HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 04202018 -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 24, 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.
B. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL--ANTICIPATED LITIGATION
Initiation of litigation pursuant to Gov. Code, § 54956.9(d)(4): One potential case
C. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS
Property: 205 41st Street and 3927 Bissell Avenue, Richmond
Agency Negotiators: Karen Laws, Principal Real Property Agent and
Eric Angstadt, Chief Assistant County Administrator
Negotiating Parties: County of Contra Costa and RYSE, Inc.
Under negotiation: Price and terms
9:30 A.M. Call to order and opening ceremonies.
Inspirational Thought- "A smile is happiness you'll find right under your nose." ~ Tom Wilson
Present: John Gioia, District I Supervisor; Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor; Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor; Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor; Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor
Staff Present:David Twa, County Administrator
By unanimous vote, with all Supervisors present, the Board voted to initiate legal action. The particulars will be available when
the matter commences.
CONSIDER CONSENT ITEMS (Items listed as C.1 through C.62 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 Jerome E. Hatfield for his many years of service on the occasion of his retirement. (Russell Watts,
Treasurer-Tax Collector)
PRESENTATION recognizing the month of April 2018 as Child Abuse Prevention Month in Contra Costa County. (Kathy Marsh,
Employment and Human Services Department)
PRESENTATION recognizing the month of April 2018 as National Sexual Assault Awareness Month in Contra Costa County.
(Supervisor Mitchoff)
PR.4 PRESENTATION regarding the status of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District Idle Free Pledge in Contra Costa
County. (Jody London, Department of Conservation and Development)
DISCUSSION ITEMS
D. 1 CONSIDER Consent Items previously removed.
There were no consent items removed for discussion.
D. 2 PUBLIC COMMENT (2 Minutes/Speaker)
Ajit Kaushal, coordinator invited all to join the Baisakhi Mela, the 15th Annual Diversity Spring Festival at Todos Santos Plaza
in Concord on April 28, 2018 from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. http://interfaithccc.org/event/15th-annual-diversity-spring-festival-baisakhi-mela-2018/
D.3 CONSIDER update on public outreach regarding the County's Preliminary Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis and
DIRECT staff regarding preparation of a zoning ordinance for the unincorporated areas of Contra Costa County. (John Kopchik and
Ruben Hernandez, Conservation and Development Department)
Speakers: Marsha Golangco, resident of Alamo; Bhagat Aramandia, resident of San Ramon; Michael Cox, CCCCARM; Azad
Aramandla, resident of San Ramon; Alice Zhang, Rossmoor Seniors; Corliss Lee, resident of WC; Hongmei Gao, East Bay
Trinity Chinese Church; Dr. Phillip Drowm, resident of Martinez; Sara Mai, resident of San Ramon; Yan Way, PTA
Dougherty Valley High School; Kieran Ringgenberg, Global Quality Foods; Lily Ding, Silicon Valley Chinese Association
Foundation (SVCA); Jay Yao, CCC Against Recreational Marijuana Crystal Lu, SVCA; Crystal Lu, SVCA; Jiyun Xu, resident
of Moraga; Fanbo Jiang, Pleasant Hill church; Renee M. Lee, Rossmoor Medical Marijuana Club; Greg Kremenliev,
NORML; Yan Heim, resident of Orinda; Stephanie Shu, resident of San Ramon; Mark Unterbad, resident of Brentwood; Max
Unterbach, resident of Brentwood; Patrick Irnion, resident of Pleasant Hill; Jacob Coggshall, resident of Crockett; Marisol
Pena, resident of Crockett; Melanie Walker, resident of Brentwood; (handout); Stephen Shub, resident of Oakland; Mei Leng,
HOA Rose Garden Oncore; Shalini Jaipuriyar, HOA Rose Garden Oncore, San Ramon; Jaime Rich, ADAPT Lamorinda,
resident of Concord; Oscar Burrula, resident of Brentwood ; Israel Martinez, resident of Brentwood; John thiella, Jim Gonzelz
& Associates LLC; Sabrina Li, resident of Pleasant Hill; Frank Lee, resident CCC; Charles Huang, resident of CCC; Chris
Conrad, Family Council on Drug Awareness; Mikki Norris resident of El Sobrante; Ivy Liu, resident of San Ramon; Fang
Pan; Xinchuan Huang, resident of San Ramon; Juan Pablo Galvan, Save Mt. Diablo; Jinsong Zhang, resident of Walnut
Creek; Alfred Crancter, resident of Moraga; Ken Zheng, resident of Orinda; Vijay Chirumanilla, resident of San Ramon;
Shyla Knowton Mangipundi; Wenge Sun, business operator Brentwood; Brian Eliff, resident of Knightsen; Juan Chen-Olsen,
resident of Lafayette The following people left written comments for the Board’s consideration (attached): Ali Wohlgemuth, resident
of Contra Costa; Qinl Woul, East Bay Trinity Chinese church, resident of San Ramon; Lin Dong, East Bay Trinity Chinese
Church; Juan Chen-Olsen, resident of Lafayette; John Rudniski, resident of Lafayette; Ye Liu, resident of Orinda; Li Long,
resident of Lafayette; Kieran Ringgenberg, resident of Oakland; Vijay Chirumamilla and SailaJa Mangipudi, residents of San
Ramon; Maggie Huong, resident of San Ramon; Ting Ding, Resident of San Ramon; Fang Pan, San Ramon; Mingying Chen,
resident of San Ramon; Zhenfang Zhang, resident of San Ramon; Ying Tian, resident of San Ramon; Ruiyu Wang, resident of
San Ramon; Mei Tao, resident of Danville; Zhen Yuan, resident of San Ramon; Liwen Liu, resident of Livermore.
ADOPTED staff’s recommendations to include staff’s recommended changes to the framework with the following adjustments
to the seven major areas of change proposed by staff:
Adjustments to Change # 1 General Permit Terms – Replaced the original provision calling for compliance review annually for
three years, then very three years thereafter with a provision requiring compliance review in years, 1, 2, 4 and the midpoint of
any future renewal.
Adjustments to Change No. # 2 Caps and Applicant Selection Process –
Retail Storefront – Concurred with the limit of four but changed the re-evaluation period from three years to two years.
Manufacturing – Added a limit for a certain type of manufacturing: manufacturing in an agricultural zone as a stand-alone
operation, not combined with cultivation, a maximum of two (2).
Adjustments to Change #3 Revised Zoning Matrix – Adjusted the matrix to reflect that up to 2 stand-alone manufacturing
facilities could be in an agricultural zone.
Adjustments to Change #4: Exclusion Areas – Added Contra Costa Centre to the list of unincorporated communities in which
certain zoning districts would be designated ineligible for commercial cannabis.
Adjustments to Change #5 Buffer Zones – Chose Option B – reflecting 1000 foot buffers from any K-12 school, day care center
or youth center, as well as 1000 foot buffers from drug treatment shelters. Directed to staff to include in future RFP process and
permit issuance findings considerations related to proximity to other sensitive receptors.
Adjustments to Change #7 Retail Delivery from Outside County – Staff will bring the Board data on safeguards in state law or
County regulations regarding ensuring deliveries are made only to persons of legal age and some data on staff resources
required to implement a permit process compared to allowing by right.
D. 4 CONSIDER reports of Board members.
Supervisor Glover received a phone call from the General Manager of Keller Canyon Landfill advising him of an article in the
Sunday San Francisco Chronicle regarding Hunters Point Project materials transported to Keller Canyon.
Supervisor Glover asked for reports next week from the environmental health division and the Department of Conservation and
Development.
County Administrator David Twa said that the report would be before the Board at its next meeting on May 1, 2018.
Closed Session
ADJOURN
CONSENT ITEMS
Road and Transportation
C. 1 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Chair, Board of Supervisors, to execute, on behalf of the County, a grant of easement to
convey to Phillips 66 a pipeline easement near Grayson Creek for relocation in connection with the SR4/I-680 Widening Project
Phase 3, as recommended by the Public Works Director, Martinez area. (No fiscal impact)
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
C. 2 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Chair, Board of Supervisors, to execute, on behalf of the County, a quitclaim deed to
exchange property rights with East Bay Municipal Utility District for property rights required for the County’s Alhambra Valley
Road, near the intersection of Alhambra Valley Road, Castro Ranch Road, and Pinole Valley Road, as recommended by the Public
Works Director, Martinez area. (No fiscal impact)
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
C. 3 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with Hanna
Engineering, Inc., effective April 24, 2018, to increase the payment limit by $30,620 to a new payment limit of $304,620, for
construction management services for the Canal Road Bridge Replacement Project, Bay Point area. (100% Federal Highway Bridge
Program Funds)
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
C. 4 AWARD and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a construction contract with VSS International,
Inc., in the amount of $268,000, for the Blackhawk Road Bikeway Project, Blackhawk area. (28% Transportation Development Act
Grant Funds, 28% Trust Fund 819200, and 44% Local Road Funds)
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
C. 5 AWARD and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a construction contract in the amount of
$188,127 with Statewide Traffic Safety and Signs, Inc. for the Bay Point Sign Upgrade Project, Bay Point area. (90% Highway
Safety Improvement Program Grant Funds and 10% Local Road Funds)
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
C. 6 ADOPT Resolution No. 2018/154 approving a list of projects for FY 2018/19 funded by Senate Bill 1 (SB1): The Road Repair
and Accountability Act of 2017 , Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account funds and DIRECT staff to submit the list to the
California Transportation Commission, as recommended by the Transportation, Water and Infrastructure Committee. (100% SB1
Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account)
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
Engineering Services
C. 7 ADOPT Resolution No. 2018/146 approving reduction of performance bond amount for Subdivision Agreement (Right-of-Way
Landscaping) for park acceptance PA14-00042 (cross-reference subdivision SD05-08971) for a project 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 III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
Special Districts & County Airports
C. 8 Acting as the governing body of the Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, APPROVE and
AUTHORIZE the Chair, Board of Supervisors, to execute a grant of easement to convey to Phillips 66 a pipeline easement near
Grayson Creek for relocation in connection with the SR4/I-680 Widening Project Phase 3, as recommended by the Chief Engineer,
Martinez area. (No fiscal impact)
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
C. 9 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a contract with ANKA Behavioral Health, Inc.
in an amount not to exceed $184,650 for weed abatement in the Iron Horse Corridor for the period of May 1, 2018, through August
1, 2020, Concord, Pleasant Hill, Walnut Creek, Alamo, Danville and San Ramon areas. (100% Iron Horse Corridor Trust Funds)
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
C. 10 Acting as the governing body of the Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (District), APPROVE
and AUTHORIZE the Chair, Board of Supervisors, to execute a Grant Deed to the City of Pinole for the conveyance of District real
property located on Henry Avenue over Pinole Creek, and take related actions under the California Environmental Quality Act; as
recommended by the Chief Engineer, Pinole area. (No fiscal impact)
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
C. 11 AUTHORIZE the Director of Airports, or designee, to negotiate a long-term ground lease and development terms between the
County, as Landlord, and MS Commercial, Inc., as the developer, for approximately 36 acres of land on the northwest side of the
Byron Airport. (100% Airport Enterprise Fund)
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
Claims, Collections & Litigation
C. 12 DENY claims filed by Nadieh Kakar, Juanito C. Lumapac, CSAA, a subrogee of Maria Delourdes Martinez Correa, East Bay
Regional Park District, and Rhonda Polite.
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
Statutory Actions
C. 13 ACCEPT Board members meeting reports for March 2018.
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
Honors & Proclamations
C. 14 ADOPT Resolution 2018/151 recognizing the month of April 2018 as Child Abuse Prevention Month, as recommended by the
Employment and Human Services Director.
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
C. 15 ADOPT Resolution No. 2018/148 recognizing Susan and Sam Sperry as the Moraga Citizens of the Year, as recommended by
Supervisor Andersen.
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
C. 16 ADOPT Resolution No. 2018/150 recognizing April 2018 as National Sexual Assault Awareness Month in Contra Costa
County, as recommended by Supervisor Mitchoff.
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
C. 17 ADOPT Resolution No. 2018/158 recognizing Jerome E. Hatfield on the occasion of his retirement, as recommended by the
Treasurer-Tax Collector.
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
C. 18 ADOPT Resolution No. 2018/161 recognizing the 15th anniversary of the Contra Costa Regional Health Foundation, as
recommended by Supervisor Mitchoff.
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
Ordinances
C. 19 INTRODUCE Ordinance No. 2018-13 to require the humane treatment of roosters; WAIVE reading; and FIX May 1, 2018 for
adoption.
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
Appointments & Resignations
C. 20 REAPPOINT Stanley Caldwell to the Contra Costa Special Districts Association seat on the Treasury Oversight Committee for
a term of May 1, 2018 through April 30, 2022, as recommended by the Treasurer-Tax Collector.
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
C. 21 APPOINT Dr. Matthew White as the Acting Director of Behavioral Health/Mental Health and interim local director of mental
health services for Contra Costa County pursuant to Welfare & Institutions Code section 5607, as recommended by the Health
Services Director.
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
C. 22 APPOINT Richard Bell to the District 1 seat on the Family & Children's Trust Committee, as recommended by Supervisor
Gioia.
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
C. 23 APPOINT Dr. Talia Moore to the District 1-A seat on the Alcohol and Other Drugs Advisory Board, as recommended by
Supervisor Gioia.
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
Appropriation Adjustments
C. 24 Health Services (5899) / Fleet ISF (0064): APPROVE Appropriations and Revenue Adjustment No. 5066 authorizing the
transfer of appropriations in the amount of $43,506 from Behavioral Health Services Division – Mental Health Services Act
Innovation to General Services – ISF Fleet Services for the purchase of one vehicle for the Mental Health Older Adult Clinic. (100%
Mental Health Services Act)
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
C. 25 Health Services (5899) / Fleet ISF (0064): APPROVE Appropriation and Revenue Adjustment No. 5067 authorizing the
transfer of appropriations in the amount of $39,507 from Behavioral Health Services Division – Mental Health Service Act
Innovation to General Services – ISF Fleet Services for the purchase of one vehicle for the implementation of the Center for
Recovery and Empowerment project. (100% Mental Health Services Act)
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
Grants & Contracts
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE execution of agreements between the County and the following agencies for receipt of fund and/or
services:
C. 26 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Librarian, or designee, to apply for and accept California State Library grant funding
in an amount not to exceed $85,000 to meet the operational and services expenses required by Project Second Chance, the Contra
Costa County Library adult literacy program, to provide adult literacy services for the period of July 1, 2018 through June 30, 2019.
(86% Library Fund, 14% California State Library)
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
C. 27 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract containing modified
indemnification language with California Green Business Network, to pay the County an amount not to exceed $20,000, to promote
and help businesses adopt environmentally preferable practices for the period April 1, 2018 through March 1, 2019. (No County
match)
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
C. 28 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment & Human Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with the
Catholic Council for the Spanish Speaking of the Diocese of Stockton to pay the County an amount not to exceed $28,000, to
provide food services to the childcare program at El Concilio Preschool in Brentwood, California for the period May 1, 2018 through
April 30, 2019. (No County match)
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
C. 29 ADOPT Resolution No. 2018/156 to approve and authorize the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to
execute a contract with the California Department of Aging to pay County an amount not to exceed $4,290,517 for Older California
Act, Title III and Title VII services for the period July 1, 2018 through June 30, 2019. (92% Federal, 8% State) (County Match
$103,098)
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
C. 30 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Veterans Service Officer, or designee, to apply for and execute a contract to accept
C. 30 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Veterans Service Officer, or designee, to apply for and execute a contract to accept
grant funding from the California Department of Veterans Affairs in an amount not to exceed $30,000, to provide mental health
outreach and support services through the Veteran's Voices television production for the period July 1, 2018 through June 30, 2019.
(No County match)
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE execution of agreement between the County and the following parties as noted for the purchase of
equipment and/or services:
C. 31 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with Metropolitan Van
And Storage Inc., effective April 1, 2018, to increase the payment limit by $3,500,000 to a new payment limit of $7,500,000, with no
change to the original term of June 1, 2016 through May 31, 2019, to provide moving services, Countywide. (100% General Fund)
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
C. 32 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with Ana Hernandez,
LCSW, effective April 1, 2018, to increase the payment limit by $20,000 to a new payment limit of $120,000 to provide additional
specialty mental health services to Contra Costa Mental Health Plan Medi-Cal beneficiaries for the period November 1, 2016 through
June 30, 2018. (50% Federal Medi-Cal, 50% Mental Health Realignment)
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
C. 33 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with STAND!
For Families Free of Violence, in an amount not to exceed $317,125 to provide domestic violence support services to California
Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKs) participants for the period of July 1, 2018 through June 30, 2019. (100%
Federal)
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
C. 34 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the Sheriff-Coroner, a purchase order with
Hammons Supply Company in an amount not to exceed $180,000 for the purchase of miscellaneous custodial supplies and
equipment repairs as needed by the three County detention facilities for the period June 1, 2018 through May 31, 2019. (100%
General Fund)
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
C. 35 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with Marilee King,
MFT, effective April 1, 2018, to increase the payment limit by $10,000 to a new payment limit of $103,000 to provide additional
specialty mental health services to Contra Costa Mental Health Plan Medi-Cal beneficiaries for the period July 1, 2016 through June
30, 2018. (50% Federal Medi-Cal, 50% State Mental Health Realignment)
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
C. 36 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with Isaac Burns,
MFT, effective April 1, 2018, to increase the payment limit by $17,000 to a new payment limit of $125,000 to provide additional
specialty mental health services to Contra Costa Mental Health Plan Medi-Cal beneficiaries for the period July 1, 2016 through June
30, 2018. (50% Federal Medi-Cal, 50% State Mental Health Realignment)
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
C. 37 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Administrator, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with Lincoln, a
non-profit corporation, effective November 1, 2017, to increase the payment limit by $50,000 to a new payment limit of $168,956
and to extend the term from October 31, 2017 to June 30, 2018 for additional services at Park Middle School, Antioch, to prevent
juvenile justice involvement. (100% Federal)
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
C. 38 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Amarjit Dosanjh, M.D., a
C. 38 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Amarjit Dosanjh, M.D., a
Medical Corporation (dba Muir Plastic Surgery), in an amount not to exceed $2,340,000 to provide plastic and hand surgery at
Contra Costa Regional Medical and Health Centers for the period February 1, 2018 through January 31, 2021. (100% Hospital
Enterprise Fund I)
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
C. 39 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Probation Officer, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with Justice
Benefits Incorporated, Ltd. to extend the term from May 31, 2018 to May 31, 2019, with no change to the original payment limit of
$300,000, for continued training and Title IV-E claiming assistance. (100% General Fund)
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
C. 40 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Delta
Personnel Services, Inc. dba Guardian Security Agency in an amount not to exceed $325,000 to provide security guard services for
the period July 1, 2018 through June 30, 2019. (10% County, 48% State, 42% Federal)
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
C. 41 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute an interagency
agreement with Liberty Adult Education, in the amount not to exceed $64,000 for education and training services to California Work
Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKs) clients for the period of July 1, 2018 through June 30, 2019. (100% Federal)
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
C. 42 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Margaret A. Thayer, Ph.D.,
in an amount not to exceed $232,000 to provide neuropsychological and geropsychological testing services at Contra Costa Regional
Medical Center and Health Centers for the period June 1, 2018 through May 31, 2021. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I)
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
C. 43 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with Universal
Health Services, Inc., effective April 1, 2018, to provide biomedical technicians to service various biomedical equipment and
systems at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center and Health Centers, with no change in the payment limit of $150,000 or in the
term through May 31, 2018. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I)
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
C. 44 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with the Leland Stanford Junior
University (dba California Maternal Quality Care Collaborative) in an amount not to exceed $10,000 for Contra Costa Regional
Medical Center and Health Centers to participate in a collaborative to improve perinatal health care in California for the period
March 1, 2018 through February 28, 2021. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I)
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
C. 45 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with Traditions
Psychology Group, Inc. (dba Traditions Behavioral Health), effective April 15, 2018, to increase the hourly rate for the Psychiatric
Medical Director to act as the interim Behavioral Health Services Director, with no change in the payment limit of $45,000,000 or
the term through November 30, 2020. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I)
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
C. 46 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with S/T Health
Group Consulting, Inc., effective April 1, 2018, to increase the payment limit by $142,000 to a new payment limit of $596,000, to
provide additional drug pricing program compliance and price verification recovery audits per U.S. Health Resources and Services
Administration requirements for the period April 1, 2017 through March 31, 2020. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I)
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
C. 47 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Samir B. Shah, M.D., Inc.,
in an amount not to exceed $2,029,000 to provide ophthalmology services and, if requested, to act on behalf of the County as the
Chief Medical Officer for Contra Costa Regional Medical Center and Health Centers for the period May 1, 2018 through April 30,
2021. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I)
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
C. 48 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director or designee, to execute a contract with JBTatum Corporation in an
amount not to exceed $108,000 to provide professional consultation, management and technical assistance to the Materials
Management Unit at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center 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 III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
C. 49 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Emily Watters, M.D., in an
amount not to exceed $174,720 to provide outpatient psychiatric services to mentally ill adults in the County’s homeless shelters for
the period August 1, 2018 through July 31, 2019. (100% Mental Health Realignment)
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
C. 50 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute an Interagency
Agreement with City of Richmond Workforce Development Board, in an amount not to exceed $30,000 to provide 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 III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
Other Actions
C. 51 ADOPT the Amended and Restated Bylaws of the Contra Costa County Library Commission, as recommended by the Library
Commission and County Librarian. (No fiscal impact)
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
C. 52 ACCEPT the March 2018 update of the operations of the Employment and Human Services Department, Community Services
Bureau, as recommended by the Employment and Human Services Department Director.
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
C. 53 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Conservation and Development Director, or designee, to allow the temporary rental of the
deed restricted residential real property located at 1556 Martin Drive, North Richmond to a qualified tenant for a period of up to two
years. (50% Community Development Block Grant and 50% former Contra Costa Redevelopment Agency funds)
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
C. 54 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Librarian to close the Lafayette County Library early to the public on June 2, 2018,
at 3:00 p.m., instead of the regular 5:00 p.m. under normal business hours, to host the annual Night at the Library fundraising event,
as requested by the Lafayette Library and Learning Center Foundation. (No fiscal impact)
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
C. 55 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Sonoma State University to
permit nursing students to receive field instruction in the County’s Public Health Division for the period July 1, 2018 through June
30, 2021. (Non-financial agreement)
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
C. 56 REASSIGN Michelle Brown from the AtLarge #15 seat to the At Large #1 seat, ELIMINATE the At-Large #16-20 seats, and
C. 56 REASSIGN Michelle Brown from the AtLarge #15 seat to the At Large #1 seat, ELIMINATE the At-Large #16-20 seats, and
adopt revised bylaws to reflect these changes on the Contra Costa County Commission for Women bylaws, as recommended by the
Internal Operations Committee. (No fiscal impact)
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
C. 57 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Samuel Merritt University
to permit nursing students to receive field instruction in the County’s Public Health Division for the period October 1, 2018 through
September 30, 2021. (Non-financial agreement)
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
C. 58 CONTINUE the emergency action originally taken by the Board of Supervisors on November 16, 1999, and most recently
approved by the Board on April 10, 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 III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
C. 59 ADOPT Resolution No. 2018/157 approving and authorizing the District Attorney, or designee, to submit an application and
execute a grant award agreement and any extensions or amendments thereof, pursuant to State guidelines, with the California
Department of Insurance for the 2018/19 Workers' Compensation Insurance Fraud Prosecution Program grant in an amount not to
exceed $1,269,335 for the investigation and prosecution of workers' compensation fraud cases for the period of July 1, 2018 through
June 30, 2019. (100% State)
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
C. 60 AUTHORIZE the Auditor-Controller's Office to issue a one-time payment in the amount of $57,418.32 for Group Home
services provided to a juvenile Ward of the Court for the period August 28, 2017 to February 26, 2018, as recommended by the
County Probation Officer. (100% General Fund)
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
C. 61 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Librarian to close the Walnut Creek County Library early to the public on April 28,
2018, at 3:00 p.m. instead of the regular 6:00 p.m. under normal business hours, to host the annual fundraising event, as requested by
the Walnut Creek Library Foundation. (No fiscal impact)
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
C. 62 ADOPT Resolution No. 2018/162 authorizing the issuance and sale of "Lafayette School District General Obligation Bonds,
Election of 2016, Series B (2018)" in an amount not to exceed $40,000,000 by the Lafayette School District on its own behalf
pursuant to Section 15140(b) of the Education Code, as recommended by the County Administrator. (No County fiscal impact)
AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
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.
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 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 TBD TBD See above
Finance Committee TBD TBD See above
Hiring Outreach Oversight Committee June 4, 2018 1:00 p.m.See above
Internal Operations Committee May 14, 2018 Canceled
Next Meeting June 11, 2018
1:00 p.m. See above
Legislation Committee May 14, 2018 10:30 a.m.See above
Public Protection Committee May 7, 2018 Canceled
Next Meeting TBD
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):
RECEIVE PRESENTATION regarding the status of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District Idle
Free Pledge in Contra Costa County.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
BACKGROUND:
The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors was the first municipal government in the Bay Area to take
the Idle Free Pledge on April 25, 2017. 138 County employees have taken the pledge, including the
Supervisors. Prior to the Board's action, the Pittsburg Unified School District began promoting idle free
behavior using signage and outreach. Subsequent to the Board's Action, the Martinez Unified School
District, City of Martinez, and Walnut Creek School District issued proclamations in support of the Idle
Free Pledge. All of the actions taken to date have encouraged voluntary action.
In Martinez, students from the Public Health Academy at Alhambra High School have been instrumental in
advocating for the School Board and City Council to endorse no-idling policies. The students regularly
promote the Pledge at all the schools in Martinez. They would like to expand the reach of their
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
Contact: Jody London,
925-674-7871
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 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: , Deputy
cc:
PR.4
To:Board of Supervisors
From:John Kopchik, Director, Conservation & Development Department
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Presentation regarding the Idle Free Pledge
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
advocacy for clean air.
The Bay Area Air Quality Management District is interested in assessing the effectiveness of the Idle
Free Pledge in changing driver behavior. Contra Costa County staff have facilitated interns from
Alhambra High School to develop and administer a survey of all the people in the Bay Area who have
taken the Idle Free Pledge. The attached presentation provides their findings as well as
recommendations for additional action by the County and other entities to increase participation.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
The Board will forego an opportunity to be updated on the effectiveness of the Idle Free Pledge in
changing driver behavior that could contribute to cleaner air.
ATTACHMENTS
Idle Free Pledge Effectiveness
Idle Free
for a healthier
community!
Public Health 2017-2018
Alhambra High School
Jobette Jingco and Lindsey Osmer
1
What is idling?
Idling is running the vehicle’s
propulsion engine while the
vehicle is NOT moving.
YET...it costs money, contributes to climate
change and impacts community health!
2
Idling = Pollution
The general term for air pollutants is
particulate matter (PM). PM can...
●aggravate asthma
●decrease lung function
●worsen cardiovascular problems
3
Who is most affected by air pollution?
The elderly and young children!
4
Idling → Climate Change
Every 10 minutes of idling
creates 1 pound of CO2 emissions!
●CO2 is the primary contributor to climate change
○ About 25% of CO2 emissions in the US
comes from transportation
Emissions from the transportation
sector are an even greater source of
pollution in Contra Costa County 5
MUSD Board Presentation
June 2017 - Alhambra High
School Public Health
Students were successful
in convincing the Martinez
Unified School DIstrict
Board to pass a resolution
to limit idling on district
properties
6
Martinez City Council Proclamation
Approved - January 2018
Alhambra Public Health Students at City
Council meeting - January 2018
7
Ongoing Campaign to Reduce Idling
Public Health Internship - Spring 2018 -
CCC Department of Conservation and
Development
Worked with
●Jody London - Sustainability Coordinator
●Jessica Williams - Community Focus
(nonprofit to promote healthier communities)
8
Idle Free Pledge in Contra Costa County
●On April 24, 2017 the Board of
Supervisors took the Idle Free
Pledge
○encouraged Contra Costa
County employees and
residents to take it as well
●138 of the County employees
took the pledge out of 9,900
employees total
9
Idle Free Follow-Up Survey
10
11
12
What did we learn?
The idle free pledge seems to
change behavior around idling!
●costs nothing
●takes less than 1 minute
Suggestion: Promote pledge to ALL County
employees!
13
“I pledge to
turn off my
car’s engine if
I’ll be waiting
for more than
30 seconds!”
Suggestions from Survey Respondents
●More posted signs, especially in school drop-off and pick-up lines
●Idle Free car stickers and window clings
●Radio broadcasts
●Work with driving instructors to educate students and teach them not to idle
●Public Service Announcements
●Billboards
●Bookmarks
●Small timers
14
What the County Can Do
●Post Idle Free signs at County offices,
●More direct messaging to County employees
●Idle Free stickers in County cars
●Consider policy that prohibits idling in County cars
15
Next Steps at Alhambra High
●Approach Shell to promote Idle Free Pledge to employees
○Promote Idle Free actions at gas stations
●Approach DMV and ask to promote idle free actions to drivers
○Highlight in offices to employees, as well as drivers
16
Idle Free Pledge
https://idlefreebayarea.org/idle-free-pledge/
17
RECOMMENDATION(S):
A. ACCEPT staff's update on public outreach for the Cannabis Framework;
B. APPROVE the Final Draft of the Framework for Regulating Cannabis in the Unincorporated Areas of
the County; and
C. DIRECT Department of Conservation and Development staff to prepare an ordinance based on the Final
Draft of the Framework.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Preparation of a zoning ordinance regulating commercial cannabis uses and personal cultivation is expected
to cost in the range of $150K-$250K in staff time. This expense has been anticipated in the current
Department Budget.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
Contact: Ruben Hernandez, (925)
674-7785
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 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: , Deputy
cc:
D.3
To:Board of Supervisors
From:John Kopchik, Director, Conservation & Development Department
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Cannabis Framework Public Outreach Update and Report on Proposed Cannabis Regulations for the Unincorporated
Areas of Contra Costa County
BACKGROUND:
On November 14, 2017, the Board approved the Preliminary Working Draft for Regulating
Cannabis in the Unincorporated Area of Contra Costa County along with a public outreach
plan for obtaining public comment and input on the Framework. This action was preceded by detailed
Board discussions on October 24, 2017, July 18, 2017 and April 25, 2017. Proposed revisions to the
Framework are included in Exhibit A. Two versions are included, one clean and one tracking changes
from the November 2017 version.
The public outreach plan directed the Department of Conservation and Development to engage in an
effort to obtain input and comment on the Preliminary Framework from various organizations including
local Municipal Advisory Committees (MAC), the Alcohol and Other Drug Advisory Board, and
working with Supervisor District offices on other outreach including to City Councils. Beginning with
the Alamo MAC on February 6, 2018, Department staff presented a Cannabis Framework Power Point
to each of these groups. The presentation included background on current County cannabis regulations,
potential regulation for commercial cannabis uses, maps, and other pertinent information related to the
establishment of cannabis regulations as described in the Framework. The presentation also identified
specific areas where public input was particularly needed, including obtaining input on overall reaction
to the Framework, the use and extent of buffers, caps on the number of commercial cannabis uses and
addressing outdoor personal cultivation. A cannabis regulation survey addressing these same four topics
was also prepared and shared with the public at each of the meetings. The survey was also posted on the
County's cannabis web page and respondents were able to complete and submit it online.
COMMUNITY INPUT
In order to provide the Board with a understanding of the range of comments received throughout this
process, the comments have been summarized in attachments to this Board Order.
Exhibit B, the slides to be presented on April 24, contains a high-level summary of the input received
from the various bodies and from the survey. Exhibits C-H provide more detailed summaries.
CHANGES TO FRAMEWORK
After taking into consideration the input received during the public outreach process and after additional
staff analysis, a number of proposed modifications to the Preliminary Draft of the Framework have been
made. The proposed revised Framework is included in Exhibit A (one clean version, one version tracking
changes from November 2017). Revised maps with three buffer scenario options are provided in
Attachment 1 to Exhibit A. A summary of the major changes listed below is included in Exhibit B (the
slides to be presented on April 24).
General Permit Terms
Caps and Applicant Selection Process
Revised Zoning Matrix
Exclusion Areas
Buffer Zones
Outdoor Personal Cultivation
Retail Delivery From Outside County
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If the Board were not to approve the Draft Framework, staff would not have direction to prepare a draft
If the Board were not to approve the Draft Framework, staff would not have direction to prepare a draft
ordinance.
CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT:
Approval of the revised Framework would allow preparation of a Countywide cannabis ordinance to
move forward. Approval of a cannabis ordinance could potentially allow access to State grant funding
and new revenue streams from the future County cannabis tax which could be used for drug prevention
education, additional law enforcement services and health services.
CLERK'S ADDENDUM
Speakers: Marsha Golangco, resident of Alamo; Bhagat Aramandia, resident of San Ramon;
Michael Cox, CCCCARM; Azad Aramandla, resident of San Ramon; Alice Zhang, Rossmoor
Seniors; Corliss Lee, resident of WC; Hongmei Gao, East Bay Trinity Chinese Church; Dr. Phillip
Drowm, resident of Martinez; Sara Mai, resident of San Ramon; Yan Way, PTA Dougherty Valley
High School; Kieran Ringgenberg, Global Quality Foods; Lily Ding, Silicon Valley Chinese
Association Foundation (SVCA); Jay Yao, CCC Against Recreational Marijuana Crystal Lu, SVCA;
Crystal Lu, SVCA; Jiyun Xu, resident of Moraga; Fanbo Jiang, Pleasant Hill church; Renee M. Lee,
Rossmoor Medical Marijuana Club; Greg Kremenliev, NORML; Yan Heim, resident of Orinda;
Stephanie Shu, resident of San Ramon; Mark Unterbad, resident of Brentwood; Max Unterbach,
resident of Brentwood; Patrick Irnion, resident of Pleasant Hill; Jacob Coggshall, resident of
Crockett; Marisol Pena, resident of Crockett; Melanie Walker, resident of Brentwood; (handout);
Stephen Shub, resident of Oakland; Mei Leng, HOA Rose Garden Oncore; Shalini Jaipuriyar, HOA
Rose Garden Oncore, San Ramon; Jaime Rich, ADAPT Lamorinda, resident of Concord; Oscar
Burrula, resident of Brentwood ; Israel Martinez, resident of Brentwood; John thiella, Jim Gonzelz
& Associates LLC; Sabrina Li, resident of Pleasant Hill; Frank Lee, resident CCC; Charles Huang,
resident of CCC; Chris Conrad, Family Council on Drug Awareness; Mikki Norris resident of El
Sobrante; Ivy Liu, resident of San Ramon; Fang Pan; Xinchuan Huang, resident of San Ramon;
Juan Pablo Galvan, Save Mt. Diablo; Jinsong Zhang, resident of Walnut Creek; Alfred Crancter,
resident of Moraga; Ken Zheng, resident of Orinda; Vijay Chirumanilla, resident of San Ramon;
Shyla Knowton Mangipundi; Wenge Sun, business operator Brentwood; Brian Eliff, resident of
Knightsen; Juan Chen-Olsen, resident of Lafayette
The following people left written comments for the Board’s consideration (attached):
Ali Wohlgemuth, resident of Contra Costa; Qinl Woul, East Bay Trinity Chinese church, resident of
San Ramon; Lin Dong, East Bay Trinity Chinese Church; Juan Chen-Olsen, resident of Lafayette;
John Rudniski, resident of Lafayette; Ye Liu, resident of Orinda; Li Long, resident of Lafayette;
Kieran Ringgenberg, resident of Oakland; Vijay Chirumamilla and SailaJa Mangipudi, residents of
San Ramon; Maggie Huong, resident of San Ramon; Ting Ding, Resident of San Ramon; Fang Pan,
San Ramon; Mingying Chen, resident of San Ramon; Zhenfang Zhang, resident of San Ramon; Ying
Tian, resident of San Ramon; Ruiyu Wang, resident of San Ramon; Mei Tao, resident of Danville;
Zhen Yuan, resident of San Ramon; Liwen Liu, resident of Livermore. ADOPTED staff’s
recommendations to include staff’s recommended changes to the framework with the following
adjustments to the seven major areas of change proposed by staff: Adjustments to Change # 1
General Permit Terms – Replaced the original provision calling for compliance review annually for
three years, then very three years thereafter with a provision requiring compliance review in years, 1,
2, 4 and the midpoint of any future renewal. Adjustments to Change No. # 2 Caps and Applicant
Selection Process – Retail Storefront – Concurred with the limit of four but changed the re-evaluation
period from three years to two years. Manufacturing – Added a limit for a certain type of
manufacturing: manufacturing in an agricultural zone as a stand-alone operation, not combined
with cultivation, a maximum of two (2). Adjustments to Change #3 Revised Zoning Matrix –
Adjusted the matrix to reflect that up to 2 stand-alone manufacturing facilities could be in an
Adjusted the matrix to reflect that up to 2 stand-alone manufacturing facilities could be in an
agricultural zone. Adjustments to Change #4: Exclusion Areas – Added Contra Costa Centre to the
list of unincorporated communities in which certain zoning districts would be designated ineligible
for commercial cannabis. Adjustments to Change #5 Buffer Zones – Chose Option B – reflecting
1000 foot buffers from any K-12 school, day care center or youth center, as well as 1000 foot buffers
from drug treatment shelters. Directed to staff to include in future RFP process and permit issuance
findings considerations related to proximity to other sensitive receptors. Adjustments to Change #7
Retail Delivery from Outside County – Staff will bring the Board data on safeguards in state law or
County regulations regarding ensuring deliveries are made only to persons of legal age and some data
on staff resources required to implement a permit process compared to allowing by right.
AGENDA ATTACHMENTS
Exhibit A1-Draft Cannabis Framework-Clean Version
Exhibit A2- Redline Version Cannabis Framework Document
Exhibit A-Attachment 1- Maps
Exhibit B-PowerPoint Presentation 4-24-18
Exhibit C-MAC Comments Summary
Exhibit D- AOD Advisory Board Comments Summary
Exhibit E- Youth Town Hall Meeting Comments Summary
Exhibit F- CCC Council on Homelessness Draft Meeting Minutes Excerpt
Exhibit G- Public Survey Comments Summary
Exhibit H- Comment Letters
MINUTES ATTACHMENTS
Correspondence Received
Exhibit A1‐‐clean
DRAFT
FRAMEWORK FOR
REGULATING CANNABIS IN THE
UNINCORPORATED AREA OF
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
April 24, 2018
PREPARED FOR THE CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
BY
THE CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT
30 Muir Road
Martinez, CA 94553
(925) 674-7775
Contra Costa County
Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis
April 24, 2018
1
I. Introduction
In response to California voter approval of Proposition 64 (Adult Use of Marijuana Act) in
November 2016, the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors has directed the County staff1,
to initiate the process of preparing regulations for the establishment of commercial cannabis
businesses in the unincorporated areas of the County. The regulations will also address
cultivation of cannabis for personal use at home.
This draft document is intended to provide an overview of potential cannabis regulations being
formulated for the unincorporated areas of the County based on guidance from the County
Board of Supervisors at previous meetings. The draft zoning ordinance will reflect the general
provisions described in this document.
In addition to preparation of land use and health regulations for commercial cannabis uses,
the Board has also initiated the process of analyzing and preparing a potential taxing program
for the various commercial cannabis uses. It is anticipated that no commercial cannabis uses
would be authorized until such time as a cannabis tax ballot measure has been approved by
County voters. A County cannabis tax initiative could be considered by voters at the next
General Election in November 2018, so regulations permitting commercial cannabis uses are
not expected to become effective until that time at the earliest.
No decision has been made by the Board on the regulatory framework contemplated in this
document. Currently, and unless or until new regulations are approved by the Board of
Supervisors, the commercial cultivation, distribution, storage, manufacturing, processing, and
sale of medical cannabis and adult use cannabis and the outdoor cultivation of cannabis for
personal use are prohibited within the unincorporated areas of the County.
II. Types of Commercial Cannabis Uses to be Permitted
The County is considering regulating and permitting the establishment of various commercial
cannabis uses. The types of commercial cannabis uses to be permitted include:
Commercial Cultivation-Refers to the growing of cannabis for commercial use,
including artificial, mixed light and natural light cultivation (i.e. indoor, greenhouse
and outdoor).
1 Staff from the following County Departments have been involved: County Administrators Office, County Counsel, Sheriff’s
Office, District Attorney, Health Services Department (HSD), Probation, Treasurer‐Tax Collector, Agriculture, and Conservation
and Development (DCD). DCD is taking the lead with respect to developing land use regulations. HSD is taking the lead with
developing health regulations.
Contra Costa County
Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis
April 24, 2018
2
Retail Storefront- Refers to the sale of cannabis to retail customers from a
storefront that sells only cannabis products. Deliveries from the storefront business
to retail customers would also be allowed.
Delivery-Only Retail- Refers to a business that delivers cannabis from anon-
storefront facility to retail customers. The premises would not be open to the public
and customers would not be able to purchase cannabis on-site.
Manufacturing/Processing- Involves the processing of cannabis or cannabis
products into various marketable forms. Manufacturing may include the extraction
of cannabinoid oils from the raw plant as well as the infusion of those oils into
products intended for human consumption and/or topical use. Some examples of
infused products include: edibles, beverages, oils, and tinctures. Since non-volatile
processing techniques are safer, only non-volatile processing, as defined in state
regulations, are proposed to be allowed.
Distribution Center- A cannabis distribution center refers to a site where cannabis
or cannabis products are warehoused and distributed to licensed cannabis retailers.
The retail sale of cannabis or cannabis products is not permitted from cannabis
distribution centers.
Testing- A cannabis testing facility is a facility where cannabis and cannabis products
are tested for potency, quality, and health and safety requirements.
III. Land Use Permitting Process
All applications for commercial cannabis uses are proposed to be subject to the County Land
use Permitting Process (Article 26-2.20 of County Code). Under the land use permitting process,
applications for all commercial cannabis uses would be subject to the following procedures:
Review of application for completeness.
Solicitation of comments from other County, State, and community
agencies/organizations.
Review of project for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act.
Mailing of public hearing notice to all property owners within 300-feet of property
where use is proposed.
Public hearing before the County Zoning Administrator.
Contra Costa County
Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis
April 24, 2018
3
Discretionary decisions would be made by the County Zoning Administrator who
could approve or deny applications. Zoning Administrator decisions can be appealed
to the County Planning Commission and decisions by the Planning Commission can
be appealed to the County Board of Supervisors.
Applications for retail storefront and commercial cultivation permits would only be
accepted in response to a Request for Proposals issued by the County in order to
enforce caps on the numbers of these types of businesses (see below for additional
detail).
All decisions to issue permits would need to be supported by findings that the
proposed use is consistent with defined standards. In addition to typical findings
required for all land use permits, staff recommends additional findings be required
for cannabis uses to prevent adverse impacts to neighbors and communities.
Each permitted use would be subject to specific conditions intended to protect public health,
safety and welfare (further discussion of key examples of protections is provided below). The
permits would be subject to suspension or termination under specific circumstances, including,
for example, where a State license is suspended or revoked, or where the business is operated
in such a way as to cause a public nuisance. A permit would have an initial 5-year term. A
permit could be renewed for one or more successive five-year terms if certain conditions are
met. A compliance review approved by the Zoning Administrator would be required each year
for the first three years of operation. After the first three years, the zoning administrator would
require compliance review once every three years. These reviews would generally be
performed without the necessity of convening a public hearing, except that a public hearing
before the Zoning Administrator would be required for the first such review of any business as
well as for any review in which the Zoning Administrator determines the business is not in
compliance. Local Health Licenses or operator permits for retailers and edible manufacturing
may be required on an annual basis to be consistent with how the Division of Environmental
Health regulates and inspects other consumer good businesses.
It is important to note that additional permits from the County (as well as a state license) will
be required. For example, Environmental Health is proposing to require applicants to seek and
receive a local health license, consistent with the handling and sales of consumer goods (see
Section IX). Business licenses would also be required. Building permits may also be required.
The permitting sequence would be as follows:
1) Land use permit (which would be conditioned to require subsequent granting of other
permits and licenses)
2) State license
3) Local health license
Contra Costa County
Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis
April 24, 2018
4
4) Business license and any necessary building permits
IV. Potential Cap on Number of Permits
In order to help ensure the establishment of safe, orderly and accessible commercial cannabis
businesses, caps will be placed on the number of retail storefronts and commercial cultivation
sites. The cap amount will be reviewed and possibly adjusted after an initial three year period.
Due to the lesser impact of specific commercial cannabis uses such as testing, manufacturing,
delivery-only retail and distribution, no caps on these uses will be established initially.
Commercial Cultivation-- Maximum of ten (10) during the initial three-years. This
cap will be reviewed thereafter.
Retail Storefront- Maximum of four (4) during the initial three years. This cap will
be reviewed thereafter.
Delivery-Only Retail – No limit initially.
Manufacturing-- No limit initially.
Distribution Center-- No limit initially.
Testing Facility-- No limit initially.
V. Applicant Selection Process
As described in Section II, in order to ensure the establishment of safe and accessible
commercial cannabis uses, all applications for commercial cannabis uses would be subject to
the County’s land use permitting (LUP) process and any other applicable regulations (e.g.
Environmental Health permits and building permits). For the commercial uses subject to a cap
(Retail Storefront and Commercial Cultivation), the Board will in the future establish a selection
process to determine how available permits will be allocated and facilitate permitting of
projects with more benefits and fewer impacts.
Under the future selection process, the County would solicit proposals for establishment of
certain commercial cannabis uses utilizing a request for proposals (RFP). The proposals
submitted in response to the RFP would be scored utilizing a pre-defined, Board-approved
scoring system. The scoring system is recommended to be based on criteria that reflect the
County’s public safety, land use and health policy goals with respect to cannabis, such as
providing well-regulated access to adults while avoiding proximity to youth and discouraging
abuse, compatibility with neighboring land uses and minimization or avoidance of potential
Contra Costa County
Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis
April 24, 2018
5
impacts to public health, safety and welfare. The proposals with the highest scores would then
be invited to submit a formal land use permit application, the application would be processed
under the County LUP process and would be subject to denial, or conditional approval, by the
County Zoning Administrator, County Planning Commission or Board of Supervisors. If a permit
was denied, the highest ranked proposal just below the initial cut-off could be invited to apply
until the cap on permits is reached. The screening process could be done in phases. For
instance, the County could initially invite submission of concise and simple pre-proposals (less
detailed and costly to complete than full proposals), review and rank the pre-proposals, then
invite the proponents with the highest ranking pre-proposals to submit full proposals which
would be screened again to determine who would be invited to submit a formal land use permit
application (this is similar to some grant selection processes).
Please note, applications for a land use permit for commercial cannabis uses would only be
accepted for qualifying properties located within the appropriate zoning district, outside of any
approved buffer areas and outside any exclusion areas (see Sections VI and VII, below).
(Document continues on next page)
Contra Costa County
Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis
April 24, 2018
6
VI. Eligible Locations
The County has prepared a matrix and Preliminary Cannabis Use Maps [include link to maps
here] identifying the zoning districts where specific commercial cannabis uses could be eligible
to apply for a discretionary permit. The draft matrix is below. The draft maps are in an
attachment.
CULTIVATION PROCCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
LEGEND Artificial
Light
Mixed
Light
Natural
Light
Distribution
Center Manufacturing Testing
Retail
Delivery
Only
Retail
StorefrontZONING
DISTRICT
Agricultural
Zoning
Districts (A‐ )
Land Use
Permit
Land
Use
Permit
Land Use
Permit
Land Use Permit
(in conjunction
with cultivation
permit only)
Area‐Wide
Planned Unit
Development
(P‐1)
Land Use
Permit
Land
Use
Permit
Land Use
Permit
Land Use
Permit Land Use Permit
Land
Use
Permit
Land Use
Permit
Land Use
Permit
Retail‐
Business (R‐B) Land Use
Permit
Land Use
Permit
General
Commercial
(C)
Land Use
Permit Land Use Permit
Land
Use
Permit
Land Use
Permit
Land Use
Permit
Controlled
Manufacturing
(C‐M), Light
Industrial (L‐I),
Heavy
Industrial (H‐I)
Land Use
Permit
Land
Use
Permit
Land Use
Permit
Land Use
Permit Land Use Permit
Land
Use
Permit
Land Use
Permit
Land Use
Permit
Potential
Sustainability
Requirements
100% Renewable
Energy and served
by a public water
agency
Served by a
public
water
agency
Potential limits
on
number of
employees/trips
outside ULL
Key
Considerations
and
Limitations by
Use
Maximum 22, 000 sf Max 2 acres only within
ULL Potential limits
on number of
employees/trips
outside ULL
only
within
ULL
only
within
ULL
only within
ULL
Ag Districts:
maximum 10,000 sf
structure or in
existing structure
Greenhouse
only inside
ULL or
within 1
mile of ULL
Cultivators
may
distribute
own produce
to retailers
500 ft from
another
retail
location
Note: 1: ULL refers to Urban Limit Line
Contra Costa County
Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis
April 24, 2018
7
Note 2: Microbusinesses (operations that grow, process and sell cannabis products to retail
customers at a small-scale site) are also under consideration where cultivation is allowed inside
the ULL.
Note 3: For the area-wide P-1 zoning districts in North Richmond, El Sobrante, Rodeo, Contra
Costa Centre and Bay Point, suitable areas for commercial cannabis are limited to those with
underlying General Plan land use designations of Business Park, Commercial, Commercial
Recreational, Light Industrial, Heavy Industrial, and Mixed Use. Subsequent to approval of the
zoning ordinance, the County would need to draft and approve amendments to the site-
specific provisions of each of these districts. These amendments would establish precisely
which commercial cannabis uses would be allowed where in these five area-wide P-1 districts.
As these amendments and associated detailed site analysis have yet to be performed, the
current draft maps show in yellow all of the areas within these five P-1 districts that have a
General Plan land use designation that is compatible with one or more commercial cannabis
use, but do not specify precisely which commercial cannabis use is proposed to be eligible on
any given parcel within the yellow area.
Properties with incompatible zoning could apply to be rezoned, but this is a long and complex
process requiring Board approval. Outside of the Area-Wide P-1 zoning districts that cover the
former Redevelopment Areas and El Sobrante (and that may be eligible for cannabis uses per
the above matrix), other lands that are zoned P-1 (Planned Unit Development) could go
through a process other than rezoning to become eligible for cannabis uses if they have a
compatible General Plan designation. They could apply for a Development Plan modification
to include a cannabis use as an eligible use, which would require separate approval but not
necessarily by the Board. It is recommended that new P-1 zones outside the ULL not be eligible
for commercial cannabis.
Exclusion areas: overlay zone to further restrict commercial cannabis: To restrict eligible
sites for retail storefront, delivery-only retail, manufacturing, distribution centers and testing to
areas near the two primary freeways serving the shoreline areas of the County where
development of new industries has been targeted by the County, to separate these uses from
less compatible communities, and to avoid siting in remote areas that are more difficult to
oversee and are far from most of the customer base, staff recommends an overlay be added
to the Retail Business and General Commercial zoning districts that are located more than five
miles from Highway 4 or Interstate 80. Such zoning districts are located in Alamo, Saranap,
Bethel Island and Hotchkiss Tract in between Oakley and Bethel Island. No commercial
cannabis uses would be permitted in these districts within the overlay.
VII. Buffer Zones
In addition to being located within compatible zoning districts and outside of exclusion areas
covered by a zoning overlay, all commercial cannabis uses would be subject to specific buffer
Contra Costa County
Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis
April 24, 2018
8
requirements in order to protect certain sensitive uses from potential cannabis influence or to
prevent cannabis businesses from being located to close to each other.
Under current State law a buffer of 600 feet is required between any cannabis business licensed
by the State and any K-12 school, day care center or youth center. A County ordinance may
include more or larger buffers. A County ordinance may also establish buffers between
cannabis businesses.
For comparison purposes, the County Code currently restricts the establishment of new
tobacco retail establishments within 1,000 feet of any school, playground, park or library and
within 500 feet of any existing tobacco retailer.
The Preliminary Cannabis Use Maps attached to the April 24 Board report show three
alternatives.
Option A reflects the state-mandated 600 foot buffers from any K-12 school, day care
center or youth center.
Option B reflects 1000 foot buffers from any K-12 school, day care center or youth
center, as well as 1000 foot buffers from drug treatment shelters.
Option C reflects 1000 foot buffers from schools, day care centers, youth centers,
community parks/playgrounds, libraries, drug treatment centers, and homeless shelters,
500 foot buffers from residential zoning districts. Option C closely mirrors the most
comprehensive buffer scenario contemplated in the Board’s November 2017 Preliminary
Framework, while also accounting for the state regulations regarding minimum buffers
from day care and youth centers.
County staff recommends Option B combined with 500 foot buffers between retail storefront
establishments.
VIII. Security and Nuisance Abatement Requirements
In order to ensure that commercial cannabis uses are operated in a safe and secure manner,
commercial uses are proposed to be subject to substantial security measures incorporated into
the regulations. Examples of security measures may include (the below are examples only—
many additional measures could be considered during development of the detailed
regulations):
Require that cannabis establishments be constructed in a manner that minimizes odors
to surrounding uses, and promotes quality design and construction, and consistency
with the surrounding properties. Require submission and approval of an odor
management plan.
Contra Costa County
Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis
April 24, 2018
9
Require design measures and an enforceable security plan to ensure the applicant will
secure the premises twenty-four hours per day, seven days per week. Require approval
and submission of a security plan demonstrating compliance with all security measures
set forth in state regulations and any additional security measures outlined in County
regulations. Examples of security measures that may need to be included in security
plans include: security cameras; establishing limited access areas accessible only to
authorized personnel; storing all finished cannabis products in a secured and locked
room; preventing off-site impacts to adjoining or near properties; and limiting the
amount of cash on the premises.
Examples of operational conditions of approval include:
Requiring permitted facilities (other than retail space in storefronts) to be closed to the
general public; prohibiting transporter deliveries and pick-ups between the hours of, for
example, 7:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m.
No production, distribution, storage, display or wholesale of cannabis and cannabis-
infused products shall be visible from the exterior of the building where the commercial
cannabis activity is being conducted.
Operational requirements and standards to prevent underage persons from acquiring
cannabis that equal or exceed state standards.
IX. Public Health Safeguards
Contra Costa Health Services recommends that the Board adopt a local health ordinance that
establishes permitted activity, and the conditions under which consumer products which
contain cannabis can be manufactured and sold to consumers. Adopting a local health
ordinance will also allow county staff to inspect, regulate and enforce appropriate state and
local laws pertaining to the cannabis industry. The primary reasons for crafting a local
regulatory health ordinance are:
Provide authority for local environmental health staff to inspect and enforce the
numerous state laws pertaining to: i) the manufacturing of food and beverage products
that contain cannabis (termed “edible cannabis products”); and ii) the retail sale and
dispensing of cannabis products including, but not limited to, leaf, bud, edibles,
beverages, tinctures, candies, etc.
Contra Costa County
Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis
April 24, 2018
10
Provide local authority to establish, inspect, and enforce additional rules and restrictions
on the manufacturing and sale of consumer products which contain cannabis.
Provide local authority to restrict use of cannabis in public places and smoking of
cannabis in multi-unit housing. Currently, the County has a second hand smoke
ordinance that bans the smoking of cannabis products in the unincorporated area of
the County in all of the same places where tobacco smoking is prohibited. Additionally,
in March of 2018 the Board adopted a prohibition on smoking in multiunit residences
that is inclusive of the use of cannabis. The current and proposed smoking prohibitions
also restrict the use of electronic smoking devices (vaping). In addition, the County
could consider an outright ban on the use of cannabis in any form at certain pubic
events and venues.
Specific examples of the kinds of safeguards that are being considered for inclusion in new
regulations include the following:
Consider limiting the sale of edible cannabis products to those where dosing is a
maximum of 10mg THC/dose and packaged as a single dose. Consumers would be
allowed to purchase up to the limit allowed in state law.
Prohibit sale of flavored leaf and bud.
Consistent with recent legislation in Colorado, consider prohibiting the sale of edible
products that mimic the shape and appearance of animals, humans, or fruit, including
gummy bears.
Prohibit sale of flavored e-juices.
Establish a limit on the number of edible products that can be purchased in a single
transaction.
Prohibit all self-service vending of all cannabis and products which contain cannabis.
A report from Contra Costa Health Services with detailed recommendations and analysis of
health issues is available on the County webpage about cannabis in the section with materials
from the Board meeting on October 24, 2017 or by clicking this link.
X. Cost Recovery
The County will establish fees on cannabis businesses to cover County costs associated with
application review and monitoring compliance with permit conditions. To apply for and
maintain a land use permit, applicants will be required to cover the full costs of the County to
review the application and oversee compliance with a resulting permit. Costs of a land use
permit are typically covered through a $2700 initial deposit and payment of County costs on
a time and materials basis thereafter. For those prospective businesses responding to the
RFP an earlier initial deposit will be required to cover County costs in administering the
Contra Costa County
Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis
April 24, 2018
11
selection process. If County costs do not reach the amount of the deposit when reviewing a
proposal or land use permit application, the difference will be refunded.
XI. Taxation
A ballot measure to seek approval for taxes on certain commercial cannabis uses is under
consideration. It is anticipated that no commercial cannabis uses would be authorized until
such time as a cannabis tax ballot measure has been approved by County voters. A County
cannabis tax initiative could be considered by voters at the next General Election in November
2018. The tax measure could provide funding for a variety of public purposes, including but
not limited to enhanced public safety, improved public health, drug treatment and education,
and enhanced code enforcement capability.
XII. Personal Cultivation
In addition to providing comprehensive regulations for the establishment of commercial
cannabis uses, the County cannabis ordinance will also address cultivation for personal use.
Under current County cannabis regulations, limited indoor cultivation is permitted. The current
regulations for personal indoor cultivation have been provided below.
Indoor Personal Use Cultivation- Under the County’s current cannabis regulations, six
or fewer cannabis plants may be cultivated indoors at a private residence, or inside a
fully-enclosed and secured accessory structure to a private residence located on the
grounds of the private residence, if all of the following conditions are met:
1. The private residence or accessory structure, and all lighting, plumbing, and
electrical components used for cultivation, must comply with applicable zoning,
building, electrical, and plumbing codes and permitting requirements.
2. All living cannabis plants, and all cannabis in excess of 28.5 grams produced by
those plants, must be kept in a locked room and may not be visible from an
adjacent property, right-of-way, street, sidewalk, or other place accessible to the
public.
3. The private residence must be lawfully occupied by the person who cultivates the
cannabis plants within the private residence or within the accessory structure. If
the private residence is not owner-occupied, written permission from the owner
of the private residence must be obtained before cannabis plants may be
cultivated.
Contra Costa County
Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis
April 24, 2018
12
The final regulations are proposed to continue the current restrictions on indoor cultivation for
personal use and include new provisions to allow for limited outdoor cultivation for personal
use.
Outdoor Personal Use Cultivation- Suggestions on restrictions on outdoor cultivation
for personal use that could be considered in lieu of outright prohibition include:
1. Not more than three marijuana plants are cultivated outdoors at one time (total
indoor and outdoor may not exceed six).
2. No part of the plants being cultivated is within ten feet of any property line.
3. Plants must never exceed five feet in height.
4. Plants must not be visible from streets or public areas.
5. Plants must be inside a fenced area with locked gates
XIII. Enforcement
In order to ensure the orderly establishment of commercial cannabis uses and to prevent and
discourage the establishment of unregulated cannabis uses, robust enforcement capacity
should be a component of the regulatory program. County staff is working to more fully
explore the most effective enforcement mechanisms and to better identify enforcement roles
and resource needs.
XIV. Retail delivery from businesses established outside the unincorporated
area of Contra Costa County
The state may require that retail delivery businesses located outside of the unincorporated area
of the County be able to make deliveries to customers within the unincorporated area without
violating county regulations. To address this and provide clarity, staff recommends that such
licensed business that are operating in compliance with state and local law and permits, be
authorized to make deliveries in the unincorporated area of the County.
Exhibit A2‐redline
PRELIMINARY WORKING DRAFT
FRAMEWORK FOR
REGULATING CANNABIS IN THE
UNINCORPORATED AREA OF
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
November 14, 2017
April 24, 2018
PREPARED FOR THE CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
BY
THE CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT
30 Muir Road
Martinez, CA 94553
(925) 674-7775
(NOTE: Yellow highlighted text marks ideas or components in an early stage of formulation and on which
public input would be particularly appreciated.)
Contra Costa County
Preliminary Working Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis
OctoberApril 24, 20178
1
I. Introduction
In response to California voter approval of Proposition 64 (Adult Use of Marijuana Act) in
November 2016, the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors has directed the County staff1,
to initiate the process of preparing regulations for the establishment of commercial cannabis
businesses in the unincorporated areas of the County. The regulations will also address
cultivation of cannabis for personal use at home.
This working draft document is intended to provide an overview of potential cannabis
regulations being formulated for the unincorporated areas of the County, including aspects
still very far from being settled, based on guidance from the County Board of Supervisors at
the April 25, July 18, and October 24, 2017previous meetings. The draft zoning ordinance will
reflect the general provisions described in this document is being used to solicit further
detailed public input on this matter.
In addition to preparation of land use and health regulations for commercial cannabis uses,
the Board has also initiated the process of analyzing and preparing a potential taxing program
for the various commercial cannabis uses. It is anticipated that no commercial cannabis uses
would be authorized until such time as a cannabis tax ballot measure has been approved by
County voters. A County cannabis tax initiative could be considered by voters at the next
General Election in November 2018, so regulations permitting commercial cannabis uses are
not expected to become effective until that time at the earliest.
No decision has been made by the Board on the regulatory framework contemplated in this
document. Currently, and unless or until new regulations are approved by the Board of
Supervisors, the commercial cultivation, distribution, storage, manufacturing, processing, and
sale of medical cannabis and adult use cannabis and the outdoor cultivation of cannabis for
personal use are prohibited within the unincorporated areas of the County.
II. Types of Commercial Cannabis Uses Under Considerationto be
Permitted
The County is considering regulating and permitting the establishment of various commercial
cannabis uses. No decisions have been made and it is possible that some or all categories of
1 Staff from the following County Departments have been involved: County Administrators Office, County Counsel, Sheriff’s
Office, District Attorney, Health Services Department (HSD), Probation, Treasurer‐Tax Collector, Agriculture, and Conservation
and Development (DCD). DCD is taking the lead with respect to developing land use regulations. HSD is taking the lead with
developing health regulations.
Contra Costa County
Preliminary Working Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis
OctoberApril 24, 20178
2
use will not be permitted. Types of use under consideration The types of commercial cannabis
uses to be permitted include:
Commercial Cultivation-Cultivation Refers to the growing of cannabis for
commercial use, including artificial, mixed light and natural light cultivation (i.e.
indoor, greenhouse and outdoor).
Retail Sales/Delivery- Retail sales of cannabisStorefront- Refers to the sale of
cannabis to retail customers from a storefront that sells only cannabis products.
Retail delivery refers to Deliveries from athe storefront or other permitted
sitebusiness to retail customers. would also be allowed.
Delivery-Only Retail- Refers to a business that delivers cannabis from anon-
storefront facility to retail customers. The premises would not be open to the public
and customers would not be able to purchase cannabis on-site.
Manufacturing/Processing- Involves the processing of cannabis or cannabis
products into various marketable forms, including edibles, oils, tinctures, etc. The
County may be well-positioned to attract and retain these types of businesses
because the County has significant industrial land and a strong industrial base.
Manufacturing may include the extraction of cannabinoid oils from the raw plant as
well as the infusion of those oils into products intended for human consumption
and/or topical use. Some examples of infused products include: edibles, beverages,
oils, and tinctures. Since non-volatile processing techniques are safer, only non-
volatile processing, as defined in state regulations, are proposed to be allowed.
Distribution Center- A cannabis distribution center refers to a site where cannabis
or cannabis products are warehoused and distributed to licensed cannabis retailers.
The retail sale of cannabis or cannabis products is not permitted from cannabis
distribution centers.
Testing- A cannabis testing facility is a facility where cannabis and cannabis products
are tested for potency, quality, and health and safety requirements.
III. Land Use Permitting Process
All applications for commercial cannabis uses are proposed to be subject to the County Land
use Permitting Process (Article 26-2.20 of County Code). Under the land use permitting process,
applications for all commercial cannabis uses would be subject to the following procedures:
Review of application for completeness.
Contra Costa County
Preliminary Working Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis
OctoberApril 24, 20178
3
Solicitation of comments from other County, State, and community
agencies/organizations.
Review of project for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act.
Mailing of public hearing notice to all property owners within 300-feet of property
where use is proposed.
Public hearing before the County Zoning Administrator.
Discretionary decisions would be made by the County Zoning Administrator who
could approve or deny applications. Zoning Administrator decisions can be appealed
to the County Planning Commission and decisions by the Planning Commission can
be appealed to the County Board of Supervisors.
Applications for retail storefront and commercial cultivation permits would only be
accepted in response to a Request for Proposals issued by the County in order to
enforce caps on the numbers of these types of businesses (see below for additional
detail).
All decisions to issue permits would need to be supported by findings that the
proposed use is consistent with defined standards. In addition to typical findings
required for all land use permits, staff recommends additional findings be required
for cannabis uses to prevent adverse impacts to neighbors and communities.
Each permitted use would be subject to specific conditions intended to protect public health,
safety and welfare (further discussion of key examples of protections is provided below). The
permits would be subject to suspension or termination if performance standards are not met
or public health, safety or welfare was threatened. The regulations could incorporate automatic
expiration of cannabis permits after a set number of years and require re-approval of permits,
including a new application review process. Periodic permit review hearings or review
procedures could also be included. under specific circumstances, including, for example, where
a State license is suspended or revoked, or where the business is operated in such a way as to
cause a public nuisance. A permit would have an initial 5-year term. A permit could be renewed
for one or more successive five-year terms if certain conditions are met. A compliance review
approved by the Zoning Administrator would be required each year for the first three years of
operation. After the first three years, the zoning administrator would require compliance
review once every three years. These reviews would generally be performed without the
necessity of convening a public hearing, except that a public hearing before the Zoning
Administrator would be required for the first such review of any business as well as for any
review in which the Zoning Administrator determines the business is not in compliance. Local
Health Licenses or operator permits for retailers and edible manufacturing may be required on
Contra Costa County
Preliminary Working Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis
OctoberApril 24, 20178
4
an annual basis to be consistent with how the Division of Environmental Health regulates and
inspects other consumer good businesses.
It is important to note that additional permits from the County (as well as a state license)
maywill be required. For example, Environmental Health mayis proposing to require additional
applicationsapplicants to seek and permitsreceive a local health license, consistent with the
handling and sales of consumer goods (see Section IX). Business licenses would also be
required. Building permits may also be required.
The permitting sequence would be as follows:
1) Land use permit (which would be conditioned to require subsequent granting of other
permits and licenses)
2) State license
3) Local health license
4) Business license and any necessary building permits
IV. Potential Cap on Number of Permits
In order to help ensure the establishment of safe, orderly and accessible commercial cannabis
businesses, the Board may wish to consider placing a cap on the number of permits to be
issued for some or all of the commercial cannabis uses to be permitted. Establishment of a
“ramp-up” program where the cap on the number of permits is increased on an annual
basis may also be considered by the Board, which would enable enforcement needs and
community effects to be assessed and resource allocation to be adjusted in a deliberative
manner. Considerations on potential caps for each of the use types are as follows:caps
will be placed on the number of retail storefronts and commercial cultivation sites. The
cap amount will be reviewed and possibly adjusted after an initial three year period. Due to
the lesser impact of specific commercial cannabis uses such as testing, manufacturing,
delivery-only retail and distribution, no caps on these uses will be established initially.
[[ULTIMATE OR INTERIM LIMIT, IF ANY, FOR EACH COMMERCIAL USE TO
BE DETERMINED BY THE BOARD ]]
Commercial Cultivation- [No limit] OR [A-- Maximum of ten (10?)-(50?)-(100?)
(more?)] permits for) during the commercial cultivation of cannabis, including
indoor, mixed light and outdoor cultivation.
Retail Sales- [No limit] OR [A maximum of (3?)-(6?)-(9?)-(12?) (more?)] permits for
the retail sale of commercial cannabis and cannabis products. For delivery-only
Contra Costa County
Preliminary Working Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis
OctoberApril 24, 20178
5
retail theinitial three-years. This cap couldwill be increased or eliminated
altogetherreviewed thereafter.
Manufacturing- [No limit] OR [A maximum of (5?)-(10?)-(15?)-(20?) (more?)]
permits for manufacturing of cannabis and cannabis products. Given that the
County could have competitive advantages in the sectors of manufacturing,
distribution and testing, and that community impacts may be well addressed with
proper siting, staff suggests the Board consider a high (or no) ultimate cap on
these sectors (interim caps for a “ramp-up”may have merit).
Retail Storefront- Maximum of four (4) during the initial three years. This cap will
be reviewed thereafter.
Delivery-Only Retail – No limit initially.
Manufacturing-- No limit initially.
Distribution Center- [No limit] OR [A maximum of (?)-(?)-(?)] permits for cannabis
and cannabis products distribution center-- No limit initially.
Testing Facility- [No limit] OR a maximum of (?)-(?)-(?) permits for cannabis and
cannabis products testing facility-- No limit initially.
V. Applicant Selection Process
As described in Section II, in order to ensure the establishment of safe and accessible
commercial cannabis uses, all applications for commercial cannabis uses would be subject to
the County’s land use permitting (LUP) process and any other applicable regulations (e.g.
Environmental Health permits and building permits). IfFor the commercial uses subject to a
cap (Retail Storefront and Commercial Cultivation), the Board establishes ultimate or interim
caps on the number of businesses to be permitted for any use category (see Section IV), will in
the County willfuture establish a selection process to determine how available permits will be
allocated. If a selection process is needed, the Board has expressed an interest in utilizing a
“request for proposal” (RFP) process and scoring system and facilitate permitting of projects
with more benefits and fewer impacts.
UtilizingUnder the RFP and scoringfuture selection process, the County would solicit proposals
for establishment of acertain commercial cannabis use.uses utilizing a request for proposals
(RFP). The proposals submitted in response to the RFP would be scored utilizing a pre-defined
and , Board-approved scoring system. The scoring system is recommended to be based on
Contra Costa County
Preliminary Working Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis
OctoberApril 24, 20178
6
criteria that reflect the County’s public safety, land use and health policy goals with respect
to cannabis, such as providing well-regulated access to adults while avoiding proximity to
youth and discouraging abuse, compatibility with neighboring land uses and minimization or
avoidance of potential impacts to public health, safety and welfare. The proposals with the
highest scores would then be invited to submit a formal land use permit application, the
application would be processed under the County LUP process and would be subject to denial,
or conditional approval, by the County Zoning Administrator, County Planning Commission or
Board of Supervisors. If a permit was denied, the highest ranked proposal just below the initial
cut-off could be invited to apply until the cap on permits is reached. The screening process
could be done in phases. For instance, the County could initially invite submission of concise
and simple pre-proposals (less detailed and costly to complete than full proposals), review and
rank the pre-proposals, then invite the proponents with the highest ranking pre-proposals to
submit full proposals which would be screened again to determine who would be invited to
submit a formal land use permit application (this is similar to some grant selection processes).
Please note, applications for a land use permit for commercial cannabis uses would only be
accepted for qualifying properties located within the appropriate zoning district and, outside
of any approved buffer areas and outside any exclusion areas (see Sections VI and VII, below).
(Document continues on next page)
Contra Costa County
Preliminary Working Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis
OctoberApril 24, 20178
7
VI. Eligible Locations
The County has prepared a matrix and Preliminary Cannabis Use Maps [include link to maps
here] identifying the zoning districts where specific commercial cannabis uses could be eligible
to apply for a discretionary permit. The draft matrix and maps are still under review by the
Board. The draft matrix is below. The draft maps are in an attachment.
CULTIVATION PROCCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
LEGEND Artificial
Light
Mixed
Light
Natural
Light
Distribution
Center Manufacturing Testing
Retail
Delivery
Only
Retail
StorefrontZONING
DISTRICT
Agricultural
Zoning
Districts (A‐ )
Land Use
Permit
Land
Use
Permit
Land Use
Permit
Land Use Permit
(in conjunction
with cultivation
permit only)
Area‐Wide
Planned Unit
Development
(P‐1)
Land Use
Permit
Land
Use
Permit
Land Use
Permit
Land Use
Permit Land Use Permit
Land
Use
Permit
Land Use
Permit
Land Use
Permit
Retail‐
Business (R‐B) Land Use
Permit
Land Use
Permit
General
Commercial
(C)
Land Use
Permit Land Use Permit
Land
Use
Permit
Land Use
Permit
Land Use
Permit
Controlled
Manufacturing
(C‐M), Light
Industrial (L‐I),
Heavy
Industrial (H‐I)
Land Use
Permit
Land
Use
Permit
Land Use
Permit
Land Use
Permit Land Use Permit
Land
Use
Permit
Land Use
Permit
Land Use
Permit
Potential
Sustainability
Requirements
100% Renewable
Energy and
Sustainable Water
Supplyserved by a
public water agency
Sustainable
Water
SupplyServed
by a public
water agency
Potential limits
on
number of
employees/trips
outside ULL
Key
Considerations
and
Limitations by
Use
Maximum 22, 000 sf Max 2 acres only within
ULL
Potential limits
on number of
employees/trips
outside ULL
only
within
ULL
only
within
ULL
only within
ULL
Ag Districts:
maximum 10,000 sf
structure or in
existing structure
Greenhouse
only in non‐
ag
districtsinside
ULL or within
1 mile of ULL
Cultivators
may
distribute
own produce
to retailers
500 ft from
another
retail
location
NoteNote: 1: ULL refers to Urban Limit Line
Contra Costa County
Preliminary Working Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis
OctoberApril 24, 20178
8
Note 2: Microbusinesses (operations that grow, process and sell cannabis products to retail
customers at a small-scale site) are also under consideration where cultivation is allowed inside
the ULL.
Note 3: For the area-wide P-1 zoning districts in North Richmond, El Sobrante, Rodeo, Contra
Costa Centre and Bay Point, suitable areas for commercial cannabis are limited to those with
underlying General Plan land use designations of Business Park, Commercial, Commercial
Recreational, Light Industrial, Heavy Industrial, and Mixed Use. Subsequent to approval of the
zoning ordinance, the County would need to draft and approve amendments to the site-
specific provisions of each of these districts. These amendments would establish precisely
which commercial cannabis uses would be allowed where in these five area-wide P-1 districts.
As these amendments and associated detailed site analysis have yet to be performed, the
current draft maps show in yellow all of the areas within these five P-1 districts that have a
General Plan land use designation that is compatible with one or more commercial cannabis
use, but do not specify precisely which commercial cannabis use is proposed to be eligible on
any given parcel within the yellow area.
Properties with incompatible zoning could apply to be rezoned, but this is a long and complex
process requiring Board approval. Outside of the Area-Wide P-1 zoning districts that cover the
former Redevelopment Areas and El Sobrante (and that may be eligible for cannabis uses per
the above matrix), other lands that are zoned P-1 (Planned Unit Development) could go
through a process other than rezoning to become eligible for cannabis uses if they have a
compatible General Plan designation. They could apply for a Development Plan modification
to include a cannabis use as an eligible use, which would require separate approval but not
necessarily by the Board. It is recommended that new P-1 z ones outside the ULL not be eligible
for commercial cannabis.
Exclusion areas: overlay zone to further restrict commercial cannabis: To restrict eligible
sites for retail storefront, delivery-only retail, manufacturing, distribution centers and testing to
areas near the two primary freeways serving the shoreline areas of the County where
development of new industries has been targeted by the County, to separate these uses from
less compatible communities, and to avoid siting in remote areas that are more difficult to
oversee and are far from most of the customer base, staff recommends an overlay be added
to the Retail Business and General Commercial zoning districts that are located more than five
miles from Highway 4 or Interstate 80. Such zoning districts are located in Alamo, Saranap,
Bethel Island and Hotchkiss Tract in between Oakley and Bethel Island. No commercial
cannabis uses would be permitted in these districts within the overlay.
VII. Buffer Zones
In addition to being located within compatible zoning districts, and outside of exclusion areas
covered by a zoning overlay, all commercial cannabis uses may alsowould be subject to specific
Contra Costa County
Preliminary Working Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis
OctoberApril 24, 20178
9
buffer requirements in order to protect certain sensitive uses from potential cannabis influence
or to prevent cannabis businesses from being located to close to each other.
Under current State law a buffer of 600 feet is required between any cannabis business licensed
by the State and any K-12 school, day care center or youth center. A County ordinance may
increase this buffer distance.include more or larger buffers. A County ordinance may also
establish buffers between cannabis businesses and other sensitive uses, such as parks.
For comparison purposes, the County Code currently restricts the establishment of new
tobacco retail establishments within 1,000 feet of any school, playground, park or library and
within 500 feet of any existing tobacco retailer.
Buffers for the County’s cannabis ordinance could range in distance. The appropriate distance
could be determined based on a variety of factors such as use, location, parcel size and type of
sensitive sites the County chooses to identify. The Preliminary Cannabis Use Maps [include link
to maps here]attached to the April 24 Board report show twothree alternatives, one that
includes 500.
Option A reflects the state-mandated 600 foot buffers from residential zoning districts
along withany K-12 school, day care center or youth center.
Option B reflects 1000 foot buffers from any K-12 school, day care center or youth
center, as well as 1000 foot buffers from drug treatment shelters.
Option C reflects 1000 foot buffers from schools, day care centers, youth centers,
community parks/playgrounds, libraries, drug treatment centers, and homeless shelters
and one that includes, 500 foot buffers from residential zoning districts. Option C closely
mirrors the 1000-foot buffers but omits the 500-foot buffers to residential zoning
districts. Othermost comprehensive buffer scenarios are being consideredscenario
contemplated in the Board’s November 2017 Preliminary Framework, while also
accounting for the state regulations regarding minimum buffers from day care and
youth centers.
County staff recommends Option B combined with 500 foot buffers between retail storefront
establishments.
VIII. Security and Nuisance Abatement Requirements
In order to ensure that commercial cannabis uses are operated in a safe and secure manner,
commercial uses are proposed to be subject to substantial security measures to be
incorporated into the regulations. Examples of security measures may include (the below are
examples only—many additional measures could be considered during development of the
detailed regulations):
Contra Costa County
Preliminary Working Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis
OctoberApril 24, 20178
10
Require that cannabis establishments be constructed in a manner that minimizes odors
to surrounding uses, and promotes quality design and construction, and consistency
with the surrounding properties. Require submission and approval of an odor
management plan.
Require design measures and an enforceable security plan to ensure the applicant will
secure the premises twenty-four hours per day, seven days per week. Examples of
specific measures include: security cameras; background checks for employeesRequire
approval and submission of a security plan demonstrating compliance with all security
measures set forth in state regulations and any additional security measures outlined in
County regulations. Examples of security measures that may need to be included in
security plans include: security cameras; establishing limited access areas accessible only
to authorized personnel; storing all finished cannabis products in a secured and locked
room; preventing off-site impacts to adjoining or near properties; and limiting the
amount of cash on the premises.
Examples of operational conditions of approval include:
Requiring permitted facilities (other than retail space in storefronts) to be closed to the
general public; prohibiting transporter deliveries and pick-ups between the hours of, for
example, 7:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m.
Odors shall be contained on the property on which the commercial cannabis activity is
located.
No production, distribution, storage, display or wholesale of cannabis and cannabis-
infused products shall be visible from the exterior of the building where the commercial
cannabis activity is being conducted.
Operational requirements and standards to prevent underage persons from acquiring
cannabis that equal or exceed state standards.
IX. Public Health Safeguards
Contra Costa Health Services recommends that the Board adopt a local health ordinance that
establishes permitted activity, and the conditions under which consumer products which
contain cannabis can be manufactured and sold to consumers. Adopting a local health
ordinance will also allow county staff to inspect, regulate and enforce appropriate state and
Contra Costa County
Preliminary Working Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis
OctoberApril 24, 20178
11
local laws pertaining to the cannabis industry. The primary reasons for crafting a local
regulatory health ordinance are:
Provide authority for local environmental health staff to inspect and enforce the
numerous state laws pertaining to: i) the manufacturing of food and beverage products
that contain cannabis (termed “edible cannabis products”); and ii) the retail sale and
dispensing of cannabis products including, but not limited to, leaf, bud, edibles,
beverages, tinctures, candies, etc.
Provide local authority to establish, inspect, and enforce additional rules and restrictions
on the manufacturing and sale of consumer products which contain cannabis.
Provide local authority to restrict use of cannabis in public places and smoking of
cannabis in multi-unit housing. Currently, the County has a second hand smoke
ordinance that bans the smoking of cannabis products in the unincorporated area of
the County in all of the same places where tobacco smoking is prohibited. In
addition,Additionally, in March of 2018 the County is poised to considerBoard adopted
a revised ordinance that would add multi-unitprohibition on smoking in multiunit
residences tothat is inclusive of the locations where both tobacco anduse of cannabis
smoking would be prohibited.. The current and proposed smoking prohibitions are
inclusive ofalso restrict the use of electronic smoking devices (vaping). In addition, the
County could consider an outright ban on the use of cannabis in any form at certain
pubic events and venues.
Specific examples of the kinds of safeguards that are being considered for inclusion in new
regulations include the following:
Consider limiting the sale of edible cannabis products to those where dosing is a
maximum of 10mg THC/dose and packaged as a single dose. Consumers would be
allowed to purchase up to the limit allowed in state law.
Prohibit sale of flavored leaf and bud.
Consistent with recent legislation in Colorado, consider prohibiting the sale of edible
products that mimic the shape and appearance of animals, humans, or fruit, including
gummy bears.
Prohibit sale of flavored e-juices.
Establish a limit on the number of edible products that can be purchased in a single
transaction.
Prohibit all self-service vending of all cannabis and products which contain cannabis.
A report from Contra Costa Health Services with detailed recommendations and analysis of
health issues is available here [include link to on the report originally provided by HSD
Contra Costa County
Preliminary Working Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis
OctoberApril 24, 20178
12
toCounty webpage about cannabis in the section with materials from the Board meeting on
October 24, 2017 or by clicking this link]..
X. Cost Recovery
The County may consider establishingwill establish fees on cannabis businesses to cover
County costs associated with application review and monitoring compliance with permit
conditions. To apply for and maintain a land use permit, applicants will be required to cover
the full costs of the County to review the application and oversee compliance with a resulting
permit. Costs of a land use permit are typically covered through a $2700 initial deposit and
payment of County costs on a time and materials basis thereafter. For those prospective
businesses responding to the RFP an earlier initial deposit will be required to cover County
costs in administering the selection process. If County costs do not reach the amount of the
deposit when reviewing a proposal or land use permit application, the difference will be
refunded.
XI. Taxation
A ballot measure to seek approval for taxes on certain commercial cannabis uses is under
consideration. It is anticipated that no commercial cannabis uses would be authorized until
such time as a cannabis tax ballot measure has been approved by County voters. A County
cannabis tax initiative could be considered by voters at the next General Election in November
2018. The tax measure could provide funding for a variety of public purposes, including but
not limited to enhanced public safety, improved public health, drug treatment and education,
and enhanced code enforcement capability.
XII. Personal Cultivation
In addition to providing comprehensive regulations for the establishment of commercial
cannabis uses, the County cannabis ordinance couldwill also address cultivation for personal
use. Under current County cannabis regulations, limited indoor cultivation is permitted. The
current regulations for personal indoor cultivation hasve been provided below.
Indoor Personal Use Cultivation- Under the County’s current cannabis regulations, six
or fewer cannabis plants may be cultivated indoors at a private residence, or inside a
fully-enclosed and secured accessory structure to a private residence located on the
grounds of the private residence, if all of the following conditions are met:
Contra Costa County
Preliminary Working Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis
OctoberApril 24, 20178
13
1. The private residence or accessory structure, and all lighting, plumbing, and
electrical components used for cultivation, must comply with applicable zoning,
building, electrical, and plumbing codes and permitting requirements.
2. All living cannabis plants, and all cannabis in excess of 28.5 grams produced by
those plants, must be kept in a locked room and may not be visible from an
adjacent property, right-of-way, street, sidewalk, or other place accessible to the
public.
3. The private residence must be lawfully occupied by the person who cultivates the
cannabis plants within the private residence or within the accessory structure. If
the private residence is not owner-occupied, written permission from the owner
of the private residence must be obtained before cannabis plants may be
cultivated.
The final regulations could are proposed to continue the current restrictions on indoor
cultivation for personal use or they could be expandedand include new provisions to allow for
limited outdoor cultivation for personal use and/or allow for exceptions. Outdoor personal
cultivation could raise more odor or security concerns with neighbors but may be less
expensive and use less energy. The County is also keeping an eye on state regulations in this
area as Proposition 64 prevents access to certain grant funds by those local agencies that ban
commercial cultivation, or personal outdoor cultivation, or retail sales of cannabis, and the
standards for enforcing these restrictions have not yet been defined..
Outdoor Personal Use Cultivation- Examples ofSuggestions on restrictions on
outdoor cultivation for personal use that could be considered in lieu of outright
prohibition include:
1. Not more than three marijuana plants are cultivated outdoors at one time. (total
indoor and outdoor may not exceed six).
2. The plants are not visible from a public right-of-way or adjacent parcel.
3.2. No part of the plants being cultivated areis within fiveten feet of any property
line.
3. Discretionary permit process could be considered to allow for exceptions to
limitations on personal cultivation. The Board could consider whether the
limitations on personal cultivation are hard and fast limits with no exceptions or
whether to allow a discretionary permit process to enable certain specified
exceptions. For instance, outdoor personal cultivation could be permitted or
denied through such a process. The process would require notification to
Contra Costa County
Preliminary Working Draft Framework for Regulating Cannabis
OctoberApril 24, 20178
14
neighbors and a public hearing and decisions would be appealable. Plants must
never exceed five feet in height.
4. Plants must not be visible from streets or public areas.
5. Plants must be inside a fenced area with locked gates
XIII. Enforcement
In order to ensure the orderly establishment of commercial cannabis uses and to prevent and
discourage the establishment of unregulated cannabis uses, robust enforcement capacity
should be a component of the regulatory program. County staff is working to more fully
explore the most effective enforcement mechanisms and to better identify enforcement roles
and resource needs.
XIV. Additional sections?
XIV. Additional sections may be added to address other aspects of the potential regulations
deemed important to include in a summary document such as this Framework. Retail
delivery from businesses established outside the unincorporated area
of Contra Costa County
The state may require that retail delivery businesses located outside of the unincorporated area
of the County be able to make deliveries to customers within the unincorporated area without
violating county regulations. To address this and provide clarity, staff recommends that such
licensed business that are operating in compliance with state and local law and permits, be
authorized to make deliveries in the unincorporated area of the County.
Richmond
Antioch
Concord
Oakley
Danville
Pittsburg
Hercules
Orinda
Pinole
Lafayette
Martinez
San Ramon
Wa lnut Creek
Brentwood
Moraga
Plea sant Hill
Cla yton
El Cerrito
San Pablo
NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow comm ercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications m ay vary.
The County currently prohibit s all commercial can nabis uses!"$
Map1A Buffer Option AState-Mandated BuffersUnincorproated Contra Costa Area
Other Potential Restrictions
Retail Business zoning in the Alamo Area is proposed to be ineligible for commercial cannabis uses.
Commercial Cultivation is proposed to be restricted to properties served by a public water agency.
CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Maximum 2 acres
Greenhouse only in non-ag districts or w/in 1-mile of ULL
Only within ULL
Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL
Only within ULL
500 ft from another retail location
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use PermitLand Use Permit
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Manufacturing
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees.
µ
City Limits
Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation
0 6 123Miles
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirem ents
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Artificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Testing Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Retail StorefrontLand Use Permit(w/ Cultivation Permit)
Buffered area meets California location requirements which prohibit commercial cannabis located within a 600-foot radius of a K-12 school, day care center, or youth center that is in existence at the time the license is issued.
Parcels within 600 feet of State Buffer Sites
Richmond
Antioch
Concord
Oakley
Danville
Pittsburg
Hercules
Orinda
Pinole
Lafayette
Martinez
San Ramon
Wa lnut Creek
Brentwood
Moraga
Plea sant Hill
Cla yton
El Cerrito
San Pablo
NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow comm ercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications m ay vary.
The County currently prohibit s all commercial can nabis uses!"$
Map1B Buffer Option BExpanded State BuffersUnincorproated Contra Costa Area
Other Potential Restrictions
Retail Business and General Commerical zoning in the Alamo, Saranap, and Bethel Island Areas are proposed to be ineligible for commercial cannabis uses.
Commercial Cultivation is proposed to be restricted to properties served by a public water agency.
CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Maximum 2 acres
Greenhouse only in non-ag districts or w/in 1-mile of ULL
Only within ULL
Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL
Only within ULL
500 ft from another retail location
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use PermitLand Use Permit
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Manufacturing
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees.
µ
City Limits
Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation
0 6 123Miles
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirem ents
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Artificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Testing Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Retail StorefrontLand Use Permit(w/ Cultivation Permit)
Buffered area includes parcels within an expanded version California location requirements, prohibiting commercial cannabis located within a 1,000-foot radius of a K-12 school, day care center, youth center or drug rehab facility at the time the licensed is issued.
Parcels within Expanded State Buffer
Richmond
Antioch
Concord
Oakley
Danville
Pittsburg
Hercules
Orinda
Pinole
Lafayette
Martinez
San Ramon
Wa lnut Creek
Brentwood
Moraga
Plea sant Hill
Cla yton
El Cerrito
San Pablo
NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow comm ercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications m ay vary.
The County currently prohibit s all commercial can nabis uses!"$
Map1C Buffer Option CMore Comprehensive BuffersUnincorproated Contra Costa Area
Other Potential Restrictions
Retail Business zoning in the Alamo Area is proposed to be ineligible for commercial cannabis uses.
Commercial Cultivation is proposed to be restricted to properties served by a public water agency.Buffered area includes parcels located within 1,000 feet of a State site (school, child care facility, youth center) or additional sensitive sites (community parks/playground, library, homeless shelter, or drug rehabilitation facility), and 50 0 feet of a residential zoning district.
Parcels within 500 feet of Residential ZoningParcels within 1,000 feet from a State Site or Sensitive Site
CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Maximum 2 acres
Greenhouse only in non-ag districts or w/in 1-mile of ULL
Only within ULL
Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL
Only within ULL
500 ft from another retail location
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use PermitLand Use Permit
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Manufacturing
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees.
µ
City Limits
Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation
0 6 123Miles
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirem ents
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Artificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Testing Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Retail StorefrontLand Use Permit(w/ Cultivation Permit)
LAFAYETTE
§¨¦680
§¨¦680
Diablo RdDa
n
v
ill
e
Bl
v
d
Rudgear Rd
Mir
a
n
d
a
A
v
e
Livorna Rd
E l C e r r o B lv d
H
artz Ave
Blackhawk Rd
Stone Valley Rd
D
anville Blvd
CastleHill
SanMiguel
Diablo
Alamo
DANVILLE
Mount DiabloState Park
Las TrampasRegional Wilderness
Diablo FoothillsRegional Park
SugarloafOpen Space
Las Trampas-DiabloRegional Trail
DiabloCountry Club
RossmoorGolf Course
Round HillGolf Course
NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow comm ercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications m ay vary.
The County currently prohibit s all commercial can nabis uses!"$
Map2A Buffer Option AState-Mandated BuffersAlamo Area Buffered area meets California location requirements which prohibit commercial cannabis located within a 600-foot radius of a K-12 school, day care center, or youth center that is in existence at the time the license is issued.
Other Potential RestrictionsParcels within 600 feet of State Buffer Sites
Retail Business zoning in the Alamo Area is proposed to be ineligible for commercial cannabis uses.
Commercial Cultivation is proposed to be restricted to properties served by a public water agency.
CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Maximum 2 acres
Greenhouse only in non-ag districts or w/in 1-mile of ULL
Only within ULL
Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL
Only within ULL
500 ft from another retail location
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use PermitLand Use Permit
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Manufacturing
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees.
µ
City Limits
Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation
0 1 20.5 Miles
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirem ents
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Artificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Testing Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Retail StorefrontLand Use Permit(w/ Cultivation Permit)
LAFAYETTE
§¨¦680
§¨¦680
Diablo RdDa
n
v
ill
e
Bl
v
d
Rudgear Rd
Mir
a
n
d
a
A
v
e
Livorna Rd
E l C e r r o B lv d
H
artz Ave
Blackhawk Rd
Stone Valley Rd
D
anville Blvd
CastleHill
SanMiguel
Diablo
Alamo
DANVILLE
Mount DiabloState Park
Las TrampasRegional Wilderness
Diablo FoothillsRegional Park
SugarloafOpen Space
Las Trampas-DiabloRegional Trail
DiabloCountry Club
RossmoorGolf Course
Round HillGolf Course
NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow comm ercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications m ay vary.
The County currently prohibit s all commercial can nabis uses!"$
Map2B Buffer Option BExpanded State BuffersAlamo Area
CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Maximum 2 acres
Greenhouse only in non-ag districts
Only within ULL
Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL
Only within ULL
500 ft from another retail location
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use PermitLand Use Permit
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Manufacturing
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees.
µ
City Limits
Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation
0 1 20.5 Miles
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirem ents
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Artificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Testing Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Retail StorefrontLand Use Permit(w/ Cultivation Permit)
Buffered area includes parcels within an expanded version California location requirements, prohibiting commercial cannabis located within a 1,000-foot radius of a K-12 school, day care center, youth center or drug rehab facility at the time the licensed is issued.
Parcels within Expanded State Buffer Other Potential Restrictions
Retail Business zoning in the Alamo Area is proposed to be ineligible for commercial cannabis uses.
Commercial Cultivation is proposed to be restricted to properties served by a public water agency.
LAFAYETTE
§¨¦680
§¨¦680
Diablo RdDa
n
v
ill
e
Bl
v
d
Rudgear Rd
Mir
a
n
d
a
A
v
e
Livorna Rd
E l C e r r o B lv d
H
artz Ave
Blackhawk Rd
Stone Valley Rd
D
anville Blvd
CastleHill
SanMiguel
Diablo
Alamo
DANVILLE
Mount DiabloState Park
Las TrampasRegional Wilderness
Diablo FoothillsRegional Park
SugarloafOpen Space
Las Trampas-DiabloRegional Trail
DiabloCountry Club
RossmoorGolf Course
Round HillGolf Course
NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow comm ercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications m ay vary.
The County currently prohibit s all commercial can nabis uses!"$
Map2C Buffer Option CMore Comprehensive BuffersAlamo Area
Other Potential Restrictions
Retail Business zoning in the Alamo Area is proposed to be ineligible for commercial cannabis uses.
Commercial Cultivation is proposed to be restricted to properties served by a public water agency.Buffered area includes parcels located within 1,000 feet of a State site (school, child care facility, youth center) or additional sensitive sites (community parks/playground, library, homeless shelter, or drug rehabilitation facility), and 50 0 feet of a residential zoning district.
Parcels within 500 feet of Residential ZoningParcels within 1,000 feet from a State Site or Sensitive Site
CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Maximum 2 acres
Greenhouse only in non-ag districts or w/in 1-mile of ULL
Only within ULL
Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL
Only within ULL
500 ft from another retail location
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use PermitLand Use Permit
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Manufacturing
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees.
µ
City Limits
Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation
0 1 20.5 Miles
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirem ents
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Artificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Testing Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Retail StorefrontLand Use Permit(w/ Cultivation Permit)
PITTSB URGÄÅ4
ÄÅ4 W Leland Rd
Willow Pass Rd
Bailey RdEvora RdW Leland Rd
N Parkside Dr
BayPoint
Clyde
MallardReservoir
Military OceanTerminal Concord
PittsburgPower Plant
Allied/GeneralChemical
Chipp sIsland
MallardIsland
Diablo CreekGolf Course
UnitedSportsmen
Delta ViewGolf Course
NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$
Map3A Buffer Option AState-Mandated BuffersBay Point and Clyde Areas Buffered area meets California location requirements which prohibit commercial cannabis located within a 600-foot radius of a K-12 school, day care center, or youth center that is in existence at the time the license is issued.
Other Potential Restrictions
Commercial Cultivation is proposed to be restricted to properties served by a public water agency.
CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Maximum 2 acres
Greenhouse only in non-ag districts or w/in 1-mile of ULL
Only within ULL
Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL
Only within ULL
500 ft from another retail location
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use PermitLand Use Permit
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Manufacturing
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees.
µ
City Limits
Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation
0 0.7 1.40.35 Miles
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirem ents
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Artificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Testing Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Retail StorefrontLand Use Permit(w/ Cultivation Permit)
Parcels within 600 feet of State Buffer Sites
PITTSB URGÄÅ4
ÄÅ4 W Leland Rd
Willow Pass Rd
Bailey RdEvora RdW Leland Rd
N Parkside Dr
BayPoint
Clyde
MallardReservoir
Military OceanTerminal Concord
PittsburgPower Plant
Allied/GeneralChemical
Chipp sIsland
MallardIsland
Diablo CreekGolf Course
UnitedSportsmen
Delta ViewGolf Course
NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$
Map3B Buffer Option BExpanded State BuffersBay Point and Clyde Areas Buffered area includes parcels within an expanded version California location requirements, prohibiting commercial cannabis located within a 1,000-foot radius of a K-12 school, day care center, youth center or drug rehab facility at the time the licensed is issued.
Parcels within Expanded State Buffer Other Potential Restrictions
Commercial Cultivation is proposed to be restricted to properties served by a public water agency.
CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Maximum 2 acres
Greenhouse only in non-ag districts or w/in 1-mile of ULL
Only within ULL
Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL
Only within ULL
500 ft from another retail location
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use PermitLand Use Permit
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Manufacturing
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees.
µ
City Limits
Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation
0 0.7 1.40.35 Miles
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirem ents
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Artificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Testing Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Retail StorefrontLand Use Permit(w/ Cultivation Permit)
PITTSB URGÄÅ4
ÄÅ4 W Leland Rd
Willow Pass Rd
Bailey RdEvora RdW Leland Rd
N Parkside Dr
BayPoint
Clyde
MallardReservoir
Military OceanTerminal Concord
PittsburgPower Plant
Allied/GeneralChemical
Chipp sIsland
MallardIsland
Diablo CreekGolf Course
UnitedSportsmen
Delta ViewGolf Course
NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$
Map3C Buffer Option CMore Comprehensive BuffersBay Point and Clyde Areas
CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Maximum 2 acres
Greenhouse only in non-ag districts
Only within ULL
Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL
Only within ULL
500 ft from another retail location
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use PermitLand Use Permit
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Manufacturing
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees.
µ
City Limits
Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation
0 0.75 1.50.375 Miles
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirem ents
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Artificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Testing Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Retail Storefront
Buffered area includes parcels within an expanded version California location requirements, prohibiting commercial cannabis located within a 1,000-foot radius of a K-12 school, day care center, youth center or drug rehab facility at the time the licensed is issued.
Parcels within Expanded State Buffer Other Potential Restrictions
Commercial Cultivation is proposed to be restricted to properties served by a public water agency.
BethelIsland
Dutch Slough
JerseyIsland
HollandTract
Dutch SloughTidal Marsh Restoration
The Golf Clubat Bethel Island
BigBreak
NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$
Map4A Buffer Option AState-Mandated BuffersBethel Island Area Buffered area meets California location requirements which prohibit commercial cannabis located within a 600-foot radius of a K-12 school, day care center, or youth center that is in existence at the time the license is issued.
Other Potential Restrictions
Retail Business and General Commercial zoning in the Bethel Island Area is proposed to be ineligible for commercial cannabis uses.
Commercial Cultivation is proposed to be restricted to properties served by a public water agency.
Parcels within 600 feet of State Buffer Sites
CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Maximum 2 acres
Greenhouse only in non-ag districts or w/in 1-mile of ULL
Only within ULL
Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL
Only within ULL
500 ft from another retail location
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use PermitLand Use Permit
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Manufacturing
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees.
µ
City Limits
Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation
0 0.6 1.20.3 Miles
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirem ents
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Artificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Testing Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Retail StorefrontLand Use Permit(w/ Cultivation Permit)
BethelIsland
Dutch Slough
JerseyIsland
HollandTract
Dutch SloughTidal Marsh Restoration
The Golf Clubat Bethel Island
BigBreak
NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$
Map4B Buffer Option BExpanded State BuffersBethel Island Area Buffered area includes parcels within an expanded version California location requirements, prohibiting commercial cannabis located within a 1,000-foot radius of a K-12 school, day care center, youth center or drug rehab facility at the time the licensed is issued.
Parcels within Expanded State Buffer Other Potential Restrictions
Commercial Cultivation is proposed to be restricted to properties served by a public water agency.Retail Business and General Commercial zoning in the Bethel Island Area is proposed to be ineligible for commercial cannabis uses.
CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Maximum 2 acres
Greenhouse only in non-ag districts or w/in 1-mile of ULL
Only within ULL
Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL
Only within ULL
500 ft from another retail location
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use PermitLand Use Permit
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Manufacturing
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees.
µ
City Limits
Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation
0 0.6 1.20.3 Miles
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirem ents
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Artificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Testing Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Retail StorefrontLand Use Permit(w/ Cultivation Permit)
BethelIsland
Dutch Slough
JerseyIsland
HollandTract
Dutch SloughTidal Marsh Restoration
The Golf Clubat Bethel Island
BigBreak
NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$
Map4C Buffer Option CMore Comprehensive BuffersBethel Island Area
Other Potential Restrictions
Commercial Cultivation is proposed to be restricted to properties served by a public water agency.Buffered area includes parcels located within 1,000 feet of a State site (school, child care facility, youth center) or a nadditional sensitive site (community parks/playground, library, homeless shelter, or drug rehabilitation facility), an d 5 00 feet of a residential zoning district.
Parcels within 500 feet of Residential ZoningParcels within 1,000 feet from a State Site or Sensitive Site
CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Maximum 2 acres
Greenhouse only in non-ag districts or w/in 1-mile of ULL
Only within ULL
Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL
Only within ULL
500 ft from another retail location
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use PermitLand Use Permit
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Manufacturing
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees.
µ
City Limits
Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation
0 0.6 1.20.3 Miles
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirem ents
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Artificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Testing Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Retail StorefrontLand Use Permit(w/ Cultivation Permit)
Retail Business and General Commercial zoning in the Bethel Island Area is proposed to be ineligible for commercial cannabis uses.
Camino Tassajara
Diablo Rd
Blackhawk RdSycam ore Valley RdBlackhawk Rd
Diablo
Blackhawk
DANVILLE
Sycamore Valley RegionalOpen Space Preserve
DiabloCountry Club
Lakeside Courseat Blackhawk
Falls Courseat Blackhawk
NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$
Map5A Buffer Option AState-Mandated BuffersBlackhawk Area Buffered area meets California location requirements which prohibit commercial cannabis located within a 600-foot radius of a K-12 school, day care center, or youth center that is in existence at the time the license is issued.
Other Potential Restrictions
Commercial Cultivation is proposed to be restricted to properties served by a public water agency.
CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Maximum 2 acres
Greenhouse only in non-ag districts or w/in 1-mile of ULL
Only within ULL
Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL
Only within ULL
500 ft from another retail location
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use PermitLand Use Permit
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Manufacturing
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees.
µ
City Limits
Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation
0 0.65 1.30.325 Miles
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirem ents
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Artificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Testing Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Retail StorefrontLand Use Permit(w/ Cultivation Permit)
Parcels within 600 feet of State Buffer Sites
Camino Tassajara
Diablo Rd
Blackhawk RdSycam ore Valley RdBlackhawk Rd
Diablo
Blackhawk
DANVILLE
Sycamore Valley RegionalOpen Space Preserve
DiabloCountry Club
Lakeside Courseat Blackhawk
Falls Courseat Blackhawk
NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$
Map5B Buffer Option BExpanded State BuffersBlackhawk Area Buffered area includes parcels within an expanded version California location requirements, prohibiting commercial cannabis located within a 1,000-foot radius of a K-12 school, day care center, youth center or drug rehab facility at the time the licensed is issued.
Parcels within Expanded State Buffer Other Potential Restrictions
Commercial Cultivation is proposed to be restricted to properties served by a public water agency.
CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Maximum 2 acres
Greenhouse only in non-ag districts or w/in 1-mile of ULL
Only within ULL
Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL
Only within ULL
500 ft from another retail location
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use PermitLand Use Permit
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Manufacturing
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees.
µ
City Limits
Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation
0 0.65 1.30.325 Miles
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirem ents
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Artificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Testing Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Retail StorefrontLand Use Permit(w/ Cultivation Permit)
Camino Tassajara
Diablo Rd
Blackhawk RdSycam ore Valley RdBlackhawk Rd
Diablo
Blackhawk
DANVILLE
Sycamore Valley RegionalOpen Space Preserve
DiabloCountry Club
Lakeside Courseat Blackhawk
Falls Courseat Blackhawk
NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$
Map5C Buffer Option CMore Comprehensive BuffersBlackhawk Area
Other Potential Restrictions
Commercial Cultivation is proposed to be restricted to properties served by a public water agency.Buffered area includes parcels located within 1,000 feet of a State site (school, child care facility, youth center) or a nadditional sensitive site (community parks/playground, library, homeless shelter, or drug rehabilitation facility), an d 5 00 feet of a residential zoning district.
Parcels within 500 feet of Residential ZoningParcels within 1,000 feet from a State Site or Sensitive Site
CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Maximum 2 acres
Greenhouse only in non-ag districts or w/in 1-mile of ULL
Only within ULL
Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL
Only within ULL
500 ft from another retail location
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use PermitLand Use Permit
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Manufacturing
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees.
µ
City Limits
Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation
0 0.65 1.30.325 Miles
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirem ents
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Artificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Testing Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Retail StorefrontLand Use Permit(w/ Cultivation Permit)
Disc overyBay
Byron
G3Quarry
Vasco CavesRegional Park
Byron Airport
Discovery BayCountry ClubÄÅ4
V
a
s
c
o R
d
B
yro
n H
w
y
Camino Diablo
Concord Ave
Marsh Creek Rd
Walnut BlvdByron HwyNOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow comm ercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications m ay vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial can nabis uses!"$
Map 6A
Buffer Option AState-Mandated BuffersByron Area
Bu ffered area meets C alifornia location requirements which prohib it commercial canna bis located within a 600-foot ra dius of a K-1 2 scho ol, d ay care center, or yo uth center th at is in existe nce a t th e time th e license is issued.
Pa rce ls within 600 fe et of State Bu ffer Site s
µ
0 0.75 1.50.375 Miles
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the n umb er o f permits issu ed & the process to select p ermite es.
PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf Max 2 acres Only within U LL
Cultivators may distribute ow n product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL
Only within U LL
500 ft from aother retaillocation
Manufacturing
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Land Use Permit
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area W ide Planned Unit Development (P-1)
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirements
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Testing
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Only within ULL
Retail Storefront
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Areas with Incomp atible Zonin g District or General Plan Land Use Designatio n
City Limits
(w/ cultivation permit)
Only in green-houses in non-ag districts or if w/in 1 mile of ULL
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Artificial Light Mixed Light Natural Light
CULTIVATION
Other Potential R estrictions
Commer cial Cultiva tion is prop ose d to be restricte d to pro perties serve d by a p ub lic water a gen cy.
Disc overyBay
Byron
G3Quarry
Vasco CavesRegional Park
Byron Airport
Discovery BayCountry ClubÄÅ4
V
a
s
c
o R
d
B
yro
n H
w
y
Camino Diablo
Concord Ave
Marsh Creek Rd
Walnut BlvdByron HwyNOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow comm ercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications m ay vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial can nabis uses!"$
Map 6B
Buffer Option BExpanded State BuffersByron Area
Bu ffered area include s parcels within a n e xp ande d versio n California location requirements, prohib iting comme rcial ca nnabis lo ca te d with in a 1 ,00 0-fo ot radius of a K-12 schoo l, day care center, youth center o r drug reha b facility at the time the licensed is issued.
Pa rce ls within Expa nded State Buffer
µ
0 0.75 1.50.375 Miles
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the n umb er o f permits issu ed & the process to select p ermite es.
PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf Max 2 acres Only within U LL
Cultivators may distribute ow n product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL
Only within U LL
500 ft from aother retaillocation
Manufacturing
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Land Use Permit
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area W ide Planned Unit Development (P-1)
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirements
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Testing
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Only within ULL
Retail Storefront
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Areas with Incomp atible Zonin g District or General Plan Land Use Designatio n
City Limits
(w/ cultivation permit)
Only in green-houses in non-ag districts or if w/in 1 mile of ULL
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Artificial Light Mixed Light Natural Light
CULTIVATION
Other Potential R estrictions
Commer cial Cultiva tion is prop ose d to be restricte d to pro perties serve d by a p ub lic water a gen cy.
Disc overyBay
Byron
G3Quarry
Vasco CavesRegional Park
Byron Airport
Discovery BayCountry ClubÄÅ4
V
a
s
c
o R
d
B
yro
n H
w
y
Camino Diablo
Concord Ave
Marsh Creek Rd
Walnut BlvdByron HwyNOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow comm ercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications m ay vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial can nabis uses!"$
Map 6C
Buffer Option CMore Comprehensive BuffersByron Area
µ
0 0.75 1.50.375 Miles
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the n umb er o f permits issu ed & the process to select p ermite es.
PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf Max 2 acres Only within U LL
Cultivators may distribute ow n product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL
Only within U LL
500 ft from aother retaillocation
Manufacturing
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Land Use Permit
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area W ide Planned Unit Development (P-1)
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirements
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Testing
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Only within ULL
Retail Storefront
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Areas with Incomp atible Zonin g District or General Plan Land Use Designatio n
City Limits
(w/ cultivation permit)
Only in green-houses in non-ag districts or if w/in 1 mile of ULL
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Artificial Light Mixed Light Natural Light
CULTIVATION
Other Potential R estrictions
Commer cial Cultiva tion is prop ose d to be restricte d to pro perties serve d by a p ub lic water a gen cy.
Bu ffered area include s parcels lo ca ted within 1,0 00 fee t of a State site (school, ch ild care fa cility, youth ce nte r) or additional Se nsitive site (commu nity pa rks/pla yg ro und, library, ho me less sh elter, or d ru g re habilitation fa cility), and 500 feet of a residen tia l zo ning district.
Pa rce ls within 500 fe et of R esiden tia l Zoning
Pa rce ls within 1,0 00 fee t fro m a State Site or Se nsitive Site
Cont ra CostaCentre
PG&EPipeline Facility
CountrywoodShopping Center
Seven HillsSchool
Crossroadsat Pleasant Hill
Palmer Schoolfor Boys and Girls
Pleasant Hill / Contra Costa CentreBART Station
Iron Horse Trail
Heather FarmPark
WaldenPark
Len HesterPark
§¨¦680
§¨¦680
B
a
n
croft R
d
Oak RdHookston Rd
Geary Rd
O a k P a r k B l v d
Treat BlvdN Main StOak RdNOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow comm ercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications m ay vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial can nabis uses!"$
Map 7A
Buffer Option AState-Mandated BuffersContra Costa Centre Area
Bu ffered area meets C alifornia location requirements which prohib it commercial canna bis located within a 600-foot ra dius of a K-1 2 scho ol, d ay care center, or yo uth center th at is in existe nce a t th e time th e license is issued.
µ
0 0.15 0.30.075 Miles
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the n umb er o f permits issu ed & the process to select p ermite es.
PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf Max 2 acres Only within U LL
Cultivators may distribute ow n product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL
Only within U LL
500 ft from aother retaillocation
Manufacturing
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Land Use Permit
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area W ide Planned Unit Development (P-1)
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirements
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Testing
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Only within ULL
Retail Storefront
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Areas with Incomp atible Zonin g District or General Plan Land Use Designatio n
City Limits
(w/ cultivation permit)
Only in green-houses in non-ag districts or if w/in 1 mile of ULL
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Artificial Light Mixed Light Natural Light
CULTIVATION
Other Potential R estrictions
Commer cial Cultiva tion is prop ose d to be restricte d to pro perties serve d by a p ub lic water a gen cy.
Pa rce ls within 600 fe et of State Bu ffer Site s
Cont ra CostaCentre
PG&EPipeline Facility
CountrywoodShopping Center
Seven HillsSchool
Crossroadsat Pleasant Hill
Palmer Schoolfor Boys and Girls
Pleasant Hill / Contra Costa CentreBART Station
Iron Horse Trail
Heather FarmPark
WaldenPark
Len HesterPark
§¨¦680
§¨¦680
B
a
n
croft R
d
Oak RdHookston Rd
Geary Rd
O a k P a r k B l v d
Treat BlvdN Main StOak RdNOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow comm ercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications m ay vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial can nabis uses!"$
Map 7B
Buffer Option BExpanded State BuffersContra Costa Centre Area
µ
0 0.15 0.30.075 Miles
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the n umb er o f permits issu ed & the process to select p ermite es.
PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf Max 2 acres Only within U LL
Cultivators may distribute ow n product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL
Only within U LL
500 ft from aother retaillocation
Manufacturing
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Land Use Permit
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area W ide Planned Unit Development (P-1)
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirements
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Testing
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Only within ULL
Retail Storefront
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Areas with Incomp atible Zonin g District or General Plan Land Use Designatio n
City Limits
(w/ cultivation permit)
Only in green-houses in non-ag districts or if w/in 1 mile of ULL
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Artificial Light Mixed Light Natural Light
CULTIVATION
Bu ffered area include s parcels within a n e xp ande d versio n California location requirements, prohib iting comme rcial ca nnabis lo ca te d with in a 1 ,00 0-fo ot radius of a K-12 schoo l, day care center, youth center o r drug reha b facility at the time the licensed is issued.
Pa rce ls within Expa nded State Buffer Other Potential R estrictions
Commer cial Cultiva tion is prop ose d to be restricte d to pro perties serve d by a p ub lic water a gen cy.
Cont ra CostaCentre
PG&EPipeline Facility
CountrywoodShopping Center
Seven HillsSchool
Crossroadsat Pleasant Hill
Pleasant Hill / Contra Costa CentreBART Station
Iron Horse Trail
Heather FarmPark
WaldenPark
Len HesterPark
§¨¦680
§¨¦680
B
a
n
croft R
d
Oak RdHookston Rd
Geary Rd
O a k P a r k B l v d
Treat BlvdN Main StOak RdNOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow comm ercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications m ay vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial can nabis uses!"$
Map 7C
Buffer Option CMost Comprehensive BuffersContra Costa Centre Area
µ
0 0.15 0.30.075 Miles
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the n umb er o f permits issu ed & the process to select p ermite es.
PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf Max 2 acres Only within U LL
Cultivators may distribute ow n product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL
Only within U LL
500 ft from aother retaillocation
Manufacturing
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Land Use Permit
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area W ide Planned Unit Development (P-1)
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirements
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Testing
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Only within ULL
Retail Storefront
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Areas with Incomp atible Zonin g District or General Plan Land Use Designatio n
City Limits
(w/ cultivation permit)
Only in green-houses in non-ag districts or if w/in 1 mile of ULL
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Artificial Light Mixed Light Natural Light
CULTIVATION
Bu ffered area include s parcels lo ca ted within 1,0 00 fee t of a State site (school, ch ild care fa cility, youth ce nte r) or additional se nsitive site (commu nity pa rks/pla yg ro und, library, ho me less sh elter, or d ru g re habilitation fa cility), and 500 feet of a residen tia l zo ning district.
Other Potential R estrictions
Commer cial Cultiva tion is prop ose d to be restricte d to pro perties serve d by a p ub lic water a gen cy.
Pa rce ls within 500 fe et of R esiden tia l Zoning
Pa rce ls within 1,0 00 fee t fro m a State Site or Se nsitive Site
Discovery Bay BlvdÄÅ4Sellers AveByron HwyDelta Rd
Sunset Rd
Chestnut St
Balfour Rd
Marsh Creek Rd
Brentwood Blvd
Byron HwyDisc overyBay
Old River
Knight sen
Dredgers Cut
India n Sl ou gh
Holland CutRoosevelt Cut
BaconIsland
Ho llan dTract
PalmTract
OrwoodTract
VealeTract
VictoriaIsland
Byro nTract
WoodwardIsland
FayIsland
RhodeIslandDutch SloughTidal Marsh Restoration
Discovery BayCountry Club
NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow comm ercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications m ay vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial can nabis uses!"$
Map 8A
Buffer Option AState-Mandated BuffersDiscovery Bay Area
Bu ffered area meets C alifornia location requirements which prohib it commercial canna bis located within a 600-foot ra dius of a K-1 2 scho ol, d ay care center, or yo uth center th at is in existe nce a t th e time th e license is issued.
µ
0 0.75 1.50.375 Miles
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the n umb er o f permits issu ed & the process to select p ermite es.
PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf Max 2 acres Only within U LL
Cultivators may distribute ow n product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL
Only within U LL
500 ft from aother retaillocation
Manufacturing
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Land Use Permit
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area W ide Planned Unit Development (P-1)
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirements
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Testing
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Only within ULL
Retail Storefront
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Areas with Incomp atible Zonin g District or General Plan Land Use Designatio n
City Limits
(w/ cultivation permit)
Only in green-houses in non-ag districts or if w/in 1 mile of ULL
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Artificial Light Mixed Light Natural Light
CULTIVATION
Pa rce ls within 600 fe et of State Bu ffer Site s Other Potential R estrictions
Commer cial Cultiva tion is prop ose d to be restricte d to pro perties serve d by a p ub lic water a gen cy.
Discovery Bay BlvdÄÅ4Sellers AveByron HwyDelta Rd
Sunset Rd
Chestnut St
Balfour Rd
Marsh Creek Rd
Brentwood Blvd
Byron HwyDisc overyBay
Old River
Knight sen
Dredgers Cut
India n Sl ou gh
Holland CutRoosevelt Cut
BaconIsland
Ho llan dTract
PalmTract
OrwoodTract
VealeTract
VictoriaIsland
Byro nTract
WoodwardIsland
FayIsland
RhodeIslandDutch SloughTidal Marsh Restoration
Discovery BayCountry Club
NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow comm ercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications m ay vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial can nabis uses!"$
Map 8B
Buffer Option BExpanded State BuffersDiscovery Bay Area
µ
0 0.75 1.50.375 Miles
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the n umb er o f permits issu ed & the process to select p ermite es.
PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf Max 2 acres Only within U LL
Cultivators may distribute ow n product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL
Only within U LL
500 ft from aother retaillocation
Manufacturing
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Land Use Permit
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area W ide Planned Unit Development (P-1)
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirements
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Testing
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Only within ULL
Retail Storefront
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Areas with Incomp atible Zonin g District or General Plan Land Use Designatio n
City Limits
(w/ cultivation permit)
Only in green-houses in non-ag districts or if w/in 1 mile of ULL
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Artificial Light Mixed Light Natural Light
CULTIVATION
Bu ffered area include s parcels within a n e xp ande d versio n California location requirements, prohib iting comme rcial ca nnabis lo ca te d with in a 1 ,00 0-fo ot radius of a K-12 schoo l, day care center, youth center o r drug reha b facility at the time the licensed is issued.
Pa rce ls within Expa nded State Buffer Other Potential R estrictions
Commer cial Cultiva tion is prop ose d to be restricte d to pro perties serve d by a p ub lic water a gen cy.
Discovery Bay BlvdÄÅ4Sellers AveByron HwyDelta Rd
Sunset Rd
Chestnut St
Balfour Rd
Marsh Creek Rd
Brentwood Blvd
Byron HwyDisc overyBay
Old River
Knight sen
Dredgers Cut
India n Sl ou gh
Holland CutRoosevelt Cut
BaconIsland
Ho llan dTract
PalmTract
OrwoodTract
VealeTract
VictoriaIsland
Byro nTract
WoodwardIsland
FayIsland
RhodeIslandDutch SloughTidal Marsh Restoration
Discovery BayCountry Club
NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow comm ercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications m ay vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial can nabis uses!"$
Map 8C
Buffer Option CMore Comprehensive BuffersDiscovery Bay Area
µ
0 0.75 1.50.375 Miles
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the n umb er o f permits issu ed & the process to select p ermite es.
PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf Max 2 acres Only within U LL
Cultivators may distribute ow n product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL
Only within U LL
500 ft from aother retaillocation
Manufacturing
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Land Use Permit
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area W ide Planned Unit Development (P-1)
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirements
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Testing
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Only within ULL
Retail Storefront
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Areas with Incomp atible Zonin g District or General Plan Land Use Designatio n
City Limits
(w/ cultivation permit)
Only in green-houses in non-ag districts or if w/in 1 mile of ULL
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Artificial Light Mixed Light Natural Light
CULTIVATION
Other Potential R estrictions
Commer cial Cultiva tion is prop ose d to be restricte d to pro perties serve d by a p ub lic water a gen cy.
Bu ffered area include s parcels lo ca ted within 1,0 00 fee t of a State site (school, ch ild care fa cility, youth ce nte r) or additional se nsitive site (commu nity pa rks/pla yg ro und, library, ho me less sh elter, or d ru g re habilitation fa cility), and 500 feet of a residen tia l zo ning district.
Pa rce ls within 500 fe et of R esiden tia l Zoning
Pa rce ls within 1,0 00 fee t fro m a State Site or Se nsitive Site
RICHMOND
§¨¦80
§¨¦80
23rd StGiant RdSa
n
P
a
b
l
o
A
v
e
Pi
n
o
l
e
V
a
l
l
e
y
R
d
V
a
l
l
e
y
V
i
e
w
R
dAppian WayBlume Dr
Rumrill Blvd
El Portal Dr San Pablo Dam R
d
Market Av
eGiant HwyCastro Ranc
h
R
dFitzgerald DrManor Rd
Brooksi
d
e
D
r San Pablo AveSa
n
P
a
b
l
o
D
a
m
R
dRichmond PkwyElSobrante
Rollingwood
SANPABLO
PINOLE
Contra CostaCollege (West)
HilltopMall
Rolling HillsMemorial Park
St JosephCemetery
PinolePark
Wildcat CanyonRegional Park
Sobrante RidgeRegional Preserve
Kennedy GroveRegional Recreation Area
NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$
Map9A Buffer Option AState-Mandated BuffersEl Sobrante Area Buffered area meets California location requirements which prohibit commercial cannabis located within a 600-foot radius of a K-12 school, day care center, or youth center that is in existence at the time the license is issued.
Other Potential Restrictions
Commercial Cultivation is proposed to be restricted to properties served by a public water agency.
Parcels within 600 feet of State Buffer Sites
CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Maximum 2 acres
Greenhouse only in non-ag districts or w/in 1-mile of ULL
Only within ULL
Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL
Only within ULL
500 ft from another retail location
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use PermitLand Use Permit
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Manufacturing
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees.
µ
City Limits
Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation
0 0.6 1.20.3 Miles
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirements
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Artificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Testing Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Retail StorefrontLand Use Permit(w/ Cultivation Permit)
RICHMOND
§¨¦80
§¨¦80
23rd StGiant RdSan Pablo Ave
Pinole Valley Rd
V
a
ll
e
y
V
i
e
w
R
dAppian WayBlum e DrR um rill B lvdEl Portal Dr S a n P a b lo D a m R d
Market AveGiant HwyC a s tro R a n c h R dFitzgerald DrM a n o r R d
Brookside Dr San Pablo AveSan Pablo Dam RdRichmond PkwyElSobrante
Rollingwood
SANPABLO
PINOLE
Contra CostaCollege (West)
HilltopMall
Rolling HillsMemorial Park
St JosephCemetery
PinolePark
Wildcat CanyonRegional Park
Sobrante RidgeRegional Preserve
Ke nnedy GroveRegional Recreation Are a
NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$
Map9B Buffer Option BExpanded State BuffersEl Sobrante Area Buffered area includes parcels within an expanded version California location requirements, prohibiting commercial cannabis located within a 1,000-foot radius of a K-12 school, day care center, youth center or drug rehab facility at the time the licensed is issued.
Parcels within Expanded State Buffer Other Potential Restrictions
Commercial Cultivation is proposed to be restricted to properties served by a public water agency.
CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Maximum 2 acres
Greenhouse only in non-ag districts or w/in 1-mile of ULL
Only within ULL
Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL
Only within ULL
500 ft from another retail location
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use PermitLand Use Permit
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Manufacturing
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees.
µ
City Limits
Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation
0 0.6 1.20.3 Miles
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirem ents
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Artificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Testing Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Retail StorefrontLand Use Permit(w/ Cultivation Permit)
RICHMOND
§¨¦80
§¨¦80
23rd StGiant RdSan Pablo Ave
Pinole Valley Rd
V
a
ll
e
y
V
i
e
w
R
dAppian WayBlum e DrR um rill B lvdEl Portal Dr S a n P a b lo D a m R d
Market AveGiant HwyC a s tro R a n c h R dFitzgerald DrM a n o r R d
Brookside Dr San Pablo AveSan Pablo Dam RdRichmond PkwyElSobrante
Rollingwood
SANPABLO
PINOLE
Contra CostaCollege (West)
HilltopMall
Rolling HillsMemorial Park
St JosephCemetery
PinolePark
Wildcat CanyonRegional Park
Sobrante RidgeRegional Preserve
Ke nnedy GroveRegional Recreation Are a
NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$
Map9C Buffer Option CMore Comprehensive BuffersEl Sobrante Area
CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Maximum 2 acres
Greenhouse only in non-ag districts
Only within ULL
Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL
Only within ULL
500 ft from another retail location
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use PermitLand Use Permit
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Manufacturing
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees.
µ
City Limits
Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation
0 0.6 1.20.3 Miles
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirem ents
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Artificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Testing Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Retail StorefrontLand Use Permit(w/ Cultivation Permit)
Other Potential Restrictions
Commercial Cultivation is proposed to be restricted to properties served by a public water agency.Buffered area includes parcels located within 1,000 feet of a State site (school, child care facility, youth center) or additional sensitive sites (community parks/playground, library, homeless shelter, or drug rehabilitation facility), and 50 0 feet of a residential zoning district.
Parcels within 500 feet of Residential ZoningParcels within 1,000 feet from a State Site or Sensitive Site
Ar
l
i
ngt
on AveColusa AveM o e s e r L n
Santa Fe AveArli
n
g
t
o
n
Av
e
Colusa Ave
Kensington
BERKELEY
ALBANY
PG&E Power LineBuffer
NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow comm ercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications m ay vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial can nabis uses!"$
Map 10A
Buffer Option AState-Mandated BuffersKensington Area
Bu ffered area meets C alifornia location requirements which prohib it commercial canna bis located within a 600-foot ra dius of a K-1 2 scho ol, d ay care center, or yo uth center th at is in existe nce a t th e time th e license is issued.
µMap Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the n umb er o f permits issu ed & the process to select p ermite es.
PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf Max 2 acres Only within U LL
Cultivators may distribute ow n product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL
Only within U LL
500 ft from aother retaillocation
Manufacturing
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Land Use Permit
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area W ide Planned Unit Development (P-1)
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirements
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Testing
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Only within ULL
Retail Storefront
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Areas with Incomp atible Zonin g District or General Plan Land Use Designatio n
City Limits
(w/ cultivation permit)
Only in green-houses in non-ag districts or if w/in 1 mile of ULL
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Artificial Light Mixed Light Natural Light
CULTIVATION
0 0.15 0.30.075 Miles
Other Potential R estrictions
Commer cial Cultiva tion is prop ose d to be restricte d to pro perties serve d by a p ub lic water a gen cy.
Pa rce ls within 600 fe et of State Bu ffer Site s
Ar
l
i
ngt
on AveColusa AveM o e s e r L n
Santa Fe AveArli
n
g
t
o
n
Av
e
Colusa Ave
Kensington
BERKELEY
ALBANY
PG&E Power LineBuffer
NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow comm ercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications m ay vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial can nabis uses!"$
Map 10B
Buffer Option BExpanded State BuffersKensington Area
µMap Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the n umb er o f permits issu ed & the process to select p ermite es.
PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf Max 2 acres Only within U LL
Cultivators may distribute ow n product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL
Only within U LL
500 ft from aother retaillocation
Manufacturing
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Land Use Permit
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area W ide Planned Unit Development (P-1)
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirements
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Testing
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Only within ULL
Retail Storefront
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Areas with Incomp atible Zonin g District or General Plan Land Use Designatio n
City Limits
(w/ cultivation permit)
Only in green-houses in non-ag districts or if w/in 1 mile of ULL
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Artificial Light Mixed Light Natural Light
CULTIVATION
0 0.15 0.30.075 Miles
Bu ffered area include s parcels within a n e xp ande d versio n California location requirements, prohib iting comme rcial ca nnabis lo ca te d with in a 1 ,00 0-fo ot radius of a K-12 schoo l, day care center, youth center o r drug reha b facility at the time the licensed is issued.
Pa rce ls within Expa nded State Buffer Other Potential R estrictions
Commer cial Cultiva tion is prop ose d to be restricte d to pro perties serve d by a p ub lic water a gen cy.
Ar
l
i
ngt
on AveColusa AveM o e s e r L n
Santa Fe AveArli
n
g
t
o
n
Av
e
Colusa Ave
Kensington
BERKELEY
ALBANY
PG&E Power LineBuffer
NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow comm ercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications m ay vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial can nabis uses!"$
Map 10C
Buffer Option CMore Comprehensive BuffersKensington Area
µMap Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the n umb er o f permits issu ed & the process to select p ermite es.
PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf Max 2 acres Only within U LL
Cultivators may distribute ow n product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL
Only within U LL
500 ft from aother retaillocation
Manufacturing
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Land Use Permit
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area W ide Planned Unit Development (P-1)
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirements
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Testing
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Only within ULL
Retail Storefront
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Areas with Incomp atible Zonin g District or General Plan Land Use Designatio n
City Limits
(w/ cultivation permit)
Only in green-houses in non-ag districts or if w/in 1 mile of ULL
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Artificial Light Mixed Light Natural Light
CULTIVATION
0 0.15 0.30.075 Miles
Other Potential R estrictions
Commer cial Cultiva tion is prop ose d to be restricte d to pro perties serve d by a p ub lic water a gen cy.
Bu ffered area include s parcels lo ca ted within 1,0 00 fee t of a State site (school, ch ild care fa cility, youth ce nte r) or additional se nsitive site (commu nity pa rks/pla yg ro und, library, ho me less sh elter, or d ru g re habilitation fa cility), and 500 feet of a residen tia l zo ning district.
Pa rce ls within 500 fe et of R esiden tia l Zoning
Pa rce ls within 1,0 00 fee t fro m a State Site or Se nsitive Site
ÄÅ4
§¨¦680
§¨¦680
ÄÅ4ÄÅ4
Pacheco Blvd
Howe RdMorello AveSolano Way
Olivera Rd
Center Ave
P
a
c
h
e
c
o
B
lv
d
VineHill
MtView
MallardReservoir
MARTINEZ
ShellRefinery
CA State Riding and Hiking Trail
MartinezGun Club
NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow comm ercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications m ay vary.
The County currently prohibit s all commercial can nabis uses!"$
Map11A Buffer Option AState-Mandated BuffersMartinez Area Buffered area meets California location requirements which prohibit commercial cannabis located within a 600-foot radius of a K-12 school, day care center, or youth center that is in existence at the time the license is issued.
Other Potential Restrictions
Commercial Cultivation is proposed to be restricted to properties served by a public water agency.
Parcels within 600 feet of State Buffer Sites
CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Maximum 2 acres
Greenhouse only in non-ag districts or w/in 1-mile of ULL
Only within ULL
Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL
Only within ULL
500 ft from another retail location
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use PermitLand Use Permit
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Manufacturing
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees.
µ
City Limits
Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation
0 0.4 0.80.2 Miles
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirem ents
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Artificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Testing Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Retail StorefrontLand Use Permit(w/ Cultivation Permit)
ÄÅ4
§¨¦680
§¨¦680
ÄÅ4ÄÅ4
Pacheco Blvd
Howe RdMorello AveSolano Way
Olivera Rd
Center Ave
P
a
c
h
e
c
o
B
lv
d
VineHill
MtView
MallardReservoir
MARTINEZ
ShellRefinery
CA State Riding and Hiking Trail
MartinezGun Club
NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow comm ercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications m ay vary.
The County currently prohibit s all commercial can nabis uses!"$
Map11B Buffer Option BExpanded State BuffersMartinez Area Buffered area includes parcels within an expanded version California location requirements, prohibiting commercial cannabis located within a 1,000-foot radius of a K-12 school, day care center, youth center or drug rehab facility at the time the licensed is issued.
Parcels within Expanded State Buffer Other Potential Restrictions
Commercial Cultivation is proposed to be restricted to properties served by a public water agency.
CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Maximum 2 acres
Greenhouse only in non-ag districts or w/in 1-mile of ULL
Only within ULL
Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL
Only within ULL
500 ft from another retail location
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use PermitLand Use Permit
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Manufacturing
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees.
µ
City Limits
Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation
0 0.4 0.80.2 Miles
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirem ents
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Artificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Testing Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Retail StorefrontLand Use Permit(w/ Cultivation Permit)
ÄÅ4
§¨¦680
§¨¦680
ÄÅ4ÄÅ4
Pacheco Blvd
Howe RdMorello AveSolano Way
Olivera Rd
Center Ave
P
a
c
h
e
c
o
B
lv
d
VineHill
MtView
MallardReservoir
MARTINEZ
ShellRefinery
CA State Riding and Hiking Trail
MartinezGun Club
NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow comm ercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications m ay vary.
The County currently prohibit s all commercial can nabis uses!"$
Map11C Buffer Option CMore Comprehensive BuffersMartinez Area
Other Potential Restrictions
Commercial Cultivation is proposed to be restricted to properties served by a public water agency.Buffered area includes parcels located within 1,000 feet of a State site (school, child care facility, youth center) or additional sensitive sites (community parks/playground, library, homeless shelter, or drug rehabilitation facility), and 50 0 feet of a residential zoning district.
Parcels within 500 feet of Residential ZoningParcels within 1,000 feet from a State Site or Sensitive Site
CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Maximum 2 acres
Greenhouse only in non-ag districts or w/in 1-mile of ULL
Only within ULL
Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL
Only within ULL
500 ft from another retail location
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use PermitLand Use Permit
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Manufacturing
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees.
µ
City Limits
Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation
0 0.4 0.80.2 Miles
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirem ents
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Artificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Testing Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Retail StorefrontLand Use Permit(w/ Cultivation Permit)
§¨¦80
§¨¦80San Pablo AveGiant HwyAppian WayPinole Valley RdGiant RdBlume DrSan Pablo AveFitzgerald DrRichmond Pkwy
Atlas Rd
Appi
a
n Way
Hilltop Dr
TaraHills
BayView
MontalvinManor
PINOLE
Pinole PointBusiness Park
Point PinoleRegional Shoreline
RichmondGolf Course
San PabloBayNOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow comm ercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications m ay vary.
The County currently prohibit s all commercial can nabis uses!"$
Map12A Buffer Option AState-Mandated Buffers Buffered area meets California location requirements which prohibit commercial cannabis located within a 600-foot radius of a K-12 school, day care center, or youth center that is in existence at the time the license is issued.Montalvin Manor, Bay View, & Tara Hills Areas
Other Potential Restrictions
Commercial Cultivation is proposed to be restricted to properties served by a public water agency.
Parcels within 600 feet of State Buffer Sites
CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Maximum 2 acres
Greenhouse only in non-ag districts or w/in 1-mile of ULL
Only within ULL
Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL
Only within ULL
500 ft from another retail location
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use PermitLand Use Permit
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Manufacturing
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees.
µ
City Limits
Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation
0 0.4 0.80.2 Miles
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirem ents
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Artificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Testing Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Retail StorefrontLand Use Permit(w/ Cultivation Permit)
§¨¦80
§¨¦80San Pablo AveGiant HwyAppian WayPinole Valley RdGiant RdBlume DrSan Pablo AveFitzgerald DrRichmond Pkwy
Atlas Rd
Appi
a
n Way
Hilltop Dr
TaraHills
BayView
MontalvinManor
PINOLE
Pinole PointBusiness Park
Point PinoleRegional Shoreline
RichmondGolf Course
San PabloBayNOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow comm ercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications m ay vary.
The County currently prohibit s all commercial can nabis uses!"$
Map12B Buffer Option BExpanded State BuffersMontalvin Manor, Bay View, & Tara Hills Areas Buffered area includes parcels within an expanded version California location requirements, prohibiting commercial cannabis located within a 1,000-foot radius of a K-12 school, day care center, youth center or drug rehab facility at the time the licensed is issued.
Parcels within Expanded State Buffer Other Potential Restrictions
Commercial Cultivation is proposed to be restricted to properties served by a public water agency.
CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Maximum 2 acres
Greenhouse only in non-ag districts or w/in 1-mile of ULL
Only within ULL
Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL
Only within ULL
500 ft from another retail location
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use PermitLand Use Permit
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Manufacturing
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees.
µ
City Limits
Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation
0 0.4 0.80.2 Miles
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirem ents
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Artificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Testing Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Retail StorefrontLand Use Permit(w/ Cultivation Permit)
§¨¦80
§¨¦80San Pablo AveGiant HwyAppian WayPinole Valley RdGiant RdBlume DrSan Pablo AveFitzgerald DrRichmond Pkwy
Atlas Rd
Appi
a
n Way
Hilltop Dr
TaraHills
BayView
MontalvinManor
PINOLE
Pinole PointBusiness Park
Point PinoleRegional Shoreline
RichmondGolf Course
San PabloBayNOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow comm ercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications m ay vary.
The County currently prohibit s all commercial can nabis uses!"$
Map12C Buffer Option CMore Comprehensive BuffersMontalvin Manor, Bay View, & Tara Hills Areas
Other Potential Restrictions
Commercial Cultivation is proposed to be restricted to properties served by a public water agency.Buffered area includes parcels located within 1,000 feet of a State site (school, child care facility, youth center) or additional sensitive sites (community parks/playground, library, homeless shelter, or drug rehabilitation facility), and 50 0 feet of a residential zoning district.
Parcels within 500 feet of Residential ZoningParcels within 1,000 feet from a State Site or Sensitive Site
CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Maximum 2 acres
Greenhouse only in non-ag districts or w/in 1-mile of ULL
Only within ULL
Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL
Only within ULL
500 ft from another retail location
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use PermitLand Use Permit
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Manufacturing
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees.
µ
City Limits
Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation
0 0.4 0.80.2 Miles
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirem ents
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Artificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Testing Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Retail StorefrontLand Use Permit(w/ Cultivation Permit)
Richmond PkwyParr Blvd
Market Ave
Fred Jackson WayChesley Ave Giant RdRumrill BlvdC
a
stro S
t
NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow comm ercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications m ay vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial can nabis uses!"$
Map 13A
Buffer Option AState-Mandated BuffersNorth Richmond Area
Bu ffered area meets C alifornia location requirements which prohib it commercial canna bis located within a 600-foot ra dius of a K-1 2 scho ol, d ay care center, or yo uth center th at is in existe nce a t th e time th e license is issued.
µ
0 0.2 0.40.1 Miles
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the n umb er o f permits issu ed & the process to select p ermite es.
PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf Max 2 acres Only within U LL
Cultivators may distribute ow n product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL
Only within U LL
500 ft from aother retaillocation
Manufacturing
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Land Use Permit
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area W ide Planned Unit Development (P-1)
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirements
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Testing
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Only within ULL
Retail Storefront
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Areas with Incomp atible Zonin g District or General Plan Land Use Designatio n
City Limits
(w/ cultivation permit)
Only in green-houses in non-ag districts or if w/in 1 mile of ULL
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Artificial Light Mixed Light Natural Light
CULTIVATION
Other Potential R estrictions
Commer cial Cultiva tion is prop ose d to be restricte d to pro perties serve d by a p ub lic water a gen cy.
Pa rce ls within 600 fe et of State Bu ffer Site s
Richmond PkwyParr Blvd
Market Ave
Fred Jackson WayChesley Ave Giant RdRumrill BlvdC
a
stro S
t
NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow comm ercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications m ay vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial can nabis uses!"$
Map 13B
Buffer Option BExpanded State BuffersNorth Richmond Area
µ
0 0.2 0.40.1 Miles
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the n umb er o f permits issu ed & the process to select p ermite es.
PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf Max 2 acres Only within U LL
Cultivators may distribute ow n product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL
Only within U LL
500 ft from aother retaillocation
Manufacturing
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Land Use Permit
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area W ide Planned Unit Development (P-1)
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirements
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Testing
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Only within ULL
Retail Storefront
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Areas with Incomp atible Zonin g District or General Plan Land Use Designatio n
City Limits
(w/ cultivation permit)
Only in green-houses in non-ag districts or if w/in 1 mile of ULL
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Artificial Light Mixed Light Natural Light
CULTIVATION
Bu ffered area include s parcels within a n e xp ande d versio n California location requirements, prohib iting comme rcial ca nnabis lo ca te d with in a 1 ,00 0-fo ot radius of a K-12 schoo l, day care center, youth center o r drug reha b facility at the time the licensed is issued.
Pa rce ls within Expa nded State Buffer Other Potential R estrictions
Commer cial Cultiva tion is prop ose d to be restricte d to pro perties serve d by a p ub lic water a gen cy.
Richmond PkwyParr Blvd
Market Ave
Fred Jackson WayChesley Ave Giant RdRumrill BlvdC
a
stro S
t
NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow comm ercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications m ay vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial can nabis uses!"$
Map 13C
Buffer Option CMore Comprehensive BuffersNorth Richmond Area
µ
0 0.2 0.40.1 Miles
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the n umb er o f permits issu ed & the process to select p ermite es.
PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf Max 2 acres Only within U LL
Cultivators may distribute ow n product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL
Only within U LL
500 ft from aother retaillocation
Manufacturing
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Land Use Permit
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area W ide Planned Unit Development (P-1)
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirements
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Testing
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Only within ULL
Retail Storefront
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Areas with Incomp atible Zonin g District or General Plan Land Use Designatio n
City Limits
(w/ cultivation permit)
Only in green-houses in non-ag districts or if w/in 1 mile of ULL
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Artificial Light Mixed Light Natural Light
CULTIVATION
Other Potential R estrictions
Commer cial Cultiva tion is prop ose d to be restricte d to pro perties serve d by a p ub lic water a gen cy.
Bu ffered area include s parcels lo ca ted within 1,0 00 fee t of a State site (school, ch ild care fa cility, youth ce nte r) or additional se nsitive site (commu nity pa rks/pla yg ro und, library, ho me less sh elter, or d ru g re habilitation fa cility), and 500 feet of a residen tia l zo ning district.
Pa rce ls within 500 fe et of R esiden tia l Zoning
Pa rce ls within 1,0 00 fee t fro m a State Site or Se nsitive Site
Pacheco
Contra CostaTop Soil
BuchananField
AirportCenter
Central Contra Costa Sanitary DistrictWastewater Treatment Plant
Pleasant HillShopping Center
PachecoCemetery
Public WorksMaintenance Division
ConcordStation
Country SquareCenter
Animal ServicesMartinez Shelter
Califor niaGrand Casino
Califor nia Highway Patrol
Waterbird WayFueling Station
CCCFPDFire Station # 9
PachecoCommunity Center
PachecoStation
DVCPlaza
PG&E ImhoffSubstation
CCCSD FacilityBuffer
Buchanan FieldsGolf Course
§¨¦680
P
a
c
h
e
c
o Blv
d
Concord AveChilpancingo Pkwy
Dia
m
o
n
d Blv
d
NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow comm ercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications m ay vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial can nabis uses!"$
µ
0 0.15 0.30.075 Miles
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the n umb er o f permits issu ed & the process to select p ermite es.
PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf Max 2 acres Only within U LL
Cultivators may distribute ow n product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL
Only within U LL
500 ft from aother retaillocation
Manufacturing
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Land Use Permit
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area W ide Planned Unit Development (P-1)
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirements
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Testing
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Only within ULL
Retail Storefront
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Areas with Incomp atible Zonin g District or General Plan Land Use Designatio n
City Limits
(w/ cultivation permit)
Only in green-houses in non-ag districts or if w/in 1 mile of ULL
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Artificial Light Mixed Light Natural Light
CULTIVATION
Map 14A
Buffer Option AState-Mandated BuffersPacheco Area
Bu ffered area meets C alifornia location requirements which prohib it commercial canna bis located within a 600-foot ra dius of a K-1 2 scho ol, d ay care center, or yo uth center th at is in existe nce a t th e time th e license is issued.
Other Potential R estrictions
Commer cial Cultiva tion is prop ose d to be restricte d to pro perties serve d by a p ub lic water a gen cy.
Pa rce ls within 600 fe et of State Bu ffer Site s
Pacheco
Contra CostaTop Soil
BuchananField
AirportCenter
Central Contra Costa Sanitary DistrictWastewater Treatment Plant
Pleasant HillShopping Center
PachecoCemetery
Public WorksMaintenance Division
ConcordStation
Country SquareCenter
Animal ServicesMartinez Shelter
Califor niaGrand Casino
Califor nia Highway Patrol
Waterbird WayFueling Station
CCCFPDFire Station # 9
PachecoCommunity Center
PachecoStation
DVCPlaza
PG&E ImhoffSubstation
CCCSD FacilityBuffer
Buchanan FieldsGolf Course
§¨¦680
P
a
c
h
e
c
o Blv
d
Concord AveChilpancingo Pkwy
Dia
m
o
n
d Blv
d
NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow comm ercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications m ay vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial can nabis uses!"$
µ
0 0.15 0.30.075 Miles
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the n umb er o f permits issu ed & the process to select p ermite es.
PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf Max 2 acres Only within U LL
Cultivators may distribute ow n product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL
Only within U LL
500 ft from aother retaillocation
Manufacturing
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Land Use Permit
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area W ide Planned Unit Development (P-1)
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirements
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Testing
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Only within ULL
Retail Storefront
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Areas with Incomp atible Zonin g District or General Plan Land Use Designatio n
City Limits
(w/ cultivation permit)
Only in green-houses in non-ag districts or if w/in 1 mile of ULL
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Artificial Light Mixed Light Natural Light
CULTIVATION
Map 14B
Buffer Option BExpanded State BuffersPacheco Area
Bu ffered area include s parcels within a n e xp ande d versio n California location requirements, prohib iting comme rcial ca nnabis lo ca te d with in a 1 ,00 0-fo ot radius of a K-12 schoo l, day care center, youth center o r drug reha b facility at the time the licensed is issued.
Pa rce ls within Expa nded State Buffer Other Potential R estrictions
Commer cial Cultiva tion is prop ose d to be restricte d to pro perties serve d by a p ub lic water a gen cy.
Pacheco
Contra CostaTop Soil
BuchananField
AirportCenter
Central Contra Costa Sanitary DistrictWastewater Treatment Plant
Pleasant HillShopping Center
PachecoCemetery
Public WorksMaintenance Division
ConcordStation
Country SquareCenter
Animal ServicesMartinez Shelter
Califor niaGrand Casino
Califor nia Highway Patrol
Waterbird WayFueling Station
CCCFPDFire Station # 9
PachecoCommunity Center
PachecoStation
DVCPlaza
PG&E ImhoffSubstation
CCCSD FacilityBuffer
Buchanan FieldsGolf Course
§¨¦680
P
a
c
h
e
c
o Blv
d
Concord AveChilpancingo Pkwy
Dia
m
o
n
d Blv
d
NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow comm ercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications m ay vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial can nabis uses!"$
µ
0 0.15 0.30.075 Miles
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the n umb er o f permits issu ed & the process to select p ermite es.
PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf Max 2 acres Only within U LL
Cultivators may distribute ow n product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL
Only within U LL
500 ft from aother retaillocation
Manufacturing
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Land Use Permit
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area W ide Planned Unit Development (P-1)
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirements
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Testing
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Only within ULL
Retail Storefront
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Areas with Incomp atible Zonin g District or General Plan Land Use Designatio n
City Limits
(w/ cultivation permit)
Only in green-houses in non-ag districts or if w/in 1 mile of ULL
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Artificial Light Mixed Light Natural Light
CULTIVATION
Map 14C
Buffer Option CMore Comprehensive BuffersPacheco Area
Other Potential R estrictions
Commer cial Cultiva tion is prop ose d to be restricte d to pro perties serve d by a p ub lic water a gen cy.
Bu ffered area include s parcels lo ca ted within 1,0 00 fee t of a State site (school, ch ild care fa cility, youth ce nte r) or additional se nsitive sites (commu nity parks/playgro und, library, ho me less sh elter, or d ru g re habilitation fa cility), and 500 feet of a residen tia l zo ning district.
Pa rce ls within 500 fe et of R esiden tia l Zoning
Pa rce ls within 1,0 00 fee t fro m a State Site or Se nsitive Site
PortCosta
Rodeo
Crockett
HERCULES
Phillips 66Refinery
Philips 66Carbon Plant
C&H Pure CaneSugar Refinery
NorthshoreBusiness Park
Crockett HillsRegional Park
Carquinez StraitRegional Shoreline
San PabloBay
§¨¦80
ÄÅ4San Pablo AvePomona St
Parker AveWillo
w A
ve
San Pablo AveNOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow comm ercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications m ay vary.
The County currently prohibit s all commercial can nabis uses!"$
Map15A Buffer Option AState-Mandated BuffersRodeo, Crockett and Port Costa Areas Buffered area meets California location requirements which prohibit commercial cannabis located within a 600-foot radius of a K-12 school, day care center, or youth center that is in existence at the time the license is issued.
Other Potential Restrictions
Commercial Cultivation is proposed to be restricted to properties served by a public water agency.
Parcels within 600 feet of State Buffer Sites
CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Maximum 2 acres
Greenhouse only in non-ag districts or w/in 1-mile of ULL
Only within ULL
Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL
Only within ULL
500 ft from another retail location
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use PermitLand Use Permit
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Manufacturing
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees.
µ
City Limits
Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation
0 0.75 1.50.375 Miles
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirem ents
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Artificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Testing Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Retail StorefrontLand Use Permit(w/ Cultivation Permit)
PortCosta
Rodeo
Crockett
HERCULES
Phillips 66Refinery
Philips 66Carbon Plant
C&H Pure CaneSugar Refinery
NorthshoreBusiness Park
Crockett HillsRegional Park
Carquinez StraitRegional Shoreline
San PabloBay
§¨¦80
ÄÅ4San Pablo AvePomona St
Parker AveSan Pablo AveNOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow comm ercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications m ay vary.
The County currently prohibit s all commercial can nabis uses!"$
Map15B Buffer Option BExpanded State BuffersRodeo, Crockett and Port Costa Areas Buffered area includes parcels within an expanded version California location requirements, prohibiting commercial cannabis located within a 1,000-foot radius of a K-12 school, day care center, youth center or drug rehab facility at the time the licensed is issued.
Parcels within Expanded State Buffer
CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Maximum 2 acres
Greenhouse only in non-ag districts
Only within ULL
Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL
Only within ULL
500 ft from another retail location
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use PermitLand Use Permit
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Manufacturing
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees.
µ
0 0.75 1.50.375 Miles
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirem ents
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Artificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Testing Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Retail StorefrontLand Use Permit(w/ Cultivation Permit)
City Limits
Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation
Other Potential Restrictions
Commercial Cultivation is proposed to be restricted to properties served by a public water agency.
PortCosta
Rodeo
Crockett
HERCULES
Phillips 66Refinery
Philips 66Carbon Plant
C&H Pure CaneSugar Refinery
NorthshoreBusiness Park
Crockett HillsRegional Park
Carquinez StraitRegional Shoreline
San PabloBay
§¨¦80
ÄÅ4San Pablo AvePomona St
Parker AveWillo
w A
ve
San Pablo AveNOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow comm ercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications m ay vary.
The County currently prohibit s all commercial can nabis uses!"$
Map15C Buffer Option CMore Comprehensive BuffersRodeo, Crockett and Port Costa Areas Buffered area includes parcels located within 1,000 feet of a State site (school, child care facility, youth center) or additional sensitive sites (community parks/playground, library, homeless shelter, or drug rehabilitation facility), and 50 0 feet of a residential zoning district.
Other Potential Restrictions
Commercial Cultivation is proposed to be restricted to properties served by a public water agency.
Parcels within 500 feet of Residential ZoningParcels within 1,000 feet from a State Site or Sensitive Site
CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Maximum 2 acres
Greenhouse only in non-ag districts or w/in 1-mile of ULL
Only within ULL
Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL
Only within ULL
500 ft from another retail location
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use PermitLand Use Permit
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Manufacturing
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees.
µ
City Limits
Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation
0 0.75 1.50.375 Miles
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirem ents
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Artificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Testing Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Retail StorefrontLand Use Permit(w/ Cultivation Permit)
LAFAYETTE
WALNUTCREEK
§¨¦680
§¨¦680ÄÅ24
Olym pic BlvdN Mai
n StN Cal
i
f
or
ni
a Bl
vdMt Diablo Blvd
Olympic Blvd S Cal
i
f
orni
a Bl
vdCastleHill
Saranap
WALNUTCREEK
NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$
Map 16A
Buffer Option AState-Mandated BuffersSaranap Area
Bu ffered area meets C alifornia location requirements which prohib it commercial canna bis located within a 600-foot ra dius of a K-1 2 scho ol, d ay care center, or yo uth center th at is in existe nce a t th e time th e license is issued.
µ
0 0.2 0.40.1 Mile s
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the n umb er o f permits issu ed & the process to select p ermite es.
PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf Max 2 acres Only within U LL
Cultivators may distribute ow n product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL
Only within U LL
500 ft from aother retaillocation
Manufacturing
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Land Use Permit
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area W ide Planned Unit Development (P-1)
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirements
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Testing
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Only within ULL
Retail Storefront
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Areas with Incomp atible Zonin g District or General Plan Land Use Designatio n
City Limits
(w/ cultivation permit)
Only in green-houses in non-ag districts or if w/in 1 mile of ULL
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Artificial Light Mixed Light Natural Light
CULTIVATION
Other Pote ntial Restrictions
Retail Business an d G eneral Comm ercial zon ing in the Sa ranap Area is propo se d to beineligible for comm ercial cannabis uses.
Comm ercial Cultivation is proposed to be restricte d to p roperties served by a public water agency.
Pa rce ls within 600 fe et of State Bu ffer Site s
LAFAYETTE
WALNUTCREEK
§¨¦680
§¨¦680ÄÅ24
Olym pic BlvdN Mai
n StN Cal
i
f
or
ni
a Bl
vdMt Diablo Blvd
Olympic Blvd S Cal
i
f
orni
a Bl
vdCastleHill
Saranap
WALNUTCREEK
NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$
Map 16B
Buffer Option BExpanded State BuffersSaranap Area
µ
0 0.2 0.40.1 Mile s
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the n umb er o f permits issu ed & the process to select p ermite es.
PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf Max 2 acres Only within U LL
Cultivators may distribute ow n product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL
Only within U LL
500 ft from aother retaillocation
Manufacturing
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Land Use Permit
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area W ide Planned Unit Development (P-1)
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirements
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Testing
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Only within ULL
Retail Storefront
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Areas with Incomp atible Zonin g District or General Plan Land Use Designatio n
City Limits
(w/ cultivation permit)
Only in green-houses in non-ag districts or if w/in 1 mile of ULL
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Artificial Light Mixed Light Natural Light
CULTIVATION
Bu ffered area include s parcels within a n e xp ande d versio n California location requirements, prohib iting comme rcial ca nnabis lo ca te d with in a 1 ,00 0-fo ot radius of a K-12 schoo l, day care center, youth center o r drug reha b facility at the time the licensed is issued.
Pa rce ls within Expa nded State Buffer Other Pote ntial Restrictions
Retail Business an d G eneral Comm ercial zon ing in the Sa ranap Area is propo se d to beineligible for comm ercial cannabis uses.
Comm ercial Cultivation is proposed to be restricte d to p roperties served by a public water agency.
LAFAYETTE
WALNUTCREEK
§¨¦680
§¨¦680
ÄÅ24
Olym pic BlvdN Mai
n StN Cal
i
f
or
ni
a Bl
vdMt Diablo Blvd
Olympic Blvd S Cal
i
f
orni
a Bl
vdCastleHill
Saranap
WALNUTCREEK
NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$
Map 16C
Buffer Option CMore Comprehensive BuffersSaranap Area
µ
0 0.2 0.40.1 Mile s
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the n umb er o f permits issu ed & the process to select p ermite es.
PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf Max 2 acres Only within U LL
Cultivators may distribute ow n product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL
Only within U LL
500 ft from aother retaillocation
Manufacturing
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Land Use Permit
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area W ide Planned Unit Development (P-1)
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirements
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Testing
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Only within ULL
Retail Storefront
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Areas with Incomp atible Zonin g District or General Plan Land Use Designatio n
City Limits
(w/ cultivation permit)
Only in green-houses in non-ag districts or if w/in 1 mile of ULL
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Artificial Light Mixed Light Natural Light
CULTIVATION
Other Pote ntial Restrictions
Retail Business an d G eneral Comm ercial zon ing in the Sa ranap Area is propo se d to beineligible for comm ercial cannabis uses.
Comm ercial Cultivation is proposed to be restricte d to p roperties served by a public water agency.Bu ffered area include s parcels lo ca ted within 1,0 00 fee t of a State site (school, ch ild care fa cility, youth ce nte r) or additional se nsitive sites (commu nity parks/playgro und, library, ho me less sh elter, or d ru g re habilitation fa cility), and 500 feet of a residen tia l zo ning district.
Pa rce ls within 500 fe et of R esiden tia l Zoning
Pa rce ls within 1,0 00 fee t fro m a State Site or Se nsitive Site
UPDATE ON COMMUNITY OUTREACH AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR REVISING CANNABIS REGULATORY FRAMEWORK RELATED TO ZONINGBOARD OF SUPERVISORS MEETINGTUESDAY, APRIL 24, 20181
FOCUS FOR THIS BOARD MEETING: ZONINGStaff hopes to receive direction from the Board today on refining the Draft Regulatory Framework for Cannabis as it relates to zoningStaff is developing a draft zoning ordinance based on the Framework and plans to present a draft zoning ordinance reflecting Board direction from today to the County Planning Commission on May 23, 2018Other key dates in proposed schedule:May 8, 2018: Board guidance on potential tax measure. Guidance on health ordinance will also be requested, either on May 8 or a subsequent meeting.June 26, 2018: Board to consider adoption of zoning ordinanceJuly 10, 2018: Board to consider adoption of health and tax measure ordinances2
January 2018February 2018April 2018May 2018July 2018September 2018 October 2018MORATORIUM ORDINANCE (DCD)Moratorium in Effect (until replaced)ZONING ORDINANCE (DCD)Preliminary Regulatory FrameworkRefine FrameworkOrdinance TextCounty Planning CommissionBoard of Supervisors ApprovalEffective Date (earliest)TAX MEASURE (CAO)Measure FormulationBoard of Supervisors Approval (deadline August 7)2018 BallotHEALTH ORDINANCE (HSD)Refine FrameworkOrdinance TextBoard of Supervisors ApprovalPUBLIC OUTREACHWebsite/Mailing ListPeriodic Public Meeting/Workshops/MAC Meetings3
OVERVIEW OF COMMUNITY OUTREACH EFFORTSNovember 14, 2017-Board Approved Draft Framework & Public Outreach Plan First community outreach meeting with Alamo Municipal Advisory Council (MAC) took Place on February 6, 2018Most recent public outreach meeting was held on Monday, April 16 with Crockett Improvement AssociationDuring that time period County Board members and staff presented the Draft Framework and solicited input on it at 27 meetings618 people are presently included on the County’s cannabis notification listThe County’s cannabis home page includes an updated schedule for all outreach meetings, an online public comment survey, the Draft Framework and other documents4
PUBLIC MEETING INPUT – MUNICIPAL ADVISORY COUNCILS HIGHLIGHTS*MORE DETAILED SUMMARY OF COMMENTS IN EXHIBIT CFramework ReactionOverall reaction mixed from MAC to MAC and within MACs. Some suggestions shared at some MACs:Strict safeguards to prevent marketing to childrenLUP applications routed to MACsInclude schools, parks churches as sensitive sitesNo delivery of non-medical cannabis“Return-to-source” taxation Social equity considerationsBuffersResidential: 500’-1,000’ (2 miles also proposed) Sensitive Site: 1,000’Consistent with tobacco ordinance also recommended CapsYes. Can review and modify over time if warranted Outdoor Personal GrowGenerally “yes” to allow, some suggested complete ban. For those that supported, common ideas:Max: 3-6 plantsNot visible from public right-of-way5-foot setbacks from property line5
Alamo Bay PointBethelIslandByronContraCosta CentreCrockett DiabloFramework ReactionAdvancedsafeguardsApply Second Hand Smoke Ord.Ban nonmedical deliveryInclude Schools and Parks, and Churches as sensitive sitessustainable water usesuse of tax revenue “small guy vs outsider/corporate interest”Outdoor grows should be in an enclosed area and not visible by neighbors or the roadReasonableConcerns about importing criminal activityTax revenue should be spent on public safety and hospitalsAgricultural zones should not allow cultivate/manufacture/distributeBan nonmedical deliveryBuffers(What distance should cannabis uses be buffered from sensitive and/or residential sites?)600' residential/1000' sensitive sitesUse same buffers as Tobacco Ordinance500ft with 1,000ft notification area1,000 feet for sensitive sites and 500 feet for residentialShould be consistent with the County Tobacco Ordinance (1,000’)Buffer zones are “ridiculous”;don’t make a difference. Kids can drive and still access.1,000' within sensitive site and 500' within residentialCaps(Should we include caps on the number of permits? If so, how many? What uses should caps be applied to?)Restrict the number of permits issued related to the establishment of safe, orderly and accessible cannabis businessesYes YesInclude caps with a review after 1 yearPlace limited caps in the beginning and revisit after 3 years(see “Framework Reaction”)Start with small number of permits and after 1-3 years of data adjust the number as warranted.Outdoor Personal Grow(Should it be allowed by right? Number of plants? Other requirements?)limited to three (3) plants 20’ setback from all property line(s) not visible from public ROW or adjacent parcelSix (6) plants maximumAllow personal grows 6 indoor or outdoor plants Allow by right; 6 plants max; create policies to discourage nuisance to neighbors; grow as close to the building as possible and secure(see “Framework Reaction”)Three (3) plants max Not visible from public ROW or adjacent parcel; 5 foot setbacks6
Discovery BayEl Sobrante Kensington KnightsenNorth RichmondPacheco RodeoFramework ReactionWell thought through. Good to have one. “Devil’s in the details”Discussion and questions about zoning, possibility of allowing currently legal plants to grow outside, taxation of businesses, distribution of taxes, etc. No major “red flags,” no strong objections A lot of Framework wouldn’t apply to Kensington Concerns with enforcement, return to source taxation, theft and smellResearch experiences from other communitiesSupport businesses that give back to the communityTax revenue should “return-to-source”Well thought through. Keep out of BayoVista Housing Project and YMCAToo restrictive for these businesses to thriveBuffers(What distance should cannabis uses be buffered from sensitive and/or residential sites?)Two miles from Discovery Bay(see “Framework Reaction”)(see “Framework Reaction”)Approve proposed Framework standardsYes1,000’ buffers for sensitive sites and residential(see “Framework Reaction”)Caps(Should we include caps on the number of permits? If so, how many? What uses should caps be applied to?)In the beginning keep caps tight, then release slowly as circumstances warrant(see “Framework Reaction”)(see “Framework Reaction”)Yes; cap at 0 “zero” Yes Yes(see “Framework Reaction”)Outdoor Personal Grow(Should it be allowed by right? Number of plants? Other requirements?)Should be prohibited in Discovery Bay(see “Framework Reaction”)Discussion around whether it would be appropriate to have combination of regulated indoor and outdoor personal grow; reached no conclusionMaximum of six (6) plants (no response)Yes, with restrictions(see “Framework Reaction”)7
PUBLIC MEETING INPUT – CITY COUNCIL HIGHLIGHTSFramework ReactionCities in south County and Lamorinda generally prohibit commercial cannabis and thought the County should be consistentHowever, cities appreciated that the County had developed a draft Framework and was seeking inputConsider experiences of other cities/statesPolicies consistent with neighboring city’s regulations Avoid allowing cannabis activities near sensitive sitesContinue to coordinate with Contra Costa cities Concord suggested concept of cannabis storefront being more likely to operate well if sited in visible areas.BuffersIf allow at all, generally reasonableConsider making consistent with neighboring city buffersCapsIf allow at all, impose capsConsider “phasing” caps –if County allows anything, should start slowOutdoor Personal GrowGenerally not supported, though members in one city pointed out some positive tradeoffs with outdoor8
Concord Danville Lafayette Moraga Orinda San RamonWalnut CreekFramework ReactionConcerned w/ locations that are not visible enoughMedical should be allowed at a minimumCoordination on borders needed. City input needed on nearby projects. Concern with County getting revenue and city getting impacts.Council bannedcommercial cannabis and generally thought County should too. Additional comments were offered in the event not possible to ban. Tax potential should not drive decision.Concerns with edibles, access by children andenvironmental impactSuggest adopting an approach to match cities in neighborhoods near those cities.Lafayette banned commercial cannabis and generally recommended the County do the same.Majority view: County’s regulations should mirror the Town’s very strong anti-marijuana regulations. Dissenting opinion:Marijuana has legitimate medical uses; layering on taxes too heavily could drive more of the industry underground. Key that County policy isconsistent with City policyNot an agricultural communityNo cultivation, distribution, testingShould not have any uses around San Ramon. Keep away from childrenMaintain prohibition as currently existsGenerally, members felt it was reasonable. Tax vote idea good.City intends to permit up to two medical-only, delivery-only dispensaries and outdoor personal, but nothing else.Buffers(What distance should cannabis uses be buffered from sensitive and/or residential sites?)Residential areas may be sensitive as sensitive sites; need securityRequest County use City buffers (County's too small)If allowed,needsolid buffer zonesEncourage ban everywhere in the County. City prohibits and general suggestion was consistency.City prohibits and general suggestion was consistency.Consideradditional sensitive sitesCaps(Should we include caps on the number of permits? If so, how many? What uses should caps be applied to?)Caps are good Yes to caps, slower ramp up (2x)If allowed, cap retail at a very small numberEncourage ban everywhere in the County. City prohibits and general suggestion was consistency.City prohibits and general suggestion was consistency.Consult with city you're close to Outdoor Personal Grow(Should it be allowed by right? Number of plants? Other requirements?)Outdoor grows are a concernOutdoor cultivation -notification radiusNo outdoor personal growEncourage ban everywhere in the County. City prohibits and general suggestion was consistency.No outdoor personal growGenerally supported.9
CAP/BUFFER/RFP/TERM COMPARISON CHART CITY/COUNTY CAPS BUFFERS RFP PERMIT TERM NOTES Alameda County Medical Dispensaries: Limit of 3 dispensaries in “west” county and 3 in “east” county. Commercial Cultivation: Maximum 2 indoor and 4 mixed-light cannabis cultivation operations Countywide. Dispensaries: 1,000 feet from any school, any licensed child or day care facility, public park or playground, drug recovery facility or recreation center. 1,000 feet from other dispensaries. Commercial Cultivation: 1,000 feet from any school for pre-K to 12th grade students, licensed child or day care facility, public park or playground, drug or alcohol recovery facility or public recreation center; 300 feet from residence on adjacent property; 50 feet from property line. RFP process for dispensaries and cultivation Two (2) years Only 5 retail and 6 cultivation sites total permitted. No other commercial cannabis uses permitted. Richmond Medical Dispensaries: Maximum of 3 Cultivation/Manufacturing: No limit All Marijuana Businesses: 1,500 feet from any public or private high school and a minimum of six hundred feet (600') from any kindergarten, elementary, middle or junior high school, pursuant to State law. Manufacturing/Cultivation: 500 feet from any park, community center, youth center, public or private child-care center or nursery school Marijuana Collective (dispensary)s: 500-feet from any park, community center, youth center, public or private child-care center or nursery school RFP process for dispensaries only No permit term limits Emeryville 1 dispensary/retailer allowed within city Limits. Unlimited permits for manufacturing, testing, distribution, transportation, delivery and research and development Dispensary/Retail: 250 feet from sensitive sites No buffer for manufacturing, testing, distribution, transport, or research and development RFP Process required for retail dispensary only. Permits valid for one (1) year. Renewal application required 60 day prior to expiration Walnut Creek Medical Dispensary (delivery only): City council adopted a cap of 2 delivery-only medical dispensaries TBD TBD TBD As approved by City Council vote on February 20, 2018. Oakland Dispensary: No more than 8 new permits per year (half to equity applicant). Cultivation, distribution, manufacturing, testing and transporting: No limit Dispensary: 600-feet of a K-12 public or private school, another dispensary or youth center. The distance between facilities shall be measured via path of travel from the closest door of one facility to the closest door of the other facility. Cultivation, distribution, manufacturing, testing and transporting: 600-feet from any k-12 public or private school. The distance between facilities shall be measured via path of travel from the closest door of one facility to the closest door of the other facility. RFP for four (4) regular dispensary permits Drawing for four (4) equity applicant permits 1 year for dispensaries El Cerrito Dispensary: Maximum two (2) allowed (retail storefront or retail delivery) Dispensary Buffers: 600-feet from public and private schools and areas with youth populations, including: 1. A public or private kindergarten, elementary, middle, junior high, or high school. 2. A library open to the public. 3. A publicly owned park (excluding the Ohlone Greenway and pocket parks as defined in the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan) or recreation facility including, but not limited to, a clubhouse, community center, or public pool. RFP for dispensaries Maximum of three (3) years. No other commercial cannabis uses permitted. 10
PUBLIC MEETING INPUT –ALCOHOL AND OTHER DRUGS ADVISORY BOARD * MORE DETAILED SUMMARY IN EXHIBIT DSocial Host ordinance lacks enforcement – needs revenue.Anorexia and AIDS patients and chemo patients are only scientifically proven to benefit; wants to ensure disadvantaged/elderly population has safe accessConcentrations of cannabis activities a concernDisadvantaged communities could be in danger; language barriers an issue - need lots of education Health ordinance should be adopted concurrently w/ other policy approvalsHow do you prevent odor impacts? Capsgood idea across the board; monitoring system; permitting process; favors RFP processRevenueto help treatment and prevention services; area residents and potential/tendencies toward impacts; Need strict regulations on verifying point of sale transactions; mobile delivery a concernCounty should have a "liaison" to ensure regulations are implemented properly; w/ knowledge in substance abuse & regulations. A.O.D. needs opportunity to comment on all LUP apps (in same manner as alcohol permit LUP apps); 11
PUBLIC MEETING INPUT – YOUTH TOWN HALL * MORE DETAILED SUMMARY IN EXHIBIT ECannabis should be limited to agricultural and medicinal use Capon the THC level in cannabisLimitto how many retail stores are allowed Outdoor cultivation should not be allowed…only greenhouse and specific outdoor places should be permittedShould allow testingKeep out of disadvantaged communitiesMarijuana should not be allowed to be put into foodChildrencannot tell if the candy has drugs or not, and it can affect kids a lotShould not be within 5000 ft. of kids K-12 Facilities should have maximum security Some mention of positive medical and other impacts of cannabis12
PUBLIC MEETING INPUT – INTERJURISDICTIONAL COUNCIL ON HOMELESS * MORE DETAILED SUMMARY IN EXHIBIT FTax revenue from commercial cannabis activities should return to the communities where they are generated, not to County General Fund.Ordinance should utilize caps on commercial uses to avoid proliferation and excessive influence of cannabisThe County should consider implementing equity programs for commercial cannabis businesses similar to those used in Oakland and San FranciscoCannabis ordinance should prioritize local business owners and employmentPlacement of caps on commercial cannabis uses would inhibit growth of local businesses and limit potential tax revenue13
PUBLIC INPUT – SURVEY & TESTIMONY HIGHLIGHTS (COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION)* MORE DETAILED SUMMARY IN EXHIBIT GParticularly harmful to children and teenagers Should be completely prohibited “Toxic” substance; odor impacts; triggers asthma Brings crime and violence, gangs and cartels Destroys environment; risk to public health and safetyWill increase ER visits (see: Colorado)Limited to no benefit Recreational use damages workforce The more available and accepted it is, the more abuse will occur, particularly by children.Irresponsible use of agricultural resourcesFramework is not ready; need more careful examination of experience in other communities and analysis of studies on its impactsStill a controlled substance on Federal level Will consider moving if allowed in neighborhood Reduces property values, quality of life “Dubious” economic benefit Will exacerbate “black market” More socially-responsible ways to generate tax revenueLeads to abuse of other drugs14
PUBLIC INPUT – SURVEY & TESTIMONY HIGHLIGHTS (COMMENTS IN SUPPORT)* MORE DETAILED SUMMARY IN EXHIBIT GImprove economy, increases tax revenue; “Return-to-Source” taxation Medical benefits; need to improve access for medical usersRegulations will help eliminate “black market” County voters voted in favor of legalization Cap retailers, not cultivators Buffers too restrictive; distance between dispensaries should be same as alcohol retailers Benefits to making a legal product safely available to the communityAgriculturally zoned properties should be allowed to cultivate “by right”Outdoor grows should not be visible from public right-of-way, setback from property lineLook at success stories from other cities and statesPermits should be reviewed at regular intervals Allow vertical integration (“micro-businesses”)Be consistent with State regulations Safer than alcohol, tobacco 15
MAJOR TAKEWAWAYS FROM PUBLIC OUTREACHCannabis is still a polarizing topic and many in the community are passionately for or against.Those in favor discuss medicinal and other values and point out advantages of well-regulated access as opposed to black market.Those opposed are concerned that governmental acceptance and additional availability will lead to broad social harm, including greater abuse, particularly by children.Results of Proposition 64 indicated broad general support for legal cannabis throughout the County. However, locating a cannabis business in a community is still likely to provoke significant opposition.Opposition is consistently strongest in southern and southwestern areas of the County. Communities in the northern and western areas are generally more receptive.Buffers seen as not sufficient in communities that are more opposed and too limiting in areas that support.16
RECOMMENDED CHANGES TO THE FRAMEWORK Based on the public input and further analysis by staff, a number of revisions to the Framework are recommended.The details of these proposed revisions are reflected in the track changes version of the Framework document and the attached maps.The following slides summarize the more significant proposed revisions and compare the approaches of nearby jurisdictions on some key questions.17
RECOMMENDED CHANGES TO THE FRAMEWORK:-- GENERAL PERMIT TERMS (SIGNIFICANT CHANGE #1)Manufacturing processes related to extraction are recommended to be limited to non-volatile processing techniques.Applications for retail storefront and commercial cultivation permits would only be accepted in response to a Request for Proposals (RFP)Require additional findings be made when approving cannabis permits to prevent adverse impacts to neighbors and communitiesLimit permits to five year terms with a process to renewCompliance review annually for three years, then every three years thereafter. First compliance review and any review that determines non-compliance will be public hearings.18
RECOMMENDED CHANGES TO THE FRAMEWORK:-- CAPS AND APPLICANT SELECTION PROCESS (SIGNIFICANT CHANGE #2)The following initial caps recommended :Retail Storefront—Maximum of four (4) for first three years. Re-evaluate thereafter.Commercial Cultivation—Maximum of ten (10) for first three years. Re-evaluate thereafter.Delivery-Only retail—No limit initiallyManufacturing—No limit initiallyDistribution center—No limit initiallyTesting facility—No limit initiallyLow caps on the two most sensitive uses are based on the principle of starting slow and building oversight capacity. Possible that there are more interested applicants than cap space and that a free market could support more than these initial cap amounts. It should also be noted that future demand for these uses, their products and their product prices may be volatile.No caps or limit recommended initially on other uses because these uses are expected to have fewer impacts. Also, helpful to minimize the number of time-consuming and challenging applicant selection processes (RFP process). For uses requiring an RFP and an applicant selection process, recommend a scoring system be developed before RFP is issued that reflects the County’s public safety, land use and health policy goals. 19
RECOMMENDED CHANGES TO THE FRAMEWORK:-- REVISED ZONING MATRIX (SIGNIFICANT CHANGE #3)Staff is recommending a series of revisions to the matrix. These recommendations reflect public input and additional staff analysis and are intended to increase clarity and specificity on some key proposed restrictions.20
CULTIVATION PROCCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
LEGEND
Artificial
Light
Mixed
Light
Natural
Light
Distribution
Center Manufacturing Testing
Retail
Delivery
Only
Retail
Storefront ZONING
DISTRICT
Agricultural
Zoning Districts
(A‐ )
Land Use
Permit
Land
Use
Permit
Land Use
Permit
Land Use Permit
(in conjunction with
cultivation permit
only)
Area‐Wide
Planned Unit
Development (P‐
1)
Land Use
Permit
Land
Use
Permit
Land Use
Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use
Permit
Land Use
Permit
Land Use
Permit
Retail‐Business
(R‐B) Land Use
Permit
Land Use
Permit
General
Commercial (C) Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use
Permit
Land Use
Permit
Land Use
Permit
Controlled
Manufacturing
(C‐M), Light
Industrial (L‐I),
Heavy Industrial
(H‐I)
Land Use
Permit
Land
Use
Permit
Land Use
Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use
Permit
Land Use
Permit
Land Use
Permit
Potential
Sustainability
Requirements
100% Renewable
Energy and Sustainable
Water Supplyserved by
a public water agency
Sustainable
Water
SupplyServed
by a public
water agency
Potential limits on
number of
employees/trips
outside ULL
Key
Considerations
and Limitations
by Use
Maximum 22, 000 sf Max 2 acres only within ULL
Potential limits on
number of
employees/trips
outside ULL
only
within
ULL
only within
ULL
only within
ULL
Ag Districts: maximum
10,000 sf structure or
in existing structure
Greenhouse
only in non‐ag
districtsinside
ULL or within 1
mile of ULL
Cultivators may
distribute own
produce to
retailers
500 ft from
another retail
location
21
1
NoteNote: 1: ULL refers to Urban Limit Line
Note 2: Microbusinesses (operations that grow, process and sell cannabis products to retail
customers at a small-scale site) are also under consideration where cultivation is allowed inside
the ULL.
Note 3: For the area-wide P-1 zoning districts in North Richmond, El Sobrante, Rodeo, Contra
Costa Centre and Bay Point, suitable areas for commercial cannabis are limited to those with
underlying General Plan land use designations of Business Park, Commercial, Commercial
Recreational, Light Industrial, Heavy Industrial, and Mixed Use. Subsequent to approval of the
zoning ordinance, the County would need to draft and approve amendments to the site-
specific provisions of each of these districts. These amendments would establish precisely
which commercial cannabis uses would be allowed where in these five area-wide P-1 districts.
As these amendments and associated detailed site analysis have yet to be performed, the
current draft maps show in yellow all of the areas within these five P-1 districts that have a
General Plan land use designation that is compatible with one or more commercial cannabis
use, but do not specify precisely which commercial cannabis use is proposed to be eligible on
any given parcel within the yellow area.
22
Richmond
Antioch
Concord
Oakley
Danville
Pittsburg
Hercules
Orinda
Pinole
Lafayette
Martinez
San Ramon
Walnut Creek
Brentwood
Moraga
Pleasant Hill
Clayton
El Cerrito
San Pablo
Agricultural Zoning Districts
Agricultural Zoning Districts
23
Richmond
Antioch
Concord
Oakley
Danville
Pittsburg
Hercules
Orinda
Pinole
Lafayette
Martinez
San Ramon
Walnut Creek
Brentwood
Moraga
Pleasant Hill
Clayton
El Cerrito
San Pablo
Public Water Agency Boundaries and Agricultural Zoning Districts
Agricultural Zoning Districts
Area Not in a Public Water Agency Boundary Note: Not all properties within a Public Water Agency Boundary are served by the Agency
24
RECOMMENDED CHANGES TO THE FRAMEWORK:-- EXCLUSION AREAS (SIGNIFICANT CHANGE #4)Staff recommends an overlay be added to the Retail Business and General Commercial zoning districts that are located more than five miles from Highway 4 or Interstate 80. Such zoning districts are located in Alamo, Saranap, Bethel Island and Hotchkiss Tract in between Oakley and Bethel Island. No commercial cannabis uses would be permitted in these districts within the overlay.Rationale:Restrict eligible sites for retail storefront, delivery-only retail, manufacturing, distribution centers and testing to areas near the two primary freeways serving the shoreline areas of the County where development of new industries has been targeted by the CountySeparate these uses from less compatible communitiesAvoid siting these uses in remote areas that are more difficult to oversee and are far from most of the customer base, 25
}þ4
}þ4
Richmond
Antioch
Concord
Oakley
Danville
Pittsburg
Hercules
Orinda
Pinole
Lafayette
Martinez
San Ramon
Walnut Creek
Brentwood
Moraga
Pleasant Hill
Clayton
El Cerrito
San Pablo
}þ4
}þ24
}þ242
}þ4
§¨¦80
§¨¦680
§¨¦580
Non-Agricultural Zoning Districts
Eligible, Non-Agricultural, Zoning Districts
Urban Limit Line
26
}þ4
}þ4
Richmond
Antioch
Concord
Oakley
Danville
Pittsburg
Hercules
Orinda
Pinole
Lafayette
Martinez
San Ramon
Walnut Creek
Brentwood
Moraga
Pleasant Hill
Clayton
El Cerrito
San Pablo
}þ4
}þ24
}þ242
}þ4
§¨¦80
§¨¦680
§¨¦580
Potential Exclusion of Certain Non-Agricultural Zoning Districts
Eligible, Non-Agricultural, Zoning Districts
Overlay Zone Applicability Area
Urban Limit Line
Five mile from Highway 4 or Interstate 80
27
RECOMMENDED CHANGES TO THE FRAMEWORK:-- BUFFER ZONES (SIGNIFICANT CHANGE #5)The Preliminary Cannabis Use Maps attached to the April 24 Board report show three alternatives. Option Areflects the state-mandated 600 foot buffers from any K-12 school, day care center or youth center. Option Breflects 1000 foot buffers from any K-12 school, day care center or youth center, as well as 1000 foot buffers from drug treatment shelters. Option Creflects 1000 foot buffers from schools, day care centers, youth centers, community parks/playgrounds, libraries, drug treatment centers, and homeless shelters, 500 foot buffers from residential zoning districts. Option C closely mirrors the most comprehensive buffer scenario contemplated in the Board’s November 2017 Preliminary Framework, while also accounting for the state regulations regarding minimum buffers from day care and youth centers. County staff recommends Option B combined with 500 foot buffers between retail storefront establishments.28
Richmond
Antioch
Concord
Oakley
Danville
Pittsburg
Hercules
Orinda
Pinole
Lafayette
Martinez
San Ramon
Walnut Creek
Brentwood
Moraga
Pleasant Hill
Clayton
El Cerrito
San Pablo
NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$
Map1A Buffer Option AState-Mandated BuffersUnincorproated Contra Costa Area
Other Potential Restrictions
Retail Business zoning in the Alamo Area is proposed to be ineligible for commercial cannabis uses.
Commercial Cultivation is proposed to be restricted to properties served by a public water agency.
CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Maximum 2 acres
Greenhouse only in non-ag districts or w/in 1-mile of ULL
Only within ULL
Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL
Only within ULL
500 ft from another retail location
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use PermitLand Use Permit
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Manufacturing
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees.
µ
City Limits
Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation
0 6 123Miles
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirements
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Artificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Testing Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Retail StorefrontLand Use Permit(w/ Cultivation Permit)
Buffered area meets California location requirements which prohibit commercial cannabis located within a 600-foot radius of a K-12 school, day care center, or youth center that is in existence at the time the license is issued.
Parcels within 600 feet of State Buffer Sites
29
Richmond
Antioch
Concord
Oakley
Danville
Pittsburg
Hercules
Orinda
Pinole
Lafayette
Martinez
San Ramon
Walnut Creek
Brentwood
Moraga
Pleasant Hill
Clayton
El Cerrito
San Pablo
NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$
Map1B Buffer Option BExpanded State BuffersUnincorproated Contra Costa Area
Other Potential Restrictions
Retail Business and General Commerical zoning in the Alamo, Saranap, and Bethel Island Areas are proposed to be ineligible for commercial cannabis uses.
Commercial Cultivation is proposed to be restricted to properties served by a public water agency.
CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Maximum 2 acres
Greenhouse only in non-ag districts or w/in 1-mile of ULL
Only within ULL
Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL
Only within ULL
500 ft from another retail location
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use PermitLand Use Permit
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Manufacturing
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees.
µ
City Limits
Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation
0 6 123Miles
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirements
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Artificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Testing Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Retail StorefrontLand Use Permit(w/ Cultivation Permit)
Buffered area includes parcels within an expanded version California location requirements, prohibiting commercial cannabis located within a 1,000-foot radius of a K-12 school, day care center, youth center or drug rehab facility at the time the licensed is issued.
Parcels within Expanded State Buffer
30
Richmond
Antioch
Concord
Oakley
Danville
Pittsburg
Hercules
Orinda
Pinole
Lafayette
Martinez
San Ramon
Walnut Creek
Brentwood
Moraga
Pleasant Hill
Clayton
El Cerrito
San Pablo
NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$
Map1C Buffer Option CMore Comprehensive BuffersUnincorproated Contra Costa Area
Other Potential Restrictions
Retail Business zoning in the Alamo Area is proposed to be ineligible for commercial cannabis uses.
Commercial Cultivation is proposed to be restricted to properties served by a public water agency.Buffered area includes parcels located within 1,000 feet of a State site (school, child care facility, youth center) or additional sensitive sites (community parks/playground, library, homeless shelter, or drug rehabilitation facility), and 500 feet of a residential zoning district.
Parcels within 500 feet of Residential ZoningParcels within 1,000 feet from a State Site or Sensitive Site
CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Maximum 2 acres
Greenhouse only in non-ag districts or w/in 1-mile of ULL
Only within ULL
Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL
Only within ULL
500 ft from another retail location
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use PermitLand Use Permit
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Manufacturing
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees.
µ
City Limits
Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation
0 6 123Miles
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirements
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Artificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Testing Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Retail StorefrontLand Use Permit(w/ Cultivation Permit)
31
Richmond PkwyParr Blvd
Market Ave
Fred Jackson WayChesley Ave Giant RdRumrill BlvdC
a
s
t
r
o
S
t
NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$
Map 13A
Buffer Option AState-Mandated BuffersNorth Richmond Area
Buffered area meets California location requirements which prohibit commercial cannabis located within a 600-foot radius of a K-12 school, day care center, or youth center that is in existence at the time the license is issued.
µ
0 0.2 0.40.1 Miles
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the number of permits issued & the process to select permitees.
PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf Max 2 acres Only within ULL
Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL
Only within ULL
500 ft from aother retaillocation
Manufacturing
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Land Use Permit
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1)
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirements
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Testing
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Only within ULL
Retail Storefront
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation
City Limits
(w/ cultivation permit)
Only in green-houses in non-ag districts or if w/in 1 mile of ULL
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Artificial Light Mixed Light Natural Light
CULTIVATION
Other Potential Restrictions
Commercial Cultivation is proposed to be restricted to properties served by a public water agency.
Parcels within 600 feet of State Buffer Sites
32
Richmond PkwyParr Blvd
Market Ave
Fred Jackson WayChesley Ave Giant RdRumrill BlvdC
a
s
t
r
o
S
t
NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$
Map 13B
Buffer Option BExpanded State BuffersNorth Richmond Area
µ
0 0.2 0.40.1 Miles
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the number of permits issued & the process to select permitees.
PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf Max 2 acres Only within ULL
Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL
Only within ULL
500 ft from aother retaillocation
Manufacturing
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Land Use Permit
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1)
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirements
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Testing
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Only within ULL
Retail Storefront
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation
City Limits
(w/ cultivation permit)
Only in green-houses in non-ag districts or if w/in 1 mile of ULL
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Artificial Light Mixed Light Natural Light
CULTIVATION
Buffered area includes parcels within an expanded version California location requirements, prohibiting commercial cannabis located within a 1,000-foot radius of a K-12 school, day care center, youth center or drug rehab facility at the time the licensed is issued.
Parcels within Expanded State Buffer Other Potential Restrictions
Commercial Cultivation is proposed to be restricted to properties served by a public water agency.
33
Richmond PkwyParr Blvd
Market Ave
Fred Jackson WayChesley Ave Giant RdRumrill BlvdC
a
s
t
r
o
S
t
NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$
Map 13C
Buffer Option CMore Comprehensive BuffersNorth Richmond Area
µ
0 0.2 0.40.1 Miles
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the number of permits issued & the process to select permitees.
PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf Max 2 acres Only within ULL
Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL
Only within ULL
500 ft from aother retaillocation
Manufacturing
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Land Use Permit
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1)
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirements
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Testing
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Only within ULL
Retail Storefront
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation
City Limits
(w/ cultivation permit)
Only in green-houses in non-ag districts or if w/in 1 mile of ULL
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Artificial Light Mixed Light Natural Light
CULTIVATION
Other Potential Restrictions
Commercial Cultivation is proposed to be restricted to properties served by a public water agency.
Buffered area includes parcels located within 1,000 feet of a State site (school, child care facility, youth center) or additional sensitive site (community parks/playground, library, homeless shelter, or drug rehabilitation facility), and 500 feet of a residential zoning district.
Parcels within 500 feet of Residential Zoning
Parcels within 1,000 feet from a State Site or Sensitive Site
34
RICHMOND
§¨¦80
§¨¦80
23rd StGiant RdSa
n
P
a
b
l
o
A
v
e
Pi
n
o
l
e
V
a
l
l
e
y
R
d
V
a
l
l
e
y
V
i
e
w
R
dAppian WayBlume Dr
Rumrill Blvd
El Portal Dr San Pablo Dam R
d
Market Av
eGiant HwyCastro Ranc
h
R
dFitzgerald DrManor Rd
Brooksi
d
e
D
r San Pablo AveSa
n
P
a
b
l
o
D
a
m
R
dRichmond PkwyElSobrante
Rollingwood
SANPABLO
PINOLE
Contra CostaCollege (West)
HilltopMall
Rolling HillsMemorial Park
St JosephCemetery
PinolePark
Wildcat CanyonRegional Park
Sobrante RidgeRegional Preserve
Kennedy GroveRegional Recreation Area
NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$
Map9A Buffer Option AState-Mandated BuffersEl Sobrante Area Buffered area meets California location requirements which prohibit commercial cannabis located within a 600-foot radius of a K-12 school, day care center, or youth center that is in existence at the time the license is issued.
Other Potential Restrictions
Commercial Cultivation is proposed to be restricted to properties served by a public water agency.
Parcels within 600 feet of State Buffer Sites
CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Maximum 2 acres
Greenhouse only in non-ag districts or w/in 1-mile of ULL
Only within ULL
Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL
Only within ULL
500 ft from another retail location
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use PermitLand Use Permit
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Manufacturing
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees.
µ
City Limits
Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation
0 0.6 1.20.3 Miles
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirements
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Artificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Testing Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Retail StorefrontLand Use Permit(w/ Cultivation Permit)
35
RICHMOND
§¨¦80
§¨¦80
23rd StGiant RdSa
n
P
a
b
l
o
A
v
e
Pi
n
o
l
e
V
a
l
l
e
y
R
d
V
a
l
l
e
y
V
i
e
w
R
dAppian WayBlume Dr
Rumrill Blvd
El Portal Dr San Pablo Dam R
d
Market Av
eGiant HwyCastro Ranc
h
R
dFitzgerald DrManor Rd
Brooksi
d
e
D
r San Pablo AveSa
n
P
a
b
l
o
D
a
m
R
dRichmond PkwyElSobrante
Rollingwood
SANPABLO
PINOLE
Contra CostaCollege (West)
HilltopMall
Rolling HillsMemorial Park
St JosephCemetery
PinolePark
Wildcat CanyonRegional Park
Sobrante RidgeRegional Preserve
Kennedy GroveRegional Recreation Area
NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$
Map9B Buffer Option BExpanded State BuffersEl Sobrante Area Buffered area includes parcels within an expanded version California location requirements, prohibiting commercial cannabis located within a 1,000-foot radius of a K-12 school, day care center, youth center or drug rehab facility at the time the licensed is issued.
Parcels within Expanded State Buffer Other Potential Restrictions
Commercial Cultivation is proposed to be restricted to properties served by a public water agency.
CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Maximum 2 acres
Greenhouse only in non-ag districts or w/in 1-mile of ULL
Only within ULL
Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL
Only within ULL
500 ft from another retail location
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use PermitLand Use Permit
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Manufacturing
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees.
µ
City Limits
Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation
0 0.6 1.20.3 Miles
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirements
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Artificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Testing Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Retail StorefrontLand Use Permit(w/ Cultivation Permit)
36
RICHMOND
§¨¦80
§¨¦80
23rd StGiant RdSa
n
P
a
b
l
o
A
v
e
Pi
n
o
l
e
V
a
l
l
e
y
R
d
V
a
l
l
e
y
V
i
e
w
R
dAppian WayBlume Dr
Rumrill Blvd
El Portal Dr San Pablo Dam R
d
Market Av
eGiant HwyCastro Ranc
h
R
dFitzgerald DrManor Rd
Brooksi
d
e
D
r San Pablo AveSa
n
P
a
b
l
o
D
a
m
R
dRichmond PkwyElSobrante
Rollingwood
SANPABLO
PINOLE
Contra CostaCollege (West)
HilltopMall
Rolling HillsMemorial Park
St JosephCemetery
PinolePark
Wildcat CanyonRegional Park
Sobrante RidgeRegional Preserve
Kennedy GroveRegional Recreation Area
NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$
Map9C Buffer Option CMore Comprehensive BuffersEl Sobrante Area
CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Maximum 2 acres
Greenhouse only in non-ag districts
Only within ULL
Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL
Only within ULL
500 ft from another retail location
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use PermitLand Use Permit
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Manufacturing
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees.
µ
City Limits
Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation
0 0.6 1.20.3 Miles
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirements
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Artificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Testing Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Retail StorefrontLand Use Permit(w/ Cultivation Permit)
Other Potential Restrictions
Commercial Cultivation is proposed to be restricted to properties served by a public water agency.Buffered area includes parcels located within 1,000 feet of a State site (school, child care facility, youth center) or additional sensitive sites (community parks/playground, library, homeless shelter, or drug rehabilitation facility), and 500 feet of a residential zoning district.
Parcels within 500 feet of Residential ZoningParcels within 1,000 feet from a State Site or Sensitive Site
37
PortCosta
Rodeo
Crockett
HERCULES
Phillips 66Refinery
Philips 66Carbon Plant
C&H Pure CaneSugar Refinery
NorthshoreBusiness Park
Crockett HillsRegional Park
Carquinez StraitRegional Shoreline
San PabloBay
§¨¦80
ÄÅ4San Pablo AvePomona St
Parker AveWi
l
l
o
w
A
v
e
San Pablo AveNOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$
Map15A Buffer Option AState-Mandated BuffersRodeo, Crockett and Port Costa Areas Buffered area meets California location requirements which prohibit commercial cannabis located within a 600-foot radius of a K-12 school, day care center, or youth center that is in existence at the time the license is issued.
Other Potential Restrictions
Commercial Cultivation is proposed to be restricted to properties served by a public water agency.
Parcels within 600 feet of State Buffer Sites
CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Maximum 2 acres
Greenhouse only in non-ag districts or w/in 1-mile of ULL
Only within ULL
Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL
Only within ULL
500 ft from another retail location
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use PermitLand Use Permit
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Manufacturing
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees.
µ
City Limits
Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation
0 0.75 1.50.375 Miles
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirements
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Artificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Testing Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Retail StorefrontLand Use Permit(w/ Cultivation Permit)
38
PortCosta
Rodeo
Crockett
HERCULES
Phillips 66Refinery
Philips 66Carbon Plant
C&H Pure CaneSugar Refinery
NorthshoreBusiness Park
Crockett HillsRegional Park
Carquinez StraitRegional Shoreline
San PabloBay
§¨¦80
ÄÅ4San Pablo AvePomona St
Parker AveSan Pablo AveNOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$
Map15B Buffer Option BExpanded State BuffersRodeo, Crockett and Port Costa Areas Buffered area includes parcels within an expanded version California location requirements, prohibiting commercial cannabis located within a 1,000-foot radius of a K-12 school, day care center, youth center or drug rehab facility at the time the licensed is issued.
Parcels within Expanded State Buffer
CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Maximum 2 acres
Greenhouse only in non-ag districts
Only within ULL
Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL
Only within ULL
500 ft from another retail location
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use PermitLand Use Permit
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Manufacturing
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees.
µ
0 0.75 1.50.375 Miles
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirements
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Artificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Testing Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Retail StorefrontLand Use Permit(w/ Cultivation Permit)
City Limits
Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation
Other Potential Restrictions
Commercial Cultivation is proposed to be restricted to properties served by a public water agency.
39
PortCosta
Rodeo
Crockett
HERCULES
Phillips 66Refinery
Philips 66Carbon Plant
C&H Pure CaneSugar Refinery
NorthshoreBusiness Park
Crockett HillsRegional Park
Carquinez StraitRegional Shoreline
San PabloBay
§¨¦80
ÄÅ4San Pablo AvePomona St
Parker AveWi
l
l
o
w
A
v
e
San Pablo AveNOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$
Map15C Buffer Option CMore Comprehensive BuffersRodeo, Crockett and Port Costa Areas Buffered area includes parcels located within 1,000 feet of a State site (school, child care facility, youth center) or additional sensitive sites (community parks/playground, library, homeless shelter, or drug rehabilitation facility), and 500 feet of a residential zoning district.
Other Potential Restrictions
Commercial Cultivation is proposed to be restricted to properties served by a public water agency.
Parcels within 500 feet of Residential ZoningParcels within 1,000 feet from a State Site or Sensitive Site
CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Maximum 2 acres
Greenhouse only in non-ag districts or w/in 1-mile of ULL
Only within ULL
Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL
Only within ULL
500 ft from another retail location
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use PermitLand Use Permit
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Manufacturing
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees.
µ
City Limits
Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation
0 0.75 1.50.375 Miles
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirements
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Artificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Testing Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Retail StorefrontLand Use Permit(w/ Cultivation Permit)
40
Pacheco
Contra CostaTop Soil
BuchananField
AirportCenter
Central Contra Costa Sanitary DistrictWastewater Treatment Plant
Pleasant HillShopping Center
PachecoCemetery
Public WorksMaintenance Division
ConcordStation
Country SquareCenter
Animal ServicesMartinez Shelter
CaliforniaGrand Casino
California Highway Patrol
Waterbird WayFueling Station
CCCFPDFire Station # 9
PachecoCommunity Center
PachecoStation
DVCPlaza
PG&E ImhoffSubstation
CCCSD FacilityBuffer
Buchanan FieldsGolf Course
§¨¦680
P
a
c
h
e
c
o
B
l
v
d
Concord AveChilpancingo Pkwy
Di
a
m
o
n
d
B
l
v
d
NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$
µ
0 0.15 0.30.075 Miles
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the number of permits issued & the process to select permitees.
PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf Max 2 acres Only within ULL
Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL
Only within ULL
500 ft from aother retaillocation
Manufacturing
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Land Use Permit
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1)
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirements
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Testing
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Only within ULL
Retail Storefront
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation
City Limits
(w/ cultivation permit)
Only in green-houses in non-ag districts or if w/in 1 mile of ULL
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Artificial Light Mixed Light Natural Light
CULTIVATION
Map 14A
Buffer Option AState-Mandated BuffersPacheco Area
Buffered area meets California location requirements which prohibit commercial cannabis located within a 600-foot radius of a K-12 school, day care center, or youth center that is in existence at the time the license is issued.
Other Potential Restrictions
Commercial Cultivation is proposed to be restricted to properties served by a public water agency.
Parcels within 600 feet of State Buffer Sites
41
Pacheco
Contra CostaTop Soil
BuchananField
AirportCenter
Central Contra Costa Sanitary DistrictWastewater Treatment Plant
Pleasant HillShopping Center
PachecoCemetery
Public WorksMaintenance Division
ConcordStation
Country SquareCenter
Animal ServicesMartinez Shelter
CaliforniaGrand Casino
California Highway Patrol
Waterbird WayFueling Station
CCCFPDFire Station # 9
PachecoCommunity Center
PachecoStation
DVCPlaza
PG&E ImhoffSubstation
CCCSD FacilityBuffer
Buchanan FieldsGolf Course
§¨¦680
P
a
c
h
e
c
o
B
l
v
d
Concord AveChilpancingo Pkwy
Di
a
m
o
n
d
B
l
v
d
NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$
µ
0 0.15 0.30.075 Miles
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the number of permits issued & the process to select permitees.
PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf Max 2 acres Only within ULL
Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL
Only within ULL
500 ft from aother retaillocation
Manufacturing
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Land Use Permit
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1)
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirements
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Testing
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Only within ULL
Retail Storefront
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation
City Limits
(w/ cultivation permit)
Only in green-houses in non-ag districts or if w/in 1 mile of ULL
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Artificial Light Mixed Light Natural Light
CULTIVATION
Map 14B
Buffer Option BExpanded State BuffersPacheco Area
Buffered area includes parcels within an expanded version California location requirements, prohibiting commercial cannabis located within a 1,000-foot radius of a K-12 school, day care center, youth center or drug rehab facility at the time the licensed is issued.
Parcels within Expanded State Buffer Other Potential Restrictions
Commercial Cultivation is proposed to be restricted to properties served by a public water agency.
42
Pacheco
Contra CostaTop Soil
BuchananField
AirportCenter
Central Contra Costa Sanitary DistrictWastewater Treatment Plant
Pleasant HillShopping Center
PachecoCemetery
Public WorksMaintenance Division
ConcordStation
Country SquareCenter
Animal ServicesMartinez Shelter
CaliforniaGrand Casino
California Highway Patrol
Waterbird WayFueling Station
CCCFPDFire Station # 9
PachecoCommunity Center
PachecoStation
DVCPlaza
PG&E ImhoffSubstation
CCCSD FacilityBuffer
Buchanan FieldsGolf Course
§¨¦680
P
a
c
h
e
c
o
B
l
v
d
Concord AveChilpancingo Pkwy
Di
a
m
o
n
d
B
l
v
d
NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$
µ
0 0.15 0.30.075 Miles
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the number of permits issued & the process to select permitees.
PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf Max 2 acres Only within ULL
Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL
Only within ULL
500 ft from aother retaillocation
Manufacturing
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Land Use Permit
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1)
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirements
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Testing
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Only within ULL
Retail Storefront
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation
City Limits
(w/ cultivation permit)
Only in green-houses in non-ag districts or if w/in 1 mile of ULL
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Artificial Light Mixed Light Natural Light
CULTIVATION
Map 14C
Buffer Option CMore Comprehensive BuffersPacheco Area
Other Potential Restrictions
Commercial Cultivation is proposed to be restricted to properties served by a public water agency.
Buffered area includes parcels located within 1,000 feet of a State site (school, child care facility, youth center) or additional sensitive sites (community parks/playground, library, homeless shelter, or drug rehabilitation facility), and 500 feet of a residential zoning district.
Parcels within 500 feet of Residential Zoning
Parcels within 1,000 feet from a State Site or Sensitive Site
43
Contra CostaCentre
PG&EPipeline Facility
CountrywoodShopping Center
Seven HillsSchool
Crossroadsat Pleasant Hill
Palmer Schoolfor Boys and Girls
Pleasant Hill / Contra Costa CentreBART Station
Iron Horse Trail
Heather FarmPark
WaldenPark
Len HesterPark
§¨¦680
§¨¦680
B
a
n
c
r
o
f
t
R
d
Oak RdHookston Rd
Geary Rd
Oak Park Blvd
Treat BlvdN Main StOak RdNOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$
Map 7A
Buffer Option AState-Mandated BuffersContra Costa Centre Area
Buffered area meets California location requirements which prohibit commercial cannabis located within a 600-foot radius of a K-12 school, day care center, or youth center that is in existence at the time the license is issued.
µ
0 0.15 0.30.075 Miles
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the number of permits issued & the process to select permitees.
PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf Max 2 acres Only within ULL
Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL
Only within ULL
500 ft from aother retaillocation
Manufacturing
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Land Use Permit
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1)
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirements
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Testing
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Only within ULL
Retail Storefront
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation
City Limits
(w/ cultivation permit)
Only in green-houses in non-ag districts or if w/in 1 mile of ULL
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Artificial Light Mixed Light Natural Light
CULTIVATION
Other Potential Restrictions
Commercial Cultivation is proposed to be restricted to properties served by a public water agency.
Parcels within 600 feet of State Buffer Sites
44
Contra CostaCentre
PG&EPipeline Facility
CountrywoodShopping Center
Seven HillsSchool
Crossroadsat Pleasant Hill
Palmer Schoolfor Boys and Girls
Pleasant Hill / Contra Costa CentreBART Station
Iron Horse Trail
Heather FarmPark
WaldenPark
Len HesterPark
§¨¦680
§¨¦680
B
a
n
c
r
o
f
t
R
d
Oak RdHookston Rd
Geary Rd
Oak Park Blvd
Treat BlvdN Main StOak RdNOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$
Map 7B
Buffer Option BExpanded State BuffersContra Costa Centre Area
µ
0 0.15 0.30.075 Miles
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the number of permits issued & the process to select permitees.
PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf Max 2 acres Only within ULL
Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL
Only within ULL
500 ft from aother retaillocation
Manufacturing
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Land Use Permit
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1)
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirements
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Testing
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Only within ULL
Retail Storefront
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation
City Limits
(w/ cultivation permit)
Only in green-houses in non-ag districts or if w/in 1 mile of ULL
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Artificial Light Mixed Light Natural Light
CULTIVATION
Buffered area includes parcels within an expanded version California location requirements, prohibiting commercial cannabis located within a 1,000-foot radius of a K-12 school, day care center, youth center or drug rehab facility at the time the licensed is issued.
Parcels within Expanded State Buffer Other Potential Restrictions
Commercial Cultivation is proposed to be restricted to properties served by a public water agency.
45
Contra CostaCentre
PG&EPipeline Facility
CountrywoodShopping Center
Seven HillsSchool
Crossroadsat Pleasant Hill
Pleasant Hill / Contra Costa CentreBART Station
Iron Horse Trail
Heather FarmPark
WaldenPark
Len HesterPark
§¨¦680
§¨¦680
B
a
n
c
r
o
f
t
R
d
Oak RdHookston Rd
Geary Rd
Oak Park Blvd
Treat BlvdN Main StOak RdNOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$
Map 7C
Buffer Option CMost Comprehensive BuffersContra Costa Centre Area
µ
0 0.15 0.30.075 Miles
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the number of permits issued & the process to select permitees.
PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf Max 2 acres Only within ULL
Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL
Only within ULL
500 ft from aother retaillocation
Manufacturing
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Land Use Permit
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1)
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirements
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Testing
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Only within ULL
Retail Storefront
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation
City Limits
(w/ cultivation permit)
Only in green-houses in non-ag districts or if w/in 1 mile of ULL
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Artificial Light Mixed Light Natural Light
CULTIVATION
Buffered area includes parcels located within 1,000 feet of a State site (school, child care facility, youth center) or additional sensitive site (community parks/playground, library, homeless shelter, or drug rehabilitation facility), and 500 feet of a residential zoning district.
Other Potential Restrictions
Commercial Cultivation is proposed to be restricted to properties served by a public water agency.
Parcels within 500 feet of Residential Zoning
Parcels within 1,000 feet from a State Site or Sensitive Site
46
PITTSBURGÄÅ4
ÄÅ4 W Leland Rd
Willow Pass Rd
Bailey RdEvora RdW Leland
R
d
N Parkside Dr
BayPoint
Clyde
MallardReservoir
Military OceanTerminal Concord
PittsburgPower Plant
Allied/GeneralChemical
ChippsIsland
MallardIsland
Diablo CreekGolf Course
UnitedSportsmen
Delta ViewGolf Course
NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$
Map3A Buffer Option AState-Mandated BuffersBay Point and Clyde Areas Buffered area meets California location requirements which prohibit commercial cannabis located within a 600-foot radius of a K-12 school, day care center, or youth center that is in existence at the time the license is issued.
Other Potential Restrictions
Commercial Cultivation is proposed to be restricted to properties served by a public water agency.
CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Maximum 2 acres
Greenhouse only in non-ag districts or w/in 1-mile of ULL
Only within ULL
Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL
Only within ULL
500 ft from another retail location
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use PermitLand Use Permit
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Manufacturing
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees.
µ
City Limits
Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation
0 0.7 1.40.35 Miles
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirements
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Artificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Testing Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Retail StorefrontLand Use Permit(w/ Cultivation Permit)
Parcels within 600 feet of State Buffer Sites
47
PITTSBURGÄÅ4
ÄÅ4 W Leland Rd
Willow Pass Rd
Bailey RdEvora RdW Leland
R
d
N Parkside Dr
BayPoint
Clyde
MallardReservoir
Military OceanTerminal Concord
PittsburgPower Plant
Allied/GeneralChemical
ChippsIsland
MallardIsland
Diablo CreekGolf Course
UnitedSportsmen
Delta ViewGolf Course
NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$
Map3B Buffer Option BExpanded State BuffersBay Point and Clyde Areas Buffered area includes parcels within an expanded version California location requirements, prohibiting commercial cannabis located within a 1,000-foot radius of a K-12 school, day care center, youth center or drug rehab facility at the time the licensed is issued.
Parcels within Expanded State Buffer Other Potential Restrictions
Commercial Cultivation is proposed to be restricted to properties served by a public water agency.
CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Maximum 2 acres
Greenhouse only in non-ag districts or w/in 1-mile of ULL
Only within ULL
Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL
Only within ULL
500 ft from another retail location
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use PermitLand Use Permit
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Manufacturing
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees.
µ
City Limits
Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation
0 0.7 1.40.35 Miles
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirements
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Artificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Testing Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Retail StorefrontLand Use Permit(w/ Cultivation Permit)
48
PITTSBURGÄÅ4
ÄÅ4 W Leland Rd
Willow Pass Rd
Bailey RdEvora RdW Leland
R
d
N Parkside Dr
BayPoint
Clyde
MallardReservoir
Military OceanTerminal Concord
PittsburgPower Plant
Allied/GeneralChemical
ChippsIsland
MallardIsland
Diablo CreekGolf Course
UnitedSportsmen
Delta ViewGolf Course
NOTE: The information presented on this map is preliminary. It presents an estimate of which areas could be eligible to apply for a discretionary permit if the County were to change its regulations to allow commercial cannabis uses according to the criteria described in the map legend. In partiucular, sensitive site data is from multiple agencies. Individual project applications may vary.
The County currently prohibits all commercial cannabis uses!"$
Map3C Buffer Option CMore Comprehensive BuffersBay Point and Clyde Areas
CULTIVATION PROCESSING AND MOVEMENT SALES
Non-Ag Districts: Maximum 22,000 sf
Renewable Energy, if applicable, and served by a public water agency or clearly demonstrates sustainable water supply
Maximum 2 acres
Greenhouse only in non-ag districts
Only within ULL
Cultivators may distribute own product to retailers
Distribution Center
Potential limits on number of employees/trips outside ULL Only within ULL Only within ULL
Only within ULL
500 ft from another retail location
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use PermitLand Use Permit
Land Use Permit Land Use Permit Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Land Use Permit
Manufacturing
Map Created on 4/16/2018 by Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
* See Draft Framework for potential limitations on the number of permits issued and the process to select permitees.
µ
City Limits
Areas with Incompatible Zoning District or General Plan Land Use Designation
0 0.75 1.50.375 Miles
LEGENDZONING DISTRICT
Agricultural Zoning Districts (A- )
Area Wide Planned Unit Development (P-1), non-residential
Retail- Business (R-B)
General Commercial (C)
Controlled Manufacturing (C-M), Light Industrial (L-1), Heaving Industrial (H-I)
Potential Sustainability Requirements
Key Considerations and Limitations by Use
Artificial Light Natural LightMixed Light Testing Retail Delivery Only
Land Use Permit
Ag Districts: Max. 10,000 sf structure or in existing structure
Retail Storefront
Buffered area includes parcels within an expanded version California location requirements, prohibiting commercial cannabis located within a 1,000-foot radius of a K-12 school, day care center, youth center or drug rehab facility at the time the licensed is issued.
Parcels within Expanded State Buffer Other Potential Restrictions
Commercial Cultivation is proposed to be restricted to properties served by a public water agency.
49
RECOMMENDED CHANGES TO THE FRAMEWORK:-- OUTDOOR PERSONAL CULTIVATION (SIGNIFICANT CHANGE #6)Staff recommendation, based on staff’s general sense of the preponderance of opinion among the Municipal Advisory Councils:Continue the current restrictions on indoor cultivation for personal use and include new provisions to allow for limited outdoor cultivation for personal use. Outdoor Personal Use Cultivation- Suggestions on restrictions on outdoor cultivation for personal use that could be considered in lieu of outright prohibition include: 1) Not more than three marijuana plants are cultivated outdoors at one time (total indoor and outdoor may not exceed six).2) No part of the plants being cultivated is within ten feet of any property line.3) Plants must never exceed five feet in height.4) Plants must not be visible from streets or public areas.5) Plants must be inside a fenced area with locked gates50
RECOMMENDED CHANGES TO THE FRAMEWORK:-- RETAIL DELIVERY FROM OUTSIDE COUNTY (SIGNIFICANT CHANGE #7)The state may require that retail delivery businesses located outside of the unincorporated area of the County be able to make deliveries to customers within the unincorporated area without violating county regulations. To address this and provide clarity, staff recommends that such licensed business that are operating in compliance with state and local law and permits, be authorized to make deliveries in the unincorporated area of the County.51
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONA. ACCEPT staff's update on public outreach for the Cannabis Framework;B. APPROVE the Final Draft of the Framework for Regulating Cannabis in the Unincorporated Areas of the County; and C. DIRECT Department of Conservation and Development staff to prepare an ordinance based on the Final Draft of the Framework52
Exhibit C
Municipal/Town Advisory Council and Community Services District Comment Summary
MAC/TAC/CSD Framework Reaction Buffers
(What distance should cannabis uses be buffered
from sensitive and/or residential sites?)
Caps
(Should we include caps on the number of
permits? If so, how many? What uses should
caps be applied to?)
Outdoor Personal Grow
(Should it be allowed by right? Number of plants?
Other requirements?)
Alamo
The following safeguards be considered for inclusion in the
County’s cannabis regulations:
Consider limiting the sale of edible cannabis products
to those where dosing is a max. of 10mg THC/dose
and packaged as a single dose. Consumers would be
allowed to purchase up to the limit allowed in state law.
Prohibit sale of flavored leaf and bud.
Consistent with recent legislation in CO, consider
prohibiting the sale of edible products that mimic the
shape and appearance of animals, humans, or fruit,
including gummy bears.
Prohibit the sale of flavored e-juices.
Prohibit all self-service vending of all cannabis and
products which contain cannabis.
Recommend adherence to a County Land Use Process that is
discretionary and remain that way for all cannabis applications
within the unincorporated areas of the County.
Recommend ‘No Smoking’ of cannabis in all public venues
and to restrict the use of cannabis and smoking of cannabis in
multi -unit housing. Currently, the County has a second hand
smoke ordinance that bans the smoking of cannabis products
in the unincorporated areas of the County in all of the same
places as tobacco. This is to be strictly enforced.
Recommended that all delivery of nonmedical cannabis and
cannabis products in Alamo be prohibited.
Request that the DRAFT Ordinance Regulating Cannabis in
the Unincorporated Area of Contra Costa C ounty be
recirculated back before them prior to a decision being made
by the Board of Supervisors if at all possible.
600' residential/1000' sensitive sites
Restrict the number of permits
issued related to the
establishment of safe, orderly
and accessible cannabis
businesses
Regulations on the establishment of
indoor or outdoor personal cultivation
be limited to three (3) plants whether
indoor or outdoor with
20’ setback from all property line(s)
No plants are visible from either
public right-of-way or neighboring
adjacent parcel
Absolutely no front yard grows are to
be established anywhere on the
property.
Bay Point Make sure to include Schools and Parks, and Churches
should be included
should use the same buffers as are
used for the Tobacco Ordinance Yes Recommend 6 maximum
Bethel Island
Other issues brought up include sustainable water uses, use
of funds (in particular in relation to location of potential
commercial cannabis operations), and “small guy vs
outsider/corporate interest”
500ft with 1,000ft notification area
Yes
Motion to allow personal grows
PASSED.
Exhibit C
Municipal/Town Advisory Council and Community Services District Comment Summary
MAC/TAC/CSD Framework Reaction Buffers
(What distance should cannabis uses be buffered
from sensitive and/or residential sites?)
Caps
(Should we include caps on the number of
permits? If so, how many? What uses should
caps be applied to?)
Outdoor Personal Grow
(Should it be allowed by right? Number of plants?
Other requirements?)
Byron outdoor grows should be in an enclosed area and not visible
by neighbors or the road
1,000 feet for sensitive sites and 500
feet for residential
include caps with a review after 1
year
Motion for 6 indoor or outdoor plants
PASSED
Contra Costa
Centre Reasonable Should be consistent with the County
Tobacco Ordinance (1,000’)
Place limited caps in the
beginning and revisit after 3
years
Allow by right; 6 plants max; create
policies to discourage nuisance to
neighbors; grow as close to the
building as possible and secure
Crockett
Concerns about people coming from out of state to commit
robberies on businesses that have cannabis and worried
about the security of the community. Raised concerns about
testing laboratories or warehouses and crime.
Concerned about people driving high and more accidents
happening and if the County has done a study on the effects it
will have on other services like the hospital and sheriff.
If the tax measure passes, what would the money be spent
on‐would like to see it be spent on public safety and hospital
services.
Environmental impacts‐will these businesses still need to be
reviewed for their environmental impacts before they begin to
operate.
Buffer zones are ridiculous because
they don’t make a difference. Kids can
drive and still access drugs even with
buffer zones.
(see “Framework Reaction”) (see “Framework Reaction”)
Diablo
No objection to Framework.
Add a requirement that the local MAC be consulted before a
Cannabis Land Use Permit is issued in that District.
Agricultural zones in densely populated areas, like Diablo,
should not be allowed to cultivate/manufacture/distribute
cannabis commercially because of the narrow roads and
pedestrian traffic situation.
Manufacturing permits should be granted only where property
already has a commercial manufacturing permit or there is
ample space and low traffic to absorb the additional
buildings/traffic.
Consider eliminating delivery distribution for non-medical
marijuana.
Agree w/ County recommendation of
1,000' within sensitive site and 500'
within residential
Cap the number of cannabis
permits issued and caps should
apply to each commercial use.
Start with small number of
permits and after 1-3 years of
data adjust the number as
warranted. Look at other counties
for the permit ratios of retail
(small) to cultivation (largest) and
manufacturing (medium). E.g.,
Alameda County should have
good information on what is
working and what is not. Permits
should have reasonable
expiration date.
Agree w/ County examples (for no
other reason that we have no other
data to compare it with).
1) Not more than 3 plants at one
time;
2) Plants shall not be visible from
public ROW or adjacent parcel;
3) 5 foot setbacks from property line.
Exhibit C
Municipal/Town Advisory Council and Community Services District Comment Summary
MAC/TAC/CSD Framework Reaction Buffers
(What distance should cannabis uses be buffered
from sensitive and/or residential sites?)
Caps
(Should we include caps on the number of
permits? If so, how many? What uses should
caps be applied to?)
Outdoor Personal Grow
(Should it be allowed by right? Number of plants?
Other requirements?)
Discovery Bay
Well thought through.
Good to have one.
“Devil’s in the details”
Cultivation should be two miles from
Discovery Bay
In the beginning keep caps tight,
then release slowly as
circumstances warrant
Should be prohibited in Discovery
Bay
El Sobrante Discussion and questions about zoning, possibility of allowing
currently legal plants to grow outside, taxation of businesses,
distribution of taxes, etc.
(see “Framework Reaction”) (see “Framework Reaction”) (see “Framework Reaction”)
Kensington
No major “red flags,” no strong objections
A lot of Framework wouldn’t apply to Kensington
Discussion around regulating medical delivery; how is it
enforced across jurisdictional boundaries
(see “Framework Reaction”) (see “Framework Reaction”)
Discussion around whether it would
be appropriate to have combination
of regulated indoor and outdoor
personal grow; reached no
conclusion
Knightsen Concerns with enforcement, return to source taxation, theft
and smell
Approve proposed Framework
standards Yes; cap be 0 “zero”
Motion to approve current state
maximum of 6 plants outdoor
PASSED
North Richmond
Framework open-ended; did not get indication that research of
other communities with cannabis regulations was done. (MAC
discussed a number of topics and raised the issue of social
equity and return to source of taxes but no recommendations
on other aspects agreed upon. Numerous individual survey
responses received from participants.)
Yes Yes (see “Framework Reaction”)
Pacheco Well thought through. 1,000’ buffers for sensitive sites and
residential Yes Yes, with restrictions
Exhibit C
Municipal/Town Advisory Council and Community Services District Comment Summary
MAC/TAC/CSD Framework Reaction Buffers
(What distance should cannabis uses be buffered
from sensitive and/or residential sites?)
Caps
(Should we include caps on the number of
permits? If so, how many? What uses should
caps be applied to?)
Outdoor Personal Grow
(Should it be allowed by right? Number of plants?
Other requirements?)
Rodeo
They do not want to see any cannabis activities within Bayo
Vista Housing Project.
The Rodeo MAC wants to make sure that all day care facilities
are included, even the day care facilities that are within
residential homes.
Do not want to see any cannabis activities near the YMCA in
Rodeo.
Concerns about being too restrictive for these businesses to
thrive because it can bring in some revenue but at the same
time, they are concerned about the access for children.
Community concerns about potential thefts and burglaries
because the Sheriff’s Department is already spread too thin.
(see “Framework Reaction”) (see “Framework Reaction”) (see “Framework Reaction”)
Exhibit D
Contra Costa Health Service Department
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY ALCOHOL AND OTHER DRUGS ADVISORY BOARD MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, February 28, 2018
Diablo Valley College
321 Golf Club Road, Diablo Room, third floor of the HFS Building,
Pleasant Hill, CA, 94523
Anne Sutherland M.D. introduced Kristen Solseng and Jamar Stamps, staff from the Department
of Conservation and Development (DCD) who gave a presentation on the Proposed Framework
for Regulating Cannabis in the Unincorporated Area of Contra Costa County. A few key points
from the presentation were as follows:
In November 2016, California residents passed Proposition 64, the Adult Use of
Marijuana Act. In doing so it approved a dual permitting process in which businesses
need both a local approval and state approval in order to operate.
Contra Costa County Health Services is working on a separate Public Health Ordinance.
The Board of Supervisors are considering creating caps on the allowed number of
cannabis businesses within each supervisorial district, but before implementing them
they wanted to conduct public outreach.
The early estimate is that Contra Costa County could gain anywhere from $1million -
$10 million if a tax is put in place.
There is currently a tax mea sure being prepared for the 2018 ballot.
DCD is considering imposing either a 1,000 feet buffer from sensitive sites such as
schools, parks, playgrounds, homeless shelters, and Substance Use Disorder (SUD)
Treatment programs, and/or a 500 feet buffer from residential areas.
DCD is also looking at imposing a 500 feet buffer between cannabis businesses.
Following the presentation Anne Sutherland M.D. opened the floor for public comment on the
presentation. Public Comment was as follows:
Michael Collins wanted to know if it can anticipated that the Health Ordinance is
completed at the same time as the land use ordinance. He believes it is critical that the
two ordinances are implemented simultaneously.
Sam Yoshioka stated that Contra Costa County has a little over 1 million residents. He is
curious to know how many people live in unincorporated communities. Sam added that
there are counties that have similar demographics like Alameda and Sacramento and he
was interested to know what those counties are doing about recreational marijuana.
Denis e Haverty commented that she believes that setting a cap on cannabis businesses
is a great idea, and asked if there will be an application process.
Exhibit D
Contra Costa Health Service Department
Antwon Cloird asked where the money from the cannabis taxes will be going within
unincorporated Contra Cos ta County. Antwon indicated that Richmond will only allow
three (3) businesses resulting from concerns of oversaturation in the community. He
also said that people need to benefit from the businesses in their neighborhood.
Antwon asked that DCD look at the areas where they are planning to place businesses,
in order to determine how many patrons they can handle.
Kathryn reported that she is a parent of a student at Miramonte who suffers from an
addiction to marijuana. She said that some students have medic al marijuana cards and
are selling products to other students. She believes that if we bring in recreational
marijuana businesses, we are sending the message to our youth that “marijuana is
cool.” She believes that there needs to be strict regulations, spe cifically around mobile
cannabis deliveries which, she believes, is how youth are accessing marijuana currently.
Victor Lecha said that he wants to make sure there is a fair process for the
implementation of permits. He wanted to know how the county will determine who
applies for a permit. Mr. Lecha stated that he would prefer a Request for Proposals
(RFP) process.
A community member stated that in Richmond there is a dispensary within 100 feet of
Albany Hill Park and youth steal the marijuana once disposed. The same community
member was also concerned about how police will be able to tell when people are
under the influence of Cannabis.
Kennedy reported that Cannabis is not a gateway drug, it is the most commonly used
illicit substance. He stated that people can use Cannabis to wean themselves off of
prescription medications. He also stated that to keep Cannabis out of the hands of kids
we need to put good regulations in place. It is his belief that if the County bans
marijuana, it will increase the bl ack market operations.
Brian shared that his friends consume CBD oil and they consider it a miracle drug.
Personally he considers marijuana to be a gateway drug. He also recommended that
Contra Costa County should have a liaison who is knowledgeable on t his topic, so
regulations can be done right. Brian believes that 500 feet is too close, because that is
just across the street.
Guita Bahramipour said that she believes that the majority of Cannabis tax revenue goes
to the Police Department. She added that she would like to make sure funds go to
prevention and treatment services.
Discussion ensued about establishing a similar procedure for Marijuana licenses in
which the AOD Board provides input and recommendations in relationship to alcohol
licenses anytime a new alcohol license application is submitted to the Department of
Conservation and Development.
Exhibit D
Contra Costa Health Service Department
Peter wanted to know how businesses can be prevented within the city limits.
Tom Aswad said that buffer zones of 1,000 feet should be the minimum. He also stated
that in 1996 he took part in a study on adolescent treatment and saw how underserved
they are as a demographic. He believes that tax money should go to fund adolescent
treatment services.
Jaime Rich commented that youth are already inundated with marijuana messaging. She
also shared that at the Youth Town Hall attendees asked that cannabis businesses be at
least 5,000 feet away from youth sensitive areas. Jaime believes t hat we do not need
any more marijuana businesses. Most cities have banned everything so she is interested
to know why the County is looking at allowing businesses. Jaime also pointed out that
delivery should not be allowed and shared that Concord now allow s delivery, as a result
they are now experiencing people stealing from the vehicles.
A community member said that she believes that banning medical marijuana is a bad
idea because they see that it is already hurting the community. She stated that there ar e
people who count on marijuana as their medicine, who have not had access to it since
January 1st when the dual licensing structure went into effect.
Kathryn affirmed that opioids cannot be refilled for 30 days. She would like to have the
County regulate how much marijuana people can have in their possession at any time.
Patty Hoyt reported that she has been going to the Municipal Advisory Council Meetings
and City Council meetings within the San Ramon Valley and there has been a lot of
opposition to marijuana businesses. She believes that the 6 plants allowed to be grown
indoors are enough and that the county should not allow outdoor cultivation. She
expressed concern about how to prevent youth from accessing outdoor grows. Patty
also reported that she i s working to add marijuana to the Social Host Ordinance in
Danville and San Ramon and that she would like Contra Costa County to do the same.
Victor reported that it is good to talk about regulation in order to vacate the black
market. He is interested to learn how much of the funds from Colorado go to law
enforcement vs. treatment.
Fatima Matal Sol stated that the county has a Social Host Ordinance, but the problem is
that it is not being consistently enforced. She believes that we need to advocate for t he
enforcement of such Ordinance.
Greg, a representative from the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws
(NORML), stated that the evidence shows that marijuana is not a gateway drug. He
shared that NORML would like to see the overall negat ivity related to marijuana change.
He also pointed out that a 600 feet buffer is what NORML recommends.
Erin commented that the disease of addiction is personal, but it should not be what
drives the regulations. She believes that the tax money should go t owards funding
Exhibit D
Contra Costa Health Service Department
prevention services to teach students elementary age through college age about the
risks of Cannabis use and brain development.
Guita stated that youth are trying substances and that is where addiction starts. She
would like to focus the attention on preventing youth use.
Anne Sutherland M.D. stated that she believes we are a disease oriented society and not
prevention oriented. She believes that the best way to keep youth safe is to educate
them on the harms.
A community member was curious to know who will make the decision on where the
tax revenue will go.
One community member shared some statistics from the Journal of School and Health
declaring that cannabis is not a gateway drug. She shared that the National Institute on
Drug Abuse (NIDA) reported the majority of people who use marijuana do not go on to
use other substances. She also stated that it is important to look at where the data is
coming from to see if it is valid.
Talia Moore reported that she lives in El Sobrante and she does not want to see her
community as the part of the county where everyone travels to, in order to buy
marijuana. She also believes that there needs to be a serious conversation about where
the money from the tax dollars will go.
Ricardo Simenta l reported that he represents the Monument Corridor, in Concord,
where the community sees themselves as a “dumping ground.” The community feels
like marijuana can be destructive in the family, so the community would like to see
more education for youth and parents.
Page 1 of 11
Exhibit E
Contra Costa Health Service Department
Youth Town Hall
February 27, 2018
Food is very popular in the world and people are easily drawn to it across all ages. Therefor so that it
doesn’t affect the community, marijuana should not be allowed to be put into food. So I ask that you
don’t allow marijuana into food.
I think that people should stop making the gumm ies and they should stop putting marijuana because it
is bad for humans. Children cannot tell if the candy has drugs or not, and it can affect kids a lot. Food
with drugs is affecting people in the community and that is not good.
Around our neighborhood some people smoke marijuana. Because of this , children around my
neighborhood are affected by the bad odor it produces. So, I believe marijuana shops should be at least
5000 ft. away from schools.
Around our neighborhood some people smoke something that smells very bad and there are kids in this
neighborhood including my 8 month old brother. This is why there should not be allowed marijuana
shops close to schools.
Gummy bears with marijuana shouldn’t really be produced anymore because children can’t tell the
difference between the ones with weed. Therefore, I believe edibles that are produce d in the form that
are appealing to children shouldn’t be allowed to have marijuana put in them.
Gummy bears should not have marijuana put in them it’s hard for kids our age to tell the difference
between normal gummy bears and marijuana gummy bea rs. Therefore I think marijuana should not be
allowed to be put in edibles.
Gummy bears, what are they you ask? Well they are bad for humans and kids. I think you should not sell
gummy bears because of the weed.
The experience I have had with cannabis is that many student s buy & sell illegally. It seems very
accessible to students. It is already so easy for young adults to get it.
Question: How much are they selling? What are the doses? If they set up the stores, is there going to
be security? Will it be regulated?
Marijuana should not be within 5000 ft . of kids K-12 because if you are an adult and you want to make
those choices to smoke that’s on you , but it isn’t fair to kids that have no choice but to be exposed to it.
Faciliti es that will produce marijuana should be at least 300 feet away from school, neighborhoods,
city’s, etc.
The facilities should have maximum security in case of someone breaking in.
Page 2 of 11
Exhibit E
Contra Costa Health Service Department
Marijuana should not be produced in the form of edibles that kids might mis take them for candy.
If someone was given permission to grow the drug in their house, they should have a license or pape r
signed by all members of the B oard of Supervisors.
Cannabis can mess you up and also my football teammates would smoke it. My friends have overdosed
on it and nearly died. It makes me sad when I see this and I think that it should be within 5000 ft. radius.
I do believe we can do something about this. It even makes consequences higher for the teens doing
this. It is horrible how kids are getting more hooked and hooked every year. My school smokes a lot
and around my neighborhood it is a normal thing for people to do. They are getting hooked and it hurts
to see this.
For the eligible locations for example agricultural will the farmers around there want to farm near
marijuana that is being farmed?
Comments: I have a friend that smokes weed and he said it calms himself down.
Also a family member of mine smokes weed too and she said that it helps her with her surgery
aftermath. (Like it relaxes her)
So, I think it should be legal but I think it shouldn’t because it still kills your lungs.
Hello, my name is William Latimer and I am a strong advocate for strict cannabis restrictions in Contra
Costa County. I believe that marijuana sage should be limited to medical needs. Although the sale of
weed can put back money into the economy, it presents little benefit to those that consume it. I’ve seen
the effects that this addictive drug can have on young influential people that are the same age of me.
They have been able to obtain marijuana in way too easy of a fashion. I an effort to spare time, I’ll
present my thoughts on cannabis in a straight forward manner. As of now, the proposed areas of
legalized weed growth are restricted to 500-1000 ft. within youth sensitive areas. I believe that this is
much too close to very influential individuals. I hope to see these spot s for the growth of legalized
cannabis moved to at the very least 4,000 ft. I ask you to consider substantially raising the am ount of
feet that legalized weed growth are required to be from youth sensitive areas. I thank you for your time
and hope you co nsider my feedback.
It is bad how kid are outside playing and adults come outside to smoke , cannabis, weed, and cigarettes
and kids have to smell it.
I think that the people that sell Ice Cream, they should not be selling cannabis in the Ice Crea m truck
(a thought)
I think that use of cannabis should be limited to agricultural and medicinal use because if allowed to be
sold commercially in retail stores and grown for personal use, there could be a n increase in crime from
teen and adults alike who try to break in to steal cannabis.
Page 3 of 11
Exhibit E
Contra Costa Health Service Department
After how many years would one’s cannabis permit expire? (could possibly coincide w/ population
growth and proximity changes b/w commercial sites and schools, residential areas, libraries etc.)
Question: Can cannabis make your lungs black and your teeth and gums black too?
Statement: More recently, I have had many encounters with drugs, more than last year. Whether that’s
others around me smoking, or being offered it. And I’ve found that it takes one person. One person
who has it in their possession, and they share it with the group . Smoking and vaping are more evident
now than ever before, and it’s only going to increase. Especially if it’s within reach. That’s why I request
that marijuana not be sold within 5 miles of any family -oriented locations. Thank you.
Marijuana is used to relieve your stress and who does not want to be stressful. Marijuana is addictive,
although almost half of all Contra Costa youth do not believe marijuana is addictive, but in fact
minorities that was arrested for marijuana increased after legislation in Colorado, both young and adult.
The accessibility to get marijuana is easy. 500 foot is not that far. Pe ople are able to walk there and use
it somewhere else. Students can get it from their parents or other people. It is hard in semester 2 in
school, but using marijuana will lower your brain function (motivation, learning, attention, and etc.).
Between 2013 and 2015 in CA, youth using marijuana within the past 30 days increased with grade level;
22% of eleventh grade students surveyed reporting past 30 day use. Parents too are able to make
mistake. One incident where parent gave an alcopop (soda contain alcohol) to the kid and did not know
that I was an alcopop. Now another incident where parent give gummy bear that contained marijuana
to the kid. It is the same thing with diff erent substances. Young people are able to access it in early age
and once it gets addictive, it will be hard for them to stop (gaming addictive). It is only 1000 foot away
from schools, community parks, libraries, and etc. It is like 3 football fields and it does not take a long
time to get 1000 foot away from school. From De Anza, my high school , I can walk for 17 minutes and
get to a tobacco retailer and by law it should be 1000 foot away from school . It should be more than
2,000 foot away from sensitive area and 1000 foot away from another retail er.
- Perhaps we can make time limit of when you can smoke marijuana, like people are not allowed
to smoke at afternoon when students go to home.
●If a minor is caught with cannabis, will an adult get punished for it? There could be some sort of “letter
of intent” signed by the adul t that states that they will not give the cannabis to any minors.
●Will there be a cap on the THC level is on cannabis?
There should be a limit to how many retail stores are allow ed in. Also that they are more spread out in
areas, then focusing in one certain areas. Like should at least be 2,000 or more feet away from schools
and same for neighborhoods.
Another thing we need to check is what kind of products that the marijuana are selling. For example if
they’re selling fake weed or they’re mixed with tobacco. And for candy that are infused with weed
Page 4 of 11
Exhibit E
Contra Costa Health Service Department
maybe they should look a little more different like making them look like popular everyday snack they
should look like bootleg version of them so it’s easier to tell the differences.
Another thing that we need to consider is what neighborhoods we are putting the dispensary in. Like
North Richmond, that has high crimes rates and then we decide to put dispensaries there. It doesn’t
really make sense. So the locations of these stores are very important to consider.
Good evening. My name is Sania and I go to Pinole middle school. I am here to talk about Marijuana
Dispensary locations. I believe that we should not put them near schools grounds because young people
will see them and become curio us. This will make them want to test it out. It has been proven that the
more youth has access to marijuana it increases how often and how much they will use it. So, we ask
you to please have youth in mind when you are making these decisions. 1,000 fee t away from schools.
─Buffer zones: 500 feet is not enough, bare minimum of distance should be at least a bare minimum
distance of 3 blocks from residential areas, 2,000 feet distance from a youth sensitive area (influence on
kids/gummy bear story)
─Stricter policies on who can buy CBD and THC infused edibles and where they are sold
─Stricter and vetting processes on dis pensaries (stop sales of synthetic and fake marijuana)
─Dispensary and “plantation” limits (maximum of 5)
─Private growth of recreational use and illegal distribution
Protocol for Minors caught with cannabis (non -medical)
I believe that consequences for those who are underage. Who are caught with marijuana should be
worse. Instead of merely citing them, officers should arrest them and impose a fine on them. This will
greatly discourage youth from using /transporting/growing/ etc. marijuana. Although this will probably
be combated by having minors find new ways to have cannabis, this new policy will make it severely
harder for minors and cannabis usage. The less that use a harmful drugs the better.
Buffer Zone
I believe that the feet that the current buffer zone requires should be increased from 1,000 to at least
3,000. Science and studies have proven the various negative effects of cannabis on the human body
both physically and mentally. The l onger the buffer zone is from youth sensitive and residential areas
the better.
Regulating cannabis in the unincorporated area of Contra Costa County to me is a great plan because
when I walk by the park people are openly smoking marijuana. This ma ke me feel unsafe. I would feel
safer if they were 1,000 fee t away.
Page 5 of 11
Exhibit E
Contra Costa Health Service Department
Marijuana Speak Up
When I was younger during lunch a girl came up to me and asked me if I wanted a gummy and
to me I didn’t look like a normal gummy bear so I asked her what was in it and she said that their
was marijuana in it and luckily my mom always told me to never eat something that doesn’t look
normal. So my question is how exactly did a middle schooler get marijuana when she is not of
age to even vote? Did her relatives gi ve it to her? Did her friends give it to her?
Almost half of all Contra Costa youth surveyed do not believe that marijuana is addictive while 1
in 6 teens who use marijuana will become addicted
I also want to mention that “Neighborhoods with a high densit y of liquor stores have been
shown to experience higher rates of alcohol -related hospitalizations, drunk driving accidents,
pedestrian injuries, childhood accidents, assaults, child abuse injuries, crime and violence”
I am happy that I came;
1. Why is marijuana even allowed in the community?
2. Can marijuana kill you?
3. Can it affect your lungs really badly?
Question
●Can weed be made in to a drink?
What protocol is under place if a minor is caught abusing/possessing marijuana?
If you take away cannabis clubs, kids will still get it. But it’s dangerous because they can get laced.
Should allow testing. Should let store sell
Don’t restrict where to smoke
While marijuana accessibility is a commonly debated topic, research from the Cali fornia Healthy Kids
Survey depicts that in the past thirty days usage of marijuana increased 22% of in eleventh grade
students. Moreover, in 2014-2015, a school in Colorado reported that abusing Drugs accounted for 41%
of all expulsions, 31% of all law enforcement referrals, and 6% of all suspensions. As the health
consequences of marijuana increase through research the California department of public health
released research indicated that marijuana has THC levels of 30% and that it has doubled since the
1990’s.
Not only can marijuana affect individuals during consumption but literatu re has shown that it can
disrupt brain functions crucial to motivation, memory, learning, judgement, and behavioral control.
Through the research that has been performed it is clear and prevalent that marijuana catalyzes youth
development problems, and in creases poor performance in school.
Page 6 of 11
Exhibit E
Contra Costa Health Service Department
Questions
1) Will stores be able to sell cannabis to people with medical permission?
2) Will you propose a limit on how many dispensing or stores to the cities?
3) The buffer should be extended to 1,000 or 2,000.
4) Would the deliveries be for medical use or for personal?
5) If deliveries are made, should the person show their medical cannabis car d? Verify
● Commercial cannabis use is prohibited including storage, cultivation & distribution
● Cannabis has many use:
─ Oils
─ Medicine
─ Etc.
● Discussion of self -regulation
Questions
1) Are you going to put a cap of potency of cannabis?
2) Concerns about outside farms. How’s the security?
3) If cannabis is grown for personal use, can they sell?
4) Will stores be able to sell cannabis products such as oils, lotion, or edibles?
Page 7 of 11
Exhibit E
Contra Costa Health Service Department
Responses to Cannabis Regulation Surveys (Actual Surveys Attached) (1)
1. What is your overall reaction to the County’s Preliminary Cannabis Framework?
Neutral
2. If permitted, which buffer distance from sensitive uses such as schools and parks do you think is
appropriate for commercial cannabis uses?
2,000 feet
3. If permitted, should a buffer be required between residential uses and commercial cannab is uses
such as retailing, manufacturing, distributing or testing?
Other: 2,000 feet
4. If permitted, should the County place a cap on the number of commercial cannabis uses such as
retailers, manufacturers, cultivators, etc.?
Yes
5. Should outdoor cultivation for personal use be allowed? (6 plant maximum per State law)
No
Page 8 of 11
Exhibit E
Contra Costa Health Service Department
Cannabis Regulation Survey (2)
1. What is your overall reaction to the County’s Preliminary Cannabis Framework?
Somewhat Agree
Comments: Certain aspects are very vague; words such as “could” = more discussion necessary
2. If permitted, which buffer distance from sensitive uses such as schools and parks do you think is
appropriate for commercial cannabis uses?
1,000 feet
3. If permitted, should a buffer be requir ed between residential uses and commercial cannabis uses
such as retailing, manufacturing, distributing or testing?
Yes 1,000 feet
4. If permitted, should the County place a cap on the number of commercial cannabis uses such as
retailers, manufacturers, cultivators, etc.?
Yes
5. Should outdoor cultivation for personal use be allowed? (6 plant maximum per State law)
Other Lots of grey space, how would personal use be regulated? Can’t simply
rely on testimony from neighbors. Permit expiration: I left another comment suggesting that permit
expiration could coincide with significant population growth and residential development in proximity to
commercial cannabis sites (i.e. 5 years!)
Page 9 of 11
Exhibit E
Contra Costa Health Service Department
Cannabis Regulation Survey (3)
1. What is your overall reaction to the County’s Preliminary Cannabis Framework?
Neutral The packet doesn’t really speak specific information.
2. If permitted, which buffer distance from sensitive uses such as schools and parks do you think is
appropriate for commercial cannabis uses?
1,500+ feet
3. If permitted, should a buffer be required between residential uses and commercial cannabis uses
such as retailing, manufacturing, distributing or testing?
Yes 1,000 feet
4. If permitted, should the County place a cap on the number of commercial cannabis uses such as
retailers, manufacturers, cultivators, etc.?
Yes
5. Should outdoor cultivation for personal use be allowed? (6 plant maximum per State law)
Yes I think that people should be allowed to have their own plants,
but it should be LESS than 6.
Additional Comments: I think that there should also be a limit on the THC amount in cannabis. This can
prevent over dose and things like that.
Page 10 of 11
Exhibit E
Contra Costa Health Service Department
Cannabis Regulation Survey (4)
1. What is your overall reactio n to the County’s Preliminary Cannabis Framework?
Neutral The outline of the county’s preliminary cannabis is in detail but
much comments are much vague and do not have a specific number/amount of detail to support the
comment.
2. If permitted, which buffer distance from sensitive uses such as schools and parks do you think is
appropriate for commercial cannabis uses?
1,000 feet
3. If permitted, should a buffer be required between residential uses and commercial cannabis uses
such as retailing, manufacturing, distributing or testing?
1,000 feet
4. If permitted, should the County place a cap on the number of commercial cannabis uses such as
retailers, manufacturers, cultivators, etc.?
Yes
5. Should outdoor cultivation for personal use be allowed? (6 plant maximum per State law)
No, outdoor cultivation should not be allowed for personal use at all. Only greenhouse plants
and specific outdoor places should be permitted.
Additional Comments: The enforcement of marijuana in public schools should be h eavily regulated
through certain rules that allow administration to interfere.
Page 11 of 11
Exhibit E
Contra Costa Health Service Department
Exhibit F
Contra Costa Health Service Department
Contra Costa Council on Homelessness
Draft Meeting Minutes Excerpt: Framework for Regulating Cannabis in the Unincorporated Area
of Contra Costa County
I. Cannabis Regulation Presentation (Ruben Hernandez)
A. 2016 - Prop 64 to allow the commercial cultivation and use of cannabis
B. November 2017 - BOS voted to prohibit to commercial cannabis uses
1. Summer 2017 looking to establish regulations around commercial uses
C. Zoning Districts - different districts represented by different colors
1. Green - Agricultural Zoning - looking to allow cultivation; also looking to
allow some manufacturing in those districts
2. Planned Unit (P-1) - have all different types of uses. Thinking of allowing
all different uses.
3. Retail - not a lot available after applying buffets.
4. General - allow sales and manufacturing
5. Industrial - thinking of allowing most everything
D. To sum it up, cannabis will be regulated like alcohol, so every gram or ounce will
tracked and regulated (ideally)
E. Identifying sensitive sites and then buffering those sensitiv e sites. Would like to
keep sites free from cannabis - this being promoted at state level
1. Include: Schools, homeless shelters, others
2. Buffers of 1,000 feet of a sensitive site.
3. Also thinking of having a 500 ft buffer in residential site (state does not
ha ve residential buffer)
F. Also working with health dept to come up with some health standards.
G. Being considered because of taxes
1. Local jurisdictions can tax. State is also collecting money and grant money
will be available only to the jurisdictions that all ow sale/cultivation of
cannabis.
H. Ballot in November - will ask voters if they would like to approve a cannabis tax
(not sure about amount). If that measure passes then the ordinance goes
through. But if it fails the ordinances will go away. The BOS has in dicated they
don’t want anything to do with it if there won’t be revenue attached.
1. Cannabis tax will only be for unincorporated areas of Contra Costa
County.
I. Going to about 27 community groups throughout the county. Will go to BOS on
April 24 to provide update on the outreach.
1. Shortly after (May) go to County Planning with Draft Ordinance, then go
to BOS in June/July with Ordinance to be ready in November.
Exhibit F
Contra Costa Health Service Department
J. Community Input
1. Can go to County’s website to fill out a survey:
www.cccounty.us/cannabis . Can also sign up to get
2. Q: How much are permits and how much will the county make?
a) Haven’t discussed cost. A lot of jurisdictions are 3 -7% but a lot of
jurisdictions lowering
3. Q: Do you have a sense of where the tax would go?
a) It will be general fund
b) State money will go toward law enforcement, prevent youth drug
use but county will be for anything.
4. Q: Are there buffers for alcohol? Do those mirror what you present for
cannabis?
a) There is a buffer for tobacco but not for alcohol.
5. Q: You identified that homeless shelters are a sensitive sites, how many
homeless shelters are in unincorporated areas?
a) Jaime - There are some but I don’t know if there are any county
ones.
6. Q: Does the buffer only apply up to incorporated area?
a) Buffer will stop at jurisdictions lines
b) Most jurisdictions adopting buffers but sensitive sites varies
7. Q: I’m curious about the caps and the inclusion of caps when you don’t
know what the flow will be?
a) Alameda adopted cap of 5 or 6 commercial cultivation and 5 retail
sites for unincorporated for Alameda.
b) Main reason is that we don’t want a proliferation of 4 retail sites
in a row. Might reassess.
c) We are definitely evaluating and doing outreach to see how the
community feels.
8. Q: Is the Board considering any language around earmarking tax funds for
specific purposes?
a) This is coming up more and more. BOS is telling this will be
general fund so it’s s imple majority; if specific use tax it needs ⅔
approval.
b) Patrice - My concern is that the County is jumping the gun. Really
consider having a fine balance and don’t be so quick to place
limitations. Balance with the revenue source that this can be to
support programs.
Exhibit F
Contra Costa Health Service Department
c) Alejandra - Take opposite approach and be more conservative.
What have communities been saying?
(1) Bay Point community was concerned about it. But you
have some more interested than others.
(2) South County have lots of opposition but OK with outdoor
personal cultivation. Pacheco seemed to be OK with it.
North Richmond hesitant but if there’s money wants it to
come back to them.
d) In Unincorporated CCC, 63% voted in favor of Prop 64.
9. Q: Doing any equity analysis around who is getting permits? Looking at
disparities and inequities in who might be prohibited.
a) Got this comment in North Richmond, so starting to look at it.
b) Oakland and SF did reports on these, you should look at these.
10. Q: What is the the prioritization of local residents vs outside residents in
the permitting cap process? Are you looking at prioritizing businesses in
this county?
a) We haven’t started to analyze this yet.
b) John B. - Missing opportunity to not have specialized funding;
hesita nt to make this a general fund tax. Don’t runaway from this.
Exhibit G: Public Survey Comment Log
Framework Reaction
1b. Comments about your reaction answer
Note: There were two IP addresses that answered just the first question 14 or 15 times – these responses are separated for context
1. dubious economic value; 2. unproven formula with huge uncertainty and downside risk; 3. Orinda can afford to wait till a winning formula
emerging instead of become early guinea pig to try it out
1.its harmful to children.2.drug dealer, cartels may get involved.
Disagree Completely
172
61%Disagree Completely
-Repeat IP
29
10%
Somewhat Disagree
16
6%
Neutral
16
6%
Somewhat Agree
16
6%
Fully Agree
16
6%
Blank or Mixed Response
15
5%
Exhibit G: Public Survey Comment Log
1000' buffer is a mistake
Absolutely NO.
As a former smoker (1954-1985), I have seen and experienced the long -term results of mood-altering inhalants. These include nicotine
delivered through cigarettes, cigars and pipes as vehicles. From the late 1950s to date, scientists have worked to document t he negative
results of tobacco use. Albeit slowly we have made not able steps away from ingesting smoke of any kind into our lungs, at least here in the
US. Part of the process is education but also in the development local regulations about where tobacco may be used. Having m ade this
'progress', why would we offer regul ations/ordinances permitting the farming and distribution of that very toxin we have tried to lead our
children away from? Ask yourself, "Is it because I want more money in the County coffers at the expense of the health of our residents?"
Don't let the "PROFIT AT THE EXPENSE OF HEALTH" lead us to an early and painful death.
Based on our limited resources, Cannabis should not be allowed in Contra Costa County anywhere other than is legally required .
Be careful cannabis to your living environment
Because commercial cannabis cultivation can improve economic development, increase residents' welfare and improve the living standard of
residents. Can have medical effects, pain relief, fight cancer.
Bethel Island is a small community which already is fighting drug use and homelessness. The new framework would allow cultivation on
nearly all of the island.
Cannabis business can help bring a lot of income tax, and will increase a lot of employment! Cannabis also has a lot of use i n medical, can help
cancer patient reduce pain!
Cannabis cultivation is conducive to the development of economy, increase employment opportunities, increase income tax, cann abis also
medical use, analgesia, fight against cancer.
Complete prohibition
Concerns about crime, addiction, and adolescent safety can be more than adequately addressed with research provided by the many peer -
reviewed studies that are available. Bans and other restrictions fuel a dangerous black market and hurt the people who are b eing helped by
cannabis.
Contra Costa county should embrace all cannabis avenues.
Contra County residents voted---overwhelming---for access to cannabis. The current bans effectively eliminate local access and suppress the
will of the voters.
Create a lot of employment, and income tax, and medical use!
do not want commercial cannabis in my neighborhood
Dont like indoor grows. Too many fires
Don't like legal cannabis
Don't want cannabis in the area. It brings crime and fights.
Grow areas are too large and too close to residential areas
Growing cannibis will destroy your living environment
I agree there needs to be some regulated buffer distances for schools, parks etc.
I am a 64-year old female who wants access to and might like to cultivate my own personal use mari juana. I voted for legalization. I would
defer to what seems to be working in other states.
Exhibit G: Public Survey Comment Log
I am a cancer patient and it is VERY inconvenient for me to have to drive into Berkeley to be able to go to a dispensary to g et the medical
marijuana that I use and that help me with pain.
I am against any commercial cultivation of cannabis whether in the towns and cities or in unincorporated areas. Whatever tax bump we
receive will need to be spent on the increased ills weed brings (more pot related ER visits, i ncreased drug related crime and homelessness,
gangs and cartels). One need only look at Oregon to get a good idea of the unintended consequences. See this article:http://f ortune.com/pot-
marijuana-colorado/
I am against to any cannabis activities
I am as open to new regulation but I still have more questions than answers. For example, could you open a commercial kitchen for edi bles
but also be a vitamin store? Joint business ventures often do better commercially since one acts like a crutch for the other during slow times
of the year.
I am deeply concerned and don’t see the benefit of this to Lamorinda residents. With Colorado as an example, a lot of things went wrong.
These were called unexpected, but leading supporters of marijuana cultivation and manuf acturing in incorporated area changing their mind.
Such experience should be seriously considered. The potential but immaterial Benefit should not be the focus. At least, we sh ould not rush
into a decision. Instead, observe how it goes in the neighboring communities in the Bay Area first, and learn from their experience. Bottom
line, I don’t see how it could be justified that we have to become the first batch of guinea pigs when we don ’t know where we are heading for.
I am mostly interested in personal cultivation so most of the commercial regulations are of no importance to me.
I am not familiar with the existing framework.
I can think of no reason to permit any cannibis sales in Contra Costa County. My experience (33 years) in the Navy and in th e private sector
(30 years) have demonstrated nothing but bad results can come, especially for long people and skilled workers. results from r ecreational use
of cannibis
I don't agree with the county limiting the number of growing areas. Anyone who gets pr oper permit should be allowed to grow and let the
market determine the demand.
I don't want my kids to close then addict to drugs!
I don't want the stuff anywhere near me. It is already becoming a problem. People think because it's legal they can smoke it where ever and
when ever they want, even next door. The smell is nauseous to me and triggers my Asthma.
I feel our county's agriculture resources; land, water, compost, and sunlight should be used to produce food, to create a sus tainable county.
All owing cannabis farming on productive food ag. land, when will still have hunger issues and water shorages, is irresponsible.
I felt that the proposed buffers were too restrictive to development.
I have serious concerns over allowing marijuana cultivation and manufacturing in unincorporated areas around Lamorinda. The decision
should be centered by community rather than being politically correct or pursuing uncertain fees. The possible undesirable im pact on the
community, including but not limited to safe ty, education, house value, both short term and long term, should be carefully considered.
Experience from other communities, e.g., lessons learned from Colorado (http://fortune.com/pot -marijuana-colorado/) should be considered.
We could have the excuse of not knowing the consequence, but we cannot use the same excuse of "unexpected" effect since these already
happened elsewhere following similar initiatives.
Before a careful and detailed plan is provided to address similar issues, the framework is not rea dy.
I oppose any commercial cannabis business in unincorporated contra costa county areas
Exhibit G: Public Survey Comment Log
I oppose any use of unincorporated county area for cannabis purposes.
I oppose commercial marijuana activities in CCC.
I support complete ban of commercial cannabis activities in contra costa county.
I think the county should compliment the state regulations concerning cannabis businesses. Zoning seems sparse for retailers; especially
considering nonstorefront retail. Zoning should be different for storefron t vs considering retailers. The buffer for residential seems excessive. I
think that should be removed altogether.
I would like to comment that county on a solid proposal.
I would like to see strict measure to ensure non medical usage is completely bann ed. Harvesting in the county is exposing grave danger to
children and young people, not to mention possible crimes and damages related to that. Safe environment is important to ever yone,
especially family and children, which is the main driving force of t he prosperity of the county.
I’m a cannabis user
If allowed commercial users, we'd not have qualified soldiers to protect our country...... Total disaster!
Improve the economy and increase welfare. Pain relief, fight cancer.
In my experience, marij uana users are much calmer, quieter and less a bother than people who drink alcohol and are loud, boisterous and
sometimes violent. Some I have spoken with seem to believe that marijuana is a gateway drug to the addictive and dangerous d rugs that
present serious problems. I think our household medicine cabinets and household alcohol cabinets are often much more a gateway to th ese
problems. I think this should be taken into consideration and that marijuana sales should be treated similar to alcohol sale s.
It can bring a lot of tax, and also bring a lot of employment to us, and help patient treatment!
It harms environment, increases crimes, and not good example setting for kids.
It help develop the economy, also help a lot of patient!
It is bad for the teenagers.
It is kind of murder of ourselves
It is much better to regulate cannabis, than let the black market control it. Plus setting the age to 21is much better, as c annabis when used
recreationally by minors is very damaging to them. so I fully support.
It is pretty open ended and I did not get an understanding that there was research done across the nation of other communitie s grappling
with this. Would have found more value in the framework if clear pin pointed solutions from other communities would have been identified.
It is shocking to know that Walnut Creek is considering making it legal.
It is still a controversial plant. It is not suitable in the populated neighborhood area.
It is still illegal federally, so it cann ot be legalized in the state
It should not be in populated residential area.
it will bring gangs, make kids easier access of cannabis. the cost of regulation, law enforcement will also increase.
It will bring in illegal transaction/activities in the co mmunity, promote the marijuana use to our kids, affect the environment, increase the
drought problem, damage the soil. No benefit at all.
It will destroy our community completely by poising our kids.
It would cause a lot of problems.
It’s going to cause lots problems for teenage health if they can get it easily.
Exhibit G: Public Survey Comment Log
Items about controlling the number of stores is not useful. Stores will come and go based on quality, cost, and service. Same with land use.
There may be an initial rush but people will sti ll grow walnuts. It is now a legal substance similar to alcohol. Should be sold at DB Safeway.
Safeguards look reasonable, IMHO.
It's been legalized; why prevent your constituents from receiving the tax money they voted that they wanted? It will only hel p to improve the
community and get rid of black market transactions
It's harmful to everybody in public uses of the cannabis.
It's ok for people who need it for medical use under doctor's prescription. If now we plan to open to public, do we think abo ut people who will
mis-use, and combine with alcohol, gun, by the end, it will create more complicate situation between neighbors, and also make mor e difficult
situations for police officers to handle it under law enforcement.
It's premature to discuss commercial cannabis without better understanding the impact from the recently legalized recreational use.
Just because the prop is passed doesn ’t mean it’s a good idea to grow it in our backyard.
Just do a math. The benefit from planting and trading marijuana will be way much than the unbelievable costs May way beyond we could
imaged that would be inevitable adding to our communities and families.Think about how easily it may poison our teenagers and young
people and increase possibility of severe traffic accid ents which may kills enumerous of lives and harmness on public safety Which we all
could not afford! Why we want to risk our lives for the small benefit from it.
Just keep the Cannabis Regulation 2017-26 in effect and don't change anything. I don't want any cannabis to be manufactured, distributed, or
grown in our county. I believe this will only pave the way for big commercial growers to buy up land to cultivate it and cre ate big agribusiness
cannabis monopolies that will eventually lead to undesirable consequences in our community associated with it. Consequences like our youth
thinking it's o.k. to indulge in the use of a hallucinogen because their parents use it, second hand smoke inhalation by chil dren in the homes of
users, adults driving under the influence of it, law enforcement associated with its use etc.
Largely overlooked the negative impact on envirnment and society safety.
lead to more Crimes, Traffic Accidents, Education Problems
Many factors.
Marijuana is banned at the federal level. Cultivation, possession and selling marijuana are considered federal crimes and prosecuted by the
FBI. We don't want our community become an FBI target. Our neighborhood will becomes unhealthy and unsafe.
Medical use, bring a lot of income tax!
My family moved to Orinda for its high quality school district. Marijuana use among students is a big concern for my family. If cannabis
cultivation is allowed, my family will consider moving to another area.
Need stricter limits on proximity to residential neighborhoods and schools. Need lower limits on quantity of plants for commercial farming.
Requires direct taxation and other levies to support increased police patrols and enforcement burden.
Need to be more specific
Need to include stronger language that any and all costs associated with safety, security, enforcement and compliance should be entirely
covered by fees and/or possible taxes levied on cannabis businesses/uses.
No cannabis cultivation in CCC
No cannabis in CCC!
No cannabis in my back yard.
Exhibit G: Public Survey Comment Log
No cannabis is appropriate
No commercial cannabis business in CCC
No large scale cultivation should be allowed in cc
No permit
No, I don't want to have cannabis growing from my neighbor or my own backyard.
No, this does not raise the value of the property or enrich the area. Discovery Bay is unincorporated and do not have the additional coverage
needed for enforcement of regulations for this industry. Making access closer for youth that are already challenged enough wi th underaged
selling at “smoke shops― with addictive vaping, tobacco. Remember, Discovery Bay Safeway ’s gas station has been shut down for selling
to under legal age how many times? Go to a city that can afford the “extra― activity that comes with this.
The numbers of grow houses that exist and have been busted are not run by people for the best interest of the community - They are pursuing
income under the cover of a residential neighborhood by converting a family dwelling into a hydroponic “grow house―.
This industry can be anywhere - the customer base is prevalent- They will drive, to the source. There should be zero sales unless in An
industrial complex with plenty of parking out of residential shopping centers for community. The smoke shop at Sandy Cove sho pping center
is unecessary and stories of lude behavior toward female employees by owner are numerous. Please restrict selling medicinal m arijuana to an
industrial site only, IF the need exists in the Discovery Bay community, a Dmv licensed adult can go to like they go to get their car repaired.
The additional alcohol and customers to “ Aloha Club― have already attracted more violence, drunk driving and deaths. With a location
that can be seen from the street with festive lights that compete with traffic lig hts. One would hope a “ club― could have been a great
resterant but the profit margin on a bar is so much more. Marijuana is already projected to make 8 billion in tax revenue for Ca. Please
consider the extracurricular activities that come with legalized substances and keep separation of the licensing for dispensing of marinuana
from the highly profitable alcohol dispen$aries.
Only brings in crime
Outdoor grow shouldn't be allowed. Prohibits all commercial cannabis uses
outdoor grows should be pe rmitted with the number limited to 6 plants
Please no commercial use in the home town, no cannabis cultivation in the backyard. We care about children safe, family save and community
save. Economic profit is countable, but the huge security risks are unco untable. This is some side effect of taking marijuana which obviously
put a nice and peaceful home town into uncountable risks:― Short-term side effects may include a decrease in short -term memory, dry
mouth, impaired motor skills, red eyes, and feelings of paranoia or anxiety.[21][24][25] Long-term side effects may include addiction,
decreased mental ability in those who started as teenagers, and behavioral problems in children whose mothers used cannabis d uring
pregnancy.[21] Studies have found a strong relation between cannabis use and the risk of psychosis.―( side effect informations come from
Wikipedia)
Please not in our country. Too dangerous for kids
Exhibit G: Public Survey Comment Log
Properties within agriculturally zoned areas should be allowed to engage in agricultural practices within the bounds of the current zoning as
follows:
84-38.402 - Permitted.
Uses permitted in the A -2 district shall be as follows:
(1) All types of agriculture, including general farming, wholesale horticulture and floriculture, wholesale nurs eries and greenhouses,
mushroom rooms, dairying, livestock production, fur farms, poultry raising, animal breeding, aviaries, apiaries, forestry, an d similar
agricultural uses. (2) Other agricultural uses, including the erection and maintenance of building s for the storage of agricultural products and
equipment; sheds; warehouses; granaries; dehydration plants; hullers; fruit and vegetable packing plants; and agricultural co ld storage plants
on parcels at least ten acres in size. (3) A grower stand or farm stand.
Cannabis is a cash crop and should be treated as such in a fashion similar to other cash crops within the boundaries of state law. The zoning
allows for farm stands etc, this should be no different, again, within the bounds of state law. Proces sing of crops is an allowable use under
this zoning as well and no special use permits are required. Cannabis is just another crop. Let farmers farm and read your zoning ordinance
relative to agricultural endeavors. Why is this crop being treated differ ently from any other crop other than as it pertains to state law? While
it is understandable that there should be some sort of regulation and taxation, what is the rationale for making it difficult for agricultural
landowners to produce a cash crop that w ill actually allow them to farm profitably? A wine grape grower can grow grapes and produce a
consumable on site with no restrictions on who can and who cannot grow wine grapes and who can or cannot produce wine. Are t hey as
heavily regulated??
regarding outdoor personal use & growing, we as a society should not impede on the natural and low cost personal cultivation of (6) p lants.
These (2) items seem very appropriate: The plants are not visible from a public right -of-way or adjacent parcel.
3. No part of the plants being cultivated are within five feet of any property line.
People need their medicine and we should not create unnecessary barriers to growing their own medicine. Costs are already hig h for people
who need medications and we should supp ort compassion. Additionally indoor only growing could pose fire risks with inadequate electrical
wiring or other potential fire hazards. I don't feel it is right to force people inside when there already are limits to livi ng spaces and access to
proper li ghting. Outdoors does not have those issues. You pretty much eliminate a lot of risk with allowing outdoor growing.
Shocking to hear about the framework
strongly disagree
strongly disagree with the proposal of cannabis in incoperated in Contra Vosta county.
Taxes killing me
The extreme caution is unnecessary. Look at how cannabis has been dealt with in Oregon and the other states AND how the citi es of
Sacramento, Oakland, Berkeley and San Francisco have successfully dealt with this.
The proposed framework is too restrictive with respect to retail sales, commercial growing and buffer distances. This is an important new
industry. Its development should be nurtured ad emcouraged, not burdened with unnecessary restrictions
Exhibit G: Public Survey Comment Log
There is no merit to introduce substance
To our neighborhood nocomp
Think about our kids, and what cannabis is going to bring to our community, don't understand anybody would agree to the frame work
This frame work may seems to be beneficial to certain extent in the short term, but in the long run, it will have foreseeable negative
consequences in education, community, health, house values, public facilities and government tax income.
This is a great start but should not be so difficult for growers zoned A -2 and not effecting the community. Regulation is needed to stave off
the black-market.
Today's gun disaster will be the future if we do not prohibit of Marijuana
Traffic safety and kids influence concerns.
We don’t need marijuana in our county, where there are lots of kids, barely any water, really bad traffic, worsening safety!
we don't need this type of things in our neighborhood! please spend your time and effort on something meaningful and bringing positive
change for our community, no this cannabis business - a negative impact in our county.
We moved to Orinda for its residential atmosphere and high quality school district. Marijuana use in school is a big concern for us. If cannabis
cul tivation is permitted, we ’ll consider moving to other places.
We should allow commercial businesses. We should allow as many as it can handle. If there are too many, they won't survive. W e should
allow outdoor growing of six plants county -wide, as it is more environmentally-friendly and less costly than indoor growing. If there are
problems with outdoor growing by neighbors, they should be complaint driven with mediators rather than law enforcement. Perso nal grows
should not require any special permitting. It's just six plants!
We will face more crime, traffic accidence, unsafe neiboughthood, worse air, addicted children
What are we doing to ourselves, young adults, teenagers and young children? Do we really want to deal with marijuana caused deaths on the
highway? What are we setting ourselves up for?
Why arent you guys making money on this and let me grow or open avdispensary in Bethal Island please?
Why don’t bring in some good business and let us feel proud of you and ourselves. You know there can be really bad consequence of
marijuana business in the neighboring unincorporated lands. How can you be so easily convinced that all the good promises can materialize
while the bad things won’t happen.
With some modifications, of course, but this is the right direction if taxes are low, outdoor gardens are allowed and we get ventilated on -site
adult consumption sites.
with the amount of people in this county it is only rational to have cannabis businesses where the citizens of this county ca n actually reach
them. the preliminary map show very little land allocated to sale of cannabis (and land where it is allocated is very far fro m the majority
population). also where to individual delivery services come into play in this? now -a-days most citizens live very busy lives and don't have the
time or energy to go to a storefront to receive their cannabis. look at hospital pharmacies for example, I personally have my medication
shipped to my house because I don't have the time to pickup my meds while they are o pen. I think this map should be revaluated with
cooperation from cities on where storefronts/deliveries should be allowed.
Worried, concerned, angry3000
You guys are dragging your feet you need to release permits for people to get their meds.
You need to respect the will of the voters who overwhelmingly voted in for legalization and retail.
Exhibit G: Public Survey Comment Log
Permitting number for cultivation should coinside with population density, i.e. more permits in lower density parts of county .
Sensitive Site Buffers (other than 1 000’)
1. If permitted, which buffer distance from sensitive uses such as schools and parks do you think is appropriate for commercial cannabis
uses?
Exhibit G: Public Survey Comment Log
2b. If other, what is that distance
150ft
3 Miles
100ft
5 miles
5 miles
1 mile
out of our county
2000 feet
5000
5000
10000ft
10000ft
10000 ft
10000 ft
Cannabis farms should be located out of the public's sight. Our communities should not be subject to living in environments where cannabis
is seen or smelled.
5 miles
2 miles
As far as we can, may be 1000 miles away
The,further,the better
1 mile
>50 miles
One mile
10 miles
1 mile
1 mile
5 miles
2 miles
5000
1 mile
1mile
15 miles
1000 miles
5000 ft
do not let public grow cannabis
Exhibit G: Public Survey Comment Log
1 mile
At lease 1 Mile
5,000 ft
Completely NO!!!
As far as possible.
As far as possible.
100 mile
10,000 feet
5 miles
Do not support any land use for cannabis
as far as possible
100 miles
5 miles
10000 feet
25miles
10miles
50miles
At least 20 miles
10000ft
should completed prohibited in the residential area
10miles
Whatever the standard distance is for establishments that sell alcohol and prescription drugs.
The state regs are sufficient.
Schools 1,000; parks 500.
What buffer exists for beer, wine and liquor sales?
Commercial cultivation should be restrickted to property parcels of 20 plus ac. Set backs inforced of 100feet.
600 ft.
2000 ft
Our cities should be considering buffers on businesses that distribute sugar, the number one health threat to our children and opioids, the
number one drug threat to our community.
no distance is far enough
5000 ft
3000
To be studied
A 10 miles
1000 miles
Exhibit G: Public Survey Comment Log
1000 miles
Don't allow it at all
5 miles
1000000000 feet
5miles
1 mile
5000
cannabis shouldn't be allowed to planted in the county
1000 miles
5 miles
10 miles
As far away as possible
At least 1 mile
5000 miles
10 miles
20 miles
15miles
As far as possible.
Please don't permit that
Please don't give the permit for commercial cannabis uses.
3000 feet, if unfortunitely it permitted.
3000 feet if unfortunately permitted
5 miles
5 MILES
5 miles
No buffer. Should not be permitted.
*School is misspelled* I think there in an opportunity for the framework to give su ggested guidelines as to the buffer distance. It looks like
North Richmond is a community that can potentially be sorrounded by Cannabis, would prefer that cannabis sales is not visible within schools
and neighborhoods.
Cannabis should not be allowed anywhere near sensitive areas such as schools or parks. No buffer at all, buffers don’t work!
Next county
It should not be allowed whatsoever
2-5 miles
2 miles200
More than 1000 from school
Try mile(s)
Exhibit G: Public Survey Comment Log
Complete prohibition
two miles
7.5 to 10 Mil es
50 miles
5 miles
5mi
Should not be allowed
Completely out of the Town of Moraga!
100 miles ordon't allow in first place
250 ft.
I think 1000 ft is not far enough from a school.
Against allowing commercial cultivation
500 ft
Residential Buffers (other than 500’)
3a. If permitted, should a buffer be required between residential uses and commercial cannabis uses such as retailing, distri buting or
testing? If Yes, what distance
Exhibit G: Public Survey Comment Log
1,000 ft
14%
500 ft
9%
Other
77%
3b. If yes, what distance
Exhibit G: Public Survey Comment Log
If other, what is that distance?
3 Miles
5 miles
10miles
1 mile
out of our county
5000
5000
10000ft
10000ft
8000 ft
8000 ft
maximum possible
5 miles
1 mile
1000 miles away
The further the better
1mile
50 miles
10 miles
3000 ft
One mile
5 miles
2 mikes minimum
5000
1mile
1mile
10 miles
1000 miles
5000 ft
do not let public grow cannabis
1 mile
At lease 1 Mile
5,000 ft
As far as possible.
As far as possible.
Exhibit G: Public Survey Comment Log
100 mile
10,000 feet
1 mile
2 miles
Do not support any land use for cannabis
100 miles
5 miles
20miles
19 miles
25miles
10miles
50miles
≥10 miles
1 mile
10000ft
20 Miles
10 miles
A commercial farm should be able to have tasting and retail shop on farm samecas winnery
2000
no distance is far enough
5000 ft
3000
2miles
As far as possible
TBD
10miles
1000 miles
1000 morning miles
Don't allow it at all
3 miles
10000000 feet
5 miles
5 miles
1 Mile
5000
not within county limit
Exhibit G: Public Survey Comment Log
1000 miles
5miles
As far as possible.
As far away as possible
At least 1 mile
5000 miles
10 miles
10 miles
As far as possible.
no distance is good enough
Please don't give the permission
3000 feet if unfortunitely it gets permitted.
3000 feet
5 miles
5 MILES
5 miles
Should not be near any Residenial area.
Again, need deeper understading of what other communities are doing in terms of buffer. Is this the county can research and s hare with the
community as to what others may be engaging/grappling with?
Should NOT be permitted. Buffer zones do not work. Pr ohibition does. Do not permit this activity.
5 miles
1,000,000 feet sway
2-5 miles
2000 ft
Again miles, adults can drive to go get it, shouldn ’t be close to residential areas
10000
7.5-10 Miles.
50 miles
5 miles
5mi
Should not be allowed
Just READ 1b above.
100 miles
250 ft.
Against allowing commercial cultivation
should be allowed in industrial, commercial and mixed districts, not in residential only areas
Exhibit G: Public Survey Comment Log
Caps
4. If permitted, should the County place a cap on the number of commercial cannabis uses such as retailers, manufactures, cultivators, etc?
Exhibit G: Public Survey Comment Log
Outdoor Personal Grow
(Should it be allowed by right? Number of plants? Other requirements?)
5b. Comments about Outdoor Cultivation for Personal Use
While I do believe that indoor cultivation is the more perfect solution in terms of concealment of smell. The price of cultivating plants indoor s
is very expensive in California at $.18 /Kw it costs $300 just to run lights for the plants over the course of the grow. This doesn't include a/c or
dehumidifying either. The carbon foot print is quite immense. This is why I believe outdoor cultivation is a reasonable solut ion. Outdoor
cultivation completely removes the carbon footprint, and with only 3 plants the smell will be ver y minimal.
Yes
1%
No Response
99%
Exhibit G: Public Survey Comment Log
I think outdoor cultivation should be allowed. having personally been around outdoor cultivation this plant really doesn't sm ell until the last 4
weeks of its life. And even then the odor is minimal.
Who’s going to verify that it’s 6 plants or under? And who’s going to verify it’s for personal use only? It adds more burden on the police force
and increase cost.
Rome didn’t fall in a day. Passing such a regulation is a start.
Seriously, people will wonder what we were talking about in a yea r or so.
not allowed
outdoor cultivation should not be allowed on the east side of the county, because it is the area of agriculture core.
Against !
Very bad idea! It will be visible. A hint to kids that it ’s okay and an invitation for crime.
Bad idea! It will invite crime to our neighborhood as it can be visible.
THIS WILL ATTRACT MORE CRIMES TO OUR COMMUNITY
This will ATTRACT CRIMES to our community.
Outdoor cultivation put neighbor youth at risk and lowers home values.
Kids will go in backyard and help themselves
No more than 3
To provide dirty business
Negative externality to community
Shouldn’t permitted
It wastes resources, and it is harmful to the environment and society at large.
It will arise much more troubles between neighbors
Not allowed. It's very difficult and no effective way to secure the amount per permit to plant
Cap at 3 plants maximum.
Should not be allowed
It should be forbidden
Pot growing is water and pesticide intensive. It should be banned in our county. People can purchase via mail order so it doesn't curtail their
right to use it.
He will make it commercial
Do we have regulations to ensure such outdoor cultivation is limited to personal use? If not, we are not there yet.
How can we ensure this will be limited for personal use?
personal use can become commercial use
No!!!!!
Shouldn’t be allowed.
Shouldn’t be allowed.
Do not like it
Don't support
Exhibit G: Public Survey Comment Log
Do not support any land use for cannabis
Will creative easy access for under age users.
it's impossible to prove and garantee its personal use. If the cultivators sell it sneakily, it will take huge efforts and r esource for law
enforcemnet to find out.
We are in drought. We can’t afford wasting water resources on drugs!
Prohibite use in any schools, public parks, museum, or facilities. Especially for those places with lots of kids activities l ike school , park,
playground and etc.
Since this is still a controversial matter, growing it outdoor will graphycally amplify it .
Not allowed
Our children and juveniles will take marijuana as acceptable behavior, have easier access, and eventually double the risk of getting addictive
or even worse becoming drug-addictive.
I'm allergic to sycamore trees. They grow 50 feet high. There's nothing to stop my neighbors from planting them. Also, I hate the smell of
curry. Guess what? That's my problem. State regs sufficiently govern outdoor grows.
Some strains just do better in natural light.
State law
Not visible from public righ t of way
Allowing outdoor cultivation would be a money saver as the citizen would not have to buy power and special equipment. it is a good idea
with some common sense regulations, such as setbacks from neighbors and not visible from beyond the property.
The plots on the Bethel Island are generally too small for personal use cultivation.
People should be allowed to grow cannabis on their property just as they do other plants and vegetables.
Indoor cultivation only.
No objection to personal use, concerned about outdoor cultivation due to safety reason
Visual symbol of controversial topic in open area is not suitable in the neighberhood
Don’t bring cannabis to CCC!
No cannabis at all
No!
No cannabis at all
It should not be allowed
It has lots of potential risk to environment and community and it's hard to keep the limit so it shouldn't be permitted.
absolutely no outdoor cultivation
it's almost impossible for LE to check outdoor cannibus plant number cultivated.
No outdoor cultivation for personal use.
the smell affects neighborhood health
Will attract criminals
It's a kind of drug. I don't think it's wise to plant or use it as wish.
second hand inhale of that is harmful
Exhibit G: Public Survey Comment Log
It's harmful to people, the public environment
Outdoor cultivation of cannabis leads to same negative impact to the wellbeing and safety of the community, disregard the purpose
Drug cautivation will lead to similar damage to community, disregard whether or not it is for personal use or business use
NO OUTDOOR GROWING RESIDENTIAL OR COMMERCIAL
NO OUTDOOR CULTIVATION OF ANY KIND
home break-ins will go through the roof. Crime will increase with no consequences
Not permitted.
Not sure.
Should not be allowed. Invites crime and theft. Places neighbors in harms way.
There are so many healing properties in cannabis that I think if you need it you should be able to grow it.
Abuse as will happen
Again, crime will increase as Thieves w ill go into people’s backyards and steal their plants,Once the criminals know the homeowner is growing
they will then break into the house
This is a small number of plants and the number of outdoor cultivators is unlikely to be significant.
This could be an invitation to theft.
Once again, it is illegal in the US by the federal government, therefore it is not legal in the state
Personal quantity only
They can grow it indoors or in their garage
Complete prohibition no cannabis
Should be able to grow for personal use outside as long as not visible from street
It will be in all our neighborhoods. Terrible idea!
Medicinal Marijuana can be helpful for some citizens with seizures among other ailments. They should be able to benefit and b e allowed to
exercise their full rights within the law. Personal use is a necessity for some patients, for relief of pain etc. Growing their own could be more
economical & perhaps organic. Making it harder for a self grower could be considered inhumane. A plant still nee ds to be nurtured, pruned
etc- not everyone is equipped for gardening their medicinal marijuana. People that are should be allowed use of Sunshine that coul d raise
their vitamin D & increase other healthy benefits of Mother Nature in CA. Research has shown some people’s brains do not benefit over
longtime use, but for many, this choice works best compared to other prescribed medications and pharmaceutical ’s that may have adverse
side effects.
Depends on location to neighbors and/or 'smell' issues.
I am a senior citizen on a fixed income who just built a small "forever house" in El Sobrante. I don't have room to designate as an indoor grow
area and I wouldn't be able to afford the electricity to grow. Also using artificial light is not environmentally wi se. We have a small house on a
large (1/3 acre) so we could discreetly grow a few plants if we wanted to if the county allowed us to. I am allergic to most prescription pain
pills, and anxiety medication which even if I could tolerate them there are too many serious side effects. There are no side effects with
cannabis and no one has ever died.
It's environmentally cleaner and CoCo won't lose the tax income as long as we don't ban.
Very important and would help the bee populations.
Exhibit G: Public Survey Comment Log
Absolutely. It's silly to allow indoor, which is much more resource intensive, creates fire hazards, and other potentially unsafe conditions
without allowing outdoor personal cultivation.
Yes why do you guys want to stand in the way for people to grow there own? We grow v egtables its natural let us grow please
It smells terrible. Don't allow any cultivation.
It is discriminatory to make people grow indoors. It is environmentally better and less costly to grow outdoors. We should ha ve that right.
Indoor cultivation is energy intensive, and adds to global warming. The biggest issue with outdoor cultivation in residential areas is theft.
Stolen plants would have a high likelihood being taken by and distributed to the children in the area, thus if an individual wants to cultivate in
their backyard, the county may want the grower to provide some type of approved security. I do not want law enforcement to b e focusing on
the theft of cannabis plants by locals.
should NOT be allowed
People growing six plants for personal use should be able to do so.
Outdoor and indoor cultivation should be measured by canopy size not number of plants. One could grow huge plants for unneces sary large
yields, when other hobbiest may like to have 20 little plants that would yield far less th an 6 massive unregulated size plants.
We as a society should not impede on the natural and low cost personal cultivation of (6) plants. These (2) items seem very a ppropriate: The
plants are not visible from a public right-of-way or adjacent parcel.
3. No part of the plants being cultivated are within five feet of any property line.
People need their medicine and we should not create unnecessary barriers to growing their own medicine. Costs are already hig h for people
who need medications (Bog Pharma) and we should support compassion. Additionally, indoor only growing could pose fire risks with
inadequate electrical wiring or other potential fire hazards. I don't feel it is right to force people inside when there alre ady are limits to living
spaces and access to proper indoor lighting. Outdoors does not have those issues. You pretty much eliminate a lot of risk and financial impacts
with allowing outdoor growing.
Regulate outdoor cultivation to secure covered greenhouses; do not require heavy regulati on as it may be a barrier for some that simply want
to enjoy what's legal
Additional Comments
6. Additional Comments
Commercial marijuana is planted outdoors and affected by the seasonal climate. It should be planted outdoors in April -May and harvested in
October. We hope to speed up the identification of planting, ensure planting and harvesting this year, and delay the time. Th e loss this year
will be enormous.
Because of the outdoor planting in early May, the October harvest, the government should as soon as possible to ensure that can be planted
this year, once the delay time, this loss is very serious. Cause social unrest
We hope we can get cannabis's license as soon as possible, we hope we can start cultivate cannabis at May 2018, because outdo or cultivation
time is May to October!
San Ramon, Danville are prestigious communities in the US. It takes hundred years to build such wonderful places. Introducing marijuana into
these neighborhoods is brainless. Our kids should compete in STEM nationally and internationally. They should not b e surrounded by
Exhibit G: Public Survey Comment Log
marijuana no matter what excuses adult legislators could come up. When marijuana is in,school will be down, our valuable engi neer families
and other mid class families will move out, marijuana consumers will move in, house price down, real estate tax down, public facilities
maintenance is down, School funding reduced, etc. etc. it is a foreseeable chain reaction in a death spiral.
What really is the issue? Not many people can grow anything, much less marijuana. Six plants --who is worried?
No, No, No to this cannabis framework.
PLEASE BUILD A BETTER COMMUNITY FOR OUR KIDS
Please build a better neighbourhood for our kids.
The key issue is keeping those 21 and under away from pot. If allowed as a landscape plant, it will be nearly impossi ble. I would also like to
see stern laws created to fine/arrest people adults/youth who knowingly or accidentally provide cannabis to youth.
The framework does not address the need for and the cost of police patrols and enforcement activities, which sh ould be expected to be very
significant costs. The framework must impose direct taxation, license fees, and fines for every residential and commercial gr ower to address
these costs. These revenue streams must cover MORE than the cost of police services, an d produce net improvements to police services for
the unincorporated county areas. The framework must support auditing and automatic increases (but not decreases) in revenue s hould costs
become higher than expected.
EBMUD must be consulted regarding water conservation restrictions and costs. Cannabis is a very demanding crop and requires far more
water than is currently supported in this water district.
The framework must also plan for increased traffic, whether industrial or commercial, to and from the fa rms and retail locations. These costs
must also be imposed directly on the growers and retailers.
Set firmly against this proposal
We love California because of its beautiful landscape and clean air. Our community is calm and safe. It is important to ke ep this place great
for our children, and beyond. We do not want to see cannabis cultivation/recreation in any sort. It is a disgrace to collect money from this
business. It took generations and so many lives to fight with the cigarette industry, it is as tonishing to see state is legalizing something even
worse. At least, a driver smoking cigarette is not DUI!
It should absolutely not allowed to have outdoor or indoor cultivation at residential area, especially at townhouse or condom inium. It will
avoid potential lawsuits between homeowners for property damage due to mis planting at garage or any sharing wall with neighbors
NO NO!
The framework should also include regular review/revisiting of the regulations. For example, a yearly review for the first 3 -5 years after
adoption and biannual review after that.
Do not end up on the wrong side of history. Despite your personal biases t his will move forward with or without you. However we will
remember your actions come election.
What are the basis for the distance? How was it assumed that a distance like 1000 ft is enough to prevent impact on students and school
routines?
We need full y functional people for our society, cannabis can destroy people's neural system
Do not support any land use for cannabis
Disagree Completely
Exhibit G: Public Survey Comment Log
Cannabis is not without risk; Marijuana smoke was identified as a human carcinogen by the state fo CA since 200 9, when it was put on the
proposition 65 list.
A well regulated cannabis business would be welcomed by the citizens. We voted for it and won by a significant margin. Most c ity councils
seem to believe that they know what is best for us in spite of how we voted. It is not up to them to decipher the votes. Implement what we
voted on in a timely manner. I've seen the county's presentation and it was fine, though it contained NOT ONE positive impact of cannabis.
There are over 25K cannabis studies published in the medical literature. There have been over 100 clinical studies with human subjects.
Consider that most FDA -approved drugs undergo 1-2 clinical studies before approval.
These studies demonstrate that cannabis can help treat symptoms related to neuro logical and psychological disorders, and to
gastrointestinal, infectious, and inflammatory diseases. These studies demonstrate that cannabis is safe and effective.
Yet currently, because of bans and moratoriums, there are no legal cannabis companies in Contra Costa County. Your residents call us
everyday because they can no longer find the products that are helping them.
Harry J. Anslinger was the first commissioner of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, which was the predecessor to the DEA. Ansli nger was able to
convince congress to pass the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937. At the Senate Hearing on marijuana, he testified that:
"... the primary reason to outlaw marijuana is its effect on the degenerate races."
He went on:
“There are 100,000 total marijuan a smokers in the U.S., and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos and entertainers. This marijuana causes
white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers and any others.―
And later:
“Reefer makes darkies think they ’re as good as white men.―
The fact is, cannabis prohibition laws were never about the plant, but rather about who was using it. It remains so to this d ay.
According to the Attorney General, in 2016 alone, over 3000 kids were arrested in California for cannabis -related misdemeanors. These are
simple possession arrests. Over 70% of those arrests were children of color. We don ’t need cannabis laws to protect our children. We need to
protect our children from the cannabis laws.
It should be noted that the Colorado Departm ent of Public Health and Environment has stated that cannabis use among middle and high
school students has remained unchanged since legislation passed there in 2012.
Make no mistake: when you vote to extend your ban, you ’re voting for a racist and nativi st legacy: 80 years of misinformation, persecution,
Exhibit G: Public Survey Comment Log
and incarceration. And, you’re preventing access for people who use cannabis to alleviate stress and suffering, to help with sleep, pain,
anxiety, and depression.
If at all possible, can the council please consider grouping these types of businesses together such as manufacturing, cultivating, and testing in
industrial complexes. That way it is easier for the company's to go Green with green energy as well as water supplies. The mo re people who
chip in the lesser the cost is to the individual and the quality and durability go up. It's better to build once and maintain something rather than
having to replace low quality time and time again.
OREGON.Wash.Col. Is failing 90% of all farms r closing folding as we speak.t
In my opinion, pot is legal and is going to be used wherever legal to smoke - if I understand correctly. We have a lot of Ag land in East County.
It will be grown, manufactured and sold somewhere...why not garner some income while we can. I live in Knightsen. We will never have
another source of income, such as new housing, etc. This is an opportunity like none other. It ’s unfortunate the town council can ’t see the big
picture. I vote we at least are able to cultivate in Knightsen. The counci l is aware (I was not) that it’s already grown all over town. Why then
can’t we benefit from it? Their logic made no sense to me.
The County should be considering studies from peer -reviewed journals that discuss how a local cannabis industry is healthful for the
community: It reduces crime, duis, provides important job opportunities in the health sciences industry, and provides a commu nity with safer
alternatives to NSAIDs, opioids, and other harmful drugs. It does not increase adolescent use and addictio n. This information is widely cited,
even by anti -cannabis agencies like NIDA, yet we've never seen a municipality or a County refer to those very important resources when
developing policy. Prohibition is extremely dangerous and it hurts the very people you're intending to protect.
Contra Costa County will attract undesirables trying to make money associated with the new law. Please make every effort to overturn
further laws encouraging it before our state falls into the hands of unscrupulous crime bos ses bent on making a fortune with no regard for our
families and our community's future.
I agree the County should place a cap on the number of commercial cannabis retailers and manufacturing sites. I do not belie ve there should
be a cap on the number of cultivator growth sites.
we really need to consider the potential risk a community that allows cannabis planting and circulation. Especially the long term negative
impact on our children.
No marijuana in contra costa!
It will bring in illegal transaction/activities in the community, promote the marijuana use to our kids, affect the environment, increase the
drough problem, damage the soil. No benefit at all.
Please don't give the permission to the commercial cannabis uses
From surface, cannabis cul tivation seems harmless, but the truth is opposite: it could result in a devastating outcome: undermine the safety
of the community, turn the county into a vulnerable area for criminals, drug dealers, inevitablly it will jeoperdize the hous es' value, the
housing macket, eventually it will undermine the county's economic system, an outcome that is opposite to the purpose of est iblishing
commercial cannabis business.
If permitted, it will definitely undermine the entire wellbeing of CCC, it is just a matte r of time.
Real Estate Values will plummet. Any type of knowledge of any type of growing will become a permanent disclosure item in any Real Estate
transaction.
Exhibit G: Public Survey Comment Log
I AM VERY CONCERNED ABOUT HOME INVASIONS. THEY OFTEN HIT THE WRONG HOUSE. CRIME INCREASE. SMELL IS HORRENDOUS.
How about we just keep it out of Discovery Bay. we are a small residential community with a lot of weekenders. lets not becom e the place to
live and play as well as grow weed.
Why add to the issues we already have with Cann abis
It seems like many of the parcels within North Richmond which have potential for cannabis sale are within 1,000 feet of resid ential and school
sites. North Richmond cannabis sales would be too close to the community and in fact, surrounded by this b usiness. There are other
unincorporated areas in Contra Costa, and I hope that we adopt a framework that values the needs of North Richmond as the oth er
unincorporated areas. Meaning, if community members of other unincorporated sites are asking for a cert ain buffer zone, that we also apply
those wishes to a community that does not often have many of it's residents engaging with this topic.
If however, the community decides that they do want commercial cannabis businesses surrounding North Richmond, It i s my hope that the
county is thinking about a North Richmond Community Foundation or trust that funnels generated funds back into the community.
In addition, besides the buffer zones, it will be important to support cannabis businesses who give back to t he community. With that, I think
it's important for Cannabis businesses who land in North Richmond to commit to funding the arts and culture in North Richmond . The profits
of the sale can then beautify North Richmond and add to the arts, culture and histor y.
Contra Costa co should restrict this activity wherever possible. The one thing that is known is there is not enough law enfo rcement to enforce
any zoning or buffering requirements.
This is an absolute disgrace the Contra Costa County has forced th is measure into our community, why not allow our community to vote on
this matter, why is it up to the politicians to decide? Are small quiet community will be in flexed with gangs and criminals
As to #4, capping the number of commercial cultivators and r etailers etc. merely invites corruption, monopolistic practices and similar ills.
While not everyone should be able to receive a licence for the asking, of course, responsible, qualified persons who demonstr ate the capacity
to comply with reasonable regulatory requirements should be able to obtain one without excessive red tape and unnecessary barriers or
complications. The law should not artificially limit the number of persons or firms who want to enter and compete in this n ew marketplace.
In general ,I favor a regulatory regime roughly similar to that applied to the production, purchasing and consumption of alcohol and tob acco,
both of which are far more harmful and have fewer, if any, beneficial uses.
Do not allow any growing or use in our wonderful county. It is ILLEGAL
Knowing information from CO why are we doing this? Medical marijuana for those needing it is OK with me and that's it. Now look what has
happened since this has been legalized. Push! Push! Push for the next thing!
Outdoor growing is the preferred way for personal cultivation, less costly and more environmentally friendly. Should be regulated by location
not general assumptions
I, and all the others attending the meeting on Wednesday night, March 15 led by Ruben (sorry I c an't remember his last name) were so
impressed with his presentation. Job well done. Thank you for giving us a voice in this matter.
We need to reduce the stigma that has been foisted on cannabis by normalizing it. Any added taxes have to be minimal for us to rein in the
underground marketplace, not more than 2-3% max. El Sobrante needs more than one retail site and the whole county could use some
Exhibit G: Public Survey Comment Log
ventilated on-site consumption sites like coffee houses where people can go out to socialize instead of just drinking bars where nobody can
consume it.
It is very important to me that there would be designations in the cannabis tax that earmark funds it generates from commerci al cannabis to
return them into the budget of the communities where the taxes are col lected; schools, parks, open spaces, perhaps a community center! I
think 60% of the funds should go to the communities from which the funds come, and 40% can go to the counties general fund.
I have no issue with legal, permitted activities related to can nabis in or around my community. Growing for personal use on your property
should just follow state law (no additional local law needed)
I have seen young lives ruined and bad mistakes made in various industrial processes as a result of cannibis use.
Cannabis is now legal in California and it was greatly supported by 61% of voters for Prop. 64. We should honor that and bring t he industry to
Contra Costa. We certainly can use the tax revenue. We deserve to have good access to quality products nearby so we don't have to drive
very far and waste gas and fighting traffic to get it. We also should allow on -site consumption, like cannabis lounges, so people will have a
place to consume cannabis socially. Many people live in restricted multi -family dwellings and rentals that could prevent them from using it at
home. We deserve equal rights to our alcohol drinking peers who can go to bars to consume. We should have the same right to c onsume in
places outside the home as well. Rehab centers should not be considered "sensitive use," as cannabis is known to be a harm reduction
measure to enable people to step off opiates and alcohol. Studies show that there are fewer opioid -related deaths and use in medical
marijuana states.
I would oppose to allowing commercial mari juana growing now in Orinda for the following reasons: first, the economic benefits are dubious.
Second, granting marijuana growing now means using Orinda as a guinea pig in a risky experiment. Finally, as an affluent town , Orinda can
afford to pursue the more prudent and responsible option of waiting before jumping on the marijuana bandwagon.
The distance between commercial or medical cannabis dispensaries and residential areas, parks etc. should be the same as requ ired for
alcohol sales in my opinion. A lso, its important to NOT get greedy with permit fees and taxes ... revenue from these can benefit our
communities but if the amounts charged are too high, cannabis revenue will be driven into the black market and underground. The final
regulations should make it easier and more attractive to do business openly than it would be to move into the "underground". Testing and
support for open businesses should be strong to ensure that the criminal element is at a disadvantage.
Suggest 50sqft indoor and 100sqft outdoor
As the citizens of Contra Costa County have voted high in favor of Prop 64, we should honor that and not heavily regulate per sonal use
growing. There are many positives w/ growing your own medicine that include those folks who really want to gro w organic cannabis. We
should pave the way to allow for those opportunities.
No lmiit on testing sites. Market will determine need. Buffer for sensitive sites should be treated exactly the same as alcoh ol sales. 10mg/THC
does in a single package is much too low. 25mg minimum. Packaging would be wastful at 5mg per dose.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Chair, Board of Supervisors to execute, on behalf of the County, the
conveyance of a pipeline easement to Phillips 66 located near Marsh Drive and SR-4 in Martinez, identified
in Exhibit “A” of the Grant of Easement (State Parcel No. 63156-1) pursuant to Government Code Section
25526.6.
DETERMINE that the conveyance of the pipeline easement is in the public interest and that the interest in
the land conveyed will not substantially conflict or interfere with the use of the County’s use of the
property; and
AUTHORIZE the Chair, Board of Supervisors, to execute the Grant of Easement on behalf of the County;
and
DIRECT the Real Estate Division of the Public Works Department to cause said Grant of Easement to be
delivered to the grantee for acceptance and recording in the Office of the County Clerk-Recorder.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Jessica Dillingham, 925.
313-2224
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 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy
cc:
C. 1
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:APPROVE the Conveyance of a pipeline Easement to Phillips 66, for pipeline purposes in connection with the
SR4/I680 Widening Phase 3 Project.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No fiscal impact.
BACKGROUND:
The State of California conveyed Marsh Drive and adjacent road right of way to Contra Costa County in
the 1960’s for road purposes. As part of the improvements for the State’s current I-680/SR-4 Widening
Phase 3 Project, the State requires said pipeline easement to be conveyed to Phillips 66 due to the
relocation of the existing pipeline.
An Environmental Impact Report dated December 17, 2015 was completed by the State. The State has
the power of Eminent Domain to acquire the necessary rights from the County. The easement document
provides language so as not to substantially conflict or interfere with the County’s use of the property.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
The Project will not have sufficient land rights to allow construction in accordance with the approved
plans and specifications.
AGENDA ATTACHMENTS
Pipeline Easement
MINUTES ATTACHMENTS
Signed: Pipeline Easement
1
Recorded at the request of:
Contra Costa County
After recording return to:
Kristin Finefrock
Phillips 66 Pipeline LLC
18781 El Camino Real
Atascadero, CA 93422
Ptn. Of Assessor’s Parcel No.: 125-010-xxx
State Parcel No. : 63156 -1
GRANT OF EASEMENT
For good and valuable consideration, including but not limited to the agreements contained
herein, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, CONTRA COSTA
COUNTY, (hereinafter “COUNTY ”), hereby grants to PHILLIPS 66 PIPELINE LLC, a Delaware
Limited Liability Company (hereinafter “GRANTEE”), a nonexclusive perpetual easement
and right of way (hereinafter “Easement”) for installing, constructing, reconstructing,
removing, replacing, repairing, upgrading, maintaining, operating , using and abandoning in
placea 16-inch steel pipeline that will transport crude oil, and appurtenances thereto, and
for no other purposes whatsoever, along and in all of the hereinafter described parcel of
land (the “Easement Area”) situated in the County of Contra Costa, State of California,
described as follows :
FOR DESCRIPTION AND MAP, SEE ATTACHED EXHIBITS “A’ AND “B”
The foregoing grant is made subject to the following terms and conditions:
1. PRIMARY USE OF THE PROPERTY The primary use of the Property subject to
this easement (hereinafter the “Property”) is for public road purposes.
GRANTEE acknowledges and agrees that the use just described constitutes the
primary use of the Property and that any and all rights granted or implied by this
Grant of Easement are secondary and subordinate to the primary use of the
Property by the COUNTY , its successors and assigns. GRANTEE shall not, at any
time, use or permit the public to use the Easement Area in any manner that will
interfere with or impair the COUNTY ’s primary use of the Property. GRANTEE shall
not fence nor otherwise obstruct the Easement Area.
2. DISTRICT TITLE: GRANTEE hereby acknowledges COUNTY’s title to the Property
and agrees never to assail or resist said title.
3. CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE AC TIVITIES :
(a) Prior to any construction, reconstruction, remodeling, excavation, installation ,
or plantings within the Easement Area, GRANTEE shall submit specific plans and
specifications to the COUNTY for review and approval. Such approval, together with
any additional COUNTY requirements, will be in the form of a written permit issued
by COUNTY to GRANTEE.
2
(b) Normal maintenance by GRANTEE of its facilities within the Easement Area,
including inspection and cleaning of the existing pipeline, shall not require prior
notice to the COUNTY . GRANTEE shall perform maintenance of its facilities so as to
prevent damage to the Property .
(c) GRANTEE shall disclose to the COUNTY the volume, pressure and type of
substances being transported by Grantee’s pipeline; the size, date of construction
and material specifications of the pipeline; maximum pipeline pressure ratings; the
date of the most recent pipeline inspection required by law; a copy of the most
recent pipeline certifications from all applicable regulatory agencies; a detailed
description of materials transported, maximum daily volumes, and certifications from
all agencies responsible for permitting and operation of the pipeline, as applicable;
and any other information as may be requested by the COUNTY.
(d) GRANTEE shall be responsible, at its sole expense, for all repair and
maintenance directly caused by GRANTEE’s use of the Easement Area. Except in the
case of an emergency, the GRANTEE shall not make alterations to the Easement
Area, without obtaining the prior written consent of COUNTY’s Engineer, or his or
her designee, which shall be in the form of an “Encroachment Permit for Use of
COUNTY’s Right of Way ” (“Encroachment Permit”). The GRANTEE shall make every
effort to report emergency work in the Easement Area to the COUNTY within one (1)
Business-day after commencing such activities .
(e) GRANTEE shall test all pipelines as required by the State Fire Marshal or other
state or federal agency with jurisdiction over the pipeline or by any applicable law,
and must make available for inspection by the COUNTY the results of all pipeline
inspections and pipeline tests that are required by the State Fire Marshal and by all
applicable laws within sixty (60) days after the GRANTEE’S receipt of those results.
(f) GRANTEE shall file, and thereafter annually keep on file with the COUNTY , a
pipeline emergency plan as may be required by 49 C .F.R. section 195.402, 49 C.F.R.
section 192.615, the California Pipeline Safety Act of 1981 (Government Cod e
sections 51010 et seq.), and all other applicable laws , regulations , and ordinances .
GRANTEE shall update its pipeline emergency plan whenever it acquires, constructs,
lays, removes , or abandons any facilities in the Easement Area, and shall file the
plan with the COUNTY within thirty (30) days after any update.
4. DAMAGE TO DISTRICT PROPERTY : Any and all COUNTY property, facilities,
landscaping, or other improvements removed or damaged to the extent caused by
the use of the Easement Area by GRANTEE, or any other person or entity acting
under GRANTEE’s direction or control, shall, at COUNTY’s discretion and direction,
Either (a) be repaired or replaced by COUNTY , and GRANTEE shall reimburse
COUNTY for all of COUNTY’s reasonable repair or replacement costs with all of
COUNTY’s costs and expenses to be paid by GRANTEE (including but not limited to
reasonable engineering costs and legal costs of collecting any unpaid expenses), or
(b) shall be repaired or replaced by GRANTEE, at the sole cost and expense of
GRANTEE, equivalent to or better than their existing condition. In the event that
GRANTEE fails to commence the required work within ninety days after being
directed to do so by COUNTY , or such reasonable extension as COUNTY may agree
3
to in writing, or fails to complete the required work within a reasonable time
thereafter, , the COUNTY may perform or complete the work at the reasonable
expense of GRANTEE, which expense GRANTEE agrees to pay to COUNTY promptly
upon demand, including but not limited to re asonable engineering costs and any
legal expenses incurred to collect such costs.
5. NON -EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT: The Easement granted hereunder is non-exclusive.
This Easement is subject and subordinate to all existing rights, rights of way,
licenses, reservations, franchises , and easements of record, or that would be evident
from a physical inspection or accurate survey of the Property, in and to the Property .
Nothing contained herein shall be construed to prevent COUNTY from granting other
easements, franchises, licenses or rights of way over said lands, provided however,
that said subsequent uses do not unreasonably prevent or obstruct GRANTEE’s
easement rights hereunder or cause damage to Grantee’s facilities or improvements .
6. NO WARRANTIES : GRANTEE understands and acknowledges that COUNTY makes
no representations, warranties or guarantees of any kind or character, express or
implied, with respect to the Property, and Grantee is entering into this transaction
without relying in any manner on any such representation or warranty by CCOUNTY.
7. ABANDONMENT: In the event GRANTEE shall cease to use the Easement herein
continuously for a period of one year (unless prevented from doing so by force
majeure, in which event said one year period shall be extended b y the period of
time GRANTEE is actually so prevented), or in the event GRANTEE abandons its
facilities or fails to use the Easement for the purpose for which it is granted, then all
rights of GRANTEE in and to said lands shall thereupon cease and terminat e and
shall immediately revert to and vest in COUNTY or its successors. Upon request by
COUNTY , GRANTEE shall ex ecute any Quitclaim Deeds required by COUNTY to
relinquish GRANTEE’s interest in the Easement Area following abandonment.
8. NO ASSIGNMENT OF EASEMENT: Except as otherwise specified herein, no rights
granted hereunder shall be transferred, apportioned, or assigned without the prior
written consent of the COUNTY , which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld,
delayed or conditioned. The rights granted herein may be assigned by the
GRANTEE without the prior written consent of the COUNTY only for the purposes of
effectuating a corporate transfer, including without limitation, an assignment to any
corporation, partnership, or joint venture affiliated by common management or
ownership with GRANTEE. In the event of any assignment by the GRANTEE,
whether for corporate transfer or otherwise, the GRANTEE shall not be released
from any of its obligations or liabilities hereunder as a result of any assignment until
such assignee(s) has assumed and agreed to carry out any and all such covenants,
agreements, and obligations.
9. NO SECONDARY RIGHTS : Nothing herein contained shall be deemed to construe
that access or other secondary rights are conveyed by t his Easement over any of
COUNTY’s adjacent lands lying outside of the Easement Area.
10. ENTIRE AGREEMENT: This Grant of Easement contains the entire agreement
between the parties hereto and shall not be modified in any manner except by an
instrument in writing executed by the parties or their respective successors in
interest.
4
11. CONSTRUCTION : This grant of easement shall not be construed as if it had been
prepared by one of the parties, but rather as if both parties have prepared it. The
parties to this Grant of Easement and their counsel have read and reviewed this
Grant of Easement and agree that any rule of construction to the effect that
ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party shall not apply to the
interpretation of this Grant of Easement.
12. SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS : This indenture and all of the covenants herein
contained shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the heirs, successors and
assigns of the respective parties hereto.
13. NO THIRD-PARTY BENEFICIARIES : Nothing in this Grant of Easement confers
any rights on any persons or entities other than the Parties hereto.
REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
5
14. GOVERNING LAW: This Grant of Easement shall be construed in ac cordance with
the laws of the State of California .
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Grant of Easement is signed and executed this day of
__________________ 2018.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY GRANTEE
By Phillips 66 Pipeline LLC
By By
Karen Mitchoff Tracey R. Brown
Chair, Board of Supervisors Supervisor, Western Region Real
Estate and Right of Way
JD:dw
G:\realprop\Jessica\Grayson Creek at Hwy 4\Board order Docs\EA 17PA - Pipeline Easement 63156-1- County - Phillips 66.doc
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA )
On before me, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors, Contra Costa County, personally
appeared ___________________________, who proved to me on the basis of
satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and
acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ie s), and that by
his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted,
executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing pa ragraph is true
and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature:
Deputy Clerk
A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed
the document, to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that
document.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Chair, Board of Supervisors, to execute, on behalf of the County, a
quitclaim deed to exchange property rights with East Bay Municipal Utility District for property rights
required for the County’s Alhambra Valley Road, near the intersection of Alhambra Valley Road, Castro
Ranch Road, and Pinole Valley Road, identified in Exhibit "A" of the quitclaim deed, pursuant to Streets
and Highways Code section 960, as recommended by the Public Works Director, Martinez area. (Project
No.: 0676-6P0040)[CP#17-04]
DETERMINE that the property rights described in the quitclaim deed were acquired by the County for
highway purposes but are no longer necessary for those purposes.
DIRECT the Real Estate Division of the Public Works Department to cause said Quitclaim Deed to be
delivered to the grantee for acceptance and recording in the Office of the County Clerk-Recorder.
FISCAL IMPACT:
100% Road Fund
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Jessica Dillingham, 925.
313-2224
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 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy
cc:
C. 2
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:APPROVE the Conveyance of a Quitclaim Deed to East Bay Municipal Utility District for a Correction Roadway
Easement, District V.
BACKGROUND:
In 1935, EBMUD granted an Easement for Roadway purposes to the County. The road alignment does
not match the Roadway Easement in this location therefore a corrective measure is necessary. A
Correction Roadway Easement Deed has been secured and will be recorded to reflect the existing rights
necessary for the road. EBMUD has requested the County Quitclaim the rights conveyed that are not
being used as part of the roadway. The requested Quitclaim Deed legal description will be cross
referenced with the Correction Roadway Easement Deed granting the County rights for the road that was
constructed.
On February 14, 2017, the Board of Supervisors approved the project and determined that project is
exempt from CEQA (CP#17-04).
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
The County will continue to have title over property that is no longer needed for County purposes.
AGENDA ATTACHMENTS
Quitclaim Deed
Exhibit A & B
MINUTES ATTACHMENTS
Signed: Quitclaim Deed
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute Contract Amendment
No. 1 to the Consulting Services Agreement (CSA) with Hanna Engineering, Inc. (dba The Hanna
Group)(Hanna), effective April 24, 2018, to increase the payment limit by $30,620 to a new payment limit
of $304,620, for construction management services for the Canal Road Bridge Replacement Project
(Project), for the period of June 6, 2017, through June 30, 2018, Bay Point area (District III) County Project
No. 0662-6R4080/Federal Project No. BRLO-5928(108)
FISCAL IMPACT:
This project, including the CSA, is funded by 100% Federal Highway Bridge Program Funds.
BACKGROUND:
The project consists of removing an existing concrete slab bridge and pedestrian bridge, construction of a
new concrete precast/prestressed concrete slab bridge, pavement reconstruction, temporary and permanent
waterlines, drainage improvements, erosion control, signing and striping. Hanna was selected to provide
construction management services for the project.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Kevin Emigh, (925)
313.2233
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board
of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: April 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy
cc:
C. 3
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Contract Amendment with Hanna Engineering, Inc., Bay Point area.
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
Proposed Amendment No. 1 will amend the payment limits in order to provide additional construction
management services that are needed to successfully complete the project. Construction delays due to
girder procurement issues caused a need to extend the construction duration by approximately 3 months
requiring additional consultant construction management services.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
The project completion would be delayed and Federal funds would be in jeopardy.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
(1) APPROVE plans, specifications, and design for the Blackhawk Road Bikeway Project. Project No.
0662-6R4018-18
(2) DETERMINE that VSS International, Inc. (“VSS”) 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 VSS
has submitted the lowest responsive and responsible bid for the project.
(3) AWARD the construction contract for the above project to VSS in the listed amount ($268,000.00) and
the unit prices submitted in the bid, and DIRECT that VSS 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.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Kevin Emigh, (925)
313.2233
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board
of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: April 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy
cc:
C. 4
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Construction Contract for the Blackhawk Road Bikeway Project, Blackhawk area.
RECOMMENDATION(S): (CONT'D)
(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 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 VSS 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 28% Transportation Development Act (TDA) Grant Funds,
28% Trust Fund 819200, and 44% Local Road Funds.
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 March 20, 2018, the Public
Works Department received bids from the following contractors:
BIDDER, TOTAL AMOUNT, BOND AMOUNTS
VSS International, Inc.: $268,000.00; Payment: $268,000.00; Performance: $268,000.00
California Pavement Maintenance Company, Inc.: $312,373.40
The Public Works Director has reported that VSS 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 VSS.
The Public Works Director recommends that the bid submitted by VSS is the lowest responsive and
responsible bid, which is $44,373.40 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 21, 2016.
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.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
(1) APPROVE plans, specifications, and design for the Bay Point Sign Upgrade Project, Bay Point
area. County Project No. 0662-6R4024-18, Federal Project No. HSIPL 5928 (132), (District V)
(2) DETERMINE that the bid submitted by Statewide Traffic Safety and Signs, Inc. (Statewide),
exceeded the Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Goal for this project and that Statewide
has submitted the lowest responsive and responsible bid for this project
(3) AWARD the construction contract for the above project to Statewide in the listed amount
($188,127.18) and the unit prices submitted in the bid, and DIRECT that Statewide 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.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Kevin Emigh, (925)
313.2233
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board
of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: April 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy
cc:
C. 5
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Construction Contract for the Bay Point Sign Upgrade Project, Bay Point area.
RECOMMENDATION(S): (CONT'D)
(5) ORDER that, in accordance with the project specifications and/or upon signature of the contract
by the Public Works Director, or designee, and bid bonds posted 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 Statewide 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 and associated fees of this project will be funded by 90.5% Highway Safety
Improvement Program (HSIP) Grant Funds and 9.5% Local Road Funds.
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 March 27, 2018,
the Public Works Department received bids from the following contractors:
BIDDER, TOTAL AMOUNT, BOND AMOUNTS
Statewide Traffic Safety and Signs, Inc., $188,127.18; Payment: $188,127.18; Performance:
$188,127.18
FBD Vanguard Construction, Inc., $327,830.00
Highway Specialty Company, Inc., $331,810.25
The bidder listed first above, Statewide, submitted the lowest responsive and responsible bid, which
is $139,702.82 less than the next lowest bid.
This is a federally funded project subject to a Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) contract
goal and requirements. The Public Works Director reports that the lowest monetary bidder,
Statewide, attained DBE participation of 13.40% to meet the DBE goal (13.00%) and requirements
for this project. The Public Works Director recommends that the Board determine that Statewide
has complied with the DBE requirements for this project and recommends that the construction
contract be awarded to Statewide.
The Public Works Director recommends that the bid submitted by Statewide is the lowest
responsive and responsible 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 March 9, 2017.
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 this project would be delayed, and the project might not be built.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
ADOPT Resolution No. 2018/154 approving a list of projects for FY 2018/19 funded by Senate Bill
1(SB1): The Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017 , Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account
(RMRA) funds, and DIRECT staff to submit the list to the California Transportation Commission, as
recommended by the Transportation, Water and Infrastructure Committee (TWIC).
FISCAL IMPACT:
100% allocation to the Road Fund from Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account (RMRA) program
under Senate Bill 1 (SB1) in the amount of $13.8 million.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Jerry Fahy,
925.313.2276
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 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy
cc:
C. 6
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Fiscal Year 2018/2019 Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account Project List for Unincorporated Contra Costa
County
BACKGROUND:
On April 28, 2017, the Governor signed SB1, which is known as the Road Repair and Accountability
Act of 2017. SB1 creates the RMRA, which provides much needed transportation funding for California
to address basic road maintenance, rehabilitation, and critical safety needs on both the state highway and
local streets and road system.
SB1 includes new performance and reporting requirements in order to be eligible for the RMRA funds.
The TWIC reviewed the project list for Fiscal Year 2018/2019 on April 9.
SB1 Funds were available to cities and counties starting in Fiscal Year 2017/2018. The California State
Association of Counties has provided the estimated revenues the County can expect that will be
generated from this transportation bill. The first year of the program was a partial year and the County
expects to receive about $4.9 million from the RMRA program under SB1. We expect the RMRA
amount to increase to $13.8 million for Fiscal Year 2018/2019 and steadily grow with the built-in
inflationary index in future years.
SB1 emphasizes the importance of accountability and transparency in the delivery of California’s
transportation programs. Therefore, in order to be eligible for RMRA funding, state statute requires cities
and counties to provide basic RMRA project reporting to the California Transportation Commission
(CTC).
Prior to receiving an apportionment of RMRA funds from the State Controller in a fiscal year, a city or
county must submit to the CTC a list of projects proposed to be funded with these funds. All projects
proposed to receive funding must be reviewed and approved by the applicable city council or county
board of supervisors at a regular public meeting.
The list of projects must include a description and location of each proposed project, a proposed
schedule for the project’s completion, and the estimated useful life of the improvement. The project list
does not limit the flexibility of an eligible city or county to fund projects in accordance with local needs
and priorities so long as the projects are consistent with RMRA priorities as outlined in the applicable
code sections. Some example projects and uses for RMRA funding include, but are not limited to the
following:
• Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation
• Safety Projects
• Railroad Grade Separations
• Complete Streets Components (including active transportation purposes, pedestrian and bicycle safety
projects, transit facilities, and drainage and stormwater capture projects in conjunction with any other
allowable project)
• Traffic Control Devices
Streets and Highways Code Section 2030(b)(2) states that funds made available by the program may
also be used to satisfy a match requirement in order to obtain state or federal funds for projects
authorized by this subdivision.
Staff has developed a recommended list of projects for the Transportation Water and Infrastructure
Committee and the Board of Supervisors to consider for submitting to the Commission.
When developing the recommended project list for RMRA funds, staff considered:
• Eligibility criteria for RMRA funds
• Emergency storm damage projects that exceeded existing road fund revenue capacity
• Maintenance and rehabilitation priorities
• Roadway safety
• Expiring grants where local funds are necessary to complete the funding package
• Geographic equity
• Projects where expenditures had already occurred for design of the project and had been shelved due to
declining gas tax revenues
• Multi-modal benefits in accordance with the Board of Supervisor’s Complete Streets policy
• Positive impact to Road Program performance metrics
• Clearing the queue of delayed projects that were a result of declining gas tax revenues
• Meeting customer expectations
It should be noted that this project list is a small subset of the proposed project delivery list that is
outlined in the adopted Capital Road Improvement and Preservation Program document and only focuses
on how the RMRA funds will be expended as required by the Commission.
PROPOSED PROJECTS (Total RMRA = $13.8M)
Proposed Project No. 1: Road Drainage Maintenance (RMRA = $1.1 M)-
Countywide
• Ditch Cleaning – This routine maintenance item is to perform drainage ditch cleaning to remove debris
and vegetation which may obstruct the passage of stormwater and cause local flooding. (RMRA =
$200k) County Project No.: 0672-6U2303
• Clean Catch Basin – This routine maintenance item is to perform cleaning of sediment and prevent
obstructions of catch basins (drainage inlets) and related pipe systems. The county has over twenty
thousand catch basins throughout the unincorporated portions of the County. (RMRA = $600k) County
Project No.: 0672-6U2308
• Inspect Catch Basin – This routine maintenance item is to perform inspections of catch basins and
associated systems. This includes a visual inspection of the drainage inlet and any clean water inserts.
Follow-up video inspections may be required for deeper inlets and/or suspected structural issue
concerning the inlets. (RMRA = $300k) County Project No.: 0672-6U2308
Proposed Project No.2: Traffic Safety Devices Maintenance (RMRA = $800k) -
Countywide
• Traffic Signing – This routine maintenance item is to perform sign repair, replacement, and installation
along the unincorporated County roadways. (RMRA = $300k) County Project No.: 0672-6U2504
• Traffic Striping – This routine maintenance item is to perform new painting, routine painting and
replacement of pavement striping along the unincorporated County roadways to enhance public safety.
(RMRA = $500k) County Project No.: 0672-6U2504
Proposed Project No. 3: Pavement Repairs and Preparation (RMRA = $5.0M)-
Countywide
• Pot Hole Patching – This routine maintenance item is to perform spot pavement repairs of pot holes
along the unincorporated County roadways to eliminate surface hazards. (RMRA = $700k) County
Project No.: 0672-6U2101
• Pavement Fabric Patching – This routine maintenance item is to perform pavement fabric patching
along the unincorporated County roadways to correct minor pavement defects and prevent further
cracking. The patch will remove an area of existing damaged asphalt and excavate to the roadway fabric
portion. The roadway base will be compacted and leveled to support the new fabric layer and asphalt
layer. (RMRA = $500k) County Project No.: 0672-6U2102
• Pavement Failure Repair - Backhoe – This routine maintenance item is to conduct pavement failure
repair along the unincorporated County roadways. This task requires the removal of a larger area of
cracked or damaged pavement with a backhoe. The roadway base will be compacted and overlaid with
new asphalt. (RMRA = $600k) County Project No.: 0672-6U2103
• Pull Box Paving – This is a roadway paving operation to place asphalt on localized roadway
depressions to provide a smooth riding surface for the motorized public along the unincorporated
County roadways. (RMRA = $625k) County Project No.: 0672-6U2104
• Hand Patching – This is similar to pot hole patching to conduct spot pavement repairs along
unincorporated County roadway, but on a smaller scale. (RMRA = $600k) County Project No.:
0672-6U2105
• Crack Sealing – This pavement preservation task is to seal cracks in the roadway. Cracks are typically
filled in to seal the roadway structural section from water penetration. The goal is to prolong the service
live of the pavement and/or prepare the roadway surface for an overlay. (RMRA = $700k) County
Project No.: 0672-6U2106
• Leveling – This task is associated with leveling of large settlements, depressions, surface irregularities
and recent large pavement repairs. This is to provide a smooth riding surface for the motorized public
along unincorporated County roadways. (RMRA = $500k) County Project No.: 0672-6U2107
• Grinder Follow-up Paving – This task is associated with placing roadway asphalt on localized
settlements and pavement repairs. This is conducted as a follow-up to grinding operations to provide a
smooth riding surface. (RMRA = $80k) County Project No.: 0672-6U2107
• Pavement Failure Repair – Grinder – This task is to remove badly cracked or broken pavement. The
roadway is then replaced with new asphalt and roadway base rock. This task supports pavement
preservation operations and also extends the service life of the roadway pavement. (RMRA = $600k)
County Project No.: 0672-6U2123
• Pavement Grinding – Bobcat – This task is to remove flaws and tripping hazards in the roadway or curb
edge through machine grinding. (RMRA = $90k) County Project No.: 0672-6U2108
Proposed Project No. 4: County-Wide Surface Treatments (RMRA = $5.3M)
Countywide:
• Double Chip Seal Project (2018) – This project will apply a double chip seal to various roads as a
pavement preservation project in the unincorporated Contra Costa County. Work will also include
surface preparation and pavement striping and markings. (RMRA = $1.30M) County Project No.
0672-6U2162
• Slurry Seal Project (2018) – This project will apply a slurry seal to various roads as a pavement
preservation project in the unincorporated Contra Costa County. Work will also include surface
preparation and pavement striping and markings. (RMRA = $500k) County Project No. 0672-6U2163
• Single Chip Seal Project (2018) – This project will apply a single chip seal to various roads as a
pavement preservation project in the unincorporated Contra Costa County. Work will also include
surface preparation and pavement striping and markings. (RMRA = $500k) County Project No.
0672-6U2162
Bay Point Area and Central County:
• Asphalt Rubber Cape Seal Project (2018) - The project will apply an asphalt rubber chip seal covered
with a type II slurry seal to various roadways in the Bay Point (76 streets), Martinez (6 streets), Walnut
Creek Overlook (24 streets), Parkmead (33 streets) areas and a type II slurry seal on roadways in Bay
Point and Clyde areas (18 streets) and the Bella Vista and Clyde Trails. Work will also include surface
preparation and pavement striping and markings. (RMRA = $3M) County Project No. 0672-6U2154
Proposed Project No. 5: Pomona Street Pedestrian Safety Improvement Project –
Phase II (RMRA = $175k)- Crockett area
• The project will improve two pedestrian crossings on Pomona Street near three schools and a
community center. At Pomona Street and 3rd Avenue, Pedestrian-Actuated Rectangular Rapid-Flashing
Beacons (RRFB) and other pedestrian improvements will be added. At Pomona Street and Rolph
Avenue, bulb outs and ramps will be added. County Project No. 0622-6U4090
Proposed Project No. 6: Tara Hills Pedestrian Infrastructure Project (RMRA =
$420k)—Tara Hills area
• The project will construct 20+ ADA compliant curb ramps on the roads surrounding the Tara Hills
Elementary School and North Campus Continuation High School. County Project No. 0662-6R4211
Proposed Project No. 7: Pedestrian Crossing Enhancements Project – Central &
East County (RMRA = $350k)
• The project will install ten Rectangular Rapid-Flashing Beacons at uncontrolled crosswalks at seven
school sites in Central and East County. County Project No. 0662-6R4112
Proposed Project No. 8: Blackhawk Road Bikeway Project (RMRA =
$210k)—Blackhawk/Diablo area
• The project will stripe a class 2 bike lane for 3.3 miles and class bikeway for 0.3 miles (a portion at
each end of the project) and connect to existing class 2 and class 3 bikeways using thermoplastic striping.
The bikeway will also use green pavement markings at transition areas. County Project No.
0662-6R4018
Proposed Project No. 9: Alhambra Valley Road Embankment Repair
($450k)—Alhambra Valley area
• The project will reconstruct the creek embankment and the roadway. The creek embankment that
supported Alhambra Valley Road eroded during a severe storm event several years ago. Since then,
traffic has been routed to one lane with stop control in both directions. The remainder of Alhambra
Valley Road is a rural two-lane roadway winding through the hills between Martinez and Pinole. The
proposed project length is about 800 feet with a road widening to support two 12-foot wide travel lanes
and 4-foot shoulders for bicyclists. County Project No. 0662-6U4095
The overall strategy for this partial year of RMRA funds was to 1) clear as many delayed projects as
possible from the queue with 2) a balanced approach that met the road program mission to provide a
safe, efficient, reliable, and accessible transportation system.
With the annual reporting requirement, the Department will begin strategizing how the County can
allocate the new funding to achieve the Road Program’s mission and improve the program’s key
performance metrics for safety, efficiency, reliability and accessibility.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If a project list is not reviewed by the TWIC, forwarded to the Board of Supervisors for approval, and
submitted to the CTC by the May 1, 2018 deadline, the County will not be eligible to receive its portion
of RMRA funds and the projects listed above will not be constructed.
AGENDA ATTACHMENTS
Resolution No. 2018/154
MINUTES ATTACHMENTS
Signed: Resolution No. 2018/154
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board
Adopted this Resolution on 04/24/2018 by the following vote:
AYE:5
John Gioia
Candace Andersen
Diane Burgis
Karen Mitchoff
Federal D. Glover
NO:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
RECUSE:
Resolution No. 2018/154
IN THE MATTER OF ADOPTING A List of Projects for Fiscal Year 2018-19 funded by Senate Bill 1 (Sb 1): The Road Repair
and Accountability Act of 2017
WHEREAS, Senate Bill 1 (SB 1), the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017 (Chapter 5, Statutes of 2017) was passed by
the Legislature and Signed into law by the Governor in April 2017 in order to address the significant multi-modal transportation
funding shortfalls statewide; and
WHEREAS, SB 1 includes accountability and transparency provisions that will ensure the residents of our County are aware of
the projects proposed for funding in our community and which projects have been completed each fiscal year; and
WHEREAS, the County must adopt by resolution a list of all projects proposed to receive funding from the Road Maintenance
and Rehabilitation Account (RMRA), created by SB 1, which must include a description and the location of each proposed
project, a proposed schedule for the project’s completion, and the estimated useful life of the improvement; and
WHEREAS, the County, will receive an estimated $13.8 million in RMRA funding in Fiscal Year 2018-19 from SB 1; and
WHEREAS, this is the second fiscal year in which County is receiving SB 1 funding and will enable County to continue
essential road maintenance and rehabilitation projects, safety improvements, repairing and replacing aging bridges, and
increasing access and mobility options for the traveling public that would not have otherwise been possible without SB 1 ; and
WHEREAS, County has undergone a public process to ensure public input into our community’s transportation priorities/the
project list; and
WHEREAS, the County used a Pavement Management System to develop the SB 1 project list to ensure revenues are being used
on the most high-priority and cost-effective projects that also meet the communities priorities for transportation investment; and
WHEREAS, the funding from SB 1 will help the County maintain its roadways at a significant higher level and rehabilitate 157
roads, as well as add active transportation infrastructure throughout the County this fiscal yar and hundreds of similar projects
into the future; and
WHEREAS, the SB 1 project list and overall investment in our local streets and roads infrastructure with a focus on basic
maintenance and safety, investing in complete streets infrastructure, and using cutting-edge technology, materials and practices,
will have significant positive co-benefits statewide.
NOW, THEREFORE IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED, ORDERED AND FOUND by the Contra Costa County Board of
Supervisors, State of California, as follows:
1. The foregoing recitals are true and correct. 2. The fiscal year 2018-19 list of projects planned to be funded with Road
Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account revenues are summarized below:
PROPOSED PROJECTS (Total RMRA = $13.8M)
Proposed Project 1: Road Drainage Maintenance (RMRA = $1.1 M)-Countywide
Description:
• Ditch Cleaning – This routine maintenance item is to perform drainage ditch cleaning to remove debris and vegetation which
may obstruct the passage of stormwater and cause local flooding. (RMRA = $200k) County Project No.: 0672-6U2303
• Clean Catch Basin – This routine maintenance item is to perform cleaning of sediment and prevent obstructions of catch basins
(drainage inlets) and related pipe systems. The county has over twenty thousand catch basins throughout the unincorporated
portions of the County. (RMRA = $600k) County Project No.: 0672-6U2308
• Inspect Catch Basin – This routine maintenance item is to perform inspections of catch basins and associated systems. This
includes a visual inspection of the drainage inlet and any clean water inserts. Follow-up video inspections may be required for
deeper inlets and/or suspected structural issue concerning the inlets. (RMRA = $300k) County Project No.: 0672-6U2308
• RMRA Priority: Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation
Proposed Schedule for Completion:
• Anticipated construction year – 2018
Estimated Useful Life:
• 15 - 40 years (ditch – dirt roadway to concrete V-ditch)
• 40 years (concrete structures)
Proposed Project 2: Traffic Safety Devices Maintenance (RMRA = $800k) -Countywide
Description:
• Traffic Signing – This routine maintenance item is to perform sign repair, replacement, and installation along the
unincorporated County roadways. (RMRA = $300k) County Project No.: 0672-6U2504
• Traffic Striping – This routine maintenance item is to perform new painting, routine painting and replacement of pavement
striping along the unincorporated County roadways to enhance public safety. (RMRA = $500k) County Project No.:
0672-6U2504
• RMRA Priority: Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation
Location:
• Countywide
Proposed Schedule for Completion:
• Anticipated construction year – 2018
Estimated Useful Life:
• 10 years (roadway signage)
• 2 - 4 years (roadway striping - thermoplastic)
Proposed Project 3: Pavement Repairs and Preparation (RMRA = $5.0M)-Countywide
Description:
• Pot Hole Patching – This routine maintenance item is to perform spot pavement repairs of pot holes along the unincorporated
County roadways to eliminate surface hazards. (RMRA = $700k) County Project No.: 0672-6U2101
• Pavement Fabric Patching – This routine maintenance item is to perform pavement fabric patching along the unincorporated
County roadways to correct minor pavement defects and prevent further cracking. The patch will remove an area of existing
damaged asphalt and excavate to the roadway fabric portion. The roadway base will be compacted and leveled to support the new
fabric layer and asphalt layer. (RMRA = $500k) County Project No.: 0672-6U2102
• Pavement Failure Repair - Backhoe – This routine maintenance item is to conduct pavement failure repair along the
unincorporated County roadways. This task requires the removal of a larger area of cracked or damaged pavement with a
backhoe. The roadway base will be compacted and overlaid with new asphalt. (RMRA = $600k) County Project No.:
0672-6U2103
• Pull Box Paving – This is a roadway paving operation to place asphalt on localized roadway depressions to provide a smooth
riding surface for the motorized public along the unincorporated County roadways. (RMRA = $625k) County Project No.:
0672-6U2104
• Hand Patching – This is similar to pot hole patching to conduct spot pavement repairs along unincorporated County roadway,
but on a smaller scale. (RMRA=$600k) County Project No.: 0672-6U2105
• Crack Sealing – This pavement preservation task is to seal cracks in the roadway. Cracks are typically filled in to seal the
roadway structural section from water penetration. The goal is to prolong the service live of the pavement and/or prepare the
roadway surface for an overlay. (RMRA = $700k) County Project No.: 0672-6U2106
• Leveling – This task is associated with leveling of large settlements, depressions, surface irregularities and recent large
pavement repairs. This is to provide a smooth riding surface for the motorized public along unincorporated County roadways.
(RMRA = $500k) County Project No.: 0672-6U2107
• Grinder Follow-up Paving – This task is associated with placing roadway asphalt on localized settlements and pavement
repairs. This is conducted as a follow-up to grinding operations to provide a smooth riding surface. (RMRA = $80k) County
Project No.: 0672-6U2107
• Pavement Failure Repair – Grinder – This task is to remove badly cracked or broken pavement. The roadway is then replaced
with new asphalt and roadway base rock. This task supports pavement preservation operations and also extends the service life of
the roadway pavement. (RMRA = $600k) County Project No.: 0672-6U2123
• Pavement Grinding – Bobcat – This task is to remove flaws and tripping hazards in the roadway or curb edge through machine
grinding. (RMRA = $90k) County Project No.: 0672-6U2108
• RMRA Priority: Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation
Location:
• Countywide
Proposed Schedule for Completion:
• Anticipated construction year – 2018
Estimated Useful Life:
• 7 years (pavement surface treatment)
Proposed Project 4: Surface Treatments (RMRA = $5.3M)
Countywide
Description:
• Double Chip Seal Project (2018) – This project will apply a double chip seal to various roads as a pavement preservation
project in the unincorporated Contra Costa County. Work will also include surface preparation and pavement striping and
markings. (RMRA = $1.30M) County Project No. 0672-6U2162
• Slurry Seal Project (2018) – This project will apply a slurry seal to various roads as a pavement preservation project in the
unincorporated Contra Costa County. Work will also include surface preparation and pavement striping and markings. (RMRA =
$500k) County Project No. 0672-6U2163
• Single Chip Seal Project (2018) – This project will apply a single chip seal to various roads as a pavement preservation project
in the unincorporated Contra Costa County. Work will also include surface preparation and pavement striping and markings.
(RMRA = $500k) County Project No. 0672-6U2162
• RMRA Priority: Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation
Location:
• Countywide Proposed Schedule for Completion:
• Anticipated construction year – 2018
Estimated Useful Life: 7 years (pavement surface treatment)
Bay Point and Central County area
• Asphalt Rubber Cape Seal Project (2018)
Description:
• The project will apply an asphalt rubber chip seal covered with a type II slurry seal to various roadways in the Bay Point (76
streets), Martinez (6 streets), Walnut Creek Overlook (24 streets), Parkmead (33 streets) areas and a type II slurry seal on
roadways in Bay Point and Clyde areas (18 streets) and the Bella Vista and Clyde Trails. Work will also include surface
preparation and pavement striping and markings. (RMRA = $3M) County Project No. 0672-6U2154
• RMRA Priority: Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation
Location:
• Cape Seal: Bay Point (76 streets), Martinez (6 streets), Walnut Creek Overlook (24 streets), Parkmead (33 streets)
• Slurry Seal: Bay Point and Clyde areas (18 streets) and the Bella Vista and Clyde Trails
Proposed Schedule for Completion:
• Anticipated construction year – 2018
Estimated Useful Life:
• 7 years (pavement surface treatment)
Proposed Project 5: Pomona Street Pedestrian Safety Improvement Project – Phase II (RMRA = $175k)
Description:
• The project will improve two pedestrian crossings on Pomona Street near three schools and a community center. At Pomona
Street and 3rd Avenue, Pedestrian-Actuated Rectangular Rapid-Flashing Beacons (RRFB) and other pedestrian improvements
will be added. At Pomona Street and Rolph Avenue, bulb outs and ramps will be added. County Project No. 0622-6U4090
• RMRA Priority: Complete Streets Components
Location:
• Pomona Street at 3rd Avenue
• Pomona Street at Rolph Avenue
Proposed Schedule for Completion:
• Anticipated construction year – 2018
Estimated Useful Life:
• 50 years (concrete)
• 12 years (RRFB)
Proposed Project 6: Tara Hills Pedestrian Infrastructure Project (RMRA = $420k)
Description:
• The project will construct 20+ ADA compliant curb ramps on the roads surrounding the Tara Hills Elementary School and
North Campus Continuation High School. County Project No. 0662-6R4211
• RMRA Priority: Complete Streets Components
Location:
• Dolan Way, Flannery Road, Shamrock Drive, Tara Hills area
Proposed Schedule for Completion:
• Anticipated construction year – 2018
Estimated Useful Life:
• 50 years (concrete)
Proposed Project 7: Pedestrian Crossing Enhancements Project – Central & East County (RMRA = $350k)
Description:
• The project will install ten RRFB’s at uncontrolled crosswalks at seven school sites in Central and East County. County Project
No. 0662-6R4112
• RMRA Priority: Complete Streets Components
Location:
• 1 – Delta Road, Knightsen Elementary School, Knightsen area
• 2 – Newport Drive, Timber Point Elementary School, Discovery Bay area crossing o Two crossing sites
• 3 – Willow Lake Road, Discovery Bay Elementary School, Discovery Bay area
• 4 – Marina Road, Shore Acres Elementary School, Bay Point area o Two crossing sites
• 5 – Pacifica Avenue, Riverview Middle School, Bay Point area o Two crossing sites
• 6 – Castle Rock Road, Northgate High School, Walnut Creek area
• 7 – Magnolia Way, Parkmead Elementary School, Walnut Creek area
Proposed Schedule for Completion:
• Anticipated construction year – 2018
Estimated Useful Life:
• 12 years (flashing beacons)
Proposed Project 8: Blackhawk Road Bikeway Project (RMRA = $210k)
Description:
• The project will stripe a class 2 bike lane for 3.3 miles and class bikeway for 0.3 miles (a portion at each end of the project) and
connect to existing class 2 and class 3 bikeways using thermoplastic striping. The bikeway will also use green pavement
markings at transition areas. County Project No. 0662-6R4018
• RMRA Priority: Complete Streets Components
Location:
• Blackhawk Road, between Camino Tassajara and Mount Diablo Scenic Drive, Blackhawk/Danville area
Proposed Schedule for Completion:
• Anticipated construction year – 2018
Estimated Useful Life:
• 2 - 4 years (thermoplastic striping)
Proposed Project 9: Alhambra Valley Road Embankment Repair ($450k)
Description:
• The project will reconstruct the creek embankment and the roadway. The creek embankment that supported Alhambra Valley
Road eroded during a severe storm event several years ago. Since then, traffic has been routed to one lane with stop control in
both directions. The remainder of Alhambra Valley Road is a rural two-lane roadway winding through the hills between Martinez
and Pinole. The proposed project length is about 800 feet with a road widening to support two 12-foot wide travel lanes and
4-foot shoulders for bicyclists. County Project No. 0662-6U4095
• RMRA Priority: Roadway Safety, Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation
Location:
• Alhambra Valley Road between Castro Ranch Road and Bear Creek Road
Proposed Schedule for Completion:
• Anticipated construction year – 2018
Estimated Useful Life:
• 40 years (roadway re-construction)
Contact: Jerry Fahy, 925.313.2276
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 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy
cc:
RECOMMENDATION(S):
ADOPT Resolution No. 2018/146 approving reduction of performance bond amount for Subdivision
Agreement (Right-of-Way Landscaping) for park acceptance PA14-00042 (cross-reference subdivision
SD05-08971) for a project developed by Toll Brothers, Inc., as recommended by the Public Works Director,
San Ramon (Dougherty Valley) area. (District II)
FISCAL IMPACT:
No fiscal impact
BACKGROUND:
Title 9 of the County Ordinance Code allows a reduced performance security to guarantee repair of any
defective work upon acceptance of the work as complete. The work has been accepted as completed and
the developer requested this bond reduction.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
The performance bond amount reduction will not be approved.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V 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 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy
cc: Jocelyn LaRocque- Engineering Services, Dante Morabe - Design & Construction, Lori Leontini- Engineering Services , Craig Standafer- Engineering Services, Mike Mann-
Finance, Chris Low - City of San Ramon, Toll Brothers, Inc., Western Surety Company
C. 7
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Approving reduction of performance bond amount for the park acceptance PA14-00042, San Ramon (Dougherty
Valley) area.
AGENDA ATTACHMENTS
Resolution No. 2018/146
Decrease Penalty Rider
MINUTES ATTACHMENTS
Signed: Resolution No.
2018/146
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board
Adopted this Resolution on 04/24/2018 by the following vote:
AYE:5
John Gioia
Candace Andersen
Diane Burgis
Karen Mitchoff
Federal D. Glover
NO:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
RECUSE:
Resolution No. 2018/146
IN THE MATTER OF: Approving reduction of the performance bond amount for Subdivision Agreement (Right-of-Way
Landscaping) for park acceptance PA14-00042 (cross-reference subdivision SD05-08971) for a project developed by Toll
Brothers, Inc., as recommended by the Public Works Director, San Ramon (Dougherty Valley) area. (District II)
WHERE AS, on April 10, 2018 (Resolution No. 2018/126) the Public Works Director has notified this Board that the
improvements in the park acceptance have been completed.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the performance and guarantee surety bond for Subdivision Agreement
(Right-of-Way Landscaping) for park acceptance PA14-00042 approved by the Board on March 20, 2018, is hereby REDUCED
to $94,200.00, Bond No. 58727561 dated August 11, 2015, issued by Western Surety Company submitted by Toll Brothers, Inc.,
and be RETAINED until further action by this Board.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the payment (labor and materials) cash bond for $7,000.00, auditor’s Deposit Permit No.
DP695177 submitted by Toll Brothers, Inc., be RETAINED until further action 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 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy
cc: Jocelyn LaRocque- Engineering Services, Dante Morabe - Design & Construction, Lori Leontini- Engineering Services , Craig Standafer- Engineering
Services, Mike Mann- Finance, Chris Low - City of San Ramon, Toll Brothers, Inc., Western Surety Company
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Acting as the governing body of the Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District
(District), APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the conveyance of a pipeline easement to Phillips 66 located near
Grayson Creek adjacent to Highway 4 and Interstate 680 (SR4/I680) Interchange in Martinez identified in
Exhibit “A”, of the Grant of Easement (State Parcel No. 63155-6), pursuant to Section 31 of the Contra
Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District Act and Government Code Section 25526.6.
(Project No.7520-6B8721)
DETERMINE that the conveyance of the pipeline easement is in the public interest and that the interest in
the land conveyed will not substantially conflict or interfere with the use of the Districts use of the
property; and
AUTHORIZE the Chair, Board of Supervisors, to execute the Grant of Easement on behalf of the District;
and
DIRECT the Real Estate Division of the Public Works Department to cause said Grant of Easement to be
delivered to the grantees for acceptance and recording in the Office of the County Clerk-Recorder.
FISCAL IMPACT:
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Jessica Dillingham, 925
313-2224
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 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy
cc:
C. 8
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:APPROVE the Conveyance of a pipeline Easement to Phillips 66, for pipeline purposes in connection with the
SR4/I680 Widening Project Phase 3.
No fiscal impact.
BACKGROUND:
The District acquired the real property in the 1960’s and 1970’s for Flood Control purposes. As part of
the improvements for the I-680/SR 4 Widening Project Phase 3, the State requires said pipeline
easement to be conveyed to Phillips 66 due to the relocation of the existing pipeline as part of the State’s
project. An Environmental Impact Report dated December 17, 2015 was completed by the State. The
State has the power of Eminent Domain to acquire the necessary rights from the District. The easement
document provides language so as not to substantially conflict or interfere with the Districts use of the
property.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
The Project will not have sufficient land rights to allow construction in accordance with the approved
plans and specifications.
AGENDA ATTACHMENTS
Exhibits A & B
Pipeline Easement
MINUTES ATTACHMENTS
Signed: Pipeline Easement
1
Recorded at the request of:
Contra Costa County Flood Control
And Water Conservation District
After recording return to:
Kristin Finefrock
Phillips 66 Pipeline LLC
18781 El Camino Real
Atascadero, CA 93422
Ptn. Of Assessor’s Parcel No.: 125-020-XXX
State Parcel # 63155 -6
GRANT OF EASEMENT
For good and valuable consideration, including but not limited to the agreements contained
herein, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, CONTRA COSTA
COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT, a flood control district,
organized under the laws of the State of California, (hereinafter “DISTRICT”), hereby grants
to Phillips 66 Pipeline LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability Company (hereinafter “GRANTEE”), a
nonexclusive right to a perpetual easement and right of way (hereinafter “Easement Area”)
for constructing, repairing, maintaining, operating , using and abandoning in place a 16-inch
steel pipeline that will transport crude oil, and appurtenances thereto, and for no other
purposes whatsoever, along and in all of the hereinafter described parcel of land situated in
the County of Contra Costa, State of California, described as follows:
FOR DESCRIPTION AND PLAT MAP, SEE ATTACHED EXHIBITS “A’ AND “B”
The foregoing grant is made subject to the following terms and conditions:
1. PRIMARY USE OF THE PROPERTY The primary use of the property subject to this
easement (hereinafter the “Property”) is for flood control conveyance of storm water
and flood protection purposes, including, but not limited to, the right of channeling,
impounding and otherwise controlling the flow of drainage waters, as well as
performing any other activities, and construction o r maintaining any facilities that the
District may be required to perform, construction or maintain by other agencies at
Federal, State, Regional or Local level, including but not limited to, water quality and
quantity control activities (such activities a nd those ancillary there to being hereinafter
referred to as “Flood Control”).
GRANTEE acknowledges and agrees that the use just described constitutes the
primary use of the Property and that any and all rights granted or implied by this Grant
of Easement are secondary and subordinate to the primary use of the Property by the
DISTRICT, its successors and assigns. GRANTEE shall not, at any time, use or permit
the public to use the Easement Area in any manner that will interfere with or impair
the DISTRICT’s primary use of the Property. GRANTEE shall not fence said Easement
Area without the prior written approval of the DISTRICT, and shall remove any fencing
when requested by DISTRICT to do so. GRANTEE shall not otherwise obstruct the
Easement Area.
2. U. S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEER’S PROJECT: The Property is part of the U. S.
Army Corps of Engineers , Walnut Creek Project, Contra Costa County, California . The
2
project provides flood protection to the surrounding communities. Approval by the
Flood Protection and Navigation Section of the Sacramento District, U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers are required under 33 USC (United States Code) 408 (Section 408).
3. DISTRICT TITLE: GRANTEE hereby acknowledges DISTRICT’s title to the Property
and agrees never to assail or resist said title.
4. CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES :
(a) GRANTEE shall, prior to any construction, reconstruction, remodeling,
excavation, installation or plantings within the Easement Area, submit specific plans
and specifications to the DISTRICT for review and approval. Such approval, together
with any additional requirements , to be in the form of a written permit issued by
DISTRICT to GRANTEE.
(b) Normal maintenance by GRANTEE of its facilities within the Easement Area,
including inspection and cleaning of existing pipelines, shall not require prior notice to
the DISTRICT. GRANTEE shall perform maintenance of its facilities so as to prevent
dam age to the site.
(c) GRANTEE shall disclose to the DISTRICT the volume, pressure and type of
substances being transported by the pipeline; the size, date of construction and
material specifications of the pipeline; maximum pipeline pressure ratings; the date of
the most recent inspection required by law; a copy of the most recent certifications
from all applicable regulatory agencies; a detailed description of materials transported,
maximum daily volumes, and certifications from all agencies responsible for permitting
and operation of the pipeline facilities, as applicable; and any other information as
may be requested by the DISTRICT and Army Corps of Engineers.
(d) GRANTEE is responsible, at its expense, for all repair and maintenance directly
caused by GRANTEE’s use of the Easement Area. Except in the case of an emergency,
the GRANTEE shall not make alterations to the Easement Area, without the prior
written consent of DISTRICT ’s Chief Engineer, or his or her designee which shall be
in the form of an Encroachment Permit for Use of DISTRICT ’s Right of Way
(“Encroachment Permit”). The GRANTEE shall make every effort to report emergency
work in the Easement Area to the DISTRICT within one (1) business- day after
commencing such activities.
(e) GRANTEE shall test all pipelines as required by the State Fire Marshal or other
state or federal agency with jurisdiction over the pipeline or by any applicable law,
and must make available for inspection by the DISTRICT the results of all pipeline
inspections and pipeline tests that are required by the State Fire Marshal and by all
applicable laws within sixty (60) days of the GRANTEE’S receipt of those results.
(f) GRANTEE shall file, and thereafter annually keep on file, with the DISTRICT, a
pipeline emergency plan as may be required by 49 CFR (Code of Federal Regulations)
section 195.402, 49 C.F.R. section 192.615, the California Pipeline Safety Act of 1981
(Government Code sections 51010 et seq.), and all other applicable laws. GRANTEE
shall update its pipeline emergency plan whenever it acquires, constructs, lays,
removes or abandons any facilities in the Easement Area, and shall file the plan with
the DISTRICT within thirty (30) days after any update.
3
5. DAMAGE TO DISTRICT PROPERTY : Any and all DISTRICT Property, facilities,
landscaping or other improvements removed or damaged to the extent caused by the
use of the Easement Area by GRANTEE or any other person or entity acting under
GRANTEE’s direction or control, shall, at DISTRICT’s discretion and direction, be
repaired or replaced by DISTRICT, with all reasonable costs and expenses to be paid
by GRANTEE (including, but not limited to, reasonable engineering costs and legal
costs of collecting any unpaid expenses) or shall be repaired or replaced by GRANTEE,
at the sole cost and expense of GRANTEE, equivalent to or better than their existing
condition. In the event that GRANTEE fails to commence the required work within
ninety days after being directed to do so by DISTRICT, or such reasonable extension
as DISTRICT may agree to in writing, or fails to complete the required work within a
reasonable time thereafter, DISTRICT may perform or complete the work at the
reasonable expense of GRANTEE, which expense GRANTEE agrees to pay to DISTRICT
promptly upon demand, including but not limited to reasonable engineering costs and
any legal expenses incurred to collect such costs.
6. NON -EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT: The easement granted hereunder is non-exclusive.
This easement is subject and subordinate to all existing rights, rights of way, licenses,
reservations, franchises and easements of record, or that would be evident from a
physical inspection or accurate survey of the Property, in and to the Property. Nothing
contained herein shall be construed to prevent DISTRICT from granting other
easements, franchises, licenses or rights of way over said lands ; provided, however,
that said subsequent uses do not unreasonably prevent or obstruct GRANTEE’s
easement rights hereunder or cause damage to Grantee’s facilities or improvements .
7. NO WARRANTIES : GRANTEE understands and acknowledges that DISTRICT makes
no representations, warranties or guarantees of any kind or character, express or
implied, with respect to the Property, and GRANTEE is entering into this transaction
without relying in any manner on any such representation or warranty by DISTRICT.
8. ABANDONMENT: In the event GRANTEE shall cease to use the easement herein
continuously for a period of one year (unless prevented from doing so by force
majeure, in which event said one year period shall be extended by the period of
time GRANTEE is actually so prevented), or in the event GRANTEE abandons its
facilities or fails to use the easement for the purpose for which it is granted, then all
rights of GRANTEE in and to said lands shall thereupon cease and terminate and shall
immediately revert to and vest in DISTRICT or its successors. GRANTEE shall ex ecute
any Quitclaim Deeds required by DISTRICT to relinquish GRANTEE’S interest in the
Easement Area following abandonment .
9. NO ASSIGNMENT OF EASEMENT: Except as otherwise specified herein, no rights
granted hereunder shall be transferred, apportioned, or assigned without the prior
written consent of the DISTRICT , which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld,
delayed or conditioned. The rights granted herein may be assigned by the GRANTEE
without the prior written consent of the DISTRICT only for the purposes of effectuating
a corporate transfer, including without limitation, an assignment to any corporation,
partnership, or joint venture affiliated by common management or ownership with
GRANTEE. In the event of any assignment by the GRANTEE, whether for corporate
transfer or otherwise, the GRANTEE shall not be released from any of its obligations
4
or liabilities hereunder as a result of any assignment until such assignee(s) has
assumed and agreed to carry out any and all such covenants, agreements, and
obligations.
10. NO SECONDARY RIGHTS : Nothing herein contained shall be deemed to construe
that access or other secondary rights are c onveyed by this document over any of
DISTRICT’s adjacent lands lying outside of the aforesaid strip of land above described.
11. ENTIRE AGREEMENT: This Grant of Easement contains the entire agreement
between the parties hereto and shall not be modified in any manner except by an
instrument in writing executed by the parties or their respective successors in interest.
12. CONSTRUCTION : This Grant of Easement shall not be construed as if it had been
prepared by one of the parties, but rather as if both pa rties have prepared it. The
parties to this Grant of Easement and their couns el have read and reviewed this Grant
of Easement and agree that any rule of construction to the effect that ambiguities are
to be resolved against the drafting party shall not app ly to the interpretation of this
Grant of Easement.
13. SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS : This indenture and all of the covenants herein
contained shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the heirs, successors and
assigns of the respective parties hereto.
14. NO THIRD-PARTY BENEFICIARIES : Nothing in this Grant of Easement confers
any rights on any persons or entities other than the parties hereto.
15. GOVERNING LAW: This Grant of Easement shall be construed in accordance with
the laws of the State of California.
REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
5
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Grant of Easement is signed and executed this day of
__________________ 20__.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY FLOOD GRANTEE
CONTROL & WATER CONSERVATION PHILLIPS 66 PIPELINE LLC
DISTRICT
By By
Karen Mitchoff Tracey R. Brown
Chair, Board of Supervisors Supervisor, Western Region Real
Estate and Right-of -Way
C:\Users\jdilling\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\XY8PX50T\NC -21 FC Pipeline Easement - Phillips 66
Final_032818.docx
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA )
On before me, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors, Contra Costa County, personally
appeared ___________________________, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory
evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that
he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the
instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true
and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature:
Deputy Clerk
A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed
the document, to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that
document.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a contract with ANKA
Behavioral Health, Inc. (ANKA) in an amount not to exceed $184,650 for weed abatement in the Iron Horse
Corridor for the period of May 1, 2018, through August 1, 2020, Concord, Pleasant Hill, Walnut Creek,
Alamo, Danville and San Ramon areas. (Districts II and IV)
FISCAL IMPACT:
100% Iron Horse Corridor Trust Funds.
BACKGROUND:
The Iron Horse Corridor (IHC), formerly known as the Southern Pacific right of way, is 18.5 miles long
corridor traversing north-south in Central Contra Costa County. The northern terminus is Mayette Avenue
in Concord, and the southern terminus is the Alameda County line in San Ramon. The corridor varies in
width from 30 to 100 feet and currently includes a 10-foot wide, paved multi-use trail managed by the East
Bay Regional Park District. The County Public Works Department has overall management responsibility
of the IHC and performs the majority of maintenance.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor
Contact: Carl Roner -
(925)313-2213
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 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy
cc: Carrie Ricci- Duty, Warren Lai- Engineering Services, Carl Roner- Special Districts, Rochelle Johnson - Special Districts, Scott Anderson - Special Districts, Paulette
Denison- Finance
C. 9
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Approve and Authorize a contract with ANKA Behavioral Health, Inc.
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
California Welfare and Institute Code section 19404 (“Section 19404”) gives the County the authority to
purchase services from non-profit corporations who operate community rehabilitation programs and meet
the criteria of Section 19404 without advertising or calling for bids, provided that the services meet the
specifications and needs of the County and are purchased at a fair market price, as determined by the
County.
ANKA Behavioral Health, Inc. (ANKA) is a California 501(c)(3) non-profit corporation. ANKA meets the
requirements of Section 19404 in that: (1) the work to be performed under the contract will primarily (at
least 75% of it) be performed by a labor force comprised of persons with disabilities; (2) ANKA makes
elections under the federal Insurance Contributions Act to provide social security and unemployment
benefits to its employees; (3) maintains Articles of Incorporation requiring that at least two directors on its
Board of Directors are persons with disabilities or the parents, guardians, or conservators of persons with
disabilities; and (4) provides disabled employees substantially equally benefits that are provided to ANKA’s
organized employees.
ANKA has a client in training/contractor relationship with its workers and provides sick time and vacation.
ANKA does not commit unfair labor practices and abides by the provisions of the Federal Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Walsh-Healy Public Contract Act, the Wagner O’Day Act, and the regulations of the
State Division of Industrial Welfare.
The Public Works Department has contracted with ANKA for the last three years to perform weed
abatement in the IHC, in order to meet the Fire District’s June 1st deadline for completion of mowing. The
Public Works Department’s Maintenance Division continues to abate weeds the rest of unincorporated
County. This arrangement has allowed more resources to be allocated to other County unincorporated areas
to meet the Fire District's deadline. Public Works Department staff discussed this arrangement and the
intention to contract with ANKA for a three-year period with the Teamster’s Business Agent and
employees. Employees expressed their agreement with this arrangement and requested for it to continue.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
Without approval of the contract, Public Works will continue to mow the IHC, but may not be able to meet
the Fire District’s deadline for weed abatement
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Acting as the governing body of the Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District
(District), APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the conveyance of portions of District Parcel Nos. 2, 44 and 44c
(“Property Rights”), located on Henry Avenue over Pinole Creek in Pinole, to the City of Pinole (City), as
described and shown on Exhibits “A” and “B” of the Grant Deed, pursuant to Section 31 of the Contra
Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District Act and Government Code Section 25526.5.
(Project No. WL083A – EF1400637)(CP#15-23)
DETERMINE that the conveyance of said Property Rights are in the public interest and that the rights
conveyed will not substantially conflict or interfere with the Districts use of the property.
DETERMINE that said property is surplus and no longer necessary for District purposes.
DETERMINE that the activity is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant
to Article 5, Section 15061 (b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines; and DIRECT the Director of the
Department of Conservation and Development (DCD) to file a Notice of Exemption with the County Clerk.
DIRECT the Chief Engineer, or designee, to arrange for payment of the $50.00 fee to the County Clerk for
filing and a $25.00 fee to DCD for processing of the Notice of Exemption.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Jewel Lopez, 925.
313-2191
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 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy
cc:
C. 10
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:APPROVE the Conveyance of CCC Flood Control and Water Conservation District real property to the City of
Pinole, District I
RECOMMENDATION(S): (CONT'D)
AUTHORIZE the Chair, Board of Supervisors, to execute a Grant Deed on behalf of the District.
DIRECT the Real Estate Division of the Public Works Department to cause said Grant Deed to be
delivered to the City of Pinole for acceptance and recording in the Office of the County Clerk-Recorder.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No fiscal impact.
BACKGROUND:
The District accepted Grant Deeds for portions of Parcel Nos. 2, 44, and 44c in 1958 and 1966 for flood
control purposes. The Property Rights are considered excess and no longer necessary for District
purposes. The District is transferring the Property Rights to the City of Pinole in order for them to have
control over what utilities can be placed within that portion of Henry Avenue and for overall
maintenance that includes the culvert underneath of it.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
The District will continue to own and be responsible for the upkeep and maintenance of excess Property
Rights no longer necessary for District purposes.
AGENDA ATTACHMENTS
Grant Deed
Exhibit A & B
MINUTES ATTACHMENTS
Signed: Grant Deed
RECOMMENDATION(S):
AUTHORIZE the Director of Airports, or designee, to negotiate a long-term ground lease and
development terms between the County, as Landlord, and MS Commercial, Inc., as the developer, for
approximately 36 acres of land on the northwest side of the Byron Airport.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no negative impact on the General Fund. The Airport Enterprise Fund could realize lease and other
revenues. The County General Fund could realize sales tax and other revenues if a lease is successfully
negotiated.
BACKGROUND:
The development site is approximately 36 acres of land owned by the County and located on the northwest
side of Byron Airport. The parcel is designated for non-aviation use
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
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 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy
cc:
C. 11
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Keith Freitas, Airports Director
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:CCCAirports-Authorization to Negotiate Ground Lease and Development Terms for Approx 36 Acres of
County-Owned Land at Byron Airport (District III)
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
on the Byron Airport Master Plan.
On January 19, 2018, the Contra Costa County Public Works – Airports Division received a letter of
interest from a private party to develop a commercial use on the approximately 36-acre parcel.
In accordance with prior discussions with the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) Airports District
Office (ADO) regarding development at Buchanan Field or Byron Airport, the County notified existing
commercial tenants at Buchanan Field and Byron to solicit other competitive interest in the property. The
January 23, 2018, development solicitation letter provided a response deadline of April 2, 2018, for all
competitive interests in the approximately 36-acre parcel to be submitted to the County Airport Office. The
County did not receive any additional letters of interest to develop this property.
Consistent with the master developer selection process that was approved by the Board of Supervisors on
May 23, 2006, projects without a competitive interest are to proceed with the traditional environmental
review and lease development processes. The commercial development project will be presented to the
Aviation Advisory Committee, the Airport Committee, and any other party as deemed relevant to enhance
community relations and collaborative relationships.
Development of this 36-acre vacant parcel for business park use would expand economic development
activity at the Byron Airport and lead to increased revenues to the Airport Enterprise Fund. This
development will also facilitate the growth and development as identified in the adopted Byron Airport
Master Plan.
A business proposal must be consistent with the Airport Master Plan and General Plan for consideration.
While the proposed use is consistent with the adopted Byron Airport Master Plan, it is not currently
consistent with the General Plan. The Department of Conservation and Development is in process of
amending the General Plan for the Byron Airport to allow for the broader range of uses that are identified
in the adopted Byron Airport Master Plan, including this proposed business use. The General Plan
Amendment is anticipated to be complete by February 2019. The Board of Supervisors could consider
approval of a commercial use lease at the Byron Airport upon completion of the General Plan Amendment.
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.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
Delay in initiating the developer selection process will result in a delay of developing vacant land at Byron
Airport and may negatively impact the Airport Enterprise Fund and County General Fund.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
DENY claims filed by Nadieh Kakar, Juanito C. Lumapac, CSAA, a subrogee of Maria Delourdes Martinez
Correa, East Bay Regional Park District, and Rhonda Polite.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No fiscal impact.
BACKGROUND:
Nadieh Kakar: Personal injury claim for workplace discrimination in an amount to be determined.
Juanito C. Lumapac: Personal injury claim for bus accident in an amount to be determined.
CSAA a/s/o Maria Delourdes Martinez Correa: Property claim for damage to vehicle in the amount of
$1415.45
East Bay Regional Park District: Claim against the County and the Contra Costa County Flood Control and
Water Conservation District for damages and indemnity arising out of water damage to property located at
2530 Patra Drive, El Sobrante, CA.
Rhonda Polite: Personal injury claim for unfair employment treatment in the amount of $50,000.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Scott Selby
925.335.1400
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board
of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: April 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy
cc:
C. 12
To:Board of Supervisors
From:David Twa, County Administrator
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Claims
RECOMMENDATION(S):
ACCEPT Board members meeting reports for March 2018.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No fiscal impact.
BACKGROUND:
Government Code section 53232.3(d) requires that members of legislative bodies report on meetings
attended for which there has been expense reimbursement (mileage, meals, lodging ex cetera). The attached
reports were submitted by the Board of Supervisors members in satisfaction of this requirement. District V
has nothing to report.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
The Board of Supervisors will not be in compliance with Government Code 53232.3(d).
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Joellen Bergamini
925.335.1906
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the
Board of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: April 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy
cc:
C. 13
To:Board of Supervisors
From:David Twa, County Administrator
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:ACCEPT Board members meeting reports for March 2018
ATTACHMENTS
District III March 2018
Report
District II March 2018 Report
District I March 2018 Report
District IV March 2018
Report
Date Meeting Name Location
1-Mar Meeting with 110 Magazine Brentwood
1-Mar Tour of Byron Airport Byron
1-Mar
Meeting with Bethel Island MAC Member, Ken
Quick Brentwood
1-Mar
Meeting with Discovery Bay P-6 Chair, Lesley
Belcher Brentwood
1-Mar
Meeting with Oakley City Councilwoman, Sue
Higgins Brentwood
1-Mar Phone Meeting with Airport Director, Keith Freitas Brentwood
1-Mar Contra Costa Mayor's Conference Antioch
2-Mar Family Justice Center Meeting Concord
2-Mar
Meeting with Integrated Pest Management
Coordinator, Tanya Drlik Brentwood
2-Mar
Meeting with Behaviorial Health Services, Cynthia
Belon Brentwood
4-Mar NACO Conference Washington D.C.
5-Mar NACO Conference Washington D.C.
6-Mar NACO Conference Washington D.C.
7-Mar NACO Conference Washington D.C.
9-Mar Delta Counties Coalition Conference Call Brentwood
9-Mar
Contra Costa Health Plan/Joint Conference
Committee Meeting Martinez
9-Mar Save Mt. Diablo - Open Road TV Series Brentwood
9-Mar Brentwood Chamber Annual Awards Gala Brentwood
9-Mar Antioch Chamber Annual Awards Gala Antioch
10-Mar Network of Care 12th Annual Crab Feed Antioch
12-Mar Meeting with Airport Director, Keith Freitas Martinez
12-Mar Internal Operations Committee Meeting Martinez
13-Mar Board of Supervisors Meeting Martinez
13-Mar
Contra Costa County Fire Protection District
Meeting Martinez
13-Mar Meeting with Public Works Director, Brian Balbas Martinez
14-Mar Constituent Meeting Concord
14-Mar Airport Committee Meeting Concord
14-Mar LAFCO Meeting Martinez
14-Mar Candlelight Vigil for Pathway Home Brentwood
15-Mar
Meeting with Department of Conservation and
Development Director, John Kopchik Martinez
15-Mar Meeting with Antioch City Manager, Ron Bernal Brentwood
15-Mar Meeting with Brentwood City Manager, Gus Vina Brentwood
Supervisor Diane Burgis - March 2018 AB1234 Report
(Government Code Section 53232.3(d) requires that members legislative bodies report on meetings
attended for which there has been expense reimbursement (mileage, meals, lodging, etc).
15-Mar Delta Protection Commission Meeting Clarksburg
16-Mar Delta Counties Coalition Conference Call Brentwood
16-Mar Meeting with Supervisor Federal Glover Pittsburg
16-Mar Lynn Gursky Reception Knightsen
17-Mar NAMI Crab Feed Fundraiser Concord
19-Mar
Northern Waterfront Economic Development
Initiative Oakland
20-Mar Board of Supervisors Meeting Martinez
21-Mar Meeting with Mayor of Brentwood, Bob Taylor Brentwood
21-Mar Meeting with Blackhawk HOA Blackhawk
21-Mar
Meeting with Bethel Island Mac Member, Mark
Whitlock Brentwood
21-Mar
Meeting with Discovery Bay CSD Director, Bill
Mayer Brentwood
22-Mar Constituent Meeting Brentwood
22-Mar Meeting with Greenbelt Alliance Brentwood
22-Mar Meeting with Somerville Towne Center Antioch
22-Mar Seth Adams 30th Anniversary Tribute Walnut Creek
23-Mar Delta Counties Coalition Conference Call Brentwood
27-Mar Board of Supervisors Meeting Martinez
27-Mar Meeting with County Administrator, David Twa Martinez
27-Mar
Meeting with Department of Conservation and
Development Director, John Kopchik Martinez
28-Mar
Meeting with Veterans Services Director, Nathan
Johnson Brentwood
28-Mar Contra Costa Taxpayers Association Luncheon Brentwood
28-Mar
Meeting with Contra Costa County Fire Chief, Jeff
Carman Brentwood
28-Mar Tri-Delta Transit Meeting Antioch
29-Mar Redefining Mobility Summit San Ramon
30-Mar
Meeting with Alameda County Supervisor, Scott
Haggerty Pleasanton
30-Mar 6th Annual Partners for Justice Event Lafayette
* Reimbursement may come from an agency other than Contra Costa County
Purpose
Business Meeting
Business Meeting
Business Meeting
Business Meeting
Business Meeting
Business Meeting
Community Outreach
Business Meeting
Business Meeting
Business Meeting
Business Meeting
Business Meeting
Business Meeting
Business Meeting
Business Meeting
Business Meeting
Business Meeting
Community Outreach
Community Outreach
Community Outreach
Business Meeting
Business Meeting
Business Meeting
Business Meeting
Business Meeting
Business Meeting
Business Meeting
Business Meeting
Community Outreach
Business Meeting
Business Meeting
Business Meeting
Supervisor Diane Burgis - March 2018 AB1234 Report
(Government Code Section 53232.3(d) requires that members legislative bodies report on meetings
attended for which there has been expense reimbursement (mileage, meals, lodging, etc).
Business Meeting
Business Meeting
Business Meeting
Community Outreach
Community Outreach
Business Meeting
Business Meeting
Business Meeting
Business Meeting
Business Meeting
Business Meeting
Business Meeting
Business Meeting
Business Meeting
Community Outreach
Business Meeting
Business Meeting
Business Meeting
Business Meeting
Business Meeting
Community Outreach
Business Meeting
Business Meeting
Business Meeting
Business Meeting
Community Outreach
* Reimbursement may come from an agency other than Contra Costa County
Supervisor Candace Andersen – Monthly Meeting Report March 2018
Date Meeting Location
1 CCCTA Concord
2 LAFCO special meeting Martinez
5-6 CALAPRS conference Indian Wells
7 Orinda State of City Orinda
7 TRAFFIX Danville
8 Street Smarts San Ramon
8 Head Start site visit San Ramon
12 TWIC Martinez
12 Internal Ops Martinez
13 BOS Meeting Martinez
14 CCCERA Concord
14 LAFCO Martinez
15 CCCTA Concord
15 Danville Chamber Danville
15 ABAG San Francisco
16 Regionalism Mtg San Francisco
17 Young Childrens Forum Pleasant Hill
19 Alamo Liaison Meeting Danville
20 Board of Supervisors Martinez
20 Orinda City Council Orinda
21 Soroptimists Awards San Ramon
22 East Bay EDA Oakland
22 CCCSWA Walnut Creek
23 Citizen Corps Council San Ramon
26 Housing Forum Pleasant Hill
27 Board of Supervisors Martinez
28 CCCERA Concord
28 StreetSmarts Danville
29 East Bay Innovation Awards Oakland
Supervisor John Gioia
March – 2018 Monthly Meeting Statement
Government Code section 53232.3(d) requires that members of legislative bodies
report on meetings attended for which there has been expense reimbursement
(mileage, meals, lodging, etc.)
Supervisor Gioia did not seek reimbursement from the County for any meetings
that he attended in his capacity as a County Supervisor during month of March,
2018.
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff
March 2018
DATE MEETING NAME LOCATION PURPOSE
03/05/18 East Bay Women's Conference San Ramon Community Outreach
03/06/18
Budget Justice Coalition Budget
Workshop Concord Community Outreach
03/07/18 BAAQMD Board Meeting San FranciscoDecisions on agenda items
03/07/18 CCTA Planning Committee Walnut Creek Decisions on agenda items
03/08/18 TRANSPAC Pleasant Hill Decisions on agenda items
03/09/18 ABAG/MTC Administrative Committee San FranciscoDecisions on agenda items
03/09/18 ABAG Legislation Committee San FranciscoDecisions on agenda items
03/13/18 Board of Supervisors Meeting Martinez Decisions on agenda items
03/14/18
Hispanic Chamber of Commerce
Meeting Concord Community Outreach
03/14/18 Airport Committee Meeting Concord Decisions on agenda items
03/15/18 ABAG Finance Committee Meeting
San
Francisco Decisions on agenda items
03/15/18 Advancing CA Finance Authority San FranciscoDecisions on agenda items
03/15/18 ABAG Executive Board Meeting San FranciscoDecisions on agenda items
03/16/18 Pleasant Hill Rotary St. Patrick's Day EventPleasant Hill Community Outreach
03/17/18 Young Children's Issues Forum Pleasant Hill Community Outreach
03/19/18 BAAQMD Stationary Source Meeting San FranciscoDecisions on agenda items
03/20/18 Board of Supervisors Meeting Martinez Decisions on agenda items
03/20/18 Concord City Council Concord Community Outreach
03/21/18 DCC Meeting with Sacramento Bee Sacramento Water Advocacy
03/21/18 CCTA Authority Board Meeting Walnut Creek Decisions on agenda items
03/22/18
BAAQMD Legislative Committee
Meeting San FranciscoDecisions on agenda items
03/22/18 CCCSWA Meeting Walnut Creek Decisions on agenda items
03/24/18 March for our Lives Walnut Creek Community Outreach
03/25/18 Dose of Awareness Walk Walnut Creek Community Outreach
03/26/18 Finance Committee Martinez Decisions on agenda items
03/27/18 Board of Supervisors Meeting Martinez Decisions on agenda items
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff
March 2018
03/27/18 Pleasant Hill Community Awards Night Pleasant Hill Community Outreach
03/28/18
BAAQMD Budget and Finance
Committee San FranciscoDecisions on agenda items
03/29/18 CCTA's Redefining Mobility Summit San Ramon Community Outreach
03/30/18 Partners in Justice Event Lafayette Community Outreach
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Child Abuse Prevention
Month
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
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 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy
cc:
C. 14
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Kathy Gallagher, Employment & Human Services Director
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Child Abuse Prevention Month
AGENDA ATTACHMENTS
Resolution No. 2018/151
MINUTES ATTACHMENTS
Signed: Resolution No.
2018/151
In the matter of:Resolution No. 2018/151
Child Abuse Prevention Month
WHEREAS, as a community, we have a responsibility to nurture and protect our
children and help ensure they become healthy and productive adults; and
WHEREAS, child abuse and neglect affect children of all ages, races, and income,
and is 100 percent preventable; and
WHEREAS, in Contra Costa County, the Child Abuse Prevention Council (CAPC)
and Child Protective Services (CPS), a program of Children & Family Services within
the Employment and Human Services Department, collaborate to protect children
through preventive services, response, intervention, and investigation; and
WHEREAS, despite outreach and community efforts, the rising number of reported
child abuse cases remains a great concern, and highlights the need for increased
protection and improved services for abused and neglected children; and
WHEREAS, in 2017, CPS in Contra Costa County received and investigated more
than 7,500 referrals of children potentially in harm's way; and
WHEREAS, in 2017, there were 536 verified cases of child abuse in Contra Costa
County; and
WHEREAS, most experts believe the number of incidents of child abuse are far
greater than what is reported; and early intervention is critical for preventing abuse
and can positively impact at-risk families, protecting children; and
WHEREAS, the annual economic burden of child abuse in Contra Costa was $258.9
million in 2017, underscoring the financial importance to Contra Costa of preventing
a single child from becoming a victim; and
WHEREAS, all members of the community have a role to play in strengthening
families by offering parents the education, support, and skills they need to provide
healthy, safe and nurturing homes for their children; and
WHEREAS, in Contra Costa County there are numerous committed agencies,
parents, relatives, community volunteers, public policymakers and professionals who
collaborate to eliminate child abuse and give our children hope, security and safety.
Now, Therefore, Be It Resolved that the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors joins in proclaiming
April to be "Child Abuse Prevention Month", and recognizes the efforts made by the Child Abuse
Prevention Council and Children and Family Services of the Employment and Human Services
Department; and acknowledges both agencies for their dedication to preventing child abuse in Contra Costa
County.
___________________
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 24, 2018
David J. Twa,
By: ____________________________________, Deputy
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Lauri Byers, (925)
957-8860
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 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy
cc:
C. 15
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Resolution recognizing Susan and Sam Sperry as the Moraga Citizens of the Year
AGENDA ATTACHMENTS
Resolution No. 2018/148
MINUTES ATTACHMENTS
Signed: Resolution No.
2018/148
In the matter of:Resolution No. 2018/148
recognizing Susan and Sam Sperry as the Moraga Citizens of the Year.
Whereas, Susan Sperry’s father bought 80 acres of undeveloped land the year Susan was
born, a place where the family still lives, and during her childhood the train would run
from Oakland through Canyon and would stop not far from Lafayette’s Town Hall;
and
Whereas, Susan Sperry began her teaching career in the Moraga School District and has
continuously contributed to that district for 50 years, she helped start the historical
tour of Moraga for her middle school students, and for her 3rd grade students; and
Whereas, Sam Sperry has contributed on many occasions to the town’s task forces,
committees and commissions, volunteering and providing his professional expertise,
he is an active member and past president of the Moraga Valley Kiwanis; and as a
Kiwanian, he was part of numerous projects benefiting the town such as the
restoration of the band shell in the Moraga Commons Park; and
Whereas, Sam was one of the 15 original founding board members of the Moraga
Education Foundation in 1985, as well as an original member of the Moraga
Community Foundation, providing guidance and input to many volunteer efforts; and
Whereas, Susan and Sam have made their presence known in Moraga, leading the
monthly Moraga Liaison meetings; through Susan’s advocacy as a member of the
Preserve Lamorinda Open Space group or her role on the Arts in Public Spaces
Committee; and Sam’s role teaching fascinated children about Moraga’s history, and
that it once was a part of the great Sacramento Northern Railway that linked Oakland
to Sacramento.
Now, Therefore, Be It Resolved that the Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County does hereby honor Susan
& Sam Sperry for their long-standing dedication to the town of Moraga.
___________________
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
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 24, 2018
David J. Twa,
By: ____________________________________, Deputy
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Colleen Isenberg,
925-521-7100
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the
Board of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: April 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy
cc:
C. 16
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Resolution Recognizing April as National Sexual Assault Awareness Month - 2018
AGENDA ATTACHMENTS
Resolution No. 2018/150
MINUTES ATTACHMENTS
Signed: Resolution No.
2018/150
In the matter of:Resolution No. 2018/150
recognizing April as National Sexual Assault Awareness Month - 2018
WHEREAS, in California there were 13,695 forcible rapes in 2016 and 283 forcible rapes reported in Contra Costa County in the
same year; with an increasing number affecting adolescents; and
WHEREAS, sexual assault affects every person of Contra Costa County as a victim/survivor or as a family member, significant
other, neighbor or co-worker of a victim/survivor; and
WHEREAS, many citizens of Contra Costa County are working to provide quality services and assistance to sexual assault
survivors; and dedicated volunteers help staff 24-hour crisis hotlines, respond to emergency calls and offer support, comfort and
advocacy during forensic exams, criminal proceedings, and throughout the healing process; and
WHEREAS, staff and volunteers of Community Violence Solutions and its Rape Crisis Center, Children’s Interview Center,
Prevention Dept., and Anti-Trafficking Project programs in Contra Costa County are promoting education by offering training to
schools, churches, and civic organizations, as well as medical, mental health, law enforcement, education, and criminal justice
personnel regarding sexual assault issues; and
WHEREAS, it is vitally important that continued educational efforts to provide information about prevention and services for
sexual assault be supported and enhanced; and
WHEREAS, it is critical to intensify public awareness of sexual assault, to educate people about the need for citizen involvement
in efforts to reduce sexual violence, to increase support for agencies providing sexual assault services, and to increase awareness
of the healing power of creative expression; and
WHEREAS, Community Violence Solutions requests public support and assistance as it continues to work toward a society
where all women, children, and men can live in peace, free from violence and exploitation.
Now, Therefore, Be It Resolved that the Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County, join anti-sexual violence advocates and
support service programs in the belief that all community members must be part of the solution to end sexual violence. Along
with the United States Government and State of California, I do hereby proclaim April as “Sexual Assault Awareness Month!" in
Contra Costa County.
______________________________________
KAREN MITCHOFF CANDACE ANDERSEN
Chair, District IV 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 24, 2018
David J. Twa,
By: ____________________________________, Deputy
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Ronda Boler, (925)
957-2806
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 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy
cc:
C. 17
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Russell Watts, Treasurer-Tax Collector
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Recognizing Jerome E. Hatfield on the Occasion of His Retirement
AGENDA ATTACHMENTS
Resolution No. 2018/158
2000.04.18 TOC Appointments
MINUTES ATTACHMENTS
Signed: Resolution No.
2018/158
In the matter of:Resolution No. 2018/158
Recognizing the contributions of Jerome E. Hatfield for his extraordinary service to the citizens of Contra Costa County
and to the Office of the County Treasurer-Tax Collector.
Whereas, Mr. Hatfield was appointed by the Board of Supervisors on April 18, 2000
to serve on the County Treasury Oversight Committee in one of its three public seats
representing the County at large;
Whereas, Mr. Hatfield regularly participated in the annual review of the County’s
Investment Policy and the annual audit for determining the county treasury's
compliance with that Policy;
Whereas, Mr. Hatfield regularly reviewed the quarterly Investment Performance
Report, and made significant contributions to Committee discussions and to the
contents and format of the report;
Whereas, Mr. Hatfield served on the Treasury Oversight Committee for a full five
terms in eighteen years and rarely missed any of its quarterly meetings;
Whereas, Mr. Hatfield resigned from the Treasury Oversight Committee on April 30
of 2018.
Now, therefore, be it resolved that the Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County does hereby recognize
and commend Jerome E. Hatfield for his extraordinary service to the County and to the Office of the
County Treasurer-Tax Collector. Passed by a unanimous vote of the Board of Supervisors members present
this 24 day of April, 2018.
___________________
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 24, 2018
David J. Twa,
By: ____________________________________, Deputy
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Colleen Isenberg,
925-521-7100
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the
Board of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: April 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy
cc:
C. 18
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Recognizing the 15th anniversary of the Contra Costa Regional Health Foundation
AGENDA ATTACHMENTS
Resolution No. 2018/161
MINUTES ATTACHMENTS
Signed: Resolution No.
2018/161
In the matter of:Resolution No. 2018/161
In matter of recognizing the 15th anniversary of the Contra Costa Regional Health Foundation
Whereas, Contra Costa Regional Health Foundation is a non-profit community
based-organization that raises funds to support and raise awareness of the vital work
of Contra Costa Health Services; and
Whereas, Contra Costa Health Services works to care for and improve the health of
all the people in Contra Costa County with special attention to those who are the most
vulnerable to health problems; and
Whereas, the Contra Costa Regional Health Foundation was established in 2003 to
increase community awareness of the work performed by Contra Costa Regional
Medical Center & Health Centers, which is part of Contra Costa Health Services, the
county-operated health system; and
Whereas, Contra Costa Regional Health Foundation has supported several critical
clinical initiatives, such as the Health Leads, Integrative Health, and Global Health
Fellowship, which has sent Contra Costa doctors around the world to train the next
generation of physicians in countries with limited resources; and
Whereas, the Foundation’s efforts have made a lasting impact on Contra Costa
communities by supporting the Housing Security Fund, Family Medicine Residency
Program, and Medical Reserve Corps (MRC), which is a specialized partner of the
national network Citizen Corps and part of the county's emergency planning and
response system; and
Whereas, additionally, the Foundation has funded creative initiatives like the Art of
Health and Healing, which focuses on the psychological, emotional and spiritual
aspects of patient healing as a complement to physical healing.
Now, Therefore, Be It Resolved that the Board of Supervisors does hereby honor Contra Costa Regional
Health Foundation on their 15th anniversary, which provides invaluable services to improve the health of
the citizens of Contra Costa County.
___________________
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 24, 2018
David J. Twa,
By: ____________________________________, Deputy
RECOMMENDATION(S):
INTRODUCE Ordinance No. 2018-13 to require the humane treatment of roosters; WAIVE reading; and
FIX May 1, 2018 for adoption.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no anticipated impact to the County General Fund. The enforcement activities proposed by the
ordinance would be funded by administrative fines and other revenues.
BACKGROUND:
On December 6, 2016, the Board of Supervisors referred to the Internal Operations Committee (IOC)
development of an ordinance to authorize administrative penalties for barking dogs and other noisy
animals, and to limit the number of roosters on private property in the County's unincorporated areas. After
receiving feedback from Contra Costa County residents, the Animal Services Department (ASD) also
determined that the County lacks regulations enabling ASD to effectively combat illegal rooster fighting
activities.
In April 2017, after reviewing a draft ordinance, the IOC chose to recommend to the Board for adoption
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Steve Burdo,
925-608-8470
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board
of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: April 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy
cc:
C. 19
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Beth Ward, Animal Services Director
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Ordinance No. 2018-13 to require the humane treatment of roosters
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
an ordinance only addressing barking dogs and other noisy animal concerns. The IOC directed ASD
staff to work with the Department of Conservation and Development (DCD) to incorporate the
provisions addressing the keeping of roosters into the urban farm animal ordinance. The noisy animal
ordinance was subsequently adopted by the Board on June 6, 2017.
ASD staff has continued to partner and work with DCD to prepare and present Ordinance No. 2018-13.
This ordinance would amend the County Ordinance Code by adding Article 416-12.10 to regulate the
keeping of roosters in unincorporated areas of the County by prohibiting the tethering of roosters and
including other specific requirements to ensure rooster health, safety, and well-being. In addition, the
proposed ordinance would authorize the Animal Services Director to enforce the rooster keeping
regulations.
A separate urban farm animal ordinance amending Title 8 of the County Ordinance Code has been
prepared by DCD and includes provisions limiting the number of roosters that may be kept on a lot. The
Board will consider adopting the urban farm animal ordinance after a public hearing on May 1, 2018.
Staff recommends that the Board introduce Ordinance No. 2018-13, waive its reading, and fix May 1,
2018 for adoption, at which time the Board will also be considering the urban farm animal ordinance.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
This County will not have specific provisions in its ordinance code regulating the keeping of roosters to
ensure rooster health, safety, and well-being.
CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT:
ATTACHMENTS
Ordinance No. 2018-13
ORDINANCE NO. 2018-13
ROOSTER KEEPING
The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors ordains as follows (omitting the parenthetical
footnotes from the official text of the enacted or amended provisions of the County Ordinance
Code):
SECTION I. SUMMARY. This ordinance adds Article 416-12.10 to the County Ordinance
Code to require humane treatment of roosters.
SECTION II. Article 416-12.10 is added to the County Ordinance Code, to read:
Article 416-12.10
Roosters
416-12.1002 Definition. For the purposes of this article, “rooster” means any male chicken that:
(1) is six months or older, (2) has full adult plumage, or (3) is capable of crowing. (Ord. 2018-13
§ 2).
416-12.1004 Rooster keeping.
(a)Notwithstanding any other provisions of law, no person may maintain any rooster by
means of a tether attached to an object.
(b)At all times, roosters must be provided all of the following:
(1)Access to water.
(2)Shelter from the elements, including rain, wind, and direct sun.
(3)Sufficient room to spread both wings fully and to be able to turn in a complete
circle without any impediment and without touching the side of an enclosure.
(4)Clean and sanitary premises that are maintained in good repair. (Ord. 2018-13 §
2).
416-12.1006 Enforcement In addition to any other remedy allowed by this code or applicable
law, the animal services director may issue an administrative penalty under Article 416-4.8 to
any responsible person for a violation of this article. (Ord. 2018-13 § 2).
ORDINANCE NO. 2018-13
1
SECTION III. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance becomes effective 30 days after passage,
and within 15 days after passage shall be published once with the names of supervisors voting for
or against it in the Contra Costa Times, a newspaper published in this County.
PASSED on ___________________________, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST: DAVID J. TWA, _____________________________
Clerk of the Board of Supervisors Board Chair
and County Administrator
By: ______________________[SEAL]
Deputy
KCK:
H:\Client Matters\2018\DCD\Ordinance No. 2018-13 Rooster Keeping.wpd
ORDINANCE NO. 2018-13
2
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPOINT Stanley Caldwell, address on file, to a second term in the Contra Costa Special Districts
Association (CCSDA) seat on the Treasury Oversight Committee. Term: May 1, 2018 - April 30, 2022
(Reappointment)
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
BACKGROUND:
The purpose of the Treasury Oversight Committee (TOC) is to review the County's investment policy;
regularly monitor the County Investment Pool's performance; and report on the pool's performance to the
Board of Supervisors. The TOC is composed of seven members and three alternates; one representative and
an alternate appointed by the Board of Supervisors; the County Superintendent of Schools or designee; one
representative and an alternate selected by a majority of the presiding officers of the governing
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Ronda Boler, (925)
957-2806
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 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy
cc:
C. 20
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Russell Watts, Treasurer-Tax Collector
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:APPOINTMENT TO THE TREASURY OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
bodies of the school districts and the community college district in the county; one representative and an
alternate selected by a majority of the presiding officers of the legislative bodies of the special districts
in the county that are required or authorized to deposit funds in the County Treasury; three members of
the public nominated by the County Treasurer, a majority of whom shall have expertise in, or an
academic background in, public finance and who shall be economically diverse and bipartisan in
political registration. The updated Bylaws were adopted by the Treasury Oversight Committee on
August 15, 2017. Terms for membership are for four years.
At the April 17, 2017, CCSDA meeting, elections were held to fill Michael Caine's seat on the TOC.
Stanley Caldwell was nominated and selected by unanimous vote to serve as its representative for the
remainder of the term ending April 30, 2018. Stanley Caldwell attends the quarterly Treasury Oversight
Committee meetings regularly and he is an asset to the committee.
Stanley Caldwell, retired, currently serves as member of the Mt. View Sanitary District Board, is the
Special District alternate commissioner to LAFCo, and the Contra Costa Special District Association
(CCSDA), President and newsletter editor. California Special District Association (CSDA) board
member, prior service includes CSDA Executive Committee as past-president, current member of the
Member Services Committee and Professional Development Committee. Stanley serves on the Institute
for Local Government (ILG) as a board member and he serves on the Panel of Advisors. Stanley also is a
board member of the Special District Leadership Foundation. If appointed to serve another term on the
TOC, this will be his first full term representing Special Districts.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
No continuous representation by the Contra Costa Special Districts Association (CCSDA) on the
Treasury Oversight Committee as required by California Government Code section 27132 and the
November 6, 1995, County Board Order (I.O.-4) regarding Composition of a County Treasury Oversight
Committee.
ATTACHMENTS
S. Caldwell Application
SCaldwell Recommendation Letter 2018
Submit Date: Jan 23, 2018
Seat Name (if applicable)
First Name Middle Initial Last Name
Email Address
Home Address Suite or Apt
City State Postal Code
Primary Phone
Employer Job Title Occupation
Contra Costa County Boards & Commissions
Application Form
Profile
Which Boards would you like to apply for?
Treasury Oversight Committee: Submitted
This application is used for all boards and commissions
Do you, or a business in which you have a financial interest, have a contract with Contra
Costa Co.?
Yes No
Is a member of your family (or step-family) employed by Contra Costa Co.?
Yes No
Education History
Special District Member
Stanley Caldwell
stan_caldwell@comcast.net
75 Cecilia Lane
Martinez CA 94553
Home: (925) 228-8922
Stanley Caldwell Page 1 of 6
If "Other" was Selected Give Highest Grade or
Educational Level Achieved
Name of College Attended
Course of Study / Major
Units Completed
Degree Type
Date Degree Awarded
Name of College Attended
Course of Study / Major
Units Completed
Select the highest level of education you have received:
Other
College/ University A
Type of Units Completed
None Selected
Degree Awarded?
Yes No
College/ University B
A.A. and A.S. degree
De Anza
Liberal Arts
Associate of Arts
1970
West Valley College
Modelbuilding Technology
Stanley Caldwell Page 2 of 6
Degree Type
Date Degree Awarded
Name of College Attended
Course of Study / Major
Units Completed
Degree Type
Date Degree Awarded
Course Studied
Type of Units Completed
None Selected
Degree Awarded?
Yes No
College/ University C
Type of Units Completed
None Selected
Degree Awarded?
Yes No
Other schools / training completed:
Associate of Science
1976
Computer Technology
Stanley Caldwell Page 3 of 6
Hours Completed
Dates (Month, Day, Year) From - To
Hours per Week Worked?
Position Title
Dates (Month, Day, Year) From - To
Hours per Week Worked?
Certificate Awarded?
Yes No
Work History
Please provide information on your last three positions, including your current one if you are
working.
1st (Most Recent)
Volunteer Work?
Yes No
Employer's Name and Address
Contractor at Chevron headquarters, San Ramon, Ca.
Duties Performed
Maintain desktop and laptop computers with Chevron specific applications
2nd
?
2005 - 2009
40
Desktop Support Tech
August 2000 - June 2005
Stanley Caldwell Page 4 of 6
Position Title
Dates (Month, Day, Year) From - To
Hours per Week Worked?
Position Title
Upload a Resume
Volunteer Work?
Yes No
Employer's Name and Address
Charles Schwab San Francisco, Ca
Duties Performed
Maintain desktop and laptop computers with Schwab specific applications
3rd
Volunteer Work?
Yes No
Employer's Name and Address
Duties Performed
Final Questions
Desktop Support Tech
Stanley Caldwell Page 5 of 6
If "Other" was selected please explain
How did you learn about this vacancy?
Other
. Do you have a Familial or Financial Relationship with a member of the Board of
Supervisors?
Yes No
If Yes, please identify the nature of the relationship:
Do you have any financial relationships with the County such as grants, contracts, or other
economic relations?
Yes No
If Yes, please identify the nature of the relationship:
Current Special District member
Stanley Caldwell Page 6 of 6
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPOINT Dr. Matthew White as the Acting Director of Behavioral Health/Mental Health and interim local
director of mental health services for Contra Costa County pursuant to Welfare & Institutions Code section
5607, as recommended by the Health Services Director.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This acting appointment will not result in salary and benefit costs due to Dr. White being a contractor under
the Traditions Psychology Group, Inc. contract. The contract amendment with this contractor, which is also
on this agenda, does not include a change to the payment limit. However, the contract amendment requests
an increase in the hourly rate set forth for the Psychiatric Medical Director to account for the additional
duties Dr. White will be performing as the Acting Director of Behavioral Health/Mental Health and interim
local director of mental health services. Previous rate was approximately $241 per hour and the new rate
will be approximately $277 as outlined in agenda item for the Traditions Psychology Group, Inc. contract
amendment.
BACKGROUND:
Cynthia Belon, Behavioral Health/Mental Health Director, retired on March 30, 2018. As the Health
Services
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Anna Roth,
925-370-5101
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board
of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: April 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy
cc: Tasha Scott, Marcy Wilhelm, Erika Jenssen
C. 21
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Appointment of Dr. Matthew White as Acting Behavioral Health/Mental Health Director
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
Director, Anna Roth recommends that Dr. Matthew White be appointed as the Acting Behavioral
Health/Mental Health Director until such time as a new, permanent candidate for this position is identified.
This position oversees the Contra Costa Health Services Behavioral Health Division, including Mental
Health and Alcohol and Other Drugs. This appointment will fill also the role of the County's local director
of mental health services as required by Welfare and Institutions Code section 5607 and Contra Costa
County Ordinance Code section 33-5.313, subdivision(a)(4).
Dr. White meets the criteria to be the local director of mental health services as he is a licensed physician
and psychiatrist, and is currently the Chief Psychiatrist at Contra Costa Health Services where he supervises
all hospital-based psychiatric services, including the inpatient unit at Contra Costa Regional Medical
Center, psychiatric emergency services, Miller Wellness Center and Detention Psychiatry. The contract
amendment set forth in agenda item no. 49 of the April 24, 2018 Board agenda, will compensate Dr. White
for the additional duties he will be performing as the Acting Director of Behavioral Health/Mental Health
and interim local director of mental health services.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If this appointment is not approved, the County will not have anyone serving as the Acting Behavioral
Health/Mental Health Director for Contra Costa County.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPOINT Richard Bell to the District 1 seat on the Family & Children's Trust Committee to a term ending
on 9/30/2019.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
BACKGROUND:
The Family and Children’s Trust Committee (FACT) was established in 1985 by the Contra Costa County
Board of Supervisors to make funding recommendations on the allocation of specific funds for the
prevention and treatment of child abuse and neglect and supportive services for families and children.
Funding for FACT supported projects derived from federal and state program legislation, and donations to
the County’s Family and Children’s Trust Fund.
Richard Bell
El Cerrito, CA
Supervisor Gioia advertises his open advisory body seats in numerous ways including through his website,
eblasts, and newsletters, as well as with the traditional media.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
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 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy
cc:
C. 22
To:Board of Supervisors
From:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:APPOINT Richard Bell to the District 1 seat of the Family & Children's Trust Committee
ATTACHMENTS
Richard_Bell_Application
THIS FORM IS A PUBLIC DOCUMENT
BOARD, COMMITTEE OR COMMISSION NAME AND SEAT TITLE YOU ARE APPLYING FOR:
____________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________
PRINT EXACT NAME OF BOARD, COMMITTEE, OR COMMISSION PRINT EXACT SEAT NAME (if applicable)
5. EDUCATION: Check appropriate box if you possess one of the following:
High School Diploma G.E.D. Certificate California High School Proficiency Certificate
Give Highest Grade or Educational Level Achieved________________________________________________
Names of colleges / universities
attended Course of Study / Major Degree
Awarded Units Completed Degree
Type
Date
Degree
Awarded
Semester Quarter
A)
Yes No
B)
Yes No
C)
Yes No
D) Other schools / training
completed:
Course Studied Hours Completed Certificate Awarded:
Yes No
For Reviewers Use Only:
Accepted Rejected
Contra
Costa
County
Contra Costa County
CLERK OF THE BOARD
651 Pine Street, Rm. 106
Martinez, California 94553-1292
PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT IN INK
(Each Position Requires a Separate Application)
BOARDS, COMMITTEES, AND COMMISSIONS APPLICATION
MAIL OR DELIVER TO:
1. Name:_______________________________________________________________________
(Last Name) (First Name) (Middle Name)
2. Address: ____________________________________________________
(No.) (Street) (Apt.) (City) (State) (Zip Code)
3. Phones: ________________________________________________________
(Home No.) (Work No.) (Cell No.)
4. Email Address: ________________________________________________
For Office Use Only
Date Received:
For Reviewers Use Only:
Reason:
Education Experience
Incomplete Other
THIS FORM IS A PUBLIC DOCUMENT
6. PLEASE FILL OUT THE FOLLOWING SECTION COMPLETELY. List experience that relates to the qualifications needed to
serve on the local appointive body. Begin with your most recent experience. A resume or other supporting documentation
may be attached but it may not be used as a substitute for completing this section.
A) Dates (Month, Day, Year)
From To
Total: Yrs. Mos.
Hrs. per week_____ . Volunteer
Title
Duties Performed
Employer’s Name and Address
B) Dates (Month, Day, Year)
From To
Total: Yrs. Mos.
Hrs. per week_____ . Volunteer
Title
Duties Performed
Employer’s Name and Address
C) Dates (Month, Day, Year)
From To
Total: Yrs. Mos.
Hrs. per week_____ . Volunteer
Title
Duties Performed
Employer’s Name and Address
D) Dates (Month, Day, Year)
From To
Total: Yrs. Mos.
Hrs. per week_____ . Volunteer
Title
Duties Performed
Employer’s Name and Address
THIS FORM IS A PUBLIC DOCUMENT
7. How did you learn about this vacancy?
CCC Homepage Walk-In Newspaper Advertisement District Supervisor Other _________________________
8. Do you have a Familial or Financial Relationship with a member of the Board of Supervisors? (Please see Board
Resolution no. 2011/55, attached): No ______ Yes______
If Yes, please identify the nature of the relationship: ______________________________________________
9. Do you have any financial relationships with the County such as grants, contracts, or other economic relations?
No ______ Yes______
If Yes, please identify the nature of the relationship: ______________________________________________
I CERTIFY that the statements made by me in this application are true, complete, and correct to the best of my knowledge and
belief, and are made in good faith. I acknowledge and understand that all information in this application is publically
accessible. I understand and agree that misstatements / omissions of material fact may cause forfeiture of my rights to serve
on a Board, Committee, or Commission in Contra Costa County.
Sign Name: _____________________________________________ Date: __________________________________
Important Information
1. This application is a public document and is subject to the California Public Records Act (CA Gov. Code §6250-6270).
2. Send the completed paper application to the Office of the Clerk of the Board at: 651 Pine Street, Room 106, Martinez, CA 94553.
3. A résumé or other relevant information may be submitted with this application.
4. All members are required to take the following training: 1) The Brown Act, 2) The Better Government Ordinance, and 3) Ethics Training.
5. Members of boards, commissions, and committees may be required to: 1) file a Statement of Economic Interest Form also known as a Form
700, and 2) complete the State Ethics Training Course as required by AB 1234.
6. Advisory body meetings may be held in various locations and some locations may not be accessible by public transportation.
7. Meeting dates and times are subject to change and may occur up to two days per month.
8. Some boards, committees, or commissions may assign members to subcommittees or work groups which may require an additional
commitment of time.
THIS FORM IS A PUBLIC DOCUMENT
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for
Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board Adopted Resolution
no. 2011/55 on 2/08/2011 as follows:
WHEREAS the Board of Supervisors wishes to avoid the reality or appearance of improper influence or favoritism;
IN THE MATTER OF ADOPTING A POLICY MAKING FAMILY MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS INELIGIBLE
FOR APPOINTMENT TO BOARDS, COMMITTEES OR COMMISSIONS FOR WHICH THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS IS THE
APPOINTING AUTHORITY
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the following policy is hereby adopted:
1. Mother, father, son, and daughter;
2. Brother, sister, grandmother, grandfather, grandson, and granddaughter;
I. SCOPE: This policy applies to appointments to any seats on boards, committees or commissions for which the Contra Costa Co unty
Board of Supervisors is the appointing authority.
II. POLICY: A person will not be eligible for appointment if he/she is rela ted to a Board of Supervisors’ Member in any of the following
relationships:
3. Great-grandfather, great-grandmother, aunt, uncle, nephew, niece, great-grandson, and great-granddaughter;
4. First cousin;
5. Husband, wife, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, stepson, and stepdaughter;
6. Sister-in-law (brother’s spouse or spouse’s sister), brother-in-law (sister’s spouse or spouse’s brother), spouse’s grandmother,
spouse’s grandfather, spouse’s granddaughter, and spouse’s grandson;
7. Registered domestic partner, pursuant to Californi a Family Code section 297.
8. The relatives, as defined in 5 and 6 above, for a registered domestic partner.
9. Any person with whom a Board Member shares a financial interest as defined in the Political Reform Act (Gov’t Code §87103,
Financial Interest), such as a business partner or business associate.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPOINT Dr. Talia Moore to the District 1-A seat of the Alcohol and Other Drugs Advisory Board to a
term ending on 6/30/2019.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
BACKGROUND:
The Alcohol and Other Drugs Advisory Board provides input and recommendations to the Board of
Supervisors and the Health Services Department concerning family and community needs regarding
prevention and treatment of alcohol and drug related problems. The mission of the Contra Costa County
Alcohol and Other Drugs Advisory Board is to assess family and community needs regarding treatment and
prevention of alcohol and drug abuse problems. The board reports their findings and recommendations to
the Contra Costa Health Services Department, the Board of Supervisors and the communities they serve.
The Alcohol and Other Drugs Advisory Board works in collaboration with the Alcohol and Other Drugs
Services of Contra Costa Health Services. The board provides input and recommendations as they pertain to
alcohol and other drugs prevention, intervention, and treatment services.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
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 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy
cc:
C. 23
To:Board of Supervisors
From:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:APPOINT Dr. Talia Moore to the District 1-A seat of the Alcohol and Other Drugs Advisory Board
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
Dr. Talia Moore
El Sobrante, CA
Supervisor Gioia advertises his open advisory body seats in numerous ways including through his
website, eblasts, and newsletters, as well as with the traditional media.
ATTACHMENTS
Talia_Moore_Application
Submit Date: Oct 28, 2017
First Name Middle Initial Last Name
Email Address
Home Address Suite or Apt
City State Postal Code
Primary Phone
Employer Job Title Occupation
Contra Costa County Boards & Commissions
Application Form
Profile
Which Boards would you like to apply for?
El Sobrante Municipal Advisory Council: Submitted
Alcohol and Other Drugs Advisory Board: Submitted
Contra Costa County Juvenile Justice & Delinquency Prevention Commission (Superior Court): Submitted
Mental Health Commission: Submitted
Racial Justice Task Force: Submitted
This application is used for all boards and commissions
Do you, or a business in which you have a financial interest, have a contract with Contra
Costa Co.?
Yes No
Is a member of your family (or step-family) employed by Contra Costa Co.?
Yes No
Education History
Talia Moore
El Sobrante CA 94803
Chabot College College Professor College Professor
Talia Moore Page 1 of 6
If "Other" was Selected Give Highest Grade or
Educational Level Achieved
Name of College Attended
Course of Study / Major
Units Completed
Degree Type
Date Degree Awarded
Name of College Attended
Course of Study / Major
Units Completed
Select the highest level of education you have received:
Other
College/ University A
Type of Units Completed
Semester
Degree Awarded?
Yes No
College/ University B
Doctorate
University of California, Berkeley
Social Welfare, Psychology,
African-American Studies
Bachelor of Arts
December 2003
Golden Gate University
Psychology
Talia Moore Page 2 of 6
Degree Type
Date Degree Awarded
Name of College Attended
Course of Study / Major
Units Completed
Degree Type
Date Degree Awarded
Course Studied
Type of Units Completed
Degree Awarded?
Yes No
College/ University C
Type of Units Completed
Semester
Degree Awarded?
Yes No
Other schools / training completed:
Master's of Arts
May 2005
Argosy University
Counseling Psychology and
Forensics
Educational Doctorate (Ed.D)
May 2013
Talia Moore Page 3 of 6
Hours Completed
Dates (Month, Day, Year) From - To
Hours per Week Worked?
Position Title
Dates (Month, Day, Year) From - To
Certificate Awarded?
Yes No
Work History
Please provide information on your last three positions, including your current one if you are
working.
1st (Most Recent)
Volunteer Work?
Yes No
Employer's Name and Address
Chabot College 25555 Hesperian Blvd. Hayward, CA 94545
Duties Performed
Provide traditional and non-traditional student learners with pertinent information about the American legal
system. Analyze various components of the juvenile justice and criminal justice systems. Promote student
participation and engagement. Create a safe and welcoming classroom environment to share. Develop
lesson plans, tests materials and facilitate in-class discussions.
2nd
8/1/2013
20
College Professor
8/1/12- 8/1/16
Talia Moore Page 4 of 6
Hours per Week Worked?
Position Title
Dates (Month, Day, Year) From - To
Hours per Week Worked?
Position Title
Volunteer Work?
Yes No
Employer's Name and Address
University of Phoenix 3590 N. 1st Street San Jose, CA 95134
Duties Performed
Teach traditional and non-traditional students from various educational and life backgrounds. Work with
students from different colleges within the university and provide instruction in the Psychology, Securities
and Criminal Justice and Behavioral Health and Social Services Departments. Develop lesson plans, tests
materials and facilitate in-class discussions to cultivate a greater working knowledge and understanding of
the course material.
3rd
Volunteer Work?
Yes No
Employer's Name and Address
San Mateo County Probation Department 222 Paul Scannell Drive San Mateo, CA 94402
10
Associate Faculty
09/1/04-05/1/13
40
Deputy Probation Officer III
Talia Moore Page 5 of 6
If "Other" was selected please explain
Duties Performed
Ensure that adjudicated and convicted law violators released on probation adhere to orders of the court.
Issue probation violations, bench warrants and impose client sanctions. Protect the interest of the
community by monitoring out of custody probationers. Utilize department supported assessment tools to
determine need and appropriate level of supervision. Supervise juvenile and adult populations inclusive of
the severely mentally ill; convicted drug offenders mandated to complete counseling; juveniles removed
and returned to the home; and first-time offenders on local high school campuses. Coordinate and
facilitate meetings, work with different community agencies and incorporate a wrap-around treatment
modality. Respond to crisis situations, attend emergency family meetings and provide case management.
Final Questions
How did you learn about this vacancy?
Contra Costa County Homepage
. Do you have a Familial or Financial Relationship with a member of the Board of
Supervisors?
Yes No
If Yes, please identify the nature of the relationship:
Do you have any financial relationships with the County such as grants, contracts, or other
economic relations?
Yes No
If Yes, please identify the nature of the relationship:
Talia Moore Page 6 of 6
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Health Services Department (5899) / Fleet ISF (0064): Approve Appropriation and Revenue Adjustment #
5066 authorizing the transfer of appropriations in the amount of $43,506 from Behavioral Health Services
Division – Mental Health Services Act Innovation to General Services – ISF Fleet Services for the purchase
of one (1) vehicle for the Mental Health Older Adult Clinic.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This action increases appropriations in General Services – Fleet Services (0064) and reduces appropriations
in Behavioral Health Services (5899) by $43,506. This purchase is funded 100% by Mental Health Services
Act funds.
BACKGROUND:
Mental Health Older Adult Clinic provides a continuum of care to seniors throughout Contra Costa County
with teams that provide outreach, engagement, and on-going services to the most imperiled seniors in the
County. The Intensive Care Management Program consists of three multidisciplinary teams who provide
community-based services to individuals diagnosed with a chronic and severe mental illness in their homes,
board and care homes, shelters, etc. The vehicle will be used to transport older adults to and from the clinic
and to other services within the community that are part of the treatment plan. This will include County
programs and services providers.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Matthew Luu,
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 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy
cc: Tasha Scott, Marcy Wilhelm, Windy Taylor
C. 24
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Appropriation Adjustment for a vehicle for the Older Adult Mental Health Clinic
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If this appropriation adjustment is not approved, the division will not be able to purchase the vehicle for
the Mental Health Older Adult Clinic.
AGENDA ATTACHMENTS
TC24 & TC27 No. 5066 HSD
MINUTES ATTACHMENTS
Signed: Appropriations & Adjustment No. 5066
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Health Services Department (5899) / Fleet ISF (0064): Approve Appropriation and Revenue Adjustment
No. 5066 authorizing the transfer of appropriations in the amount of $39,507 from Behavioral Health
Services Division – Mental Health Services Act Innovation to General Services – ISF Fleet Services for the
purchase of one (1) vehicle for the implementation of the Center for Recovery and Empowerment Project.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This action increases appropriations in General Services – Fleet Services (0064) and reduces appropriations
in Behavioral Health Services (5899) by $39,507. This purchase is funded 100% by Mental Health Services
Act funds.
BACKGROUND:
The Center for Recovery and Empowerment is an intensive outpatient treatment program offering three
levels of care: intensive, transitional and continuing care to adolescents dualy diagnosed with substance use
and mental health disorders. Services that will be provided include a multi-disciplinary team, and will
include individual, group and family therapy, and linkage to community services. Vehicle will be used to
transport adolescents to and from center and other services within the community that are part of the
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Matthew Luu,
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 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy
cc: Tasha Scott, Marcy Wilhelm, Windy Taylor
C. 25
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Appropriation Adjustment for a Vehicle for Center for Recovery and Empowerment Project
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
treatment plan. This will include: County programs, service providers, Young People Alcohol
Anonymous, schools and field trips to support adventure therapy. The purchase of this vehicle will allow
the County to implement the Center for Recovery and Empowerment project.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If this appropriation adjustment is not approved, the division will not be able to purchase a car to
implement the Center for Recovery and Empowerment project.
AGENDA ATTACHMENTS
TC24 & TC27 No. 5067 HSD
MINUTES ATTACHMENTS
Signed: Appropriations & Adjustment No. 5067
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Librarian, or designee, to apply for and accept California State
Library grant funding in the amount not to exceed $85,000 to meet the operational and services expenses
required by Project Second Chance (PSC), the Contra Costa County Library adult literacy program, to
provide adult literacy services for the period of July 1, 2018 to June 30, 2019.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Funds committed to Project Second Chance by the Contra Costa County Library, foundation grants, and
private donations will be matched by the California State Library using a funding formula that is based on:
The State Library’s budget for adult literacy, the number of students served by Project Second Chance and
the total amount of local funding that the Contra Costa County Library certifies will be allocated to support
Project Second Chance. For fiscal year 2018/19, the Library has pledged adult literacy funds currently
budgeted in the amount of $624,805 (86% Library fund and 14% California State Library).
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Walt Beveridge
925-608-7730
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the
Board of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: April 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc:
C. 26
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Melinda Cervantes, County Librarian
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:California State Library Grant for Literacy Services for FY 2018/19
BACKGROUND:
Project Second Chance was founded in 1984 with a grant from the California State Library. In 2003, AB
1266 was passed. Article 4.6, Section 18880-18884 of that bill, established the California Library Literacy
and English Acquisition Services Program and the formula that determines how local funds, generated by
individual library jurisdictions, are matched by the California State Library, using funds legislated
specifically for this purpose.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
The Library will not receive California State Library funding for adult literacy, reducing the number of
students that can be served.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the
County, Agreement #28-370 with California Green Business Network, a nonprofit corporation, to pay the
County an amount not to exceed $20,000, including agreeing to indemnify and hold harmless Contractor, for
green practices including reducing hazardous and non-hazardous waste and good water and energy
conservation practices for the period from April 1, 2018 through March 1, 2019.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Approval of this agreement will allow the County to receive an amount not to exceed $20,000 from
California Green Business Network. No County funds required.
BACKGROUND:
This agreement is a sub-award under California Air Resources Board contract with California Green
Business Network. In collaboration with program partners, the County will certify new businesses, report
outcomes and participate in working committees for green practices, including reducing hazardous and
non-hazardous waste, good water, and energy conservation practices.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
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 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc: L Walker , M Wilhelm
C. 27
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Agreement #28-370 with California Green Business Network
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
Approval of Agreement #28-370 will allow the County to receive funds from the California Green Business
Network through March 1, 2019. The County is agreeing to indemnify and hold harmless the contractor for
claims arising out of County’s performance under this contract.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If this contract is not approved, the County will not receive funding to promote and help businesses adopt
environmentally preferable practices.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment & Human Services Director, or designee, to execute a
contract with the Catholic Council for the Spanish Speaking of the Diocese of Stockton to pay the County
an amount not to exceed $28,000, to provide food services to the childcare program at El Concilio
Preschool in Brentwood, California for the period May 1, 2018 through April 30, 2019.
FISCAL IMPACT:
El Concilio Preschool will reimburse the County, up to the limits of the California Child and Adult Food
Program, for all food service expenses related to this contract. The County will provide breakfast, lunch,
and snack to 20 children and 3 teachers at the rates specified below. There are no net County costs for this
contract.
Breakfast - $3.25 each
Lunch - $5.00 each
Snack - $3.20 each
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: CSB (925) 681-6304
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 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc: Nelly Ige, Sam Mendoza
C. 28
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Kathy Gallagher, Employment & Human Services Director
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:2018-19 Food Services Agreement with the Catholic Council for the Spanish Speaking of the Diocese of Stockton
BACKGROUND:
El Concilio (Center) is a Migrant Head Start program operating through San Joaquin County’s program.
The preschool, located in Brentwood, California, provides services to migrant children for only a limited
number of months each year. The Community Services Bureau will provide meals that meet the Head Start
Performance Standards and USDA meal guidelines. At some point in the future the Community Services
Bureau may operate the program in the months that the Center is closed to ensure continuity of care for
clients.
The Center, located adjacent to Community Services Bureau's (CSB) Los Nogales Center, serves the
migrant farm-worker families of Contra Costa County. Both Head Start programs have similar missions and
similar client needs. The San Joaquin agency has just taken over the El Concilio program and is unable to
provide food services to the families due to a lack of facility space. CSB has offered to assist with this
unmet need for the following reasons:
• The same community is served;
• The continuity of services – the migrant program operates a limited amount per year. (CSB would like to
continue serving those families since they qualify for their program.);
• Besides our program, El Concilio is the only publicly funded program to provide these services to
families. It is a great need; and
• Assisting with the nutrition program is one way that the two programs can partner.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If not approved, County will be unable to provide food services at El Concilio preschool.
CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT:
The Employment & 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.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
ADOPT Resolution No. 2018/156 to approve and authorize the Employment and Human Services Director,
or designee, to execute a contract with the California Department of Aging in an amount not to exceed
$4,290,517 for Older American Act, Title III and Title VII services for the period July 1, 2018 through June
30, 2019.
FISCAL IMPACT:
County to receive an amount not to exceed $4,290,517 (Agreement AP-1819-07) from the California
Department of Aging, of which 92% is Federal and 8% is State funded. The County match requirement of
$103,098 will be covered by County General Fund revenue that was anticipated in the department's FY
2018/19 budget.
BACKGROUND:
The Employment and Human Services Department, Area Agency on Aging, provides services to low
income older residents of Contra Costa County as defined by Title III and Title VII of the Older Americans
Act. Services include, but are not limited to disease prevention and health promotion, nutrition counseling,
risk screening, mediation management, information through multipurpose senior centers, congregate meal
sites, home-delivered meal programs, information services at appropriate sites for low income County
residents, elder abuse prevention, and ombudsman services.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
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 24, 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:Kathy Gallagher, Employment & Human Services Director
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:California Department of Aging, Older Americans Act, Title III and Title VII Funding
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
Without funding, Older Americans Act, Title III and Title VII services could not be provided.
AGENDA ATTACHMENTS
Resolution No. 2018/156
MINUTES ATTACHMENTS
Signed Resolution No. 2018/156
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board
Adopted this Resolution on 04/24/2018 by the following vote:
AYE:5
John Gioia
Candace Andersen
Diane Burgis
Karen Mitchoff
Federal D. Glover
NO:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
RECUSE:
Resolution No. 2018/156
In The Matter Of: California Department of Aging, Older Americans Act, Title III and Title VII funding.
WHEREAS, the Employment and Human Services Department contracts with and receives funding from the California
Department of Aging to provide services under the Older Americans Act, Title III and Title VII; and
WHEREAS, there is available funding (Agreement AP-1818-07) in the amount of $4,290,517 for the period July 1, 2018 through
June 30, 2019; and
WHEREAS, Employment and Human Services, Area Agency on Aging, provides services to include, but not limited to, disease
prevention and health promotion, nutrition counseling, risk screening, mediation management, information through multipurpose
senior centers, congregate meals sites, home-delivered meal programs, information services at appropriate sites for low income
County residents, elder abuse prevention, and ombudsman services.
Now, Therefore, Be It Resolved: the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors approves and authorizes the Employment and
Human Services director, or designee, to execute a contract with the California Department of Aging (Agreement AP-1819-07) in
an amount not to exceed $4,290,517 for Older Americans Act, Title III and Title VII services for the period July 1, 2018 through
June 30, 2019.
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 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc:
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Veterans Services Officer, or designee, to apply for and execute
a contract, including signatory authority, to accept grant funding from the California Department of
Veterans Affairs (CalVet) in an amount not to exceed $30,000 to provide mental health outreach and
support services for the period July 1, 2018 through June 30, 2019.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The grant is awarded, funding of up to $30,000 would be disbursed to the County by CalVet through the
2018-19 Proposition 63, the Mental Health Services Act, grant program. Funding is specifically provided to
County Veterans Service offices. No County match is required.
BACKGROUND:
Since July of 2014, the County Veterans Service Office in collaboration with CCTV has produced
"Veteran's Voices", a monthly talk show that has facilitated outreach efforts for East Bay veterans and their
families. Funding for "Veteran's Voices" production has been provided by CalVet through Proposition 63
grant program monies. CalVet has once again invited County Veterans Service Offices (CVSO) providing
mental health outreach and services to submit applications for the 2018-19 Proposition 63 funding. The
CVSO is requesting approval to apply for and accept this grant funding, which will allow for the production
of additional episodes of "Veteran's Voices."
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Enid Mendoza, (925)
335-1039
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the
Board of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: April 24, 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:David Twa, County Administrator
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:APPLY FOR AND RECEIVE FUNDING FOR VETERANS MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES GRANT
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If this action is not approved, the Veterans Service Office may not be able to provide key mental health
outreach and support services to veterans and their families living in Contra Costa County.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment
with Metropolitan Van And Storage Inc., effective April 1, 2018, to increase the payment limit by
$3,500,000 to a new payment limit of $7,500,000, with no change to the original term of June 1, 2016
through May 31, 2019, to provide moving services, Countywide. (100% General Fund)
FISCAL IMPACT:
This cost is to be funded through Facilities Services budget user departments (100% General Fund).
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Stan Burton
925-313-7077
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board
of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: April 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc:
C. 31
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:APPROVE a contract amendment with Metropolitan Van and Storage Inc
BACKGROUND:
Public Works Facilities Services responds to work requests from user departments for moving services at
County offices and facilities, paid storage, and office landscape partitional furniture (OLP) repair,
relocation, replacement and adjustment. Government Code Section 31000 authorizes the County to contract
for services including the type of administrative services that Metropolitan Van And Storage Inc. provides.
The contract was originally solicited and awarded in 2016 through Bidsync #1501-114. Facilities Services
is currently in the middle of a three year contract but an unexpectedly large amount of move related work
orders and projects have depleted the original contract amount. Since inception of this contract about 20
months ago, this vendor has submitted 2266 invoices for work at 1429 jobs totaling $4,014,000. Over 80%
of the contract spent to date has been for services provided to three departments. While we cannot know of
all future work requests or projects that will require the services of this vendor, we do expect more work of
this type from user departments. The original contract amount of $4,000,000 was estimated based on the
previous three year history for this type of service. Facilities Services is requesting the dollar amount be
amended for additional work anticipated before the end of the contract period.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If this contract amendment is not approved, moving services with Metropolitan Van And Storage Inc. will
not proceed.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the
County Contract Amendment Agreement #74-475-54(2) with Ana Hernandez, LCSW, an individual,
effective April 1, 2018, to amend Contract #74-475-54 (as amended by Contract Amendment Agreement
#74-475-54(1)), to increase the payment limit by $20,000, from $100,000 to a new payment limit of
$120,000, with no change in the term of November 1, 2016 through June 30, 2018.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This contract is funded by 50% Federal Medi-Cal and 50% State Mental Health Realignment. (No rate
increase)
BACKGROUND:
In October 2016, the County Administrator approved and the Purchasing Services Manager executed
Contract #74-475-54, as amended by Contract Amendment Agreement #74-475-54(1), with Ana
Hernandez, LCSW for the provision of Medi-Cal specialty mental health services for the period from
November 1, 2016 through June 30, 2018.
At the time of negotiations, the payment limit was based on target levels of utilization.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Matthew White,
925-370-5891
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 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc: Robert Curotto, Marcy Wilhelm
C. 32
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Amendment #74-475-54(2) with Ana Hernandez, LCSW
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
However, the utilization during the term of the contract was higher than originally anticipated. Approval of
Contract Amendment Agreement #74-475-54(2) will allow the contractor to provide additional mental
health services through June 30, 2018.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If this amendment is not approved, services provided to Contra Costa Mental Health Plan Medi-Cal
beneficiaries could be negatively impacted, including access to services, choice of providers, cultural
competency, language capacity, geographical locations of service providers, and waiting lists.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute a
contract with STAND! For Families Free of Violence, a California non-profit public benefit corporation, in
an amount not to exceed $317,125 to provide domestic violence support services to California Work
Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKs) participants for the period of July 1, 2018 through
June 30, 2019.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The funds allocated for this contract are 100% Federal, and were included in the FY 2018/19 department
budget.
BACKGROUND:
STAND! For Families Free of Violence provides a wide array of domestic violence services tailored to
meet the specific needs of the Workforce Services Bureau. Services include California Work Opportunity
and Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKs) domestic violence liaisons at Employment and Human Services
Department offices, technical assistance, consultation, and domestic violence identification and skills
training, on-site capacity building, and linkages for domestic violence victims to community resources.
STAND! For Families Free of Violence was selected through a competitive bid process (Request For
Proposals #1152).
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: V. Kaplan, (925)
608-4963
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board
of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: April 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc:
C. 33
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Kathy Gallagher, Employment & Human Services Director
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Contract with STAND! For Families Free of Violence
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If not approved, CalWORKs clients' access to domestic violence services will be hindered.
CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT:
This contract supports all of the community outcomes established in the Children's Report Card: (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.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the Sheriff-Coroner, a
purchase order with Hammons Supply Company, in an amount not to exceed $180,000 for the purchase of
miscellaneous custodial supplies and equipment repairs as needed by the three County detention facilities
for the period June 1, 2018 through May 31, 2019.
FISCAL IMPACT:
$180,000. 100% General Fund; Budgeted.
BACKGROUND:
Hammons Supply Company provides miscellaneous janitorial products and equipment for the three
Detention Facilities of Contra Costa County. This vendor offers lower pricing for specific custodial
products, such as plastic liners, latex gloves and toilet paper when compared to major county suppliers such
as Supply Works. They also have a local warehouse that accommodates quicker delivery and/or pick-up of
supplies.
CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT:
No impact.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Liz Arbuckle,
925-335-1529
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 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc: Heike Anderson, Liz Arbuckle, Tim Ewell
C. 34
To:Board of Supervisors
From:David O. Livingston, Sheriff-Coroner
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Purchase Order - Hammons Supply Company
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the
County Contract Amendment Agreement #74-475-23(4) with Marilee King, MFT, an individual, effective
April 1, 2018, to amend Contract #74-475-23(2) (as amended by Contract Amendment Agreement
#74-475-23(3)), to increase the payment limit by $10,000, from $93,000 to a new payment limit of
$103,000, with no change in the term of July 1, 2016 through June 30, 2018.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This amendment is funded by 50% Federal Medi-Cal and 50% State Mental Health Realignment. (No rate
increase)
BACKGROUND:
In December 2016, the County Administrator approved and the Purchasing Services Manager executed
Contract #74-475-23(2), as amended by Contract Amendment Agreement #74-475-23(3), with Marilee
King, MFT for the provision of Medi-Cal specialty mental health services for the period from July 1, 2016
through June 30, 2018.
At the time of negotiations, the payment limit was based on target levels of utilization.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Matthew White,
925-370-5891
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 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc: Robert Curotto, Marcy Wilhelm
C. 35
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Amendment #74-475-23(4) with Marilee King, MFT
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
However, the utilization during the term of the contract was higher than originally anticipated. Approval of
Contract Amendment Agreement #74-475-23(4) will allow the contractor to provide additional mental
health services through June 30, 2018.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If this amendment is not approved, services provided to Contra Costa Mental Health Plan Medi-Cal
beneficiaries could be negatively impacted, including access to services, choice of providers, cultural
competency, language capacity, geographical locations of service providers, and waiting lists.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the
County, Contract Amendment Agreement #74-475-24(4) with Isaac Burns, MFT, an individual, effective
April 1, 2018, to amend Contract #74-475-24(2) (as amended by Contract Amendment Agreement
#74-475-24(3)), to increase the payment limit by $17,000, from $108,000 to a new payment limit of
$125,000, with no change in the term of July 1, 2016 through June 30, 2018.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This amendment is funded by 50% Federal Medi-Cal and 50% State Mental Health Realignment. (No rate
increase)
BACKGROUND:
In October 2016, the County Administrator approved and the Purchasing Services Manager executed
Contract #74-475-24(2), as amended by Contract Amendment Agreement #74-475-24(3), with Isaac Burns,
MFT for the provision of Medi-Cal specialty mental health services for the period from July 1, 2016
through June 30, 2018.
At the time of negotiations, the payment limit was based on target levels of utilization.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Matthew White,
925-370-5891
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 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc: Robert Curotto, Marcy Wilhelm
C. 36
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Amendment #74-475-24(4) with Isaac Burns, MFT
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
However, the utilization during the term of the contract was higher than originally anticipated. Approval of
Contract Amendment Agreement #74-475-24(4) will allow the contractor to provide additional mental
health services through June 30, 2018.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If this amendment is not approved, services provided to Contra Costa Mental Health Plan Medi-Cal
beneficiaries could be negatively impacted, including access to services, choice of providers, cultural
competency, language capacity, geographical locations of service providers, and waiting lists.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Administrator, or designee, to execute a contract amendment
with Lincoln, a non-profit corporation,effective November 1, 2017, to increase the payment limit by
$50,000 to a new payment limit of $168,956 and to extend the term from October 31, 2017 to June 30, 2018
for additional services at Park Middle School, Antioch, to prevent juvenile justice involvement. (100%
Federal)
FISCAL IMPACT:
$168,956.00: 100% Federal (Edward Bryne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant [JAG])
BACKGROUND:
Contra Costa County was awarded a three-year Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) in order to implement the
Youth Justice Initiative (YJI) in Contra Costa County. County is engaging Lincoln to provide services at
Park Middle School in Antioch and carry out activities related to the implementation of the Wellness Room
in accordance with the YJI. Services to be provided include: support students and families, provide
on-campus individual or group therapy to referred students and their families, provide guidance and support
to the Wellness Room staff, refer students and their
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: L. DeLaney,
925-335-1097
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board
of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: April 24, 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:David Twa, County Administrator
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Contract with Lincoln for Youth Justice Initiative project
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
families to necessary resources in the community, assist in addressing behavior issues in on-campus School
Success Team meetings, provide increased access to clinical mental health services on campus, contribute
to an improved school climate measured by pre- and post-test student surveys, and contribute to reductions
in disciplinary referrals, suspensions, and expulsions.
The Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Program was created as part of the
Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2005, which merged the discretionary Edward Byrne Memorial Grant
Program with the formula-based Local Law Enforcement Block Grant (LLEBG) program. The JAG
Program, administered by the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA), is the leading source of federal justice
funding to state and local jurisdictions. The JAG Program provides states, tribes, and local governments
with critical funding necessary to support a range of program areas including law enforcement, prosecution
and court, prevention and education, corrections and community corrections, drug treatment and
enforcement, planning, evaluation, and technology improvement, and crime victim and witness initiatives.
The JAG Program is administered through the Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC).
The grant cycle began in January of 2015 and runs through June 30, 2018 (Contra Costa County was
granted an extension from the December 31, 2017 grant ending date, in order to accommodate a full school
year of services). The final evaluation report is due March 31, 2019. No matching funds are required. The
management of the grant program for Contra Costa County was transferred from EHSD to the County
Administrator's Office of Reentry and Justice in January 2017.
CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT:
The services provided under this contract supports four of the five Contra Costa County’s community
outcomes: (1) "Children Ready for and Succeeding in School"; (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 improving
school engagement, successfully preventing juvenile justice involvement, and reducing recidivism.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the
County, Contract #26-657-9 with Amarjit Dosanjh, M.D., a Medical Corporation (dba Muir Plastic
Surgery), in an amount not to exceed $2,340,000, to provide plastic and hand surgery services at Contra
Costa Regional Medical Center (CCRMC) and Health Centers for the period February 1, 2018 through
January 31, 2021.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This contract is funded 100% by Hospital Enterprise Fund I. (Rate increase)
BACKGROUND:
On February 10, 2015, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #26-657-7 (as amended by Amendment
Agreement #26-657-8) with Amarjit Dosanjh, M.D. who is now known as Amarjit Dosanjh, M.D., a
Medical Corporation (dba Muir Plastic Surgery) to provide plastic and hand surgery services including
consultation, training, on-call coverage and medical and/or surgical procedures services at CCRMC and
Health Centers for the period February 1, 2015 through January 31, 2018.
Approval of Contract #26-657-9 will allow the contractor to continue providing plastic and hand surgery
services through January 31, 2021.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Samir Shah, M.D.,
925-370-5525
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the
Board of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: April 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc: K Cyr, M Wilhelm
C. 38
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Contract #26-657-9 with Amarjit Dosanjh, M.D., a Medical Corporation (dba Muir Plastic Surgery)
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If this contract is not approved, patients requiring plastic and hand surgery services at CCRMC and Health
Centers will not have access to the contractor’s services.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Probation Officer, or designee, to execute a contract amendment
with Justice Benefits Incorporated, Ltd. to extend the term from May 31, 2018 to May 31, 2019, with no
change to the original payment limit of $300,000, for continued training and Title IV-E claiming assistance.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Actual cost to the Probation Department will not exceed 15% of the total Title IV-Claim, approximately
$90,000 annually.
BACKGROUND:
Title IV-E of the Social Security Act authorized the Foster Care and Adoption Assistance programs to
provide federal matching funds to states for directly administering the programs. Its objectives were to
improve the quality of care of children in foster care, reduce the number of children in foster care, return
children to their homes as soon as conditions permit, and facilitate the adoption or permanent placement of
children who cannot be returned to their homes. A single State agency is designed to claim Federal Title
IV-E. In California, the agency is the California Department of Social Services (CDSS). The state
designates implementation at the local level
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
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 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc:
C. 39
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Todd Billeci, County Probation Officer
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Contract Amendment with Justice Benefits Incorporated
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
through the county’s Social Services Agency. In Contra Costa County that agency is Employment and
Human Services (EHSD). In late 2013, the Federal Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS)
conducted site visits of two Probation departments in California. During their visits they determined that
Probation did not have a clear understanding of which juveniles could properly be claimed under Title
IV-E. As a result the DHHS froze funding to all Probation departments. At the time they froze funding to
all Probation Departments while CDSS worked DHHS to ensure that Probation departments statewide
received training to ensure compliance with Title IV-E. Funding for Probation statewide has now been
lifted but Contra Costa Probation has seen Title IV-E revenue drop from $4.5 million annually to $424,000.
On April 24, 2015 CDSS audited Contra Costa Probation’s Title IV-E claims. During this audit it was
determined that Probation is properly claiming the correct juveniles but there was concern that Probation
was under reporting the amount of time they are working with these youths. Justice Benefits, Inc. (JBI),
founded in 1997, specializes in Federal Revenue Maximization for state and local entities. They are the
national experts in Title IV-E claiming assistance for Probation departments and they contract with 30
Probation departments in California alone. Contra Costa Probation needs the assistance of JBI to determine
how to accurately capture the amount of time deputies work with Title IV-E eligible youths.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
Contra Costa County will no longer have the training and claiming expertise provided by Justice Benefits
Incorporated, Ltd.
CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT:
This action supports four of the community outcomes established in the Children's Report Card, 1)
"Children Ready for and Succeeding in School"; 2) "Children and Youth Healthy and Preparing for
Productive Adulthood"; 3) "Families that are Safe, Stable and Nurturing"; and, 4) "Communities that are
Safe and Provide a High Quality of Life for Children and Families".
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute a
contract with Delta Personnel Services, Inc. dba Guardian Security Agency in an amount not to exceed
$325,000 to provide security guard services for the period July 1, 2018 through June 30, 2019.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This contract will increase department expenditures by $325,000, of which $189,000 is assigned to
departmental Administrative Overhead, and $136,000 is assigned to the Community Services Bureau. The
contract is funded by 10% County, 48% State, and 42% Federal revenue.
BACKGROUND:
The Employment and Human Services Department (EHSD) maintains an agreement with the County
Health Services Department to provide personnel security officers (PSOs) at several EHSD locations.
EHSD, through a contract with Delta Personnel Services, Inc. dba Guardian Security Agency (Guardian),
provides security personnel services at EHSD locations when PSOs are unavailable due to vacation
schedules, illness, and alternative work schedules, or for night and social occasion events. Guardian
provides contingency security services to EHSD locations.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
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 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc:
C. 40
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Kathy Gallagher, Employment & Human Services Director
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Contract with Delta Personnel Services, Inc. dba Guardian Security Agency, Inc. for Security Guard Services
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
Upon request from EHSD, Guardian will perform temporary and unanticipated security services to
safeguard equipment and property, prepare reports, conduct visual checks of areas in and around EHSD
sites, and monitor and respond at the request of staff regarding unauthorized visitors, to insure the safety of
visitors and employees at EHSD locations.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
County building sites, property, and staff would not have security and safety mechanisms in place.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute an
interagency agreement with Liberty Adult Education, in an amount not to exceed $64,000 for education and
training services to California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKs) clients for the
period of July 1, 2018 through June 30, 2019.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The interagency agreement is funded with 100% CalWORKs Single Allocation revenue. [CFDA #93.558]
BACKGROUND:
The purpose of this contract is to provide a vocational and academic skills training program, FOCUS,
specially designed for Welfare-to-Work (WTW) participants of the California Work Opportunity and
Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKs) Program. This specifically targeted program for CalWORKs clients is
to be provided in a classroom setting at the Adult School location. Clients learn basic math and English
skills to prepare them for either an entry job test or performing at work. Additionally, they learn basic
computer skills for work. This is necessary as participants referred to FOCUS have completed a job
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: V. Kaplan, (925)
608-4963
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board
of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: April 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc:
C. 41
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Kathy Gallagher, Employment & Human Services Director
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Contract with Liberty Adult Education
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
search activity unsuccessfully in part due to their lack of basic job skills. This is considered education
related to employment which is the goal of the WTW program. This program has been in operation for over
10 years.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
The Employment and Human Services Department will be unable to provide the FOCUS program for its
Welfare to Work clients.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the
County, Contract #26-364-13 with Margaret A. Thayer, Ph.D., an individual, in an amount not to exceed
$232,000, to provide neuropsychological and geropsychological testing services at Contra Costa Regional
Medical Center (CCRMC) and Health Centers for the period June 1, 2018 through May 31, 2021.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This contract is funded 100% by Hospital Enterprise Fund I. (No rate increase)
BACKGROUND:
On July 7, 2015, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #26-364-11 (as amended by Contract
Amendment Agreement #26-364-12) with Margaret A. Thayer, Ph.D., to provide neuropsychological and
geropsychological testing services and group therapy sessions at CCRMC and Health Centers, for the
period June 1, 2015 through May 31, 2018.
Approval of Contract #26-364-13 will allow the contractor to continue providing neuropsychological and
geropsychological testing services and group therapy sessions through May 31, 2021.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Samir Shah, M.D.,
925-370-5525
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the
Board of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: April 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc: K Cyr, M Wilhelm
C. 42
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Contract #26-364-13 with Margaret A. Thayer, Ph.D.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If this contract is not approved, patients requiring neuropsychological and geropsychological testing
services and group therapy sessions 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 Amendment Agreement #76-583-1 with Universal Health Services, Inc., a corporation,
effective April 1, 2018, to amend Contract #76-583 to include biomedical technicians for preventative
maintenance and repair services on various biomedical equipment and systems at Contra Costa Regional
Medical (CCRMC) and Health Centers, with no change in the payment limit of $150,000 or term of June 1,
2017 through May 31, 2018.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This contract is funded 100% by Hospital Enterprise Fund I. (No rate increase)
BACKGROUND:
On June 20, 2017, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #76-583 for the provision of preventative
maintenance and repair services on Mesa Temperature Monitoring System, GCX End User Devices, Metro
Flow Electronic Medical Record (EMR) Workstations and Hugs Infant Security System at CCRMC for the
period from June 1, 2017 through May 31, 2018.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
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 24, 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 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Amendment Agreement #76-583-1 with Universal Hospital Services, Inc.
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
Approval of Contract Amendment Agreement #76-583-1 will allow contractor to provide biomedical
technicians for preventative maintenance and repair services through May 31, 2018.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If this contract is not approved, the County will not have biomedical technicians available to repair or
conduct preventative maintenance services.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the
County, Participation Agreement #26-796-1 with the Leland Stanford Junior University (dba California
Maternal Quality Care Collaborative), an education institution, in an amount not to exceed $10,000, to
allow Contra Costa Regional Medical Center (CCRMC) and Health Centers to participate in a collaborative
to improve perinatal health care in California, for the period from March 1, 2018 through February 28,
2021.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This contract is funded 100% by Hospital Enterprise Fund I.
BACKGROUND:
The purpose of the collaboration is to improve the quality and outcomes of perinatal health care in
California through: a) development of a responsive, real time, statewide material and perinatal data system;
b) taking advantage of existing core State and front-end maternal and perinatal data systems; c)
improvement in accuracy of the data collected for documenting and reporting on maternal and infant health
and the provision of maternity care services; and d) development of a collaborating network of public and
private obstetric and neonatal providers, insurers, public health professionals and business groups to
supports a system for benchmarking and continue performance improvement activities for perinatal care.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
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 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc: D Morgan, M Wilhelm
C. 44
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Participation Agreement #26-796-1 with the Leland Stanford Junior University, dba, California Maternal Quality Care
Collaborative (CMQCC)
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
On May 12, 2015, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #26-796 with the Leland Stanford Junior
University to allow County to participate in a collaborative to improve perinatal health care in California for
the period March 1, 2015 through February 28, 2018.
Approval of Participation Agreement #26-796-1 will allow the County to continue to participate in a
collaborative to improve perinatal health care in California, through February 28, 2021.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If this agreement is not approved, the County will not be able to participate and take advantage of
state-wide data systems improving the accuracy of perinatal health care at CCRMC.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the
County, Contract Amendment Agreement #26-602-13 with Traditions Psychology Group, Inc. (dba
Traditions Behavioral Health), a corporation, effective April 15, 2018, to amend Contract #26-602-12 to
increase the hourly rate for the Psychiatric Medical Director to act as the interim Behavioral Health
Services Director, with no change in the payment limit of $45,000,000, and no change in the term of
December 1, 2017 through November 30, 2020.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Funded 100% by Hospital Enterprise Fund I.
BACKGROUND:
On November 7, 2017, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #26-602-12 with Traditions
Psychology Group, Inc. (dba Traditions Behavioral Health) for the provision of physician management and
psychiatric staffing for the Inpatient Psychiatric Crisis Stabilization Unit at Contra Costa Regional Medical
Center, Health Centers and the County’s Main Detention Facility, for the period from December 1, 2017
through November 30, 2020.
Traditions Behavioral Health currently provides the Psychiatric Medical Director who supervises all
hospital-based psychiatric services, including the inpatient unit at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center,
psychiatric emergency services, Miller Wellness Center and Detention
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Anna Roth,
925-370-5101
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board
of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: April 24, 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:Anna Roth, Health Services Director
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Amendment #26-602-13 with Traditions Psychology Group, Inc. (dba Traditions Behavioral Health)
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
Psychiatry. As appropriate, patients and/or third party payors are billed for psychiatric services rendered.
At the request of the County, the Psychiatric Medical Director will additionally act as the Behavioral
Health/Mental Health Director until a permanent candidate for the position is identified.
On the recommendation of the County's Health Services Director and subject to Board approval as set forth
in agenda item no. 49 of the April 24, 2018 Board agenda, the current Psychiatric Medical Director, Dr.
Matthew White, will additionally be the Acting Behavioral Health/Mental Health Director and interim local
director of mental health services until a permanent candidate for these duties is identified.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If this contract is not approved, the Department will not have an interim Behavioral Health/Mental Health
Director to oversee Mental Health and Alcohol and other Drug services in Contra Costa County.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the
County, Contract Amendment Agreement #26-872-2 with S/T Health Group Consulting, Inc., a corporation,
effective April 1, 2018, to amend Contract #26-872-1 to increase the payment limit by $142,000 from
$454,000 to a new payment limit of $596,000 for the provision of 340B compliance and price verification
recovery audits per Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) requirements at Contra Costa
Regional Medical Center (CCRMC) and Health Centers for the period from April 1, 2017 through March
31, 2020.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This contract is funded 100% by Hospital Enterprise Fund I. (No rate increase)
BACKGROUND:
On April 5, 2017, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #26-872-1 with S/T Health Group
Consulting, Inc. to provide compliance and price verification recovery audits of the 340B Drug Pricing
Program per the U.S. HRSA requirements at CCRMC for the period from April 1, 2017 through March 31,
2020.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Jaspreet Benepal,
925-370-5100
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the
Board of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: April 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc: L Walker , M Wilhelm
C. 46
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Amendment Agreement #26-872-2 with S/T Health Group Consulting, Inc.
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
Approval of Contract Amendment Agreement #26-872-2 will allow the contractor to provide additional
compliance and price verification recovery audit services to the Health Services Department through March
31, 2020.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If this contract is not approved, the County will not be in compliance with HRSA requirements.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of County,
Contract #76-524-14 with Samir B. Shah, M.D., Inc., a professional corporation, in an amount not to exceed
$2,029,000, to provide ophthalmology services and, if requested, to act on behalf of the County as the Chief
Medical Officer at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center (CCRMC) and Health Centers, for the period
May 1, 2018 through April 30, 2021.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This contract is 100% funded by Hospital Enterprise Fund I. (Rate increase)
BACKGROUND:
On May 5, 2015, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #76-524-13 with Samir B. Shah, M.D., Inc.,
for the period from May 1, 2015 through April 30, 2018, for the provision of ophthalmology services
including consultation, clinic coverage, training, and medical and/or surgical procedures, and upon request
acting as Department Head of the assigned medical unit, Section Chief and Chief Medical Officer at Contra
Costa Regional Medical Center and Health Centers.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Patrick Godley,
925-957-5405
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 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc: Tasha Scott, Marcy Wilhelm
C. 47
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Contract #76-524-14 with Samir B. Shah, M.D., Inc.
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
Approval of Contract #76-524-14 will allow the contractor to continue to provide ophthalmology services
and to act as Chief Medical Officer at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center and Health Centers, through
April 30, 2021.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If this contract is not approved, patients requiring ophthalmology services at Contra Costa Regional
Medical and Health Centers will not have access to the contractor’s services, which will result in a
reduction in the overall level of services to the community.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director or designee, to execute on behalf of the
County, Contract #76-607 with JBTatum Corporation, a corporation, in an amount not to exceed $108,000
for the provision of professional consultation, management, and technical assistance to the Materials
Management Unit at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center (CCRMC) for the period from May 1, 2018
through April 30, 2019.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Funding for this contract is 100% from Hospital Enterprise Fund I.
BACKGROUND:
Under Contract #76-607, the contractor will provide professional consultation, management, and technical
assistance to the Materials Management Unit including managing employees and identifying cost savings
for the period May 1, 2018 through April 30, 2019. The contractor has previous experience in the Materials
Management Unit and with the current Material Management Supervisor on leave, the unit believes the
contractor will be able to assist in providing the needed administrative oversight and coordination of the
procurement, storage, distribution and accounts payable function for the Contra Costa Regional Medical
Center.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: JASPREET BENEPAL,
925-370-5100
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the
Board of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: April 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc: L Walker , M Wilhelm
C. 48
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Contract #76-607 with JBTatum Corporation
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If this contract is not approved, the County’s Materials Management Unit will not receive consultation and
technical assistance for managing day-to-day operations.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the
County, Contract #74-562 with Emily Watters, M.D., an individual, in an amount not to exceed $174,720 to
provide outpatient psychiatric services to mentally ill adults in Contra Costa County’s homeless shelters,
for the period from August 1, 2018 through July 31, 2019.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This contract is funded 100% by Mental Health Realignment funds.
BACKGROUND:
For a number of years the County has contracted with medical, dental and mental health specialists to
provide specialized professional services which are not otherwise available.
Under Contract #74-562, the contractor will provide outpatient psychiatric services to mentally ill adults in
the County’s homeless shelters through July 31, 2019.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If this contract is not approved, County’s clients will not have access to the contractor’s psychiatric services.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Matthew Luu,
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 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc: L Walker , M Wilhelm
C. 49
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Contract #74-562 with Emily Watters, M.D.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute an
Interagency Agreement with City of Richmond Workforce Development Board, in an amount not to exceed
$30,000 to provide workforce development staff training and professional development for the period of
December 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The interagency agreement is funded 100% by federal Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act Funding
revenue.
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 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 City of Richmond. 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
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Gina Chenoweth
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 24, 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 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Contract with City of Richmond Workforce Development Board for City of Richmond Workforce Development Staff
Training and Professional Development.
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
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
Richmond Workforce Development Board 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 of Supervisor
approval before execution.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If not approved, Contra Costa County will not be meeting its responsibilities as the lead agency for the
State-defined East Bay Regional Planning Unit for WIOA funding.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
ADOPT the Amended and Restated Bylaws of the Contra Costa County Library Commission, as
recommended by the Library Commission and County Librarian.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No fiscal impact.
BACKGROUND:
The Library Commission was established by the Board on March 12, 1991. The 1991 Board Order
established the composition and powers of the Commission. Since that time, a number of changes have
occurred that have affected the Commission. The City of Richmond elected to leave the Commission. Two
new members were added to the Commission when the City of Oakley incorporated in 2000 and the
College District was invited to join.
On December 19, 2017, the Board approved the current composition of the Commission and assorted
changes to the powers of the Commission. At the same time, the Board directed the Librarian to propose,
within ninety days, revisions to the Commission’s bylaws to reflect the approved changes. The proposed
Amended and Restated Bylaws are attached.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Walt Beveridge
925-608-7730
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the
Board of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: April 24, 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:Melinda Cervantes, County Librarian
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Amended and Restated Bylaws of the Contra Costa County Library Commission
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
The following key terms are incorporated into the Amended and Restated Bylaws:
Composition. When all of the positions are filled, the Commission will be
comprised of no fewer than twenty-four voting members and no more than
twenty-eight total members. The Commission will have the following voting
members: Eighteen city (town) representatives, five representatives of the County,
with each member of the Board having one appointment, and one member appointed
by the Contra Costa Central Labor Council, for a total of twenty-four voting
members. In addition, the Commission will have four ex officio (non-voting)
members, with each of the following entities having one appointment: the Contra
Costa County Office of Education, the Contra Costa Friends Council, the East Bay
Leadership Council and the Contra Costa Community College District.
1.
Term. Each member will serve a 4-year term and may be reappointed by their appointing
authority. Each member, including a member appointed to fill a vacancy, will hold the seat for
which they were appointed until the expiration of the term for that seat, or until that member’s
earlier resignation or removal in accordance with the bylaws.
2.
Each member is being appointed to one of four “classes,” as assigned by the Librarian. The
purpose of the classes is to enable the expiration dates of members’ terms to be staggered. A copy
of the class assignments is attached. Some members will have a “transition term,” to bridge them
from their current term to the term that applies to their class.
Quorum. A quorum for all meetings is thirteen voting members.3.
Voting. Except for a vote related to an amendment to the bylaws, the work of the Commission
may proceed by consensus as long as there is no objection from a member to proceeding in this
manner. When a member requests a recorded vote, the matter may only be approved if it is
approved by a majority of the County members present and a majority of the City members
present. For purposes of such a vote, the vote of the Labor Council member will be counted as a
City member vote.
4.
Amendments to Bylaws . Only the Board of Supervisors may amend the Commission’s
bylaws. A recommendation to the Board that the bylaws be amended must be approved by an
affirmative vote of 60% of the voting members of the Commission.
5.
Working Committees. The Commission may appoint working committees of no more than five
members. All working committees will make progress reports to the Commission at the
Commission's regular meetings. All working committees are encouraged to contain a
representative mix of County members, City members and non-voting members.
6.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If these revised bylaws are not approved, there will be inconsistencies between the existing bylaws and
the Board Order of December 19, 2017, which made changes to the composition and powers of the
Library Commission.
CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT:
No children's impact.
ATTACHMENTS
Bylaws - Clean Copy
2018 vs 2012 Comparison
Terms of Office Class List
RECOMMENDATION(S):
ACCEPT the March 2018 update of the operations of the Employment and Human Services Department,
Community Services Bureau, as recommended by the Employment and Human Services Department
Director.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
BACKGROUND:
The Employment and Human Services Department submits a monthly report to the Contra Costa County
Board of Supervisors (BOS) to ensure ongoing communication and updates to the County Administrator
and BOS regarding any and all issues pertaining to the Head Start Program and Community Services
Bureau.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
Not applicable.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
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 24, 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 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Operations Update of the Employment and Human Services Department, Community Services Bureau
ATTACHMENTS
CSB Mar 2018 CAO Report
CSB Mar 2018 HS Fiscal
CSB Mar 2018 EHS Fiscal
CSB Mar 2018 EHS Partnership Fiscal 1
CAB MAr 2018 EHS CC Partnership Fiscal 2
CSB Mar 2018 CACFP Report
CSB Mar 2018 LIHEAP
CSB Mar 2018 Credit Card
CSB Mar 2018 Menu
P: 925 681 6300
F: 925 313 8301
1470 Civic Court ,
Suite 200
Concord, CA
94520
www.cccounty.us/ehsd
To: David Twa, Contra Costa County Administrator
From: Kathy Gallagher, EHSD Director
Subject: Community Services Monthly Report
Date: March 2018
News /Accomplishments
On March 7th, Maureen Burns-Vermette, Program Specialist, and Sonja LaCaze, Early
Childhood Specialist, from the Administration for Children and Families (ACF) Regional
Office visited three (3) of our Richmond Centers: GMIII, Crescent Park and Verde
Children’s Center before returning to Civic for lunch and our monthly ACF call /onsite
visit. They both shared positive feedback about the centers that they visited and
commented on how unique each center is.
In celebration of the 10 years that CSB has collaborated with Bay Area Discovery
Museum (BADM), Isabel Renggenathen, Pam Arrington, Ron Pipa and Ambreen Khawaja
attended the BADM - Creativity Forum "Raising Brilliant Kids" in San Francisco on March
8th. Connection programs such as BADM makes quality, hands-on learning accessible for
the community’s most vulnerable children such as children from our Brookside, Las
Deltas, GMIII and Crescent Park Children’s Centers in Richmond. Children and families
travel to the museum four (4) times a year and museum staff offe r on-site training for
the teachers and families at these centers. All of this is of no cost to our families and
program.
The Head Start / Early Head Start Health and Nutrition Services Advisory Committee
Meeting was held on March 27th at CSB’s Administrative Office in Concord. These
meetings are held quarterly and provide an opportunity for CSB and community
collaborative partners to come together to share resources, discuss health concerns
facing our communities and develop strategies/systems to support the community.
On March 17th, CSB teaching staff, admi nistrators and parents joined educators from
other programs, state legislators, local elected officials, and members of the community
for the 14th Annual Young Children's I ssues Forum to converse about the current
movement to elevate the quality of Early Care and Education services for all children
and promote increased compensation.
CSB continues to offer Parental Financial Fitness Workshops to Head Start (HS)/Early
Head Start (EHS) families. The traini ngs are co-facilitated by CSB Comprehensive
Services Assistant Managers, and are offered to our families in East County at Marsh
Creek Children’s Center and in West County at the Brookside Children’s Center. Al l
families are invited to attend as childcare is provided. Additionally, a Financial Fitness
Workshop was also offered to CSB employees. An award c eremony was held on March
8th for the twenty- four (24) staff participants who completed the workshop. The
participants are looking forward to sharing this valuable information from with the
families that they work with.
cc: Policy Council Chair
2
The teaching staff early closure days in April will focus on interactive science activities.
Head Start and Early Head Start teaching staff will receive training about a variety of
science material and tools that children can use in the classroom. Initially, this training
was scheduled in March, but was moved to April to allow all site staff time to complete
the Mandated Reporter trainings.
On February 28th, all EHS and HS teaching staff participated in a circle time/movement
training presented by Tandem. Teachers learned new strategies, songs, and hands -on
activiti es to support their circle time activities with the children .
I. Status Updates:
a. Caseloads, workload (all programs)
Head Start enrollment: 100.15%
Early Head Start enrollment: 100%
Early Head Start Child Care Partnership enrollment: 100%
Early Head Start Child Care Partnership # 2 enrollment: 62.09% (100% to
capacity at CSB centers/ adjusted for open rooms & staffing )
Head Start Average Daily Attendance: 82.6%
Early Head Start Average Daily Attendance: 83.5%
Early Head Start Child Care Partnership Attendance: 83.5%
Stage 2: 379 families and 607 children
CAPP: 145 families and 249 children
- In total: 524 families and 856 children
- Incoming transfers from Stage 1: 19 families and 33 children
LIHEAP: 244 households have been assisted
Weatherization: 17 units
b. Staffing:
During the month of March , CSB hired a Teacher, Associate Teacher,
Business Systems Analyst, and two (2) Assistant Director-Project.
Additionally, the bureau continues to recruit permanent and temporary
employees within all teaching classifications. Targeted recruitments will
be opened to fill two (2) vacant Comprehensive Services Manager and
one (1) Comprehensive Services Assistant Manager positions, which
became vacant due to upward mobility.
CSB continues to struggle with hiring qualified teaching staff, and
currently has two vacant classrooms in West County due to the staffing
shortage.
c. Union Issues:
o CSB has scheduled a Meet and Confer (M&C) session with PEU, Local 1
to reach an agreement on a temporary contract with Child Care Career
(Temp Agency supplying teaching staff). The contract will allow the
Bureau to use temporary teaching staff provided by the agency to
cc: Policy Council Chair
3
ensure adequate teacher-child ratios in the CSB’s child care centers as
needed.
o The Bureau is working with Labor Relation to schedule a Meet and
Confer (M&C) with Local 1 to negotiate wages for CSB employees
represented by the Union effective July 1, 2018. Additional M & C
sessions with PEU, Local 1 will be scheduled to discuss upcoming
program changes that may impact staff working terms and conditions.
II. Emerging Issues and Hot Topics:
Effective June 30, 2018, the Brookside Children’s Center will close for child care
and comprehensive sup port services. Although this has been a difficult decision,
the Brookside Children’s center has experienced several significant challenges in
recent years such as contaminants found in the soil and groundwater as a result
of two (2) inactive oil pipelines surrounding the center 4-6 feet underground,
the close proximity of two (2) active railroads tracks on either side of the facility
resulting in exposure to diesel fuel exhaust, a growing homeless population and
an aged facility that requires on -going repai rs. CSB has been seeking alternative
locations for this center since early 2016 in hopes of moving the location with
no disruption to services; however, possibilities for appropriate site relocation
have not been successful. CSB is choosing to wait no more in the best interest of
the children, while we continue to seek an appropriate relocation site.
Due to the timing of the planned closure , no children will lose child care
services; all children continuing services in 18-19 program year will be
individually case managed and transitioned to a near-by center of their choice.
Due to staffing vacancies in multiple West county centers, no staff will lose
employment. CSB is working with Local One to ensure staff have options for re -
assignment to other West Count y Centers.
The 2018 appropriations bill resulted in a 2.2% COLA increase for Head Start and
new partnership funding for Early Head Start. We also learned that LI HEAP and
Weatherization programs will receive a $270 million increase.
1 2 3 4 5
DESCRIPTION Total Remaining %
YTD Actual Budget Budget YTD
a. PERSONNEL 679,690$ 3,954,677$ 3,274,987$ 17%
b. FRINGE BENEFITS 415,734 2,519,058 2,103,324 17%
c. TRAVEL - - - 0%
d. EQUIPMENT - - - 0%
e. SUPPLIES 2,688 143,000 140,312 2%
f. CONTRACTUAL 18,325 7,066,378 7,048,053 0%
g. CONSTRUCTION - - - 0%
h. OTHER 114,268 1,500,246 1,385,978 8%
I. TOTAL DIRECT CHARGES 1,230,704$ 15,183,359$ 13,952,655$ 8%
j. INDIRECT COSTS 110,886 945,168 834,282 12%
k. TOTAL-ALL BUDGET CATEGORIES 1,341,590$ 16,128,527$ 14,786,937$ 8%
In-Kind (Non-Federal Share)335,398$ 4,032,132$ 3,696,734$ 8%
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
COMMUNITY SERVICES BUREAU
2018 HEAD START PROGRAM
February 2018 Expenditures
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Actual Actual Total YTD Total Remaining %
Jan-18 Feb-18 Actual Budget Budget YTD
a. Salaries & Wages (Object Class 6a)
Permanent 1011 291,198 314,382 605,580 3,403,950 2,798,370 18%
Temporary 1013 41,391 32,719 74,110 550,727 476,617 13%
a. PERSONNEL (Object class 6a)332,589 347,101 679,690 3,954,677 3,274,987 17%
b. FRINGE (Object Class 6b)195,243 220,490 415,734 2,519,058 2,103,324 415,734
e. SUPPLIES (Object Class 6e)
1. Office Supplies - 1,036 1,036 32,000 30,964 3%
2. Child and Family Services Supplies (Includesclassroom Supplies)116 900 1,016 50,000 48,984 2%
4. Other Supplies
Computer Supplies, Software Upgrades, Computer Replacement - 29 29 45,000 44,971 0%
Health/Safety Supplies - - - 3,000 3,000 0%
Mental helath/Diasabilities Supplies - - - 1,000 1,000 0%
Miscellaneous Supplies 35 572 607 8,000 7,393 8%
Household Supplies - - - 4,000 4,000 0%
TOTAL SUPPLIES (6e)151 2,537 2,688 143,000 140,312 2%
f. CONTRACTUAL (Object Class 6f)
1. Adm Svcs (e.g., Legal, Accounting, Temporary Contracts)- 2,605 2,605 58,000 55,395 4%
Estimated Medical Revenue from Medi-Cal (Org 1432 - credit)- - - (500,000) (500,000) 0%
Health Consultant 2,240 4,480 6,720 45,700 38,980 15%
5. Training & Technical Assistance - PA11
Interaction - - - 11,000 11,000 0%
Diane Godard ($50,000/2)- - - 10,000 10,000 0%
Josephine Lee ($35,000/2)- - - 14,300 14,300 0%
Susan Cooke ($60,000/2)- - - 10,400 10,400
7. Delegate Agency Costs
First Baptist Church Head Start PA22 - - - 2,101,965 2,101,965 0%
First Baptist Church Head Start PA20 - - - 8,000 8,000 0%
8. Other Contracts
FB-Fairgrounds Partnership (Wrap)- - - 74,213 74,213 0%
FB-Fairgrounds Partnership - - - 183,600 183,600 0%
FB-E. Leland/Mercy Housing Partnership - - - - -
Martinez ECC (18 HS slots x $225/mo x 12/mo)- 9,000 9,000 108,000 99,000 8%
YMCA Richmond CDC, Lucas Ave.(48 slots x 12 x $350) $201,600 - - - 201,600 201,600 0%
YMCA 8th CDC, Lucas Ave.(48 slots x 12 x $350) $201,600 - - - 201,600 201,600 0%
YMCA Giant Rd. CDC (16 slots x 12 x $350) $67,200 - - - 67,200 67,200 0%
YMCA Rodeo CDC(24 slots x 12 x $350) $100,800 - - - 100,800 100,800 0%
Child Outcome Planning and Administration (COPA/Nulinx)- - - 20,000 20,000 0%
Enhancement/wrap-around HS slots with State CD Program - - - 4,350,000 4,350,000 0%
f. CONTRACTUAL (Object Class 6f)2,240 16,085 18,325 7,066,378 7,048,053 0%
h. OTHER (Object Class 6h)
2. Bldg Occupancy Costs/Rents & Leases 645 24,004 24,649 366,000 341,351 7%
(Rents & Leases/Other Income)- - - - -
4. Utilities, Telephone 6,434 26,694 33,128 295,000 261,872 11%
5. Building and Child Liability Insurance - - - 3,000 3,000 0%
6. Bldg. Maintenance/Repair and Other Occupancy - 3,786 3,786 100,000 96,214 4%
8. Local Travel (55.5 cents per mile effective 1/1/2012)648 1,182 1,830 50,000 48,170 4%
9. Nutrition Services - - -
Child Nutrition Costs - 22,377 22,377 310,000 287,623 7%
(CCFP & USDA Reimbursements)- - - (230,000) (230,000) 0%
13. Parent Services - - -
Parent Conference Registration - PA11 - - - 9,000 9,000 0%
Parent Resources (Parenting Books, Videos, etc.) - PA11 - 1,780 1,780 1,000 (780) 178%
PC Orientation, Trainings, Materials & Translation - PA11 99 1,218 1,318 7,700 6,382 17%
Policy Council Activities 16 5 21 4,000 3,979 1%
Male Involvement Activities - - - 2,500 2,500 0%
Parent Activities (Sites, PC, BOS luncheon) & Appreciation 2,825 - 2,825 5,500 2,675 51%
Child Care/Mileage Reimbursement - - - 5,100 5,100 0%
14. Accounting & Legal Services - - -
Auditor Controllers - - - 2,000 2,000 0%
Data Processing/Other Services & Supplies 1,024 406 1,430 15,000 13,570 10%
15. Publications/Advertising/Printing - - -
Outreach/Printing - - - 100 100 0%
Recruitment Advertising (Newspaper, Brochures)- - - 8,500 8,500 0%
16. Training or Staff Development - - -
Agency Memberships (WIPFLI, Meeting Fees, NHSA, NAEYC, etc.)- 156 156 22,098 21,942 1%
Staff Trainings/Dev. Conf. Registrations/Memberships - PA11 - 279 279 48,000 47,721 1%
Family, Community and Parent Involvement - - - 95,000 95,000 0%
17. Other
Site Security Guards - 94 94 35,000 34,906 0%
Dental/Medical Services - - - 1,000 1,000 0%
Vehicle Operating/Maintenance & Repair 4,195 4,746 8,941 70,000 61,059 13%
Equipment Maintenance Repair & Rental - 1,147 1,147 82,000 80,853 1%
Dept. of Health and Human Services-data Base (CORD)912 912 1,825 6,000 4,176 30%
Other Operating Expenses (Facs Admin/Other admin)726 7,957 8,684 186,748 178,064 5%
Other Departmental Expenses - - - - -
h. OTHER (6h)17,524 96,744 114,268 1,500,246 1,385,978 8%
I. TOTAL DIRECT CHARGES (6a-6h)547,747 682,957 1,230,704 15,183,359 13,952,655 8%
j. INDIRECT COSTS - 110,886 110,886 945,168 834,282 12%
k. TOTALS (ALL BUDGET CATEGORIES)547,747 793,843 1,341,590 16,128,527 14,786,937 8%
Non-Federal Share (In-kind)136,937 198,461 335,398 4,032,132 3,696,734 8%
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
COMMUNITY SERVICES BUREAU
2018 HEAD START PROGRAM
February 2018 Expenditures
1 2 3 4 5
DESCRIPTION Total Remaining %
YTD Actual Budget Budget YTD
a. PERSONNEL 61,414$ 601,077$ 539,663$ 10%
b. FRINGE BENEFITS 37,015 384,355 347,340 10%
c. TRAVEL - - - 0%
d. EQUIPMENT - - - 0%
e. SUPPLIES 77 16,800 16,723 0%
f. CONTRACTUAL 50,420 2,292,672 2,242,252 2%
g. CONSTRUCTION - - - 0%
h. OTHER 2,439 99,983 97,544 2%
I. TOTAL DIRECT CHARGES 151,365$ 3,394,887$ 3,243,522$ 4%
j. INDIRECT COSTS 8,537 143,657 135,120 6%
k. TOTAL-ALL BUDGET CATEGORIES 159,902$ 3,538,544$ 3,378,642$ 5%
In-Kind (Non-Federal Share)39,975$ 884,636$ 844,661$ 5%
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
COMMUNITY SERVICES BUREAU
2018 EARLY HEAD START PROGRAM
February 2018 Expenditures
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Actual Actual Total YTD Total Remaining %
Jan-18 Feb-18 Actual Budget Budget YTD
Expenditures
a. Salaries & Wages (Object Class 6a)
Permanent 1011 25,341 31,511 56,852 519,798 462,946 11%
Temporary 1013 2,359 2,203 4,562 81,279 76,717 6%
a. PERSONNEL (Object class 6a)27,700 33,714 61,414 601,077 539,663 10%
b. FRINGE (Object Class 6b)15,514 21,502 37,015 384,355 347,340 10%
e. SUPPLIES (Object Class 6e)
1. Office Supplies - 77 77 1,000 923 8%
2. Child and Family Serv. Supplies/classroom Supplies - - - 11,000 11,000 0%
4. Other Supplies - - - -
Computer Supplies, Software Upgrades, Comp Replacemnt- - - 2,000 2,000 0%
Health/Safety Supplies - - - 500 500 0%
Miscellaneous Supplies - - - 2,300 2,300 0%
Household Supplies - - - - -
e. SUPPLIES (Object Class 6e)- 77 77 16,800 16,723 0%
f. CONTRACTUAL (Object Class 6f)
1. Adm Svcs ( Legal, Accounting, Temporary Contracts)- - - 1,000 1,000 0%
2. Health/Disabilities Services - - - -
Health Consultant - 1,920 1,920 19,500 17,580 10%
5. Training & Technical Assistance - PA11 -
Interaction - - - 5,500 5,500 0%
Diane Godard - - - 7,500 7,500 0%
Josephine Lee ($35,000/2)- - - 5,000 5,000 0%
Susan Cooke ($60,000/2)- - - 6,500 6,500
8. Other Contracts
FB-Fairgrounds Partnership - - - 84,000 84,000 0%
FB-E. Leland/Mercy Housing Partnership - - - 180,000 180,000 0%
Apiranet - 40,500 40,500 388,800 348,300 10%
Crossroads - - - 110,000 110,000 0%
Martinez ECC - 8,000 8,000 96,000 88,000 8%
Child Outcome Planning & Admini. (COPA/Nulinx)- - - 3,000 3,000 0%
Enhancement/wrap-around HS slots with State CD Prog.- - - 1,385,872 1,385,872 0%
f. CONTRACTUAL (Object Class 6f)- 50,420 50,420 2,292,672 2,242,252 2%
h. OTHER (Object Class 6h)
2. Bldg Occupancy Costs/Rents & Leases - 155 155 1,800 1,645 9%
(Rents & Leases/Other Income)- - - - -
4. Utilities, Telephone - 390 390 3,600 3,210 11%
5. Building and Child Liability Insurance - - - - -
6. Bldg. Maintenance/Repair and Other Occupancy - - - 9,200 9,200 0%
8. Local Travel (55.5 cents per mile)- 272 272 6,500 6,228 4%
9. Nutrition Services - - - -
Child Nutrition Costs - - - 1,100 1,100 0%
(CCFP & USDA Reimbursements)- - - (800) (800)
13. Parent Services
Parent Conference Registration - PA11 - - - 4,000 4,000 0%
Parent Resources (Parenting Books, Videos, etc.) - PA11 - 305 305 - (305)
PC Orientation, Trainings, Materials & Translation - PA11 - 58 58 4,000 3,942 1%
Policy Council Activities - - - 1,000 1,000 0%
Parent Activities (Sites, PC, BOS luncheon) & Appreciation- - - 500 500 0%
Child Care/Mileage Reimbursement - - - 2,500 2,500 0%
14. Accounting & Legal Services
Data Processing/Other Services & Supplies - 296 296 3,200 2,904 9%
15. Publications/Advertising/Printing
Recruitment Advertising (Newspaper, Brochures)- - - 100 100
16. Training or Staff Development
Agency Memberships (WIPFLI, Meeting Fees, NHSA, NAEYC)- - - 20,200 20,200 0%
Staff Trainings/Dev. Conf. Registrations/Memberships - PA11- - - 30,244 30,244 0%
17. Other
Vehicle Operating/Maintenance & Repair - 758 758 8,000 7,242 9%
Equipment Maintenance Repair & Rental - 2 2 1,000 998 0%
Other Operating Expenses (Facs Admin/Other admin)- 204 204 3,839 3,635 5%
Other Departmental Expenses - - - - -
h. OTHER (6h)- 2,439 2,439 99,983 97,544 2%
I. TOTAL DIRECT CHARGES (6a-6h)43,214 108,151 151,365 3,394,887 3,243,522 4%
j. INDIRECT COSTS - 8,537 8,537 143,657 135,120 6%
k. TOTALS - ALL BUDGET CATEGORIES 43,214 116,688 159,902 3,538,544 3,378,642 5%
Non-Federal Match (In-Kind)10,803 29,172 39,975 884,636 844,661 5%
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
COMMUNITY SERVICES BUREAU
2018 EARLY HEAD START PROGRAM
February 2018 Expenditures
1 2 3 4 5
DESCRIPTION Total Remaining %
YTD Actual Budget Budget YTD
a. PERSONNEL 189,001$ 299,555$ 110,554$ 63%
b. FRINGE BENEFITS 115,434 216,733 101,299 53%
c. TRAVEL - - - 0%
d. EQUIPMENT - - - 0%
e. SUPPLIES 6,497 57,850 51,353 11%
f. CONTRACTUAL 184,909 470,120 285,211 39%
g. CONSTRUCTION - 0%
h. OTHER 48,795 70,363 21,568 69%
I. TOTAL DIRECT CHARGES 544,636$ 1,114,621$ 569,985$ 49%
j. INDIRECT COSTS 52,404 62,557 10,153 84%
k. TOTAL-ALL BUDGET CATEGORIES 597,040$ 1,177,178$ 580,138$ 51%
In-Kind (Non-Federal Share)198,596$ 272,845$ 74,248$ 73%
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
COMMUNITY SERVICES BUREAU
EARLY HEAD START- CC PARTNERSHIP #1
February 2018 Expenditures
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Jul-17 Oct-17
thru thru Actual Actual Total YTD Total Remaining %
Sep-17 Dec-17 Jan-18 Feb-18 Actual Budget Budget YTD
Expenditures
a. Salaries & Wages (Object Class 6a)
Permanent 1011 86,175 56,267 22,013 23,136 187,591 299,555 111,964 63%
Temporary 1013 - - 813 597 1,410 - (1,410)
a. PERSONNEL (Object class 6a)86,175 56,267 22,826 23,732 189,001 299,555 110,554 63%
b. FRINGE BENEFITS (Object Class 6b)
Fringe Benefits 52,846 35,449 14,003 13,136 115,434 216,733 101,299 53%
b. FRINGE (Object Class 6b)52,846 35,449 14,003 13,136 115,434 216,733 101,299 53%
e. SUPPLIES (Object Class 6e)
1. Office Supplies 61 1,172 554 - 1,786 1,000 (786) 179%
2. Child and Family Serv. Supplies/classroom Supplies 40 522 - - 562 54,250 53,688 1%
4. Other Supplies - -
Computer Supplies, Software Upgrades, Comp Replacemnt1,089 1,279 19 - 2,386 1,200 (1,186) 199%
Miscellaneous Supplies - 25 - - 25 100 75 25%
Household Supplies 936 793 8 - 1,737 1,300 (437) 134%
e. SUPPLIES (Object Class 6e)2,125 3,791 581 - 6,497 57,850 51,353 11%
f. CONTRACTUAL (Object Class 6f)
1. Adm Svcs (e.g., Legal, Accounting, Temporary Contracts)- - - - - 12,000 12,000 0%
8. Other Contracts - 117,416 - 7,362 124,777 312,000 187,223 40%
Contra Costa Child Care Council - - - - - 20,000 20,000 0%
First Baptist (20 slots x $450)- - - - - 3,000 3,000 0%
Child Outcome Planning and Administration (COPA/Nulinx)53,000 (3,000) 10,000 - 60,000 109,920 49,920 55%
Enhancement/wrap-around HS slots with State CD Prog.- 132 - - 132 - (132)
f. CONTRACTUAL (Object Class 6f)53,000 114,548 10,000 7,362 184,909 470,120 285,211 39%
h. OTHER (Object Class 6h)
2. Bldg Occupancy Costs/Rents & Leases 4,760 3,595 383 1,217 9,955 3,800 (6,155) 262%
(Rents & Leases/Other Income)- - - - - - -
4. Utilities, Telephone 3,210 5,109 2,038 1,560 11,918 6,000 (5,918) 199%
5. Building and Child Liability Insurance - - - - - - -
6. Bldg. Maintenance/Repair and Other Occupancy 1,145 35 5 - 1,185 1,400 215 85%
8. Local Travel (54 cents per mile)702 889 29 - 1,620 4,200 2,580 39%
13. Parent Services - - - - - - - 0%
14. Accounting & Legal Services - -
Data Processing/Other Services & Supplies 269 403 134 - 806 1,000 194 81%
15. Publications/Advertising/Printing - - - - - - -
Outreach/Printing - - - - - 400 400
16. Training or Staff Development
Agency Memberships (WIPFLI, Meeting Fees, NHSA, NAEYC)- - - - - - -
Staff Trainings/Dev. Conf. Registrations/Memberships - PA1114,746 2,895 10 - 17,651 25,907 8,256 68%
17. Other -
Vehicle Operating/Maintenance & Repair 688 224 - 63 975 2,000 1,025 49%
Equipment Maintenance Repair & Rental 2,468 428 395 - 3,291 4,000 709 82%
Other Operating Expenses (Facs Admin/Other admin)590 492 147 164 1,393 2,106 713 66%
h. OTHER (6h)28,578 14,071 3,141 3,005 48,795 70,363 21,568 69%
I. TOTAL DIRECT CHARGES (6a-6h)222,725 224,125 50,551 47,235 544,636 1,114,621 569,985 49%
j. INDIRECT COSTS 14,702 23,601 7,238 6,863 52,404 62,557 10,153 84%
k. TOTALS - ALL BUDGET CATEGORIES 237,427 247,727 57,789 54,098 597,040 1,177,178 580,138 51%
Non-federal Match In-Kind 31,710 105,349 31,784 29,754 198,596 272,845 74,248 73%
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
COMMUNITY SERVICES BUREAU
EARLY HEAD START- CC PARTNERSHIP #1
February 2018 Expenditures
1 2 3 4 5
DESCRIPTION Total Remaining %
YTD Actual Budget Budget YTD
a. PERSONNEL 201,061$ 1,227,715$ 1,026,654$ 16%
b. FRINGE BENEFITS 127,496 893,334 765,838 14%
c. TRAVEL - - - 0%
d. EQUIPMENT 388 225,000 224,612 0%
e. SUPPLIES 109,728 419,400 309,672 26%
f. CONTRACTUAL 221,328 2,479,300 2,257,972 9%
g. CONSTRUCTION - - - 0%
h. OTHER 198,486 844,441 645,955 24%
I. TOTAL DIRECT CHARGES 858,487$ 6,089,190$ 5,230,703$ 14%
j. INDIRECT COSTS 56,875 271,072 214,197 21%
k. TOTAL-ALL BUDGET CATEGORIES 915,362$ 6,360,262$ 5,444,900$ 14%
In-Kind (Non-Federal Share)264,011$ 1,590,065$ 1,326,054$ 17%
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
COMMUNITY SERVICES BUREAU
EARLY HEAD START- CC PARTNERSHIP #2
February 2018 Expenditures
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Actual Actual Total YTD Total Remaining %
Jan-18 Feb-18 Actual Budget Budget YTD
Expenditures
a. Salaries & Wages (Object Class 6a)
Permanent 1011 24,296 29,434 191,878 1,081,279 889,401 18%
Temporary 1013 2,461 6,722 9,183 146,436 137,253 6%
a. PERSONNEL (Object class 6a)26,757 36,155 201,061 1,227,715 1,026,654 16%
b. FRINGE BENEFITS (Object Class 6b)
Fringe Benefits 16,442 19,923 127,496 893,334 765,838 14%
b. FRINGE (Object Class 6b)16,442 19,923 127,496 893,334 765,838 14%
d. EQUIPMENT (Object Class 6d)
1. Office Equipment/Computer Equipment - - 388 125,000 124,612 0%
2. Vehicle Purchase - - - 100,000 100,000 0%
d. EQUIPMENT (Object Class 6d)- - 388 225,000 224,612 0%
e. SUPPLIES (Object Class 6e)
1. Office Supplies - 65 2,047 6,500 4,453 31%
2. Child and Family Serv. Supplies/classroom Supplies - - 3,926 69,000 65,074 6%
Start-Up Child and Family Serv. Supplies/classroom Supplies 2,800 11,316 96,674 216,000 119,326 45%
3. Other Supplies
Computer Supplies, Software Upgrades, Comp Replacemnt 33 - 4,407 18,000 13,593 24%
Health/Safety Supplies - - - 6,000 6,000 0%
Start-Up Health/Safety Supplies - 2,447 2,447 102,000 99,553 2%
Miscellaneous Supplies 113 - 164 1,000 836 16%
Household Supplies 14 - 63 900 837 7%
e. SUPPLIES (Object Class 6e)2,960 13,829 109,728 419,400 309,672 26%
f. CONTRACTUAL (Object Class 6f)
1. Adm Svcs (e.g., Legal, Accounting, Temporary Contracts)- - - 36,000 36,000 0%
2. Health/Disabilities Services
Health Consultant - - - 25,500 25,500 0%
3. Training & Technical Assistance - PA11
Interaction - - - 14,000 14,000 0%
Diane Godard - - - 4,000 4,000 0%
Josephine Lee 3,060 1,650 12,720 38,000 25,280 33%
Susan Cooke - - - 8,000 8,000 0%
UCSF Benioff - - 9,375 25,600 16,225 37%
4. Other Contracts
First Baptist/East Leland - - - 6,000 6,000 0%
Crossroads - - - 144,000 144,000 0%
Martinez ECC 4,000 - 4,000 117,000 113,000 3%
YMCA Richmond CDC, Lucas Ave.- 7,000 7,000 48,000 41,000 15%
YMCA 8th CDC, Lucas Ave.- 5,500 5,500 66,000 60,500 8%
YMCA Rodeo CDC - 3,000 3,000 18,000 15,000 17%
KinderCare Mahogany - 12,500 12,500 96,000 83,500 13%
Baby Yale Brentwood - 21,000 21,000 108,000 87,000 19%
Baby Yale Antioch - - - 39,000 39,000 0%
Loss of Subsidy - - - 194,000 194,000 0%
Child Outcome Planning and Administration (COPA/Nulinx)- 52 998 6,000 5,002 17%
Enhancement EHS slots with State Child Dev. Program 39,705 - 145,235 1,486,200 1,340,965 10%
f. CONTRACTUAL (Object Class 6f)46,765 50,702 221,328 2,479,300 2,257,972 9%
h. OTHER (Object Class 6h)
1. Bldg Occupancy Costs/Rents & Leases 15 180 426 60,000 59,574 1%
2. Utilities, Telephone 16 279 633 10,000 9,367 6%
3. Building & Child Liability Insurance - - - 1,000 1,000 0%
4. Bldg. Maintenance/Repair and Other Occupancy - - 99 66,300 66,201 0%
Start-Up Bldg. Maintenance/Repair and Other Occupancy 87,664 6,216 171,733 377,000 205,267 46%
5. Local Travel (54 cents per mile)283 339 1,070 10,800 9,730 10%
6. Nutrition Services
Child Nutrition Costs - - - 18,000 18,000 0%
CCFP and USDA Reimbursements - - - (13,000) (13,000) 0%
7. Parent Services -
Parent Conference Registration - PA11 - - - 2,000 2,000 0%
Parent Resources (Parenting Books, Videos, etc.)- - - 4,500 4,500 0%
PC Orientation, Trainings, Materials & Translation - PA11 - - - 8,000 8,000 0%
Policy Council Meetings - - - 4,000 4,000 0%
Parent Activities (Sites, PC, BOS luncheon) & Appreciation - - - 3,700 3,700 0%
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
COMMUNITY SERVICES BUREAU
EARLY HEAD START- CC PARTNERSHIP #2
February 2018 Expenditures
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Actual Actual Total YTD Total Remaining %
Jan-18 Feb-18 Actual Budget Budget YTD
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
COMMUNITY SERVICES BUREAU
EARLY HEAD START- CC PARTNERSHIP #2
February 2018 Expenditures
Child Care/Mileage Reimbursement - - - 2,600 2,600 0%
8. Accounting & Legal Services -
Audit/Legal (County Council)- - - 1,000 1,000 0%
Auditor Controllers - - - 500 500 0%
Data Processing/Other Services & Supplies 235 264 1,563 3,500 1,937 45%
9. Publications/Advertising/Printing -
Outreach/Printing - - 426 1,500 1,074 28%
Recruitment Advertising (Newspaper, Brochures)- - 243 1,500 1,257 16%
10. Training or Staff Development
Agency Memberships (WIPFLI, Meeting Fees, NHSA, NAEYC)- - - 24,608 24,608 0%
Family, Community and Parent Engagement - - - 16,000 16,000 0%
Staff Trainings/Dev. Conf. Registrations/Memberships - PA11 1,156 4,678 20,108 85,854 65,746 23%
11. Other
Site Security Guards - - - 5,000 5,000 0%
Dental/medical Services - - - 500 500 0%
Vehicle Operating/Maintenance & Repair - - - 12,800 12,800 0%
Equipment Maintenance Repair & Rental - 23 824 10,000 9,176 8%
Dept. of Health and Human Services-211 data base - - - 3,000 3,000 0%
Other Operating Expenses (Facs Admin/Other admin)85 190 1,361 123,779 122,418 1%
h. OTHER (6h)89,455 12,169 198,486 844,441 645,955 24%
I. TOTAL DIRECT CHARGES (6a-6h)182,380 132,777 858,487 6,089,190 5,230,703 14%
j. INDIRECT COSTS 4,196 7,944 56,875 271,072 214,197 21%
k. TOTALS - ALL BUDGET CATEGORIES 186,576 140,722 915,362 6,360,262 5,444,900 14%
Non-federal Match In-Kind 111,946 2,447 264,011 1,590,065 1,326,054 17%
2018
Month covered January
Approved sites operated this month 15
Number of days meals served this month 21
Average daily participation 716
Child Care Center Meals Served:
Breakfast 12,077
Lunch 15,035
Supplements 11,034
Total Number of Meals Served 38,146
fldr/fn:2018 CAO Monthly Reports
EMPLOYMENT & HUMAN SERVICES DEPARTMENT
COMMUNITY SERVICES BUREAU
CHILD NUTRITION FOOD SERVICES
CHILD and ADULT CARE FOOD PROGRAM MEALS SERVED
FY 2017-2018
CAO Monthly Report
CSBG and Weatherization Programs
Year-to-Date Expenditures
As of February 28, 2018
1.2017 LIHEAP WX
Contract # 17B-3005
Term: Oct. 1, 2016 - March 31, 2018
Amount: WX $ 963,937
Total Contract 963,937$
Expenditures (856,858)
Balance 107,079$
Expended 89%
2.2017 LIHEAP ECIP/EHA 16
Contract # 17B-3005
Term: Oct. 1, 2016 - March 31, 2018
Amount: EHA 16 $ 1,034,329
Total Contract 1,034,329$
Expenditures (984,536)
Balance 49,793$
Expended 95%
4.2017 COMMUNITY SERVICES BLOCK GRANT (CSBG)
Contract # 17F-2007
Term: Jan. 1, 2017 - December 31, 2017
Amount: $ 846,479
Total Contract 846,479$
Expenditures (771,714)
Balance 74,765$
Expended 91%
fldr/fn:CAO Monthly Reports/WX YTD Exp-CAO Mo Rprt 2-2018
A - 5
Authorized Users
C. Rand, Bureau Dir xxxx8798
Month: February 2018 K. Mason, Div Mgr xxxx2364
C. Reich, Div Mgr xxxx4959
Credit Card:Visa/U.S. Bank S. Kim, Sr. Bus. Systems Analyst xxxx1907
C. Johnson, AD xxxx0220
J. Rowley, AD xxxx2391
P. Arrington, AD xxxx3838
I. Renggenathen, AD xxxx0494
R. Radeva, PSA III xxxx1899
Corporate Acct. Number xxxx5045
Acct. code Stat. Date Card Account # Amount Program Purpose/Description
2100 02/22/18 xxxx8798 25.03 HS Basic Grant Office Exp
2100 02/22/18 xxxx5045 2.00 Indirect Admin Costs Office Exp
27.03
2102 02/22/18 xxxx4959 66.90 HS Basic Grant Books, Periodicals
2102 02/22/18 xxxx8798 1,411.65 HS Basic Grant Books, Periodicals
1,478.55
2132 02/22/18 xxxx1907 40.63 HS Basic Grant Minor Computer Equip
2132 02/22/18 xxxx1907 40.63 Child Care Svs Program Minor Computer Equip
2132 02/22/18 xxxx1907 239.00 Indirect Admin Costs Minor Computer Equip
2132 02/22/18 xxxx1907 115.26 Comm. Svc Block Grant Minor Computer Equip
435.52
2303 02/22/18 xxxx1907 908.32 HS Basic Grant Other Travel Employees
2303 02/22/18 xxxx1907 908.32 Child Care Svs Program Other Travel Employees
2303 02/22/18 xxxx2364 4,344.92 HS Basic Grant Other Travel Employees
2303 02/22/18 xxxx8798 963.24 Child Care Svs Program Other Travel Employees
2303 02/22/18 xxxx2391 4,572.86 HS Basic Grant Other Travel Employees
11,697.66
2467 02/22/18 xxxx4959 930.00 HS Basic Grant Training & Registration
2467 02/22/18 xxxx4959 18.00 EHS-Child Care Partnership #2 Training & Registration
2467 02/22/18 xxxx4959 12.00 EHS-Child Care Partnership Training & Registration
2467 02/22/18 xxxx1907 398.00 Indirect Admin Costs Training & Registration
2467 02/22/18 xxxx0494 4.85 CC College Site Costs Training & Registration
1,362.85
2477 02/22/18 xxxx8798 549.10 HS Basic Grant Educational Supplies
2477 02/22/18 xxxx8798 953.04 EHS-Child Care Partnership #2 Educational Supplies
2477 02/22/18 xxxx3838 1,121.70 HS Parent Services Educational Supplies
2477 02/22/18 xxxx2391 96.68 HS Basic Grant Educational Supplies
2477 02/22/18 xxxx0220 194.12 George Miller Concord Site Costs Educational Supplies
2477 02/22/18 xxxx0220 (34.99) Riverview Site Costs Educational Supplies
2,879.65
2479 02/22/18 xxxx1899 75.00 Indirect Admin Costs Other Special Dpmtal Exp
75.00
2490 02/22/18 xxxx4959 1,705.07 EHS-Child Care Partnership #2 Misc Services/Supplies
2490 02/22/18 xxxx4959 886.86 HS Basic Grant Misc Services/Supplies
2490 02/22/18 xxxx4959 295.62 EHS Basis Grant Misc Services/Supplies
2490 02/22/18 xxxx4959 295.62 EHS-Child Care Partnership Misc Services/Supplies
2490 02/22/18 xxxx0220 1,920.65 HS Basic Grant Misc Services/Supplies
2490 02/22/18 xxxx0220 99.99 EHS Basis Grant Misc Services/Supplies
5,203.81
Total 23,160.07
COMMUNITY SERVICES BUREAU
SUMMARY CREDIT CARD EXPENDITURE
Agency: Community Services Bureau
1 of 1
M arch 2018 – COMMUNITY SERVICES BUREAU PRESCHOOL MENU
MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY
ALL BREAKFAST & LUNCH SERVED WITH
1% LOW-FAT MILK
*Indicates vegetable included in main
dish
WATER IS OFFERED THROUGHOUT
THE DAY
1
BREAKFAST
1 ea. FRESH BANANA
⅓ c. CHEERIOS
LUNCH
Baja Bean Taco
⅜ c. (kidney beans, pinto beans & salsa)
¼ c. SHREDDED LETTUCE
¼ c. FRESH KIWI
1 ea. SOFT CORN TORTILLA
PM SNACK
½ c. DICED PEACHES
1 ea. MOZZARELLA CHEESE STICK
2 BREAKFAST
½ c. UNSWEETNED APPLESAUCE
½ sl. WHOLE WHEAT CINNAMON BREAD
LUNCH
1 oz. Sliced Roasted Turkey
½ oz. SLICED SWISS CHEESE
MAYO & MUSTARD DRESSING
¼ c. GREEN LEAF LETTUCE & TOMATO SLICE
¼ c. MANGO CHUNKS
1 sl. WHOLE WHEAT BREAD
PM SNACK
1 ea. HARD BOILED EGG
½ c. FRESH ORANGE
5
BREAKFAST
½ c. FRESH APPLE
⅓ c. KIX CEREAL
LUNCH
⅜ c. Cuban Black Bean
¼ c. BABY CARROTS (no dressing)
¼ c. FRESH KIWI
6 ea. WHOLE CORN TORTILLA CHIPS
PM SNACK
1 pkg. GOLDFISH CRACKERS
½ c. 1% LOW-FAT MILK
6
BREAKFAST
½ c. FRESH TANGERINE
⅓ c. CORN CHEX CEREAL
LUNCH
⅔ c.*Ground Turkey & Spanish Rice
(ground turkey, tomatoes, green pepper, onion)
¼ c. FRESH PEAR
PM SNACK
½ c. FRESH APPLE
1 ea. CHEDDAR CHEESE STICK
7
BREAKFAST
½ c. MANGO CHUNKS
½ ea. WHOLE WHEAT BAGEL/CREAM CHEESE
LUNCH
¾ c.*Beef Vegetable Stew
(beef cubes, sliced carrots, green peas, potatoes)
¼ c. FRESH ORANGE
½ ea. WHOLE WHEAT ROLL
PM SNACK
2 pkgs. RITZ CRACKERS
1 tbsp. SUNBUTTER
8
BREAKFAST
1 ea. FRESH BANANA
¼ c. CINNAMON OATMEAL & RAISINS
LUNCH
⅜ c. Pinto Beans
¼ c. RAINBOW COLESLAW
¼ c. FRESH APPLE
1 sq. HOMEMADE MEXICALI CORNBREAD
PM SNACK
½ c. SALSA(PICO DE GALLO)
6 ea. WHOLE CORN TORTILLA CHIPS
9 BREAKFAST
½ c. FRESH ORANGE
⅓ c. RICE CHEX CEREAL
LUNCH
1 ½ oz s. Tuna Salad
(tuna, eggs, mayo, relish, celery, onions)
¼ c. SPRING SALAD MIX/ITALIAN DRESSING
¼ c. FRESH STRAWBERRIES
1 sl. WHOLE WHEAT BREAD
PM SNACK
⅓ c. LETS GO FISHING TRAIL MIX
(corn chex, pretzels, fish & cheese crackers)
½ c. 1% LOW-FAT MILK
12 BREAKFAST
½ c. FRESH PEAR
⅓ c. BRAN CEREAL
LUNCH
*Veggie Pita Pocket
¼ c. LEAFY SALAD GREENS & SHREDDED CARROTS
½ oz. SHREDDED CHEESE
1 ea. HARD BOILED EGG
¼ c. FRESH TANGERINE
½ ea. WHOLE WHEAT PITA POCKET
PM SNACK
2 pkgs. WHOLE WHEAT CRACKERS/HUMMUS
½ c. 1% LOW-FAT MILK
13
BREAKFAST
½ c. FRESH ORANGE
⅓ c. RICE CHEX CEREAL
LUNCH
1 ½ ozs . Sloppy Joe Meat
¼ c. BROCCOLI SLAW
¼ c. FRESH APPLE SLICES
½ ea. WHOLE WHEAT HAMBURGER BUN
PM SNACK
1 pkg. ANIMAL CRACKERS
½ c. 1% LOW-FAT MILK
14
BREAKFAST
1 ea. FRESH BANANA
⅓ c. KIX CEREAL
LUNCH
½ c. Red Pozole Soup
(diced chicken, tomato paste, hominy)
¼ c. SHREDDED CABBAGE & CILANTRO
¼ c. MANGO CHUNKS
6 ea. WHOLE CORN TORTILLA CHIPS
PM SNACK
1 ea. SOFT PRETZEL STICK
½ c. CUCUMBER & CARROT STICKS/RANCH DRESSING
15
BREAKFAST
½ c. FRESH ORANGE
½ sl. WHOLE WHEAT CINNAMON BREAD
LUNCH
⅜ c. Blackeye Peas
¼ c. COLESLAW
¼ c. FRESH PEAR
1 sq. HOMEMADE CORNBREAD SQUARE
PM SNACK
½ c. PINEAPPLE TIDBITS
⅛ c. COTTAGE CHEESE
16
BREAKFAST
1 ea. FRESH BANANA
⅓ c. CHEERIOS
LUNCH
½ c. Chicken Salad
¼ c. SPINACH LEAVES
¼ c. FRESH STRAWBERRIES
½ ea. WHOLE WHEAT PITA BREAD
PM SNACK
½ c. FRESH APPLE
1 tbsp. SUNBUTTER
19
BREAKFAST
½ c. FRESH ORANGE
⅓ c. CORN CHEX CEREAL
LUNCH
¾ c.*Vegetable Chili
(kidney beans, tomatoes, bulgur wheat, yogurt, &
cheddar cheese)
¼ c. FRESH KIWI
2 pkgs. WHEAT CRACKERS
PM SNACK
½ c. CARROT PINEAPPLE RAISIN SALAD
½ c. 1% LOW-FAT MILK
20
BREAKFAST
½ c. FRESH APPLE SLICES
⅓ c. BRAN CEREAL
LUNCH
½ c. Curry Chicken Salad
¼ c. MARINATED CUCUMBER & TOMATOES
¼ c. FRESH STRAWBERRIES
½ ea. WHOLE WHEAT PITA POCKET BREAD
PM SNACK
⅓ c. FRIENDS TRAIL MIX
(kix, cheerios, corn chex, raisins, pretzels, &
dried apricots)
½ c. 1% LOW-FAT MILK
21
BREAKFAST
1 ea. FRESH BANANA
⅓ c. CORNFLAKES
LUNCH
½ c.*Turkey Spaghetti Casserole
(ground turkey, tomato paste, onions with
whole wheat spaghetti)
¼ c. FRESH APPLE
PM SNACK
½ c. FRESH BROCCOLI & CAULIFLOWER/RANCH DIP
6 ea. WHEAT THIN CRACKERS
22 BREAKFAST
½ c. FRESH KIWI
½ ea. ENGLISH MUFFIN/MIXED FRUIT JELLY
LUNCH
1 ea.*Mexican Pizza
(refried beans, tomato paste, chunky salsa)
½ oz. SHREDDED MOZZARELLA CHEESE
¼ c. FRESH PEAR
1 ea. WHOLE WHEAT TORTILLA
PM SNACK – ANTS ON A LOG
2 tbsps. SUNBUTTER
¼ c. CELERY STICKS
1 tbsp. RAISINS
½ c. 1% LOW-FAT MILK
23
BREAKFAST
1 ea. FRESH BANANA
⅓ c. RICE CHEX CEREAL
LUNCH
1 oz. Turkey Ham & ½ oz. Swiss Cheese
MAYO & MUSTARD DRESSING
¼ c. GREEN LEAF LETTUCE & TOMATO SLICE
¼ c. FRESH TANGERINE
1 sl. WHOLE WHEAT BREAD
PM SNACK
⅛ c. COTTAGE CHEESE
½ c. MANGO CHUNKS
26
BREAKFAST
½ c. FRESH ORANGE
⅓ c. RICE CHEX CEREAL
LUNCH
½ c. Vegetarian Beans
½ ea. TOASTED CHEESE SANDWICH
¼ c. SPRING SALAD MIX/ITALIAN DRESSING
¼ c. FRESH APPLE
PM SNACK
2 pkgs. RITZ CRACKERS
½ c. 1% LOW-FAT MILK
27
BREAKFAST
½ c. FRESH KIWI
⅓ c. BRAN CEREAL
LUNCH
1 ½ ozs. Filipino Adobo
(beef stew meat, soy sauce, vinegar)
¼ c. FRESH BROCCOLI FLORETS/RANCH DRESSING
¼ c. FRESH TANGERINE
¼ c. BROWN RICE
PM SNACK
1 ea. FRESH BANANA
1 tbsp. SUNBUTTER
28
BREAKFAST
½ c. FRESH APPLE
½ ea. WHOLE WHEAT BAGEL/CREAM CHEESE
LUNCH
1 serv. Chicken Chilaquiles With
Whole Grain Corn Tortilla Chips
¼ c. GREEN SALAD/ITALIAN DRESSING
¼ c. FRESH PEAR
PM SNACK
½ c. FRUIT SALSA
(mandarin oranges, pineapple chunks, onions, &
green bell peppers)
6 ea. WHOLE CORN TORTILLA CHIPS
29
BREAKFAST
½ c. FRESH KIWI
⅓ c. CORN CHEX CEREAL
LUNCH
⅓ c. Egg Salad
¼ c. BABY CARROTS (no dressing)
¼ c. FRESH STRAWBERRIES
1 sl. WHOLE WHEAT BREAD
PM SNACK
½ c. JICAMA & CUCUMBER STICKS
VEGETABLE DRESSING
6 ea. WHEAT THIN CRACKERS
30
BREAKFAST
1 ea. FRESH BANANA
⅓ c. CHEERIOS
LUNCH
¾ c.*Greek Chicken Salad
(cucumbers, tomatoes & olives) WITH
FETA CHEESE DRESSING
¼ c. FRESH APPLE
½ ea. WHOLE WHEAT PITA BREAD
PM SNACK
1 sl. RAISIN BREAD
1 tbsp. SUNBUTTER
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Director of Conservation and Development, or designee, to allow the
rental of the deed-restricted residential real property located at 1556 Martin Drive, North Richmond,
identified as Assessor’s Parcel No. 408-230-071, to a qualified tenant for a period of up to two years.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No General Fund impact. The Parkway Estates development was supported in part with Community
Development Block Grant and former Contra Costa Redevelopment Agency funds.
BACKGROUND:
On September 19, 1995, the Governing Board of the Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency
(Agency) approved the Second Amendment to the Parkway Estates Development Loan Agreement in North
Richmond. This Second Amendment set forth requirements to be met by local non-profit housing developer
Community Housing Development Corporation of North Richmond to construct 87 for-sale single family
homes on a 10 acre site formerly known as 217 West Gertrude Avenue. Twenty-five of the 87 units were
required to be sold to low income homebuyers. In addition, the Agreement stated that all low-income buyers
must enter into a Buyer’s Resale Restriction Agreement (Resale Agreement) with the following
requirements:
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Kara Douglas
647-7880
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 24, 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:John Kopchik, Director, Conservation & Development Department
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Waiver to Allow Property Rental, North Richmond
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
• The units would have 28 year resale restrictions
• The homes must be sold at a restricted price to an income eligible buyer (“Eligible Purchaser”); and
• The units must be owner-occupied for 28 years
Crystal Barrett purchased her home on June 20, 2001, at which time she also signed the Resale Agreement.
She and her family now have a hardship that requires temporary relocation. These family circumstances
compelled Ms. Barrett to request a waiver to allow her to rent the property. It is Ms. Barrett's intention to
move back into 1556 Martin Drive and occupy the residence as part of the County’s Affordable Housing
Program at the end of two years.
Due to Ms. Barrett’s family hardship, staff recommends that the Agency allow Ms. Barrett to rent her home.
The term of this temporary rental shall be for up to two years. An eligible tenant will have a monthly
income that does not exceed $83,440 for a household of four, adjusted for actual family size. The monthly
rent will not exceed $1,877 per month, including an allowance for utilities. The new tenant will not be
entitled to relocation expenses when the lease terminates. The unit must remain affordable for another low
income homebuyer with an annual income not to exceed $83,440 for a household of four.
If the owner's circumstance has not changed at the end of two years, the Agency can consider the need to
extend the rental time period.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
Should the Agency not allow this rental, Ms. Barrett's family will either not be allowed to move, or will
have to sell the home to a low-income family.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Librarian to close the Lafayette County Library early to the
public on June 2, 2018, at 3:00 p.m., instead of the regular 5:00 p.m. under normal business hours, to host
the annual Night at the Library fundraising event, as requested by the Lafayette Library and Learning
Center (LLLC) Foundation.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No fiscal impact.
BACKGROUND:
On Saturday, June 2, 2018, the Lafayette Library and Learning Center Foundation will host their annual
Night at the Library fundraiser. Last year, the LLLCF had a very successful fundraiser within the library to
showcase the library to donors and potential donors and to offer "stations" where attendees can see and
experience emerging technologies, chat with authors, and gain an appreciation for the lovely space that is
the Lafayette Library. The LLLCF is requesting approval to close the Lafayette Library early to the public
at 3:00 p.m. instead of the regular closure time of 5:00 p.m. in order to have time to ready the library for the
event.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Walt Beveridge
925-608-7730
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the
Board of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: April 24, 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:Melinda Cervantes, County Librarian
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Night at the Library Event - Lafayette Library and Learning Center Foundation
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
The Lafayette Library will not close early to the public, making it difficult to set up the library for the event.
CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT:
None.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the
County, Contract #22-610-8, the Unpaid Student Training Agreement with Sonoma State University, an
educational institution, to provide supervised field instruction in the County’s Public Health Division to
nursing students for the period from July 1, 2018 through June 30, 2021.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This is a non-financial agreement.
BACKGROUND:
The purpose of this agreement is to provide Sonoma State University nursing students 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 at the same time, benefiting from the students’ services to patients.
On May 16, 2016, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #22-610-7 with Sonoma State University
for the period from July 1, 2016 through June 30, 2018 for the provision of supervised fieldwork
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Dan Peddycord,
925-313-6712
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the
Board of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: April 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc: D Morgan, M WILHELM
C. 55
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Unpaid Student Training Agreement #22-610-8 with Sonoma State University
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
instruction experience with health services.
Approval of Unpaid Student Training Agreement #22-610-8 will allow Sonoma State University nursing
students to receive supervised fieldwork instruction experience in County’s Public Health Division, through
June 30, 2021.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If this contract is not approved, the students will not receive supervised fieldwork instruction experience in
County’s Public Health Division.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
REASSIGN Michelle Brown from the AtLarge #15 seat to the At Large #1 seat, ELIMINATE the
At-Large #16-20 seats, and adopt revised bylaws to reflect these changes on the Contra Costa County
Commission for Women bylaws.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No fiscal impact will occur due to the adoption of the recommendation.
BACKGROUND:
Over the past few years, the Contra Costa County Commission for Women ("Commission") has
experienced challenges in both recruiting and retaining members. As a result, the Commission has been
unable to operate in its full capacity due to its inability to achieve meeting quorum. At the February 12,
2018 Internal Operations Committee meeting, the Chair and Vice Chair recommended that the Commission
consider reducing its membership size from 20 seats down to 15 seats. The new membership structure
would include five district seats and 10 at-large seats plus an alternate. It would also reduce the quorum
requirement from 11 to 8. This preliminary recommendation from the Internal Operations Committee and
staff is intended to address the operational issues the Commission is experiencing and to assist the
Commission in consistently achieving the meeting quorum it requires.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Julie Enea, (925)
335-1077
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 24, 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:INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:APPROVE AMENDMENT TO CONTRA COSTA COUNTY COMMISSION FOR WOMEN BYLAWS
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
The proposed amendments are being made to the last revised bylaws that were adopted by the Board of
Supervisors on March 15, 2011. Since the March 15, 2011 version, the Commission has been working
on updates to its bylaws and will bring a revised version to the Board once it is able to achieve meeting
quorum.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
The Commission will not be able to achieve a meeting quorum due to the number of vacant seats it holds.
AGENDA ATTACHMENTS
CCCCW Bylaws with Track Changes
CCCCW Bylaws Clean Copy
MINUTES ATTACHMENTS
CCCCW Bylaws with Track Changes (Redline)
1
BYLAWS
Of
THE CONTRA COSTA COMMISION for WOMEN
REVISED April 2018
ARTICLE I
NAME
Section 1.
The name of this Association shall be the Contra Costa Commission for Women, hereinafter
referred to as CCCW.
Section 2.
This association was formed in 1984 as an Advisory Committee. In 1993, it received non-profit
status as a 501 (c) (4) non-partisan association, to carry out the purposes as stated in Article II.
In 2000, the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors approved the Advisory’s Committee
request that the association be renamed the Contra Costa Commission for Women.
ARTICLE II
PURPOSE
CCCW was formed to educate the community and advise the Contra Costa County Board of
Supervisors and other entities as necessary on issues relating to the cha nging social and
economic conditions of women in the County, with particular emphasis on the economically
disadvantaged.
ARTICLE III
MEMBERSHIP
Section 1. Members
CCCW shall consist of fifteen (15) members plus one alternate: five members shall come from
one of the five supervisorial districts (one member per district) and 10 at-large members. The
membership shall be broadly representative of racial, ethnic, age, religious affiliation, gender and
sexual orientation of the community at large.
Section 2. Appointment
Members of the CCCW shall be appointed for fixed and staggered terms by the County Board of
Supervisors.
2
Section 3. Terms of Appointment
All seat terms are for a period of three years with staggered expiration dates for eight seats in one
year, eight seats plus the alternate in the second year and nine seats in the third year.
Appointments to seats shall begin on the effective date of appointment and end on expiration
date for the seat to which the appointment is made.
Section 4. Va cancies
The County Board of Supervisors may appoint members to fill unexpired terms of less than three
(3) years and incumbents may be re-appointed to successive terms.
The Membership Review Committee shall review scheduled and unscheduled membership
vacancies as they occur as to appropriateness and need to appoint a replacement. The
Membership Review Committee shall consider community experience and minority and
geographical representation in formulating a recommendation for review by the CCCW
The CCCW Chairperson and/or Co-Chairs shall report to the County Board of Supervisors any
scheduled or unscheduled membership vacancy as it occurs.
Section 5. Removal
Any member may be recommended for removal from membership by one of the following
actions:
1. Resignation.
2. Failure to attend 5 of the 11 Commission meetings scheduled each year (45%).
Members whose attendance rate falls below 45% and/or members who miss three
consecutive meetings will have their membership automatically reviewed by the
Membership Review Committee, which in turn will present a recommendation to
the CCCW.
3. Lack of participation on CCCW Standing and Special Committees. The
Membership Chairperson shall request information from Committee Chairpersons
on an annual basis regarding member involvement. The Membership Review
Committee will take this information into consideration when presenting
recommendations to the CCCW as referenced in section 2 above.
The Board of Supervisors makes the final decision on any recommendations for removal of a
Commissioner.
3
ARTICLE IV
OFFICERS
Section 1. Officers
The officers of CCCW shall include a Chairperson and/or Co -Chairs, a Vice-Chair, a Treasurer,
and a Secretary. In the event that the responsibilities of a designated office would be best se rved
by two individuals, those individuals elected to that position will share the position as
cooperative officers. Each officer(s) shall be elected from among the members of the
Commission in February of each year. Should vacancies occur, officers may a lso be appointed
at the discretion of the Chair and/or Co -Chairs to fulfill the remaining term of the vacant
position(s).
Section 2. Term of Office
The officers of CCCW shall hold office for a term of one year, twelve (12) consecutive months
beginning in March of the year of election. In the event elections are held after February in any
given year, officers will serve their terms until elections the following year. Officers may
succeed themselves.
In the event the Chairperson(s) is/are unable to comple te her/their term of office, the Vice Chair
will succeed the Chairperson(s) and fulfill the Chairperson’s remaining term of office as the
presiding officer. The membership will conduct an election to replace the Vice Chair. The Vice-
Chair’s successor will serve the remaining term of office.
A vacancy in any office may be filled by the by a vote of the members attending a special or
regular Commission meeting.
Section 3. Duties
The Chairperson and/or Co-Chairs shall preside at all CCCW meetings, repre sent the CCCW
whenever the occasion demands, approve all standing committees, appoint the Chairperson of
any standing committees, and call a special meeting or a regular Commission meeting.
Presiding duties include: opening and adjournment; ascertainment of the existence of a quorum;
sequence of business; recognition of members entitled to the floor; statement for a vote on all
motions that legitimately come before the assembly; enforcement of rules of debate, and
protection of the assembly from frivolous or dilatory motions.
The Vice-Chairperson shall assist the Chairperson and/or Co -Chairs as directed by the latter and
shall assume all the obligations and authority of the Chairperson in the absence of the latter.
The Treasurer shall be responsible for tracking the financial activity of the CCCW.
The Secretary shall take minutes, prepare the regular and executive agenda, and handle any other
special or administrative duty which may include updating the CCCW website, and more
specifically perform the following tasks:
4
Take minutes at meetings. Distribute them to members at least 10 days before next board
meeting. Minutes to include reminder of next board meeting date.
Send announcements of other meetings as needed, giving at least 10 days ’ notice.
File corrected minutes and related handouts for CCCW’s records. This serves as a historical record
of board activities for posterity.
Keep track of attendance
Section 4. Elections
A Nominating Committee and Chair shall be elected by Commission members at the regularly
scheduled full CCCW meeting each September.
A report from the Nominating Committee on selection of officers shall be given at the regularly
scheduled CCCW meeting each January.
Selection of officers shall be held each February. Terms of o ffice shall begin as of the regular
meeting in March of each year.
ARTICLE V
MEETINGS
Section 1. Regular Meetings
Regular meetings of the CCCW shall be publicly noticed and held at 5:30 p.m. on the third
Tuesday of each month. Exception: CCCW generally does not meet one month out of the year
Notice of regular meetings of the CCCW and an accompanying agenda shall be mailed to each
representative at least ten (10) days prior to the day named for such meeting.
Section 2. Special Meetings
Special or emergency meetings of the CCCW may be called at any time by the Chairperson
and/or Co-Chairs. Notice of a special or emergency meeting will include the time, date, place,
and purpose. The notice, time permitting, shall be not less than three working days before such
meeting date.
Section 3. Action at a Meeting: Quorum and Required Vote
The presence of fifty-one (51%) of the current membership at a regular meeting of the CCCW
constitutes a quorum. Each Member present shall have one vote on motions. Members must
offer disclosure and abstain from voting upon issues in which conflict of interest may constrain
impartiality.
5
ARTICLE VI
COMMITTEES
Section 1. Executive Committee
The Executive Committee, formerly the Steering Committee, shall consist of t he Chair and/or
Co-Chairs, Vice Chair, Secretary, and Treasurer, shall be established to provide cohesive
leadership and continuity to the CCCW.
Section 2. Standing Committees
The Executive Committee and/or a majority of the Members may form Standing Committees to
manage on-going functions of the CCCW in order to expedite the business of the CCCW.
The Standing Committees are: Outreach Committee, Legislative/Historian Committee,
Membership Review Committee, and Public Relations Committee.
The Standing Committees shall be formed of at minimum two (2) Members and maximum of
four (4). The responsibilities of each Committee shall be as follows:
Outreach Committee :
The Outreach Committee’s responsibilities are as follows:
Making the public at large and members aware of the benefits of CCCW membership,
Highlight ing current CCCW activities and programs,
Fostering a professional image, proactive, and inclusive of all members and groups. This
Committee shares responsibility for the CCCW website
Legislative/H istorian Committee :
The Legislative/Historian Committee's responsibilities are as follows:
Identifying and recommend legislative initiative priorities to the CCCW Board and
membership for approval. All State or federal legislation supported by the CCCW must
be included in the Board of Supervisors’ Legislative Platform or have specific Board of
Supervisors’ approval.
Serving as a liaison to CCCW in women's legislative and policy initiatives
O rganizing all legislative events and activities and working with other organizations to
seek broad based support for all women initiatives
Disseminating information to membership including legislative updates and alerts;
preparation of legislative materials for advocacy purposes, and monitoring federal and
state legislation, funding and policy initiatives that affect women’s rights in California
Membership Committee
The Membership Committee’s responsibilities are as follows:
Interview applicants and make recommendations to the commission regarding applicant
Submit recommended applicant’s names to the Internal Operations Committee for Board
of Supervisor approval and appointment to the commission
6
Recommend ing policies, procedures, and strategies for enhancing the membership in
CCCW both numerically and qualitatively to assure a growing and vital membership
organization.
Maintaining current membership roster
Public Relations Committee
The Public Relations Committee’s responsibilities are as follows: are
Creating, maintaining, and protecting the organization's reputation,
Enhancing its prestige, and present a favorable image
Fielding complaints and advertising the CCCW’s service effectively and accurately. This
Committee shares responsibility for the CCCW website
Section 3. Special Committees
The Chairperson and/or Co-Chairs of the CCCW and/or the majority of the Members may also
form Special Committees. Special Committees (“ad hoc” or “select” committees) are formed for
a specific purpose and cease to exist after completion of a designated task.
Section 4. Terms of C ommittee Membership
The terms of membership for members of Standing Committees of the CCCW shall be one year,
twelve (12) consecutive months from appointment. All Members of CCCW must serve on at
least one (1) Standing and/or Special Committee.
Section 5. Accountability of Committees
All Committees formed by the CCCW or the Executive Committee shall present monthly
activity reports at the regularly scheduled meetings and shall have authority to make
recommendations to the Committee on matters within the Committee’s area of expertise; only
the CCCW may take action on Committee recommendations.
ARTICLE VIII
GOVERNANCE
The operations of the Contra Costa Commission for Women shall be governed by its bylaws.
ARTICLE IX
AMENDMENT OF BYLAWS
The Bylaws of the Contra Costa Commission for Women may be amended after presentation of
proposed amendments as a scheduled agenda item in a Regular Commission meeting.
Notification of proposed amendments should be given 30 days prior to the next regular meeting
to allow adoption at said regular meeting are prerequisites to amendment of the Bylaws.
7
Originally adopted by majority membership vote at the regular
Meeting of the Contra Costa County Women’s Advisory
Committee on May 18, 1993 and amended on September 21, 1993,
March 19, 1996, April 16, 1996, November 21, 2000 , April 17,
2007, February 17, 2010, and December 11, 2010.
_______________________________________________
Kirsten Upshaw, Chair
Approved by the Contra Costa Board of Supervisors
April ___, 2018
1
BYLAWS
Of
THE CONTRA COSTA COMMISION for WOMEN
REVISED March April 20181
ARTICLE I
NAME
Section 1.
The name of this Association shall be the Contra Costa Commission for Women, hereinafter
referred to as CCCW.
Section 2.
This association was formed in 1984 as an Advisory Committee. In 1993, it received non-profit
status as a 501 (c) (4) non-partisan association, to carry out the purposes as stated in Article II.
In 2000, the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors approved the Advisory’s Committee
request that the association be renamed the Contra Costa Commission for Women.
ARTICLE II
PURPOSE
CCCW was formed to educate the community and advise the Contra Costa County Board of
Supervisors and other entities as necessary on issues relating to the changing social and
economic conditions of women in the County, with particular emphasis on the economically
disadvantaged.
ARTICLE III
MEMBERSHIP
Section 1. Members
CCCW shall have a minimumconsist of fifteen (15) members plus one alternate: five members
shall come from one of the five supervisorial districts (one member per district) and 10 at-large
seats membersand not more than twenty-five (25) members. The membership shall be broadly
representative of racial, ethnic, age, religious affiliation, gender and sexual orientation of the
community at large.
Section 2. Appointment
Members of the CCCW shall be appointed for fixed and staggered terms by the County Board of
Supervisors.
2
Section 3. Terms of Appointment
All seat terms are for a period of three years with staggered expiration dates for eight seats in one
year, eight seats plus the alternate in the second year and nine seats in the third year.
Appointments to seats shall begin on the effective date of appointment and end on expiration
date for the seat to which the appointment is made.
Section 4. Vacancies
The County Board of Supervisors may appoint members to fill unexpired terms of less than three
(3) years and incumbents may be re-appointed to successive terms.
The Membership Review Committee shall review scheduled and unscheduled membership
vacancies as they occur as to appropriateness and need to appoint a replacement. The
Membership Review Committee shall consider community experience and minority and
geographical representation in formulating a recommendation for review by the CCCW
The CCCW Chairperson and/or Co-Chairs shall report to the County Board of Supervisors any
scheduled or unscheduled membership vacancy as it occurs.
Section 5. Removal
Any member may be recommended for removal from membership by one of the following
actions:
1. Resignation.
2. Failure to attend 5 of the 11 Commission meetings scheduled each year ( 45%).
Members whose attendance rate falls below 45% and/or members who miss three
consecutive meetings will have their membership automatically reviewed by the
Membership Review Committee, which in turn will present a recommendation to
the CCCW.
3. Lack of participation on CCCW Standing and Special Committees. The
Membership Chairperson shall request information from Committee Chairpersons
on an annual basis regarding member involvement. The Membership Review
Committee will take this information into consideration when presenting
recommendations to the CCCW as referenced in section 2 above.
The Board of Supervisors makes the final decision on any recommendations for removal of a
Commissioner.
3
ARTICLE IV
OFFICERS
Section 1. Officers
The officers of CCCW shall include a Chairperson and/or Co-Chairs, a Vice-Chair, a Treasurer,
and a Secretary. In the event that the responsibilities of a designated office would be best served
by two individuals, those individuals elected to that position will share the position as
cooperative officers. Each officer(s) shall be elected from among the members of the
Commission in February of each year. Should vacancies occur, officers may also be appointed
at the discretion of the Chair and/or Co-Chairs to fulfill the remaining term of the vacant
position(s).
Section 2. Term of Office
The officers of CCCW shall hold office for a term of one year, twelve (12) consecutive months
beginning in March of the year of election. In the event elections are held after February in any
given year, officers will serve their terms until elections the following year. Officers may
succeed themselves.
In the event the Chairperson(s) is/are unable to complete her/their term of office, the Vice Chair
will succeed the Chairperson(s) and fulfill the Chairperson’s remaining term of office as the
presiding officer. The membership will conduct an election to replace the Vice Chair. The Vice-
Chair’s successor will serve the remaining term of office.
A vacancy in any office may be filled by the by a vote of the members attending a special or
regular Commission meeting.
Section 3. Duties
The Chairperson and/or Co-Chairs shall preside at all CCCW meetings, represent the CCCW
whenever the occasion demands, approve all standing committees, appoint the Chairperson of
any standing committees, and call a special meeting or a regular Commission meeting.
Presiding duties include: opening and adjournment; ascertainment of the existence of a quorum;
sequence of business; recognition of members entitled to the floor; statement for a vote on all
motions that legitimately come before the assembly; enforcement of rules of debate, and
protection of the assembly from frivolous or dilatory motions.
The Vice-Chairperson shall assist the Chairperson and/or Co-Chairs as directed by the latter and
shall assume all the obligations and authority of the Chairperson in the absence of the latter.
The Treasurer shall be responsible for tracking the financial activity of the CCCW.
The Secretary shall take minutes, prepare the regular and executive agenda, and handle any other
special or administrative duty which may include updating the CCCW website, and more
specifically perform the following tasks:
4
Take minutes at meetings. Distribute them to members at least 10 days before next board
meeting. Minutes to include reminder of next board meeting date.
Send announcements of other meetings as needed, giving at least 10 days’ notice.
File corrected minutes and related handouts for CCCW’s records. This serves as a historical record
of board activities for posterity.
Keep track of attendance
Section 4. Elections
A Nominating Committee and Chair shall be elected by Commission members at the regularly
scheduled full CCCW meeting each September.
A report from the Nominating Committee on selection of officers shall be given at the regularly
scheduled CCCW meeting each January.
Selection of officers shall be held each February. Terms of office shall begin as of the regular
meeting in March of each year.
ARTICLE V
MEETINGS
Section 1. Regular Meetings
Regular meetings of the CCCW shall be publicly noticed and held at 5:30 p.m. on the third
Tuesday of each month. Exception: CCCW generally does not meet one month out of the year
Notice of regular meetings of the CCCW and an accompanying agenda shall be mailed to each
representative at least ten ( 10) days prior to the day named for such meeting.
Section 2. Special Meetings
Special or emergency meetings of the CCCW may be called at any time by the Chairperson
and/or Co-Chairs. Notice of a special or emergency meeting will include the time, date, place,
and purpose. The notice, time permitting, shall be not less than three working days before such
meeting date.
Section 3. Action at a Meeting: Quorum and Required Vote
The presence of fifty-one (51%) of the current membership at a regular meeting of the CCCW
constitutes a quorum. Each Member present shall have one vote on motions. Members must
offer disclosure and abstain from voting upon issues in which conflict of interest may constrain
impartiality.
5
ARTICLE VI
COMMITTEES
Section 1. Executive Committee
The Executive Committee, formerly the Steering Committee, shall consist of the Chair and/or
Co-Chairs, Vice Chair, Secretary, and Treasurer, shall be established to provide cohesive
leadership and continuity to the CCCW.
Section 2. Standing Committees
The Executive Committee and/or a majority of the Members may form Standing Committees to
manage on-going functions of the CCCW in order to expedite the business of the CCCW.
The Standing Committees are: Outreach Committee, Legislative/Historian Committee,
Membership Review Committee, and Public Relations Committee.
The Standing Committees shall be formed of at minimum two (2) Members and maximum of
four (4). The responsibilities of each Committee shall be as follows:
Outreach Committee:
The Outreach Committee’s responsibilities are as follows:
Making the public at large and members aware of the benefits of CCCW membership,
Highlighting current CCCW activities and programs,
Fostering a professional image, proactive, and inclusive of all members and groups. This
Committee shares responsibility for the CCCW website
Legislative/Historian Committee:
The Legislative/Historian Committee's responsibilities are as follows:
Identifying and recommend legislative initiative priorities to the CCCW Board and
membership for approval. All State or federal legislation supported by the CCCW must
be included in the Board of Supervisors’ Legislative Platform or have specific Board of
Supervisors’ approval.
Serving as a liaison to CCCW in women's legislative and policy initiatives
Organizing all legislative events and activities and working with other organizations to
seek broad based support for all women initiatives
Disseminating information to membership including legislative updates and alerts;
preparation of legislative materials for advocacy purposes, and monitoring federal and
state legislation, funding and policy initiatives that affect women’s rights in California
Membership Committee
The Membership Committee’s responsibilities are as follows:
Interview applicants and make recommendations to the commission regarding applicant
Submit recommended applicant’s names to the Internal Operations Committee for Board
of Supervisor approval and appointment to the commission
6
Recommending policies, procedures, and strategies for enhancing the membership in
CCCW both numerically and qualitatively to assure a growing and vital membership
organization.
Maintaining current membership roster
Public Relations Committee
The Public Relations Committee’s responsibilities are as follows: are
Creating, maintaining, and protecting the organization's reputation,
Enhancing its prestige, and present a favorable image
Fielding complaints and advertising the CCCW’s service effectively and accurately. This
Committee shares responsibility for the CCCW website
Section 3. Special Committees
The Chairperson and/or Co-Chairs of the CCCW and/or the majority of the Members may also
form Special Committees. Special Committees (“ad hoc” or “select” committees) are formed for
a specific purpose and cease to exist after completion of a designated task.
Section 4. Terms of Committee Membership
The terms of membership for members of Standing Committees of the CCCW shall be one year,
twelve (12) consecutive months from appointment. All Members of CCCW m ust serve on at
least one (1) Standing and/or Special Committee.
Section 5. Accountability of Committees
All Committees formed by the CCCW or the Executive Committee shall present monthly
activity reports at the regularly scheduled meetings and shall have authority to make
recommendations to the Committee on matters within the Committee’s area of expertise; only
the CCCW may take action on Committee recommendations.
ARTICLE VIII
GOVERNANCE
The operations of the Contra Costa Commission for Women shall be governed by its bylaws.
ARTICLE IX
AMENDMENT OF BYLAWS
The Bylaws of the Contra Costa Commission for Women may be amended after presentation of
proposed amendments as a scheduled agenda item in a Regular Commission meeting.
Notification of proposed amendments should be given 30 days prior to the next regular meeting
to allow adoption at said regular meeting are prerequisites to amendment of the Bylaws.
7
Originally adopted by majority membership vote at the regular
Meeting of the Contra Costa County Women’s Advisory
Committee on May 18, 1993 and amended on September 21, 1993,
March 19, 1996, April 16, 1996, November 21, 2000, April 17,
2007, February 17, 2010, and December 11, 2010.
_______________________________________________
Carlyn ObringerKirsten Upshaw, Chair
Approved by the Contra Costa Board of Supervisors
March April ___, 20112018
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the
County, Contract #22-175-12, the Unpaid Student Training Agreement with Samuel Merritt University, an
educational institution, to provide supervised field instruction in the County’s Public Health Division to
nursing students for the period from October 1, 2018 through September 30, 2021.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This is a non-financial agreement.
BACKGROUND:
The purpose of this agreement is to provide Samuel Merritt University nursing students 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 at the same time, benefiting from the students’ services to patients.
On August 5, 2015, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #22-175-11 with Samuel Merritt
University for the period from October 1, 2015 through September 30, 2018 for the provision of
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Dan Peddycord,
925-313-6712
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the
Board of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: April 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc: D Morgan, M WILHELM
C. 57
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Unpaid Student Training Agreement #22-175-12 with Samuel Merritt University
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
supervised fieldwork instruction experience with health services.
Approval of Unpaid Student Training Agreement #22-175-12 will allow Samuel Merritt University nursing
students to receive supervised fieldwork instruction experience in County’s Public Health Division, through
September 30, 2021.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If this contract is not approved, the students will not receive supervised fieldwork instruction experience in
the County’s Public Health Division.
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 April 10, 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: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Enid Mendoza, (925)
335-1039
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the
Board of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: April 24, 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:David Twa, County Administrator
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:CONTINUE EXTENSION OF EMERGENCY DECLARATION REGARDING HOMELESSNESS
RECOMMENDATION(S):
ADOPT Resolution No. 2018/157 approving and authorizing the District Attorney, or designee, to submit
an application and execute a grant award agreement and any extensions or amendments thereof, pursuant to
State guidelines, with the California Department of Insurance for the 2018/19 Workers' Compensation
Insurance Fraud Prosecution Program grant in an amount not to exceed $1,269,335 for the investigation and
prosecution of workers' compensation fraud cases for the period of July 1, 2018 through June 30, 2019.
FISCAL IMPACT:
If approved, the District Attorney's office will receive $1,269,335 of 100% State revenue. No County
match.
BACKGROUND:
The State Legislature has determined that one of the significant factors driving up the cost of workers'
compensation insurance is fraud. While fraud is recognized as a growing problem across the country,
California is an area of concerted criminal activity in insurance fraud. The cost of insurance is a factor in
the high cost of doing business in the State. SB 1218 (Presley) was enacted to provide resources for
enforcement of current laws. If the grant is approved,
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Elizabeth Molera, (925)
957-2205
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 24, 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:Diana Becton, District Attorney
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:2018/19 Workers' Compensation Insurance Fraud Prosecution Program Grant Application
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
the District Attorney will continue to place staff in the criminal fraud division, who will be able to
concentrate on the growing problem of workers' compensation fraud.
Failure to approve the recommendation will result in the inability of the District Attorney to apply for
State funds designated for use by Contra Costa County in the prosecution of workers' compensation
insurance fraud. A County which fails to submit the application shall not be considered for funding, and
their undistributed funds shall be returned to the Department of Insurance to be reprogrammed.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
The District Attorney will be unable to apply for the grant.
CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT:
No impact.
AGENDA ATTACHMENTS
Resolution No. 2018/157
MINUTES ATTACHMENTS
Signed Resolution No. 2018/157
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board
Adopted this Resolution on 04/24/2018 by the following vote:
AYE:5
John Gioia
Candace Andersen
Diane Burgis
Karen Mitchoff
Federal D. Glover
NO:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
RECUSE:
Resolution No. 2018/157
Funding for the Workers' Compensation Insurance Fraud Prosecution Program.
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors, Contra Costa County, desires to undertake a certain project designated as the Workers'
Compensation Insurance Fraud Prosecution Program to be funded in part from funds made available under the authority of
Workers' Compensation California Insurance Code section 1872.83, California Code of Regulations and administered by the
California Department of Insurance.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the District Attorney of the County of Contra Costa, or designee, is authorized,
to submit the a proposal to the California Department of Insurance and is authorized to execute, on behalf of the Board of
Supervisors, the Grant Award Agreement, including any extensions or amendments thereof, in the amount of $1,269,335 for the
period July 1, 2018 through June 30, 2019. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the grant funds received hereunder shall not be
used to supplant expenditures previously authorized or controlled by this body.
Contact: Elizabeth Molera, (925) 957-2205
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 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc:
RECOMMENDATION(S):
AUTHORIZE the Auditor-Controller's Office to submit a one-time payment in the amount of $57,418.32
for Group Home Services provided at Valley Teen Ranch from August 28, 2017 to February 26, 2018, for a
602 WIC Ward of the Court, as recommended by the County Probation Officer.
FISCAL IMPACT:
$56,418.32, 100% General Fund.
BACKGROUND:
On August 8, 2017, M.M. was declared 602 WIC Ward of the Court and ordered into out of home
placement, Foster Care, after attaining the age of 18 years old. Ward M.M. was placed at Valley Teen
Ranch in Madera, CA in order to receive rehabilitative servces on August 28, 2017, and exited the program
on February 26, 2018. The result of the Court making a removal order to Foster Care after the Ward
attained the age of 18 years old made the Ward ineligible for Federal and State Foster Care funding.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
Failure to reimburse Valley Teen Ranch for services provided may jeopardize future Foster Care
placements at the group home. Further, failure to reimburse Valley Teen Ranch for services provided could
result in litigation.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Jeff Waters,
925-313-4154
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board
of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: April 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc:
C. 60
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Todd Billeci, County Probation Officer
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Payment to Valley Teen Ranch
ATTACHMENTS
ACL-17-75 Group Home Rates
2017
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Librarian to close the Walnut Creek County Library early to the
public on April 28, 2018, at 3:00 p.m. instead of the regular 6:00 p.m. under normal business hours, to host
the annual fundraising event, as requested by the Walnut Creek Library Foundation.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No fiscal impact.
BACKGROUND:
On Saturday, April 28, 2018, the Walnut Creek Library Foundation will host their annual fundraising
event. The WCLF is requesting approval to close the Walnut Creek Library close early to the public at 3:00
p.m. instead of the regular closure time of 6:00 p.m. in order to have time to ready the library for the event.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
The Walnut Creek Library will not close early to the public, making it difficult to set up the library for the
event.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: W. 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 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc:
C. 61
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Melinda Cervantes, County Librarian
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Annual Library Fundraiser - Walnut Creek Library Foundation
RECOMMENDATION(S):
ADOPT Resolution No. 2018/162 authorizing the issuance and sale of "Lafayette School District General
Obligation Bonds, Election of 2016, Series B (2018)" in an amount not to exceed $40,000,000 by the
Lafayette School District on its own behalf pursuant to Section 15140(b) of the Education Code
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact to the County.
BACKGROUND:
The Lafayette School District intends to issue General Obligation bonds to fund capital improvements
throughout the District. The District has requested that the Board of Supervisors adopt a resolution
authorizing the direct issuance and sale of bonds by the District on its own behalf as authorized by Section
15140(b) of the Education Code.
The District adopted a resolution on April 18, 2018 authorizing the sale and issuance of the bonds (copy
attached). This issuance was approved by the voters as part of a $70,000,000 bond measure listed on the
June 7, 2016 ballot.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
Without the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors authorization, the School District would not be able
to issue the bonds as proposed.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/24/2018 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Timothy Ewell,
925-335-1036
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the
Board of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: April 24, 2018
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc: Hon. Rachel Zinn, Superintendent, Hon. Robert R. Campbell, Auditor-Controller, Hon. Russell V. Watts, Treasurer-Tax Collector
C. 62
To:Board of Supervisors
From:David Twa, County Administrator
Date:April 24, 2018
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Lafayette School District General Obligation Bonds, Election of 2016, Series B (2018)
CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT:
The recommendation supports the following Children's Report Card outcome: Communities that are
Safe and Provide a High Quality of Life for Children and Families.
AGENDA ATTACHMENTS
Resolution No. 2018/162
District Resolution
MINUTES ATTACHMENTS
Signed Resolution No. 2018/162