCHMP have questions): Andrew Celin 925-313-8990 x10 3. Summarize the status of the Stationary Source’s Safety Plan and Program (450-8.030(B)(2)(i)): The stationary sourse’s safety plan is complete per the CCHS requirement. The program was audited in March 2015 by CCHS as part of the three year CCHS site audit, and in October 2015 as part of an unannounced inspection. 4. Summarize Safety Plan updates (i.e., brief explanation of update and corresponding date) (450-8.030(B)(2)(ii)): The three year periodic audit completed in 2015 by CCHS required some updates to the site safety plan. These are complete. 5. List of locations where Safety Plans are/will be available for review, including contact telephone numbers if the source will provide individuals with copies of the document (450- 8.030(B)(2)(ii)): CCHMP Office at 4585 Pacheco Boulevard, Suite 100, Martinez; Martinez Library (library closest to the stationary source). 6. Provide any additions to the annual accident history reports (i.e. updates) submitted pursuant to Section 450-8.016(E)(2) of County Ordinance 98-48 (450-8.030(B)(2)(iii)) (i.e., provide information identified in Section 450-8.016(E)(1) for all major chemical accidents or releases occurring between the last annual performance review report and the current annual performance review and evaluation submittal (12-month history)): There were no major accidents or releases to report. 7. Summary of each Root Cause Analysis (Section 450-8.016(C)) including the status of the analysis and the status of implementation of recommendations formulated during the analysis (450-8.030(B)(2)(iv)): There are no outstanding recommendations. 8. Summary of the status of implementation of recommendations formulated during audits, inspections, Root Cause Analyses, or Incident Investigations conducted by the Department (450-8.030(B)(2)(v)): Final recommendations from the 3 year CCCHS audit are complete . 9. Summary of inherently safer systems implemented by the source including but not limited to inventory reduction (i.e., intensification) and substitution (450-8.030(B)(2)(vi)): There were none implemented. 42 10. Summarize the enforcement actions (including Notice of Deficiencies, Audit Reports, and any actions turned over to the Contra Costa County District Attorney’s Office) taken with the Stationary Source pursuant to Section 450-8.028 of County Ordinance 98-48 (450-8.030(B)(2) (vii)): There were no enforcement actions during this period. 11. Summarize total penalties assessed as a result of enforcement of this Chapter (450-8.030(3)): No penalities have been assessed against this facility. 12. Summarize the total fees, service charges, and other assessments collected specifically for the support of the ISO (450-8.030(B)(4)): The total CalARP Program fees for the eight facilities subject to the Industrial Safety Ordinance was $750,648. The total Industrial Safety Ordinance program fees for these nine facilities was $550,021. (NOTE: These fees include those for the County and City of Richmond ISO facilities). 13. Summarize total personnel and personnel years utilized by the jurisdiction to directly implement or administer this Chapter (450-8.030(B)(5)): 3,828 hours were used to audit/inspect and issue reports on the Risk Management Chapter of the Industrial Safety Ordinance. 14. Copies of any comments received by the source (that may not have been received by the Department) regarding the effectiveness of the local program that raise public safety issues(450-8.030(B)(6)): None. 15. Summarize how this Chapter improves industrial safety at your stationary source (450-8.030(B)(7)): Air Products is committed to the safer operation of our facilities and has implemented applicable requirements outlined in the ISO and CalARP regulations. Both the ISO and Human Factors programs are an integral part of our five year Operating Hazard Review revalidations and ongoing management of change process. The next OPHR is scheduled for April 2018. There have been no incidents resulting in an offsite impact. The Chapter has helped reinforce the need to maintain and follow a structured safety program to help ensure the safety of our empoloyees and the communities in which we operate. 16. List examples of changes made at your stationary source due to implementation of the Industrial Safety Ordinance (e.g., recommendations from PHA’s, Compliance Audits, and Incident Investigations in units not subject to CalARP regulations; recommendations from RCA’s) that significantly decrease the severity or likelihood of accidental releases. The Air Products facility is tracking various metrics (leading and lagging). These include those called out in ISO API/ACC Tier 1 and 2 events, past due PHA recommendations and past due incident investigation recommendations. A baseline was developed and metrics are tracked for the facility on a company share site. 17. Summarize the emergency response activities conducted at the source (e.g., CWS or TEN activation) in response to major chemical accidents or releases: There were no emergency response activities to this site since the previous Annual Performance review, however a response drill was conducted in coordination with the Emergency Response Team. 18. Common Process Safety Performance Indicators: 43 Overdue inspection for piping and pressure vessels based on total number of circuits Past due PHA recommended actions, includes seismic and LCC recommended actions 2016 Overdue Repeat January 0 0 February 0 0 March 0 0 April 0 0 May 0 0 June 0 0 July 0 0 August 0 0 September 0 0 October 0 0 November 0 0 December 0 0 2016 Overdue Repeat January 0 0 February 0 0 March 0 0 April 0 0 May 0 0 June 0 0 July 0 0 August 0 0 September 0 0 October 0 0 November 0 0 December 0 0 Total number of circuits: 660 Total number of annual planned circuit inspections: 131 44 Past due investigation recommended actions for API/ACC Tier 1 and Tier 2 incidents 2016 Overdue Repeat January 0 0 February 0 0 March 0 0 April 0 0 May 0 0 June 0 0 July 0 0 August 0 0 September 0 0 October 0 0 November 0 0 December 0 0 1Petroleum refineries to report publically available refinery rate for API Tier 1 and Tier 2 classification. Chemical plants to report publically available mean only for ACC Tier 1 2Petroleum refineries to report publically available refinery mean for API Tier 1 and Tier 2 classification. Chemical plants to report publically available mean only for ACC Tier 1. Year 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 No. Tier 1 LOPC 0 0 0 0 0 0 Incident rate for Tier 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Refinery or Industry rate1 Refinery or Industry mean2 No. Tier 2 LOPC 0 0 0 0 0 0 Incident rate for Tier 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 Refinery or Industry rate1 Refinery or Industry mean2 API/ACC TIER 1 & TIER 2 INCIDENTS AND RATES STARTING 2011 45 Annual Performance Review and Evaluation Submittal June 30, 2017 *Attach additional pages as necessary 1. Name and address of Stationary Source: Phillips 66 Rodeo Refinery, 1380 San Pablo Avenue, Rodeo, CA 94572 2. Contact name and telephone number (should CCHMP have questions): Morgan Walker 510-245-4665 3. Summarize the status of the Stationary Source’s Safety Plan and Program (450-8.030(B)(2)(i)): The Safety Plan was last updated in August of 2015. 4. Summarize Safety Plan updates (i.e., brief explanation of update and corresponding date) (450-8.030(B)(2)(ii)): The original Safety Plan for this facility was filed with Contra Costa Health Services on January 14, 2000. A revised plan was filed on April 7, 2000 with the updated recommendations requested by CCHS. A Human Factors Amendment was submitted on January 15, 2001. In conjunction with CCHSs required 2nd public meeting on our plan and audit findings, we submitted a complete revision of the plan to reflect the change in ownership of our facility and to update where needed. We took this opportunity to include Human Factors within the plan instead of having it as an amendment. On August 9, 2002 the plan was resubmitted. Public meetings for our plans were held on June 22, 2004 in Rodeo and July 8, 2004 in Crockett. As required the Plan was fully updated in August 2005 on the 3 year cycle. The Plan was reviewed by CCHS and was revised on July 28, 2006 with recommended changes. The Safety Plan was updated in July 2009 per the 3 year cycle.. Recommendations requested by CCHMP were incorporated into the Safety Plan 11-4-2010. Safety Plan was again updated in August 2012 and August 2015 per the 3 year cycle. 5. List of locations where Safety Plans are/will be available for review, including contact telephone numbers if the source will provide individuals with copies of the document (450- 8.030(B)(2)(ii)): CCHMP Office at 4585 Pacheco Boulevard, Suite 100, Martinez; Crockett and Rodeo Libraries (libraries closest to the stationary source). 6. Provide any additions to the annual accident history reports (i.e. updates) submitted pursuant to Section 450-8.016(E)(2) of County Ordinance 98-48 (450-8.030(B)(2)(iii)) (i.e., provide information identified in Section 450-8.016(E)(1) for all major chemical accidents or releases occurring between the last annual performance review report and the current annual performance review and evaluation submittal (12-month history)): There were no major chemical accidents or releases at the Rodeo Refinery in the 2016–2017 time period. 7. Summary of each Root Cause Analysis (Section 450-8.016(C)) including the status of the analysis and the status of implementation of recommendations formulated during the analysis (450-8.030(B) (2)(iv)): There were no root cause analysis of major chemical accidents or releases at the Rodeo Refinery in the 2016–2017 time period. 46 8. Summary of the status of implementation of recommendations formulated during audits, inspections, Root Cause Analyses, or Incident Investigations conducted by the Department (450-8.030(B)(2)(v)): There are two consider items from the 2014 CalARP/ISO audit open. Both are scheduled for closure in August 2017. 9. Summary of inherently safer systems implemented by the source including but not limited to inventory reduction (i.e., intensification) and substitution (450-8.030(B)(2)(vi)): See ATTACHMENT 1 for the listing of Inherently Safer Systems Improvements. 10. Summarize the enforcement actions (including Notice of Deficiencies, Audit Reports, and any actions turned over to the Contra Costa County District Attorney’s Office) taken with the Stationary Source pursuant to Section 450-8.028 of County Ordinance 98-48 (450-8.030(B)(2) (vii)): There were no enforcement actions during this period. 11. Summarize total penalties assessed as a result of enforcement of this Chapter (450-8.030(3)): No penalities have been assessed against this facility. 12. Summarize the total fees, service charges, and other assessments collected specifically for the support of the ISO (450-8.030(B)(4)): The total CalARP Program fees for the eight facilities subject to the Industrial Safety Ordinance was $750,648. The total Industrial Safety Ordinance program fees for these nine facilities was —$550,021. (NOTE: These fees include those for the County and City of Richmond ISO facilities). 13. Summarize total personnel and personnel years utilized by the jurisdiction to directly implement or administer this Chapter (450-8.030(B)(5)): 3828 hours were used to audit/inspect and issue reports on the Risk Management Chapter of the Industrial Safety Ordinance. 14. Copies of any comments received by the source (that may not have been received by the Department) regarding the effectiveness of the local program that raise public safety issues(450-8.030(B)(6)): No comments have been received. 15. Summarize how this Chapter improves industrial safety at your stationary source (450- 8.030(B)(7)): In addition to the Phillips 66 Corporate Health Safety Environment Management Systems the ISO provides another tool for the improvement of process safety performance. 16. List examples of changes made at your stationary source due to implementation of the Industrial Safety Ordinance (e.g., recommendations from PHA’s, Compliance Audits, and Incident Investigations in units not subject to CalARP regulations; recommendations from RCA’s) that significantly decrease the severity or likelihood of accidental releases. Units not covered by RMP, CalARP, and PSM are covered under the ISO and PHAs are scheduled and performed on all these units. Recommendations from the PHAs are implemented at an accelerated rate. A list of inherently safer system improvements, required by the ISO for PHA recommendations and projects, are listed in Attachment 1. 47 17. Summarize the emergency response activities conducted at the source (e.g., CWS or TEN activation) in response to major chemical accidents or releases: There were no major chemical accidents or releases at the Rodeo Refinery in the 2016–2017 time period. 18. Common Process Safety Performance Indicators: NOTE: Phillips 66 follows ANSI API RP-754 Process Safety Performance Indicators for the Refining and Petrochemical Industries. Tier 4 indicators such as a) overdue inspections, b) past due PHA recommendations and c) past due Investigation recommendations are all useful for identifying opportunities for both learning and systems improvement and are intended for internal site trending and analysis. These Tier 4 indicators are not considered valid for benchmarking or development of industry applicable criteria. 48 Overdue inspection for piping and pressure vessels based on total number of circuits Past due PHA recommended actions, includes seismic and LCC recommended actions 2016 Overdue Repeat January 0 0 February 0 0 March 0 0 April 0 0 May 0 0 June 0 0 July 0 0 August 0 0 September 0 0 October 0 0 November 0 0 December 0 0 2016 Overdue Repeat January 0 0 February 0 0 March 0 0 April 0 0 May 0 0 June 0 0 July 0 0 August 0 0 September 0 0 October 0 0 November 0 0 December 0 0 Total number of circuits: 155,019. Total number of annual planned circuit inspections: 10,525. Reported metrics are inspections or inspection points. SFR Rodeo does not use circuits for scheduling. 49 Past due investigation recommended actions for API/ACC Tier 1 and Tier 2 incidents 2016 Overdue Repeat January 0 0 February 0 0 March 0 0 April 0 0 May 0 0 June 0 0 July 0 0 August 0 0 September 0 0 October 0 0 November 0 0 December 0 0 1Petroleum refineries to report publically available refinery rate for API Tier 1 and Tier 2 classification. Chemical plants to report publically available mean only for ACC Tier 1 2Petroleum refineries to report publically available refinery mean for API Tier 1 and Tier 2 classification. Chemical plants to report publically available mean only for ACC Tier 1. * The publically available AFPM rates for Tier 1 events are reported for 2011 through 2016 when available. The Tier 1 “refinery mean” metric is reported as the average number of events per facility; Table 3.4. There was no Tier 2 “refinery mean” metric found for events prior to 2016. The available report did not have 2011 data. Data is from AFPM Process Safety Event Statistics for the Petroleum Refining and Petrochemical Industries, published July 2017. Year 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 No. Tier 1 LOPC 2 3 0 0 2 0 0 Incident rate for Tier 1 0.17 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.00 0 Refinery or Industry rate1 0.1553 0.0995 0.0947 0.0925 0.1038 0.0627 * Refinery or Industry mean2 *1.49 1.30 1.38 1.55 1.01 * No. Tier 2 LOPC 5 3 0 1 2 2 0 Incident rate for Tier 2 0.43 0.29 0.00 0.10 0.21 0.17 0 Refinery or Industry rate1 *0.2405 0.2531 0.2380 0.2063 0.1726 * Refinery or Industry mean2 ****3.08 2.78 * API/ACC TIER 1 & TIER 2 INCIDENTS AND RATES STARTING 2011 50 Attachment 1: June 2016—June 2017 ISS improvements Reference Approach ISS Category MOC Description M20111468-001 Moderate Passive Replaced vessel with a higher pressure rating. M20121167-001 Moderate Passive Upgraded thermowell materials of construction to more robust material/design. M20121560-001 Moderate Passive Replaced carbon steel oxidizer tank with 316L stainless steel tank. M2012191-001 Moderate Passive Installed a restricting orifice in the blowdown line to minimize the likelihood of an overpressure scenario. M2012228-001 Moderate Passive Modified unit relief valve piping to improve pressure safety valve (PSV) protection. M20122294-001 Moderate Passive Installed a check valve on bulk transfer line to minimize the likelihood of unintended reverse flow. M20123726-003 Moderate Passive Upgraded unit depressuring system design by replacing MOV’s with depressuring control valves. M20134613-001 Moderate Passive Upgraded design of the Second Stage Reactor liquid distribution and quench tray internals and improved design and number of Temperature Indicators. M2013784-001 Moderate Passive Installed a check valve on odor abatement skid to minimize the likelihood of unintended reverse flow. M20143139-001 Moderate Passive Upgraded Pressure Safety Valve trim on the fresh feed surge drum to better respond to liquid or vapor releases. M2014574-001 Moderate Passive Upgraded metallurgy on spool upstream of level instrument from PVC lined pipe to stainless steel. M20151393-001 Moderate Passive Upgraded metallurgy on control valves from Carbon Steel to 317L Stainless Steel M20151512-003 Moderate Passive Installed a restricting orifice in the control valve line to minimize the likelihood of an overpressure scenario. M20151862-001 Moderate Passive Reconfigured safety valve piping to minimize inlet line pressure losses. M20151864-001 Moderate Passive Reconfigured safety valve piping to ensure free draining and ensure adequate relief path. M20153730-003 Moderate Passive Installed a restricting orifice in the bypass line and replaced pressure safety valve to minimize the likelihood of an overpressure scenario. M20153991-001 Moderate Passive Replaced two PSV’s and installed restricting orifice to minimize the likelihood of an overpressure scenario. M20154721-001 Moderate Passive Upgraded metallurgy from Carbon Steel to 304L Stainless Steel on the quench water piping. M20161987-001 Moderate Passive Installed dual check valves on the discharge of wash water make-up pump to minimize the likelihood of unintended reverse flow. M20163946-001 Moderate Passive Upgraded piping from schedule 40 to schedule 80 on pump discharge piping. M20164249-001 Eliminate Inherent Removed sparger and industrial water deadleg piping. M20164555-001 Moderate Passive Upgraded metallurgy on the vessel overhead Carbon Steel nozzle with an inconel lined nozzle and iconel weld overlay. M20165259-001 Moderate Passive Upgraded heat exchanger floating head studs from teflon coated Carbon Steel to Inco 625. M2016554-001 Moderate Passive Upgraded seal materials in two valves to provide improved protection from Hydrogen Sulfide attact. M2016831-001 Moderate Passive Replaced relief valve with a balanced bellows valve to mitigate potential high back pressure relief scenario. M20171358-001 Moderate Passive Upgraded heat exchanger bundle with thicker wall thickness. M2017551-001 Moderate Passive Upgraded the channel-to-tube sheet gasket on heat exchanger to improve sealing properties. 51 Annual Performance Review and Evaluation Submittal June 30, 2017 *Attach additional pages as necessary 1. Name and address of Stationary Source: Shell Oil Products U.S. Martinez Refinery, 3485 Pacheco Blvd., Martinez, CA 94553 2. Contact name and telephone number (should CCHMP have questions): Ha Nguyen: 925-313-3079 3. Summarize the status of the Stationary Source’s Safety Plan and Program (450-8.030(B)(2)(i)): SMR’s Safety Plan was last updated in August 2016. SMR’s Safety Plan is due for update in August 2019. 4. Summarize Safety Plan updates (i.e., brief explanation of update and corresponding date) (450-8.030(B)(2)(ii)): SMR’s Safety Plan was last updated in August 2016. The changes addressed actions from the CCHS 2015 audit. 5. List of locations where Safety Plans are/will be available for review, including contact telephone numbers if the source will provide individuals with copies of the document (450- 8.030(B)(2)(ii)): CCHMP Office at 4585 Pacheco Boulevard, Suite 100, Martinez; Martinez Library (libraries closest to the stationary source). 6. Provide any additions to the annual accident history reports (i.e. updates) submitted pursuant to Section 450-8.016(E)(2) of County Ordinance 98-48 (450-8.030(B)(2)(iii)) (i.e., provide information identified in Section 450-8.016(E)(1) for all major chemical accidents or releases occurring between the last annual performance review report and the current annual performance review and evaluation submittal (12-month history)): There was one MCAR during this reporting period—12/19/16—Loss of power to substations 1203 and 1206, which resulted in flaring. 7. Summary of each Root Cause Analysis (Section 450-8.016(C)) including the status of the analysis and the status of implementation of recommendations formulated during the analysis (450-8.030(B) (2)(iv)): 12/19/16–Loss of power to substations 1203 and 1206—The Root Cause Analysis was complete and the report was submitted to the CCHMD. One recommendation was completed. Remaining recommendations are expected to be completed by 2/2018. 8. Summary of the status of implementation of recommendations formulated during audits, inspections, Root Cause Analyses, or Incident Investigations conducted by the Department (450-8.030(B)(2)(v)): Action items from 2015 CCHS Audit are all completed. There have been no RCA’s or Incident Investigations conducted by the Department. 9. Summary of inherently safer systems implemented by the source including but not limited to inventory reduction (i.e., intensification) and substitution (450-8.030(B)(2)(vi)): See Attachment 1, Table 1 52 10. Summarize the enforcement actions (including Notice of Deficiencies, Audit Reports, and any actions turned over to the Contra Costa County District Attorney’s Office) taken with the Stationary Source pursuant to Section 450-8.028 of County Ordinance 98-48 (450-8.030(B)(2) (vii)): There were no enforcement actions during this period. 11. Summarize total penalties assessed as a result of enforcement of this Chapter (450-8.030(3)): No penalities have been assessed against this facility. 12. Summarize the total fees, service charges, and other assessments collected specifically for the support of the ISO (450-8.030(B)(4)): The total CalARP Program fees for the eight facilities subject to the Industrial Safety Ordinance was $750,648. The total Industrial Safety Ordinance program fees for these nine facilities was—$550,021. (NOTE: These fees include those for the County and City of Richmond ISO facilities). 13. Summarize total personnel and personnel years utilized by the jurisdiction to directly implement or administer this Chapter (450-8.030(B)(5)): 3828 hours were used to audit/inspect and issue reports on the Risk Management Chapter of the Industrial Safety Ordinance. 14. Copies of any comments received by the source (that may not have been received by the Department) regarding the effectiveness of the local program that raise public safety issues(450-8.030(B)(6)): None received 15. Summarize how this Chapter improves industrial safety at your stationary source (450- 8.030(B)(7)): SMR has integrated requirements of the Industrial Safety Ordinance into our Health, Safety, and Environment Management System; in the context of our HSE MS, the ISO requirements drive continual improvement in our HSE performance. 16. List examples of changes made at your stationary source due to implementation of the Industrial Safety Ordinance (e.g., recommendations from PHA’s, Compliance Audits, and Incident Investigations in units not subject to CalARP regulations; recommendations from RCA’s) that significantly decrease the severity or likelihood of accidental releases. See Attachment 1, Table 2. 17. Summarize the emergency response activities conducted at the source (e.g., CWS or TEN activation) in response to major chemical accidents or releases: 12/19/16—Loss of power to substations 1203 and 1206—Shell activated the Emergency Operations Center, which brings together Environmental, Health & Safety, Security, Operations, and Management together to assist in coordinating the response. In addition, Shell’s Community Sampling Team was deployed to the community to monitor for potential offsite impacts (noise, odors, etc). The refinery’s Ground Level Monitors located on the facility fence-line showed no detection of H2S or SO2 above background levels. 18. Common Process Safety Performance Indicators: 53 Overdue inspection for piping and pressure vessels based on total number of circuits Past due PHA recommended actions, includes seismic and LCC recommended actions 2016 Overdue Repeat January 0 February 0 March 0 April 0 May 0 June 0 July 0 August 0 September 0 October 0 November 0 December 0 2016 Overdue Repeat January 0 February 0 March 0 April 0 May 0 June 0 July 0 August 0 September 0 October 0 November 0 December 0 Total number of circuits: 12,280 Total number of annual planned circuit inspections: 2,196 54 Past due investigation recommended actions for API/ACC Tier 1 and Tier 2 incidents 2016 Overdue Repeat January 0 February 0 March 0 April 0 May 0 June 0 July 0 August 0 September 0 October 0 November 0 December 0 1Petroleum refineries to report publically available refinery rate for API Tier 1 and Tier 2 classification. Chemical plants to report publically available mean only for ACC Tier 1 2Petroleum refineries to report publically available refinery mean for API Tier 1 and Tier 2 classification. Chemical plants to report publically available mean only for ACC Tier 1 Note: Tier 1 and 2 data are from July 1 to June 30, Incident rate for Tier 1 and 2 and Industry Rates are from Jan 1 to Dec 31 of that year. API/ACC TIER 1 & TIER 2 INCIDENTS AND RATES STARTING 2011 Year 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 No. Tier 1 LOPC 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 Incident rate for Tier 1 0.07 0.07 0.08 0.00 0.07 0.00 Refinery or Industry rate1 N/A 0.0995 0.0947 0.0925 0.1038 0.0627 Refinery or Industry mean2 No. Tier 2 LOPC 2 0 5 2 5 2 1 Incident rate for Tier 2 0.14 0 .41 0.11 0.42 0.06 Refinery rate1 N/A 0.2405 0.2531 0.2380 0.2063 0.1726 Refinery mean2 55 Attachment 1 Reference ISS Type Description M2017216-001 Passive / Moderate SVC1008 Bellows Material Upgrade M2016722-001 Passive / Moderate Upgrade the steam jacket for 18HV1185 from CS to 316SS M2016704-001 Passive / Moderate E1103A/B Replacement Shells and Upgrade to Stainless Steel M20162645-001 Passive / Moderate HP1 EB-650A/B/C Material Upgrade SS from CS M20162638-001 Passive / Moderate Upgrade Spool to Alloy 625 M2016164-001 Passive / Moderate Upgrade the body of 14LV1414A and 14LV1414B to 316SS M20153457-001 Passive / Moderate KGP ZAS22014 metallurgy upgrade M20152622-001 Passive / Moderate Materials Upgrade – ALKY Spent Acid Spools M20152333-001 Passive / Moderate F-41A/B Radiant Coil Metallurgy Upgrade M20152215-001 Passive / Moderate GOHT HPS OH Piping Metallurgy Upgrade M20151747-001 Passive / Moderate Upgrade NHT Wash Water Injection Point from SS to Alloy 625, upgrade metallurgy of deadlegs on the NHT reactor V-419 outlet piping to Alloy, upgrade GOHT EB-552 bundles from CS to SS. M20143841-001 Passive / Moderate Rich Caustic and Rich DEA Sample Station in CR2-VGT (upgrade from tubing to piping) M20151227-001 Inherent / Simplify Remove Neutralizing Amine Deadleg M20171180-001 Inherent / Simplify Small Piping Change - remove deadleg M20161656-001 Inherent / Simplify Remove FV415B Deadleg M20152284-001 Inherent / Simplify NHT Deadlegs Removal Table 1. Summary of Implemented ISS 56 Number Source Description 864673 2015 GMDO PHA Revalidation Update associated procedures to ensure that V-1109/1110 outlet valves are CSO when in service. 876693 2015 GMDO PHA Revalidation CSC the valve from the process water header to GMDO in order to avoid sending caustic to GMDO. 876699 2015 GMDO PHA Revalidation Update unit car sealed checklist DC19508P to be specific about required CS valve position. 885948 2015 Recovered Oil PHA Revalidation Relocate or add audible or visual alarms associated with combustible analyzers for increased notification to the Clean Harbors personnel. 876697 2015 GMDO PHA Revalidation Review procedure ISOM-3225 to ensure safeguards are adequate to prevent low level in V-13220 and V-13222 to prevent P13221 and P13220 pump damage. 885950 2015 Recovered Oil PHA Revalidation LCC Checklist Action: Create reference documents or training manual for Recovered Oil Movements (Transfers). 885945 2015 ETP PHA Revalidation Update PIDs per marked up during the PHA discussions. 938377 2017 OPCEN Flares PHA Revalidation Global Rec: Update P&IDs per field verification. 938375 2017 OPCEN Flares PHA Revalidation Upgrade 14FI4232B to ESP Standard low flow alarm in accordance with Flare Recommended Practice Study to mitigate asset loss. Table 2. ISO-only Recommendations Implemented (not required by CalARP) 57 Annual Performance Review and Evaluation Submittal June 30, 2015 *Attach additional pages as necessary 1. Name and address of Stationary Source: Tesoro Golden Eagle Refinery, 150 Solano Way, Martinez, CA 94553 2. Contact name and telephone number (should CCHS have questions): James Jeter at 925-370-3279 or Sabiha Gokcen at (925) 370-3620. . 3. Summarize the status of the Stationary Source’s Safety Plan and Program (450- 8.030(B)(2)(i)): The most recent Safety Plan was submitted to Contra Costa Hazardous Materials Program (CCHMP) in June 2017. CCHMP has completed seven audits on the safety programs. The first audit was in September 2000 on the safety programs. The second audit was in December 2001 and focused on Inherently Safer Systems and Human Factors. CalARP/ISO audits were conducted in August 2003, November—December 2005, August-October 2008, April—May 2011, January, 2014 and most recently October 2016. All safety program elements required by the ISO have been developed and are implemented. 4. Summarize Safety Plan updates (i.e., brief explanation of update and corresponding date) (450-8.030(B)(2) (ii)): The original Safety Plan for this facility was filed with CCHMP on January 14, 2000. An amended plan, updated to reflect CCHS recommendations and ownership change, was filed on November 30, 2000. A Human Factors Amendment was submitted on January 15, 2001. A Power Disruption Plan was submitted, per Board of Supervisor request, on June 1, 2001. An amended Safety Plan, updated to reflect ownership change was submitted on June 17, 2002. The Safety Plan for this facility is updated whenever changes at the facility warrant an update or every three years. In addition, the accident history along with other information is updated every year on June 30 in the Annual ISO Update to CCHMP. The most recent Safety Plan was submitted in June, 2017. 5. List of locations where Safety Plans are/will be available for review, including contact telephone numbers if the source will provide individuals with copies of the document (450-8.030(B)(2)(ii)): CCHMP Office at 4585 Pacheco Boulevard, Suite 100, Martinez; Martinez Library (library closest to the stationary source). 6. Provide any additions to the annual accident history reports (i.e. updates) submitted pursuant to Section 450-8.016(£)(2) of County Ordinance 98-48 (450-8.030(B)(2)(iii)) (i.e., provide information identified in Section 450-8.016(£)(1) for all major chemical accidents or releases occurring between the last accident history report submittal (January 15) and the annual performance review and evaluation submittal (June 30)): There have been no MCARs during the last year. 7. Summary of each Root Cause Analysis (Section 450-8.016(C)) including the status of the analysis and the status of implementation of recommendations formulated during the analysis (450-8.030(B)(2)(iv)): Status of Root Cause Analysis Recommendations: The recommended action items for all MCARs are closed. 58 8. Summary of the status of implementation of recommendations formulated during audits, inspections, Root Cause Analyses, or Incident Investigations conducted by the Department (450-8.030(B)(2)(v)): “CCHS Information”: CCHS completed an audit on September 15, 2000, December, 2001, August, 2003, November/December, 2005, August—October, 2008, April—May 2011, January, 2014 and October 2016. There are no RCA or Incident Investigations that have been conducted by the Department. Facility status of audit recommendations: All recommendations from CCHMP audits prior to 2016 are closed. The facility has not received the 2016 recommendations. 9. Summary of inherently safer systems implemented by the source including but not limited to inventory reduction (i.e., intensification) and substitution (450-8.030(B)(2)(vi)): Tesoro is submitting a list of the Inherently Safer Systems (ISS) that meet the criteria for Inherent or Passive levels only and that were completed within the last year (see attached). 10. Summarize the enforcement actions (including Notice of Deficiencies, Audit Reports, and any actions turned over to the Contra Costa County District Attorney’s Office) taken with the Stationary Source pursuant to Section 450-8.028 of County Ordinance 98-48 (450- 8.030(B)(2)(vii)): “CCHMP Information”: There were no enforcement actions during this period. 11. Summarize total penalties assessed as a result of enforcement of this Chapter (450-8.030(3)): “CCHMP Information”: No penalties have been assessed against this facility. 12. Summarize the total fees, service charges, and other assessments collected specifically for the support of the ISO (450-8.030(B)(4)): “CCHMP Information”: The total CalARP Program fees for the nine facilities subject to the Industrial Safety Ordinance was $750,648. The total Industrial Safety Ordinance program fees for these nine facilities was—$550,021. (NOTE: These fees include those for the County and City of Richmond ISO facilities). 13. Summarize total personnel and personnel years utilized by the jurisdiction to directly implement or administer this Chapter (450-8.030(B)(5)): “CCHMP Information”: 3828 hours were used to audit/inspect and issue reports on the Risk Management Chapter of the Industrial Safety Ordinance. 14. Copies of any comments received by the source (that may not have been received by the Department) regarding the effectiveness of the local program that raise public safety issues(450-8.030(B)(6)): This facility has not received any comments to date regarding the effectiveness of the local program. 15. Summarize how this Chapter improves industrial safety at your stationary source (450- 8.030(B)(7)): Chapter 450-8 improves industrial safety by expanding the safety programs to all units in the refinery. In addition, the timeframe is shorter to implement recommendations generated from the Process Hazard Analysis (PHA) safety program than state or federal law. This has resulted in a faster implementation of these recommendations. 59 Chapter 450-8 also includes requirements for inherently safer systems as part of implementing PHA recommendations and new construction. This facility has developed an aggressive approach to implementing inherently safer systems in these areas. Chapter 450-8 has requirements to perform root cause analyses on any major chemical accidents or releases (MCAR). This facility has applied that rigorous methodology to investigate any MCARs that have occurred since January, 1999. Chapter 450-8 requires a human factors program. This facility has developed a comprehensive human factors program and is in the process of implementing the program. Chapter 450-8 requires a safety culture assessment. This facility has developed a safety culture assessment program that meets the requirements in the ordinance. 16. List examples of changes made at your stationary source due to implementation of the Industrial Safety Ordinance (e.g., recommendations from PHA’s, Compliance Audits, and Incident Investigations in units not subject to CalARP regulations; recommendations from RCAs) that significantly decrease the severity or likelihood of accidental releases. This question was broadly answered under question 15 above. Some examples of changes that have been made due to implementation of the ordinance are as follows. There are some units that were not covered by RMP, CalARP or PSM. Those units are now subject to the same safety programs as the units covered by RMP, CalARP and PSM. They have had PHAs performed on them according to the timeline specified in the ISO and the PHA recommendations have been resolved on the timeline specified in the ISO. A list of inherently safer systems as required by the ISO for PHA recommendations and new construction is attached to this filing as mentioned in the response to question 9. With respect to Compliance Audits, there was a compliance audit performed in April 2015 in addition to the CCHMP audits mentioned above. All audit findings are being actively resolved. Root Cause Analysis findings and recommendations for MCARs are listed in the response under question 6. 17. Summarize the emergency response activities conducted at the source (e.g., CWS or TEN activation) in response to major chemical accidents or releases: Please refer to #6 which has the CWS classifications for the major chemical accidents and releases as well as any information regarding emergency responses by agency personnel. 18. Common Process Safety Performance Indicators: 60 Overdue inspection for piping and pressure vessels based on total number of circuits 2016 Overdue Repeat January 0 0 February 0 0 March 0 0 April 0 0 May 0 0 June 0 0 July 0 0 August 0 0 September 0 0 October 0 0 November 0 0 December 0 0 Total number of circuits: 7,423 Total number of annual planned circuit inspections: 947 in the year 2016. 61 Past due PHA recommended actions, includes seismic and LCC recommended actions 2016 Overdue Repeat January 0 0 February 0 0 March 0 0 April 0 0 May 0 0 June 0 0 July 0 0 August 0 0 September 0 0 October 0 0 November 0 0 December 0 0 Past due investigation recommended actions for API/ACC Tier 1 and Tier 2 incidents 2016 Overdue Repeat January 1 0 February 0 1 March 0 0 April 1 0 May 1 1 June 0 2 July 0 2 August 0 2 September 0 2 October 0 2 November 0 2 December 0 2 62 API/ACC TIER 1 & TIER 2 INCIDENTS AND RATES STARTING 2011 *Petroleum refineries to report publically available refinery mean for API Tier 1 and Tier 2. Chemical plants to report publically available mean only for ACC Tier 1. **Data is not publicly available; report from AFPM only went back to 2012. Year 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 No. Tier 1 LOPC 0 0 0 1 1 0 Incident rate for Tier 1 0 0 0 0.05 0.06 0.00 Refinery or Industry rate1 **0.0995 0.0947 0.0925 0.1038 0.0627 No. Tier 2 LOPC 1 1 2 3 3 0 Incident rate for Tier 2 0.06 0.05 0.12 0.16 0.17 0 Refinery rate1 **0.2405 0.2531 0.2380 0.2063 0.1726 Item Identifier Implementation Category Risk Reduction Category ISS Approach AO 14-20 I 1-001-ISS ISS Inherent Second Order Inherent Safety—The hazard associated with the operations was reduced through the application of inherently safer principals to reduce the likelihood of a release of hazardous material. A034-20I5-001-LOPA LOPA Inherent Second Order Inherent Safety—The hazard associated with the operations was reduced through the application of inherently safer principals to reduce the likelihood of a release of hazardous material. A034-2015-007-LOPA LOPA Inherent Second Order Inherent Safety—The hazard associated with the operations was reduced through the application of inherently safer principals to reduce the likelihood of a release of hazardous material. 63 64 Root Cause Analysis Report Tesoro Golden Eagle Refinery December 15, 2015 Loss of 6 Boiler Causes Smoky Flaring Summary of Event: On December 15, 2015, the 6 Boiler unit, which provides 600 psig steam, tripped offiine due to a loss of fuel gas. Loss of 600 psig steam caused the FCCU to trip offiine and a rise in pressure in the flare knock-out pot caused the flare gas recovery compressors to trip offline. This resulted in flaring from three flares which also generated smoke due to the loss of steam to the flares. A CWS level 1 was sent at approximately 11 :59 hours for shut down of the 6 Boiler unit, but was inadvertently sent as a test. CWS level 1 sent out at 12:15 hours for the 6 Boiler unit shut down. A CWS level 2 was sent out at 12:19 hours due to the smoking flare and potential offsite impact. One flare compressor was restarted at 12:50 hours and all flaring stopped as of 12:51 hours. Odor, Science, & Engineering (OS&E) was dispatched to determine if there were any odors offsite; no odors were found in surrounding neighborhoods, slight odor detected in area around Highway 4 and 680 intersection. Refinery operations stabilized and event downgraded to CWS level Oat 14:02 hours after consultation with and confirmation from CCCHMP. A brief timeline follows: . 11:47 hrs:6 Boiler trips on loss of fuel gas 11:55:57 hrs:West Flare Gas Compressor CP540 trips offiine due to high pressure in the extraneous Knock Out pot 11:56:02 hrs:East Flare Gas Compressor CP539 trips offline 11:56:22 hrs:FCCU trips offline on low riser flow 11:59 hrs:Shift Superintendent (in training) sends CWS level 1 notification to agencies (but sends as test) 12:00:32 hrs:Flaring begins at smaller flares 12:06:26 hrs:DCU Flare begins; small amount of smoke seen from smaller flares 12:10:32 hrs:Flare smoking is intensified 12:15 hrs:Shift Superintendent (in training) sends CWS level 1 notification to agencies 12:19 hrs:Shift Superintendent (in training) sends CWS level 2 notification to agencies 12:23:26 hrs:Flaring from DCU Flare stops; small flares still smoking 12:30 hrs:OS&E dispatched to monitor for odors in the community 12:36 hrs:IH monitors area near South Gate, Concord Business Park, and area South of Hwy 4. Detection for H2S, S02, CO and LEL is zero. Collection plates set in locations for particulate collection 12:44:27 hrs Flares stop smoking 12:50:33 hrs East Flare Gas Compressor CP539 is re-started 12:51:57 hrs All flaring stops 14:12 hrs CCHMD downgrades event from CWS level 2 to level 0 65 Agency Notification and Response: The following agencies were immediately notified: Contra Costa Hazardous Materials Program (CCHMP) via the CWS, the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) via the CWS, Contra Costa Fire Protection District, and the Contra Costa County Office of Emergency Services. The following agencies responded with personnel to the scene: CCHMP and BAAQMD. The following is a summary of the initial agency notifications made by Tesoro. 12:15 hrs:Community Warning System activation (Level 1) 12:19 hrs:Community Warning System activation (Level 2) 12:42 hrs:Cal-OES for S02 RQ exceedance (Report# 15-7322) [Note: Notifications over the GWS terminal: CWS level 1 notifies CCHMP, Contra Costa OES, and the Contra Costa Sheriff with a specific message. Addifional notice informs BAAQMD, Contra Costa Fire Protection District, Martinez Police, Antioch Police, Pinole Police and Richmond Police. CWS level 2 notifies CCHMP, Contra Costa OES, Contra Costa Sheriff and BAAQMD with a specific message. Additional notice informs Contra Costa Fire Protection District. California Highway Patrol, California Dept. of Health, San Ramon Valley Fire, Martinez Police, Antioch Police, Pinole Police and Richmond Police. CWS level 3 notifies CCHMP. Contra Costa OES, Contra Costa Sheriff and BAAQMD with a specific message. Additional notice informs Contra Costa Fire Protection District, California Highway Patrol, California Dept. of Health, San Ramon Valley Fire, Martinez Police, Antioch Police, Pinole Police, Richmond Police, EDIS and National Weather Service. CWS level 3 also activates sirens and the news media with a shelter in place message.] Emergency Response Actions: No emergency response actions were required. Additional process actions were taken to accommodate the shutdown unit and loss of steam. Material Released: The material released was Sulfur Dioxide from the flare. The release amount was estimated as exceeding the Reportable Quantity of 500 lbs. Meteorological Conditions: The weather was clear and dry on 12/15/15. The average wind speed and direction, during the flaring event was 15 mph and 15 degrees respectively (wind direction primarily from the North). The temperature was about 55 degrees F. Injuries: No injuries were reported on or off site. Community Impact: There was visible flaring and smoke from the refinery flares. Incident Investigation of the event: This investigation focused on the loss of Fuel Gas to 6 Boiler, which caused the boiler to shutdown. This resulted in a steam shortage in the refinery causing black smoke while flaring. 66 Background: #6 Boiler is one of two boilers at the Martinez Refinery. The boiler provides steam for use in heating or cooling in process units. Steam also provides a mode of force to drive some rotating equipment such as compressors and pumps. In addition, steam injection at the steam driven flares of the flare system allows for smokeless flaring. When steam is lost to the refinery, flaring will result due to the effects on the process units and the slowing down of steam-driven equipment There will also be smoke from the flares that use steam for smokeless operation. The 5 Gas Plant serves as the gas processing plant for the Delayed Coking Unit. In addition, 5 Gas Plant processes gas from numerous units in the refinery, including 50 Unit, 4 Gas, 3 Crude, 4HDS, 3HDS, 3 Reformer, BSU, 1HDS, 2HDS, the Alky and Hydrocracker Stage 1 and 2. The 5 Gas plant also receives the gases recovered from the flare system via the Extraneous Knock-out Pot. The 5 Gas Plant has two parallel Wet Gas Compressors that are driven by steam turbines. During steam emergencies, 5 Gas Plant is directed to slow down one of their Wet Gas Compressors per Emergency Steam Load Shedding Procedure 0-099-EP-01 and Loss of 600 PSIG Steam Procedure 0·003-EP-08. The reason for slowing down the steam driven compressors is to prevent major equipment damage. The slow down or shut down of one of the 5 Gas Plant Wet Gas compressors is fikely to cause a rise in pressure on either or both the Main Accumulator or Extraneous Knock out Pot. For safety reasons, if the Main Accumulator pressure reaches 9.5 psig, the pressure control valve 2401 automatically opens to the flare system. For safety reasons, if the pressure on the Extraneous Knock-out pot reaches 7 psig, an automatic shutdown of the flare gas recovery compressors is inilfated. Both of these safety actions are to protect the vessels from an overpressure situation. At 6 Boiler, the design phase of a project to upgrade the burner management system for safety reasons was begun in 2010. A Project Evaluation Report (PER) was developed for the project PTS 11506 and MOC 7069 was established for managing the change. As part of the safety upgrade, a Safety Instrumented System (SIS) was installed for the 6 Boiler fuel gas system. This installation was completed in 2013. Loss of Fuel Gas at 6 Boiler: On 12/15/15 at 11 :47 hours, a loss of fuel gas to 6 Boiler caused !he boiler to trip offline, resulting in significant steam loss to the refinery. Several units were shut down and others reduced rate. This resulted in flaring that exceeded the reportable quantity for S02 and other permit/regulatory deviations with excess emissions. The Contra Costa County Community Warning System (Level 2) was activated due to visible smoke from the flare that drifted offsite. There were no injuries from this event. Flaring was caused by the Joss of the Flare Gas Compressors, which tripped offline. The trip was caused by a pressure increase in the extraneous Knock-out pot at 5 Gas Plant, which exceeded the Flare Gas Compressor shutdown point of 7 psig. Normally, the Flare Gas Compressors send recovered flare gas back to the 5 Gas Plant to avoid flaring. However, due to the steam deficiency, the 5 Gas Plant had to substantially cut back on the Wet Gas Compressors, which are powered by steam. While troubleshooting what caused the loss of fuel gas to the boiler, an l&E Technician discovered the solenoid for FV0111 had no voltage. It was then found that the button on HS0111 B was pushed in and the indicator light for HL0111 was lit. The button on HS0111 B is for testing the solenoid for FV0111. FV0111 is part of the Safety Instrumented System (SIS) for 6 Boiler fuel gas control. When the test button is pushed, the solenoid de-energizes, causing FV0111 to close cutting off the fuel gas supply to 6 Boiler. Despite numerous interviews, the investigation team was unable to determine how the button was pushed or who may have pushed it. There were staging and electrical crews working in the area during the time of the incident. In addition, the area is congested and the button is at elbow height. 67 An examination of HS0111 B revealed there was partial guarding around the button to protect it from inadvertent operation, but nothing preventing a direct push of the button. The investigation focused on the design process for the SIS system (as part of the burner management system safety upgrade on 6 Boiler) and found that human factors were not sufficiently reviewed during the engineering design of the SIS system. Further examination of the training material and operating procedures that had been updated as part of MOC 7069 to install the burner management system upgrade #2 project for 6 Boiler found that important information was not included in the updates of these documents. The missing information appears to have contributed to the Jack of recognition by 6 Boiler personnel regarding the importance of protecting the SIS test button after the installation had been completed. The investigation also found it was difficult for operators to troubleshoot the cause of the Joss of fuel gas as information was missing from procedure 0-031-PR-EP-19 “Fuel Gas Supply Pressure Upset at 6 Boiler. Interviews with some personnel indicated they recognized the potential for inadvertent operation of the test button but did not recognize the potential for the test button to shutdown 6 Boiler or they indicated the risk would be deemed acceptable. Root Causes: The causal analysis for this incident yielded the following root causes and corrective actions (see table): Root Cause #1: The design process of the burner management system safety upgrade project for 6 Boiler did not sufficiently address human factors. Root Cause #2: he execution of MOC 7069 to install the burner management system safety upgrade project for 6 Boiler did not sufficiently update operating procedures and operator training material. Root Cause #3: The potential risk posed by inadvertent operation of the solenoid test button was unrecognized or the risk was accepted. Corrective Actions Corrective Actions Anticipated Date ofCompletion Root Cause 1 Protect the test button on FY-0111 solenoid operated by HS- 0111 B against inadvertent operation. (A subsequent burner management safety upgrade project has removed the SIS test button. This project had been planned for installation in January 2016.) Note -the test button on HS-0111 B was immediately protected from inadvertent operation by installing a cage around HS-0111 B. The removal of HS-0111 B was completed in January 2016. Complete 1 2 Conduct high impact refresher training with engineering personnel to reinforce the expectation to follow all requirements of R&SI 14-08 during project design to ensure human factors is adequately addressed in project design and construction. 3/31/16 1 68 3 a) Revise information in Operations training manual for 6 Boiler to include more specific information that explains all the functions of the SIS system. b) Revise procedure 0-031-PR-EP-19 “Fuel Gas Supply Pressure Upset at 6 Boiler” to provide more guidance on troubleshooting of the fuel gas system. Consider including a troubleshooting matrix. c) Update Board Operator training and refresher training on diagnosis of boiler trips and resetting permissives after a trio. 4/30/16 4/30/16 9/30/16 2 and 3 69 2016–17 ATTACHMENT C RICHMOND REGULATED SOURCES ANNUAL PERFORMANCEContra Costa Health Services 70 Annual Performance Review and Evaluation Submittal June 21, 2017 *Attach additional pages as necessary 1. Name and address of Stationary Source: Chevron U.S.A. Inc. (CUSA), Richmond Refinery, 841 Chevron Way, Richmond, California 94802 2. Contact name and telephone number (should CCHMP have questions): Karla Salomon, 510-242-3629 3. Summarize the status of the Stationary Source’s Safety Plan and Program (450-8.030(B)(2)(i)): The CUSA Richmond Refinery (Refinery) initial Site Safety Plan (SSP) was completed in 2003, and the most recent revision is dated September 29, 2015. The SSP was prepared in accordance with the City of Richmond Industrial Safety Ordinance 42-03 (RISO), which was adopted by the Richmond City Council on January 17, 2002. 4. Summarize Safety Plan updates (i.e., brief explanation of update and corresponding date) (450-8.030(B)(2)(ii)): The site safety plan was updated in 2015. 5. List of locations where Safety Plans are/will be available for review, including contact telephone numbers if the source will provide individuals with copies of the document (450- 8.030(B)(2)(ii)): CCHMP Office at 4585 Pacheco Boulevard, Suite 100, Martinez; Richmond Public Library at 325 Civic Center Plaza Richmond, CA 94804; and Point Richmond Public Library at 135 Washington Ave., Richmond, CA 94801. 6. Provide any additions to the annual accident history reports (i.e. updates) submitted pursuant to Section 450-8.016(E)(2) of County Ordinance 98-48 (450-8.030(B)(2)(iii)) (i.e., provide information identified in Section 450-8.016(E)(1) for all major chemical accidents or releases occurring between the last annual performance review report and the current annual performance review and evaluation submittal (12-month history)): There were no maj o r che mica l ac cid ents o r r elea se s ( “ MCAR”) as defined in Section 450-8.014(h) between June 1, 2016 and June 1, 2017. 7. Summary of each Root Cause Analysis (Section 450-8.016(C)) including the status of the analysis and the status of implementation of recommendations formulated during the analysis (450-8.030(B)(2)(iv)): There were no MCAR events between June 1, 2016 and June 1, 2017, and accordingly there were no Root Cause Analyses conducted under section 450-8.016(c) during this period. 8. Summary of the status of implementation of recommendations formulated during audits, inspections, Root Cause Analyses, or Incident Investigations conducted by the Department (450-8.030(B)(2)(v)): The 2011 Cal ARP/ISO Audit had 73 ensure and consider recommendations, from which 85 total action items were created, and 67 of those action items are complete. The actions to complete the remaining items are due by the end of 2017. The final report and action plans from the 2013 Cal/ARP /Richmond ISO audit were accepted by the County and Richmond Refinery in 2015. The 2013 Cal ARP/ISO audit had 163 ensure and consider recommendations, from which 177 total action items were created, and 143 of those action items are complete. The remaining action items are in progress, some with multiyear timelines for completion. The report and action plans from the 2016 Cal ARP/Richmond ISO audit have not been finalized at the time of this Annual Performance Review. 71 9. Summary of inherently safer systems implemented by the source including but not limited to inventory reduction (i.e., intensification) and substitution (450-8.030(B)(2)(vi)): See Page 76. 10. Summarize the enforcement actions (including Notice of Deficiencies, Audit Reports, and any actions turned over to the Contra Costa County District Attorney’s Office) taken with the Stationary Source pursuant to Section 450-8.028 of County Ordinance 98-48 (450- 8.030(B)(2)(vii)): There were no enforcement actions during this period under the RISO. 11. Summarize total penalties assessed as a result of enforcement of this Chapter (450-8.030(3)): No penalities have been assessed against this facility under the RISO. 12. Summarize the total fees, service charges, and other assessments collected specifically for the support of the ISO (450-8.030(B)(4)): The total of CalARP Program fees for the nine facilities subject to the Industrial Safety Ordinance was $750,648. The total of Industrial Safety Ordinance program fees for these nine facilities was—$550,021. (NOTE: These fees include those for the County and City of Richmond ISO facilities). 13. Summarize total personnel and personnel years utilized by the jurisdiction to directly implement or administer this Chapter (450-8.030(B)(5)): 3828 hours were used to audit/inspect and issue reports on the Risk Management Chapter of the Industrial Safety Ordinance. 14. Copies of any comments received by the source (that may not have been received by the Department) regarding the effectiveness of the local program that raise public safety issues(450-8.030(B)(6)): No comments were received during this period regarding the effectiveness of the local program that raise public safety issues. 15. Summarize how this Chapter improves industrial safety at your stationary source (450- 8.030(B)(7)): Operating safely is one of CUSA’s core values and underpins our commitment to enhancing our process safety programs. The RISO assists CUSA in improving our process safety performance. We have worked closely with CCHMP in its implementation of the RISO and its oversight of our operations, including during its periodic reviews of our operations. Consistent with t his co mmi t me nt , and as p ar t o f the co mp a n y’s efforts to continually improve its process safety performance, CUSA will continue to confer with the CCHMP as it refines and implements these actions. 16. List examples of changes made at your stationary source due to implementation of the Industrial Safety Ordinance (e.g., recommendations from PHA’s, Compliance Audits, and Incident Investigations in units not subject to CalARP regulations; recommendations from RCAs) that significantly decrease the severity or likelihood of accidental releases. In addition to the Inherently Safer Systems implemented in Question 9, CUSA has also made other changes to the facility pursuant to the RISO and beyond to decrease the severity or likelihood of accidental releases. A few examples include the following: • Changes implemented based on findings from Tier 1 and Tier 2 Incident Investigation with solutions due between June 2016 to June 2017: 72 »Developed new warning tag/car seal design for certain valves on temporary tanks which will warn personnel not to remove the valve bolts. »Debutanizer overhead pump seal flush lines modified to reduce stresses that can result in premature failure of the lines. » Jet filter change out procedure developed for maintenance and commissioning & line labelling was improved to clarify line configuration for LOTO. • Equipment and procedural changes implemented to reduce risks identified during PHAs, including: » Installed continuous vibration monitoring with high vibration alarm and shutdown on 17 Pump Station pumps to prevent damage and loss of containment. Upgraded procedures to ensure Operator surveillance during operating conditions when there is a higher potential for high pump vibration. » Installed automatic interlock to block in ship-to-tank transfer upon high-high level to prevent tank overfill. » Procedural PHA process was used to review and update Rheniformer Regeneration Procedures to reduce the risk of corrosion, equipment damage and potential loss of containment. • Completed Damage Mechanism Reviews on PSM-covered equipment and piping. • Continued performing Safeguard Protection Analysis (Layers of Protection Analysis) consistent with the RISO. • sRCM (Streamlined Reliability-Centered Maintenance) continued implementing studies to set up ITPM’s (inspection, testing, and preventative maintenance task s) that were identified from 2008 to 2012 and have reconciled 99.6% of the 52,335 tasks to date. Additional sRCM studies are currently being conducted to develop and implement ITPM’s for the equipment on the Refinery Modernization Project including the new H2 Plant Complex, H2 Purity and HYCUP Modifications. 17. Summarize the emergency response activities conducted at the source (e.g., CWS or TEN activation) in response to major chemical accidents or releases: There were no level two or three CWS or TENS activations between June 1, 2016 and June 1, 2017. 18. Common Process Safety Performance Indicators: (January 2016 to December 2016 unless otherwise noted): 73 Overdue inspection for piping and pressure vessels based on total number of circuits 2016 Overdue Repeat January 0 0 February 0 0 March 0 0 April 0 0 May 0 0 June 0 0 July 0 0 August 0 0 September 0 0 October 0 0 November 0 0 December 0 0 Total number of circuits: 26,108 Total number of annual planned circuit inspections: 2,371. 74 Past due PHA recommended actions, includes seismic and LCC recommended actions 2016 Overdue Repeat January 0 0 February 0 0 March 0 0 April 0 0 May 0 0 June 0 0 July 0 0 August 0 0 September 0 0 October 0 0 November 0 0 December 0 0 Past due investigation recommended actions for API/ACC Tier 1 and Tier 2 incidents 2016 Overdue Repeat January 0 0 February 0 0 March 0 0 April 0 0 May 0 0 June 0 0 July 0 0 August 0 0 September 0 0 October 0 0 November 0 0 December 0 0 75 1Petroleum refineries to report publicly available refinery rate for API Tier 1 and Tier 2 classification. Chemical plants to report publicly available mean only for ACC Tier 1 (data from AFPM website: https://www.afpm.org/754-reporting/). 2Petroleum refineries to report publicly available refinery mean for API Tier 1 and Tier 2 classification. Chemical plants to report publicly available mean only for ACC Tier 1 (data from AFPM website: https:// www.afpm.org/754-reporting/). ** Refinery Industry rates or means are not publicly available at this time and will be provided when available or released. † Jan 1, 2017 thru Jun 1, 2017 API/ACC TIER 1 & TIER 2 INCIDENTS AND RATES STARTING 2011 Year 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 No. Tier 1 LOPC 4 3 0 1 2 1 Incident rate for Tier 1 0.14 0.11 0.00 0.02 0.05 0.02 Refinery or Industry rate1 0.1553 0.995 0.0947 0.0925 0.1038 0.627 Refinery or Industry mean2 ************ No. Tier 2 LOPC 5 8 6 3 1 3 Incident rate for Tier 2 0.18 0.29 0.19 0.07 0.02 0.07 Refinery or Industry rate1 **0.2405 0.2531 0.2380 0.2063 0.1726 Refinery or Industry mean2 ************ 76 Response to Question #9: . Inherent Safety Strategy/Safeguard ISS Solution Employed Passive Removed potential leak point by replacing valve with pipe spool Procedural Updated regeneration procedure to include low point blowdown checklist Procedural Updated regeneration procedure to incorporate an audit of contractor neutralization Active function Moderate Placed check valves on Preventative Maintenance program to reduce likelihood of Active backflow Procedural Installed permanent bonding and grounding systems for process equipment Active Installed an automatic shutdown for steam to heat exchanger to prevent overpressure Procedural scenario Procedural Proactively changing out chloride absorber on a fixed time interval versus waiting until Procedural breakthrough analysis shows signs of corrosion Active Placed fin fans bearings on Preventative Maintenance program to be inspected on Procedural every Turnaround Procedural Updated MPT alarms to appropriate limit Procedural Updated procedures to include guidance for introduction of cracked stocks during Procedural plant startup Active Developed plant idling procedure Moderate Add a furnace chop for low feed rate scenario Procedural Added pressure indication to identify filter plugging prior to loss of seal flush Active Added alarm to prevent loss of cooling and potential amine stress corrosion cracking Active Updated procedure to clarify when feed can be re-introduced Active Installed new MOV for remote isolation Procedural Installed check valve for backflow prevention Moderate Upgraded mole seal piping for corrosion resistance Procedural Added Shutdown pump-out connections to prevent corrosion Active Restored sample station so samples could be taken and tested for signs of corrosion Active Added furnace chop upon loss of recycle hydrogen Active Added automatic dump system upon loss of recycle hydrogen Procedural Updated total loss of feed procedure Active Installed vibration monitoring shutdown system Procedural Installed overfill protection 77 Annual Performance Review and Evaluation Submittal June 30, 2017 *Attach additional pages as necessary 1. Name and address of Stationary Source: Chemtrade West LLC, Richmond Plant 2. Contact name and telephone number (should CCHMP have questions): Jon Becker 510-232-7193 3. Summarize the status of the Stationary Source’s Safety Plan and Program (450-8.030(B)(2)(i)): Safety training is being updated. Most safety training is conducted first on line and where necessary during safety meetings and huddles. Monthly safety inspections continue as in previous years. 4. Summarize Safety Plan updates (i.e., brief explanation of update and corresponding date) (450-8.030(B)(2)(ii)): The only changes to the safety plan and emergency response plans are the adddition of new employees replacing those that have left the company. 5. List of locations where Safety Plans are/will be available for review, including contact telephone numbers if the source will provide individuals with copies of the document (450- 8.030(B)(2)(ii)): CCHMP Office at 4585 Pacheco Boulevard, Suite 100, Martinez; Richmond Library (libraries closest to the stationary source). 6. Provide any additions to the annual accident history reports (i.e. updates) submitted pursuant to Section 450-8.016(E)(2) of County Ordinance 98-48 (450-8.030(B)(2)(iii)) (i.e., provide information identified in Section 450-8.016(E)(1) for all major chemical accidents or releases occurring between the last annual performance review report and the current annual performance review and evaluation submittal (12-month history)): No MCAR events this year. 7. Summary of each Root Cause Analysis (Section 450-8.016(C)) including the status of the analysis and the status of implementation of recommendations formulated during the analysis (450-8.030(B)(2)(iv)): 8. Summary of the status of implementation of recommendations formulated during audits, inspections, Root Cause Analyses, or Incident Investigations conducted by the Department (450-8.030(B)(2)(v)): 9. Summary of inherently safer systems implemented by the source including but not limited to inventory reduction (i.e., intensification) and substitution (450-8.030(B)(2)(vi)): Replacement of Oleum return line at UP with schedule 80 Stainless steel. Implimentation of closed dome loading sysem at railcar loading rack. 78 10. Summarize the enforcement actions (including Notice of Deficiencies, Audit Reports, and any actions turned over to the Contra Costa County District Attorney’s Office) taken with the Stationary Source pursuant to Section 450-8.028 of County Ordinance 98-48 (450- 8.030(B)(2)(vii)): There were no enforcement actions during this period. 11. Summarize total penalties assessed as a result of enforcement of this Chapter (450-8.030(3)): No penalities have been assessed against this facility. 12. Summarize the total fees, service charges, and other assessments collected specifically for the support of the ISO (450-8.030(B)(4)): The total CalARP Program fees for the eight facilities subject to the Industrial Safety Ordinance was $750,648. The total Industrial Safety Ordinance program fees for these nine facilities was - $550,021. (NOTE: These fees include those for the County and City of Richmond ISO facilities). 13. Summarize total personnel and personnel years utilized by the jurisdiction to directly implement or administer this Chapter (450-8.030(B)(5)): 3828 hours were used to audit/inspect and issue reports on the Risk Management Chapter of the Industrial Safety Ordinance. 14. Copies of any comments received by the source (that may not have been received by the Department) regarding the effectiveness of the local program that raise public safety issues(450-8.030(B)(6)): 15. Summarize how this Chapter improves industrial safety at your stationary source (450- 8.030(B)(7)): 16. List examples of changes made at your stationary source due to implementation of the Industrial Safety Ordinance (e.g., recommendations from PHA’s, Compliance Audits, and Incident Investigations in units not subject to CalARP regulations; recommendations from RCAs) that significantly decrease the severity or likelihood of accidental releases. PHA’s conducted for new Oleum line, Burner management system upgrade. 17. Summarize the emergency response activities conducted at the source (e.g., CWS or TEN activation) in response to major chemical accidents or releases: Chemtrade conducts Emergency Response drills on a quarterly basis. . 18. Common Process Safety Performance Indicators: 79 Overdue inspection for piping and pressure vessels based on total number of circuits 2016 Overdue Repeat January N/A February March April May June July August September October November December Total number of circuits: 26,108 Total number of annual planned circuit inspections: 947 in the year 2371. 80 Past due PHA recommended actions, includes seismic and LCC recommended actions 2016 Overdue Repeat January 0 February 0 March 0 April 0 May 0 June 0 July August September October November December Past due investigation recommended actions for API/ACC Tier 1 and Tier 2 incidents 2016 Overdue Repeat January N/A February March April May June July August September October November December 81 1Petroleum refineries to report publically available refinery rate for API Tier 1 and Tier 2 classification. Chemical plants to report publically available mean only for ACC Tier 1. 2Petroleum refineries to report publically available refinery mean for API Tier 1 and Tier 2 classification. Chemical plants to report publically available mean only for ACC Tier 1 ). API/ACC TIER 1 & TIER 2 INCIDENTS AND RATES STARTING 2011 Year 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 No. Tier 1 LOPC Incident rate for Tier 1 Refinery or Industry rate1 Refinery or Industry mean2 No. Tier 2 LOPC Incident rate for Tier 2 Refinery or Industry rate1 Refinery or Industry mean2 INDUSTRIAL SAFETY ORDINANCE 4585 Pacheco Blvd. Suite 100 Martinez, CA 94553 ccchazmat@hsd.cccounty.us 925-335-3200 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS A Division of Contra Costa Health Services APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Chris Lau, (925) 313-7002 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Jocelyn LaRocque, Engineering Services, Paul Detjens, Flood Control, Will Nelson, DCD, Marcelle Indelicato, OES D.4 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Adopt the Contra Costa County Hazard Mitigation Plan Update for County and County Flood Control and Water Conservation District RECOMMENDATION(S): (CONT'D) Acting as the Governing Board of Contra Costa County and the Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District: 1. ACCEPT a report on the proposed Contra Costa County Hazard Mitigation Plan Update. 2. DETERMINE that adoption of the Contra Costa County Hazard Mitigation Plan Update is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under CEQA Guidelines sections 15061(b)(3) (General Exemption) and 15262 (Feasibility and Planning Studies). 3. DIRECT the Department of Conservation and Development to file a CEQA Notice of Exemption with the County Clerk. 4. ADOPT Resolution No. 2018/93 to adopt an update to the Contra Costa County Hazard Mitigation Plan, Countywide. FISCAL IMPACT: No Fiscal Impact BACKGROUND: Hazard Mitigation Planning in Contra Costa County: In November of 2016, a coalition of Contra Costa County cities and special districts embarked on a planning process to prepare for and lessen the impacts of specified natural hazards by updating the Contra Costa County Operational Area Hazard Mitigation Plan. Responding to federal mandates in the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-390), the partnership was formed to pool resources and to create a uniform hazard mitigation strategy that can be consistently applied to the defined planning area and used to ensure eligibility for specified grant funding success. This effort represents the third comprehensive update to the initial hazard mitigation plan, approved by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) in November of 2005 and developed in partnership with the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), as well as a return to a truly regional effort following the 2010 planning process. The 35 member coalition of partners involved in this program includes unincorporated Contra Costa County, 14 city and town governments and 20 special purpose districts. The planning area for the hazard mitigation plan was defined as the Contra Costa County Operational Area. The result of the organizational effort will be a FEMA and California Office of Emergency Services (CalOES) approved multi-jurisdictional, multi-hazard mitigation plan. Mitigation is defined in this context as any sustained action taken to reduce or eliminate long-term risk to life and property from a hazard event. Mitigation planning is the systematic process of learning about the hazards that can affect the community, setting clear goals, identifying appropriate actions and following through with an effective mitigation strategy. Mitigation encourages long-term reduction of hazard vulnerability and can reduce the enormous cost of disasters to property owners and all levels of government. Mitigation can also protect critical community facilities, reduce exposure to liability, and minimize post-disaster community disruption. The hazard identification and profiling in the hazard mitigation plan addresses the following hazards of concern within the planning area: 1. Dam failure 2. Drought 3. Earthquake 4. Flood 5. Landslide 6. Sea level rise 7. Severe weather 8. Tsunami 9. Wildfire Climate change is incorporated as a summary assessment of current and anticipated impacts for each identified hazard of concern. With the exception of dam failure, this plan does not provide a full risk assessment of human-caused hazards. However, brief, qualitative discussions of the following hazards of interest are included: terrorism, cyber threats, hazardous materials release, pipeline and tank failure, and airline incidents. A Planning Team consisting of local officials has taken the lead in developing the hazard mitigation plan. All participating local jurisdictions have been responsible for assisting in the development of the hazard and vulnerability assessments and the mitigation action strategies for their respective jurisdictions and organizations. The Plan presents the accumulated information in a unified framework to ensure a comprehensive and coordinated plan covering the entire Contra Costa County Operational Area planning area. Each jurisdiction has been responsible for the review and approval of their individual sections of the Plan. Additionally, the plan has been aligned with the goals, objectives and priorities of the State’s multi-hazard mitigation plan. The Plan also integrates with the general plan, climate action plan and emergency operations plan. A 13 member Steering Committee (SC) composed of representative stakeholders was formed early in the planning process to guide the development of the Plan. In addition, residents were asked to contribute by sharing local knowledge of their individual area’s vulnerability to natural hazards based on past occurrences. Public involvement has been solicited via a comprehensive public outreach campaign that included two rounds of public meetings, web-based information, a questionnaire, and multiple social media updates. Why adopt this Plan? The plan has been conditionally approved by CalOES and FEMA. Once the hazard mitigation plan is adopted by all of the jurisdictional partners, FEMA will issue a final approval and the partnership will collectively and individually become eligible to apply for hazard mitigation project funding from both the Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant Program (PDM) and the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP). For example, the following jurisdictions currently have submitted applications for funding under the HMGP: City of Antioch City of Concord City of El Cerrito Bethel Island Municipal Improvement District. What is the Pre-Disaster Mitigation competitive grant program? The PDM competitive grant program provides funds to State, Tribal, and local governments for pre-disaster mitigation planning and projects primarily addressing natural hazards. Cost-effective pre-disaster mitigation activities reduce risk to life and property from natural hazard events before a natural disaster strikes, thus reducing overall risks to the population and structures, while also reducing reliance on funding from actual disaster declarations. Funds will be awarded on a competitive basis for mitigation planning and project applications intended to make local governments more resistant to the impacts of future natural disasters (For more details on this program see Attachment 1). What is the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program? Authorized under Section 404 of the Stafford Act, the HMGP administered by FEMA provides grants to States and local governments to implement long-term hazard mitigation measures after a major disaster declaration. The purpose of the program is to reduce the loss of life and property due to natural disasters and to enable mitigation measures to be implemented during the immediate recovery from a disaster (For more details on this program see Attachment 1). Where do we go from here? Upon adoption of Volume I and the unincorporated Contra Costa County and Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District Annexes of Volume II of the Contra Costa County Operational Area Hazard Mitigation Plan Update (HMP) and final approval of said plan by CalOES and FEMA, unincorporated Contra Costa County and the Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District will be eligible to apply for specified grants. The grant funds are made available to states and local governments and can be used to implement the long-term hazard mitigation measures specified within the unincorporated Contra Costa County and Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District's annexes of the HMP before and after a major disaster declaration. The HMP is considered a living document such that, as awareness of additional hazards develops and new strategies and projects are conceived to offset or prevent losses due to natural disasters. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Failure to approve the Hazard Mitigation Plan update may cause the County or the Flood Control District to become ineligible from applying for and receiving FEMA Disaster Mitigation Funds and/or disqualification from receiving state disaster assistance funding. ATTACHMENTS Resolution No. 2018/93 Attachment 1 - HMGP and PDM Fact Sheet Attachment 2 - Volume2, Chapter 1 - Unincorporated Contra Costa County Jurisdictional Annex Attachment 2 - Volume 2, Chapter 20 - Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District Jurisdictional Annex THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board Adopted this Resolution on 04/10/2018 by the following vote: AYE:4 John Gioia Candace Andersen Karen Mitchoff Federal D. Glover NO: ABSENT:1 Diane Burgis ABSTAIN: RECUSE: Resolution No. 2018/93 IN THE MATTER OF: Adoption of the Contra Costa County Hazard Mitigation Plan Update as the Contra Costa County's and Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District's Hazard Mitigation Plan, Countywide. WHEREAS, all of Contra Costa County has exposure to natural hazards that increase the risk to life, property, environment and the County’s economy; and WHEREAS; pro-active mitigation of known hazards before a disaster event can reduce or eliminate long-term risk to life and property; and WHEREAS, The Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-390) established new requirements for pre- and post-disaster hazard mitigation programs; and WHEREAS; a coalition of Contra Costa County, Cities, Towns and Special Districts with like planning objectives has been formed to pool resources and create consistent mitigation strategies within the Contra Costa County Operational Area planning area; and WHEREAS, the coalition has completed a planning process that engages the public, assesses the risk and vulnerability to the impacts of natural hazards, develops a mitigation strategy consistent with a set of uniform goals and objectives, and creates a plan for implementing, evaluating and revising this strategy; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, this Board, 1) Adopts in its entirety, Volume I and the introduction, Chapter 1 - the unincorporated Contra Costa County jurisdictional annex, Chapter 20 - the Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District jurisdictional annex, and the appendices of Volume II of the Contra Costa County Operational Area Hazard Mitigation Plan (HMP). 2) Will use the adopted and approved portions of the HMP to guide pre- and post-disaster mitigation of the hazards identified. 3) Will coordinate the strategies identified in the HMP with other planning programs and mechanisms under its jurisdictional authority. 4) Will continue its support of the Steering Committee and continue to participate in the Planning Partnership as described by the HMP. 5) Will help to promote and support the mitigation successes of all HMP Planning Partners. Contact: Chris Lau, (925) 313-7002 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Jocelyn LaRocque, Engineering Services, Paul Detjens, Flood Control, Will Nelson, DCD, Marcelle Indelicato, OES Attachment 1 Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) Pre -Disaster Mitigation Grant Program (PDM) FACT SHEET I. HAZARD MITIGATION GRANT PROGRAM (HMGP) What is the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program? HMGP is authorized by Section 404 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, as amended (the Stafford Act), Title 42, United States Code (U.S.C.) 5170c. The key purpose of HMGP is to provide the opportunity to take critical mitigation measures to reduce future loss of life and property during the reconstruction process following a disaster. HMGP is available, when authorized under a Presidential major disaster declaration, in the Tribe or areas of the State requested b y the Governor. The amount of HMGP funding available is based upon the estimated total Federal assistance provided by FEMA for disaster recovery under the Presidential major disaster declaration. Who is eligible to apply? Hazard Mitigation Grant Program funding is only available to applicants that reside within a Presidentially declared disaster area. Eligible applicants are  State and local governments  Indian tribes or other tribal organizations  Certain non -profit organizations What types of projects can be funded by the HMGP? HMGP funds may be used to fund projects that will reduce or eliminate the losses from future disasters. Projects must provide a long -term solution to a problem, for example, elevation of a home to reduce the risk of flood damages as opposed to buying sandbags and pumps to fight the flood. In addition, a project’s potential savings must be more than the cost of implementing the project. Funds may be used to protect either public or private property or to purchase property that has been subjected to, or is in danger of, repetitive damage. Examples of projects include, but are not limited to:  Acquisition of real property for willing sellers and demolition or relocation of buildings to convert the property to open space use  Retrofitting structures and facilities to minimize damages from high winds, earthquake, flood, wildfire, or other natural hazards  Elevation of flood prone structures  Safe room construction  Development and initial implementation of vegetative management programs  Minor flood control projects that do not duplicate the flood prevention activities of other Federal agencies  Localized flood control projects, such as certain ring levees and floodwall systems, that are designed specifically to protect critical facilities  Post -disaster building code related activities that support building code officials during the reconstruction process What are the minimum project criteria? There are five issues you must consider when determining the eligibility of a proposed project.  Does your project conform to your State’s Hazard Mitigation Plan?  Does your project provide a beneficial impact on the disaster area i.e. the State ?  Does your application meet the environmental requirements?  Does your project solve a problem independently?  Is your project cost -effective? II. PRE-DISASTER MITIGATION GRANT PROGRAM (PDM) What is the Pre-Disaster Mitigation competitive grant program? The Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM) competitive grant program provides funds to State, Tribal, and local governments for pre-disaster mitigation planning and projects primarily addressing natural hazards. Cost - effective pre-disaster mitigation activities reduce risk to life and property from natural hazard events before a natural disaster strikes, thus reducing overall risks to the population and structures, while also reducing reliance on funding from actual disaster declarations. Funds will be awarded on a c ompetitive basis to successful applicants for mitigation plannin g and project applications intended to make local governments more resistant to the pacts of future natural disasters. Who can apply for a PDM competitive grant? Eligible PDM competitive grant applicants include state and t erritorial emergency management agencies, or a similar office of the State, District of Columbia, U.S. Virgin Islands, Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and Federally -recognized Indian Tribal governments.  Eligible Sub -applicants include State agencies; Federally -recognized Indian Tribal governments; and local governments (including State recognized Indian Tribal governments and Alaska native villages).  Applicants can apply for PDM competitive grant funds directly to FEMA, while Sub -applicants must apply for funds through an eligible Applicant.  Private non -profit organizations are not eligible to apply for PDM but may ask the appropriate local government to submit an application for the propose d activity on their behalf. What are eligible PDM projects? Multi-hazard mitigation projects must primarily focus on natural hazards but also may address hazards caused by non -natural forces. Funding is restricted to a maximum of $3M Federal share per project. The following are eligible mitigation projects:  Acquisition or relocation of hazard -prone property for conversion to open space in perpetuity;  Structural and non -structural retrofitting of existing buildings and facilities (including designs and feas ibility studies when included as part of the construction project) for wildfire, seismic, wind or flood hazards (e.g., elevation, flood proofing, storm shutters, hurricane clips);  Minor structural hazard control or protection projects that may include vegetation management, Stormwater management (e.g., culverts, floodgates, retention basins), or shoreline/landslide stabilization ; and,  Localized flood control projects, such as certain ring levees and floodwall systems, that are designed specifica lly to protect critical facilities and that do not constitute a section of a larger flood control system. Mitigation Project Requirements Projects should be technically feasible (see Section XII. Engineering Feasibility) and ready to implement. Engineering designs for projects must be included in the application to allow FEMA to assess the effectiveness and feasibility of the proposed project. The project cost estimate should complement the engineering design, including all anticipated costs. FEMA has several formats that it uses in cost estimating for projects. Additionally, other Federal agencies’ approaches to project cost estimating can be used as long as the method provides for a complete and accurate estimate. FEMA can provide technical assistance on e ngineering documentation and cost estimation (see Section XIII.D. Engineering Feasibility). Mitigation projects also must meet the following criteria: 1. Be cost -effective and substantially reduce the risk of future damage, hardship, loss, or suffering resulting from a major disaster, consistent with 44 CFR 206.434(c)(5) and related guidance, and have a Benefit-Cost Analysis that results in a benefit -cost ratio of 1.0 or greater (see Section X. Benefit-Cost Analysis). Mitigation projects with a benefit-cost ratio less than 1.0 will not be considered for the PDM competitive grant program; 2. Be in conformance with the current FEMA -approved State hazard mitigation plan; 3. Solve a problem independently or constitute a functional portion of a solution where there is as surance that the project as a whole will be completed, consistent with 44 CFR 206.434(b)(4); 4. Be in conformance with 44 CFR Part 9, Floodplain Management and Protection of Wetlands, and 44 CFR Part 10, consistent with 44 CFR 206.434(c)(3); 5. Not duplicate ben efits available from another source for the same purpose, including assistance that another Federal agency or program has the primary authority to provide (see Section VII.C. Duplication of Benefits and Programs); 6. Be located in a community that is particip ating in the NFIP if they have been identified through the NFIP as having a Special Flood Hazard Area (a FHBM or FIRM has been issued). In addition, the community must not be on probation, suspended or withdrawn from the NFIP; and, 7. Meet the requirements of Federal, State, and local laws. What are examples of Ineligible PDM Projects? The following mitigation projects are not eligible for the PDM program:  Major flood control projects such as dikes, levees, floodwalls, seawalls, groins, jetties, dams, waterway channelization, beach nourishment or re -nourishment;  Warning systems;  Engineering designs that are not integral to a proposed project;  Feasibility studies that are not integral to a proposed project;  Drainage studies that are not integral to a proposed project;  Generators that are not integral to a proposed project;  Phased or partial projects;  Flood studies or flood mapping; and,  Response and communication equipment. 1-1 1. UNINCORPORATED CONTRA COSTA COUNTY 1.1 HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN POINT OF CONTACT Primary Point of Contact Alternate Point of Contact Marcelle Indelicato, Senior Emergency Planner 50 Glacier Drive Martinez, CA 94553 Telephone: 925-313-9609 E-mail Address: minde@so.cccounty.us Rick Kovar, OES Manager 50 Glacier Drive Martinez, CA 94553 Telephone: 925-313-9621 E-mail Address: rkova@so.cccounty.us 1.2 JURISDICTION PROFILE The following is a summary of key information about the jurisdiction and its history: • Date of Incorporation—1850 • Current Population—1,139,513 as of January 1, 2017 (California Department of Finance) • Population Growth—Contra Costa County should continue to experience a steady rate of growth, with an estimated population increase of 27.6 percent by 2040. • Location and Description—Contra Costa County is major metropolitan area east of San Francisco. The county has a total area of 802 square miles, of which 720 square miles is land and 82 square miles is water. It is bounded on the south and west by Alameda County; on the northwest by San Francisco Bay (San Francisco and Marin Counties); on the north by San Pablo Bay, the Carquinez Strait, and Suisun Bay (Solano and Sacramento Counties); and on the east by the San Joaquin River (San Joaquin County). • Brief History—Contra Costa County was incorporated in 1850 as one of the original 27 counties of the state. The County’s Spanish language name translates as “opposite coast,” indicating its location opposite San Francisco on San Francisco Bay. The County originally encompassed the entire East Bay area. In 1853 the southern portion of the County was detached to form Alameda County. Coal was discovered near Pittsburg in the early 1850s. The Mount Diablo Coal Field was the most extensively mined coal deposit in California. From the 1860s to the beginning of the 20th century, it is estimated that 4 million tons of coal were extracted from the area. Railroads are also an important part of the County’s history. In 1901, the Santa Fe Railroad, now BNSF Railway, selected Richmond for its western terminal. During the late 1800s and early 1900s, industry moved into the County: Union Oil constructed a refinery in Rodeo in 1896; a U.S. Steel mill opened in Pittsburg in 1910; Standard Oil, later to become Chevron, moved to Richmond; and Shell Oil built a refinery in Martinez. Great Western Electro-Chemical, which later became Dow, opened in Pittsburg in 1916. Contra Costa County played a significant role in World War II. Richmond was a major shipbuilding center, the U.S. Steel mill in Pittsburg produced casting for the shipyards, Camp Stoneman (Pittsburg) was a troop staging area from 1942 to 1957, wartime pilots trained at what is now Concord/Buchanan Field Airport, and Port Chicago was a major munitions depot. Saint Mary’s College Pre-Flight School trained approximately 15,000 recruits in Moraga from June 1, 1942, until it was decommissioned on June 30, 1946. Many workers who migrated to the County to work in the shipyards remained after the war ended. Veterans who passed through the County during the war returned to become residents. Contra Costa County Hazard Mitigation Plan; Volume 2—Planning Partner Annexes 1-2 Farming has always been an important part of the County’s history. Cattle ranching has been a part of the County’s economy since the days of the Spanish land grants. Wheat has been grown in the County since the mid-1800s. However, a steady decline in world wheat prices led to a gradual transition from wheat to fields to vineyards and orchards. Prior to Prohibition, Martinez was home to many wineries, including Christian Brothers Wineries, which started crushing grapes for sacramental wine in Martinez in 1882. Today, the County is home to vineyards that produce award-winning wines. The total gross value of agriculture crops and products in 2015 was $128,507,000. Several categories exceeded $1 million in value (in decreasing order): cattle and calves, tomatoes, sweet corn, miscellaneous vegetables, grapes, rangeland, field corn, alfalfa, walnuts, miscellaneous field crops, cherries, peaches, apricots, and wheat. Today, the major industries are petroleum (Chevron being one of the largest employers in the County), chemical, bio-medical, healthcare services, banking, communication, transportation (shipping/rail/pipelines), retail services, higher education (several private colleges), and agriculture. Major employers in the County include the following governmental entities: Contra Costa County, three junior colleges (Diablo Valley, Contra Costa Community, Los Medanos), California State University East Bay, and the Contra Costa Regional Medical Center (one of eight remaining County hospitals in the state). • Climate—In Contra Costa County, average rainfall ranges from 13.25 inches in Antioch (60 feet above sea level) to 23.84 inches at Mount Diablo Junction (2,170 feet above sea level). Martinez (40 feet above sea level) averages 19.32 inches. The average snowfall is 0 inches, except at higher elevations (Mount Diablo Junction averages 1.5 inches per year). The average number of days with precipitation ranges from 55 at Antioch to 66 at Mount Diablo, with Martinez averaging 63. The average number of sunny days (cloud cover less than 8/10) is 260. The average high temperature in July ranges from 71 at Richmond (20 feet above sea level) to 91 in Antioch. The average low in January ranges from 37 at Antioch to 43 at Richmond. The vast majority of rainfall occurs between October and May. Analysis of long-term precipitation records indicates that wetter and drier cycles lasting several years are common in the region. Severe, damaging rainstorms occur in the Bay Area at a frequency of about once every three years. The western United States periodically experiences two distinct weather patterns that can cause severe storms and heavy precipitation:  El Nino—A warm ocean current that typically appears around late December and lasts for several months, but may persist into May or June. The warm current influences storm patterns around the globe. As a result, these climate events commonly bring heavy rains and blustery storms and, in some locations, drought. During the past 40 years, nine El Nino events have affected the western coasts of North and South America.  Pineapple Express—A Pacific Ocean subtropical jet stream that brings warm moist air from Hawaii into the region. The combination of moisture-laden air, atmospheric dynamics and orographic enhancement that results as this air passes over the mountain ranges of the West Coast cause some of the region’s most torrential rains. • Governing Body Format—The Contra Costa County seat is located in Martinez. The County is governed by a five-member Board of Supervisors, each of whom is elected to represent a supervisorial district. In addition to the five Board members, six County department heads are voted into office via County-wide elections: Assessor, Auditor-Controller, Clerk-Recorder, District Attorney, Sheriff-Coroner, and Treasurer-Tax Collector. The Board of Supervisors assumes responsibility for the adoption of this plan; the Contra Costa County Office of Emergency Services will oversee its implementation. 1.3 DEVELOPMENT TRENDS Table 1-1 presents growth projections for the County. Contra Costa should continue to experience a steady rate of growth, with an estimated population increase of 27.6 percent by 2040. 1. Unincorporated Contra Costa County 1-3 Table 1-1. Contra Costa County Growth Projections 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Population Total County Population 1,049,025 1,085,700 1,123,500 1,172,600 1,224,400 1,280,300 1,338,400 Household Population 1,038,711 1,074,900 1,112,000 1,160,500 1,211,300 1,266,200 1,323,200 Households 375,364 387,870 400,800 416,220 432,430 448,090 464,150 Persons/household 2.77 2.77 2.77 2.79 2.80 2.83 2.85 Employed Residents 455,540 489,750 526,530 539,360 552,720 572,170 592,060 Employment Agriculture and Natural Resources 990 1,010 1,020 990 960 930 890 Construction 21,400 25,220 29,490 30,320 31,190 32,350 33,550 Manufacturing and Wholesale 27,980 28,780 29,600 30,040 30,520 31,140 31,840 Retail 44,440 45,270 46,120 46,230 46,290 46,560 46,820 Transportation and Utilities 8,850 9,440 10,060 10,150 10,240 10,400 10,560 Information 10,790 11,450 12,140 12,200 12,260 12,380 12,500 Financial and Leasing 27,270 31,320 35,970 36,220 36,440 37,130 37,790 Professional and Management Services 49,410 56,730 65,220 69,110 73,150 78,170 83,520 Health and Educational Services 52,680 58,780 65,750 69,520 73,510 78,400 83,600 Arts, Recreation, and Other Services 47,600 52,060 56,990 58,810 60,680 63,150 65,720 Government 53,510 54,550 55,450 56,470 57,490 59,030 60,600 Total 344,920 374,610 407,810 420,060 432,730 449,640 467,390 Sources: 2010 demographic data taken directly from the U.S. Census. 2010 employment data are derived from the California County- Level Economic Forecast, 2011-2040, California Department of Transportation; Bay Area Job Growth to 2040: Projections and Analysis, Center for Continuing Study of the American Economy; 1989-2009 National Establishment Times-Series (NETS) Database, Walls & Associates using Dun and Bradstreet data; and labor force data from U.S. Bureau of Labor and Statistics and the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2005-2009 American Community Survey. As a primarily suburban county, Contra Costa’s development pattern is sprawling, with single-family homes and low-intensity commercial uses being predominant. From 1990-2010, approximately 47 percent of the population growth in Contra Costa County occurred in the East County cities of Pittsburg, Antioch, Oakley, and Brentwood. Significant growth also occurred along the I-680 corridor in the cities of Danville and San Ramon. Most of this growth followed the traditional development pattern. The Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) foresees continued population and job growth in the county through 2040. However, unlike in previous decades, most growth is projected to occur within 38 Priority Development Areas (PDAs) designated throughout the county. Growth in the PDAs is anticipated to consist primarily of transit-oriented multi-family residential or mixed uses. As only five PDAs are located in the unincorporated area, most growth is planned within the 19 incorporated cities in the county. California law requires counties and cities to prepare and adopt a “general plan,” a comprehensive long-range plan to guide community development. The general plan must contain seven state-mandated “elements” (land use, housing, circulation, safety, open space, conservation, and noise) and may contain additional elements as a jurisdiction sees fit. The general plan must comprise an integrated and internally consistent set of goals, policies, and implementation measures. County actions related to land use such as zoning, subdivisions, design review, and capital improvements, must be consistent with the plan. The Contra Costa County General Plan was originally adopted in 1990, with the last major update occurring in January 2005. Future growth and development in the unincorporated areas of the County will be managed as identified in the County General Plan. Table 1-2 summarizes development trends in the performance period since development of the previous hazard mitigation plan and expected future development trends. Contra Costa County Hazard Mitigation Plan; Volume 2—Planning Partner Annexes 1-4 Table 1-2. Recent and Expected Future Development Trends Criterion Response Has your jurisdiction annexed any land since the development of the previous hazard mitigation plan? No • If yes, give the estimated area annexed and estimated number of parcels or structures. N/A Is your jurisdiction expected to annex any areas during the performance period of this plan? No Are any areas targeted for development or major redevelopment in the next five years? Yes • If yes, please briefly describe Already-approved subdivisions consisting of several hundred homes in the Discovery Bay and Bethel Island areas may be constructed over the next five years. High-density multi-family development is expected to continue in the vicinity of the Pleasant Hill BART Station. How many building permits for new construction were issued in your jurisdiction since the development of the previous hazard mitigation plan? 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Single-Family 343 428 432 632 494 Multi-Family 0 0 0 12 13 Other (commercial, mixed-use, etc.) 7 7 5 7 10 Please provide the number of permits for each hazard area or provide a qualitative description of where development has occurred. While development occurred throughout the unincorporated areas of the county during the performance period of this plan, the vast majority of new construction (over 2,100 permits) occurred in the communities of Discovery Bay (392 permits) and Alamo (83 permits), unincorporated pockets of the cities of Martinez (208 permits) and Danville (301 permits), and the Dougherty Valley area (1,146 permits), which was subsequently annexed into the City of San Ramon. In Discovery Bay, primary hazards of concern are flooding and liquefaction. In Alamo, Martinez, Danville, and San Ramon, the primary concerns are landslides and/or wildfires. All new development was consistent with applicable General Plan policies, the requirements of the zoning and building codes, and project-specific mitigation measures adopted for the purpose of reducing risk associated with natural hazards. Very little development occurred in unincorporated areas at risk from tsunami or dam failure. 1.4 CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT Contra Costa County performed an inventory and analysis of existing capabilities, plans, programs and policies that enhance its ability to implement mitigation strategies. The introduction at the beginning of this volume of the hazard mitigation plan describes the components included in the capability assessment and their significance for hazard mitigation planning. This section summarizes the following findings of the assessment: • An assessment of legal and regulatory capabilities is presented in Table 1-3. • Development and permitting capabilities are presented in Table 1-4. • An assessment of fiscal capabilities is presented in Table 1-5. • An assessment of administrative and technical capabilities is presented in Table 1-6. • An assessment of education and outreach capabilities is presented in Table 1-7. • Information on National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) compliance is presented in Table 1-8. • Classifications under various community mitigation programs are presented in Table 1-9. • The community’s adaptive capacity for the impacts of climate change is presented in Table 1-10. 1. Unincorporated Contra Costa County 1-5 Table 1-3. Legal and Regulatory Capability Local Authority Other Jurisdiction Authority State Mandated Integration Opportunity? Codes, Ordinances, and Requirements Building Code Yes No Yes Yes Comment: County Ordinance Code Title 7 – Building Regulations (incorporates by reference and is based upon the 2016 California Building Code, 2016 California Residential Code, 2016 California Green Building Standards Code, and 2016 California Existing Building Code [all codified in California Code of Regulations, Title 24]); adopted October 25, 2016. Zoning Code Yes No Yes Yes Comment: County Ordinance Code Title 8 – Zoning; originally adopted March 17, 1947; last updated July 11, 2017. Subdivisions Yes No No Yes Comment: County Ordinance Code Title 9 – Subdivisions; originally adopted October 2, 1933; last updated 2015. Stormwater Management Yes Yes Yes Yes Comment: County Ordinance Code Title 10 – Public Works and Flood Control; last updated in 2005. Post-Disaster Recovery Yes Yes Yes Yes Comment: California Disaster Assistance Act Title 2, Division 1, Chapter 7.5; California Code of Regulations Title 19, Division 2, Article 1 State Public Assistance Program. Real Estate Disclosure No Yes Yes No Comment: California State Civil Code 1102 requires full disclosure on natural hazard exposure of the sale/re-sale of any and all real property. Growth Management Yes Yes Yes No Comment: County General Plan 2005–2020 includes a Growth Management Element; originally adopted in 1990; Cal. Gov. Code §65300 et seq. Site Plan Review Yes No No Yes Comment: County Ordinance Code Titles 7, 8, 9, and 10, see previous entries Environmental Protection Yes Yes Yes Yes Comment: California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and County CEQA Guidelines. Flood Damage Prevention Yes No Yes Yes Comment: County Ordinance Code Titles 8 and 10; see the Hazard Mitigation Plan Jurisdictional Annex for the Contra Costa Flood Control and Water Conservation District. Emergency Management Yes Yes Yes Yes Comment: County Ordinance Code Title 4 – Health and Safety, General Article 42-2.2; last updated in 2001. Climate Change Yes No Yes Yes Comment: California Senate Bill 379 Planning Documents General Plan Yes No Yes Yes Is the plan compliant with Assembly Bill 2140? Yes Comment: The Safety Element was amended in June 2011 to incorporate the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan by reference. Capital Improvement Plan Yes Yes No Yes How often is the plan updated? Every other year during the odd years. Comment: Contra Costa County Public Works Department-Capital Road Improvement and Preservation Program (CRIPP) Fiscal Year 2015/2016 to Fiscal Year 2021/2022; originally adopted by the Board of Supervisors on May 19, 1989. Floodplain or Watershed Plan Yes No Yes Yes Comment: Managed by the Public Works Department/Flood Control & Water Conservation District Stormwater Plan Yes No Yes Yes Comment: Managed by the Public Works Department/Flood Control & Water Conservation District. SB 790 Stormwater Resources Act effective January 1, 2010. Urban Water Management Plan No Yes Yes No Comment: Responsibility rests with local water districts. Habitat Conservation Plan Yes Yes No No Comment: East Contra Costa County Habitat Conservation Plan; adopted May 9, 2007. Contra Costa County Hazard Mitigation Plan; Volume 2—Planning Partner Annexes 1-6 Local Authority Other Jurisdiction Authority State Mandated Integration Opportunity? Economic Development Plan Yes No No No Comment: No plan exists. Shoreline Management Plan No No No No Comment: No local plan exists. Community Wildfire Protection Plan No Yes No No Comment: Local fire districts/departments are responsible for implementation Forest Management Plan No No No No Comment: No local plan exists. Climate Action Plan Yes No No Yes Comment: Adopted by Board of Supervisors in December 2015 Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan Yes No No Yes Comment: Emergency Operations Plan (EOP), adopted by the Board of Supervisors in May 2015 Threat & Hazard Identification & Risk Assessment (THIRA) Yes Yes Yes Yes Comment: Last capability assessment review conducted April 12, 2017. Post-Disaster Recovery Plan Yes Yes No No Comment: Plan to be developed in the future. Continuity of Operations Plan Yes Yes No No Comment: Draft Template Completed 2017. Public Health Plan Yes Yes Yes No Comment: Administered by County Health Services Department. Other: Debris Management Plan Yes Yes Yes No Comment: Approved by FEMA in December 2016. Table 1-4. Development and Permitting Capability Criterion Response Does your jurisdiction issue development permits? Yes • If no, who does? If yes, which department? Department of Conservation and Development issues permits for grading and construction on private property. Public Works Department issues permits for construction on public property or in public rights-of-way. Does your jurisdiction have the ability to track permits by hazard area? No Does your jurisdiction have a buildable lands inventory? No • If yes, please briefly describe. N/A • If no, please quantitatively describe the level of buildout in the jurisdiction. The County does not maintain a list or database of buildable lands. By voter-approved initiative, no more than 35 percent of all land in the County, including land within the incorporated cities, can be developed with urban uses. Currently approximately 30 percent of the land has been developed with such uses. 1. Unincorporated Contra Costa County 1-7 Table 1-5. Fiscal Capability Financial Resource Accessible or Eligible to Use? Community Development Block Grants Yes Capital Improvements Project Funding Yes Authority to Levy Taxes for Specific Purposes Yes User Fees for Water, Sewer, Gas or Electric Service Yes Incur Debt through General Obligation Bonds Yes Incur Debt through Special Tax Bonds Yes Incur Debt through Private Activity Bonds Unknown Withhold Public Expenditures in Hazard-Prone Areas No State-Sponsored Grant Programs Yes Development Impact Fees for Homebuyers or Developers Yes Other Yes Table 1-6. Administrative and Technical Capability Staff/Personnel Resource Available? Department/Agency/Position Planners or engineers with knowledge of land development and land management practices Yes Department of Conservation and Development and Public Works Department Engineers or professionals trained in building or infrastructure construction practices Yes Department of Conservation and Development and Public Works Department Planners or engineers with an understanding of natural hazards Yes Emergency Services Division/Office of Emergency Services- Senior Emergency Planners, Public Works Department- Engineers Staff with training in benefit/cost analysis Yes Public Works Department Surveyors Yes Public Works Department Personnel skilled or trained in GIS applications Yes Department of Information Technology (DOIT), Public Works Department, and Department of Conservation and Development Scientist familiar with natural hazards in local area Yes Flood Control and Water Conservation Control District- Hydrologist Department of Conservation and Development- Geologist Emergency Manager Yes Emergency Services Division/Office of Emergency Services - OES Manager Grant writers Yes Emergency Services Division/Office of Emergency Services - OES Manager, Public Works Department, Department of Conservation and Development, Health Services Department, Contra Costa Fire District Other Yes Department of Conservation and Development and Public Works Department Contra Costa County Hazard Mitigation Plan; Volume 2—Planning Partner Annexes 1-8 Table 1-7. Education and Outreach Capability Criterion Response Do you have a Public Information Officer or Communications Office? Yes Do you have personnel skilled or trained in website development? Yes Do you have hazard mitigation information available on your website? Yes • If yes, please briefly describe. Adopted Hazard Mitigation Plan information is available on the County website Do you utilize social media for hazard mitigation education and outreach? Yes • If yes, please briefly describe. Utilize Facebook, Twitter, and NextDoor Do you have any citizen boards or commissions that address issues related to hazard mitigation? No • If yes, please briefly describe. N/A Do you have any other programs already in place that could be used to communicate hazard-related information? Yes • If yes, please briefly describe. Contra Costa Fire Districts participate in the Diablo Fire Safe Council planning and outreach efforts. Do you have any established warning systems for hazard events? Yes • If yes, please briefly describe. Community Warning System Table 1-8. National Flood Insurance Program Compliance Criterion Response What local department is responsible for floodplain management? Public Works Department/Flood Control and Water Conservation District Who is your floodplain administrator? (department/position) Public Works Department/Flood Control and Water Conservation District-Assistant Chief Engineer & Floodplain/Watershed Manager Are any certified floodplain managers on staff in your jurisdiction? Yes What is the date that your flood damage prevention ordinance was last amended? 2016 Does your floodplain management program meet or exceed minimum requirements? Exceeds • If exceeds, in what ways? Requires freeboard, deed restrictions, grant deed of development rights for creek structure setbacks When was the most recent Community Assistance Visit or Community Assistance Contact? 2014 Does your jurisdiction have any outstanding NFIP compliance violations that need to be addressed? No • If so, please state what they are. N/A Do your flood hazard maps adequately address the flood risk within your jurisdiction? Yes • If no, please state why. N/A Does your floodplain management staff need any assistance or training to support its floodplain management program? No • If so, what type of assistance/training is needed? N/A Does your jurisdiction participate in the Community Rating System (CRS)? Yes • If yes, is your jurisdiction interested in improving CRS Classification? No • Is your jurisdiction interested in joining the CRS program? N/A 1. Unincorporated Contra Costa County 1-9 Criterion Response How many Flood Insurance policies are in force in your jurisdiction?a 1,793 • What is the insurance in force? $ 444,846,900 • What is the premium in force? $ 2,056,371 How many total loss claims have been filed in your jurisdiction?a 323 • How many claims were closed without payment/are still open? 158/2 • What were the total payments for losses? $ 1,871,843 a. According to FEMA statistics as of December 31, 2016 Table 1-9. Community Classifications Participating? Classification Date Classified Community Rating System Yes 6 05/01/2001 Building Code Effectiveness Grading Schedule Yes 2 2016 Public Protection N/A N/A N/A Storm Ready Yes Current 2016 Firewise No N/A N/A Table 1-10. Adaptive Capacity for Climate Change Criterion Jurisdiction Ratinga Technical Capacity Jurisdiction-level understanding of potential climate change impacts Low Comments/Additional Information: None provided Jurisdiction-level monitoring of climate change impacts Low Comments/Additional Information: None provided Technical resources to assess proposed strategies for feasibility and externalities Low Comments/Additional Information: None provided Jurisdiction-level capacity for development of greenhouse gas emissions inventory Medium Comments/Additional Information: Greenhouse gas inventory was completed in 2015. Capital planning and land use decisions informed by potential climate impacts Low Comments/Additional Information: None provided Participation in regional groups addressing climate risks Low Comments/Additional Information: None provided Implementation Capacity Clear authority/mandate to consider climate change impacts during public decision-making processes Low Comments/Additional Information: None provided Identified strategies for greenhouse gas mitigation efforts Medium Comments/Additional Information: Climate Action Plan was adopted in December 2015. Identified strategies for adaptation to impacts Low Comments/Additional Information: Adapting to Rising Tides Program Champions for climate action in local government departments Medium Comments/Additional Information: None provided Contra Costa County Hazard Mitigation Plan; Volume 2—Planning Partner Annexes 1-10 Criterion Jurisdiction Ratinga Political support for implementing climate change adaptation strategies Medium Comments/Additional Information: None provided Financial resources devoted to climate change adaptation Low Comments/Additional Information: None provided Local authority over sectors likely to be negatively impacted Low Comments/Additional Information: As the agency with land use jurisdiction over the unincorporated areas, Contra Costa County has authority to impose reasonable requirements aimed at reducing risks associated with climate change. However, certain land uses, particularly those of a heavy industrial nature (i.e., refineries, chemical plants, ports) and/or located along the shoreline, often fall under the jurisdiction of one or more state or federal agencies. Public Capacity Local residents knowledge of and understanding of climate risk Medium Comments/Additional Information: None provided Local residents support of adaptation efforts Low Comments/Additional Information: None provided Local residents’ capacity to adapt to climate impacts Low Comments/Additional Information: None provided Local economy current capacity to adapt to climate impacts Low Comments/Additional Information: None provided Local ecosystems capacity to adapt to climate impacts Low Comments/Additional Information: None provided a. High = The capacity exists and is in use; Medium = The capacity may exist, but is not used or could use some improvement; Low = Capacity does not exist or could use substantial improvement; Unsure= Not enough information is known to assign a rating. 1.5 INTEGRATION WITH OTHER PLANNING INITIATIVES The information on hazards, risk, vulnerability and mitigation contained in this hazard mitigation plan is based on the best available data. Plan integration is the incorporation of this information into other relevant planning mechanisms, such as general planning and capital facilities planning. It includes the integration of natural hazard information and mitigation policies, principles and actions into local planning mechanisms and vice versa. Additionally, plan integration is achieved though the involvement of key staff and community officials in collaboratively planning for hazard mitigation. 1.5.1 Existing Integration In the performance period since adoption of the previous hazard mitigation plan, Contra Costa County made progress on integrating hazard mitigation goals, objectives, and actions into other planning initiatives. The following plans and programs currently integrate components of the hazard mitigation strategy: • Capital Improvement Plan—The capital improvement plan includes projects that can help mitigate potential hazards. The County will strive to ensure consistency between the hazard mitigation plan and the current and future capital improvement plan. The hazard mitigation plan may identify new possible funding sources for capital improvement projects and may result in modifications to proposed projects based on results of the risk assessment. • Building Code—The County’s adoption of the 2016 California Building Code incorporated local modifications addressing seismic and fire hazards. 1. Unincorporated Contra Costa County 1-11 • General Plan 2020—The County General Plan includes a Safety Element to protect the community from unreasonable risk by establishing policies and actions to avoid or minimize the following hazards:  Geologic and seismic hazards  Fire hazards  Hazardous materials  Flooding • Climate Action Plan—The County’s Climate Action Plan includes projects for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. • County Debris Management Plan—The County of Contra Costa Disaster Debris Management Plan (DDMP) provides a comprehensive framework for management of debris following a disaster for all debris-generating hazards. It addresses the roles and responsibilities of government organizations as well as private firms and non-governmental organizations that might have a role in debris operation. Resources listed in Section 1.11 were used to provide information for this annex on hazard events and local capabilities within the jurisdiction. 1.5.2 Opportunities for Future Integration As this hazard mitigation plan is implemented, Contra Costa County will use information from the plan as the best available science and data on natural hazards. The capability assessment presented in this annex identifies codes, plans, and programs that provide opportunities for integration. The area-wide and local action plans developed for this hazard mitigation plan in actions related to plan integration. The capability assessment identified the following plans and programs that do not currently integrate goals or recommendations of the hazard mitigation plan but provide opportunities to do so in the future: • Flood Control Capital Improvement Plan—Capital improvement project proposals may take into consideration hazard mitigation potential as a means of evaluating project prioritization. • Capital Road Improvement and Preservation Plan—Capital improvement project proposals may take into consideration hazard mitigation potential as a means of evaluating project prioritization. • County General Plan—The County is conducting a comprehensive update to its General Plan. The opportunity to incorporate additional hazard mitigation and abatement measures will be contemplated for inclusion into the updated General Plan. • County Emergency Operations Plan (EOP)—The County EOP establishes the emergency organization, assigns tasks, specifies polices and general procedures, and provides for coordination of planning efforts of the various emergency staff and service elements utilizing Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS). The EOP and the hazard mitigation plan are currently integrated and will continue to be integrated as appropriate. Post-Disaster Recovery Plan—The County does not have a recovery plan and intends to develop one as a mitigation planning action during the next five years. The plan will build on the mitigation goals and objectives identified in the mitigation plan. 1.6 JURISDICTION-SPECIFIC NATURAL HAZARD EVENT HISTORY Table 1-11 lists past occurrences of natural hazards for which specific damage was recorded in unincorporated Contra Costa County. Other hazard events that broadly affected the entire planning area, including unincorporated Contra Costa County, are listed in the risk assessments in Volume 1 of this hazard mitigation plan. Contra Costa County Hazard Mitigation Plan; Volume 2—Planning Partner Annexes 1-12 Table 1-11. Past Natural Hazard Events Type of Event Disaster # Date Damage Assessment Flooding DR-4308 2/1/2017-2/23/2017 $7,000,000 Flooding DR-4305 1/18/2017-1/23/2017 $250,000 Flooding DR-4301 1/3/2017-1/12/2017 $7,800,000 Moraga Sinkhole 14767 3/13/2016 - Drought SBA #14122 9/17/2014 - Drought USDA S #3743 1/1/2014 - Cherry Crop - 11/1/2013-5/31/2014, 8/19/2014 $3,200,000 Morgan Territory Fire - 9/8/2013-9/14/2013 - Agriculture - 8/5/2013 - Agricultural Drought USDA S #3558 SBA 13693 6/4/2013-7/29/2013 $500,000 Drought - 2012-2016 (2014) - Marsh Creek Road Sinkhole - 12/18/2012 - Lafayette Winter Storm - 2012 - Agricultural Drought - Fall 2011 - Excessive Rain USDA #3159 SBA #12829 5/1/2011-6/28/2011 - Winter Storms - 2011 - Agricultural Freeze USDA #3109 SBA #12488 11/25/2010-11/26/2010 $500,000 Salmon Fishery 12513 4/10/2010-9/30/2010 - Drought - 2007-2009 Conditions resulted in $3.6 million loss of forage value and $1.3 million cattle production Landslide - 4/6/2006 $5,500,000 Property Flooding - 12/31/2005–1/1/2006 $22,000,000 Property/$8,710,359 Crop Drought - 3/2004 Rangeland forage: $6,564,946; dryland hay: $72,425 Wind - 12/31/2002 $120,000 Property Wind - 11/7/2002 $200,000 Property Drought - 9/2002 Reduced rangeland due to drought estimated loss $1,114296 Severe Weather - 7/10/2002 $25,000 Property Wind - 11/24/2001 $700,000 Property Wind (High Wind) - 12/18/2000 $550,000 Property Flooding (Flash Flood) - 02/14/2000 $100,000 Property Wind (High Wind) - 12/21/1999 $62,500 Property Wind (High Wind) - 2/9/1999 $200,000 Property Wind (High Wind) - 12/16/1998 $25,000 Property Tornado - 12/5/1998 $200,000 Property Tornado - 02/19/1998 $50,000 Property Landslide (El Nino) - 1/1/1997 $27,000,000 Property Severe Weather - 12/9/1995 $6,000,000 Property/$500,000 Crop Damage Severe Weather - 2/21/1994 $128,000 Property Severe Weather - 12/11/1993 $344,828 Property Wind (High Wind) - 11/14/1993 $62,500 Property Wind (High Wind) - 2/19/1993 $50,000 Property 1. Unincorporated Contra Costa County 1-13 Type of Event Disaster # Date Damage Assessment Flooding (Flash Flood) - 1/20/1993 $12,500 Property Flooding (Flash Flood) - 1/13/1993 $5,555,556 Property/Crops Severe Weather - 1/10/1993 $8,333,333 Property Flooding/Severe Weather - 12/11/1992 $131,579 Property Severe Weather - 12/7/1992 $1525 Property Flooding-Severe Weather - 02/14/1992 $9,090.91 Property Flooding-Severe Weather - 02/11/1992 $11,627.91 Property Severe Weather - 02/09/1992 $89,286 Severe Weather - 12/20/1990 $86,206 Property/Crops Flooding (Flash Flood) - 5/28/1990 $500,000 Property Earthquake (Loma Prieta) - 10/17/1989 $25,000.000 Wind - 12/14/1988 $50,000 Property Drought - 1987-1992 Flooding (Flash Flood) - 2/17/1986 $5,000,000 Property Levee Failure, High Winds, High Tides, Floods, Storm, Wind Driven Water - 12/9/1983 Public-$7,240,785; private- $2,669 million; agriculture $1 million Severe Weather - 12/3/1983 $312,500 Property Flood-Severe Weather - 1/25/1983 $384,165 Property Wind - 12/22/1982 $1,041,666 Property Flooding - 3/30/1982 $166,667 Property Flood-Severe Weather - 1/3/1982 $7,142,857 Property Delta Levee Break Holland & Webb Levee breaks - 1/23/1980 Public-$11,158,700; private-$1,479,500; agriculture- $3,887,195; Total-$17,388,013 Drought - 2/13/1976 Damage Statewide $888.5 million Eucalyptus Tree Freeze - 4/4/1973 Federal Disaster 2 Counties Contra County & Alameda- removal of approximately $2 million dead trees $8-10 million Flood-Severe Storm/Thunder - 1/16/1973 $86,206 Property Flood-Severe Storm/Thunder - 1/18/1969 $862,068 Property Notes: In 1973, 1982, and 1986, one or more Delta island levees failed or were overtopped, including summertime breaks that did not occur at time of high storm runoff. Some islands in the Delta have flooded two or three times since 1980. Sources: Spatial Hazard Events and Losses Database for the United States (SHELDUS); Cal EMA Disasters 1950 – 1999; OES files 1.7 JURISDICTION-SPECIFIC VULNERABILITIES Volume 1 of this hazard mitigation plan provides complete risk assessments for each identified hazard of concern. This section provides information on a few key vulnerabilities for the jurisdiction. Repetitive loss records are as follows: • Number of FEMA-identified Repetitive-Loss Properties: 12 • Number of FEMA-identified Severe-Repetitive-Loss Properties: 0 • Number of Repetitive-Loss Properties or Severe-Repetitive-Loss Properties that have been mitigated: 1 Other noted vulnerabilities include the following: Contra Costa County Hazard Mitigation Plan; Volume 2—Planning Partner Annexes 1-14 • Discrepancies between FEMA’s printed and digital Flood Insurance Rate Maps. • Low community understanding of risks associated with hazards. • Throughout the County there is a general risk related to creek bank erosion. • Limited available funding sources or funding shortfalls may affect the completion of projects or continuation of programs aimed at mitigating hazards. • Facilities approaching their end of useful life may begin to fail due to age, limiting their ability to mitigate hazards. • Completion and implementation of County facility upgrades in a timely manner may limit their ability to mitigate hazards. • Some unincorporated communities, such as Canyon and Morgan Territory, have limited ingress and egress routes that may present access issues during and after a hazard event. • There are a number of facilities in the County that store and utilize extremely hazardous materials, such as the Nuclear Reactor facility in San Ramon. Secondary impacts associated with the release of these materials may complicate response and recovery efforts during and after an event. • Major transportation corridors and rail lines are vulnerable to disruption, particularly from the earthquake hazard. • Additional consideration needs to be given to venues for mass gathering, such as concert venues, given the implications for emergency response agencies, should a large event occur at the same time as a scheduled event. 1.8 HAZARD RISK RANKING Table 1-12 presents a local ranking for unincorporated Contra Costa County of all hazards of concern for which Volume 1 of this hazard mitigation plan provides complete risk assessments. This ranking summarizes how hazards vary for this jurisdiction. As described in detail in Volume 1, the ranking process involves an assessment of the likelihood of occurrence for each hazard, along with its potential impacts on people, property and the economy. Table 1-12. Hazard Risk Ranking Rank Hazard Type Risk Rating Score (Probability x Impact) Category 1 Earthquakeb 54 High 2 Landslidee 48 High 3 Wildfiree 39 High 4 Severe weather 30 Medium 5 Dam and levee failurea 18 Medium 5 Floodc 18 Medium 6 Sea level rised 12 Low 7 Drought 9 Low 8 Tsunami 6 Low a. Based on the level of detail conducted in the risk assessment, the risk ranking for this hazard is focused solely on dam failure impacts. See Chapter 6.4 of Volume 1 for combined dam inundation list on which this assessment is based. b. “HayWired” M7.05 event was used to assign probability and impacts c. 1-percent annual chance event was used to assign probability and impacts d. 2100 upper range estimates and extreme tide are used to assign probability and impacts e. Very High and High Severity Zones were used to assign probability and impacts 1. Unincorporated Contra Costa County 1-15 1.9 STATUS OF PREVIOUS PLAN ACTIONS Table 1-13 summarizes the actions that were recommended in the previous version of the hazard mitigation plan and their implementation status at the time this update was prepared. Table 1-13. Status of Previous Plan Actions Removed; Carried Over to Plan Update Action Item Completed No Longer Feasible Check if Yes Enter Action # CCC-1—Support County-wide initiatives identified in Volume 1. X Comment: Supported throughout the performance period of the plan CCC-2—Continue to support the implementation, monitoring, maintenance, and updating of this Plan, as defined in Volume 1. X CCC-3 Comment: CCC-3—Continue to maintain compliance and good standing under the National Flood Insurance Program. X X CCC-4 Comment: Ongoing CCC-4—Continue to maintain/enhance the County’s classification under the Community Rating System. X X CCC-5 Comment: Ongoing CCC-5—Integrate Local Hazard Mitigation Plan into the Safety Element of the General Plan. X X CCC-2 Comment: The Safety Element was amended in June 2011 to incorporate the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan by reference. CCC-6—Upgrade Emergency Operations Center (EOC) HVAC. X Comment: Completed 2013 CCC-7—Develop and Conduct a Multi-Hazard Seasonal Public Awareness Program to Include Exercises. X Comment: Action unclear CCC-8—Annually Provide California State Training Institute (CSTI) “Earthquake” Class to Essential County Personnel. X X CCC-6 Comment: Ongoing CCC-9— Support Mass Care and Shelter Drills conducted by Red Cross, which involve both County Employees, Non-Government Agencies, CERT volunteers, and the public. X X CCC-7 Comment: Ongoing CCC-10—County participates in annual statewide emergency planning exercises. X X CCC-8 Comment: Ongoing CCC-11—FCC P-25 East Bay Regional Communications System (Alameda & Contra Costa County- At built out, the East Bay Regional Communications System will be a 36-site, 2 county P-25 compliant communication system designed to provide fully interoperable communications to all public agencies within Alameda and Contra Costa counties. Refer to website www.ebrcsa.org for complete project description. X X CCC-9 Comment: Roll out over two year period 2012-2013, went live CCC-12—Update existing network in the EOC to support full activation to include Wi-Fi. X Comment: Completed 2015 Contra Costa County Hazard Mitigation Plan; Volume 2—Planning Partner Annexes 1-16 Removed; Carried Over to Plan Update Action Item Completed No Longer Feasible Check if Yes Enter Action # CCC-13—Retrofit antenna mast to support the addition of additional antennas, and protect from impacts from seismic and severe weather hazards. X Comment: Action unclear CCC-14—Continue to maintain and develop the existing County-wide Community Warning System (CWS) by identifying and implementing new technology as it becomes available. X X CCC-10 Comment: Ongoing CCC-15—Community Warning System to continue outreach for their “Cell Phone Alert” program which allows individuals to register their cell phones with the CWS and to be notified via cell phone during an emergency incident in their geographic location. X X CCC-11 Comment: Ongoing CCC-16—Update/enhance existing flood hazard mapping to better reflect current conditions. X X CCC-12 Comment: Ongoing CCC-17—Canal Road Bridge Replacement. X CCC-13 Comment: Construction to begin Summer 2017 CCC-18—Marsh Creek Road Bridge over Marsh Creek. X CCC-14 Comment: Construction to begin Summer 2019 CCC-19—Bethel Island Road retrofit-widen to four lane arterial standard from East Cypress Road to Gateway Road including realignment of curve, Road elevation, and construction of new bridge. X Comment: Completed in 2012 CCC-20—Center Avenue (Pacheco Boulevard to Blackwood Drive) Relocate Fire Station, widen bridge, and construct 2 additional lanes (4 lanes total). X CCC-16 Comment: On Capital Road Improvement and Preservation Plan (CRIPP) CCC-21—Boulevard Way at Las Trampas Creek Scour Repair - Bridge on Boulevard Way crossing Las Trampas Creek - Repair of the scouring is needed to maintain the bridge’s structural integrity. X CCC-17 Comment: Construction anticipated for 2017/2018 CCC-22—Retrofit Marsh Drive Bridge over Walnut Creek. X CCC-18 Comment: Construction anticipated for 2022 CCC-23—Orwood Road Bridge Replacement - the existing bridge is approaching the end of its useful life and is not designed to for earthquake loading. Project # 0662-6R4076 X Comment: Completed 2017 CCC-24—Pomo Street Arch Culvert Repair. X Comment: Completed 2011 CCC-25—San Pablo Avenue Bridge over Rodeo Creek - bridge replacement. X Comment: Completed 2015 CCC-26—Update of four Dam Emergency Plans (EAP): Deer Creek, Dry Creek, Marsh Creek, and Pine Creek. X Comment: Completed 2016 1. Unincorporated Contra Costa County 1-17 Removed; Carried Over to Plan Update Action Item Completed No Longer Feasible Check if Yes Enter Action # CCC-27—Adoption of Fire and Resource Assessment Program (FRAP) Maps - Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone Maps developed by Cal Fire. X Comment: Contra Costa Fire Protection District is the responsible agency. CCC-28—Enhance/Improve County Ordinance Code language and enforcement including: County Building Codes to Increase Compliance with SB 1369 Defensible Space and Other Fire Safe Requirements in the Unincorporated County. X CCC-23 Comment: CCC-29—Improve, expand and develop new programs that increase awareness of and reduce risk to wildfires including: Support Fire District Chipper Program. X Comment: Diablo Fire Safe Council is the responsible agency. CCC-30—Implementation of projects listed in the Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWFPP). X Comment: None of the listed projects are under Contra Costa County’s authority to implement. CCC-31—Participate in Annual Multi-Agency Wildland Fire Drill X Comment: Local fire districts participate, not the County. CCC-32—Continue and Maintain Noxious Weed Eradication Program - Department of Agriculture & California Department of Forestry. X Comment: Action unclear CCC-33—Participate in the bi-annual CAER Group Coastal Region Hazardous Materials Response Organization (CHMRO) Hazardous Materials Transportation Conference 2011. X Comment: Completed 2011 CCC-34—Address deferred maintenance of County owned facilities as identified in the 2007 “Contra Costa County Facility Condition Analysis (FCA).” The FCA project included the inspection of 93 buildings, totaling over 2,900,000 square feet. Facilities inspected fall into critical infrastructure/key resources categories. X CCC-24 Comment: CCC-35—Where appropriate, support retrofitting, purchase, or relocation of structures located in hazard-prone areas to protect structures from future damage, with repetitive loss and severe repetitive loss properties as priority. X CCC-1 Comment: CCC-36— Sponsor the formation and training of Community Emergency Response Teams (CERT) training through partnerships with local businesses. X Comment: This action is not feasible with currently available resources. CCC-37— Better inform residents of comprehensive mitigation activities, for all hazards of concern including elevation of appliances above expected flood levels, use of fire-resistant roofing and defensible space in high wildfire threat and wildfire-urban-interface areas, structural retrofitting techniques for older homes, and use of intelligent grading practices through workshops, publications, and media announcements and events. X CCC-25 Comment: Contra Costa County Hazard Mitigation Plan; Volume 2—Planning Partner Annexes 1-18 1.10 HAZARD MITIGATION ACTION PLAN AND EVALUATION OF RECOMMENDED ACTIONS Table 1-14 lists the actions that make up the Unincorporated Contra Costa County hazard mitigation action plan. Table 1-15 identifies the priority for each action. Table 1-16 summarizes the mitigation actions by hazard of concern and mitigation type. Table 1-14. Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix Applies to new or existing assets Hazards Mitigated Objectives Met Responsible Agencya Estimated Cost Sources of Funding Timeline CCC-1—Where appropriate, support retrofitting or relocation of structures in high hazard areas, prioritizing structures that have experienced repetitive losses. Existing All Hazards 1, 4, 7, 9, 12, 14, 15, 17 Public Works High HMGP, PDM, FMA Short-term CCC-2—Integrate the hazard mitigation plan into other plans, ordinances, and programs that dictate land use decisions in the community, including the County General Plan, County Zoning Ordinance, and County Capital Road Improvement and Preservation Plan. New and Existing All Hazards 1, 3, 4, 5, 7, 11, 12, 14, 17, 18 Conservation and Development*, Public Works Low Staff time/department funds Ongoing CCC-3—Actively support and participate in implementation, monitoring, maintenance, and updating of this Plan, as outlined and defined in Volume 1. New and Existing All Hazards 3, 8, 16 OES Low Staff time, HMGP Short-term CCC-4—Continue to maintain good standing and compliance under the NFIP through implementation of floodplain management programs that, at a minimum, meet the NFIP requirements: • Enforce the flood damage prevention ordinance. • Participate in floodplain identification and mapping updates. • Provide public assistance/information on floodplain requirements and impacts. New and Existing Flood 3, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 15 Public Works/Flood Control District Low Staff time/department funds Ongoing CCC-5—Continue to maintain/enhance the County’s classification under the Community Rating System. New and Existing Flood 3, 4, 5, 7, 9 Public Works/Flood Control District Low General Fund Ongoing CCC-6—Annually Provide California State Training Institute (CSTI) “Earthquake” Class to Essential County Personnel. N/A Earthquake 2, 6, 13 OES Low; $50,000 EMPG, SHSGP Ongoing CCC-7—Support Mass Care and Shelter Drills conducted by Red Cross, which involve County Employees, Non-Government Agencies, CERT volunteers, and the public. N/A All Hazards 2, 3 Red Cross* and City*, OES Medium; $50,000 Staff Time, General Funds Ongoing CCC-8—Continue to participate in annual statewide emergency planning exercises. N/A All Hazards 2, 6, 13 OES Low; $50,000 UASI, CDPH Ongoing CCC-9—FCC P-25 phase 2 compliance East Bay Regional Communications System (Alameda & Contra Costa Counties - at built out, the East Bay Regional Communications System will be a 36-site, two county, P-25 compliant communication system designed to provide fully interoperable communications to all public agencies within Alameda and Contra Costa Counties. (Refer to website www.ebrcsa.org for complete project description). New and Existing All Hazards 1, 2 JPA*, Sherriff’s Office IT High; $9 Million Multiple Federal Grants Ongoing CCC-10—Continue to maintain and develop the existing County-wide Community Warning System (CWS) by identifying and implementing new technology as it becomes available. New and Existing All Hazards 2, 3 OES Low CUPA Fees Ongoing 1. Unincorporated Contra Costa County 1-19 Applies to new or existing assets Hazards Mitigated Objectives Met Responsible Agencya Estimated Cost Sources of Funding Timeline CCC-11—Community Warning System will continue to educate and outreach on all registration tools (cell phones, social media, sirens, etc.). Existing All Hazards 2, 3 OES Low CUPA Fees Ongoing CCC-12—Update/enhance existing flood hazard mapping to better reflect current conditions. Existing Flood 3, 6, 12, 16 Public Works/Flood Control District Medium FEMA/Public Works Floodplain Determination Fees; FEMA Risk-MAP program Short-term; Ongoing CCC-13—Canal Road Bridge Replacement (Bridge No. 28C0376) – The existing bridge is approaching the end of its useful life. Existing Flood/ Earthquake 1, 7, 15 Public Works $3 Million Medium HBP, Prop 111 Gas Tax Short-term CCC-14—Marsh Creek Road Bridge over Marsh Creek (Bridge No. 28C141) – The existing bridge is approaching the end of its useful life. Existing Flood/ Earthquake 1, 7, 15 Public Works $5 Million Medium HBP, Prop 111 Gas Tax Short-term; Anticipated completion date 2019 CCC-15—Byron Highway Bridge Replacement over California Aqueduct (Bridge No. 28C0121) – The existing bridge is approaching the end of its useful life. Existing Flood/ Earthquake 1, 7, 15 Public Works $15 Million, High DWR, HBP, Prop 111 Gas Tax Short-term; Anticipated completion date 2020 CCC-16—Center Avenue and Pacheco Boulevard Intersection Improvements – Relocate fire station, widen bridge, and construct intersection improvements. Existing Flood/ Earthquake 1, 7, 15 Public Works $7.6 Million, High FEMA Hazard Mitigation Grant funding for FS relocation. Pacheco Area of Benefit Funds and Prop 111 Gas Tax for road work Long-term; Depends on funding CCC-17—Boulevard Way at Las Trampas Creek Scour Repair- Bridge on Boulevard Way crossing Las Trampas Creek- Repair of the scouring is needed to maintain the bridge’s structural integrity. Existing Flood/ Earthquake 1, 7, 15 Public Works $500,000, Medium HBP, Prop 111 Gas Tax Short-term; 2017/2018 CCC-18—Retrofit Marsh Drive Bridge over Walnut Creek (Bridge No. 28C0442) – The existing bridge is approaching the end of its useful life. Existing Flood/ Earthquake 1, 7, 15 Public Works $8 Million, High HBP, Prop 111 Gas Tax Short-term; Anticipated completion date 2022 CCC-19—Marsh Creek Road Bridge over Marsh Creek (Bridge No. 28C143) – The existing bridge is approaching the end of its useful life. Existing Flood/ Earthquake 1, 7, 15 Public Works $4 Million Medium HBP, Prop 111 Gas Tax Short-term; Anticipated completion date 2020 Contra Costa County Hazard Mitigation Plan; Volume 2—Planning Partner Annexes 1-20 Applies to new or existing assets Hazards Mitigated Objectives Met Responsible Agencya Estimated Cost Sources of Funding Timeline CCC-20—Marsh Creek Road Bridge over Marsh Creek (Bridge No. 28C145) – The existing bridge is approaching the end of its useful life. Existing Flood/ Earthquake 1, 7, 15 Public Works $4 Million Medium HBP, Prop 111 Gas Tax Short-term; Anticipated completion date 2020 CCC-21—Del Monte Drive Bridge Replacement (Bridge No. 28C0207) – The existing bridge is approaching the end of its useful life. Existing Flood/ Earthquake 1, 7, 15 Public Works $4 Million Medium HBP, Prop 111 Gas Tax Long-term; Depends on funding CCC-22—Pacific Avenue Bridge Replacement (Bridge No. 28C0379) – The existing bridge is approaching the end of its useful life. Existing Flood/ Earthquake 1, 7, 15 Public Works $4 Million Medium HBP, Prop 111 Gas Tax Long-term; Depends on funding CCC-23—Enhance/Improve County Ordinance Code language and enforcement including: County Building Codes to Increase Compliance with SB 1369 Defensible Space and Other Fire Safe Requirements in the Unincorporated County. New Wildfire 5, 7, 11, 12 Conservation and Development $20,000 Low Staff time/department funds Long-term, Unknown; depends on FRAP map adoption CCC-24—Address deferred maintenance of County owned facilities as identified in the 2007 “Contra Costa County Facility Condition Analysis (FCA).” The FCA project included the inspection of 93 buildings, totaling over 2,900,000 square feet. Facilities inspected fall into critical infrastructure/key resources categories. Existing All Hazards 3, 7, 15 Public Works $251 Million High Grants and General Funds when they become available Long-term; depends on funding CCC-25—Through publications and social media, better inform residents of comprehensive mitigation strategies for all hazards of concern, including but not limited to, elevating appliances above expected flood levels, using fire-resistant roofing and defensible space in high wildfire threat and wildfire-urban interface areas, structural retrofitting techniques for older homes, and using intelligent grading techniques. New All Hazards 3, 5, 7 Conservation and Development Low Staff time/department funds Short-term; Ongoing CCC-26—Construct new EOC and obtain Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certification. New All Hazards 1, 2, 18 Sheriff’s Office Low Capital budget Short-term; 2018/2019 CCC-27—Hazardous Materials Emergency Program (HMEP) Adapting to Rising Tides shoreline data overlay hazardous materials rail transportation data to look at the impact that disruption from flooding/sea level rise could or would cause to Contra Costa County. Existing Flood 1, 6, 18 HazMat Division, Health Department High HMGP Short-term 1. Unincorporated Contra Costa County 1-21 Applies to new or existing assets Hazards Mitigated Objectives Met Responsible Agencya Estimated Cost Sources of Funding Timeline CCC-28—Review and revise, as necessary, General Plan Safety Element policies and maps related to landslide hazards based on information contained in Seismic Hazard Zone (SHZ) Reports prepared by the California Department of Conservation. New Landslide 5, 6, 7, 12, 14 Conservation and Development Low Staff time/department funds Long-term, Unknown; depends on state’s completion of SHZ Reports CCC-29—Implement the North Richmond Watershed Connections Project that includes a suite of multiple-benefit urban greening projects to improve water quality and enhance the health of San Pablo and Wildcat Creeks and their watersheds, while expanding the urban forest and reducing heat islands, and providing Green Infrastructure. New Flood 1, 3, 10, 14, 17 Public Works $900,000 Medium State Coastal Conservancy Urban Greening Grant Short-term; Early 2018 to 2020 CCC-30—North Richmond Stormwater Pump Station Retrofit. Existing Flood 1, 10 Public Works/Flood Control District Low Flood Control District/County Funds Short-term a. Where multiple responsible agencies are listed, an asterisk (*) identifies the lead agency. Table 1-15. Mitigation Action Priority Action # # of Objectives Met Benefits Costs Do Benefits Equal or Exceed Costs? Is Project Grant- Eligible? Can Project Be Funded Under Existing Programs/ Budgets? Implementation Prioritya Grant Pursuit Prioritya CCC-1 8 High High Yes Yes No Medium High CCC-2 9 Medium Low Yes No Yes High Low CCC-3 3 Low Low Yes No Yes High Low CCC-4 7 Medium Low Yes No Yes High Low CCC-5 5 Low Low Yes No Yes High Low CCC-6 3 High Low Yes Yes Yes Medium High CCC-7 2 High Medium Yes No No Medium Low CCC-8 3 High Low Yes Yes Yes Mediumb Medium CCC-9 2 High High Yes Yes Yes High High CCC-10 2 Medium Low Yes No Yes High Low CCC-11 2 High Low Yes No Yes High Low CCC-12 4 Medium Medium Yes Yes No Medium Medium CCC-13 3 High Medium Yes Yes No Medium High CCC-14 3 High Medium Yes Yes No Medium High CCC-15 3 High High Yes Yes No Medium High CCC-16 3 High High Yes Yes No Medium High CCC-17 3 High Medium Yes Yes Yes High High CCC-18 3 High High Yes Yes No Medium High CCC-19 3 High Medium Yes Yes No Medium High CCC-20 3 High Medium Yes Yes No Medium High Contra Costa County Hazard Mitigation Plan; Volume 2—Planning Partner Annexes 1-22 Action # # of Objectives Met Benefits Costs Do Benefits Equal or Exceed Costs? Is Project Grant- Eligible? Can Project Be Funded Under Existing Programs/ Budgets? Implementation Prioritya Grant Pursuit Prioritya CCC-21 3 High Medium Yes Yes No Medium High CCC-22 3 High Medium Yes Yes No Medium High CCC-23 4 Medium Low Yes No Yes High Low CCC-24 3 High High Yes Yes No Medium Medium CCC-25 3 Medium Low Yes No Yes High Low CCC-26 3 Medium Low Yes No Yes High Low CCC-27 3 Medium High Yes Yes No Medium High CCC-28 5 Medium Low Yes No Yes High Low CCC-29 5 Medium Medium Yes Yes Yes Medium Medium CCC-30 2 Medium Low Yes Yes Yes Medium High a. See the introduction to this volume for explanation of priorities. b. Several drills are held throughout the year and are attended as staff resources are available. Table 1-16. Analysis of Mitigation Actions Action Addressing Hazard, by Mitigation Typea Hazard Type Prevention Property Protection Public Education and Awareness Natural Resource Protection Emergency Services Structural Projects Climate Resilient Community Capacity Building All hazards CCC-2 CCC-25 CCC-2 CCC-25 CCC-2, CCC-9, CCC-10, CCC-11 CCC-25 CCC-2 CCC-2, CCC-8, CCC-9, CCC-10 CCC-2 CCC-2 CCC-25 CCC-2, CCC-7, CCC-9, CCC-10 CCC-25 Dam and levee failure Drought Earthquake CCC-13 CCC-14 CCC-15 CCC-16 CCC-17 CCC-18 CCC-19 CCC-20 CCC-21 CCC-22 CCC-6 CCC-13 CCC-14 CCC-15 CCC-16 CCC-17 CCC-18 CCC-19 CCC-20 CCC-21 CCC-22 Flood CCC-5 CCC-12 CCC-29 CCC-5 CCC-13 CCC-14 CCC-15 CCC-16 CCC-17 CCC-18 CCC-19 CCC-20 CCC-21 CCC-22 CCC-5 CCC-12 CCC-5 CCC-29 CCC-5 CCC-13 CCC-14 CCC-15 CCC-16 CCC-17 CCC-18 CCC-19 CCC-20 CCC-21 CCC-22 CCC-29 CCC-29 CCC-30 CCC-30 Landslide CCC-28 CCC-28 Severe weather Tsunami Wildfire CCC-23 CCC-23 CCC-23 a. See the introduction to this volume for explanation of mitigation types. 1. Unincorporated Contra Costa County 1-23 1.11 REVIEW AND INCORPORATION OF RESOURCES FOR THIS ANNEX The following technical reports, plans, and regulatory mechanisms were reviewed to provide information for this annex. • Contra Costa County General Plan—The General Plan was reviewed for the full capability assessment and for identifying opportunities for action plan integration. • Contra Costa County Ordinance Code—The ordinance code was reviewed for the full capability assessment and for identifying opportunities for action plan integration. • Contra Costa County Floodplain Management Ordinance—The Floodplain Management Ordinance was reviewed for compliance with the National Flood Insurance Program. • Contra Costa County Capital Road Improvement and Preservation Plan (CRIPP)—The CRIPP was reviewed for identifying projects that address hazards. • Hazard Mitigation Plan Annex Development Tool-kit—The tool-kit was used to support the development of this annex including past hazard events, noted vulnerabilities, risk ranking and action development. §¨¦780 §¨¦80 ÄÆÅ29 ÄÆÅ4 ÄÆÅ4 ÄÆÅ4Hercules Pinole Unincorporated Martinez Pinole Valley R d Pom o n a St SanPabloAveCarquine z Scenic DrFranklinCanyon R dSanPabloAveRedwoodRd RefugioValley R dParker AveCr ockettBlv d Cu mmingsSkw y McE w e n RdTsunami Evacuation Planning Scenario Contra Costa County Boundary City Boundaries Water Bodies Tsunami Inundation Zones 0 1 20.5 Miles / Rodeo / CrockettUnincorporated Area This tsunami inundation map was preparedto assist cities and counties in identifyingtheir tsunami hazard. It is intended forlocal jurisdictional, coastal evacuationplanning uses only. Map Data Sources: Contra Costa County,Caltrans, ABAG, USDA, USGS §¨¦580 §¨¦580 §¨¦80 §¨¦80 §¨¦880 §¨¦680 ÄÆÅ238 ÄÆÅ185 ÄÆÅ160 ÄÆÅ92 ÄÆÅ242 ÄÆÅ82 ÄÆÅ13 ÄÆÅ84 ÄÆÅ61 ÄÆÅ29 ÄÆÅ131 ÄÆÅ221 ÄÆÅ37 ÄÆÅ380 ÄÆÅ4 ÄÆÅ4 ÄÆÅ12 ÄÆÅ12 ÄÆÅ84 ÄÆÅ24 Hercules Lafayette Orinda Moraga OakleyMartinezConcord Danville Pittsburg Richmond Antioch Main St Marsh C r e ekRd Sellers AveAlhambra V a lley RdVascoRdByro n H wy Clayton Rd Lon eTree Way £¤101 £¤101 Contra Costa County Boundary City Boundaries Water Bodies Wildfire Severity Zone Moderate High Very High Map Data Sources: Contra Costa County,Caltrans, CalFIRE, USDA Unincorporated Wildfire Severity Zones 0 7.5 153.75 Miles / §¨¦680 ÄÆÅ242 ÄÆÅ4 ÄÆÅ4 ÄÆÅ4 Pleasant Hill Unincorporated Martinez Concord Pittsburg Cowell R d Pacheco B lv d L e land Rd Tay lo r B l v d C oncord Ave K irker P assRdWillow Pass Rd W illowPassRdClaytonRd Concord Blvd C layton Rd Babel LnMorelloAveBaileyRdBailey Rd12" Mean Higher High Water Scenario Low Lying Areas Contra Costa County Boundary City Boundaries Map Data Sources: Contra Costa County,Caltrans, SFBCDC, USDA, USGS Vine Hill / Bay PointUnincorporated Area Sea Level Rise - Mean Higher HighWater Scenario Inundation Zones 0 1 20.5 Miles / The inundation maps and the associated analyses are intended as planning level tools to illustrate the potential for inundation and coastal flooding under future SLR scenarios and (they) do not represent the exact location or depth of flooding or shoreline overtopping. The maps are based on model outputs and do not account for all of the complex and dynamic Bay processes or future conditions such as erosion, subsidence, future construction or shoreline protection upgrades, or other changes to San Francisco Bay or the region that may occur in response to SLR. For more context about the maps and analyses, including a description of the data and methods used, please see Adapting to Rising Tides: Transportation Vulnerability and Risk Assessment Pilot Project, Technical Report, November 2011. §¨¦680 ÄÆÅ242 ÄÆÅ4 ÄÆÅ4 ÄÆÅ4 Pleasant Hill Unincorporated Martinez Concord Pittsburg Cowell R d Pacheco B lv d L e land Rd Tay lo r B l v d C oncord Ave K irker P assRdWillow Pass Rd W illowPassRdClaytonRd Concord Blvd C layton Rd Babel LnMorelloAveBaileyRdBailey Rd12" Mean Higher High Water Plus 100-Year Extreme Tide Low Lying Areas Contra Costa County Boundary City Boundaries Map Data Sources: Contra Costa County,Caltrans, SFBCDC, USDA, USGS Vine Hill / Bay PointUnincorporated Area Sea Level Rise - Mean Higher HighWater Scenario Inundation Zones 0 1 20.5 Miles / The inundation maps and the associated analyses are intended as planning level tools to illustrate the potential for inundation and coastal flooding under future SLR scenarios and (they) do not represent the exact location or depth of flooding or shoreline overtopping. The maps are based on model outputs and do not account for all of the complex and dynamic Bay processes or future conditions such as erosion, subsidence, future construction or shoreline protection upgrades, or other changes to San Francisco Bay or the region that may occur in response to SLR. For more context about the maps and analyses, including a description of the data and methods used, please see Adapting to Rising Tides: Transportation Vulnerability and Risk Assessment Pilot Project, Technical Report, November 2011. §¨¦680 ÄÆÅ242 ÄÆÅ4 ÄÆÅ4 ÄÆÅ4 Pleasant Hill Unincorporated Martinez Concord Pittsburg Cowell R d Pacheco B lv d L e land Rd Tay lo r B l v d C oncord Ave K irker P assRdWillow Pass Rd W illowPassRdClaytonRd Concord Blvd C layton Rd Babel LnMorelloAveBaileyRdBailey Rd66" Mean Higher High Water Scenario Low Lying Areas Contra Costa County Boundary City Boundaries Map Data Sources: Contra Costa County,Caltrans, SFBCDC, USDA, USGS Vine Hill / Bay PointUnincorporated Area Sea Level Rise - Mean Higher HighWater Scenario Inundation Zones 0 1 20.5 Miles / The inundation maps and the associated analyses are intended as planning level tools to illustrate the potential for inundation and coastal flooding under future SLR scenarios and (they) do not represent the exact location or depth of flooding or shoreline overtopping. The maps are based on model outputs and do not account for all of the complex and dynamic Bay processes or future conditions such as erosion, subsidence, future construction or shoreline protection upgrades, or other changes to San Francisco Bay or the region that may occur in response to SLR. For more context about the maps and analyses, including a description of the data and methods used, please see Adapting to Rising Tides: Transportation Vulnerability and Risk Assessment Pilot Project, Technical Report, November 2011. §¨¦680 ÄÆÅ242 ÄÆÅ4 ÄÆÅ4 ÄÆÅ4 Pleasant Hill Unincorporated Martinez Concord Pittsburg Cowell R d Pacheco B lv d L e land Rd Tay lo r B l v d C oncord Ave K irker P assRdWillow Pass Rd W illowPassRdClaytonRd Concord Blvd C layton Rd Babel LnMorelloAveBaileyRdBailey Rd66" Mean Higher High Water Plus 100-Year Extreme Tide Low Lying Areas Contra Costa County Boundary City Boundaries Map Data Sources: Contra Costa County,Caltrans, SFBCDC, USDA, USGS Vine Hill / Bay PointUnincorporated Area Sea Level Rise - Mean Higher HighWater Scenario Inundation Zones 0 1 20.5 Miles / The inundation maps and the associated analyses are intended as planning level tools to illustrate the potential for inundation and coastal flooding under future SLR scenarios and (they) do not represent the exact location or depth of flooding or shoreline overtopping. The maps are based on model outputs and do not account for all of the complex and dynamic Bay processes or future conditions such as erosion, subsidence, future construction or shoreline protection upgrades, or other changes to San Francisco Bay or the region that may occur in response to SLR. For more context about the maps and analyses, including a description of the data and methods used, please see Adapting to Rising Tides: Transportation Vulnerability and Risk Assessment Pilot Project, Technical Report, November 2011. §¨¦780 §¨¦80 ÄÆÅ29 ÄÆÅ4 ÄÆÅ4 ÄÆÅ4Hercules Pinole Unincorporated Martinez Pinole Valley R d Pom o n a St SanPabloAveCarquine z Scenic DrFranklinCanyon R dSanPabloAveRedwoodRd RefugioValley R dParker AveCr ockettBlv d Cu mmingsSkw y McE w e n Rd12" Mean Higher High Water Scenario Low Lying Areas Contra Costa County Boundary City Boundaries Map Data Sources: Contra Costa County,Caltrans, SFBCDC, USDA, USGS Sea Level Rise - Mean Higher HighWater Scenario Inundation Zones 0 1 20.5 Miles / The inundation maps and the associated analyses are intended as planning level tools to illustrate the potential for inundation and coastal flooding under future SLR scenarios and (they) do not represent the exact location or depth of flooding or shoreline overtopping. The maps are based on model outputs and do not account for all of the complex and dynamic Bay processes or future conditions such as erosion, subsidence, future construction or shoreline protection upgrades, or other changes to San Francisco Bay or the region that may occur in response to SLR. For more context about the maps and analyses, including a description of the data and methods used, please see Adapting to Rising Tides: Transportation Vulnerability and Risk Assessment Pilot Project, Technical Report, November 2011. Rodeo / CrockettUnincorporated Area §¨¦780 §¨¦80 ÄÆÅ29 ÄÆÅ4 ÄÆÅ4 ÄÆÅ4Hercules Pinole Unincorporated Martinez Pinole Valley R d Pom o n a St SanPabloAveCarquine z Scenic DrFranklinCanyon R dSanPabloAveRedwoodRd RefugioValley R dParker AveCr ockettBlv d Cu mmingsSkw y McE w e n Rd12" Mean Higher High Water Plus 100-Year Extreme Tide Low Lying Areas Contra Costa County Boundary City Boundaries Map Data Sources: Contra Costa County,Caltrans, SFBCDC, USDA, USGS Sea Level Rise - Mean Higher HighWater Scenario Inundation Zones 0 1 20.5 Miles / The inundation maps and the associated analyses are intended as planning level tools to illustrate the potential for inundation and coastal flooding under future SLR scenarios and (they) do not represent the exact location or depth of flooding or shoreline overtopping. The maps are based on model outputs and do not account for all of the complex and dynamic Bay processes or future conditions such as erosion, subsidence, future construction or shoreline protection upgrades, or other changes to San Francisco Bay or the region that may occur in response to SLR. For more context about the maps and analyses, including a description of the data and methods used, please see Adapting to Rising Tides: Transportation Vulnerability and Risk Assessment Pilot Project, Technical Report, November 2011. Rodeo / CrockettUnincorporated Area §¨¦780 §¨¦80 ÄÆÅ29 ÄÆÅ4 ÄÆÅ4 ÄÆÅ4Hercules Pinole Unincorporated Martinez Pinole Valley R d Pom o n a St SanPabloAveCarquine z Scenic DrFranklinCanyon R dSanPabloAveRedwoodRd RefugioValley R dParker AveCr ockettBlv d Cu mmingsSkw y McE w e n Rd66" Mean Higher High Water Scenario Low Lying Areas Contra Costa County Boundary City Boundaries Map Data Sources: Contra Costa County,Caltrans, SFBCDC, USDA, USGS Sea Level Rise - Mean Higher HighWater Scenario Inundation Zones 0 1 20.5 Miles / The inundation maps and the associated analyses are intended as planning level tools to illustrate the potential for inundation and coastal flooding under future SLR scenarios and (they) do not represent the exact location or depth of flooding or shoreline overtopping. The maps are based on model outputs and do not account for all of the complex and dynamic Bay processes or future conditions such as erosion, subsidence, future construction or shoreline protection upgrades, or other changes to San Francisco Bay or the region that may occur in response to SLR. For more context about the maps and analyses, including a description of the data and methods used, please see Adapting to Rising Tides: Transportation Vulnerability and Risk Assessment Pilot Project, Technical Report, November 2011. Rodeo / CrockettUnincorporated Area §¨¦780 §¨¦80 ÄÆÅ29 ÄÆÅ4 ÄÆÅ4 ÄÆÅ4Hercules Pinole Unincorporated Martinez Pinole Valley R d Pom o n a St SanPabloAveCarquine z Scenic DrFranklinCanyon R dSanPabloAveRedwoodRd RefugioValley R dParker AveCr ockettBlv d Cu mmingsSkw y McE w e n Rd66" Mean Higher High Water Plus 100-Year Extreme Tide Low Lying Areas Contra Costa County Boundary City Boundaries Map Data Sources: Contra Costa County,Caltrans, SFBCDC, USDA, USGS Sea Level Rise - Mean Higher HighWater Scenario Inundation Zones 0 1 20.5 Miles / The inundation maps and the associated analyses are intended as planning level tools to illustrate the potential for inundation and coastal flooding under future SLR scenarios and (they) do not represent the exact location or depth of flooding or shoreline overtopping. The maps are based on model outputs and do not account for all of the complex and dynamic Bay processes or future conditions such as erosion, subsidence, future construction or shoreline protection upgrades, or other changes to San Francisco Bay or the region that may occur in response to SLR. For more context about the maps and analyses, including a description of the data and methods used, please see Adapting to Rising Tides: Transportation Vulnerability and Risk Assessment Pilot Project, Technical Report, November 2011. Rodeo / CrockettUnincorporated Area 20-1 20. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT 20.1 HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN POINT OF CONTACT Primary Point of Contact Alternate Point of Contact Paul R. Detjens Senior Civil Engineer 255 Glacier Drive, Martinez, CA 94553 Telephone: 925-313-2394 E-mail Address: paul.detjens@pw.cccounty.us Mike Carlson Deputy Chief Engineer 255 Glacier Drive, Martinez, CA 94553 Telephone Number: 925-313-2321 E-mail Address: mike.carlson@pw.cccouny.us 20.2 JURISDICTION PROFILE 20.2.1 Overview The Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (District) is a dependent Special District, first formed by an act of the State legislature in 1951. Its governing document is the Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District Act, last amended in 1992, which grants the District various powers such as the ability to acquire and hold property; sue and be sued; conserve, store and import water; control flood waters; issue bonds; levy taxes and assessments and use eminent domain. The governing board of the District is the County’s five-member Board of Supervisors, which are elected to four year terms. Each Supervisor represents a specific area of the County. The District plans, constructs and maintains major flood protection infrastructure to reduce flooding risk. The District’s jurisdiction encompasses all of Contra Costa County, including all nineteen incorporated cities. The District’s funding comes from a combination of ad-valorem taxes and fees paid by developers upon creation of impervious surfaces. The District has approximately 20 staff, and relies on other specialists from the Contra Costa County Public Works Department, with whom they share office space. The District currently serves a population of approximately 1,123,429 residents as of January 1, 2016 (California Department of Finance estimate) covering a land area of approximately 720 square miles. The District’s service area is broken up into three distinct regions of the County: west, central and east. The west and central portions of the county are nearing their full development potential. Service demands are expected to increase in these areas not because of added population, but primarily because of increased customer demands for more ecologically sensitive flood protection, including potential removal of concrete lining of channels and restoration of the resulting streams. Other factors expected to increase demands for District services include the effect of global climate change on low-lying areas, increased regulatory requirements on operation and maintenance of existing facilities, and new clean water requirements on trash and other pollutants. Contra Costa County Hazard Mitigation Plan; Volume 2—Planning Partner Annexes 20-2 The eastern portion of the District’s service area includes the fast-growing cities of Pittsburg, Antioch, Oakley and Brentwood. Here, population growth means significantly increased runoff and customer demands for improved levels of protection as agricultural lands are converted to residential and commercial uses. Additionally, this eastern portion of the County has the same issues noted for central and west portions noted above. The Deputy Chief Engineer of the Flood Control District assumes responsibility for the adoption of this plan by the County Board of Supervisors; the Deputy Chief Engineer of the Flood Control District will oversee its implementation. 20.2.2 Assets Table 20-1 summarizes the critical assets of the district and their value. Table 20-1. Special Purpose District Assets Asset Value Property 2,600 acres in fee, 1450 acre easement $100M Critical Infrastructure and Equipment 47 Drop Structures $66M 13.2 miles Concrete Channels $209M 5 Dams $122M 34,600 LF Levees $35M 24 Detention Basins $36M Various specialized equipment and trucks $1M Total: $469M Critical Facilities Glacier Drive (District main office) $8M Waterbird Maintenance Yard $2M Total: $10M 20.3 CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT 20.3.1 Planning and Regulatory Capabilities Jurisdictions develop plans and programs and implement rules and regulations to protect and serve residents. When effectively prepared and administered, these plans, programs and regulations can support the implementation of mitigation actions. The following existing codes, ordinances, policies, programs or plans are applicable to this hazard mitigation plan: • Regulatory permitting from:  US Army Corps of Engineers  California Natural Diversity Database  California Department of Public Health  California and US Environmental Protection Agencies  California Code of Regulations  Federal Endangered Species Act  California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) 20. Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District 20-3 • Expenditure Policy, June 2005 • Infrastructure Report: Status of Flood Protection Infrastructure, November 2013 • Contra Costa County Code, Title 8—Zoning; originally adopted March 17, 1947; last updated July 11, 2017. • Contra Costa County Code, Title 9—Subdivisions; originally adopted October 2, 1933; last updated 2015. • Contra Costa County Code, Title 10—Public Works and Flood Control; last updated in 2005. 20.3.2 Fiscal, Administrative and Technical Capabilities Fiscal capability is an indicator of a jurisdiction’s ability to fulfill the financial needs associated with hazard mitigation projects. An assessment of fiscal capabilities is presented in Table 20-2. Administrative and technical capabilities represent a jurisdiction’s staffing resources for carrying out the mitigation strategy. An assessment of administrative and technical capabilities is presented in Table 20-3. Table 20-2. Fiscal Capability Financial Resource Accessible or Eligible to Use? Capital Improvements Project Funding Yes Authority to Levy Taxes for Specific Purposes Yes User Fees for Water, Sewer, Gas or Electric Service No Incur Debt through General Obligation Bonds Yes Incur Debt through Special Tax Bonds Yes Incur Debt through Private Activity Bonds No State-Sponsored Grant Programs Yes Development Impact Fees for Homebuyers or Developers Yes Federal Grant Programs Yes Other No Table 20-3. Administrative and Technical Capability Staff/Personnel Resource Available? Department/Agency/Position Planners or engineers with knowledge of land development and land management practices Yes Flood Control District/Engineers Engineers or professionals trained in building or infrastructure construction practices Yes Flood Control District/Engineers Planners or engineers with an understanding of natural hazards Yes Flood Control District/Engineers Staff with training in benefit/cost analysis Yes Flood Control District/Engineers Surveyors Yes Flood Control District/Surveyors Personnel skilled or trained in GIS applications Yes Flood Control District/Technicians Scientist familiar with natural hazards in local area Yes Flood Control District/Engineers and Hydrologists Emergency manager Yes County Public Works and OES/Various Grant writers Yes Flood Control District/Engineers Other No Contra Costa County Hazard Mitigation Plan; Volume 2—Planning Partner Annexes 20-4 20.3.3 Education and Outreach Capabilities Outreach and education capability identifies the connection between government and community members, which opens a dialogue needed for a more resilient community. An assessment of education and outreach capabilities is presented in Table 20-4. Table 20-4. Education and Outreach Criterion Response Do you have a Public Information Officer or Communications Office? Yes Do you have personnel skilled or trained in website development? Yes Do you have hazard mitigation information available on your website? Yes • If yes, please briefly describe Information on hazard mitigation plan (http://www.contracosta.ca.gov/6415/Local-Hazard- Mitigation-Plan) Do you utilize social media for hazard mitigation education and outreach? No • If yes, please briefly describe N/A Do you have any citizen boards or commissions that address issues related to hazard mitigation? No • If yes, please briefly describe N/A Do you have any other programs already in place that could be used to communicate hazard-related information? Yes • If yes, please briefly describe Flood Forecast Information (http://www.cccounty.us/1578/Flood-Forecast- Information) Do you have any established warning systems for hazard events? No – warnings would be issued by County OES • If yes, please briefly describe N/A 20.3.4 Adaptive Capacity for Climate Change Given the uncertainties associated with how hazard risk may change with a changing climate, a jurisdiction’s ability to track such changes and adapt as needed is an important component of the mitigation strategy. Table 20-5 summarizes the District’s adaptive capacity for climate change. 20.4 INTEGRATION WITH OTHER PLANNING INITIATIVES The information on hazards, risk, vulnerability and mitigation contained in this hazard mitigation plan is based on the best available data. Plan integration is the incorporation of this information into other relevant planning mechanisms, such as general planning and capital facilities planning. It includes the integration of natural hazard information and mitigation policies, principles and actions into local planning mechanisms and vice versa. Additionally, plan integration is achieved though the involvement of key staff and community officials in collaboratively planning for hazard mitigation. 20. Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District 20-5 Table 20-5. Adaptive Capacity for Climate Change Criterion Jurisdiction Ratinga Technical Capacity Jurisdiction-level understanding of potential climate change impacts Medium Comments/Additional Information: None provided Jurisdiction-level monitoring of climate change impacts Medium Comments/Additional Information: None provided Technical resources to assess proposed strategies for feasibility and externalities Low Comments/Additional Information: None provided Jurisdiction-level capacity for development of greenhouse gas emissions inventory Low Comments/Additional Information: None provided Capital planning and land use decisions informed by potential climate impacts Medium Comments/Additional Information: None provided Participation in regional groups addressing climate risks High Comments/Additional Information: Participate in the Adapting to Rising Tides Program of the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission, and in CHARG, Coastal Hazards Adaptation Resiliency Group of San Francisco Bay Area planners, scientists, engineers, and policy makers from local, state, and federal agencies. Implementation Capacity Clear authority/mandate to consider climate change impacts during public decision-making processes Medium Comments/Additional Information: None provided Identified strategies for greenhouse gas mitigation efforts Low Comments/Additional Information: None provided Identified strategies for adaptation to impacts Medium Comments/Additional Information: None provided Champions for climate action in local government departments Low Comments/Additional Information: None provided Political support for implementing climate change adaptation strategies Medium Comments/Additional Information: None provided Financial resources devoted to climate change adaptation Low Comments/Additional Information: None provided Local authority over sectors likely to be negative impacted Low Comments/Additional Information: None provided Public Capacity Local residents knowledge of and understanding of climate risk Low Comments/Additional Information: None provided Local residents support of adaptation efforts Low Comments/Additional Information: None provided Local residents’ capacity to adapt to climate impacts Low Comments/Additional Information: None provided Local economy current capacity to adapt to climate impacts Low Comments/Additional Information: None provided Local ecosystems capacity to adapt to climate impacts Low Comments/Additional Information: None provided a. High = The capacity exists and is in use; Medium = The capacity may exist, but is not used or could use some improvement; Low = Capacity does not exist or could use substantial improvement; Unsure= Not enough information is known to assign a rating. Contra Costa County Hazard Mitigation Plan; Volume 2—Planning Partner Annexes 20-6 20.4.1 Existing Integration In the performance period since adoption of the previous hazard mitigation plan, the Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District made progress on integrating hazard mitigation goals, objectives and actions into other planning initiatives. The following plans and programs currently integrate components of the hazard mitigation strategy: • Expenditure Policy—The expenditure policy sets the following order of priorities: system preservation, public safety, and system expansion. This relates to the hazard mitigation plan because it emphasizes repair and rehabilitation of existing facilities to ensure they remain able to reduce flood risk and minimize the risk of dam failure. Resources listed in Section 20.11 were used for information on hazards and local jurisdiction capabilities. 20.4.2 Opportunities for Future Integration As this hazard mitigation plan is implemented, the Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District will use information from the plan as the best available science and data on natural hazards. The capability assessment presented in this annex identifies codes, plans and programs that provide opportunities for integration. The area-wide and local action plans developed for this hazard mitigation plan include actions related to plan integration, and progress on these actions will be reported through the progress reporting process described in Volume 1. New opportunities for integration also will be identified as part of the annual progress report. The capability assessment identified the following plans and programs that do not currently integrate goals or recommendations of the hazard mitigation plan but provide opportunities to do so in the future: • Public Works Emergency Response Plan—Risk assessment information will be incorporated as appropriate. • Capital Improvement Plan (Draft)—Funding for mitigation activities will be considered and incorporated as appropriate. 20.5 JURISDICTION-SPECIFIC NATURAL HAZARD EVENT HISTORY Table 20-6 lists past occurrences of natural hazards for which specific damage was recorded in the Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District. Other hazard events that broadly affected the entire planning area, including the Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, are listed in the risk assessments in Volume 1 of this hazard mitigation plan. Table 20-6. Natural Hazard Events Type of Event FEMA Disaster # (if applicable) Date Damage Assessment Severe Weather, Flood DR-4308 2/1/2017-2/23/2017 $800,000 Severe Weather, Flood DR-4301 1/3/2017-1/12/2017 $250,000 Severe Weather, Flood, Landslides FEMA-1628 12/31/2005 $1,900,000 Severe Weather, Flood FHWA 12/16/2002 No data Severe Weather, Flood, Landslides FEMA-1203 2/2/1998 $1,200,00 El Nino Storm, Flood, Landslides FEMA-1155 1/1/1997 $973,000 Severe Weather, Flood FEMA-1046 3/1995 $753,000 Severe Weather, Flood FEMA-1044 1/1995 $1,100,000 Severe Weather, Flood FEMA-979 1/1993 $911,000 Severe Weather, Flood, Landslides FEMA-758 2/17/1986 $63,000 Severe Weather, Flood NA 3/1980 $150,000 Severe Weather, Flood, Landslides NA 11/21/1977 No data 20. Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District 20-7 20.6 JURISDICTION-SPECIFIC VULNERABILITIES Volume 1 of this hazard mitigation plan provides complete risk assessments for each identified hazard of concern. Noted vulnerabilities within the district include the following: • There is a significant risk for flood damage in the County, with approximately 8 percent of the total replacement value located within the 0.2 percent annual chance floodplain. • In many areas, the FEMA flood insurance rate maps do not accurately show current flood risk • There is a low community understanding of flood risks, and a general feeling that flood risks are lower than they actually are. • Creek bank erosion is a concern, especially in unlined earthen channels throughout the county. • Dam failures due to seismic activity may impact the County. • Funding shortfalls • Many of the District’s facilities are nearing the end of their useful life, and may need significant rehabilitation or replacement. • Most District reservoirs are nearing 50 years old, and will likely need rehabilitation including a seismic vulnerability analysis. • District funding sources are insufficient to meet new or expected clean water mandates, such as trash and mercury total maximum daily loads (TMDL). This reduces available local funds for flood risk reduction and structure analysis and rehabilitation. • Some District levees no longer enjoy FEMA accreditation, and the District lacks the resources to study and potentially improve these levees for re-accreditation. • Many District facilities lack instrumentation that would allow timely notification and emergency response to address flood hazards. 20.7 HAZARD RISK RANKING Table 20-7 presents a local ranking for the Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District of all hazards of concern for which Volume 1 of this hazard mitigation plan provides complete risk assessments. This ranking summarizes how hazards vary for this jurisdiction. As described in detail in Volume 1, the ranking process involves an assessment of the likelihood of occurrence for each hazard, along with its potential impacts on people, property and the economy. Table 20-7. Hazard Risk Ranking Rank Hazard Type Risk Rating Score (Probability x Impact) Category 1 Severe weather (excluding extreme heat) 45 High 2 Flood 39 High 3 Landslide 36 High 3 Drought 36 High 4 Earthquake 32 High 5 Sea level rise 14 Low 6 Dam and levee failure 12 Low 7 Tsunami 6 Low 7 Wildfire 6 Low 8 Severe Weather (extreme heat) 0 None Contra Costa County Hazard Mitigation Plan; Volume 2—Planning Partner Annexes 20-8 20.8 STATUS OF PREVIOUS PLAN ACTIONS Table 20-8 summarizes the actions that were recommended in the previous version of the hazard mitigation plan and their implementation status at the time this update was prepared. Table 20-8. Status of Previous Plan Actions Removed; Carried Over to Plan Update Action Item Completed No Longer Feasible Check if Yes Enter Action # FCD1—Repair bank erosion, various sites countywide. (i.e.: Green Valley Creek, Grayson Creek at County Quarry, San Ramon Creek, etc.). X CCCFCWCD-4 Comment: FCD2—Construct / expand detention basins (implement basin construction as identified in FCD CIP: Lower Sand Creek Basin, Oakley / Trembath, etc.). X CCCFCWCD-5 Comment: FCD3—Expand Upper Sand Creek detention basin to significantly reduce flood risk for downstream communities. Construct Upper Sand Creek dam to state Division of Dam Safety requirements. X Comment: Completed 2014 FCD4—Repair bank erosion, various sites countywide. (i.e.: Green Valley Creek, Grayson Creek at County Quarry, San Ramon Creek, etc.). X CCCFCWCD-4 Comment: FCD5—Widen creeks / channels and raise / rehabilitate levees (implement projects as identified in FCD CIP: Marsh Creek, East and West Antioch Creeks, etc.) X CCCFCWCD-6 Comment: FCD6—Assess condition of Wildcat and San Pablo Creek levees to determine/seek levee re-accreditation. X Comment: Completed 2017 FCD7—Remove sediment from channels and detention basins (implement projects as identified in FCD CIP. i.e.: Kubicek Basin, Walnut Creek, Grayson Creek, etc.). X CCCFCWCD-7 Comment: FCD8—Seismic assessment of existing dams. X CCCFCWCD-8 Comment: FCD9—Seismic rehabilitation/retrofitting of existing dams (may combine with FCD5 above). X CCCFCWCD-9 Comment: FCD10—Acquire floodplain easements over privately held parcels at various sites District-wide (i.e.: Trembath floodplain on East Antioch Creek, floodplains on Marsh Creek, Walnut Creek overflow area at Pacheco Creek, etc.). X CCCFCWCD-10 Comment: FCD11—Support County-wide initiatives identified in the 2011 Hazard Mitigation Plan. X CCCFCWCD-31 Comment: FCD12—Continue to support the implementation, monitoring, maintenance, and updating of this Plan, as defined in the 2011 Hazard Mitigation Plan. X CCCFCWCD-2 Comment: 20. Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District 20-9 20.9 HAZARD MITIGATION ACTION PLAN AND EVALUATION OF RECOMMENDED ACTIONS Table 20-9 lists the actions that make up the Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District hazard mitigation action plan. Table 20-10 identifies the priority for each action. Table 20-11 summarizes the mitigation actions by hazard of concern and mitigation type. Table 20-9. Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix Applies to new or existing assets Hazards Mitigated Objectives Met Responsible Agencya Estimated Cost Sources of Funding Timeline CCCFCWCD-1— Where appropriate, support retrofitting or relocation of structures in high hazard areas, prioritizing structures that have experienced repetitive losses. Existing All Hazards 1, 10 County High HMGP, PDM, FMA Short-term CCCFCWCD-2—Actively participate in the plan maintenance protocols outlined in Volume 1 of this hazard mitigation plan. New and Existing All Hazards All FCD Low Staff Time, General Funds Short-term CCCFCWCD-3—Analyze and reconstruct (as needed) spillway structures at DSOD regulated dams to ensure continued safe passage of releases (i.e.: Marsh Creek Reservoir Emergency Spillway armoring at downstream toe) Existing Flood, Dam and Levee Failure, Earthquake, Severe Weather 1, 10 FCD High FCD Funds, FMA Short-term CCCFCWCD-4—Repair bank erosion, various sites countywide. (i.e.: Green Valley Creek, Grayson Creek at County Quarry, San Ramon Creek, Rodeo Creek, etc.). Existing Flood, Landslide, Severe Weather, Earthquake 1, 10 FCD Low FCD Funds, FMA, HMGP, Possible EPA Short-term CCCFCWCD-5—Construct / expand detention basins (implement basin construction as identified in FCD CIP: Lower Sand Creek Basin, Deer Creek, Oakley / Trembath, etc.). New and Existing Flood, Dam and Levee Failure, Severe Weather, Drought 1, 10 FCD Medium FCD Funds, FMA, HMGP, Possible EPA Short-term CCCFCWCD-6—Widen creeks / channels and raise / rehabilitate levees (implement projects as identified in FCD CIP: Marsh Creek, East and West Antioch Creeks, etc.) Existing Flood, Dam and Levee Failure, Severe Weather 1, 10 FCD Medium FCD Funds, FMA, HMGP, Possible EPA Short-term CCCFCWCD-7—Remove sediment from channels and detention basins (implement projects as identified in FCD CIP. i.e.: Kubicek Basin, Walnut Creek, Grayson Creek, Wildcat Creek, Rodeo Creek, San Pablo Creek, Pine Creek, San Ramon Creek, etc.). Existing Flood 1, 10 FCD Medium FCD Funds, FMA, HMGP, Possible EPA Short-term CCCFCWCD-8—Conduct seismic assessment of flood control facilities and structures, various sites countywide (dams, channels, structures, etc.) Existing Flood, Earthquake, Dam and Levee Failure 1, 10 FCD Medium FCD Funds, Possible Grants Long-term CCCFCWCD-9—Seismic rehabilitation/retrofitting of existing dams (may combine with CCFCWCD8 above). Existing Flood; Dam and Levee Failure, Earthquake 1, 10 FCD High FCD Funds, HMGP, FMA Long-term Contra Costa County Hazard Mitigation Plan; Volume 2—Planning Partner Annexes 20-10 Applies to new or existing assets Hazards Mitigated Objectives Met Responsible Agencya Estimated Cost Sources of Funding Timeline CCCFCWCD-10—Acquire floodplain easements over privately held parcels at various sites District-wide (i.e.: Trembath floodplain on East Antioch Creek, floodplains on Marsh Creek, Walnut Creek overflow area at Pacheco Creek, etc.). New and Existing Flood, Dam and Levee Failure, Landslide 1, 5, 10 FCD Medium FCD Funds, FMA Long-term CCCFCWCD-11—Habitat Improvements, various sites countywide (Wildcat Creek, Pinole Creek, Pacheco Creek, East Antioch Creek Marsh, Marsh Creek, etc.) New and Existing Flood, Dam and Levee Failure 1, 10 FCD Medium FCD Funds, FMA, HMGP, Possible EPA Short-term CCCFCWCD-12—Creek channel improvements, various sites countywide (Galindo Creek, Wildcat Creek, San Pablo Creek, etc.) Existing Flood 1, 10 FCD Medium FCD Funds, FMA, HMGP, Possible EPA Short-term CCCFCWCD-13—Conduct silt surveys in creeks and sediment basins, various sites countywide (Grayson Creek, Walnut Creek, San Pablo Creek, Rheem Creek, Wild Cat Creek, Rodeo Creek, etc.) Existing Flood 1, 10 FCD Medium FCD Funds, Possible Grants Short-term CCCFCWCD-14—Conduct condition assessment of flood control facilities and structures, various sites countywide (Shadow Creek, West Alamo Creek, Canyon Lakes Creek, Rossmoor Creek, Bogue Creek, Rassier Creek, San Pablo Creek, Rheem Creek, Wild Cat Creek, Rodeo Creek, etc.) Existing Flood, Landslide, Earthquake 1, 10 FCD Medium FCD Funds, Possible Grants Short-term CCCFCWCD-15—Conduct functional assessment of flood control facilities, various sites countywide Existing Flood 1, 10 FCD Medium FCD Funds, Possible Grants Short-term CCCFCWCD-16—Conduct geotechnical investigation of flood control facilities and structures, various sites countywide Existing Flood, Dam and Levee Failure, Earthquake, Landslide 1, 10 FCD Medium FCD Funds, Possible Grants Short-term CCCFCWCD-17—Marsh Creek Reservoir Capacity and Habitat Restoration Existing Flood, Dam and Levee Failure, Drought 1, 10 FCD Low FCD Funds, Possible Grants Short-term CCCFCWCD-18—North Richmond Stormwater Pump Station Retrofit Existing Flood 1, 10 FCD/County Low FCD/County Funds, FMA, HMGP Short-term CCCFCWCD-19—DA46 Grayson and Murderer’s Creek local drainage (Subregional) Capacity Improvements New and Existing Flood 1, 10 FCD Low FCD Funds, Possible Grants Short-term CCCFCWCD-20—Grayson Creek Levee Rehabilitation at CCCSD Treatment Plant Existing Flood, Dam and Levee Failure 1, 10 FCD Medium FCD Funds, FMA, HMGP Short-term CCCFCWCD-21—Grayson Creek Channel Fence Rehabilitation Existing Flood 1, 10 FCD Medium FCD Funds, Possible Grants Short-term CCCFCWCD-22—Lower Walnut Creek Restoration Project New and Existing Flood, Dam and Levee Failure, Drought 1, 10 FCD High FCD Funds, , Possible Grants Short-term 20. Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District 20-11 Applies to new or existing assets Hazards Mitigated Objectives Met Responsible Agencya Estimated Cost Sources of Funding Timeline CCCFCWCD-23—Sustainable Capacity Improvement at Rodeo Creek Existing Flood, Landslide, Earthquake 1, 10 FCD Low FCD Funds, , Possible Grants Short-term CCCFCWCD-24—DA 67 - Tice Creek Bypass New Flood 1, 10 FCD Low FCD Funds, , Possible Grants Short-term CCCFCWCD-25—Walnut Creek Levee Rehabilitation at Buchanan Field Airport Existing Flood, Dam and Levee Failure 1, 10, 13 FCD/County Low FCD Funds, FMA, HMGP Short-term CCCFCWCD-26—DA 33A Concord Boulevard Culvert Replacement Existing Flood, Severe Weather 1, 10 FCD/City of Concord Low FCD Funds, FMA, HMGP Short-term CCCFCWCD-27—DA 48B Line A storm Drainage Improvements at Port Chicago Highway New and Existing Flood, Severe Weather 1, 10 FCD Low FCD Funds, FMA. HMGP Short-term CCCFCWCD-28—West Antioch Creek Improvements - L Street to 10th Street New and Existing Flood 1, 10 FCD/City of Antioch Low FCD Funds, FMA Short-term CCCFCWCD-29—West Antioch Creek Improvements at Highway 4 New and Existing Flood 1, 10 FCD/City of Antioch Low FCD Funds, FMA Short-term CCCFCWCD-30—Marsh Creek Supplemental Capacity New Flood 1, 10 FCD Medium FCD Funds, Possible Grants Short-term CCCFCWCD-31—Support County-wide initiatives identified in the 2017 Hazard Mitigation Plan. New and Existing All Hazards All County*, FCD Low FCD Funds Short-term, ongoing CCCFCWCD-32—Integrate Local Hazard Mitigation Plan into the Safety Element of the General Plan Existing All Hazards All County*, FCD Low County Funds Short-term, ongoing a. Where multiple responsible agencies are listed, an asterisk (*) identifies the lead agency. Contra Costa County Hazard Mitigation Plan; Volume 2—Planning Partner Annexes 20-12 Table 20-10. Mitigation Action Priority Action # # of Objectiv es Met Benefit s Costs Do Benefits Equal or Exceed Costs? Is Project Grant- Eligible? Can Project Be Funded Under Existing Programs/ Budgets? Implementation Prioritya Grant Pursuit Prioritya CCCFCWCD-1 8 High High Yes Yes No Medium High CCCFCWCD-2 3 Low Low Yes No Yes High Low CCCFCWCD-3 2 Medium Medium Yes Yes Yes Medium Medium CCCFCWCD-4 2 High Low Yes Yes Yes Medium High CCCFCWCD-5 2 High Medium Yes Yes Yes Medium High CCCFCWCD-6 2 High Medium Yes Yes Yes Medium Medium CCCFCWCD-7 2 High Low Yes Yes Yes Medium High CCCFCWCD-8 2 Medium Low Yes Yes Yes Medium High CCCFCWCD-9 2 High High Yes Yes Yes Medium Medium CCCFCWCD-10 3 Medium Low Yes Yes Yes Low High CCCFCWCD-11 2 Medium Medium Yes Yes Yes Low Medium CCCFCWCD-12 2 Medium Medium Yes Yes Yes Medium High CCCFCWCD-13 2 Medium Medium Yes Yes Yes Medium High CCCFCWCD-14 2 Medium Medium Yes Yes Yes Medium High CCCFCWCD-15 2 Medium Medium Yes Yes Yes Medium High CCCFCWCD-16 2 Medium Medium Yes Yes Yes Medium High CCCFCWCD-17 2 High Low Yes Yes Yes Medium High CCCFCWCD-18 2 Medium Low Yes Yes Yes Medium High CCCFCWCD-19 2 Medium Low Yes Yes Yes Medium High CCCFCWCD-20 2 Medium Medium Yes Yes Yes Medium High CCCFCWCD-21 2 Medium Medium Yes Yes Yes Medium High CCCFCWCD-22 2 High High Yes Yes Yes High High CCCFCWCD-23 2 Medium Low Yes Yes Yes Low Medium CCCFCWCD-24 2 Medium Low Yes Yes Yes Low Medium CCCFCWCD-25 3 Medium Low Yes Yes Yes Medium High CCCFCWCD-26 2 Medium Low Yes Yes Yes Medium High CCCFCWCD-27 2 Medium Low Yes Yes Yes Medium High CCCFCWCD-28 2 Medium Low Yes Yes Yes Medium High CCCFCWCD-29 2 Medium Low Yes Yes Yes Medium High CCCFCWCD-30 2 Medium Medium Yes Yes Yes Medium High CCCFCWCD-31 18 Medium Low Yes No Yes Medium High CCCFCWCD-32 18 Medium Low Yes No Yes Medium High a. See the introduction to this volume for explanation of priorities. 20. Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District 20-13 Table 20-11. Analysis of Mitigation Actions Action Addressing Hazard, by Mitigation Typea Hazard Type Prevention Property Protection Public Education and Awareness Natural Resource Protection Emergency Services Structural Projects Climate Resilient Community Capacity Building All hazards 2, 31, 32 1 2, 10, 32 2, 9, 32 Dam and Levee Failure 8, 9, 16 5, 9 5, 11, 17, 22, 31 3, 5, 9 8, 16 Drought Earthquake 8, 9, 16 4, 9, 14, 16, 23 3, 9 8, 16 Flood 8, 9, 14, 16, 23 3, 4, 5, 6 3, 4, 5, 6 25, 26. 27, 28, 29 1, 3, 4, 5, 18 8, 16 Landslide 14, 16, 23 4, 16, 23 4 4 16 Severe weather 4, 5, 6 4, 5, 6 3, 4, 5 Tsunami Wildfire a. See the introduction to this volume for explanation of mitigation types. 20.10 FUTURE NEEDS TO BETTER UNDERSTAND RISK/VULNERABILITY • District facilities generally lack instrumentation that would allow timely notification and emergency response to address flood hazards. Additional instrumentation would help inform our understanding of risk. • District reservoirs are nearing 50 years old, and the seismic risk is poorly understood. A seismic vulnerability analysis is needed to better understand risk and keep probability of dam failure low. • Some District levees no longer enjoy FEMA accreditation, and the District lacks the resources to study and potentially improve these levees for re-accreditation. Lacking a specific assessment, actual risk is poorly understood. • Many District facilities are nearing or over 50 years old, and need facility condition assessment to help prioritize needed repairs, rehabilitation, or replacement. 20.11 REVIEW AND INCORPORATION OF RESOURCES FOR THIS ANNEX The following technical reports, plans, and regulatory mechanisms were reviewed for this annex. • Hazard Mitigation Plan Annex Development Tool-kit—The tool-kit was used to support the development of this annex including past hazard events, noted vulnerabilities, risk ranking and action development. • Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District Capital Improvement Plan (DRAFT) June 2017—This CIP was used to determine which upcoming projects would help inform or reduce flood risk, and thus should be included in this annex. RECOMMENDATION(S): ACCEPT the 2017 Annual Report of real estate acquisition acceptances dated January 1, 2017 through December 31, 2017, approved by the Public Works Director as submitted, for the acquisitions of any interest in real property where the purchase price for the real property interest did not exceed $100,000, Antioch, Bay Point, Brentwood, Clayton, Kinightsen, Martinez, Pinole, Rodeo and Walnut Creek areas. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: Pursuant to Contra Costa County, Ordinance Code, Title 11, Division 1108, Chapter 1108-8.002, “The Board of Supervisors authorizes the Public Works Director, or the designated deputy, to perform all acts necessary to approve and accept for the County the acquisition of any interest in real property where the purchase price for the real property interest does not exceed one hundred thousand dollars.” The Public Works Director shall submit a semi-annual report to the Board of Supervisors on each acquisition done pursuant to this section, including the interest acquired, its price, and the necessity for the purchase, which is described in the attached Annual APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 1 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:ACCEPT the 2017 Annual Report of Real Estate Acquisitions Acceptances dated January 1, 2017 – December 31, 2017. BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) Acceptance Report. The Semi-Annual Reports for 2017 were not submitted to the Board of Supervisors; therefore an Annual Report is being submitted at this time. Submittal of Semi-Annual Reports will resume in July 2018 for January 2018-June 2018. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The Board of Supervisors would not be informed of the acquisitions accepted by the Public Works Director pursuant to Contra Costa County Ordinance Code. ATTACHMENTS Report RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE the Curb Ramp Project in Alamo and Kensington (Project), Alamo and Kensington areas. [County Project No. 0662-6U4001, DCD-CP#18-10] (Districts I and II). DETERMINE the Project is a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Class 1(c) Categorical Exemption, pursuant to Article 19, Section 15301 of the CEQA Guidelines, and DIRECT the Director of Department of Conservation and Development to file a Notice of Exemption with the County Clerk, and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director or designee to arrange for payment of a $25 fee to the Department of Conservation and Development for processing, and a $50 fee to the County Clerk for filing the Notice of Exemption. FISCAL IMPACT: APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Sandeep Singh, (925) 313-2022 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Ave Brown, Environmental Services C. 2 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:APPROVE the Curb Ramp Project in Alamo and Kensington and take related actions under CEQA. FISCAL IMPACT: (CONT'D) Estimated Project cost: $67,000. 100% Gas Tax Funds. BACKGROUND: The project is located in two unincorporated portions of Contra Costa County including Stone Valley Road in Alamo on the west side of the intersections with Todd Court and Shandelin Court where four curb ramps will be installed, and Arlington Avenue in Kensington on the northwest side of the intersection with Westminster Avenue where one curb ramp will be installed. The purpose of this Project is to improve accessibility according to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) by installing a total of five curb ramps at the selected intersections to provide access for mobility impaired users.The construction process for curb ramps will consist of minor clearing and grubbing, saw-cutting, base rock placement and compaction, formwork construction, and concrete placement. A shrub at the intersection of Arlington and Westminster Avenues will be removed. Excavation will not go below existing base rock. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Delay in approving the project may result in a delay of design, construction, and may jeopardize funding. ATTACHMENTS CEQA document RECOMMENDATION(S): (1) APPROVE plans, specifications, and design for the 2018 Asphalt Rubber Cape Seal Project. Project No. 0672-6U2164-18 (2) DETERMINE that American Pavement Systems, Inc. (“APS”) the lowest monetary bidder, has complied with the requirements of the County’s Outreach Program and has exceeded the Mandatory Subcontracting Minimum for this project, as provided in the project specifications; and FURTHER DETERMINE that APS has submitted the lowest responsive and responsible bid for the project. (3) AWARD the construction contract for the above project to APS in the listed amount ($2,958,537.40) and the unit prices submitted in the bid, and DIRECT that APS shall present two good and sufficient surety bonds, as indicated below, and that the Public Works Director, or designee, shall prepare the contract. (4) ORDER that, after the contractor has signed the contract and returned it, together with the bonds as noted below and any required certificates of insurance or other required documents, and the Public Works Director has reviewed and found them to be sufficient, the Public Works Director, or designee, is authorized to sign the contract for this Board. (5) ORDER that, in accordance with the project specifications and/or upon signature of the contract by the Public Works Director, or designee, bid bonds posted APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 3 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Construction Contract for the 2018 Asphalt Rubber Cape Seal Project, Walnut Creek, Martinez, Clyde, and Bay Point areas. RECOMMENDATION(S): (CONT'D) by the bidders are to be exonerated and any checks or cash submitted for security shall be returned. (6) ORDER that, the Public Works Director, or designee, is authorized to sign any escrow agreements prepared for this project to permit the direct payment of retentions into escrow or the substitution of securities for moneys withheld by the County to ensure performance under the contract, pursuant to Public Contract Code Section 22300. (7) DELEGATE, pursuant to Public Contract Code Section 4114, to the Public Works Director, or designee, the Board’s functions under Public Contract Code Sections 4107 and 4110. (8) DELEGATE, pursuant to Labor Code Section 6705, to the Public Works Director, or to any registered civil or structural engineer employed by the County, the authority to accept detailed plans showing the design of shoring, bracing, sloping, or other provisions to be made for worker protection during trench excavation covered by that section. (9) DECLARE that, should the award of the contract to APS be invalidated for any reason, the Board would not in any event have awarded the contract to any other bidder, but instead would have exercised its discretion to reject all of the bids received. Nothing in this Board Order shall prevent the Board from re-awarding the contract to another bidder in cases where the successful bidder establishes a mistake, refuses to sign the contract, or fails to furnish required bonds or insurance (see Public Contract Code Sections 5100-5107). FISCAL IMPACT: The construction contract will be funded by 100% SB1 Gas Taxes. BACKGROUND: The above project was previously approved by the Board of Supervisors, plans and specifications were filed with the Board, and bids were invited by the Public Works Director. On February 27, 2018, the Public Works Department received bids from the following contractors: BIDDER, TOTAL AMOUNT, BOND AMOUNTS American Pavement Systems, Inc.: $2,958,537.40; Payment: $2,958,537.40; Performance: $2,958,537.40 Telfer Pavement Technologies, LLC: $3,211,641.35 VSS International, Inc. $3,312,120.00 The Public Works Director has reported that APS documented an adequate good faith effort to comply with the requirements of the County’s Outreach Program and exceeded the Mandatory Subcontracting Minimum, and the Public Works Director recommends that the construction contract be awarded to APS. The Public Works Director recommends that the bid submitted by APS is the lowest responsive and responsible bid, which is $253,103.95 less than the next lowest bid, and this Board concurs and so finds. The Board of Supervisors previously determined that the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as a Class 1(c) Categorical Exemption, and a Notice of Exemption was filed with the County Clerk on January 17, 2018. The general prevailing rates of wages, which shall be the minimum rates paid on this project, have been filed with the Clerk of the Board, and copies will be made available to any party upon request. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Construction of the project would be delayed, and the project might not be built. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Resolution No. 2018/115 approving the fifth extension of the Subdivision Agreement (Right-of-Way Landscaping) for subdivision SD08-09165, for a project being developed by Shapell Homes, a Division of Shapell Industries, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, as recommended by the Public Works Director, San Ramon (Dougherty Valley) area. (District II) FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: The terminal date of the Subdivision Agreement (Right-of-Way Landscaping) needs to be extended. (Approximately 100% of the work has been completed to date.) The development is in the warranty period and the bond needs to be kept up to date. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Lori Leontini (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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Jocelyn LaRocque, Lori Leontini, Dante Morabe, Design/Construction, Ruben Hernandez - DCD , C . Low, City of San Ramon, Shapell Homes, The Continental Insurance Company, File C. 4 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Approving the fifth extension of the Subdivision Agreement (Right-of-Way Landscaping) for subdivision SD08-09165, San Ramon (Dougherty Valley) area. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The terminal date of the Subdivision Agreement (Right-of-Way Landscaping) 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. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Resolution No. 2018/115 Subdivision Agreement (Right-Of-Way Landscaping) Extension MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed Resolution No. 2018/115 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board Adopted this Resolution on 04/10/2018 by the following vote: AYE:4 John Gioia Candace Andersen Karen Mitchoff Federal D. Glover NO: ABSENT:1 Diane Burgis ABSTAIN: RECUSE: Resolution No. 2018/115 IN THE MATTER OF approving the fifth extension of the Subdivision Agreement (Right-of-Way Landscaping) for subdivision SD08-09165, for a project being developed by Shapell Homes, a Division of Shapell Industries, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, as recommended by the Public Works Director, San Ramon (Dougherty Valley) area. (District II) WHEREAS the Public Works Director having recommended that he be authorized to execute the fifth agreement extension which extends the Subdivision Agreement (Right-of-Way Landscaping) between Shapell Homes, a Division of Shapell Industries, Inc., a Delaware Corporation and the County for construction of certain improvements in SD08-09165, San Ramon (Dougherty Valley) area, through May 3, 2018. APPROXIMATE PERCENTAGE OF WORK COMPLETE: 100% ANTICIPATED DATE OF COMPLETION: Completed BOND NO.: 929 518 818 Date: March 11, 2011 REASON FOR EXTENSION: The development is in the warranty period and the bond needs to be kept up to date. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the recommendation of the Public Works Director is APPROVED. Contact: Lori Leontini (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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Jocelyn LaRocque, Lori Leontini, Dante Morabe, Design/Construction, Ruben Hernandez - DCD , C . Low, City of San Ramon, Shapell Homes, The Continental Insurance Company, File RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Resolution No. 2018/116 accepting completion of private improvements for minor subdivision MS16-00001 for a project developed by Pacific Crest Builders, Inc., as recommended by the Public Works Director, Walnut Creek area. (District IV) FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: The developer has completed the private improvements per the Subdivision Agreement, and in accordance with the Title 9 of the County Ordinance Code. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Lori Leontini (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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Jocelyn LaRocque, Lori Leontini, Dante Morabe, Design/Construction, Chris Hallford, Mapping, Michael Mann, Finance, Pacific Crest Builders, Inc., Indemnity Company of California C. 5 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Accepting completion of private improvements for minor subdivision MS16-00001, Walnut Creek area AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Resolution No. 2018/116 MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed Resolution No. 2018/116 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board Adopted this Resolution on 04/10/2018 by the following vote: AYE:4 John Gioia Candace Andersen Karen Mitchoff Federal D. Glover NO: ABSENT:1 Diane Burgis ABSTAIN: RECUSE: Resolution No. 2018/116 IN THE MATTER OF: Accepting completion of private improvements for minor subdivision MS16-00001 for a project developed by Pacific Crest Builders, Inc., as recommended by The Public Works Director, Walnut Creek area. (District IV) The Public Works Director has notified this Board that the private improvements in minor subdivision MS16-00001 have been completed as provided in the Subdivision Agreement with Pacific Crest Builders, Inc., heretofore approved by this Board in conjunction with the filing of the Subdivision Map. WHEREAS, these improvements are located on Amigo Lane near Mountain View Boulevard. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the private improvements have been COMPLETED as of April 10, 2018, thereby establishing the six month terminal period for the filing of liens in case of action under said Subdivision Agreement: DATE OF AGREEMENT: December 20, 2016 NAME OF SURETY: Indemnity Company of California BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED the payment (labor and materials) surety for $17,000.00, Bond No. 705081P issued by the above surety be RETAINED for the six month lien guarantee period until October 10, 2018, at which time the Board AUTHORIZES the release of said surety less the amount of any claims on file. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Amigo Lane widening for the hereinafter described private roads, as shown and dedicated for private use on the Parcel Map of minor subdivision MS16-00001 filed December 23, 2016, in Book 211 of parcel maps at Page 48, Official Records of Contra Costa County, State of California, have been COMPLETED and are NOT ACCEPTED. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that there is no warranty period required, and the Public Works Director is AUTHORIZED to refund the $1,000.00 cash security for performance (Auditor's Deposit Permit No. 725407, dated December 6, 2016) plus interest in accordance with Government Code Section 53079, if appropriate, to Pacific Crest Builders, Inc., pursuant to the requirements of the Ordinance Code; and the Subdivision Agreement and surety bond, Bond No. 705081P, dated December 20, 2016 are EXONERATED. Contact: Lori Leontini (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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Jocelyn LaRocque, Lori Leontini, Dante Morabe, Design/Construction, Chris Hallford, Mapping, Michael Mann, Finance, Pacific Crest Builders, Inc., Indemnity Company of California RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Resolution No. 2018/117 accepting Grant Deed of Development Rights for subdivision SD05-08947, for a project being developed by James Scott Busby and Margaret Mary Busby, as recommended by the Public Works Director, Martinez area. (District V) FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: The Grant Deed of Development Rights is required per Condition of Approval No. 84. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Jocelyn LaRocque, Kara Schuh-Garibay, Hiliana Li - DCD Secretary, James Scott Busby & Margaret Mary Busby-Owners C. 6 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Accepting a Grant Deed of Development Rights for subdivision SD05-08947, Martinez area. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The Grant Deed of Development Rights will not be recorded. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Resolution No. 2018/117 Grant Deed of Development Rights MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed Resolution No. 2018/117 Signed Grant Deed of Development Rights Recorded at the request of:Kara Schuh-Garibay Return To:Simone Saleh (925)313-2170 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board Adopted this Resolution on 04/10/2018 by the following vote: AYE:John Gioia, District I SupervisorCandace Andersen, District II SupervisorKaren Mitchoff, District IV SupervisorFederal D. Glover, District V Supervisor NO: ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor ABSTAIN: RECUSE: Resolution No. 2018/117 IN THE MATTER OF accepting Grant Deed of Development Rights for subdivision SD05-08947, for a project being developed by James Scott Busby and Margaret Mary Busby, as recommended by the Public Works Director, Martinez area. (District V) NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the following instrument is hereby ACCEPTED: INSTRUMENT: Grant Deed of Development Rights REFERENCE: APN: 367-140-010 GRANTOR: James Scott Busby, Margaret Mary Busby, James Scott Busby, Jr., Kristen Marie Busby AREA: Martinez DISTRICT: V 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Jocelyn LaRocque, Kara Schuh-Garibay, Hiliana Li - DCD Secretary, James Scott Busby & Margaret Mary Busby-Owners RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Resolution No. 2018/118 accepting Offer of Dedication for Park Purposes for subdivision SD05-08971, for a project being developed by Shapell Industries, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, as recommended by the Public Works Director, San Ramon (Dougherty Valley) area. (District II) FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: The Offer of Dedication for Park Purposes is required per the statement on the recorded final map for SD05-08971 (517M43) and the fact that Mosaic Linear Park Phase 1 (PA15-00042) and Phase 2 (PA15-00044) are located on Parcels A and B of SD05-08971, respectively. The park is to be publicly maintained by the City of San Ramon per the Dougherty Valley Memorandum of Understanding. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Craig Standafer (925)313-2018 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Jocelyn LaRocque, C . Low, City of San Ramon, Ruben Hernandez - DCD , Craig Standafer, Engineering Services, Lori Leontini, Shapell Industries, Inc. C. 7 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Accepting an Offer of Dedication for Park Purposes for subdivision SD05-08971, San Ramon (Dougherty Valley) area. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The Offer of Dedication for Park Purposes will not be recorded. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Resolution No. 2018/118 Offer of Dedication-Park Purposes MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed Resolution No. 2018/118 Recorded at the request of:Craig Standafer (925)313-2018 Return To:Simone Saleh (925)313-2170 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board Adopted this Resolution on 04/10/2018 by the following vote: AYE:John Gioia, District I SupervisorCandace Andersen, District II SupervisorKaren Mitchoff, District IV SupervisorFederal D. Glover, District V Supervisor NO: ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor ABSTAIN: RECUSE: Resolution No. 2018/118 IN THE MATTER OF accepting Offer of Dedication for Park Purposes for subdivision SD05-08971, for a project being developed by Shapell Industries, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, as recommended by the Public Works Director, San Ramon (Dougherty Valley) area. (District II) NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the following instrument is hereby ACCEPTED FOR RECORDING ONLY: INSTRUMENT: Offer of Dedication for Park Purposes REFERENCE: APNs 222-650-091 and -092 (cross-reference PA15-00042 and PA15-00044) GRANTOR: Shapell Industries, Inc., a Delaware Corporation AREA: San Ramon (Dougherty Valley) DISTRICT: II Contact: Craig Standafer (925)313-2018 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Jocelyn LaRocque, C . Low, City of San Ramon, Ruben Hernandez - DCD , Craig Standafer, Engineering Services, Lori Leontini, Shapell Industries, Inc. RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Resolution No. 2018/119 approving the Agreement for Improvement Warranty for park acceptance PA15-00044 (cross-reference subdivision SD05-08971), for the project being developed by Shapell Industries Inc., a Delaware Corporation, San Ramon (Dougherty Valley) area. (District II) FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: The Agreement for Improvement Warranty has been reviewed and processed by Public Works staff and meets all applicable conditions of approval regarding landscape improvements. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Craig Standafer (925) 313-2018 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Jocelyn LaRocque, Dante Morabe- Design & Construction, Ruben Hernandez - DCD , Craig Standafer, Engineering Services, Lori Leontini, T-February 10, 2019, Shapell Industries, Inc. , Western Surety Company C. 8 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Approving the Agreement for Improvement Warranty, for park acceptance PA15-00044, San Ramon (Doughty Valley) area. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The Agreement for Improvement Warranty will not be approved. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Resolution No. 2018/119 Agreement for Improvement Warranty & Improvement Security Bond MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed Resolution No. 2018/119 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board Adopted this Resolution on 04/10/2018 by the following vote: AYE:4 John Gioia Candace Andersen Karen Mitchoff Federal D. Glover NO: ABSENT:1 Diane Burgis ABSTAIN: RECUSE: Resolution No. 2018/119 IN THE MATTER OF approving the Agreement for Improvement Warranty for park acceptance PA-00044 (cross-reference subdivision SD05-08971), for the project being developed by Shapell Industries, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, as recommended by the Public Works Director, San Ramon (Dougherty Valley) area. (District II) WHERE AS, the following documents were presented for Board approval this date: The Agreement for Improvement Warranty with Shapell Industries, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, principal, whereby said principal agrees to warrant all improvements as required in said park acceptance within 1 year from the date of said agreement. Improvements generally consist of landscaping. Said document was accompanied by the following: Security to guarantee the completion of right-of-way landscaping as required by Titles 8 and 9 of the County Ordinance, as follows: I. Cash Deposit Amount: $3,840 Auditor's Deposit Permit No. 757523 Date: March 5, 2018 Submitted by: Toll Brothers, Inc. II. Surety Bond Bond Company: Western Surety Company Bond Number: 30034551 Date: February 28, 2018 Performance Amount: $57,650.00 Labor & Materials Amount: $192,160.00 Principal: Shapell Industries, Inc. All deposit permits are on file with the Public Works Department. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that said Agreement for Improvement Warranty is APPROVED. Contact: Craig Standafer (925) 313-2018 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Jocelyn LaRocque, Dante Morabe- Design & Construction, Ruben Hernandez - DCD , Craig Standafer, Engineering Services, Lori Leontini, T-February 10, 2019, Shapell Industries, Inc. , Western Surety Company RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Resolution No. 2018/123 accepting Offer of Dedication for Roadway Purposes and Relinquishment of Abutter's Rights for subdivision SD05-08947, for a project being developed by James Busby and Margaret Mary Busby, as recommended by the Public Works Director, Martinez area. (District V) FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: The Offer of Dedication for Roadway Purposes and is required per Condition of Approval No. 61. The Relinquishment of Abutter's Rights is required per Condition of Approval No. 66. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The Offer of Dedication for Roadway Purposes and Relinquishment of Abutter's Rights will not be recorded. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Jocelyn LaRocque, Kara Schuh-Garibay, Hiliana Li - DCD Secretary, James Scott Busby & Margaret Mary Busby-Owners C. 9 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Accepting an Offer of Dedication for Roadway Purposes and Relinquishment of Abutter's Rights for subdivision SD05-08947, Martinez area. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Resolution No. 2018/123 Offer of Dedication -Road Purposes and Releasing of Abutter's Rights MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed Resolution No. 2018/123 Recorded at the request of:kara Schuh-Garibay Return To:Simone Saleh (925)313-2170 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board Adopted this Resolution on 04/10/2018 by the following vote: AYE:John Gioia, District I SupervisorCandace Andersen, District II SupervisorKaren Mitchoff, District IV SupervisorFederal D. Glover, District V Supervisor NO: ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor ABSTAIN: RECUSE: Resolution No. 2018/123 IN THE MATTER OF accepting Offer of Dedication for Roadway Purposes and Relinquishment of Abutter's Rights for subdivision SD05-08947, for a project being developed by James Scott Busby and Margaret Mary Busby, as recommended by the Public Works Director, Martinez area. (District V) NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the following instrument is hereby ACCEPTED FOR RECORDING ONLY: INSTRUMENT: Offer of Dedication for Roadway Purposes and Relinquishment of Abutter's Rights REFERENCE: APN: 367-140-010 GRANTOR: James Scott Busby, Margaret Mary Busby, James Scott Busby, Jr., Kristen Marie Busby AREA: Martinez DISTRICT: V 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Jocelyn LaRocque, Kara Schuh-Garibay, Hiliana Li - DCD Secretary, James Scott Busby & Margaret Mary Busby-Owners RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Resolution No. 2018/124 accepting Offer of Dedication for Roadway Purposes for development permit DP16-03008, for a project being developed by Goldman Enterprises, Inc., as recommended by the Public Works Director, North Richmond area. (District I) FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: The Offer of Dedication for Roadway Purposes is required per Condition of Approval No. 20. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The Offer of Dedication for Roadway Purposes will not be recorded. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Jocelyn LaRocque, Adrian Veliz, Kara Schuh-Garibay, Goldman Enterprises, Inc., Developers Surety and Indemnity Company C. 10 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Accept a/an Offer of Dedication for Roadway Purposes for development permit DP16-03008, North Richmond area. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Resolution No. 2018/124 Offer of Dedication - Road Purposes MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed Resolution No. 2018/124 Recorded at the request of:kara Schuh-Garibay Return To:Simone Saleh (925)313-2170 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board Adopted this Resolution on 04/10/2018 by the following vote: AYE:John Gioia, District I SupervisorCandace Andersen, District II SupervisorKaren Mitchoff, District IV SupervisorFederal D. Glover, District V Supervisor NO: ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor ABSTAIN: RECUSE: Resolution No. 2018/124 IN THE MATTER OF accepting Offer of Dedication for Roadway Purposes for development permit DP16-03008, for a project being developed by Goldman Enterprises, Inc., as recommended by the Public Works Director, North Richmond area. (District I) NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the following instrument is hereby ACCEPTED FOR RECORDING ONLY: INSTRUMENT: Offer of Dedication for Roadway Purposes REFERENCE: DP16-03008 (APNs 408-203-2006, 408-203-010, and 408-203-011) GRANTOR: Goldman Enterprises, Inc. AREA: North Richmond DISTRICT: I 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Jocelyn LaRocque, Adrian Veliz, Kara Schuh-Garibay, Goldman Enterprises, Inc., Developers Surety and Indemnity Company RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Resolution No. 2018/125 accepting completion of improvements and approving the Final Map for subdivision SD05-08947 for a project developed by James Scott Busby and Margaret Mary Busby, as recommended by the Public Works Director, Martinez area. (District V) FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: The Public Works Department has reviewed the conditions of approval for SD05-08947 and has determined that all conditions of approval for Final Map approval have been satisfied. In addition, the developer has completed the improvements in accordance with Title 9 of the County Ordinance Code. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Lori Leontini (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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Jocelyn LaRocque, Lori Leontini, Dante Morabe, Design/Construction, chris.lau, Maintenance, Renee Hutchins, Records, Chris Hallford, Mapping, Michael Mann, Finance, Hiliana Li - DCD Secretary, CHP, c/o AI, James Scott Busby & Margaret Mary Busby-Owners, SureTec Insurance Company, Old Republic Title Company, T-02/10/2019 C. 11 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Accepting completion of improvements and approving the Final Map for subdivision SD05-08947, Martinez area. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The completion of improvements will not be accepted and the Final Map will not be approved and recorded. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Resolution No. 2018/125 Subdivision Map Tax Letter & Bond MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed Resolution No. 2018/125 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board Adopted this Resolution on 04/10/2018 by the following vote: AYE:4 John Gioia Candace Andersen Karen Mitchoff Federal D. Glover NO: ABSENT:1 Diane Burgis ABSTAIN: RECUSE: Resolution No. 2018/125 IN THE MATTER OF: Accepting completion of improvements and approving the Final Map for subdivision SD05-08947 for a project developed by James Scott Busby and Margaret Mary Busby, as recommended by the Public Works Director, Martinez area. (District V) The Public Works Director has notified this Board that the improvements for subdivision SD05-08947 have been completed without the need of a subdivision agreement. WHEREAS, these improvements are approximately located off of Alhambra Valley Road and near Reliez Valley Road. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the improvements have been COMPLETED as of April 10, 2018. The following document was presented for Board approval this date: The Final Map of subdivision SD05-08947, property located in the Martinez area, Supervisorial District V, said map having been certified by the proper officials; Said documents were accompanied by: 1. Letter from County Tax Collector stating that there are no unpaid County taxes heretofore levied on the property included in said may and that the 2017-2018 tax lien has been paid in full and that 2018-2019 tax lien, which became a lien on the first day of January 2018, is estimated to be $32,125. 2. Security to guarantee the payment of taxes, as required by Title 9 of the County Ordinance Code, in the form of a surety bond, No. 4412949, issued by SureTec Insurance Company, with James Scott Busby and Margaret Mary Busby as principal, in the amount $32,125, guaranteeing the payment of the estimated tax. NOW, THEREFORE, THE FOLLOWING IS RESOLVED: 1. That said subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is DETERMINED to be consistent with the County's general and specific plans. 2. That said Final Map is APPROVED and this Board does hereby accept subject to installation and acceptance of improvements on behalf of the public any of the streets, paths, or easements shown thereon as dedicated to public use. Contact: Lori Leontini (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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Jocelyn LaRocque, Lori Leontini, Dante Morabe, Design/Construction, chris.lau, Maintenance, Renee Hutchins, Records, Chris Hallford, Mapping, Michael Mann, Finance, Hiliana Li - DCD Secretary, CHP, c/o AI, James Scott Busby & Margaret Mary Busby-Owners, SureTec Insurance Company, Old Republic Title Company, T-02/10/2019 RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Resolution No. 2018/126 accepting completion of landscape improvements for a Subdivision Agreement (Right-of-Way Landscaping) for park acceptance PA14-00042 (cross-reference subdivision SD05-08971), for a project being developed by Toll Brothers, Inc., as recommended by the Public Works Director, San Ramon (Dougherty Valley) area. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact BACKGROUND: The developer has completed the landscape improvements per the Subdivision Agreement (Right-of-Way Landscaping), and in accordance with the Title 9 of the County Ordinance Code. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Lori Leontini (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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Jocelyn LaRocque, Dante Morabe- Design & Construction, Lori Leontini, Chris Lau, Maintenance, Chris Hallford, Mapping, C . Low, City of San Ramon, T-03/20/2020, Toll Brothers, Inc, Western Surety Company C. 12 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Accepting completion of landscape improvements for park acceptance PA14-00042, San Ramon (Dougherty Valley) area. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The completion of improvements will not be accepted and the maintenance/warranty period will not begin. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Resolution No. 2018/126 MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed Resolution No. 2018/126 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board Adopted this Resolution on 04/10/2018 by the following vote: AYE:4 John Gioia Candace Andersen Karen Mitchoff Federal D. Glover NO: ABSENT:1 Diane Burgis ABSTAIN: RECUSE: Resolution No. 2018/126 IN THE MATTER OF: Accepting completion of landscape improvements for a Subdivision Agreement (Right-of-Way Landscaping) for park acceptance PA14-00042 (cross-reference subdivision SD05-08971), for a project being developed by Toll Brothers, Inc., as recommended by the Public Works Director, San Ramon (Dougherty Valley) area. (District II) WHEREAS, these improvements are approximately located near Main Branch Road. The Public Works Director has notified this Board that the right-of-way landscaping improvements for park acceptance PA14-00042 (cross-reference subdivision SD05-08971), have been completed as provided in the Subdivision Agreement (Right-of-Way Landscaping) with Toll Brothers, Inc., heretofore approved by this Board; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the landscape improvements have been COMPLETED as of April 10, 2018, thereby establishing the six month terminal period for the filing of liens in case of action under said Subdivision Agreement (Right-of-Way Landscaping): DATE OF AGREEMENT: March 20, 2018 NAME OF SURETY: Western Surety Company BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED the payment (labor and materials) surety for $318,000.00, Bond No. 58727561 issued by the above surety be RETAINED for the six-month lien guarantee period until October 20, 2018, at which time the Board AUTHORIZES the release of said surety less the amount of any claims on file. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the right-of-way landscaping improvements for park acceptance PA14-00042, as shown as Parcel B Final Map of subdivision SD05-08971, filed September 23, 2013, in Book 517 of maps at Page 43, Official Records of Contra Costa County, State of California, and offered for dedication for park purposes by separate instrument are ACCEPTED AS COMPLETE. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that upon acceptance by the Board of Supervisors , the San Ramon City Council shall accept the landscape improvements for maintenance in accordance with the Dougherty Valley Memorandum of Understanding. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the beginning of the warranty and maintenance period is hereby established, and the $7,000.00 cash deposit (Auditor's Deposit Permit No. 695177, dated October 6, 2015) made by Toll Brothers, Inc., and the performance/maintenance surety bond for $628,000.00, Bond No. 58727561 issued by Western Surety Company be RETAINED pursuant to the requirements of Section 94-4.406 of the Ordinance Code until released by this Board. Contact: Lori Leontini (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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Jocelyn LaRocque, Dante Morabe- Design & Construction, Lori Leontini, Chris Lau, Maintenance, Chris Hallford, Mapping, C . Low, City of San Ramon, T-03/20/2020, Toll Brothers, Inc, Western Surety Company RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Resolution No. 2018/127 accepting completion of landscape improvements for park acceptance PA15-00044 (cross-reference subdivision SD05-08971), for a project being developed by Shapell Industries, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, as recommended by the Public Works Director, San Ramon (Dougherty Valley) area. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact BACKGROUND: The developer has completed the landscape improvements in accordance with the Title 9 of the County Ordinance Code. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The completion of improvements APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Lori Leontini (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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Jocelyn LaRocque, Dante Morabe- Design & Construction, Lori Leontini, Chris Lau, Maintenance, Chris Hallford, Mapping, C . Low, City of San Ramon, T-03/20/2020, Shapell Industries, Inc. , Western Surety Company C. 13 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Accepting completion of landscape improvements for park acceptance PA15-00044, San Ramon (Dougherty Valley) area. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: (CONT'D) will not be accepted and the maintenance/warranty period will not begin. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Resolution No. 2018/127 MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed Resolution No. 2018/127 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board Adopted this Resolution on 04/10/2018 by the following vote: AYE:4 John Gioia Candace Andersen Karen Mitchoff Federal D. Glover NO: ABSENT:1 Diane Burgis ABSTAIN: RECUSE: Resolution No. 2018/127 IN THE MATTER OF: Accepting completion of landscape improvements for park acceptance PA15-00044 (cross-reference subdivision SD05-08971), for a project being developed by Shapell Industries, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, as recommended by the Public Works Director, San Ramon (Dougherty Valley) area. (District II) WHEREAS, these improvements are approximately located near Golden Bay Avenue. The Public Works Director has notified this Board that the right-of-way landscaping improvements for park acceptance PA15-00044 (cross-reference subdivision SD05-08971), have been completed without the need of an agreement; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the landscape improvements have been COMPLETED as of April 20, 2018, thereby establishing the six-month terminal period for the filing of liens in case of action under Agreement for Improvement Warranty: DATE OF AGREEMENT: April 10, 2018 NAME OF SURETY: Western Surety Company BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED the payment (labor and materials) surety for $192,160.00, Bond No. 30034551 issued by the above surety be RETAINED for the six month lien guarantee period until October 10, 2018, at which time the Board AUTHORIZES the release of said surety less the amount of any claims on file. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the right-of-way landscaping improvements for park acceptance PA15-00044, as shown as Parcel A on the Final Map of subdivision SD05-08971, filed September 23, 2013, in Book 517 of maps at Page 43, Official Records of Contra Costa County, State of California, and offered for dedication for park purposes by separate instrument are ACCEPTED AS COMPLETE. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that upon acceptance by the Board of Supervisors , the San Ramon City Council shall accept the landscape improvements for maintenance in accordance with the Dougherty Valley Memorandum of Understanding. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the beginning of the warranty and maintenance period is hereby established, and the $3,840.00 cash deposit (Auditor's Deposit Permit No. 757523, dated March 5, 2018) made by Toll Bros. Inc., a, and the performance/maintenance surety bond for $57,650.00, Bond No. 30034551 issued by Western Surety Company be RETAINED pursuant to the requirements of Section 94-4.406 of the Ordinance Code until released by this Board. Contact: Lori Leontini (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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Jocelyn LaRocque, Dante Morabe- Design & Construction, Lori Leontini, Chris Lau, Maintenance, Chris Hallford, Mapping, C . Low, City of San Ramon, T-03/20/2020, Shapell Industries, Inc. , Western Surety Company RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Director of Airports, or designee, to execute a month-to-month hangar rental agreement with John Cicero for a Large T-hangar at Buchanan Field Airport effective April 1, 2018 in the monthly amount of $548.33, Pacheco area. (District IV) FISCAL IMPACT: The Airport Enterprise Fund will realize $6,579.96 annually. BACKGROUND: On September 1, 1970, Buchanan Airport Hangar Company entered into a 30-year lease with Contra Costa County for the construction of seventy-five (75) hangars and eighteen (18) aircraft shelters at Buchanan Field Airport. Buchanan Airport Hangar Company was responsible for the maintenance and property management of the property during that 30-year period. On September 1, 2000, the County obtained ownership APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Beth Lee, (925) 681-4200 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 14 To:Board of Supervisors From:Keith Freitas, Airports Director Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Director of Airports, or designee, to execute a hangar rental agreement with Buchanan Field Airport Hangar tenant BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) of the aircraft hangars and shelters, pursuant to the terms of the above lease. On February 13, 2007, Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors approved the new Large Hangar Lease Agreement for use with the larger East Ramp Hangars. On February 3, 2008, Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors approved the amended T-Hangar Lease Agreement which removed the Aircraft Physical Damage Insurance requirement. The new amended T-hangar Lease Agreement will be used to enter into this aircraft rental agreement. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: A negative action will cause a loss of revenue to the Airport Enterprise Fund. ATTACHMENTS Hangar Rental Agmt - John Cicero RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Director of Airports, or designee, to execute a month-to-month hangar rental agreement with Archer Two Aviation, LLC. for a Shade hangar at Buchanan Field Airport effective March 23, 2018 in the monthly amount of $177.07, Pacheco area (District IV). FISCAL IMPACT: The Airport Enterprise Fund will realize $2,124.84 annually. BACKGROUND: On September 1, 1970, Buchanan Airport Hangar Company entered into a 30-year lease with Contra Costa County for the construction of seventy-five (75) hangars and eighteen (18) aircraft shelters/shade hangars at Buchanan Field Airport. In 1977 Buchanan Airport Hangar Company amended their lease to allow for the construction of another 30-year lease with Contra Costa County for the construction of seventeen (17) additional hangars. Buchanan Airport Hangar Company was APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Beth Lee, (925) 681-4200 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 15 To:Board of Supervisors From:Keith Freitas, Airports Director Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Director of Airports, or designee, to execute a hangar rental agreement with Buchanan Field Airport Hangar tenant BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) responsible for the maintenance and property management of the property during the lease period. On September 1, 2000, the ninety-three (93) t- and shade hangars at Buchanan Field reverted to the County ownership pursuant to the terms of the above lease. On November 14, 2006, the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors approved the form of the T-Hangar and Shade Hangar Rental Agreement for use with renting the County's t-hangars, shade hangars, medium hangars, and executive hangars at Buchanan Field Airport. On February 16, 2007, the additional seventeen (17) hangars at Buchanan Field reverted back to the County pursuant to the above referenced lease. This row included six (6) large hangars which were not covered by the approved T-Hangar and Shade Hangar Rental Agreement. On February 23, 2007, Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors approved the new Large Hangar Rental Agreement for use with the large East Ramp Hangars. On January 16, 2009, Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors approved an amendment to the T-Hangar and Shade Hangar Rental Agreement and the Large Hangar Rental Agreement (combined "Hangar Rental Agreements") which removed the Aircraft Physical Damage Insurance requirement. The Hangar Rental Agreements are the current forms in use for rental of all the County hangars at Buchanan Field Airport. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: A negative action will cause a loss of revenue to the Airport Enterprise Fund. ATTACHMENTS Hangar Rental Agmt - Archer Two Aviation, LLC. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY -BUCHANAN FIELD AIRPORT T-HANGAR AND SHADE HANGAR RENTAL AGREEMENT 1. PARTIES : March 23, 2018 ("Effective Date"), the COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, a political subdivision of the State of California ("Airport"), Archer Two Aviation, LLC ("Renter"), hereby mutually agree and promise as follows: 2. RENTER AND AIRCRAFT INFORMATION: Simultaneous with the execution of this T-Hangar and Shade Hangar Rental Agreement ("Rental Agreement") by Renter, Renter shall complete the Renter and Aircraft Information Form. A completed copy of the Renter and Aircraft Information Form is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein. Renter must also provide to Airport at that time, for inspection and copying, (1) the original current Aircraft Registration or, if the aircraft described in Exhibit A is under construction, the plans for and proof of ownership of such aircraft; and (2) the insurance information required by Section 16 below. 3. 4. PURPOSE: The purpose of this Rental Agreement is to provide for the rental of a T- Hangar or Shade Hangar space at the Contra Costa County -Buchanan Field Airport for the storage of the aircraft described in the Renter and Aircraft Information Form ("Renter's Aircraft"). PREMISES: For and in consideration of the rents and faithful performance by Renter of the terms and conditions set forth herein, Airport hereby rents to Renter and Renter hereby rents from Airport that T-Hangar or Shade Hangar shown as# B-12 on the T-Hangar and Shade Hangar Site Plan, attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated herein. This T-Hangar or Shade Hangar is part of the T-Hangar and Shade Hangar Site ("T-Hangar Site") and shall hereinafter be described as the "T- Hangar." Renter has inspected the T-Hangar and hereby accepts the T-Hangar in its present condition, as is, without any obligation on the part of Airport to make any alterations, improvements , or repairs in or about the T-Hangar. 5. USE: The T-Hangar shall be exclusively by Renter for the storage of Renter's Aircraft. In addition to the storage of Renter's Aircraft , Renter may use the T-Hangar for (1) the homebuilding, restoration and /or maintenance of Renter's Aircraft, provided that such homebuilding , restoration and /or maintenance is pe rformed by Renter only and in conformance with all applicable statutes, ordinances , resolutions, regulations, orders, circulars (including but not limited to FAA Advisory Circular 20- 27) and policies now in existence or adopted from time to time by the United States, the State of California , the County of Contra Costa and other government agencies with jurisdiction over Buchanan Field Airport; (2) the storage of and materials directly 4 Revised T-HANGAR AND S HADE HANGAR A GREEMENT 'll'J l..,f\f\n related to the storage, construction of homebuilt planes homebuilding , restoration , and /or maintenance of Renter's Aircraft; (3) the storage of one boat, or one recreational vehicle , or one motorcycle, or one automobile, provided that Renter first provides to Airport proof of Renter's ownership and original registration of any stored boat or vehicle, for inspection and copying; and /or (4) the storage of comfort items (such as a couch, small refrigerator, etc.) that the Director of Airports, in his sole discretion, determines will not impede the use of the hangar for the storage of Renter's Aircraft, and are not prohibited by applicable building and fire codes. The T-Hangar shall not be used for any purpose not expressly set forth in this Section 5. Use. The use of all or a portion of the T-Hangar for the storage of aircraft not owned or leased by Renter is prohibited. ("Aircraft not owned or leased by Renter" means any aircraft in which Renter does not have an ownership interest or which is not directly leased to Renter). Renter shall present proof of said ownership interest or lease to Airport upon request in addition to that information provided in Exhibit A. If Renter's Aircraft is or becomes non-operational , it may be stored in the T-Hangar only if it is being homebuilt or restored by Renter. Prior to the commencement of any such homebuilding or restoration, Renter shall provide to Airport (1) a copy of the purchase agreement or (2) a valid federal registration number. If Renter's Aircraft is not registered as of the Effective Date , upon completion of construction, Renter shall register and apply for an airworthiness certificate for Renter's Aircraft in accordance with all applicable federal statutes and regulations and provide the original registration and certification to Airport, for inspection and copying, immediately upon receipt by Renter. On or before January 1 of each year, if the homebuilding or restoration has not been completed , Renter shall provide a written annual report to the Director of Airports that details the homebuilding or restoration activity performed, work still required to be completed and an estimate of time of completion. 6. TERM : This Rental Agreement shall be from month to month commencing March 23, 2018 , and shall continue until terminated . This Rental Agreement may be terminated by any party upon thirty (30) days written notice to the other party. 7. RENT: A. Monthly Rent and Additional Rent. Renter shall pay$ 177.07 in rent per month ("Monthly Rent") due and payable in advance on the first day of each calendar month, beginning on the commencem ent date of this Rental Agreement. Unless directed to do otherwise by Airport , Re nter shall pay rent only in cash or by personal check , certified check, or money order. If the term of this Rental Agreement begins on a day other than the first day of the month, the Monthly Rent stated above for the first month shall be prorated 5 Rev ised T-HANGAR AND SHADE HANGAR AGREEMENT ,,,.,,,,""" RECOMMENDATION(S): A. APPROVE the Buchanan Feld Airport Business Park Project [Project No. WL0075, DP1603049] DCD-CP# 17-37 (District 4), and, B. FIND, on the basis of the whole record, including the proposed Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and any comments received and staff responses thereto, that there is no substantial evidence the Project may have significant effect on the environment, and that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the lead agency, Contra Costa County (County). C. ADOPT the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Program for the Project in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), pursuant to Article 6, Section 15070(a), (the custodian of which is the Department of Conservation and Development Director who is located at 30 Muir Road, Martinez, CA), and, D. DIRECT the Director of Conservation and Development to file a Notice of Determination with the County Clerk, and, APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Beth Lee, (925) 681-4200 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 16 To:Board of Supervisors From:Keith Freitas, Airports Director Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Approve CCR Bus. Park Project & take related actions under CEQA; Authorize execute of 50-yr lease w/Montecito Comm. Group LLC approx. 3.2 acres at CCR RECOMMENDATION(S): (CONT'D) E. AUTHORIZE the Director of Airports, or designee, to arrange for payment of $2,280.75 to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife fees and a $50 fee to the County Clerk for filing the Notice of Determination, F. APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Director of Airports, or designee, to execute a 50-year ground lease between the County, as lessor, and Montecito Commercial Group LLC, as tenant, for the lease of approximately 3.21 acres of land located on the northwest corner of Marsh Drive and Sally Ride Drive at the Buchanan Field Airport (the “Lease”) FISCAL IMPACT: There is no negative impact on the General Fund. The Airport Enterprise Fund will receive lease and other revenues and the County General Fund will receive property, sales and possessory interest tax revenues from this development. Upon completion of the construction rent period (at $1,000 per month), the ground rent will begin at $4,247.08 per month (or $50,964.96 per year) and increase annually by a CPI inflator. Every 10 years the lease will be revalued based on a market revaluation process. BACKGROUND: The site of the Buchanan Field industrial business park development consists of approximately 3.21 acres of land owned by the County that is located on the northeast corner of Marsh Drive and Sally Ride Drive on the west side of Buchanan Field Airport. The parcel is designated for non-aviation use on the Buchanan Field Master Plan. This parcel is located entirely within the unincorporated County. On December 8, 2015, the Contra Costa County Public Works – Airports Division received a letter of interest from a private party to develop an industrial business park on the approximate 3.21-acre parcel. In accordance with prior discussions with the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) Airports District Office (ADO) regarding development at Buchanan Field, the County notified existing commercial tenants at Buchanan Field and Byron to solicit other competitive interest in the property. The development solicitation letter and publication provided for a competitive interest response deadline of January 14, 2016. The County did not receive any additional letters of interest to develop this property. On March 29, 2016, the Board of Supervisors authorized staff to negotiate a ground lease for this project. This action was consistent with the master developer selection process that was approved by the Board of Supervisors on May 23, 2006, whereby projects without a competitive interest are to proceed with the traditional environmental review and lease development processes. County staff has negotiated lease and development terms with Montecito Commercial Group LLC and the project is ready to proceed to implementation. This development project has been presented and discussed with the Aviation Advisory Committee and the Airport Committee during the environmental and lease process. Development of this 3.21-acre vacant parcel for business park use would expand economic development activity at Buchanan Field Airport. The lease will provide significant revenue to the Airport Enterprise Fund and County General Fund. The lease is comparable to other executed leases and is consistent with the Airport Master Plan and County General Plan. This development will also facilitate the growth and development identified in the adopted Buchanan Field Airport Master Plan. Unless and until a final lease agreement is fully executed by all parties, this Board Order, any draft lease agreement, other communications or conduct of the parties shall have absolutely no legal effect, may not be used to impose any legally binding obligation on the County and may not be used as evidence of any oral or implied agreement between the parties or as evidence of the terms and conditions of any implied agreement. A copy of the Lease signed by the Tenant is attached. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The County General Fund and the Airport Enterprise Fund would not realize the additional revenues. The County-owned land would remain vacant, which could negatively impact build out of the airport as detailed in the Master Plan. ATTACHMENTS Montecito Lease Agreement Exhibit A - Legal Description Exhibit B - Site Plan Exhibit C - Mitigated Negative Declaration Exhibit D - Form of Rental Agreement Exhibit E - Form of Consent to Rental Agreement Exhibit F - Form of Performance Bond Comment Letters RECOMMENDATION(S): AUTHORIZE the Chief Engineer, Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (FC District), or designee, to execute and record the Memorandum of Unrecorded Grant Agreement/Deed Restriction (MOUGA) with the Contra Costa Resource Conservation District (CCRCD) and the California Natural Resources Agency (CNRA) to protect public interest in the Pinole Creek Fish Passage Project (Project), effective April 10, 2018, in perpetuity, Pinole area. FISCAL IMPACT: By executing the agreement, the FC District agrees to maintain the fish ladder for the reasonable lifetime of the improvement. The maintenance cost will be funded by Flood Control Zone 9 (Pinole Creek Watershed) funds. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Michelle Cordis, (925) 313-2381 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Tim Jensen, Flood Control, Michelle Cordis, Flood Control, Teri E. Rie, Flood Control, Karen Laws, Real Property, Caroline Tom, Flood Control, Catherine Windham, Flood Control C. 17 To:Contra Costa County Flood Control District Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Memorandum of Unrecorded Grant Agreement/Deed Restriction for the Pinole Creek Fish Passage Project, Pinole area. Project No. 7505-6F8248 BACKGROUND: The CCRCD is the sponsor of the Project, which involved the retrofitting of one of the existing 430-foot-long culverts located in Pinole Creek, under Interstate 80, to improve fish passage conditions. Construction of the Project was completed in October 2016. The FC District owns and maintains a section of the Pinole Creek Flood Control Channel where a portion of the Project is located and has issued Flood Control Permit 622-10 to the CCRCD and to the project contractor for work associated with the Project. The agencies that funded the Project are the CNRA and the State Coastal Conservancy (SCC). These funding agencies are requiring the CCRCD to execute a MOUGA with the FC District, and with the funding agencies themselves, to provide notice of an agreement between the State of California, by and through the CNRA, the CCRCD, and the FC District. The FC District had executed a similar agreement with American Rivers and the SCC for the Marsh Creek Fish Ladder Project. The agreement is entitled “Agreement Protecting the Public Interest in Certain Improvements and Development.” CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the MOUGA is not executed, then the MOUGA will not be recorded. ATTACHMENTS MOUGA RECOMMENDATION(S): DENY claims filed by CSAA – Subrogee for Faisal Malik, Julie Enea, Kerri & Michael Harris, Cristell Hoover, EH, a minor by Cristell Hoover her guardian, Shannon O. Murphy Sr. and Lavanya Shahani. DENY late claim filed by Mario Torres. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: CSAA a Subrogee for Faisal Malik: Property claim for damage to fence in the amount of $3,772.21 Julie Enea: Property claim for damage to vehicle in the amount of $11,540. Kerri & Michael Harris: Personal injury claim for medical expenses and damages in the amount of $1,000,000. Cristell Hoover: Personal injury claim for loss of support E.H., a minor by Cristell Hoover her guardian: Personal injury claim for loss of support Shannon O. Murphy Sr.: Personal injury claim for medical expenses in the amount of $8,550. Lavanya Shahani: Property cliam for damage to vehicle in the amount of $209.05 Mario Torres: Request to Board of Supervisors APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 18 To:Board of Supervisors From:David Twa, County Administrator Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Claims BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) to accept a late claim RECOMMENDATION(S): ACCEPT the Fiscal Year 2017/18 Community Facilities District Administration Report on County of Contra Costa Community Facilities District No. 2001-1 (Norris Canyon) as required by Sections 50075.3 and 53411 of the California Government Code. FISCAL IMPACT: None. The report relates to Special Taxes approved by voters and bonds issued and secured by said Special Taxes. BACKGROUND: On June 5, 2001 the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors (Board) authorized the establishment of Community Facilities District No. 2001-1 (Norris Canyon). The creation of the Community Facilities District (CFD) authorized the levy of a Mello-Roos Special Tax on the Norris Canyon Estates subdivision in the San Ramon area. The action of the Board also authorized the issuance of bonded indebtedness secured by the approved Special Tax in the amount of $7,220,000. The (CFD) bonds were issued on June 14, 2001. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 19 To:Board of Supervisors From:Robert Campbell, Auditor-Controller Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:County of Contra Costa Community Facilities District No. 2001-1 (Norris Canyon) BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) On December 11, 2012, the Board authorized the refinancing of the 2001 Special Tax Bonds in order to lower the annual debt service on the bonds. The 2013 Special Tax Refunding Bonds were issued on January 24, 2013. The California Government Code Sections 50075.3 and 53411 require that specified information be provided to the Board of Supervisors on an annual basis. The report requirements include information on Mello-Roos CFD Special Taxes collected and CFD Bond issued. The attached CFD Administration Report fulfills the requirement of the Government Code. The reporting requirements are summarized below: Section 50075.3 Item (a): Identify amount of special taxes that have been collected and expended. Response to Item (a): The fiscal year 2016-17 special tax levy was $418,392. Since the CFD is on the County Teeter Plan, the full amount of the tax levy was remitted to the CFD. The total levy was used to pay debt services in March and September 2017 on the CFD bonds as well as administrative costs for the CFD. Item (b): Identify the status of any project required or authorized to be funded by the special taxes. Response to Item (b): All CFD No. 2001-1 improvements have been completed and accepted by the Public Works Department of the County. Section 53411 Item (a): Identify the amount of bonds that have been collected and expended. Response to Item (a): A total of $7,220,000 in special tax bonds was issued by the County on June 14, 2001. Upon issuance of the bonds, $6,000,000 from bond proceeds was deposited into the Improvement Fund and has been used to acquire the CFD No. 2001-1 improvements from the developer. An additional $170,000 was used to pay the costs of issuing the bonds. Approximately $417,000 was deposited in the Reserve Fund, and the remaining $487,000 was deposited in the Bond Fund to be used for capitalized interest. The Series 2001 Bonds were refunded and defeased on January 24, 2013 by the issuance of $5,605,000 in special tax refunding bonds. An Original Issue Premium of $20,460, together with available moneys from the Series 2001 Bonds in the amount of $767,049, left a total of $6,392,508 in bond proceeds to be expended. Upon issuance of the bonds, $5,947,529 from bond proceeds was deposited into the Refunding Fund, to be used to redeem all of the outstanding Series 2001 Bonds. An additional $207,063 was deposited into the Reserve Fund. The remaining $237,917 was used to pay the costs of issuing the Series 2013 Special Tax Refunding Bonds. Item (b): Identify the status of any project required or authorized to be funded from bond proceeds: Response to Item (b): All CFD No. 2001-1 improvements have been completed and accepted by the Public Works Department of the County. The following information on the incidence of delinquencies within the District is for informational purposes and is not part of the Government Code requirement. The total amount collected by the County for the fiscal year 2016-17 CFD special tax levy was $418,392 pursuant to the Teeter Plan. The delinquency percentage in the District is 0%, which is below the threshold for which the County is obligated to take affirmative action to remedy. ATTACHMENTS 2017-18 Admin Report 333(University(Ave,(Suite(160(•(Sacramento,(CA(95825 Phone:(d916l(561-0890(•(Fax:(d916l(561-0891 www.goodwinconsultinggroup.net COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2001-1 (NORRIS CANYON) CFD TAX ADMINISTRATION REPORT FISCAL YEAR 2017-18 February 28, 2018 Community Facilities District No. 2001-1 CFD Tax Administration Report TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page Executive Summary ............................................................................................................. i I. Introduction ..........................................................................................................................1 II. Purpose of Report ................................................................................................................2 III. Special Tax Requirement .....................................................................................................3 IV. Special Tax Levy .................................................................................................................4 V. Development Update ...........................................................................................................7 VI. Status of Public Improvements ............................................................................................8 VII. CFD Funds ...........................................................................................................................9 VIII. Prepayments .......................................................................................................................11 IX. Delinquencies .....................................................................................................................12 X. Foreclosure Covenant ........................................................................................................13 XI. Senate Bill 165 Reporting Requirements ...........................................................................14 XII. Assembly Bill 1666 Requirements ....................................................................................16 Appendix A – Summary of Fiscal Year 2017-18 Special Tax Levy Appendix B – Fiscal Year 2017-18 Special Tax Levy for Individual Assessor’s Parcels Appendix C – Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax Appendix D – Boundary Map of Community Facilities District No. 2001-1 Appendix E – Assessor’s Parcel Maps for Fiscal Year 2017-18 County of Contra Costa i Fiscal Year 2017-18 CFD No. 2001-1 CFD Tax Administration Report EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The following summary provides a brief overview of the main points from this report regarding the County of Contra Costa Community Facilities District No. 2001-1 (Norris Canyon) (‘‘CFD No. 2001-1’’ or the ‘‘CFD’’): Fiscal Year 2017-18 Special Tax Levy Number of Taxed Parcels Total Special Tax Levy 347 $419,093 For further detail regarding the special tax levy, or special tax rates, please refer to Section IV of this report. Development Status for Fiscal Year 2017-18 Land Use Category Parcels or Acres Residential Property 347 parcels * Other Property 0 parcels Undeveloped Property 1.5 acres * Does not include 13 parcels that have prepaid their special tax obligation. For more information regarding the status of development in CFD No. 2001-1, please see Section V of this report. Delinquency Summary Delinquent Amount for FY 2016-17 (as of September 19, 2017) Total Levy for FY 2016-17 Delinquency Rate $0 $418,392 0.00% For additional delinquency information, including historical delinquency rates, please see Section IX of this report. County of Contra Costa ii Fiscal Year 2017-18 CFD No. 2001-1 CFD Tax Administration Report Outstanding Bonds Summary 2013 Special Tax Refunding Bonds Issuance Date Original Principal Amount Retired Current Amount Outstanding January 2013 $5,605,000 $1,225,000* $4,380,000* * As of the date of this report. County of Contra Costa 1 Fiscal Year 2017-18 CFD No. 2001-1 CFD Tax Administration Report I. INTRODUCTION Community Facilities District No. 2001-1 On June 5, 2001, the County of Contra Costa (the “County”) Board of Supervisors established CFD No. 2001-1. In a landowner election held on the same day, the sole owner of property within the CFD voted to authorize the levy of a Mello-Roos special tax on property within CFD No. 2001-1. The landowner also voted to incur bonded indebtedness, secured by special taxes levied on property within the CFD, in an amount not to exceed $7,220,000. On June 14, 2001, special tax bonds (the “Series 2001 Bonds”) in the principal amount of $7,220,000 were issued on behalf of CFD No. 2001-1. In January 2013, the outstanding Series 2001 Bonds were refunded and defeased with the issuance of $5,605,000 in bonds (the “Series 2013 Special Tax Refunding Bonds” or the “Bonds”). A special tax will be levied on property within the CFD in fiscal year 2017-18 in order to pay debt service obligations in calendar year 2018. The CFD boundary encompasses a 389-acre site that is proposed for the Norris Canyon Estates residential community. The CFD is located in an unincorporated area of the County just west of the City of San Ramon. At build out, the project was originally expected to include 361 single family detached homes. As of June 1, 2017, 360 building permits have been issued for new residential home construction within the CFD. The Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 The reduction in property tax revenues that resulted from the passage of Proposition 13 in 1978 required public agencies and real estate developers to look for other means to generate funding for public infrastructure. The funding available from traditional assessment districts was limited by certain requirements of the assessment acts, and it became clear that a more flexible funding tool was needed. In response, the California State Legislature (the “Legislature”) approved the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 (the “Act”) which provides for the levy of a special tax within a defined geographic area (i.e., a community facilities district) if such levy is approved by two-thirds of the qualified electors in the area. The Act can generate funding for a broad range of facilities and special taxes can be allocated to property in any reasonable manner other than on an ad valorem basis. A community facilities district is authorized to issue tax-exempt bonds that are secured by land within the district. If a parcel does not pay the special tax levied on it, a public agency can foreclose on the parcel and use the proceeds of the foreclosure to ensure that bondholders receive interest and principal payments on the bonds. Because bonds issued by a community facilities district are land-secured, there is no risk to a public agency’s general fund or taxing capacity. In addition, because the bonds are tax-exempt, they typically carry an interest rate that is lower than conventional construction financing. County of Contra Costa 2 Fiscal Year 2017-18 CFD No. 2001-1 CFD Tax Administration Report II. PURPOSE OF REPORT This CFD Tax Administration Report (the “Report”) presents findings from research and financial analysis performed by Goodwin Consulting Group, Inc. to determine the fiscal year 2017-18 special tax levy for CFD No. 2001-1. The Report is intended to provide information to interested parties regarding the current financial obligations of the CFD, special taxes levied in fiscal year 2017-18, and information on the public facilities authorized to be funded by the CFD. The Report also summarizes development activity as well as other pertinent information (e.g., prepayments, delinquencies, and foreclosures) on property within the CFD. In addi tion, the Report provides all of the information that must be filed with the County Board of Supervisors pursuant to the requirements of Senate Bill 165. The remainder of the Report is organized as follows:  Section III identifies the financial obligations of CFD No. 2001-1 for fiscal year 2017- 18.  Section IV provides a summary of the special tax categories and the methodology that is used to apportion the special tax among parcels in the CFD. The maximum special tax rates for fiscal year 2017-18 are also identified in this section.  Section V provides an update of the development activity occurring within CFD No. 2001-1, including new building permit activity.  Section VI provides information on the public improvements authorized to be funded by CFD No. 2001-1.  Section VII provides information regarding funds established for the Bonds, including current balances in such funds.  Section VIII identifies parcels, if any, that have prepaid their special tax obligation.  Section IX provides information regarding special tax delinquencies in CFD No. 2001-1.  Section X provides information on covenants regarding foreclosure on delinquent parcels.  Section XI provides a summary of the reporting requirements set forth in Senate Bill 165, the Local Agency Special Tax and Bond Accountability Act, and the information needed for the County to respond to these requirements.  Section XII provides information on requirements set forth in Assembly Bill 1666. County of Contra Costa 3 Fiscal Year 2017-18 CFD No. 2001-1 CFD Tax Administration Report III. SPECIAL TAX REQUIREMENT Pursuant to the Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax (the “RMA”) for CFD No. 2001-1, which was adopted as an exhibit to the Resolution of Formation of CFD No. 2001-1, the Special Tax Requirement means the total amount needed each fiscal year to (i) pay principal and interest on bonds, (ii) create or replenish reserve funds, (iii) cure any delinquencies in the payment of principal or interest on indebtedness of CFD No. 2001-1 which have occurred in the prior fiscal year or (based on delinquencies in the payment of special taxes which have already taken place) are expected to occur in the fiscal year in which the tax will be collected, and (iv) pay administrative expenses. For fiscal year 2017-18, the Special Tax Requirement is $419,093 and is calculated as follows: Community Facilities District No. 2001-1 Special Tax Requirement for Fiscal Year 2017-18* Debt Service $406,425 Interest Payment on Bonds Due March 1, 2018 $73,213 Interest Payment on Bonds Due Sept. 1, 2018 $73,213 Principal Payment on Bonds Due Sept. 1, 2018 $260,000 Administrative Expenses $12,664 Surplus Funds to Reduce Special Tax Requirement $0 Rounding Adjustment $4 Fiscal Year 2017-18 Special Tax Requirement $419,093 *Total may not sum due to rounding. County of Contra Costa 4 Fiscal Year 2017-18 CFD No. 2001-1 CFD Tax Administration Report IV. SPECIAL TAX LEVY Special Tax Categories Special taxes within CFD No. 2001-1 are levied pursuant to the methodology set forth in the RMA. The RMA establishes various special tax categories against which the special tax can be levied each fiscal year, including Residential Property, Other Propert y, and Undeveloped Property. (Capitalized terms are defined in the RMA in Appendix C of this Report.) Residential Property is defined as any parcel within the CFD for which a building permit for construction of a residential structure was issued prior to June 1 of the preceding fiscal year. Other Property means all taxable parcels in the CFD for which a building permit was issued prior to June 1 of the preceding fiscal year for a structure that is not used for residential purposes and is not owned by a homeowners’ association or public agency. Undeveloped Property is defined as all taxable parcels in the CFD for which a building permit has not been issued prior to June 1 of the preceding fiscal year. Maximum Special Tax Rates The maximum special tax rates applicable to each category of property in CFD No. 2001 -1 are set forth in Section C of the RMA. The actual amount of the maximum special tax which will be levied on each land use category in fiscal year 2017-18, is determined by the method of apportionment included in Section E of the RMA. The following table identifies the maximum special taxes that can be levied on property in CFD No. 2001-1. Community Facilities District No. 2001-1 Maximum Special Tax Rates Tax Category Description Maximum Special Tax 1 Residential Property $2,100 per parcel 2 Other Property $2,100 per residential unit planned on the parcel before it became Other Property 3 Undeveloped Property $3,360 per acre County of Contra Costa 5 Fiscal Year 2017-18 CFD No. 2001-1 CFD Tax Administration Report Changes to Norris Canyon Tentative Map The maximum special tax rates shown above assume that a particular number of residential units will be developed within Norris Canyon consistent with the tentative map approved by the County Board of Supervisors in August 1997. To the extent changes are proposed to the tentative map in future years that would reduce the number of residential units within the project, the County must either deny the revision to the tentative map or require a prepayment of special taxes by the developer proposing the tentative map change. Such prepayment would be in an amount sufficient to retire a portion of the bonds and maintain 110% debt service coverage with the reduced special tax revenues that will result after the tentative map revision. To date, development in Norris Canyon has been consistent with the approved tentative map. Apportionment of Special Taxes The amount of special tax levied on each parcel in the CFD each fiscal year will be determined by application of Section E of the RMA. Pursuant to this section, the Special Tax Requirement will be allocated as follows: The first step requires special taxes to be levied on each parcel of Residential Property and Other Property up to 100% of the applicable maximum special tax rate. If additional revenue is needed after the first step is completed, and after applying capitalized interest to the Special Tax Requirement, then a special tax will be levied on each parcel of Undeveloped Property up to 100% of the applicable maximum special tax. If additional revenues are still needed to pay annual obligations of the CFD after the maximum special tax is levied on Residential Property, Other Property, and Undeveloped Property, a special tax will be levied on Homeowners’ Association Property and parcels of Public Propert y that originally had planned units, as defined in the RMA. Application of the maximum special tax rate to the 347 Residential Property parcels for fiscal year 2017-18 will generate special tax revenues of $728,700. Since the Special Tax Requirement for fiscal year 2017-18 is only $419,093, Residential Property will be taxed at approximately 57.5% of the maximum, or $1,208 per parcel. The resulting special tax on Residential Property will fully fund the Special Tax Requirement for fiscal year 2017-18, assuming no delinquencies. No special tax will be levied on Undeveloped Property in fiscal year 2017-18. The actual special tax rates and the number of units and/or acres of taxable property on which those rates are levied for fiscal year 2017-18 are shown in the table on the following page. County of Contra Costa 6 Fiscal Year 2017-18 CFD No. 2001-1 CFD Tax Administration Report Community Facilities District No. 2001-1 Fiscal Year 2017-18 Special Tax Levy Land Use Category Maximum Special Tax Rates Fiscal Year 2017-18 Actual Special Tax Rates Parcels/Acres Taxed Total Special Tax Levy Residential Property $2,100 per parcel $1,208 per parcel 347 parcels * $419,093 Undeveloped Property $3,360 per acre $0 per acre 0 acres $0 Total Special Tax Levy for Fiscal Year 2017-18 $419,093 * Total does not include 13 parcels that have had their special tax obligation prepaid and therefore are no longer subject to the annual tax. County of Contra Costa 7 Fiscal Year 2017-18 CFD No. 2001-1 CFD Tax Administration Report V. DEVELOPMENT UPDATE From June 1, 2016, to May 31, 2017, no building permits were issued to construct single family homes within CFD No. 2001-1. In total, 360 building permits have been issued and no Other Property currently exists within CFD No. 2001-1. Based on the current status of development in CFD No. 2001-1, the following table summarizes the allocation of parcels to the special tax categories defined in the RMA: Community Facilities District No. 2001-1 Allocation to Special Tax Categories Fiscal Year 2017-18 Tax Category Description Number of Parcels 1 Residential Property 347* 2 Other Property 0 3 Undeveloped Property 1 * Total does not include 13 parcels that have had their special tax obligation prepaid and therefore are no longer subject to the annual tax. County of Contra Costa 8 Fiscal Year 2017-18 CFD No. 2001-1 CFD Tax Administration Report VI. STATUS OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS CFD No. 2001-1 was formed to finance the widening of Norris Canyon Road, starting at the intersection of Bollinger Canyon Road and continuing a distance of 7,700 feet. Improvements to Norris Canyon Road include: (1) grading, pavement, curbs and gutters, rock shoulder, traffic signing and striping, and street lights; (2) construction of sanitary sewer mains, structures, fittings, and appurtenances; (3) construction of water distribution facilities and appurtenances; (4) construction of joint utility distribution facilities for electrical, telephone, gas, cable and television, including trenching, conduit and cable installation, pull and splice boxes, fittings and appurtenances, and relocation of overhead facilities; (5) construction of landscaping and irrigation facilities, including soil preparation, landscape materials, irrigation pipes, fittings, and appurtenances; (6) required attendant public fees and design and construction engineering fees; and (7) acquisition of all necessary interests in real propert y. The developer entered into an Acquisition Agreement with the County that contains provisions that set forth the process by which completed improvements will be acquired with bond proceeds that are on deposit in the Improvement Fund for the CFD. The Acquisition Agreement obligates the developer to pay any costs of the improvements that are not covered by funds available in the Improvement Fund. All Norris Canyon Road improvements have been completed and accepted by the Public Works division of the County. Per the Acquisition Agreement with the County, the balance in the CFD Improvement Fund was used to acquire the completed improvements from the developer. County of Contra Costa 9 Fiscal Year 2017-18 CFD No. 2001-1 CFD Tax Administration Report VII. CFD FUNDS Six funds were established pursuant to the Fiscal Agent Agreement between the County and the Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company (the “Fiscal Agent”). Following is a brief description of the purpose of each fund. The Improvement Fund was created exclusively to pay the cost of improvements until all authorized facilities have been paid. The Improvement Fund, due to completion of all improvements, has been closed. The Reserve Fund was established as a reserve for the payment of principal and interest on the bonds in the event the balance in the Special Tax Fund is insufficient to make debt service payments. The Fiscal Agent will maintain the Reserve Fund. The Reserve Requirement is $205,613 as of June 30, 2017. The Bond Fund was created exclusively to pay principal and interest on CFD indebtedness. The Bond Fund will be held by the Fiscal Agent; twice each year, the fiscal agent will use proceeds in this account to pay interest and/or principal on the bonds. If, on any interest payment date, amounts in the Bond Fund are insufficient to pay debt service that is due on such date, the Fiscal Agent must withdraw from the Reserve Fund to cover the shortfall. The Special Tax Fund was established as a fund to be held by the County Auditor- Controller (the “Auditor”) into which special tax revenues collected by the County will be deposited. Not later than three business days prior to each interest payment date on the bonds, the Auditor will transfer money from the Special Tax Fund to the Fiscal Agent to pay interest and principal due on the bonds, as well as any amount needed to bring the Reserve Fund up to the required reserve amount. Any remaining balance in the Special Tax Fund will be transferred to the Administrative Expense Fund. The Administrative Expense Fund will be held by the Auditor and used to pay CFD administrative expenses. Each year, the Auditor will transfer any excess amount in the Administrative Expense Fund to the Special Tax Fund. The Costs of Issuance Fund will be held by the Fiscal Agent and will be disbursed to pay costs associated with formation of CFD No. 2001-1 and issuance of the Bonds. This fund has been closed. Money held in any of the aforementioned funds can be invested by the Fiscal Agent at th e direction of the County and in conformance with limitations set forth in the Fiscal Agent Agreement. Investment interest earnings, if any, will generally be applied to the fund for which the investment is made. County of Contra Costa 10 Fiscal Year 2017-18 CFD No. 2001-1 CFD Tax Administration Report Fund Balances As of June 30, 2017, the various funds had the following balances: Community Facilities District No. 2001-1 Fund Balances as of June 30, 2017 Reserve Fund $208,155 Special Tax Fund $341,640 Administrative Expense Fund $5,093 County of Contra Costa 11 Fiscal Year 2017-18 CFD No. 2001-1 CFD Tax Administration Report VIII. PREPAYMENTS The special tax lien for 13 properties in CFD No. 2001-1 have been fully prepaid and are no longer subject to the annual special tax levy. The 13 parcels that have fully prepaid their special tax obligation are as follows: 211-240-011-0 211-260-011-5 211-300-008-3 211-310-009-9 211-320-001-4 211-370-025-2 211-370-026-0 211-370-033-6 211-370-037-7 211-370-038-5 211-370-055-9 211-380-029-2 211-380-037-5 County of Contra Costa 12 Fiscal Year 2017-18 CFD No. 2001-1 CFD Tax Administration Report IX. DELINQUENCIES As of September 19, 2017, the Contra Costa County Auditor’s Office reports the following delinquency amounts for CFD No. 2001-1: Community Facilities District No. 2001-1 Delinquencies as of September 19, 2017 Fiscal Year Parcels Delinquent Delinquent Amount CFD Tax Levied Percent Delinquent 2016-17 0 $0 $418,392 0.00% County of Contra Costa 13 Fiscal Year 2017-18 CFD No. 2001-1 CFD Tax Administration Report X. FORECLOSURE COVENANT Covenants of the County The County may order the institution of a court action to foreclose the lien on a parcel within specified time limits if any payment of the special tax is delinquent. In such an action, the real property subject to the unpaid amount may be sold at a judicial foreclosure sale. Pursuant to the Bonds’ covenants, the County shall review its records in connection with the collection of the special tax on or about March 30 and June 30 of each year to compare the amount of special tax levied in the CFD to the amount of special tax collected, and proceed as follows: Individual Delinquencies. If the Auditor determines that any single parcel subject to the special tax in the CFD is delinquent in the payment of special taxes in the aggregate amount of (i) $7,500 or more if all the property within the CFD is on the Teeter Plan, or (ii) $3,000 or more if any of the property in the CFD is not on the Teeter Plan, then the Auditor shall send or cause to be sent a notice of delinquency (and a demand for immediate payment thereof) to the property owner within 60 days of such determination, and (if the delinquency remains uncured) foreclosure proceedings shall be commenced by the County within 120 days of such determination. Aggregate Delinquencies. If the Auditor determines that the total amount of delinquent special tax for the prior fiscal year for the entire CFD, (including the total of delinquencies under the preceding paragraph), exceeds 5% of the total special tax due and payable for the prior fiscal year, the County shall notify or cause to be notified property owners who are then delinquent in the payment of special taxes (and demand immediate payment of the delinquency) within 60 days of such determination, and shall commence foreclosure proceedings within 120 days of such determination against each parcel of land in the CFD with a special tax delinquency. Since the CFD’s special tax delinquency rate for fiscal year 2016-17 is below 5%, the County has not been required to initiate foreclosure proceedings on property in CFD No. 2001-1. County of Contra Costa 14 Fiscal Year 2017-18 CFD No. 2001-1 CFD Tax Administration Report XI. SENATE BILL 165 REPORTING REQUIREMENTS On September 18, 2000, former Governor Gray Davis approved Senate Bill 165 which enacted the Local Agency Special Tax and Bond Accountability Act. In approving the bill, the Legislature pointed out that local agencies need to demonstrate to the voters that special taxes and bond proceeds are being spent on the facilities and services for which they were int ended. To further this objective, the Legislature added Sections 50075.3 and 53411 to the California Government Code setting forth annual reporting requirements relative to special taxes collected and bonds issued by a local public agency. A response to each of the reporting requirements in SB 165 is provided below. Pursuant to Sections 50075.3 and 53411, the chief fiscal officer of the County will, by January 1, 2002, and at least once a year thereafter, file a report with the Board of Supervisors (which may be this CFD Tax Administration Report) setting forth the following information. Section 50075.3 Item (a): Identify amount of special taxes that have been collected and expended. The fiscal year 2016-17 special tax levy was $418,392. Since the CFD is on the County Teeter Plan, the full amount of the tax levy was remitted to the CFD. The total levy was used to pay debt service in March and September 2017 on the CFD bonds as well as administrative costs for the CFD. Item (b): Identify the status of any project required or authorized to be funded by the special taxes. All CFD No. 2001-1 improvements have been completed and accepted by the Public Works division of the County. Section 53411 Item (a): Identify the amount of bonds that have been collected and expended. A total of $7,220,000 in special tax bonds was issued by the County on June 14, 2001. Upon issuance of the bonds, $6,000,000 from bond proceeds was deposited into the Improvement Fund and has been used to acquire the CFD No. 2001-1 improvements from the developer. An additional $170,000 was used to pay the costs of issuing the bonds. Approximately $417,000 was deposited in the Reserve Fund, and the remaining $487,000 was deposited in the Bond Fund to be used for capitalized interest. County of Contra Costa 15 Fiscal Year 2017-18 CFD No. 2001-1 CFD Tax Administration Report The Series 2001 Bonds were refunded and defeased on January 24, 2013 by the issuance of $5,605,000 in special tax refunding bonds. An Original Issue Premium of $20,460, together with available moneys from the Series 2001 Bonds in the amount of $767,049, left a total of $6,392,508 in bond proceeds to be expended. Upon issuance of the bonds, $5,947,529 from bond proceeds was deposited into the Refunding Fund, to be used to redeem all of the outstanding Series 2001 Bonds. An additional $207,063 was deposited into the Reserve Fund. The remaining $237,917 was used to pay the costs of issuing the Series 2013 Special Tax Refunding Bonds. Item (b): Identify the status of any project required or authorized to be funded from bond proceeds. All CFD No. 2001-1 improvements have been completed and accepted by the Public Works division of the County. County of Contra Costa 16 Fiscal Year 2017-18 CFD No. 2001-1 CFD Tax Administration Report XII. ASSEMBLY BILL 1666 REQUIREMENTS On July 25, 2016, Governor Jerry Brown signed Assembly Bill No. 1666, adding Section 53343.2 to the California Government Code (“GC”). The bill enhances the transparency of community facilities districts by requiring that certain reports be accessible on a local agency’s web site. Pursuant to Section 53343.2, a local agency that has a web site shall, within seven months after the last day of each fiscal year of the district, display prominently on its web site the following information: Item (a): A copy of an annual report, if requested, pursuant to GC Section 53343.1. The report required by Section 53343.1 includes CFD budgetary information for the prior fiscal year and is only prepared by a community facilities district at the request of a person who resides in or owns property in the community facilities district. If the annual report has not been requested to be prepared, then a posting to the web site would not be necessary. Item (b): A copy of the report provided to the California Debt and Investment Advisory Commission (“CDIAC”) pursuant to GC Section 53359.5. Under Section 53359.5, local agencies must provide CDIAC with the following: (i) notice of proposed sale of bonds; (ii) annual reports on the fiscal status of bonded districts; and (iii) notice of any failure to pay debt service on bonds, or of any draw on a reserve fund to pay debt service on bonds. Item (c): A copy of the report provided to the State Controller’s Office pursuant to GC Section 12463.2. This section refers to the parcel tax portion of a local agency’s Financial Transactions Report that is prepared for the State Controller’s Office annually. Note that school districts are not subject to the reporting required by GC Section 12463.2. APPENDIX A Summary of Fiscal Year 2017-18 Special Tax Levy Total Special Land Use Category Tax Levy Residential Property $2,100.00 per parcel $1,207.76 per parcel 347 parcels $419,092.72 Undeveloped Property $3,360.00 per acre $0.00 per acre 1.5 acres $0.00 Total Fiscal Year 2017-18 Special Tax Levy $419,092.72 Goodwin Consulting Group, Inc. Fiscal Year 2017-18 Maximum Special Tax Rates County of Contra Costa Community Facilities District No. 2001-1 (Norris Canyon) Special Tax Levy Summary for Fiscal Year 2017-18 Parcels/Acres Taxed Fiscal Year 2017-18 Actual Special Tax Rates APPENDIX B Fiscal Year 2017-18 Special Tax Levy for Individual Assessor’s Parcels Assessor's Type of Status of Taxable Special Parcel Number Property Development Acres Tax 211-210-045-4 HOA HOA $0.00 211-210-063-7 HOA HOA $0.00 211-210-074-4 HOA HOA $0.00 211-210-081-9 HOA HOA $0.00 211-210-082-7 HOA HOA $0.00 211-210-084-3 HOA HOA $0.00 211-210-085-0 HOA HOA $0.00 211-240-001-1 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-240-003-7 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-240-004-5 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-240-005-2 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-240-006-0 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-240-007-8 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-240-008-6 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-240-009-4 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-240-010-2 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-240-011-0 Prepaid Prepaid $0.00 /1 211-240-012-8 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-240-013-6 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-240-014-4 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-240-015-1 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-240-016-9 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-240-017-7 HOA HOA $0.00 211-240-019-3 HOA HOA $0.00 211-250-001-8 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-250-002-6 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-250-003-4 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-250-004-2 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-250-005-9 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-250-006-7 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-250-007-5 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-250-008-3 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-250-009-1 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-250-010-9 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-250-011-7 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-250-012-5 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-250-013-3 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-250-014-1 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-250-015-8 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-250-016-6 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-250-017-4 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-250-018-2 Residential Developed $1,207.76 County of Contra Costa Community Facilities District No. 2001-1 (Norris Canyon) Special Tax Levy for Fiscal Year 2017-18 1 of 10 Assessor's Type of Status of Taxable Special Parcel Number Property Development Acres Tax County of Contra Costa Community Facilities District No. 2001-1 (Norris Canyon) Special Tax Levy for Fiscal Year 2017-18 211-250-019-0 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-250-020-8 HOA HOA $0.00 211-250-021-6 HOA HOA $0.00 211-250-023-2 HOA HOA $0.00 211-260-001-6 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-260-002-4 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-260-003-2 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-260-004-0 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-260-005-7 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-260-006-5 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-260-007-3 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-260-008-1 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-260-009-9 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-260-010-7 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-260-011-5 Prepaid Prepaid $0.00 /1 211-260-012-3 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-260-013-1 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-260-014-9 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-260-015-6 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-260-016-4 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-260-017-2 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-260-018-0 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-260-025-5 HOA HOA $0.00 211-270-001-4 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-270-002-2 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-270-003-0 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-270-004-8 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-270-005-5 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-270-006-3 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-270-007-1 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-270-008-9 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-270-009-7 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-270-010-5 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-270-011-3 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-270-012-1 HOA HOA $0.00 211-280-001-2 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-280-002-0 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-280-003-8 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-280-004-6 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-280-005-3 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-280-006-1 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-280-007-9 Residential Developed $1,207.76 2 of 10 Assessor's Type of Status of Taxable Special Parcel Number Property Development Acres Tax County of Contra Costa Community Facilities District No. 2001-1 (Norris Canyon) Special Tax Levy for Fiscal Year 2017-18 211-280-008-7 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-280-009-5 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-280-010-3 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-280-011-1 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-280-012-9 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-280-013-7 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-280-014-5 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-280-015-2 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-280-016-0 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-280-017-8 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-280-018-6 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-280-019-4 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-280-020-2 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-280-021-0 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-280-022-8 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-280-023-6 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-280-024-4 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-280-025-1 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-280-026-9 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-280-027-7 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-280-028-5 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-280-029-3 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-280-030-1 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-280-031-9 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-280-032-7 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-280-033-5 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-280-034-3 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-280-035-0 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-280-036-8 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-280-037-6 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-280-038-4 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-280-039-2 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-290-001-0 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-290-002-8 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-290-003-6 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-290-004-4 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-290-005-1 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-290-006-9 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-290-007-7 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-290-008-5 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-290-009-3 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-290-010-1 Residential Developed $1,207.76 3 of 10 Assessor's Type of Status of Taxable Special Parcel Number Property Development Acres Tax County of Contra Costa Community Facilities District No. 2001-1 (Norris Canyon) Special Tax Levy for Fiscal Year 2017-18 211-290-011-9 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-290-012-7 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-290-013-5 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-290-014-3 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-290-015-0 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-290-016-8 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-290-017-6 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-290-018-4 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-290-019-2 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-290-020-0 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-300-001-8 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-300-002-6 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-300-003-4 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-300-004-2 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-300-005-9 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-300-006-7 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-300-007-5 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-300-008-3 Prepaid Prepaid $0.00 /1 211-300-009-1 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-300-010-9 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-300-011-7 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-300-012-5 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-300-013-3 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-300-014-1 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-300-015-8 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-300-016-6 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-300-017-4 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-300-018-2 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-300-019-0 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-300-020-8 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-300-021-6 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-300-022-4 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-300-023-2 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-300-024-0 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-300-025-7 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-300-026-5 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-300-027-3 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-310-001-6 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-310-002-4 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-310-006-5 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-310-007-3 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-310-008-1 Residential Developed $1,207.76 4 of 10 Assessor's Type of Status of Taxable Special Parcel Number Property Development Acres Tax County of Contra Costa Community Facilities District No. 2001-1 (Norris Canyon) Special Tax Levy for Fiscal Year 2017-18 211-310-009-9 Prepaid Prepaid $0.00 /1 211-310-010-7 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-310-011-5 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-310-012-3 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-310-013-1 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-310-014-9 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-310-015-6 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-310-016-4 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-310-017-2 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-310-018-0 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-310-019-8 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-310-020-6 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-310-021-4 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-310-024-8 HOA HOA $0.00 211-310-026-3 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-310-027-1 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-310-028-9 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-320-001-4 Prepaid Prepaid $0.00 /1 211-320-002-2 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-320-003-0 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-320-004-8 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-320-005-5 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-320-006-3 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-320-007-1 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-320-008-9 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-320-009-7 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-320-010-5 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-320-011-3 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-320-012-1 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-320-013-9 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-320-014-7 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-320-015-4 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-320-016-2 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-320-017-0 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-320-018-8 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-320-019-6 HOA HOA $0.00 211-330-001-2 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-330-002-0 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-330-003-8 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-330-004-6 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-330-005-3 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-330-006-1 Residential Developed $1,207.76 5 of 10 Assessor's Type of Status of Taxable Special Parcel Number Property Development Acres Tax County of Contra Costa Community Facilities District No. 2001-1 (Norris Canyon) Special Tax Levy for Fiscal Year 2017-18 211-330-007-9 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-330-008-7 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-330-009-5 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-330-012-9 HOA HOA $0.00 211-340-001-0 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-340-002-8 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-340-003-6 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-340-004-4 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-340-005-1 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-340-006-9 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-340-007-7 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-340-011-9 Undeveloped Public $0.00 211-340-012-7 Undeveloped Public $0.00 211-350-001-7 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-350-002-5 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-350-005-8 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-350-006-6 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-350-007-4 Undeveloped Undeveloped $0.00 211-350-008-2 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-350-009-0 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-350-010-8 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-350-011-6 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-350-012-4 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-350-013-2 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-350-014-0 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-350-015-7 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-350-016-5 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-350-017-3 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-350-026-4 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-350-027-2 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-360-001-5 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-360-002-3 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-360-003-1 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-360-004-9 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-360-005-6 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-360-006-4 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-360-007-2 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-360-008-0 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-360-009-8 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-360-010-6 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-360-011-4 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-360-012-2 Residential Developed $1,207.76 6 of 10 Assessor's Type of Status of Taxable Special Parcel Number Property Development Acres Tax County of Contra Costa Community Facilities District No. 2001-1 (Norris Canyon) Special Tax Levy for Fiscal Year 2017-18 211-360-013-0 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-360-014-8 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-360-015-5 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-360-016-3 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-360-017-1 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-360-018-9 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-360-019-7 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-360-020-5 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-360-021-3 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-360-022-1 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-360-023-9 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-360-024-7 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-360-025-4 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-360-026-2 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-360-027-0 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-360-028-8 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-360-029-6 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-360-030-4 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-360-031-2 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-360-032-0 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-360-033-8 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-360-034-6 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-360-035-3 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-360-036-1 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-360-037-9 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-360-038-7 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-360-039-5 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-360-040-3 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-360-041-1 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-360-042-9 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-360-043-7 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-360-051-0 HOA HOA $0.00 211-360-052-8 HOA HOA $0.00 211-370-001-3 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-370-002-1 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-370-003-9 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-370-004-7 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-370-005-4 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-370-006-2 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-370-007-0 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-370-008-8 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-370-009-6 Residential Developed $1,207.76 7 of 10 Assessor's Type of Status of Taxable Special Parcel Number Property Development Acres Tax County of Contra Costa Community Facilities District No. 2001-1 (Norris Canyon) Special Tax Levy for Fiscal Year 2017-18 211-370-010-4 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-370-011-2 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-370-012-0 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-370-013-8 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-370-014-6 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-370-015-3 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-370-016-1 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-370-017-9 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-370-018-7 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-370-019-5 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-370-020-3 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-370-021-1 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-370-022-9 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-370-023-7 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-370-024-5 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-370-025-2 Prepaid Prepaid $0.00 /1 211-370-026-0 Prepaid Prepaid $0.00 /1 211-370-027-8 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-370-028-6 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-370-029-4 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-370-030-2 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-370-031-0 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-370-032-8 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-370-033-6 Prepaid Prepaid $0.00 /1 211-370-034-4 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-370-035-1 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-370-036-9 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-370-037-7 Prepaid Prepaid $0.00 /1 211-370-038-5 Prepaid Prepaid $0.00 /1 211-370-039-3 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-370-040-1 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-370-041-9 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-370-042-7 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-370-043-5 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-370-044-3 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-370-045-0 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-370-046-8 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-370-047-6 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-370-048-4 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-370-049-2 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-370-050-0 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-370-051-8 Residential Developed $1,207.76 8 of 10 Assessor's Type of Status of Taxable Special Parcel Number Property Development Acres Tax County of Contra Costa Community Facilities District No. 2001-1 (Norris Canyon) Special Tax Levy for Fiscal Year 2017-18 211-370-052-6 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-370-053-4 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-370-054-2 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-370-055-9 Prepaid Prepaid $0.00 /1 211-370-056-7 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-370-057-5 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-370-058-3 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-370-062-5 HOA HOA $0.00 211-370-063-3 HOA HOA $0.00 211-370-069-0 HOA HOA $0.00 211-380-001-1 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-380-002-9 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-380-003-7 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-380-004-5 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-380-005-2 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-380-006-0 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-380-007-8 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-380-008-6 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-380-009-4 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-380-010-2 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-380-011-0 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-380-012-8 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-380-013-6 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-380-014-4 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-380-015-1 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-380-016-9 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-380-017-7 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-380-018-5 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-380-019-3 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-380-020-1 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-380-021-9 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-380-022-7 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-380-023-5 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-380-024-3 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-380-025-0 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-380-027-6 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-380-028-4 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-380-029-2 Prepaid Prepaid $0.00 /1 211-380-030-0 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-380-031-8 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-380-032-6 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-380-033-4 Residential Developed $1,207.76 9 of 10 Assessor's Type of Status of Taxable Special Parcel Number Property Development Acres Tax County of Contra Costa Community Facilities District No. 2001-1 (Norris Canyon) Special Tax Levy for Fiscal Year 2017-18 211-380-034-2 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-380-035-9 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-380-036-7 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-380-037-5 Prepaid Prepaid $0.00 /1 211-380-038-3 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-380-039-1 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-380-049-0 Undeveloped Public $0.00 211-380-050-8 Residential Developed $1,207.76 211-410-001-5 HOA HOA $0.00 Total Special Tax Levy $419,092.72 /1 This parcel has prepaid its special tax obligation and is no longer subject to the special tax. Goodwin Consulting Group, Inc. 10 of 10 APPENDIX C Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax County of Contra Costa CFD No. 2001-1 1 April 13, 2001 COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2001-1 (NORRIS CANYON) RATE AND METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT OF SPECIAL TAX A Special Tax applicable to each Assessor's Parcel in Community Facilities District No. 2001-1 (herein ACFD No. 2001-1@) shall be levied and collected according to the tax liability determined by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Contra Costa or its designee, as described below. All of the property in CFD No. 2001-1, unless exempted by law or by the provisions of Section G below, shall be taxed for the purposes, to the extent, and in the manner herein provided. A. DEFINITIONS The terms hereinafter set forth have the following meanings: AAcre or Acreage@ means the land area of an Assessor=s Parcel as shown on an Assessor's Parcel Map, or if the land area is not shown on an Assessor's Parcel Map, the land area shown on the applicable final map, parcel map, or other recorded County parcel map. AAct@ means the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, as amended, being Chapter 2.5, (commencing with Section 53311), Division 2 of Title 5 of the Government Code of the State of California. AAdministrative Expenses@ means any or all of the following: the fees and expenses of any fiscal agent or trustee (including any fees and expenses of its counsel) employed in connection with any Bonds; any costs associated with the marketing or remarketing of the Bonds; the expenses of the Administrator and the County in carrying out their respective duties under any fiscal agent agreement, indenture or resolution with respect to the Bonds or CFD No. 2001-1, including, but not limited to, the levy and collection of the Special Tax, the fees and expenses of legal counsel, charges levied by the County or any division or office thereof in connection with the levy and collection of Special Taxes, audits, continuing disclosure or other amounts needed to pay arbitrage rebate to the federal government with respect to Bonds; costs associated with complying with continuing disclosure requirements; costs associated with responding to public inquiries regarding Special Tax levies and appeals; attorneys= fees and other costs associated with commencement or pursuit of foreclosure for delinquent Special Taxes; costs associated with overhead expense allocations to CFD No. 2001-1; and all other costs and expenses of the County, the Administrator, and any fiscal agent, escrow agent or trustee related to the administration of CFD No. 2001-1. AAdministrator@ shall mean the person or firm designated by the Board to administer the Special Tax according to this Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax. County of Contra Costa CFD No. 2001-1 2 April 13, 2001 “Annual Interest Component@ means the total amount of interest on Bonds in the calendar year commencing in such Fiscal Year. AAssessor's Parcel@ or AParcel@ means a lot or parcel shown in an Assessor's Parcel Map with an assigned Assessor's Parcel number. AAssessor's Parcel Map@ means an official map of the County Assessor of the County of Contra Costa designating parcels by Assessor's Parcel Number. ABonds@ means any bonds or other debt (as defined in Section 53317(d) of the Act), whether in one or more series, issued by CFD No. 2001-1 under the Act. ABoard@ means the Board of Supervisors of the County of Contra Costa. ACapitalized Interest@ means funds in any capitalized interest account available to pay debt service on Bonds issued by CFD No. 2001-1. ACapitalized Interest Requirement@ means the least of: i) the Annual Interest Component, ii) the difference between the Special Tax Requirement and the amount determined pursuant to Step 1 of Section E hereof, or iii) the amount of Capitalized Interest available. ACounty@ means the County of Contra Costa. ADeveloped Property@ means Taxable Property for which a building permit for construction was issued prior to June 1 of the preceding Fiscal Year. AFiscal Year@ means the period starting July 1 and ending on the following June 30. AHomeowners= Association Property@ means any property within the boundaries of CFD No. 2001- 1 which is owned by a homeowners= or property owners= association. ALand Use Class@ means one of the defined land use categories for which a specific Maximum Special Tax is identified in Table 1 in Section C below. AMaximum Special Tax@ means the maximum amount of Special Tax, determined in accordance with Section C below, that can be levied in any Fiscal Year. AOther Property@ means Developed Property which is not Residential Property, Public Property, or Homeowners= Association Property. APlanned Units@ means the number of individual residential units that were expected to be constructed on property within CFD No. 2001-1 as shown in Attachment 1. AProportionately@ means, for Residential Property and Other Property, that the ratio of the actual Special Tax levied in any Fiscal Year to the Maximum Special Tax authorized to be levied in that County of Contra Costa CFD No. 2001-1 3 April 13, 2001 Fiscal Year is equal for all Assessor=s Parcels of Residential Property and Other Property. For Undeveloped Property, "Proportionately" means that the ratio of the actual Special Tax to the Maximum Special Tax is equal for all Assessor=s Parcels of Undeveloped Property. For Homeowners= Association Property and nonexempt Public Property, "Proportionately" means that the ratio of the actual Special Tax to the Maximum Special Tax is equal for all Assessor=s Parcels of Homeowners= Association Property and Public Property. APublic Property@ means any property within the boundaries of CFD No. 2001-1 that is owned by or irrevocably offered for dedication to the federal government, State of California or other local governments or public agencies. AResidential Property@ means, in any Fiscal Year, any Parcel of Developed Property for the construction of a residential structure which is not Homeowners= Association Property or Public Property. ASpecial Tax@ means a special tax levied in any Fiscal Year that will be used to pay the Special Tax Requirement, as defined below. ASpecial Tax Requirement@ means the total amount needed each Fiscal Year to (i) pay principal and interest on Bonds in the calender year commencing in such Fiscal Year, (ii) create or replenish reserve funds, (iii) cure any delinquencies in the payment of principal or interest on indebtedness of CFD No. 2001-1 which have occurred in the prior Fiscal Year or (based on delinquencies in the payment of Special Taxes which have already taken place) are expected to occur in the Fiscal Year in which the tax will be collected, (iv) pay Administrative Expenses. ATaxable Property@ means all of the Assessor's Parcels within the boundary of CFD No. 2001-1 which are not exempt from the Special Tax pursuant to law or Section G below. ATentative Map@ means the tentative map for Norris Canyon Estates approved by the Board in August 1997. AUndeveloped Property@ means any Parcel of Taxable Property within CFD No. 2001-1 for which a building permit has not been issued prior to June 1 of the preceding Fiscal Year. B. ASSIGNMENT TO LAND USE CLASS Each Fiscal Year, the Administrator shall categorize each parcel of property in CFD No. 2001-1 as Developed Property or Undeveloped Property, and Parcels of Developed Property shall be further identified as either Residential Property, Other Property, Homeowners= Association Property or Public Property. For each Parcel of Other Property within the CFD, the Administrator shall determine how many Planned Units had been expected on the Parcel in order to assign the Maximum Special Tax pursuant to Section C below. County of Contra Costa CFD No. 2001-1 4 April 13, 2001 C. MAXIMUM SPECIAL TAX Pursuant to Section 53321 (d) of the Act, a Maximum Special Tax must be established as a specific dollar amount before a Parcel is first subject to the tax when in private residential use. The following maximum rates shall apply to all Parcels of Taxable Property within CFD No. 2001-1 for each Fiscal Year in which the Special Tax is collected: TABLE 1 MAXIMUM SPECIAL TAX (Fiscal Year 2001-02) Land Use Class Description Maximum Special Tax (Fiscal Year 2001-02) 1 Residential Property $2,100 per Parcel 2 Other Property $2,100 per Planned Unit of the Parcel before it became Other Property 3 Undeveloped Property $3,360 per Acre Pursuant to Section 53321 (d) of the Act, the Special Tax levied against a Parcel used for private residential purposes shall under no circumstances increase more than ten percent (10%) as a consequence of delinquency or default by the owner of any other Parcel or Parcels and shall, in no event, exceed the Maximum Special Tax in effect for the Fiscal Year in which the Special Tax is being levied. D. MANDATORY PREPAYMENT OF SPECIAL TAX RESULTING FROM TENTATIVE MAP REVISIONS It is possible that a revision in the Tentative Map could result in less Special Tax revenue being available from the CFD. To preclude this result, after CFD No. 2001-1 has been formed, the County shall apply the following steps for every proposed Tentative Map revision: Step 1: The County or its designee shall calculate the Maximum Special Tax revenues that could be collected from the property affected by the proposed Tentative Map revision (the AAffected Property@) prior to the revision being approved; County of Contra Costa CFD No. 2001-1 5 April 13, 2001 Step 2: The County or its designee shall calculate the Maximum Special Tax revenues that could be collected from the Affected Property if the Tentative Map revision is approved; Step 3: If the amount determined in Step 2 is higher than that calculated in Step 1, the Tentative Map revision may be approved without prepayment of the Special Tax. If the revenues calculated in Step 2 are less than those calculated in Step 1, the County may not approve the Tentative Map revision unless the landowner requesting the Tentative Map revision prepays a portion of the Special Tax obligation that would have applied to the Affected Property prior to approval of the revision in an amount sufficient to retire a portion of the Bonds and maintain 110% coverage on the Bonds= debt service with the reduced Maximum Special Tax revenues that will result after the Tentative Map revision is approved. The required prepayment shall be calculated using the formula set forth in Section H below. Property owners wishing to prepay the Special Tax as a result of a Tentative Map revision cannot be delinquent on past Special Taxes on the Affected Property. E. METHOD OF LEVY AND COLLECTION OF THE SPECIAL TAX Commencing with Fiscal Year 2001-02 and for each following Fiscal Year, the Administrator shall determine the Special Tax Requirement for that Fiscal Year. The Special Tax shall then be levied as follows: Step 1: The Special Tax shall be levied Proportionately on each Parcel of Residential Property and Other Property up to 100% of the Maximum Special Tax up to the Special Tax Requirement for each Land Use Class for such Fiscal Year as determined pursuant to Section C. The Maximum Special Tax for a Parcel of Other Property shall be the total Maximum Special Taxes for the Planned Units that the Other Property replaced, as determined by the Administrator; Step 2: Determine the Capitalized Interest Requirement, if any, and add it to the amount levied under Step 1; Step 3: If the total of the Capitalized Interest Requirement and the amount levied under Step 1 is less than the Special Tax Requirement, the Special Tax shall be levied Proportionately on each Assessor's Parcel of Undeveloped Property within the CFD, up to 100% of the Maximum Special Tax for Undeveloped Property for such Fiscal Year determined pursuant to Section C; Step 4: If additional monies are needed after applying the first three steps, the Special Tax shall be levied Proportionately on each Parcel of Homeowners= Association Property and Public Property which originally had Planned Units, up to 100% of the Maximum Special Tax for Undeveloped Property for such Fiscal Year determined pursuant to Section C. County of Contra Costa CFD No. 2001-1 6 April 13, 2001 F. MANNER OF COLLECTION The Special Taxes for CFD No. 2001-1 shall be collected in the same manner and at the same time as ordinary ad valorem property taxes, provided, however, that prepayments are permitted as set forth in Section H below (and may be required in the case of Tentative Map revisions) and provided further that the County may directly bill the Special Tax, may collect Special Taxes at a different time or in a different manner, and may collect delinquent Special Taxes through foreclosure or other available methods. The Special Tax shall be levied and collected until principal and interest on Bonds have been repaid and authorized facilities to be constructed directly from Special Taxes proceeds have been completed. However, in no event shall a Special Taxes be levied after Fiscal Year 2039-2040. G. EXEMPTIONS Notwithstanding any other provision of this Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax, no Special Taxes shall be levied on Public Property, except as otherwise provided in Sections 53317.3 and 53317.5 of the Act. H. PREPAYMENT OF SPECIAL TAX The following definitions apply to this Section H: "Future Facilities Costs" means the Public Facilities Requirements (as defined below) minus public facility costs funded by Previously Issued Bonds, interest earnings on the construction fund actually earned prior to the date of prepayment, Special Taxes, developer equity, and/or any other source of funding. "Outstanding Bonds" means all Previously Issued Bonds which remain outstanding, with the following exception: if a Special Tax has been levied against, or already paid by, an Assessor=s Parcel making a prepayment, and a portion of the Special Tax will be used to pay a portion of the next principal payment on the Bonds that remain outstanding (as determined by the Administrator), that next principal payment shall be subtracted from the total Bond principal that remains outstanding, and the difference shall be used as the amount of AOutstanding Bonds@ for purposes of this prepayment formula. "Previously Issued Bonds" means all Bonds that have been issued by CFD No. 2001-1 prior to the date of prepayment. "Public Facilities Requirements" means either $5,900,000 in 2001 dollars, which shall increase by three percent (3%) on January 1, 2002, and on each January 1 thereafter, or such lower number as shall be determined by the County as sufficient to fund public facilities to be provided by CFD No. 2001-1 under the authorized bonding program for CFD No. 2001-1. County of Contra Costa CFD No. 2001-1 7 April 13, 2001 The Special Tax obligation applicable to an Assessor's Parcel in CFD No. 2001-1 may be prepaid and the obligation of the Assessor's Parcel to pay the Special Tax permanently satisfied as described herein, provided that a prepayment may be made only if there are no delinquent Special Taxes with respect to such Assessor's Parcel at the time of prepayment. An owner of an Assessor's Parcel intending to prepay the Special Tax obligation shall provide the County with written notice of intent to prepay. Within 30 days of receipt of such written notice, the County shall notify such owner of the prepayment amount of such Assessor's Parcel. Prepayment must be made not less than 75 days prior to any interest payment date for Bonds to be redeemed with the proceeds of such prepaid Special Taxes. The Prepayment Amount shall be calculated as follows (capitalized terms as defined below): Bond Redemption Amount plus Future Facilities Amount plus Redemption Premium plus Defeasance plus Administrative Fees and Expenses less Reserve Fund Credit equals Prepayment Amount As of the proposed date of prepayment, the Prepayment Amount shall be determined by application of the following steps: Step 1: Compute the total Maximum Special Tax that could be collected from the Assessor's Parcel prepaying the Special Tax in the Fiscal Year in which prepayment would be received by the County. Step 2: Divide the Maximum Special Tax computed pursuant to Step 1 for such Assessor=s Parcel by the lesser of (i) the Maximum Special Tax revenues that could be collected in that Fiscal Year from property in the entire CFD, or (ii) the Maximum Special Tax revenues that could be generated at buildout of property in the CFD based on anticipated land uses at the time the prepayment is calculated. Step 3: Multiply the quotient computed pursuant to Step 2 by the Outstanding Bonds to compute the amount of Outstanding Bonds to be retired and prepaid. (the ABond Redemption Amount@). Step 4: Compute the current Future Facilities Costs. Step 5: Multiply the quotient computed pursuant to Step 2 by the amount determined pursuant to Step 4 to compute the amount of Future Facilities Costs to be prepaid (the AFuture Facilities Amount@). County of Contra Costa CFD No. 2001-1 8 April 13, 2001 Step 6: Multiply the Bond Redemption Amount computed pursuant to Step 3 by the applicable redemption premium, if any, on the Outstanding Bonds to be redeemed (the ARedemption Premium@). Step 7: Compute the amount needed to pay interest on the Bond Redemption Amount starting with the first Bond interest payment date after which the prepayment has been received until the earliest redemption date for the Outstanding Bonds. However, if Bonds are callable at the first interest payment date after the prepayment has been received, Steps 7, 8 and 9 of this prepayment formula will not apply. Step 8: Compute the amount of interest the County reasonably expects to derive from reinvestment of the Bond Redemption Amount plus the Redemption Premium from the first Bond interest payment date after which the prepayment has been received until the redemption date for the Outstanding Bonds. Step 9: Take the amount computed pursuant to Step 7 and subtract the amount computed pursuant to Step 8 (the ADefeasance@). Step 10: The administrative fees and expenses of CFD No. 2001-1 are as calculated by the County and include the costs of computation of the prepayment, the costs of redeeming Bonds, and the costs of recording any notices to evidence the prepayment and the redemption (the AAdministrative Fees and Expenses@). Step 11: A reserve fund credit shall be calculated as the reduction, if any, in the applicable reserve fund for the Outstanding Bonds to be redeemed pursuant to the prepayment (the AReserve Fund Credit@). Step 12: The Special Tax prepayment is equal to the sum of the amounts computed pursuant to Steps 3, 5, 6, 9, and 10, less the amount computed pursuant to Step 11 (the APrepayment Amount@). Attachment 1 Tentative Map for Norris Canyon Estates APPENDIX D Boundary Map of Community Facilities District No. 2001-1 APPENDIX E Assessor’s Parcel Maps for Fiscal Year 2017-18 ASSESSOR’S MAP CONTRA COSTA COUNTY,CALIF. BOOK PAGE211 21 X-15 PURPOSES ONLY. NO LIABILITY IS ASSUMED FOR THE ACCURACY OF THE INFORMATION NOTE: THIS MAP WAS PREPARED FOR ASSESSMENT DELINEATED HEREON. ASSESSOR’S PARCELS MAY NOT COMPLY WITH LOCAL LOT SPLIT OR BUILDING SITE ORDINANCES. 1 2 2 1 1 "A" "C" STA. #70-1 STA. #70-A STA. #70 W. LANE 10’ EASE. CTR. NORRIS CANYON RD. STA.#69 NO R R I S CANY O N 2 "A" "D" 117.01Ac. 1.818Ac. LOT 2 LOT 1 210 22 210 17 16 2120 18 17 2019 W. LN FREITAS 4848 O.R. 141 PCL.2 COUNTYLINE387.06 R=967 155. 4 3 R=333 N78^2 5 ’ W327.381262. 7 5 1290.73N52^5 2 ’ 1 5 " E N02^0’WR=1033 274.17 65.6 R=633 119.43 N53^25’37"E 2328.48 N89^27’34"W N89^27’34"W 860.12 2188.56N50^23’7"E 442.10 129.49 R=133 1272.931668.02398.10309.34N19^18’WN2 9 ^ 3 9 ’ 5 0 "W 2 4 7 7 . 1 6 .23Ac.200.0 50.0S5^39’15"WS86^08’52"E S3^51’08"WS4 4 ^ 3 5 ’ 4 5 " E 24 1 5 . 9 7 38 7 . 1 32604.71N02^42’27"EN70 ^ 2 ’ 1 9 " W 156 0 . 0 5828.9N10^9’32"E77.34 768.3635.75N81^22’40"E 1024.90 N31^21’46"EN5^01’43"WN63 ^ 0 7 ’ 5 4 "WN11^53’58"WR=1 6 3 217.6 25 1 . 7 8 128 . 1 3 191.51115.32 90.86 N89^29’W (TIE)N0^31’EN81^22’40"E 2626.09 219. 9 6 515.12 N.D.S74^52’W S25^0’59"W139.46R=273 294.64 N.D. N.B. 1 9 4 . 6 4 52 6 . 1 7 16 5372.03211.6N6 3 ^ 5 0 ’ 3 9 "W 555 .6 9 09 17 29 14 75 54 55 58 57 78 80 1"=800’ TI E 4 2 1 4 . 3 6 t o T P O B A S H B O U R N E D R STARCROSS D R LYNDHURST PLWENTWOOD DR24 25 26 "E" 82 45 84 "C-2""D" COMMON AREA COMMON AREA COMMON AREA COMMON AREA N0^31’E 1694.524 8 9 .7 2 235.71 366.25 42 5 . 9 4 332.2423 4 . 4 119 0 .8 9 216.3 0 R = 1 5 2 4 82 4 . 4 61317.56A A A A A A A A A A 24 "F-3" 1109.66S89^4’30"E S 2 6 ^ 4 2 ’ 5 2 "W N89^4’30"W 1429.13 04 209 A L A M E D A C O U N T Y C O N T R A C O S T A C O U N T Y 23 35 07 209 65 59 S 2 6 ^ 3 5 ’ 3 1 " E 9 9 9 . 9 6 414.37659.66450 N80^29’3 9 " W 496.01 158.70 408.27151.76128.70N.D.63 81 "D" "B-1" "A""U" 64 28.28AC 28 29 136 245.15130.1320 2 . 4 0 124.463 3 7 . 8 9 206.35 190.56 231.18 2 9 6 . 5 3264.28 174.24165.95217408.45 2217.65 733.45 220.3 3173. 80 15 0 . 8 4170.89R= 7 2 6 519.80 B B B B B B BB B B COMMON AREA 3 4 8 0 . 2 0 349.08 S63^1 5 ’ 5 2 " W 5 4 3 . 9 2N2 9 ^ 9 ’ 2 5 "W624.93N59^57’40"W 1125.71 S81^33’3"W 2 2 7 . 3 2 N 4 1 ^ 5 ’ 1 3 " W 279.18N7^10’27"W322.68165.7586.26 86.62 87.11 86.27 85.16 FROM PAGE 23 68 32.18Ac. 67 61.19Ac. 31 32 33 34 "L" TRACT 7998 74 C C C C PCL "L" TR 7998 C 2 4 2 . 6 0R=1 4 8 7 218.15406.202- 36 37 38 83 "S" TRACT 7996 23 EBMUD SEE PG. 38 FOR PCL. NO. D D D D POR TRACT 7578 POR TRACT 7575 POR SEC 17,18,19,20&21 T2S R1W MDBM TR 7996 MB 473-46 TR 7996 1/31/05 EB REG PARK DIST 74.77Ac MB 438-38 219.38 257.83N24^3’54"E12/5/75 5/5/88 41PM21 133PM8 1- MB 438-38 (NORRIS CANYON ESTATES PHASE IV) 1/28/02 6.51Ac.FM 209-5 1/17/02 POR "D" 77.80Ac 67.052Ac 23 30 MB 432-30 75.54Ac 8-06-01 1.112Ac MB 415-4 9-13-99 91.48Ac POR "B" 30.96Ac 36.02Ac 38.363Ac 1.01Ac TRACT 8566 1-28-09 MB 508-45 138.85Ac 93.42Ac 12.45Ac 20.08Ac POR "B" RD 7.64Ac 19.13Ac 1-28-02 S2^49’38"W65.08 132.94 11.65 301.16S73^19’40"W A- B- C- D-MB 473-46 (NORRIS CANYON ESTATES PHASE III) 1/31/05PCL "S" TR 7996 40 5.886Ac MB 415-4 (NORRIS CANYON ESTATES) 9/13/99 MB 432-30 (NORRIS CANYON ESTATES) 8/6/01 S85^34’09"W 8/15/12 392.67 N69 ^ 6 ’ 3 2 " W 347. 2 3 673.45 "H"N22^39’11 "W185 .84 "G" TR 7575 "C "27 256.74 R=770 D "L" "K" B B B 46.8Ac TR 7578 "F-1" "F-2" "F-4" 4.94Ac 81-84 41 ASSESSOR’S MAP CONTRA COSTA COUNTY,CALIF. BOOK PAGE211 23 PURPOSES ONLY. NO LIABILITY IS ASSUMED FOR THE ACCURACY OF THE INFORMATION NOTE: THIS MAP WAS PREPARED FOR ASSESSMENT DELINEATED HEREON. ASSESSOR’S PARCELS MAY NOT COMPLY WITH LOCAL LOT SPLIT OR BUILDING SITE ORDINANCES. 24 1 9 . 8 6 S4 4 ^ 3 5 ’ 4 5 " W 917.3 S87^5’45"E 1339.61 S4 6 ^ 1 7 ’ 5 0 " E 21 21 230 01 15 04 14 20 21 2829 506.25 (CODE LINE) 230 37-8 1- A L A M E D A C O U N T Y 04 C O N T R A C O S T A C O U N T Y 07 01 02 03 1"=800’ TO PG 21 1125.71 624.93N59^57’40"W 5 4 3 . 9 2 349.08 X-15,16 N81^45’00"E 2 7 0 5 . 9 8 N01^34’46"E2158.9013 54.33Ac 17 4 5 CRANLEIGH C TASHBOURNE CIRN63^1 5 ’ 5 2 " E N10^12’25"W320.0N53^32 ’ 0 4 " E 610.4 7 N86^08’01"W 877.29 N 2 4 ^ 4 2 ’ 4 9 "W 5 0 3 3 . 3 4 N88^03’38"W 2471.95 416.54N79^46’0 8 " W 318.15 29 0 . 2 6 49 7 . 7 9 N82^07’42"E 1 8 7 6 . 0 6N02^42’27"E 2604.71N81^22’40"E 1 5 5 3 . 0 4 N01^36’27"E 1980.5955 5 . 6 9 N6 3 ^ 5 0 ’ 3 9 "W N88^22’45"W 408.27 229.67 268.01N43^35’ 0 8 " E 19 4 . 6 4 372.03N04^41’18"E139.46N34^03’27"W 83.97 223.90N18^25’40"EN06^12’21"E382.32N50^54’39 "W 4 6 8 . 5 7 236.73183. 4 8 N48^22’59"W 106.58 N33^42’20"W 143.17 N50^15’40"W 179.06 111.69N 6 1 ^ 2 4 ’ 1 9 "W 29 0 . 5 1 N38^11’29"W 83.47 N76^55’47"W 54.81 2 6 5 . 4 1 291.88376.42 161.29 270. 8 8 135.87 286.77 N58^23’17"E 97.40 N51^23 ’ 4 8 " E 293.97209.94125.69155.782 4 6 . 0 8 1 1 8 . 9 5 2 4 2 . 6 0 N 3 9 ^ 3 0 ’ 5 8 " W R=83 128.02 N76^31’05"W 90.27 R=1487 218.15 N55^41’40"W 22.87 21 1 . 0 1 22 6 . 4 7 219. 9 7 N62^40’21"E 151.26 N85^13’51"E 111.98 177.70 229.80 R=224 40.20 A A A A A A A A 17 SEE PAGE 37 SEE PAGE 35N31^21’46"E768.3N10^9’32"E828.9N70 ^ 2 ’ 1 9 " W 156 0 . 0 5 S74^52’W 515.12 S25^0’59"WN.D.16 68.16Ac FM 209-6 1/17/02 9/23/09N2 9 ^ 0 9 ’ 2 5 "W N 4 1 ^ 1 0 ’ 0 8 " W N81^33’3"E LOT 1 A A BDY OF RANCHO SAN RAMONN01^41’32"EN68^08’06 "W 2244 .35 N 4 6 ^ 1 7 ’ 5 0 " W POR SECS 20,21,28&29 T2S R1W MDBM 41PM21 12/5/1975 MB 508-45 (WIEDEMANN RANCH ESTATES) 1/28/2009A-2010 ROLL-LTS 1,2&3 TR 8566 LOT 2 362.33Ac 469.55 N01^19’22"W419.25 POR LOT 3 POR LOT 3ND 21.90Ac A A 134.25Ac 82.72Ac POR LOT 3 N03^06’13"E 130.98 N05^39’21"E 79.10 N01^0’29"W 96.45 N13^43’36"E 181.10 N28^04’56"W 134.35 N39^39’31"E 93.14 N16^29’52"W 128.71 N24^47’26"W 113.50 N75^35’08"W 115.62 N66^06’13"W 185.19 241.62 199.6135.0Ac WITT E N H A M C T 186.61 AN21^25’01"E406.20494.72 N80^26’14 " W A A A A A POR LOT 3 FROM PG 21 A PURPOSES ONLY. NO LIABILITY IS ASSUMED FOR THE ACCURACY OF THE INFORMATION NOTE: THIS MAP WAS PREPARED FOR ASSESSMENT DELINEATED HEREON. ASSESSOR’S PARCELS MAY NOT COMPLY WITH LOCAL LOT SPLIT OR BUILDING SITE ORDINANCES. ASSESSOR’S MAP CONTRA COSTA COUNTY,CALIF. BOOK PAGE211 24 1"=100’ 25 240 240 2000 ROLL-X-15 ASHBOURNE DR 30 31 36 35 34 33 32 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 "S" "C-3" "U" "J" "B" "R" "T" "C-2" "I" L Y N D H U R S T P L 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 19 1718 03 04 05 06 07 01 02 22 21 POR.TRACT 7578 M.B. 415-4 (NORRIS CANYON ESTATES) .55AC .04AC .06AC 1.15AC 21 31.3 4 76. 3 8 47.3 3R=464 15 9 . 2 0 R=9 7 6 R = 4 1 0 1 5 0 . 9 9 151 . 2 1 118.09 60125.1446.45N4^2’8"E62.2430.75 N81^ 22’40"E R= 1 0 2 4 33 3 . 2 4 N 5 9 ^ 0 ’ 2 7 "W 109.39 50 11 7 . 1 7 160 1 1 7 . 0 7 163.5 5 157 150 170.84 170.54 164.83 85. 62 85. 29 88.331 1 5 . 8 8 1 1 7 . 3 3 N61^5’43"WN35^40’3"EN30^27 ’56 ’W 17 0 . 89 133.46 153.02 3 3 . 7 4 9 7 . 2 3 N 4 5 ^ 1 3 ’ 1 3 " W 62.754 8 . 8 2 169.2 6 167.9 8 96.0396.09 9 5 . 9 8 1 2 8 . 7 0 1 3 1 1 3 1 N33^44’1 1 " E 1 5 9 . 3 9 N43^36 ’ 4 5 " E N53^2 4 ’ 6 " E N48^3 3 ’ 2 ’ E N38^40’28 " E N57^1’ 1 1 " E 100 97.13N71^9’1’E N69^12’30" E 7 2 . 6 6 9278.89R=1572 0 8 . 7 9 N 5 3 ^ 4 7 ’ 4 0 " W N 4 7 ^ 7 ’ 5 " W 2 3 4 . 4 1 N 4 2 ^ 2 9 ’ 2 "WN21^8’54"WN31 ^2 2 ’18 "W 170 .9 1 N56^11 ’ 2 0 " E N62^16’ 1 7 " E N64^15’4 3 " E N60^38 ’ 3 1 " EN24^19’52"W 190 .8988.1146.1931.78 179 166.97 107.1083.79 N49^5 1 ’ 1 9 " E N49^5 1 ’ 1 9 " E N49^5 1 ’ 1 9 " E N 4 0 ^ 8 ’ 4 1 " W 3 1 6 . 7 0 1 0 5 . 0 1 8 8 . 7 0 R=25R=2519.888 8 . 0 1 8 8 . 6 9 1 0 5 166.4 8 R=830217.50R=15208 1 5 . 3 5 26 . 2 5 R = 4 5 212.9 6 34.87 R=15748 2 4 . 4 6 R = 4 6 4 108.0752.78N29^6’41"E51 . 3 2 R = 4 1 0 R=1231 6 3 . 5 7 4.31 N49^5 1 ’ 1 9 " E N49^5 1 ’ 1 9 " E N 4 6 ^ 3 8 ’ 4 8 " W 19.88292.94 281.0 9 8 0 . 5 2 4.31 89.7473. 9 1 73. 9 1 12. 6 1 7.6 8 56.0 5 56.0 5 1 0 6 . 6 0 94.8728.3128.3133.3839.03N7 2 ^ 8 ’ 5 0 "W R= 5 3 R= 8 7 N80 ^ 2 6 ’ 5 9 " W R= 3 0 9 R= 2 7 5 N60^41’WR=2 0 1 R=235N70^11’59"W 162 .73 1 6 2 . 7 3 R= 2 0 0 1 4 . 0 7 1 4 2 . 1 1 12 1 . 7 2R= 2 3 4 12 8 . 3 4N25^13’3"E 259.36277.09191.51128.13115.52251.78N25^13’3"EN64^57’20"WN24^38’13"EN66^31’43"W33.3251.05N 5 3 ^ 8 ’ 1 3 " W N 5 3 ^ 8 ’ 1 3 " W 48 9 . 7 2 50 2 . 8 6 1 8 4 . 2 7 1 6 5 . 5 7 82 . 6 1 97 . 3 9 9 6 . 0 6 7 3 . 7 1 R = 3 0 1 R = 3 3 5 R = 2 2 4 R = 1 9 0 N 4 1 ^ 5 6 ’ 5 "W N 4 1 ^ 5 6 ’ 5 "W 40.69 54.76N81^22’40"E 673.45 ( P V T . S T . ) ( PVT . ST . ) ( PVT . ST . ) 4.39AC E.B.M.U.D. COMMON AREA 10 4 . 7 5 COMMON AREA N 3 9 ^ 1 9 ’ 2 4 20.5934.023 1 . 7 8 N04^02’55"E POR. PCL. C 133PM8 FM. 209-95 01-17-02 21 21 25 TO PCL 211-210-056 ( P V T . S T . ) SE E A P N # 2 1 1 - 2 5 0 - 0 2 6 S E E A PN # 2 1 1 - 2 5 0 - 0 2 6 SE E A P N # 2 1 1 - 2 5 0 - 0 2 6 S E E A PN # 2 1 1 - 2 5 0 - 0 2 6 S E E A PN # 2 1 1 - 2 5 0 - 0 2 6 8/15/12 ASSESSOR’S MAP CONTRA COSTA COUNTY,CALIF. BOOK PAGE211 25 PURPOSES ONLY. NO LIABILITY IS ASSUMED FOR THE ACCURACY OF THE INFORMATION NOTE: THIS MAP WAS PREPARED FOR ASSESSMENT DELINEATED HEREON. ASSESSOR’S PARCELS MAY NOT COMPLY WITH LOCAL LOT SPLIT OR BUILDING SITE ORDINANCES. 1"=100’ 21 250 250 2000 ROLL- NORRIS C A N Y O N R D STARCROSS D R LYNDHURST PL 1 2 3 4 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 "L" "A" "M" "N" "F-2" "C-1" "I" "O" 20 26 01 24 16 23 17 18 19 15 14 13 12 11 10 09 08 07 06 05 21 04 03 02 25 "F-1" 21 21 21 POR.TRACT 7578 M.B. 415-4 (NORRIS CANYON ESTATES) L Y N D H U R S T P L 24 24 21 1.53 AC "R" "T" ( PVT . ST . ) ( PV T. S T. )( PVT. ST. )( PVT. ST. )79.99 105.18 28.88N15^10’1’WN31^3’28"EN81^41’3"E N80^33’46"E N71^54’ 4 " E N58^2 5 ’ 5 7 " E N53^9’ 4 6 " E 179 7 8 . 9 7 1 7 . 6 8 6 7 . 8 5 1 0 6 . 5 568.2224.01N1^7’18"WN21^40’10 "W N 3 9 ^ 2 4 ’ 1 0 " W 1 6 2 . 4 485.33180.38 172 174.3 8 N56^1 1 ’ 2 0 ’ E65.07 7 3 . 9 6 8 8 . 4 8R=5702 4 2 . 6 2R=6242 6 5 . 6 0 1 7 . 6 8 4.2324.01 R=176 R=224 170.6 2 134.0 6 102 65.47 24.46 41.77 65.51 N 4 2 ^ 5 1 ’ 1 4 " W N52^3 8 ’ 1 " E N88^31’23"E N26^47’29"EN89^3’25"W 150.57N8^53’29"W25 R=828 143.86143.4443.41202.76 R=330R=305121.73N21^21’28"EN86^42’12"E23.2528.5929.8719.69N13^4’59"WN55^49’28"WR=429 135.70 123.1 2 R=376 N80^33’46"E 12 870.71152.41 98R=234 249.73 R=40N32^9’39"ER=6056.76 N79^38’1 6 " W 282.11R=208125.85R=274113.3030.24 6.97 25.9016.27N8^53’29"W257.19 41.20 175.10N8^0’15"EN53^5 8 ’ 1 5 " E R=858 17.85 25.73 R=186 N 3 6 ^ 7 ’ 3 4 " W 216.3 0 170 27.23 185.7 2 N75^1 8 ’ 3 1 " W N88^45’10"W N75^4’19 " E N15^34’16"W 340 .58R=528423.18 N2 4 ^ 4 8 ’ 4 6 "W N82^39’19"E 130.48R=4493 2 0 . 0 481 3784.27381 7 7 . 1 3 260.24 71 16.44 114.73N13^38’25"WN34^58’33"E30N2^19’49"WN44^9’35"EN4 4 ^ 4 3 ’ 5 3 " W221.67117.5 3 N60^1 ’ 4 4 " E 166.48 N49^23’ 4 5 " E N49^51 ’ 1 9 " E N49^51 ’ 1 9 " E N49^51 ’ 1 9 " E 1 0 7 . 9 1 9 0 8 7 N 4 6 ^ 3 8 ’ 4 8 " W 4 3 8 . 4 2 1 3 1 . 2 5 1 2 3 . 9 4 N 4 0 ^ 8 ’ 4 1 " W 3 1 6 . 7 0 292.94N49^51 ’ 1 9 " E 158.5 3 165 9 4 . 3 1 6 7 . 5 8 3 5 N 3 3 ^ 2 1 ’ 2 3 "WN2 8 ^ 1 7 ’ 4 4 ’W 236.46 272.77 283.03 87 . 5 6 90 . 5 8 1 1 0 . 7 1 69 . 0 4R=4012 1 5 . 1 3 48N15^35’55"W95.146328.93262.58 13 5 . 1 8235.17263.6276.96 197.74 22.46 8 0 . 5 6 486 1 .07 N 4 6 ^ 3 8 ’ 4 8 " W 4 2 5 . 9 4 4 7 . 3 8N2 4 ^ 4 8 ’ 4 6 "WN15^34’16"W 366 .25 58.19 92.28 118.4 9 R=930 R=878 125.5 1 N2 5 ^ 2 3 ’ 2 0 "W 5 2 N53^8’13"WN53^8’13"W4 89 . 7 2 502.8 6 80 . 5 2ASHBOURNE DR 54 52 217.0693.48178.05N59^46’23 "W N60^2 7 ’ 2 6 " E R = 7 7 6 R = 8 3 0 135.7 6 186.85R=592 COMMON AREA COMMON AREA COMMON AREA COMMON AREA 2 7 . 2 2 R=465N 3 9 ^ 3 3 ’ 1 6 3 1 6 . 7 0 X-15 FM. 209-96 01-17-0224 26 N70^30’ 5 3 " E 7.38Ac .16Ac .68Ac 1.0Ac COMMON AREA .30Ac 26 TO PG 21 TO PG 21 8/15/12 ASSESSOR’S MAP CONTRA COSTA COUNTY,CALIF. BOOK PAGE211 26 PURPOSES ONLY. NO LIABILITY IS ASSUMED FOR THE ACCURACY OF THE INFORMATION NOTE: THIS MAP WAS PREPARED FOR ASSESSMENT DELINEATED HEREON. ASSESSOR’S PARCELS MAY NOT COMPLY WITH LOCAL LOT SPLIT OR BUILDING SITE ORDINANCES. 1"=100’ 260 260 LYNDHURST PLWENTWOOD DR5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 171819 2021 22 2000 ROLL-POR.TRACT 7578 M.B. 415-4 (NORRIS CANYON ESTATES) "F-3" "O" "P" "F-4" "G-1" "G-2" "Q" "K" "H" 22 21 21 22 01 25 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 131415161718 CANY O N RD 25 19 21 ( PV T. S T. ) .81AC 70 94.20 100.1 0 101.61R=23586.45 2 0 2 . 4 3N2 8 ^ 2 6 ’ 4 1 "W129.19 R=17023.0587.99 65.12 59.15 N7^23’43"EN67^50 ’ 6 ’ E 1 7 6 . 1 5 35.0371.49 381.57 62.44 16.46 80.15 93 97.21 80.08 17.48 186.85194.96162 .78 1 5 5 . 4 1 1 6 0 . 5 7 1 7 7 . 8 2 171.58N16^3’48"W129.15 63.4388.30R=286151.73N65^28 ’ 2 6 " E R=234122.5660.13 45.93 53.73 20 66.42 57.97 22.67 N15^47’24"WN2 6 ^ 5 7 ’ 1 6 "WN2 9 ^ 2 0 ’ 8 "WN2 9 ^ 2 0 ’ 8 "WN23 ^32 ’29 ’WN17^56’17"WN13^34’11"WN1^26’20"WN1^26’20"WN1^26’20"WN0^31’E76.50 78.16 38.08 41.96 80 27.55 29 24.99 30111.97 9.49 64.72 115.2 8 57.35 5.11 116.77 80.05 80.10 168.08 220.3680.01 80.01 181.51 218.11215.55213178.11175.86N54^56’29"WN55^39’56"W 182 .01223.68N86^46’19"E 198.81 N89^36’42"W 331.3638.78 80.01 80.01 80.08 80.08 171.20 R=376 R=424 201.24 21 2 . 7 8 201.57198.80172.54N88^33’40"E 239.04 147.69N2^9’55"WN2^9’55"WN2^9’55"WN2^9’55"WN2^9’55"W220.94 323.33 50N86^51’1"E N89^35’25"W R=23.50 36.91 R=23.50 36.91 97.25 32.84R=25 172.64 N57^8’ 5 8 " E 3 6 6 . 9 0 39.41 152.9627.59103.2 2167.51N22^36 ’49 "W54.12N20^31’59 "WN20^59’56"EN5 4 ^ N 6 6 ^ 1 3 ’ 1 "W 27. 5 9 65 R=930 125.5 1 R=924 R=176 94.36 R=878 312.97 194.48 R=223 N53^3’ 2 7 " E 1 1 9 . 7 1 N53^3’ 2 7 " E 1 2 4 . 3 9 5 2N2 5 ^ 2 3 ’ 2 0 ’W 118.4 9 22.29 4654.99 52 COMMON AREA COMMON AREA COMMON AREA ( PVT. ST. )87.53N89^27’34"W 860.17 48NORR I S 17.55 21.61 R=25 18.45 23.9115.1623.15 422.24 N56^2 7 ’ 4 9 " E X-15 4 209 FM. 209-97 01-17-02 1.71Ac 8/15/12 25 .29Ac SEE APN # 2 1 1 - 2 5 0 - 0 2 6 TO PG 21 TO PG 21 ASSESSOR’S MAP CONTRA COSTA COUNTY,CALIF. BOOK PAGE211 27 1"=100’ 21 270 270 X-15 PURPOSES ONLY. NO LIABILITY IS ASSUMED FOR THE ACCURACY OF THE INFORMATION NOTE: THIS MAP WAS PREPARED FOR ASSESSMENT DELINEATED HEREON. ASSESSOR’S PARCELS MAY NOT COMPLY WITH LOCAL LOT SPLIT OR BUILDING SITE ORDINANCES. POR TRACT 7575 A S H B O U R N E D R WHI T C L I F F E C T ASHBO U R N E C I R 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 95 96 97 "N" "I" "H" "O"ARDLEIGH CT"B-1" "B-2" "G" 10 11 09 16 05 04 03 02 01 12 06 07 08 13 21 21 30 21 30 28 26 . 9 2 N 4 1 ^ 5 6 ’ 5 " W R=2176 7 . 8 7 R=1835 1 . 2 6 4.57 N41^56’5"W 117.59 33.59N5 9 ^ 5 1 ’ 1 6 "W56.91R=40 R=303 6 . 6 3 150.58N5 9 ^ 5 1 ’ 1 6 "W224.58170.89N30^8’44"E1621 5 0 . 8 4 N63 ^ 1 4 ’ 4 "WN30^8’44"E746.0 160.53N29^35’12"ER= 6 1 5 99. 3 4 78. 3 4 165.32N24^41’53"E8 1 . 5 8 N60^54 ’37 "W173.8092.22 15 63. 6 6 156.84N20^53’28"E89.98 N74^ 9 ’ 4 2 " W 220.3 3 130.3 4 129. 8 4 145.36N20^53’28"EN5 9 ^ 5 1 ’ 1 6 "W158.82 R = 5 8 1 93. 8 4 N69 ^ 0 6 ’ 3 2 " W 347. 2 3 R=192 11.0 153. 7 3 176.1 5N52^2’ 3 6 " E R=19211 5 . 0 3 32.48 81.02172.20N18^3’13"WR=1589 6 . 4 8 N74^ 2 0 ’ 2 7 " W 82.74 86.07 R=1378 5.0 R=822 86.02 176N20^48’23 "W N68^29 ’ 3 1 " E N67^13 ’ 1 9 " E 82.71 34 7 . 2 3 N69 ^ 6 ’ 3 2 " W 34.73N16^24’58"ER=822 105.6 3 45.49 N53^4 0 ’ 6 " E R=280138.6513.81N25^17’47"E32. 5 3 N6 4 ^ 4 2 ’ 1 3 "W 125 R=260 28.28229.18N36^22’31"E70 N6 4 ^ 4 2 ’ 1 3 "W49.16N25^17’47"ER=220108.949.63N53^40 ’ 6 " E 176.1 6 256.74 R=770 40.33 R=1430 118.59 185.84N22^39’11 "W 277.37 N55^5 7 ’ 2 7 " E 25 0 N 4 6 ^ 3 4 ’ 1 9 " W27.95 28.2828.2876.168 9 . 9 4 N6 4 ^ 4 2 ’ 1 3 "W 63.6 5 R=240 34.59 98.2 4 R= 7 7 4 498. 8 8 288.65 272.42 N42^22 ’ 5 " E 99.66N26^10’32"E42.67 N88^22’26"W 358.10N7^6’41"W408.27151.76N11^18’56"E155.2 2N52^1 1 ’ 2 1 " E 189.24251.5 8 N74^ 1 8 ’ 5 7 " W211.60N11^21’00"ER = 7 2 6 519.8 0 3 4 . 5 2 N6 4 ^ 4 2 ’ 1 3 "W22N25^17’47"E22N25^17’47"E96. 1 6 R=2 9 9 80.72 R = 2 5 1163.57R=344140.74R=29633 . 8 0 N 4 2 ^ 2 4 ’ 3 6 " W N 4 2 ^ 2 4 ’ 3 6 " W 33 . 8 0 1.66Ac. 84.84176.31N2 4 ^ 4 4 ’ 5 9 "W 25,063SF 13,026SF 13,806SF 13,511SF 19,619SF 19,171SF 15,163SF 15,665SF 39,468SF 81,556SF 53,847SF COMMON AREA COMMON AREA R= 2 4 0R=288210.23168.85FM PG 211-21 2/5/02N23^13’25 "W 5 2 . 0 M.B. 432-30 (NORRIS CANYON ESTATES) 8-6-01 TO PG 21 1/28/13 9.37Ac 16 (PVT STS) (PV T S T S ) "J"30’ PAE1.52Ac ASSESSOR’S MAP CONTRA COSTA COUNTY,CALIF. BOOK PAGE211 28 1"=100’ 21 280 X-15 PURPOSES ONLY. NO LIABILITY IS ASSUMED FOR THE ACCURACY OF THE INFORMATION NOTE: THIS MAP WAS PREPARED FOR ASSESSMENT DELINEATED HEREON. ASSESSOR’S PARCELS MAY NOT COMPLY WITH LOCAL LOT SPLIT OR BUILDING SITE ORDINANCES.HARDCASTLE CT 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 2748 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 "P" "R" "T" "Q"KINGSBRIDGE CTASHBO U R N E C I R POR TRACT 7575 29 21 27 21 36 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 37 25 24 23 26 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 1617 18 19 21 20 22 27 28 29 30 32 33 34 35 36 38 39 31 91.90 88.22 N63^3’35 " E N58^45 ’ 5 7 " E N55^33 ’ 2 " E 78.51 176N20^48’23"W105.38176 N29^7’52"W 101.16176N33^20 ’14 "W 85.99175N3 5 ^ 4 6 ’ 1 9 "W 100.88 N53^4’ 4 " E 104.36 57 49.65 N53^5’ 1 5 " E 161.3 6 1 7 5N3 6 ^ 5 4 ’ 4 5 "W 118.51 N56^31 ’ 3 5 " E 170N32^58’21 "W R=722 503.9385.68 90.55 111.80 N60^37’ 1 4 " E N25^47’11"W105.79 170N18^59’14"WN67^36’47" E 104.59 N74^22’25"E 84.70 170N12^15’56"W82.76 170N5^41’54"W102.18 N81^1’5"E 78.21 94.45 N89^37’4 4 " W 165.01N0^10’59"W79.24 32.38 49.62 170N01^6’55"WN87^45’38" E 70.18 93.75 R=678 331.26170N9^2’15"W69.87 92.63 165N16^51’55"W89.28 165N24^24’35"W67.50 N84^55’25"E N81^8’34"E N69^21’45"E 5.99 74.41 102.37 165N16^44’52"WN68^59’56"E R=522 52R=470 32 51.97R=730 230.99 80 99.03 163.95N17^38’30"W74.90 99.35 156.13N20^50’13"W103.725238.14N13^42’30"W155.72135.61 N84^21’13"E N83^6’41"E 153.58 N72^37’29"E 174.24 27.44 N39^53’ 4 6 " E 74.8639N03^25’20"W113.8648 53R=8762 7 . 4 4 N 4 6 ^ 4 4 ’ 2 6 " W 39.96 R=730 91.0122.8559.41R=924165.44 N82^53’38"E99.0660.67N88^36’48" E 169.48111.60117.90 R=670 467.63 150N7^0’16"W93 80 N79^01’8"E149.66N11^56’49"W83.81 118.16 150N25^3’42"W138.58 107.65 N69^8’42"E N59^0’3 7 " E 1 4 9 . 9 8 N3 6 ^ 4 8 ’ 1 7 "W97 .11 9 8 . 6 9 4 5 . 8 3 117.3 6 N53^5 ’ 1 5 " E 28.28N8^5’15"E77. 1 1N3 6 ^ 5 4 ’ 4 5 "W 1 1 9 . 3 7 4 2 . 2 6 137.18 N53^5 ’ 1 5 " E 141.37 N61^58’ 2 1 " E34 . 74 R=224230.8573.78123.32N25^46’20"W157 N80^50’36"E 124.46N1^38’28"E73.78154 N80 ^ 1 7 ’ 1 0 " W 111.21N9^45’7"E48.5627.31N22^8’6"E16 9 N67^51’54"W 4.6619.88R=25212.96R=4552.9015 8 . 4 7 N 5 3 ^ 3 2 ’ 2 2 " W 34.18 106.10N20^2’44"E101.2 2 N43^1 7 ’ 2 4 " E 88.66 N77^8’37"E170.29N1^54’20"W162.40N68^25’16 "W202.40166.8 0N42^46 ’ 5 7 " E 35.104085.27N25^23’54"W35.4762147.91 N87^56’58" E118.30N23^37’14"E54.7919.88125.2168.92R=25148.78N69^20’54"W51.07N12^46’49"E31.97N22^8’6"E85.38R=176181.38152.48 N85^51’26"E 50 . 1 6 N 5 3 ^ 1 5 ’ 4 7 " W 167.88 N53^3 2 ’ 1 2 " E 963 8 . 0 4N3 6 ^ 5 4 ’ 4 5 "W 1 2 0 . 0 4 8 2 27.8 5 N81 ^ 2 ’ 3 5 " W 112135 R=1430 447.90 N29^45’52 "W 81.99 184.34N27^34’42"W 112.31 185.84N22^39’11"W128.17 N64^59’3 1 " E 5 8 . 1 2 N 4 8 ^ 5 9 ’ 3 0 " W R=1378 473.43 118.50 180.91 5248 17,415SF 16,714SF 14,467SF 17,957SF 19,339SF 17,075SF 16,170SF 15,988SF 15,623SF 14,371SF 13,282SF 14,229SF 13,654SF 12,987SF 14,956SF 22,151SF 18,808SF 16,750SF 14,275SF 12,861SF 13,040SF 18,091SF 15,248SF 18,628SF 13,525SF 14,826SF 15,026SF 14,248SF 12,093SF 13,130SF 18,682SF 15,218SF 13,039SF 19,287SF 15,114SF 12,094SF 13,024SF 13,895SF 12,677SF FM PG 211-21 2/5/02170N18^47’32"WN23^13’25"WR=822 86.02 81.02 40.33 27 M.B. 432-30 (NORRIS CANYON ESTATES) 8-6-01 (PVT S T S ) SEE APN # 2 1 1 - 2 7 0 - 0 1 6 SEE APN # 2 1 1 - 2 7 0 - 0 1 6 (PVT STS )521/28/13 ASSESSOR’S MAP CONTRA COSTA COUNTY,CALIF. BOOK PAGE211 29 1"=100’ 28 290 PURPOSES ONLY. NO LIABILITY IS ASSUMED FOR THE ACCURACY OF THE INFORMATION NOTE: THIS MAP WAS PREPARED FOR ASSESSMENT DELINEATED HEREON. ASSESSOR’S PARCELS MAY NOT COMPLY WITH LOCAL LOT SPLIT OR BUILDING SITE ORDINANCES.KING SBR IDGE CT 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 POR TRACT 7575 X-15 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 09 08 07 06 05 04 03 02 01 "S" "F" 21 21 21 28ASHB O U R N E C I R N83^6’41"E 153.58 8973.69N18^47’32"W 165.11 N77^17’25 " E 97R=876356.70 169.11 N70^56’ 4 5 " E 164.92 N64^58 ’ 5 1 " E 5 5 . 8 3 73.90 161.62 N63^49 ’ 2 " E 7 9 . 5 7 8 2 N62^55 ’ 6 " E 157.96 8 6 86 .12N2 4 ^ 7 ’ 8 "W621 .3 5 154 6 5 . 1 3 15 . 8 9 145.44 80.11 4.0 115.33N2 6 ^ 4 5 ’ 9 "W 2 8 8 . 9 7 R=25R = 4 5 212.967 5 . 2 4 147.17 N80^54’17"E 42.73 65.3441.97N19^22’30"W107.30 193.87 88 . 0 1 93.19 231.18 N80^54’17"E 29 44.24 R= 2 3 . 5 0 36.9 1 1529144.96 N63^54 ’ 2 6 " E N19^22’30"W 190.56 N64^36 ’ 5 5 " E99.98106.36N15^20’17"W206.35 15 R=23.5036.9147.27 2 8 . 8 7 164.92 N67^48 ’ 4 7 " E 32.2119.88R=254 1 . 9 2 76.08N18^2’25"W 173.73 N63^1 4 ’ 5 1 " E 8 2 . 0 5 170.82 N63^1 4 ’ 5 1 " E 8 2N2 6 ^ 4 5 ’ 9 "W 2 8 8 . 9 7 8 3 . 7 2 8 2167.85 N63^49 ’ 2 " E 8 0 . 0 2 N2 4 ^ 4 3 ’ 1 "W 3 3 7 . 8 9 8 1 . 6 4 92 . 1 0 165 N63^1 4 ’ 5 1 " E 1.41 7 6 . 9 5 165.5 1 N68^1 ’ 9 " E 78.3392.31N19^14’21"W165 N72^52’3 4 " E 83.2398.06N14^32’36"WR=924376.24 165 N78^2’13"E92.31N9^48’18"W165.44 N82^53’38"E 78.3314,040SF 14,888SF 15,182SF 12,891SF 13,591SF 13,889SF 14,128SF 14,346SF 17,543SF 17,302SF 19,163SF 15,617SF 12,487SF 12,150SF 13,415SF 12,902SF 14,721SF 12,939SF5359.41113.86113.86N3^25’20"W48 FM PG 211-21 2/5/02 1.0 1.0 164.90 7 8 . 0 3 2 5 . 5 0 13,992SF 13,018SF78.56 9 2 . 2 0 1/28/13 M.B. 432-30 (NORRIS CANYON ESTATES) 8-6-01 (PVT STS )SEE APN # 211-270-016 ASSESSOR’S MAP CONTRA COSTA COUNTY,CALIF. BOOK PAGE211 30 1"=1 0 0 ’ 300 PURPOSES ONLY. NO LIABILITY IS ASSUMED FOR THE ACCURACY OF THE INFORMATION NOTE: THIS MAP WAS PREPARED FOR ASSESSMENT DELINEATED HEREON. ASSESSOR’S PARCELS MAY NOT COMPLY WITH LOCAL LOT SPLIT OR BUILDING SITE ORDINANCES.ARDLEIGH CTASHB O U R N E C I R HEN L E Y C T 68 69 70 71 72 7374 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 "E" "I" "M" "J" "L" "K" POR TRACT 7575 X-15 21 27 27 21 "C" 28 27 26 25 24 29 19 20 21 22 23 09 10 11 12 18 17 16 15 14 13 08 07 06 05 04 03 02 01 2127.95N19^2’23"WR=288 135.9349.16N25^17’47"E108.94R=220N46^34’19" W 495.90 158.11 N41^1 ’ 3 1 " W 167.94N42^5’48"E140.43 R= 4 5 5 48 8 . 0 2 180.60 R=520 93. 4 0 186N63^12’52"E13 0 . 1 0 N 9 ^ 2 9 ’ 3 0 " W92.54160N74^52’2"E13.8170N25^17’47"ER=28028.2832.53 N64^42’13"W 76.16N21^31’56"E28.28N19^42’13"W28.28N70^17’47"E34.52 N64^42’13"W 107.55 R=240 9.14 54.89129.01 N48^33’24"W 115.43N50^4’10"E2222R=272148.7893.89121.66N36^28’54"E150.8 3 N37^ 4 7 ’ 1 3 " W 86.03R=328R=2520.77R= 4 5 209.06 26.82142.01 N61^50’25"W 65.48N41^25’36"E60.35111.07N63^25’57"E120.52N70^13’45"E92.39 N75^35 ’ 8 " W86.14N24^47’26"W140N14^59’52 "E 40 145N65^55’38"E1 08 .7 2N16^29’46"W99.66N26^10’32"E42.67N88^2 2 ’ 2 6 " W 128.71N16^29’46"W 1 1 3 . 5 0 N24^47’26"W 115.62 N75^35 ’ 8 " W 185.19 N66^6’13"W 4 7 . 1 2 153.04 N54^4’51"W 34.7817.33R=25101.12N42^22’5"E272.4290.0430.28R=380107.20166.76 N45^58’0" W 76.9214R=220106.34120.34181.09 N45^58’0" W81.2663.65 89.94 R=240 34.59 98.24 N64^42’13"W 125 R=260 ASHBO U R N E DR ASHBOURNECIRR=580 111.03 112.99N50^4’10"E174.1525.01 53.93138.04 N48^57’01"W 233.18 95.14 28.97 163.87N36^13’43"E102.48 167.44150 8 5 .45N48^38’0"E170N70^23’28"EN 2 8 ^ 4 8 ’ 1 3 "WR= 3 9 5 51 9 . 4 8 14 2 141.2 3 N89^0 ’ 4 1 " W 40.2616 125.64 N77^53 ’ 4 5 " W 125R= 2 7 2 1 1 7 . 5 0 134.14 N82^6’ 2 4 " W 1 0 7 . 4 2 8 4 . 7 3 30.80N44^43’21"E104.06 R=126 30.39 R=424 148.46N7 ^ 9 ’ 3 9 " E 1 9 2 . 1 5 118.0727.17R=25 24 . 0 8 R = 4 5 196.92 65.87 38.803 7 . 4 4 N20^24’1"E23N71^14’9"E150.05N19^56’21"WN57^34’39"E131.2544N31^53’28"E169.34 N69^20’1 8 " W 109.24N14^42’57 "E 77. 5 2 N34 ^ 3 ’ 2 7 " W 162.53N62^59’15"E30.72 R=376 187.19 84.86N62^59’15"E78.98R=215112.46 14.73152.02 206.64 120 N46^51’21" W 509.8652.76N74^32’49"E83. 3 6 N3 4 ^ 3 ’ 2 7 " W139.46N14^42’57 "E 60 77.13 R=174 171.23 173.80N43^15’5"E187.19N21^6’43"E94.10 98 23.07 N58^45’45"W R=2 7 2 205.22N44^57’5"E52N45^49’21"E194.52 R = 2 2 0 264 .5570.03136 N83^3 1 ’ 7 " W56.48R=26 0 88.48 125.20 N77^43 ’ 3 6 " W 111.93133.22 3 2 N12^18’9 "E245.15 6 4 . 6 4 144.75 N87^4’ 5 5 " E 97 1 3 0 . 1 3 N 2 ^ 2 0 ’ 7 " W 53.40 1.93Ac.21,658SF 18,759SF 16,952SF 15,073SF 15,610SF 33,822SF 29,262SF 22,698SF 18,782SF 16,288SF 16,294SF 20,134SF 18,988SF 20,968SF 16,404SF 14,580SF 15,076SF 16,279SF 15,828SF 18,905SF 14,453SF 15,519SF 21,042SF 2.08Ac. FM PG 211-21 2/5/0295.2036.05146. 5 5 N33 ^ 5 0 ’ 9 " W 81.5370.63 12.73 27.5390. 1 5N2 7 ^ 3 6 ’ 2 4 "W 13,609SF 18,516SF 21,281SF 18,002SF (.312Ac.) (.425Ac.) (.489Ac.) (.413Ac.)N27^16’08"E1/28/13 MB 432-30 (NORRIS CANYON ESTATES) 8-6-01 300 TO PG 41 TO PG 21 (PVT STS) SEE APN # 2 1 1 - 2 7 0 - 0 1 6 ASSESSOR’S MAP CONTRA COSTA COUNTY,CALIF. BOOK PAGE211 32 1"=100’ 320 320 2003 ROLL- X-15 PURPOSES ONLY. NO LIABILITY IS ASSUMED FOR THE ACCURACY OF THE INFORMATION NOTE: THIS MAP WAS PREPARED FOR ASSESSMENT DELINEATED HEREON. ASSESSOR’S PARCELS MAY NOT COMPLY WITH LOCAL LOT SPLIT OR BUILDING SITE ORDINANCES. 8 9 10 11 12 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 POR. TRACT 7998 M.B. 438-38 (NORRIS CANYON ESTATES PHASE IV) "M" "E" "F" "G" 02 01 03 04 05 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 09 08 07 06 "N" 19227.27N8^44’20"E176.54N8^44’20"E494.72 N80^26’1 4 " W 256.35 N80^26’14 " W 422.51 166.16 2 0 4 . 1 8 1 2 2 . 4 2 N 3 3 ^ 5 5 ’ 5 8 "W 3 2 6 . 6 0 3 6 5 . 0 3 N 3 3 ^ 5 5 ’ 5 8 "W132.20N3^30’51"E155.78N3^30’51"E50.44 177.70 228.14 N78^55’ 2 8 " W40.20121.44 R = 2 2 4 463.24166.4 4 N59^5 9 ’ 5 0 " E 2 0 0 . 4 0172.86N8^44’20"E256.33 360.05 CIRCLE 229.80 N78^55’ 2 8 " W 50.20 179.60 101.20117.39N8^49’13"E125.69N8^49’13"E31.0531.67N37^13’39"E2 0 2 . 9 8N51^36’27"W109.20N32^50’40"E81.54113.41R=554 843.98 102.60 N51^23 ’ 4 8 " E 209.94N32^50’40"E1 9 9 . 7 9 N 4 1 ^ 2 ’ 3 5 " W 50 53.72 249.95 R=1224R=1762 2 6 . 0 9 139.42N62^1 3 ’ 4 4 " E R = 2 2 4 287.7 5 18 8 . 7 5 94.37 N41^ 2 7’ 3 4 " E 180.01N23^1’53"E272.1 4 141.19 N74^ 3 8 ’ W 157.0 5 170.51N13^28’32"E119.01 R=1176 287.74N10^47’23"E173.5 1 121.13 16.88 311N8^44’20"E149.1 0 122.0 1 23.55 312.31N8^44’20"E140.98 144.17 171.58 219.28N8^44’20"E58.02 22 7 . 8 8R=176 363.97235.20 N83^53’44"E 136.09188.283162.72N37^13’39"E2020 6 . 6 5 N 4 8 ^ 3 ’ 1 6 " W 99.13 96N65^54 ’ 2 1 " E 2 3 8 . 8 6N2 6 ^ 2 8 ’ 5 9 "W 178.03 178 173.07 164. 3 557.42R=506 770.87236.71N7^29’55"W110.9 3 267.49N7^22’51"E160.1 7 257.61N7^47’9"E1 0 0 . 6 4 147.4 2 217.32N7^47’9"E215.72N7^47’9"E157.8 0 R= 5 5 4 N81^15’40 " W 360.05 21 34 33 23 44,781SF 1.32Ac. 50,289SF 33,216SF 34,547SF 33,658SF (1.49Ac) 62,574SF 42,840SF 42,990SF 44,849SF 38,319SF 30,267SF 27,542SF 30,517SF 33,193SF 35,771SF 42,636SF 34,480SF 33,118SF 4848COMMON AREA FM PG 21 04-30-02 HAWKSH E A D SEE 211-310-023 SEE 211-310-023 (.97Ac) 31 23 SEE 211-330-012 ASSESSOR’S MAP CONTRA COSTA COUNTY,CALIF. BOOK PAGE211 33 1"=100’ 330 X-15 PURPOSES ONLY. NO LIABILITY IS ASSUMED FOR THE ACCURACY OF THE INFORMATION NOTE: THIS MAP WAS PREPARED FOR ASSESSMENT DELINEATED HEREON. ASSESSOR’S PARCELS MAY NOT COMPLY WITH LOCAL LOT SPLIT OR BUILDING SITE ORDINANCES. 13 14 1516 17 18 19 20 21 POR TRACT 7998 "G" "F" "O" "N" 01 02 0304 05 06 07 08 09 12 131.1 3 1 9 9 . 7 9 N 4 1 ^ 0 2 ’ 3 5 " W 129.71 2 1 3 . 5 3N2 7 ^ 2 8 ’ 5 2 "W 180.1 5 N51^23 ’ 4 8 " E 85.94 N58^2 3 ’ 1 7 " E 97.40 N58^2 3 ’ 1 7 " E 286.77 N77^28’1" E 96.16 N77^28’1"E 274.03 177.87 121.46 N87^22’30"E 126.49136.86 215.92N14^3’58"W231.55N0^59’2"W75. 7 9 135.87 N87^22’30"E 195. 2 5 N69 ^ 4 9 ’ 1 1 " W 138. 0 2 231.51N13^10’14"E231.95N27^26’43"E68.3577.75 164.05 N87^1’20"E322.87N26^40’56"ER=506 431. 8 0 177.6 5 177.77 359.48 N75^5 6 ’ 2 5 " W 327.91N26^40’56"E176.41 181.71278.33N32^14’46"E232.37N54^31’11"W188. 1 8 R=1 7 4 224.93 51.14 N47^35’4" E 276.06 252.55N54^31’11"W376.4 2 N75^5 6 ’ 2 5 " W 161.29 N87^1’20"E 191. 1 6 N69 ^ 4 9 ’ 1 1 " W 730.56 R=554 R=506 472.77 R=554 R=126 N51^23 ’ 4 8 " E 32 23 34 HAWKSHEADCIRCLE 31,511SF 33,970SF 33,410SF 39,320SF 37,881SF 39,988SF 57,364SF 49,570SF 46,548SF (1.14Ac) 32 48 4 8 50.38FM PG 21 04-30-02 270. 8 8 79.7 3 SEE 211-310-023 SEE 211-310-023 COMMON AREA COMMON AREA M.B. 438-38 (NORRIS CANYON ESTATES PHASE IV) 01-28-02 330 2.47Ac 8/14/12 12 ASSESSOR’S MAP CONTRA COSTA COUNTY,CALIF. BOOK PAGE211 34 1"=100’ 32 340 340 2003 ROLL-X-15 PURPOSES ONLY. NO LIABILITY IS ASSUMED FOR THE ACCURACY OF THE INFORMATION NOTE: THIS MAP WAS PREPARED FOR ASSESSMENT DELINEATED HEREON. ASSESSOR’S PARCELS MAY NOT COMPLY WITH LOCAL LOT SPLIT OR BUILDING SITE ORDINANCES. 22 44 45 46 47 48 49 POR TRACT 7998 M.B. 438-38 (NORRIS CANYON ESTATES PHASE IV) "H" "B" "P" "Y" "K" "V" "U" 06 0507 10 13 04 03 02 11 01 ASHBOURNE CIRCLE"R"HAWKSHEADCIRCLEHAWKSHEADC I R .CLIFFECASTLE141.1 9 N74^3 8 ’ W 215.72N7^47’9"E214.33 R=554109R=1263 0 7 . 2 0198.19 203.1 8 N52^30 ’ 7 " E 130N21^52’11"E180.01N23^1’53"E139.42 N62^13 ’ 4 4 " E 313.90N62^1 3 ’ 4 4 " E 8 9 R = 2 2 4 R=724442.17252.17299.55 N84^46’55"W N5^50’26"E203.47164.70168.23280.52 N84^24’45"W R=215116.28R=676412.86186.7944.20238. 1 7 N69 ^ 1 4 ’ 5 2 " WR=40194.85 19.07R=3022.72R=30 31.06 37.2977.1238.5 1 2 2 . 8 6 37.29 65.50 N41^ 5 8’ 1 0 " E 42.3284.60N4^32’6"W11 1 .48N2 7 ^ 4 6 ’ 3 8 "W 234.35 N71^22’ 5 7 " E 119.567 2 . 2 7 276.06 N47^35’4" E 39.312 6 5 . 4 1N2 7 ^ 4 6 ’ 3 8 "W76.03N4^32’6"W20.4 0 136.23R=48432 N64 ^ 9 ’ 2 8 "W 3 4 . 2 2 R=516 15.15 R=174424 . 2 2 7.41 2.37 3241.7820.91 8.30 20.61 R=17.50 R=17. 5 0 60.70R=51684.15 N41^ 5 8’ 1 0 " E 141 N56^5 5 ’ 3 0 " E 58.32 140.73 N84^41’48"E 199.05 191.28 N84^41’48"E 111.98 151.2 6 N62^40 ’ 2 1 " E 54.81 N76^5 5 ’ 4 7 " W 8 3 . 4 7 N 3 8 ^ 1 1 ’ 2 9 " W111.69N36^58’19"E48 N79^25’ 2 2 " W 75 N 4 1 ^ 5 8 ’ 1 7 " W158N52^4’10"W23 4 . 1 2 N6 3 ^ 3 4 ’ 7 "W 29 0 . 5 1 N 6 1 ^ 2 4 ’ 1 9 "WN54^31’11"W88.42R=1852 6 1 . 0 3N4 9 ^ 5 1 ’ 2 1 "W229.99N29^3’54"E201.86N11^17’22"W203.471 3 2 . 7 6 R = 1 0 5 184.83 COURT R=135 42.236 7 . 5 2N2 7 ^ 1 8 ’ 1 6 "W94.22N34^57’3"E152.29 R=90 22.90 N83^1’7"W R=60 75.80 63.53177.69 R=272 264.52N7^53’45"E185N22^52’19"E33 31 23 35 21 31 48 48303049,246SF 72,909SF87,487SF .99Ac. .64Ac. 48,627SF 49,108SF 53,883SF 1.09Ac. 2.10Ac. 49,770SF FM PG 21 04-30-02 N85^13’51"E DED. TO E.B. REG PARK DIST "G" E.B. REG PARK DIST 12 DED. TO COMMON AREA SEE 211-310-023 35 "J" SEE APN # 211-350-025 SEE APN # 211-350-025(PVT ST)8/15/12 SEE 211-410-001 SEE 211-310-023 TO PG 41 ASSESSOR’S MAP CONTRA COSTA COUNTY,CALIF. BOOK PAGE211 36 1"=200’ 28 360 2006 ROLL- PURPOSES ONLY. NO LIABILITY IS ASSUMED FOR THE ACCURACY OF THE INFORMATION NOTE: THIS MAP WAS PREPARED FOR ASSESSMENT DELINEATED HEREON. ASSESSOR’S PARCELS MAY NOT COMPLY WITH LOCAL LOT SPLIT OR BUILDING SITE ORDINANCES. 1 SUDBURY CTCAMBERLY CT01 02 03 04 05 06 07 51 52 08 09 10 11 14 1312 15 1617 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 POR TRACT 7996 101.40 101. 4 0 101 . 40 1 0 1 . 4 0 N77^29’4"E N85^56’57"E N85^35’10"W N77^7’ 1 8 " W N6 8 ^ 3 9 ’ 2 5 " W 165N16^44’52"W77.12 77. 1 2 R=52 2 7 4 0 . 2 1N25^34’31"EN8^16’59"WN0^1’53"EN8^38’46"EN17^6’39"E77.12 7 7 . 1 2 165 1 0 2 . 5 5 100.11N18^24’10"WN3 1 ^ 4 6 ’ 1 "W 54.68165N57^59’47"WN 4 9 ^ 3 1 ’ 5 5 "W N 4 1 ^ 4 ’ 2 " W N 3 2 ^ 3 6 ’ 9 "W 150.93N36^14’9"EN44^42’2"E N53^9’ 5 4 " E N61^3 7 ’ 4 7 " E 2 6 . 1 4 R = 2 5 20 . 5 4 3 8 . 9 5 R=5 5 64.4820.54 R=25183 R=470 319.34 100.75 97 163.95N17^38’30"W63.2040.48183.9275.32129.71156.59 29.6389.7614 2 N62 ^ 1 2 ’ 2 5 "W85.0985.09858514 6 15 0 29.63 83.831 3 2 . 2 1 72.5915 0 858515 0 157.591 1 6 . 8 0 8 2 . 4 0 112 50.23R=25R=5523.67155.16 39 . 5 0 23.6792.3660.92N30^38’53"EN35^1’35"E89.26N17^13’26"W13 3 . 9 6 32.75137.08 N70^20’ 4 6 " E 1 5 8 . 7 3N2 7 ^ 3 6 ’ 4 5 "W 34 . 9 3 179.38N25^52’11"E33.96 166.32 23.88 N84^54’33"W 182N17^22’10"W37.80 153.42N27^47’35"E1 3 8 . 0 7 89.89N46^47’5"EN62 ^ 1 2 ’ 2 5 "W33.21R=45212.9 6 R=25 37.5919.891 8 8 . 2 5 R=470347.4432.45151.01 N82^45’37"E 120177.5782.1879.49N82^36’40" W N18^46’18"E262.66117.51R=522134.10 2 7 . 1 1 85.76 172.81N5^35’26"E213.39 195.06 408.45 N80^58’36"E 105.63 108.80 107. 4 3 3 0 . 9 8 107.43 1 0 8 . 8 0 1 0 8 . 8 0 2 1 4 . 2 4 N 3 2 ^ 1 0 ’ 4 2 "W83.83 174.24 N72^37’ 2 9 " E 264.28N18^47’32"W 2 4 4 . 7 2N24 ^7 ’8 "W 333.74 N84^3’3"E 1296650.8318 2 . 4 9 N6 6 ^ 5 3 ’ 7 "W 16 5N61 ^ 2 8 ’ 3 1 "W101101117.36N32^15’35"E357.54R=1105178 N6 6 ^ 4 2 ’ 4 4 "W117.36N14^18’58"E165 N71 ^ 5 6 ’ 5 7 " W 101116.04N15^25’57"E165 3 7 6 . 6 3N24 ^7 ’8 "W 75. 3 1 93. 9 1 48.90 154N29^36’1"E54.635 R=25 19.89 3 6 N6 6 ^ 1 0 ’ 1 6 " W 205.56N58^4’20"W84 . 8 3196.79 27.1350.06229.13 N75^25’5 4 " E 27.1184.76 164.35129. 8 7111.05140.42N30^28’14"E35.5535.42 51.3 7 R=45 21 2 . 9 6 16 1 . 1 8 76.03N45^37’43"EN5 9 ^ 1 8 ’ 1 1 "W 85.83 N55^7 ’ 2 5 " E 95.44N46^37’31"E 139.9886.83 111.3 2 N45^37’43"E N55^7 ’ 2 5 " E 19. 8 8 6 169.04N14^12’23"W130.16 93.72 36.44 N6 7 ^ 4 7 ’ 1 6 " W 79.2077.37 N78^38’ 4 4 " W 10.106Ac 175.21N27^20’26"E172.82121.84164.6491.06100.99R=522190.2510812N59^29’33 "W 165 N6 5 ^ 2 2 ’ 8 "W11092.72N27^20’26"EN21^38’18"E91.46108.50165 165 N15^41’38"EN71 ^ 2 1 ’ 1 5 " W N77^1 5 ’ 2 8 " W 85.1686.27N15^41’38"EN21^28’19"E50.07 392.67 N80^29’3 9 " W 2.39 301.16N2^49’38"E9 9 9 . 9 6N2 6 ^ 3 5 ’ 3 1 "W 450 N89^4’30"W 20.0129 37 21 22 21ASHBOURNECIR234 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 1617 18 19 20 21 22 "A" "T" "T" "B" 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 "H" "I" FM PG 21 8/9/05 MB 473-46 1/31/05 (NORRIS CANYON ESTATES PHASE III) 21 N9^01’24"W 46.35 52165N27^46’16"E43.16 40.331.67R = 2 5N9^11’23"W8565.08 N73^19’4 0 " E N28^54’51"W 8/15/12 496.02 (36.32) (45.74) 132.94(T ) N85^34’09"E 11.65 (67.47) (103.34)117.9189.09N12^16’51"E68. 9 6 N6 5 ^ 2 4 ’ 1 6 "W23.3071.52N29^2’7"W231.18 N80^54’17"E N64^36 ’ 5 5 " E N10^09’11"EN77^11 ’ 1 0 " W 102.63116.59N4^51’41"E72. 0 6 52 5.200Ac "J" FROM PG 37 19 8 . 6 7 N 4 7 ^ 1 4 ’ 4 2 " W S E E A P N # 2 1 1 - 3 7 0 - 0 7 0 (PVT STS)51,52 C R A N L E I G H C T ASSESSOR’S MAP CONTRA COSTA COUNTY,CALIF. BOOK PAGE211 37 1 " = 2 0 0 ’ 370 2006 ROLL- PURPOSES ONLY. NO LIABILITY IS ASSUMED FOR THE ACCURACY OF THE INFORMATION NOTE: THIS MAP WAS PREPARED FOR ASSESSMENT DELINEATED HEREON. ASSESSOR’S PARCELS MAY NOT COMPLY WITH LOCAL LOT SPLIT OR BUILDING SITE ORDINANCES. 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 69 11 12 13 14 15 62 1617 1863 19 20 212223 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 64 54 55 56 57 58 70 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 3839 40 41 42 43 4445 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 "J" "C" "D" "E" "F" "G"165N77^15 ’28 "W 109.50 109 107.34 83.60 330.29 92.30 91.88 90.46 1 6 5 1 6 5 1 6 5 . 3 2 1 6 5 . 2 5 N8 3 ^ 1 2 ’ 5 8 "W N 8 9 ^ 8 ’ 4 9 " W N 8 5 ^ 0 ’ 4 5 " E 17.08 98 N5^48’40 " W 368.36 N5^55’1 " W100 10183.76 N 8 4 ^ 4 ’ 5 9 " E 1 6 5 . 0 7 N 8 4 ^ 4 ’ 5 9 " E N 8 4 ^ 4 ’ 5 9 " E 1 3 5 100 5 0 103.70 N19^15’9 " E 66.10 15.75 N68^55’5"W10.26 27.434 0 . 9 2 27.43 4 0 . 9 2 116.1 9 165N77^11’10"W 102.63 101.4 8 111.6 9 45.45 R=11 0 5 R=105 3 357.54 1 6 5 1 6 5 1 8 7 . 7 0 117.9 1 116.5 9 89.09 N8 2 ^ 3 0 ’ 2 8 "W N 8 7 ^ 4 6 ’ 1 0 "WN8 0 ^ 2 9 ’ 2 9 "W 18.77 28.28 1 6 7 . 9 3 134.3 6N2^32’ 8 " W N12^16 ’ 5 1 " E N4^51 ’ 4 1 " E ASH BOURNE CIR 28.2898.75 1 6 9 . 0 7 N 8 4 ^ 4 ’ 5 9 " E 1 4 9 . 0 7 118.75N5^55’1 " W 45.45 69.08 114 17 9 . 3 9 N 8 4 ^ 4 ’ 5 9 " E 98.41 83.07 86.82 N2^38 ’ 1 2 " E 268.3 0 N2^19 ’ 4 0 " W 48.84 68 N5^55’1 " W 261.591 9 1 . 5 6 N 8 9 ^ 5 3 ’ 5 4 " E 116 116 1 8 8 . 3 3N8 0 ^ 1 0 ’ 5 5 "W170N70^15’43"W75 . 8 2 116.80 15 . 2 5 88 . 4 4 168.70 N5^55’1 " W 12 8 . 4 3 159.59 N10^59 ’ 2 5 " E 54 . 3 7 19.89 16.1 1 14 3 . 1 1 N 7 9 ^ 1 0 ’ 4 8 " E 133.231 7 3 . 22 N64^2 ’35 "E41.6747.70 211.91 N7^10’27 " W 78.68 134.18 N24^3’54"E 50.89139.225 4 . 6 1 212.96152.9150.1 9 10 0 . 3 7 14.61R=2 5 R=2519.8 8 70 . 4 2 160.4 0 N12^ 3 9’ 5 5 " W 34 . 1 3 54 . 8 588.5920.08 166.98 4 5 . 4 0 1 4 0 . 2 4 143.80 160 . 3 2 N7 9 ^ 4 ’ 5 8 "W169.3950.57N67^40’17"W219.97176.57 N13^41 ’ 2 9 " E 157.23 N13^41 ’ 2 9 " E 56.4399 . 4 5 N 8 2 ^ 1 5 ’ 3 0 " E 157.61 N24^3’54"E 279.18 N7^10’27 " W 32 2 . 6 8 N 7 9 ^ 1 0 ’ 4 8 " E 27.31 N55^19’6"W 69.30N5^48’40 " W 86.26 86.63 87.11 5 0 . 0 7 100.86 211.01N59^40’4"WR=722 107.2898 160N51^9’15"W160.84131 119.63160160N43^22’38"W25.0151.56135.62 138.44 N42^44’4"E N34^57’26"E50.31119 122.6 8 95.9 8 50.16160N33^46’35"WN52^ 1 1 ’ 5 6 " E 102. 0 7 N5 6 ^ 3 1 ’ 1 7 " E 88.85 88.71 N46^19’ 3 2 " E 88.71 N41^4’22"E 33.78 75 . 9 9 N52^ 1 1 ’ 5 6 " E 25. 2 7 82. 7 3 102. 3 5N35^47’42"W93.30 R=1178 108 160N56^48’24"W108 93.30 108 N51^33’14"W93.30 93.30 108 21.5090.0 R=620 N59^44’56"W97.05 97.0 5 109.64 109.65 109. 6 5 R=1230 622.1 1 595.8 1 N32^30’41"E N37^1’56"E 97.05N55^13’42"WN50^42’27"WN46^11’12"WN41^39’57"WN37^8’43"WN32^37’28"WN60^32’47"W160N50^6’48"WN40^16’45"W122 115 99.4 9 18. 3 2 R=670 96.3 3 87.43 92.74 N34^40’12"E N44^48’14 " E N54 ^ 4 7 ’ 4 9 " E N55 ^ 6 ’ 5 5 " E N50^3 5 ’ 4 0 " E N46^4’2 5 " E N41^33’10"E 86.68 N42^58’23"E N32^25’56"E 90.97 160117 N52^25’59"WN41^37’15"WN 8 4 ^ 4 ’ 5 9 " E 1 8 . 8 5 7 4 . 2 6 170 N8^18 ’ 4 5 " E 1 2 8 . 4 1 N 8 7 ^ 4 4 ’ 3 1 " E WYCOMBECT94.13149.5 4N77^26 ’30 "W 2 0 2 .5 4 182.60 N26^21’3"E5394.9295.9110.0R=2992 6 4 . 3 0R=2512 2 1 . 8 7 1 4 8 . 0 3 72.06 150 N27^52’26"EN45^15’49"W204.46109.54187.37 N37^58’1"E 73.8457.66114.6784N47^14’42"W198.67158 N34^32’E111.8368.96N65^24’16"W182 N21^22’12 " E 6 6 . 0 2 23.30 133.60154.89 N29^52’1"E 2 9 . 4 4 12.41 1 2 1 . 0 8 71.52N29^2’7"W23 1 . 1 8 N 8 0 ^ 5 4 ’ 1 7 " E 1 9 0 .5 6 N64^36’55"E 20 121.51 37.34R=25206.35N15^20’17"W76.08N18^2’25"W146.32173.92 N37^38’5"E 70.4031.0365.9640.0356.8350156.81 N36^52’17"E 83.29R=45180.39 30.62102.84138.2118.15 11.85 13.20 28.77 R=20 10.81 30.42 R = 2 0 30 42.5092.7772.85166.96 N33^7’8"E 188.21N62^26’59"W20.66210.43 N37^38’5"E 157.90N45^32’7"W192.2 4 N52^ 3 7 ’ 3 1 " E 100N34^51’15"WR=2154.26 179. 3 9 N54 ^ 2 8 ’ 3 0 " E 66.48 168.87N49^56’31"W56.70R=164120 . 33 136.59 N28^40’31"E 63.63 2 9 . 4 4 5 7 . 0 1141.24N73^20’46"WR=324R=276 POR TRACT 7996 .300Ac. .640Ac. 1.060Ac 21 23 21 36 113.61 29 31 21 38 PVT STS FM PG 21 8/9/05 N10^09 ’ 1 1 " E 5296.45 52N46^18’03"WN41^02’53"WN 7 6 ^ 5 7 ’ 5 2 " E N35^49’11"E MB 473-46 (NORRIS CANYON ESTATES PHASE III) 1/31/05 81.08 R=672 224.36 "AA"67 11 9 . 9 3 100.22 .391Ac A A A A 5 "B" LT 5 & PCL B TR 8566 MB 508-45 (WIEDEMANN RANCH ESTATES) 1/28/09 96 . 4 1 81.85 R= 4 5 A-2010 ROLL- 1.957Ac TO PG 36 7.30Ac PVT STS 8/15/12 69,70 ASSESSOR’S MAP CONTRA COSTA COUNTY,CALIF. BOOK PAGE211 411"=200’ 410 M.B. 432-30 (NORRIS CANYON ESTATES) PURPOSES ONLY. NO LIABILITY IS ASSUMED FOR THE ACCURACY OF THE INFORMATION NOTE: THIS MAP WAS PREPARED FOR ASSESSMENT DELINEATED HEREON. ASSESSOR’S PARCELS MAY NOT COMPLY WITH LOCAL LOT SPLIT OR BUILDING SITE ORDINANCES. "A" COMMON AREA "R" "O" "M" "N" "P" "Q" 30 27 23 38 "E" "S" "Q" "R" "P" "R" 38 35 34 POR TRACT 7575A - 2002 ROLL- A A A A C C PCL A TR 8566 MB 508-45 C C B - 2003 ROLL- C - 2006 ROLL- POR TRACT 7998 POR TRACT 7996 C C C C C C CC C C C B B B B B B B B B B B B M.B. 438-38 (NORRIS CANYON ESTATES PHASE IV) M.B. 473-46 (NORRIS CANYON ESTATES PHASE III) FM. PGS 30,34,35,38 8-15-12 N07^53’45" E 2 6 4 . 5 2 N2 2 ^ 5 2 ’ 1 9 " E 1 8 5 . 0 0177.69N52^04’10"W 158.00N84^41’48"E 199.05N 5 6 ^ 5 5 ’ 3 0 " E 1 4 1 . 0 0 84 . 1 5 22.86 60 . 7 0 N84^41’48"E 191.2820.91 8.30 2.37 75.00 48.00N61^24’19"W 290.51N50^15’40" W 179.06156.62143.1 7 106.5 8 N33^42 ’ 2 0 " W 1 4 2 . 3 3 183.48N68^21’42"W 195.0089.00N74^26’19"W 186.6160.00 118.6 7 66.00 62.00N10^58’ 2 2 " E 4 0 7 . 9 8 N10^58’ 2 2 " E 2 3 6 . 7 3 N50^54’39" W 468.57 N50^54’39" W 357.95 N06^12’21"E 34 3 . 4 9 N06^12’21"E 3 8 2 . 3 2155.07N28^44’30 "E 199 .61N79^25’48"W 241.62195.87N59^21’11"W 206.361 1 4 . 1 2 182.3 4 N29^32’21"E 207 .00R=374.0072.85167.00 126.76N28^5 9 ’ 1 1 " W 1 5 7 . 2 7 193.77 N49^ 2 4’ 4 3" W 1 4 8. 4 7 N13^4 3 ’ 3 6 " E 1 5 6 . 8 5 181.10 96.45 100.0076.6385.66R=78.0079.10 162.1 6 N28^04 ’ 5 6 " W 1 3 4 . 3 5 130.98 42.4588.379 3 . 1 4 49. 7 6 N 3 9 ^ 3 9 ’ 3 1 " E 1 7 0 . 4 7 N18 ^ 2 5 ’ 4 0 " E 2 2 4 . 0 5154.84112.88 153.6797.39 91.43 101.00 81.75 67.38 67.381 6 0 . 0 0 R=326.00173.58N01^52’03"W 149.39 1 4 3 . 9 4 7 2 . 1 0 1 2 1 . 0 5 N 4 6 ^ 5 6 ’ 2 9 " E 1 4 3 . 9 4 52.0 8 52.08 75.39165.00 206.47N 4 4 ^ 5 7 ’ 0 5 " E 2 0 5 . 2 2 N46^51’ 2 1 " W 4 7 8 . 6 6 7 8 . 9 8 8 4 . 8 614.7330.72 1 6 2 . 5 3 83.36N14^4 2 ’ 5 7 " E 1 3 9 . 4 6 109.2 4 77.5244.001 3 1 . 2 523.00125.6416.0040.26N66^06’13"W 185.19115.62113.50 128.7142.67108.72 86.14 92.39120.52111.07 65 . 4 8121.661 1 5 . 4 3 1 1 2 . 9 9 25.01 53.93N48^ 5 7’ 0 1" W 2 3 3. 1 8 85.45 121. 7 7 20.61 01 15.89Ac ASHBOU R N E C I R CIRASHBO URNER=272ASHBOURNECIR R=272ASHBOURNECIR RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE Board meeting minutes for March 2018, 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: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 20 To:Board of Supervisors From:David Twa, County Administrator Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:APPROVE the Board meeting minutes for March 2018 RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT a Resolution to proclaim April 8-14, 2018 as National Crime Victims' Rights Week in promotion of victims' rights and to recognize crime victims and those who advocate on their behalf. FISCAL IMPACT: None BACKGROUND: The National Campaign for Victims' Rights led to President Ronald Reagans reforms on behalf of crime victims, his declaration of the first National Crime Victims' Rights Week, victims' rights legislation and victim services. National Crime Victims' Rights Week offers an opportunity to renew and strengthen our partnerships and teamwork, and to highlight the collaborative approaches that are integral to the U.S. Department of Justice's mission. Through partnerships, organizations can mobilize their experience, skills, resources, and stakeholders to help plan a powerful strategy to provide direct services to crime victims. In commemoration of National Crime Victims' Rights Week the District Attorney's Office will host on Friday, April 13, 2018 from 10:30 to noon in APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: 9259572259 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Joellen Bergamini, Deputy cc: C. 21 To:Board of Supervisors From:Diana Becton, District Attorney Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:National Crime Victims' Rights Week Resolution BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) the Board of Supervisors' Chambers located at 651 Pine Street, Martinez, a special ceremony to recognize the following award recipients: Support Staff Adriana Gonzales-Powles Attorney Chad Mahalich DA Investigations Chris Shelby Victim Advocate Beverly Brown Law Enforcement-Sexual Assault Detective Thomas Norvell, Contra Costa County Sheriff's Office Law Enforcement-Crimes Persons Corporal Ryan Baillie, Martinez Police Department Making A Difference DeWanda Joseph, Ceasefire and Ya-Neema Healing Circle Special Courage Natasha Herzig AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Resolution No. 2018/133 MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed Resolution No. 2018/133 In the matter of:Resolution No. 2018/133 PROCLAIMING APRIL 8-14, 2018 AS NATIONAL CRIME VICTIMS' RIGHTS WEEK Whereas, Americans are the victims of 20 million crimes each year, affecting individuals and communities;  Whereas, years of investment in crime victims' rights and services have developed a system of victim response that can help victims recover from crime;  Whereas, reaching and serving all victims of crime is essential to supporting thriving communities, because those who receive holistic services and support are more likely to remain invested in their communities;  Whereas, dedicated victim service providers are working every day to meet the needs of crime victims, yet there are still too many victims without meaningful access to rights and services;  Whereas  many victims face barriers-such as isolation, distrust of authorities, language limitations, lack of transportation, or cultural barriers-that keep them from accessing the services and criminal justices systems that help them recover;  Whereas, we must make a dedicated effort to expand the circle of those prepared to respond to victims and link them to the resources that can help them recover;  Whereas  engaging a broader array of healthcare providers, community leaders, faith organizations, educators, and businesses can provide new links between victims and services that improve their safety, healing, and access to justice;  Whereas, National Crime Victims Rights Week provides an opportunity to recommit to ensuring that all victims of crime-especially those who are challenging to reach or serve-are afforded their rights and receive a trauma-informed response; and  Whereas, The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors is dedicated to strengthening victims and survivors in the aftermath of crime, building resilience in our communities and our victim responders, and working for justice for all victims and survivors.                        The Board of Supervisors does hereby proclaim the week of ApriI 8-14,2018 as Crime Victims' Rights Week and reaffirm their commitment to creating a victim service ad criminal justice response that assists all victims of crime during Crime Victims' Rights Week and throughout the year; and to express our sincere gratitude and appreciation for those community members, victim service providers, and criminal justice professionals who are committed to improving our response to all victims of crime so that they may find relevant assistance, support, justice and peace.     ___________________ KAREN MITCHOFF Chair, District IV Supervisor   ______________________________________ JOHN GIOIA CANDACE ANDERSEN District I Supervisor District II Supervisor   ______________________________________ DIANE BURGIS FEDERAL D. GLOVER District III Supervisor District V 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:    April  10, 2018    David J. Twa,    By: ____________________________________, Deputy APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Joellen Bergamini, Deputy cc: C. 22 To:Board of Supervisors From:Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Declaring April 2018 as Alcohol Awareness Month AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Resolution No. 2018/143 MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed Resolution No. 2018/143 In the matter of:Resolution No. 2018/143 In the Matter of declaring April 2018 as Alcohol Awareness Month WHEREAS, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, excessive drinking is responsible for more than 4,300 deaths among underage youth each year, and cost the U.S. $24 billion in 2010; and WHEREAS, people aged 12 to 20 years old drink 11% of all alcohol consumed in the United States and more than 90% of it is in the form of binge drinking; and WHEREAS, according to the California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development, in Contra Costa County, in 2015, there were 345 non-fatal emergency department visits by youth under the age of 20, with their reason for the visit classified as “alcohol only”; and WHEREAS, alcohol is the number one drug of choice amongst America’s youth. In 2014-2016 California Healthy Kids Survey, the results show that approximately 8% of 7th grade students in California reported using Alcohol in the past 30 days; and WHEREAS, it takes both a school-based and community-based prevention approach to effectively educate youth on the dangers of underage drinking; and WHEREAS, the Monument Corridor Anti-Drug and Alcohol Coalition is an Evidence Based Prevention Program, whose mission it is to identify health disparities in the community that affect youth and introduce policy to reduce or eradicate alcohol usage among youth in the city of Concord; and WHEREAS, during the 2016-2017 school year, Monument Corridor Anti-Drug and Alcohol staff and coalition volunteers were able to conduct 45 assessments of liquor merchants, facilitate a Responsible Beverage Training Class for local alcohol merchants, work with local High School youth to design and present anti-alcohol and alcopops presentations to middle school youth and the community at large; and WHEREAS, Over the last four years, Contra Costa County Alcohol and Other Drugs Services has strengthened their collaboration with the Contra Costa County Office of Education, Community Based Providers and the Contra Costa County Alcohol and Other Drugs Advisory Board. They have worked collectively with students, parents and educators to educate Contra Costa youth on the harmful effects of youth alcohol use and changing the community norms in regards to underage drinking. Now, Therefore, Be It Resolved that the Board of Supervisors declares April 2018 as Alcohol Awareness Month in Contra Costa County. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors call upon all citizens, parents, youth, governmental agencies, public and private institutions, businesses and workplaces, hospitals, and schools in Contra Costa County to support efforts that will reduce and prevent underage drinking in our community. ___________________ KAREN MITCHOFF Chair, District IV Supervisor ______________________________________ JOHN GIOIA CANDACE ANDERSEN District I Supervisor District II Supervisor ______________________________________ DIANE BURGIS FEDERAL D. GLOVER District III Supervisor District V 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, By: ____________________________________, Deputy RECOMMENDATION(S): ACCEPT the resignation of Cesar Zepeda, DECLARE a vacancy in the District I Public Sector seat on the Economic Opportunity Council, and DIRECT the Clerk of the Board to post the vacancy. FISCAL IMPACT: None. BACKGROUND: The Economic Opportunity Council makes recommendations to the Board of Supervisors on all program proposals and budgets related to Community Services Block Grant and the Weatherization program, and performs other functions as specified in the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964. Mr. Zepeda has been successfully serving on the Economic Opportunity Council and now wishes to resign his seat. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: James Lyons, 510-231-8692 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 23 To:Board of Supervisors From:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Accept the resignation of Cesar Zepeda from the Economic Opportunity Council District 1 Public Sector seat. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Vacancy Notice RECOMMENDATION(S): APPOINT the following individual to the District IV Alternate Seat on the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District Fire Advisory Commission to a term expiring June 30, 2018, as recommended by Supervisor Karen Mitchoff: Darran Mazaika Concord FISCAL IMPACT: None. BACKGROUND: The Contra Costa County Fire Protection District Fire Commissioners reviews and advises on the annual operations, capital budgets, and all district expenditures; reviews and advises on long-range capital improvement plans; pursuant to district ordinance serves as the Appeals Board on weed abatement matters; and advises the Fire Chief on district service matters. Members serve four year terms ending June 30. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The seat will remain vacant. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 24 To:Board of Supervisors From:Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:APPOINT Darran Mazaika to the District IV Alternate Seat of the Contra Costa County Fire District Advisory Commission RECOMMENDATION(S): ACCEPT the resignations of Amo Virk (Business Seat) and Gayle Walls-Burns (Veteran's Seat). DECLARE vacancies for both seats. DIRECT the Clerk of the Board to post the vacancies for the Business and Veteran Member Seats as recommended by the Advisory Council on Equal Employment Opportunity. FISCAL IMPACT: None BACKGROUND: The Business and Member Seats were vacated before the terms ended on November 30, 2018. The ACEEO provides a county-wide planning, cooperation, and coordination forum for individuals and groups interested in improving equal employment opportunities for all. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The ACEEO will not be able to fill the vacancies and conduct routine business. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Antoinne Wilson, 925-335-1455 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 25 To:Board of Supervisors From:David Twa, County Administrator Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Advisory Council on Equal Employment Opportunity Vacant Seats AGENDA ATTACHMENTS MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Vacancy Notice RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE the medical staff appointments and reappointments, additional privileges, changes to emergency medicine privileges, medical staff advancements, and voluntary resignations as recommend by the Medical Staff Executive Committee, at their March 19, 2018 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 above recommendations for appointment/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 and Health Centers' medical staff would not be appropriately credentialed and 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: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Jaspreet Benepal, 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Tasha Scott, Marcy Wilhelm, Tami Sloan C. 26 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Medical Staff Appointments and Reappointments – March, 2018 ATTACHMENTS EM Privilege Change Attachment EME 2 Privilege Change Current Privilege: ANE EME EME 2 Cricothyrotomy and Jet Ventilation D CA License, Orientation To Airway Procedures N/A N/A U CA License, Orientation To Airway Procedures N/A 1 case or orientation in last 4 yrs. Proposed Privilege Change: ANE EME EME 2 Cricothyrotomy and Jet Ventilation D CA License N/A N/A U CA License N/A 1 case or inservice in last 4 yrs. MEC Recommendations – March 2018 Definitions: A=Active C=Courtesy Aff=Affiliate P/A= Provisional Active P/C= Provisional Courtesy Page 1 A. New Medical Staff Members Kenley, Eric, MD Emergency Medicine Matthews, Zakee, MD Psychiatry/Psychology Nainani, Neha, MD Internal Medicine Terry, Jonathan, DO Psychiatry/Psychology B. 2nd Year Resident Reappointment-Family Medicine Anaya, Gabriel, MD Back, Joshua, MD Dolezal, Kevin, MD Estrada-Melgar, Jennifer, MD Harsha Bangara, Alex, MD Kong, Melinda, MD Lucey, Jessica, MD Mleczko, Victor, MD Nguyen, Catherine, MD Patberg, Jonathan, MD Pettibone, Sarah, MD Rodgers, Angela, MD Weinbaum, Karen, MD C. Request for Additional Privileges Requested by: Department Requesting Standish, Jessica, MD Hospitalist Additional Hospitalist Stanger, Jennifer, MD Hospitalist Emergency Medicine D. Advance to Non-Provisional Carrasco, Androuw, MD Emergency Medicine Lusk, Leslie, MD Pediatrics (Neonatology) Rhoades, Chelsea, MD Internal Medicine (Outpt) E. Biennial Reappointments Abid, Ahmed, MD Hospitalist A Bates, Andrea, MD Psychiatry/Psychology C Berletti, Charles, MD OB/GYN C Carey, David, MD Family Medicine A Cherayil, Annie, MD Family Medicine A Ferguson, Melissa, MD Hospitalist A Galina-Quintero, Doris, MD Internal Medicine -Nephrology C Goheen, Katharine, MD Family Medicine A Jett, Margaret, DO Pediatrics A Kim, Ben, DDS Dental A Kurio, Gregory, MD Pediatrics C Kwon, Esther, DPM Surgery-Podiatry A Lee, George, MD Anesthesia A Lewis, Ronel, MD Psychiatry/Psychology C MEC Recommendations – March 2018 Definitions: A=Active C=Courtesy Aff=Affiliate P/A= Provisional Active P/C= Provisional Courtesy Page 2 Lo, Irene, MD Surgery-General A Marquez -Floyd, Estelita, MD Psychiatry/Psychology C Mekuria, Sefanit, MD Pediatrics C Mohebati, Arash, MD Surgery-General A Moore, Gregory, MD Family Medicine A Porteous, Brent, DO Hospitalist A Radosevich, Jeana, MD Hospitalist A Raine r, Annelies, MD Psychiatry/Psychology C Rosendale, Nicole, MD Internal Medicine -Neurology C Sarvi, Saunaz, DDS Dental A Shah, Sonika, MD Internal Medicine A Shidara, Chiyo, DDS Dental A Shiue, Zita, MD Internal Medicine -Nephrology C Sobel, Daniel, MD Emergency Medicine A Velleman, David, Psy.D Psychiatry/Psychology A Watters, Emily, MD Psychiatry/Psycholog y A Wright, Lara, MD Surgery-General A *No Hospital affiliations, requires MEC waiver F. Biennial Renew of Privileges Concepcion, Yeillie, FNP Family Medicine AFF Oqvist, Jessica, LM OB/GYN AFF Wyrobe k, Sonya, CNM OB/GYN AFF G. Teleradiologist (VRAD) Reappointments Jones, Kendall, MD Diagnostic Imaging (vRad) McCarron, Audrey, MD Diagnostic Imaging (vRad) Mitchell, Richard, MD Diagnostic Imaging (vRad) Rickman, Christopher, MD Diagnostic Imaging (vRad) Schultz, Donald, MD Diagnostic Imaging ( vRad) Sergeyev, Pavel, MD Diagnostic Imaging (vRad) Turner, James, MD Diagnostic Imaging (vRad) H. Voluntary Resignations Andelman, Ross, MD Psychiatry/Psychology Burgoyne, Brian, MD Diagnostic Imaging (vRad) Froyd, Jon, DO Hospital Medicine Harvey Ann, MD Family Medicine Heart, Anita, MD Family Medicine Khanna Neil, MD Psychiatry/Psychology Kosik, Russell, MD Diagnostic Imaging (vRad) Littlefield, Matthew, MD Psychiatry/Psychology Massa, Michael, MD Psychiatry/Psychology Yang, Janet, MD Internal Medicine (Outpt) MEC Recommendations – March 2018 Definitions: A=Active C=Courtesy Aff=Affiliate P/A= Provisional Active P/C= Provisional Courtesy Page 3 I. Attachments EME2 Privilege Change RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE Appropriation Adjustment No. 5062 authorizing the transfer of wage and benefit appropriations between the Workforce Services Bureau (decreasing Department 0504 expenditures) and the Aging and Adult Services Bureau (increasing Department 0503 expenditures) to reflect the transfer of seven full-time positions engaged in Supplemental Security Income (SSI) Advocacy activities, effective April 1, 2018. FISCAL IMPACT: This action will adjust expenditure budgets to reflect an internal staffing transfer of the seven employees in the SSI Advocacy Unit out of the Workforce Services Bureau (WFS) into the Aging and Adult Services Bureau (AAS) for the remainder of FY 17/18 (April 1, 2018 - June 30, 2018). The net effect of these appropriation changes is an increase to the budgeted AAS Bureau salaries and benefits and a decrease in WFS Bureau salaries and benefits by $200,001, with offsetting expenditure transfers in both AAS (0503) and WFS (0504). There are no revenue adjustments needed and there is no additional net county cost. BACKGROUND: As part of its FY 18/19 budget planning, the Employment and Human Services Department has moved the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) Advocacy Unit out of the WFS Bureau into the AAS Bureau for enhanced management oversight and improved administrative support. The Department desires to implement this staffing change for the remainder of the current Budget Year. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Richard Loomis, 608-4861 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 27 To:Board of Supervisors From:Kathy Gallagher, Employment & Human Services Director Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:EHSD Appropriation Adjustment (SSI Advocacy Unit Transfer) BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) The SSI Advocacy Unit provides assistance to disabled adults to apply for SSI disability benefits. The program serves all adults, but it predominantly supports those adults without dependent children that are served in the General Assistance program. In order to improve coordination with the General Assistance program, the SSI Advocacy program is best placed within the Aging and Adult Services Bureau under the direction of the EHS Division Manager over the General Assistance Division. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this action is not approved, expenditure appropriations will not be properly allocated within EHSD to maximize efficiency in administering the SSI Advocacy program. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS APOO #5062 MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed Approp Adj 5062 RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT a position of "Support" on Senate Bill 914 (Dodd) Construction Manager At-Risk Contracting For Counties, a bill that would authorize the use of this method of contracting for the erection, construction, alteration, repair, or improvement of any infrastructure, excluding roads. FISCAL IMPACT: None. BACKGROUND: This California State Association of Counties (CSAC) sponsored legislation would expand existing county Construction Manager At-Risk (CMAR) authority. Counties can currently use CMAR for the erection, construction, alteration, repair, or improvement of any building owned or leased by the county for projects over $1 million through January 1, 2023. SB 914 would expand that authority to other types of infrastructure projects, such as flood control projects. The bill maintains the existing project cost threshold of in excess of $1 million and skilled and trained workforce requirements. Ultimately, the bill that made it into print excluded roads in the list of CMAR eligible projects. The Transportation, Water, and Infrastructure Committee, at their March 13, 2018, meeting, discussed the Bill and the omission of roads. The Committee did recommend a support position with the addition of a APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: John Cunningham (925) 674-7833 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 28 To:Board of Supervisors From:TRANSPORTATION, WATER & INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Senate Bill 914 (Dodd): Construction Manager At-Risk (CMAR) Contracting For Counties--SUPPORT BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) comment to the author recommending roads be added in if the opportunity presents itself. Related Statutes/Legislation SB 328 (Knight, 2013) authorized counties to use construction manager at-risk method for projects costing in excess of $1 million and allowed the county to award the contract to the lowest responsible bidder or by the best value method until January 1, 2018. AB 851 (Caballero, 2017) extended the sunset date for county authority for five years to January 1, 2023. AB 851 also added skilled and trained workforce requirements for projects built with county CMAR authority. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The County would not have an official position on the bill. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Draft Support Letter: SB 914 - Dodd CMAR SB 914 (Dodd) - Fact Sheet PDF SB 914 (Dodd) - Bill Text (1-22-18) MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed Letter - SB 914 - Dodd g:\transportation\cunningham\memo-letter\letter\2018\drafts\04-10-18_draft bos_dodd_resb914-cmar-support.doc The Board of Supervisors County Administration Building 651 Pine Street, Room 106 Martinez, California 94553-1293 John Gioia, 1st District Candace Andersen, 2nd District Diane Burgis, 3rd District Karen Mitchoff, 4th District Federal D. Glover, 5th District April 10, 2018 The Honorable Bill Dodd California State Senate State Capitol, Room 5064 Sacramento, CA 95814 Re: Senate Bill 914 (Dodd): Construction Manager At-Risk (CMAR) Contracting for Counties Dear Senator Dodd, On behalf of the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors, I am writing to express support for Senate Bill 914. In addition, the County respectfully requests that, should it be possible during the legislative process, roads be included in CMAR eligible project types. A CMAR contract is a competitively procured contract with an entity that guarantees the cost of a project and furnishes construction management services, including, but not limited to, preparation and coordination of bid packages, scheduling, cost control, value engineering, evaluation, preconstruction services and construction administration. Before construction can begin on a project, the owner and construction manager must agree on “guaranteed maximum price” for the project. The construction manager is responsible for delivering the project within the agreed upon price, thereby assuming the risk for cost-overruns. The result is better-designed, properly-phased, and cost-effective county infrastructure project. Current law allows counties to use CMAR on projects in excess of $1 million for the erection, construction, alteration, repair or improvement of buildings. Counties may award the projects to the lowest responsible bidder or by the best value method. Counties have CMAR authority until January 1, 2023 and must also meet specified skilled and trained workforce requirements. SB 914 expands county authority to use the CMAR method for other types of infrastructure projects. The County is interested in potentially using the CMAR method for flood control projects and other local projects. Again, the County believes that would David Twa Clerk of the Board and County Administrator (925) 335-1900 Contra Costa County g:\transportation\cunningham\memo-letter\letter\2018\drafts\04-10-18_draft bos_dodd_resb914-cmar-support.doc could make use of CMAR authority for road projects and would welcome that revision to the legislation. For the reasons stated, Contra Costa County is pleased to support SB 914 and thank you for authoring this important measure. Sincerely, Karen Mitchoff, Chair Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors cc: Members, Assembly Transportation Committee Contra Costa County Legislative Delegation OFFICE OF SENATOR BILL DODD SHEILA MCFARLAND PHONE: 916-651-4003 SB 914 – DODD CONSTRUCTION MANAGER AT-RISK CONTRACTING FOR COUNTIES Summary Senate Bill 914 would expand the tools counties have to plan and deliver infrastructure projects by extending construction manager at-risk (CMAR) authority to all types of infrastructure projects. Background The Local Agency Public Construction Act generally requires local officials to invite bids for construction projects and then award contracts to the lowest responsible bidder. This design-bid-build method is the traditional approach to public works construction. The method known as construction manager at -risk is another approach to public works construction and project delivery which combines elements of the design-bid-build and design-build methods. CMAR allows the owner of a project to retain a construction manager who provides pre- construction services during the design period and becomes the general contractor during the construction process. A CMAR contract is a competitively procured contract with an entity that guarantees the cost of a project and furnishes construction management services, including, but not limited to, preparation and coordination of bid packages, scheduling, cost control, value engineering, evaluation, preconstruction services and construction administration. Before construction can begin on a project, the owner and construction manager must agree on either a fixed price or “guaranteed maximum price” for the project. The construction manager is responsible for delivering the project within the agreed upon price, thereby assuming the risk for cost-overruns. The result is better-designed, properly-phased, and cost-effective county infrastructure project. California’s counties currently have CMAR authority for the erection, construction, alteration, repair, or improvement of any building owned or leased by the county. Besides counties, the California Administrative Office of the Courts, University of California, California State University System, school districts, and some cities have used the CMAR method for building construction projects. SB 328 (Knight, 2013) authorized counties to use construction manager at-risk method for projects costing in excess of $1 million, and allowed the county to award the contract to the lowest responsible bidder or by the best value method until January 1, 2018. AB 851 (Caballero, 2017) extended the sunset date for county authority for five years to January 1, 2023. AB 851 also added skilled and trained workforce requirements for projects built with county CMAR authority. This Bill SB 914 expands county authority to use the CMAR method for all infrastructure projects. The bill maintains the existing project cost threshold of in excess of $1 million and skilled and trained workforce requirements. Support California State Association of Counties (CSAC) (Sponsor) Opposition None OFFICE OF SENATOR BILL DODD SHEILA MCFARLAND PHONE: 916-651-4003 Contact Sheila McFarland – Sheila.mcfarland@sen.ca.gov SENATE BILL No. 914 Introduced by Senator Dodd (Coauthor: Assembly Member Grayson) January 22, 2018 An act to amend Section 20146 of the Public Contract Code, relating to public contracts. legislative counsel’s digest SB 914, as introduced, Dodd. Local agency contracts. Existing law authorizes a county, until January 1, 2023, with approval of the board of supervisors, to utilize construction manager at-risk construction contracts for the erection, construction, alteration, repair, or improvement of any building owned or leased by the county, subject to certain requirements, including that the method may only be used for projects that are in excess of $1,000,000. This bill would authorize the use of this method of contracting for the erection, construction, alteration, repair, or improvement of any infrastructure, excluding roads. Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: no. State-mandated local program: no. The people of the State of California do enact as follows: line 1 SECTION 1. Section 20146 of the Public Contract Code is line 2 amended to read: line 3 20146. (a)  A county, with approval of the board of supervisors, line 4 may utilize construction manager at-risk construction contracts line 5 for the erection, construction, alteration, repair, or improvement line 6 of any building infrastructure, excluding roads, owned or leased line 7 by the county. A construction manager at-risk construction contract 99 line 1 may be used only for projects in the county in excess of one million line 2 dollars ($1,000,000) and may be awarded using either the lowest line 3 responsible bidder or best value method to a construction manager line 4 at-risk entity that possesses or that obtains sufficient bonding to line 5 cover the contract amount for construction services and risk and line 6 liability insurance as may be required by the county. Any payment line 7 or performance bond written for the purposes of this section shall line 8 be written using a bond form developed by the county. line 9 (b)  For purposes of this section, the following definitions apply: line 10 (1)  “Best value” means a value determined by objective criteria line 11 related to the experience of the entity and project personnel, project line 12 plan, financial strength of the entity, safety record of the entity, line 13 and price. line 14 (2)  “Construction manager at-risk contract” means a line 15 competitively procured contract by a county with an individual, line 16 partnership, joint venture, corporation, or other recognized legal line 17 entity, that is appropriately licensed in this state, including a line 18 contractor’s license issued by the Contractors’ State License Board, line 19 and that guarantees the cost of a project and furnishes construction line 20 management services, including, but not limited to, preparation line 21 and coordination of bid packages, scheduling, cost control, value line 22 engineering, evaluation, preconstruction services, and construction line 23 administration. line 24 (c)  (1)  A construction manager at-risk entity shall not be line 25 prequalified or shortlisted or awarded a contract unless the entity line 26 provides an enforceable commitment to the county that the entity line 27 and its subcontractors at every tier will use a skilled and trained line 28 workforce to perform all work on the project or contract that falls line 29 within an apprenticeable occupation in the building and line 30 construction trades, in accordance with Chapter 2.9 (commencing line 31 with Section 2600) of Part 1. line 32 (2)  This subdivision shall not apply if any of the following line 33 conditions are met: line 34 (A)  The county has entered into a project labor agreement that line 35 will bind all contractors and subcontractors performing work on line 36 the project or contract to use a skilled and trained workforce, and line 37 the entity agrees to be bound by that project labor agreement. line 38 (B)  The project or contract is being performed under the line 39 extension or renewal of a project labor agreement that was entered line 40 into by the county before January 1, 2018. 99 — 2 —SB 914 line 1 (C)  The entity has entered into a project labor agreement that line 2 will bind the entity and all its subcontractors at every tier line 3 performing the project or contract to use a skilled and trained line 4 workforce. line 5 (3)  For purposes of this subdivision, “project labor agreement” line 6 has the same meaning as in paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) of line 7 Section 2500. line 8 (d)  Subcontractors that were not listed by a construction manager line 9 at-risk entity as partners, general partners, or association members line 10 in a partnership, limited partnership, or association in the entity’s line 11 construction manager at-risk bid submission shall be awarded by line 12 the construction manager at-risk entity in accordance with the line 13 process set forth by the county. All subcontractors bidding on line 14 contracts pursuant to this section shall be afforded the protections line 15 contained in Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 4100) of Part line 16 1. The construction manager at-risk entity shall do both of the line 17 following: line 18 (1)  Provide public notice of the availability of work to be line 19 subcontracted in accordance with the publication requirements line 20 applicable to the competitive bidding process of the county. line 21 (2)  Provide a fixed date and time on which the subcontracted line 22 work will be awarded in accordance with the procedure established line 23 pursuant to this section. line 24 (e)  A county that elects to proceed under this section and uses line 25 a construction manager at-risk contract for a building project shall line 26 make a copy of the contract available for public inspection on its line 27 Internet Web site and notify the appropriate policy committees of line 28 the Legislature with instructions on finding and accessing the line 29 stored contract. line 30 (f)  (1)  If the county elects to award a project pursuant to this line 31 section, retention proceeds withheld by the county from the line 32 construction manager at-risk entity shall not exceed 5 percent if a line 33 performance and payment bond issued by an admitted surety line 34 insurer is required in the solicitation of bids. line 35 (2)  In a contract between the construction manager at-risk entity line 36 and any subcontractor, and in a contract between a subcontractor line 37 and any subcontractor thereunder, the percentage of the retention line 38 proceeds withheld shall not exceed the percentage specified in the line 39 contract between the county and the construction manager at-risk line 40 entity. If the construction manager at-risk entity provides written 99 SB 914— 3 — line 1 notice to any subcontractor that is not a member of the construction line 2 manager at-risk entity, before or at the time the bid is requested, line 3 that a bond may be required and the subcontractor subsequently line 4 is unable or refuses to furnish a bond to the construction manager line 5 at-risk entity, then the construction manager at-risk entity may line 6 withhold retention proceeds in excess of the percentage specified line 7 in the contract between the county and the construction manager line 8 at-risk entity from any payment made by the construction manager line 9 at-risk entity to the subcontractor. line 10 (g)  If the county elects to award a project pursuant to this line 11 section, the contract between the county and construction manager line 12 at-risk entity shall be subject to subdivision (b) of Section 2782 line 13 of the Civil Code. Any contract between the construction manager line 14 at-risk entity and a contractor or subcontractor shall be subject to line 15 Section 2782.05 of the Civil Code. line 16 (h)  This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2023, line 17 and as of that date is repealed, unless a later enacted statute, that line 18 is enacted before January 1, 2023, deletes or extends that date. O 99 — 4 —SB 914 RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Resolution No. 2018/130, which establishes SUPPORT for Proposition 69, a constitutional amendment (Assembly Constitutional Amendment 5) to prevent new transportation funds from being diverted for non-transportation purposes, and OPPOSITION to the proposed November ballot proposition (Proposed Initiative 17-0033) that would repeal the new Senate Bill 1 (2017) transportation funds and make it more difficult to raise state and local transportation funds in the future. FISCAL IMPACT: Taking these positions (Prop 69:Support, SB 1 Repeal: Oppose) will not have any direct fiscal impact. Secondary impacts should the proposed initiative, "California Voter Approval for Gas and Vehicle Taxes Initiative" (Proposal 17-0033) make it on the ballot and be approved by the voters include the loss of new revenue detailed in the attached CSAC new SB1 revenue estimates, and in summary would result in an average annual Contra Costa loss of $15.3 million from 2017/18 to 2026/27 (countywide). Secondary impacts should Proposition 69 pass are detailed in the attached Assembly Constitutional Amendment 5 Senate Floor Analyses and in summary, incurs one-time State General Fund costs ($414,000 to $552,000 for printing and mailing ballot materials), and would protect increased road funds (funding amounts detailed in the previous sentence) available to the County due to constitutional gas tax protections from diversions for non-transportation uses, and exempt new revenues from statutory spending limits. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: John Cunningham (925) 674-7833 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 29 To:Board of Supervisors From:TRANSPORTATION, WATER & INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:SUPPORT: Prop 69 Constitutional Protection For Transportation Funds and OPPOSE: Potential November Ballot proposition repealing SB 1(trans. funds) BACKGROUND: California Proposition 69: "Transportation Taxes and Fees Lockbox and Appropriations Limit Exemption Amendment" From the Senate Floor Analyses (attached): Digest: This constitutional amendment proposes to amend the California Constitution to prohibit the Legislature from borrowing revenues from fees and taxes imposed on vehicles or their use or operation, and from using those revenues other than as specifically permitted in the Constitution. Also, exempts appropriations of revenues generated as part of the proposed Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017 (SB 1, Beall) from counting towards the state appropriation limit (Gann Limit). During the Transportation, Water, and Infrastructure Committees (TWIC) discussion it was acknowledged that the County formally supported Senate Bill 1 in 2017 (see attached: 2-7-17 BOS SB1 letter of support). In 2017, during the Board of Supervisors deliberations on SB 1, some concern was raised that the constitutional protection for the transportation revenue being discussed was not proceeding concurrently with the Bill. The timing of the legislative process and other issues did not allow for that protection to be put in place in 2017. The Proposition 69 effort makes the intent of the original package, revenue generation (Senate Bill 1) and protection (Proposition 69), complete. TWIC recommends that the full Board of Supervisors support Proposition 69. "California Voter Approval for Gas and Vehicle Taxes Initiative" (Proposal 17-0033) [At the time this report was submitted to the Board of Supervisors, this proposal had not yet qualified to be on the ballot] Summary from the California Secretary of State: Eliminates Recently Enacted Road Repair and Transportation Funding by Repealing Revenues Dedicated for those Purposes. Requires any Measure to Enact Certain Vehicle Fuel Taxes and Vehicle Fees be Submitted to and Approved by the Electorate. Repeals a 2017 transportation law’s tax and fee provisions that pay for repairs and improvements to local roads, state highways, and public transportation. Requires the Legislature to submit any measure enacting specified taxes or fees on gas or diesel fuel, or on the privilege to operate a vehicle on public highways, to the electorate for approval. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local government: Reduced annual state transportation tax revenues of $2.9 billion in 2018-19, increasing to $4.9 billion annually by 2020-21. These revenues would primarily have supported state highway maintenance and rehabilitation, local streets and roads, and mass transit. In addition, potentially lower transportation tax revenues in the future from requiring voter approval of such tax increases, with the impact dependent on future actions by the Legislature and voters. Citing the County's formal position of support for SB1 in 2017, and the demonstration of critical need provided during the time leading up to that action, TWIC recommends that the Board of Supervisors oppose Initiative 17-0033. In addition, the statewide coalition (The Coalition to Protect Local Transportation Improvements) has requested that agencies and organizations taking the positions recommended in this report, sign on to their effort. The subject of the resolution referenced in the recommendations is: 1] support for Proposition 69 (Transportation Taxes and Fees Lockbox and Appropriations Limit Exemption Amendment), Exemption Amendment), 2] opposition to Proposed Initiative17-0033 (California Voter Approval for Gas and Vehicle Taxes Initiative), and 3] the Board of Supervisors consent and request to be listed as a listed as a member of the "Coalition to Protect Local Transportation Improvements". CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The County would not have an official position on Proposition 69 or the effort to repeal Senate Bill 1 (2017) which the Board of Supervisors supported in 2017 and established new transportation revenues. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Resolution No. 2018/130 2-7-17 BOS SB1 letter of support Ballotpedia: Prop69 Transportation Taxes and Fees Lockbox and Appropriations Limit Exemption Amendment AssemblyConstitutionalAmendment5.pdf ACA5(Prop 5)Senate Floor Analyses.pdf Ballotpedia: Voter Approval for Gas and Vehicle Taxes Initiative (2018 - Proposal 17-0033) CSAC_sb_1_ten-yr_estimates_new_revenues Fix Our Roads Coaltion Fact Sheet MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed Resolution No. 2018/130 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board Adopted this Resolution on 04/10/2018 by the following vote: AYE:4 John Gioia Candace Andersen Karen Mitchoff Federal D. Glover NO: ABSENT:1 Diane Burgis ABSTAIN: RECUSE: Resolution No. 2018/130 In the Matter of Proposition 69, the June 2018 constitutional amendment to prevent new transportation funds from being diverted for non-transportation purposes; and the proposed November ballot proposition (Attorney General #17-0033) that would repeal the new transportation funds and make it more difficult to raise state and local transportation funds in the future. WHEREAS, cities and counties own and operate more than 81 percent of streets and roads in California, and from the moment we open our front door to drive to work, bike to school, or walk to the bus station, people are dependent upon a safe, reliable local transportation network; and WHEREAS, the 2016 California Statewide Local Streets and Roads Needs Assessment, which provides critical analysis and information on the local transportation network’s condition and funding needs, indicates that the condition of the local transportation network is deteriorating at an increasing rate; and WHEREAS, cities and counties are facing a funding shortfall of $73 billion over the next 10-years to repair and maintain in a good condition the local streets and roads system and the State Highway System has $57 billion worth of deferred maintenance; and WHEREAS, SB 1 – the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017 – will raise approximately $5.4 billion annually in long-term, dedicated transportation funding to rehabilitate and maintain local streets, roads, and highways, make critical, life-saving safety improvements, repair and replace aging bridges and culverts, reduce congestion and increase mobility options including bicycle and pedestrian facilities with the revenues split equally between state and local projects; and WHEREAS, SB 1 provides critically-needed funding in Contra Costa County that will be used for much-needed road improvement and maintenance projects; and WHEREAS, SB 1 contains strong accountability and transparency provisions to ensure the public knows how their tax dollars are being invested and the corresponding benefits to their community including annual project lists that identify planned investments and annual expenditure reports that detail multi-year and completed projects; and WHEREAS, SB 1 requires the State to cut bureaucratic redundancies and red tape to ensure transportation funds are spent efficiently and effectively, and also establishes the independent office of Transportation Inspector General to perform audits, improve efficiency and increase transparency; and WHEREAS, Proposition 69 on the June 2018 ballot would add additional protections for taxpayers by preventing the State Legislature from diverting or raiding any new transportation revenues for non-transportation improvement purposes; and WHEREAS, there is also a proposed ballot measure aimed for the November 2018 ballot (Attorney General #17-0033) that would repeal the new transportation revenues provided by SB 1 and make it more difficult to increase funding for state and local transportation improvements in the future; and WHEREAS, this proposed November proposition would raid approximately $15.3 million (annually 2017/18 to 2026/27) dedicated to Contra Costa County (countywide), and halt critical investments in future transportation improvement projects in our community; and WHEREAS, the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors, on February 7, 2017, formally supported Senate Bill 1 (Beall), the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017 which is the subject of both the protective constitutional amendment (Prop 69), and the repeal effort (Proposed Initiative Attorney General #17-0033). NOW, THEREFORE, the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors adopts the following positions: Support for Proposition 69, the June 2018 constitutional amendment to prevent new transportation funds from being diverted for non-transportation purposes; and 1. Opposition to the proposed November ballot proposition (Proposed Initiative AG #17-0033) that would repeal the new transportation funds and make it more difficult to raise state and local transportation funds in the future; and 2. Consents and requests to be listed as a member of the Coalition to Protect Local Transportation Improvements, a diverse coalition of local government, business, labor, transportation and other organizations throughout the state, in support of Proposition 69 and in opposition to the repeal of SB 1. 3. Contact: John Cunningham (925) 674-7833 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Charles Schwab Is Your Portfolio Ready?Ad LEARN MORE Report Advertisement California Proposition 69: Transportation Taxes and Fees Lockbox and Appropriations Limit Exemption Amendment Election date June 5, 2018 Topic State and local government budgets, spending and finance and Transportation California Proposition 69, Transportation Taxes and Fees Lockbox and Appropriations Limit Exemption Amendment (June 2018) California Proposition 69, the Transportation Taxes and Fees Lockbox and Appropriations Limit Exemption Amendment, is on the ballot in California as a legislatively referred constitutional amendment on June 5, 2018. A "yes" vote supports this amendment to: require that revenue from the diesel sales tax and Transportation Improvement Fee, as enacted by Senate Bill 1 (SB 1), be used for transportation-related purposes; and exempt revenue generated by SB 1's tax increases and fee schedules from the state appropriations limit. A "no" vote opposes this amendment to: require that revenue from the diesel sales tax and Transportation Improvement Fee, as enacted by Senate Bill 1 (SB 1), be used for transportation-related purposes; and exempt revenue generated by SB 1's tax increases and fee schedules from the state appropriations limit. Overview Amendment and Senate Bill 1 Proposition 69 was part of a legislative package that included Senate Bill 1 (SB 1). Without SB 1, Proposition 69 would not affect anything. SB 1, which was also known as the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017, enacted an estimated $5.2 billion-a-year increase in transportation- related taxes and fees, including a $0.12 cents per gallon increase of the gasoline excise tax, a $0.20 cents per gallon increase of the diesel [1] [1] Status On the ballot Type Constitutional amendment Origin State legislature excise tax, a 4 percentage points increase of the diesel sales tax, an annual $25 to $100 Transportation Improvement Fee, and an annual $100 zero-emission vehicles fee. Proposition 69 would require that revenue from the diesel sales tax and Transportation Improvement Fee (TIF) be dedicated for transportation- related purposes. As of 2018, the state constitution prohibited the legislature from using gasoline excise tax revenue or diesel excise tax revenue for general non-transportation purposes. The amendment would require the diesel sales tax revenue to be deposited into the Public Transportation Account, which was designed to distribute funds for mass transportation and rail systems. Proposition 69 would require the TIF revenue be spent on public streets and highways and public transportation systems. Although SB 1 requires revenue from the zero-emission vehicles fee to be placed in the Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account, Proposition 69 does not contain a provision creating a constitutional mandate for zero-emission vehicles fee revenue. Proposition 69 would make revenue from SB 1's tax increases and fee schedules exempt from the state appropriations limit, also known as the Gann Limit. In other words, the revenue would not count toward the limit. The Gann Limit prohibits the state government and local governments from spending revenue in excess of per-person government spending in fiscal year 1978-1979, with an adjustment allowed for changes in the cost-of-living and population. Amendments were made to the Gann Limit in 1988 and 1990, modifying the formula and requiring half of the excess revenue to be distributed to public education and the other half to taxpayer rebates. Rejecting the constitutional amendment would make SB 1's revenue subject to the Gann Limit. As of 2018, the Gann Limit had been exceeded just once in 1987. Vote in the state legislature The constitutional amendment was referred to the ballot box with support from just two legislative Republicans—Rep. Baker and Sen. Cannella. Just one Republican—Sen. Cannella—voted for SB 1. The constitutional amendment required a two-thirds vote in both chambers of the California State Legislature. Democrats, controlling two-thirds of the seats in both chambers, were united in voting to refer the amendment. Text of the measure Ballot title The ballot title is as follows: “Requires That Certain New Transportation Revenues Be Used for Transportation Purposes. Legislative Constitutional Amendment.” Ballot summary The ballot summary is as follows: [2][3] [1][2] [1] [4] [1] [5] [6] [5] “Requires that revenues generated by a 2017 transportation funding law, through a certain vehicle license fee and diesel sales tax, be used only for transportation purposes, including public transportation. Generally prohibits the Legislature from diverting those funds to other purposes. Prohibits revenue from new vehicle license fees from being used to repay general obligation bond debt. Exempts new revenues from state and local spending limits.” Fiscal impact statement The fiscal impact statement is as follows: “No direct effect on the amount of state and local revenues or costs, as the measure does not change existing tax and fee rates. The measure could affect how some monies are spent by ensuring that revenues from recently enacted taxes and fees continue to be spent on transportation purposes. The measure would put the state a little further below its constitutional spending limit.” Constitutional changes See also: Article XIII B and Article XIX A of the California Constitution The measure would add a Section 15 to Article XIII B and amend Section 1 of Article XIX A of the California Constitution. The measure would also add a new Article XIX D to the constitution. The following underlined text would be added: Readability score See also: Ballot measure readability scores, 2018 (b) The revenues described in subdivision (a) shall not be used for the payment of principal and interest on state transportation general obligation bonds that were authorized by the voters on or before November 8, 2016, nor shall those revenues be used for payment of principal and interest on state transportation general obligation bond acts approved by the voters after that date, unless the bond act expressly authorizes that use. (c) Except as provided in Sections 16310 and 16381 of the Government Code, as those sections read on January 1, 2018, the Legislature shall not borrow the revenues described in subdivision (a), and shall not use these revenues for purposes, or in ways, other than as authorized in subdivisions (a) or (b). [6] [5] [6] [1] [6] Using the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) and Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) formulas, Ballotpedia scored the readability of the ballot title and summary for this measure. Readability scores are designed to indicate the reading difficulty of text. The Flesch-Kincaid formulas account for the number of words, syllables, and sentences in a text; they do not account for the difficulty of the ideas in the text. The California attorney general wrote the ballot language for this measure. The FKGL for the ballot title is grade level 17.5, and the FRE is -18. The word count for the ballot title is 14, and the estimated reading time is 3 seconds. For the 2017 ballot, the average ballot question required 20 years of U.S. formal education (graduate school-level of education) to read and comprehend, according to the FKGL formula. During the 10-year period from 1997 to 2007, political scientists Shauna Reilly and Sean Richey found that average California ballot title score was equivalent to 13 years of U.S. formal education. Support Supporters Officials The following officials sponsored the amendment in the legislature: Parties California Democratic Party Organizations California Chamber of Commerce Arguments Sen. Josh Newman (D-29), one of the amendment's authors, said: “Given the urgency of the transportation and infrastructure repair backlog before California, and the additional burden we are asking the state’s taxpayers to take on to address it now, it is essential that we provide Californians with a very clear assurance that these new revenues will be spent only on repairing our aging infrastructure, reducing congestion, and otherwise supporting transportation improvements that foster economic development across the state – in urban, suburban, and rural areas alike. ACA 5 provides voters with the important assurance that their hard-earned money will be spent in a responsible and fiscally prudent manner.” Official arguments Sen. Josh Newman (D-29) Rep. Jim Frazier (D-11) Rep. Kevin Mullin (D-22) Rep. Evan Low (D-28) Rep. Miguel Santiago (D-53) Rep. Todd Gloria (D-78) [1] [7] [8] [9] [6] Warren Stanley, commissioner of the California Highway Patrol, Helen Hutchison, president of the League of Women Voters of California, and Allan Zaremberg, president of the California Chamber of Commerce, wrote the official argument in support of Proposition 69 found in the state's voter guide: Opposition Opponents Sen. John Moorlach (R-37) Rep. Frank Bigelow (R-5) Arguments Official arguments Sen. John Moorlach (R-37) and Rep. Frank Bigelow (R-5) each wrote an official argument against the measure found in the state's voter guide: Campaign finance See also: Campaign finance requirements for California ballot measures YES ON 69: PREVENT THE LEGISLATURE FROM REDIRECTING TRANSPORTATION REVENUES AND ENSURE THEY CAN ONLY BE USED TO FUND TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS. YES on 69 ensures existing transportation revenues we pay at the pump and when we register our vehicles can ONLY be used for road and transportation improvement projects. Proposition 69 constitutionally protects these funds by prohibiting the legislature from using these revenues for non-transportation purposes. And YES on 69 won’t raise taxes one cent. YES ON 69 REQUIRES TRANSPORTATION FUNDS BE SPENT ON PRIORITIES LIKE FIXING LOCAL ROADS HIGHWAYS BRIDGES AND OTHER TRANSPORTATION [5] [5] [5] [5] [hide] Total campaign contributions as of March 21, 2018 Support:$0.00 Opposition:$0.00 As of March 21, 2018, there were no ballot measure committees registered in support of the measure or in opposition to the measure. Reporting dates In California, ballot measure committees file a total of four campaign finance reports in 2018. The filing dates for reports are as follows: Campaign finance reporting dates for June 2018 ballot Date Report Period 1/31/2018 Annual Report for 2017 1/01/2017 - 12/31/2017 4/26/2018 Report #1 1/01/2018 - 4/21/2018 5/24/2018 Report #2 4/22/2018 - 5/19/2018 7/31/2018 Report #3 5/20/2018 - 6/30/2018 1/31/2019 Annual Report for 2018 1/01/2018 - 12/31/2018 Media editorials Support The Sacramento Bee said, "Yes. The 12-cent gas tax increase passed last year by California lawmakers was the first in 23 years, and, gauging from the number of potholes in need of filling, it was way overdue. This companion measure would ensure that $5 billion in new revenue only gets spent on transportation projects. While most transportation revenue is already constitutionally earmarked, some of the new funding falls outside those protections, so this is just common-sense cleanup, endorsed by a long list of good government groups." Opposition Ballotpedia did not find any media editorial boards opposing Proposition 69. If you are aware of an editorial, please email it to editor@ballotpedia.org. Background Senate Bill 1 California State Legislature [10] [11][12] [13] [14] Senate Bill 1 (SB 1), also known as the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017, was passed on April 6, 2017. The California State Senate voted 27 to 11 with two members not voting; 27 votes were required to pass the bill. Democrats controlled 27 seats in the state Senate. Sen. Steve Glazer (D-7) joined Republicans in opposing SB 1, but Sen. Anthony Cannella (R-12) joined Democrats in passing the bill, allowing the bill to pass with 27 votes. The California State Assembly voted 54 to 26 to pass the legislation; 54 votes were required. Democrats controlled 55 seats in the state Assembly. One Democrat, Rep. Rudy Salas (D-32), joined Republicans in opposing the bill, leaving Democrats with 54 votes needed to pass SB 1. Gov. Jerry Brown (D) signed the legislation into law on April 28, 2017. Revenue SB 1 increased the following transportation-related taxes and fees on November 1, 2017: Increased the gas tax $0.12 cents per gallon, from $0.297 cents per gallon to $0.417 cents per gallon. Increased the diesel fuel tax $0.20 cents per gallon, from $0.16 cents per gallon to $0.36 cents per gallon. Increased the sales tax on diesel fuels by an additional 4 percentage points, from 9 percent to 13 percent. SB 1 created a new annual Transportation Improvement Fee (TIF) based on the market value of a vehicle. The fee went into effect on January 1, 2018. The fee rate was scheduled as follows: $25 per year for vehicles with a market value of $0-$4,999; $50 per year for vehicles with a market value of $5,000-$24,999; $100 per year for vehicles with a market value of $25,000-$34,999; $150 per year for vehicles with a market value of $35,000-$59,999; and $200 per year for vehicles with a market value of $60,000 or higher. SB 1 enacted an annual $100 per vehicle fee for owners of zero-emission vehicles (ZEV) model years 2020 or later starting in 2020. Vote in the California State Senate April 6, 2017 Requirement: Two-thirds (66.67 percent) vote of all members in each chamber Number of yes votes required: 27 Yes No Not voting Total 27 11 2 Total percent 67.50%27.50%5.00% Democrat 26 1 0 Republican 1 10 2 Vote in the California St April 6, 201 Requirement: Two-thirds (66.67 percent) chamber Number of yes votes req Yes Total 54 Total percent 67.50% Democrat 54 Republican 0 [2] [15] [2][16] [2] [2] Diagram from the California Legislative Analyst’s Office on SB 1's revenue sources and appropriations. Other than the diesel sales tax, SB 1 was designed to adjust the tax and fee rates based on annual changes in the California Consumer Price Index (CPI). Funds According to the California Senate Appropriations Committee, SB 1 is expected to generate an estimated $5.2 billion a year or $52.4 billion between 2017 and 2027. Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Program SB 1 created the Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Program (RMRP), which is expected to receive an estimated $3.24 billion a year. The RMRP was designed to receive revenue from the gasoline excise tax, excluding revenue from gasoline for off-road vehicles, half of the diesel excise tax ($0.10), the zero-emission vehicles fee, and revenue over $600 million from the Transportation Improvement Fee. The bill required RMRA funds to be distributed as follows: $400 million to maintain and repair state bridges and culverts; $200 million to counties with voter-approved taxes and fees for transportation improvements; $100 million to the Active Transportation Program, which is tasked with bicycling and pedestrian improvement projects; $25 million to the freeway service patrol program to remove disabled vehicles from freeways; [2] [2][3] [2][3] $25 million for local and regional transportation planning grants; and $7 million for transportation research; $5 million for transportation-related workforce education, training, and development. Following the distribution of the $762 million in revenue listed above, the remaining $2.48 million in estimated RMRP funds would be divided 50-50 between maintenance of the state highway system and maintenance of local streets. Trade Corridor Enhancement Account SB 1 was designed to deposit half of the diesel excise tax ($0.10) into the Trade Corridor Enhancement Account (TCEA) to fund corridor-based freight projects. TCEA is expected to receive an estimated $310 million per year. Solutions for Congested Corridors Program The Solutions for Congested Corridors Program (SCCP) was designed to receive $250 million per year from the Transportation Improvement Fee. SB 1 requires SCCP to distribute funds to projects that address transportation, environmental, and community access improvements within highly congested-travel corridors throughout the state. Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program SB 1 provides the Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program (TIRCP) with 70 percent of $350 million from the Transportation Improvement Fee. TIRCP is a competitive grant program that awards funding for transit and rail capital projects. State Transit Assistance Program SB 1 was designed to provide the State Transit Assistance Program (STAP) with 30 percent of $350 million from the Transportation Improvement Fee and 87.5 percent of the revenue from the diesel sales tax for about $430 million a year. STAP provides funding for transit operators. Intercity and Commuter Rail SB 1 created a new stream of revenue for intercity rail operations and projects from 12.5 percent of the diesel sales revenue tax for a total of about $44 million per year. Department of Parks and Recreation and Department of Food and Agriculture The bill was designed to distribute revenue from the gas tax increase received from off-highway vehicles and boats to the state Department of Parks and Recreation and revenue from the gas tax increase received from agricultural vehicles to the state Department of Food and Agriculture. Reactions Democratic leadership Gov. Jerry Brown (D), upon signing the bill, said, "Safe and smooth roads make California a better place to live and strengthen our economy. This legislation will put thousands of people to work." Senate President Kevin de León (D-24) praised the legislation, saying, "Today, after decades of inaction, the legislature approved a fiscally responsible plan to address our decrepit transportation infrastructure. This bipartisan compromise includes strict accountability measures and closes our massive transportation funding shortfalls — without burdening future generations with debt." [2][3] [2][3] [2][3] [2][3] [2][3] [2][3] [2][3] [17] [18] Speaker of the Assembly Anthony Rendon (D-63) stated, "Supporting SB 1 required a combination of common sense, political courage, and concern for the Californians who drive on our roads and bridges." Republican leadership Assembly Minority Leader Chad Mayes (R-42), critical of the bill, stated, "Gov. Brown and Capitol Democrats just gave us the largest gas tax increase in state history — a deal so bad they needed $1 billion in pork to buy the votes to pass it. California deserves better." Senate Minority Leader Patricia Bates (R-36) said, "It didn't have to be this way. Senate Republicans put forth our own transportation plan that would have provided $7.8 billion for our crumbling roads without raising taxes. Instead, drivers will be paying more to fund not just road repairs that could have been paid for with existing dollars, but also other projects such as bike trails and potentially high-speed rail. Californians deserve better." Senate Minority Caucus Chair Tom Berryhill (R-8) said, "A few weeks ago, Sacramento politicians went into a backroom to cook up a sharp increase in vehicle registration fees and the largest gas tax increase in state history, sticking it to working-class Californians and just about everyone living outside of the Bay Area or Los Angeles. Gas taxes disproportionately hurt lower-income drivers, who have less money to spend on more expensive gas." Initiatives to repeal SB 1 Rep. Travis Allen (R-72), a candidate for governor in 2018, proposed an initiative to repeal most sections of Senate Bill 1 (2017). He paused the campaign while a court battle ensued over the initiative’s ballot language, which Attorney General Becerra (D) had written. The court case wasn’t resolved until December 2017 and the court ruling sided with the attorney general's office. Citing the legal dispute, Rep. Allen said the initiative failed to collect enough signatures. He said he would support the other initiative to repeal SB 1. John Cox, a businessman running for governor, is also a part of an initiative campaign to overturn the gas tax and fees increase. The two campaigns are different. Rep. Allen's initiative is a state statute, requiring 365,880 signatures. The initiative campaign that Cox is involved in was started by Carl DeMaio’s group Reform California and is a constitutional amendment, requiring 585,407 signatures. Whereas Rep. Allen's initiative was designed to repeal most sections of SB 1, Reform California's initiative would require majority voter approval for the state legislature to impose, increase, or extend a tax on gasoline, diesel fuel, or the operation of a vehicle or trailer coach on public highways after January 1, 2017. The initiative would both repeal SB 1 and require voter approval of future vehicle-related gas and fee increases. Recall of Sen. Josh Newman The vote on Senate Bill 1 led to a recall attempt against Sen. Josh Newman (D-29). He was elected to represent District 29 in 2016, when he defeated Republican Assemblywoman Ling Ling Chang by 2,498 votes. The recall attempt was launched on April 19, 2017. Supporters of the recall effort needed to collect 63,593 signatures by October 16, 2017, to move the recall forward. On August 18, 2017, recall proponents had gathered enough signatures to trigger an election against Newman. On January 8, 2018, the governor announced a recall election for June 5, 2018. Gann Limit [19] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24][25] [26] [27] [28][29] The measure would exempt from the state appropriations limit, also known as the Gann Limit, the appropriation of revenue from Senate Bill 1's tax increases and fee schedules. The Gann Limit prohibited the state government and local governments from spending revenue in excess of per-person government spending in fiscal year 1978-1979, with an adjustment allowed for changes in the cost-of-living and population. Voters approved the Gann Limit in 1979. The Gann Limit allowed governments to exceed the appropriations limit for paying off debts from voter- approved bonds; otherwise, governments were required to revise tax rates and fee schedules within the following two fiscal years to return the revenue to taxpayers. In 1988, voters amended the Gann Limit via Proposition 98, requiring that some of the excess revenue (equal to 4 percent of the minimum school funding level) be appropriated to public education. Proposition 111 of 1990 increased the amount of excess revenue dedicated to education—from an amount equal to 4 percent of the minimum school funding level to half the total excess revenue—and exempted appropriations for natural disasters and appropriations financied through increases in transportation- related taxes from the Gann Limit. Proposition 111 also changed the formula for calculating the state appropriations limit, including the measurements for cost-of-living and population growth and the timetable for determining excess revenue. As of 2018, the Gann Limit had been exceeded just once in 1987, when taxpayers received $1.1 billion in rebates. Between 1988 and 2018, voters approved three ballot initiatives related to tabacco tax increases that exempted appropriation of the revenue from the taxes from the Gann Limit. Other transportation lockbox measures See also: State and local government budgets, spending and finance on the ballot and Transportation on the ballot Voters in California approved a ballot initiative, Proposition 22, in 2010 that prohibited the California State Legislature from allocating revenue from fuel taxes in specific funds to the state's general fund. In 2014, voters in Maryland and Wisconsin decided on transportation fund lockbox measures. Maryland's Question 1 established a transportation fund defined by the state constitution, required that the fund's revenue only be used for transportation-related projects, and required that the revenue not be transferred (with certain exceptions). Wisconsin's Question 1 required that transportation-related revenue could only be used for projects under the purview of the Wisconsin Department of Transportation. Both measures were approved. Illinois and New Jersey voted on transportation lockbox measures in 2016. The amendment to the Illinois Constitution was designed to prohibit the state legislature from using transportation funds for non-transportation related projects. Citizens to Protect Transportation Funding, the support campaign, spent $3.8 million to help the amendment pass. New Jersey Question 2 pitted Gov. Chris Christie, an amendment supporter, against his lieutenant governor, Kim Guadagno, who opposed the amendment. Voters approved the measure 54.5 to 45.5 percent. Question 2 required that all revenue derived from taxes on motor fuels be deposited into the Transportation Trust Fund. The following table illustrates the outcome of each transportation lockbox amendment: State Initiative Year Percent “Yes” Percent “No” California Proposition 22 2010 60.62%39.38% Maryland Question 1 2014 81.65%18.35% Wisconsin Question 1 2014 79.94%20.06% [1] [30] [31] [4] [32] State Initiative Year Percent “Yes” Percent “No” Illinois Amendment 2016 78.91%21.09% New Jersey Question 2 2014 54.51%45.49% Average 71.13%28.87% Referred amendments on the ballot From 1996 through 2016, the California State Legislature referred 28 constitutional amendments to the ballot. Voters approved 24 and rejected four of the referred amendments. Most of the amendments (23 of 28) were referred to the ballot during even-numbered election years. The average number of amendments appearing on the ballot during an even-numbered election year was two. In 2016, one referred amendment was on the ballot. The approval rate at the ballot box was 85.71 percent during the 20-year period from 1996 through 2016. The rejection rate was 14.29 percent. Legislatively referred constitutional amendments, 1996-2016 Years Total number Approved Percent approved Defeated Percent defeated Annual average Annual median Annual minimum Annual maximum Even years 23 23 100.00%0 0.00%2.09 2.00 0 6 Odd years 5 1 20.00%4 80.00%0.45 0.00 0 4 All years 28 24 85.71%4 14.29%1.27 0.50 0 6 Path to the ballot See also: Amending the California Constitution In California, a constitutional amendment must be passed by a two-thirds vote in each house of the California State Legislature during one legislative session. The 2017 legislative session ran from December 5, 2016, through September 15, 2017. Rep. Jim Frazier (D-11) and Sen. Josh Newman (D-29) authored the constitutional amendment, which was introduced as Assembly Constitutional Amendment 5 (ACA 5). Both the state Assembly and the state Senate passed the amendment on April 6, 2017. In the state Assembly, 56 members voted "yes" and 24 voted "no." In the state Senate, 28 senators voted "yes," 10 voted "no," and two did not vote. In the state Assembly, Rep. Catharine Baker (R-16) joined the chamber's 55 Democrats in approving the amendment. In the state Senate, Sen. Anthony Cannella (R-12) joined the chamber's 27 Democrats in approving the amendment. All other Republicans voted against the measure. The measure was enrolled with the secretary of state on April 17, 2017.[1] How to vote See also: Voting in California Poll times All polls in California are open from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Pacific Time. Registration requirements To vote in California, an individual must be U.S. citizen and California resident. A voter must be at least 18 years of age on Election Day. Conditional voter registration is available beginning 14 days before an election through Election Day. On October 10, 2015, California Governor Jerry Brown (D) signed into law Assembly Bill No. 1461, also known as the New Motor Voter Act. The legislation authorized automatic voter registration in California for any individuals who visit the Department of Motor Vehicles to acquire or renew a driver's license. The law was scheduled to take effect in 2016. Online registration See also: Online voter registration California has implemented an online voter registration system. Residents can register to vote by visiting this website. Voter ID requirements According to the Office of the California Secretary of State, "in most cases, California voters are not required to show identification at their polling place." A voter may be asked to provide identification at the polls if it is his or her first time voting (this requirement applies if the individual registered by mail without providing a driver's license number, state identification number, or the last four digits of Vote in the California State Assembly April 6, 2017 Requirement: Two-thirds (66.67 percent) vote of all members in each chamber Number of yes votes required: 54 Yes No Not voting Total 56 24 0 Total percent 70.00%30.00%0.00% Democrat 55 0 0 Republican 1 24 0 Vote in the California S April 6, 201 Requirement: Two-thirds (66.67 percent) chamber Number of yes votes req Yes Total 28 Total percent 70.00% Democrat 27 Republican 1 [33] [34] [35][36] Demographic data for California California U.S. Total population:38,993,940 316,515,021 Land area (sq mi):155,779 3,531,905 Gender Female:50.3%50.8% Race and ethnicity** White:61.8%73.6% Black/African American:5.9%12.6% Asian:13.7%5.1% Native American:0.7%0.8% Pacific Islander:0.4%0.2% Two or more:4.5%3% Hispanic/Latino:38.4%17.1% Education High school graduation rate:81.8%86.7% College graduation rate:31.4%29.8% Income a Social Security number). Acceptable forms of identification include driver's licenses, utility bills, or any document sent by a government agency. For a complete list of acceptable forms of identification, see this list. State profile This excerpt is reprinted here with the permission of the 2016 edition of the Almanac of American Politics and is up to date as of the publication date of that edition. All text is reproduced verbatim, though links have been added by Ballotpedia staff. To read the full chapter on California, click here. Both sides of America's political divide have taken the opportunity to emphasize how different California is from the rest of the country. After the 2016 presidential election, supporters of Donald Trump complained that were it not for Hillary Clinton's margin of victory in California, Trump would have won the popular vote. For their part, California's Democratic politicians have taken a leading role in opposing Trump's vision for America; some Californians are even flirting with seceding from the union, though "Calexit" faces constitutional obstacles that make it highly improbable. Despite such antagonism, California and the United States need each other, even if it no longer seems like it. Americans have long thought of California as the Golden State -- a distant and dreamy land initially, then as a shaper of culture and as a promised land for millions of Americans and immigrants for many decades. America's most populous state remains in many ways a great success story. But in ...(read more) Presidential voting pattern See also: Presidential voting trends in California California voted for the Democratic candidate in all five presidential elections between 2000 and 2016. More California coverage on Ballotpedia Elections in California United States congressional delegations from California [37] 2018 ballot measures Transportation on the ballot 2018 legislative sessions California ballot measures California ballot measure laws California state budget and finances Ballot measure lawsuits Ballot measure readability Ballot measure polls Median household income:$61,818 $53,889 Persons below poverty level:18.2%11.3% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, "American Community Survey" (5-year estimates 2010- 2015) **Note: Percentages for race and ethnicity may add up to more than 100 percent because respondents may report more than one race and the Hispanic/Latino ethnicity may be selected in conjunction with any race. Read more about race and ethnicity in the Census here. Public policy in California Influencers in California California fact checks More... Related measures Transportation measures on the ballot in 2018 State Measures Connecticut Connecticut Transportation Revenue Lockbox Amendment See also 2018 measures California News and analysis External links Assembly Constitutional Amendment 5 Recent news The link below is to the most recent stories in a Google news search for the terms California 2018 Transportation Lockbox Amendment. These results are automatically generated from Google. Ballotpedia does not curate or endorse these articles. Ballotpedia includes 267,963 encyclopedic articles written and curated by our professional staff of editors, writers, and researchers. To contact our editorial staff, click here. To report an error, click here. For media inquiries, you can reach us here. To support our continued expansion, please contact us here. California Proposition 69, Transportation Taxes and Fees Lockbox and Appropriations Limit Exemption Amendment (June 2018) - Google News Footnotes Only the first few references on this page are shown above. Click to show more. 1. California Legislature, "Assembly Constitutional Amendment 5," accessed April 7, 2017 2. California Legislature, "Senate Bill 1," accessed April 7, 2017 3. California Legislative Analyst's Office, "Overview of the 2017 Transportation Funding Package," accessed January 9, 2017 4. New York Times, "California Taxpayers to Get $1 Billion in Rebates," July 8, 1987 5. California Secretary of State, "June 2018 Voter Guide," accessed March 20, 2018 6. Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are SENATE RULES COMMITTEE Office of Senate Floor Analyses (916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) 327-4478 ACA 5 THIRD READING Bill No: ACA 5 Author: Frazier (D) and Newman (D), et al. Amended : 4/4/17 in Assembly Vote: 27 ASSEMBLY FLOOR: Not available SUBJECT: Motor vehicle fees and taxes: restriction on expenditures: appropriations limit SOURCE: Author DIGEST: This constitutional amendment proposes to amend the California Constitution to prohibit the Legislature from borrowing revenues from fees and taxes imposed on vehicles or their use or operation, and from using those revenues other than as specifically permitted in the Constitution. ANALYSIS: Existing law, pursuant to the California Constitution: 1) Restricts the use of fuel excise tax revenues (from vehicles used on public streets and highways) and vehicle registration fee revenues to transportation purposes. 2) Restricts the Legislature from borrowing revenues from the Highway Users Tax Account. 3) Restricts fuel excise tax revenues to development and construction of roads and highways, unless a majority of voters in an election throughout a county or counties approves the use of the revenues for fixed -guideway mass transit. 4) Allows the Legislature to pledge fuel excise tax revenues for payment of bonds to fund voter-approved fixed -guideway mass transit projects. ACA 5 Page 2 5) Allows the Legislature to use up to 25% of the state’s share of fuel excise tax revenues for payment of state-issued, voter-approved bonds for transportation purposes issued after November 2010. 6) Allows a city or county to use up to 25% of its share of fuel excise tax revenues for payment of locally issued, voter-approved bonds for transportation purposes. 7) Specifies that the restrictions on fuel excise tax and vehicle registration fee revenues do not apply to revenues derived from sales taxes or vehicle license fees. 8) Establishes the Public Transportation Account (PTA) as a trust fund and provides that revenues in the fund may only be used for specified transportation planning and mass transportation purposes. Further specifies that the Legislature is prohibited from borrowing revenues from the PTA, loaning or transferring them to the General Fund, or using the revenues for any purposes not specifically authorized. 9) Imposes an appropriation limit on the state and most local governments whic h limits the amount of spending to a base level, adjusted annually for inflation and population growth. State appropriations from the proceeds of taxes must be made within the state appropriation limit (SAL) or Gann limit. If state appropriations subject to those restrictions exceed the SAL, any revenue in excess of the SAL over two consecutive years must be appropriated for purposes exempt from the SAL (such as debt service), or used for a combination of Proposition 98 education spending and taxpayer reb ates. This constitutional amendment: 1) Requires diesel fuel sales tax revenues to be deposited into the PTA and prohibits the Legislature from diverting or appropriating those funds for purposes other than transportation planning and mass transportation. 2) Requires revenues derived from a proposed Transportation Improvement Fee to be used solely for transportation purposes, prohibits those revenues from being used to pay for previously authorized transportation bond debt service, and prohibits the Legislature from borrowing or using those revenues for unauthorized purposes. 3) Exempts appropriations of revenues generated as part of the proposed Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017 (SB 1, Beall) from counting towards the state appropriation limit (Gann Limit). ACA 5 Page 3 4) Requires the provisions specified in this measure are subject to voter approval in the 2018. Comments 1) Purpose. According to the authors, “ACA 5 will ensure that future revenues passed by the Legislature to pay for road and highway maintenance will be s pent exclusively on vitally needed repairs and not on other legislative priorities. “According to the American Society of Civil Engineers, 68% of California’s roads are considered to be in ‘poor’ or ‘mediocre’ condition. Not only does poor road quality affect individual users, it also impacts the efficient movement of goods throughout the state, which directly impacts job growth and the competitiveness of California’s ports and goods movement industries. With freight movement predicted to increase significantly, Californians will see increased deterioration of their roads due to the heavier vehicle use. Because preventative maintenance costs 10 to 12 times less than pavement and road rehabilitation, California is at an opportune moment to make needed repa irs and avoid facing even higher maintenance costs down the road. “In order to fund needed repairs to the states roads and highways, the Legislature is considering a number of options that would provide increased funding for transportation projects but provide no oversight or protection on how funds would be spent. Without the protections in SCA 2, revenues that are raised to pay for the repair and maintenance of the state’s roads and highways could be used for non-transportation related purposes. Not o nly would this fail to fix our roads and highways, it would also defy the intent of the Legislature and violate the public trust of our constituents.” 2) Current restrictions. Most transportation revenues, including gasoline and diesel excise taxes and vehic le registration fees, are constitutionally protected from being borrowed or used for purposes other than transportation. This protection does not apply to vehicle license fees and fuel excise taxes for usage outside of public roads. Additionally, s ince 2011, weight fees have been used to pay down transportation-related general obligation bonds . 3) The need for new funding. The deterioration of California’s state and local streets and roads has been widely documented. For example, at the January 2017 California Transportation Commission (CTC) hearing, a local streets and roads needs assessment presented to the CTC found that the statewide average pavement condition index, which rates the condition of the surface of a road ACA 5 Page 4 network, to be 65. This score indicates that statewide, roads on average are in “fair/at risk” condition and are becoming worn down to the point where rehabilitation, rather than routine maintenance, may be needed to prevent rapid deterioration. The needs assessment further found that in or der to maintain local roads at their existing condition would require an additional $3.5 billion annually. Overall, according to the “Fix Our Roads” Coalition, total deferred maintenance shortfalls total approximately $78 billion, while the shortfall is estimated at $59 billion for the deferred maintenance backlog at the state level. 4) A response to the need. Introduced in the current legislative session, SB 1 (Beall) serves the consensus transportation funding package between the Senate, Assembly, and G overnor. Serving as the legislative vehicle, SB 1 proposes to increase a number of transportation-related taxes and fees to raise roughly $5.2 billion in new transportation revenues annually and makes annual inflation adjustments. SB 1 proposes the funding to be used towards deferred maintenance on the state highways and local streets and roads, improve the state’s trade corridors, and transit. SB 1 further contains a number of additional transportation-related reforms including creating a Transportation Inspector General subject to Senate confirmation within the newly created Caltrans Office of Audits and Investigations, granting CTC additional oversight over the SHOPP projects, including staffing support, and developing an Advance Mitigation Program. ACA 5 serves as the companion measure to provide constitutional protections for the revenues generated under SB 1. Related/Prior Legislation ACA 5 is an identical measure to SCA 2 (Newman, 2017) which was heard in the Transportation and Housing Committee, the Elections and Constitutional Amendments Committee, and the Appropriations Committee of the Senate. SC A 2 is currently on the Senate F loor awaiting a final Senate vote; however as part of the consensus transportation funding package, ACA 5 will serve as the companion measure to SB 1. FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes Local: No According to the Senate Appropriations Commit tee analysis of SCA 2:  One-time General Fund costs in the range of $414,000 to $552,000 to the Secretary of State, likely in 2017-18, for printing and mailing costs to place the measure on the ballot in a statewide election. Actual costs may be higher or lower, depending on the length of required elements and the overall size of the ballot. ACA 5 Page 5  New constitutional protections that ensure diesel fuel sales tax revenues are deposited into the PTA and not subject to diversion or appropriation for purposes other than transportation planning and mass transportation would apply to approximately $500 million in annual revenues.  New constitutional protections that require revenues from the proposed Transportation Improvement Fee be used solely for specified transporta tion purposes, and not for existing bond debt service, would apply to an estimated $1.5 billion to $1.6 billion in new annual revenues, if SB 1 is enacted.  Exempts appropriations of approximately $2 billion in new annual revenues generated by SB 1 from counting towards the Gann Limit. Absent this provision, state spending could be constrained in future years, to the extent appropriations of SB 1 revenues result in state appropriations exceeding the Gann Limit for two consecutive years in the future. SUPPORT: (Verified 4/6/17) None received OPPOSITION: (Verified 4/6/17) None received Prepared by: Manny Leon / T. & H. / 4/6/17 18:16:49 **** END **** Report Advertisement Voter Approval for Gas and Vehicle Taxes Initiative Election date November 6, 2018 Topic Direct democracy measures and Taxes Status Gathering signatures Type Constitutional amendment Origin Citizens California Voter Approval for Gas and Vehicle Taxes Initiative (2018) The California Voter Approval for Gas and Vehicle Taxes Initiative (#17-0033) may appear on the ballot in California as an initiated constitutional amendment on November 6, 2018. The measure would require majority voter approval for the state legislature to impose, increase, or extend a tax on gasoline, diesel fuel, or the operation of a vehicle or trailer coach on public highways. The measure would not apply to tax rates in effect on January 1, 2017. Any tax or tax rate enacted after January 1, 2017, would cease unless and until approved by a majority of voters. In April 2017, the California State Legislature passed and Gov. Brown (D) signed Senate Bill 1 (SB 1), which was designed to increase the gas tax $0.12 per gallon, increase the diesel fuel tax $0.20 per gallon, increase the sales tax on diesel fuels by an additional 4 percentage points, create an annual transportation improvement fee, and create an annual zero- emission vehicles fee. As Initiative #17-0033 was designed to terminate new taxes and tax rate increases enacted after January 1, 2017, the taxing provisions of SB 1 would effectively be repealed under the initiative unless and until voters approve SB 1. Reform California, chaired by Carl DeMaio, is sponsoring the ballot initiative. Reform California is also leading the effort to recall Sen. Josh Newman, who voted for SB 1. Text of the measure Ballot title The official ballot title is as follows: “Eliminates Recently Enacted Road Repair and Transportation Funding by Repealing Revenues Dedicated for those Purposes. Requires any Measure to Enact Certain Vehicle Fuel Taxes and Vehicle Fees be Submitted to and Approved by the Electorate. Initiative Constitutional Amendment.” [1] [1] [2] [3] [4] Petition summary The summary provided for inclusion on signature petition sheets is as follows: “Repeals a 2017 transportation law’s tax and fee provisions that pay for repairs and improvements to local roads, state highways, and public transportation. Requires the Legislature to submit any measure enacting specified taxes or fees on gas or diesel fuel, or on the privilege to operate a vehicle on public highways, to the electorate for approval.” Fiscal impact Note: The fiscal impact statement for a California ballot initiative authorized for circulation is prepared by the state's legislative analyst and director of finance. The fiscal impact statement is as follows: “Reduced annual state transportation tax revenues of $2.9 billion in 2018-19, increasing to $4.9 billion annually by 2020-21. These revenues would primarily have supported state highway maintenance and rehabilitation, local streets and roads, and mass transit. In addition, potentially lower transportation tax revenues in the future from requiring voter approval of such tax increases, with the impact dependent on future actions by the Legislature and voters.” Constitutional changes See also: Article XIII A, California Constitution The measure would add a Section 3.5 to Article XIII A of the California Constitution. The following text would be added: Section 3.5 (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Legislature shall not impose, increase or extend any tax, as defined in section 3, on the sale, storage, use or consumption of motor vehicle gasoline or diesel fuel, or on the privilege of a resident of California to operate on the public highways a vehicle, or trailer coach, unless and until that proposed tax is submitted to the electorate and approved by a majority vote. (b) This section does not apply to taxes on motor vehicle gasoline or diesel fuel, or on the privilege of operating a vehicle or trailer coach at the rates that were in effect on January 1, 2017. Any increase in the rate of such taxes imposed after January 1, 2017 shall cease to be imposed unless and until approved by the electorate as required by this section. Support Give Voters a Voice is leading the campaign in support of the ballot initiative. Reform California proposed the ballot initiative. Carl DeMaio, a former member of the San Diego City Council, is the group's chairperson. DeMaio, discussing the initiative, stated: [3] [4] [3] [4] [1] [4] [5] [6] “Once we qualify this initiative for the ballot, 2018 will be remembered as the year we had another taxpayer revolt in California – where the outrageous car and gas taxes were reversed by voters and the politicians that enacted those tax hikes are punished at the ballot box.” Supporters U.S. Rep. Mimi Walters (R-45) U.S. Rep. Doug LaMalfa (R-1) John Cox, candidate for governor in 2018 Rep. Travis Allen (R-12), candidate for governor in 2018 Arguments Give Voters a Voice provided a list of arguments on the campaign's website: “Fact: The Legislature allows these new higher GAS and CAR TAXES to be spent on bike lanes, but not new roads or highways Fact: The Legislature PROHIBITS the new higher GAS and CAR TAXES from being spent on increasing capacity on our clogged highways. Motorists will be sitting in the same traffic and suffering the same long commutes, and paying more for the privilege Fact: Californians now pay the highest gas prices in the nation Fact: By 2021, many Californians will be paying close to $2 a gallon extra because of taxes, fees and other government created costs – that’s almost $40 extra every time you fill up your car. Fact: Sacramento politicians have the wrong priorities. Other states with lower gas taxes have far better roads, because they make transportation a priority. Our politicians waste our tax dollars – and keep coming back for more.” Opposition Arguments Gov. Jerry Brown (D) responded to the initiative's filing, saying, "I can’t believe the proponents of this ballot measure really want Californians to keep driving on lousy roads and dangerous bridges. Taking billions of dollars a year from road maintenance and repair borders on insanity." Lucy Dunn, president of the Orange County Business Council, stated, "While Congress has repeatedly failed to act, California finally passed a historic measure to invest in fixing roads, repairing unsafe bridges, and reducing traffic congestion. This measure, which won’t be voted on for a year if it goes forward, will have the effect of halting billions of dollars worth of local road repair and improvement projects mid-stream. It will kick people off the job site and completely leave road construction in disarray." Campaign finance [4] [7] [7] [8] [9] [10] [4] [6] [6] Total campaign contributions as of March 21, 2018 Support: $1,153,110.00 Opposition: $0.00 See also: Campaign finance requirements for California ballot measures As of March 21, 2018, there were two ballot measure committees registered in support of the measure. The committee Give Voters A Voice – Representatives and Taxpayers Against Tax Increases received most of the funds. Together, the two support committees received $1.15 million and spent $658,282. The top contributor to the support committees was John Cox for Governor 2018—the gubernatorial committee of Republican businessman John Cox—which contributed $250,000. Both the California Republican Party and Kevin McCarthy for Congress—the congressional committee of U.S. House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-23)—donated $200,000. As of March 21, 2018, there were no committees registered in opposition to the measure. Support The contribution and expenditure totals for the committees in support of the initiative were current as of March 21, 2018. Donors The following were the top five donors who contributed to the support committees as of March 21, 2018: Donor Cash In-kind Total John Cox for Governor 2018 $250,000.00 $0.00 $250,000.00 California Republican Party $200,000.00 $0.00 $200,000.00 Kevin McCarthy for Congress $200,000.00 $0.00 $200,000.00 Walters for Congress $139,000.00 $0.00 $139,000.00 Western Growers Association $100,000.00 $0.00 $100,000.00 Committees in support of the Voter Approval for Gas and Vehicle Taxes Initiative Updated as of February 7, 2018 Supporting committees Cash contributions In-kind services Cash expenditures Give Voters A Voice – Representatives and Taxpayers Against Tax Increases $1,128,010.00 $0.00 $656,992.36 Reject the Gas Tax, a Committee Sponsored and Funded by No New Taxes, a Project of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association $25,050.00 $50.00 $1,239.60 Total $1,153,060.00 $50.00 $658,231.96 Totals Total raised: Total spent: [11] [12] [13] [13] [13] [13] [13] Noteworthy events Letter to Republican members of Congress On September 28, 2017, The Sacramento Bee reported that a coalition of 20 business, labor, and local government organizations sent letters to California's 14 Republican members of Congress. The letter warned the congressional members not to get involved in the initiative campaign to repeal Senate Bill 1 (SB 1), stating: “With so much at stake, our organizations will have no option but to mount a robust and powerful effort in opposition to this initiative, using the voices of California’s business community to counter your efforts. We don’t think your objective is to create new political adversaries. Rather than enter into a battle that is likely only to be a distraction from your primary objective and self-defeating, we would like to engage you in a conversation to discuss the pitfalls of this approach.” Dave Gilliard, a consultant for the initiative's backers, said he does not believe the letter would impact the decisions of congressional members. He stated, "I think the Republican Party will be strongly in favor of this, regardless of what the other side does. I don’t think threatening members of Congress is an approach that will work." Background Senate Bill 1 California State Legislature Senate Bill 1 (SB 1), also known as the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017, was passed on April 6, 2017. The California State Senate voted 27 to 11 with two members not voting; 27 votes were required to pass the bill. Democrats controlled 27 seats in the state Senate. Sen. Steve Glazer (D-7) joined Republicans in opposing SB 1, but Sen. Anthony Cannella (R-12) joined Democrats in passing the bill, allowing the bill to pass with 27 votes. The California State Assembly voted 54 to 26 to pass the legislation; 54 votes were required. Democrats controlled 55 seats in the state Assembly. One Democrat, Rep. Rudy Salas (D-32), joined Republicans in opposing the bill, leaving Democrats with 54 votes needed to pass SB 1. Gov. Jerry Brown (D) signed the legislation into law on April 28, 2017. [14] [4] [14] [2] [15] Revenue SB 1 increased the following transportation-related taxes and fees on November 1, 2017: Increased the gas tax $0.12 cents per gallon, from $0.297 cents per gallon to $0.417 cents per gallon. Increased the diesel fuel tax $0.20 cents per gallon, from $0.16 cents per gallon to $0.36 cents per gallon. Increased the sales tax on diesel fuels by an additional 4 percentage points, from 9 percent to 13 percent. SB 1 created a new annual Transportation Improvement Fee (TIF) based on the market value of a vehicle. The fee went into effect on January 1, 2018. The fee rate was scheduled as follows: $25 per year for vehicles with a market value of $0-$4,999; $50 per year for vehicles with a market value of $5,000-$24,999; $100 per year for vehicles with a market value of $25,000-$34,999; $150 per year for vehicles with a market value of $35,000-$59,999; and $200 per year for vehicles with a market value of $60,000 or higher. SB 1 enacted an annual $100 per vehicle fee for owners of zero-emission vehicles (ZEV) model years 2020 or later starting in 2020. Other than the diesel sales tax, SB 1 was designed to adjust the tax and fee rates based on annual changes in the California Consumer Price Index (CPI). Funds According to the California Senate Appropriations Committee, SB 1 is expected to generate an estimated $5.2 billion a year or $52.4 billion between 2017 and 2027. Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Program Vote in the California State Senate April 6, 2017 Requirement: Two-thirds (66.67 percent) vote of all members in each chamber Number of yes votes required: 27 Yes No Not voting Total 27 11 2 Total percent 67.50%27.50%5.00% Democrat 26 1 0 Republican 1 10 2 Vote in the California St April 6, 201 Requirement: Two-thirds (66.67 percent) chamber Number of yes votes req Yes Total 54 Total percent 67.50% Democrat 54 Republican 0 [2][16] [2] [2] [2] [2][17] Diagram from the California Legislative Analyst’s Office on SB 1's revenue sources and appropriations. SB 1 created the Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Program (RMRP), which is expected to receive an estimated $3.24 billion a year. The RMRP was designed to receive revenue from the gasoline excise tax, excluding revenue from gasoline for off-road vehicles, half of the diesel excise tax ($0.10), the zero-emission vehicles fee, and revenue over $600 million from the Transportation Improvement Fee. The bill required RMRA funds to be distributed as follows: $400 million to maintain and repair state bridges and culverts; $200 million to counties with voter-approved taxes and fees for transportation improvements; $100 million to the Active Transportation Program, which is tasked with bicycling and pedestrian improvement projects; $25 million to the freeway service patrol program to remove disabled vehicles from freeways; $25 million for local and regional transportation planning grants; and $7 million for transportation research; $5 million for transportation-related workforce education, training, and development. Following the distribution of the $762 million in revenue listed above, the remaining $2.48 million in estimated RMRP funds would be divided 50-50 between maintenance of the state highway system and maintenance of local streets. Trade Corridor Enhancement Account [2][17] [2][17] SB 1 was designed to deposit half of the diesel excise tax ($0.10) into the Trade Corridor Enhancement Account (TCEA) to fund corridor-based freight projects. TCEA is expected to receive an estimated $310 million per year. Solutions for Congested Corridors Program The Solutions for Congested Corridors Program (SCCP) was designed to receive $250 million per year from the Transportation Improvement Fee. SB 1 requires SCCP to distribute funds to projects that address transportation, environmental, and community access improvements within highly congested-travel corridors throughout the state. Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program SB 1 provides the Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program (TIRCP) with 70 percent of $350 million from the Transportation Improvement Fee. TIRCP is a competitive grant program that awards funding for transit and rail capital projects. State Transit Assistance Program SB 1 was designed to provide the State Transit Assistance Program (STAP) with 30 percent of $350 million from the Transportation Improvement Fee and 87.5 percent of the revenue from the diesel sales tax for about $430 million a year. STAP provides funding for transit operators. Intercity and Commuter Rail SB 1 created a new stream of revenue for intercity rail operations and projects from 12.5 percent of the diesel sales revenue tax for a total of about $44 million per year. Department of Parks and Recreation and Department of Food and Agriculture The bill was designed to distribute revenue from the gas tax increase received from off-highway vehicles and boats to the state Department of Parks and Recreation and revenue from the gas tax increase received from agricultural vehicles to the state Department of Food and Agriculture. Reactions Democratic leadership Gov. Jerry Brown (D), upon signing the bill, said, "Safe and smooth roads make California a better place to live and strengthen our economy. This legislation will put thousands of people to work." Senate President Kevin de León (D-24) praised the legislation, saying, "Today, after decades of inaction, the legislature approved a fiscally responsible plan to address our decrepit transportation infrastructure. This bipartisan compromise includes strict accountability measures and closes our massive transportation funding shortfalls — without burdening future generations with debt." Speaker of the Assembly Anthony Rendon (D-63) stated, "Supporting SB 1 required a combination of common sense, political courage, and concern for the Californians who drive on our roads and bridges." Republican leadership Assembly Minority Leader Chad Mayes (R-42), critical of the bill, stated, "Gov. Brown and Capitol Democrats just gave us the largest gas tax increase in state history — a deal so bad they needed $1 billion in pork to buy the votes to pass it. California deserves better." [2][17] [2][17] [2][17] [2][17] [2][17] [2][17] [18] [19] [20] [20] Senate Minority Leader Patricia Bates (R-36) said, "It didn't have to be this way. Senate Republicans put forth our own transportation plan that would have provided $7.8 billion for our crumbling roads without raising taxes. Instead, drivers will be paying more to fund not just road repairs that could have been paid for with existing dollars, but also other projects such as bike trails and potentially high-speed rail. Californians deserve better." Senate Minority Caucus Chair Tom Berryhill (R-8) said, "A few weeks ago, Sacramento politicians went into a backroom to cook up a sharp increase in vehicle registration fees and the largest gas tax increase in state history, sticking it to working-class Californians and just about everyone living outside of the Bay Area or Los Angeles. Gas taxes disproportionately hurt lower-income drivers, who have less money to spend on more expensive gas." Josh Newman recall See also: Josh Newman recall, California State Senate (2017) The vote on Senate Bill 1 led to a recall attempt against Sen. Josh Newman (D-29). He was elected to represent District 29 in 2016, when he defeated Republican Ling Ling Chang by 2,498 votes. The recall attempt was launched on April 19, 2017. Supporters of the recall effort needed to collect 63,593 signatures by October 16, 2017, to move the recall forward. On August 18, 2017, The Sacramento Bee reported that enough valid signatures had been collected for the recall to move to the election phase. Legal and legislative conflict between Democrats supporting Newman and Republicans supporting his recall arose before and after the necessary signatures were collected. This conflict resulted in delays in the recall process. On January 8, 2018, the governor announced a recall election for June 5, 2018. The recall effort was initiated by talk radio host and former San Diego City Councilman Carl DeMaio (R). According to DeMaio, the recall was launched in order to break Democrats' two-thirds majority in the California Legislature. DeMaio also said that Newman was targeted because of his slim margin of victory in 2016. Related polling Note: The polls shown below were not specific to this initiative. Rather, they asked about the gas tax bill—SB 19—more generally, making the results relevant but not a direct poll on this initiative. USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times This was a survey of 1,504 eligible voters in California conducted online from October 27 through November 6, 2017, by USC Dornslife in collaboration with the Los Angeles Times. Those who conducted the poll reported a margin of error of +/- 4 percent. The question in the polls was as follows: “A law passed last year to repair roads and bridges over the next 10 years raises gasoline taxes by 12 cents, diesel by 20 cents and raises registration fees. If a vote were being held today, how would you vote?” [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] [27] [4] 46 percent of those surveyed chose Keep the law. 54 percent of those surveyed chose Cancel the law. UC Berkeley’s Institute of Governmental Studies UC Berkeley's Institution of Governmental Studies released the results of a phone survey of 1,628 Californians—of which 1,271 were registered voters—conducted from May 4 through May 29, 2017. A margin of error of +/- 2.7 percent was reported. The following question was asked: “Last month the state legislature passed and Governor Brown signed into law a $5 billion per year plan devoted to repairing state and local roads and highways. To pay for the plan, state taxes on gasoline will increase by 12 cents per gallon while taxes on diesel fuels will increase by 16 cents per gallon. State vehicle registration fees will also go up by $25 to $175 depending on the value of the vehicle. Generally speaking, do you favor or oppose the new transportation funding law?” 35 percent of those surveyed supported the law. 58 percent of those surveyed opposed the law. 7 percent of those surveyed had no opinion on the law. Path to the ballot See also: California signature requirements and Laws governing the initiative process in California In California, the number of signatures needed to qualify a measure for the ballot is based on the total number of votes cast for the office of governor. For an initiated constitutional amendment, petitioners must collect signatures equal to 8 percent of the most recent gubernatorial vote. To get a measure on the 2018 ballot, the number of signatures required is 585,407. In California, initiatives can be circulated for 180 days. Signatures need to be certified at least 131 days before the 2018 general election, which will be around June 28, 2018. As the signature verification process can take several weeks, the California secretary of state issues suggested deadlines for several months before the certification deadline. The timeline for the initiative is as follows: Thomas W. Hiltachk submitted a letter requesting a title and summary on September 14, 2017. A title and summary were issued by the California attorney general's office on November 20, 2017. On December 15, 2017, proponents of the initiative had collected 25 percent of the required signatures. Proponents of the initiative need to submit 585,407 valid signatures by May 21, 2018, in order for it to make the ballot. See also 2018 ballot measures [28] [28] [4] [29] Ballotpedia includes 267,963 encyclopedic articles written and curated by our professional staff of editors, writers, and researchers. To contact our editorial staff, click here. To report an error, click here. For media inquiries, you can reach us here. To support our continued expansion, please contact us here. California 2018 ballot propositions California ballot measures External links Initiative Petition #17-0033 Footnotes Only the first few references on this page are shown above. Click to show more. 1. California Attorney General, "Initiative 17-0033," September 14, 2017 2. California Legislature, "Senate Bill 1," accessed April 7, 2017 3. California Secretary of State, "Initiatives and Referenda Cleared for Circulation," accessed March 6, 2017 4. Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributed to the original source. 5. Give Voters a Voice, "Homepage," accessed March 8, 2018 New County Revenues from SB 1 (Beall, 2017) ‐ Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account (RMRA) Revenues ONLY* COUNTY 2017‐18 2018‐19 2019‐20 2020‐21 2021‐22 2022‐23 2023‐24 2024‐25 2025‐26 2026‐27Alameda 5,980,000$             16,540,000$           16,750,000$           18,600,000$           19,390,000$           19,970,000$           20,510,000$           21,180,000$           21,820,000$           22,510,000$           Alpine 120,000$                320,000$                320,000$                360,000$                370,000$                380,000$                390,000$                410,000$                420,000$                430,000$                Amador 550,000$                1,520,000$             1,540,000$             1,710,000$             1,780,000$             1,830,000$             1,880,000$             1,940,000$             2,000,000$             2,060,000$             Butte 1,960,000$             5,410,000$             5,480,000$             6,090,000$             6,340,000$             6,530,000$             6,710,000$             6,930,000$             7,140,000$             7,360,000$             Calaveras 840,000$                2,320,000$             2,350,000$             2,600,000$             2,720,000$             2,800,000$             2,870,000$             2,970,000$             3,060,000$             3,150,000$             Colusa 660,000$                1,820,000$             1,840,000$             2,040,000$             2,130,000$             2,190,000$             2,250,000$             2,330,000$             2,400,000$             2,470,000$             Contra Costa 4,990,000$             13,810,000$           13,990,000$           15,530,000$           16,190,000$           16,680,000$           17,130,000$           17,690,000$           18,220,000$           18,790,000$           Del Norte 340,000$                950,000$                960,000$                1,060,000$             1,110,000$             1,140,000$             1,170,000$             1,210,000$             1,250,000$             1,290,000$             El Dorado 1,760,000$             4,880,000$             4,940,000$             5,490,000$             5,720,000$             5,890,000$             6,050,000$             6,250,000$             6,440,000$             6,640,000$             Fresno 5,990,000$             16,580,000$           16,790,000$           18,640,000$           19,440,000$           20,020,000$           20,560,000$           21,230,000$           21,870,000$           22,560,000$           Glenn 800,000$                2,210,000$             2,230,000$             2,480,000$             2,590,000$             2,660,000$             2,740,000$             2,820,000$             2,910,000$             3,000,000$             Humboldt 1,560,000$             4,300,000$             4,360,000$             4,840,000$             5,050,000$             5,200,000$             5,340,000$             5,510,000$             5,680,000$             5,860,000$             Imperial 2,710,000$             7,490,000$             7,590,000$             8,420,000$             8,780,000$             9,050,000$             9,290,000$             9,600,000$             9,880,000$             10,200,000$           Inyo 960,000$                2,660,000$             2,690,000$             2,990,000$             3,120,000$             3,210,000$             3,300,000$             3,400,000$             3,510,000$             3,620,000$             Kern 5,640,000$             15,600,000$           15,800,000$           17,540,000$           18,290,000$           18,840,000$           19,350,000$           19,980,000$           20,580,000$           21,230,000$           Kings 1,180,000$             3,270,000$             3,310,000$             3,670,000$             3,830,000$             3,950,000$             4,050,000$             4,190,000$             4,310,000$             4,450,000$             Lake 840,000$                2,310,000$             2,340,000$             2,600,000$             2,710,000$             2,790,000$             2,870,000$             2,960,000$             3,050,000$             3,150,000$             Lassen 810,000$                2,250,000$             2,280,000$             2,530,000$             2,640,000$             2,710,000$             2,790,000$             2,880,000$             2,970,000$             3,060,000$             Los Angeles 36,120,000$           99,910,000$           101,200,000$        112,350,000$        117,150,000$        120,650,000$        123,910,000$        127,970,000$        131,830,000$        135,980,000$        Madera 1,710,000$             4,740,000$             4,800,000$             5,330,000$             5,550,000$             5,720,000$             5,880,000$             6,070,000$             6,250,000$             6,450,000$             Marin 1,360,000$             3,750,000$             3,800,000$             4,220,000$             4,400,000$             4,530,000$             4,660,000$             4,810,000$             4,950,000$             5,110,000$             Mariposa 540,000$                1,480,000$             1,500,000$             1,670,000$             1,740,000$             1,790,000$             1,840,000$             1,900,000$             1,960,000$             2,020,000$             Mendocino 1,250,000$             3,460,000$             3,510,000$             3,890,000$             4,060,000$             4,180,000$             4,300,000$             4,440,000$             4,570,000$             4,710,000$             Merced 2,260,000$             6,260,000$             6,340,000$             7,040,000$             7,340,000$             7,560,000$             7,770,000$             8,020,000$             8,260,000$             8,520,000$             Modoc 790,000$                2,170,000$             2,200,000$             2,440,000$             2,550,000$             2,620,000$             2,690,000$             2,780,000$             2,860,000$             2,960,000$             Mono 580,000$                1,610,000$             1,630,000$             1,810,000$             1,890,000$             1,940,000$             1,990,000$             2,060,000$             2,120,000$             2,190,000$             Monterey 2,470,000$             6,830,000$             6,920,000$             7,680,000$             8,010,000$             8,250,000$             8,470,000$             8,750,000$             9,010,000$             9,300,000$             Napa 960,000$                2,640,000$             2,680,000$             2,970,000$             3,100,000$             3,190,000$             3,280,000$             3,390,000$             3,490,000$             3,600,000$             Nevada 980,000$                2,710,000$             2,740,000$             3,050,000$             3,180,000$             3,270,000$             3,360,000$             3,470,000$             3,570,000$             3,690,000$             Orange 12,330,000$           34,120,000$           34,560,000$           38,360,000$           40,000,000$           41,200,000$           42,310,000$           43,700,000$           45,010,000$           46,430,000$           Placer 2,540,000$             7,030,000$             7,120,000$             7,910,000$             8,240,000$             8,490,000$             8,720,000$             9,010,000$             9,280,000$             9,570,000$             Plumas 650,000$                1,790,000$             1,810,000$             2,010,000$             2,090,000$             2,160,000$             2,220,000$             2,290,000$             2,360,000$             2,430,000$             Riverside 9,920,000$             27,420,000$           27,780,000$           30,840,000$           32,160,000$           33,120,000$           34,010,000$           35,130,000$           36,180,000$           37,320,000$           Sacramento 7,370,000$             20,390,000$           20,660,000$           22,930,000$           23,910,000$           24,630,000$           25,290,000$           26,120,000$           26,910,000$           27,760,000$           San Benito 550,000$                1,530,000$             1,550,000$             1,720,000$             1,800,000$             1,850,000$             1,900,000$             1,960,000$             2,020,000$             2,090,000$             San Bernardino 9,600,000$             26,550,000$           26,890,000$           29,860,000$           31,130,000$           32,060,000$           32,930,000$           34,010,000$           35,030,000$           36,140,000$           San Diego 13,820,000$           38,220,000$           38,710,000$           42,980,000$           44,810,000$           46,150,000$           47,400,000$           48,950,000$           50,430,000$           52,010,000$           San Francisco* 2,810,000$             7,770,000$             7,870,000$             8,740,000$             9,110,000$             9,390,000$             9,640,000$             9,960,000$             10,260,000$           10,580,000$           San Joaquin 3,990,000$             11,030,000$           11,170,000$           12,410,000$           12,930,000$           13,320,000$           13,680,000$           14,130,000$           14,560,000$           15,010,000$           CSAC Estimates ‐ May 16, 2017 New County Revenues from SB 1 (Beall, 2017) ‐ Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account (RMRA) Revenues ONLY* COUNTY 2017‐18 2018‐19 2019‐20 2020‐21 2021‐22 2022‐23 2023‐24 2024‐25 2025‐26 2026‐27San Luis Obispo 2,300,000$             6,350,000$             6,430,000$             7,140,000$             7,450,000$             7,670,000$             7,880,000$             8,140,000$             8,380,000$             8,640,000$             San Mateo 3,360,000$             9,290,000$             9,410,000$             10,440,000$           10,890,000$           11,210,000$           11,520,000$           11,890,000$           12,250,000$           12,640,000$           Santa Barbara 2,340,000$             6,480,000$             6,560,000$             7,290,000$             7,600,000$             7,820,000$             8,040,000$             8,300,000$             8,550,000$             8,820,000$             Santa Clara 7,510,000$             20,770,000$           21,040,000$           23,360,000$           24,360,000$           25,090,000$           25,760,000$           26,610,000$           27,410,000$           28,270,000$           Santa Cruz 1,550,000$             4,280,000$             4,340,000$             4,820,000$             5,020,000$             5,170,000$             5,310,000$             5,490,000$             5,650,000$             5,830,000$             Shasta 1,810,000$             5,000,000$             5,070,000$             5,620,000$             5,860,000$             6,040,000$             6,200,000$             6,410,000$             6,600,000$             6,810,000$             Sierra 310,000$                870,000$                880,000$                980,000$                1,020,000$             1,050,000$             1,080,000$             1,110,000$             1,140,000$             1,180,000$             Siskiyou 1,300,000$             3,580,000$             3,630,000$             4,030,000$             4,200,000$             4,330,000$             4,440,000$             4,590,000$             4,730,000$             4,880,000$             Solano 2,170,000$             6,010,000$             6,080,000$             6,750,000$             7,040,000$             7,250,000$             7,450,000$             7,690,000$             7,920,000$             8,170,000$             Sonoma 3,260,000$             9,020,000$             9,130,000$             10,140,000$           10,570,000$           10,890,000$           11,180,000$           11,550,000$           11,900,000$           12,270,000$           Stanislaus 3,200,000$             8,860,000$             8,980,000$             9,970,000$             10,390,000$           10,700,000$           10,990,000$           11,350,000$           11,690,000$           12,060,000$           Sutter 990,000$                2,730,000$             2,760,000$             3,070,000$             3,200,000$             3,300,000$             3,380,000$             3,500,000$             3,600,000$             3,710,000$             Tehama 1,120,000$             3,110,000$             3,150,000$             3,490,000$             3,640,000$             3,750,000$             3,850,000$             3,980,000$             4,100,000$             4,230,000$             Trinity 600,000$                1,660,000$             1,690,000$             1,870,000$             1,950,000$             2,010,000$             2,060,000$             2,130,000$             2,200,000$             2,260,000$             Tulare 3,890,000$             10,760,000$           10,890,000$           12,100,000$           12,610,000$           12,990,000$           13,340,000$           13,780,000$           14,190,000$           14,640,000$           Tuolumne 790,000$                2,170,000$             2,200,000$             2,440,000$             2,550,000$             2,620,000$             2,700,000$             2,780,000$             2,870,000$             2,960,000$             Ventura 3,790,000$             10,480,000$           10,610,000$           11,780,000$           12,290,000$           12,650,000$           12,990,000$           13,420,000$           13,820,000$           14,260,000$           Yolo 1,380,000$             3,820,000$             3,870,000$             4,300,000$             4,480,000$             4,620,000$             4,740,000$             4,900,000$             5,050,000$             5,210,000$             Yuba 790,000$                2,180,000$             2,200,000$             2,450,000$             2,550,000$             2,630,000$             2,700,000$             2,790,000$             2,870,000$             2,960,000$             TOTAL 192,750,000$        533,070,000$        539,920,000$        599,440,000$        625,020,000$        643,700,000$        661,110,000$        682,810,000$        703,340,000$        725,500,000$        ** County revenues only* Note: Estimates only include RMRA revenues, which are one of the four separate components of new SB 1 revenues:    ‐ Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account revenues from new Transportation Improvement Fee, half of new 20‐cent diesel excise tax, new 12‐cent gasoline excise tax, and future inflationary adjustments to these rates.CSAC Estimates ‐ May 16, 2017 New County Revenues from SB 1 (Beall, 2017) ‐ ALL New Revenues* COUNTY 2017‐18 2018‐19 2019‐20 2020‐21 2021‐22 2022‐23 2023‐24 2024‐25 2025‐26 2026‐27Alameda 7,140,000$             18,510,000$           26,130,000$           29,780,000$           31,610,000$           33,070,000$           34,590,000$           36,250,000$           37,860,000$           39,530,000$           Alpine 140,000$                350,000$                500,000$                570,000$                600,000$                630,000$                660,000$                700,000$                730,000$                750,000$                Amador 660,000$                1,680,000$             2,380,000$             2,670,000$             2,810,000$             2,920,000$             3,050,000$             3,190,000$             3,320,000$             3,450,000$             Butte 2,340,000$             5,960,000$             8,480,000$             9,490,000$             10,000,000$           10,430,000$           10,860,000$           11,340,000$           11,810,000$           12,280,000$           Calaveras 1,000,000$             2,550,000$             3,640,000$             4,050,000$             4,280,000$             4,460,000$             4,650,000$             4,850,000$             5,050,000$             5,250,000$             Colusa 790,000$                1,990,000$             2,840,000$             3,140,000$             3,310,000$             3,440,000$             3,570,000$             3,730,000$             3,880,000$             4,020,000$             Contra Costa 5,960,000$             15,460,000$           21,820,000$           24,870,000$           26,400,000$           27,630,000$           28,900,000$           30,280,000$           31,620,000$           33,010,000$           Del Norte 410,000$                1,040,000$             1,490,000$             1,640,000$             1,730,000$             1,800,000$             1,870,000$             1,950,000$             2,040,000$             2,110,000$             El Dorado 2,100,000$             5,440,000$             7,700,000$             8,760,000$             9,280,000$             9,700,000$             10,150,000$           10,620,000$           11,100,000$           11,570,000$           Fresno 7,160,000$             18,290,000$           26,010,000$           29,120,000$           30,770,000$           32,090,000$           33,440,000$           34,900,000$           36,350,000$           37,850,000$           Glenn 960,000$                2,420,000$             3,440,000$             3,820,000$             4,030,000$             4,180,000$             4,350,000$             4,520,000$             4,710,000$             4,890,000$             Humboldt 1,860,000$             4,720,000$             6,740,000$             7,500,000$             7,920,000$             8,250,000$             8,590,000$             8,950,000$             9,310,000$             9,690,000$             Imperial 3,240,000$             8,170,000$             11,700,000$           12,910,000$           13,590,000$           14,150,000$           14,690,000$           15,310,000$           15,890,000$           16,510,000$           Inyo 1,150,000$             2,910,000$             4,150,000$             4,600,000$             4,850,000$             5,050,000$             5,250,000$             5,460,000$             5,690,000$             5,910,000$             Kern 6,740,000$             17,250,000$           24,510,000$           27,540,000$           29,120,000$           30,390,000$           31,690,000$           33,110,000$           34,500,000$           35,940,000$           Kings 1,410,000$             3,580,000$             5,110,000$             5,670,000$             5,970,000$             6,230,000$             6,470,000$             6,750,000$             7,010,000$             7,290,000$             Lake 1,000,000$             2,540,000$             3,630,000$             4,050,000$             4,280,000$             4,450,000$             4,640,000$             4,840,000$             5,040,000$             5,250,000$             Lassen 970,000$                2,470,000$             3,520,000$             3,920,000$             4,130,000$             4,290,000$             4,470,000$             4,670,000$             4,860,000$             5,050,000$             Los Angeles 43,150,000$           111,800,000$        157,870,000$        179,860,000$        190,910,000$        199,780,000$        208,930,000$        218,870,000$        228,610,000$        238,660,000$        Madera 2,040,000$             5,180,000$             7,400,000$             8,200,000$             8,630,000$             8,990,000$             9,350,000$             9,740,000$             10,120,000$           10,510,000$           Marin 1,620,000$             4,170,000$             5,920,000$             6,700,000$             7,100,000$             7,430,000$             7,760,000$             8,120,000$             8,470,000$             8,840,000$             Mariposa 640,000$                1,620,000$             2,320,000$             2,580,000$             2,720,000$             2,830,000$             2,940,000$             3,070,000$             3,190,000$             3,330,000$             Mendocino 1,490,000$             3,790,000$             5,420,000$             6,030,000$             6,370,000$             6,630,000$             6,910,000$             7,200,000$             7,490,000$             7,780,000$             Merced 2,700,000$             6,860,000$             9,800,000$             10,890,000$           11,480,000$           11,960,000$           12,450,000$           12,970,000$           13,490,000$           14,030,000$           Modoc 940,000$                2,370,000$             3,390,000$             3,770,000$             3,980,000$             4,130,000$             4,300,000$             4,480,000$             4,650,000$             4,850,000$             Mono 690,000$                1,760,000$             2,520,000$             2,810,000$             2,960,000$             3,090,000$             3,210,000$             3,350,000$             3,480,000$             3,620,000$             Monterey 2,950,000$             7,570,000$             10,740,000$           12,090,000$           12,800,000$           13,370,000$           13,940,000$           14,570,000$           15,190,000$           15,830,000$           Napa 1,150,000$             2,930,000$             4,160,000$             4,700,000$             4,970,000$             5,190,000$             5,420,000$             5,670,000$             5,910,000$             6,160,000$             Nevada 1,170,000$             3,010,000$             4,260,000$             4,820,000$             5,100,000$             5,330,000$             5,560,000$             5,820,000$             6,070,000$             6,340,000$             Orange 14,730,000$           38,240,000$           53,950,000$           61,580,000$           65,390,000$           68,460,000$           71,620,000$           75,060,000$           78,410,000$           81,890,000$           Placer 3,030,000$             7,860,000$             11,110,000$           12,650,000$           13,420,000$           14,050,000$           14,690,000$           15,400,000$           16,080,000$           16,780,000$           Plumas 780,000$                1,990,000$             2,820,000$             3,180,000$             3,360,000$             3,520,000$             3,670,000$             3,840,000$             4,010,000$             4,180,000$             Riverside 11,850,000$           30,570,000$           43,260,000$           49,070,000$           52,020,000$           54,390,000$           56,830,000$           59,490,000$           62,090,000$           64,770,000$           Sacramento 8,800,000$             22,720,000$           32,160,000$           36,480,000$           38,670,000$           40,440,000$           42,250,000$           44,220,000$           46,150,000$           48,150,000$           San Benito 660,000$                1,690,000$             2,400,000$             2,680,000$             2,840,000$             2,950,000$             3,070,000$             3,210,000$             3,340,000$             3,480,000$             San Bernardino 11,470,000$           29,620,000$           41,890,000$           47,560,000$           50,420,000$           52,730,000$           55,110,000$           57,690,000$           60,210,000$           62,830,000$           San Diego 16,510,000$           42,730,000$           60,360,000$           68,710,000$           72,900,000$           76,270,000$           79,750,000$           83,530,000$           87,230,000$           91,040,000$           San Francisco** 3,360,000$             8,620,000$             12,230,000$           13,780,000$           14,580,000$           15,240,000$           15,890,000$           16,620,000$           17,330,000$           18,050,000$           San Joaquin 4,770,000$             12,240,000$           17,350,000$           19,570,000$           20,700,000$           21,620,000$           22,560,000$           23,590,000$           24,600,000$           25,630,000$           CSAC Estimates ‐ May 16, 2017 New County Revenues from SB 1 (Beall, 2017) ‐ ALL New Revenues* COUNTY 2017‐18 2018‐19 2019‐20 2020‐21 2021‐22 2022‐23 2023‐24 2024‐25 2025‐26 2026‐27San Luis Obispo 2,750,000$             7,020,000$             9,970,000$             11,180,000$           11,820,000$           12,330,000$           12,860,000$           13,430,000$           13,980,000$           14,560,000$           San Mateo 4,010,000$             10,390,000$           14,670,000$           16,720,000$           17,750,000$           18,560,000$           19,430,000$           20,350,000$           21,250,000$           22,190,000$           Santa Barbara 2,800,000$             7,220,000$             10,210,000$           11,580,000$           12,270,000$           12,820,000$           13,400,000$           14,010,000$           14,620,000$           15,260,000$           Santa Clara 8,970,000$             23,230,000$           32,820,000$           37,360,000$           39,660,000$           41,490,000$           43,390,000$           45,460,000$           47,470,000$           49,550,000$           Santa Cruz 1,850,000$             4,770,000$             6,760,000$             7,660,000$             8,120,000$             8,490,000$             8,870,000$             9,290,000$             9,690,000$             10,110,000$           Shasta 2,160,000$             5,510,000$             7,850,000$             8,780,000$             9,280,000$             9,690,000$             10,090,000$           10,540,000$           10,970,000$           11,430,000$           Sierra 370,000$                960,000$                1,360,000$             1,520,000$             1,610,000$             1,670,000$             1,750,000$             1,820,000$             1,880,000$             1,970,000$             Siskiyou 1,550,000$             3,930,000$             5,620,000$             6,270,000$             6,610,000$             6,890,000$             7,160,000$             7,480,000$             7,790,000$             8,110,000$             Solano 2,590,000$             6,680,000$             9,460,000$             10,710,000$           11,350,000$           11,860,000$           12,390,000$           12,950,000$           13,520,000$           14,090,000$           Sonoma 3,890,000$             10,010,000$           14,190,000$           16,030,000$           16,960,000$           17,720,000$           18,500,000$           19,350,000$           20,180,000$           21,040,000$           Stanislaus 3,820,000$             9,800,000$             13,940,000$           15,670,000$           16,580,000$           17,300,000$           18,040,000$           18,860,000$           19,650,000$           20,480,000$           Sutter 1,180,000$             2,990,000$             4,270,000$             4,750,000$             5,010,000$             5,220,000$             5,420,000$             5,660,000$             5,880,000$             6,110,000$             Tehama 1,340,000$             3,400,000$             4,860,000$             5,370,000$             5,660,000$             5,890,000$             6,120,000$             6,380,000$             6,630,000$             6,890,000$             Trinity 720,000$                1,830,000$             2,610,000$             2,910,000$             3,070,000$             3,200,000$             3,330,000$             3,480,000$             3,630,000$             3,760,000$             Tulare 4,650,000$             11,790,000$           16,820,000$           18,690,000$           19,680,000$           20,500,000$           21,320,000$           22,230,000$           23,110,000$           24,020,000$           Tuolumne 940,000$                2,400,000$             3,410,000$             3,830,000$             4,060,000$             4,230,000$             4,420,000$             4,600,000$             4,800,000$             5,000,000$             Ventura 4,530,000$             11,730,000$           16,550,000$           18,850,000$           20,010,000$           20,930,000$           21,890,000$           22,940,000$           23,950,000$           25,010,000$           Yolo 1,650,000$             4,210,000$             6,000,000$             6,720,000$             7,090,000$             7,410,000$             7,720,000$             8,060,000$             8,400,000$             8,740,000$             Yuba 940,000$                2,390,000$             3,400,000$             3,790,000$             4,000,000$             4,170,000$             4,340,000$             4,520,000$             4,700,000$             4,890,000$             TOTAL 230,240,000$        592,930,000$        839,890,000$        950,200,000$        1,006,590,000$     1,051,930,000$     1,098,540,000$     1,149,340,000$     1,198,990,000$     1,250,310,000$     ** County revenues only* Note: Estimates include all four separate components of new SB 1 revenues:     1. Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account revenues from new Transportation Improvement Fee, half of new 20‐cent diesel excise tax, new 12‐cent gasoline excise tax, and future inflationary adjustments to these rates;     2. Revenue from future inflationary adjustments to existing 18‐cent gasoline excise tax rate, reset to 16‐cents of existing diesel excise tax, and future inflationary adjustments to existing diesel excise tax rate;     3. Revenue from reset of price‐based gasoline excise tax to 17.3 cents and future inflationary adjustments to this rate; and     4. Revenue from transportation loan funds redirected to local streets and roads purposes (three annual installments of $37.5 million to counties in 2017‐18, 2018‐19 and 2019‐20 fiscal years)CSAC Estimates ‐ May 16, 2017 Get the Facts @ fixcaroads.com | #RebuildingCA OPPOSE REPEAL OF SB 1: Californians depend on a safe and reliable transportation network to support our quality of life and a strong economy. In April 2017, California passed Senate Bill 1 (SB 1) which provides more than $5 billion annually to make road safety improvements, fill potholes, repair local streets, freeways, tunnels, bridges and overpasses and invest in public transportation in every California community. Road safety and transportation improvement projects are already underway across the state, but this long-awaited progress could come to a halt unless voters take action in 2018. The Coalition to Protect Local Transportation Improvements has formed to support Proposition 69 which protects transportation funds from being diverted and to oppose the November 2018 measure that would repeal new transportation funds. Here’s how you can help: June 2018 ballot measure prohibits the Legislature from diverting new transportation funds and ensures they can only be used for transportation projects. Extends constitutional protections to the new revenues generated by SB 1 that aren’t currently protected. Guarantees transportation funds can only be used for transportation improvement purposes. Will not raise taxes. Protects transportation taxes and fees we already pay. November 2018 ballot measure would repeal SB 1 and rob our communities of vital road safety and transportation improvement projects. Certain politicians are currently collecting signatures to try to repeal the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017 (SB 1) and stop critical investments in future transportation improvement projects. Our broad coalition opposes this measure now because its passage would: Jeopardize public safety. This measure would halt roadway improvements at the state and local level that will save lives and increase safety for the traveling public. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, poor roadways were a contributing factor in more than half of the 3,623 roadway fatalities on California roads in 2016. Support Safer Roads and Protect Local Transportation Improvements SUPPORT PROP 69: Get the Facts @ fixcaroads.com | #RebuildingCA OPPOSE the November 2018 ballot measure that would repeal SB 1 and rob our communities of vital road safety and transportation improvement projects. Stop transportation improvement projects already underway in every community. This measure would eliminate funds already flowing to every city and county to fix potholes, make safety improve- ments, ease traffic congestion, upgrade bridges, and improve public transportation. 4,000 local transpor- tation improvement projects are already underway across the state thanks to SB 1. Make traffic congestion worse. Our freeways and major thoroughfares are among the most congested in the nation, and Californians spend too much time stuck in traffic away from family and work. This mea- sure would stop projects that will reduce traffic congestion. Cost drivers and taxpayers more money in the long-run. The average driver spends $739 per year on front end alignments, body damage, shocks, tires and other repairs because of bad roads and bridg- es. Additionally, it costs eight times more to fix a road than to maintain it. By delaying or stopping proj- ects, this measure will cost motorists more money in the long run. Hurt job creation and our economy. Reliable transportation infrastructure is critical to get Californians to work, move goods and services to the market, and support our economy. This measure would elimi- nate more than 680,000 good-paying jobs and nearly $183 billion in economic growth that will be created fixing our roads over the next decade. Paid for by the Coalition to Protect Local Transportation Improvements, sponsored by business, labor, local governments, transportation advocates and taxpayers Committee Major Funding from League of California Cities California Alliance for Jobs Funding details at www.fppc.ca.gov RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE a position of "Support" for the Coalition Against Bigger Trucks initiative opposing increases in truck length and weight, and AUTHORIZE the Chair of the Board of Supervisors to sign a letter communicating the County's position. FISCAL IMPACT: None. BACKGROUND: The Coalition Against Bigger Trucks (CABT) approached the County with a request that we support their effort to oppose increases in truck length and weight. These increases are being considered by the federal Department of Transportation. There are numerous studies and statistics that provide a reasonable rationale for the opposition (Attached:CSAC Ltr to Asm Trans Re Freight Reccos.pdf: "Heavier and Longer Trucks..."). The list of CABT supporters from California is attached and includes the California State Association of Counties (CSAC). CSAC's communication on this topic is attached for additional background. The Transportation, Water, and Infrastructure Committee (TWIC) considered the CABT request at their March 12, 2018 meeting. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: John Cunningham (925) 674-7833 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 30 To:Board of Supervisors From:TRANSPORTATION, WATER & INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Support For "Coalition Against Bigger Trucks" (Opposition to Increases in Truck Weight/Length) BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) TWIC commented that electric or hybrid public transit busses are heavier than their conventionally powered counterparts and directed staff to ensure that the weight limitations would not apply to these vehicles. Subject to that clarification, staff was directed to bring the CABT initiative to the Board of Supervisors with a recommendation of support. Staff clarified that the limitations only apply to tractor-trailer vehicles. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the Board of Supervisors does not take the recommended action the County will miss an opportunity to communicate its policy preferences on the subject issue. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS California Support: CABT CSAC Ltr to Asm Trans Re Trucks CSAC Truck Size and Weight Study Comments 04-10-18 BOS to House of Reps re DRAFT Support CABT Initiative.pdf 04-10-18 BOS to Senators re DRAFT Support CABT Initiative.pdf MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed Letter to House of Representatives Signed Letter to Senators Feinstiien and Harris Coalition Against Bigger Trucks – California Supporters Christine Kahn  Engineer, CA Department of Transportation California Kiana Valentine Legislative Advocate, California State Association of Counties California Jolena Voorhis Executive Director, Urban Counties of California California Gary Tofanelli County Supervisor, Calaveras County California Paul Rodriguez Councilmember, City of Chino California Sara Lamnin Councilmember, City of Hayward California Anne Logie Project Manager, City of Irvine California Mark Houghton Public Works Director, City of Manteca California Eduardo Martinez Councilmember, City of Richmond California Jewel Edson Councilmember, City of Solana Beach California Stan Hill Engineer, City of South Lake Tahoe California Michael Van Winkle Mayor, City of Waterford California Diane Burgis County Supervisor, Contra Costa County California John Gay Public Works Director, Imperial County California Mark Baza Executive Director, Imperial County Transportation Commission California Matt Machado Public Works Director, Stanislaus County California Jorge Aguilar Engineer, The Wallace Group California Randy Hanvelt County Supervisor, Tuolumne County California Karl Rodefer County Supervisor, Tuolumne County California Jim Provenza County Supervisor, Yolo County California June 15, 2016 The Honorable Jim Frazier Chair, Assembly Transportation Committee State Capitol, Room 3091 Sacramento, CA 95814 Re: Opposition to Truck Weight and Length Recommendation in Draft Sustainable Freight Action Plan Dear Assembly Member Frazier: In anticipation of the Assembly Transportation Committee Informational Hearing scheduled on June 20, 2016 on the Administration’s Efforts to Develop an Integrated Freight Plan, CSAC writes to share with you our thoughts and perspectives on the recommendations contained within the Draft Sustainable Freight Action Plan. Specifically, we want to share with you our concerns with, and opposition to, Section IV.A of the “Strategies to Maximize Asset Utilization in the California Freight System: Part II – Strategies” White Paper, which appears to recommend a relaxation of California’s truck size and weight laws as an action in the Sustainable Freight Action Plan. Attached for your review is a letter signed by CSAC and a coalition of stakeholders that share our public safety and infrastructure concerns with this recommendation and urging the Administration not to include this recommendation in the final Sustainable Freight Action Plan delivered to Governor Brown. Also attached is a memo detailing evidence substantiating our concerns with increasing truck size and weight, which is based largely on a study by the United States Department of Transportation. We look forward to the presentations and discussion at the hearing next week. If you have any questions or need additional information about our position on this issue please do not hesitate to contact me at (916) 650-8185 or kvalentine@counties.org. Sincerely, Kiana Valentine Legislative Representative California State Association of Counties Cc: Members and Consultants, Assembly Transportation Committee Daniel Ballon, Assembly Republican Caucus April 20, 2016 Mr. Kome Ajise Chief Deputy Director California Department of Transportation P.O. Box 942873 Sacramento, CA 94273-0001 Mr. Ajise: On behalf of the Peace Officers Research Association of California, California Police Chiefs Association, California State Association of Counties, League of California Cities and California State Sheriffs’ Association, we are deeply concerned with Section IV.A of the “Strategies to Maximize Asset Utilization in the California Freight System: Part II – Strategies” White Paper, which appears to recommend a relaxation of California’s truck size and weight laws as an action in the Sustainable Freight Action Plan. We are writing to request that this recommendation not be included in the Sustainable Freight Action Plan delivered to Governor Brown. Our organizations strongly oppose any state or national effort to increase truck size and weight because such increases would endanger motorists, damage state and local roads and bridges, and increase costs to motorists and taxpayers. California’s congressional delegation overwhelmingly opposed several proposals in Congress in 2015 that called for increases in truck size and weight—and, in fact, Sen. Dianne Feinstein served as a leading advocate to defeat the “Double 33s” proposal that would have mandated longer double-trailer trucks on California highways. Proposals for longer and heavier trucks were ultimately defeated in Congress last year, in part due to the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) Technical Reports published in June of 2015 that recommended against any increases in truck size and weight. The reports found alarmingly higher crash rates for heavier trucks, longer stopping distances for longer trucks, and increased infrastructure damage from both heavier and longer trucks. Attached is a memo detailing numerous concerns with increasing truck size and weight, which is based largely on the USDOT study. Speaking on behalf of law enforcement and local government organizations across the State of California, we request that this recommendation not be included in the Sustainable Freight Action Plan delivered to Governor Brown. Thank you for your consideration, and please contact us if we can answer any questions. Sincerely, Enclosure: Memo cc: Mr. Benjamin De Alba Assistant Secretary for Rail and Ports California State Transportation Agency 915 Capitol Mall Suite 350 B Sacramento, CA 95814 Michael Durant President Peace Officers Research Association of California Ken Corney President California Police Chiefs Association Kiana L. Valentine Legislative Representative California State Association of Counties Rony Berdugo Legislative Representative League of California Cities Sheriff Donny Youngblood, Kern County President, California State Sheriffs’ Association Ms. Cynthia Marvin Division Chief California Air Resources Board Transportation and Toxic Division P.O. Box 2815 Sacramento, CA 95812 Mr. Daniel Sperling Board Member California Air Resources Board P.O. Box 2815 Sacramento, CA 95812 Mr. Giles Giovinazzi Federal Liaison California Department of Transportation 1120 N Street MS 49 Sacramento, CA 95814 Mr. Miguel A. Jaller Assistant Professor Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering 2001 Ghausi Hall, Room 3143 University of California Davis, CA 95616 1 HEAVIER AND LONGER TRUCKS ARE NOT A SUSTAINABLE FREIGHT STRATEGY FOR CALIFORNIA April 2016 1. The US Department of Transportation initiated a two-year long “Comprehensive Truck Size and Weight Limits Study” in 2012. In June 2015, DOT released various Technical Reports with the findings from its research (http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/sw/map21tswstudy/technical_rpts/index.htm). Importantly, in a letter to Congress following the release of its Technical Reports, USDOT recommended that there be no increases in truck size or weight (Undersecretary Peter Rogoff’s transmittal letter to Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman Bill Shuster: http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/sw/map21tswstudy/technical_rpts/trtransmittalletters.pdf). 2. The USDOT reports found that heavier and longer trucks are more dangerous: a) heavier trucks have dramatically higher crash rates in states where they are currently authorized to operate, from a 47% higher crash rate in Washington state to a 400% higher crash rate in Michigan (Highway Safety and Truck Crash Comparative Analysis Technical Report, pg. 26, Table 8); b) longer double–trailer trucks need an alarming 22 additional feet to stop than today’s double-trailer trucks (Highway Safety and Truck Crash Comparative Analysis Technical Report, pg. 65, Table 26). 3. The USDOT reports also found that heavier and longer trucks impose dramatically increased costs to maintain and repair infrastructure. Longer double-trailer trucks would increase pavement damage up to 1.8 to 2.7% annually, translating to $1.8 billion, as well as $1.1 billion in bridge damage (Volume 1: Technical Reports Summary, ES-12, Table ES-2b). Triple-trailer trucks would incur significant bridge reinforcement or replacement, costing $5.4 billion (Volume 1: Technical Reports Summary, ES-12, Table ES-2b). Heavier trucks would also incur significant bridge reinforcement or replacement—an increase in truck weights to 91,000 pounds would cost $1.1 billion, and an increase to 97,000 pounds would cost $2.2 billion (Volume 1: Technical Reports Summary, ES-11, Table ES-2a). 4. CSAC estimates that it would cost in excess of $5 billion just to replace the city and county bridges in California that could not accommodate trucks weighing 97,000 pounds or more (2013 CSAC letter to USDOT is attached). 5. The Federal Highway Administration has found that trucks on the road today only cover about 80% of their damage, and heavier trucks would pay even less (FHWA Addendum to Highway Cost Allocation Study, 2000). Proponents of heavier trucks may see higher profits; motorists and taxpayers will end up paying the bill. 6. The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration reported there were 10,412 large-truck crashes in California in 2014, causing 342 fatalities and 4,992 injuries. 7. Just last November, Congress rejected both weight and length increases. The House voted down an amendment on the floor to allow 91,000 pound trucks on Interstates and 2 NHS – the California delegation voted overwhelming to oppose this increase with 42 members of the California House delegation opposing a weight increase and only 11 supporting it (H.R. 22, Amendment No. 29 on Nov. 3, 2015). 8. Senator Feinstein was the leading opponent of longer trucks (double 33s), which were rejected by the Senate 56-31 (Wicker-Feinstein Motion to Instruct on H.R. 22 on Nov. 10, 2015). 9. Because Congress rejected heavier and longer trucks, if California does decide to increase truck weights or length (a state cannot unilaterally allow LCVs on their highways now under the 1991 LCV freeze passed by Congress), this would result in diverting truck traffic from the interstates to the state and local roads and those trucks would be heavier and longer than the trucks on the roads today. The state and local roads are the most vulnerable to bigger trucks in terms of both safety and infrastructure. Our organizations believe the above facts should be adequate reason to reject any truck size or weight increases as part of a sustainable freight strategy. In addition, we would like to point out the positions of the following important stakeholders: x Opposition from safety groups: The National Troopers Coalition, National Sheriffs’ Association, International Association of Chiefs of Police, National Association of Police Organizations, AAA, and the National Association of Counties all oppose increases in truck size and weight. x Opposition from trucking companies: The trucking industry is deeply divided on longer and heavier trucks as evidenced by the attached letters by the Truckload Carriers Association (TCA) and large number of individual truckload carriers. x Public opposition: A 2015 nationwide poll found 76% of respondents oppose longer and heavier trucks, while 15% support and 9% not sure. (Harper Polling, live-operator survey of 1,000 respondents with a margin of error of plus or minus 3.1 percentage points, January 2015) In summary, Congress rejected increases in both truck weight and length outright just last November. Given the dramatically negative impacts of larger and heavier trucks and longer trucks, our organizations ask that CARB and California DOT and the other Sustainable Strategy agencies, remove this strategy from any final recommendations on sustainable freight to the Governor. California should not adopt a document promoting the idea of heavier or longer trucks. November 8, 2013    The Honorable Anthony Foxx, Secretary  U.S. Department of Transportation  1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE  Washington, DC 20590    RE:  Comprehensive Truck Size and Weight Study    Dear Secretary Foxx:     The California State Association of Counties (CSAC) submits the following comments for the Department  of Transportation’s consideration in its development of the Comprehensive Truck Size and Weight Study  undertaken pursuant to the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP‐21). CSAC is the  voice of California’s fifty‐eight counties at the state and federal level. Its long‐term objective is to  significantly improve the fiscal health of all California counties so they can adequately meet the demand  for vital public programs and services, including the preservation and improvement of California’s local  transportation infrastructure.    It is important to ensure that the condition of California’s local roads and bridges is considered as part of  an analysis of the impacts of larger or heavier trucks. Whether by car, bus, bicycle or on foot, every trip  begins and ends on a local street and road. Counties and cities in California maintain an estimated  312,708 lane miles of roads, and 13,775 bridges included in the National Bridge Inventory. Despite  sizable investments from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act and a recent infusion of bond  funding from the State of California, the pavement condition index (PCI) of California’s local streets and  roads has continued to decline. With a statewide average PCI of 66 (on scale of 0 [failed] to 100  [excellent]), local agencies in California currently face a $1.9 billion annual funding shortfall to simply  maintain the status quo. Moreover, of the 13,775 local agency bridges in California, 1,964 are  functionally obsolete and 2,088 are structurally deficient.  As recent tragedies highlight, when bridges  fail, the cost can be human. Having a well‐maintained transportation network is critical to the efficient  and safe movement of people and goods, a robust economy, and our environment. Any analysis of the  potential impacts to the transportation system due to heavier or larger trucks must incorporate a  thorough examination of the impacts of such vehicles on local roads and bridges, as they serve a vital  role in the overall transportation network in California and nationally.    CSAC consulted with the County of Los Angeles to collect data related to the potential impacts of larger  and heavier trucks on County‐maintained transportation infrastructure. Where possible, CSAC has  provided data from our California Statewide Local Streets and Roads Needs Assessment and other  sources, or extrapolated from the Los Angeles County’s calculations to come up with statewide  estimates. We hope the following information will be helpful to your department as it undertakes this  important analysis.    Structurally Deficient or Functionally Obsolete Bridges  Statewide, there are 1,964 city and county bridges that are functionally obsolete and 2,088 bridges that  are structurally deficient. Functionally obsolete bridges may have geometry making it difficult or  impossible for them to accommodate large trucks, while structurally deficient bridges may be unable to  accommodate heavier trucks.    Bridges Not Rated to Handle Trucks Weighing 97,000 lbs or More and Estimated Costs to Upgrade  Based on a preliminary screening of their 1,111 National Bridge Inventory bridges, Los Angeles County  identified 126 bridges that may not be adequate to carry the larger 97,000 pound truck.  Using a  construction contract cost of $350 per square foot, the County estimated the total cost to replace these  bridges to be approximately $500 million. In addition to the construction contract cost, the total cost  includes the cost of plans, specifications, consultant services, survey, material testing, construction  engineering, inspection, contract administration, change order contingency, and other necessary work.    Extrapolating Los Angeles County’s estimate to the 2,088 structurally deficient city and county bridges  statewide by applying the $350 per square foot estimate to the cumulative area of these bridges yields  an estimated $5.76 billion cost of replacement.     Cost to Analyze Bridges to Determine if they are Capable of Handling 97,000 lbs or Heavier Trucks  The County of Los Angeles estimates that at a cost of $4,000 to fully analyze each bridge, it would cost  approximately $4.5 million to load rate and determine whether the 1,111 locally‐maintained NBI bridges  in Los Angeles County are capable of handling a 97,000 pound truck. Extrapolating from Los Angeles’  estimate, it would cost an estimated $55.1 million to inspect city and county bridges statewide to  determine whether they were sufficient to support heavier trucks.    Miles and Pavements Types of Locally‐Maintained Roads  Los Angeles County Public Works maintains approximately 2,987 miles of asphalt paved roads, 30 miles  of concrete paved roads, and 201 miles of unpaved roads. As previously indicated, cities and counties in  California maintain 312,708 lane‐miles of roadways, including 96,017 lane‐miles of major urban roads  and 28,056 lane‐miles of major rural roads. Statewide, concrete paved roads are estimated to comprise  less than 0.5% of the local network.    The Cost of Oversize/Overweight Permits and Whether the Cost of the Permit Covers the Full Damage  Done by Permitted Trucks  The Los Angeles County Code requires the Public Works Department to charge the maximum permit fee  amount allowed as published by the State, which is currently $16 or $90, for a single‐trip permit and a  blanket annual permit, respectively. For permits requiring inspections during movement, the County  charges separate fees to recover our inspection cost. The fees the state authorizes local agencies are  authorized to charge to for the issuance of overweight/oversized transportation permits are neither  sufficient nor intended to account for any current or future damages to roads resulting from these truck  trips.    Thank you for your consideration of CSAC’s comments. We hope this information will assist the  Department in analyzing potential impacts to local roadways and bridges as it completes the  Comprehensive Truck Size and weight study mandated by MAP‐21. Should you have any questions or  need additional information, please contact me at (916) 327‐7500 ext. 566, or kbuss@counties.org.     Sincerely,    Kiana Buss  Legislative Representative  The Board of Supervisors County Administration Building 651 Pine Street, Room 106 Martinez, California 94553 John Gioia, 1st District Candace Andersen, 2nd District Diane Burgis, 3rd District Karen Mitchoff, 4th District Federal D. Glover, 5th District April 10, 2018 The Honorable Mark DeSaulnier U.S. House of Representatives 327 Cannon House Office Building Washington, DC 20515 The Honorable Jerry McNerney U.S. House of Representatives 2265 Rayburn Office Building Washington, DC 20515 The Honorable Eric Swalwell U.S. House of Representatives 129 Cannon House Office Building Washington, DC 20515 The Honorable Mike Thompson U.S. House of Representatives 231 Cannon House Office Building Washington, DC 20515 RE: Support for the Coalition Against Bigger Trucks initiative opposing increases in truck length and weight. Dear Representatives DeSaulnier, McNerney, Swalwell, and Thompson: We are reaching out to share our concerns about proposals that would bring longer and heavier trucks to our roads and bridges. Contra Costa County opposes any effort at the federal level to increase truck size and weight. Such increases would endanger motorists, damage state and local roads and bridges, and increase costs to motorists and taxpayers. California’s congressional delegation overwhelmingly opposed several proposals in Congress in 2015 that called for increases in truck size and weight—we are writing now to ensure that opposition continues. While we recognize the important role that tractor-trailer trucks have in keeping our economy moving, we believe that any potential benefits of bigger and heavier trucks will be offset by the additional damage to local infrastructure, as well as the safety risk that heavier and longer trucks will bring to our roadways. The U.S. Department of Transportation in their 2016 Comprehensive Truck Size and Weight Study found that heavier trucks of 91,000 to 97,000 pounds would cause an additional $1.1 - $2.2 billion in damages to our bridges. The study also determined that longer double-trailer trucks would add an additional $1.2 – $1.8 billion in pavement damage. The addition of a sixth axle would only mitigate additional damage, and would have no affect at all unless the weight distribution is evenly placed David Twa Clerk of the Board and County Administrator (925) 335-1900 Contra Costa County House of Representatives – Support CABT Initiative April 10, 2018 Page 2 of 2 over each axle, which rarely happens. As you well know, California reflects an aging network of roads and bridges. These proposals are coming at a time when many counties across our state have seen a declining stream of funding for road projects and general maintenance. Thank you for standing up for highway safety and the integrity of our roads and bridges. Please oppose any legislation that seeks to increase the weight and length of tractor-trailer trucks. Sincerely, Karen Mitchoff, Chair Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors cc: Cindy Mills, Coalition Against Bigger Trucks G:\Transportation\Cunningham\MEMO-LETTER\Letter\2018\04-10-18 BOS To House Of Reps Re DRAFT Support CABT Initiative.Docx The Board of Supervisors County Administration Building 651 Pine Street, Room 106 Martinez, California 94553 John Gioia, 1st District Candace Andersen, 2nd District Diane Burgis, 3rd District Karen Mitchoff, 4th District Federal D. Glover, 5th District April 10, 2018 The Honorable Dianne Feinstein U.S. Senate 331 Hart Building Washington, DC 20515 The Honorable Kamala Harris U.S. Senate112 Hart Building Washington, DC 20515 RE: Support for the Coalition Against Bigger Trucks initiative opposing increases in truck length and weight. Dear Senators Feinstein and Harris: We are reaching out to share our concerns about proposals that would bring longer and heavier trucks to our roads and bridges. Contra Costa County opposes any effort at the federal level to increase truck size and weight. Such increases would endanger motorists, damage state and local roads and bridges, and increase costs to motorists and taxpayers. California’s congressional delegation overwhelmingly opposed several proposals in Congress in 2015 that called for increases in truck size and weight—we are writing now to ensure that opposition continues. While we recognize the important role that tractor-trailer trucks have in keeping our economy moving, we believe that any potential benefits of bigger and heavier trucks will be offset by the additional damage to local infrastructure, as well as the safety risk that heavier and longer trucks will bring to our roadways. The U.S. Department of Transportation in their 2016 Comprehensive Truck Size and Weight Study found that heavier trucks of 91,000 to 97,000 pounds would cause an additional $1.1 - $2.2 billion in damages to our bridges. The study also determined that longer double-trailer trucks would add an additional $1.2 – $1.8 billion in pavement damage. The addition of a sixth axle would only mitigate additional damage, and would have no affect at all unless the weight distribution is evenly David Twa Clerk of the Board and County Administrator (925) 335-1900 Contra Costa County House of Representatives – Support CABT Initiative April 10, 2018 Page 2 of 2 placed over each axle, which rarely happens. As you well know, California reflects an aging network of roads and bridges. These proposals are coming at a time when many counties across our state have seen a declining stream of funding for road projects and general maintenance. Thank you for standing up for highway safety and the integrity of our roads and bridges. Please oppose any legislation that seeks to increase the weight and length of tractor-trailer trucks. Sincerely, Karen Mitchoff, Chair Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors cc: Cindy Mills, Coalition Against Bigger Trucks G:\Transportation\Cunningham\MEMO-LETTER\Letter\2018\04-10-18 BOS To Senators Re DRAFT Support CABT Initiative.Docx RECOMMENDATION(S): AUTHORIZE the Chair of the Board of Supervisors to sign a letter to the County's Congressional representatives providing support to continue the funding for the U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board (CSB), as recommended by the Contra Costa County Hazardous Materials Commission. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact to the County. BACKGROUND: The CSB was created by the 1990 Clean Air Act and investigation chemical incidents to determine the root cause of the incident and makes recommendations on how to prevent such similar incidents in the future. The President’s proposed budget would defund the CSB. Attached is a letter from the Hazardous Materials Commission making a request that the Chair of the Board send a letter to the County’s Congressional representatives to continue to fund the CSB. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Randy Sawyer, 925-335-3210 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Randy Sawyer, Tasha Scott, Marcy Wilhelm, CAO-Legislation C. 31 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Letter of Support to Fund the U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The County has over 3,500 facilities that handle hazardous materials, including four petroleum refineries and a number of chemical facilities. The valuable lessons learned from the CSB investigations will be lost, including how to prevent releases, spills, and fires from facilities handling hazardous materials. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Letter for HazMat Commission Board Letter to Senator Harris Board Letter to Senator Feinstein Board Letter to Rep Thompson Board Letter to Rep DeSaulnier MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed Letter to Senator Harris Signed Letter to Senator Feinstein Signed Letter to Rep Thompson Signed Letter to Rep DeSaulnier Contra Costa County The Board of Supervisors County Administration Building 651 Pine Street, Room 107 Martinez, California 94553-1293 John M. Gioia, 1st District Candace Andersen, 2nd District Diane Burgis, 3rd District Karen Mitchoff, 4th District Federal D. Glover, 5th District David J. Twa Clerk of the Board and County Administrator (925) 335-1900 April 10, 2018 Honorable Kamala D. Harris United States Senate 112 Hart Senate Office Building Washington, D.C. 20510 Subject: U. S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board (CSB) Funding Dear Honorable Harris: The proposed budget that was presented to Congress by the President did not include funding for the CSB. The budget for the rest of this fiscal year that was passed by Congress and signed by the President did include funding for the CSB. This is the second time that the proposed budget by the President has no t included funding for the CSB. The CSB performs an important function that is not duplicated by a ny other government office. The CSB budget is approximately $11 million dollars that has remained relatively flat for nearly decade. Throughout its twenty-year history, the CSB has initiated more than 130 deployments and issued more than 800 recommendations related to chemical incidents. Incidents investigated by the CSB have resulted in more than 200 fatalities, over 1,200 injuries, and significant environmental damage. The agency educates regulators, industry personnel, standards setting organizations, academia, and the American people to help make the industries that use hazardous chemicals safer while maintaining economic prosperity. Two of the CSB investigations have occurred in Contra Costa County. The 1999 flash fire at the Tosco Avon Refinery where four people died and another was seriously injured was one o f the CSB first investigations. The second investigation was the 2012 Chevron Richmond Refinery Crude Unit fire where over 15,000 people sought medical attention during and after the fire. The impact of the CSB’s investigations and recommendations has resulted in significant safety improvements throughout the country in a wide variety of industries. The following examples of safety improvements were a direct result of CSB safety recommendations :  The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) awarded two grants to develop training programs for first responders related to the hazards of fertilizer grade ammonium nitrate.  The American Chemical Society (ACS) developed guidance to identify, assess and control hazards in research laboratories. The Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET), Inc. added a requirement for chemical process safety education in university curricula for a broad range of engineering disciplines.  BP formed an independent review panel, led by former Secretary James A. Baker III, to conduct a thorough review of the company’s corporate safety culture and safety management systems. The lessons learned from the final report have been shared in the refining industry and led to specific safety improvements.  The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) implemented a national Special Emphasis Program to mitigate the hazards of combustible dust.  The California Department of Industrial Relations and the Californ ia Office of Emergency Services approved new safeguards for refineries to consider safer designs to the greatest extent feasible to increase the safety of refinery equipment. The costs of chemical disasters total in the hundreds of billions of dollars. To make the safety of Americans our primary priority, it is critical that chemical safety lessons are learned and shared among diverse stakeholders that use hazardous chemicals. The CSB has investigated numerous high consequence incidents that have resulted in millions of dollars in damage and a disruption to the regional and local economies.  Flooding from Hurricane Harvey in August 2017 disabled the refrigeration system at a chemical plant near Houston. As the temperature of chemicals stored at the facility rose, the trailers containing them began to catch fire, and emergency responders issued a six-day evacuation of residents within a 1.5 mile radius of the plant.  A 2016 explosion at one of the country’s four nitrous oxide production facilities led to a chemical shortage that affected hospitals, dentists, universities, food producers, and other industrial facilities across the country.  A 2013 explosion at a fertilizer facility resulted in 15 fatalities and more than 260 injuries; $230 million in insurance-related losses; and $16 million in Federal disaster assistance; however, the company held only a $1 million insurance policy.  The 2012 explosion at a refinery resulted in med ical treatment for 15,000 residents; $2 million in fines and restitution; and $447 million in increased gas prices for California consumers.  A 2010 explosion at an offshore drilling rig in the Gulf of Mexico resulted in $21 billion in settlements; $13 billion in economic and medical claims from local businesses and residents; 11 workers killed and 17 injured; and four million barrels of oil spilled into the Gulf of Mexico. If the CSB’s many safety lessons prevent at least one catastrophic incident, the c osts avoided from damage to facilities and the surrounding communities, legal settlements, and the loss of human lives far outweigh the agency’s annual budget. Safety and prosperity are compatible. Strong safety programs are critical for the economic success of the many industries that use hazardous chemicals. If we do not learn from previous incidents, Americans will continue to spend billions of dollars responding to new ones, jeopardizing the prosperity of the affected industries. Through its independent investigations, the CSB plays a unique role in fostering collaboration with industry, regulators, standards setting bodies and professional organizations, thus emphasizing the CSB’s vital role in driving critical chemical safety change in the United State s. The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors request that Congress continues the CSB and the important work that they perform. Please contact Randy Sawyer at (925) 335-3210, randy.sawyer@hsd.cccounty.us or me if you have any further questions. Sincerely Karen Mitchoff Chair cc: Board of Supervisors Anna Roth, Contra Costa Health Services Director Contra Costa County The Board of Supervisors County Administration Building 651 Pine Street, Room 107 Martinez, California 94553-1293 John M. Gioia, 1st District Candace Andersen, 2nd District Diane Burgis, 3rd District Karen Mitchoff, 4th District Federal D. Glover, 5th District David J. Twa Clerk of the Board and County Administrator (925) 335-1900 April 10, 2018 Honorable Dianne Feinstein United States Senate 331 Hart Senate Office Building Washington, D.C. 20510 Subject: U. S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board (CSB) Funding Dear Honorable Feinstein: The proposed budget that was presented to Congress by the President did not include funding for the CSB. The budget for the rest of this fiscal year that was passed by Congress and signed by the President did include funding for the CSB. This is the second time that the proposed budget by the President has not included funding for the CSB. The CSB performs an important function that is not duplicated b y any other government office. The CSB budget is approximately $11 million dollars that has remained relatively flat for nearly decade. Throughout its twenty-year history, the CSB has initiated more than 130 deployments and issued more than 800 recommendations related to chemical incidents. Incidents investigated by the CSB have resulted in more than 200 fatalities, over 1,200 injuries, and significant environmental damage. The agency educates regulators, industry personnel, standards setting organizations, academia, and the American people to help make the industries that use hazardous chemicals safer while maintaining economic prosperity. Two of the CSB investigations have occurred in Contra Costa County. The 1999 flash fire at the Tosco Avon Refinery whe re four people died and another was seriously injured was one o f the CSB first investigations. The second investigation was the 2012 Chevron Richmond Refinery Crude Unit fire where over 15,000 people sought medical attention during and after the fire. The impact of the CSB’s investigations and recommendations has resulted in significant safety improvements throughout the country in a wide variety of industries. The following examples of safety improvements were a direct result of CSB safety recommendat ions :  The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) awarded two grants to develop training programs for first responders related to the hazards of fertilizer grade ammonium nitrate.  The American Chemical Society (ACS) developed guidance to identify, assess and control hazards in research laboratories. The Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET), Inc. added a requirement for chemical process safety education in university curricula for a broad range of engineering disciplines.  BP formed an independent review panel, led by former Secretary James A. Baker III, to conduct a thorough review of the company’s corporate safety culture and safety management systems. The lessons learned from the final report have been shared in the refining industry and led to specific safety improvements.  The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) implemented a national Special Emphasis Program to mitigate the hazards of combustible dust.  The California Department of Industrial Relations and the California Office of Emergency Services approved new safeguards for refineries to consider safer designs to the greatest extent feasible to increase the safety of refinery equipment. The costs of chemical disasters total in the hundreds of billions of dollars. To make the safety of Americans our primary priority, it is critical that chemical safety lessons are learned and shared among diverse stakeholders that use hazardous chemicals. The CSB has investigated numerous high consequence incidents that have r esulted in millions of dollars in damage and a disruption to the regional and local economies.  Flooding from Hurricane Harvey in August 2017 disabled the refrigeration system at a chemical plant near Houston. As the temperature of chemicals stored at the facility rose, the trailers containing them began to catch fire, and emergency responders issued a six-day evacuation of residents within a 1.5 mile radius of the plant.  A 2016 explosion at one of the country’s four nitrous oxide production facilities le d to a chemical shortage that affected hospitals, dentists, universities, food producers, and other industrial facilities across the country.  A 2013 explosion at a fertilizer facility resulted in 15 fatalities and more than 260 injuries; $230 million in insurance-related losses; and $16 million in Federal disaster assistance; however, the company held only a $1 million insurance policy.  The 2012 explosion at a refinery resulted in medical treatment for 15,000 residents; $2 million in fines and restitution; and $447 million in increased gas prices for California consumers.  A 2010 explosion at an offshore drilling rig in the Gulf of Mexico resulted in $21 billion in settlements; $13 billion in economic and medical claims from local businesses and residents ; 11 workers killed and 17 injured; and four million barrels of oil spilled into the Gulf of Mexico. If the CSB’s many safety lessons prevent at least one catastrophic incident, the costs avoided from damage to facilities and the surrounding communities, legal settlements, and the loss of human lives far outweigh the agency’s annual budget. Safety and prosperity are compatible. Strong safety programs are critical for the economic success of the many industries that use hazardous chemicals. If we do not lea rn from previous incidents, Americans will continue to spend billions of dollars responding to new ones, jeopardizing the prosperity of the affected industries. Through its independent investigations, the CSB plays a unique role in fostering collaboration with industry, regulators, standards setting bodies and professional organizations, thus emphasizing the CSB’s vital role in driving critical chemical safety change in the United States. The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors request that Congress c ontinues the CSB and the important work that they perform. Please contact Randy Sawyer at (925) 335-3210, randy.sawyer@hsd.cccounty.us or me if you have any further questions. Sincerely Karen Mitchoff Chair cc: Board of Supervisors Anna Roth, Contra Costa Health Services Director Contra Costa County The Board of Supervisors County Administration Building 651 Pine Street, Room 107 Martinez, California 94553-1293 John M. Gioia, 1st District Candace Andersen, 2nd District Diane Burgis, 3rd District Karen Mitchoff, 4th District Federal D. Glover, 5th District David J. Twa Clerk of the Board and County Administrator (925) 335-1900 April 10, 2018 Honorable Mike Thompson California 5th District Congressman 231 Cannon Office Building Washington, DC 20515 Subject: U. S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board (CSB) Funding Dear Honorable Thompson: The proposed budget that was presented to Congress by the President did not include funding for the CSB. The budget for the rest of this fiscal year that was passed by Congress and signed by the President d id include funding for the CSB. This is the second time that the proposed budget by the President has not included funding for the CSB. The CSB performs an important function that is not duplicated by any other government office. The CSB budget is approximately $11 million dollars that has remained relatively flat for nearly decade. Throughout its twenty-year history, the CSB has initiated more than 130 deployments and issued more than 800 recommendations related to chemical incidents. Incidents investigated by the CSB have resulted in more than 200 fatalities, over 1,200 injuries, and significant environmental damage. The agency educates regulators, industry personnel, standards setting organizations, academia, and the American people to help make the industries that use hazardous chemicals safer while maintaining economic prosperity. Two of the CSB investigations have occurred in Contra Costa County. The 1999 flash fire at the Tosco Avon Refinery whe re four people died and another was seriously injured was one of the CSB first investigations. The second investigation was the 2012 Chevron Richmond Refinery Crude Unit fire where over 15,000 people sought medical attention during and after the fire. The impact of the CSB’s investigations and recommendations has resulted in significant safety improvements throughout the country in a wide variety of industries. The following examples of safety improvements were a direct result of CSB safety recommendation s :  The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) awarded two grants to develop training programs for first responders related to the hazards of fertilizer grade ammonium nitrate.  The American Chemical Society (ACS) developed guidance to identify, assess and control hazards in research laboratories. The Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET), Inc. added a requirement for chemical process safety education in university curricula for a broad range of engineering disciplines.  BP formed an independent review panel, led by former Secretary James A. Baker III, to conduct a thorough review of the company’s corporate safety culture and safety management systems. The lessons learned from the final report have been shared in the refining industry and led to specific safety improvements.  The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) implemented a national Special Emphasis Program to mitigate the hazards of combustible dust.  The California Department of Industrial Relations and the California Office of Emergency Services approved new safeguards for refineries to consider safer designs to the greatest extent feasible to increase the safety of refinery equipment. The costs of chemical disasters total in the hundreds of billion s of dollars. To make the safety of Americans our primary priority, it is critical that chemical safety lessons are learned and shared among diverse stakeholders that use hazardous chemicals. The CSB has investigated numerous high consequence incidents tha t have resulted in millions of dollars in damage and a disruption to the regional and local economies.  Flooding from Hurricane Harvey in August 2017 disabled the refrigeration system at a chemical plant near Houston. As the temperature of chemicals store d at the facility rose, the trailers containing them began to catch fire, and emergency responders issued a six-day evacuation of residents within a 1.5 mile radius of the plant.  A 2016 explosion at one of the country’s four nitrous oxide production facilities led to a chemical shortage that affected hospitals, dentists, universities, food producers, and other industrial facilities across the country.  A 2013 explosion at a fertilizer facility resulted in 15 fatalities and more than 260 injuries; $230 mill ion in insurance-related losses; and $16 million in Federal disaster assistance; however, the company held only a $1 million insurance policy.  The 2012 explosion at a refinery resulted in medical treatment for 15,000 residents; $2 million in fines and restitution; and $447 million in increased gas prices for California consumers.  A 2010 explosion at an offshore drilling rig in the Gulf of Mexico resulted in $21 billion in settlements; $13 billion in economic and medical claims from local businesses and r esidents; 11 workers killed and 17 injured; and four million barrels of oil spilled into the Gulf of Mexico. If the CSB’s many safety lessons prevent at least one catastrophic incident, the costs avoided from damage to facilities and the surrounding communities, legal settlements, and the loss of human lives far outweigh the agency’s annual budget. Safety and prosperity are compatible. Strong safety programs are critical for the economic success of the many industries that use hazardous chemicals. If we do not learn from previous incidents, Americans will continue to spend billions of dollars responding to new ones, jeopardizing the prosperity of the affected industries. Through its independent investigations, the CSB plays a unique role in fostering collaboration with industry, regulators, standards setting bodies and professional organizations, thus emphasizing the CSB’s vital role in driving critical chemical safety change in the United States. The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors request that Co ngress continues the CSB and the important work that they perform. Please contact Randy Sawyer at (925) 335 -3210, randy.sawyer@hsd.cccounty.us or me if you have any further questions. Sincerely Karen Mitchoff Chair cc: Board of Supervisors Anna Roth, Contra Costa Health Services Director Contra Costa County The Board of Supervisors County Administration Building 651 Pine Street, Room 107 Martinez, California 94553-1293 John M. Gioia, 1st District Candace Andersen, 2nd District Diane Burgis, 3rd District Karen Mitchoff, 4th District Federal D. Glover, 5th District David J. Twa Clerk of the Board and County Administrator (925) 335-1900 April 10, 2018 Honorable Mark DeSaulnier California 11th District Congressman 115 Cannon House Office Building Washington, DC 20515 Subject: U. S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board (CSB) Funding Dear Honorable DeSaulnier: The proposed budget that was presented to Congress by the President did no t include funding for the CSB. The budget for the rest of this fiscal year that was passed by Congress and signed by the President d id include funding for the CSB. This is the second time that the proposed budget by the President has not included funding for the CSB. The CSB performs an important function that is not duplicated by any other government office. The CSB budget is approximately $11 million dollars that has remained relatively flat for nearly decade. Throughout its twenty-year history, the CSB has initiated more than 130 deployments and issued more than 800 recommendations related to chemical incidents. Incidents investigated by the CSB have resulted in more than 200 fatalities, over 1,200 injuries, and significant environmental damage. The agency educates regulators, industry personnel, standards setting organization s, academia, and the American people to help make the industries that use hazardous chemicals safer while maintaining economic prosperity. Two of the CSB investigations have occurred in Contra Costa County. The 1999 flash fire at the Tosco Avon Refinery where four people died and another was seriously injured was one of the CSB first investigations. The second investigation was the 2012 Chevron Richmond Refinery Crude Unit fire where over 15,000 people sought medical attention during and after the fire. The impact of the CSB’s investigations and recommendations has resulted in significant safety improvements throughout the country in a wide variety of industries. The following examples of safety improvements were a direct result of CSB safety recommenda tions:  The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) awarded two grants to develop training programs for first responders related to the hazards of fertilizer grade ammonium nitrate.  The American Chemical Society (ACS) developed guidance to identify, asses s and control hazards in research laboratories. The Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET), Inc. added a requirement for chemical process safety education in university curricula for a broad range of engineering disciplines.  BP formed an independent review panel, led by former Secretary James A. Baker III, to conduct a thorough review of the company’s corporate safety culture and safety management systems. The lessons learned from the final report have been shared in the refining industry and led to specific safety improvements.  The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) implemented a national Special Emphasis Program to mitigate the hazards of combustible dust.  The California Department of Industrial Relations and the California Office of Emergency Services approved new safeguards for refineries to consider safer designs to the greatest extent feasible to increase the safety of refinery equipment. The costs of chemical disasters total in the hundreds of billion s of dollars. To make the safety of Americans our primary priority, it is critical that chemical safety lessons are learned and shared among diverse stakeholders that use hazardous chemicals. The CSB has investigated numerous high consequence incidents tha t have resulted in millions of dollars in damage and a disruption to the regional and local economies.  Flooding from Hurricane Harvey in August 2017 disabled the refrigeration system at a chemical plant near Houston. As the temperature of chemicals store d at the facility rose, the trailers containing them began to catch fire, and emergency responders issued a six-day evacuation of residents within a 1.5 mile radius of the plant.  A 2016 explosion at one of the country’s four nitrous oxide production facilities led to a chemical shortage that affected hospitals, dentists, universities, food producers, and other industrial facilities across the country.  A 2013 explosion at a fertilizer facility resulted in 15 fatalities and more than 260 injuries; $230 mill ion in insurance-related losses; and $16 million in Federal disaster assistance; however, the company held only a $1 million insurance policy.  The 2012 explosion at a refinery resulted in medical treatment for 15,000 residents; $2 million in fines and restitution; and $447 million in increased gas prices for California consumers.  A 2010 explosion at an offshore drilling rig in the Gulf of Mexico resulted in $21 billion in settlements; $13 billion in economic and medical claims from local businesses and r esidents; 11 workers killed and 17 injured; and four million barrels of oil spilled into the Gulf of Mexico. If the CSB’s many safety lessons prevent at least one catastrophic incident, the costs avoided from damage to facilities and the surrounding communities, legal settlements, and the loss of human lives far outweigh the agency’s annual budget. Safety and prosperity are compatible. Strong safety programs are critical for the economic success of the many industries that use hazardous chemicals. If we do not learn from previous incidents, Americans will continue to spend billions of dollars responding to new ones, jeopardizing the prosperity of the affected industries. Through its independent investigations, the CSB plays a unique role in fostering collaboration with industry, regulators, standards setting bodies and professional organizations, thus emphasizing the CSB’s vital role in driving critical chemical safety change in the United States. The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors request that Co ngress continues the CSB and the important work that they perform. Please contact Randy Sawyer at (925) 335 -3210, randy.sawyer@hsd.cccounty.us or me if you have any further questions. Sincerely Karen Mitchoff Chair cc: Board of Supervisors Anna Roth, Contra Costa Health Services Director RECOMMENDATION(S): Adopt Position Adjustment Resolution No. 22262 to cancel one vacant permanent-intermittent Substance Abuse Counselor (VHVC) position (#14623) and add one permanent full-time Substance Abuse Counselor (VHVC) position at salary level and grade TC5-1436 ($4,941 - $6,006) in the Health Services Department. (Represented) FISCAL IMPACT: Upon approval, there is no fiscal impact for this position adjustment. BACKGROUND: With the Drug Medi-Cal Waiver, Behavioral Health Division’s Alcohol and Other Drug is experiencing an increased demand for substance abuse treatment programs especially at its Discovery House location. The division believes by canceling a permanent-intermittent Substance Abuse Counselor position and adding a permanent full-time Substance Abuse Counselor position it will help address part of this increased need. In addition, permanent-intermittent positions have proven to be more difficult to fill than permanent full-time positions. Based on evaluations of the needs of the unit and its patient population, the division has determined converting this Substance Abuse Counselor position from permanent-intermittent to permanent full-time would best fulfill this demand. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Melissa Carofanello, (925) 957-5248 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 32 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Cancel one permanent intermittent Substance Abuse Counselor and add one permanent full time Substance Abuse Counselor in the Health Services Dept. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this action is not approved, the Health Services’ Department will not be able to adequately hire and staff Alcohol and Other Drug Program’s Discovery House. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS P300 22262_Cxl PI Substance Abuse Counselor and Add Perm Substance Abuse Counselor in HSD MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed P300 22262 POSITION ADJUSTMENT REQUEST NO. 22262 DATE 2/26/2018 Department No./ Department HEALTH SERVICES Budget Unit No. 0540 Org No. 6381 Agency No. A 18 Action Requested: Cancel one permanent-intermittent Substance Abuse Counselor (VHVC) position (#14623) at salary plan and grade TC5-1436 ($4,941.85 - $6,006.84) and add one full-time permanent Substance Abuse Counselor (VHVC) position at salary plan and grade TC5-1436 ($4,941.85 - $6,006.84) in the Health Services Department. (Represented) Proposed Effective Date: 3/14/2018 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 $0.00 Net County Cost $0.00 Total this FY $0.00 N.C.C. this FY $0.00 SOURCE OF FUNDING TO OFFSET ADJUSTMENT Cost neutral Department must initiate necessary adjustment and submit to CAO. Use additional sheet for further explanations or comments. Melissa Carofanello ______________________________________ (for) Department Head REVIEWED BY CAO AND RELEASED TO HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT Susan Smith 3/29/2018 ___________________________________ ________________ Deputy County Administrator Date HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATIONS DATE Exempt from Human Resources review under delegated authority. Amend Resolution 71/17 establishing positions and resolutions allocating classes to the Basic / Exempt salary schedule. Effective: Day following Board Action. (Date) ___________________________________ ________________ (for) Director of Human Resources Date COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION: DATE: 4/3/18 Approve Recommendation of Director of Human Resources Disapprove Recommendation of Director of Human Resources /s/ Julie DiMaggio Enea Other: Approve as recommended by the Department. ___________________________________ (for) County Administ rator 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 REQUEST FOR PROJECT POSITIONS Department Date 4/3/2018 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 o f: 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 consid ered. 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 RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 22248 to add one Children’s Services System Support Specialist (XATA) (represented) position at Salary Plan and Grade 3R5 1409 ($4,811 - $5,848) and cancel Eligibility Worker III (XHTB) (represented) vacant position #4916 at Salary Plan and Grade 255 1334 ($4,466 - $5,428) in the Children and Family Services Bureau of the Employment and Human Services Department. FISCAL IMPACT: Upon approval of this action, the net county cost will increase by $1,772 for FY 2017/2018. The annual pension expense increase is $2,624. This position is funded 44% Federal revenue, 39% State revenue, and 17% County cost. BACKGROUND: The Employment and Human Services Department, Children and Family Services Bureau (CFS) has determined the need to add an additional Children’s Services Systems Support Specialist (CSSSS) position to support CFS Bureau staff and adequately implement the new web-based statewide Child Welfare Services/Case Management System (CWS/CMS). The current two (2) Children’s Services Systems Support Specialists work with more than five (5) different computer systems, in addition to CWS/CMS, and provide on-going trainings to the Children and Family Services staff on the use of these systems. Additionally, APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Cheryl Morse 925 608-5023 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: EHSD C. 33 To:Board of Supervisors From:Kathy Gallagher, Employment & Human Services Director Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Add One Children’s Services System Support Specialist Position and Cancel One Vacant Eligibility Worker III in CFS EHSD BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) the continuous turnover in staff at all levels, primarily social workers, has increased the need for CSSSS to provide on-going trainings. Due to the increase in on-going trainings and support to CFS Bureau staff, and the implementation of the new web-based statewide Child Welfare Services/Case Management System (CWS/CMS) the department is requesting to add one additional position. The cost to add the new Children's Services Systems Support Specialist position will be offset by the cancellation of one vacant Eligibility Worker III vacant position. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Children and Family Services (CFS) is currently on a state performance improvement plan after performing poorly on the Federal Child and Family Services Review. Missing and incorrect data in the case management system has adversely affected the state and federal measures and outcomes for CFS. Not having adequate staffing will impact compliance, quality control, and services to youth and families. The Children and Family Services Bureau continues to be at risk of not being in compliance with the State Division 31 regulations and Federal mandates of Title IV-E program requirements. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: The recommendation supports all of the following children's outcomes: (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. Without proper training and support, Child Welfare Social Workers and support staff will not have the appropriate skills and knowledge to operate the state mandated case management system. This will impact timely assessments of risk and safety, as well as services to youth and families. Missing and incorrect data in the case management system can also affect children’s eligibility for federal aid and newly mandated services through initiatives such as Katie A. mental health services, Commercially Sexually Exploited Child (CSEC), and the National Youth in Transition Database (NYTD). AGENDA ATTACHMENTS P300 No. 22248 EHSD MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed P300 22248 POSITION ADJUSTMENT REQUEST NO. 22248 DATE 2/26/2018 Department No./ Department Employment and Human Services Budget Unit No. 0502 Org No. 5216 Agency No. A19 Action Requested: Add one (1) Children's Services System Support Specialist (XATA)(represented) full time position at Salary Plan and Grade 3R5 1409 ($4811 - $5848) and cancel one (1) Eligibility Worker III (XHTB) (represented) vacant full time pos ition at Salary Plan and Grade 255 1334 ($4466 - $5428) position # 4916. AR #43660 Proposed Effective Date: 4/1/2018 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 $7,495.00 Net County Cost $7,088.00 Total this FY $1,874.00 N.C.C. this FY $1,772.00 SOURCE OF FUNDING TO OFFSET ADJUSTMENT 44% Federal, 39 %State, 17% County cost Department must initiate necessary adjustment and submit to CAO. Use additional sheet for further explanations or comments. Cheryl Morse 608-5023 ______________________________________ (for) Department Head REVIEWED BY CAO AND RELEASED TO HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT Kristen Lackey 3/12/2018 ___________________________________ ________________ Deputy County Administrator Date HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATIONS DATE 3/15/2018 Add one Children’s Services System Support Specialist (XATA) (represented) position at Salary Plan and Grade 3R5 1409 ($4,811 - $5,848) and cancel one vacant Eligibility Worker III (XHTB) (represented) position #4916 at Salary Plan and Grade 255 1334 ($4,466 - $5,428) in the Children and Family Services Bureau of the Employment and Human Services Department. Amend Resolution 71/17 establishing positions and resolutions allocating classes to the Basic / Exempt salary schedule. Effective: Day following Board Action. (Date) OPARRA 3/15/2018 ___________________________________ ________________ (for) Director of Human Resources Date COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION: DATE 04/04/18 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) / posi tion(s) as follows: P300 (M347) Rev 3/15/01 REQUEST FOR PROJECT POSITIONS Department Date 4/4/2018 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 & Benefit s 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 p osition(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 l eave from current job 2. Non-County employee Provide a justification if filling position(s) by C1 or C2 USE ADDITIONAL PAPER IF NECESSARY RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 22261 to reassign seven (7) filled positions and incumbents (represented) from Department 0504 (Workforce Services Bureau) to Department 0503 (Aging and Adult Services Bureau), as specified in Attachment A, in the Employment and Human Services Department effective April 1, 2018. FISCAL IMPACT: Upon approval, this action will have a salary and benefit cost shift from the Workforce Services Bureau (0504) to the Aging and Adult Services Bureau (0503). This shift is necessary due to revenue cuts in Workforce Services and available revenues to support additional positions and services in Aging and Adult. This action has no net county cost increase. BACKGROUND: The Employment and Human Services Department (EHSD) is requesting to move the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) Advocacy program, positions and employees from the Workforce Services Bureau to the Aging and Adult Services Bureau. The SSI Advocacy Program staff to be transferred are five Social Worker positions, one Social Work Supervisor I position, and one Clerk-Experienced APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Holly Trieu (925) 608-5024 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: EHSD C. 34 To:Board of Supervisors From:Kathy Gallagher, Employment & Human Services Director Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Reassign Seven Filled Positions and Incumbents Effective April 1, 2018 from Department 0504 to Department 0503 in EHSD BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) Level position. SSI Advocacy provides assistance to disabled adults to apply for SSI disability benefits. The program serves all adults but it predominantly supports those adults without dependent children that are served in the General Assistance program. In order to improve coordination with the General Assistant program, the SSI Advocacy program would best be placed within Aging and Adult Services Bureau and under the direction of the EHS Division Manager over the General Assistant division. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this action is not approved, the department will not be able to maximize efficiency in administering the SSI Advocacy program. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS P300 No. 22261 EHSD P300 2261 Att A MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed P300 22261 POSITION ADJUSTMENT REQUEST NO. 22261 DATE 3/15/2018 Department No./ Department Employment and Human Services Budget Unit No. 0503 Org No. 5308 Agency No. A19 Action Requested: Reassign seven filled positions and incumbents from Department 0504 (Workforce Services Bureau) to Department 0503 (A ging and Adult Services ), as specified in Attachment A, in the Employment and Human Services Department . Propos ed Effective Date: 4/1/2018 Classification Questionnaire attached: Yes No / Cost is within Department’s budget: Yes No Total One-Time Costs (non-salary) associat ed with request: $0.00 Estimated total cost adjustment (salary / benefits / one time): Total annual cost $0.00 Net County Cost $0.00 Total this FY $0.00 N.C.C. this FY 0 SOURCE OF FUNDING TO OFFSET ADJUSTMENT Department must initiate necessary adjustment and submit to CAO. Use additional sheet for further explanations or comments. Holly Trieu 925-608-5024 ______________________________________ (for) Department Head REVIEWED BY CAO AND RELEASED TO HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT Kristen Lackey 3/28/18 ___________________________________ ________________ Deputy County Administrator Date HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATIONS DATE 3/29/2018 Reassign seven (7) filled positions and incumbents (represented) from Department 0504 (Workforce Services Bureau) to Department 0503 (Aging and Adult Services Bureau), as specified in Attachment A, in the Employment and Human Services Department effective April 1, 2018. Amend Resolution 71/17 establishing positions and resolutions allocating classes to the Basic / Exempt salary schedule. Effective: Day following Board Action. 4/1/2018(Date) D. Dinsmore 3/29/2018 ___________________________________ ________________ (for) Director of Human Resources Date COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION: DATE Approve Recommendation of Director of Human Resources Disapprove Recommendation of Director of Human Resources 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 REQUEST FOR PROJECT POSITIONS Department Date 3/29/2018 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 & Benefit s Costs : b. Support Cost s : (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 consi dered. 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 i s 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 jo b 2. Non-County employee Provide a justification if filling position(s) by C1 or C2 USE ADDITIONAL PAPER IF NECESSARY AGENCY:Employment and Human Services (A-19) EFFECTIVE: April 1, 2018 REASSIGN POSITIONS Position #Classification Class Code Employee # OR VACANT From Dept # To Dept # To Org # 5004 Social Worker X0VC 63392 0504 0503 5308 5077 Social Worker X0VC 80223 0504 0503 5308 13874 Social Worker X0VC 53347 0504 0503 5308 13875 Social Worker X0VC 76970 0504 0503 5308 13876 Social Worker X0VC 72549 0504 0503 5308 3995 Social Work Supervisor I X0HB 55437 0504 0503 5308 16204 Clerk-Experienced Level JWXB 83934 0504 0503 5330 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY POSITIONS TO BE REASSIGNED P300 No. 22261 ‐ Attachment A RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 22267 to add one (1) full-time Health Services Reimbursement Accountant (VCTA) position at salary plan and grade ZA5-1854 ($7,475-$10,017) in the Health Services Department. (Represented) FISCAL IMPACT: Upon approval, this action has an approximate annual cost of $192,666 with pension costs of $42,675 included. The increased cost will be funded 100% by Hospital Enterprise Fund I. BACKGROUND: Contra Costa Health Services Finance Division is requesting to add one full-time permanent Health Services Reimbursement Accountant position to assume a management role in the Finance Reporting unit. The primary responsibility of this position will be to manage and oversee the Financial Reporting unit. Duties and responsibilities include: performing complex financial and accounting work, functioning as a section leader, supervising the work of other accounting staff, and overseeing the planning and operations of the unit to ensure all deadlines are met in a timely matter. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Shelanda Adams, 925-957-5263 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 35 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Add One Health Services Reimbursement Accoutant Position in the Health Services Department CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this action is not approved, the Health Services Finance Division will be deficient in management over the Financial Reporting unit. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS P300 22267_Add Health Services Reimbursement Acct Position in HSD MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed P300 22266 POSITION ADJUSTMENT REQUEST NO. 22267 DATE 3/20/2018 Department No./ Department HEALTH SERVICES Budget Unit No. 0860 Org No. 6567 Agency No. A 18 Action Requested: Add one permanent full -time Health Services Reimbursement Accountant (VCTA) position at salary plan and grade ZA5-1854 ($7,475 - $10,017) in the Health Services Department. (Represented) Proposed Effective Date: 4/11/2018 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 t otal cost adjustment (salary / benefits / one time): Total annual cost $192,666.76 Net County Cost $0.00 Total this FY $48,166.68 N.C.C. this FY $0.00 SOURCE OF FUNDING TO OFFSET ADJUSTMENT Hospital Enterprise Fund I Department must initiate necessary adjustment and submit to CAO. Use additional sheet for further explanations or comments. Shelanda Adams ______________________________________ (for) Department Head REVIEWED BY CAO AND RELEASED TO HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT Susan Smith 4/3/2018 ___________________________________ ________________ Deputy County Administrator Date HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATIONS DATE Exempt from Human Resources review under delegated authority. Amend Resolution 71/17 establishing positions and resolutions allocating classes to the Basic / Exempt salary schedule. Effective: Day following Board Action. (Date) ___________________________________ ________________ (for) Director of Human Resources Date COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION: DATE 4/3/18 Approve Recommendation of Director of Human Resources Disapprove Recommendation of Director of Human Resources /s/ Julie DiMaggio Enea Other: Approve as recommended by the Department. ___________________________________ (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 REQUEST FOR PROJECT POSITIONS Department Date 4/3/2018 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 b enefit 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 a nalysis 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 RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 22263 to add one (1) full-time Automated Call Distribution Coordinator II (LBNA) position at salary plan and grade ZB5-1714 ($6,507-$7,910) and cancel one vacant full-time Network Administrator I (LNSA) position (#15732) at salary plan and grade ZA5-1694 ($6,380-$7,755) in the Health Services Department. (Represented) FISCAL IMPACT: Upon approval, this action has an approximate annual increase of $2,521 with estimate pension costs of $660 already included. The increased cost will be funded 100% by Hospital Enterprise Fund I. BACKGROUND: Contra Costa County Health Services (CCHS) Information Technology (IT) Unit is requesting to add one full-time permanent Automated Call Distribution Coordinator II (LBNA) position and cancel one vacant full-time Network Administrator I (LNSA) position (#15732). Due to the increase in the number of call centers over the last couple of years, the IT unit is requesting to add one Automated Call Distribution Coordinator II position. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Shelanda Adams, 925-957-5263 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 36 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Add Automated Call Dist Coordinator II and Cancel Network Admin I Positions in the Health Services Department BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) Contra Costa County Health Services operates 11 call centers, including: IT’s Service Desk, Financial Counseling, CCHP, Appointment Unit, Advice Nurse, and others units. Previously, support functions were performed by a Network Administrator as an additional duty. As the number of call centers grew, new technologies were implemented and the technology's complexity also evolved which has led to the need for a full-time Automated Call Distribution Coordinator II position. It is now evident that an individual with the specific skills and experience to support the unit’s mission critical applications is needed. Typical tasks to be performed by this new position will include testing new technology and software upgrades, performing preventive maintenance, troubleshooting routing issues between the phone service provider, the phone system and call distribution system, monitoring performance, creating and supporting call center work flows, and developing and producing management reports. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this action is not approved, the Information Technology Unit will not have adequate staff to support mission critical applications. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS P300 22263_Add Auto Call Dist Coord II and Cxl NW Admin I in HSD MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed P300 22263 POSITION ADJUSTMENT REQUEST NO. 22263 DATE 3/28/2018 Department No./ Department HEALTH SERVICES Budget Unit No. 0540 Org No. 6555 Agency No. A 18 Action Requested: Add one permanent full-time Automated Call Distribution Coordinator II (LBNA) position at salary plan and grade ZB5-1714 ($6,507 - $7,910) and c ancel one vacant permanent full-time Network Administrator I (LNSA) position (#15732) at salary plan and grade ZA5-1694 ($6,308 - $7,755) in the Health Services Department . (Represented) Proposed Effective Date: 4/11/2018 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 $2,521.93 Net County Cost $0.00 Total this FY $630.48 N.C.C. this FY $0.00 SOURCE OF FUNDING TO OFFSET ADJUSTMENT 100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I Department must initiate necessary adjustment and submit to CAO. Use additional sheet for further explanations or comments. Shelanda Adams ______________________________________ (for) Department Head REVIEWED BY CAO AND RELEASED TO HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT Susan Smith 4/2/2018 ___________________________________ ________________ Deputy County Administrator Date HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATIONS DATE Exempt from Human Res ources review under delegated authority. Amend Resolution 71/17 establishing positions and resolutions allocating classes to the Basic / Exempt salary schedule. Effective: Day following Board Action. (Date) ___________________________________ ________________ (for) Director of Human Resources Date COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION: DATE 4/3/18 Approve Recommendation of Director of Human Resources Disapprove Recommendation of Director of Human Resources /s/ Julie DiMaggio Enea Other: Approve as recommended by the Department. ___________________________________ (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 REQUEST FOR PROJECT POSITIONS Department Date 4/3/2018 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 o f: 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 consid ered. 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 RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a lease with the Pleasant Hill Executive Park Association, for 9,563 square feet of office space for the Health Services Department – First Hope/ First Break program. The term of this lease is 10 years with one five-year renewal term. The annual rental payment for the first year is $214,596 with annual increases thereafter, under the terms and conditions set forth in the lease. AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute the lease on behalf of Contra Costa County, and any renewal options under the terms and conditions set forth in the lease. FISCAL IMPACT: 100% Mental Health Services Act funds. The lease was anticipated and budgeted in the Health Services Department approved 2017/2018 budget. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Julin Perez, (925) 313-2010 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 37 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Execute a Lease for Health Services Department – First Hope/ First Break program, 391 Taylor Blvd., Ste. 100, Pleasant Hill. BACKGROUND: The space that Health Services Department - First Hope/ First Break program occupies is not sufficient program space for anticipated and approved growth. The cost of updating the space to bring current location up to date to run the program efficiently is very expensive. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this lease is not approved, the Health Services Department - First Hope/First Break will not be able to hire staff to support the growth of the program and the County will incur additional expenses in finding a new location. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: The First Hope/First Break program serves the most vulnerable children and adolescents facing serious mental health challenges. The growth of the program will significantly increase capacity to meet the mental health needs of youth recently experiencing a first episode of psychosis. ATTACHMENTS Lease RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the County, Amendment Agreement #28-694-17 with the City of Concord, Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), to incorporate updated contract language that the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requires to use Community Development Block Grant funds for the Adult Interim Housing Program, with no change to the term August 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018. FISCAL IMPACT: No change in amount payable to the County of $10,000. BACKGROUND: On October 17, 2017, the Board of Supervisors approved Grant Agreement #28-694-16 with the City of Concord CDBG, for the operation of the Adult Interim Housing Program for fiscal years 2017-2018. The Health Services Department continues to seek funding to operate the emergency shelter program at full capacity on a year-round basis. Each year, the shelters provide interim housing and support services to over 800 individuals per year. The CDBG program, funded by the U.S. Department of HUD, is a source of public funding providing valuable housing and service benefits to homeless persons of Contra Costa County. Without such funding, the emergency shelter program may have to operate at a reduced capacity. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Lavonna Martin, 925-608-6701 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: L Walker, M Wilhelm C. 38 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Amendment Agreement #28-694-17 with the City of Concord CDBG funding for the operation of the Adult Interim Housing Program for Adults BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) Approval of Grant Amendment #28-694-17 will allow the City of Concord to include changes to the HUD requirements for the Adult Interim Housing Program through June 30, 2018. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this amendment is not approved, County will not be in compliance with HUD requirements to receive funding for the emergency shelter program and may have to operate at a reduced capacity. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the County Contract Amendment Agreement #29-806-2 with the City of Concord, Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), to incorporate updated contract language that the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requires to use Community Development Block Grant funds for homeless outreach services for the Coordinated Outreach, Referral and Engagement (CORE) Program with no change to the term August 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018. FISCAL IMPACT: No change in amount payable to the County of $10,000. (20% County match) BACKGROUND: On October 17, 2017, the Board of Supervisors approved Grant Agreement #29-806-1 with the City of Concord CDBG for the operation of the CORE Program which provides services to 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. The CDBG Program is funded by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and is a source of public funding providing valuable housing and service benefits to homeless persons of Contra Costa County. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Lavonna Martin, 925-608-6701 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: L Walker , M Wilhelm C. 39 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Amendment Agreement #29-806-2 with the City of Concord (Community Development Block Grant) BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) Approval of Agreement #29-806-2 will allow the City of Concord to include changes to the HUD requirements for the CORE program through June 30, 2018. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this amendment is not approved, the County will not be in compliance with HUD requirements to receive funding for the CORE program and unsheltered persons may be served at a reduced capacity. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director or designee, to execute, on behalf of the County, Standard Amendment Agreement #29-502-43 (State #17-94124, A1) with the Department of Health Care Services, to amend Standard Agreement #29-502-42 to increase the amount payable to County by $3,500,000, from $20,072,025 to a new payment limit not to exceed $23,572,025, with no change in the original term of July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2020. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this amendment agreement will result in an increase of $3,500,000 for Drug Medi-Cal Federal Participation. No County match required. BACKGROUND: The California Department of Health Care Services (DHCS) provides funding to counties for Substance Abuse Disorder (SUD) prevention and treatment services through a contractual mechanism. This contract is supported by State General Fund, Federal Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment (SAPT) Block Grant and the Federal Share of reimbursement claimed for Drug Medi-Cal services. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Tasha Scott, Marcy Wilhelm C. 40 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Amendment Agreement #29-502-43 with the Department of Health Care Services BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) On December 5, 2017, the Board of Supervisors approved Standard Agreement #29-502-42 with the Department of Health Care Services, for the period from July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2020, to provide SUD prevention and treatment services. Approval of this Standard Amendment Agreement #29-502-43, will increase funding and make technical adjustments to the budgets for the Drug Medi-Cal Substance Abuse Treatment Services, with no change in the original term, through June 30, 2020. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this amendment is not approved, the County will not be able to make adjustments to the budget and continue to receive funds to support the Substance Abuse Services, Prevention and Treatment Program. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the County Contract Amendment Agreement #28-343-3 with West Contra Costa Unified School District, a government agency, effective March 1, 2018, to amend Interagency Agreement #28-343-2 to increase the payment to County by $210,000 from $70,000 to a new payment limit not to exceed $280,000, with no change in the original term of March 1, 2017 through August 31, 2020, for additional school-based mobile clinic services in the West Contra Costa Unified School District. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this amendment agreement will result in a total payment to the County not to exceed $280,000. No County match required. BACKGROUND: On March 17, 2017, the Board of Supervisors approved Interagency Agreement #28-343-2 with West Contra Costa Unified School District for providing school-based mobile clinic services to children within the District through August 31, 2020. The agreement also includes agreeing to indemnify and hold the District harmless of any claims arising out of the County's performance of this agreement. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Daniel 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: D Morgan, M Wilhelm C. 41 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Amendment #28-343-3 with West Contra Costa Unified School District BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) Approval of Amendment Agreement #28-343-3 will allow the County to provide additional services through August 31, 2020. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this amendment is not approved, the County will not receive additional funds to support school-based mobile clinic services to children. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: This program supports the following Board of Supervisors’ community outcomes: “Children Ready for Succeeding in School” and “Communities that are Safe and Provide a High Quality of Life for Children and Families”. Expected program outcomes include an increase in the number of healthy children within the District. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Librarian, or designee, to apply for and accept a grant in an amount not to exceed $14,799 from the Pacific Library Partnership Innovation and Technology Grant Program to install and maintain a Power Tower Station for the period November 1, 2017 through October 31, 2018. FISCAL IMPACT: No Library Fund match. BACKGROUND: Contra Costa County Library will install and maintain one Power Tower station in the main lobby of the Contra Costa Regional Medical Center (CCCRMC) in downtown Martinez. A Power Tower is a combination of a fast charging station for mobile devices and a portal to access the Library’s online services. In addition to it being able to simultaneously charge up to 24 devices 30% faster than a regular charging station, it also has a 50 inch interactive touch screen that will promote library services and events, allow users to sign up for library cards and give them access the Library’s downloadable collection. Users will be able to download items from the Library’s e-collection directly to their device from the Power Tower. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 42 To:Board of Supervisors From:Melinda Cervantes, County Librarian Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Pacific Library Partnership Innovations Grant BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) In the Library’s current strategic plan, it is stated that Library service does not stop with the physical building. CCCL brings library services wherever residents are and expands reading skills and opportunities to various locations outside of its library buildings. The Library’s current strategic plan also calls for a focus on increasing services to the underserved in the County. The Power Tower will connect thousands of the county’s low-income and underserved residents who use the CCCRMC to the Library and its e-collections as well as make them aware of the larger array of services and resources available in physical libraries. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The Contra Costa Regional Medical Center (CCRMC) will not have the charging tower installed. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the County Grant Agreement #28-825-11 (MRC #18-1969), from the National Association of County and City Health Officials (NACCHO), to pay the County an amount not to exceed $7,500 for Contra Costa Medical Reserve Corps (MRC) Non-Competitive Capacity Building Grant Project, for the period February 12, 2018 through August 31, 2018. FISCAL IMPACT: Acceptance of this grant agreement will result in an amount of $7,500 from NACCHO for the County’s Medical Reserve Corps Non-Competitive Capacity Building Grant Project. No County match required. BACKGROUND: The Contra Costa MRC is housed under Contra Costa County’s Emergency Medical Services (EMS). MRC is part of the County's emergency planning and response system to address the need for additional medical professionals to respond to a medical surge event or an event such as those requiring the mass distribution of pharmaceuticals. Additionally, the MRC participates in trainings, health fairs, flu clinics, first aid, and community service. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Patricia Frost, 925-335-9554 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: L Walker , M Wilhelm C. 43 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Grant Agreement #28-825-11 from the National Association of County and City Health Officials (NACCHO) BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) The NACCHO award will provide funding to allow continuous support to County’s MRC Non-competitive Capacity Building Grant Project to enhance the Contra Costa MRC unit. On March 13, 2017, the Board of Supervisors approved submission of Grant Application #28-825-10 to NACCHO. Approval of the Grant Agreement #28-825-11 will provide funding to support the MRC Non-Competitive Capacity Building Grant Project to enhance emergency planning and response system through August 31, 2018. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this grant agreement is not approved, the County’s Emergency Medical Services will not receive funding to support its Non-Competitive Capacity Building Grant Project to continue enhancement of the MRC units. RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Resolution No. 2018/129 approving and authorizing the Sheriff-Coroner or designee, to apply for and accept the Office of the Attorney General, California Department of Justice, Division of Law Enforcement Tobacco Law Enforcement Grant Program in an amount not to exceed $97,100 for law enforcement operations to decrease juvenile access and use of tobacco products for the period June 1, 2018 through June 30, 2020. FISCAL IMPACT: Initial Revenue of $97,100; 100% State funds. BACKGROUND: The Office of the Attorney General, California Department of Justice, Division of Law Enforcement Tobacco Law Enforcement Grant Program is providing funding to apply strategies that reduce illegal sales and marketing of all tobacco products to minors. According to California Healthy Kids Survey, Contra Costa County 2016 data, thirty-two percent of 11th graders and twenty percent of 9th graders reported that it is "very easy" to obtain tobacco products within Contra Costa County. Beginning July 1, 2018 the Office of the Sheriff will conduct various enforcement operations and prevention projects in order to meet the goals of the grant if state funding is awarded. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 44 To:Board of Supervisors From:David O. Livingston, Sheriff-Coroner Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Tobacco Law Enforcement Grant CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Failure to secure state funding will result in less opportunities for the Office of the Sheriff to lower the access and use of tobacco products to juveniles in Contra Costa County. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: This grant is to help reduce the access and use of tobacco products, to include e-cigarette and vapor products, and reduce the perception of ease in which these products can be obtained. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Resolution No. 2018/129 MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed Resolution No. 2018/129 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board Adopted this Resolution on 04/10/2018 by the following vote: AYE:4 John Gioia Candace Andersen Karen Mitchoff Federal D. Glover NO: ABSENT:1 Diane Burgis ABSTAIN: RECUSE: Resolution No. 2018/129 IN THE MATTER OF: Applying for and Accepting the Office of the Attorney General, California Department of Justice, Division of Law Enforcement Tobacco Law Enforcement Grant Program and any future amendments, if any, to this Grant Program for the purpose of increasing funding provided in the original contract, without an additional resolution from the Board of Supervisors, beginning June 1, 2108 through the end of the available grant funding. WHEREAS, the County of Contra Costa is seeking funds available through the Office of the Attorney General, California Department of Justice, Division of Law Enforcement Tobacco Law Enforcement Grant Program; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisor's Authorizes the Sheriff-Coroner, Undersheriff or the Sheriff's Chief of Management Services, to execute for and on behalf of the County of Contra Costa, a public entity established under the laws of the State of California, any action necessary for the purpose of obtaining financial assistance provided by the Office of the Attorney General, California Department of Justice, Division of Law Enforcement Tobacco Law Enforcement Grant Program. 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Chief Information Officer, or designee, to execute a contract with the State of California, Department of Justice, to pay the County an amount not to exceed $47,736 for access to County's LJIS (Law and Justice Information Systems) for the period July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2020. FISCAL IMPACT: This contract will generate $47,736 in revenue for the contract period. BACKGROUND: This contract provides the Department of Justice electronic, read only, access to Contra Costa County's automated criminal information system. This access will allow the DOJ to obtain arrest and court information including charge and sentence information, court case numbers, diversion status, dismissal reasons, warrant information, probation conditions, and firearms restrictions. Contractor 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, APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Joanne Buenger, Deputy CIO 925-313-1202 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 45 To:Board of Supervisors From:Marc Shorr, Chief Information Officer Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Agreement with Department of Justice for Computer Services BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) and any other person, firm or corporation furnishing or supplying work services, material, 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 Contractor in the performance of this Agreement. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this request is not approved, the County will not be able to generate the revenue. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: None RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to execute a contract with the California Department of Fish and Game, including modified indemnification language, for use of the Sheriff's Range Facility commencing with execution of the contract through June 30, 2020. FISCAL IMPACT: No net County cost - 100% Participant fees BACKGROUND: Local, state, and federal law enforcement officers are required to complete firearms qualifications on a regular basis. The Office of the Sheriff has a firing range and classroom that can be used by other law enforcement agencies for firearms qualifications when not in use by County staff. The recommended contract provides for use of the Sheriff's Range Facilities, including firearms range and classroom, for firearms qualification of this government agency and their employees. The County Counsel's Office has approved the mutual indemnification language included in the contract. The contract agency will pay a per day fee for access to the Sheriff's Range Facility. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Negative action on this request would mean a loss of revenue for the County and a valuable loss of services for outside agencies. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III 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: April 10, 2018 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:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Range Use Contract CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: No impact. RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Resolution No. 2018/109 approving and authorizing the Sheriff-Coroner or designee, to apply for and accept a California Division of Boating and Waterways Surrendered and Abandoned Vessel Exchange Grant in an initial allocation of $300,000 for the abatement of abandoned vessels and the vessel turn in program on County waterways for the period beginning October 1, 2018 through the end of the grant funding availability. FISCAL IMPACT: $300,000; 90% State, 10% In kind match (Budgeted). BACKGROUND: The California Division of Boating and Waterways (DBW) is prepared to award Surrendered and Abandoned Vessel Exchange grant to the Office of the Sheriff to assist the Sheriff's Marine Patrol with the removal of abandoned vessels and water hazards. The funding provided by this grant will enable the Marine Patrol Unit to remove abandoned vessels and identified hazards to vessel navigation in a continued effort to protect life and property on the waterways within Contra Costa County. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 47 To:Board of Supervisors From:David O. Livingston, Sheriff-Coroner Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:California Division of Boating and Waterways Surrendered and Abandoned Vessel Exchange Grant CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Negative action on this request will result in the loss of State funding designed to significantly increase the safety and security of persons and property on the waterways within Contra Costa County. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: None. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Resolution No. 2018/109 MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed Resolution No. 2018/109 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board Adopted this Resolution on 04/10/2018 by the following vote: AYE:4 John Gioia Candace Andersen Karen Mitchoff Federal D. Glover NO: ABSENT:1 Diane Burgis ABSTAIN: RECUSE: Resolution No. 2018/109 IN THE MATTER OF: Applying for and Accepting the FY 2018/2019 California Division of Boating and Waterways Surrendered and Abandoned Vessel Exchange Grant. WHEREAS,the County of Contra Costa is seeking funds available through the California Division of Boating and Waterways Surrendered and Abandoned Vessel Exchange Grant; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors: Authorizes the Sheriff-Coroner, Undersheriff or the Sheriff's Chief of Management Services, to execute for and on behalf of the County of Contra Costa, a public entity established under the laws of the State of California, any action necessary for the purpose of obtaining financial assistance provided by the State of California for the Surrendered and Abandoned Vessel Exchange Grant. 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Resolution No. 2018/134 approving and authorizing the Sheriff-Coroner or designee, to apply for and accept Boating Safety and Enforcement Equipment Grant Funds from the California State Parks, Division of Boating and Waterways in an amount not to exceed $96,427 for the purchase and installation of diving equipment and training for the Sheriff's Dive team. FISCAL IMPACT: Revenue;100% State, $96,426.63. No County funding. BACKGROUND: The California State Parks, Division of Boating and Waterways has announced a grant opportunity under its Boating Safety and Enforcement Equipment Grant Program (BSEE). In accordance with Title 14, 6594.1 of the California Government Code of Regulations, California State Parks, Division of Boating and Waterways provides grants to local government agencies to purchase boating safety and law enforcement equipment. The application will also request funds for equipment and training to transition the Office of the Sheriff's Dive team to using surface supplied air during dive operations. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 48 To:Board of Supervisors From:David O. Livingston, Sheriff-Coroner Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Boating Safety and Enforcement Equipment Grant Program CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Should the Board decide against granting authority to apply for and accept this grant, currently unfunded equipment replacement will continue to be deferred or be purchased with County funds. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: None. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Resolution No. 2018/134 MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed Resolution No. 2018/134 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board Adopted this Resolution on 04/10/2018 by the following vote: AYE:4 John Gioia Candace Andersen Karen Mitchoff Federal D. Glover NO: ABSENT:1 Diane Burgis ABSTAIN: RECUSE: Resolution No. 2018/134 IN THE MATTER OF: Applying for and Accepting the FY 2018/2019 California State Parks, Division of Boating and Waterways, Boating Safety and Enforcement Equipment Grant. WHEREAS, the County of Contra Costa is seeking funds available through the California State Parks, Division of Boating and Waterways, Boating Safety and Enforcement Equipment Grant; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors: Authorizes the Sheriff-Coroner, Undersheriff or the Sheriff's Chief of Management Services-Exempt, to execute for and on behalf of the County of Contra Costa, a political subdivision of the State of California, any action necessary for the purpose of obtaining financial assistance provided by the State of California for the Boating Safety and Enforcement Equipment Grant. 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Resolution No. 2018/142 approving and authorizing the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to apply for and accept a grant from the California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control, in an initial amount of $62,525 to fund proactive enforcement targeting the unauthorized sale of alcoholic beverage by businesses within the County for the period July 1, 2018 through the end of the grant funding. FISCAL IMPACT: Initial revenue of $62,525 to support continued monitoring and licensing of Alcoholic Beverage Control(ABC) businesses, and to support training and other personnel costs associated with ABC licensed businesses. No matching County funds. BACKGROUND: This grant will provide the Office of the Sheriff additional staffing and resources to institute proactive enforcement and training of ABC licensed businesses in areas where the crime rate is higher than the county average. Enforcement operations will utilize a variety of methods to address sales to minors, unlicensed sales, sales to intoxicated persons, purchase of alcohol with food stamps, illegal gaming, and narcotics in licensed establishments. Expectations include a decline in alcohol related crimes and arrests, with an overall reduction in the number of police calls for service County-wide. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III 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: April 10, 2018 , County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 49 To:Board of Supervisors From:David O. Livingston, Sheriff-Coroner Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:2018 State of California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control Grant CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The Sheriff-Coroner will not be authorized to apply for and accept the grant funding. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Resolution No. 2018/142 MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed Resolution No. 2018/142 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board Adopted this Resolution on 04/10/2018 by the following vote: AYE:4 John Gioia Candace Andersen Karen Mitchoff Federal D. Glover NO: ABSENT:1 Diane Burgis ABSTAIN: RECUSE: Resolution No. 2018/142 IN THE MATTER OF: Applying for and accepting a grant from the California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control, entering into a contract with the State and any future amendments to the contract, if any, for the purpose of additional funding. WHEREAS, THE Contra Costa County Office of the Sheriff desires to undertake a certain project designated as Alcoholic Beverage Control Grant Assistance Program 2018-2019 to be funded in part from funds made available through the Grant Assistance Program (GAP) administered by the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (hereafter referred to as ABC); NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors: Authorizes the Sheriff-Coroner, Undersheriff, or the Sheriff’s Chief of Management Services, to execute for and on behalf of the County of Contra Costa, a public entity established under the laws of the State of California, any action necessary for the purpose of obtaining financial assistance provided by the California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control. IT IS AGREED that any liability arising out of the performance of this contract, including civil court actions for damages, shall be the responsibility of the grant recipient and the authorizing agency. The State of California and the ABC disclaim responsibility for any such liability. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that grant funds received hereunder shall not be used to supplant expenditures controlled by this body. IT IS ALSO AGREED that this award is not subject to local hiring freezes. 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: April 10, 2018 , County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to enter into worksite contractual/financial agreements with employers participating in the Contra Costa Works Subsidized Employment Program to allow for reimbursement of not less than $10 per hour and not to exceed $20 per hour for each of the CalWORKs clients worksited with employers during the period July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018. FISCAL IMPACT: The CalWORKs participant wage reimbursements are funded with $1,157,533 CalWORKs Single Allocation. (85% Federal, 15% State) [CFDA #93.558] BACKGROUND: As authorized by Assembly Bill AB 74, the Employment and Human Services Department (EHSD) has operated a subsidized employment program known as Contra Costa Works (CCWORKS) since 2011. Following the guidelines and funding options of AB 98 the CCWORKS program has been designed APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 50 To:Board of Supervisors From:Kathy Gallagher, Employment & Human Services Director Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Contra Costa Works (CCWORKS) Program BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) very similarly to other programs operated in the Bay Area. CalWORKs participants are screened into the program and placed with local employers (for-profit, non- profit, and public agencies) who have the responsibility for payroll, associated taxes, and workers compensation for the CCWORKS program participant worksited within their organization. The employers hire the eligible CCWORKS participants upfront and train the participants with the appropriate skills for the position in which they are placed. The participants receive a wage comparable to those workers performing the same or like duties at the worksite. A worksite agreement is executed for each participant that is placed at the employer's worksite. Under the CCWORKS program, EHSD will reimburse the employer no less than $10 per hour and up to $20 per hour for a minimum of 20 hours per week to a maximum of 40 hours per week (no overtime will be subsidized). Worksite contracts will not exceed six months. Monthly reimbursement invoices are submitted by participating employers for each CCWORKS participant placed at their worksite. The invoices are reviewed by EHSD CCWORKS staff and submitted to the EHSD Fiscal Unit for payment. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Without approval, the CCWORKS program participants will have fewer employment opportunities and may continue reliance on public benefits. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to continue the process of reimbursement to those employers participating in the Expanded CCWORKS (Contra Costa Works) Subsidized Employment Program whereby the Employment and Human Services Department (EHSD) will enter into worksite contractual/financial agreements with employers to allow for reimbursement of not less than $10 per hour but not to exceed $20 per hour for those CalWORKs clients worksited with employers during the period July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018. FISCAL IMPACT: Funded with $960,665 Expanded Subsidized Employment Allocation for the Expanded Employment program wages for CalWORKs participants. (96% Federal, 4% State) CFDA #93.558 BACKGROUND: Based upon the success of the subsidized employment programs operated in response to Senate Bill 72 which extended the State reimbursement to counties for subsidized employment programs as APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 51 To:Board of Supervisors From:Kathy Gallagher, Employment & Human Services Director Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Contra Costa Works Expanded (CCWORKS) Program BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) authorized by Assembly Bill (AB) 98 (now Assembly Bill 74), the Employment and Human Services Department (EHSD) developed and implemented the subsidized employment program known as CCWORKS (Contra Costa Works). Following the guidelines and funding options of AB 98 and building upon the success of previous Subsidized Employment and Training (SET) programs operated under the American Recovery and Reimbursement Act (ARRA), the Expanded CCWORKS program has been designed very similarly to other programs operated in the Bay Area. CalWORKs participants will be screened into the program and placed with local employers (for-profit, non- profit, and public agencies) who will have the responsibility for (under contractual/financial worksite agreements) the payroll, associated taxes, and workers compensation for each Expanded CCWORKS program participant approved and worksited within their organization. The employers will hire the eligible CalWORKs Expanded CCWORKS participants upfront and will train the participants to appropriate skills for the position in which they are placed and Expanded CCWORKS participants will receive a wage comparable to those workers performing the same or like duties at the worksite. The worksite agreement will be signed with the employer for each participant that is placed at the employer's worksite. Under the Expanded CCWORKS program, EHSD will reimburse no less than $10 per hour and not to exceed $20 per hour (due to the anticipated increase in minimum wage) for a minimum of 20 hours per week to a maximum of 40 hours per week (no overtime will be subsidized). The individual contracts with each employer will state the reimbursement process and those reimbursements will be paid on the contractual timeline of six months. Monthly reimbursement invoices will be submitted by participating employers for each client employed through the Expanded CCWORKS program. The invoices will be reviewed by EHSD CCWORKS staff and submitted to the EHSD Fiscal Unit for payment. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Without approval, the Expanded CCWORKS program participants will have fewer employment opportunities and will continue reliance on public benefits. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: Not applicable. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute an Interagency Agreement with the City of Oakland, a public entity, in an amount not to exceed $30,000 to provide Oakland Workforce Development Staff training and professional development for the period of December 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018. FISCAL IMPACT: The interagency agreement will increase department expenditures by $30,000, to be funded 100% with federal Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act Funding. BACKGROUND: The Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) requires States to identify economic regions within their states, and for local areas to coordinate planning and service delivery on a regional basis. The State of California (State) designated the East Bay Regional Planning Unit (RPU) as four local workforce areas consisting of: Contra Costa County, the City of Richmond, Alameda County, and the APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Gina Chenoweth 8-4961 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 52 To:Board of Supervisors From:Kathy Gallagher, Employment & Human Services Director Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Contract with City of Oakland for Oakland Workforce Development Board Staff Training and Professional Development BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) City of Oakland. The Workforce Development Board of Contra Costa County (WDBCCC) currently serves as the lead workforce development board for the East Bay RPU. As such, the WDBCCC receives the entire allocation of State funding dedicated to the East Bay RPU for organizing and training purposes. Each local workforce board within the State-designated RPU is responsible for complying with the training plan as developed and agreed upon by their RPU. The purpose of this Agreement is to establish the responsibilities of the WDBCCC and the City of Oakland (Agency) to identify and enroll staff to participate in the designated professional development, conferences, and/or trainings as established by the State-designated East Bay RPU. Due to an administrative error, the interagency agreement was not submitted for Board approval earlier in the fiscal year. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Contra Costa County will not meet its responsibilities as the lead agency for the State-defined East Bay Regional Planning Unit for WIOA funding. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with Ombudsman Services of Contra Costa County, Inc., a non-profit corporation of California, effective March 15, 2018, to increase the payment limit by $25,176 to a new payment limit of $271,017 for the provision of ombudsman services to seniors in long-term care with no change to the original contract term of July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018. FISCAL IMPACT: The contract amendment increases expenditures by $25,176, which will be covered by 52% State and 48% Federal funds. The State funds are comprised of Public Health Fund, L&C Program Fund, State Health Facilities Citation Penalties Account, and SNF Quality & Accountability Fund. The federal funds are comprised of Older Americans Act, Title III-B and VII-A. BACKGROUND: Ombudsman Services of Contra Costa County, Inc. provides ombudsman services to adults, in long-term care, including mediation and conciliation services, creation of Family Councils for support of families of long-term care residents, document and report investigations of physical abuse of all dependent adult and elder residents of long-term care facilities, education and training on seniors' rights, benefits, and APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Gina Chenoweth 8-4961 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 53 To:Board of Supervisors From:Kathy Gallagher, Employment & Human Services Director Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Amend Contract with Ombudsman Services of Contra Costa County, Inc. for Ombudsman Services to Seniors BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) entitlements. This payment limit increase is from the California Department of Aging’s (CDA) annual redistribution of unused funds from all California counties. Funds are redistributed based on county populations and are designated for the increase of budget line items that are not direct service delivery. The increase will be used toward the contractor's rent, which is a CDA allowable expense. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Contractor will not be able to access the additional funding allocated to Contra Costa County by the California Department of Aging. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to execute on behalf of the Public Works Director, a purchase order, with Netronix Integration, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $ 300,000 for access control products for the period from April 1, 2018 through March 31, 2020 Countywide. (100% General Fund). FISCAL IMPACT: This cost is to be funded through Public Works Facilities budget (100% General Fund). BACKGROUND: Public Works Materials Management is responsible for access control parts and supplies. Our facilities are equipped with Lenel brand access control hardware. This is the equipment that allows staff to gain access to buildings and gates with our keycards. As solicited on Bidsync # 1706-230, Netronix Integration, Inc. has been awarded this commodity. This commodity was bid for a two (2) year term with three (3) possible one year extensions. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 54 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:APPROVE a Purchase Order with Netronix Integration, Inc. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this agreement is not approved, then purchasing access control products through Northland Control Systems will discontinue. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Mark Scott Construction, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $1,500,000 to provide on-call fire, water and mold mitigation services, for the period April 1, 2018 through March 31, 2021, Countywide. FISCAL IMPACT: This cost is to be funded through Facilities Services maintenance budget. (100% General Fund) BACKGROUND: Public Works Facilities Services is responsible for emergency repair and mitigation of County facilities damaged by fire, water or mold. Government Code Section 25358 authorizes the County to contract for maintenance and upkeep of County buildings if the County solicits bids for the work and awards the contract to the lowest responsible bidders. This contract was bid on Bidsync # 1710-256. Mark Scott Construction, Inc. is one of three vendors being awarded this type of work as a lowest responsible bidder. Facilities Services is requesting this contract be approved APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 55 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:APPROVE a contract with Mark Scott Construction, Inc. BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) for a period covering the next three years. The mitigation service rates, and the asbestos abatement service rates, are listed in the attached rate schedule. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved, fire, water and mold mitigation services will be discontinued. ATTACHMENTS Rate Schedule Attachment A Rates MITIGATION SERVICE RATES MITIGATION LABOR RATES Category of Mitigation Labor Water and Mold Technician General Labor On Site Supervisor Carpenter Electrician Emergency Service Inspection PACK OUT MATERIALS & CHARGES Items Boxes Moving Van Off -Site Storage Misc. Packing Supplies Blanket Rental MITIGATION SUPPLIES Items Hepa filters 6 mill Plastic Full face Respirator - Service & cartridges Disinfectant IAQ2000 Disposable suits, gloves & boots. Non-haz. debris removal (min. charge) Non-haz. debris removal Misc. consumable supplies (min. charge). Misc. consumable supplies Decontamination of Equipment MITIGATION EQUIPMENT Rental & Usage Items Dehumidifier Dehumidifier Large Dehumidifier XL Extraction Unit Sewage Extraction Unit Air mover Air mover axial Negative air 500 Negative air 1800 Negative air 2000 Regular Scheduled Emergency Hours Overtime Services 108.00/Hr. $138.00/Hr. $168.00/Hr. 108.00/Hr. $138.00/Hr. $168.00/Hr. 123.00/Hr. $138.00/Hr. $168.00/Hr. 150.00/Hr. $196.00/Hr. $242.00/Hr. 180.00/Hr. $230.00/Hr. $285.00/Hr. 375.00/ Ea. $450.00/Ea. $500.00/Ea. Unit Price Units 3.85 EA 250.00 Day 1.75 SF/Month 250.00 Day 13.00 EA Unit Price Units 230.00 EA 106.00 Roll 42.00 Day 45.60 Gal. 22.25 Set 250.00 Min. 30.00 Yd. 200.00 Min. 0.50 SF 75.00 EA Unit Price Units 75.00 Day 85.00 Day 121.00 Day 125.00 Day 175.00 Day 45.00 Day 50.00 Day 98.00 Day 145.00 Day 190.00 Day Page 1 of 3 Attachment A Rates MITIGATION EQUIPMENT (cont.) Unit Price Units Negative Air 1000 Rental & Usage Items Unit Price Units Hepa Vac 50.00 Day Hydroxyl 290.00 Day Ozone 120.00 Day Floor drying unit 280.00 Day inject a dry unit 180.00 Day Tension poles 19.00 Ea/Wk. Service Truck Charge 20.00 Day ASBESTOS ABATEMENT SERVICE RATES ABATEMENT LABOR RATES Regular Scheduled Category of Asbestos Labor Hours Overtime Technician $118.00/Hr. $148.00/hr, Supervisor $122.00/Hr. $142.00/Hr Project Manager $132.00/Hr. $142.00/Hr ABATEMENT EQUIPMENT Rental & Usage Items Unit Price Units Negative Air 1000 141.00 Day Negative Air 2000 189.00 Day HEPA Vac 81.00 Day ABATEMENT SUPPLIES Items Unit Price Units 4 ML 20X100 Clear Poly 62.00 Ea. 6 ML 20x100 Clear Poly 97.00 Ea. 6ML 30x36 Clear No Prt Bag 2.55 Ea. 6ML 30x36 Prt Bag 4.00 Ea. Inline High Grade Teal Tape 2" 7.76 Ea. Intertape CM& (part#TA-CM7-2) 7.47 Ea. Inlne Super Polytack Spray Glue 3.38 Ea. Kappler Nextgen 3XL 5.10 Ea. G-4719 Blue dipped glove 5.37 Ea. Hepa Filter #7580 P100 10.13 Ea. Respirator wipes 0.16 Ea. STAPLES, 1/4"-9/16" 14.92 Box Disposable suits, gloves & boots. 22.25 Set Half face Respirator - Service & cartridges 30.00 Day Blades for 8" Scraper 1.08 Ea. Sawzall Blade 6" Metal 2.48 Ea. pre filters 24" 1.32 Ea. Page 2 of 3 Emergency Services 178.00/Hr. 178.00/Hr. 178.00/Hr. ABATEMENT SUPPLIES (cont.) Items pleated filter 24" 10" X 25' Two Ply Flex Mylar 12"x25' Two -Ply Mylar Zip -Up Unit 3"x7' Dust Bags AA- Vace White Scrim Towels 15x27 Asbestos Sign English Decontamination of Machine OTHER Equipment Rental Markup Materials Markup Sub Contractors Markup Permits Bridge Tolls Freight Attachment A Rates Unit Price Units 7.64 Ea. 13.84 Ea. 16.67 Ea. 10.53 Ea. 3.25 Ea. 0.20 Ea. 0.34 Ea. 170.00 Ea. 20% with Documentation on Request 20% with Documentation on Request 20% with Documentation on Request At Cost At Cost At Cost Page 3 of 3 RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Sharjo, Inc., d/b/a ServiceMaster Restoration Services in an amount not to exceed $1,500,000 to provide on-call fire, water and mold mitigation services, for the period April 1, 2018 through March 31, 2021, Countywide. FISCAL IMPACT: This cost is to be funded through Facilities Services maintenance budget. (100% General Fund) BACKGROUND: Public Works Facilities Services is responsible for emergency repair and mitigation of County facilities damaged by fire, water or mold. Government Code Section 25358 authorizes the County to contract for maintenance and upkeep of County building if the County solicits bids for the work and awards the contract to the lowest responsible bidders. This contract was bid on Bidsync # 1710-256. ServiceMaster Restoration Services is one of three vendors being awarded this type of work as a lowest responsible bidder. Facilities Services is requesting this contract be approved APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 56 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:APPROVE a contract with Sharjo, Inc., d/b/a ServiceMaster Restoration Services BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) for a period covering the next three years. The mitigation service rates, and the asbestos abatement service rates, are listed in the attached rate schedule. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved, fire, water and mold mitigation services will be discontinued. ATTACHMENTS Rate Schedule RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, on behalf of the Employment and Human Services Department, to pay the California Department of Social Services an amount not to exceed $198,894 to reimburse the State for payments made on behalf of Contra Costa County to the Private Adoptions Agency Program serving youth who would otherwise be in foster care during the 2016-17 fiscal year. FISCAL IMPACT: County to pay California Department of Social Services $198,894 for reimbursement to the Private Adoptions Agencies Program from 100% State 2011 Realignment funds. BACKGROUND: The Private Adoption Agency Reimbursement Program is an incentive program for private adoption agencies to recruit adoptive families for children who would otherwise remain in foster care because of age, membership in a sibling group, medical or psychological disability or other circumstance that would make adoptive placement of these children especially difficult. The California Department of Social Services has funded the shortage in this program based on the commitment that counties will repay the shortage. Counties reimburse the State annually for Private Adoption Agencies Program services. The payment amount is based on a percentage derived from the past five years of Contra Costa County's expenses. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Elaine Burres, 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 57 To:Board of Supervisors From:Kathy Gallagher, Employment & Human Services Director Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Private Adoption Agency Reimbursement Program CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Without the State funding of the Private Adoption Agency Program, hard to place youth may remain in foster care. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: The board order supports one of the community outcomes established in the Children's Report Card: "Children and Youth Healthy and Preparing for Productive Adulthood" by placing youth who would otherwise remain in foster care into adoptive families. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Chief Probation Officer, or designee, to execute a contract with Contra Costa County Office of Education (CCCEO) in an amount not to exceed $212,270 to provide assistance to individuals as they transition from the County’s adult detention facilities for the period of January 1, 2018 through June 30, 2019. FISCAL IMPACT: 100% Community Corrections Performance Incentive funds (SB 678) BACKGROUND: Under this contract will provide a Reentry Transition Specialist. The Reentry Transition Specialist will provide assistance to individuals as they transition from the County’s adult detention facilities back into Contra Costa County communities. They will assist incarcerated individuals by identifying and addressing barriers to employment, education and community reintegration; providing incarcerated individuals individualized case management services. They will link students with appropriate support resources, including reentry centers, social services, housing authorities, drug/alcohol rehabilitations services, DMV, health services and other appropriate community based resources and providers. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Without this contract, a key linkages will be unavailable for Contra Costa's adult reentry population. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Danielle Fokkema, 925-313-4195 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 58 To:Board of Supervisors From:Todd Billeci, County Probation Officer Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Contract with Contra Costa County Office of Education RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute an amendment and extension to the Interagency Agreement with Ambrose Recreation and Parks District, a public entity, effective May 1, 2018, to increase the payment limit by $45,273 to a new payment limit of $144,818 and to extend the term from June 30, 2018 to a new term ending December 31, 2018 for the provision of Promoting Safe and Stable Families Program Services. FISCAL IMPACT: The amendment will increase expenditures by $45,273, which will be covered 100% by Federal Promoting Safe and Stable Families Program Funds. [CFDA#: 93.556] BACKGROUND: Ambrose Recreation and Parks District (Ambrose) was selected through a competitive bid process (Request For Proposals 1135) by the Employment and Human Services Department (EHSD), Children and Family Services Bureau (CFS). The department sought a community-based and/or faith-based organizations to provide Promoting Safe and Stable Families (PSSF) services in Contra Costa County. The purpose of PSSF services is to prevent the unnecessary separation of children from their families, improve the quality APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Gina Chenoweth 8-4961 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 59 To:Board of Supervisors From:Kathy Gallagher, Employment & Human Services Director Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Amend Interagency Agreement with Ambrose Recreation and Parks District for Promoting Safe and Stable Families Program Services BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) of care and services to children and their families, and to ensure permanency for children by reuniting them with their parents, by adoption, or by another permanent living arrangement. Ambrose is a public agency that serves as the fiscal agent for the Bay Point Teen Center and provides a wide array of services under the PSSF Program, including provision of organized youth leadership development, recreational activities, and case management and information referral services for pregnant and parenting teens. This amendment and extension provides continued services while a new Request For Proposal (RFP) can be processed. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Low-income Bay Point youth between the ages of 12-18 will not have the opportunity to access services at the Bay Point Teen Center that improve schoolwork, maintain satisfactory school performance, build confidence, strengthen their connection to the community, or gain work, life, and academic experiences that prepare them for a successful transition into adulthood. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: This contract supports all five community outcomes: 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, by providing resources and referrals to support self-sufficiency. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Minh Nguyen, M.D., an individual, in an amount not to exceed $174,720, to provide outpatient psychiatric services to patients in West Contra Costa County for the period from April 1, 2018 through March 31, 2019. FISCAL IMPACT: This contract is funded 100% by Mental Health Realignment. (No rate increase) BACKGROUND: On April 18, 2017, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #74-488-2 with Ming Nguyen, M.D., for the provision of outpatient psychiatric services, including, but not limited to diagnosing, counseling, evaluating, and providing medical and therapeutic treatment to mentally ill adults in West Contra Costa County for the period April 1, 2017 through March 31, 2018. Approval of Contract #74-488-3 will allow the contractor to continue providing outpatient psychiatric services, through March 31, 2019. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved, the County’s clients will not have access to the contractor’s outpatient psychiatric services. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: D Morgan, M Wilhelm C. 60 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Contract #74-488-3 with Minh Nguyen, M.D. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the County, Contract #76-564-1with Prometheus Laboratories, Inc., a corporation, in an amount not to exceed $300,000, to provide outside laboratory testing services for Contra Costa Regional Medical Center (CCRMC) and Health Centers for the period November 1, 2017 through October 31, 2020. FISCAL IMPACT: This contract is funded 100% by Hospital Enterprise Fund I. (No rate increase) BACKGROUND: In October 2017, the County Administrator approved and the Purchasing Services Manager executed Contract #76-564 with Prometheus Laboratories, Inc., to provide outside laboratory testing services including testing for patients diagnosed with Hepatitis C, to reduce the number of liver biopsies performed at CCRMC and Health Centers. Approval of Contract #76-564-1 will allow the contractor to continue providing outside laboratory testing services through October 31, 2020. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Jaspreet Benepal, 925-370-5741 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: K Cyr, M Wilhelm C. 61 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Contract #76-564-1 with Prometheus Laboratories, Inc. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved, patients requiring outside testing services for liver abnormalities will not have access to the contractor’s services. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the County Contract #26-759-4 with Medical Anesthesia Consultants Medical Group, Inc., a corporation, in an amount not to exceed $150,000, to provide anesthesia staffing services at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center (CCRMC) and Contra Costa Health Centers for the period from April 1, 2018 through March 31, 2021. FISCAL IMPACT: This contract is funded 100% by Hospital Enterprise Fund I. (No rate increase) BACKGROUND: On March 31, 2015, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #26-759-2 (as amended by Amendment Agreement #26-759-3) with Medical Anesthesia Consultants Medical Group, Inc. to provide anesthesia staffing coverage at CCRMC and Health Centers including consultation, training, medical procedures, and on-call coverage for General and Obstetrics Units for the period from March 1, 2015 through February 28, 2018. Approval of Contract #26-759-4 will allow the contractor to continue to provide anesthesia services at CCRMC and Health Centers through March 31, 2021. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: K Cyr, M Wilhelm C. 62 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Contract #26-759-4 with Medical Anesthesia Consultants Medical Group, Inc. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved, patients requiring anesthesia services at CCRMC and Health Centers will not have access to the contractor’s services. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Auditor-Controller, or designee, to pay each of up to eleven In-Home Supportive Services Public Authority Advisory Committee members $24 per meeting, not to exceed three meetings per month, in stipends to defray meeting attendance costs for the period July 1, 2018 through June 30, 2019 for a total cost not to exceed $6,427, as recommended by the Employment and Human Services Department Director. FISCAL IMPACT: Stipends totaling $6,427 to be paid to In-Home Supportive Services Public Authority Advisory Committee members are funded by In-Home Supportive Services funds. (50% Federal, 50% State) BACKGROUND: The In-Home Supportive Services Public Authority Advisory Committee members receive a $24-stipend to attend Advisory Committee meetings paid through the Auditor-Controller to defray attendance costs of the members. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Without stipends, meeting costs may prohibit member attendance. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Elaine Burres, 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 63 To:Board of Supervisors From:Kathy Gallagher, Employment & Human Services Director Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:In-Home Supportive Services Public Authority Advisory Committee Stipends RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to execute, on behalf of the Chief Information Officer, a purchase order with AT&T, and a third-party master lease agreement with Key Government Finance, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $946,000, for the purchase of computer equipment for the period of May 1, 2018 through May 31, 2022, Countywide. FISCAL IMPACT: The cost of $946,000 is charged back to user departments through the Department of Information Technology’s billing process. (100% Department User Fees) BACKGROUND: The Department of Information Technology is purchasing Cisco routers for the maintenance of the County’s AT&T phone system. Key Government Finance, Inc., is a financing partner of Cisco Systems, Inc. Cisco Systems, Inc. is contributing $43,000 towards the principal amount of the lease purchase. The Purchasing Division and County Counsel have reviewed, and are executing, a new master lease agreement with Key Government Finance, Inc. The interest rate for this financing schedule is 1%. The amount needed to cover the principal and interest has been budgeted for fiscal year 2017/18. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: David Gould (925) 313-2151 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Marc Shorr, Chief Information Officer C. 64 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Authorize a Purchase Order with AT&T, and a third-party master lease agreement with Key Government Finance, Inc. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Failure to maintain these critical systems may result in reduced capacity, system failure, and interrupted business and emergency operations. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute an amendment to the Consulting Services Agreement with Ross Drulis Cusenbery Architecture, Inc. (RDC), to extend termination date by 24 months with no other change to the other terms or payment limit, to provide architectural, engineering, and other technical support services during further design and construction phases support for the new Emergency Operations Center/Public Safety Building. AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute the amendment. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: The construction of a new Emergency Operations Center/Public Safety Building is part of the County’s five year plan APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 65 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Approve and Authorize Amendment No. 3 to the Consulting Services Agreements with Ross Drulis Cusenbery Architecture, Inc. (WH140D) BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) for capital facility projects, RDC was selected through a competitive, qualifications-based selection process to provide architectural, engineering and other technical services for a planning study for preliminary work on a new emergency operations center. On August 16, 2016, the Board approved the Consulting Services Agreement with RDC. At the Board’s retreat on January 31, 2017, RDC presented three options and the Board selected option 1 as the preferred location for the new Public Safety Building and the new Emergency Operations Center. At that time it was recommended to the Board to retain RDC to complete the next phase of design work and complete the bridging documents necessary to construct the project. Amendment No. 1 approved on March 7, 2017, provided these services and increased the payment limit for the contract. On October 17, 2017 Board approved amendment No. 2 to add subconsultants and update project schedule with no other change or payment limit. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the Amendment is not approved, the project will not have background and peer review of design intent for architectural engineering and other technical aspects of the project used in bridging documents, and could potentially impact final design. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute an amendment to the Consulting Services Agreement with KMD Architects ("KMD"), to increase the payment limit by $300,000, to a new payment limit of $3,400,000, for additional architectural, engineering and other technical support services during further design and construction phases for the new County Administration Building. FISCAL IMPACT: 100% General Fund. BACKGROUND: The replacement of the existing County Administration Building, located at 651 Pine Street, Martinez, is part of the County’s five year plan for capital facility projects. KMD was selected through a competitive, qualifications-based selection process to provide architectural, engineering and other technical services for a planning study for preliminary work for the replacement of the existing County Administration Building. On August 16, 2016, the Board approved APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 66 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Approve and Authorize Amendment No. 3 to Consulting Services Agreements with KMD Architects for the Replacement of the Administration Bldg. (WH140F) BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) the Consulting Services Agreement with KMD. On February 7, 2017, the Board approved Site Option A, in downtown Martinez, as the preferred site for the new County Administration Building and structured parking as shown and discussed at the Board retreat on January 31, 2017. At the Board’s retreat, the County Administrator's Office presented three potential site options prepared by KMD. The new County Administration Building and parking development will be on three separate parcels in downtown Martinez. The first two parcels straddle both sides of Pine Street between Marina Vista Avenue and Escobar Street. By closing off Pine Street, these two combined parcels will accommodate the new building. The new Administration Building is proposed as a four-story modern structure with its front entrance oriented toward Pine Street. Across Escobar Street, on the parcel where the existing 651 Pine Street tower is now located, new parking would be provided east of the existing tower. New parking would extend to the east end of the parcel. Surrounding site work will have additional limited surface parking and a new plaza along with civic features or details. At the retreat, it was recommended to the Board to retain KMD to complete the next phase of design work and complete the bridging documents necessary to construct the project. Amendment No. 1 to the Consulting Services Agreement will provide for those additional services. On March 14, 2017, the Board approved Amendment No.1 for additional architectural, engineering, and other technical services to provide bridging documents for the replacement of the existing County Administration Building. On October 17, 2017, the Board approved Amendment No. 2 for additional architectural engineering and other technical services to provide bridging documents related to off-site work, new street parking development and signage for New County Administrative Building. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the amendment is not approved, the project will not have background and peer review of design intent for architectural engineering and other technical aspects of the project used in bridging documents, and could potentially impact final design. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the County, Contract #26-797-3 with Mission Recruiting, LLC, a limited liability company, in an amount not to exceed $300,000, to provide physician recruitment services for Contra Costa Regional Medical Center (CCRMC) and Health Centers, for the period May 1, 2018 through April 30, 2019. FISCAL IMPACT: This contract is funded 100% by Hospital Enterprise Fund I. (No rate increase) BACKGROUND: On April 18, 2017, the Board of Supervisors approved #26-797-2, with Mission Recruiting, LLC to recruit family practice physicians for CCRMC and Health Centers to fill on-going vacancies. Services include advertising, screening, and providing reference materials for potential candidates, for the period from May 1, 2017 through April 30, 2018. Approval of Contract #26-797-3 will allow the the contractor to continue providing recruitment services through April 30, 2019. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Samir Shah, M.D., 925-370-5475 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Kathleen Cyr, Marcy Wilhelm C. 67 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Contract #26-797-3 with Mission Recruiting, LLC CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved, CCRMC may not be able to recruit enough physicians to meet patient needs. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the County, Contract #26-798-4 with Infectious Disease Doctors Medical Group, APC, a corporation, in an amount not to exceed $260,000, to provide infectious disease consulting services and training at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center (CCRMC) and Health Centers for the period May 1, 2018 through April 30, 2019. FISCAL IMPACT: This contract is funded 100% by Hospital Enterprise Fund I. (No rate increase) BACKGROUND: On March 8, 2017 the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #26-798-3, with Infectious Disease Doctors Medical Group, APC, to provide weekly infectious disease consulting services including clinic sessions, on-call coverage and training for the period from May 1, 2017 through April 30, 2018. Approval of Contract #26-798-4 will allow the contractor to continue to provide infectious disease consulting services through April 30, 2019. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Kathleen Cyr, Marcy Wilhelm C. 68 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Contract #26-798-4 with Infectious Disease Doctors Medical Group, APC CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved, patients requiring infectious disease consulting services will not have access to the contractor’s services. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the County, Contract #26-800-3 with John Roark, M.D., an individual, in an amount not to exceed $250,000, to provide gastroenterology services at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center (CCRMC) and Health Centers for the period May 1, 2018 through April 30, 2020. FISCAL IMPACT: This contract is funded 100% by Hospital Enterprise Fund I. (No rate increase) BACKGROUND: On May 24, 2016 the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #26-800-2 with John Roark, M.D., to provide gastroenterology services including, clinic coverage, consultation, on-call coverage, training and medical procedures at CCRMC and Health Centers for the period May 1, 2016 through April 30, 2018. Approval of Contract #26-800-3 will allow the contractor to continue providing gastroenterology services through April 30, 2020. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Kathleen Cyr, Marcy Wilhelm C. 69 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Contract #26-800-3 with John Roark, M.D. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved, patients requiring gastroenterology services at CCRMC and Health Centers will not have access to the contractor’s services. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to execute on behalf of the Public Works Director, a purchase order amendment, with Jon K Takata Corp d/b/a Restoration Management Company, to increase the payment limit by $37,000 to a new payment limit of $135,000 for mold abatement and repair at 1391 Shell Ave, Martinez Area. (100% Health Services Enterprise Fund) FISCAL IMPACT: This cost is to be funded through the Health Services Fund org 5739. (100% General Fund) BACKGROUND: In October 2017, the Contra Costa County facility at 1391 Shell Avenue in Martinez was found to contain mold around it’s entire perimeter. Restoration Management was called out to abate the area and give us a quote on reconstruction of all damaged areas. The mold remediation and reconstruction has been estimated at $135k. Facility Services is requesting a not to exceed purchase order to complete this project. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 70 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:APPROVE a Purchase Order Amendment with John K Takata Corp d/b/a Restoration Management Company CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this agreement is not approved, then mold abatement at 1391 Shell Ave will discontinue. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Matt Colchico d/b/a Summit Building Services, in an amount not to exceed $3,500,000 to provide custodial services in certain leased buildings and certain County owned buildings, for the period April 1, 2018 through March 31, 2021, Countywide. FISCAL IMPACT: This cost is to be funded through the Custodial Services budget over three (3) years (100% General Fund). BACKGROUND: Public Works Custodial Services Division is requesting a contract to provide sublet custodial services to several leased sites and County owned sites. These locations are remote sites either outside of the normal routes used by County custodial staff, or sites requiring night work. Custodial Services does not have the ability to manage or oversee employees working in these conditions. The locations where the contractor will perform custodial services, and the monthly APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 71 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:APPROVE a contract with Matt Colchico (d/b/a Summit Building Services) BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) cost at each location, are listed in the attached "Rate and Frequency Schedule". This is a continuation of existing policy and has no negative impact on the current custodial staff. Government Code Section 25358 authorizes the County to contract for maintenance and upkeep of County buildings if the County solicits bids for the work and awards the contract to the lowest responsible bidders. This contract was originally bid on Bidsync #1712-270. Matt Colchico d/b/a Summit Building Services was the lowest responsible and responsive vendor for this type of work. We are requesting that a contract be approved for a period covering the next three (3) years. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this agreement is not approved, custodial services with Matt Colchico d/b/a Summit Building Services will be discontinued leaving the County unable to provide custodial services to remote buildings. ATTACHMENTS Rate and Frequency Schedule RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the Health Services Director, a purchase order with Groupware Technology, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $153,755 for the purchase of PureStorage FlashArray hardware and support for the period from April 21, 2018 through April 20, 2019. FISCAL IMPACT: 100% funding is included in the Hospital Enterprise Fund I budget. BACKGROUND: Health Services Information Technology (IT) currently owns PureStorage arrays, which stores ccLink electronic medical records (EMR) data. This purchase is for PureStorage storage arrays to increase capacity of existing storage to house all associated Epic EMR data, and expand Epic Cache Storage. Additional disc storage will expand the amount of online medical record data available to providers and provide a faster storage system. This purchase includes maintenance and support. The County and PureStorage entered into an End User Agreement dated April 21, 2017 which includes terms and conditions governing the County’s use of PureStorage products. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Patrick Wilson, 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Tasha Scott, Marcy Wilhelm C. 72 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Purchase Order with Groupware Technology, Inc., for PureStorage Hardware and Support CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this purchase order is not approved, Health Services IT will be unable to adequately store Epic EMR patient data and other critical healthcare information. This could lead to loss of existing data through overwriting or loss of new data due to an inability to store it. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the Health Services Director, an amendment to Purchase Order #F06131 with Lifenet Health, to increase the payment limit by $60,000 for a new payment limit of $159,900 for the purchase of medical supplies, instruments and allografts for the Contra Costa Regional Medical Center (CCRMC), with no change in the original term of January 1, 2017 through December 31, 2018. FISCAL IMPACT: 100% funding is included in the Hospital Enterprise Fund I budget. BACKGROUND: CCRMC purchases Allograft Bio-implant solutions for general orthopedics and trauma. Lifenet Health has a comprehensive Allograft portfolio to ensure surgeons have access to the right graft for their procedures. Grafts are specific to individual patients, so the availability of the correct graft for the procedure is critical for a successful outcome. Lifenet Health is an alternate provider for Allograft. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the amendment for this purchase order is not approved, CCRMC will not be able to ensure the surgeons have access to the right instruments for their procedures. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Jaspreet Benepal, 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Tasha Scott, Marcy Wilhelm, Margaret Uitti C. 73 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Amendment to Purchase Order with Lifenet Health RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the Health Services Director, a purchase order with Sam Clar Office Furniture, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $104,504 for purchase of furniture for the relocation of the Emergency Medical Services (EMS) Division. FISCAL IMPACT: Funded 100% by Hospital Enterprise Fund I. BACKGROUND: Sam Clar Office Furniture, Inc. has supplied needed furniture and installation for offices and other spaces to multiple Health Services Department locations. The EMS Division is relocating to 777 Arnold Drive, Suite 100 Martinez, CA 94553, and requires furniture settings to be used for existing staff. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Patricia Frost, 925-646-4690 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Tasha Scott, Marcy Wilhelm, Patricia Weisinger C. 74 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Purchase Order with Sam Clar Office Furniture, Inc. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the County Contract #27-997-2 with S/T Health Group Consulting, Inc., a corporation, in an amount not to exceed $113,200, to provide pharmacy audit services for Contra Costa Health Plan (CCHP) members, for the period from April 1, 2018 through March 31, 2020. FISCAL IMPACT: This contract is funded 100% by Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund III. (Rate increase) BACKGROUND: In February 2017, the County Administrator approved and Purchasing Manager executed Contract #27-997-1 with S/T Health Group Consulting, Inc., for the provision of pharmacy audit services for Contra Costa Health Plan members, for the period from March 1, 2017 through February 28, 2018. Approval of Contract #27-997-2 will allow the contractor to continue providing pharmacy audit services for Contra Costa Health Plan members through March 31, 2020. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: A Floyd, M Wilhelm C. 75 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Contract #27-997-2 with S/T Health Group Consulting, Inc. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved, the County will have limited assurance that certain specialty health care services for its members, under the terms of their Individual and Group Health Plan membership contracts with the County, will continue to be provided. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the County Contract #27-802-4 with Eileen M. Linder Optometrist, Inc., a corporation, in an amount not to exceed $150,000, to provide optometry services to Contra Costa Health Plan (CCHP) members, for the period May 1, 2018 through April 30, 2020. FISCAL IMPACT: This contract is funded 100% by CCHP Enterprise Fund III. (No Rate increase) BACKGROUND: In May 2017, County Administrator approved and Purchasing Services manager executed Contract #27-802-3 with Eileen M. Linder Optometrist, Inc., (dba Eye to Eye Optometry) for the period from May 1, 2014 through April 30, 2018, for optometry services for CCHP members. Approval of Contract #27-802-4 will allow the contractor to continue to provide optometry services for CCHP members through April 30, 2020. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: A Floyd, M Wilhelm C. 76 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Contract #27-802-4 with Eileen M. Linder Optometrist, Inc. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract 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. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the Health Services Director, a purchase order with Med One Capital, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $474,518 for lease of the Omnicell Repackager for the Pharmacy Department at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center, for the period March 1, 2018 through February 28, 2023. FISCAL IMPACT: 100% funding is included in the Hospital Enterprise Fund I budget. BACKGROUND: The Omnicell Repackager enables the Contra Costa Regional Medical Center's Pharmacy Division to operate much more efficiently and optimize work flow. Pharmacy operations and the work flow could further be optimized by increasing the frequency of drug distribution to more than once a day, using the Omnicell Repackager. In doing so, the pharmacy can minimize volume of returned to stock items which is quite time consuming. The Pharmacy Division has observed over the years how beneficial the Omnicell Repackager has been for the Detention facilities and has decided to replicate this model. Overall, the intent is to improve efficiency of the work flow and to conserve the cost of manpower. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Jaspreet Benepal, 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Tasha Scott, Marcy Wilhelm, Irene Segovia C. 77 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Purchase Order with Med One Capital Funding, LLC CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this purchase order is not approved, the Pharmacy Division will experience tremendous operational flow difficulties, incur additional cost of hiring temporary agency technicians to cover duties, and negative fiscal impact on the organization resulting from outsourcing repacking needs. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Phamatech, Incorporated, in an amount not to exceed $246,960 for Child Welfare mandated drug testing services for the period of July 1, 2018 through June 30, 2019. FISCAL IMPACT: This contract will increase department expenditures by $246,960 to be funded with 30% County and 70% State revenue. BACKGROUND: Random drug tests are court-ordered services and are ordered as a part of the client service plan. Laboratory results are submitted for inclusion in the Child Welfare Family Maintenance and Reunification cases. Services include insuring the availability of specimen collection sites, screening test specimens, providing "on-demand" sample testing when requested by the County's Employment and Human Services Department (EHSD) social workers, and providing monthly statistics to EHSD for clients referred for drug testing. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 78 To:Board of Supervisors From:Kathy Gallagher, Employment & Human Services Director Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Contract with Phamatech, Incorporated, for Mandatory Child Welfare Drug Testing Services CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Without this service, the Employment and Human Services Department would be unable to comply with court-ordered drug testing. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Community Violence Solutions, a non-profit corporation, in an amount not to exceed $144,024 for the provision of services to victims of human trafficking in Contra Costa County for the period of April 1, 2018 through September 30, 2018. FISCAL IMPACT: This contract will increase department expenditures by $144,024 and will be funded by U.S. Department of Justice Grant funds. There is no County match requirement. BACKGROUND: The Contra Costa County Employment and Human Services Department, Contra Costa Alliance to End Abuse (Alliance) applied for and received funds from the US Department of Justice, Office for Victims of Crime, Services for Victims of Human Trafficking Program (Project). The County is engaging Community Violence Solutions (Contractor) 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: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Gina Chenoweth 8-4961 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 79 To:Board of Supervisors From:Kathy Gallagher, Employment & Human Services Director Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Contract with Community Violence Solutions for Services to Victims of Human Trafficking BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) The primary purpose of the Project is to enhance the social service field’s response to victims of human trafficking as defined by the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA) of 2000 (22 U.S.C. § 7101 et. seq.) as amended. The goals of the Project are: To provide timely and high-quality comprehensive services for all victims of human trafficking; 1. To enhance interagency coordination in the provision of services to trafficking victims; and 2. To provide training to service providers and allied professionals within the target community to improve community collaboration and increase awareness of the needs and rights of trafficking victims and survivors 3. During the term of this contract, Contractor will be responsible for case management services, social services, and criminal justice system-based advocacy for victims of trafficking who are identified during the grant period. Contractor will also support the objectives of the Project, by developing resources for survivors of human trafficking, such as conducting outreach, community awareness, and technical assistance and training on human trafficking. Contractor will also provide project management and general administrative services to support the Project and provide semi-annual progress reports on Project activities. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Vital services to Contra Costa County victims of human trafficking will be significantly limited. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: The services provided under this contract support three of the five Contra Costa County’s community outcomes: (2) Children and Youth Healthy and Preparing for Productive Adulthood; (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, by providing timely, high-quality, comprehensive services to Contra Costa County victims of human trafficking. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute an Interagency Agreement with Contra Costa County Office of Education, a public entity, in an amount not to exceed $50,000 to provide tutoring services to children in foster care for the period of July 1, 2018 through June 30, 2019. FISCAL IMPACT: This contract will increase department expenditures by $50,000 to be funded with 30% County (General Fund) and 70% State (2011 Realignment Funding). BACKGROUND: Contra Costa County Office of Education (Agency) was selected through the competitive bid process, Request For Information (RFI) 630, by EHSD Children and Family Services Bureau (CFS). RFI 630 was posted to select a qualified individual or agency to provide tutoring services to children and youth in foster care in all Contra Costa County school districts. Selection was based on the following experience: Bachelor’s degree or associate’s degree and at least two years working as an instructional assistant or tutor with students in various subject matters; Teaching credential preferred but not required; Working with children with learning disabilities preferred; Fluency in a second language preferred. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Gina Chenoweth 8-4961 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 80 To:Board of Supervisors From:Kathy Gallagher, Employment & Human Services Director Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Contract with Contra Costa County Office of Education for Tutoring Services to Children in Foster Care BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) Agency documented the following knowledge: (1) Culturally and linguistically appropriate, evidence-based tutoring/education approaches with a special focus on working with children who have been impacted by family violence, separation and loss; (2) Ability to tutor children of all ages and subjects; (3) Ability to engage students and assist them in the development of academic skills; (4) Ability to negotiate a variety of school districts to get the child’s educational needs met; (5) Ability to maintain confidentiality of children and youth in foster care; and (6) Ability to communicate with social worker about the progress of child’s academics. Under this Agreement, Agency must recruit, train, hire and pay tutors who will serve Contra Costa County dependent children and youth in foster care and who request tutoring; ensure Education Liaisons work collaboratively with CFS Social Workers; and provide CFS a monthly report of all tutoring provided to each child receiving tutoring through this Agreement. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Children in Contra Costa County Foster Care will not receive State mandated tutoring services. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: The services provided under this Agreement support three of the five Contra Costa County community outcomes: (1) Children Ready for and Succeeding in School; (2) Children and Youth Healthy and Preparing for Productive Adulthood; and (5) Communities that are Safe and Provide a High Quality of Life for Children and Families, by supporting the educational rights of children and youth in foster care. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the Health Services Director, a purchase order with AT&T Corp., in an amount of $107,476.62 for the audio visual equipment purchase at 777 Arnold Drive, Suite 100 Martinez, CA 94553 for the relocation of the Emergency Medical Services (EMS) Division. FISCAL IMPACT: Funded 100% by Hospital Enterprise Fund I. BACKGROUND: AT&T Corp. has supplied needed telecommunication, audio visual equipment and installation services for offices and other spaces to multiple Health Services Department locations. The EMS Division is relocating to 777 Arnold Drive, Suite 100 Martinez, CA 94553, and requires audio visual equipment at the location for training and education purposes. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this purchase order is not approved, the EMS Division staff will not have the necessary audio visual equipment for training and education of pre-hospital providers. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Patricia Frost, 925-646-4690 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Tasha Scott, Marcy Wilhelm, Patti Weisinger C. 81 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Purchase Order with AT&T Corp. for Network Integration Services RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to purchase, on behalf of the Health Services Director, transportation vouchers in an amount not to exceed $33,433 to be used to provide transportation to appointments for homeless patients served by the Health Care for the Homeless team, for the period from February 1, 2018 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 HRSA to provide health care for the homeless population in Contra Costa County. The program provides care coordination to its homeless patients and assists them in getting to and from any necessary health-related appointments. Transportation is one of the biggest barriers to receiving care for the homeless population. Providing bus tickets and transportation vouchers helps address this barrier. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Tasha Scott, Marcy Wilhelm, Rachel Birch C. 82 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Transportation Vouchers for Health Care for Homeless 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. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent or designee to execute, on behalf of the Chief Information Officer, a purchase order amendment with Tessco Technologies to extend the term from June 30, 2018 through June 30, 2020 with no change to the payment limit of $150,000, for telecommunications and radio parts and supplies. FISCAL IMPACT: $150,000 (100% User Fees); the whole cost is charged to the ordering department through DoIT's billing process. BACKGROUND: The Department of Information Technology's Telecommunications and Radio divisions need to be able to readily purchase parts and supplies, in order to complete Work Order requests and other jobs submitted by their customers. The pricing is pursuant to General Services Administration Federal Acquisition Service contract number GS-35F-0548P In accordance with Administrative Bulletin No. 611.0, County departments are required to obtain Board approval for single item purchases exceeding $100,000. The County Administrator's Office has reviewed this request and recommends approval. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Joanne Buenger (925) 313-1202 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 83 To:Board of Supervisors From:Marc Shorr, Chief Information Officer Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Change Order with Tessco Technologies CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the action is not approved, DoIT will not have the necessary authority to process and pay anticipated expenses through the Blanket Purchase Order. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE a restructuring of the membership of the Arts and Culture Commission of Contra Costa County by adding two At-Large Seats, ADOPT revised bylaws of the Arts and Culture Commission as recommended by the Commission, and DECLARE vacancies in the At-Large 3, At-Large 4, District V, and Alternate Seats of the Arts and Culture Commission. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: The Arts and Culture Commission of Contra Costa County (“Commission”) is currently composed of 7 commissioners (one representative from each supervisorial district and two at-large seats) plus one alternate. The original membership of the Commission included 9 commissioners, and the Commission recommends returning to a 9-member Commission. For several years, commissioners have expressed interest in expanding the Commission’s membership to assist in the numerous duties performed by the commissioners. The Commission has also reviewed its bylaws and identified several necessary revisions. At its February 11, 2018 meeting, the Commission APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 84 To:Board of Supervisors From:David Twa, County Administrator Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Membership and Bylaws of the Arts and Culture Commission of Contra Costa County BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) voted to recommend to the Board of Supervisors a restructuring of the membership of the Commission by adding two At-Large Seats, and adoption of the revised bylaws. The proposed revisions to the Commission’s bylaws include: 1. A new section defining the duties of commissioners. 2. A description of the restructured membership of the Commission to include 9 commissioners (one representative from each supervisorial district and four at-large seats) plus one alternate. 3. Provisions regarding resignations and/or removal of commissioners. 4. The addition of a Senior Commissioner Officer to replace the Immediate Past Chair officer. 5. A limitation of two consecutive officer terms unless approved by 80% of the commissioners. 6. The addition of the Arts Recognition Awards Committee. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The membership and bylaws of the Arts and Culture Commission of Contra Costa County will remain unchanged. ATTACHMENTS AC5 February Minutes AC5 Bylaws Redlined AC5 Bylaws Clean February 2018 AC5 COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES ARTS AND CULTURE COMMISSION OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Douglas Street, Suite 250, Martinez, CA 94553 (Office); STAFF@AC5.cccounty.us MINUTES for Sunday, February 11, 2018, 9:20 AM – 2:00 PM Boys & Girls Club of Contra Costa County 1301 Alhambra Ave. Martinez, CA 94553, USA Commissioners Present: Silvia Ledezma, District I; Marija Nelson Bleier, District II, PJ Shelton, District III; Elizabeth Wood, District IV; Teresa Snook O’Riva District V; LaMar Anderson, at Large Commissioners Absent: Y’Anad Burrell, At-Large Staff Present: Roger Renn, AC5 Managing Director Guests/Visitors Present: None Call to Order: Tess Snook O’Riva, Chair called the meeting to order at 9:20 AM Public Comment: None Review of Work accomplished in 2016-17 Commissioner Ledezma reported that she is satisfied with how Arts Passage is moving along. The About Face program is important. Commissioner Wood indicated the bi-laws are finalized and it has taken 1.5 years to do so. Her biggest success is the 20th Anniversary Arts Recognition Awards Ceremony and Luncheon. Commissioner Wood headed up the Arts Recognition Awards Banquet Luncheon honoring people in Contra Costa County who have made a significant contribution to the arts. Commissioner Anderson noted that he secured this meeting location of the Boys & Girls Club and wanted to recognize Commissioner Wood for all of her work on the Awards Luncheon. Commissioner Bleier attended the Americans for the Arts Conference in June 2016; she also attended brown bag arts luncheons to connect with arts professionals working for municipalities in Contra Costa County, to discuss trends in the arts, what is successful and what is not, with regards to programming and marketing efforts. She also noted that she has been asked to serve on the BART public art committee that will meet three times to discuss and public arts programs for BART and serve as an advisory committee to the Board of Directors for BART. Commissioner Chair O’Riva implemented the first Rodeo Arts Fair and worked to bring together many people and vendors to serve the Town. She commented that she wants to work to make a difference in people’s lives through the arts. Poetry Out Loud was a success with impact to her children. Page 2 of 3 Review and Accept AC5 Bylaws as reviewed and corrected by County Council MOTION MADE: Wood moved that the new bylaws were reviewed and accepted MOTION SECONDED: Bleier ABSTAINED: Burell (absent) N FAVOR: All others ✓ MOTION PASSED Appointment of AC5 Commission Seats There was a consensus that the commission needs to find more arts commissioners who represents music and digital film arts, as we are missing representatives of those particular art forms. There are Seats open for one new Commissioners and an alternate. East County is underrepresented. There should be PR for promoting open seats. Purpose of Arts & Culture Commission and how it works with the CA Arts Council Discussion was led by Roger Renn, Executive Director in conjunction with Chair O’Riva. Supervisors need to be reminded of commission and the efforts being made by the commissioners. Attendance and events should be tallied. Review of AC5 Arts Council Grant Offerings Discussion led by Roger Renn California Arts Council gives grants to arts organizations through AC5. California Arts Council is changing their grant cycle calendar (SLPP State Local Partnership). Discussion of commission budget and how much can be taken in kind. All donations must be given with receipt to indicate monetary value (such as rentals). AC5 can offer letters of support to non-profits seeking grants through AC5. AC5 can then oversee their grant. Liaison Relationship with Supervisor Districts Discussion led by Commissioner Wood, she gave all other Commissioners a “test” which allowed everyone to take stock of how much work we have been doing and how often each Commissioner is taking time to connect with their representative (Supervisors). Idea was mentioned that Supervisors be invited to meetings. Commissioners should attend more meetings and be sure to report their activity each month to staff of AC5. Commissioner Wood will draft a letter that all commissioners can send to their Supervisors for consideration of exhibition space in the new County Building. Commissioners should submit revised bios to AC5. CCTV photographer can take photos for website (head shots). Five Year Action Plan Discussion led by Commissioner Anderson. Discussion of more fund raisers to allow the funds to put on events such as the arts recognition awards. Goals: 1) Add Staff to AC5. 2) Double Budget (100%) 3) Re-granting to other non-profit organizations 4) Double local programs. *This is to be made into an agenda item so that it can be voted on at the March meeting. Action Plan for 2018-19 Discussion lead by Commissioner Chair O’Riva, protect plan with assignments and accountability. Everyone on Commission should “own” a task. -Arts Awards- Art Cafe Art Passages - Art Directory/Calendars Page 3 of 3 With current grants there is a commitment to connect with local arts agencies and networking. National Gallery of Arts on CCTV. Menu of videos on AC5 Program time. Ledeza is volunteering for the video line up and Director Roger Renn has a directive to follow up with her about this. Poetry Out loud: Robin Moore is the project manager for this program and help is needed to contact schools to join. Outreach is needed for all programs, publicity and marketing and connecting with supervisors. Commissioners need to report on events and meetings. Cultural Plan: Connection between Black History Month exhibitions, Cesar Chavez exhibition. More Community Engagement and representing of different cultures in Contra Costa County. Access and equity in education. Arts in Correctional Facilities in Conjunction with California Lawyers for the Arts. Discussion tabled until next meeting Request for Agenda Items for Next Meeting None Commissioner Chair called adjournment at 2:00 PM 1 | P a ge BY-LAWS OF THE ARTS AND CULTURE COMMISSION OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY RECOMMENDED AMMENDMENTS January 2018 1. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE The function of the Arts and Culture Commission of Contra Costa County (Commission) is to advise the Board of Supervisors on 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; to increase communication and understanding between all citizens through art; and to create District Alliances in each Supervisorial District. Most importantly, the Commission will promote a rts and culture as a vital element in the quality of life for all of the citizens of Contr a Costa County. 2. DUTIES OF COMMISSIONERS Each Commissioner is expected to: a. Support the functions of the Commission. b. Give all meetings and other Commission activities a priority on his/her calendar. c. Serve on and chair C ommission committees and events. d. Keep current with all facts and information upon which the Commission must base its collective opinions and decisions. e. Participate in strategic planning and implementation of arts programming. f. Be an ambassador and proponent of the arts and the Commission in Contra Costa County and engage people from all cultural and ethnic groups in the arts and in the work of the Commission. 3. LOCATION OF MEETINGS Regularly scheduled Commission meetings will be held at the location designated by a majority of the Commission, and such location shall be accessible to the public. 4. MEMBERSHIP OF THE COMMISSION The Commission will have nine members and one alternate. Each Supervisor will appoint one member to represent his or her district. Four members will serve at-large and will be recommended by the Commission for appointment by the Board of Supervisors, as will the one alternate. The alternate may sit and vote for any absent member or vacant seat. 5. TERMS OF COMMISSIONERS 2 | P a ge Staggered terms are four years in length, ending June 30 . Upon expiration of their term, Commissioners may continue to serve until their reappointment has been approved, or a successor is appointed. There are no term limits . 6. RESIGNATION AND/OR REMOVAL OF COMMISSIONERS Resignations from District seats shall be given i n writing to the appointing District Supervisor. Resignations from at-large seats shall be given in writing to the Executive Director or the Chair. Resignation will be effective upon receipt of the written letter, unless a later effective date is specified in the resignation. Regular attendance is essential for the Commission to conduct regular business , accomplish annual goals as approved by the Board of Supervisors , and meet funding source program requirements. Any Commissioner who is absent from three (3) regular meetings in a 12-month period, may be asked to resign, unless good cause is shown and approved by the Commission (e.g., work assignment, accident, illness or death of a family member, vacation, or personal illness). 7. OFFICERS The officers are Chair, Vice -Chair, and Senior Commissioner. 8. ELECTION OF OFFICERS A three-member nomination committee, appointed by the Chair, will develop a slate of officers to be presented and elected by the Commission at the June meeting. If an office becomes vacant at any time, the Commission will elect a new officer at the first regularly scheduled meeting following the effective date of the vacancy. 9. TERMS OF OFFICE Each officer serves a term of one year, beginning in July and ending the following June. An officer may not serve more than two consecutive terms, unless 80% of the Commissioners approve the waiving of this bylaw provision. 10. DUTIES OF OFFICERS Chairperson 1. The C hair calls and presides over meetings of the Commission. 2. The C hair and the Executive Director, with input from the Commissioners, prepare the meeting agenda. 3. The Chair may delegate his/her duties to the Vice -Chair. 3 | P a ge 4. The C hair ensures that there is full participation of the Commissioners present during a duly held meeting. Vice-Chair 1. The Vice-Chair assumes the duties of the Chair in the Chair’s absence. 2. The Vice-Chair assumes the duties of the Chair for the remainder of the term of that office if the Chair is unable to continue. Senior Commissioner 1. The Commissioner with the most service time on the Commission, excluding the Chair and Vice-Chair, is the Senior Commissioner. 2. In the absence of the Chair and Vice -Chair, the Senior Commissioner will assume the duties of the C hair until either the Chair or Vice-Chair returns, or a new Chair or Vice-Chair is appointed. 11. THE STANDING COMMITTEES The Commission may create committees composed solely of members of the Commission, which can be standing committees, task forces , or ad hoc committees, as needed. Standing committees should meet at least quarterly or more frequently as needed. All actions approved by a standing committee will be referred to the Commission for final approval. Former Commissioners, the general public, and community members may, and are encouraged to, attend meetings of a standing committee, task force, or ad hoc committee, but may not be members of any committee. 1. Communications Committee – It is recommended that three Commissioners serve on the Communications Committee. The Communications Committee will develop plans to increase public visibility of both the Commission and the arts in Contra Costa County. Functions include public relations, marketing and media relations. 2. Public Arts Committee – It is recommended that three Commissioners serve on the Public Arts Committee. The Public Arts Committee will oversee the Arts Passages Program and other public art projects as directed by the Commission. 3. Executive Committee The Executive Committee is comprised of the Commission Chair, Vice -Chair, and Senior Commissioner. The Executive C ommittee will review and make recommendations concerning Commission staff, personnel matters, finance and budget, and Commission governance issues. The Executive Committee shall 4 | P a ge meet at least once every six months with the Executive Director to establish priorities and set agendas for the regular meetings of the C ommission. 4. Arts Recognition Awards Committee – It is recommended that two Commissioners serve on the Arts Recognition Awards Committee. The Arts Recognition Awards Committee shall oversee the Annual Arts Recognition Program, including, but not limited to, establishing a project plan, reviewing the nomination forms for completeness, selecting judges, managing the judging process, selecting the artist to create the awards , and the coordination and preparation of the c elebration honoring the recipients. 12. CONDUCT OF MEETINGS All meetings of the Commission and its committees shall be held in accordance with The Ralph M Brown Act and the County’s Better Government Ordinance . 13. QUORUM A majority of the total number of authorized seats on the Commission or on a committee must be present to constitute a quorum for meetings. If all authorized seats are not filled, this does not change the quorum requirement. Wi th nine authorized seats, a quorum of the Commission is five Commissioners. The alternate may sit for any absent member or vacant seat and count toward a quorum. No business shall be conducted without a quorum. 14. AMENDING THE BY-LAWS Any proposed changes to these bylaws will be referred to the Executive Committee for review and recommendation to the Commission. The proposed changes to these bylaws shall be presented in writing at the next regularly scheduled meeting of the Commission and may be recommended to the Board of Supervisors by a two-thirds vote of the Commission members present. The proposed changes to these bylaws shall be effective upon approval by the Board of Supervisors. Adopted: 5/8/96 Amended: 8/14/96, 9/23/02, 10/09/02, 02/08/06, 10/02/07, 04/23/13, 02/03/15, 1 | P a ge BY-LAWS OF THE ARTS AND CULTURE COMMISSION OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY 1. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE The function of the Arts and Culture Commission of Contra Costa County (Commission) is to advise the Board of Supervisors on 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; to increase communication and understanding between all citizens through art; and to create District Alliances in each Supervisorial District. Most importantly, the Commission will promote a rts and culture as a vital element in the quality of life for all of the citizens of Contra Costa County. 2. DUTIES OF COMMISSIONERS Each Commissioner is expected to: a. Support the functions of the Commission. b. Give all meetings and other Commission activities a priority on his/her calendar. c. Serve on and chair C ommission committees and events. d. Keep current with all facts and information upon which the Commission must base its collective opinions and decisions. e. Participate in strategic planning and implementation o f arts programming. f. Be an ambassador and proponent of the arts and the Commission in Contra Costa County and engage people from all cultural and ethnic groups in the arts and in the work of the Commission. 3. LOCATION OF MEETINGS Regularly scheduled Commission meetings will be held at the location designated by a majority of the Commission, and such location shall be accessible to the public. 4. MEMBERSHIP OF THE COMMISSION The Commission will have nine members and one alternate. Each Supervisor will appoint one member to represent his or her district. Four members will serve at-large and will be recommended by the Commission for appointment by the Board of Supervisors, as will the one alternate. The alternate may sit and vote for any absent member or vacant seat. 2 | P a ge 5. TERMS OF COMMISSIONERS Staggered terms are four years in length, ending June 30. Upon expiration of their term, Commissioners may continue to serve until their reappointment has been approved, or a successor is appointed. There are no term limits. 6. RESIGNATION AND/OR REMOVAL OF COMMISSIONERS Resignations from District seats shall be given i n writing to the appointing District Supervisor. Resignations from at-large seats shall be given in writing to the Executive Director or the Chair. Resignation will be effective upon receipt of the written letter, unless a later effective date is specified in the resignation. Regular attendance is essential for the Commission to conduct regular business , accomplish annual goals as approved by the Board of Supervisors , and meet funding source program requirements. Any Commissioner who is absent from three (3) regular meetings in a 12-month period, may be asked to resign, unless good cause is shown and approved by the Commission (e.g., work assignment, accident, illness or death of a family member, vacation, or personal illness). 7. OFFICERS The officers are Chair, Vice -Chair, and Senior Commissioner. 8. ELECTION OF OFFICERS A three-member nomination committee, appointed by the Chair, will develop a slate of officers to be presented and elected by the Commission at the June meeting. If an office becomes vacant at any time, the Commission will elect a new officer at the first regularly scheduled meeting following the effective date of the vacancy. 9. TERMS OF OFFICE Each officer serves a term of one year, beginning in July and ending the following June. An officer may not serve more than two consecutive terms, unless 80% of the Commissioners approve the waiving of this bylaw provision. 10. DUTIES OF OFFICERS Chairperson 1. The C hair calls and presides over meetings of the Commission. 2. The C hair and the Executive Director, with input from the Commissioners, prepare the meeting agenda. 3. The Chair may delegate his/her duties to the Vice -Chair. 3 | P a ge 4. The C hair ensures that there is full participation of the Commissioners present during a duly held meeting. Vice-Chair 1. The Vice-Chair assumes the duties of the Chair in the Chair’s absence. 2. The Vice-Chair assumes the duties of the Chair for the remainder of the term of that office if the Chair is unable to continue. Senior Commissioner 1. The Commissioner with the most service time on the Commission, excluding the Chair and Vice-Chair, is the Senior Commissioner. 2. In the absence of the Chair and Vice -Chair, the Senior Commissioner will assume the duties of the C hair until either the Chair or Vice-Chair returns, or a new Chair or Vice-Chair is appointed. 11. THE STANDING COMMITTEES The Commission may create committees composed solely of members of the Commission, which can be standing committees, task forces , or ad hoc committees, as needed. Standing committees should meet at least quarterly or more frequently as needed. All actions approved by a standing committee will be referred to the Commission for final approval. Former Commissioners, the general public, and community members may, and are encouraged to, attend meetings of a standing committee, task force, o r ad hoc committee, but may not be members of any committee. 1. Communications Committee – It is recommended that three Commissioners serve on the Communications Committee. The Communications Committee will develop plans to increase public visibility of both the Commission and the arts in Contra Costa County. Functions include public relations, marketing and media relations. 2. Public Arts Committee – It is recommended that three Commissioners serve on the Public Arts Committee. The Public Arts Committee will oversee the Arts Passages Program and other public art projects as directed by the Commission. 3. Executive Committee The Executive Committee is comprised of the Commission Chair, Vice -Chair, and Senior Commissioner. The Executive C ommittee will review and make recommendations concerning Commission staff, personnel matters, finance and budget, and Commission governance i ssues. The Executive Committee shall 4 | P a ge meet at least once every six months with the Executive Director to establish priorities and set agendas for the regular meetings of the C ommission. 4. Arts Recognition Awards Committee – It is recommended that two Commissioners serve on the Arts Recognition Awards Committee. The Arts Recognition Awards Committee shall oversee the Annual Arts Recognition Program, including, but not limited to, establishing a project plan, reviewing the nomination forms for completeness, selecting judges, managing the judging process, selecting the artist to create the awards , and the coordination and preparation of the c elebration honoring the recipients. 12. CONDUCT OF MEETINGS All meetings of the Commission and its committees shall be held in accordance with The Ralph M Brown Act and the County’s Better Government Ordinance . 13. QUORUM A majority of the total number of authorized seats on the Commission or on a committee must be present to constitute a quorum for meetings. If all authorized seats are not filled, this does not change the quorum requirement. With nine authorized seats, a quorum of the Commission is five Commissioners. The alternate may sit for any absent member or vacant seat and count toward a quorum. No business shall be conducted without a quorum. 14. AMENDING THE BY-LAWS Any proposed changes to these bylaws will be referred to the Executive Committee for review and recommendation to the Commission. The proposed changes to these bylaws shall be presented in writing at the next regularly scheduled meeting of the Commission and may be recommended to the Board of Supervisors by a two-thirds vote of the Commission members present. The proposed changes to these bylaws shall be effective upon approval by the Board of Supervisors. Adopted: 5/8/96 Amended: 8/14/96, 9/23/02, 10/09/02, 02/08/06, 10/02/07, 04/23/13, 02/03/15 , 4/10/18 RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE referrals to the Transportation, Water and Infrastructure Committee for action in 2018. FISCAL IMPACT: None. The cost to staff this Committee is included in the budget of the Department of Conservation and Development. Cost for reports to the Committee are borne by the department or agency responsible for addressing the referral item. BACKGROUND: Each year the Board of Supervisors is asked to approve a list of issues to be referred to its standing committees. The attached list of issue referrals was reviewed and approved by the Transportation, Water and Infrastructure Committee at the March 12, 2018 meeting. The Committee recommended that the Board of Supervisors approve the 2018 referral list. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The Transportation, Water and Infrastructure Committee will not have a Board of Supervisors approved list of issues to address. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: John Cunningham (925) 674-7833 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 85 To:Board of Supervisors From:TRANSPORTATION, WATER & INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Referrals to the Transportation, Water and Infrastructure Committee for 2018 ATTACHMENTS TWIC Referrals 2018 FINAL 2017 Referrals to the Transportation, Water and Infrastructure Committee (Approved at the March 13, 2018 TWIC meeting) 1. Review legislative matters on transportation, water, and infrastructure. 2. Review applications for transportation, water and infrastructure grants to be prepared by the Public Works and Conservation and Development Departments. 3. Monitor the Contra Costa Transportation Authority including efforts to implement Measure J. 4. Monitor EBMUD and Contra Costa Water District projects and activities. 5. Review projects, plans and legislative matters that may affect the health of the San Francisco Bay and Delta, including but not limited to conveyance, flood control, dredging, climate change, habitat conservation, governance, water storage, development of an ordinance regarding polystyrene foam food containers, water quality, supply and reliability, consistent with the Board of Supervisors adopted Delta Water Platform. 6. Review and monitor the establishment of Groundwater Sustainability Agencies and Groundwater Sustainability Plans for the three medium priority groundwater basins within Contra Costa County as required by the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act. 7. Review issues associated with County flood control facilities. 8. Monitor creek and watershed issues and seek funding for improvement projects related to these issues. 9. Monitor the implementation of the Integrated Pest Management policy. 10. Monitor the status of county park maintenance issues including, but not limited to, transfer of some County park maintenance responsibilities to other agencies and implementation of Measure WW grants and expenditure plan. 11. Monitor and report on the East Contra Costa County Habitat Conservation Plan. 12. Monitor the implementation of the County Complete Streets Policy. 13. Monitor and report on the Underground Utilities Program. 14. Monitor implementation of the Letter of Understanding with PG&E for the maintenance of PG&E streetlights in Contra Costa. 15. Freight transportation issues, including but not limited to potential increases in rail traffic such as that proposed by the Port of Oakland and other possible service increases, safety of freight trains, rail corridors, and trucks that transport hazardous materials, the planned truck route for North Richmond; freight issues related to the Northern Waterfront (and coordinate with the Northern Waterfront Ad Hoc Committee as needed), and the deepening of the San Francisco-to-Stockton Ship Channel. 15. Monitor the Iron Horse Corridor Management Program. 16. Monitor and report on the eBART Project. 17. Review transportation plans and services for specific populations, including but not limited to County Low Income Transportation Action Plan, Coordinated Human Services Transportation Plan for the Bay Area, Priorities for Senior Mobility, Bay Point Community Based Transportation Plan, and the Contra Costa County Mobility Management Plan, Accessible Transportation Strategic Planand the work of Contra Costans for Every Generation. 18. Monitor issues of interest in the provision and enhancement of general transportation services, including but not limited to public transportation, taxicab/transportation network companies, and navigation apps. 19. Monitor the statewide infrastructure bond programs. 20. Monitor implementation and ensure compliance with the single-use carryout bag ban consistent with Public Resources Code, Chapter 5.3 (resulting from Senate Bill 270 [Padilla – 2014]). 21. Monitor efforts at the State to revise school siting guidelines and statutes. 22. Monitor issues related to docked and dockless bike share programs. 20.23. Monitor efforts related to water conservation including but not limited to turf conversion, graywater, and other related landscaping issues. G:\Conservation\TWIC\2018\2018 TWIC Referrals\TWIC Referrals 2018 ‐ FINAL.Doc  RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Resolution No. 2018/110 ratifying a Memorandum of Understanding entered into by the Sheriff-Coroner with the California State Parks Division of Boating and Waterways and approve and authorize the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to apply for and accept reimbursement funding for critical skills training from the California State Parks Division of Boating and Waterways with an initial request of $25,000 for the period beginning June 5, 2017 through the end of reimbursement funding availability. FISCAL IMPACT: $25,000: 100% State. No in kind match. BACKGROUND: The California State Parks, Division of Boating and Waterways has set aside funding to assist local agencies with Maritime Officer training through the Maritime Law Enforcement Training Center. This Federal assistance is authorized by Chapter 131 of Title 46 of the United States Code for training personnel in skills related to boating safety and to the enforcement of boating safety laws and regulations. Division of Boating and Waterways will reimburse government agencies with federal monies for allowed transportation, lodging, and subsistence expenses incurred by their employees while attending and satisfactorily completing training courses approved by the Division of Boating and Waterways. Funding reimbursement is available until funding sources are exhausted. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 86 To:Board of Supervisors From:David O. Livingston, Sheriff-Coroner Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:California State Parks, Division of Boating and Waterways CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Negative action on this request will result in the loss of reimbursement funding and/or the loss of training opportunities designed to provide training of Maritime Safety Officers in the Office of the Sheriff. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: None. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Resolution No. 2018/110 MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed Resolution No. 2018/110 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board Adopted this Resolution on 04/10/2018 by the following vote: AYE:4 John Gioia Candace Andersen Karen Mitchoff Federal D. Glover NO: ABSENT:1 Diane Burgis ABSTAIN: RECUSE: Resolution No. 2018/110 IN THE MATTER OF: Entering into a Memorandum of Understanding with the California State Parks Division of Boating and applying and accepting funding for critical skills training from the California State Parks Division of Boating and Waterways. WHEREAS, The County of Contra Costa is seeking funds available through the California State Parks Division of Boating and Waterways; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors: Authorizes the Sheriff-Coroner, Undersheriff or the Sheriff's Chief of Management Services, to execute for and on behalf of the County of Contra Costa, a public entity established under the laws of the State of California, any action necessary for the purpose of obtaining financial assistance provided by the State of California for Marine Law Enforcement Training. 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: RECOMMENDATION(S): ACCEPT and APPROVE the revised Head Start Policy Council Bylaws for the Community Services Bureau, as recommended by the Employment and Human Services Department. FISCAL IMPACT: None BACKGROUND: Head Start Performance Standards 1304.50(d)(1)(ii) require annual Board of Supervisors approval of the Head Start Policy Council Bylaws. Below is a summary of the revisions reviewed and approved by the Head Start Policy Council on January 17, 2018. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: CSB, (925) 681-6389 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Nasim Eghlima, Ana Araujo C. 87 To:Board of Supervisors From:Kathy Gallagher, Employment & Human Services Director Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Approval of Head Start Policy Council Bylaws BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) Summary of Changes to Head Start Policy Council Bylaws Bylaw Section Modification Rationale 1. Throughout Grammar corrections Corrections 2. III. G. Officer Vacancies Added “officer vacancies”.To clarify sentence. 3. IV. Policy Council Membership Changed "CFR 1306.3(h)" to “CFR 1305.2”To update new performance code. 4. IV. A. Compositions Removed Currently Enrolled Representatives table and added “The numbers of parent representatives is determined by the 1/60 formula, 1 representative for every 60 HS/EHS slots”. To explain calculation of parent representation. 5. IV.B. Term of Membership Changed "three year" to “five year”. To update term from 3 years to 5 years. 6. IV. E. Resignation Added “is no longer enrolled in the program”.To clarify enrollment status. 7. IV.F. Termination Added “the member represents”.To clarify to which Center the notice was sent. 8. VIII. Meetings Added “Policy Council meetings take place the 3rd Wednesday of every month, with the exception of July and December”. To clarify meeting schedule. 9. VIII. D. Quorum Added “is required to meet quorum”.To clarify the sentence. 10. VIII. E. Voting Added "The Chairperson votes only in the case of a tie." To clarify when the Chairperson can vote. 11. Appendix I: Head Start Performance Standards: Governance and Policy Council Removed To comply with new code. 12. Appendix 2: Head Start Performance Standards Appendix A Removed To comply with new code. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If not approved, Department will not be in compliance with Head Start regulations. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: The Employment and Human Services Department Community Services Bureau supports three of Contra Costa County's community outcomes - Outcome 1: Children Ready for and Succeeding in School, Outcome 3: Families that are Economically Self-sufficient, and Outcome 4: Families that are Safe, Stable, and Nurturing. These outcomes are achieved by offering comprehensive services, including high quality early childhood education, nutrition, and health services to low-income children throughout Contra Costa County. ATTACHMENTS Bylaws Redline copy Bylaws Clean copy Summary of Changes CC Employment and Human Services Department Community Services Bureau Head Start/Early Head Start Bylaws PC Bylaws - PC Approved: Pending BOS Approved: —Pending | Community Services Bureau 2 Table of Contents I. Name ................................................................................................................ 3 II. Purpose ........................................................................................................ 3 III. Executive Committee .................................................................................. 3 IV. Policy Council Membership ....................................................................... 4 V. Subcommittees............................................................................................ 6 VI. Conferences ................................................................................................ 6 VII. Standards of Conduct ................................................................................. 6 VIII. Meetings ...................................................................................................... 6 IX. Reimbursement ........................................................................................... 7 X. Amendments................................................................................................ 7 PC Bylaws - PC Approved: Pending BOS Approved: —Pending | Community Services Bureau 3 I. Name The name of this council is the Contra Costa County Head Start and Early Head Start Policy Council, hereinafter referred to as the Policy Council. II. Purpose The purpose of the Policy Council is to serve as a governing body using a shared decision making process with the County Board of Supervisors in all matters relating to the planning and coordination of the Head Start and Early Head Start programs operated by the Community Services Bureau. The Policy Council serves as the link among public and private organizations, the Grantee and Delegate Agencies, the communities served, and the parents of enrolled children. The Policy Council will comply with the existing Head Start Performance Standards requirements and the 2007 Head Start legislation. Any changes in the Head Start Performance Standards that will affect Policy Council bylaws will be brought to the Policy Council for explanation and approval. III. Executive Committee The Executive officers will be elected annually at the Policy Council Orientation/general meeting in September. The role of the Executive officers is to plan general meetings, review previous month’s minutes, set the agenda, and help staff in the overall planning. Executive officers shall attend all Policy Council and Executive Committee meetings. Executive members may teleconference for the Executive meeting. No more than two absences total from both Policy Council and Executive Committee meeting for the full term will be allowed. Arriving 15 or more minutes late to an Executive Committee meeting will be considered an unexcused absence. A. Chairperson The Chairperson shall preside at all Policy Council meetings. He or she has the authority to call special meetings, maintain order, and appoint chairperson ad-hoc committees. The Chairperson shall enforce the observance of order and decorum among the members, recognize members, staff and visitors who wish to speak and make official written communication. B. Vice-Chairperson The Vice-Chairperson shall assist the Chairperson and assume all the obligations and authority if the Chairperson is absent. The Vice Chair will be responsible for reviewing the desired outcomes and meeting rules during the Policy Council meetings. C. Secretary The Secretary shall declare whether a quorum exists at the beginning of each meeting. The Secretary shall monitor attendance. He or she shall read any correspondence at Policy Council meetings. He or she shall check for any corrections or clarification on previous month’s minutes, and seek approval of minutes. The Secretary shall also help prepare minutes of the meeting and ensure that the meeting is recorded. D. Parliamentarian PC Bylaws - PC Approved: Pending BOS Approved: —Pending | Community Services Bureau 4 The Parliamentarian assists the Chairperson in maintaining order during meetings. He or she states and reviews the principles of conduct and expected behaviors during meetings. He or she acts a timekeeper of the agenda items and notifies the Chairperson when time is an issue. He or she is the Chairperson of the Bylaws Subcommittee. E. Election of Officers The officers shall be elected annually at the September general meeting. Nominations for the officers shall be made by the general membership. Current Head Start and Early Head Start parents and past parents may be nominated as candidates. All votes are cast by closed ballot. No more than three past parents may serve on the Executive Committee. . F. Removal from Office Executive officers may be removed from office by a two-thirds (2/3) vote at any regular meeting for reasons of misconduct or excessive absenteeism. G. Officer Vacancies The Chairperson of the Policy Council fills officer vacancies by appointment and the Policy Council ratifies or elects a new nominee to fill each vacancy. If the Chairperson’s position is vacated, the Vice-Chair assumes all the obligations and authority of the Chair. IV. Policy Council Membership The Policy Council is comprised of parents of currently enrolled children and community agency representatives. At least 51 percent of the members must be the parents of currently enrolled Head Start or Early Head Start children (see 45 CFR 1306.3(h1305.2 ) for the definition of Head Start parent). No grantee, delegate or child care partner agency staff members or their immediate family members (spouse, co-parent) may serve on the Policy Council. A. Composition Policy Council composition is reviewed annually to ensure that it meets the general membership guidelines of Head Start Performance Standards and that the representatives are proportionately selected according to program option (Head Start, Early Head Start, Full Day, Part Day, and Home Base). The numbers of parent representatives is determined by the 1/60 formula, 1 representative for every 60 HS/EHS slots. Currently Enrolled Representatives (% of funded slots) Head Start 72% 16 Representatives Early Head Start 27 % 9 Representatives Home Based Option 1% 1 Representative Community Representatives Past Parents 3 Representatives Community Agencies 5 Representatives Total Council Seats 34 Comment [AA1]: Bylaw subcommittee is group of PC reps that once a year or in as needed basis review the updated bylaw with the CSB staff and present the updates at the PC meeting. Comment [AA2]: New HS Performance Standard Comment [AA3]: Not needed/use formula above PC Bylaws - PC Approved: Pending BOS Approved: —Pending | Community Services Bureau 5 1. Currently Enrolled Parents Currently enrolled parent representatives are elected by center parent committees and must have one or more children currently enrolled in the Head Start or Early Head Start programs. 2. Past Parent Representatives Former Head Start and Early Head Start parents may request to participate on the Policy Council, provided they have not exceeded the term limit. See the Policy Council handbook for application procedure. 3. Community Agency Representatives The Policy Council determines which community agencies it would like to invite to participate. Agencies are drawn from the local community and are familiar with resources and services for low-income children and families. B. Term of Membership Term of membership is for one year, September-August. Members are elected each year for a maximum of three five years. This limit applies to primary and alternate representatives who are listed on the Policy Council roster as a center representative at any time during the term. Currently Enrolled Parent Policy Council Members are expected to serve the full term, even if their program option closes for the summer. C. Alternates When an elected Policy Council member is unable to attend a meeting, he or she must secure an alternate to attend the meeting on his or her behalf. The alternate will participate fully including voting on action items. Each center shall maintain a list of alternates. D. Absences Policy Council members are required to attend all meetings. If a member will be absent, he or she shall secure an alternate. The member shall give twenty-four hour notice to the alternate and program staff. If a currently enrolled parent has two unexcused absences (failed to notify CSB staff or an Executive Officer of the absence) the center will be notified and the parent committee may choose to terminate the parent’s membership. The center must notify the Secretary of any changes in representation and in cases of excessive absenteeism, provide a response about the course of action the parent committee would like to take. If a past parent or community representative has two unexcused absences the Policy Council may choose to terminate his or her membership. E. Resignation If a member resigns from the Policy Council or is no longer enrolled in the program, the member must submit his or her resignation in writing to staff. If the member is an Executive Officer or Chair of a committee, the vacancy shall be filled as outlined in section III.G of the Policy Council Bylaws. Comment [AA4]: Comment [AA5]: Statement was added to clarify enrollment status PC Bylaws - PC Approved: Pending BOS Approved: —Pending | Community Services Bureau 6 F. Termination A Policy Council membership may be terminated by a two-thirds (2/3) vote at any regular meeting for reasons of misconduct or excessive absenteeism. If the termination is in regards to excessive absenteeism, this vote will take place only after a notice has been sent to the center the member represents and the center has provided a response as to the course of action. The member will be notified in writing of his or her termination from the Policy Council. G. Vacancy A vacancy at a center will be filled by an alternate until a new representative can be elected by the center parent committee. If a vacancy occurs by a community agency representative, the agency must appoint a replacement as soon as possible. Filling past parent member vacancies are outlined in Section IV.A of the Policy Council Bylaws. V. Subcommittees The Policy Council has four standing subcommittees: Fiscal Committee, Self-Assessment Committee, Personnel/Interview Panel Committee, and Ongoing Monitoring/Program Services Committee. The Policy Council has two Ad-Hoc subcommittees: By-laws Committee, and Policies and Procedures Committee. Executive Officers must sit on at least one subcommittee. Each subcommittee must maintain at least four members at all times. The Policy Council Chair appoints subcommittee leads and the Policy Council must ratify all appointments. Subcommittees must keep minutes, and reports must be presented to the Policy Council. VI. Conferences Policy Council representatives may be selected to attend conferences. Upon return from a conference, attendees must present a conference report to the Executive Officers and the Policy Council. Attendees will be given a per diem allotment for meals, ground transportation and child care expenses. All receipts must be submitted to staff no more than seven (7) days after return from travel. Conference attendance guidelines are outlined in the Policy Council Handbook. VII. Standards of Conduct All Policy Council members must sign and adhere to the Contra Costa County Code of Conduct , Community Service’s Bureau Standards of Conduct, and abide by policies and procedures for reporting to Child Protective Services and State Community Care Licensing. Any Policy Council Member in violation of any standards of conduct may be temporarily dismissed from his or her duties while the misconduct is under investigation. Staff and the Policy Council Executive Committee will hold a closed-session meeting and review the nature of the misconduct and make recommendations to the Policy Council to resume or remove membership. VIII. Meetings Policy Council meetings take place the 3rd Wednesday of every month, with the exception of July and December. Comment [AA6]: To clarify what center the notice has been sent. Comment [AA7]: To clarify meeting schedules PC Bylaws - PC Approved: Pending BOS Approved: —Pending | Community Services Bureau 7 Meeting notices shall comply with the Brown Act, the County’s Better Government Ordinance, and all applicable local and state meetings laws. A. Regular Meetings The Policy Council will hold a minimum of nine (9) meetings per year. Notice of meetings is provided 96 hours in advance of meetings and will be scheduled to encourage parent participation. All meetings of the Policy Council and its committees will be held in accordance with the Brown Act and the Contra Costa County Better Government Ordinance. B. Special Meetings A special meeting may be called at any time by the Chairperson. A twenty-four hour notice must be given to Policy Council members unless written notice has been waived. C. Emergency Meetings The Executive Officers may conduct business in emergency matters or if a majority of the Policy Council members cannot meet. A quorum (51% of the Executive Committee) is required to make a decision on behalf of the Policy Council. All decisions made during an Emergency Meeting must be ratified at the next regularly scheduled Policy Council meeting. D. Quorum A minimum of 25% of the full Policy Council membership is required to meet quorum. At least 51% of the total number of authorized Policy Council members in attendance must be Currently Enrolled Parents. E. Voting Only Policy Council members their alternates are permitted to vote on any Policy Council action. The Chairperson votes only in the case of a tie. F. Agenda The agenda shall comply with the Ralph M. Brown Act and the County Better Government Ordinance and all applicable laws. IX. Reimbursement Policy Council members will be reimbursed for child care and mileage for approved Policy Council activities according to the standard approved rates. Current standard rates and procedures for requesting reimbursement are outlined in the Policy Council Handbook. X. Amendments Proposed amendments of these bylaws may be initiated by action of the Policy Council. Proposed amendments must be presented to members at least one general meeting prior to action. Comment [AA8]: To clarify sentence Comment [AA9]: Clarify, the chair leads the meeting and ask to approve/disapprove motions, only votes if there is a tie PC Bylaws - PC Approved: Pending BOS Approved: —Pending | Community Services Bureau 8 CC Employment and Human Services Department Community Services Bureau Head Start/Early Head Start Bylaws PC Bylaws - PC Approved: 1/17/2018 BOS Approved: —Pending | Community Services Bureau 2 Table of Contents I. Name ............................................................................................................ 3 II. Purpose ....................................................................................................... 3 III. Executive Committee.................................................................................. 3 IV. Policy Council Membership ....................................................................... 4 V. Subcommittees ........................................................................................... 6 VI. Conferences ................................................................................................ 6 VII. Standards of Conduct ................................................................................ 6 VIII. Meetings ...................................................................................................... 6 IX. Reimbursement ........................................................................................... 7 X. Amendments ............................................................................................... 7 PC Bylaws - PC Approved: 1/17/2018 BOS Approved: —Pending | Community Services Bureau 3 I. Name The name of this council is the Contra Costa County Head Start and Early Head Start Policy Council, hereinafter referred to as the Policy Council. II. Purpose The purpose of the Policy Council is to serve as a governing body using a shared decision making process with the County Board of Supervisors in all matters relating to the planning and coordination of the Head Start and Early Head Start programs operated by the Community Services Bureau. The Policy Council serves as the link among public and private organizations, the Grantee and Delegate Agencies, the communities served, and the parents of enrolled children. The Policy Council will comply with the existing Head Start Performance Standards requirements and the 2007 Head Start legislation. Any changes in the Head Start Performance Standards that will affect Policy Council bylaws will be brought to the Policy Council for explanation and approval. III. Executive Committee The Executive officers will be elected annually at the Policy Council Orientation/general meeting in September. The role of the Executive officers is to plan general meetings, review previous month’s minutes, set the agenda, and help staff in the overall planning. Executive officers shall attend all Policy Council and Executive Committee meetings. Executive members may teleconference for the Executive meeting. No more than two absences total from both Policy Council and Executive Committee meeting for the full term will be allowed. Arriving 15 or more minutes late to an Executive Committee meeting will be considered an unexcused absence. A. Chairperson The Chairperson shall preside at all Policy Council meetings. He or she has the authority to call special meetings, maintain order, and appoint chairperson ad-hoc committees. The Chairperson shall enforce the observance of order and decorum among the members, recognize members, staff and visitors who wish to speak and make official written communication. B. Vice-Chairperson The Vice-Chairperson shall assist the Chairperson and assume all the obligations and authority if the Chairperson is absent. The Vice Chair will be responsible for reviewing the desired outcomes and meeting rules during the Policy Council meetings. C. Secretary The Secretary shall declare whether a quorum exists at the beginning of each meeting. The Secretary shall monitor attendance. He or she shall read any correspondence at Policy Council meetings. He or she shall check for any corrections or clarification on previous month’s minutes, and seek approval of minutes. The Secretary shall also help prepare minutes of the meeting and ensure that the meeting is recorded. PC Bylaws - PC Approved: 1/17/2018 BOS Approved: —Pending | Community Services Bureau 4 D. Parliamentarian The Parliamentarian assists the Chairperson in maintaining order during meetings. He or she states and reviews the principles of conduct and expected behaviors during meetings. He or she acts a timekeeper of the agenda items and notifies the Chairperson when time is an issue. He or she is the Chairperson of the Bylaws Subcommittee. E. Election of Officers The officers shall be elected annually at the September general meeting. Nominations for the officers shall be made by the general membership. Current Head Start and Early Head Start parents and past parents may be nominated as candidates. All votes are cast by closed ballot. No more than three past parents may serve on the Executive Committee. . F. Removal from Office Executive officers may be removed from office by a two-thirds (2/3) vote at any regular meeting for reasons of misconduct or excessive absenteeism. G. Officer Vacancies The Chairperson of the Policy Council fills officer vacancies by appointment and the Policy Council ratifies or elects a new nominee to fill each vacancy. If the Chairperson’s position is vacated, the Vice-Chair assumes all the obligations and authority of the Chair. IV. Policy Council Membership The Policy Council is comprised of parents of currently enrolled children and community agency representatives. At least 51 percent of the members must be the parents of currently enrolled Head Start or Early Head Start children (see 45 CFR 1305.2 for the definition of Head Start parent). No grantee, delegate or child care partner agency staff members or their immediate family members (spouse, co-parent) may serve on the Policy Council. A. Composition Policy Council composition is reviewed annually to ensure that it meets the general membership guidelines of Head Start Performance Standards and that the representatives are proportionately selected according to program option (Head Start, Early Head Start, Full Day, Part Day, and Home Base). The numbers of parent representatives is determined by the 1/60 formula, 1 representative for every 60 HS/EHS slots. 1. Currently Enrolled Parents Currently enrolled parent representatives are elected by center parent committees and must have one or more children currently enrolled in the Head Start or Early Head Start programs. PC Bylaws - PC Approved: 1/17/2018 BOS Approved: —Pending | Community Services Bureau 5 2. Past Parent Representatives Former Head Start and Early Head Start parents may request to participate on the Policy Council, provided they have not exceeded the term limit. See the Policy Council handbook for application procedure. 3. Community Agency Representatives The Policy Council determines which community agencies it would like to invite to participate. Agencies are drawn from the local community and are familiar with resources and services for low-income children and families. B. Term of Membership Term of membership is for one year, September-August. Members are elected each year for a maximum of five years. This limit applies to primary and alternate representatives who are listed on the Policy Council roster as a center representative at any time during the term. Currently Enrolled Parent Policy Council Members are expected to serve the full term, even if their program option closes for the summer. C. Alternates When an elected Policy Council member is unable to attend a meeting, he or she must secure an alternate to attend the meeting on his or her behalf. The alternate will participate fully including voting on action items. Each center shall maintain a list of alternates. D. Absences Policy Council members are required to attend all meetings. If a member will be absent, he or she shall secure an alternate. The member shall give twenty-four hour notice to the alternate and program staff. If a currently enrolled parent has two unexcused absences (failed to notify CSB staff or an Executive Officer of the absence) the center will be notified and the parent committee may choose to terminate the parent’s membership. The center must notify the Secretary of any changes in representation and in cases of excessive absenteeism, provide a response about the course of action the parent committee would like to take. If a past parent or community representative has two unexcused absences the Policy Council may choose to terminate his or her membership. E. Resignation If a member resigns from the Policy Council or is no longer enrolled in the program, the member must submit his or her resignation in writing to staff. If the member is an Executive Officer or Chair of a committee, the vacancy shall be filled as outlined in section III.G of the Policy Council Bylaws. F. Termination A Policy Council membership may be terminated by a two-thirds (2/3) vote at any regular meeting for reasons of misconduct or excessive absenteeism. If the termination is in PC Bylaws - PC Approved: 1/17/2018 BOS Approved: —Pending | Community Services Bureau 6 regards to excessive absenteeism, this vote will take place only after a notice has been sent to the center the member represents and the center has provided a response as to the course of action. The member will be notified in writing of his or her termination from the Policy Council. G. Vacancy A vacancy at a center will be filled by an alternate until a new representative can be elected by the center parent committee. If a vacancy occurs by a community agency representative, the agency must appoint a replacement as soon as possible. Filling past parent member vacancies are outlined in Section IV.A of the Policy Council Bylaws. V. Subcommittees The Policy Council has four standing subcommittees: Fiscal Committee, Self-Assessment Committee, Personnel/Interview Panel Committee, and Ongoing Monitoring/Program Services Committee. The Policy Council has two Ad-Hoc subcommittees: By-laws Committee, and Policies and Procedures Committee. Executive Officers must sit on at least one subcommittee. Each subcommittee must maintain at least four members at all times. The Policy Council Chair appoints subcommittee leads and the Policy Council must ratify all appointments. Subcommittees must keep minutes, and reports must be presented to the Policy Council. VI. Conferences Policy Council representatives may be selected to attend conferences. Upon return from a conference, attendees must present a conference report to the Executive Officers and the Policy Council. Attendees will be given a per diem allotment for meals, ground transportation and child care expenses. All receipts must be submitted to staff no more than seven (7) days after return from travel. Conference attendance guidelines are outlined in the Policy Council Handbook. VII. Standards of Conduct All Policy Council members must sign and adhere to the Contra Costa County Code of Conduct, Community Service’s Bureau Standards of Conduct, and abide by policies and procedures for reporting to Child Protective Services and State Community Care Licensing. Any Policy Council Member in violation of any standards of conduct may be temporarily dismissed from his or her duties while the misconduct is under investigation. Staff and the Policy Council Executive Committee will hold a closed-session meeting and review the nature of the misconduct and make recommendations to the Policy Council to resume or remove membership. VIII. Meetings Policy Council meetings take place the 3rd Wednesday of every month, with the exception of July and December. Meeting notices shall comply with the Brown Act, the County’s Better Government Ordinance, and all applicable local and state meetings laws. PC Bylaws - PC Approved: 1/17/2018 BOS Approved: —Pending | Community Services Bureau 7 A. Regular Meetings The Policy Council will hold a minimum of nine (9) meetings per year. Notice of meetings is provided 96 hours in advance of meetings and will be scheduled to encourage parent participation. All meetings of the Policy Council and its committees will be held in accordance with the Brown Act and the Contra Costa County Better Government Ordinance. B. Special Meetings A special meeting may be called at any time by the Chairperson. A twenty-four hour notice must be given to Policy Council members unless written notice has been waived. C. Emergency Meetings The Executive Officers may conduct business in emergency matters or if a majority of the Policy Council members cannot meet. A quorum (51% of the Executive Committee) is required to make a decision on behalf of the Policy Council. All decisions made during an Emergency Meeting must be ratified at the next regularly scheduled Policy Council meeting. D. Quorum A minimum of 25% of the full Policy Council membership is required to meet quorum. At least 51% of the total number of authorized Policy Council members in attendance must be Currently Enrolled Parents. E. Voting Only Policy Council members their alternates are permitted to vote on any Policy Council action. The Chairperson votes only in the case of a tie. F. Agenda The agenda shall comply with the Ralph M. Brown Act and the County Better Government Ordinance and all applicable laws. IX. Reimbursement Policy Council members will be reimbursed for child care and mileage for approved Policy Council activities according to the standard approved rates. Current standard rates and procedures for requesting reimbursement are outlined in the Policy Council Handbook. X. Amendments Proposed amendments of these bylaws may be initiated by action of the Policy Council. Proposed amendments must be presented to members at least one general meeting prior to action. Summary of Changes to Head Start Policy Council Bylaws Bylaw Section Modification Rationale 1. Throughout Grammar corrections Corrections 2. III. G. Officer Vacancies Added “officer vacancies”. To clarify sentence. 3. IV. Policy Council Membership Changed "CFR 1306.3(h)" to “CFR 1305.2” To update new performance code. 4. IV. A. Compositions Removed Currently Enrolled Representatives table and added “The numbers of parent representatives is determined by the 1/60 formula, 1 representative for every 60 HS/EHS slots”. To explain calculation of parent representation. 5. IV.B. Term of Membership Changed "three year" to “five year”. To updated term from 3 years to 5 years. 6. IV. E. Resignation Added “is no longer enrolled in the program”. To clarify enrollment status. 7. IV.F. Termination Added “the member represents”. To clarify to which Center the notice was sent. 8. VIII. Meetings Added “Policy Council meetings take place the 3rd Wednesday of every month, with the exception of July and December”. To clarify meeting schedule. 9. VIII. D. Quorum Added “is required to meet quorum”. To clarify the sentence. 10. VIII. E. Voting Added "The Chairperson votes only in the case of a tie." To clarify when the Chairperson can vote. 11. Appendix I: Head Start Performance Standards: Governance and Policy Council Removed To comply with new code. 12. Appendix 2: Head Start Performance Standards Appendix A Removed To comply with new code. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the County, Contract #22-472-3, the Unpaid Student Training Agreement with University of Phoenix, an educational institution, to provide supervised field instruction to nursing students in the County’s Public Health Division for the period from March 1, 2018 through June 30, 2021. FISCAL IMPACT: Non-financial agreement. BACKGROUND: The purpose of this agreement is to provide nursing students at University of Phoenix with the opportunity to integrate academic knowledge with applied skills at progressively higher levels of performance and responsibility. Supervised fieldwork experience for students is considered to be an integral part of both educational and professional preparation. The Health Services Department can provide the requisite field education, while benefiting from the students’ services to patients. Under Unpaid Student Training Agreement #22-472-3, University of Phoenix nursing students will receive supervised fieldwork instruction experience with Health Services Department through June 30, 2021. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: D Morgan, M Wilhelm C. 88 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Unpaid Student Training Agreement #22-472-3 with University of Phoenix CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this agreement is not approved, the students will not receive supervised fieldwork instruction experience in the County’s Public Health Division. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the El Sobrante Library to be closed until further notice while clean up and restoration of the facility is completed following the recent fire. FISCAL IMPACT: Impact to the Library Fund is being determined. BACKGROUND: On February 27, 2018 at approximately 8pm, Library Administration was notified that the El Sobrante Library was on fire. The fire is under investigation by Contra Costa County Fire. During the process of fighting the fire a number of holes had to be cut into the roof for ventilation purposes. The outside of the building suffered moderate fire damage adjacent to the porta-potty location. The inside of the building and its contents suffered significant smoke and some water damage Public Works has contracted with Restoration Management Company on fire cleanup and building restoration. Risk Management and insurance adjusters are working with Public Works and the Library to assess damage APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 89 To:Board of Supervisors From:Melinda Cervantes, County Librarian Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:El Sobrante Library closed until further notice BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) to the building and contents. All contents of the building have been removed and anything that can be cleaned and reused is undergoing that process and will be stored while work on the library continues. The Library is working with Public Works, Risk Management and the insurance company to determine what work must be done before reopening the library to the public. During the closure El Sobrante Library employees have been assigned to work at branches where position vacancies exist; and patron holds for books and other items have been redirected to nearby branches. It is not known at this time how long the El Sobrante Library will need to remain closed. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Clean up and restoration of the building will not be possible. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Auditor-Controller, or designee, to distribute the 2016-17 State Highway property rental revenue in the amount of $99,415.60 to the County Road Fund and to eligible cities pursuant to the provisions of Section 104.10 of the Streets and Highways Code, as follows: County Road Fund $82,753.96; City of Lafayette $6,120.00; City of Pittsburg $10,541.64 FISCAL IMPACT: This action has no impact on the General Fund. The County Road Fund will receive $82,753.96. BACKGROUND: Section 104.6 of the Streets and Highways Code authorizes the State Department of Transportation to lease any lands it holds which are not presently needed for State Highway purposes and provides that 24 percent of such rental revenue shall be allocated pursuant to Section 104.10. Section 104.13 provides that all funds distributed to the County shall be deemed to be in full or partial payment of the possessory interest taxes due on such leased properties. The recommended distribution is in accordance with these State laws. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The funds will not be distributed. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Joanne Bohren, (925) 335-8610 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 90 To:Board of Supervisors From:Robert Campbell, Auditor-Controller Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:DISTRIBUTION OF STATE HIGHWAY PROPERTY RENTAL REVENUE ATTACHMENTS State Highway Property Rental Revenue $82,753.96 $6,120.00 $10,541.64 TOTAL $99,415.60 DISTRIBUTION OF 2016-17 HIGHWAY PROPERTY RENTAL REVENUE (Right of Way Rental Income) County Road Fund City of Lafayette City of Pittsburg RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE the list of providers recommended by Contra Costa Health Plan's Peer Review and Credentialing Committee on March 13, 2018, and by the Health Services Director, as required by the State Departments of Health Care Services and Managed Health Care, and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. FISCAL IMPACT: Not applicable. BACKGROUND: The National Committee on Quality Assurance (NCQA) requires that evidence of Board of Supervisors' approval must be contained within each CCHP provider’s credentials file. Approval of this list of providers as recommended by the CCHP Peer Review and Credentialing Committee will enable the Contra Costa Health Plan to comply with this requirement. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this action is not approved, Contra Costa Health Plan’s providers will not be appropriately credentialed and in compliance with the NCQA. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Heather Wong, Tasha Scott, Marcy Wilhelm C. 91 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Approve New and Recredentialing Providers in Contra Costa Health Plan’s Community Provider Network ATTACHMENTS Attachment Contra Costa Health Plan Providers Approved by Peer Review and Credentialing Committee March 13 , 2018 CREDENTIALING PROVIDER S MARCH 2018 Name Specialty Cabreira, Rachael, NP Mid -Level Urolog y Chideya, Sekai, MD Primary Care Family Medicine Colombo, Corinne, NP Mid -Level Urology Donthineni, Rakesh, MD Surgery – Orthopaedic Goudeau, Theron, NP Primary Care Family Medicine Igbinosa, Irogue, MD OB/GYN Kang, Gail, MD Neurology Maldonado, Diana, RBT Qualified Autism Paraprofessional Nainani, Neha, MD Nephrology Rezapour, Alireza, MD Primary Care Internal Medicine Salera, Christine, NP Primary Care Family Medicine Thomas, Rahitha, NP Mid-Level Nephrology Thomas, Ryan, DPM Podiatry Vaerten, Katelyn, BCBA Qualified Autism Provider Wada, Hitomi, BCBA Qualified Autism Provider Weiner, Paul, DPM Podiatry RECREDENTIALING PROVIDER S MARCH 2018 Name Specialty Ansari, Erum, MD Pediatric Urgent Care Carlton, Bruce, MD Dermatology Ceci, Kimberly, MD Primary Care Family Medicine Centeno, Joseph, MD Surgery – Orthopaedic Dave, Neesha, DO Pain Medicine Desai, Manoj, MD Primary Care Pediatrician Dhillon, Jatinder, MD Surgery – Cardiothoracic Drummond -Hay, Leslie, MD Family Planning DuMouchel, Ralph, DC Chiropractic Medicine Eigelberger, Monica, MD Surgery – General Fleminger, Dawn, BCBA Qualified Autism Provider Holton, Casey, BCBA Qualified Autism Provider Johnson, Veneisha, MFT Mental Health Services Khakmahd, Oliver, MD Nephrology Kim, Charleen, MD Surgery – General Contra Costa Health Plan Providers Approved by Peer Review and Credentialing Committee March 13, 2018 Page 2 of 2 RECREDENTIALING PR OVIDER S MARCH 2018 Name Specialty Lowe, Suzanne, DC Chiropractic Medicine Malatesta, Angela, NP Mid-Level Pain Medicine Marcus, Gary, MD Cardiovascular Disease Martin, Lesley, MD Hematology/Medical Oncolog y Moore, Kyle, MD Primary Care Internal Med icine Morrow, Joseph, PhD, BCBA Qualified Autism Provider Mostofi, Tara, PA Mid-Level Allergy & Immunology Nissen, Teodoro, MD Surgery – Orthopaedic Pagtalunan, Maria, MD Nephrology Peace, Elizabeth, BCBA Qualified Autism Provider Petrovich, Rashida , NP Mid-Level Nephrology Sachdeva, Suresh, MD Primary Care Pediatrician Shah, Pratik, PT Physical Therapy Wardlaw, Mary, NP Primary Care Family Medicine Weinstock, Diana, PhD Mental Health Services Wong, Samuel, DO Nephrology Yandell, Genevieve, MFT Mental Health Services Young, Steven, MD Surgery – General RECREDENTIALING ORGANIZATIONAL PROVIDERS MARCH 2018 Provider Name Provide the Following Services Location Guardian Adult Day Health Centers of California dba: Guardian Adult Day Health Center Adult Day Services El Sobrante Sutter Infusion & Pharmacy Services dba Sutter Care at Home Infusion Pharmacy Alameda Sutter Infusion & Pharmacy Services dba Sutter Care at Home Infusion Pharmacy Sacramento Vitas Healthcare Corporation of California Hospice Walnut Creek bopl-March 13, 2018 RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Auditor-Controller, or designee, to pay $60,000 to Aspiranet for home visiting services rendered on behalf of the Employment and Human Services Department from April 1, 2017 to June 30, 2017, as recommended by the Employment and Human Services Department Director. FISCAL IMPACT: The costs will be paid 100% by federal funds from Early Head Start Partnership Grant #2 from the Administration for Children and Families. [CFDA No. 93.600] BACKGROUND: Aspiranet has held a contract with the department to provide home visiting services to pregnant women, infants and toddlers in support of the department's Early Head Start program since 2014. During FY 2016-17 the department and Contractor agreed to provide services to an additional 40 children beyond the scope of the FY 2016-17 contract with the new Early Head Start Partnership Grant #2 funds. The contractor began to provide the services on April 1, 2017 at the amount of $500 per child per month. The additional services continued for 3 months at a total cost of $60,000. The contractor began to provide the services without having a contract amendment to authorize the extra services, in the good faith that the department would amend the FY 2016-17 contract accordingly. The request for an amendment was not submitted APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: (925) 681-6334 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Nelly Ige, Haydee Ilan, Magda Bedros C. 92 To:Board of Supervisors From:Kathy Gallagher, Employment & Human Services Director Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Payment for Services Provided by Aspiranet BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) and therefore the FY 2016-17 contract ended without the additional services and payment being added to that contract. The oversight was recently recognized by both the contractor and department. This board order seeks to rectify the oversight by providing payment for services rendered. The Department requests the Board of Supervisors authorize the Auditor-Controller to issue a one-time payment to the contractor in the amount of $60,000. The Department has instituted a new monitoring process to insure that this situation will not occur in the future. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Provider will not be paid for services rendered to the Employment and Human Services Department. ATTACHMENTS 2016-17 contract 2017-18 contract RECOMMENDATION(S): CONTINUE the emergency action originally taken by the Board of Supervisors on November 16, 1999 regarding the issue of homelessness in Contra Costa County. FISCAL IMPACT: None. BACKGROUND: On November 16, 1999, the Board of Supervisors declared a local emergency, pursuant to the provisions of Government Code Section 8630 on homelessness in Contra Costa County. Government Code Section 8630 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. In no event is the review to take place more than 21 days after the previous review. On March 27, 2018, the Board of Supervisors reviewed and approved the emergency declaration. With the continuing high number of homeless individuals and insufficient funding available to assist in sheltering all homeless individuals and families, it is appropriate for the Board to continue the declaration of a local emergency regarding homelessness. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Susan Smith, (925) 335-1042 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 93 To:Board of Supervisors From:David Twa, County Administrator Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:CONTINUE EXTENSION OF EMERGENCY DECLARATION REGARDING HOMELESSNESS RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Resolution No. 2018/140 to APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to temporarily close the part-day, part-year Head Start Center Based Pre-School Program, and the Home Based Program during the low enrollment summer period effective the close of business day May 11, 2018; ABOLISH project positions and lay off employees in the Employment and Human Services Department/Community Services Bureau as specified in Attachment A-1, effective the close of business day May 11, 2018; and C) Re-establish positions as specified in Attachment A-2, effective August 20, 2018. FISCAL IMPACT: Upon approval there will be no fiscal impact. The fiscal year funding anticipates the closure of the part-day, part-year Center Based and the Home Based Programs during the summer months. The closure of the part day, part year Head Start Center Based Pre-School Program and the Home Based Program is scheduled in the operation of the child care program, and the savings from the closure are incorporated in the Employment and Human Services Department/Community Services Bureau's fiscal year budget. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 04/10/2018 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 Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Contact: Reni Radeva (925) 608-5036; rradeva@ehsd.cccounty.us 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: EHSD/CSB C. 94 To:Board of Supervisors From:Kathy Gallagher, Employment & Human Services Director Date:April 10, 2018 Contra Costa County Subject:Lay off Employees and Abolish and Restore Position in the EHSD/CSB Part-Day, Part-Year Programs BACKGROUND: The Head Start Center Based and the Home Based Programs operate on a nine-month schedule. Teacher-Project and Early Childhood Educator-Project positions, funded through the Administration for Children and Families grant, will be eliminated at the close of business day May 11, 2018 through August 19, 2018. In order to keep expenditures within the available funding and keep staffing at the level necessary for efficient operations, it is necessary to abolish the positions described in Attachment A-1 on the date indicated. Positions required to support Center Based and Home Based programs for the 2018-2019 program year will be re-established August 20, 2018 as indicated on Attachment A-2. Incumbents in positions that are proposed to be eliminated were hired as part-year teachers and/or have bid into these part-year slots. They are aware of the summer closures and the employment opportunities available when the new school year starts and positions are re-established. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Failure to close the part-day, part-year Center Based and Home Based programs during the summer months of 2018 will result in a fiscal deficit for the Employment and Human Services Department/Community Services Bureau. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: The Employment and Human Services Department/Community Services Bureau supports four of Contra Costa County's community outcomes - Outcome 2: Children and Youth Healthy and Preparing for Productive Adulthood; Outcome 3: Families that are Economically Self Sufficient; Outcome 4: Families that are Safe, Stable and Nurturing; and Outcome 5: Communities that are Safe and Provide a Health Quality of Life for Children and Families are supported. Employment and Human Services/Community Services Bureau part-day, part-year Head Start pre-school and home based programs support all the listed outcomes. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Resolution No. 2018/140 List of positions to be abolished and restored MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed Resolution No. 2018/40 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board Adopted this Resolution on 04/10/2018 by the following vote: AYE:4 John Gioia Candace Andersen Karen Mitchoff Federal D. Glover NO: ABSENT:1 Diane Burgis ABSTAIN: RECUSE: Resolution No. 2018/140 Abolishing positions, laying off and re-appointing certain County Employees in the Employment and Human Services Department, Community Services Bureau's Head Start Center Based and Home Based programs WHEREAS, the Board has considered the financial impact on the county departments of reduced funding and increased funding requirements, and has considered the position and staff reduction/retention plans submitted by departments; and, WHEREAS, the department will temporarily close the part-day, part-year Head Start Center Based and Home Based Program, abolish positions, restart the programs and add the positions at a later date; and, WHEREAS, the Department Head has issued layoff or displacement notices, as the case may be, and has begun giving notice to the affected employees of the Board's action; and, WHEREAS to the extent that the subjects of this Resolution are within the scope of representation pursuant to the Meyers-Milias Act (Government Code Section 3500 et seq.), this Board has offered to meet with recognized employee organizations upon request concerning this resolution. Now, Therefore, Be It Resolved: 1. The positions set forth in the attached list A-1 will be abolished and the employees laid-off. List A-1 is incorporated herein by reference, and said positions are hereby abolished, effective on the date indicated. 2. The positions set forth in the attached list A-2 will be re-established. List A-2 is incorporated herein by reference, and said positions are hereby re-established, effective on the date indicated. 3. The Employee Relations Officer shall give notice of this Resolution to all recognized employee organizations representing employees impacted by this action. 4. Recognized employee organizations may submit to the Employee Relations Officer written request to meet and confer on specific proposals with respect to this Resolution and/or resulting layoffs. This authorization and direction is given without prejudice to the Board's right to reduce or terminate the operations and services of the County and of districts governed by this Board and to eliminate classes of employees or positions, as these decisions involve the merits, necessity, or organization of services or activities of the County and districts governed by the Board and are not subject within the scope of representation. Contact: Reni Radeva (925) 608-5036; rradeva@ehsd.cccounty.us 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: April 10, 2018 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: EHSD/CSB ATTACHMENT A-1 RESOLUTION NO. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY POSITIONS TO BE ABOLISHED Effective: May 11th, 2018 DEPARTMENT: Employment and Human Services Pos # Classification Class Code Org # FT/PT Vacant/Filled 17247 Early Childhood Educator 9MW 4 1419 FT Filled 17254 Teacher CJN1 1458 FT Filled 17249 Teacher CJN1 1458 FT Filled 17251 Teacher CJN1 1438 FT Filled 17255 Teacher CJN1 1438 FT Filled 17253 Teacher CJN1 1458 FT Filled 16653 Teacher CJN1 1805 FT Filled 17260 Master Teacher CJT1 1427 FT Filled 17259 Master Teacher CJT1 1417 FT Filled ATTACHMENT A-2 RESOLUTION NO. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY POSITIONS TO BE ESTABLISHED Effective: August 20th, 2018 DEPARTMENT: Employment and Human Services Pos # Classification Class Code Org # FT/PT Early Childhood Educator 9MW 4 1419 FT Teacher CJN1 1458 FT Teacher CJN1 1458 FT Teacher CJN1 1438 FT Teacher CJN1 1438 FT Teacher CJN1 1458 FT Teacher CJN1 1805 FT Master Teacher CJT1 1427 FT Master Teacher CJT1 1417 FT