HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 12152009 - Full Minutes PacketCALENDAR 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
SUSAN A. BONILLA, CHAIR , 4th DISTRICT
JOHN GIOIA, 1st DISTRICT
GAYLE B. UILKEMA, 2nd DISTRICT
MARY N. PIEPHO, 3rd DISTRICT
FEDERAL D. GLOVER, 5th DISTRICT
DAVID J. TWA, CLERK OF THE BOARD AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR, (925) 335-1900
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.
AGENDA
December 15, 2009
9:00 A.M. Convene and announcement adjournment to Closed Session in Room 101.
Present: District I Supervisor John Gioia
District II Supervisor Gayle B. Uilkema
District III Supervisor Mary N. Piepho
District IV Supervisor Susan A. Bonilla
District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover
Attendees: David J. Twa
Closed Session Agenda :
A. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS
1. Agency Negotiators: Ted Cwiek and Keith Fleming.
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,
Local1021; 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 Empl. Int’l Union United Health Care Workers West; East County
Firefighters’ Assn.; 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.
2. Agency Negotiators: David Twa and Keith Fleming.
Unrepresented Employees: All unrepresented agency management employees.
B. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL--EXISTING LITIGATION (Gov. Code, § 54956.9(a))
1. Marita Mayer v. County of Contra Costa, C.C.C. Superior Court No. MSC 08-02630
2. Lugo, et. al., v. County of Contra Costa, et. al., C.C.C. Superior Court No. CIVMSN09-1117
3. Letha Hackett v. Christopher Farnitano C.C.C. Superior Court No. MSC 08-00368
C. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL--ANTICIPATED LITIGATION
Initiation of litigation pursuant to Gov. Code, § 54956.9(c): One potential case.
County Counsel announced that from the Closed Session, a settlement agreement was approved in the
matter of Lugo, et. al., v. County of Contra Costa, et. al., C.C.C. Superior Court No. CIVMSN09-1117,
by unanimous vote, with all Supervisors present.
The settlement recognizes the actions taken by the Board of Supervisor's in October 2009 to reinstate
17 employee positions in the General Assistance program in order to manage the significant influx of
applications. The current economic recession has resulted in a backlog of applications too large for
staff to process in the usual time period. The Board also authorized a simplified application procedure.
The staff and the new application procedure are now in place. The petitioners pay will be retroactive to
the appropriate date and they will be compensated for the delay in processing of their applications.
9:30 A.M. Call to order and opening ceremonies.
Inspirational Thought - “What does love look like? It has the hands to help others. It has the feet to hasten to the
poor and needy. It has eyes to see misery and want. It has the ears to hear the sighs and sorrows of men. That is
what love looks like.” ~ Saint Augustine
CONSIDER CONSENT ITEMS (Items listed as C.1 through C. 103 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 this section will be considered with the Short Discussion Items.
PRESENTATIONS
PR.1 PRESENTATION on the results of the 2009 Countywide Combined Charities Campaign. (Silvano
Marchesi, County Counsel)
Vote: 5 - 0
PR.2 PRESENTATION honoring County Counsel Silvano B. Marchesi upon the occasion of his retirement, for
his 40 years of exemplary and dedicated service to Contra Costa County. (Supervisor Bonilla) (See C.20)
Vote: 5 - 0
PR.3 PRESENTATION to proclaim December 1, 2009 as World AIDS Day in Contra Costa County. (Supervisor
Bonilla) (See C.13)
Mr. Douglas J. Hartsough, Hemophilia Foundation of Northern California accepted the proclamation.
Vote: 5 - 0
PR.4 PRESENTATION of the 2009 Chair of the Board Award to Mike van Hofwegen of the Michael Chavez
Center for Economic Opportunity. (Supervisor Bonilla)
Vote: 5 - 0
PR.5 PRESENTATION by Supervisor Bonilla reviewing the Board's activities for 2009.
Vote: 5 - 0
SHORT DISCUSSIONS ITEMS
SD.1 PUBLIC COMMENT (3 Minutes/Speaker)
The following people spoke on the proposed reduction in pension benefits for In-Home Support
Services employees:
Daniel Villarosa, resident of Concord; Elba Lira, resident of Pittsburg; Hilda Martinez, resident of
Antioch; Maria C. Reyes, resident of El Sobrante; Nina Soeganda, resident of Oakley; Suheir Khalaf,
resident of San Pablo; Hardial Singh Mann, resident of Hercules; Ry Kumar Singh, resident of
Hercules; Maria Ramirez, resident of Antioch; Martha Paz, resident of Pittsburg; Alfred Radovan,
resident of Antioch; Rosa Cerda, resident of Pittsburg; Mark Siddall, resident of Bay Point; Fidel
Lucero, resident of El Sobrante; Maria Munoz, resident of Pittsburg; Gladys Lopez, resident of Bay
Point; Jimi Williams, resident of San Pablo; Westley Duffy, resident of Pittsburg; Eusebia Meijia,
resident of San Pablo; and Mary Harms.
Captain David R. Frey (U.S. Navy, Retired), requested that Contra Costa adopt the patient care model
in which appointments are not set for dental patients: patients line up at the clinic to be seen for care
on the day on which they arrive.
SD.2 CONSIDER Consent Items previously removed.
SD. 3 HEARING on the appeal of a decision by the Contra Costa County Health Services Department,
Environmental Health Division, to deny a request for variance of the Contra Costa County Health Officer
Regulations for well setback requirements and well protection requirements at 18615 Marsh Creek Road,
Brentwood. (George S. Arata, Applicant & Owner) (Sherman Quinlan, Health Services Environmental
Health)
Chair Bonilla opened the hearing and called for comment. The following people spoke:
George Arata, Appellant;
Ray Lochhead, resident of Brentwood;
Verna Kruse, resident of Concord;
Brian Kruse, resident of Brentwood;
Troy Bristol, Save Mt. Diablo.
Mr. Arata said he did not understand the all of the technical impacts of the requested variance, but did
not wish to adversely affect his neighbors property in any way. The Environmental Health Division of
Health Services will meet further Mr. Arata to resolve and clarify issues related to a variance for the
well. Therefore, The Board:
CONTINUED the open hearing to January 19, 2010 at 9:30 a.m.
Vote: 5 - 0
SD. 4 HEARING to consider adoption of Resolution No. 2009/559 approving new and revised fees for land
development and other services. (Catherine Kutsuris, Conservation and Development Director)
ADOPTED the recommendations and Resolution No. 2009/559 as amended today to exclude
affordable housing restrictions on rental units.
Vote: 5 - 0
SD. 5 HEARING to consider adoption of Ordinance No. 2009-34 establishing a $1 fee on each recorded
document in order to implement and operate an electronic recording delivery system as recommended by
the Clerk-Recorder. (Steve Weir, Clerk-Recorder)
Vote: 5 - 0
Vote: 5 - 0
SD. 6 HEARING to consider adoption of Resolution No. 2009/551 establishing a fee of $10 for recording
and indexing the first page of every document required or permitted to be recorded. (Steve Weir, Clerk
Recorder)
Vote: 5 - 0
SD. 7 CONSIDER adoption of Resolution No. 2009/583, approving the Side Letter Agreement between
Contra Costa County and Public Employees Union, Local One regarding contract with The P.C.
Professional Incorporation and approving and authorizing the Health Services Director, or designee, to
execute the contract in an amount not to exceed $378,000 for the period from November 1, 2009 through
October 31, 2010. (100% Enterprise I Fund) (Ted Cwiek, Human Resources Director)
Vote: 5 - 0
SD. 8 CONSIDER adopting the FY 2010/11 Recommended Budget development schedule. (David Twa,
County Administrator)
Vote: 5 - 0
SD. 9 CONSIDER adopting Resolution No. 2009/556 declaring a position of support for the dual ballot
measures proposed by Repair California to convene a State Constitutional Convention in California to
revise the guiding document of our great state. (Supervisor Bonilla)
Vote: 5 - 0
SD.10 HEARING to consider adoption of Traffic Resolution No. 2009/4304 to extend the closure of
Carquinez Scenic Drive (Road No. 2191B), beginning at the Martinez City limit and proceeding
northwesterly for 1.7 miles, from sunset to sunrise daily for an additional 18 months, as recommended by
the Public Works Director, Martinez area. (Mark de la O, Public Works Department) (No Fiscal Impact)
Vote: 5 - 0
SD.11 CONSIDER accepting report from the Finance Committee on the 30-40 Muir Road Building in
Martinez and approving its remodel for use by the Department of Conservation and Development. (100%
Land Development fees) (Supervisor Gioia)
Vote: 5 - 0
SD.12 CONSIDER accepting the report acknowledging Contra Costa Television for 15 years of serving
County residents and approving the amended Office of Communications and Media Policy and Procedures.
(Patricia Burke, County Administrator's Office)
Vote: 5 - 0
SD.13 CONSIDER accepting report from the Transportation, Water and Infrastructure Committee on the
Impacts of the Proposed Municipal Regional Permit, as recommended by the Public Works Director,
Countywide. (100% Stormwater Utility Area 17 Funds) (Rich Lierly, Public Works Department)
Vote: 5 - 0
Closed Session
Rollie Katz, Public Employee's Union Local 1, spoke on the matter of missed deadlines in regard to the
conversion of long-term tempory employees to permanent employee status with benefits, particularly
those in the Health Services Department. Mr. Twa noted that a board order addressing this issue would
be placed on the agenda in January 2010.
1:00 P.M. Adjourn to Special Meeting of the Contra Costa County Housing Authority
1:15 P.M.
DELIBERATION ITEMS
D. 1 CONSIDER accepting report on Delta-Water legislative bills and activity and oral report on Delta
Counties Coalition lobbying trip to Washington, D.C.; and determining action to be taken regarding a
response to any Delta-related issues. (Supervisor Piepho)
Vote: 5 - 0
1:30 P.M.
D. 2 HEARING on the recommendation of the County Planning Commission to approve the amendment to
the Conditions of Approval for Land Use Permit #LP2054-92 to add Condition of Approval No. 6.17 to
facilitate the collection of a Local Enforcement Agency fee in the Richmond area. (West Contra Costa
Sanitary Landfill- Applicant & Owner) (Catherine Kutsuris, Conservation and Development Director)
Vote: 5 - 0
D. 3 CONSIDER reports of Board members.
There were no reports at this time.
CONSENT ITEMS
Road and Transportation
C. 1 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute an agreement with
BNSF Railway Company for an estimated amount of $101,622 for the installation of a railroad crossing
surface at Viera Avenue, Antioch area. (100% Bicycle Transportation Alliance Grant Funds)
Vote: 5 - 0
C. 2 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a Right of Way
Contract - Temporary Construction Easement from Feasible Properties, Buchanan, LLC, a California
Limited Liability Company, and APPROVE payment in the amount of $42,110 by the Contra Costa
Transportation Authority in connection with the State Route 4 East, Somersville Road to State Route 160
Project, Antioch area. (100% Contra Costa Transportation Authority Funds)
Vote: 5 - 0
Engineering Services
C. 3 ADOPT Resolution No. 2009/571 accepting completion of warranty period and release of cash deposit
for faithful performance for the Subdivision Agreement (Right-of-Way Landscaping) RA 05-01187, for
project being developed by Shapell Homes, a Division of Shapell Industries, Inc., a Delaware Corporation,
as recommended by the Public Works Director, San Ramon (Dougherty Valley) area. (No Fiscal Impact)
Vote: 5 - 0
Vote: 5 - 0
C. 4 ADOPT Resolution No. 2009/572 accepting completion of private improvements, for MS 90-00141,
for project being developed by Charles M. Farr and Lorraine A. Farr, as recommended by the Public
Works Director, San Ramon area. (No Fiscal Impact)
Vote: 5 - 0
C. 5 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the execution of Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement for the
Maintenance of the Diablo Vista Middle School Playfields with the Town of Danville and the San Ramon
Unified School District, as recommended by the Public Works Director, Danville area. (100% Countywide
Landscape and Lighting District AD1979-3 (LL-2), Zone 71 Funds)
Vote: 5 - 0
Special Districts & County Airports
C. 6 ACCEPT Status Report on the Street Light Coordination effort among PG&E, County and cities for
street light maintenance, as recommended by the Public Works Director, Countywide. (No Fiscal Impact)
Vote: 5 - 0
C. 7 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Assignment of Easement to East Bay Regional Park District over a
portion of County road right-of-way, known as Feeder Trail No. 1, located between Dutra Road and
Ferndale Road, as recommended by the Public Works Director, Martinez area. (No fiscal impact)
Vote: 5 - 0
C. 8 ADOPT Resolution No. 2009/567 accepting as complete the contracted work performed by Asbestos
Management Group of CA, Inc., for Phase 9 asbestos abatement of the Orbisonia Heights Redevelopment
Project, as recommended by the Public Works Director, Bay Point area. (No impact to general fund)
Vote: 5 - 0
C. 9 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Chair, Board of Supervisors, to execute an amendment to an
existing Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement with the Town of Danville, effective December 15, 2009, to
refer issues to the Alamo Municipal Advisory Council for advice in place of the Advisory Committee for
County Service Area R-7A, as recommended by the Public Works Director, Danville and Alamo areas.
(No fiscal impact)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.10 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Chair, Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors, to sign a letter to
the California Energy Commission regarding the proposed construction of a power plant in Alameda
County in close proximity to the Byron Airport, requesting that specific scientific studies be completed to
ensure that the proposed location of power plant would not pose any hazards to aeronautical activities. (No
fiscal impact)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.11 APPROVE the proposed summary vacation of an excess road right of way along Feeder Trail No. 1,
located between Dutra Road and Ferndale Road, and ADOPT related findings under the California
Environmental Quality Act, as recommended by the Public Works Director, Martinez area. (No fiscal
impact)
Vote: 5 - 0
Claims, Collections & Litigation
Claims, Collections & Litigation
C.12 DENY claims by Christopher Madrid; Bridget E. Robinson; Pamela Lee Bourne; Tryphena Smith;
Juan Jose Salazar; Billie Whittaker, individually and as representative of the Estate of Barry Whittaker,
decedent; David Golick and Lorna Golick; Justin Midyett; Daniel Greaves; Dion Simoni; John G. Hanlin
and Yoshabel Clements; Late Claims for Monica Meadors-Washington; and Patricia Bynum; and amended
claim for John G. Hanlin and Yoshabel Clements individually and as natural guardians ad litem for Gavin
Hanlin, Chayton Hanlin and Alcon Hanlin, minor children.
Vote: 5 - 0
Honors & Proclamations
C.13 ADOPT Resolution No. 2009/577 to proclaim December 1, 2009 as World AIDS Day in Contra Costa
County, as recommended by Supervisor Bonilla. (See PR.3)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.14 ADOPT Resolution No. 2009/575 recognizing Officer Roger Young upon his retirement for his years
of service, as recommended by Supervisor Piepho.
Vote: 5 - 0
C.15 ADOPT Resolution No. 2009/576 recognizing Office Richard Gomez upon his retirement for his
years of service, as recommended by Supervisor Piepho.
Vote: 5 - 0
C.16 ADOPT Resolution No. 2009/577 recognizing Officer Pete Sciarretta upon his retirement for his
years of service with California Highway Patrol, as recommended by Supervisor Piepho.
Vote: 5 - 0
C.17 ADOPT Resolution No. 2009/578 recognizing Officer Mike Nelson upon his retirement and for his
years of service with California Highway Patrol, as recommended by Supervisor Piepho.
Vote: 5 - 0
C.18 ADOPT Resolution No. 2009/579 recognizing Sergeant Keith Marsden upon his retirement and for
his years of service with California Highway Patrol, as recommended by Supervisor Piepho.
Vote: 5 - 0
C.19 ADOPT Resolution No. 2009/580 recognizing Uri Eliahu as the American Society of Engineers'
Engineer of the Year, as recommended by Supervisor Piepho.
Vote: 5 - 0
C.20 ADOPT Resolution No. 2009/951 honoring County Counsel Silvano B. Marchesi, upon his retirement,
for his many years of exemplary and dedicated service to Contra Costa County, as recommended by
Supervisor Bonilla. (See PR.2)
Vote: 5 - 0
Appointments & Resignations
C.21 APPOINT Jake Sloan to the District I seat on the County Planning Commission, as recommended by
C.21 APPOINT Jake Sloan to the District I seat on the County Planning Commission, as recommended by
Supervisor Gioia.
Vote: 5 - 0
C.22 DECLARE vacant the District I seat on the Contra Costa County Commission for Women due to the
resignation of Debra Dias, and DIRECT the Clerk of the Board to post the vacancy, as recommended by
Supervisor Gioia.
Vote: 5 - 0
C.23 APPOINT Joanne Sidwell to the District I seat on the Contra Costa County Merit Board, as
recommended by Supervisor Gioia.
Vote: 5 - 0
C.24 APPOINT Cecilia Valdez to the West County Elected Official seat on the Contra Costa
Inter-jurisdictional Council on Homelessness Advisory Board for a term expiring March 31, 2010, as
recommended by Supervisor Gioia.
Vote: 5 - 0
C.25 APPOINT Sean Duckworth to the At Large #11 seat on the Contra Costa Commission for Women, as
recommended by the County Administrator.
Vote: 5 - 0
Appropriation Adjustments
C.26 Sheriff-Coroner (0255): APPROVE Appropriations and Revenue Adjustment No. 5023 authorizing
new revenue in the Sheriff's Office in the amount of $602,579 from the California Office of Traffic Safety
"Avoid the 25" DUI (Driving Under the Influence) campaign and appropriating it for DUI enforcement
equipment and activities. (100% State; No County match)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.27 Sheriff-Coroner (0255): APPROVE Appropriations and Revenue Adjustment No. 5030 authorizing
new revenue in the Sheriff's Office in the amount of $178,268 from the U.S. Department of Homeland
Security, Infrastructure Protection Program - 2007 Port Security Grant and appropriating it for the
purchase of marine patrol equipment. (100% Federal; Grant match satisfied)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.28 Cooperative Extension (0630): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE Appropriation and Revenue
Adjustment No. 5022 to increase revenue in the Cooperative Extension program in the amount of $114,252
and appropriate it for on-going personnel and operating expenses, as recommended by Supervisors Glover
and Piepho.
Vote: 5 - 0
Personnel Actions
C.29 ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 20679 to reclassify one Health Services Department
Community Health Worker II position and its incumbent to Community Health Worker Specialist. (100%
Federally Qualified Health Care Facility)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.30 ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 20661 to reclassify one Network Administrator I position
(represented) and its incumbent to Network Administrator II (represented) position in the Health Services
Department/IT Division.
Vote: 5 - 0
C.31 ADOPT Resolution No. 2009/546 authorizing the deletion of certain positions and laying off
employees in the General Services Department. (County cost savings)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.32 DIRECT the Human Resources Department to conduct classification studies with the goal of
establishing the following classes in the County Clerk-Recorder Division: Clerk-Recorder Services
Technician, Clerk-Recorder Services Specialist, Clerk-Recorder Services Supervisor, and Clerk-Recorder
Services Manager. (No fiscal impact)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.33 ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 20756 to cancel one Deputy Sheriff position and add one
Sergeant position in the Office of the Sheriff. (100% Military Ocean Terminal Concord contract)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.34 ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 20759 to cancel one (1) Chief of Property Conservation
position (represented), and add three (3) Senior Building Inspector (represented) positions in the
Conservation and Development Department. (100% Land Development fees)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.35 ADOPT Resolution No. 2009/491, amending Resolution No. 2009/298, which amended Resolution
No. 2009/112, to revise the effective date for the abolishment of one position in Cooperative Extension,
from December 31, 2009 to June 30, 2010, as recommended by Supervisors Glover and Piepho. (Budgeted)
Vote: 5 - 0
Leases
C.36 DECLARE 205 41st Street, Richmond, as surplus and APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the General
Services Director, or designee, to execute a lease with RYSE, Inc., for approximately 6,600 square feet of
building space for the five-year period July 1, 2009 through June 30, 2014, for the operation of a
Community Youth Center by RYSE, Inc.; and ADOPT related California Environmental Quality Act
findings. (Those building expenses not paid for by RYSE have been budgeted in the General Services
Department's FY 2009/10 budget.)
Vote: 5 - 0
Grants & Contracts
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE execution of agreements between the County and the following agencies for
receipt of fund and/or services:
C.37 APPROVE project design and scope of work documents (including drawings and specifications) for
C.37 APPROVE project design and scope of work documents (including drawings and specifications) for
the 4th Floor Remodel project at the Wakefield Taylor Courthouse located at 725 Court Street, Martinez;
AUTHORIZE the General Services Director, or designee, to execute a memorandum of understanding with
the Judicial Council of California, Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC), and the Contra Costa
County Superior Court pursuant to which AOC will pay the County an amount not to exceed $550,000 to
renovate the 4th floor of the Wakefield Taylor Courthouse; AUTHORIZE the General Services Director,
or designee, to advertise for bids for trade contracts; and MAKE related findings under the California
Environmental Quality Act. (100% State AOC funding)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.38 AWARD and AUTHORIZE the General Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with
Kel-Tec Builders, Inc., the lowest responsive and responsible bidder, in the amount of $217,244 for the
Pharmacy Area remodel, Building One, 2500 Alhambra Avenue, Martinez for the Contra Costa County
Health Services Department. (Health Services Department Enterprise Fund)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.39 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to apply
for and accept the Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development, Redevelopment
and Economic Division, Community Development Block Grant Program funding in an amount not to
exceed $30,000 for a two-year period ($15,000 each year) to provide substance abuse and mental health
services at the Bay Point and North Richmond Service Integration Team sites for the period July 1, 2010
through June 30, 2012. (No County match)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.40 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to apply
for and accept Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development, Redevelopment and
Economic Development Division Community Development Block Grant funding in an amount not to
exceed $30,000 for a two year period ($15,000 each year) to support the Bay Point Works Community
Career Center for the period of July 1, 2010 through June 30, 2012. (No County match)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.41 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Clerk-Recorder, or designee, to execute a Help America
Vote Act (HAVA) grant funds contract and subsequent addendums for participating in State VoteCal
Project activities for a total amount not to exceed $100,000 for the period January 1, 2010 through
December 31, 2011, in conformance with State grant requirements. (100% HAVA grant)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.42 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a novation
contract with Golden Rain Foundation of Walnut Creek, to pay County an amount not to exceed $13,400 to
provide congregate meal services for County’s Senior Nutrition Program, for the period July 1, 2009
through June 30, 2010, with a three-month automatic extension through September 30, 2010, in an amount
not to exceed $3,350. (No County match)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.43 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to apply for and accept a grant from
the California Department of Boating and Waterways Equipment grant in an amount not to exceed $36,000
for the purchase of equipment in the Marine Patrol Unit for the period July 1, 2009 through September 30,
2010. (100% State; No County match)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.44 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to apply for and accept a grant from
C.44 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to apply for and accept a grant from
the California Department of Boating and Waterways in an amount not to exceed $100,000 for the
abatement of abandoned vessels on County waterways for the period November 1, 2009 through October
31, 2010. (90% State, 10% County match; Budgeted)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.45 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute grant award
contract with the San Francisco Foundation, to pay the County an amount not to exceed $30,000 towards
providing the Family Maternal and Child Health Program, Building Economic Security Today (BEST), for
the period December 1, 2009 through November 30, 2010. (No County match)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.46 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to enter into contracts, including
mutual indemnification, with the Contra Costa Central Narcotics Enforcement Team and the Contra Costa
West Narcotics Enforcement Team, each to pay the County the amount of $15,000 to provide evidence
storage services for the period January 1 through December 31, 2010. (100% Reimbursement revenue;
Budgeted)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.47 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with the
California Department of Public Health, to pay the County an amount not to exceed $1,641,903 for the
Public Health Emergency Preparedness Comprehensive Program, Public Health Emergency Response
Phase Three, for the period July 31, 2009 through July 30, 2010. (No County match)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.48 ADOPT Resolution No. 2009/581 authorizing the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to accept additional
grant funding for the State of California, 2007 Buffer Zone Protection Program (BZPP) grant in an amount
not to exceed $63,050 to build security and risk management capabilities enhancing the security of
California water systems for the period of January 1, 2008 through January 31, 2010. (100% Federal)
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.078)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.49 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute an amendment to
the Grant Agreement with the California Environmental Protection Agency, effective January 1, 2010, to
increase payment to County by $10,281, to a new total not to exceed $106,155, for continuation of the
County’s Health Services Hazardous Materials, Aboveground Petroleum Storage Act Program, and to
extend the term of the agreement from March 1, 2010 through May 1, 2011. (No County match required)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.50 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with the
First 5 Contra Costa Children and Families Commission, to pay County an amount not to exceed $12,000
to provide the Bridges to Care Program for the period October 5, 2009 through June 30, 2010. (No County
match)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.51 ADOPT Resolution No. 2009/582 approving and authorizing the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to
apply for and accept the 2008 Buffer Zone Protection Program (BZPP) grant from the State of California in
an amount not to exceed $207,834 to build security and risk management capabilities enhancing the
security of California water systems for the period of January 1, 2009 through March 31, 2011. (100%
Federal) (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.078)
Vote: 5 - 0
Vote: 5 - 0
C.52 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a grant award
contract with Education, Training, and Research Associates, to pay the County an amount not to exceed
$35,000 for the Family, Maternal & Child Health Program, “Working to Institutionalize Sexuality
Education Project”, for the period September 25, 2009 through August 31, 2011. (No County match)
Vote: 5 - 0
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE execution of agreement between the County and the following parties as
noted for the purchase of equipment and/or services:
C.53 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Administrator, or designee, to execute contracts totaling
$210,000 with the following agencies for the County Dispute Resolution Program for calendar year 2010
(100% Restricted Dispute Resolution Funds):
Agency Amount
Center for Human
Development
$102,500
Congress of Neutrals $107,500
2010 Program Total $210,000
Vote: 5 - 0
C.54 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to execute a Purchase Order with
McCain Traffic Supply in the amount of $350,000 to purchase and install 36 traffic signal controllers for
the Town of Danville. (100% Town of Danville funding)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.55 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Clerk-Recorder, or designee, to execute a contract extension
agreement with AtPac, Inc. to extend the contract term from December 31, 2009 to December 31, 2010,
for services related to the Social Security Number Truncation Program back conversion, Countywide
(100% Recorder Redaction Program funds)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.56 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the Employment and
Human Services Department, a purchase order with CompuCom Systems, Inc., in an amount not to exceed
$556,400 for the third installment of the Microsoft Enterprise Agreement Renewal for 2009. (11% County
General Fund, 89% State funding)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.57 AMEND Board action of October 6, 2009 (Item C.47), which authorized the Purchasing Agent to
execute a purchase order with Sharp Business Systems, to include Leasesource Financial Service, Inc., as
equipment financier and to change the term to a period of 48 months commencing with the execution of
Lease Agreement documents, with no change in the payment limit of $3,800,000, as recommended by the
Employment and Human Services Director. (40% State, 40% Federal, 20% County General Fund)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.58 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with
C.58 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with
Intratek Computer, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $260,000 to provide hardware and software support
services for the period January 1 through December 31, 2010. (100% Enterprise Fund I)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.59 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract
amendment with Discovery Counseling Center of the San Ramon Valley, Inc., effective November 1,
2009, to increase the payment limit by $35,000 to a new payment limit of $119,988 to provide additional
hours of alcohol and drug abuse prevention services, with no change in the original term of July 1, 2009
through June 30, 2010. (100% Federal Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.60 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a novation
contract with Anka Behavioral Health, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $801,802 to provide mental health
outreach services for the homeless mentally ill for the period July 1, 2009 through June 30, 2010, with a
six-month automatic extension through December 31, 2010 in an amount not to exceed $400,901. (51%
Federal Medi-Cal, 35% Substance Abuse/Mental Health Services Act, 15% Project for Assistance in
Transition from Homelessness)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.61 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with
Uzma Anwer, M.D., in an amount not to exceed $156,250 to provide psychiatric services in East Contra
Costa County, for the period January 1 through December 31, 2010. (100% Mental Health Realignment)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.62 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with
Behavioral Interventions, Inc., to increase the payment limit by $191,000 to a new payment limit of
$533,600 and expand the scope of services to include electronic home detention equipment with cellular
connectability, with no change to the contract term. (100% Participant fees)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.63 AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the Health Services Department, a
purchase order with GE Healthcare, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $158,294 for nine G.E. Giraffe Infant
Warmers, for use at by Contra Costa Regional Medical Center's Labor and Delivery Department. (100%
Enterprise I Fund)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.64 AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the Health Services Department, a
purchase order and maintenanace contract with GE Healthcare, Inc., in the amount of $443,827 to provide
service and maintenance for imaging systems at the Contra Costa Regional Medical Center, Richmond
Health Center, and Pittsburg Health Center, for the period December 1, 2009 through November 30, 2013.
(100% Enterprise I Fund)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.65 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with
Staff Care, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $850,000 to provide temporary physician services for the
Contra Costa Regional Medical Center and Contra Costa Health Centers, for the period January 1 through
December 31, 2010. (100% Enterprise Fund I)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.66 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with
C.66 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with
Jackson & Coker LocumTenens, LLC in an amount not to exceed $250,000 to provide temporary help
physicians for the Contra Costa Regional Medical Center and Contra Costa Health Centers and the
County’s Main Detention Facility, for the period January 1 through December 31, 2010. (100% Enterprise
Fund I)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.67 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute
a contract with Metropolitan Van and Storage, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $350,000 to provide
archival records storage and office furniture and equipment storage for the period February 1, 2010
through January 31, 2011. (20% County General Fund; 40% State; 40% Federal)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.68 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, to execute a contract with Contra Costa
Regional Health Foundation, in an amount not to exceed $125,000, to provide professional consultation
services to the Health Services Director with regard to the Contra Costa Regional Medical Center and
Contra Costa Health Centers, for the period from October 1, 2009 through September 30, 2010. (100%
Enterprise Fund I)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.69 RATIFY the actions taken by the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract to use
the San Ramon Valley Conference Center in the amount of $4,105, for the seasonal and H1N1 flu
vaccination clinic held on November 21, 2009, as recommended by the Health Services Director.
Vote: 5 - 0
C.70 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract
amendment with Total Healthcare Management, Inc., effective November 30, 2009, to increase the
payment limit by $130,000 to a new payment limit of $380,000 to extend the term from November 30,
2009 through May 31, 2010 to continue providing claims process and negotiation services for Contra
Costa Health Plan. (Percentage of savings)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.71 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with
Oliver Wyman Actuarial Consulting, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $195,000, to provide actuarial
consulting services for the Contra Costa Health Plan, for the period December 1, 2009 through November
30, 2010. (100% Local Initiative Funds)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.72 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with
Nadhan, Inc. (dba Creekside Convalescent Hospital and Mental Health Rehabilitation Program), in an
amount not to exceed $255,500 to provide sub-acute care for seriously and persistently mentally ill adults
for the period January 1 through December 31, 2010. (100% Mental Health Realignment)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.73 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with
Victor Kogler in an amount not to exceed $125,938 to provide consultation, technical assistance, and
operational support to the Alcohol and Other Drugs Services Division for the period January 1 through
December 31, 2010. (100% Federal Prevention Set-Aside and Substance Abuse & Crime Prevention Act of
2000 Grant Funds)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.74 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or desginee, to execute a contract amendment with
C.74 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or desginee, to execute a contract amendment with
URS Corporation Americas to extend the contract term from December 31, 2009 to February 28, 2010 for
development of a County-wide Earthquake Response Plan, with no change in payment limit of $325,000.
(100% State Homeland Security Grant Program funding)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.75 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with
Cheryl Adams-Woodford in an amount not to exceed $119,808, to provide project management,
consultation and technical assistance with regard to the PeopleSoft General Ledger System, for the period
December 1, 2009 through November 30, 2010. (100% Enterprise Fund I)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.76 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with
Richard D. Baldwin, M.D., in an amount not to exceed $186,300 to provide geriatric psychiatric services
for the period January 1 through December 31, 2010. (100% Mental Health Realignment funding)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.77 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a contract with
Miller Pacific Engineering Group, in an amount not to exceed $150,000 for on-call geotechnical
engineering services for the period December 15, 2009 through December 14, 2011, Countywide. (Various
Project Funds)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.78 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a contract with
Engeo Incorporated in an amount not to exceed $150,000 for on-call geotechnical engineering services for
the period December 15, 2009 through December 14, 2011, Countywide. (Various Project Funds)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.79 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a contract with
Hultgren-Tillis Engineers, in an amount not to exceed $150,000 for on-call geotechnical engineering
services for the period December 15, 2009 through December 14, 2011, Countywide. (Various Project
Funds)
Vote: 5 - 0
Other Actions
C.80 APPROVE the delegation of authority to the County Treasurer for investing and reinvesting County
funds and the funds of other depositors in the County Treasury, or to sell or exchange securities so
purchased, pursuant to section 53607 of the State Government Code.
Vote: 5 - 0
C.81 ACCEPT the North Richmond Waste & Recovery Mitigation Fee Joint Expenditure Planning
Committee Annual Report for 2009, as recommended by the Conservation and Development Director. (No
fiscal impact)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.82 RATIFY the actions taken by the Workforce Development Board of Contra Costa Director to provide
program services through the Contra Costa Office of Education for the West County summer youth
program and APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Contra Costa County Auditor-Controller to pay the Contra
Costa County Office of Education up to $33,000 for services delivered in the West County summer youth
program from May 1, 2008 through October 30, 2008. (100% Federal)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.83 ACKNOWLEDGE receipt of the Auditor-Controller’s Annual Supplemental Law Enforcement
Services Fund (SLESF) Summary Report for the 2008/09 fiscal year.
Vote: 5 - 0
C.84 RATIFY the actions taken by the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute an Application For
Permit to use the common area at Hilltop Mall for the seasonal and H1N1 vaccination clinic held on
November 7, 2009, as recommended by the Health Services Director.
Vote: 5 - 0
C.85 ADOPT Resolution No. 2009/574 approving the appropriation of up to $50,000 from the County
Redevelopment Agency for a public improvement study program by the Rodeo Sanitary District for the
period June 1, 2009 through June 30, 2010, and ADOPT findings pursuant to Health and Safety Code
Section 33445, as recommended by the Conservation and Development Director, Rodeo.(100%
Redevelopment funds) (Consider with C.101)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.86 DECLARE as surplus and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to dispose of vehicles no
longer needed for public use as recommended by the General Services Director. (No fiscal impact)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.87 ACCEPT report from the Local Child Care and Development Planning Council on activities during
calendar year 2009 relating to the implmentation of the Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Plan for
2008-2011 and the 2009 Annual Report, as recommended by the Family and Human Services Committee.
Vote: 5 - 0
C.88 ACCEPT report on the activities and achievements of the Contra Costa County Service Integration
Program, as recommended by the Family and Human Services Committee.
Vote: 5 - 0
C.89 ACCEPT report from the Health Services Department, Public Health Division, on the Needle
Exchange Program and on efforts to prevent the spread of HIV infections and other diseases, as
recommended by the Family and Human Services Committee.
Vote: 5 - 0
C.90 ACCEPT the recommendations from the Family and Human Services Committee to carry forward 21
referrals from the 2009 Family and Human Services Committee to the 2010 Committee.
Vote: 5 - 0
C.91 RATIFY the Health Services Director or his designee, actions in executing an Application with Contra
Costa Community College District for use of its Los Medanos College parking lot for seasonal and H1N1
flu vaccination clinic, held on December 6, 2009.
Vote: 5 - 0
C.92 APPROVE the providers recommended by the Contra Costa Health Plan's Peer Review and
Credentialing Committee at its November 17, 2009 meeting, and by the Health Services Director, as
required by the State Departments of Health Care Services and Managed Health Care, and the Centers for
Medicare and Medicaid Services.
Vote: 5 - 0
Vote: 5 - 0
C.93 DIRECT the Auditor-Controller to reimburse the Employment and Human Service Department’s
Revolving Fund in the amount of $55, as recommended by the Employment and Human Services Director.
(70% State, 30% County General Fund)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.94 APPROVE the Preliminary 2010/2011 North Richmond Waste and Recovery Mitigation Fee
Expenditure Plan developed by the North Richmond Waste & Recovery Mitigation Fee Joint Expenditure
Planning Committee. which specifies recommended allocations of the revenues projected to be derived
from 2010/210 Mitigation Fee, as recommended by the Conservation and Development Director.
Vote: 5 - 0
C.95 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute an unpaid student
training agreement with Contra Costa Community College District to provide field instruction in the Health
Services Department for the University’s students, for the period September 1, 2009 through August 31,
2012. (Non financial agreement)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.96 APPROVE the Notice of Intention to Purchase Real Property located at 20 Allen Street, Martinez for
the sum of $1,900,000, declaring that this Board will meet on January 19, 2010, at 9:30 a.m. or thereafter,
to consider consummation of the purchase, and directing the Clerk of the Board to publish notice of the
acquisition pursuant to Government Code Section 6063, as recommended by the Health Services Director.
(100% Enterprise I Fund)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.97 ACKNOWLEDGE and AFFIRM the purpose and use of special revenue mitigation funds, as
recommended by Supervisors Piepho and Bonilla.
Vote: 5 - 0
C.98 ADOPT Resolution No. 2009/950 allowing the County to reimburse certain expenditures for capital
improvements to 20 Allen Street, Martinez, for the Health Services Department, as recommended by the
County Administrator.
Vote: 5 - 0
C.99 APPROVE the Conflict of Interest Code for the Measure J Traffic Congestion Relief Agency dba
TRAFFIX. (No fiscal impact)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.100 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to enter into Memoranda of
Understanding with the County of Alameda and the City of Oakland to participate in the ARIES Integrated
Justice System for the purpose of sharing and integrating criminal justice information from July 1, 2009
through June 30, 2010.
Vote: 5 - 0
C.101 DIRECT the County Administrator to report to the Board on County procedures governing employee
involvement in contracts with prospective employers.
ADOPTED the recommendation; and REFERRED the matter to the Internal Operations Committee
for development of a clear policy.
Redevelopment Agency
Redevelopment Agency
C.102 ADOPT Resolution No. 2009/573 approving the appropriation of up to $50,000 for a public
improvement study program by the Rodeo Sanitary District, ADOPT findings pursuant to Health and
Safety Code Section 33445, and AUTHORIZE the Redevelopment Director, on behalf of the of the
Redevelopment Agency, to execute a Public Facilities Design Funding Agreement with Rodeo Sanitary
District, in the amount up to $50,000 for a public improvements study program in Downtown Rodeo and
the Rodeo Marina with a term of June 1, 2009 to June 30, 2010. (100% Redevelopment funds) (Consider
with C.85)
Vote: 5 - 0
C.103 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Redevelopment Director to execute a Purchase and Sale
Agreement between Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency and 1546 Third Street, LLC. for
property rights for Parcel No. 409-080-020, and Accept the Grant Deed for said property rights in
connection with the Grove Point Unified Development Program, Richmond (100% Redevelopment Agency
Funds)
Vote: 5 - 0
GENERAL INFORMATION
The Board meets in all its capacities pursuant to Ordinance Code Section 24-2.402, including as the Housing
Authority and 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.
Requests for reconsideration of a land use (planning) decision must be submitted in writing to the Clerk of the Board
of Supervisors within 10 days of the Board's decision, and must identify the new information which was not before
the Board of Supervisors when the decision was made.
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 taped 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
The Closed Session agenda is available each week upon request from the Office of the Clerk of the Board, 651 Pine
Street, Room 106, Martinez, California, and may also be viewed on the County’s Web Page.
STANDING COMMITTEES
The Airport Committee (Supervisors Mary N. Piepho and Susan A. Bonilla) meets on the first Monday of the month
at 9:00 a.m. at Director of Airports Office, 550 Sally Ride Drive, Concord.
The Family and Human Services Committee (Supervisors Federal D. Glover and Gayle B. Uilkema) meets on the
third Monday of the month at 1:00 p.m. in Room 101, County Administration Building, 651 Pine Street, Martinez.
The Finance Committee (Supervisors John Gioia and Susan A. Bonilla) meets on the first Monday of the month at
1:00 p.m. in Room 101, County Administration Building, 651 Pine Street, Martinez.
The Internal Operations Committee (Supervisors Gayle B. Uilkema and Mary N. Piepho) meets on the third
Monday of the month at 9:00 a.m. in Room 101, County Administration Building, 651 Pine Street, Martinez.
The Legislation Committee (Supervisors Susan A. Bonilla and Mary N. Piepho) meets on the first Monday of the
month at 10:30 a.m. in Room 101, County Administration Building, 651 Pine Street, Martinez.
The Public Protection Committee (Supervisors Federal D. Glover and John Gioia) meets on the first Monday of the
month at 2:30 p.m. in Room 101, County Administration Building, 651 Pine Street, Martinez.
The Transportation, Water & Infrastructure Committee (Supervisors Mary N. Piepho and Federal D. Glover)
meets on the third Monday of the month at 10:30 a.m. in Room 101, County Administration Building, 651 Pine
Street, Martinez.
Airport Committee See above
Family & Human Services Committee See above
Finance Committee January 4, 2010 See above
Internal Operations Committee See above
Legislation Committee See above
Public Protection Committee See above
Transportation, Water & Infrastructure Committee See above
AD HOC COMMITTEE
Ad Hoc committees of the Board of Supervisors meet on an as-needed basis at the direction of the committee chair.
Please contact the offices of the committee chairs for meeting times and information.
Municipal Advisory Council Review Committee
PERSONS WHO WISH TO ADDRESS THE BOARD MAY BE LIMITED TO THREE (3)
MINUTES
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
BAAQMD Bay Area Air Quality Management District
BART Bay Area Rapid Transit District
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 (CCCPFD) 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
EBMUD East Bay Municipal Utility District
ECCFPD East Contra Costa Fire Protection District
ECCRPC East Contra Costa Regional Planning Commission
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 Department 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
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
SRVRPC San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission
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
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):
ACCEPT report on the results of the 2009 Countywide Combined Charities Campaign from Campaign Chair Silvano
Marchesi, County Counsel, and Co-Chair Ted Cwiek, Human Resources Director.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
BACKGROUND:
The 2009 Contra Costa County Combined Charities Campaign ran from October 1 through October 30, 2009. A total
of 1,026 County employees participated in this year's campaign, and their donations total $254,628. The generosity
of county employees is remarkable and is greatly appreciated by the participating charities.
The participating charity federations associated with the campaign included Community Health Charities of
California (the lead organization), Bay Area Black United Fund, Local Independent Charities, Earth Share of
California, and United Way of the Bay Area. Significant donations also were accepted for several non-profit agencies
managed by County departments and agencies that support
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Silvano Marchesi,
335-1810
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Katherine Sinclair, Deputy
cc: David Twa, County Administrator
PR.1
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Silvano B. Marchesi, County Counsel
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:2009 Contra Costa County Combined Charities Campaign Report
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
activities and services for County residents. The following tables reflect disbursements of campaign donations,
the top five donor departments, the top five donor departments per number of employees, and the 2009 Campaign
coordinators.
Finally, I thank and express the gratitude of the Board, the charity federations, and the individual charities
themselves, for our very generous County employees, who made significant donations during this time of
uncertainty and concern to them.
ATTACHMENTS
Campaign Statistics
2009 Contra Costa County
Combined Charities Campaign
Disbursements to Charitable Organizations of Campaign Donations
Community Health Charities of California $33,114
Bay Area Black United Fund $10,294
Local Independent Charities $19,352
Earth Share of California $61,064
United Way of the Bay Area $49,145
Donor Choice $81,659
Top Five Donor Departments
Employment & Human Services $58,419
Health Services $54,242
Public Works $26,298
Conservation & Development $12,163
Child Support Services $11,895
Top Five Departments Per Employee Donating
Child Support Services $476
Animal Services $427
County Administrator $396
County Counsel $343
Assessor $319
2009 Contra Costa County
Combined Charities Campaign
Department Coordinator
Agriculture Department Matthew Slattergren
Animal Services Department Jan Millar
Assessor Debra McClanahan
Auditor-Controller Joanne Barton
Board of Supervisors - Chief Clerk Jane Pennington
Board of Supervisors, District 1 Terrence Cheung
Board of Supervisors, District 3 Marion Murphy
Board of Supervisors, District 4 Suzette Madrid
Board of Supervisors, District 5 Lynn Reichard
Child Support Services Louise Britton
Clerk-Recorder Elaine Baird
Conservation & Development Department Barbara Melton
County Administrator Nancy Yee
County Counsel Noel Plummer
Employees' Retirement Association Charice Hester
District Attorney Bruce T. Flynn
Employment & Human Services Department Ann Struthers
Contra Costa County Fire Protection District Dan Yaworsky
General Services Department Stacy Ruthrauff
Health Services Department –
Alcohol & Other Drug Services Mary McLain
Health Services – Ambulatory Care Sharyn Owens
Health Services Department – CCHP Pam Gomez
Health Services Department –
Emergency Medical Services Pam Dodson
Health Services Department –
Environmental Health Lori Braunesreither
Health Services Department –
Finance Administration Jackie Peterson
Department Coordinator
Health Services Department –
Hazardous Materials Lacey Friedman
Health Services Department –
Hospital Medical Staff Dana Stephens
Health Services Department – Mental Health Jeannie DeTomasi
Health Services Department – Mental Health Robin Draper-Praetz
Health Services Department – Personnel Mary Kooyman
Health Services Department – Public Health Dave Shoemaker
Housing Authority Laurie Lewis/ Kathy Sosa
Human Resources Department Debbie Nejedlo
Dept. of Information Technology (DoIT) Kathy Duhaime/
Marcia Malmgren
Law Library Naomi Little
Library Shannon LaDage
Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) Kate Sibley
Probation Department Todd Billeci/Jim Morphy
Public Defender Donna Broussard
Public Works Department Gary Huisingh/
Diane Favero
Revenue Collection Department Gene Williams
Risk Management Department Aretha Chandler
Risk Management Joan Staley
Sheriff-Coroner Jim Bickert
Treasurer-Tax Collector Susan Chavez
Veterans Service Office Luinda Dayak
RECOMMENDATION(S):
ACCEPT presentation by Supervisor Bonilla reviewing the Board's activities for
2009.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
BACKGROUND:
.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT:
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: .
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: , Deputy
cc:
PR.5
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Supervisor Susan A. Bonilla
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:2009 Year in Review for Chair Bonilla and Board of Supervisors
ATTACHMENTS
2009 BOS in
Review
Dear Friend:
This has been a year of change, cooperation, and opportunity. I believe the residents of Contra Costa County have not only persevered through this hardship but have succeed in laying the foundation for a new era. Our local government is smaller and performing as best it can to deliver vital services to the many people in need of training and a job. While our state government is continuing to face challenges amidst an escalating budget deficit, I believe the solutions lie in doing what is best for our community, making government more efficient and responsive, and helping our constituents go back to school, receive training, and find jobs.
In 2007, when I first started my term on the Board of Supervisors, I encountered a system of government in need of reform, innovation, and responsiveness. This year, the Board of Supervisors approved my recommended action of shifting to a two-year budget cycle to better prepare for impending cuts and to inform our constituents and employees what to expect in terms of available resources. In addition the Board of Supervisors approved to annually adopt budget balancing principles and having a conversation with constituents to identify our top funding priorities.
Finally, the Board of Supervisors adopted my recommendation of performing a sustainability audit of our county hospital. It is my belief that by working more efficiently, we can perform at a level that meets or exceeds our constituents’ needs’ while saving taxpayer money. Working together with employees, managers, and my colleagues on the Board of Supervisors we were able to agree on a unprecedented contract agreement based on shared sacrifice. This contract agreement effectively eliminated the substantial retiree health care liability of $2.6 billion the County would have owed over the next 30 years. Furthermore, the Board of Supervisors approved my action of reducing our salaries in conjunction with our employees, as I believe that leaders should never ask those around them to do more than they would themselves.
(Continued on Page 3)
Contra Costa County Supervisor
2151 Salvio Street, Suite R
Concord, CA 94520
Dist4@bos.cccounty.us
Phone: 925.521.7100
Fax: 925.646.5202
Winter 2009, Page 1
Susan A. Bonilla
2009 Year in Review
www.SusanBonilla.org
Supervisor Susan Bonilla and the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisor’s presented Dr. Brian O’Neill, Director of the VA Northern California Health Care System, with a resolution during the 2009 Veterans ceremony.
Winter 2009, Page 2
The federally mandated census occurs every 10 years and the next one is scheduled for April
2010. The census aims to count every person living in the United States. Data collected from the
census is then used to distribute Congressional seats to states, apportion more than $400 billion
in federal grants to tribal, state and local government, and help guide decisions at every level of
government that will impact our communities – for example, where to put more schools, libraries,
hospital, senior services, etc. With the economic challenges everyone is faced with today, there is
so much at stake for us not to take the census seriously.
We in Contra Costa County are committed to making the census a top priority. We need to reach
out to every resident in the county and send a very strong and loud message that they each must
be counted to make a difference. Special efforts will be made to reach out to the undercounted
population, especially those that are linguistically isolated and living in low-income households.
As part of our census efforts, a Complete Count Committee will be created which will have
regional sub-committees made up of local and respected experts in the community – community
agencies, faith-based organizations, business and city leaders, local school representatives, media
– all working together collaboratively in the community to raise awareness of the importance of
the census and achieving an accurate count. The county will be relying on you - our community
partners - to play a big role in the local census outreach. Our success will depend on building
a strong partnership with our community; after all, the census is a community-wide effort. We
invite you to join Contra Costa County in our census campaign. Make a difference and help shape
the future of our communities! More information will follow in the weeks ahead. Please contact
Kristine Solseng at (925) 313-4371 for any questions.
CENSUS 2010:
It’s a Community Effort and We Need You
Contra Costa County
Quick Facts and Figures 2007
CITY POPULATION CITY POPULATION
Antioch 100,150 Oakley 31,906
Brentwood 48,907 Orinda 17,517
Clayton 10,781 Pinole 19,234
Concord 123,519 Pittsburg 63,004
Danville 42,601 Pleasant Hill 33,117
El Cerrito 23,194 Richmond 103,828
Hercules 23,975 San Pablo 30,965
Lafayette 23,953 San Ramon 58,035
Martinez 36,179 Walnut Creek 65,384
Moraga 16,165 County Total 1,042,341
District IV Spotlight on: Contra Costa Commission for WomenWorking on Behalf of Women and Girls in Contra Costa CountyBy Carlyn Obringer
The Contra Costa County Commission for Women has been busy!
Comprised of 15 energetic women, the Commission is currently focusing on two big projects. Recognizing that there is a proliferation of girl-on-girl violence within schools throughout the country, the Commission is currently surveying all of the high school, middle school and elementary school principals in the County about the number and nature of incidents of girl-on-girl violence at their schools. Once this research is complete, the Commission will compile a report, to be presented to the Board of Supervisors and made available to all participating schools and interested parties. The Commission will then facilitate community workshops to educate parents and teachers about the rise in girl-on-girl violence and how to prevent and deal with this issue.
The Commission is also conducting outreach to Contra Costa County’s female Hispanic population regarding the U.S. 2010 Census. The idea is to build trust among undocumented Latinas amid growing concern that those individuals in the county illegally will be afraid to be counted. Since Census information affects the numbers of seats California occupies in the U.S. House of Representatives, and what portion of federal funding will be spent on infrastructure and public services in California each year, the Commissioners know that it is important to connect with the County’s Latina population and alleviate any fears they might have about participating in the 2010 Census.
Want to learn more about the work of the Commission?Please visit the Contra Costa Women’s Commission’s web site at www.WomensCommission.com or e-mail WomensCommission@gmail.com.
Winter 2009, Page 3
A Message From Susan....(Continued from Page 1)The core purpose of the Board of Supervisors is to further policy that will protect and improve the quality of life for the people, neighborhoods, and diverse communities of Contra Costa County. I am proud of the partnerships my office has created and strengthened to help our neighbors stay the course in this difficult time. The Assistance League of Diablo Valley, the Blue Star Moms, the Monument Crisis Center, the Michael Chavez Center for Economic Opportunity, Foster A Dream, and many other organizations are providing incredible programs and services thereby filling the gaps created by the county’s cuts in services. The construction of the Contra Costa Centre Transit Village and the arrival of the northern headquarters of the California State Automobile Association (CSAA) have brought much needed jobs to our community. Their work is commendable and I honor our partnerships and know they will continue in the spirit of making our community stronger.
My tenure as Chair of the Board has been inspiring and challenging. It is my hope that I leave the position as Chair in a much better place for my colleagues and constituents. I look forward to continuing to serve Contra Costa County and I am always encouraged by the dedication and perseverance that I see in many of our outstanding employees who have dedicated their lives to public service. This coming year will require continued perseverance and strong leadership among all of our partners in government, non-profits, and businesses. As we continue to work together, we will see a new era of growth and opportunity emerge in Contra Costa County.
Best Regards,
Susan Bonilla
JOIN US FOR:The 10th Annual Women’s Hall of Fame Awards Dinner
When: Thursday, March 18, 2010
Where: Crowne Plaza Hotel in Concord
Women displaying leadership in the following categories will be honored:
Women Demonstrating LeadershipWomen Creating CommunityWomen Working for JusticeWomen Preserving the EnvironmentWomen Improving Health CareWomen Contributing to the ArtsWomen Innovating in Science/Technology
Proceeds will benefit Community Violence Solutions
Please contact Teresa Inman at (925) 351-6988 for information.
Winter 2009, Page 4
Supervisor Susan Bonilla Celebrates Grand Opening and Dedication of the Michael Chavez Center for Economic Opportunity
The Grand Opening and Dedication of the Michael Chavez Center for Economic Opportunity in Concord’s Monument Corridor area provided a chance for community leaders and supporters of the Chavez Center to see the finished transformation of the center and to learn about the many valuable programs offered to community residents.
“The Michael Chavez Center provides an invaluable service to residents of the Monument Community, the City of Concord and Contra Costa County. The programs and services offered through the Chavez Center are essential to our community and are excellent examples of the power of public and private partnerships,” Chair of the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors, Susan Bonilla said.
Executive Director of the Michael Chavez Center for Economic Opportunity since February 2009, Mike Van Hofwegen said, “coming alongside men and women of our community and supporting them in recognizing, developing and utilizing their abilities is incredibly gratifying. The Michael Chavez Center does this in a way that helps people to both take specific steps out of poverty and at the same time give back to their community.”
The Michael Chavez Center’s mission is to transform the community through economic opportunities and to train and develop skills in technology and literacy as well as business development. These programs develop the human, social and economic capital that enables individuals to become self-sufficient and contribute to their families and the community in meaningful ways.
Esperanza Flores is a member of the recently launched Green and Clean Professional House-cleaning Services which is a women-owned cooperative, dedicated to making homes safe, clean, and healthy. “The Michael Chavez Center gave me the tools and support to rise to another level and become independent. It is a center that is open to those who have a desire to learn and to improve their lives,” said Flores.
Michael Chavez, a 27-year Concord resident and business owner, was elected to the City Council in November 2006. His wife, Vikki, continues to operate Charisma Salon on Clayton Road in Concord, the business they co-founded in 1979.
Councilmember Chavez chaired the Concord City Council Housing & Economic Development Committee and served on the Neighborhood & Community Services Committee. Chavez was a pioneer in making inroads for the underprivileged people of Concord. The Michael Chavez Center, formerly known as Monument Futures, desires to continue the work he began and carry out his vision.
Questions? Comments? Concerns?We Want to Hear from You
Phone: 925.521.7100 2151 Salvio Street, Suite RConcord, CA 94520
Chief of Staff: Luis Quinonez
lquin@bos.cccounty.us
Deputy Chief of Staff: Lauren Brosnan lauren.brosnan@bos.cccounty.us
Director of Constituent Services: Laura Case lcase@bos.cccounty.us
Admin. Assistant: Suzette Adkins suzette.adkins@bos.cccounty.us
Executive Assistant: Jill Ryan jryan@bos.cccounty.us
RECOMMENDATION(S):
CONDUCT hearing on the appeal of a decision by the Contra Costa County Health Services Department,
Environmental Health Division, to deny a request for variance of the Contra Costa County Health Officer
Regulations for well setback requirements and well protection requirements at 18615 Marsh Creek Road, Brentwood.
(George S. Arata, Applicant & Owner)
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
BACKGROUND:
On July 7, 2009 Contra Costa Environmental Health received an application for soil borings (well test holes) for the
property located at 18615 Marsh Creek Road, Brentwood. The application was reviewed, and permit approved on
July 9, 2009 based on information provided with the application packet.
On August 14, 2009 Contra Costa Environmental Health received applications to develop two of the soil borings into
water wells, and an application for a request for variance of Health Officer Regulations, submitted
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: John Wiggins,
925-692-2570
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc:
SD. 3
To:Board of Supervisors
From:William Walker, M.D., Health Services Director
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Hearing on the Appeal of Denial of Request for Variance
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
by George S. Arata Sr., requesting that one well be allowed with a setback of 8 feet from the neighboring property
line, and the second well to have an annular seal of less than 50 feet in depth.
Both variance requests were denied on September 4, 2009 and a letter informing the applicant of the decision was
sent on October 1, 2009. The reasons for the denial of the variance requests are as follows:
1. The request for the first well to be setback 8 feet from the property line instead of 50 feet, as required by Contra
Costa Health Officer Regulations, Section 414-1.220, was denied because the reduced setback would place the well
in such close proximity to the neighboring property that the neighboring property owner would be faced with
restrictions including, but not limited to, placement of septic systems, water wells, and livestock areas.
2. Section 414-1.222 of the Contra Costa Health Officer Regulations requires water wells to have seals at least 50
feet in depth to prevent contamination from surface sources. The request for both the first and second wells to have
annular seals less than 50 feet in depth was denied because a 50 foot seal is possible, and the wells would still achieve
estimated production rates which meet the well yield requirements for an individual water system as set forth in
Section 414-4.601 of the Ordinance Code of Contra Costa County. In addition, the allowance of a seal less than 50
feet in depth would enable water interchange between aquifers which may result in water degradation in one or more
of the aquifers.
On October 28, 2009 the County received a request for an appeal hearing from Mr. George S. Arata for the denial of
the variances.
CLERK'S ADDENDUM
Chair Bonilla opened the hearing and called for comment. The following people spoke: George Arata, Appellant;
Ray Lochhead, resident of Brentwood; Verna Kruse, resident of Concord; Brian Kruse, resident of Brentwood;
Troy Bristol, Save Mt. Diablo. Mr. Arata said he did not understand the all of the technical impacts of the
requested variance, but did not wish to adversely affect his neighbors property in any way. The Environmental
Health Division of Health Services will meet further Mr. Arata to resolve and clarify issues related to a variance
for the well. Therefore, The Board: CONTINUED the open hearing to January 19, 2010 at 9:30 a.m.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
ACCEPT the report from the Director of the Department of Conservation and Development related to adjustments to
the Land Development Fee Schedule to implement the following:
Incorporate the $500 service fee for the processing and maintenance of requests for Impact Fee Deferral as
established by Ordinance No. 2009-14 authorizing the deferral of certain impact fees;
Modify the inclusionary housing in lieu fee, as approved by th Board on July 21, 2009, to more accurately reflect
changes to median homes sales prices and median rent in the area;
Establish fees related to the processing of financing, refinancing, mortgage credit certificates and re-issuance of
mortgage credit certificates for multi-family and single-family housing;
Incorporate the fees adopted by the Board on June 16, 2009 for the Montalvin Manor Planned-Unit District and
provide for the Amnesty Program until December 31, 2011 on building permit fees for specified structures;
and,
Update the Building Valuation source document,
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Louise Aiello, 313-4303
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc:
SD. 4
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Catherine Kutsuris, Conservation & Development Director
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Adopt New and Revised Fees for Land Development and Other Services
RECOMMENDATION(S): (CONT'D)
the hourly rates for additional plan checking services, and the per trip costs for code compliance site reviews.
OPEN the public hearing, ACCEPT any written or oral public testimony related to the proposed fee changes, and
CLOSE the public hearing;
DETERMINE for the purposes of compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act, that the project is
Exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15273 (fees established by public agencies to meet operating
expenses);
ADOPT Resolution #2009/559 which incorporates revisions to the fee schedule; and,
DIRECT staff to file a Notice of Exemption from CEQA with the County Clerk.
FISCAL IMPACT:
It is anticipated that any General Fund revenue loss resulting from the Impact Fee Deferral Program will be offset
by increased economic activity within the county resulting from these actions. All other fee adjustments will have
no impact on the General Fund.
BACKGROUND:
Development Impact Fee Realignment Program Fee
On June 2, 2009, the Board of Supervisors adopted Ordinance No. 2009-14 authorizing the realignment of certain
impact fees by allowing for the deferral of specified fee payments for residential development projects through
December 31, 2011.
Fees included in this program are Area of Benefit Fees, Child Care Fees, Inclusionary Housing Fees, Park Impact
Fees, Police Services Fees (Minor subdivisions), and Traffic Impact Fees. Special district and regional authority
fees are not included in this program. Fees not included are: multi-jurisdictional fees involving joint powers
agencies, fire district fees, school impact fees, fees derived from conditions of approval rather than by ordinance,
fee program funding services (e.g. Dougherty Valley Transit Fee Program), planning/engineering application fees,
and building permit fees.
The Ordinance requires that a developer apply to participate in the deferral program, and execute an agreement
that will be recorded as a lien on the property. The developer will be required to pay a $500 one-time service fee.
This fee will help to off-set staff costs incurred in processing the application, monitoring the development, and
ensuring that the fee is paid when the development is complete.
Inclusionary Housing Ordinance In-Lieu Fee
On October 24, 2006, the Board of Supervisors adopted County Ordinance 2006-43 Inclusionary Housing (IHO).
The IHO is applicable to all new residential developments of five or more units, as well as condominium
conversions. Fifteen percent of all the residential units are required to be affordable. The IHO provides some
alternative compliance options, including the payment of fees in-lieu of developing affordable units (“in-lieu fee”),
allowing the affordable units to be developed on a separate site, and allowing a developer to convey land suitable
for affordable housing development to a qualified affordable housing developer. In addition, the County may
consider any other reasonable alternative that a developer proposes.
On July 21, 2009, the Board directed staff to update the Department of Conservation and Development’s Fee
Schedule to reflect changes in the area median income, median home sales price, and median rent. Upon adoption
of the Fee Schedule, the in-lieu fee for for-sale developments will be $3,874.89 per market rate unit, and
$26,774.55 per market rate unit in rental developments.
Affordable Housing Program Loan Subordination Request Review and Document Preparation Fee.
1. Fees For Subordination To Multi-Family Refinances
The Board of Supervisors has allocated Community Development Block Grant, HOME Investment Partnerships
Act, and Housing Opportunities for Persons with HIV/AIDS, and Redevelopment Agency funds to developers of
affordable housing over the past 30 years. Over the past year, the County has received requests from some of the
project owners to assist in refinancing by subordinating to a new first mortgage. Some of these transactions are
straightforward and require minimal County staff time. Other transactions are quite complex and require
significant staff time as well as new or modified legal documents. These costs can exceed $5,000 per transaction.
A deposit of $1,000 plus time and materials will assist in offsetting costs and allow the Department to maintain a
balanced budget for affordable housing programs.
2. Fees For Subordination To Single-Family Refinances
The Board of Supervisors has provided homeownership opportunities through below market priced homes and
silent second loan programs. The County has frequent requests from homeowners to subordinate the County
Deeds of Trust to a new first mortgage. Some of these transactions are straightforward and require minimal
County staff time. Other transactions are quite complex. In addition to County staff time, it is sometimes
necessary to draft new legal agreements. These costs are $350 per transaction at a minimum.
A flat fee of $350 for subordination requests for County financed affordable single-family housing will assist in
offsetting costs and allowing the Department to maintain a balanced budget for affordable housing programs.
3. Fees Related to Refinancing and Issuance of Mortgage Credit Certificates for Affordable Multi-Family and
Single-Family Housing
Staff and legal costs for time in reviewing requests and for preparing and processing documents related to
refinancing and mortgage credit certificates can also be $5,000 or more. The following fees will assist in covering
these staff and legal costs:
Multi-Family Affordable
Housing Refinancing Fee $1,000 deposit plus time and materials
Single-Family Affordable
Housing Refinancing Fee $350
Mortgage Credit
Certificate Issuance $300
Re-Issuance of
Mortgage Credit Certificate $300
Replacement of Lost
Mortgage Credit Certificate or
Reissued Mortgage Credit
Certificate $100
Lender/Broker Mortgage
Credit Certificate Participation $400
Lender/Broker Mortgage
Credit Certificate Participation
Annual Fee $200
Montalvin Manor Planned-Unit District Fee Schedule and Amnesty Program
On June 16, 2009, the Board of Supervisors adopted the Montalvin Manor Planned-Unit District rezoning. This
action provides for a streamlined application process for many types of development applications. The fees
adopted by the Board for the Montalvin Manor Planned-Unit Zoning District reflect the actual charges for staff
time needed to review administrative permits in this new zoning district. These fees are consistent with the Bay
Point, Rodeo and North Richmond Planned-Unit Zoning Districts. The deposits for Land Use Permit and
Development Plan applications for both of these areas cover the standard processing costs. Time and Materials are
charged to all applicants that exceed the cost of the initial application fees and/or deposits.
At the same time as the adoption of the Montalvin Manor Fee Schedule, the Board also adopted an Amnesty
Program exempting certain structures within Montalvin Manor from building permit fees through December 31,
2011. The exempt structures include: roof conversions from flat to pitch; porch covers/roof extensions; second
story additions; room additions to the rear of the dwelling; carport conversions to garage or living space; garage
conversions to living space. All building codes and standards and health and safety standards as well as the
Montalvin Manor Planned Unit District requirement must be met.
Update Building Inspection Services Section of the Fee Schedule
The last update to the Building Inspection Services section of the Land Development Fee Schedule was in 1997.
Changes to both costs of doing business and to various building valuation source information have occurred.
In 1997, building valuation data was published by the International Conference of Building Officials (ICBO) in a
monthly magazine. In the intervening years, the ICBO has been replaced by the International Code Conference
(ICC) and the building valuation data is now published in the ICC’s monthly journal. The fee schedule needs to be
modified to allow for any future organizational changes but still retain use of the internationally recognized data
on building valuation. Additionally, the Fee Schedule needs to be modified to reflect the consolidation of
departments into the Department of Conservation and Development.
Both hourly rates for staff and costs for vehicle trips to sites requiring code enforcement inspections have changed
since 1997. Modifications to the Fee Schedule increase the vehicle trip charges for code enforcement from $25
per trip to $50 per trip. Also, the new Fee Schedule eliminates the hourly rate listed for Additional Processing for
Permit Processing but provides for using the hourly rate in effect at the time the additional plan check services are
required.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
The Land Development Fee Schedule will not reflect actions already taken by the Board of Supervisors, and the
fees charged will not cover the cost of the service.
CLERK'S ADDENDUM
ADOPTED the recommendations and Resolution No. 2009/559 as amended today to exclude affordable
housing restrictions on rental units.
ATTACHMENTS
Resolution No. 2009/559
3244_Exhibit_A
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board
Adopted this Resolution on 12/15/2009 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
RECUSE:
Resolution No. 2009/559
NEW AND REVISED FEES FOR LAND DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS AND OTHER RELATED SERVICES.
The Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County RESOLVES as follows:
A. BACKGROUND FINDINGS:
1. The County of Contra Costa has conducted an analysis of its services, the costs reasonably borne of providing those services,
the beneficiaries of those services, and the revenues produced by those paying fees and charges for special services.
2. The County wishes to comply with both the letter and the spirit of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution and limit the
growth of taxes.
3. The County’s policy is to recover the full costs reasonably borne of providing special services of a voluntary and limited
nature, so that general taxes are not diverted from general services of a broad nature and used to unfairly and inequitably
subsidize special services.
4. Heretofore, the Board of Supervisors has, by ordinance, established its policy on the recovery of costs, particularly, the
percentage of costs reasonably borne from users of County services and directed staff as to the methodology for implementing
said ordinance.
5. It is the intention of the Board of Supervisors to develop, as necessary, a revised schedule of fees and charges based on the
County’s budgeted and projected costs reasonably borne, for each fiscal year.
6. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66016, the specific fees to be charged for services may be adopted by the Board of
Supervisors by Resolution, after providing notice of and holding a public hearing at which oral and written presentations may be
made, and providing an opportunity to review the supporting data upon which the fees are based at least ten days before the
hearing. This Board finds that all of the requirements of Government Code Section 66016 have been met.
7. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66018 other fees for services may be charged after providing notice pursuant to
Government Code Section 6062a and holding a public hearing at which oral and written representations may be made. This
Board finds that all of the requirements of Government Code Section 66018 have been met.
B. ADOPTION OF FEE:
1. Fee Schedule Adoption. The fees set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, are hereby
adopted and shall be charged and collected for the services enumerated therein.
2. Separate Fee for Each Process. All fees set by this resolution are for each identified process. Additional fees shall be required
for each additional process or service that is requested or required. Where fees are indicated on a per unit of measurement basis,
the fee is for each identified unit or portion thereof within the indicated ranges of such unit.
3. Added Fees and Refunds. One and one half times the set fee shall be charged for accelerated processing. Where additional fees
must be charged and collected for completed staff work, or where a refund of excess deposited monies is due, and where such
charge or refund is ten dollars ($10.00) or less, a charge or refund need not be made, pursuant to and provided the requirements
of Government Code Sections 29373.1 and 29375.1 and amendments thereto are met. Where a fee payment is over 60 days past
due, the departments shall seek a court judgment against the debtor and will charge interest at a rate of 10% from the date of
judgment.
4. Establishment of a Trust Fund. The Auditor-Controller shall establish a trust fund for joint Community Development/Public
Works application review fees, and the Treasurer shall invest said deposits with interest to accrue in the trust fund.
5. Defining and Timing of Fee Schedule. Definitions regarding and the timing of the implementation of the herein enumerated
fee schedule shall be as set forth herein and in Ordinance No. 98/196, as said ordinance is amended from time to time.
6. Interpretation. This Resolution may be interpreted by the several involved County department heads in consultation with the
County Administrator. The department heads may reasonably and consistently modify a fee calculation methodology such that
the resulting fee amount more closely reflects the cost reasonably borne for providing a service. If there is a conflict between two
fees, the lower in dollar amount of the two shall be applied.
7. Severability. If any portion of this resolution is declared invalid or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the
Board of Supervisors hereby declares that it would have adopted the remainder of this Resolution regardless of the absence of the
invalid part(s).
8. Repealer. All resolutions and other actions of the Board of Supervisors in conflict with the contents of this Resolution,
including Resolution No. 95-636, are repealed to the extent of any conflict, on the operative date of the conflicting provisions
hereof. Obligations existing under any resolution or other Board action repealed by this section shall not be affected and shall
remain in full force and effect.
9. Effective. This Resolution is effective immediately upon adoption subject to any applicable terms and conditions of Ordinance
No. 98/196, as amended, except that fees imposed herein on development projects (Gov. Code, §66000) become effective 60
days after adoption.
10. Supercedes. This Resolution supercedes Resolution No. 2007/12.
The fees for land development applications, permits, inspections, plan checking, map checking, and other related services shown
on the attached fee schedule are approved.
Contact: Louise Aiello, 313-4303
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: , Deputy
cc:
EXHIBIT A
Page 1 of 23
FEE SCHEDULE
S-001 Permit Processing and Issuance Program
A. Plan Review 65% of Building Permit Fee. Applicable when plans are
required beyond a plot or site plan.
B. Permit Review and Processing 25% of Building Permit Fee. Applicable when review for
compliance can be determined through a plot or site plan, or
references to a master plan previously reviewed and
approved by the department.
C. Additional Processing Applicable when additional plan review is required due to: 1)
incomplete or unacceptable follow-through by applicant on
deficiencies found in the initial plan review; 2) significant
revisions submitted after plan review is well underway; or 3)
revisions submitted during construction to reflect field
changes. Fees for such reviews shall be at the hourly rates in
effect at the time of plan review.
D. Refinery and Chemical Plant Fee
1. Yearly Building/
Grading Permit
10% of the actual annual valuation of building construction
and grading activity. Excluded from this category are all
expenditures for which individual building or grading
permits are applicable.
2. Individual Building/
Grading Permit
For new construction, additions, or major alterations of
buildings, the fees charged will be consistent with other
sections of this fee schedule. For all other construction work
the valuation will be based upon the actual cost of materials
and labor associated with the installation of foundations and
other structural items only. The permit will be calculated as
per Table No. 1-A.
3. Yearly Electrical Permit 1% of the actual valuation of electrical construction activity.
S-002 Construction Inspection Program
A. Building Inspection
1. Building Permit The Building Permit fee shall be as set forth in the Fee
Schedule (Table No. 1-A) of the 1994 Uniform Building
Code, or $62.25, whichever is greater.
2. Energy Compliance 25% of Building Permit and Plan Review or processing fees.
Applicable on all structures with heated or air-conditioned
space.
3. Access Compliance 25% of Building Permit and Plan Review or processing fees.
Deleted: following hourly rates:
Structural Engineers - $70; Plans
Examiners - $50; Inspectors - $60
EXHIBIT A
Page 2 of 23
FEE SCHEDULE
Applicable on all buildings except residential use buildings
with fewer than 4 dwelling units. Additions and alterations to
an exempt building, and accessory structures on the same
parcel with an exempt building, also are exempt from this
fee.
B. Earthquake Fee Residential: $10 per each $100,000 of building valuation.
Commercial: $20 per each $100,000 of building valuation.
Valuation. The determination of value or valuation under any provisions of the County Building
Code shall be made by the Director of Conservation and Development. The total valuation to be
used with the Fee Schedule shall be determined using the Building Valuation Data contained in
the Building Safety Journal, published by the International Code Council (ICC) or in the
Successor magazine published by the ICC or its Succesor organization. The data in the March-
April issue of each year shall be used for the ensuing fiscal year. Work not listed in the Building
Valuation Data shall be valued per the Building Valuation Data Supplement below, which may be
modified administratively by the Director of Conservation and Development to clarify or cover
additional types of work and situations.
The valuation to be used in computing the building permit fee shall be the total valuation of all
construction work for which the permit is issued, as well as all finish work, painting, roofing,
mechanical, electrical, plumbing, heating, air conditioning, elevators, fire extinguishing systems,
and any other permanently installed equipment. For industrial facilities, the value of process
equipment and heavy machinery supported by the structure or by its own foundation shall be
included. Contractor overhead and profit shall be included.
The valuation of grading, retaining walls, paving and other site work, and any demolition work,
shall be included unless such work was included in other permits issued by the Department of
Conservation and Development.
The valuation data is used to establish consistent criteria for calculating permit fees, and the
calculated total valuation does not necessarily reflect actual costs. The County Assessor does not
rely on this cost, but performs independent assessments of the permitted work.
BUILDING VALUATION DATA SUPPLEMENT
The work listed in this supplement shall be valued based on the gross square footage of the work, or where
noted, as a lump sum. Where actual costs are higher, those costs shall be used for the valuation.
$/Sq.Ft.
1. Residential addition
-Good Quality
-Average Quality
94.80
69.04
Deleted: Building Inspection
Deleted: Standards Magazine
Deleted: Conference of Building
Officials, Whittier, California
Deleted: expanded
Deleted: Building Inspection
Deleted: Building Inspection
Department
EXHIBIT A
Page 3 of 23
FEE SCHEDULE
2. Residential remodel (to existing floor areas)
If bathrooms are added or remodeled, for each one, add lump sum of
If kitchen is remodeled, add lump sum of
47.40
5,000.00
15,000.00
3. Residential use conversion from garage, basement or unfinished area
-Good Quality
-Average Quality
If bathrooms or kitchen added, include lump sum(s) as for residential
remodel
56.50
33.90
4. Sun room with >60% glazing, cabanas, other similar structures
If conditioned space and integrated with main structure, add
37.10
58.30
5. Patio cover (includes pre-fab types, usually with ICBO research listing)
If enclosed with walls or glazing, add
16.27
31.80
6. Deck 15.90
7. Retaining wall (projected sq.ft. areas of wall and footing)
-concrete or CMU
-wood
10.60
5.30
8. Freestanding fence (projected area)
-concrete or CMU
-wood, chainlink
5.30
3.18
9. Swimming pool, lump sum of 25,000.00
10. Remodel or tenant improvement work in commercial buildings
Type I and II Construction
Type III, IV and V Construction
If restrooms are added or relocated - add lump sum for each
If commercial kitchen is added - add lump sum of
31.80
26.50
10,000.00
30.000.00
11. Reroofing
-Built up, composition shingles, foam
-Treated wood, metal and proprietary products
-Tile - masonry, clay, concrete
3.18
3.71
4.77
12. Mobile home on permanent foundation (based on square footage of mobile
home)
10.60
13. Moved building (for existing s.f. any added s.f. shall be at "average
quality" valuation)
31.80
14. Agricultural/husbandary buildings
-Pole construction
-Wood construction
-Steel construction
9.00
14.00
16.00
B. Electrical Inspection Fees
EXHIBIT A
Page 4 of 23
FEE SCHEDULE
1. New dwelling 15% of the Building Permit Fee.
2. Addition or alteration to dwelling
unit
20% of the Building Permit Fee, $62.25 minimum.
3. New commercial building 25% of the Building Permit Fee, $62.25 minimum.
4. Shell building 5% of the Building Permit Fee, $62.25 minimum.
5. Commercial alterations & tenant
improvements
20% of the Building Permit Fee, $62.25 minimum.
6. Electrical Permit $62.25 minimum. See * note.
* An electrical permit is required for all electrical work regulated by the Electrical Code. Fees for
work not included in Items 1 - 5 above shall be calculated using Table 1-A of the Building Code, and
based on the contract amount of the electrical work. Where such electrical work is performed in
conjunction with a building permit, the fee may be added to that permit, and a separate electrical
permit is not required.
C. Mechanical Inspection Fees
1. New dwelling 10% of the Building Permit Fee.
2. Addition or alteration to dwelling
unit.
15% of the Building Permit Fee, $62.25 minimum.
3. New commercial building 15% of the Building Permit Fee, $62.25 minimum.
4. Shell building 5% of the Building Permit Fee, $62.25 minimum.
5. Commercial alterations & tenant
improvements
10% of the Building Permit Fee, $62.25 minimum.
6. Mechanical Permit $62.25 minimum. See * note below.
* A mechanical permit is required for all mechanical work regulated by the Mechanical Code. Fees
for work not included in Items 1 - 5 above shall be calculated using Table 1-A of the Building Code,
and based on the contract amount of the mechanical work. Where such mechanical work is
performed in conjunction with a building permit, the fee may be added to that permit, and a separate
mechanical permit is not required.
D. Plumbing Inspection Fees
1. New dwelling 15% of the Building Permit Fee.
EXHIBIT A
Page 5 of 23
FEE SCHEDULE
2. Addition or alteration to dwelling
unit.
20% of the Building Permit Fee, $62.25 minimum.
3. New commercial building 20% of the Building Permit Fee, $62.25 minimum.
4. Shell building 5% of the Building Permit Fee, $62.25 minimum.
5. Commercial alterations & tenant
improvements
15% of the Building Permit Fee, $62.25 minimum.
6. Plumbing Permit $62.25 minimum. See * note below.
* A plumbing permit is required for all plumbing work regulated by the Plumbing Code. Fees for
work not included in Items 1 - 5 above shall be calculated using Table 1-A of the Building Code, and
based on the contract amount of the work. Where such plumbing work is performed in conjunction
with a building permit, the fee may be added to that permit, and a separate plumbing permit is not
required.
E. Miscellaneous Fees
1. Reinspections. When return trips to the site by an inspector are necessary as specified below, a
reinspection fee shall be charged as follows:
a. For building permits with total valuations not exceeding $5,000, $25 per trip.
b. For building permits with total valuations of more than $5,000, $60 per trip.
c. For electrical, mechanical and plumbing permits on residential buildings, $25 per trip.
d. For electrical, mechanical and plumbing permits on non-residential buildings, $60 per trip.
Situations where reinspection fees shall be applicable include the following:
a. When the work for a called inspection is not ready or not accessible to the inspector.
b. When extra inspections are necessary due to deficient or defective work through fault or
error of the owner or contractor. One such extra inspection will be made for each phase of work
that requires inspection (i.e. foundation, rough electric, etc.) under the regular fees prescribed in
this section. A reinspection fee shall be charged for each additional visit or inspection thereafter.
c. When more than one inspection is made on a phase of work (i.e. "partial inspections") that
normally is inspected in one trip. The fee may be waived when partial inspections are necessary
due to the large size of the project, or when the inspections do not adversely affect the efficiency
of the inspector.
EXHIBIT A
Page 6 of 23
FEE SCHEDULE
2. Owner-requested inspection of an existing building. The fee shall be based on an hourly rate @ $60
per hour, with 1 hour minimum. If overtime is required the rate shall be $180 per hour with a one
hour minimum.
3. Inspection for Change of Occupancy. The fee shall be based on an hourly rate @ $60 per hour, with
1 hour minimum.
4. Investigation of work without permit. When a Stop Work Notice is issued for work being performed
without permits or performed beyond the scope of existing permits, a special investigation and
inspection shall be made before permits may be issued for such work. An investigation fee shall be
charged equal to two times the amount of all permit fees required by this ordinance, with a minimum
of $100. The fee is additive to the permit fees. This provision shall not apply to emergency work
when it can be proven to the satisfaction of the Director of Building Inspection that such work was
urgently necessary, that it was not practical to obtain a permit before the work was commenced, and
that a permit was applied for as soon as practical.
5. Abatement of code violations.
Building: Abatement costs: When an RF (Report Form) is issued as a result of an inspection of a
property, and compliance is required to correct violations found, or permits are required
to legalize work previously performed without building permits, a code enforcement
cost shall be charged equal to two times the amount of all permit fees required by this
ordinance, with a minimum of $100. Where repeat visits are required before the owner
complies or obtains the required permits, a reinspection cost of $50 per trip shall be
charged after the second trip. Where repeat visits are necessary after compliance or
permit issuance to enforce the abatement work, a reinspection cost of $50 per trip shall
be charged after the second trip. The costs in this section are additive to the permit fees.
Zoning: When Code Enforcement activities are required as a result of an inspection of a property
and compliance is required to correct violations found, or permits are required for
compliance, a code enforcement cost shall be charged equal to the amount of all permit
fees required by this ordinance, with a minimum of $100. Where repeat visits are
required before the owner complies or obtains the required permits, a reinspection cost
of $50 per trip shall be charged. Where repeat visits are necessary after compliance or
permit issuance to enforce the abatement work, a reinspection cost of $50 per trip shall
be charged. The costs in this section are additive to the permit fees.
6. Renewal fee for an expired permit:
• For Final Inspection: 10% of the current building valuation will be used as the basis for the
calculation of the building permit fee.
• For permits that have expired within one year after issuance date: the permit fee will be 50% of
the sum of the original building, electrical, mechanical and plumbing fees.
• For permits that have expired more than one year from issuance date: full fee is applicable.
Deleted: 25
Deleted: 25
Deleted: 25
Deleted: 25
EXHIBIT A
Page 7 of 23
FEE SCHEDULE
S-003 Grading Plan Check/Inspection
Improvement Value:
$100,000 or less
$100,001 to $1,000,000
Over $1,000,000
Additional fee if:
Work goes over 1 year
Work goes over 2 years
Fee:
The greater of 5% or $100.
$5,000 plus 4% of amount in excess of $100,000.
$41,000 plus 3% of amount in excess of $1,000,000.
1% of uncompleted work + $100.
2% of uncompleted work + $100.
S-004 Building Demolition Review $60 permit.
S-005 Mobile Home Park Annual Inspection $25 plus $2 per lot for licensing, plus $4 per mobile home
lot for annual inspection.
S-006 Mobile Home Permit Inspection Application - $20.
Inspection - $100 plus $30 for each half hour over one hour.
Reinspection - $60 plus $30 for each half hour over one
hour.
S-007 Permanent Mobile Home Inspection Same as construction inspection. (S-002)
S-008 R-Form Complaint Investigation Costs are offset by a portion of the 40% surcharge collected
on building permit fees. To the extent surcharge revenues
are insufficient, costs are absorbed by the operations
reserve.
S-009 R-Form Site Investigation $200 per investigation plus County's fully burdened hourly
rates for travel time outside the County.
S-010 County Code Compliance $200 per report.
S-011 Records Information Research Retrieval/research fee: $60 per hour, $15 minimum.
Photocopy charges at published rates.
Documents requested to be certified have an additional
charge:
First page $4.50
Add'l pages $1.00 each
S-012 Subpoena Services Evidence reproduction: $60 per hour, $15 minimum
Witness summons: Time and materials plus mileage, $150
deposit.
S-013 Certificate of Compliance
Review/Determination of Legal Lot
$1,000 minimum deposit, time and materials.
EXHIBIT A
Page 8 of 23
FEE SCHEDULE
S-014 Development Plan Review
(Multiple Family/
Commercial/Office/Industrial)
$6,000 minimum deposit plus
Multiple family: $195 per unit.
Commercial, Office, Industrial: $.20 sq.ft.
Time and materials.
S-015 Development Plan Review
(Exterior Change)
$2,900 minimum deposit. Time and materials.
S-016 Development Plan Review
(No Exterior Change)
$2,000 minimum deposit. Time and materials.
S-017 Time Extension (Administrative) $200 fee.
S-018 Time Extension (Public Hearing) $600 fee.
S-019 General Plan Amendment Review $5,000 plus $100 per acre minimum deposit.
Time and materials. $3,500 non refundable fee for General
Plan Maintenance.
S-019A Specific Plan Amendment $5,000 minimum deposit. Time and materials.
S-019B General Plan Amendment Feasibility
Request
$750 fee credited towards subsequent General Plan
Amendment application.
S-020 General Plan Maintenance Costs are offset by the 40% surcharge on building permit
fees. To the extent such fees are insufficient, costs will be
absorbed by the operations reserve.
S-021 Land Use Permit (Quarry) $5,600 minimum deposit plus $75 per acre.
Time and materials.
S-022 Land Use Permit
(Quarry Reclamation Plan)
$1,780 minimum deposit plus $75 per acre.
Time and materials.
S-023 Land Use Permit
(Caretaker Mobile Home)
$2,000 minimum deposit. Time and materials.
S-024 Land Use Permit
(Family Member Mobile Home)
$750 minimum deposit. Time and materials.
$150 with proof of financial hardship of property owner.
S-025 Land Use Permit
(Residential Care Facility)
$3,000 minimum deposit. Time and materials.
S-026 Land Use Permit (Home Occupation) $300 minimum deposit. Time and materials.
EXHIBIT A
Page 9 of 23
FEE SCHEDULE
S-027 Land Use Permit (Take Out Food) $2,700 minimum deposit. Time and materials.
S-027A Land Use Permit (Second Unit) $1,000 minimum deposit. Time and materials.
S-027B Land Use Permit
(Additional Residence)
$2,000 minimum deposit. Time and materials.
S-028A Land Use Permit
(Development Plan Combination)
$2,000 minimum deposit plus Development Plan deposit.
Time and materials.
S-028B Land Use Permit (Development Plan
Combo, Minor Revisions/Amendments)
$500 minimum deposit. Time and materials.
S-029 Land Use Permit (Other) $2,700 minimum deposit plus ½ % of value of project over
$100,000. Time and materials.
S-029A Land Use Permit
(Solid Waste Disposal Review)
$10,000 minimum deposit. Time and materials.
S-030 Land Use Permit
(Administrative Permit - Gas Well)
$570 minimum deposit. Time and materials.
S-031 Land Use Permit
(Gas Well Ordinance)
$2,060 minimum deposit. Time and materials.
S-032 Lot Line Adjustment Review $50 per adjusted parcel. $500 minimum.
S-033 Tentative Subdivision Map Review -
Major
5-30
lots/units
$5,490 minimum deposit plus $185 per
lot/unit 5-30. Time and materials.
31-100
lots/units
$11,500 minimum deposit plus $96 per
lot/unit 31-100. Time and materials.
101 or
more
lots/units
$18,200 minimum deposit plus $64 per
lot/unit 101 and up. Time and materials.
S-033A Development Agreement $1,000 minimum deposit. Time and materials.
S-033B Development Impact Fee Deferral $ 500 – Agreement must be executed and recorded as lien
on property for deferral of Area of Benefit, Child Care,
Inclusionary Housing, Park Impact, Police Services, and
Traffic Impact Fees. Sunsets December 31, 2011.
S-034 Tentative Subdivision Map Review -
Minor
$4,800 minimum deposit plus $300 per lot/unit.
Time and materials.
Formatted: Justified
EXHIBIT A
Page 10 of 23
FEE SCHEDULE
S-034A Reversion to Acreage $1,500 minimum deposit. Time and materials.
S-035 Condo Conversion
Tentative Map
1 - 30 lots/units $1,910 minimum deposit plus $140 per lot/unit 1 - 30.
31 - 100 lots/units $6,104 minimum deposit plus $105 per lot/unit 31 - 100.
101/or more lots/units $13,454 minimum deposit plus $70 per lot/unit 101 and up.
Time and materials.
S-036 Lot Split $2,000 minimum deposit. Time and materials.
S-036A Undersized Lot Review $150 fee. If public hearing, $500 minimum deposit in
addition to review fee. Time and materials.
S-037 Planned Unit Development
Rezoning Review - Residential
1-30 units $4,185 minimum deposit plus $128 per unit.
1-100 units $8,025 minimum deposit plus $96 per unit 31 - 100.
1-101/up $14,745 minimum deposit plus $64 per unit 101 and up.
Time and materials.
S-038 Planned Unit Development
Rezoning Review -
Commercial/Industrial
$6,200 minimum deposit plus $.15 per sq.ft. of floor area
over 25,000 sq. ft. Time and materials.
S-039A Planned Unit Development
Final Development Plan Review/New
$3,500 minimum deposit. Time and materials.
S-039B Planned Unit Development
Final Development Plan
Review/Non-Substantial Modification
$1,000 minimum deposit. Time and materials.
S-039C Planned Unit Development
Final Development Plan
Review/Substantial Modification
$3,000 minimum deposit. Time and materials.
S-040 Planned Unit Development
Tentative Subdivision Map Review
$2,850 minimum deposit. Time and materials.
S-041 Rezoning Review -
Commercial/Industrial
$6,500 minimum deposit. Time and materials.
S-042 Rezoning Review - Other $2,500 minimum deposit. Time and materials.
S-043 Police Services District Formation $800 fee.
EXHIBIT A
Page 11 of 23
FEE SCHEDULE
S-044 Zone Variance $550 fee.
If public hearing, time and materials with a $1,000 deposit
in addition to variance review fee.
S-045 Sign Review Minor modification $550 fee.
Public hearing Additional $800 deposit towards
time and materials.
S-045A Address Change/Private Road
Name Change
$500 fee plus $100 per address over 10.
S-046 Request for Determination $200 fee.
S-046A Accelerated Review Non-refundable deposit equal to 30% of amount of
consultant contract plus time and materials.
S-047A Zoning Administrator Appeal
- Land Use Permit
$125 filing fee.
Time and materials charged to applicant.
S-047B Zoning Administrator Appeal
- Minor Subdivision
$125 filing fee.
Time and materials charged to applicant.
S-047C Zoning Administrator Appeal
- Major Subdivision
$125 filing fee.
Time and materials charged to applicant.
S-047D Zoning Administrator Appeal
- Other
$125 filing fee.
Time and materials charged to applicant.
S-047E Planning Commission Agenda
Mailing Service
$25 per year plus $5 per year for each additional agenda.
S-048 Fish and Game - Posting Fee
Administrative Fee
$25 fee.
$25 fee.
S-048A Appeal to the Board
- Land Use Permit
$125 filing fee.
Time and materials charged to applicant.
S-048B Appeal to the Board
- Minor Subdivision
$125 filing fee.
Time and materials charged to applicant.
S-048C Appeal to the Board
- Major Subdivision
$125 filing fee.
Time and materials charged to applicant.
S-048D Appeal to the Board
- Other
$125 filing fee.
Time and materials charged to applicant.
EXHIBIT A
Page 12 of 23
FEE SCHEDULE
S-049 Reconsideration Review $125 filing fee. Time and materials.
S-049A Condition of Approval
Modification Review
$500 fee. Time and materials with $1,000 deposit if
modification goes to public hearing.
S-049B Modification of Official
Document
$250 fee.
S-050 Agricultural Preserve
Rezoning Review
$1,000 minimum deposit. Time and materials.
S-050A Agricultural Preserve Contract $500 deposit. Time and materials.
S-051 Agricultural Preserve
Cancellation Review
$5,400 minimum deposit. Time and materials.
S-051A Preapplication Review
Minor Subdivision, Minor
Land Use Permit, Development
Permit (Not more than one
building)
Major Subdivision
up to 100 lots
101 - 250 lots
Major Residential, Commercial or
Industrial Development
(More than one building)
$500 fee. All additional costs charged to future application,
credit given for fee paid.
$750 fee. All additional costs charged to future application,
credit given for fee paid.
$950 fee. All additional costs charged to future application,
credit given for fee paid.
$1,000 fee. All additional costs charged to future
application, credit given for fee paid.
S-051B Agricultural Preserve
Non-Renewal Notice
$300 minimum deposit. Time and materials.
S-051C Annual Review of Quarry Reclamation $1,000 fee plus $2 per acre.
S-051D Permit for Alteration of Protected
Trees (multiple)
$300 fee plus $50 per tree over 6 trees up to a maximum of
$550. If public hearing additional $1,000 plus time and
materials.
S-051E Permit for Alteration of Protected
Tree (single)
$25/tree. Time and materials.
EXHIBIT A
Page 13 of 23
FEE SCHEDULE
S-051F Heritage Tree (appeal) $50 minimum deposit plus time and materials.
S-051G Heritage Tree (nomination) $100 fee per tree.
S-051H Heritage Tree (removal permit) $1,000 minimum deposit plus time and materials.
S-051J Heritage Tree
(encroachment permit)
$500 minimum deposit plus time and materials.
S-052 Planning Surcharge 40% surcharge on building permits.
S-052A Fee Services Clerical Costs to be offset by a portion of the Planning Surcharge.
To the extent such revenues are insufficient, costs will be
absorbed by the operations reserve.
S-052B Notification List Services $1.50 per address plus $30.
S-053 Mitigation/ Condition of Approval
Compliance Monitoring
$1,500 minimum deposit plus time and materials.
S-056 Hazardous Waste Application
Review
Determination
Monitoring 86/100
Mitigation Monitoring
(non 86/100)
$2,440 minimum deposit plus time and materials.
$2,900/year minimum deposit plus time and materials.
Time and materials.
S-057 Environmental Impact Review Contract amount plus 30% administrative surcharge.
Time and materials.
S-059 County Water Agency Wetland Review $500 minimum deposit. Time and materials.
S-060 Records Information Research Retrieval/research fee: $60 per hour, $15 minimum.
Photocopy charges at published rates.
Documents requested to be certified have an additional
charge:
First page $4.50.
Add'l pages $1.00 each.
EXHIBIT A
Page 14 of 23
FEE SCHEDULE
S-060A Geologic Review Contract amount. Time and materials.
Major Subdivision: Deposit of $750
Minor Subdivision: Deposit of $1,500
Others: Deposit based on estimated
contract amount.
Deposit to be paid at submittal application or submittal of
soil report whichever is earlier.
S-060B Landscaping and Tree
Protection Agreement
Time and materials charged against $100 minimum initial
deposit.
S-060C COA Compliance Check for
Building Permit Issuance
Minor Developments -
Major Developments -
$500 minimum deposit.
Time and materials.
$1,000 minimum deposit.
Time and materials.
S-060D Liquor License Site Determination $525 fee
S-060E Gun Ordinance Annual License $250 fee.
S-060F Deemed Approved Annual Fee $400 yearly fee per ABC license
S-060G Subpoena Services Evidence reproduction: $60 per hour, $15 minimum.
Witness summons: Time and materials plus mileage, $150
deposit.
S-060H Temporary Events $150 Deposit – Time and materials - $2,500 cap.
S-061 Growth Management Task Force
Review
Costs offset by portion of 40% surcharge on Building
Review Permit fees. To the extent such revenues are
insufficient, costs will be absorbed by the operations
reserve.
S-062 Growth Management Plan CCTA funds program annually, as long as County was in
compliance in prior year. Allocation of funding internally is
determined by the Board of Supervisors.
Excess costs over annual funding determined by Board of
Supervisors is offset by 40% surcharge on building permit
fees and the operations reserve.
S-063 California Environmental Quality Act
Review County Projects - Non EIR
Time and materials excluding general overhead.
S-064 California Environmental Quality Act
Review County Projects -EIR
Time and materials excluding general overhead.
S-065 Child Care Application Review $1,000 minimum deposit. Time and materials.
EXHIBIT A
Page 15 of 23
FEE SCHEDULE
S-066 Code Enforcement Costs are offset by 40% surcharge on building permit fees.
To the extent such revenues are insufficient, costs will be
absorbed by the operations reserve.
S-066A Late Filing of Development Permit
Application
Non refundable penalty equal to 50% of application fee or
deposit amount.
S-067 Counter Information Costs are offset by 40% surcharge on building permit fees.
To the extent such revenues are insufficient, costs will be
absorbed by the operations reserve.
FEES FOR NORTH RICHMOND PLANNED-UNIT DISTRICT AREA
S-NR01 Administrative Permits $150 fee, plus time and materials.
S-NR02 Land Use Permit – Automotive Uses $1,000 deposit, plus time and materials.
S-NR03 Land Use Permit $500 deposit, plus time and materials.
S-NR04 Development Permit $1,000 deposit, plus time and materials.
S-NR05 Lot Line Adjustment $150 fee per parcel, plus time and materials.
S-NR06 Annual Monitoring Fee $50 fee, plus time and materials.
S-NR07 Home Occupation $50 fee, plus time and materials.
FEES FOR RODEO PLANNED-UNIT DISTRICT AREA
S-RD01 Administrative Permits $150 fee, plus time and materials.
S-RD02 Land Use Permit – Automotive Uses $1,000 deposit, plus time and materials.
S-RD03 Land Use Permit $500 deposit, plus time and materials.
S-RD04 Development Permit $1,000 deposit, plus time and materials.
S-RD05 Lot Line Adjustment $150 fee per parcel, plus time and materials.
S-RD06 Annual Monitoring Fee $50 fee, plus time and materials.
S-RD07 Home Occupation $50 fee, plus time and materials.
FEES FOR BAY POINT PLANNED-UNIT DISTRICT AREA
EXHIBIT A
Page 16 of 23
FEE SCHEDULE
S-BP01 Administrative Permits $150 fee, plus time and materials.
S-BP02 Land Use Permit - Automotive Uses $1,000 deposit, plus time and materials.
S-BP03 Land Use Permit $500 deposit, plus time and materials.
S-BP04 Development Permit $1,000 deposit, plus time and materials.
S-BP05 Lot Line Adjustment $150 fee per parcel, plus time and materials.
S-BP06 Annual Monitoring Fee $50 fee, plus time and materials.
S-BP07 Home Occupation $50 fee, plus time and materials.
FEES FOR MONTALVIN MANOR PLANNED-UNIT DISTRICT AREA *
S-
MM01
Administrative Permits $150 fee, plus time and materials.
S-
MM02
Land Use Permit – Automotive Uses $1,000 deposit, plus time and materials.
S-
MM03
Land Use Permit $500 deposit, plus time and materials.
S-
MM04
Development Permit $1,000 deposit, plus time and materials.
S-
MM05
Lot Line Adjustment $150 fee per parcel, plus time and materials.
S-
MM06
Annual Monitoring Fee $50 fee, plus time and materials.
S-
MM07
Home Occupation $50 fee, plus time and materials.
*Effective July, 2009 to June, 2010 roof conversions (flat to pitch), porch cover/roof extensions, second-story
additions, room additions to rear of dwelling, carport conversions to garage, carport conversions to living space,
and garage conversions to living space are exempt from building permit fees but must comply with all required
building codes and standards, health and safety standards, and the requirements of the Montalvin Manor P-1
zoning district.
AFFORDABLE HOUSING REFINANCING PROCESS FEES
EXHIBIT A
Page 17 of 23
FEE SCHEDULE
S-
HM01
Multi-Family Affordable Housing
Refinancing Fee
$1,000 deposit plus time and materials.
S-HS01 Single-Family Affordable Housing
Refinancing Fee
$350 deposit plus time and materials.
S-
MCC01
Mortgage Credit Certificate Insurance $300 deposit plus time and materials.
S-
RMCC
1
Reissued Mortgage Credit Certificate $300 deposit plus time and materials.
S-
MCC02
Replacement lost mortgage credit and
reissued mortgage credit certificate
$100 deposit plus time and materials.
S-
MCC03
$400 deposit plus time and materials.
S-
MCC04
$200 deposit plus time and materials.
IN-LIEU FEES FOR INCLUSIONARY HOUSING ORDINANCE – APPLIES TO PROJECTS WITH 5
THROUGH 125 UNITS ONLY. FEES ARE NOT ALLOWED ON PROJECTS WITH MORE THAN 125
UNITS EXCEPT FOR FRACTIONAL UNITS
Fees are one option for compliance. See Ordinance for requirements and options for any project of five or more
units. Fees may be paid on a fraction of a unit if the calculation of the required number of inclusionary units in a
project results in a fraction of a unit.
Developments of 5 or more units must provide 15% of the units as affordable.
For-sale developments must have 80% of the inclusionary units (12% of total units) as affordable to moderate
income households and 20% of the inclusionary units (3% of total units) as affordable to lower income
households.
Rental developments must have 80% of the inclusionary units (12% of total units) as affordable to lower income
households and 20% of the inclusionary units (3% of total units) as affordable to very-low income households.
Refer to Ordinance for income definitions.
Fee amounts are based on the formula in Section 822.4404(b) of the ordinance.
S-IH1 FOR SALE HOUSING Fee equals 12% of total number of units in the development
times $0 plus 3% of total number of units in the
development times $129,163; i.e.,
[(0.12 x total units)($0) + (0.03 x total units)($129,163) or
$3,874.89 per market rate unit.]
EXHIBIT A
Page 18 of 23
FEE SCHEDULE
S-IH2 RENTAL HOUSING Fee equals 12% of total number of units in the development
times $151,965 plus 3% of total number of units in the
development times $284,625; i.e.,
[(0.12 x total units)($151,965) + (0.03 x total
units)($284,625) or $26,774.55 per rental unit.]
S-068 Final Map Check (Major) Deposit of $1,500 plus $25 per lot. 50% surcharge for
accelerated review if available.
Lot line revisions after the first check $25 per affected lot.
Time and materials.
S-069 Parcel Map Check Deposit of $1,500 plus $25 per lot. 50% surcharge for
accelerated review if available.
Lot line revisions after the first check are $25 per affected
lot. Time and materials.
S-070 Record of Survey Check The fee is actual time at the County's fully burdened hourly
rates charged against an initial deposit of $500, and
additional deposits as necessary. The minimum fee is $200.
S-072 Public Improvement Plan Check
(Major)
Based on Improvement Value:
$25,000 or less
$25,001-$50,000
More than $50,000
Deposit of:
$1,500 + 8% of improvement value.
$3,500 + 6% of amount over $25,000.
$5,000 + 2% of amount over $50,000.
Time and materials. 50% surcharge for accelerated review if
available.
S-073 Public Improvement Plan Check
(Minor)
Based on Improvement Value:
$25,000 or less
$25,001-$50,000
More than $50,000
Deposit of:
$1,500 + 8% of improvement value.
$3,500 + 6% of amount over $25,000.
$5,000 + 2% of amount over $50,000.
Time and materials. 50% surcharge for accelerated review if
available.
S-074A Public Improvement Plan Check
(LUP)
Based on Improvement Value:
$25,000 or less
$25,001-$50,000
More than $50,000
Deposit of:
$1,500 + 8% of improvement value.
$3,500 + 6% of amount over $25,000.
$5,000 + 2% of amount over $50,000.
Time and materials. 50% surcharge for accelerated review if
available.
EXHIBIT A
Page 19 of 23
FEE SCHEDULE
S-075 Public Improvement Plan Check
(Development Plan)
Based on Improvement Value:
$25,000 or less
$25,001-$50,000
More than $50,000
Deposit of:
$1,500 + 8% of improvement value.
$3,500 + 6% of amount over $25,000.
$5,000 + 2% of amount over $50,000.
Time and materials. 50% surcharge for accelerated review if
available.
S-076 Drainage Review
(No Improvement Plan)
$700 deposit. Time and materials.
S-076A Condition of Approval Compliance
Check (No Improvement Plan)
$1,000 deposit. Time and materials.
S-076B Improvement Agreement Extension $250 if documents signed and submitted 21 days before
agreement expires, $400 thereafter.
S-076C Public Improvement Plan
-Bridge/Major Structure
$2,000 + 6% of improvement value.
Time and materials.
S-077 Public Improvement Inspection
(Major)
Based on Improvement Value:
$100,000 or less
$100,001 or more
Deposit of:
$1,500 + 6.5% of improvement value.
$3,500 + 4.5% of amount over $101,000.
Time and materials.
M & T Lab retests at scheduled test prices.
S-077A Public Improvement Inspection -
Bridge/Major Structure
Deposit of:
$1,500 + 7% of improvement value.
Time and materials.
M & T Lab retests at scheduled test prices.
S-078 Public Improvement Inspection
(Minor)
Based on Improvement Value:
$100,000 or less
$100,001 or more
Deposit of:
$1,500 + 6.5% of improvement value.
$8,000 + 4.5% of amount over $100,000.
Time and materials.
M & T Lab retests at scheduled test prices.
EXHIBIT A
Page 20 of 23
FEE SCHEDULE
S-079 Public Improvement Inspection
(Land Use Permit)
Based on Improvement Value:
$100,000 or less
$100,001 or more
Deposit of:
$1,500 + 6.5% of improvement value.
$8,000 + 4.5% of amount over $100,000.
Time and materials.
M & T Lab retests at scheduled test prices.
S-080A Public Improvement Inspection
(Development Plan)
Based on Improvement Value:
$100,000 or less
$100,001 or more
Deposit of:
$1,500 + 6.5% of improvement value.
$8,000 + 4.5% of amount over $100,000.
Time and materials.
M & T Lab retests at scheduled test prices.
S-081C Public Improvement Plan Review -
Landscaping
$500 deposit plus 2% of improvement value.
Time and materials.
S-081D Subdivision Monument Check 1 -2 monuments $500.00
3 -5 monuments $750.00
6-9 monuments (per monument) $125.00
10 or more monuments (per monument) $120.00
Time and materials.
S-081E Application Review -
Encroachment Permit (small)
(driveway, sidewalk repairs,
small retaining walls, sewer
laterals or water service by
property owner, etc.)
$35.00 fee plus $500 cash bond required for work in the
street.
S-081F Application Review -
Encroachment Permit (large)
Deposit determined by staff based on valuation with a $300
initial deposit. One hour minimum. Time and materials at
fully burdened hourly rates. Bond may be required.
S-081G Application Review -
Encroachment Permit (utilities)
Time and materials using fully burdened hourly rates. One
hour minimum.
"Blanket" permit style services are available upon request
for routine utility work within the right of way.
S-082B Public Improvement Inspection -
Landscaping
$500 plus 8% of improvement value.
Time and materials.
EXHIBIT A
Page 21 of 23
FEE SCHEDULE
S-082C Encroachment Permit Inspection
(small)
(driveways, sidewalk repairs,
small retaining walls, etc.)
$100 fee. Unpermitted inspection fee is double inspection
and permit fee.
Non-notification for inspection: $100 plus time and
materials.
S-082D Encroachment Permit Inspection
(large)
(If engineering plans required for
street excavation)
Time and materials. One hour minimum.
$300 + $1,000 initial deposit charged at time and materials.
Non-notification for inspection: $100 plus time and
materials.
S-082E Encroachment Permit Inspection
(utilities)
Time and materials. One hour minimum.
$300 + $1,000 initial deposit charged at time and materials.
Non-notification for inspection: $100 plus time and
materials.
S-083 Flood Control District
Encroachment
Construction Permit Review - Time and materials.
$400 initial deposit.
Inspections - Time and materials. Initial deposit is the larger
of $1,000 or 10% of project valuation.
Temporary Right of Entry - Time and materials. $400 initial
deposit.
Non-inspection Notification for Permitted Work - $100 plus
actual cost of inspection.
S-084A Drainage Permit Application Time and materials against initial deposit determined by
staff.
$100 minimum.
S-084B Drainage Permit Inspection Time and materials against initial deposit determined by
staff.
$100 minimum.
S-085A Miscellaneous Road Permit
Application (house move)
Time and materials. $500 initial deposit.
S-085B Miscellaneous Road Permit
Application (house move inspection)
Time and materials. $500 initial deposit.
S-085C Miscellaneous Road Permit
Application (extra legal load)
Permit fee set by State. Premium billing service
$100 per year plus $100 security deposit.
EXHIBIT A
Page 22 of 23
FEE SCHEDULE
S-085D Miscellaneous Road Permit
Application (temporary road closure -
construction)
For-profit applicant $300.00
Not-for-profit applicant $35.00
S-085E Miscellaneous Road Permit
Application (temporary road closure -
special events)
For-profit applicant $300.00
Not-for-profit applicant $35.00
S-085F Miscellaneous Road Permit
Application (extension/modification)
$125 per extension/modification.
S-085G Road Acceptance Plan Review Same as S-072, S-073, S-074A, S-075 as applicable.
Time and materials.
S-085H Road Acceptance Inspection Same as S-077, S-078, or S-080A as applicable.
Time and materials.
S-086 Street Vacation Review If an in-use area:
Actual time spent at County's fully burdened hourly
rates charged against a $1,700 deposit.
If an unused area:
Actual time spent at County's fully burdened hourly
rates charged against a $900 deposit.
Additional mapping fee if map is required, as follows:
If map exists:
Actual time spent at County's fully burdened
hourly rates charged against a $1,000 deposit.
If no map exists:
Time and materials against a $2,700 deposit.
S-086A Floodplain Management Compliance $30 per parcel.
S-086B Flood Zone/Base Flood Elevation
Determination
Flood Zone Determination: $50 per lot, $300 maximum for
a group of adjacent lots. If site visit required: $250 plus $50
per lot; $550 maximum for a group of adjacent lots.
Base Flood Elevation: Time and materials, initial deposit
determined by staff based upon complexity of project.
S-086C Floodplain Management Permit
Application
$325 per application. Time and materials.
S-086D Floodplain Elevation Certification $200 per lot.
S-086E Floodplain Map
Revision/Amendment
Floodplain Map Amendment: $500.
Base map revision, $35 per lot.
Time and materials.
EXHIBIT A
Page 23 of 23
FEE SCHEDULE
S-087 Assessment District Bond
Segregation
Segregation initiated by owner or County: $1,000 + $30 per
lot.
Segregation initiated by developer’s engineer: time and
materials. $200 initial deposit. $100 minimum.
S-088 Certificate of Correction Time and materials. $500.00 initial deposit.
S-088A Adopt-a-Road $500 per application.
S-088B Adopt-a-Park $250 per application.
S-088C Road Name Change
(public road)
$200 plus $200 installation charge for first intersection,
$50 per intersection thereafter.
S-088D Corner Record Check Fee same as fee for recording a document at the Recorder's
Office.
S-088F Base Map Revision $25 per lot. This fee is waived if the parcel maps or final
maps are submitted on computer disk.
S-088H Amended Map Revision Time and materials plus base map revision fee of $25 per
lot for altered lots. $1,000 initial deposit.
S-088I Records Information Research/
Survey Assistance
Retrieval/Research fee:
$60 per hour, $15 minimum.
Photocopy charges at published rates.
Documents requested to be certified have an additional
charge:
First page $4.50
Add'l pages $1.00 each
S-088J Subpoena Services Evidence reproduction: $60 per hour, $15 minimum.
Witness summons: Time and materials plus mileage, $150
deposit.
S-088L Computer Map and Data Requests Prices to be set using time and materials, including the cost
of data development.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
OPEN the public hearing on Ordinance No. 2009-34, RECEIVE testimony, and CLOSE the hearing.
ADOPT Ordinance NO. 2009-34 establishing a $1 fee on each recorded document in order to implement and operate
an electronic recording delivery system.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This fee will generate approximately $300,000 per year to pay for the implementation and ongoing costs of the
Electronic Recording Delivery System.
BACKGROUND:
AB 578 established the Electronic Recording Delivery Act of 2004 (Article 6 of Chapter 6 of Part 3 of Division 4 of
Title 1 of the Government Code). This act provided for the California Attorney General's office to develop and adopt
regulations for review, approval, and
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: B. Chambers 335-7910
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc:
SD. 5
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Stephen L. Weir, Clerk-Recorder
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Public Hearing and adoption of Ordinance for Electronic Recording Delivery System
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
oversight of electronic recording delivery systems. These regulations provide for system certification and security
audits of the system and the users. Electronic Recordng Delivery System means a system to electronically deliver
for recording, and to return to the party requesting recording, digitized or digital electronic records.
In order to pay costs under this section, Government Code sections 27397 allows a county to impose a fee in an
amount up to and including one dollar ($1.00) for each instrument that is recorded by a county. The funds
generated by the fee can only be used to pay for the implementation and operation of the electronic recording
delivery system, the delivery and approval of vendors and potential authorized submitters, security testing as
required by Government Code sections 27300 through 27399, and reimbursement to the California Attorney
General for regulation and oversight of the electronic recording delivery system.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
The Clerk-Recorder would have to fund the electronic recording delivery system by another funding mechanism
(potentially with General Fund monies) or not participate in this time and cost saving new technology.
CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT:
ATTACHMENTS
ERDS Ordinance
RECOMMENDATION(S):
1. OPEN the public hearing on Resolution No. 2009/551, RECEIVE testimony, and CLOSE the hearing.
2. ADOPT Resolution No. 2009/551 establishing a $10 base fee for recording and indexing the first page of every
document required or permitted to be recorded.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The increase in fees will generate approximately $1,800,000 in new revenues each year, depending on the volume of
documents that are recorded.
BACKGROUND:
An analysis was conducted with the assistance of the Auditor/Controller to determine the current costs associated
with processing documents to be recorded and indexed. The analysis shows that Contra Costa County does not
recover the full costs it incurs in providing those services. Adoption of the new fees will allow
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: B. Chambers 335-7910
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc:
SD. 6
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Stephen L. Weir, Clerk-Recorder
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:SB 676 Recording fees
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
the County to recover most of the costs of providing the mandated duties of recording and indexing documents for
the public record. Tables showing the Recorder fee calculations were made available to the public before the
introduction of this resolution.
SB 676 (Chapter 606) Section 2 Government Code 27361 is amended to read: 27361. (a) The fee for recording
and indexing every instrument, paper or notice required or permitted by law to be recorded shall not exceed ten
dollars ($10) for recording the first page and three dollars ($3) for each additional page, to reimburse the county
for the costs of services rendered pursuant to this subdivision.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
Failure to increase the base recording fee will cause the county to not be able to collect new revenues, customer
service will remain at the reduced level and the County will not be able to recover most of the cost to provide the
recording and indexing services.
CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT:
ATTACHMENTS
Resolution No. 2009/551
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board
Adopted this Resolution on 12/15/2009 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
RECUSE:
Resolution No. 2009/551
A resolution of the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors to increase recording and indexing fees.
Whereas:
Effective January 1, 2010, Government Code section 27361 authorizes the County Clerk-Recorder to charge a maximum base
fee of $10 for recording and indexing the first page of every instrument, paper, or notice required or permitted to be recorded;
Whereas:
The County Clerk-Recorder has conducted a fee study that determines that charging a base fee of $10 for recording and indexing
the first page of every instrument, paper, or notice required or permitted by law to be recorded, and charging a base fee of $3 for
recording and indexing each additional page, does not exceed the amount required to provide the service of recording and
indexing every instrument, paper, or notice required or permitted to be recorded. The Clerk-Recorder currently charges a base fee
of $4 for recording and indexing the first page of every instrument, paper, or notice required or permitted to be recorded and a
base fee of $3 for recording each additional page;
Whereas:
This resolution is adopted pursuant to the procedures set forth in Government Code section 66018. All required notices have been
properly given and public hearings held.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
On and after February 1, 2010, or on and after the adoption date of this resolution, whichever is later, the following base fee is
adopted and shall be charged and collected for the service set forth below:
Service
Fee
Recording and indexing the first page of
every instrument, paper, or notice
required or permitted by law to be recorded
$10
2. All other Clerk-Recorder fees remain in full force and effect, including the $3 base fee for recording and indexing each
additional page of a document following the first page.
3. The Clerk-Recorder fee schedule shall be revised to be consistent with this resolution.
Contact: B. Chambers 335-7910
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: , Deputy
cc:
RECOMMENDATION(S):
ADOPT Resolution No. 2009/583, approving the Side Letter between Contra Costa County and Public Employees
Union, Local One regarding the County's decision to enter into a contract with The P.C. Professional Incorporation
and approving and authorizing the Health Services Director, or his designee to execute the contract in an amount not
to exceed $378,000 for the period from November 1, 2009 through October 31, 2010. (100% Enterprise Fund I)
FISCAL IMPACT:
The contract is funded 100% by Enterprise Fund I revenues.
BACKGROUND:
The contract encompasses subcontracted work that is arguably within the Local One Bargaining Unit. The parties
have met and conferred and agreed to allow limited subcontracting to continue.
The Department requires temporary supplemental personnel when needed to complete projects that require
computer technical services in a timely manner.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Ted J. Cwiek, 335-1766
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc: County Administrator, County Counsel, Auditor-Controller, Human Resources Department, Human Resources Department
SD. 7
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Ted Cwiek, Human Resources Director
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Side Letter Agreement Between Contra Costa County and Public Employees Union, Local One - Contract with The
P.C. Professional Incorporation
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
On December 9, 2008, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #23 423 1 (as amended by Amendment
Agreement #23-423-2) with the PC Professional Incorporation to provide consultation and technical assistance to
the
Department’s Information Systems Unit with regard to technical support services, as requested by County, for the
period from November 1, 2008 through October 31, 2009.
Approval of Contract #23-423-3 will allow the Contractor to continue to provide services, through October 31,
2010.
Services requested under this contract will be in compliance with the side letter.
ATTACHMENTS
Resolution No. 2009/583
Side Letter
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board
Adopted this Resolution on 12/15/2009 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
RECUSE:
Resolution No. 2009/583
SUBJECT: In the Matter of Adopting the Side Letter Agreement between Contra Costa County and Public Employees
Union, Local One
WHEREAS the contract with P.C. Professional Incorporation encompasses subcontracted work that is arguably within the Local
One Bargaining Unit. The parties have met and conferred and agreed to allow limited subcontracting to continue.
Now, Therefore, Be It Resolved that the Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County ADOPT the Side Letter Agreement
between Contra Costa County and Public Employees Union, Local One.
Contact: Ted J. Cwiek, 335-1766
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: , Deputy
cc: County Administrator, County Counsel, Auditor-Controller, Human Resources Department, Human Resources Department
RECOMMENDATION(S):
DECLARE the Board’s intent to adopt a FY 2010/11 General Fund budget that balances annual expenses and
revenues;
1.
ACKNOWLEDGE that significant progress had been made in recent years towards restoring the County’s
fiscal health;
2.
ACKNOWLEDGE that significant economic stresses have reduced reserves recently;3.
ACKNOWLEDGE that restoration of reserves and an improved credit rating is a priority; 4.
ACKNOWLEDGE that due to State deficit projections, State revenue reductions to counties are likely to be
significant;
5.
RE-AFFIRM the Board’s Policy prohibiting back-filling State cuts with General Purpose Revenue;6.
DIRECT Department Heads to work closely with the County Administrator to achieve a balanced budget that
minimizes net County cost while continuing core service delivery levels;
7.
DIRECT Departments, in cooperation with Labor Relations, to begin if necessary the meet and confer process
with employee representatives regarding the impact of potential program reductions on the terms and
conditions of employment for affected employees;
8.
9.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:Speaker: Rollie Katz, Public Employees' Union, Local 1.
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor
Contact: Lisa Driscoll, County Finance Director,
925-335-1023
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board
of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc: All County Departments, Lisa Driscoll, County Finance Director, Laura Strobel, Budget System Administrator, Marie Rulloda, Budgets/Auditor-Controller
SD. 8
To:Board of Supervisors
From:David Twa, County Administrator
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:FY 2010/11 Recommended Budget Development
RECOMMENDATION(S): (CONT'D)
DIRECT the County Administrator to return to the Board April 20 with a FY 2010/11 Recommended Budget that
meets the above requirements;
DESIGNATE Tuesday, April 20 for FY 2010/11 budget hearings (including Bielenson hearings if needed); and
Tuesday, May 11 for adoption of the FY 2010/11 County and Special District Budgets; and
DIRECT the Clerk of the Board to publish notice of the budget hearings and availability of budget documents.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None. However, the result of the recommendations herein, if implemented, will improve the County’s overall fiscal
stability and multi-year outlook.
BACKGROUND:
The recommended actions today will direct the County Administrator to return April 20 with a Recommended
Budget that balances expenses with revenues for the 2010/11 fiscal year. This action follows both the Budget and
Reserve Policy. Building on labor concessions made this year, we plan an approach that will minimize service
reductions as much as possible. Unfortunately, the fiscal projection does not yet appear to provide the opportunity to
rebuild services and reserves. Especially in light of a projected State deficit of $20 billion.
Recommended Budget Development
There are many challenges that the County will face in the coming fiscal year, not all of which stem from the State
budget. The County Administrator believes there will be further decline in local property tax and other general
purpose and program revenues used to fund the baseline cost of services into FY 2010/11. Although the County has
sustained most of the structural cuts that balanced the last five County budgets, many one-time solutions were used to
balance the current fiscal year, which creates a gap for FY 2010/11.
Additionally, there are factors over which the County has little or no control (such as Federal and State budgets,
economic changes, and demographics) that will affect the ultimate size of the baseline budget and ultimately the
County’s budget challenge. Department Heads will be expected to work closely with the County Administrator to
achieve a balanced budget that restricts net County cost growth while minimizing service delivery cuts. Wherever
possible, categorical/ program revenues will be increased to offset increased cost of doing business. Restrictions on
increases in net County cost needed to balance the budget may result in the loss of federal and State program
revenues, and this added loss may cause program reductions.
Meet and Confer
Departmental budget requests are due to the County Administrator’s Office on February 22. At that time Department
Heads will know which, if any, positions may be affected by reductions necessary to balance the budget.
Departments, in cooperation with Labor Relations, will if necessary, begin the meet and confer process with
employee representatives regarding the impact of potential program reductions on the terms and conditions of
employment for affected employees. Early planning will allow Departments a reasonable period of time to meet and
confer, and permit them to implement all budgetary required actions prior to July 1, 2010. As with the last four fiscal
years, this progress will allow the County to adopt a budget that is balanced from the first day of the new fiscal year.
Public Notice
The County Budget Act requires that the Board of Supervisors publish a notice in a newspaper of general circulation
throughout the county, stating when budget documents will be available and the date of Budget Hearings. The FY
2010/11 Proposed Budget document will be available to the public on April 9, 2010.
Conclusion
The County Administrator will return to the Board on April 20 with a FY 2010/11 Recommended Budget that meets
the requirements listed above. Tuesday, April 20 will be reserved for FY 2010/11 budget hearings including
Bielenson hearings if needed. Additionally, it is recommended that the County Administrator return to the Board of
Supervisors on Tuesday, May 11 for adoption of the FY 2010/11 County and Special District Budgets, including any
changes the Board makes on April 20.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT:
FISCAL
IMPACT:
None
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:Speaker: Rollie Katz, Public Employees' Union, Local 1.
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Luis Quinonez 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: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc:
SD. 9
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Susan A. Bonilla, District IV Supervisor
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Support Repair California's efforts to convene a limited Constitutional Convention
ATTACHMENTS
Resolution No. 2009/556
Repair CA Fact Sheet
Repair CA FAQ
Repair CA Delegate
Selection
Repair CA Polling Place
In the matter of:Resolution No. 2009/556
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY SUPPORT FOR REPAIR CALIFORNIA’S BALLOT MEASURES CONVENING A
STATE CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION
WHEREAS, the Bay Area Council, a business sponsored, public policy organization for the some of the
largest employers in California has created Repair California, a non-partisan, statewide coalition of
individuals and organizations, which advocates for convening a limited Constitutional Convention to repair
California’s governance; and
WHEREAS, California has one of the oldest state Constitutions still in use today and is the world’s third
longest Constitution. With 512 amendments, the Constitution of California is eight times the length of the
U.S. Constitution. When our Constitution was written, the state’s population was nearly 8,000 residents.
Now our state possesses more than 7,000 units of government and more than 36 million residents. Due to
our constitutional challenges, there is no “silver bullet” reform; and
WHEREAS, Repair California will seek to place two measures on the ballot which will be the first
systematic reform of the guiding document of our great state since 1879;
WHEREAS, the first ballot measure will amend the state Constitution to allow for the electorate to call a
Constitutional Convention; the second measure will call and convene a limited state Constitutional
Convention focused on issues of governance; and
WHEREAS, the judicially-enforceable, limited Constitutional Convention will focus solely on issues of
governance, defined as elections, the budget process, revenue distribution, and restoring the balance of
power between the state and local governments; and
WHEREAS, designed to offer certain protection to the people of the Golden state, California’s Constitution
has largely been ignored in Sacramento, where the choice has been made to balance the budget by using
property tax revenues, siphoning gas tax money, and halting important projects by taking redevelopment
funds. Numerous punitive articles shifting power and revenue away from local governments are
permanently locked into the current state Constitution.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Contra Costa Board of Supervisors declares its support for the dual ballot
measures proposed by Repair California to convene a State Constitutional Convention in California to revise the guiding
document of our great state.
___________________
SUSAN A. BONILLA
Chair,
District IV Supervisor
______________________________________
JOHN GIOIA GAYLE B. UILKEMA
District I Supervisor District II Supervisor
______________________________________
MARY N. PIEPHO 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: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa,
By: ____________________________________, Deputy
Constitutional Convention Ballot Measures Fact Sheet
• Repair California filed two ballot measures on October 28, 2009, to call for a limited
state Constitutional Convention. They are currently awaiting title and summary from
the Attorney General.
• The first ballot measure, the Citizens’ Constitutional Convention Act, amends Article 18,
Section 2 of the California Constitution to allow the citizens of California to call for a
Constitutional Convention by the vote of simple majority in a state‐wide election ballot.
o It specifies that a Call for a Convention can be made through the initiative
process, so long as no convention has convened within ten years of such an
election.
o It stipulates that whether a Convention is called through the Legislature (the
current route to a Convention) or through the initiative process (the new route
to a Convention), the Convention call may prescribe judicially enforceable limits
(a limited scope), it authorizes the Convention to propose both a revision or
separate amendments to the Constitution and finally, it allows the call to outline
a fair methods for selecting or electing delegates.
• The second ballot measure, The Call for a Citizens’ Limited Constitutional Convention,
would call for the Convention and set forth the following rules and principals:
o Forms the Constitutional Convention Commission, made up of the Fair Political
Practices Commission or their designees, which will: Incur all costs of the
Convention; determine the date and location of the Convention; hire the
Constitutional Convention Clerk and other staff and counsel; be the final arbiter
of delegate qualification; provide for the training of delegates; determine if
required deadlines should be extended; and, provide any additional assistance as
determined by the Convention.
o Outlines the duties of the Constitutional Convention Clerk who will: Prepare and
manage the Convention budget; establish Convention rules for adoption; serve
as interim‐Chair for Convention until the delegates elect a Chair; hires staff and
provides analysis for the delegates’ deliberation (provided that the delegates
may also call upon the state’s Legislative Analyst or other sources of
information); establish and maintain Convention website; and, oversee the
administration of Convention and other duties determined by the Commission or
the Convention.
o Describes the three different types of delegates to be selected: Assembly District
delegates, County delegates and Indian Tribe delegates.
There will be 240 Assembly District delegates, three from each district.
There will be one County delegate for each 175,000 residents of that
County. If a County has less than 175,000 residents, it will have one
delegate.
There will be four Indian Tribe delegates, serving as representatives of
the federally recognized Indian Tribes in the State.
o Outlines the process by which each type of delegate is selected. (see Delegate
Selection paper)
o Limits the scope of the Convention to the following four categories:
Government Effectiveness, with emphasis on establishing a method for
ensuring government efficiency.
Elections and the Initiative Process, with a focus on reducing special
interest influence.
Spending and Budgeting, relating to the process, term and balancing of
the budget, voting thresholds and mandating spending.
Governance, including the relationship between the state and local
governments and the structure of the legislative and executive branches.
o Further limits the scope of the Convention by dictating that the Convention may
not propose direct tax or fee increases nor shall it address social issues or other
issues related to increasing taxes and changes that could threaten protections on
civil rights.
o Requires the Convention commence no later than May 20, 2011 and the
delegate’s package of proposals will be voted upon no later than at the
November 2012 general election.
o Outlines quorum, voting rules and order of business responsibilities.
o Ensures that all proceedings of the Convention are free and open to the public
and sets forth rules to ensure openness and transparency.
o Note: The parameters governing the proposed Convention set forth in this
initiative and inserted as statutory government code will expire on December 31,
2012, unless otherwise extended by the Legislature.
Repair California: We are a broad‐based coalition of Californians dedicated to achieving real
reforms that are needed to get California functioning again.
Frequently Asked Questions
» What is a Constitutional Convention?
A Constitutional Convention is a gathering of delegates for the purpose of revising an existing constitution or writing a new
constitution.
» Why should a Constitutional Convention be convened?
We think it is undeniable that California’s government suffers from drastic dysfunction – our financing system is bankrupt, our prisons
overflow, our water system teeters on collapse, our once proud schools are criminally poor, our democracy produces ideologically‐
extreme legislators that can pass neither budget nor reforms, and we have no recourse in the system to right these wrongs.
Most of these problems are a byproduct of the outdated system and rules of governance enshrined in our current constitution.
California’s constitution was always meant to be a living document that could adjust to the times, but it hasn’t been systematically
reformed since 1879. Our constitution needs serious structural reforms, chosen and authorized by the people, and a Constitutional
Convention is the only politically viable means to achieve those reforms.
» What is your new process to call a California Constitutional Convention?
We submitted two ballot measures to call for a limited Convention. One would give the right to call a Convention to the people and
the other would call the Convention and set the timeline, process and scope. (Prop 1 | Prop 2)
This voter‐driven Convention would have the same powers as a Convention created by the legislature, and the product of the
Convention would still be subject to majority approval by the voters in order to take effect. It is worth noting that one of the
fundamental statements of the California Constitution is:
All political power is inherent in the people. Government is instituted for their protection, security, and benefit, and they
have the right to alter or reform it when the public good may require.
» Could the amendment allowing voters to call a California Constitutional Convention and the actual call be
on the same ballot?
Yes. According to our legal counsel, the amendment to allow the voters to directly call a Constitutional Convention and an immediate
call for a constitutional convention can be on the same ballot. For example, “Proposition 1” would amend the Constitution to allow
voters to call a Convention and “Proposition 2” would ask voters if the Convention should be called now. Article 2, section 10 (A) of
the Constitution states “An initiative statute or referendum approved by a majority of votes thereon takes effect the day after the
election, unless the measure provides otherwise.”
1
» What is the timeline to a California Constitutional Convention in 2010?
On October 28, 2009 we submitted our ballot measures to the Attorney General for title and summary. The Attorney General has until
November to issue titles and summaries for our measures. That starts the race to collect enough signatures to get the measures on
the ballot. We have 150 days to get nearly 1.4 million signatures for the two initiatives.
» What revisions could be made during the Constitutional Convention?
In our initiative language, we outlined the scope of the Convention to address:
Government Effectiveness, including a method for periodically reviewing each State agency, department, board and
commission to determine whether it is performing its
functions to meet the needs of the people of the State and whether it should have its enabling legislation modified, be merged
into another new or existing entity, or cease to exist.
•
Elections and Reduction of Special Interest Influence, including the initiative and referendum process, the election of
state office holders, campaign finance, term
limits, and ways to increase legislative responsiveness, reduce gridlock and produce full representation of all Californians.
•
Spending and Budgeting, including the budget process and related requirements, the term and balancing of a budget, voting
thresholds, mandated spending, and
ways to increase fiscal accountability and efficiency.
•
Governance, including the relationship between the state and local governments, and the structure of the legislative and
executive branches of government.
•
» Can the topics of a Constitutional Convention be limited?
Other states have ruled convincingly that, yes, Conventions may be limited to consider only certain subjects; and second, the
Convention may be limited from considering certain subjects. According to state Constitutional Convention experts at Rutgers
University:
Questions always arise about whether state Constitutional Conventions can actually be limited, or whether there is a
possibility of a “runaway” state Constitutional Convention. These are, of course, legitimate questions but the law in the
United States seems to be clear that if the proper procedures are followed to impose limitations on a state Constitutional
Convention those limits will be legally enforceable.
This precedent applies both to Conventions emanating from the legislature or directly from the people by initiative. The limitations
would need to placed in the enabling legislation that the people vote on. Sometimes delegates are obliged to take an oath that they
will confine themselves to the issues committed to them by the Convention call.
» Who are the delegates in a Constitutional Convention?
Click here to view the delegate selection process outlined in our initiative language.
The makeup of the Convention in California is not stipulated, except that delegates geographically represent proportionate amounts of
population. In the 1878 Convention, there were 152 delegates: 3 from each Senate district and 32 at‐large delegates.
Courts across the U.S. have ruled that delegates do not necessarily need to be elected to Constitutional Conventions since a
Convention is not a “governing body” but simply a “recommending body” whose only authority is to propose amendments to be
submitted to a vote of the people.
» What is the history of Constitutional Conventions in California?
California has had two previous Constitutional Conventions: in 1849 and in 1878, which produced our current system. In 1962, the
constitution had grown to 75,000 words, which at that time was longer than any other state constitution but Louisiana. That year, the
electorate approved the creation of a “California Constitution Revision Commission,” which worked on the constitution from 1964 to
1976. The legislature placed revisions emanating from the Commission on the ballot. The electorate ratified the Commission's
revisions in 1966, 1970, 1972, and 1974. In the end, the Commission managed to remove about 40,000 words from the constitution,
but otherwise made only minor changes.
2
» What happens in other states?
Constitutional Conventions are fairly common in the United States. Indeed, in 14 other states, voters are automatically asked every
10‐20 years whether to authorize a Constitutional Convention and 25 percent of the time the voters have said “yes” to a Convention.
In seven other states a simple majority of the legislature may call a Constitutional Convention. Click here for more information on
Conventions in other States.
» Where and when will the Constitutional Convention meet?
To ensure that a Convention is held in a timely fashion once it is authorized, the Convention call should specify a date on which and a
place at which the Convention must first meet. The Convention of 1849 met in Colton Hall in Monterey, and the Convention of 1878
met in the Assembly Chambers in Sacramento. Some have proposed holding the Convention in the Assembly Chambers again, but
that might interfere with the regular operation of the Assembly. Most likely a neutral location in Sacramento would be most
appropriate, but other locations could be considered, or the Convention could move around the state.
» How long would the Constitutional Convention meet?
Other states typically specify an ending date as well as a beginning date in their enabling legislation. The deadline for conclusion of
the Convention's work serves as a spur to action, reduces the cost of holding a Convention, and ensures sufficient time for public
consideration of proposals before the ratification vote. One study of Conventions from 1938‐1968 found that their average duration
was 2.6 months. The 1878‐1879 Convention, which rewrote the entire California Constitution met for five months and four days. The
duration of a California Constitutional Convention would likely be determined by the time period between the authorization vote and
enough time to place the revision on the next convenient statewide election ballot.
» What are the approximate costs of a Constitutional Convention?
This question would be best answered by the California Legislative Analyst. Illinois’s Legislative Analyst estimated costs up to $23
million for a Convention in Illinois in 2008. This sounds high, but the cost for, the budget delay in California are $ 40 million each day.
The last budget negotiation was so late it added $9 billion to the budget shortfall.
Help Grow the Movement Main Navigation The Coalition
Sign up to receive updates about the latest developments with the
campaign, and find us on twitter, facebook, and YouTube to network
with other activists.
Repair California, Sponsored by the Bay Area Council
Design by Lion Interactive
About the Convention
Upcoming Events
Multimedia
Press
Donate to the Cause
Join Our Cause
About Us
Contact Us
3
County DelegatesAssembly District DelegatesHow it works...How it works...Routes to become a Delegate to the California Constitutional ConventionThe County Delegate Selection Committee of each County will hold public meetings to select, by major-ity vote, County delegates to the convention. Any person interested can and should apply. The State Auditor randomly selects the names of 400 people in each Assembly District across California.Those 400 people, per district, will receive informa-tion by mail about becoming a delegate. If they are interested in serving, they respond to the Auditor. Of those who responded favorably, 50 individuals per assembly district will be invited to attend a presentation to learn more about duties and responsibilities of a delegate. At the meeting of 50, following discussion and deliberation, they will vote for three in their own ranks to represent the Assembly District as delegates to the Constitutional Convention.www.repaircalifornia.orgIn each County there will be a Delegate Selection Committee made up of fi ve people: Two members of the Board of Supervisors, two mayors and a school board or board of education member. Each California County will have one delegate for every 175,000 residents. If a County has a population of less than 175,000, they will have one delegate. Recent population esti-mates show that there would be 221 County Delegates.The three cities that have a population of over one million (Los Angeles, San Diego & San Jose) will have their share of delegates chosen at the city level by the members of the City Council, under the same process the County Delegate Selection Committee. In addition, the four federally recognized Indian Tribes will also ap-point their own delegates.Each California Assembly District will have three delegates. In total, there will be 240 Assembly District Delegates.California Constitutional ConventionStep OneStep OneStep TwoStep TwoStep Three221240** Based on population estimates
Contact:
John Grubb
O: 415-946-8705
C: 415-847-6320
CALIFORNIANS WOULD VOTE TO AUTHORIZE AND CALL CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, NEW
STATEWIDE POLL OF 1000 VOTERS FINDS
Support Remarkably Consistent Across Party Lines, Age Groups, and Voting Propensity
CALIFORNIA, September 16, 2009 — Californians appear ready to support two measures to call a
limited citizen’s Constitutional Convention to reform the state’s failed governance system, according to a
poll conducted by EMC Research for Repair California. After explaining basic details of the proposal, such
as who could serve as delegates and what issues would or would not be considered, more than two-thirds of
Californians (69 percent) would vote yes on “Proposition 1,” or the Citizen’s Constitutional Convention Act,
which would allow the voters of California to directly call a Convention. A similar supermajority of 71
percent would vote yes on “Proposition 2,” or the Call for a Citizen’s Constitutional Convention, which
would immediately call a limited Constitutional Convention to assemble a representative cross section of
people of the state to propose reforms to the state’s governance structure. Both measures only require a
simple majority of 50 percent of voters to win on Election Day.
The poll was conducted September 8-13, 2009 with 1000 registered California voters and has a margin of
error of 3.1 percent.
“These results confirm what we have heard from Californians across the state who are intensely frustrated
with the failure of state government – and the damage it has caused – and are ready to take power into their
own hands to fix it,” said Jim Wunderman, President and CEO of the Bay Area Council and a member of
Repair California. “We are ecstatic to see support runs deep across party lines, ethnicities and age groups.”
After sharing details of the Convention, and subjecting voters to opponent and supporter messages, 70
percent of registered Republicans would call the Convention, 71 percent of Democrats and 74 percent of
decline to state voters would vote yes. In age groups, support was highest among young 18-34 year-old
voters with 73 percent reporting they would vote yes, but 71 percent of those 55 years-old or higher would
also approve the measures. Turnout is often considered a key political factor for ballot measures, but the
Constitutional Convention measures are strong with low propensity voters (71 percent) and with high
propensity voters (70 percent). Support for the Constitutional Convention was particularly high with Latino
voters (80 percent). Men registered as decline to state voters were least supportive, with 67 percent saying
they would support the measure.
Voters are extremely pessimistic about the direction of California. Only 14 percent think the state is on the
right track and 77 percent think the state is on the wrong track.
Voters were asked what their highest priority would be if they were a delegate to a Constitutional
Convention limited to governance reform. Their highest priorities were limiting the influence of special
interests, reducing waste and bureaucracy, and controlling spending. Their lowest priority was changing
Prop. 13.
If the election were held today, without any basic information or positive or negative campaigning, just
rudimentary ballot language, the two measures still look strong with 57 percent voting yes on Proposition 1
and 34 percent voting no. Sixty-three percent would vote yes on Proposition 2 and 28 percent would vote
no.
Repair California is finalizing two ballot measures to submit to the Attorney General for the November 2010
ballot. The first measure would amend the Constitution to give the voters the right to call a Constitutional
Convention, a right currently reserved only for the Legislature. The second measure would call the
Convention. As has been successfully and legally done in many other states, the measure would limit the
Convention to issues of governance, specifically delineated as (1) the budget process, (2) the election and
initiative process, (3) the relationship between state and local governments, and (4) management of state
bureaucracy. Delegates would be barred from proposing any tax increases.
If called, the Convention would gather in early 2011, then propose a revised system of governance to the
voters in a special election in late 2011.
“We want to make one thing very clear: This effort is as diverse as the state of California,” said
Wunderman. “We are working with Republicans, Democrats, Greens, Libertarians and Nonpartisans. We
are working with every gender, ethnicity and age group. Part of our systemic failure is our dissension into
narrower and narrower interests. This Convention can unite us again.”
# # #
About Repair California
Repair California is a broad-based coalition of Californians dedicated to achieving real reforms that are
needed to get California functioning again. While the movement was initiated by the Bay Area Council, it
has rapidly spread to include individuals and groups from around the state.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
ADOPT Traffic Resolution No. 2009/4304 closing Carquinez Scenic Drive (Road No. 2191B) daily from sunset to
sunrise the following day, for safety concerns, as recommended by the Public Works Director, Martinez area.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There will be a reduction in the costs of removing refuse and trash from the road.
BACKGROUND:
Due to landslides in the early 1980s the Board of Supervisors closed Carquinez Scenic Drive from the Ozol Fuel
Facility (owned by the United States of America) to the Contra Costa Brick Works Plant. The Carquinez Strait
Regional Shoreline Park abuts both sides of the Carquinez Scenic Drive from the Martinez Cemetery to the Ozol Fuel
Facility. Nighttime activities along the road generate refuse, trash, and human waste. On November 20, 2004, Traffic
Resolution No. 2004/4093 was adopted, which gave the East Bay Regional Park District permission from the County
to close the road overnight, to install a gate, and to close
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, 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: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc:
SD.10
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Julia R. Bueren, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Traffic Resolution No. 2009/4304 extending the closure of Carquinez Scenic Drive, Martinez area
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
the gate daily from sunset to sunrise the following day.
On December 19, 2006 Traffic Resolution No. 2006/4189 was adopted, which gave the East Bay Regional Park
District permission to close the road overnight for an additional 18 months.
On August 19, 2008 Traffic Resolution No. 2008/4266 was adopted which gave the East Bay Regional Park
District permission to close the road overnight for another 18 months.
The County Public Works Department, California Highway Patrol and the County Sheriff's Department support
the Park District’s request to extend the closure for an additional 18 months and recommends that the Board of
Supervisors support the Park District’s request and that they approve Traffic Resolution No. 2009/4304, based on
the followng:
1) There is serious and continual criminal activity on Carquinez Scenic Drive (Road No. 2191B), beginning at the
Martinez City Limit and proceeding northwesterly for 1.7 miles;
2) Carquinez Scenic Drive has not been designated as a through highway or arterial street;
3) Vehicular traffic on Carquinez Scenic Drive contributes to the criminal activity;
4) The 18-month overnight closure extension of Carquinez Scenic Drive will not substantially adversely affect
traffic flow, safety on the adjacent streets or in the surrounding neighborhoods, the operation of emergency
vehicles, the performance of municipal or public utility services, or the delivery of freight by commercial vehicles
in the area of the section of Carquinez Scenic Drive that is proposed to be temporarily closed.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
The East Bay Regional Park District would not be able to close the road at night and the nighttime activities that
are occurring along the road would continue.
ATTACHMENTS
Traffic Resolution 2009/4304
TRAFFIC RESOLUTION NO. 2009/4304
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Adopted this Traffic Resolution on December 15, 2009 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
TRAFFIC RESOLUTION NO. 2009/4304
ABSTAIN: Supervisorial District II
SUBJECT: Extend the overnight closure of Carquinez Scenic Drive (Road No.2191B) daily from
sunset to sunrise the following day, for safety concerns.
The Contra Costa Board of Supervisors RESOLVES that:
Based on the recommendations by the County Public Works Department's Transportation
Engineering Division, and pursuant to State of California Vehicle Code Section 21101.4, the
following traffic regulation is established (and other action taken as indicated):
Pursuant to Section 21101.4 of the State of California Vehicle Code declaring a road
closure from sunset to sunrise the following day, daily on Carquinez Scenic Drive
(Road No. 2191B), starting at the Martinez city limit and proceeding northwesterly
for 1.7 miles, Martinez area.
MO:jcw
G:\TransEng\2008\BO-TR\4266-2191B.doc
Orig. Dept.: Public Works (Traffic)
Contact: Jerry Fahy (313-2276)
cc: California Highway Patrol
Sheriff’s Department
East Bay Regional Park District
City of Martinez, PWD
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct
copy of an action taken and entered on the
minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the
date shown.
ATTESTED:
DAVID TWA, Clerk of the Board of
Supervisors and County Administrator
By , Deputy
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Accept the Report from the Finance Committee on the re-use of the 30 and 40 Muir Road building complex to reduce
by over 50% the estimated costs from the $45 million previously approved development at the Summit Center site
located on Arnold Drive down to $18 million which includes $15 million for the remodel, $1.2 million for the
County debt service on the buildings, and approximately $1.5 million for energy efficiency, other green construction
measures and information technology improvements;
Approve the re-use and remodel of the 30-40 Muir Road building complex for occupancy by the Department of
Conservation and Development (DCD) as a means to support the consolidation of DCD’s four Martinez office sites in
order to further the streamlining of municipal services directed by the Board with the merger of the Building
Inspection (BI) and Community Development (CDD) Departments;
Authorize the General Services Department (GSD) to carry out the necessary processes to expedite the remodel and
re-use of the 30-40 Muir Road building complex including improvements for energy efficiency and other “green”
construction in collaboration with the Department of Conservation and Development and to provide the Board
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor
Contact: Catherine Kutsuris (925)
335-1221
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of
Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc:
SD.11
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Finance Committee
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Report on 30-40 Muir Road Building and Approve Remodel for Use by the Department of Conservation and
Development
RECOMMENDATION(S): (CONT'D)
with status reports on the project at six month intervals.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Re-use of the 30-40 Muir Road building complex by the Conservation and Development Department relieves the
County General Fund of a $1.2 million debt service liability as well as the annual maintenance costs for this building
complex. No General Fund money will be used for the renovation. Costs will be covered by that portion of the land
development fees determined in the 1991 Cost/Revenue analysis completed by Management Services Institute,
Incorporated (MSI) and approved by the Board of Supervisors as necessary for facility requirements and operations.
Additionally, the improved energy efficiency will assist in reducing overall County energy costs.
BACKGROUND:
In 2006, the Board authorized GSD to work with the then Building Inspection (BI) and Community Development
Departments (CDD) in obtaining consulting services and completing a needs assessment and site comparison for a
new building to be used by the two departments. Based upon a previous review of county facilities conducted by
GSD, the Board recognized the increasing deterioration of the North Wing of the 651 Pine Street, Martinez building
occupied by BI and CDD and the increasing costs to maintain this facility. Over the next 20 years, the cost to
maintain the North Wing facility was projected to be $15 million. This projected cost did not include renovations to
the Application and Permit Center to accommodate customers and the public or any other renovations to support
streamlining of services between and within various work groups. Moreover, the $15 million did not include the
increased facilities costs resulting from the need to relocate both the Redevelopment Agency staff and the Business
and Information Services staff to other sites within the Martinez area.
The building needs assessment and site comparison resulted in a recommendation for use of a vacant site on the
Summit Center property along Arnold Drive in Martinez. Construction of a new building and the needed site
improvements to accommodate the building and customers were estimated to cost from $45 million to $48 million.
Use of this site was approved by the Board in late 2007 with direction that GSD, BI and CDD return to the Board
with report on design and build processes to be used.
The merger of Building Inspection and Community Development Department in 2008 combined with the severe
economic downturn prompted the Department of Conservation and Development to initiate discussions with the
General Services Department regarding possible alternative buildings already owned by the County that would meet
the Development's needs and would reduce the overall costs. A review of available existing County facilities resulted
in a more detailed consideration of the 30-40 Muir Road building complex for use by the Department.
Based upon the review with GSD, the Department of Conservation and Development has concluded that the 30 & 40
Muir Road facility will meet their needs in terms of location and parking, and will provide greater program
integration and work efficiencies intended with the Board’s merging of the two departments.
Currently DCD is using, or will be using in the next few months, approximately 62,000 square feet of space at four
different locations in the Martinez area. DCD occupies 37,500 square feet in the North Wing and Main Administration
Building at 651 Pine Street. An additional 5,000 square feet is rented office space at 600 Main Street. The
Redevelopment staff occupies 7,500 square feet at the Summit Center on Arnold Drive. The Weatherization Program
currently occupies another 7,500 square feet on Glacier Drive at the Probation/Juvenile Hall complex which is used
both by staff and for storage of equipment and supplies used for weatherization of homes; it is anticipated that
expansion of the weatherization program will require another 1,000 feet of materials storage. Additionally, DCD has
recently vacated public storage facilities and relocated files and other land use documents into 3,500 square feet
located on the Probation/Juvenile Hall site.
Use of the 30-40 Muir Road site by DCD would allow consolidation of all department operations and storage into
one facility. The DCD operations would take up the entire square footage available in the Muir Road buildings.
COST CONSIDERATION
The estimated cost of building a new 64,000 square foot building located at the Summit Center on Arnold Drive is
$45 million to $48 million. The estimated cost of improvements for both Muir Road buildings with 63,000 square feet
is approximately $15 million with an additional $1.5 million for energy efficiency measures and technology upgrades
to the buildings and $1.2 million in existing County debt service on the two buildings.
Moreover, the monthly occupancy cost for DCD in its current locations averages out to be $0.75 per square foot. The
monthly occupancy cost at 30 & 40 Muir Road would be approximately $0.72 per square foot. Occupancy costs
include utilities, insurance, custodial, grounds, garbage pickup, and ongoing building maintenance and repairs.
GSD has estimated that over the next 20 years, maintenance costs for DCD at 651 Pine Street will be $15 million.
DCD would also have to cover an additional $1.9 million in rent costs over the next 20 years for the space at 600
Main Street and for the 3500 square feet of file storage on Glacier Drive based upon the current rental charges. The
combined costs of $16.9 million for maintenance and rent on existing space not only fully cover the costs for the
improvements to the Muir Road buildings but also provides DCD with space that can be used to more efficiently
serve customers and the general public.
Estimated
Cost to
Renovate
Occupancy
Expenses
(20-Yr.)
Maintenance
Cost
Rent
Costs
Energy
Efficient
and IT
Improvements
Re-Use/
Repair
Base Cost
Total
20-Year
Cost
20-Year
Occupancy
30/40
Muir
Road
$15m $10.8m $1.5m $16.5m $27.3m
Remain in
Existing
Space
$10.2m $15m $1.9m $16.9m $27.1m
Cost
Savings
<$400,000>$200,000
20-YEAR COST COMPARISON TO RENOVATE AND RE-USE
30/40 MUIR ROAD FOR DCD
*Costs do not include $1.2 million in existing County debt service that will be covered by DCD
BENEFITS
As noted, DCD is currently located in four separate sites in the Martinez area. Within the 651 Pine Street buildings,
DCD is located on 4 floors within the North Wing and one floor of the Main Administration Building. Relocation of
DCD into the 30-40 Muir Road buildings would both eliminate delays in work processing due to travel times between
the buildings as well as allow more effective location of various staff groups to better serve the public. For example,
proximity of Transportation Planning, Conservation, Solid Waste and Recycling programs to Current and Advance
Planning, the Application and Permit Center, Redevelopment, New Construction, Neighborhood Preservation,
Weatherization and Code Enforcement would provide opportunities for greater integration of these services.
Improving the awareness of the broad spectrum of programs and resources available within DCD on the part of all
DCD staff will assure that they are able to better assist customers and members of the general public in accessing
programs.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
DCD will continue to struggle with the inefficiencies caused by work in multiple locations. The County $1.2 million
debt service on 30 – 40 Muir Road will not be retired. Full integration of DCD programs will be hindered by
fragmentation inherent in multiple work locations.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
ACCEPT report acknowledging CCTV (Contra Costa Television) for 15 years of service to County residents; and
APPROVE the amended CCTV Operating Policy and Procedures.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None
BACKGROUND:
Contra Costa Television (CCTV) was established by the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors in 1994 as a
Governmental and Educational Access cable television channel airing programming twenty four hours a day, seven
days a week. Programming in English, Spanish, Laotian, Mien and Chinese has been produced and aired amounting
to 8,736 hours of local programming per year.
CCTV reaches over 1 million residents in Contra Costa County on Comcast , Channel 27 and Astound Channel 32. It
also reaches Alameda, Santa Clara, San Mateo, San Francisco, Marin, Napa, Solano and Sonoma counties on the
AT&T U-Verse system Channel 99.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Patricia Burke, 313-1183
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc:
SD.12
To:Board of Supervisors
From:David Twa
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Accept Report on CCTV's 15 years or service to County residents
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
CCTV airs the Board of Supervisors meetings, other community meetings, events of countywide interest, election
forums, and NASA programming, as well as, award-winning locally originated programming. Some of the 94+
award-winning programs aired by CCTV include: Most Wanted Deadbeat Parent; Senior Information Journal;
Newcomers Task Force; Youth Vote 96’; Ask the Doctor; Family Secrets: Domestic Violence Revealed; Star Drug
Court: Jonnya’s Story; Every Woman Counts Every Year; For the Record; Mental Health Perspectives; Vida Sana
En Vivo! (Healthy Life, Live!); Language of Sound and Movement; East Bay Stand Down for Homeless
Veterans; Get Ready, Get Healthy; The Time of Your Life; Demolition of Golden 7 Liquor Store; and Elections
Preview – District 5. To its list of accomplishments CCTV adds its award winning CountyNet information
bulletin board.
In addition to LIVE broadcasts of the Board of Supervisors meetings, CCTV now streams the Board of
Supervisors LIVE on the Internet and provides a video link for agenda items. Several CCTV programs are also
aired quarterly on
Comcast's Video On Demand service.
Having successfully negotiated a 15 year franchise agreement with Comcast in 2006 that added an additional
Government, Education and Public Access channel, CCTV has recently been authorized by the Board of
Supervisors to operate the second shared government channel for the Cities of Clayton, Martinez and Pleasant Hill.
Future plans include asking the Board to support legislation that allows PEG funding to be used for operations,
web streaming of all programming on the channel and the establishment of a public access channel.
In order to update CCTV policies, Office of Communications & Media (CCTV) Operating Policy and Procedures
has been amended to include local goverment adivisory bodies among those eligible to use the channel in Section
A. 1. , has clearly defined the types of tapes that can be duplicated in Section F. 1. and has clarified the types of
candidate programming that can be done during an election cycle Section G. County Counsel has reviewed these
amendments. Staff recommends their approval.
ATTACHMENTS
CCTV Policy & Procedures
Amended 12/15/2009
1
CONTRA COSTA TELEVISION (CCTV)
OPERATING POLICY AND PROCEDURES
OFFICE OF COMMUNICATIONS & MEDIA
MISSION: Contra Costa Television (CCTV), A Governmental/Educational Access
channel, is a public service of the Board of Supervisors com mitted to producing and
televising quality programming on issues of countywide interest or concern.
A. PURPOSE OF ACCESS AND ELIGIBILITY
1. Governmental Access is intended to make cable available for use by local
governments. Access is made available upon requests submitted in
accordance with the established criteria and procedure herein, to:
a. Local government bodies and agencies (other than educational),
including their advisory boards, commissions, and committees,
located in Contra Costa County for use in connection with official
government activities.
b. State and Federal government bodies and agencies (other than
educational) for use in connection with their official government
activities that affect the interests of the citizens of Contra Costa
County.
c. Officials and representatives of the above for use in their official
government activities. This includes State and Federal legislators
who represent the districts in Contra Costa County.
However, use of government access for political advertising or to promote or
oppose a candidate for public office is not permissible Government Access
use.
2. Educational Access is intended for use by local public educational institutions
for transmission of instructional programming and other educational
purposes. Access is made available, upon request submitted in accordance
with the criteria and procedures herein, to:
a. Educational institutions and authorities located in Contra Costa
County.
b. State educational authorities and agencies.
c. Officials and representatives of the above.
The purpose of the use must be transmission of public instructional
programming or for other educational purposes.
Amended 12/15/2009
2
B. GOVERNMENTAL / EDUCATIONAL ACCESS REQUESTS
1. Request for Use of CCTV Airing Time, Facilities or Equipment:
Requests must be made in writing by an eligible applicant to the Director of
the Office of Communications & Media. Program requests should be made
on Form A (attached).
2. Charge for Use of CCTV Airing Time, Facilities or Equipment:
CCTV will not charge eligible applicants for the use of channel time, facilities
or equipment when the applicant is producing a program for airing on the
Governmental/Educational Access channel.
C. PROGRAM REVIEW
1. Evaluation Criteria: Programs submitted from eligible applicants for airing on
CCTV will be evaluated to determine if the proposed program is:
a. of countywide interest,
b. of a governmental or educational nature,
c. of broadcast quality, and
d. within acceptable community standards and mores.
D. PROGRAM CONTENT
1. Program Criteria: Program content will be reviewed for the following:
a. The program shall contain no obscene or indecent matter;
b. The program shall contain no libelous or slanderous matter;
c. The program shall contain no matter, the use of which is su bject to
copyright, except where the applicant demonstrates compliance with
applicable laws;
d. Except as provided in “f” below the program shall contain no
commercial matter. “Commercial matter” shall include: (I) any
advertising material designed to promote the sale of any products or
services, including advertising by or behalf of candidates for public
office; (ii) any audio or visual reference to any business enterprises,
service or product for which any economic consideration was received
by anyone in exchange for the display, announcement and/or
reference to such business, enterprise, product or service, or (iii) any
material used or designed for use to solicit funds, support or other
property of value, directly or indirectly, for any business or ente rprise
for commercial purposes, or for any political party or candidate for
office; and
e. The program shall contain no advertisement of or information
concerning any lottery, gift enterprise, or similar scheme offering
prizes drawn or awarded by means of any such lottery, gift enterprise
or scheme, whether said list contains any part or all of such prizes.
Amended 12/15/2009
3
f. It is recognized that grants and/or other types of support may be
made available to individuals, groups or entitles for the purpose of
underwriting the cost of production. In such instances, a standard
“patron’s acknowledgment” may be placed at the end of the subject
presentation (e.g., “This program was made possible by a contribution
from the XYZ Corporation”).
E. USE OF PRODUCTION FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT
1. Scheduling Use of the Production Facility and/or Equipment :
Following approval by the Director of the Office of Communications & Media
of a request to use the facility or equipment, and subject to availability, the
Production Manager will be responsible for scheduling the use of the facility
and equipment on a first-come, first-serve basis. Users will be required to
sign the appropriate form(s). (See Forms “B” and “C” attached.)
2. Responsibility for the Production Facility and/or Equipment:
The individual or group using the facility will bear all costs for repairing any
damage done to the facility during their use. The individual or group
checking out the equipment will bear all costs if the equipment must be
repaired or replaced due to damage, theft or abuse. CCTV may refuse to
allow use of the facility or equipment to individuals or groups who have
misused the facility or equipment, failed to return equipment on time, or in
any way abused the privilege.
3. Rental of Facility: In the event that groups other than governmental or
educational request use of the facility to produce programming or an eligible
governmental or educational group requests use of the facility to produce a
program which can not be aired on CCTV, either group will be subject to
procedures detailed in the County Administrative Bulletin entitled “County
Services” No. 3.1 dated 10/9/74 including any subsequent amendments
thereto. These groups will be required to pay the appropriate rental fees and
sign the “Temporary Permit to Use County Facility” Form. (See attached.)
F. CCTV SERVICES
1. Tape and DVD Duplication: For a reasonable fee, CCTV can make
duplications of material that has been produced by CCTV or can be
duplicated under provisions of fair use. (See “Rate Card.”or “Duplication
Request Form.”)
2. Production Services: CCTV is available to provide production services
on an “as available“ basis. A production agreement will be drafted and
signed by both parties and reviewed by County Counsel. A reasonable rate ,
sufficient to cover County costs and overhead, will be charged pursuant to
the policies described in Section E, “Use of County Facilities,” above.
Amended 12/15/2009
4
G. PROGRAMMING DURING AN ELECTION CYCLE
1. Voter Education Forums:
Within an election cycle, 45 days immediately before a primary or special
election or 60 days immediately before a general election on which a
candidate/issue may appear, only independent, inclusive events which cover
or affect a large portion of the County may be aired where:
a. All candidates/sides are invited to participate;
b. An independent moderator leads the program;
c. Questions are not pre-screened unless the event is covered live; (For
live coverage, indecent or obscene questions cannot be aired.) and
d. The event is open to the public with occasional restrictions due to
limited space.
2. Candidate Appearances:
Within the above stated election cycles, no event coverage may be aired
where a candidate appears as a participant, unless the event is part of the
candidate’s official governmental duties.
H. APPEALS PROCESS
1. Written Appeal: In the event an applicant wishes to appeal the decision
of the Director of the Office of Communications & Media to deny the request,
a written appeal can be made, within ten days after the initial request has
been denied, to the County Administrator with a copy to the Director of the
Office of Communications & Media.
If the County Administrator denies the appeal, a written appeal for review of
the request can be made, within ten days after such subsequent denial, to
the Board of Supervisors with a copy to the County Administrator and the
Director of the Office of Communications & Media.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
The Transportation, Water and Infrastructure Committee makes the following recommendations for consideration
and approval by the full Board:
• ACCEPT the following report on the recently adopted Municipal Regional Permit (MRP) issued by the Regional
Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB).
• DIRECT the County Administrator and the Public Works Director/ex officio Chief Engineer (for the Flood Control
District) to work with other affected departments to determine the impacts on their work processes and budget, and to
seek appropriate revenue sources to offset the additional costs of compliance to the greatest extent possible.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Depending on how various provisions are interpreted and enforced, the
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Greg Connaughton
313-2271
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc: David Twa, Catherine Kutsuris, Silvano Marchesi, Jim Kennedy, Mitch Avalon, Greg Connaughton, Don Freitas, Rich Lierly, David Swartz
SD.13
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Transportation, Water & Infrastructure Comm.
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Report on the Impacts of the Proposed Municipal Regional Permit
FISCAL IMPACT: (CONT'D)
MRP will have significant impacts on Contra Costa County, Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water
Conservation District (FCD) and the citizens and businesses we serve. The impacts include a potential $28 million
demand for new funds (possibly from the General Fund) over the next five years of the MRP’s term for County
activities and more than $5 million for FCD activities.
Although the Public Works Department will bear the brunt of the fiscal impacts, other departments will also be
significantly impacted.
Currently, the Public Works Department’s annual cost to implement the NPDES permit is approximately $3
million (excluding certain substantial costs that are funded by grants). The estimated total additional cost for the
five year NPDES permit period is approximately $28 million. Attachments A, B, and C contain more detail
regarding the costs to the Public Works Department for implementing the MRP.
BACKGROUND:
INTRODUCTION
The San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) on October 14, 2009, re-issued the
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit that affects Contra Costa County. This permit,
which has been in the works for almost 5 years, is known as the Municipal Regional Permit (MRP), will regulate
unincorporated Contra Costa County, the Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District
(FCD), all the cities within Contra Costa County and most jurisdictions in the greater San Francisco Bay Area.
The MRP was originally released for public comment on December 14, 2007. The Public Works Department,
County Watershed Program (CWP), analyzed the MRP and presented a report on its impacts to the
Transportation, Water and Infrastructure Committee (TWIC) on February 11, 2008, and the Contra Costa County
Board of Supervisors on February 26, 2008. A comment letter from the Board of Supervisors was submitted to
the RWQCB on February 29, 2008 and Supervisor Uilkema (along with many other elected officials and
municipal staff) gave testimony at the March 11, 2008, public hearing. The MRP was then revised and released
for public comment on February 11, 2009. The effects of the MRP were analyzed again and a report was
submitted to the TWIC on March 30, 2009 and the full Board of Supervisors on March 31, 2009. Again
significant testimony, including that of Supervisor Piepho, was provided to the RWQCB on May 13, 2009. Based
on the testimony the MRP was again revised, this time without the option for additional written comments. On
October 14, 2009 the RWQCB voted to adopt this final MRP and, withstanding appeals, it is scheduled to become
effective on December 1, 2009.
Due to our (and others’) previous comments and testimony, this adopted MRP is an improvement over the prior
two versions. However, there are still very significant issues and costs associated with this MRP. This report
highlights the effects that this MRP is anticipated to have on County and County Flood Control District
operations. The MRP is quite lengthy (125 pages plus 152 pages of attachments) and at times complicated and
confusing. One of our major concerns remains that some sections of the MRP seem to be in conflict with other
sections. We also feel that this MRP still attempts to regulate on a “one size fits all” basis. Despite our concerns,
the MRP is now law and we will be required to comply with it to the best of our ability. With these new issues in
mind this report will attempt to analyze the MRP and highlight impacts it will have on our normal business and
how we plan to comply with the MRP.
This MRP, as opposed to our existing NPDES permit, adds significant requirements on the FCD. Even though our
existing NPDES permit names the FCD as a co-permittee, the FCD has very limited requirements. This would be
expected since the FCD has no land use authority, is non-population based, and merely builds, operates and
maintains stormwater conveyance facilities. Where appropriate, this report will highlight the new FCD
requirements.
REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS AND BACKGROUND
The MRP becomes effective on December 1, 2009. Therefore, the County and the FCD need to strategize as to
how to meet the MRP requirements in the most effective and cost efficient means possible. Since the MRP is a
regional permit we are proposing that some of the requirements can more effectively be addressed at the regional
level.
History:
In an effort to stop pollution of the “Waters of the United States,” the Federal Government passed the Clean Water
Act (CWA) in 1972. Initially, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (USEPA) implementation of the CWA
emphasized control of pollution from Point Sources (e.g. industry, sewage treatment plants, etc. with pipe
outfalls). In 1987, the scope of the CWA was expanded to regulate Non-Point Source Pollution (pollution
primarily conveyed by stormwater runoff from urban, suburban and agricultural lands). For Contra Costa County,
this is generally the stormwater (originating on both public and private property) that is carried in the public
drainage system (underground pipes, drainage channels, etc.) to the “Waters of the U.S.” (natural creek systems,
the Delta, the San Francisco Bay and eventually the Pacific Ocean).
In 1993, the RWQCB, issued Contra Costa County its first NPDES permit. The NPDES permit required the
County, its cities and the Flood Control District to act jointly to implement the permit conditions. The
responsibility for unincorporated County compliance with the permit was assigned to the Public Works
Department (PWD), which created the County Watershed Program to manage the overall implementation and
administration of NPDES compliance. Since 1993, our NPDES permit has been reissued once (1999), and one
major revision has been made to the permit (adding the development/redevelopment Provision C.3 in 2003). The
MRP represents the third NPDES permit for Contra Costa County.
Permit “Approach”:
With each new NPDES permit the requirements have grown more stringent and the related costs have increased.
The MRP retains the educational focus of previous permits, expands enforcement of violations, increases the
regulation of municipal operations and new development, and also specifies various targeted pollutants, the most
publicized being trash, that must be remediated. The MRP requires that permittees evaluate these targeted
pollutants to determine their current levels of concentration and then take specific actions to reduce, and in some
instances, eliminate them. The MRP affects virtually all of our business practices, from the way the County
offices are maintained to the way we issue business licenses, the County will benefit from a “team approach” to
complying with the permit. The Public Works Department’s CWP will continue to oversee the County’s NPDES
compliance, but the challenges of complying with the new permit will involve a substantially higher level of
day-to-day cooperation with other County Departments and Special Districts.
Consequences of Non-Compliance:
If the County is found to be out of compliance with our MRP, the penalties can be as high as $35,000 per day per
violation (each area of non compliance could be viewed as a separate violation), plus $10 per gallon of stormwater
discharged into the “Waters of the United States.” In addition, if found to be out of compliance with the permit,
the County would be vulnerable to 3rd party lawsuits from environmental and “watchdog” groups. The results of
these lawsuits could far exceed the penalties that may be imposed by the RWQCB or the USEPA. It should be
noted that this MRP drew significant input from the environmental community and several of these groups were
not pleased that the MRP was not more strictly written than it is. As a result, it is expected that these groups will
be “scrutinizing” permittees to make sure that they are in strict compliance with the MRP.
MRP REGULATORY AREA
The MRP differs from the County’s current NPDES permit in that the MRP will uniformly regulate most of the
Bay Area. In addition to Contra Costa County, and its incorporated cities and special districts, this MRP also
regulates Alameda, Santa Clara, and San Mateo Counties, and several cities and agencies in Solano County
including Fairfield-Suisun and Vallejo. Given the regulatory reach of the new permit, we expect increased
potential for cooperation among agencies to find regional solutions to our common regulatory requirements.
MRP TIMING
The MRP was adopted on October 14, 2009, with implementation to commence on December 1, 2009. Under this
schedule, the five year MRP will be in effect until at least December 1, 2014 (or until the next reissuance of the
NPDES permit). It should be noted that many components of the MRP are phased in, becoming more
comprehensive over the five year permit period. Other provisions require immediate implementation upon
commencement of the permit and will remain consistent over time. Some MRP provisions do not require
additional action by the County until the second, third, fourth or fifth year(s) of the permit. We have provided in
the attachments both the anticipated costs and the implications/challenges associated with each phase of provision
implementation.
HIGHLIGHTS OF MAJOR AREAS OF IMPACT TO COUNTY GOVERNMENT
The MRP will affect many County operations. Some of the MRP’s proposed changes are simply “ratcheting up”
of current provisions and best management practices, while other provisions will require significant revisions, and
the construction of significantly different infrastructure. In addition, business practices, program definitions and
areas of responsibility may need to be expanded and modified. For example, it may be necessary for the
definition of public health to be expanded to include the “health” of the natural environment, thereby enabling the
areas of responsibility of some departments to expand to include environmental protection.
The MRP will also require a number of changes to County policies and Ordinances. These changes range from
regulating property uses, such as swimming pools (construction of pools and discharges), to requiring heightened
enforcement activities by the County (by requiring the County to issue citations for a wide variety of water quality
infractions). In addition, the MRP requires the County to consider potential water quality impacts in prioritizing all
new construction including new County offices and road maintenance projects and in operations of our storm
drainage and Flood Control infrastructure.
The departments anticipated to be significantly impacted by the MRP include:
1. Public Works Department
2. Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District
3. Department of Conservation and Development
4. General Services Department
5. Health Services Department
6. County Counsel’s Office
7. District Attorney’s Office
8. Department of Agriculture
9. Department of the Sheriff
COMPARISON OF MRP REQUIREMENTS WITH OUR EXISTING NPDES PERMIT
Our current NPDES permit has five major provisions, (for example C.2 “Municipal Operations” is one provision
with several components. An example of a component is C.2a “Street Sweeping”). The MRP expands, revises and
in some instances “eliminates” components in each of these five provisions and also adds nine new provisions.
The key new/modified requirements include trash capture, increased scope of Provision C.3 (“New Development
and Redevelopment”), developing the authority to regulate and enforce additional uses, increased monitoring and
reporting, and development of TMDLs (total maximum daily loads) for targeted pollutants.
The two significant components that “appear” to have been removed are street sweeping and catch basin cleaning.
They are removed from the requirements of provision C.2 “Municipal Operations”, but at the same time they are
effectively “required” in provisions C.10 “Trash Reduction”,C.11 “Mercury Controls”, and C.12 “Polychlorinated
Biphenols (PCBs) Controls”.
Street Sweeping and catch basin cleaning are two of the most effective means of removing pollutants. In fact, the
Water Board’s own Finding 16 (of the MRP) concedes specific extraneous pollutants found in urban run-off,
including heavy metals, dioxin and PBDE’s, are most commonly found deposited on paved and other impervious
surfaces. At present the most effective way to capture these pollutants is with effective street sweeping. Our
current County street sweeping program captures and removes 1632 cubic yards of material, which contains
significant amounts of PCBs, Mercury, Copper, Lead, Nickel, Zinc and Petroleum Hydrocarbons in addition to
almost 9,000 pounds of oil and grease! Without this highly effective practice, the pollutants would not be
captured and would be released into the environment doing further damage.
Similarly, catch basins capture pollutants in the catch basin before being released into the environment. Our
current catch basin cleaning program removes over 100 cubic yards of material which again contains significant
amounts of Copper, Lead, Zinc and almost 600 pounds of oil and grease! Without this highly effective best
management practice, these pollutants would not be captured and would be released into our waterways to damage
the environment.
The RWQCB staff is aware of the fact that street sweeping and catch basin cleaning are two of our most
successful Best Management Practices (BMPs) at removing pollutants. Even though these two provisions (street
sweeping and catch basin cleaning) are no longer specifically required by the MRP, we are recommending to
continue to maintain and provide these very effective and valuable services.
In order to provide a better understanding of the MRP and its requirements, we have developed a spreadsheet (see
Attachment B), that lays out the major permit provisions by section, identifies where each provision can be found
in the permit itself, describes significant components of each provision, and compares how our old permit’s
requirements relate to the requirements of the MRP. The document evaluates both the policy ramifications and the
financial impacts that the MRP is anticipated to have on County government (including the Flood Control district),
businesses, and residents.
Three things should be noted about this spreadsheet:
1) The costs reported are rough estimates and are intended to provide the scale of budget impacts or “ball park”
numbers. Important assumptions are listed both throughout the document and in the “Notes” section at the bottom
of the spreadsheet. Since many MRP provisions contain vague and unclear language, and others are entirely new,
more accurate estimates will continue to be developed and refined as we continue to develop strategies for
compliance both within the County and the FCD, and by working with the County wide Clean Water Program and
the regional clean water program - the association of Bay Area Stormwater Management Agencies Association
(BASMAA).
2) The MRP has fifteen provisions. Only the major provision changes (ones that will have the greatest impact on
our business practices) are included at this time.
3) Increased County costs associated with private developments will likely be passed on to the developer/builder
in the form of higher permit (pay-for-services) fees and are therefore not accounted for in this report.
In addition to this spreadsheet, we have also provided a bar graph (Attachment C). The bar graph shows the
relationship between annual costs for NPDES compliance activities (for our existing NPDES permit) and
estimated costs (based on the MRP) for each year of the MRP permit period.
Current Actions being taken to insure compliance with the MRP
The PWD - County Watershed Program (CWP) will continue to work with all affected County departments and
special districts (including FCD) to assist them in understanding how the MRP will affect their operations and in
achieving compliance with the MRP.
The CWP will continue working with the Contra Costa Clean Water Program (County wide) and BASMAA
(region wide) to pool resources in an effort to more efficiently comply with some of the MRP provisions.
The CWP will continue to revise and expand its normal activities to comply with the expanded and modified
MRP provisions.
The CWP will continue to seek opportunities to leverage its resources to meet the MRP requirements, In particular
by supporting non-profit groups (for example creek groups) to help in meeting some of the provisions utilizing
volunteer labor (for example trash assessments and clean-up). We will also seek out and apply for Federal or State
grants that might pay for some of the implementation costs.
The CWP recently acquired a part time Stormwater Inspector to help the County and the FCD meet the expanded
inspection and reporting requirements of the MRP.
Due to the comprehensive scope of the proposed MRP, it will only be possible to reach full compliance by
addressing the challenges from many different angles, and by seeking cooperation from many different partners.
The County Administrator and the Public Works Department should meet with other affected departments to
identify appropriate and potential sources of revenue to fund implementation of the MRP and reduce the potential
liability to the General Fund.
The CWP has been working with the Contra Costa Clean Water Program by conducting preliminary activities for
a ballot measure to develop additional funding for clean water purposes (pursuant to Proposition 218). These
activities include conducting public education outreach and opinion polls. The Contra Costa Clean Water
Program has been setting aside $300,000 per year toward the approximately $1.5 million cost associated with
putting a measure on the ballot.
Petition for Review of the MRP
At the November 16, 2009, Transportation, Water & Infrastructure Committee meeting it was reported that on
November 12, 2009, Contra Costa County joined with all the other 19 co-permittees and most of the other
municipalities in the Bay Area in submitting to the State Water Resources Control Board a Petition for Review.
This petition is basically an insurance policy that will help the County in two major ways:
1st - The petition puts the State Board on notice that we have significant issues with the MRP and allows us to
activate the petition and request a formal review and appeal of the MRP at some later date. This might be our
strategy if some of the provisions of the MRP (that we have been named in the petition) turn out to be impossible
or overly burdensome to implement.
2nd - If a third party or agency appeals the MRP the petition will require that the State Board notify us of the
appeal and will more importantly give us a “place at the table” and allow us to be involved in any discussions
about revising the MRP due to the 3rd party appeal.
ATTACHMENTS
Impacts of Proposed MRP Attachment
RECOMMENDATION(S):
1. ACCEPT report on Delta-Water legislative bills and activity.
2. CONSIDER oral report on Delta Counties Coalition lobbying trip to Washington, D.C.
3. CONSIDER providing direction to staff on a response to any Delta-related issues.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The changes proposed for the Delta will last for generations and will have a tremendous impact on the lives of the
four million people that live in Delta counties and the economies of the Delta communities.
BACKGROUND:
At a press conference in Los Angeles on November 6, 2009, Governor Schwarzenegger signed SBX7 6 and SBX7 8
by Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg and expressed his support for the entire Delta/ water reform
legislative package approved by the Legislature, in the early morning hours of November 4. (The Governor
subsequently signed the three remaining bills in the package.) The agreement came less than one month into the
special session on water called by the Governor in mid-October.
The package includes five bills and includes an $11.14 billion bond bill that will head to the November 2010 ballot to
be approved by voters. The bills address a variety of water issues including the management of the Delta,
groundwater monitoring, water conservation, water diversion/use reporting, and governance of the Delta.
Intense closed-door negotiations surrounded the package up until the final hour. The last two sticking points of the
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: L. DeLaney, 5-1097
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: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc:
D. 1
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Supervisor Mary N. Piepho
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Delta Water Legislative Update
all-night session related to the water rights enforcement measure and the further parsing out of the water bond dollars.
In the end, the controversial water rights language was dropped, and other provisions regarding water diversions in
the Delta were amended into another bill. In the end, the water bond gained the necessary support with the addition
$1 billion sought by Los Angeles for conservation and monitoring.
The package makes substantial changes to the management of the Delta, and while it does not specifically authorize a
peripheral canal, the package sets the stage for major decisions on Delta conveyance. The legislation does create a
new Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Conservancy, a new Delta Stewardship Council, and establishes a statewide
water conservation program, among other things.
Specifically to counties, the package includes a new statewide groundwater monitoring program. The program would
require groundwater monitoring by local agencies, the county, water replenishment districts, or a groundwater
management agency or association. If these entities choose not to perform the monitoring, they would exclude
themselves from receiving any water grants or loans administered by the state, and the Department of Water
Resources would assume the responsibility of monitoring. There is an exemption included in the language from this
penalty for a service area that qualifies as a disadvantaged community.
The legislation also calls for an increased level of regulation of local agencies land use activities by the Delta
Stewardship Council, the newly-created state governing body, in addition to that provided by the Delta Protection
Commission. Conversely, the Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP)/Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP)
process for the Canal facility, known as the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP), requires no such oversight.
Additional detail on these bills is provided later in this report.
Due to the closed-door nature of these legislative negotiations, Contra Costa County’s efforts through the Delta
Counties Coalition to seek a number of important changes to these bills were, unfortunately, unsuccessful. (Although
early efforts resulted in bill language that remained largely intact, language in other areas was modified significantly
from what the Delta Counties Coalition had proposed, and other proposals were not considered.) Our state legislative
delegation showed their support for Delta interests by voting against SB 1 (Governance) and SB 2 (Water Bond). For
additional information on the impacts of the legislative package on counties and Delta counties specifically, see
Attachment A “Impacts of Water Legislation on California Counties,” prepared by Solano County Supervisors
Reagan and Vasquez.
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
Federal Activity
In light of the passage of this package of legislation, federal interest and activity regarding the Delta, and
additional federal assistance needed for the Delta and its communities, the Delta Counties Coalition arranged a
trip to Washington, D.C. for December 2-4, 2009 to meet with key congressional representatives and agency staff.
Supervisor Piepho represented Contra Costa County. (See also Attachment B, DCC Schedule/Notes.)
Prior to the trip, the Delta Counties Coalition (DCC) had agreed to promote the following near-term
recommendations to our federal delegation and agency staff:
1) Establish a process through which the DCC can engage with the administration, and the delegation, on an
on-going basis. The DCC must be central to the development of proposals to address Sacramento-San Joaquin
Delta issues in a comprehensive, sustainable manner. We also request that representatives from the appropriate
federal agencies actively participate on the entities established in California’s recently enacted Delta/Water
legislative package, including but not limited to, the Delta Stewardship Council, the Delta Protection
Commission, the Delta Conservancy, and the Science Advisory Board.
2) Secure funding support in the 2010-2011 federal budget and appropriations processes to:
a) Assist the DCC in analyzing aspects of the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) that will not be covered in the
NEPA and CEQA analyses, notably the socio-economic, environmental and hydrologic impacts of BDCP on the
region;
b) Provide resources to permit the DCC to participate with the BDCP as it is developed in order to avoid conflicts
and provide implementable outcomes.
3) Secure federal support for the local and regional habitat management plans in the five Delta counties,
particularly those adjacent to the BDCP and assist federal regulatory agencies and counties in integration of local
terrestrial habitat management plans in the five Delta counties with the aquatic habitat being created by Delta
Smelt and Salmon Biological Opinions.
4) Accelerate federal studies associated with developing storage options and implementing water conservation,
recycling, re-use, and regional self sufficiency as part of an improved statewide storage, flood management, and
water supply systems.
a) Immediate funding to study minimum in-stream flow requirements, as well as salinity in-flows/intrusion and
how they affect federal project operation.
b) Evaluate the impacts of BDCP and an alternative water conveyance facility (i.e., the Peripheral Canal) on
existing project levees and other federal water projects and facilities.
c) Develop and fund a new regional landscape level management program or model specifically for the Delta –
such as those developed for the Great Lakes, Puget Sound, Everglades, or Chesapeake Bay programs.
5) Provide additional resources for infrastructure projects and emergency response projects such as the
completion of through Delta transportation corridor studies and levee improvements; and an increase in funding to
the Public Safety Interoperability grant program to assist Delta Counties with emergency response and recovery.
In addition to these efforts, the Delta Counties Coalition also recently submitted to our federal delegation a request
for support of a project in the 2010 Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) related to the Delta: the
Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Water Infrastructure Authority. This project is intended to serve as the beginning
of discussions on how best to align the authorities of the Army Corps of Engineers with efforts to develop and
implement a comprehensive solution to the water resource problems facing the Delta. Among other things, our
proposal seeks to provide the Corps with the authority to participate in levee improvement, water supply and water
quality projects as well as critical ecosystem and habitat restoration initiatives.
Project Description: In partnership with Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta counties and communities, authorize the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to provide financial and other assistance to Delta counties and communities in
protecting and enhancing water quality and quantity, enhancing habitat and the environment for all species in the
Delta, improving flood control and protection, and protect Delta counties and communities, their economies, and
their quality of life in restoring the Delta for endangered species and water supplies.
Summary of State Water Legislative Package
The following is a summary from CSAC staff of the five bills approved by the Legislature in Special Session 7X
on water. Comments from County staff in this summary are shown in italics.
________________________________________
SBX7 1 (Simitian) – Delta Management – Public Resources
As Amended on November 4, 2009
SBX7 1, the Delta management reform bill by Senator Joe Simitian, would make changes to the management of
the Delta and establish guidelines for the creation of a new Delta plan. Specifically, the bill would do the
following:
• Place into statute the concept of co-equal goals; providing a more reliable water supply for California and
protecting and restoring the Delta eco¬system.
• Make changes to the Delta Protection Commission (DPC), including changes to its membership and scope. The
DPC would be required to develop an economic sustainability plan for the Delta and will study and recommend
whether to change the boundaries of the Primary Zone. The DPC will retain its existing authority to consider
appeals of Primary Zone land-use decisions.
• Create a new Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Conservancy. The conservancy would be charged primarily with
Delta eco-system restoration. Funding for the conservancy would be appropriated from Proposition 84 and 1E
funds, with no ongoing source of funding identified.
• Repeal the Bay-Delta Authority Act.
• Create a new Delta Stewardship Council (Council), and establish the legal framework for the management of the
Delta. The Council would be a regulatory agency charged with developing a Delta plan, to further the co-equal
goals, promote a reliable water supply, promote conservation, and attempt to reduce risks to people, property, and
state interests in the Delta.
• The DPC would also be charged with ensuring consistency of the Delta Plan. The Council can review and advise
local and regional agencies on the consistency of their plans with the Delta Plan. State and local agencies that
propose to implement actions that occur within the legal Delta would be required to submit consistency
certifications to the Council. The Council would review the certification to determine whether the project is
consistent with the Delta Plan . There are exemptions to this consistency determination, including routine
operation and maintenance, state regulatory actions, regional transportation plans, and State Water Project and /
Central Valley Project operations.
Additionally, the bill contains an exemption for any plan, program, project, or activity within the secondary zone
of the Delta that the applicable metropolitan planning organization (MPO), pursuant to SB 375, has determined is
consistent with either a sustainable communities strategy or an alternative planning strategy, and ARB determines
meets the greenhouse gas reduction targets. The bill specifically defines “consistent with” to mean, “the use
designation, density, building intensity, transportation plan, and applicable policies specified for the area in the
sustainable communities strategy or the alternative planning strategy, and any infrastructure necessary to support
the plan, program, project, or activity.”
The bill requires the State Water Board, in consultation with the DPC, to appoint a Delta Watermaster to provide
timely monitoring and enforcement of Board actions. This authority is limited to diversions in the Delta or actions
that apply to conditions in the Delta.
• Create a Delta Independent Science Board and Delta Science Program.
• Require the Council to consider the Bay-Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) for incorporation into the larger Delta
Plan.
________________________________________
SBX7 2 (Cogdill) – Bond Bill – Safe, Clean and Reliable Drinking Water Supply Act of 2010
As Amended on November 4, 2009
SBX7 2, by Senator Dave Cogdill, would place before the voters an $11.14 billion bond for the purposes of
financing a variety of water programs, including water supply, Delta sustainability, water system operational
improvement, conservation and watershed protection, groundwater protection, water storage, drought relief, and
water recycling. The bond does not explicitly include any funding for the proposed peripheral canal (but leaves the
door open to potential mitigation cost coverage). The bond would also be issued in at least two stages, by
authorizing the sale of no more than half of the bond by 2015.
CSAC will take a position on the bond measure next year following review and approval by the CSAC
Agriculture and Natural Resources Policy Committee, Executive Committee, and CSAC Board of Directors.
The following is a summary of the bond’s funding categories:
WATER BOND -- SBX7 2 (Cogdill)
CHAPTER 5 - Drought Relief $455,000,000
- Drought Relief Projects $90,000,000
- Economic Impact from Drought $90,000,000
- Small Community Wastewater $75,000,000
- Safe Drinking Water Revolving Loan $80,000,000
- New River $20,000,000
- Local and Regional Projects in San Diego $100,000,000
CHAPTER 6 - Regional Supply $1,400,000,000
- IRWMP - allocated $1,000,000,000
- (Unallocated/Interregional) $50,000,000
- Local Conveyance $350,000,000
CHAPTER 7 - Delta $2,250,000,000
- Projects $750,000,000
- Ag Economy (out of project pot) [$250,000,000]
- Eco/ BDCP $1,500,000,000
CHAPTER 8 - Statewide Flexibility/Storage $3,000,000,000
CHAPTER 9 - Watershed and Water Quality $1,785,000,000
CHAPTER 10 - Groundwater $1,000,000,000
CHAPTER 11 - Recycling $1,250,000,000
Recycling $1,000,000,000
Conservation $250,000,000
TOTALS $11,140,000,000
________________________________________
SBX7 6 (Steinberg) –Groundwater Monitoring
As Amended on November 4, 2009
SBX7 6, by Senator Darrell Steinberg creates a statewide groundwater monitoring program. The bill states
legislative intent to have systematic monitoring and public reporting of groundwater information in all
groundwater basins and sub-basins. However, the bill does authorize the Department of Water Resources (DWR)
to prioritize groundwater basins for the purposes of monitoring.
Specifically, this bill allows local groundwater management entities, including counties, water replenishment
districts, local agencies, groundwater management agencies, or associations to volunteer to assume the
responsibility of monitoring all or part of a basin. SBX7 6 does not specifically require counties to assume this
responsibility. However, if local entities, including counties, choose not to assume this responsibility they would
exclude themselves from receiving water grants and loans administered by the state, and DWR would assume the
responsibility of groundwater monitoring. There is an exemption included in the bill for disadvantaged
communities. Additionally, the bill requires DWR, if no local agency volunteers, to directly perform groundwater
monitoring functions and charge well owners for the costs of such activity. County staff understands that Section
10933.5(c) expressly prohibits DWR from assessing a fee or charge to recover costs for groundwater monitoring.
Section 10936 authorizes DWR to recover all its costs under this statute to unallocated 2006 water bond revenue.
CSAC communicated to the Legislature and the Administration its concerns with the bill’s approach to
groundwater monitoring. Although SBX7 6 now names DWR as the default groundwater monitor, the bill still
penalizes counties and other local entities over situations in which they have no control.
________________________________________
SBX7 7 (Steinberg) – Water Conservation
As Amended on November 4, 2009
SBX7 7, by Senate Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, would set water conservation targets. Specifically, this bill would:
• Require the state to achieve a 10% reduction in urban per capita water use in California by December 31, 2015,
and a 20% statewide reduction by December 31, 2020.
• Require each urban retail water supplier to develop urban water use targets and an interim urban water use target
by July 1, 2011, and specifies methodologies for achieving the targets. Public hearing requirements are also
included to allow community input on the supplier’s water use target implementation plan.
• Prohibit urban suppliers from requiring changes that reduce process water and allows urban water supplier to
exclude process water from the development of the urban water target if substantial amount of its water deliveries
are for industrial use, but allows for reductions in emergencies. “Process water" is defined as water used for
producing a product or product content.
• Require, on or before July 31, 2012, agricultural water suppliers to implement efficient water management
practices. Mandated practices are limited to installing water meters and charging for water according to the
amount used. Suppliers are exempt from additional specified practices if the supplier documents that such
practices are not locally cost effective or technically feasible.
• Require the Department of Water Resources (DWR) to prepare reports to the Legislature regarding the progress
of urban water management plans and agricultural efficient water management practices.
• Require DWR to promote implementation of regional water resources management practices.
• Require DWR to promote implementation of regional water resources management practices.
• Condition state water grants/loans for urban and agricultural water suppliers on compliance with provisions of
the bill, but allow funding for water conservation under certain conditions and funding by the federal American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.
• Provide that all costs incurred by a water utility, as a result of the bill’s requirements, may be recoverable in
rates subject to review and approval by the Public Utilities Commission.
• Reauthorize the Agricultural Water Management Planning Program.
• Exempt from the bill’s water conservation and water management planning requirements any agricultural
supplier serving less than 25,000 of irrigated land if the state does not provide funding for those purposes.
• Provide an exemption from the bill’s provisions for agricultural water suppliers that are parties to the Colorado
River Quantification Settlement Agreement. (This enables irrigators to sell water to municipalities.)
________________________________________
SBX7 8 (Steinberg) – Water Diversion Reporting/Reallocation of Bond Funding
As Amended on November 4, 2009
SBX7 8, by Senate Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, authorizes the State Water Resources Control Board and DWR to
adopt emergency regulations for the filing of reports of water diversion or use. Specifically, the bill would:
• Repeal water diversion reporting exemptions for diverters in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.
• Increase fines and penalties relating to reporting of diversions.
• Redirect funds from Proposition 84 (2006) and 1E (2006) to pay for various Delta-related projects and purposes. This includes $250 million in grants to local public agencies to implement Integrated Regional Water Management Plans and $222 million to DWR for levee and flood control projects.
This includes $250 million in grants to local public agencies to implement Integrated Regional Water
Management Plans and $222 million to DWR for levee and flood control projects.
• Authorize the addition of 25 water rights enforcement staff at the State Water Resources Control Board, to be
paid for from the Water Rights Fee Fund.
ATTACHMENTS
DCC Schedule Notes
Attachment A
DELTA COUNTIES COALITION
MEETING SCHEDULE / NOTES (DECEMBER 2-4, 2009)
WASHINGTON, DC
REVISED 12-7-09
SUMMARY OF NEXT STEPS
1. Draft Letter to DOI/CEQ from DCC (cc: Rep. Miller, etc.) requesting full participating in BDCP, without
pre-conditions, and requesting technical assistance from one or more Federal Bay-Delta Leadership
Committee members. Target Completion Date: 12/9/009
2. Draft Thank You Letters. Target Completion Date: 12/9/009
3. Dirk Brazil to schedule follow-up meeting with Ed Burton, State Conservationist, California, NRCS, the
week of December 21st or sooner. Target Completion Date: 12/9/009
4. Modify existing WRDA proposal to include specific project recommendations, per request of Rep. George
Miller. Target Completion Date: 12/11/09
5. Review CALFED Bay-Delta Authorization Act and other legislative proposals to identify existing proposals
that could be strengthened and meet DCC objectives. Target Completion Date: December, 2009
6. Secure updated list of opponents to the State legislation from Senator Lois Wolk’s office and circulate
updated document with those offices that received the earlier version. Target Completion Date:
December, 2009
7. Develop recommendations regarding comprehensive Delta legislation for Senator Feinstein’s office. Target
Completion Date: January, 2010
8. Schedule follow-up meeting with DeeDee D’Adamo, District Director, Office of Representative Dennis
Cardoza. Target Completion Date: January, 2010
9. Schedule follow-up meeting with Frank Piccola, head of planning in the Sacramento District Office of the
Corps of Engineers. He can be reached at 916-557-6735 or via email at Francis.c.piccola@usace.army.mil.
Target Completion Date: January, 2010
10. Identify a target date for a follow-up trip to DC. Target Completion Date: TBD
11. Schedule meeting with David Nawi, Senior Advisor to the Secretary of the Department of the Interior for
California and Nevada. Target Completion Date: TBD
12. Develop consensus DCC appropriations request(s) for the FY 2011 appropriations process that address DCC
joint objectives. Target Completion Date: January, 2010
13. Draft letter to Senator Boxer describing the specific requests of the DCC in future federal legislation or
through future federal administrative action. Target Completion Date: January or early February, 2010
Wednesday, December 2
8:00 a.m. Breakfast Briefing at Dubliner (reservation under Larry Ruhstaller for 12 people) All
Phoenix Park Hotel
520 N. Capitol Street, NW Phone (202) 638-6900
9:30 a.m. Congressman Gerald McNerney All
Andrew Horowitz, Legislative Director
312 Cannon House Office Building
Phone (202) 225-1947
Agenda: DCC joint interests regarding concerns related to federal-state initiatives that seek to achieve
the co-equal, long-term goals of sustainable water supply and environmental restoration in the Delta
Key Points/Follow-up: Rep. McNerney expressed strong, unconditional support for DCC objectives;
pledged to be of assistance in any manner possible. Rep. McNerney said that Rep. Oberstar, Chairman of
the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, which has jurisdiction over the Corps of
Engineers, among a number of other agencies, may be able to help the Delta congressional delegation
free up resources to assist the DCC in its efforts to seek federal support for BDCP analysis. The
implication was that the Corps could be a source of funds.
10:30 a.m. Congressman John Garamendi Larry, Ken, Mel
Josh Franco, Legislation and Policy Mike, Roger
2459 Rayburn House Office Building
Phone (202) 225-1880
Key Points/Follow-up: Rep. Garamendi supports reconstruction/improvements of the levees in the Delta;
referenced possible funding source to support local Delta projects that might be secured in a second
stimulus package or from Build America Bonds. Rep. Garamendi expressed strong support for water re-
use: 1 million acre feet of water/equivalent of the third largest river in California could be created
through expanded water reuse. He also expressed support for expanding real-time management of
California rivers, expanded modeling, to improve the efficient use of existing supplies.
11:30 a.m. Lunch at Monocle (reservation under Paul Schlesinger) All
107 D St NE Phone (202) 546-4488
1:15 p.m. Senator Barbara Boxer All
Lynn Abramson, Ph.D., Legislative Assistant
112 Hart Senate Office Building
Phone (202) 224-3553
Agenda: DCC joint interests regarding concerns related to federal-state initiatives that seek to achieve
the co-equal, long-term goals of sustainable water supply and environmental restoration in the Delta
Key Points/Follow-up: Senator Boxer expressed serious reservations about BDCP process, in particular,
the exclusion of Delta Counties (need memo on documents that include the citation that any participant in
the BDCP Steering Committee would have to agree, in advance, to accept construction of a conveyance
facility). Senator Boxer asked the DCC to send her a letter outlining the issues to be addressed at the
federal level that were not properly dealt with in the State legislation. She asked that DCC reach out to
other groups that opposed the State legislation and seek to secure their support for the DCC package of
changes, if possible. She wants it stated in terms of the DCC wants the following assurances that were
provided during the 1982 peripheral canal debate and a modest list other improvements (she referenced
the 1982 assurances and three or four other improvements, as an example). She indicated support for
encouraging DOI and Commerce to work more closely with the DCC and indicated that she would
support a specific request for her assistance in making that happen. Finally, Senator Boxer’s office
indicated a willingness to work with the DCC on both a WRDA request and on a single, unified DCC
request for the FY 2011 appropriations process.
2:00 p.m. David Wegner, Staff Director, Water and Power Subcommittee All
Kiel Weaver, Minority Staff Director, Water and Power Subcommittee
Tyler Kruzich, Majority Legislative Staff, Water and Power Subcommittee
House Committee on Natural Resources
1327 Longworth House Office Building
Phone (202) 225-8331 (Robyn Fischer)
Agenda: DCC joint interests regarding concerns related to federal-state initiatives that seek to achieve
the co-equal, long-term goals of sustainable water supply and environmental restoration in the Delta
Key Points/Follow-up: NAS panel will be announced the week of December 7th. Wegner and Weaver
both indicated support for the concerns of the DCC members and the importance of making certain that
the DCC members have a stronger role in the BDCP process.
4:15 p.m. Senator Dianne Feinstein All
Leah Russin, Natural Resources Counsel
John Watts, Legislative Director
331 Hart Senate Office Building
Phone (202) 224-3841
Agenda: DCC joint interests regarding concerns related to federal-state initiatives that seek to achieve
the co-equal, long-term goals of sustainable water supply and environmental restoration in the Delta
Key Points/Follow-up: Senator Feinstein emphasized that she is focused on getting something
done/solving problems in the Delta. Levee improvements should occur (she focused initially on
encouraging the Counties to force the levee owners to make improvements in the levees, themselves).
She was not aware of the requirements that BDCP had imposed that all steering committee members
agree, in advance, to support conveyance, regardless of what the study effort yielded. She expressed
some concern about the loss of land use authority (develop a list of land use authority reductions/changes
from BDCP???). She encouraged DCC to find a way to become a “significant facilitator.” She
encouraged the Counties to “float a bond” to help pay for Delta improvements. She was not aware that
there was a 50/50 cost-share required in the bond language for mitigation projects (follow-up memo on
this???). She talked about her broad Delta legislation. She expects to have a draft ready for circulation
in the late winter, early spring; targeting introduction in April of next year. She is also expecting to push
for hearings next year. Senator Feinstein asked the DCC members to work with her office on the
legislation, including a recreation title and a substitute program for the proposed Heritage Area
designation for the Delta region. The DCC members extended an invitation to Senator Feinstein and her
staff to tour the Delta Counties with them as she prepares her legislative package.
Thursday, December 3
8:00 a.m. Briefing All
Phoenix Park Hotel - 520 N. Capitol Street, NW
9:00 a.m. Tanya Trujillo, Counsel All
Josh Johnson, Professional Staff Member
Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee
304 Dirksen Senate Office Building
Phone (202) 224-4971
Agenda: DCC joint interests regarding concerns related to federal-state initiatives that seek to achieve
the co-equal, long-term goals of sustainable water supply and environmental restoration in the Delta
Key Points/Follow-up: Josh Johnson recommended that the DCC go through the CALFED Bay-Delta
Authorization Act to identify provisions that the DCC supports and potentially could be strengthened. He
also recommended that the DCC make contact with Betsy Cody at the Congressional Research Service, to
discuss the DCC’s policy objectives/concerns.
11:00 a.m. Anne MacMillan, Senior Policy Advisor to Speaker Pelosi (Ag issues) Larry,Leslie, Terry
Karen Wayland, Senior Policy Advisor to Speaker Pelosi on (Energy issues) Dirk, Roger, Kevin, Joe
H-232 Capitol Building
Phone (202) 225-0100
Agenda: DCC joint interests regarding concerns related to federal-state initiatives that seek to achieve
the co-equal, long-term goals of sustainable water supply and environmental restoration in the Delta
Key Points/Follow-up: Requested that the DCC follow-up with her on the outcome of the joint Member
meeting. She emphasized that the Speaker’s office is interested in deliverables that work for the Delta
and those south of the Delta, as well.
11:30 a.m. Congressman Jim Costa Supervisors, Mel, Keith
Jaclyn Murray, Legislative Assistant
1314 Longworth House Office Building
Phone (202) 225-3341
Agenda: DCC joint interests regarding concerns related to federal-state initiatives that seek to achieve
the co-equal, long-term goals of sustainable water supply and environmental restoration in the Delta
Key Points/Follow-up: Rep. Costa indicated a desire to work with the DCC to protect the Delta while at
the same time creating the opportunity to make improvements that will allow more water to move south
of the Delta.
12:45 p.m. Joint Congressional Meeting
Meet at 2205 Rayburn (Rep. George Miller’s office) to be escorted to Supervisors
1:00 p.m. meeting at HC-7 Capitol Building with the following Members.
Congressman George Miller, Congresswoman Doris Matsui,
Congressman John Garamendi, Congressman Mike Thompson and
Congressman Gerald McNerney
Agenda: DCC joint interests regarding concerns related to federal-state initiatives that seek to achieve
the co-equal, long-term goals of sustainable water supply and environmental restoration in the Delta
Key Points/Follow-up: Rep. Miller requested that DCC write a letter to DOI and CEQ requesting that
the counties be permitted to participate in BDCP without pre-conditions and that DOI/CEQ work to
provide technical assistance to help the Counties participate fully and constructively in that process. Rep.
Miller also indicated that he and the balance of the Delta delegation would like to work with the DCC on
a revised WRDA proposal, and requested that the DCC generate a list of specific projects that could be
authorized for funding in WRDA. Reps. Miller and Garamendi, among others, expressed strong support
for expanding federal efforts to promote water recycling.
1:00 p.m. Congressman Thomas McClintock Ken/Terry/lobbyists
Igor Birman, Chief of Staff/Policy Advisor
Kristen Glenn, Legislative Director
508 Cannon House Office Building
Phone (202) 225-2511
Agenda: DCC joint interests regarding concerns related to federal-state initiatives that seek to achieve
the co-equal, long-term goals of sustainable water supply and environmental restoration in the Delta
Key Points/Follow-up: Rep. McClintock said he would work with the DCC. He expressed his
opposition to water recycling programs and his strong support for surface water storage. He also stressed
his strong support for protecting and preserving water rights, viewing them as a critical property right that
provides the economic foundation for transfers and the more efficient use of water.
2:00 p.m. Congressman Dennis Cardoza Ken/Terry/lobbyists
Callie Varner, Senior Legislative Assistant
Marilyn Shapley, Legislative Assistant
1224 Longworth House Office Building
Phone (202) 225-6131
Agenda: DCC joint interests regarding concerns related to federal-state initiatives that seek to achieve
the co-equal, long-term goals of sustainable water supply and environmental restoration in the Delta
Key Points/Follow-up: Rep. Cardoza’s office indicated strong support for the DCC’s WRDA proposal
and stressed their desire to work with the DCC to protect the Delta while at the same time creating the
opportunity to make near-term improvements that will allow more water to move south of the Delta.
Rep. Cardoza’s office requested that DCC organize a meeting with DeeDee D’Adamo, Rep. Cardoza’s
District Director, to work with her on DCC initiatives/concerns.
2:30 p.m. Congressman Dan Lungren All
Peter Tateishi , Deputy Chief of Staff
Sandra Wiseman, Senior Legislative Assistant
2262 Rayburn House Office Building
Phone (202) 225-5716
Agenda: DCC joint interests regarding concerns related to federal-state initiatives that seek to achieve
the co-equal, long-term goals of sustainable water supply and environmental restoration in the Delta
Key Points/Follow-up: Rep. Lungren’s office expressed strong concern regarding the lack of local
involvement in BDCP. They offered to follow-up with CEQ and DOI to encourage them to include the
Counties fully in their deliberations.
3:30 p.m. Michael Boots, Associate Director for Ecosystems, Lands and Water, All
Council on Environmental Quality
Matt Klasen, Presidential Management Fellow
Council on Environmental Quality
Matthew Siegel, Program Examiner, Water and Power Branch,
Energy, Science and Water Division, Natural Resources Programs,
Office of Management and Budget
Roger Gorke, Senior Policy Advisor, Office of Water,
Environment Protection Agency
Kira Finkler, Deputy Commissioner, Office of External and Intergovernmental Affairs
Department of Interior
Kelly Denit, NOAA
Department of Commerce
Jason Weller, Chief of Staff, Natural Resources Conservation Service
Department of Agriculture
Jim Townsend
Army Corps of Engineers
722 Jackson Place, N.W.
Phone (202) 395-5750 (Courtney Hight 395-2308)
Agenda: DCC joint interests regarding concerns related to federal-state initiatives that seek to achieve
the co-equal, long-term goals of sustainable water supply and environmental restoration in the Delta
Key Points/Follow-up: The meeting brought together representatives of each of the
departments/agencies participating in the Federal Bay-Delta Leadership Committee. Matt Klasen
requested a single point of contact for the DCC to keep the group informed of developments and/or solicit
input.
5:00 p.m. DCC Briefing All
Phoenix Park Hotel - 520 N. Capitol Street, NW
Friday, December 4
8:30 a.m. Dave White, Chief, Natural Resources Conservation Service Mary, Keith, Leslie, Mike,
Jason Weller, Chief of Staff for Dave White, NRCS Jim, Dirk, Paul, Roger, Joe
Ed Burton, CA State Conservationist, NRCS
1400 Independence Ave, SW, 5th Floor
Phone (202) 720-7246
Agenda: DCC joint interests regarding concerns related to federal-state initiatives that seek to achieve
the co-equal, long-term goals of sustainable water supply and environmental restoration in the Delta
Key Points/Follow-up: Dave White said he was very sympathetic to the DCC’s concerns that the
Counties were relegated to a very limited, unofficial role in the BDCP process. He stressed that NRCS
works on a consensus basis and works closely with local government jurisdictions in the areas in which
they operate. He stressed that NRCS is a small player in the Delta, but said there were several near-term
opportunities for NRCS to assist the Delta Counties: competing for funding under NRCS’s Conservation
Innovation Grants program and negotiating one or more cooperative agreements for NRCS technical
assistance funding. Ed Burton offered to hold a half day meeting with the Delta Counties to discuss the
above mentioned funding opportunities in more detail and explore ways NRCS can work with the DCC
going forward.
10:30 a.m. Special Assistant Let Mon Lee, Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army Mary, Keith, Leslie, Mike,
Civil Works Jim, Dirk, Paul, Joe
Department of the Army
Lee Conference Room, Pentagon TBD
Phone (703) 697-9809
Agenda: DCC joint interests regarding concerns related to federal-state initiatives that seek to achieve
the co-equal, long-term goals of sustainable water supply and environmental restoration in the Delta
Recommend that you plan to all arrive outside the Pentagon at the Pentagon Metro Entrance NLT 30 minutess before the start of the
meeting. Once you all arrive outside the Pentagon Metro Entrance, call our office (703-697-9809) or (703-614-3977), to advise us
that you've all arrived outside the Pentagon. At that point, you should then enter the security screening line outside the Pentagon.
On average, it will take you 15 minutes to process thru this security screening and move into a security holding area inside the
Pentagon, where you'll have to wait for a member of our office to meet you. On average, it also takes a member of our office 15
minutes to walk from our office to the security holding area inside the Pentagon. Once a member of our office links up w/your
group in the security holding area inside the Pentagon, you will each receive a badge from security personnel, there. Once each of
you have your badge, you'll be escorted by the member of our office from that area to our Sec Darcy's office where this meeting will
be held. Each member of your group will need two picture IDs.
Key Points/Follow-up: Let Mon Lee requested that the DCC meet with Frank Piccola, the head of
planning in the Sacramento District Office of the Corps of Engineers. He can be reached at 916-557-
6735 or by email at Francis.c.piccola@usace.army.mil. Corps wants to work with the DCC on issues,
such as the Delta Islands and Levee Stabilization Study.
DCC Attendees Cell Phones
Supervisor Mary Piepho, Contra Costa County (925) 250-7183
Keith DeVore, Director, Water Resources, Sacramento County (916) 747-8070
Leslie McFadden, Legislative Advocate, Sacramento County (916) 600-4349
Supervisor Larry Ruhstaller, San Joaquin County (209) 670-4464
Supervisor Ken Vogel, San Joaquin County (209) 598-0119
Mel Lytle, Water Resources Coordinator, San Joaquin County (209) 612-3147
Terry Dermody, Water Counsel, San Joaquin County (209) 489-5978
Supervisor Mike Reagan, Solano County (707) 344-2705
Supervisor Jim Provenza, Yolo County (530) 554-7331
Dirk Brazil, Deputy County Administrator, Yolo County (530) 219-5930
DCC Lobbyists
Paul Schlesinger, Alcade & Fay Contra Costa County (703) 508-6700
Kevin Fay, Alcade & Fay (Thursday Only) Contra Costa County (703) 801-3233
Roger Gwinn, The Ferguson Group SJC and Sacramento County (202) 255-5759
Joe Krahn, Waterman and Associates Solano County (703) 967-9521
1
WATER COMMITTEE
Michael J. Reagan (Dist. 5) 675 Texas Street, Suite 6500
Water Committee Chair Fairfield, CA 94533-6342
(707) 784-6130 FAX (707) 784-6665
mjreagan@solanocounty.com http://www.co.solano.ca.us
John M. Vasquez (Dist. 4)
(707) 784-6128
jmvasquez@solanocounty.com
IMPACTS OF WATER LEGISLATION ON CALIFORNIA COUNTIES
CSAC Policy Direction on State Water Proposals
Approved by the CSAC Board of Directors on September 11, 2008, the CSAC Policy Direction
on State Water Proposals recognizes that California faces many complicated a nd compelling
water resource issues. CSAC has supported statutory protection of counties of origin and
watershed areas, support for existing water rights, the need for new and expanded water
resources, and the need for local water conservation efforts. C SAC also acknowledged the
reliance of counties on the Delta as a water delivery system, and the urgency with which all of
the Delta partners, including the State must act to resolve and fund infrastructure,
environmental and supply issues.
Delta/Water Strategy:
Solano County along with Contra Costa, Sacramento, San Joaquin and Yolo Counties came
together to form the Delta Counties Coalition (DCC). These counties did so because they
realized there were several statewide Delta/Water efforts in play that would potentially result in
significant impacts to the Delta Counties. This is in keeping with CSAC’s existing policy that
recognizes the Delta as a critical region of statewide importance encompassing vital water,
transportation, energy, land use, agriculture and economic interests.
Legislative Results:
Governance: CSAC believes that any proposed Delta solutions be implemented in a manner
that ensures Delta counties’ status as voting members of any proposed Delta governance
structure. The DCC sought representation on the Delta Stewardship Council, the Delta
Protection Commission (DPC) and the Delta Conservancy. As a result of efforts to date, all
five Delta Counties have Supervisors who serve on two of three governance bodies (the
Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Conservancy and the DPC). The Delta counties collectively
have one seat on the Delta Stewardship Council, which was not part of the origi nally proposed
council membership and are looking to the Governor and Legislative appointments to include
greater Delta representation on the Stewardship Council. A dditionally, the membership of the
DPC was modified to balance and strengthen local government perspective on the
Commission.
Definition of the Delta: CSAC policy calls for the demonstration of clearly evidenced public
benefit to any proposed changes to the boundaries of the Delta. The policy also accords
special recognition and advances the economic vitality of “heritage” or “legacy” communities in
the Delta. During negotiations, there was a proposal to change the definition of the Delta; to
2
include the primary zone, legacy communities and at times parts if not all of the secondary
zone. The DCC fought to confine State usurpation of land use authority by defining what
constituted “the Delta” to include only the primary zone. This definition of primary zone held in
the legislation, as passed. A study will be commissioned to review the secondary zone. This
is consistent with CSAC policy regarding changes to the boundaries.
Local County Authority:
CSAC believes that any proposed Delta solutions be implemented in a manner that e nsures
consistency with affected counties adopted policies and plans and that respects the affected
counties’ land use authority, revenues, public health and safety, economic development, water
rights, and agricultural viability. The Legislative package sends troubling messages on this. It
provides for the development of State Plans by State Boards for the Delta and then requires
that local government land use plans be made consistent with these State Plans. The DCC
argued for enhanced representation on these governing bodies in order to ensure the Delta
counties, cities and special districts are treated fairly.
The Delta Counties believe that the Delta Protection Commission is the appropriate body to
establish land use policies for the Delta. The new legislation reforms the Commission so that a
majority of the eleven member body is composted of city and county elected officials.
However, the new legislation also allows the De lta Stewardship Council to nullify the land use
decisions of cities or counties in the Delta, without consultation with the Delta Protection
Commission. The Delta Protection Commission or its policies need to be considered in the
land use actions that are brought to the Delta Stewardship Council for a determination of
consistency with the Delta Plan.
Bond Monies: CSAC believes that any proposed Delta solutions be implemented in a manner
that secures financial support for flood management, improved emergenc y response,
preservation of agriculture, protection of water resources, and enhancement and restoration of
habitat. The bond package, if approved by the voters, does have some monies for some of
these programs.
The DCC sought to have parity in the proposed bond financing between in-Delta ecosystem
restoration and local sustainability projects. While the bond designations for these projects
went from as high as $2 billion for ecosystem and nothing for Delta communities; ultimately,
$1.5 billion was approved for ecosystem restoration and $750 million for local sustainability,
including upstream wastewater treatment and economic mitigation for lost agricultural
production. This was more than was originally proposed in the bond measures , but is
inadequate to mitigate local impacts.
Further, the DCC argued that previously approved bond monies needed to be expended for
Delta projects immediately. This need was recognized and it is hoped that projects for a
variety of programs, including levees, will move more quickly – with a positive benefit to the
Delta.
Conservancy: CSAC believes that any proposed Delta solutions be implemented in a manner
that improves and protects the Delta ecosystem, water quality, flows and supply; and that
promotes recreation and environmental protection. The DCC was able to write bill language
for the Conservancy. This language held throughout the legislative process and ultimately was
3
the language approved by the Governor. It will require the Conservancy to support efforts that
advance both environmental protection and the economic well -being of Delta residents in a
complementary manner, including protecting and preserving Delta agriculture, assisting the
Delta regional economy through the operation of the Conservancy’s programs and, protecting,
conserving, and restoring the region’s physical, agricultural, cultural, historical, and living
resources.
Water Rights/Diversion: CSAC believes that any proposed Delta solutions be implemented in
a manner that respects the affected counties’ water rights. The DCC also expressed strong
concern about the need to protect local water rights. Stronger area -of-origin protections in the
Delta were successfully incorporated into the legislative package.
Conservation and Groundwater Monitoring: CSAC believes that any proposed Delta
solutions be implemented in a manner that support development of adequate water supply for
the south, utilizing the concept of "Regional Self Sufficiency" whereby each region maximizes
conservation and recycled water use, implements storage (surface and groundwater) and
considers desalination, as necessary. The DCC expressed concerns about water
conservation measures that disproportionately impacted Delta Counties. Conservation
language for residential uses did get included in the package signed by the Governor;
however, the Legislature is expected to revisit this topic to provide cleanup language.
The new legislation makes counties ultimately responsible for any needed groundwater
monitoring. Unfortunately, the legislation provides no mechanism for counties to fund this new
mandate. Counties that fail to perform needed groundwater monitoring will be ineligible to
receive certain grant funds. The Delta Counties believe legislation should provide counties with
a mechanism to fund this groundwater monitoring or eliminate the penalty if a county is unable
to provide the data.
Delta County Issues with the Legislation: The DCC actively participated in the legislative
process this year and offered many solutions that were consistent with the Delta Vision's
coequal goals of ecosystem restoration and water supply reliability and with the DCC's
adopted 11 Principles. While some of DCC's concerns were addressed in legislation, as
summarized above, the DCC remained opposed to t he final package because the Delta
counties never received adequate assurance that Delta communities would not be adversely
harmed. The DCC continues to have major concerns with the financing of the package, the
powers and governance of the new Council, an d the new water conservation requirements, as
described below:
1. There is no assurance in the five-bill package that there will be adequate, reliable
ongoing funding for restoring and protecting the Delta; operating either the new
governance bodies or the ongoing Delta Protection Commission; or providing a
sufficient supply of clean water. Funds for Delta Sustainability to help mitigate the
impacts to Delta counties are not guaranteed or sufficient.
Delta Counties are being asked to provide matching funds for projects to repair the
damage done to the Delta as a result of its role in the State’s water supply system. This
is distressing because the counties are not responsible for the failing condition of the
Delta and do not have the funds need ed to complete the match. Delta funding is
4
contingent on passage of $11.1 billion in general obligation bonds – another battle yet to
fight.
If the bonds do pass, Senate Bill X7 -2 authorizes, but does not require, $250 million to
provide assistance to local governments due to loss of productive agricultural lands for
habitat and ecosystem restoration within the Delta. Moreover, the $750 million that is
set aside for Delta Sustainability does not allocate a specific amount to counties, cities
or impacted special districts. The bond further limits the amount of funding that we can
receive from the state for sustaining the Delta to 50% of total project costs. We question
where the balance of the needed funding will be found.
2. The new Stewardship Council in Senate Bill X7 -1 does not have sufficient oversight or
authority over the development, approval, and implementation of the Bay Delta
Conservation Plan (BDCP). Further, the package does not provide adequate protection
to Delta communities from adverse direct and indirect impacts the BDCP can cause due
to the construction of new water conveyance facilities or habitat restoration. Funding for
either upfront or ongoing mitigation related to the BDCP is missing from this package.
3. While the Delta Counties agree that water conservation is an important part of the
solution to the water crisis, we have concerns that the targets set in Senate Bill X7 -7
prejudice our Delta Counties for the water th at we are responsibly using and conserving
now. Because we are not short of water, due to prudent planning and substantial
investment in our local water infrastructure, this legislation may cause us to have to
conserve disproportionately more water than other parts of the state at an unreasonable
cost to our local ratepayers. Moreover, this bill requires us to undertake conservation
measures even if they are not locally cost-effective.
Next Steps:
It is in the best interest of CSAC to maintain a proactive approach on Water and the Delta,
which will ensure the best possible result for all counties in California. There continue to be
many statewide initiatives – such as the Bay Delta Conservation Plan, the Central Valley
Flood Protection Program and the State Water Plan – that will impact counties. And, the
Federal Government is becoming more involved in Delta water issues which will require
additional diligence on CSAC’s behalf.
Going forward, CSAC should remain committed to the existing CSAC Policy Direction on State
Water Proposals and continue to focus on ensuring the best possible f uture for California
Counties. This platform will benefit all California counties. Without a sustainable Delta, water
will not be able to be distributed through the Delta to the rest of California .
Delta Counties would like CSAC to make every effort to ensure counties maintain:
The maximum amount of meaningful authority over governance and local land use,
The greatest number of reliable assurances to protect County interests including water
rights, and
Adequate funding to support mitigating impacts to counties especially Delta counties,
and other local governments, and residents from State and Federal initiatives.
Resolution No.
AIR-3274 Deliberation 25.
BOS Agenda
Meeting Date:12/15/2009
Time (Duration):10 Minutes
Amend County File # LP2054-92 adding Condition of Approval #6.17 for the collection of a Local Enforcement Agency fee
Submitted For: Catherine Kutsuris, Conservation & Development Director
Department:Conservation & Development Division:CD - Senior Planning
Noticed Public Hearing: Yes Official Body: Board of Supervisors
Presenter/Phone, if applicable: Audio-Visual Needs:
Handling Instructions: District: District I
Contact, Phone: John Oborne, 925-335-1207
Recommendation(s):
1. OPEN the public hearing and take testimony on the proposed land use permit amendment.
2. CLOSE the public hearing.
3. FIND that the action is exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15061 (b) (3); the activity is covered by the general rule that
CEQA applies only to projects that have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment.
4. ACCEPT the recommendation of the County Planning Commission contained in Resolution No. 29-2009 (attached as
Exhibit 1).
5. APPROVE an amendment to Land Use Permit No. 2054-92 (attached as Exhibit 2), adding Condition of Approval No. 6.17
(attached as Exhibit 3) to facilitate the collection of fees to fund the County's Local Enforcement Agency.
6. Direct the Conservation and Development Department to post the Notice of Exemption with the County Clerk.
Fiscal Impact:
The approval of this amendment would facilitate the collection of a Local Enforcement Agency fee of $353,010.00.
Background:
The Environmental Health Division of Contra Costa Health Services is certified by the California Integrated Waste
Management Board to be the Local Enforcement Agency (“County LEA”) of Contra Costa County with the exception of the
City of Pittsburg. The County LEA is authorized to collect tonnage fees established by the Contra Costa Board of Supervisors
from solid waste facility operators to fund the cost of the County LEA’s solid waste enforcement activities.
In July 1993, the County Board of Supervisors approved a Land Use Permit (LUP 2054-92) allowing West Contra Costa
Sanitary Landfill (“WCCSL”) (Applicant & Operator) to construct and operate a bulk material processing and resource recovery
center at the landfill site in North Richmond. In December 2004, amendments to the Use Permits issued by the County and City
of Richmond were approved allowing expansion of various permitted resource recovery operations on-site as well as a new
solid waste transfer station, know referred to as the Golden Bear Transfer Station (“Golden Bear”).
In or about September of 2006, active landfill disposal operations at the West County Landfill ended and utilization of the
In or about September of 2006, active landfill disposal operations at the West County Landfill ended and utilization of the
Golden Bear facility to manage and transfer solid wastes began. No LEA tonnage fees were remitted to the County for the solid
waste deposited at Golden Bear from October 1, 2006 through January 31, 2008. The accrued LEA fees for this period are
$353,010.00.
Representatives of Republic Services Inc. (Republic) , the parent company of the owner and operator of Golden Bear Transfer
Station (West County Landfill, Inc. and Golden Bear Transfer Services, Inc., respectively) have advised that fees were not
collected from waste haulers or other customers with which to pay LEA tonnage fee to the County.
County staff and representatives of Republic have developed a mechanism by which the County can recover the past due LEA
fees. The applicant filed a land use permit amendment to add a condition which requires an additional tonnage fee be paid to the
County at the rate $0.50/ton on a monthly basis until the sum of $353,010.00 has been paid in full. At that time, the condition
will become null and void. The permit amendment will not become effective, however, unless and until the Board’s approval of
a settlement agreement among the County and the owner and operator of Golden Bear which is currently being drafted.
The County Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on December 1, 2009 and unanimously recommended the Board
approve the land use permit amendment.
Budget Information
Information about available funds
Budgeted: Funds Available: Adjustment: Amount Available:
Unbudgeted: Funds NOT Available: Amendment:
Account Code(s) for Available Funds
1:
Fund Transfers
Attachments
Exhibit 1-Res. No. 29-2009
Exhibit 2-COAs for LP 2054-92
Exhibit 3-COA No. 6.17
Minutes Attachments
No file(s) attached.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute an agreement with BNSF Railway
Company for the installation of a railroad crossing surface at Viera Avenue.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no impact to the General Fund. The estimated total cost of these railroad crossing improvements is
$101,622.00. The actual cost will be determined with a final invoice payment upon completion of the improvements.
The County will pay the final actual cost within 30 days of receipt of invoice. This work will be funded by a Bicycle
Transportation Alliance (BTA) Grant. (100%).
BACKGROUND:
The Public Works Department is proposing to construct bike lanes along Viera Avenue in the Antioch area which
requires BNSF to install a wider railroad crossing surface plus minor pavement widening and conform work in order
to accommodate the new bike lanes. At the County's request, BNSF Railway Company will provide all services to
construct these improvements.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Larry Theis, 313-2166
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: EMY L. SHARP, Deputy
cc: Adelina Huerta, Joellen Water
C. 1
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Julia R. Bueren, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:APPROVE a Crossing Surface Installation Agreement with BNSF Railway Company for the Viera Avenue Bike Lane
Project. Project No.: 0662-6R4088
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If this agreement is not approved, the construction of this county project will be delayed.
ATTACHMENTS
BNSF Railway Co. agreement
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE the Right of Way Contract – Temporary Construction Easement from Feasible Properties, Buchanan,
LLC, a California Limited Liability Company (Feasible Properties), dated November 30, 2009, for the required
property rights located at 1600 Buchanan Road, Antioch, Assessor’s Parcel No.: 076-440-004.
AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute said Right of Way Contract – Temporary
Construction Easement on behalf of Contra Costa County (County).
APPROVE payment of $42,110 for said property rights and DIRECT Contra Costa Transportation Authority Funds
(CCTA) to make payment to Feasible Properties, Buchanan, LLC, a California Limited Liability Company, c/o
Lawrence Cahn, 1319 Barrows Road, Oakland, CA 94610.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no impact to the County General Fund. The activity is funded by CCTA (100%) (ACQ/3540).
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Olivia Reynolds,
313-2306
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: EMY L. SHARP, Deputy
cc:
C. 2
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Julia R. Bueren, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:State Route 4/Somersville Road to State Route 160, Antioch area. Project No.: 4660-6X4168
BACKGROUND:
These property rights are required for the State Route 4 East, Somersville Road to State Route 160 project in
accordance with the approved plans and specifications. The property owner required indemnification language in
the right of way contract.
The Environmental Clearance Number is SCH No. 2004092135.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
The project will not have sufficient land rights to allow construction in accordance with the approved plans and
specifications.
ATTACHMENTS
Right of Way
RECOMMENDATION(S):
ADOPT Resolution No. 2009/571 accepting completion of warranty period and release of cash deposit for faithful
performance for the Subdivision Agreement (Right-of-Way Landscaping), for RA 05-01187 (cross reference SD
99-08306), project being developed by Shapell Homes, a Division of Shapell Industries, Inc., a Delaware
Corporation, as recommended by the Public Works Director, San Ramon (Dougherty Valley) area.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No fiscal impact.
BACKGROUND:
The landscape improvements have met the guarantee performance standards for the warranty period following
completion and acceptance of improvements.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
The developer, Shapell Homes, a Division of Shapell Industries, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, will not receive a
refund of their cash deposit, the Subdivision Agreement (Right-of-Way Landscaping) and performance/maintenance
surety bond will not be exonerated, and the billing account will not be liquidated and closed.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: J. LaRocque - 3-2315
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors
on the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: EMY L. SHARP, Deputy
cc: D. Favero, Engineering Services,, A. Bell, Construction, , E. Sanders, M & T Lab, , P. Edwards, Engineering Services, , C. Sumpter, Current Planning, Department of
Conservation and Development, , C. Low, City of San Ramon, , C. Taylor, Windemere BLC, Land Company LLC,
C. 3
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Julia R. Bueren, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Accepting completion of warranty period and release of cash deposit for Subdivision Agreement RA 05-01187
ATTACHMENTS
Resolution No.
2009/571
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board
Adopted this Resolution on 12/15/2009 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
RECUSE:
Resolution No. 2009/571
Accepting completion of warranty period and release of cash deposit for faithful performance for the Subdivision Agreement
(Right-of-Way Landscaping), RA 05-01187 (cross reference SD 99-08306), project being developed by Shapell Homes, a
Division of Shapell Industries, Inc. a Delaware Corporation, as recommended by the Public Works Director, San Ramon area.
On December 16, 2003, this Board resolved that the landscape improvements in RA 05-01187 (cross reference SD 99-08306)
were completed as provided in the Subdivision Agreement (Right-of-Way Landscaping) with Shapell Homes, a Division of
Shapell Industries, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, and now on the recommendation of the Public Works Director;
The Board hereby FINDS that the landscape improvements have satisfactorily met the guaranteed performance standards for the
period following completion and acceptance. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Public Works Director is
AUTHORIZED to:
• REFUND the 2,200.00 cash deposit (Auditor’s Deposit Permit No. 502197, dated May 1, 2008) plus interest to Shapell Homes,
a Division of Shapell Industries, Inc. a Delaware Corporation in accordance with Government Code Section 53079 (if
appropriate), Ordinance Code Section 94-4.406, and the subdivision agreement.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that upon completion of the warranty and maintenance period, the San Ramon City Council shall
accept the landscape improvements for maintenance in accordance with the Dougherty Valley Memorandum of Understanding.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the warranty period has been completed and the Subdivision Agreement (Right-of-Way
Landscaping) and surety bond, Bond No. 929 412 140, dated April 11, 2008, issued by The Continental Insurance Company, are
exonerated.
Contact: J. LaRocque - 3-2315
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: , Deputy
cc: D. Favero, Engineering Services,, A. Bell, Construction, , E. Sanders, M & T Lab, , P. Edwards, Engineering Services, , C. Sumpter, Current Planning,
Department of Conservation and Development, , C. Low, City of San Ramon, , C. Taylor, Windemere BLC, Land Company LLC,
RECOMMENDATION(S):
ADOPT Resolution No. 2009/572 accepting completion of private improvements, for MS 90-00141, for project being
developed by Charles M. Farr and Lorraine A. Farr, as recommended by the Public Works Director, San Ramon area.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No fiscal impact.
BACKGROUND:
The developer completed the private improvements required of the minor subdivision.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
The private improvements will not be accepted as complete, the developer will not receive a refund of their cash
deposit, the Subdivision Agreement and performance/maintenance surety (letter of credit) will not be exonerated.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009
12/15/2009
APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:Seven Speakers, Matt Trost, Michael Warholic, James A. Warholic, Patrick WarholicCharles Farr, Michael L.
Rains, and Lori Farr,
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: J. LaRocque - 3-2315
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: EMY L. SHARP, Deputy
cc: D. Favero, Engineering Services,, A. Bell, Construction,, E. Sanders, M & T Lab,, P. Edwards, Engineering Services,
C. 4
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Julia R. Bueren, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Accepting completion of improvements, MS 90-00141, San Ramon area.
ATTACHMENTS
Resolution No.
2009/572
Recorded at the request of:Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors
Return To:Public Works -Engineering Services
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board
Adopted this Resolution on 12/15/2009 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
RECUSE:
Resolution No. 2009/572
Accepting completion of improvements, MS 90-00141, as recommended by the Public Works Director, San Ramon area.
These improvements are approximately located off Bollinger Canyon Road.
The Public Works Director has notified this Board that the private improvements in MS 90-00141 have been completed as
provided in the Subdivision Agreement with Charles M. Farr and Lorraine A. Farr, heretofore approved by this Board in
conjunction with the filing of the Subdivision Map.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the improvements have been COMPLETED as of December 15, 2009, thereby
establishing the six month terminal period for the filing of liens in case of action under said Subdivision Agreement:
DATE OF AGREEMENT August 15, 2006
NAME OF BANK Fremont Bank
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED the payment (labor and materials) surety for $139,550.00, Letter of Credit No. 3140282 issued
by the above bank be RETAINED for the six month lien guarantee period until June 15, 2010, at which time the Public Works
Director is AUTHORIZED to arrange for the return of the Letter of Credit less the amount of any claims on file.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the private improvements have been COMPLETED and are NOT ACCEPTED NOR
DECLARED as County Roads, at this time.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that there is no warranty period required, and the Public Works Director is AUTHORIZED to
refund the $2,791.00 cash security for performance (Auditor's Deposit Permit No. 467997, dated July 27, 1996) plus interest in
accordance with Government Code Section 53079, if appropriate, to Charles M. Farr and Lorraine A. Farr pursuant to the
requirements of the Ordinance Code; and the Subdivision Agreement and performance surety for $276,309.00 Letter of Credit
No. 3140282, dated July 26, 2006, are exonerated.
Contact: J. LaRocque - 3-2315
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and
entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: , Deputy
cc: D. Favero, Engineering Services,, A. Bell, Construction,, E. Sanders, M & T Lab,, P. Edwards, Engineering Services,
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE execution of Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement for the Maintenance of the Diablo
Vista Middle School Playfields (“JEPA”) with the Town of Danville and the San Ramon Unified School District, as
recommended by the Public Works Director in the form attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There will be no impact on the General Fund. Funds that the County would be required to distribute to the San Ramon
Unified School District pursuant to the JEPA are derived from assessments paid by property owners in certain
subdivisions in the Danville area. County administrative staff costs are also funded with these assessment revenues.
{Project No. 7843-6X5237, Countywide Landscape and Lighting District AD1979-3 (LL-2), Zone 71 Funds}
BACKGROUND:
In 2002, the County approved and certified a final environmental impact report for the Alamo Creek and Intervening
Properties/Remaining Intervening Properties projects (collectively known as the “Integrated Project”), involving the
development of 1,396 units
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: T. Rie - 3-2363
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: EMY L. SHARP, Deputy
cc: D. Favero, Engineering Services, T. Rie, Flood Control,, W. Quever, Finance,, S. Cohen, Special Districts,
C. 5
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Julia R. Bueren, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Approve and Authorize the execution of Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement with the Town of Danville and San
Ramon Unified School District
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
in three subdivisions along Camino Tassajara near Danville. Shortly thereafter, the Town of Danville (“Danville”)
filed a lawsuit challenging the County’s approval of the Integrated Projects under the California Environmental
Quality Act. The following year, Danville again sued, alleging the County’s approval of the Integrated Project
violated a 1994 settlement agreement concerning the 11,000-unit Dougherty Valley project south of Danville. In
2004, the County, Danville and developers Windemere BLC Land Company, Contra Costa RE Investors, LLC,
successor in interest to Braddock & Logan Group II, L.P. (“Braddock”) Shapell Industries, Inc. (“Shapell”), and
Ponderosa Homes, II, Inc. (“Ponderosa”), entered into a Comprehensive Agreement to Settle Litigation
(“Settlement Agreement”) to resolve these lawsuits.
The Settlement Agreement dealt primarily with traffic, childcare and park issues. Among other things, the
Settlement Agreement required developers Braddock, Shapell and Ponderosa to use diligent and good faith efforts
to cause the imposition of a $75 annual assessment on Integrated Project property owners to be used to maintain
15 acres of playfields at Diablo Vista Middle School Playfields (“Playfields”) to Danville’s playfield standards.
Pursuant to this requirement, the County conducted an assessment ballot proceeding in 2005 on the proposed
formation of a new zone, Zone 71, of Countywide Landscape and Lighting District AD 1979-3 (LL-2), and
imposition of a $80 annual assessment, to include the $75 for the Playfields maintenance and an additional $5 for
the County’s administrative and engineering costs. All of the ballots cast were in favor of the proposal, and the
County began collecting the assessments on the Fiscal Year 2005-2006 tax roll. As of June 2009 approximately
$169,000 has been collected.
The Settlement Agreement required the County to make the assessment revenues intended for the maintenance of
the Playfields (“Additional Maintenance Funding”) to Danville or, at Danville’s request, to the San Ramon
Unified School District (“District”). In the proposed JEPA among the County, Danville, and the District, Danville
would assign its right to receive the Additional Maintenance Funding to the District. The proposed JEPA would
then set up a mechanism by which the County would disburse the Additional Maintenance Funding directly to the
District.
In return for receipt of the Additional Maintenance Funding, the District would be obligated to spend the
maintenance funding only for the purpose for which it was collected, i.e., the maintenance of the Playfields to
Danville’s standards, as opposed to the baseline maintenance that would otherwise be provided by the District.
Attachment A to the JEPA sets forth Danville’s standards, referred to in the attachment as “Additional
Maintenance.” Danville’s standards generally require a higher frequency of mowing, weeding, irrigation repair,
fertilization, rodent control, etc., than the District’s baseline maintenance standards.
The JEPA would require the County to disburse the Additional Maintenance Funding to the District twice per
year, on January 15 and May 15. The JEPA would also require the District to report to the County and Danville
annually by March 30 as to the District’s collection and expenditures of, and interest earned on the Additional
Maintenance Funding. Additionally, all parties would be required to indemnify each other for liabilities arising
from their own actions in performing their respective obligations under the Agreement.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If the JEPA is not approved, the County would retain the Additional Maintenance Funding and the District would
be unable to use these funds to maintain the Playfields to Danville’s standards, contrary to the intent of the
Settlement Agreement.
ATTACHMENTS
JEPA
RECOMMENDATION(S):
ACCEPT Status Report on the Street Light Coordination effort between PG&E, the County, and Cities for street light
maintenance, as recommended by the Public Works Director.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
BACKGROUND:
The Transportation, Water and Infrastructure Committee, on April 29, 2009, asked staff to report back to the
Committee before December 2009, on the status of street light coordination efforts with PG&E. Staff reported to
Committee on November 16, 2009 and were instructed to share this information with the Board of Supervisors.
Continuing the original effort initiated in May 2008 and since reporting last spring, the County Public Works
Department and Cities continued to meet on a bimonthly basis to discuss street light issues. Initially meetings
focused on daily maintenance and issues related to completion of calls for service. Discussions then focused on
subjects such as Global Information Systems (GIS), Light Emitting Diode (LED) technology, Smart Meters and
policy issues. The bimonthly meetings have helped to successfully address a number of issues related to street light
maintenance and operations.
The February 2008 Letter of Understanding (LOU) between PG&E and the County spells out agreed upon,
acceptable service standards for the various items originally presented as concerns from the County and Cities
including:
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor
Contact: Michelle Parella (925)
313-2286
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors
on the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: EMY L. SHARP, Deputy
cc: Brian Balbas, Deputy Director, Gary Huisingh, Enginnering Services, Susan Cohen, Special Districts, Marlon Epps, SD / Environmental
C. 6
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Julia R. Bueren, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Accept Report on Pacific Gas and Electric Company Coordination Efforts for Street Light Maintenance with Cities
and County of Contra Costa.
• Street light problem reporting and tracking
• Response times for repairs: 14-day and Electric Corrective (EC) 90-day (outages and knockdowns to be completed
in 90 days)
• Pole painting
• Group re-lamping (5 year plan)
• New product choices
Regular coordination meetings have been held at which County staff, PG&E and interested City staff discuss current
issues related to street lights. The meeting topics include:
• Response time and tracking of routine repairs (e.g. light burn outs)
• Response time and tracking of more complex outages
• Light Emitting Diode (LED) technology
• Smart Meter technology
• Global Information System (GIS) and mapping street lights
• PG&E policy with regard to vandalism and repair of vandalized street lights
Progress has been made on these items. Below are some of the issues that have been addressed and completed:
• Response [time and customer] tracking systems for routine repairs:
o Response time for most routine repairs continues to be within 14 days as stated in the LOU. When an outage repair
will take longer, PG&E has been consistent with notification. This issue has been satisfactorily addressed and
re-confirmed repeatedly since last spring report to TWIC.
o PG&E now provides monthly outage reports to all of the agencies with outstanding and completed repairs listed in
the 14-day and EC 90-day categories. Agencies can track outages and repairs and also be informed of outages of
which they were previously unaware which allows them to follow up, as needed. For the 14-day repairs, these reports
have proven adequate and this issue has been satisfactorily addressed.
• Customer Communications: PG&E has initiated and published a new e-mail address (
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
PGEStrlightBilling@pge.com) for street light related billing and data questions. In the past, an agency might have
one contact person to whom all street light questions went. This e-mail tool is another means to direct questions to the
most appropriate person. Although in its infancy, this additional line of communication may prove to be very efficient
for those who use it.
• New product choices: At the May 2009 Street Light Coordination meeting, PG&E introduced their plans for LED
street lights in the County. Attended by 23 people representing 12 Cities and several County agencies, this meeting
was well-timed for upcoming grant programs and much appreciated by the Cities. PG&E followed up with the
introduction of a complete turnkey program to expedite the upgrading of the street lights including rebates and
reduced rates. Agencies, including Public Works, are now able to get quotes and feedback pertinent to their Energy
Efficient and American Recovery and Redevelopment Act (ARRA) grant applications. In October 2009, the Town of
Danville completed a major retrofit with the installation of 276 LED lights along Camino Tassajara setting the
example of what we too can do in the County areas.
There are a few key areas that require continued attention including:
• Completion of repair of Electric Corrective (EC) 90-day cases: PG&E is working to assure that these repairs are
completed within the 90-day period. There has been improvement demonstrated by the fact that the number of EC
cases that extend beyond 90 days has been reduced. There remain a few cases, however, that need follow-up and
continued effort.
• Tracking on 90-day cases: This remains an area of needed effort. Once a repair moves from routine maintenance to
Construction, the flow of information is sometimes lacking, making it difficult and time consuming for PG&E to
locate and convey the status of a particular job. PG&E’s reporting agency, the Resource Management Center (RMC),
is challenged to produce accurate reports based on the information they receive from other PG&E departments. It
appears that internal communication between Construction (the PG&E department responsible for 90-day repairs) and
the RMC is in need of improvement.
In summary:
Staff from the County, participating cities, and PG&E, are committed to the ongoing effort to operate a well
organized and efficient system for street lights and appreciate the improvements that have been made over the past 18
months.
As a result of regular coordination meetings and increased communications, the response times and tracking of the
14-day repairs has improved. Various emerging tools been discussed and information provided by PG&E has been
very useful for Cities and the County. Monthly outage reports are greatly improved for the 14-day repairs. The 90-day
repairs still require attention for timely completion and consistent tracking of outstanding cases.
Staff recommends, based on the feedback from participants in the bimonthly meetings, that Street Light Coordination
meetings continue but reduce their frequency to quarterly. This will enable PG&E, County Staff, and the Cities to
continue the good work and collaboration on street light issues and to continue to develop improvements in getting
repairs done on schedule and with adequate communications to customers.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
No consequences. Informational only.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Assignment of Easement on behalf of Contra Costa County (County) to East Bay
Regional Park District (EBRPD) over a portion of County road right of way, known as Feeder Trail No. 1, located
between Dutra Road and Ferndale Road in the Martinez area.
AUTHORIZE the Chair, Board of Supervisors, to execute said Assignment of Easement on behalf of the County. A
description of the area to be assigned is attached hererto as Exhibit “A” and incorporated herein by reference located
in the Martinez area.
DIRECT the Real Property Division to deliver a certified copy of this Board Order and the Assignment of Easement
to EBRPD for acceptance and recording in the office of the County Recorder.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The County will save the cost of maintenance and repairs required along the trail and road right of way. There is no
impact to the County General Fund.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:Two Speakers, Jim Townsend and Bern Smith.
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor
Contact: Carmen Piña-Sandavol,
313-2012
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of
Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: EMY L. SHARP, Deputy
cc:
C. 7
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Julia R. Bueren, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Assignment of easement over a segment of Feeder Trail No. 1 to EBRPD. Project No. 0676-6P1600 (CP#09-60)
BACKGROUND:
Feeder Trial No. 1 is a 4.5-mile segment of the historic California State Riding and Hiking Trail established by
Mr. George Cardinet and other local equestrians. Feeder Trail No. 1 is also part of the proposed Bay Area Ridge
Trail. In 2008, the East Bay Municipal Utility District dedicated and opened a connecting 7.5-mile segment of the
Bay Area Ridge Trail on its adjacent Pinole Valley watershed.
The County holds a roadway easement over a portion of Feeder Trial No. 1 which has not been regularly
maintained and is threatened by encroachments which could sever the right of way and eliminate public access.
EBRPD has requested that the County assign its interest in the trail so it can be maintained and patrolled by
EBRPD for improved safety and active public use. EBRPD has had the development of Feeder Trail No. 1 on
their Master Plan for more than twenty years.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
The County would be responsible for maintenance and repairs to Feeder Trail No. 1 located in the Martinez area
and the trail may end up being exposed to motor vehicles.
ATTACHMENTS
Assignment of Easement
RECOMMENDATION(S):
ADOPT Resolution No. 2009/567 accepting as complete the contracted work performed by Asbestos Management
Group of CA, Inc., for Phase 9 asbestos abatement of the Orbisonia Heights Redevelopment Project, as recommended
by the Public Works Director, Bay Point area.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no impact to the County General Fund. This project is fully funded by the Contra Costa County
Redevelopment Agency.
BACKGROUND:
The Public Works Director reports that said work has been inspected and complies with the special provisions and
standard specifications and recommends its acceptance as complete as of November 23, 2009, for 581 S. Broadway
Avenue in Bay Point.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Lisa Dalziel, 313-2223
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: EMY L. SHARP, Deputy
cc:
C. 8
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Julia R. Bueren, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Accepting and Giving Notice of Completion of Contract for abatement of property, Bay Point area. Project No.
4500-6X5489
ATTACHMENTS
Resolution No.
2009/567
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board
Adopted this Resolution on 12/15/2009 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
RECUSE:
Resolution No. 2009/567
In the matter of accepting as complete the contracted work performed by Asbestos Management Group of CA, Inc., for Phase 9
asbestos abatement of the Orbisonia Heights Redevelopment Project, as recommended by the Public Works Director, Bay Point
area.
The County of Contra Costa on November 13, 2009 issued a Notice to Proceed with Asbestos Management Group of CA, Inc.,
for the Orbisonia Heights Redevelopment Project for Phase 9 asbestos abatement to be performed on the grounds of the Contra
Costa County Redevelopment Agency property; and
The Public Works Director reports that said work has been inspected and complies with the approved special provisions and
specifications and recommends its acceptance as complete as of November 23, 2009.
Now, therefore, be it resolved said work is ACCEPTED as complete on said date, and the Clerk shall file with the County
Recorder a copy of this Resolution and Notice as a Notice of Completion for said contract.
Contact: Lisa Dalziel, 313-2223
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: , Deputy
cc:
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Chair, Board of Supervisors to execute an amendment to an existing Joint Powers
Agreement with the Town of Danville effective December 15, 2009 to refer to Alamo MAC in place of the Advisory
Committee for County Service Area R-7A with no substantive changes to the Joint Powers Agreement, in order for
the Alamo MAC to perform the functions of the Advisory Committee for County Service Area R-7A, (Danville,
Alamo area).
FISCAL IMPACT:
This Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement (JEPA) amendment allows for Alamo MAC to replace the Advisory
Committee for County Service Area R-7A. There is no impact to the General Fund.
BACKGROUND:
On August 11, 2009 the Board of Supervisors adopted Resolution 2009/398 which established the Alamo Municipal
Advisory Council (MAC) and eliminated the Advisory Committee for County Service Area R-7A effective
December 31, 2009. The MAC for Alamo was established to provide a focused voice to advise the District 3
Supervisor on issues and concerns related to services provided
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Susan Cohen (925)
313-2160
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors
on the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: EMY L. SHARP, Deputy
cc: David Twa, CAO, Silvano Marchesi, County Counsel, Stephen Ybarra, Auditor controller, Brian Balbas, Deputy Public Works, Gary Huisingh, Supervising Civil Engineer,
Marlon Epps, Engineering Services
C. 9
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Julia R. Bueren, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Amendment to an existing Joint Powers Agreement with Town of Danville, Alamo area. (CSA R-7A Funds) (District
III)
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
by the County or other local agencies located within its boundary, including parks, recreation and landscaping.
The advisory functions currently being provided by the County Service Area R-7A Advisory Committee are to be
assumed by the Alamo MAC. On October 20, 2009 the Board of Supervisors appointed the members of the
Alamo MAC. Commencing January 1, 2010, the Alamo MAC will perform those functions of the JPA that were
previously assigned to the CSA R-7A Advisory Committee.
The Joint Powers Agreement between Contra Costa County and the Town of Danville must be modified to assign
the advisory functions currently provided by CSA R-7A to the Alamo MAC (see revised Amendment to JPA
Agreement attached). The JPA refers to Magee Park which is commonly referred to and known as Hap Magee
Park.
The existing Joint Powers Agreement with Town of Danville was established May 14, 1987. At the time of the
establishment of this agreement, the Advisory Committee for CSA R-7A performed the advisory functions
required by the Agreement. This amendment changes references to the Advisory Committee for County Service
Area R-7A to the Alamo Municipal Advisory Council, in accordance with the Board of Supervisor’s resolution on
August 11, 2009 which established the Alamo MAC to perform functions including those assigned by this Joint
Powers Agreement for park maintenance and operations of Hap Magee Park. Once this resolution is approved by
the Board of Supervisors, the Alamo MAC will be empowered to have representatives appointed to the Magee
Ranch Joint Planning & Operations Committee, effective January 1, 2010.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
Negative action will result in the delay for the Alamo Municipal Advisory Council to perform functions
previously in the purview of the Advisory Committee for County Service Area R-7A which will be disbanded
effective December 31, 2009.
CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT:
ATTACHMENTS
hap magee jpa
1
Amendment to Joint Powers Agreement (Magee Park)
RECITALS
This Amendment to Joint Powers Agreement (Magee Park) is based on the following
facts and circumstances:
A. At the time the Parties entered the original Joint Powers Agreement (Magee Park)
(“Agreement”) the Advisory Committee for County Service Area R-7A performed
the County advisory functions for County Service Area R-7A, including those
functions required by the Agreement;
B. On August 11, 2009, the Board of Supervisors eliminated the Advisory Committee
for County Service Area R-7A effective December 31, 2009, created the Alamo
Municipal Advisory Council, and charged the Council with performing the advisory
functions previously performed by the Advisory Committee for County Service Area
R-7A effective January 1, 2010;
C. On October 20, 2009, the Board of Supervisors appointed the members of the Alamo
Municipal Advisory Council;
D. Commencing January 1, 2010, the Alamo Municipal Advisory Council will perform
those functions under the Agreement that were previously performed by the Advisory
Committee for County Service Area R-7A.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties agree:
1. Parties. The County of Contra Costa, a political subdivision of the State of California
(“COUNTY”), and the Town of Danville, a municipal corporation (“TOWN”) are the
parties to this Amendment to Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement.
2. Effective Date. The effective date of this Amendment to Joint Powers Agreement
(Magee Park) is December 31, 2009.
3. Amendment Specifications. The Joint Powers Agreement (Magee Park) between
COUNTY and TOWN, effective May 26, 1987, is amended as follows:
A. Section 5. Administration and Decision-Making shall be deleted in its entirety and
replaced with the following:
5. Administration and Decision-Making.
a. Staff Members and Advisory Bodies. The advisory bodies for parks and
2
recreation matters for the parties are the Alamo Municipal Advisory Council for
COUNTY and Parks and Leisure Services Commission for TOWN. These two
groups, together with their respective staffs, will provide administrative and
support services for the Park project.
b. Joint Planning and Operations Committee. The parties shall appoint a Joint
Planning and Operations Committee (the “Joint Committee”).
The Joint Committee shall be selected and shall serve as follows: the COUNTY
Board of Supervisors shall appoint two members from the Alamo Municipal
Advisory Council. TOWN shall also appoint two members to serve on the Joint
Committee. Each of the four members shall serve for a two-year term, except that
in order to establish staggered terms one of the first appointees from COUNTY
and one of the first appointees from TOWN shall serve a one-year term. The four
appointed members shall select (by unanimous vote) a fifth member who is not a
member of the COUNTY Alamo Municipal Advisory Council or the TOWN
Parks and Leisure Services Commission. The fifth member must have a
demonstrated interest in park and recreation matters. The fifth member will serve
for a one-year term and may be re-appointed to one or more successive terms.
The Joint Committee shall meet semi-annually, or more frequently if necessary.
Its meetings shall be noticed and open to the public as required by the Ralph M.
Brown Act (Government Code § 54590 et seq.). Consensus decision- making is
encouraged.
The duties of the Joint Committee are to:
$ develop the master plan and recommend adoption to the Park and Leisure
Services Commission, the Alamo Municipal Advisory Council, the
Danville TOWN Council and the Board of Supervisors;
$ review construction documents;
$ review operations and solicit general community comments;
$ review and recommend to the Danville Park and Leisure Services
Commission, the Alamo Municipal Advisory Council, the Danville
TOWN Council and the Board of Supervisors:
– annual operating budget
– future capital development projects
– annual service level changes for rental rate adjustments;
$ other functions assigned to it by the Board of Supervisors and Danville
TOWN Council.
c. Governing Bodies. All final decisions on site planning and expenditures are reserved
to the governing bodies of the parties: the COUNTY Board of Supervisors and Danville
TOWN Council.
3
4. Signatures. The following signatures attest the parties’ agreement hereto:
APPROVED BY:
TOWN OF DANVILLE
By: _______________________________ ATTEST:____________________
Mayor Town Clerk
Approved as to Form:
______________________
Town Attorney
COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA
By: ________________________________ ATTEST:
Chair, Board of Supervisors David Twa,
County Administrator and
Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: ______________________
Deputy
Approved as to Form:
Silvano B. Marchesi
County Counsel
By: ____________________
Deputy County Counsel
G:\spdist\CSA R-7A\Hap Magee Ranch Park\hap magee jpa amendment 12-1-09 D (2).doc
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Chair, Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors, to sign a letter to the California
Energy Commission (CEC) regarding the proposed construction of a power plant in Alameda County approximately
2.66 miles southeast of the Byron Airport. The letter requests that specific scientific studies be completed to ensure
that the proposed location of this power plant would not pose any hazards to aeronautical activities.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There are no expected financial impacts from this action.
BACKGROUND:
Diamond Energy Company has proposed, through the CEC, building a power plant approximately 2.66 miles
southeast of the Byron Airport. The power plant would be located in Alameda County. Airport staff has identified
some areas of concern regarding other power plants that have been constructed near airports. Local pilots and pilot
associations have also expressed similar concerns. The focus of these concerns relate to possible disruption of flight
caused by the power
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:Continued to Undetermined Date.
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Keith Freitas, (925)
646-5722
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors
on the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: EMY L. SHARP, Deputy
cc:
C.10
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Keith Freitas, Airports Director
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors Chair to sign a letter to the California
Energy Commission.
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
plant exhaust plumes. Additionally, there are other areas of concern that should be evaluated, i.e. would the power
plants operation be a bird attractant.
This letter to the CEC requests that scientific analysis be conducted for each of these areas of concern before a
final decision is made by the CEC. It appears that the CEC has sole authority in determining whether or not to
approve the construction of the proposed power plant. This letter expresses the County’s goals of protecting both
the future utility of the Byron Airport and the safety of the aeronautical users in the area.
On November 2, 2009, the Airport Committee reviewed and supported the attached letter and requested that it be
sent to the full Board for approval. During their October and November meetings, the Aviation Advisory
Committee reviewed this issue and also supported the attached letter. Finally, the Contra Costa County Airport
Land Use Commission has prepared their own letter to the CEC on the matter, which outlines similar concerns.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
The County will not provide input into the CEC process that details the County’s concerns and additional studies
warranted to address those concur (related to the possible construction of a power plant near the Byron Airport),
which ultimately may impact the Airport’s utility and or the safety of aeronautical operations in the area.
ATTACHMENTS
CEC letter
Attachment A
Attachment B
Attachment C
Attachment D
Attachments E through I
Attachments J through N
Attachment O
December 15, 2009
Ms. Julia Levin, Commissioner
California Energy Commission
1516 Ninth Street, MS-15
Sacramento, CA 95814
RE: Mariposa Energy Project Power Plant Licensing Case (Docket #09-AFC-03)
Dear Ms. Levin,
Contra Costa County would like to first thank the California Energy Commission (CEC) for the
opportunity to provide input into the proposed Mariposa Energy Power Plant project. The
proposed project would be located in Alameda County approximately 2.6 miles southeast of
Contra Costa County’s Byron Airport.
In the early 1980’s Contra Costa County identified the need for a second airport site within its
boundaries. Contra Costa County operated a large reliever airport, called Buchanan Field, in
Concord. The previously privately operated Byron Airpark was ultimately selected by Contra
Costa County as the site for the new Byron Airport. With more than $21,000,000 of Federal, State
and County funding the new Byron Airport was constructed and opened to the public in 1994.
Byron Airport is currently home to more than 100 aircraft ranging in size from ultra-light to
medium size corporate jet aircraft. The airfield is also home to the Northern California Soaring
Association (gliders) and Bay Area Skydiving (parachute) operations. There are numerous flight
training operators in the Bay Area that utilize Byron Airport for flight training purposes. The
Airport has approximately 50,000 annual operations.
We believe Bryon Airport is, and will continue to develop as, a significant part of the
transportation system in Contra Costa County and the region. As a result, we want to ensure, prior
David J. Twa
Clerk of the Board
and
County Administrator
(925) 335-1080
The Board of Supervisors
County Administration Building
651 Pine Street, Room 106
Martinez, California 94553-4068
John Gioia, District I
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Federal D. Glover, District V
Contra
Costa
County
Ms. Julia Levin, Commissioner
December 15, 2009
Page 2
to approval, that the proposed Mariposa Energy Power Plant project will not degrade the safety or
utility of the Byron Airport.
Our research has identified credible concerns related to the placement of power plants near
airports. County staff has reviewed studies, reports and letters that highlight aeronautical concerns
associated with exhaust stack and power line heights, exhaust plume temperatures/vertical
velocity, exhaust stack emissions, and hazard attractants, as follows:
Federal Aviation Administration Study (FAA) – Safety Risk Analysis of Aircraft
Overflight of Industrial Exhaust Plumes (see Attachment A).
Australian Civil Aviation Safety Authority Study – Guidelines for Conducting Plume Rise
Assessment (see Attachment B).
California Energy Commission Power Plant Determination– Final Decision for Eastshore
Energy Center-denied (see Attachment C).
Letter from U.S. Congressman Pete Stark – Letter expressing concerns about a proposed
power plant adjacent to the Hayward Airport (see Attachment D).
Aviation Accidents/Incidents - Aviation accidents/incidents associated with power plants
near airports (see Attachments E through J).
Local jurisdictions – Several jurisdictions voicing concerns regarding proposed power
plants near airports (see Attachments K through M).
Since the proposed Mariposa Energy Power Plant project is in close proximity to, approximately
2.66 miles southeast, the Byron Airport we have identified several specific areas of concern that
we believe deserve further analysis prior to project approval consideration:
1. The analysis should confirm that the site will not pose a hazard to aeronautical
activities due to its close proximity to the main precision instrument runway (Runway
30) nor hinder future instrument approach upgrades to any runway (see Attachment
N);
2. The analysis should confirm that the site will not pose a hazard to aeronautical
activities due to its close proximity to the established Byron Airport traffic pattern,
both downwind leg and 45 degree pattern entrance, for Runways 5 and 23. As well as
the departure path for Runway 12;
3. The analysis should confirm that the site will not pose a hazard to any of the various
aeronautical activities at Byron Airport that include vintage military jet aircraft,
corporate jet aircraft, single and twin piston aircraft, light sport aircraft, motorized
parasail, ultra-light and skydiving;
4. The analysis should confirm that the site will not attract wildlife, i.e. birds, which are
hazardous to aircraft operating near an airport.
Ms. Julia Levin, Commissioner
December 15, 2009
Page 3
Contra Costa County requests that airspace, instrument approach modeling, exhaust plume and
wildlife analysis be completed, by an independent consultant, prior to the final consideration of the
proposed Mariposa Energy Power Plant. Unless the findings are conclusive that there are no
aeronautical hazards or detriment to the airport utility, related to the placement of this power plant
near the Byron Airport, Contra Costa County will not be in a position to support the Mariposa
Power Plant proposal.
Yours Truly,
Susan Bonilla
Chair, Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors
cc: Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors
Alameda County Board of Supervisors
David Twa, County Administrator
Keith Freitas, Director of Airports
Contra Costa County Airport Land Use Commission
Alameda County Airport Land Use Commission
Aviation Advisory Committee
Byron Municipal Advisory Committee
RECOMMENDATION(S):
DETERMINE that this summary vacation of an excess right of way of a street or highway is no longer required for
street or highway purposes, is made pursuant to Division 9, Part 3, Chapter 4 of the Streets and Highways Code,
commencing with Section 8330, et. seq. A description of the area to be vacated is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and
incorporated herein by reference located in the Martinez area.
DETERMINE that this vacation request is for an excess right of way of a street or highway not required for street or
highway purposes. (S&H Code Section 8334(a))
DETERMINE that the proposed vacation will not have a significant effect on the environment, and that it has been
determined to be exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under State CEQA guidelines
pursuant to Article 5, Section 15061 (b)(3), and DIRECT the Director of Department of Conservation and
Development (DCD) to file a Notice of Exemption with the County Clerk, and DIRECT the Public Works Director to
arrange for payment of a $50.00 fee to the County Clerk for filing and $25.00 fee to DCD for processing the Notice
of Exemption.
DECLARE that the hereinabove
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Please provide 4 embossed copies
to Sherri Reed at PW
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the
minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: EMY L. SHARP, Deputy
cc:
C.11
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Julie Bueren, Public Works Director
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Summary vacation of an excess county road right of way interest. Project No. 0676-6P1600 (CP#09-60)
RECOMMENDATION(S): (CONT'D)
described proposed vacation area is HEREBY ORDERED VACATED subject to any reservation and exception
described in attached Exhibit "A". From and after the date this Board Order is recorded, the area vacated no longer
constitutes a public highway.
DIRECT the Real Property Division to record a certified copy of this Board Order in the office of the County
Recorder.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no impact to the County General Fund.
BACKGROUND:
A portion of Feeder Trail No. 1 is no longer required for road purposes.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
The County would be responsible for the maintenance and repairs to a portion of right of way along Feeder Trail
No. 1 located in the Martinez area.
ATTACHMENTS
CEQA
Exhibit A
RECOMMENDATION(S):
DENY claims by Christopher Madrid; Bridget E. Robinson; Pamela Lee Bourne; Tryphena Smith; Juan Jose Salazar;
Billie Whittaker, individually and as representative of the Estate of Barry Whittaker, decedent; David Golick and
Lorna Golick; Justin Midyett; Daniel Greaves; Dion Simoni; John G. Hanlin and Yoshabel Clements; late Claims for
Monica Meadors-Washington; and Patricia Bynum; and amended claim for John G. Hanlin and Yoshabel Clements
individually and as natural guardians ad litem for Gavin Hanlin, Chayton Hanlin and Alcon Hanlin, minor children.
FISCAL IMPACT:
.
BACKGROUND:
.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Janet Gricius, 335-1907
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: EMY L. SHARP, Deputy
cc:
C.12
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Clerk of the Board
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Claims for December 15, 2009
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Laura Case 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: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Katherine Sinclair, Deputy
cc:
C.13
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Susan A. Bonilla, District IV Supervisor
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Proclaim December 1, 2009 as World AIDS Day in Contra Costa County
ATTACHMENTS
Resolution No.
2009/557
In the matter of:Resolution No. 2009/557
RECOGNIZING BLOOD SAFETY AND AWARENESS ON WORLD AIDS DAY 2009
WHEREAS, World AIDS Day is observed every year on December 1st; and
WHEREAS, the World Health Organization established World AIDS Day in 1988 to ensure renewed and
continual constructive attention to the grave threat posed by both HIV-AIDS and the debilitating medical
conditions, pain, suffering and social-familial-economic hardships associated with HIV infection; and
WHEREAS, World AIDS Day provides governments, national AIDS programs, faith organizations,
community organizations, and individuals with the opportunity to raise awareness and focus attention on
the global AIDS epidemic; and
WHEREAS, in the United States, The Centers for Disease Control reports that there are more than 1
million people currently living with HIV infection, and more than 40,000 Americans become infected with
HIV annually; and
WHEREAS, among the individuals whose lives have been shattered by HIV, approximately ten thousand
have been affected by bleeding disorders, specifically people with hemophilia, have contracted HIV (as
well as Hepatitis C and other viruses) as a result of tainted blood products prescribed for use during the
1980’s and 1990’s; and
WHEREAS, family members of infected persons with bleeding disorders have contracted HIV from the
infected persons who, at the time, were unaware of their seroconversion; and
WHEREAS, among the infected, no less than eight thousand have died; and
WHEREAS, the prognosis is hopeful for people living with HIV and related infections but they must
confront daily the fear of disease, pain and suffering associated with HIV, as well as financial and social
challenges; and
WHEREAS, improved safety and monitoring of blood, blood products and other medications is essential for
patients with chronic illness who depend on safe, available medications.
Now, therefore, be it resolved that the Board of Supervisors proclaims December 1, 2009 as World AIDS Day in Contra Costa
County and marks this solemn occasion by identifying the need to address issues of blood safety and security at all levels of
government.
___________________
SUSAN A. BONILLA
Chair,
District IV Supervisor
______________________________________
JOHN GIOIA GAYLE B. UILKEMA
District I Supervisor District II Supervisor
______________________________________
MARY N. PIEPHO 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: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa,
By: ____________________________________, Deputy
RECOMMENDATION(S):
RECOGNIZING OFFICER ROGER YOUNG AND HIS YEARS OF SERVICE
WITH CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL
FISCAL IMPACT:
None
BACKGROUND:
None
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Marion Murphy
820-8683
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Katherine Sinclair, Deputy
cc:
C.14
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Mary N. Piepho, District III Supervisor
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:RECOGNIZING OFFICER ROGER YOUNG AND HIS YEARS OF SERVICE
ATTACHMENTS
Resolution No.
2009/575
In the matter of:Resolution No. 2009/575
RECOGNIZING OFFICER ROGER YOUNG UPON HIS RETIREMENT FOR HIS YEARS OF SERVICE WITH
CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL
WHEREAS, the California Highway Patrol recognize the dedication and selfless sacrifices of Officer
Roger Young who has been a part of a long and noble profession that reflects the highest degree of honor,
strength, respect and distinction; and
WHEREAS, throughout our history, members of the California Highway Patrol have proudly donned their
uniforms and willingly risked their lives to carry out their duties and serve their communities with tireless
effort; and
WHEREAS, knowing full well the unforeseen dangers and challenges they might face each day, as they
protect and serve their fellow man with the greatest degree of honor and dignity; and
WHEREAS, California Highway Patrol are citizen-focused, courageous in nature, responding to the needs
of individuals and communities; and
WHEREAS, Individuals in this line of work must have good judgment and be able to make important
decisions quickly; and
WHEREAS, this occasion marks the 32nd year that Officer Roger Young has served his state and
community; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors recognizes the talents and commitment of Officer Roger
Young and the positive impact of his work in his many years of service to the California Highway Patrol.
___________________
SUSAN A. BONILLA
Chair,
District IV Supervisor
______________________________________
JOHN GIOIA GAYLE B. UILKEMA
District I Supervisor District II Supervisor
______________________________________
MARY N. PIEPHO 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: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa,
By: ____________________________________, Deputy
RECOMMENDATION(S):
ADOPT RESOLUTION NUMBER 2009/576 RECOGNIZING OFFICER RICHARD GOMEZ AND HIS YEARS
OF SERVICE
WITH CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL
FISCAL IMPACT:
None
BACKGROUND:
None
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Marion Murphy
820-8683
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Katherine Sinclair, Deputy
cc:
C.15
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Mary N. Piepho, District III Supervisor
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:RECOGNIZING OFFICER RICHARD GOMEZ AND HIS YEARS OF SERVICE
ATTACHMENTS
Resolution No.
2009/576
In the matter of:Resolution No. 2009/576
RECOGNIZING OFFICER RICHARD GOMEZ UPON HIS RETIREMENT FOR HIS YEARS OF SERVICE WITH
CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL
WHEREAS, the California Highway Patrol recognize the dedication and selfless sacrifices of Officer
Richard Gomez who has been a part of a long and noble profession that reflects the highest degree of
honor, strength, respect and distinction; and
WHEREAS, throughout our history, members of the California Highway Patrol have proudly donned their
uniforms and willingly risked their lives to carry out their duties and serve their communities with tireless
effort; and
WHEREAS, knowing full well the unforeseen dangers and challenges they might face each day, as they
protect and serve their fellow man with the greatest degree of honor and dignity; and
WHEREAS, California Highway Patrol are citizen-focused, courageous in nature, responding to the needs
of individuals and communities; and
WHEREAS, Individuals in this line of work must have good judgment and be able to make important
decisions quickly; and
WHEREAS, this occasion marks the 29th year that Officer Richard Gomez has served his state and
community; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors recognizes the talents and commitment of Officer
Richard Gomez and the positive impact of his work in his many years of service to the California Highway Patrol.
___________________
SUSAN A. BONILLA
Chair,
District IV Supervisor
______________________________________
JOHN GIOIA GAYLE B. UILKEMA
District I Supervisor District II Supervisor
______________________________________
MARY N. PIEPHO 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: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa,
By: ____________________________________, Deputy
RECOMMENDATION(S):
ADOPT RESOLUTION NUMBER 2009/577 RECOGNIZING OFFICER PETE SCIARRETTA AND HIS YEARS
OF SERVICE
WITH CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None
BACKGROUND:
None
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Marion Murphy
820-8683
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Katherine Sinclair, Deputy
cc:
C.16
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Mary N. Piepho, District III Supervisor
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:RECOGNIZING OFFICER PETE SCIARRETTA AND HIS YEARS OF SERVICE
ATTACHMENTS
Resolution No.
2009/577
In the matter of:Resolution No. 2009/577
RECOGNIZING OFFICER PETE SCIARRETTA UPON HIS RETIREMENT FOR HIS YEARS OF SERVICE WITH
CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL
WHEREAS, the California Highway Patrol recognize the dedication and selfless sacrifices of Officer Pete
Sciarretta who has been a part of a long and noble profession that reflects the highest degree of honor,
strength, respect and distinction; and
WHEREAS, throughout our history, members of the California Highway Patrol have proudly donned their
uniforms and willingly risked their lives to carry out their duties and serve their communities with tireless
effort; and
WHEREAS, knowing full well the unforeseen dangers and challenges they might face each day, as they
protect and serve their fellow man with the greatest degree of honor and dignity; and
WHEREAS, California Highway Patrol are citizen-focused, courageous in nature, responding to the needs
of individuals and communities; and
WHEREAS, Individuals in this line of work must have good judgment and be able to make important
decisions quickly; and
WHEREAS, this occasion marks the 28th year that Officer Pete Sciarretta has served his state and
community; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors recognizes the talents and commitment of Officer Pete
Sciarretta and the positive impact of his work in his many years of service to the California Highway Patrol
___________________
SUSAN A. BONILLA
Chair,
District IV Supervisor
______________________________________
JOHN GIOIA GAYLE B. UILKEMA
District I Supervisor District II Supervisor
______________________________________
MARY N. PIEPHO 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: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa,
By: ____________________________________, Deputy
RECOMMENDATION(S):
ADOPT RESOLUTION NUMBER 2009/578 RECOGNIZING OFFICER MIKE NELSON AND HIS YEARS OF
SERVICE
WITH CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None
BACKGROUND:
None
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Marion Murphy
820-8683
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Katherine Sinclair, Deputy
cc:
C.17
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Mary N. Piepho, District III Supervisor
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:RECOGNIZING OFFICER MIKE NELSON AND HIS YEARS OF SERVICE
ATTACHMENTS
Resolution No.
2009/578
In the matter of:Resolution No. 2009/578
RECOGNIZING OFFICER MIKE NELSON UPON HIS RETIREMENT AND FOR HIS YEARS OF SERVICE WITH
CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL
WHEREAS, the California Highway Patrol recognize the dedication and selfless sacrifices of Officer Mike
Nelson who has been a part of a long and noble profession that reflects the highest degree of honor,
strength, respect and distinction; and
WHEREAS, throughout our history, members of the California Highway Patrol have proudly donned their
uniforms and willingly risked their lives to carry out their duties and serve their communities with tireless
effort; and
WHEREAS, knowing full well the unforeseen dangers and challenges they might face each day, as they
protect and serve their fellow man with the greatest degree of honor and dignity; and
WHEREAS, California Highway Patrol are citizen-focused, courageous in nature, responding to the needs
of individuals and communities; and
WHEREAS, Individuals in this line of work must have good judgment and be able to make important
decisions quickly; and
WHEREAS, this occasion marks the 28th year that Officer Mike Nelson has served his state and
community; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors recognizes the talents and commitment of Officer Mike
Nelson and the positive impact of his work in his many years of service to the California Highway Patrol.
___________________
SUSAN A. BONILLA
Chair,
District IV Supervisor
______________________________________
JOHN GIOIA GAYLE B. UILKEMA
District I Supervisor District II Supervisor
______________________________________
MARY N. PIEPHO 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: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa,
By: ____________________________________, Deputy
RECOMMENDATION(S):
ADOPT RESOLUTION NUMBER 2009/579 RECOGNIZING SERGEANT KEITH MARSDEN AND HIS YEARS
OF SERVICE
WITH CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None
BACKGROUND:
None
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Marion Murphy
820-8683
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Katherine Sinclair, Deputy
cc:
C.18
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Mary N. Piepho, District III Supervisor
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:RECOGNIZING SERGEANT KEITH MARSDEN AND HIS YEARS OF SERVICE
ATTACHMENTS
Resolution No.
2009/579
In the matter of:Resolution No. 2009/579
RECOGNIZING SERGEANT KEITH MARSDEN UPON HIS RETIREMENT AND FOR HIS YEARS OF SERVICE
WITH CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL
WHEREAS, the California Highway Patrol recognize the dedication and selfless sacrifices of Sergeant
Keith Marsden who has been a part of a long and noble profession that reflects the highest degree of honor,
strength, respect and distinction; and
WHEREAS, throughout our history, members of the California Highway Patrol have proudly donned their
uniforms and willingly risked their lives to carry out their duties and serve their communities with tireless
effort; and
WHEREAS, knowing full well the unforeseen dangers and challenges they might face each day, as they
protect and serve their fellow man with the greatest degree of honor and dignity; and
WHEREAS, California Highway Patrol are citizen-focused, courageous in nature, responding to the needs
of individuals and communities; and
WHEREAS, Individuals in this line of work must have good judgment and be able to make important
decisions quickly; and
WHEREAS, this occasion marks the 13th year that Sergeant Keith Marsden has served his state and
community; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors recognizes the talents and commitment of Sergeant
Keith Marsden and the positive impact of his work in his many years of service to the California Highway Patrol.
___________________
SUSAN A. BONILLA
Chair,
District IV Supervisor
______________________________________
JOHN GIOIA GAYLE B. UILKEMA
District I Supervisor District II Supervisor
______________________________________
MARY N. PIEPHO 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: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa,
By: ____________________________________, Deputy
RECOMMENDATION(S):
RECOGNIZING URI ELIAHU AS THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CIVIL ENGINEER OF THE YEAR AS
NAMED BY THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CIVIL ENGINEERS
FISCAL IMPACT:
None
BACKGROUND:
None
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Marion Murphy
820-8683
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Katherine Sinclair, Deputy
cc:
C.19
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Mary N. Piepho, District III Supervisor
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:RECOGNIZING URI ELIAHU AS THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CIVIL ENGINEER OF THE YEAR AS
NAMED BY THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CIVIL ENGINEERS
ATTACHMENTS
Resolution No.
2009/580
In the matter of:Resolution No. 2009/580
RECOGNIZING URI ELIAHU AS THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CIVIL ENGINEER OF THE YEAR AS NAMED
BY THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CIVIL ENGINEERS
WHEREAS, Uri Eliahu, President of San Ramon-based Engeo Incorporated, and his achievement of being
named Engineer of the Year by the the American Society of Civil Engineer’s; and
WHEREAS, this honor recognizes the professional achievements, leadership, management abilities,
exceptional dedication and service of civil engineers working in the private-sector; and
WHEREAS, Engeo Incorporated is a comprehensive provider of geotechnical, environmental, hydrologic,
and geologic engineering, and construction testing and inspection services; and
WHEREAS, Uri Eliahu has gained this honor because of his leadership with innovative engineering
solutions, his integration of a successful “servant leadership” model at Engeo; and
WHEREAS, his foresight and enthusiasm to advance the civil engineering profession; and
WHEREAS, the American Society of Civil Engineer’s recognizes Uri Eliahu for his leadership of Engeo
and for his significant impact in the world of civil and geotechnical engineering; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors recognizes the talents and commitment of Uri Eliahu
and the positive impact of his work in his years of service to Engeo Incorprtaed and to the American Society of Civil Engineer’s.
___________________
SUSAN A. BONILLA
Chair,
District IV Supervisor
______________________________________
JOHN GIOIA GAYLE B. UILKEMA
District I Supervisor District II Supervisor
______________________________________
MARY N. PIEPHO 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: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa,
By: ____________________________________, Deputy
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, 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: December 15, 2009
, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Katherine Sinclair, Deputy
cc:
C.20
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Susan A. Bonilla
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:HONORING COUNTY COUNSEL SILVANO B. MARCHESI UPON HIS RETIREMENT FROM COUNTY
SERVICE
ATTACHMENTS
Resolution No. 2009/951_Silvano
Marchesi
The Board of Supervisors of
Contra Costa County, California
In the Matter of the Retirement of )
Silvano B. Marchesi, County Counsel ) RESOLUTION NO. 2009/951
WHEREAS Silvano B. Marchesi will retire from his position as County Counsel of Contra Costa
County on December 31, 2009 after 40 years of County service and so it is appropriate at this time to
acknowledge his many achievements and to publicly recognize his professional and civic leadership; and
WHEREAS Silvano graduated from University of San Francisco Law School in 1968 and joined
the Contra Costa County Counsel's Office as an attorney in the fall of 1969.
WHEREAS, while attending college and law school, Silvano worked a variety of jobs,
including shoe salesman, cannery worker, radio announcer and producer, college tutor, mail carrier,
and shipping clerk, and after securing employment as a Deputy County Counsel I with the County in
1969 at a monthly salary of $860, he married his wife Gerarda in January 1970; and
WHEREAS Silvano progressed through the ranks of the County Counsel’s Office, being
promoted to Assistant County Counsel in August 1984, Chief Assistant County Counsel in January
1999 and, ultimately, to County Counsel – the third in County history – by the Board of Supervisors in
February 2001, after 31 years with the office; and
WHEREAS Silvano’s long and illustrious career is distinguished by his negotiation of
construction and purchase agreements for the two major recycled water facilities in Pittsburg, role as
lead counsel in the condemnation trial that resulted in the Pine Creek Detention Basin and in the
lawsuit that defeated constitutional and environmental challenges to building the Martinez Detention
Facility, and as in-house counsel in the Acme Fill litigation that ultimately allowed the County to close
the landfill in Martinez and recover the costs of the closure clean -up from the County's insurance
carriers; and
WHEREAS Silvano’s stature in the legal community is exemplified by his membership on the
Executive Committee of the Public Law Section of the State Bar and on the Board of Directors of the
Contra Costa County Bar Association, and his active participation in the City Attorney's Association
and in the County Counsels' Association, of which he served as the president in 2009; and
WHEREAS, Silvano completed 38 years as a member of the J udge Advocate General (JAG)
Detachment, U.S. Army Reserve, retiring at the rank of Colonel, and, as such, set high professional
and ethical conduct standards for the office that extended to office attire; and
WHEREAS in a departure from his professional music career, Silvano famously lent his
musical talents as a bassoonist to the County’s “Not Ready for Prime Time” players, which
entertained at County functions; and
WHEREAS Silvano is the exemplar of a dedicated public agency attorney and serves as an
inspiration to all who know him for his legacy of hard work, team spirit, quick intellect, moral fortitude,
and unwavering dedication to Contra Costa County government and its citizens throughout his 40 years
of public service to the County, providing leadership, thoughtful guidance and mentoring, and the
demonstrated ability to find solutions, work creatively, and ascribe to a high level of professional ethics;
and
WHEREAS Silvano is a consummate gentleman, even-tempered and good-natured, patient
down to his fingertips – the sort who never would, never could, let an insulting remark es cape his lips;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that this Board takes great pleasure in congratulating
Silvano B. Marchesi on his valuable service to County government and his profession, and wishes him
many wonderful, exciting, and fulfilling years of retirement.
PASSED by a unanimous vote of the Board of Supervisors members present this 15th day of December, 2009.
__________________________________
SUSAN A. BONILLA
Chair
District IV Supervisor
___________________________________ ___________________________________
JOHN GIOIA GAYLE B. UILKEMA
District I Supervisor District II Supervisor
___________________________________ ___________________________________
MARY N. PIEPHO 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:
AT
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
DAVID TWA, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors and
County Administrator
By
By _________________________________, Deputy
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Appoint Jake Sloan to the District I seat on the County Planning Commission, as recommended by Supervisor Gioia.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
BACKGROUND:
Supervisor Gioia recruits for board advisory positions via word-of-mouth, eblast, his newsletter, and local
newspapers.
Supervisor Gioia reviews all applications received for his commission openings, before making a selection and has
recommended Jake Sloan.
Jake Sloan
6321 Jerilyn Ave.,
San Pablo, Ca 94896
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: 510-374-3231
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Janet Gricius, Deputy
cc:
C.21
To:Board of Supervisors
From:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Appoint Jake Sloan to the District One seat on County Planning Commission.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT:
ATTACHMENTS
Candidate Application
RECOMMENDATION(S):
DECLARE vacant the District I seat on the Contra Costa County Commission for Women due to the resignation of
Debra Dias, and DIRECT the Clerk of the Board to post the vacancy, as recommended by Supervisor Gioia.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None
BACKGROUND:
Debra Dias has resigned from the District One seat of the Contra Costa County Commission for Women.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: 510-527-6426
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Janet Gricius, Deputy
cc:
C.22
To:Board of Supervisors
From:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Vacate Debra Dias from the District One seat on the Contra Costa County Commission for Women
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Appoint Joanne Sidwell to the District One seat on the Contra Costa County Merit Board to finish the term ending
June 30, 2013, as recommended by Supervisor Gioia.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
BACKGROUND:
Supervisor Gioia recruits for board advisory positions via word-of-mouth, eblast, his newsletter, and local
newspapers. Supervisor Gioia reviews all applications received for his commission openings, before making a
selection and has recommended Joanne Sidwell. She has previously served on the Merit Board.
Joanne Sidwell
433 Golden Gate Ave.
Richmond, Ca 94801
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: 510-374-3231
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Janet Gricius, Deputy
cc:
C.23
To:Board of Supervisors
From:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Appoint Joanne Sidwell to the District One seat on the Contra Costa County Merit Board.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Appoint Cecilia Valdez to the West County Elected Official seat on the Contra Costa Inter-jurisdictional Council on
Homelessness Advisory Board.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
BACKGROUND:
The Contra Costa Inter-jurisdictional Council on Homelessness (CCICH) was established on March 11, 2008,
combining the efforts of the Contra Costa County Homeless Continuum of Care Board and the Homeless
Inter-Jurisdictional Inter-Departmental Work Group. CCICH is charged with providing a forum for communication
and coordination about the overall implementation of the Ten Year Plan to End Homelessness and providing advice
and input on the operations of homeless services. CCICH meets on a regular basis to discuss issues surrounding
homelessness throughout the County and is made up of representatives from city and county government, health
care, law enforcement, service providers and consumers.
The following appointment to the West County Elected Official seat is recommended:
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: 510-374-3231
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Janet Gricius, Deputy
cc:
C.24
To:Board of Supervisors
From:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Appoint Cecilia Valdez to the West County seat on the Contra Costa County Inter-jurisdictional Council on
Homelessness
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
Cecilia Valdez
110 Santa Rita Court
San Pablo, CA 94806
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Appoint Sean Duckworth to the At Large Seat 11 on the Contra Costa Commission for Women for a term ending
February 28, 2012.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No fiscal impact.
BACKGROUND:
The Contra Costa Commission for Women was formed to educate the community and advise the Contra Costa
County Board of Supervisors and other entities on the issues relating to the changing social and economic conditions
of women in the County, with particular emphasis on the economically disadvantaged.
The Committee consists of 25 members and one alternate, including:
• Five district representatives; (one from each supervisorial; districts)
• Twenty at large members; and
• One at large alternate.
The five district representatives are nominated for a three year term by each other the
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Dorothy Sansoe,
925-335-1009
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors
on the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Katherine Sinclair, Deputy
cc:
C.25
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Dorothy Sansoe, County Administrator
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Appointment to the Contra Costa Commission for Women
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
five members of the Board of Supervisors. The twenty at large members and one at large alternate are nominated by
the CCCW membership committee and forwarded to the full CCCW. All nominated appointments to the CCCW are
reviewed by the Internal Operations Committee (IOC) and referred to the Board of Supervisors for approval. CCCW
terms are for three years and they are staggered across the membership. A current CCCW roster, as of January 15,
2008, is attached for your information (Attachment A).
Current Status of Appointments
The CCCW has been recruiting applicants on an ongoing basis to fill the vacant seats. A press release was distributed
to major news media in the County and posted on County bulletin boards. The Commission received two applications
and invited all applicants to be interviewed. On October 20, 2009, the CCCW membership committee interviewed
one applicant. The committee assessed the applicant based on the following criteria:
• Familiarity with and understanding of the diverse issues facing women in the county
• Specific experience, knowledge or interest in women’s issues in the county
• The potential to expand the CCCW’s experience and capacity to develop recommendations for the activities of the
Commission
• Potential for conflicts of interest
• Diversity with respect to ethnic background, gender, and geographic representation
The membership committee unanimously approved the above recommendation for a new appointment.
As of October 21, 2009 there are 11 at large vacancies, the at large alternate seat and the District I seat is vacant.
These vacancies have the following terms:
At Large #14, #15, 20
February 28, 2011
At Large #12, #16, 17, Alternate February 28, 2012
At Large #3, #9, #10, #18, District I February 28. 2010
If the appointment recommended in this memorandum are ultimately approved, one seat would be filled. The
vacancies remaining after approval would be ten at large seats, one alternate and the District I.
At Large #12, #16, 17, Alternate February 28, 2012
At Large #3, #9, #10, #18, District 1 February 28. 2010
At Large #14, #15, #20 February 28, 2011
Since May 2004, the CCCW has had extremely limited staff support and no budget provided by the County.
However, the CCCW membership committee is continuing its recruiting efforts and plans to fill the remaining
vacancies within the next few months.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE Appropriations Adjustment No. 5023 authorizing new revenue in the Sheriff's Office (0255) in the
amount of $602,579 from the California Office of Traffic Safety, "Avoid the 25" DUI campaign and appropriating it
for DUI enforcement equipment and activities.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This action increases revenue and appropriations by $602,579. There is no change in net county cost.
BACKGROUND:
On March 11, 2008, the Board approved and authorized the Sheriff-Coroner to apply for and accept a State of
California Office of Traffic Safety Avoid the 25 Program grant to help fund a comprehensive, multi-jurisdictional
driving under the influence (DUI) enforcement campaign (item C.64). This program is designed to decrease the
number of DUI related traffic collisions and fatalities by increasing the number of DUI arrests. Additionally, the
"Avoid the 25" program is intended to reduce collisions and fatalities through greater public awareness and education
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Liz Arbuckle, 335-1601
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: EMY L. SHARP, Deputy
cc: Frank Scudero, Beth Kilian, Tim Ewell
C.26
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Warren Rupf, Sheriff-Coroner
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Appropriation Adjustment - Avoid the 25 Grant
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
from media coverage of the program. The program has proven to be effective in three additional Bay Area
counties, and has resulted in an increase in DUI arrests with a reduction in DUI related collisions.
The original grant award was $662,473 and approximately $59,894 was claimed in fiscal year 2008/09, resulting
in a grant balance of $602,579. This request reflects the remaining balance of the grant award, which has not been
appropriated in the department's fiscal year 2009/10 operating budget.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT:
ATTACHMENTS
TC27 Avoid the 25
TC24 Avoid the 25
AUDITOR-CONTROLLER USE ONLY
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY FINAL APPROVAL NEEDED BY:
APPROPRIATION ADJUSTMENT X BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
T/C 27 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
ACCOUNT CODING BUDGET UNIT: Sheriff's Office
EXPENDITURE
ORGANIZATION SUB-ACCOUNT Option EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION <DECREASE>INCREASE
2526 1013 Temporary Salaries 1,000 00
2526 1014 Permanent Overtime 100,000 00
2526 1042 F.I.C.A.1,000 00
2526 1044 Retirement Expense 30,000 00
2526 1060 Employee Group Insurance 10,000 00
2526 1063 Unemployment Insurance 1,000 00
2526 1070 Workers Compensation Ins 10,000 00
2526 2100 Office Expense 1,000 00
2526 2103 Postage 1,000 00
2526 2303 Other Travel Employees 1,000 00
2526 2310 Non Cnty Prof Spclzd Svcs 100,000 00
2526 2479 Other Special Dpmtal Exp 336,579 00
2526 5011 Reimbursements-Gov/Gov 10,000 00
0990 6301 Reserve for Appropriations 602,579 00
0990 6301 Appropriate New Revenue 602,579 00
TOTALS 602,579 00 1,205,158 00
APPROVED EXPLANATION OF REQUEST
AUDITOR-CONTROLLER:
BY:______________________________ DATE___________
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR:
BY:______________________________ DATE___________
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
YES:
NO:
10/30/2009
SIGNATURE TITLE DATE
APPROPRIATION APOO 5023
BY:______________________________ DATE___________ADJ. JOURNAL NO.
To appropriate new revenue for Avoid the 25 Grant
Sheriff's
Fiscal Officer
(Deputy)
(M129 Rev 2/86)
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
ESTIMATED REVENUE ADJUSTMENT
T/C 24
ACCOUNT CODING BUDGET UNIT: Sheriff's Office
REVENUE
ORGANIZATION ACCOUNT REVENUE ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION INCREASE <DECREASE>
2526 9595 Misc Govt Agencies 602,579 00
TOTALS 602,579 00 0 00
APPROVED EXPLANATION OF REQUEST
AUDITOR-CONTROLLER:
BY:______________________________ DATE___________
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR:
BY:______________________________ DATE___________
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
YES:
NO:
10/30/2009
SIGNATURE TITLE DATE
REVENUE ADJ. RAOO 5023
BY:______________________________ DATE___________JOURNAL NO.
To appropriate new revenue for Avoid the 25 Grant
Sheriff's
Fiscal Officer
(Deputy)
(M 8134 Rev. 2/86)
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE Appropriation Adjustment No. 5030 authorizing new revenue in the Sheriff's Office (0255) in the amount
of $178,268 from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Infrastructure Protection Program - 2007 Port Security
Grant and appropriating it for the purchase of marine patrol equipment.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No net County costs. This action increases revenue and appropriations by $178,268, reflecting the balance of
remaining from the original grant award. (CFDA No. 97.056)
BACKGROUND:
On September 11, 2007 (Item C.99), the Board authorized the Sheriff's Office to apply for and accept the 2007 Port
Security Grant. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) awarded the 2007 Port Security Grant to the
Sheriff's Office to provide a combined security deterrence and response capability in the water, air and land, in
cooperation with the U.S. Coast Guard, allied agencies and industry. A key element of the grant was the funding of
equipment to enhance
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Liz Arbuckle, 335-1601
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: EMY L. SHARP, Deputy
cc: Frank Scudero, Tim Ewell, Beth Kilian, Will Duke
C.27
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Warren Rupf, Sheriff-Coroner
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Appropriation Adjustment - 2007 Port Security Grant
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
security deterrence capabilities established with the 2006 Port Security Grant, including the replacement of a
Forward Looking Infrared (FLIR) on the Sheriff's STARR II helicopter and the purchase of a Coda Underwater
Inspection System (UIS) for use in the Marine Patrol Unit.
The original grant award was $1,120,000; $840,000 Federal and $280,000 County match. The County match was
satisfied by the purchase of the FLIR system described above. The remaining balance of this grant being
appropriated today requires no further match dollars.
ATTACHMENTS
TC24 Port Security
TC27 Port Security
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
ESTIMATED REVENUE ADJUSTMENT
T/C 24
ACCOUNT CODING BUDGET UNIT: Sheriff's Office
REVENUE
ORGANIZATION ACCOUNT REVENUE ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION INCREASE <DECREASE>
2507 9362 St Aid Crime Control 178,268 00
TOTALS 178,268 00 0 00
APPROVED EXPLANATION OF REQUEST
AUDITOR-CONTROLLER:
BY:______________________________ DATE___________
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR:
BY:______________________________ DATE___________
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
YES:
NO:
12/2/2009
SIGNATURE TITLE DATE
REVENUE ADJ. RAOO 5030
BY:______________________________ DATE___________JOURNAL NO.
To appropriate remaining 2007 revenue from Port
Security Grant
Chief of
Mgmt Svcs
(Deputy)
(M 8134 Rev. 2/86)
AUDITOR-CONTROLLER USE ONLY
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY FINAL APPROVAL NEEDED BY:
APPROPRIATION ADJUSTMENT X BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
T/C 27 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
ACCOUNT CODING BUDGET UNIT: Sheriff's Office
EXPENDITURE
ORGANIZATION SUB-ACCOUNT Option EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION <DECREASE>INCREASE
2507 2310 Non Cnty Prof Spclzd Svcs 88,268 00
2507 4952 Institutionl Equip & Furn 90,000 00
0990 6301 Reserve for Appropriations 178,268 00
0990 6301 Appropriate New Revenue 178,268 00
TOTALS 178,268 00 356,536 00
APPROVED EXPLANATION OF REQUEST
AUDITOR-CONTROLLER:
BY:______________________________ DATE___________
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR:
BY:______________________________ DATE___________
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
YES:
NO:
12/2/2009
SIGNATURE TITLE DATE
APPROPRIATION APOO 5030
BY:______________________________ DATE___________ADJ. JOURNAL NO.
To appropriate remaining 2007 revenues from Port
Security Grant
Chief of
Mgmt Svcs
(Deputy)
(M129 Rev 2/86)
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE Appropriation and Revenue Adjustment No. 5022 to increase revenue in the
Cooperative Extension program in the amount of $114,252 and appropriate it for on-going personnel and operating
expenses, as recommended by Supervisors Glover and Piepho.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This Appropriation Adjustment will increase authorized revenue and expenditures by $114,252 to cover the normal
on-going expenses for the program through June 30, 2010. Included in this amount is an expenditure transfer of
$50,00 from 100% general purpose revenue from transient occupancy taxes received from the Renaissance Club
Sport Hotel and designated to the CCFutures Fund. Revenues includes $100,000 from the Livable Communities
Trust, $5,622 in outside donations, $4,216 in revenue received from U.C. Davis under a contract for services, and
$4,414 award from the California State Fair.
BACKGROUND:
Additional funding has been approved by the Board of Supervisors for various sources including the CCFutures
Fund, Livable Communities Trus, donations, and an award from the California State Fair. This funding will allow the
program, previousl scheduled for closure effective December 31, 2009, to continue through June 30, 2010.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Dorothy Sansoe,
925-335-1009
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors
on the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: EMY L. SHARP, Deputy
cc:
C.28
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Dorothy Sansoe, County Administrator
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Appropriation and Revenue Adjustment for Cooperative Extension
ATTACHMENTS
Appr Adj 5022
RECOMMENDATION(S):
ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 20679 to reclassify a Community Health Worker II (VKVB) Position
#9799 and it's incumbent from salary level QT5 1043 ($3,000-$3,647.72) to Community Health Worker Specialist
(VKTA) at salary level QT5 1103 ($3,184.68-$3,870.99) in the Health Services Department, Healthy Start Unit.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Upon approval, this action will result in an annual cost of $3,889 which is 100% funded by Federally Qualified
Health Care Facility funds. This action will result in no net County cost.
BACKGROUND:
Human Resources has conducted a classification desk audit to review the incumbent's job duties currently being
performed. This action is requested on the basis that the incumbent has assumed a level of independence and is
performing higher-level responsibilities appropriate for the Community Health Worker Specialist classification. This
action will be accomplished under provisons of the Personnel Management Regulations, Section 503 Promotion by
Reclassification without Examination. Both the incumbent and the action proposed meet all requirements imposted
by that Section.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: J.Linares HS - (925)
957-5246
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors
on the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: EMY L. SHARP, Deputy
cc: otilia parra, joanne linares
C.29
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Ted Cwiek, Human Resources Director
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Reclassify a Community Health Worker II position and incumbent to Community Health Worker Specialist
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If this request is not approved, the incumbent will continue to perform duties outside the scope of her current
classification and will not be appropriately compensated.
ATTACHMENTS
P 300 #20679
RECOMMENDATION(S):
ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 20661 to RECLASSIFY a Network Administrator I (LNSA) Position
#9726 and it's incumbent from salary level ZA5 1694 ($5,717.43 - $6,949.58) to Network Administrator II (LNSB) at
salary level ZA5 1787 ($6,268.91 - $7,619.90) in the Health Services Department/IT Division.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Upon approval, this action will result in an annual cost of $11,675.00 which will be funded 100% by third party
revenue. This action will result in no net County cost.
BACKGROUND:
The Human Resources Department has conducted a classification desk audit to review the incumbent's job duties
currently being performed. This action is requested on the basis that the incumbent has assumed a level of
independence and is performing higher-level responsibilities appropriate for the Network Administrator II
classification. This action will be accomplished under provisons of the Personnel Management Regulations, Section
503 Promotion by Reclassification without Examination. Both the incumbent and the action proposed meet all
requirements imposted by this Section.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: T. Manor (HS) 957-5248
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: EMY L. SHARP, Deputy
cc: Human Resources, Human Resources, Health Services
C.30
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Ted Cwiek, Human Resources Director
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Reclassify one Network Administrator I and Incumbent to Network Administrator II
ATTACHMENTS
P 20661 (Health
Services)
RECOMMENDATION(S):
ADOPT Resolution No. 2009/546 authorizing the deletion of certain positions and laying off employees in the
General Services Department.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Two full-time, filled positions are recommended for elimination. In the Capital Facilities Division, salary savings of
$139,036 will be generated annually due to the elimination of one Sr. Capital Facilities Project Manager position.
Expenditure reductions are offset by reductions in revenue received from other departments, therefore there will be
no impact on the County general fund; however, if this action is not taken and project hours are not available for
charge out, the cost of the employee becomes an unplanned General Fund expense. In the Administrative Division,
the elimination of the Information Systems Specialist II position will generate salary savings of $95,891 annually. In
the future, the technical systems support will be handed through a service level agreement with the Department of
Information Technology (DOIT). The net future year County general fund savings due to the elimination of this
position are estimated at $45,891 per year.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Barbara Riveira
335-1018
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: EMY L. SHARP, Deputy
cc:
C.31
To:Board of Supervisors
From:David Twa, County Administrator
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Lay Off Resolution No. 2009/546 effective January 31, 2010 for the General Services Department
BACKGROUND:
The General Services Department, Capital Facilites Division projects have diminished to the point that the
department is not able to sustain the current staffing level, and no new projects have been identified at this time.
The elimination of the Sr. Capital Facilities Project Manager position and the layoff of the incumbent is
recommended due to these workload reductions.
The General Services Department has also partnered with Department of Information Technology as part of the
county-wide centralization plan. Department of Information Technology will perform all of the General Services
Department information technology support needed at a reduced cost to the General Services Department,
resulting in on-going budget savings for the General Services Department. Therefore, the elimination of one
Information Systems Specialist II position and the layoff of the incumbent is recommended.
ATTACHMENTS
Resolution No. 2009/546
GSD Lay Off 013109
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board
Adopted this Resolution on 12/15/2009 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
RECUSE:
Resolution No. 2009/546
In the Matter of Abolishing positions and laying off certain County employees in the General Services Department.
WHEREAS, the Board has considered the financial impact on the General Services Departments of reduced funding and
increased funding requirements, and has considered the position and staff reduction/retention plans submitted by
the departments; and
WHEREAS, department head has issued layoff or displacement notices, as the case may be, and have given notice to the affected
employees of the Board’s action; and
WHEREAS, to the extent that the subjects of this Resolution are within the scope of representation pursuant to the
Meyers-Milias-Brown Act (Government Code Section 3500 et seq.), this Board has offered to meet with recognized employee
organizations upon request concerning this resolution,
THE CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, in its capacity as governing Board of the County and all of its
dependent districts RESOLVES THAT: In order to keep expenditures within available funding, it is necessary to make position
adjustments, including abolishing the positions set forth in the list attached hereto (Attachment A) and to lay off employees
accordingly. Said list is incorporated herein by reference, and said positions are hereby abolished effective on the dates indicated.
Contact: Barbara Riveira 335-1018
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: , Deputy
cc:
Attachment A
DEPARTMENT: General Services Department
Pos #Classification
Class
Code Org # FT/PT
Vacant/
Filled
1756 Senior Capital Facilities Project Manager NEHA 4011 1.0 Filled
6548 Information Systems Specialist II LTVA 0149 1.0 Filled
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
POSITIONS TO BE ABOLISHED/REDUCED
Effective: January 31, 2010
(Unless Otherwise Noted)
RECOMMENDATION(S):
DIRECT the Human Resources Department to conduct classification studies with the goal of establishing the
following classes in the County Clerk-Recorder Division: Clerk-Recorder Services Technician, Clerk-Recorder
Services Specialist,
Clerk-Recorder Services Supervisor, and Clerk-Recorder Services Manager.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None at this time. Funding for the new positions will come from additional revenues generated by the fee increase
through SB 676.
BACKGROUND:
SB 676 was recently passed. allowing counties to increase the base fee charged for recording and indexing documents
- from $4 per document to up to $10 per document effective January 1, 2010. The opportunity emerged with the
passage of SB 676 to restructure the Clerk-Recorder organization that will bring tremendous improvement
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor
Contact: Debi Cooper/Steve Weir
335-7899
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of
Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: EMY L. SHARP, Deputy
cc:
C.32
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Stephen L. Weir, Clerk-Recorder
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Personnel Actions Related to SB 676 Recording and Indexing Fees Increase
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
in customer service, streamline operations, as well as reduce the general fund dependence of this department. The
objective is to create a new, higher trained and more technical classification structure so that all front line
employees in the Clerk-Recorder division can competently assist any customer, instead of the bifurcated system
that has been in place for many years. Recent budget issues and position cuts have further reduced customer
service, and SB 676 provides the department a means to improve its operations.
Though it will take several years for the operations to be fully integrated to the new structure, immediate
improvements are expected to be seen in the amount of time customers wait in line to be helped, the amount of
available parking (because customers will be in and out of the office faster), and the quality of service. This is an
opportunity for the county to take better care of its constituents.
This Board Order is a request for the Human Resources Department to initate necessary steps to facilitate the
reorganization at the Clerk-Recorder, by conducting classification studies that will ultimately result in the
establishment of several classications deemed more appropriate for the needs of the Clerk-Recorder Department.
As part of the study, Human Resources will also conduct salary reviews to determine the appropriate salary range
for various classifications in the Clerk-Recorder Division.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
Failure to increase the recording and indexing fee and to make the requested position changes will cause the
county to lose approximately $1,800,000 annually in revenues that can be utilized for recording- and
indexing-related activities The Clerk-Recorder division will continue with a bifurcated system of staff either
helping with Clerk functions or recording functions, which often leave customers for one or the other group in
long lines, waiting for service. Parking will continue to be an issue for both staff and customers. The
Clerk-Recorder will lose an opportunity to increase positive support to county constituents.
ATTACHMENTS
POSITION ADJUSTMENT REQUEST
NO.
DATE 12/1/09
Department No./
Department Clerk-Recorder Budget Unit No. 0355 Org No. 0355 Agency No. 24
Action Requested: Create classifications of Clerk-Recorder Services Technician (add 6), Clerk -Recorder Services Specialist
(add 5), Clerk -Recorder Services Supervisor (add 2), Clerk-Recorder Services Manager (add one), Chief Deputy Clerk -
Recorder (add one). Eliminate ten vacant positions (now if positions are vacant, or as soon as they become vacant).
Reallocate Assistant Recorder Exempt ALB3, Assistant Registrar Exempt ALB1, Election Services Manager EBSA on the
salary schedule. Add one Network Administrator I LNSA and eliminate one vacant Network Tech I LNWA (position 12453).
Proposed Effective Date: 1/1/2010
Classification Questionnaire attached: Yes No / Cost is within Department’s budget: Yes No
Total One-Time Costs (non-salary) associated with request: $0.00
Estimated total cost adjustment (salary / benefits / one time):
Total annual cost 784,762 Net County Cost 784,762
Total this FY 392,381 N.C.C. this FY 392,381
SOURCE OF FUNDING TO OFFSET ADJUSTMENT SB 676, effective 1/1/2010, will provide apx. $1,800,000 in new annual
revenue. After these actions, there will still be an annual General Fund savings of apx. $1,105,238.
Department must initiate necessary adjustment and submit to CAO.
Use additional sheet for further explanations or comments.
______________________________________
(for) Department Head
REVIEWED BY CAO AND RELEASED TO HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT
___________________________________ ________________
Deputy County Administrator Date
HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATIONS DATE
Amend Resolution 71/17 establishing positions and resolutions allocating classes to the Basic / Exempt salary schedule.
Effective: Day following Board Action.
1/1/2010(Date)
___________________________________ ________________
(for) Director of Human Resources Date
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION: DATE
Approve Recommendation of Director of Human Resources
Disapprove Recommendation of Director of Human Resources
Other: ____________________________________________ ___________________________________
(for) County Administrator
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ACTION: David J. Twa, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
Adjustment is APPROVED DISAPPROVED and County Administrator
DATE BY
APPROVAL OF THIS ADJUSTMENT CONSTITUTES A PERSONNEL / SALARY RESOLUTION AMENDMENT
POSITION ADJUSTMENT ACTION TO BE COMPLETED BY HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT FOLLOWING BOARD ACTION
Adjust class(es) / position(s) as follows:
P300 (M347) Rev 3/15/01
RECOMMENDATION(S):
ADOPT Personnel Adjustment Resolution No. 20756 to cancel one (1) permanent, full-time Deputy Sheriff – 40 hour
(6XWA) position # 3039, and add one permanent, full-time (1) Sergeant (6XTA) position to the Patrol Division –
Military Ocean Terminal Concord (MOTCO), in the Office of the Sheriff.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This action is 100% funded by the U.S. Army, Military Ocean Terminal Concord (MOTCO). No General Fund
monies.
BACKGROUND:
The Office of the Sheriff provides law enforcement and security services to the U.S. Army – Military Ocean
Terminal Concord through a contractual agreement. In November 2009, the Office of the Sheriff received notice
from the U.S. Army, Military Ocean Terminal Concord (MOTCO), requesting the cancellation of one Deputy Sheriff
position and addition of one Sergeant position to the staffing levels at MOTCO.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Eileen Devlin,
925-335-1557
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: EMY L. SHARP, Deputy
cc: Eileen Devlin, Karen Todd, Barbara Vargen
C.33
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Warren Rupf, Sheriff-Coroner
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Cancel one (1) Deputy Sheriff position and add one (1) Sergeant position- MOTCO
ATTACHMENTS
P300 #20756 - Office of the Sheriff
POSITION ADJUSTMENT REQUEST
NO. 20756
DATE 11/19/2009
Department No./
Department Office of the Sheriff Budget Unit No. 0255 Org No. 2543 Agency No. 25
Action Requested: CANCEL one (1) full-time, permanent Deputy Sheriff position (6XWA position #3039) and ADD one (1)
full-time, permanent Sergeant position (6XTA) to Field Operations Bureau - Patrol Division - Military Ocean Terminal Concord
(MOTCO).
Proposed Effective Date: 12/1/2009
Classification Questionnaire attached: Yes No / Cost is within Department’s budget: Yes No
Total One-Time Costs (non-salary) associated with request: $0.00
Estimated total cost adjustment (salary / benefits / one time):
Total annual cost $24,428.00 Net County Cost $0.00
Total this FY $14,252.00 N.C.C. this FY $0.00
SOURCE OF FUNDING TO OFFSET ADJUSTMENT Funded by U.S. Department of Arm y - MOTCO contract
Department must initiate necessary adjustment and submit to CAO.
Use additional sheet for further explanations or comments.
Eileen Devlin
______________________________________
(for) Department Head
REVIEWED BY CAO AND RELEASED TO HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT
TME for RJS 11/23/2009
___________________________________ ________________
Deputy County Administrator Date
HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATIONS DATE
CANCEL one (1) full-time, permanent Deputy Sheriff position (6XWA position #3039) and ADD one (1) full-time, permanent
Sergeant position (6XTA) in the Office of the Sheriff.
Amend Resolution 71/17 establishing positions and resolutions allocating classes to the Basic / Exempt salary schedule.
Effective: Day following Board Action.
(Date)
___________________________________ ________________
(for) Director of Human Resources Date
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION: DATE
Approve Recommendation of Director of Human Resources
Disapprove Recommendation of Director of Human Resources
Other: ____________________________________________ ___________________________________
(for) County Administrator
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ACTION: David J. Twa, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
Adjustment is APPROVED DISAPPROVED and County Administrator
DATE BY
APPROVAL OF THIS ADJUSTMENT CONSTITUTES A PERSONNEL / SALARY RESOLUTION AMENDMENT
POSITION ADJUSTMENT ACTION TO BE COMPLETED BY HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT FOLLOWING BOARD ACTION
Adjust class(es) / position(s) as follows:
P300 (M347) Rev 3/15/01
REQUEST FOR PROJECT POSITIONS
Department Date 3/16/2015 No. xxxxxx
1. Project Positions Requested:
2. Explain Specific Duties of Position(s)
3. Name / Purpose of Project and Funding Source (do not use acronyms i.e. SB40 Project or SDSS Funds)
4. Duration of the Project: Start Date End Date
Is funding for a specified period of time (i.e. 2 years) or on a year -to-year basis? Please explain.
5. Project Annual Cost
a. Salary & Benefits Costs: b. Support Costs:
(services, supplies, equipment, etc.)
c. Less revenue or expenditure: d. Net cost to General or other fund:
6. Briefly explain the consequences of not filling the project position(s) in terms of:
a. potential future costs d. political implications
b. legal implications e. organizational implications
c. financial implications
7. Briefly describe the alternative approaches to delivering the services which you have consi dered. Indicate why these
alternatives were not chosen.
8. Departments requesting new project positions must submit an updated cost benefit analysis of each project position at the
halfway point of the project duration. This report is to be submitted to the Human Resources Department, which will
forward the report to the Board of Supervisors. Indicate the date that your cost / benefit analysis will be submitted
9. How will the project position(s) be filled?
a. Competitive examination(s)
b. Existing employment list(s) Which one(s)?
c. Direct appointment of:
1. Merit System employee who will be placed on leave from current job
2. Non-County employee
Provide a justification if filling position(s) by C1 or C2
USE ADDITIONAL PAPER IF NECESSARY
RECOMMENDATION(S):
ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 20759 to cancel Chief of Property Conservation (FADG) (Position No.
930), and ADD three (3) Senior Building Inspector (FATE) full time permanent positions at salary level QS5 1800
($6,350-$7,001).
FISCAL IMPACT:
Annual cost savings of approximately $130,827 resulting from the cancellation of the Chief of Property Conservation
position and the subsequent cancellation of the 3 vacated positions after promotional appointments are finalized.
Funded 100% by Land Development Fees.
BACKGROUND:
The Department of Conservation and Development is trying to flatten the organization and develop future leadership.
With the retirement of the Chief of Property Conservation in September, an opportune timing has been presented to
the Department to pursue its goal of reorganization and leadership development. In line with this, the Department will
cancel the Chief of Property Conservation position and replace it with 3 Senior Building Inspectors who will provide
lead
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Laura Glass, 5-1178
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: EMY L. SHARP, Deputy
cc: Tanya Stulken, Eva Barrios, Laura Glass - Department of Conservation and Development
C.34
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Catherine Kutsuris, Conservation & Development Director
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:CANCEL Position # 930, Chief of Property Conservation. ADD three (3) Senior Building Inspectors.
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
direction for the Property Conservation Section. These three (3) Senior Building Inspectors will report to the
Department of Conservation and Development Deputy Director, Building Inspection Division. These 3 new
positions will be filled through a promotional exam and will come from the Building Inpector II pool. Upon the
successful promotional appointments, the Department will cancel the positions being vacated.
The Department will process the P300 to cancel all three (3) vacated positions as soon as the promotional
appointments have been made. Once the entire plan is executed, the net effect to the Department will be one less
FTE (Chief of Property Conservation).
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If this action is not approved, the Department of Conservation and Development will be unable to continue
reorganizing and streamlining its staffing levels.
ATTACHMENTS
Worksheet calculation
P300#20759 DCD
Cancel:Add:Savings Incurred by the Net Savings
1 Chief,
Property Conservation 3 Senior BI
Cancellation of positions
vacated
(actual costs used)(3 Building Inspection IIs)
Highest Pay, Monthly (8,175)7,001 (6,474)
Include Benefits (5,494)12,252 (11,330)
Convert to Annual Cost (164,028)147,021 (135,954)
x Number of Positions (164,028)441,063 (407,862)(130,827)
POSITION ADJUSTMENT REQUEST
NO. 20759
DATE 12/8/2009
Department No./
Department Conservation & Development Budget Unit No. 0280 Org No. 2671/ Agency No. 38
Action Requested: CANCEL Position # 930, Chief of Property Conservation (FADG). ADD three (3) Senior Building
Inspectors (FATE). Promotional exam only. Positions vacated after promotion will be cancelled (P300 for cancellation will be
submitted separately).
Proposed Effective Date: 1/1/2010
Classification Questionnaire attached: Yes No / Cost is within Department’s budget: Yes No
Total One-Time Costs (non-salary) associated with request: $0.00
Estimated total cost adjustment (salary / benefits / one time):
Total annual cost ($130,827.00) Net County Cost $0.00
Total this FY ($65,413.50) N.C.C. this FY $0.00
SOURCE OF FUNDING TO OFFSET ADJUSTMENT Land Development Fees
Department must initiate necessary adjustment and submit to CAO.
Use additional sheet for further explanations or comments.
Approved by Jason Crapo
______________________________________
(for) Department Head
REVIEWED BY CAO AND RELEASED TO HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT
RS & LD 12/7/09
___________________________________ ________________
Deputy County Administrator Date
HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATIONS DATE 12/08/2009
ADD three (3) permanent full-time Senior Building Inspector (FATE) positions at salary level QS5 1800 ($6,350-$7,001) and
CANCEL one (1) full-time Chief Property Conservation (FADG) vacant position #930 in the Department of Conservation and
Development.
Amend Resolution 71/17 establishing positions and resolutions allocating classes to the Basic / Exempt salary schedule.
Effective: Day following Board Action.
(Date)
___________________________________ ________________
(for) Director of Human Resources Date
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION: DATE
Approve Recommendation of Director of Human Resources
Disapprove Recommendation of Director of Human Resources
Other: ____________________________________________ ___________________________________
(for) County Administrator
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ACTION: David J. Twa, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
Adjustment is APPROVED DISAPPROVED and County Administrator
DATE BY
APPROVAL OF THIS ADJUSTMENT CONSTITUTES A PERSONNEL / SALARY RESOLUTION AMENDMENT
POSITION ADJUSTMENT ACTION TO BE COMPLETED BY HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT FOLLOWING BOARD ACTION
Adjust class(es) / position(s) as follows:
P300 (M347) Rev 3/15/01
REQUEST FOR PROJECT POSITIONS
Department Date 3/16/2015 No. xxxxxx
1. Project Positions Requested:
2. Explain Specific Duties of Position(s)
3. Name / Purpose of Project and Funding Source (do not use acronym s i.e. SB40 Project or SDSS Funds)
4. Duration of the Project: Start Date End Date
Is funding for a specified period of time (i.e. 2 years) or on a year -to-year basis? Please explain.
5. Project Annual Cost
a. Salary & Benefits Costs: b. Support Costs:
(services, supplies, equipment, etc.)
c. Less revenue or expenditure: d. Net cost to General or other fund:
6. Briefly explain the consequences of not filling the project position(s) in terms of:
a. potential future costs d. political implications
b. legal implications e. organizational implications
c. financial implications
7. Briefly describe the alternative approaches to delivering the services which you have considered. Indicate why these
alternatives were not chosen.
8. Departments requesting new project positions must submit an updated cost benefit analysis of each project position at the
halfway point of the project duration. This report is to be submitted to the Human Resources Department, which will
forward the report to the Board of Supervisors. Indicate the date that your cost / benefit analysis will be submitted
9. How will the project position(s) be filled?
a. Competitive examination(s)
b. Existing employment list(s) Which one(s)?
c. Direct appointment of:
1. Merit System employee who will be placed on leave from current job
2. Non-County employee
Provide a justification if filling position(s) by C1 or C2
USE ADDITIONAL PAPER IF NECESSARY
RECOMMENDATION(S):
ADOPT Resolution 2009/491, amending Resolution 2009/298, which amended Resolution 2009/112, to revise the
effective date for the abolishment of one position in Cooperative Extension, from December 31, 2009, to June 30,
2010 as recommended by Supervisors Glover and Piepho. All other provision of Resolution 2009/112 remain in full
force and effect.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Additional funding has been been approved by the Board of Supervisors from various sources, including the CC
Futures Fund, Livable Communities, donations, and an award from the California State Fair. This funding will allow
the extension of the position through the end of the fiscal year.
BACKGROUND:
On April 7, 2009, the Board approved and adopted Position Adjustment Resolution No. 2009/112 incorporating the
position eliminations identified in the FY 2009-10 Recommended Budget as modified on March 31, 2009. The
Resolution adjusted and/or eliminated positions in the following County departments: Animal Services, Assessor,
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Dorothy Sansoe,
335-1009
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: EMY L. SHARP, Deputy
cc:
C.35
To:Board of Supervisors
From:David Twa, County Administrator
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Amendment to Resolution 2009/298 Deleting Certain Positions and Laying Off Employees
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
Board of Supervisors, Clerk-Recorder, Conservation and Development, Cooperative Extension, County
Administration, Office of Revenue Collection, Department of Information Technology, District Attorney,
Employment and Human Services, General Services, Health Services, Human Resources, Library, Probation,
Public Defender, Public Works, Risk Management, Sheriff-Coroner, and Treasurer-Tax Collector.
The County Administrator is requesting that the Board revise the effective date for one position in Cooperative
Extension from December 31, 2009 to June 30, 2010. This revision will reflect on-going efforts to identify and
obtain outside funding to sustain the program services.
All other provisions of Resolutions 2009/112 and 2009/298 remain in full force and effect.
ATTACHMENTS
Resolution No. 2099/491
Attachment A to Resolution
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board
Adopted this Resolution on 12/15/2009 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
RECUSE:
Resolution No. 2099/491
SUBJECT: Changing the Effective Date for the Delection of Positions and the Layoff of Employees in Cooperative Extension
WHEREAS, the Board adopted Resolution 2009/298 on June 23, 2009, amending the effective dates of the abolishment of
certain positions in affected County Departments and establishing layoff dates; and
WHEREAS, the Board adopted Resolution 2009/112 on April 7, 2009, abolishing certain positions in affected County
Departments and establishing layoff date; and
WHEREAS, additional funding has become available to extend the layoff dates for one position in Cooperative Extension (i.e.
Office Manager);
THE CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, in its capacity as governing Board of the County and all of its
dependent districts RESOLVES THAT:
1. Resolution 2009/298, which amended Resolution 2009/112, is hereby amended to change the effective date to abolish the
positions of Office Manager in Cooperative Extension from December 31, 2009 to June 30, 2010, as shown on Attachment A6
Second Revision, attached hereto.
2. All other provisions of Resolutions No. 2009/112 and 2009/298 remain in full force and effect.
Contact: Dorothy Sansoe, 335-1009
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: , Deputy
cc:
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
POSITIONS TO BE ABOLISHED
Effective: April 30, 2009
(Unless Otherwise Noted)
DEPARTMENT: Cooperative Extension A-6 Second Revision
Pos # Classification Class Code Org # FT/PT Vacant/Filled
The following position will be abolished at the end of business on June 30, 2009
2008 Clerk - Experienced Level JWXB 0630 32/40 Filled
The following position will be abolished at the end of business on December 31, 2009
2009 Clerk - Experienced Level JWXB 0630 40/40 Filled
The following position will be abolished at the end of business on June 30, 2010
10420 Office Manager JJHC 0630 40/40 Filled
RECOMMENDATION(S):
1. DECLARE that the County-owned property at 205 41st Street, Richmond is surplus property not needed for the
County's immediate use, and APPROVE a Lease with RYSE, Inc. for that property for a five year term beginning
July 1, 2009, and ending June 30, 2014, for approximately 6,600 square feet of building space, at a monthly rent of
$1 for the operation of a Community Youth Center under the terms and conditions set forth in the Lease.
2. AUTHORIZE the Director of General Services, or designee, to EXECUTE the Lease on behalf of the County, and
EXERCISE any additional options to the Lease.
3. DETERMINE that the project is a Class 1(a) Section 15301 Categorical Exemption under the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
4. DIRECT the Department of Conservation and Development Director, or designee, to file a Notice of Exemption
with the County Clerk, and DIRECT the Director of General Services, or designee, to arrange for the payment of the
handling fees to the Department of Conservation and Development and County Clerk for filing of the Notice of
Exemption.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor
Contact: Mike Lango, General Services Director,
925.313.7100, Gail Myers, RES, 925.313.7262
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the
minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of
Supervisors
By: EMY L. SHARP, Deputy
cc: GSD Administration, GSD Accounting, GSD RES Div Manager, GSD RES Agent, GSD RES Clerical, County Counsel's Office, County Administrator's Office, Risk
Manager
C.36
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Michael J. Lango, General Services Director
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Lease with RYSE, Inc., for the County-owned Premises at 205 41st Street, Richmond
RECOMMENDATION(S): (CONT'D)
FISCAL IMPACT:
County will realize a cost avoidance of approximately $30,000 in fiscal year 2009/2010 and approximately $156,274
over the five year term of the lease due to RYSE paying for various building expenses.
BACKGROUND:
The County has not used the building at 205 41st Street since July 2006. Government Code Section 25372 (b)
authorizes the County to lease County-owned surplus property to non-profit entities organized for the care, teaching,
or training of youth. RYSE has informed the County that it is a California non-profit corporation that meets the
criteria set forth in Government Code 25372 (b) and will operate a Youth Center and provide outreach services to
support the community of Richmond from the 205 41st Street location.
RYSE will pay for janitorial, landscaping, telephone, natural gas, electricity and refuse collection services to the
Premises. County will pay for water, sewer, and alarm service, and will maintain the HVAC and interior utility
systems, and the structural integrity of the Building.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
RYSE will not provide Community Youth Center and outreach services at this location and the County-owned
building will remain vacant.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
1. APPROVE the project design and scope of work, including drawings, specifications, and work descriptions, for the
4th Floor Remodel project, Wakefield Taylor Courthouse, 725 Court Street, Martinez.
2. DETERMINE that the project is a Class 1(a) Section 15061(b)(3) Categorical Exemption under the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
3. APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the General Services Director, or his designee, to execute, on behalf of the County,
a memorandum of understanding with the Judicial Council of California, Administrative Office of the Courts
(“AOC”), and the Superior Court of California, Contra Costa County, pursuant to which the AOC will pay the
County an amount not to exceed $550,000, for the renovation of the fourth floor of the Wakefield Taylor Courthouse
as described in the scope of work, during the period January 4 through May 7, 2010, subject to approval by County
Counsel as to the form of the memorandum of understanding.
4. AUTHORIZE the General Services Director or designee to advertise for bids for trade contracts.
5. DELEGATE authority to the General
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: (925) 313-7163
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Katherine Sinclair, Deputy
cc: GSD - Admin Services, County Administrator, County Counsel
C.37
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Michael J. Lango, General Services Director
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Memorandum of Understanding with the Judicial Council of California, Administrative Office of the Courts and the
Superior Court of Contra Costa
RECOMMENDATION(S): (CONT'D)
Services Director, or his designee, to evaluate bids received for trade contracts and, pursuant to County Ordinance
Code Section 1108-3.208, to award trade contracts to the lowest responsive and responsible bidders for portions
of the work described in the scope of work.
6. AUTHORIZE the General Services Director or designee to exonerate any bid bonds posted by the bidders, after
execution of the trade contracts.
7. AUTHORIZE the General Services Director or designee 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 trade contracts, pursuant to Public Contract Code Section 22300.
8. AUTHORIZE the General Services Director or designee to order changes or additions to the contract work
pursuant to Public Contract Section 20142.
9. DELEGATE to the General Services Director or designee, pursuant to Public Contract Code Section 4114, the
Board's functions under Public Contract Code Sections 4107 and 4110 with regards to subletting and
subcontracting.
10. DIRECT the Conservation and Development Director, or designee, to file a Notice of Exemption with the
County Clerk, and DIRECT the Director of General Services, or designee, to arrange for the payment of the
handling fees to the Department of Conservation and Development and County Clerk for filing of the Notice of
Exemption.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Approval of this memorandum of understanding will allow the AOC to pay the County an amount not to exceed
$550,000 as reimbursement for all costs (including labor and materials) incurred in the renovation of the fourth
floor of the Wakefield Taylor Courthouse.
BACKGROUND:
On March 31, 2009, the Board of Supervisors approved a transfer of responsibility and title to the Wakefield
Taylor Courthouse to the AOC, pursuant to The Trial Court Facilities Act of 2002. The County retained an equity
interest in the fourth floor of the Wakefield Taylor Courthouse. Under the Equity Exchange Agreement approved
by the Board of Supervisors on December 1, 2009, the County will transfer its equity interest in theWakefield
Taylor Courthouse to the AOC in consideration for the Superior Court vacating the County Finance Building (625
Court Street, Martinez) and the AOC relinquishing its equity interest in the Finance Building. The Court needs to
have the fourth floor renovated before it is able to vacate the Finance Building, and has asked the County to
provide services needed to renovate the interior space on the 4th floor of the Wakefield Taylor Courthouse in
accordance with the scope of work. This memorandum of understanding will allow the County to quickly prepare
the 4th floor of the Wakefield Taylor Courthouse for occupancy by the Court.
As outlined above, the County proposes to enter into a memorandum of understanding pursuant to which the
AOC will pay the County to renovate the 4th floor of the Wakefield Taylor Courthouse for occupancy by the
Court. The minor interior alterations will involve negligible or no expansion of use beyond the existing uses. As
determined by the initial study, it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity may have a
significant effect on the environment. Therefore, staff recommends that the Board find that the proposed project is
categorically exempt from the provisions of CEQA pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines section 15061 (b) (3).
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
Without this memorandum of understanding, Court staff will not be able to occupy the fourth floor of the
Wakefield Taylor Courthouse, thus delaying its vacancy of space in the Finance Building.
CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT:
ATTACHMENTS
Sup Ct Notice to Proceed
4th Fl Renovation Plan Pt1
4th Fl Renovation Plan Pt2
CEQA Findings/Determination
RECOMMENDATION(S):
1. AWARD a contract in the amount of $217,244 to Kel-Tec Builders, Inc. ("Kel-Tec"), Martinez, the lowest
responsive and responsible bidder for the subject project, and AUTHORIZE the General Services Director, or
designee, to execute the contract.
2. DETERMINE that Kel-Tec, as the lowest responsive and responsible bidder, has documented an adequate good
faith effort to comply with the specifications and requirements of the County's Outreach Program.
3. AUTHORIZE the General Services Director, or designee, to exonerate any bid bond posted by the bidder after
execution of the contract.
4. AUTHORIZE the General Services Director, or designee, to sign any escrow agreements prepared for this project
to permit the direct payment of retentions into escrow or the substitution of securities for monies withheld by the
County to ensure performance under the contract, pursuant to Public Contract Code Section 22300.
5. AUTHORIZE the General Services Director, or designee to order changes or additions to the contract work
pursuant to Public Contact Code Section 20142.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor
Contact: Mike Lango, (925)313-7100
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: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Katherine Sinclair, Deputy
cc: GSD Administration, GSD Accounting, GSD CPM Division Manager, GSD CPM Project Manager, GSD CPM Clerical, Auditor's Office, County Counsel's Office,
County Administrator's Office, County Administrator's Office, Murakami/Nelson Architectural Corp. (via CPM), Kel-Tec Builders Inc. (via CPM)
C.38
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Michael J. Lango, General Services Director
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Award of Construction Contract for Pharmacy Area Remodel, Building One, 2500 Alhambra Avenue, Martinez
(WW0689)
RECOMMENDATION(S): (CONT'D)
6. DELEGATE, pursuant to Public Contract Code Section 4114, the Board's functions under Public Contract Code
Sections 4107 and 4110, with regards to subletting and subcontracting, to the General Services Director, or designee.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The construction cost of $217,244 will be funded from the Health Services Department Enterprise Fund (EF-1),
current fiscal year 2009-2010 budget.
BACKGROUND:
The relocation of the Antepartum Testing room from the hospital building at the Contra Costa Regional Medical
Center ("CCRMC") to Building One will allow an additional labor and delivery room to be built (in the future as a
separate project) in the space currently occupied by Antepartum Testing. The hospital has a shortage of labor and
delivery rooms.
The subject project scope involves remodeling the pharmacy area in Building One, including building a new
Antepartum Testing room and support spaces. In addition, the project scope includes upgrades to the air filtration for
the chemotherapy room and new emergency power backup for the medicine refrigeration equipment in the pharmacy.
The project plans and specifications were previously filed with and approved by the Board of Supervisors and bids
were duly invited from general contractors. Eleven bids were received and opened by the General Services
Department on November 12, 2009, and the bid results are as follows:
BIDDER BID
Kel-Tec Builders Inc., Martinez $217,244
Murray Building Inc., Sonoma $240,000
Page Construction Company, Novato $246,583
Euro Style Management Inc., North Highlands $263,800
Eric F. Anderson Inc., San Leandro $267,332
Codding, Rohnert Park $271,000
Sausal Corporation, San Leandro $274,000
W.E. Lyons Construction, Oakland $274,986
Albay Construction, Martinez $286,000
BC Construction, Ceres $291,041
River View Construction, Inc. West Sacramento $367,700
All bids were below the architect's estimate of $574,000. Kel-Tec submitted the lowest responsive and responsible
bid, which is $22,756 lower than the next lowest bid. Staff recommends that the contract be awarded to Kel-Tec.
The general prevailing rates of wages, which shall be the minimum rates paid on this project, are on file with the
Clerk of the Board and copies are available to any party upon request.
Kel-Tec submitted its documentation of good faith efforts to comply with the specifications and requirements of the
County's Outreach Program. Based on the outreach performed by Kel-Tec and the documentation submitted, staff
recommends that the Board determine that Kel-Tec has documented an adequate good faith and is in compliance.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If the Contract is not awarded, the antepartum testing will remain in the hospital and prevent the construction of an
If the Contract is not awarded, the antepartum testing will remain in the hospital and prevent the construction of an
additional labor and delivery room. Without the additional labor and delivery room, the CCRMC will be unable to
meet service demands. In addition, the extra space available in the pharmacy area of Building One will remain
underutilized.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to apply for and accept
Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development, Redevelopment and Economic Development
Division, Community Block Grant Program funding in an amount not to exceed $30,000 for a two-year period
($15,000 for fiscal year (FY) 2010-2011 and FY 2011 through 2012) to provide substance abuse and mental health
services at the Bay Point and North Richmond Service Integration Team sites for the period July 1, 2010 through
June 30, 2012.
FISCAL IMPACT:
If granted, County to receive $30,000 over a two (2) year period ($15,000 for FY 2010-2011 and $15,000 for FY
2011-2012) for Service Integration Team (SIT) Substance Abuse and Mental Health services at the Bay Point and
North Richmond SIT sites.
BACKGROUND:
The Community Development Block Grant funded Substance Abuse Mental Health (SAMH) component is an
integral part of the Service Integration Team (SIT) model because many of the clients served by SIT staff have
mental health and/or substance abuse issues. The SAMH counselor
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Paul Buddengen,
313-1793
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Katherine Sinclair, Deputy
cc:
C.39
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Joe Valentine, Employment & Human Services Director
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Contra Costa County Department of Conservation & Development, Redevelopment & Economic Development
Division Community Development Block Grant Program
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
receives referrals from other SIT site staff, such as the CalWORKS, MediCal, Food Stamps, Employment Specialists,
Children and Family Services workers, probation officers, Public Health nurses and school resource workers. Within
the multidisciplinary approach, the SIT SAMH counselor provides the following services: 1. Assessment and
short-term counseling; 2. Crisis intervention; 3. Clinical case management; 4. Substance abuse education; and 5.
Consultation with SIT staff.
The objective of the SIT SAMH services component is to help at least 70 unduplicated local residents achieve
economic self-sufficiency and improved family functioning by reducing or eliminating their substance abuse and/or
mental health barriers. This project employs five key strategies: 1. Inter-agency collaboration to increase the
efficiency and effectiveness of service delivery; 2. Early intervention to prevent the need for more intensive,
expensive and restrictive services over a long term; 3. Community based service delivery to ensure that services are
accessible and help build community capacity for addressing current and future need; 4. Comprehensive integrated
services based on the knowledge that the target population faces multiple barriers and that addressing this broader
constellation of issues will increase chances of success; and 5. Emphasis on the family and not just the individual, in
recognition that each individual exists within a broader family structure that can undermine or support the
individuals's chance of success in any treatment program.
CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT:
The Substance Abuse and Mental Health services provided at the Bay Point and North Richmond SIT sites will
support all of the community out comes 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 by addressing the barriers of substance abuse and mental
health and by promoting & moving families toward self sufficiency and supporting the family unit .
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to apply for and accept
Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development, Redevelopment and Economic Development
Division Community Development Block Grant funding in an amount not to exceed $30,000 for a two year period
($15,000 for fiscal year (FY) 2010-2011 and $15,000 for FY 2011 through 2012) to support the Bay Point Works
Community Career Center for the period of July 1, 2010 through June 30, 2012.
FISCAL IMPACT:
If granted, County to receive $30,000 over a two (2) year period ($15,000 for FY 2010-2011 an $15,000 for FY
2011-2012) to support the Bay Point Works Community Career Center.
BACKGROUND:
The objective of the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funded Bay Point Works Community Center
program is to help at least 140 Bay Point residents get jobs and succeed in the world of work. To meet this objective,
Bay Point Works (BPW) provides community residents
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Paul Buddenhagen,
313-1793
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors
on the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Katherine Sinclair, Deputy
cc:
C.40
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Joe Valentine, Employment & Human Services Director
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Contra Costa County Department of Conservation & Developmentnt, Redevelopment & Economic Development
Division, Community Development Block Grant
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
with a wide range of job related resources and services such as developing high quality resumes, offering access to
internet connected computers for job searches and success to basic technology such as fax machines, printers,
copiers, and telephones. The Career Center is offered as a place for employer and other agencies to do outreach and
connect with potential employees. For example, the Contra Costa County Office of Education does assessment
testing and intake with youth at BPW, offering them a convenient and central location to meet. Another popular
service offered at the Career Center is the Volunteer Income Tax Assistance (VITA) program. Last year more than
300 people were assisted by preparing their taxes for free. Finally, responding to newly employed working poor
residents who have difficulty paying for child care during school holidays YAP/gap was developed, an innovative
enriched educational child care service.
CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT:
The Bay Point Community Career Center supports three of the five community outcomes established in the
Children's Report Card: 3) Families that are Economically Self Sufficient; 4) Families that are Safe, Stable, and
Nurturing; and, 5) Communities that are Safe and Provide a High Quality of Life for Children and Families by
assisting individuals in obtaining and maintaining employment and by encouraging and supporting self sufficiency.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Clerk-Recorder, or designee, to execute a contract and subsequent
addendums to said contract with the Secretary of State for reimbursement with Federal Help America Vote Act
(HAVA) grant funds of costs incurred for participating in activities necessary to deploy VoteCal, the statewide voter
registration data base system, for the period January 1, 2010 through December 31, 2011.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no County match required for these grant funds.
BACKGROUND:
The County Clerk-Recorder has received a contract to allow reimbursement of county costs incurred for the first
group of activities under the State VoteCal Project. This contract will cover only the initial county expenses, up to
$19,594.87. The contract also describes a number of VoteCal reimbursable activities that will follow. It is the
Secretary of State's intent to amend this contract to add funding for the other
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Candy Lopez
925-335-7808
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Katherine Sinclair, Deputy
cc: Debi Cooper, Candy Lopez, Jeanine Mangewala
C.41
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Stephen L. Weir, Clerk-Recorder
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Clerk-Recorder, or designee, to execute a Help America Vote Act (HAVA)
grant funds contract for VoteCal activities
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
activities as the VoteCal Project progresses and the level of each county’s required participation is determined.
Every contract with the State requires documentation of the authorization by the County Board of Supervisors to
enter into the contract. The initial contract and any amendment to the contract cannot be fully executed until such
documentation is received by the Secretary of State. It is requested that the Board of Supervisors approve the
County Clerk-Recorder, or designee, to sign the contract and future amendments not to exceed a total of $100,000
relating to VoteCal activities, as described in the contract. This advance approval for the addendums will facilitate
the process and insure that the County does not miss the opportunity to be reimbursed for county-incurred
expenses as the project progresses.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
The County will miss the opportunity to be reimbursed for County-incurred expenses as the State VoteCal Project
progresses. VoteCal activities will proceed on schedule whether the contract for reimbursement has been
completed or not. Reimbursement cannot be made for expenses incurred outside of the effective dates of the
contract and subsequent addendums.
CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT:
ATTACHMENTS
HAVA contract
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Approve and authorize the Health Services Director, or his designee (Wendel Brunner, MD) to execute,on behalf of
the County, Novation Contract #28–644–8 with Golden Rain Foundation of Walnut Creek, a non-profit corporation,
to pay County an amount not to exceed $13,400, to provide congregate meal services for County’s Senior Nutrition
Program, for the period from July 1, 2009 through June 30, 2010. This Contract includes a three-month automatic
extension through September 30, 2010, in an amount not to exceed $3,350.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No County funds required.
BACKGROUND:
This Contract meets the social needs of County’s population by providing an average of 190 congregate meals per
week for senior citizens at its Congregate Senior Nutrition site at the Golden Rain Dining Room in Walnut Creek.
On July 27, 2008, the Board of Supervisors approved Novation Contract #28 644 7 with Golden Rain Foundation of
Walnut Creek, for the period from July 1, 2008 through June 30, 2009, which included a three-month
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Wendel Brunner, MD
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: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Katherine Sinclair, Deputy
cc: L Smith, B Borbon
C.42
To:Board of Supervisors
From:William Walker, M.D., Health Services Director
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Novation Contract #28–644–8 with Golden Rain Foundation of Walnut Creek
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
automatic extension through September 30, 2009, for the provision of congregate meal services for County’s Senior
Nutrition Program.
Approval of Novation Contract #28 644 8 replaces the automatic extension under the prior Contract and allows
Contractor to continue providing services through June 30, 2010.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to apply for and accept a grant from the California
Department of Boating and Waterways Equipment grant in an amount not to exceed $36,000 for the purchase of
equipment in the Marine Patrol Unit for the period July 1, 2009 through September 30, 2010.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No net County costs. $36,000 in new revenue; 100% State.
BACKGROUND:
The California Department of Boating and Waterways (DBW) is prepared to award an equipment grant to the Office
of the Sheriff to increase the Sheriff's Marine Patrol capabilities. The grant funds shall be used to purchase a marine
radar/GPS system for a Sheriff's patrol vessel, a marine thermal imaging (FLIR) system for a Sheriff's patrol vessel,
U.S. Coast Guard approved personal flotation devices for marine enforcement personnel and replacement sponsons
(vessel shell) for the Sheriff's Marine Patrol rigid hull inflatable patrol vessel. The increased capabilities
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Eileen Devlin, (925)
335-1557
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors
on the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Katherine Sinclair, Deputy
cc:
C.43
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Warren Rupf, Sheriff-Coroner
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:California Department of Boating and Waterways Equipment Grant
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
available through this grant will provide the necessary equipment to maintain maritime patrol and response, and thus
protect life and property on the waterways within Contra Costa County. DBW recognizes the critical importance of
the Marine Patrol boating safety and enforcement mission within Contra Costa County. No matching fund
requirement exists.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
Negative action on this request will result in the loss of State funding designed to significantly increase the safety and
security of persons and property on the waterways within Contra Costa County.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to apply for and accept a grant from the California
Department of Boating and Waterways in an amount not to exceed $100,000 for the abatement of abandoned vessels
on County waterways for the period November 1, 2009 through October 31, 2010.
FISCAL IMPACT:
$100,000; 90% State, 10% County. County match will come from existing appropriations in the Office of the Sheriff
operating budget.
BACKGROUND:
The California Department of Boating and Waterways (DBW) is prepared to award an Abandoned Watercraft
Abatement Program grant to the Office of the Sheriff to assist the Sheriff's Marine Patrol with the removal of
abandoned vessels and water hazards. The funding provided by this grant will enable the Marine Patrol unit to
remove numerous abandoned vessels and identified hazards to vessel navigation in a continued effort to protect life
and property on the waterways within Contra Costa County.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Eileen Devlin, (925)
335-1557
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors
on the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Katherine Sinclair, Deputy
cc:
C.44
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Warren Rupf, Sheriff-Coroner
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:California Department of Boating and Waterways Abandoned Watercraft Abatement Program Grant
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
Negative action on this request will result in the loss of State funding designed to significantly increase the safety and
security of persons and property on the waterways within Contra Costa County.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Approve and authorize the Health Services Director, or his designee (Wendel Bruner, M.D.), to execute, on behalf of
the County, Grant Award #28-807 (#65053) from the San Francisco Foundation, a non-profit corporation, to pay the
County an amount not to exceed $30,000, for the Family Maternal and Child Health Program, Building Economic
Security Today (BEST) Project, for the period from December 1, 2009 through November 30, 2010.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Approval of this Grant Award will result in $30,000 from the San Francisco Foundation for the County’s Family
Maternal and Child Health Program (FMCH), Building Economic Security Today (BEST) project.
BACKGROUND:
In 2005, the FMCH Program launched the Building Economic Security Today (BEST) Project. It was designed to
reduce disparities in birth outcomes, change the health of a general and bring about a paradigm shift in the planning,
delivery, and evaluation of maternal, child, and adolescent health services . (BEST) is an asset development pilot
project that utilizes innovative
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor
Contact: Wendel Brunner, M.D.
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: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Katherine Sinclair, Deputy
cc: J Pigg, B Borbon
C.45
To:Board of Supervisors
From:William Walker, M.D., Health Services Director
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Grant Award #28-807 from San Francisco Foundation
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
strategies to reduce disparities and inequities in health outcomes for low-income Contra Costa Families by improving
their financial security and stability, for this and future generations. The goal of the project will provide one-on-one
support to families in all of FMCH home visiting programs, financial education classes for WIC clients, and asset
development educational materials and referrals for all clients.
Approval of this Grant Award #28-807 will provide funding for this project to allow FMCH to train staff to deliver
BEST services to home visiting and WIC clients in Richmond and East Contra Costa County, including agreeing to
indemnify and hold the Grantor harmless for claims arising out of the County’s performance under this Agreement.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to enter into contracts, including mutual
indemnification, with the following agencies to pay the County up to the amounts listed for evidence storage services
for the period January 1, 2010 through December 31, 2010:
Agency Payment Limit
Contra Costa Central Narcotics Enforcement Team $15,000
Contra Costa West Narcotics Enforcement Team $15,000
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: 5-1553
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Katherine Sinclair, Deputy
cc:
C.46
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Warren Rupf, Sheriff-Coroner
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Evidence Storage Agreements with Contra Costa Central and West Narcotics Enforcement Teams
FISCAL IMPACT:
$30,000 Revenue; Budgeted. Each contract will provide up to $15,000 for a total of $30,000.
BACKGROUND:
The Office of the Sheriff-Coroner's Property and Evidence Unit provides storage and disposal of evidence, seizures,
and found property for the Contra Costa Central Narcotics Enforcement Team (C-NET) and the Contra Costa West
Narcotics Enforcement Team (W-NET). The Property and Evidence Unit assists with the intake of evidence, the
transfer of evidence to the court and the forensics laboratory, as well as requests to view evidence by prosecution and
defense teams. Evidence is stored as required by the Department of Justice.
The contracts include a mutual indemnification clause between the parties that has been reviewed and approved by
County Counsel.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
Evidence currently being stored by County will need to be transferred to another facility resulting in the delay in
processing forensics and raise chain-of-custody concerns that may slow cases at trial and slow investigations. Loss of
revenue.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Approve and authorize the Health Services Director, or his designee (Wendel Brunner, M.D.), to execute, on behalf
of the County, Agreement #28-700-8 (State #EPO P3-08) with the California Department of Public Health, to pay the
County an amount not to exceed $1,641,903 for the Public Health Emergency Preparedness Comprehensive Program,
Public Health Emergency Response (PHER), Phase three (3), for the period from July 31, 2009 through July 30,
2010.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Approval of this Agreement will result in $1,641,903 of funding for the Public Health Emergency Preparedness
Response Program. No County funds are required.
BACKGROUND:
On November 3, 2009, the Board of Supervisors approved Agreement #28-700-7 with the California Department of
Public Health to fund multiple Public Health Emergency Preparedness activities including, but not limited to, the
Centers for Disease Control (CD) preparedness activities,
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor
Contact: Wendel Brunner, M.D.
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: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Katherine Sinclair, Deputy
cc: J Pigg, B Borbon
C.47
To:Board of Supervisors
From:William Walker, M.D., Health Services Director
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Agreement #28-700-8 with the California Department of Public Health
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
the Cities Readiness Initiative (CRI) activities, Pandemic Influenza preparedness and ASPR Hospital Preparedness
Program activities, for the County’s Public Health Emergency Preparedness Response Program, Phase one (1) and
Phase two (2) through August 9, 2010.
Recently in November of 2009, the County Public Health Division was notified by the California Department of
Public Health of additional funds to be used to respond to the Phase three (3) of the H1N1 pandemic flu outbreak in
Contra Costa County. Approval of this Agreement #28-700-8 will provide additional funds for the PHER, to address
gaps in capabilities for the H1N1 mass vaccination program and support activities related to implementation of the
mass vaccination program, through July 30, 2010.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
ADOPT Resolution No. 2009/581 authorizing the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to accept additional grant funding for
the State of California, 2007 Buffer Zone Protection Program (BZPP) grant in an amount not to exceed $63,050 to
build security and risk management capabilities enhancing the security of California water systems for the period of
January 1, 2008 through January 31, 2010.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No net County costs. Revenue; 100% Federal; $63,050. The Buffer Zone Protection Program grant is a State
pass-through of Federal funding. (CFDA #97.078)
BACKGROUND:
On June 5, 2007 (Item C.57), the Board of Supervisors approved and authorized the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to
apply for and accept this grant in the amount of $192,500 from the State of California. The grant was awarded at a
reduced amount of $182,875. The State is prepared to augment the Buffer Zone Protection Program (BZPP) grant for
equipment purchases and training
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Eileen Devlin, (925)
335-1557
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors
on the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Katherine Sinclair, Deputy
cc:
C.48
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Warren Rupf, Sheriff-Coroner
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Resolution No. 2009/581 2007 Buffer Zone Protection Program Grant Augmentation
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
or planning activities that are designed to protect our State's water systems. The revised total of the 2007 BZPP
allocation provided to the County by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and sub-granted through the
State of California is $245,925.
The attached Resolution is to comply with specific State of California reequirements for Governing Body
authorization.
ATTACHMENTS
Resolution No. 2009/581
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board
Adopted this Resolution on 12/15/2009 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
RECUSE:
Resolution No. 2009/581
IN THE MATTER OF:
The 2007 Buffer Zone Protectrion Program (BZPP) Grant
WHEREAS, this Resolution approves an augmentation of grant funding in the amount of $63,050 from the State of California;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that Warren E. Rupf, Sheriff-Coroner, or Eileen Devlin, Sheriff's Chief of
Management Services, is hereby authorized to execute for and on behalf of Contra Costa County, a public entity established
under the laws of the State of California, any actions pertaining to this grant award augmentation.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this grant award augmentation requires no match of any kind from Contra Costa County.
Contact: Eileen Devlin, (925) 335-1557
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: , Deputy
cc:
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Approve and authorize the Health Services Director, or his designee (Randy Sawyer) to execute on behalf of the
County, Grant Agreement (Amendment) #28-313-2 with the California Environmental Protection Agency, effective
January 1, 2010, to increase payment to County by $10,281, from $95,874, to a new total not to exceed $106,155, for
the continuation of County’s Health Services Hazardous Materials, Aboveground Petroleum Storage Act Program,
and to extend the term of the agreement from March 1, 2010 through May 1, 2011.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Approval of this grant will result in an increase in amount not to exceed $10,281, for the County’s Aboveground
Petroleum Storage Act Program. No County match is required.
BACKGROUND:
Contra Costa Health Services, Hazardous Materials Programs is the Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA) for
Contra Costa County. In collaboration with the California Environmental Protection Agency, the Contra Costa
County’s Health Services Certified Unified Program
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Randy Sawyer 646-2886
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Katherine Sinclair, Deputy
cc: J. Pigg, B. Borbon
C.49
To:Board of Supervisors
From:William Walker, M.D., Health Services Director
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Grant Agreement (Amendment) #28-313-2 with the California Environmental Protection Agency
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
Agency (CUPA) and the State Water Resources Control Board staff, through two Aboveground Petroleum Storage
Act (APSA) work groups, has determined the process and formula for allocating the moneys from the Environmental
Protection Trust Fund to the CUPA’s.
On June 3, 2008, the Board of Supervisors approved Grant Agreement #28-313-1 with the California Environment
Protection Agency to fund County’s Hazardous Materials Program, to set up and implement the APSA Program
throughout Contra Costa County regulated businesses and sites, including but not limited to inspections and
compliance with all program requirements, training on policies, checklist, questionnaires, violations, quality contract
process and enforcement guidelines, through March 1, 2010.
Approval of Grant Agreement #28-313-2 will allow the County to continue the Aboveground Petroleum Storage Act
Program through May 1, 2011.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Approve and authorize the Health Services Director, or his designee (Wendel Brunner, MD), to execute, on behalf of
the County, Interagency Agreement #28-809 (#10–527) with the First 5 Contra Costa Children and Families
Commission, to pay County an amount not to exceed $12,000, for the Family, Maternal & Child Health (FMCH)
Program, “Bridges to Care Project”, for the period from October 5, 2009 through June 30, 2010.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This agreement will result in $12,000 from the First 5 Contra Costa Children and Families Commission for FMCH
“Bridges to Care Project”. No County funds are required.
BACKGROUND:
Proposition 10 was passed in 1998 by California voters. On June 15, 1999, the Contra Costa County Board of
Supervisors established the First 5 Contra Costa Children and Families Commission to implement the provisions of
Proposition 10 (Ordinance 99-15). The purpose of this Ordinance is to support local programs and services designed
to help children ages 0-5 reach their
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor
Contact: Wendel Brunner, M.D.
(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: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Katherine Sinclair, Deputy
cc: J. Pigg, B. Borbon
C.50
To:Board of Supervisors
From:William Walker, M.D., Health Services Director
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Interagency Agreement #28-809 with the First 5 Contra Costa Children and Families Commission
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
greatest potential in school and life through the development of a seamless, comprehensive system of information and
services.
Approval of this Agreement #28-809 will allow funding to support outreach and distribute materials for Bridges to
Care Project for pregnant women through June 30, 2010.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
ADOPT Resolution No. 2009/582 approving and authorizing the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to apply for and
accept the 2008 Buffer Zone Protection Program (BZPP) grant from the State of California in an amount not to
exceed $207,834 to build security and risk management capabilities enhancing the security of California water
systems for the period of January 1, 2009 through March 31, 2011.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No net County costs. New revenue of $207,834, 100% Federal. The Buffer Zone Protection Program grant is a State
pass-through of Federal funding. (CFDA #97.078)
BACKGROUND:
The State of California is prepared to award the 2008 Buffer Zone Protection Program (BZPP) grant to the County for
equipment purchases and related equipment training or planning activities that are designed to protect California's
1,200 miles of publicly and privately-owned water conveyance systems and related assets. 2008 BZPP funding will
enable the Sheriff-Coroner
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Eileen Devlin, (925)
335-1557
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors
on the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Katherine Sinclair, Deputy
cc:
C.51
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Warren Rupf, Sheriff-Coroner
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Resolution No. 2009/582 2008 Buffer Zone Protection Program Grant
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
to implement significant improvements, enhancements, and modernization of equipment and technologies that are
fundamental to the protection of California's water resources. The total allocation provided to the County by the
U.S. Department of Homeland Security and sub-granted through the State of California is $207,834.
The attached Resolution is to comply with specific State of California requirements for Governing Body
authorization.
ATTACHMENTS
Resolution No. 2009/582
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board
Adopted this Resolution on 12/15/2009 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
RECUSE:
Resolution No. 2009/582
IN THE MATTER OF:
The 2008 Buffer Zone Protection Program (BZPP) Grant
WHEREAS, this Resolution approves an application for funding and authorizes the execution of a grant award in the amount of
$207,834 and any amendments thereto, with the State of California, for the 2008 Buffer Zone Protection Program grant;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that Warren E. Rupf, Sheriff-Coroner, or Eileen Devlin, Sheriff's Chief of
Management Services, is hereby authorized to execute for and on behalf of Contra Costa County, a public entity established
under the laws of the State of California, any actions pertaining to this grant award.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this grant award requires no match of any kind from Contra Costa County.
Contact: Eileen Devlin, (925) 335-1557
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: , Deputy
cc:
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Approve and authorize the Health Services Director, or his designee (Wendel Brunner, MD), to execute, on behalf of
the County, Grant Award Agreement #28-810 with Education, Training, and Research Associates, to pay County an
amount not to exceed $35,000, for the Family, Maternal & Child Health (FMCH) Program, “Working to
Institutionalize Sexuality Education Project”, for the period from September 25, 2009 through August 31, 2011.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This agreement will result in $35,000 from the Education, Training, and Research Associates, for FMCH “Working
to institutionalize Sexuality Project”. No County funds are required.
BACKGROUND:
The County’s Health Services Family, Maternal & Child Health Programs in collaboration with Education, Training,
and Research Associates, West Contra Costa Unified School District, and Mt Diablo Unified School District are
working together to develop a comprehensive sexuality education program for youth in Contra Costa County.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor
Contact: Wendel Brunner, M.D.
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: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Katherine Sinclair, Deputy
cc: J. Pigg, B. Borbon
C.52
To:Board of Supervisors
From:William Walker, M.D., Health Services Director
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Grant Award Agreement #28-810 with the Education, Training, and Research Associates
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
Approval of this Grant Award Agreement #28-810 will allow FMCH to assess youth within Contra Costa County to
be served, establish program goals and education protocols for both school districts, and develop and deliver training
program, and develop and deliver a training of educators, through August 31, 2011.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Administrator, or designee, to execute contracts totaling $210,000 with the
following agencies for the County Dispute Resolution Program for the calendar year 2010:
Agency Amount
Center for Human Development
General Dispute Resolution $55,000
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Tim Ewell, 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: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Katherine Sinclair , Deputy
cc: N. Patel, Auditor-Controller
C.53
To:Board of Supervisors
From:David Twa, County Administrator
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:CY 2010 COUNTY DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROGRAM CONTRACTS
RECOMMENDATION(S): (CONT'D)
Guardianship Mediation $47,500
Sub-Total $102,500
Congress of Neutrals
General Dispute Resolution $12,500
Small Claims/Unlawful Detainer/
Civil Harassment Mediation $95,000
Sub-Total $107,500
2010 Program Total $210,000
FISCAL IMPACT:
$210,000; 100% Restricted Dispute Resolution funds; Budgeted. No Net County Costs. Program costs offset by $8.00
filing fee on civil actions filed in the Superior Court.
BACKGROUND: The Dispute Resolution Program Act of 1986 (Business and Professional Code Sections 465, et
seq.) provided for the establishment and funding, at County option, of local dispute resolution services as an
alternative to formal court proceedings. The Act authorized participating counties to increase Superior, Municipal and
Justice Courts filing fees from one to three dollars for the purpose of funding local dispute resolution programs.
On January 1, 1987, the Board approved the County’s participation in the program and authorized a three dollar
increase in court filing fees. The Dispute Resolution Advisory Committee was created by the Board to consider
implementation strategies and funding guidelines appropriate for Contra Costa County.
From 1989 through 1998, the Advisory Committee solicited proposals for funding under the Dispute Resolution
Programs Act of 1986. The purpose of the funding is to encourage the establishment and use of local dispute
resolution services as an alternative to formal Court proceedings. The program operates under the provisions of the
Dispute Resolution Programs Act.
In 1998, the State updated the California Dispute Resolution Program Act and authorized counties to allocate up to
$8.00 from filing fees to generate new revenues for these local programs. Effective January 1, 1999, the dispute
resolution portion of the civil filing fee in Contra Costa County increased from $3.00 to $8.00. The increase was
approved by the Board of Supervisors pursuant to a request by the Superior Court.
The Dispute Resolution Advisory Committee received two applications in response to a Request for Proposals (RFP)
issued on October 31, 2008 for two calendar years (2009 & 2010). The Committee met on December 5, 2008, to
consider the funding and program composition of the County’s dispute resolution programs and voted to fund both
agencies at the levels described below.
The following is a brief description of each program:
Center for Human Development - $102,500
General Dispute Resolution – Community Mediation Project will provide mediation and conciliation to landlords and
tenants, consumers and merchants, neighbors, public agencies, citizen groups, families, animal disputes, family
transition, and organizations. Specialty services include group facilitation, mediator training, real estate mediation,
conflict resolution skills training for agencies, and business mediation and consultation. ($55,000)
Guardianship Mediation will continue to offer mediation services with a panel of two mediators to clients referred by
the Courts for resolution of child custody and visitation issues in Guardianship Matter. Mediations will be held in the
Martinez Family Law Building. Services include referral, telephone conciliation, and mediation. ($47,500)
Congress of Neutrals - $107,500
General Dispute Resolution – Self Represented Litigants (SRL) Mediation will provide certified law student and
volunteer mediators to assist the Small Claims Advisor in the community to provide information, assistance and case
development for mediation and Alternative Dispute Resolution in the community, and where requested, to provide
mediations for said litigants. In 2010, this program will continue to work with court officers in Civil and Limited Civil
hearings to offer dispute resolution services prior to the beginning of hearings. ($12,500)
Small Claims/Civil Harassment/Unlawful Detainer Mediation for all branches of the Superior Court; to improve court
efficiency; assist court staff and reduce court caseload. Introduce disputants to the principles of conciliation and
negotiated settlement; mediations will be done at the court, prior to the court hearing and/or on the day of the court
hearing. The Congress will recruit and train community volunteers, certified law students and attorneys as mediators.
This project will continue the Superior Court’s high quality of Alternative Dispute Resolution and conflict
management programs. ($95,000)
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT:
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to execute a purchase order with McCain Traffic
Supply to purchase and install 36 traffic controllers for the Town of Danville.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The estimated cost of $350,000 will be paid by the Town of Danville.
BACKGROUND:
The General Services Department provides traffic signal maintenance to the Town of Danville and has been asked to
replace 36 traffic controllers. Six companies responded to the competitively bid solicitation with bids ranging
between $8,811 to $18,720 per controller. McCain Traffic Supply was determined to be the lowest responsible bidder
as noted in the following bid tabulation.
Vendor
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: 313-7120
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Katherine Sinclair, Deputy
cc: Becky Eaton, Barbara Hodges, Barbara Riveira
C.54
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Michael J. Lango, General Services Director
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Approval of Purchase Order for Traffic Controllers for the Town of Danville
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
Unit Price
McCain, Inc.$8,811
Econolite 9,548
Western Systems Inc.11,987
JAM Services 13,890
Western Pacific Signal, LLC 16,820
Traffic Parts, Inc.18,720
In accordance with Administrative Bulletin No. 611, County Departments are required to get Board approval for single
item, integrated systems or single product purchases over $100,000. The County Administrator's Office has reviewed
this request and recommends approval. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Replacement of the traffic
signal controllers is required by the Town of Danville. If the controllers are not replaced, the traffic signals may not
operate effectively and jeopardize public safety.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Clerk-Recorder, or designee, to execute a contract extension agreement with
AtPac, Inc. for the Social Security Number Truncation Program back conversion to extend the contract end date from
December 31, 2009 to December 31, 2010.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no change in the contract limits. The program is funded by the dedicated (non general fund) Recorder
Redaction Program.
BACKGROUND:
SB 1168 requires the County Recorder to create a public record wherein only the last four digits of a social security
number are displayed. The first five digits of a social security number must be redacted. The bill requires the County
Recorder to handle this redaction in descending chronological order from January 1, 1980 through December 31,
2008. This extends the contract term to allow for the continuation of the descending chronological order back
conversion of the social security number truncation program.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Barbara Chambers
335-7919
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Katherine Sinclair, Deputy
cc:
C.55
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Stephen L. Weir, Clerk-Recorder
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Social Security Number Truncation Program Extenstion of contract
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
Failure to continue with the back conversion redaction of the Social Security Number Truncation Program will
cause Contra Costa County to not be in compliance with the law and could leave the County open to legal action.
ATTACHMENTS
SS # Truncation - Extension
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute a purchase order with CompuCom Systems, Inc., on
behalf of the Employment and Human Services Department, Information Technology Unit, in the amount of
$556,399.27 for the third installment of the Microsoft Enterprise Agreement Renewal for 2009.
FISCAL IMPACT:
$556,399.27: 11% County Funding; 89% State Funding
BACKGROUND:
The Employment and Human Services Department, Information Technology Unit (IT), purchases the license to use
Microsoft software to operate department computer systems. This renewal is necessary for the department to continue
using Microsoft software.
In accordance with Administrative Bulletin No. 611.0,
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: 925.313.1648
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Katherine Sinclair, Deputy
cc: David Eisenlohr, Michael Roetzer, Earl Maciel
C.56
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Joe Valentine, Employment & Human Services Director
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Authorize Purchasing Agent to Execute Purchase Order
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
County Departments are required to get Board approval for single item purchases of $100,000.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
AMEND Board action of October 6, 2009 (Item C.47), which authorized the Purchasing Agent to execute a purchase
order with Sharp Business Systems, to change the Vendor to include Leasesource Financial Service Inc. as equipment
financier and to change the term to read for a period of forty-eight months commencing with the execution of Lease
Agreement documents with no change in the payment limit of $3,800,000.
FISCAL IMPACT:
$3,800,000: Administrative overhead (20% County; 40% State; 40% Federal)
BACKGROUND:
The Board order, as originally written, did not include the vendor providing equipment financing. The purpose of
this amendment is to include Leasesource Financial Services, Inc., as equipment financier.
The lease agreement documentation states that Leasesource Financial Services, Inc., will assign all rights, title, and
interest in the lease agreement to West America Bank, the parent company of Leasesource Financial Services, Inc.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: 925.313.1648
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Katherine Sinclair, Deputy
cc: Larry Jones, Michael Roetzer, Earl Maciel
C.57
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Joe Valentine, Employment & Human Services Director
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Amend Board Action of October 6, 2009, Item #C.47.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Approve and authorize the Health Services Director, or his designee (Patrick Godley), to execute, on behalf of the
County, Contract #23–399–6 with Intratek Computer, Inc., a corporation, in an amount not to exceed $260,000, to
provide hardware and software support services, for the period from January 1, 2010 through December 31, 2010.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This Contract is funded 100% by Enterprise Fund I.
BACKGROUND:
On December 16, 2008, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #23–399–5 with Intratek Computer, Inc., for the
period from January 1, 2009 through December 31, 2009, for the provision of ergonomic hardware and software
services, routine maintenance on the Department’s scanners and printers, and technical assistance with the
Department’s LANDesk® software.
Approval of Contract #23–399–6 will allow the Contractor to continue providing services through December 31,
2010.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:Speaker: Rollie Katz, Public Employees' Union, Local 1.
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Patrick Godley 957-5410
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Katherine Sinclair, Deputy
cc: L Smith, B Borbon
C.58
To:Board of Supervisors
From:William Walker, M.D., Health Services Director
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Contract #23–399–6 with Intratek Computer, Inc.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Approve and authorize the Health Services Director, or his designee (Haven Fearn), to execute, on behalf of the
County, Contract Amendment Agreement #24–535–30 with Discovery Counseling Center of the San Ramon Valley,
Inc., a non-profit corporation, effective November 1, 2009, to amend Contract #24–535–29, to increase the payment
limit by $35,000, from $84,988 to a new payment limit of $119,988, with no change in the original term of July 1,
2009 through June 30, 2010.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This Contract is funded 100% by Federal Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment.
BACKGROUND:
In July 2009, the County Administrator approved, and the Purchasing Services Manager executed Contract
#24–535–29 with Discovery Counseling Center of the San Ramon Valley, Inc. for the period from July 1, 2009
through June 30, 2010, for the provision of alcohol and drug abuse prevention services.
Approval
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Haven Fearn 313-6350
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Katherine Sinclair, Deputy
cc: L Smith, B Borbon
C.59
To:Board of Supervisors
From:William Walker, M.D., Health Services Director
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Amendment #24–535–30 with Discovery Counseling Center of the San Ramon Valley, Inc.
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
of Contract Amendment Agreement #24–535–30 will allow the Contractor to provide additional hours of prevention
services through June 30, 2010.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Approve and authorize the Health Services Director, or his designee (Donna Wigand), to execute, on behalf of the
County, Novation Contract #24–385–34 with Anka Behavioral Health, Incorporated, a non-profit corporation, in an
amount not to exceed $801,802, to provide mental health outreach services for the homeless mentally ill for the
period from July 1, 2009 through June 30, 2010. This Contract includes a six-month automatic extension through
December 31, 2010, in an amount not to exceed $400,901.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This Contract is funded 51% by Federal FFP Medi-Cal, 35% by Substance Abuse/Mental Health Services Act
(SAMHSA), and 15% by a Project for Assistance in Transition from Homelessness (PATH) Grant.
BACKGROUND:
This Contract meets the social needs of County’s population by providing ongoing operational funding for mental
health homeless outreach facilities in West, Central, and East County.
On January 27,
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Donna Wigand 957-5111
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Katherine Sinclair, Deputy
cc: L Smith, B Borbon
C.60
To:Board of Supervisors
From:William Walker, M.D., Health Services Director
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Novation Contract #24–385–34 with Anka Behavioral Health, Incorporated
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
2009, the Board of Supervisors approved Novation Contract #24–385–33 with Anka Behavioral Health,
Incorporated, for the period from July 1, 2008 through June 30, 2009, which included a six-month automatic
extension through December 31, 2009, for the provision of mental health outreach services for the homeless mentally
ill.
Approval of Novation Contract #24–385–34 replaces the automatic extension under the prior Contract and allows the
Contractor to continue providing services through June 30, 2010.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Approve and authorize the Health Services Director, or his designee (Donna Wigand), to execute, on behalf of the
County, Contract #74–338–1 with Uzma Anwer, MD, a self-employed individual, in an amount not to exceed
$156,250, to provide psychiatric services, for the period from January 1, 2010 through December 31, 2010.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This Contract is funded 100% by County Mental Health Realignment.
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.
On March 17, 2009, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #74–338 with Uzma Anwer, MD, for the period
from March 1, 2009 through December 31, 2009, for the provision of psychiatric services to Seriously and
Persistently Mentally Ill (SPMI) adults in East Contra Costa County.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Donna Wigand 957-5111
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Katherine Sinclair, Deputy
cc: L Smith, B Borbon
C.61
To:Board of Supervisors
From:William Walker, M.D., Health Services Director
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Contract #74–338–1 with Uzma Anwer, MD
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
Approval of Contract #74–338–1 will allow Contractor to continue providing services through December 31, 2010.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to enter into a contract amendment with Behavioral
Interventions, Inc. increasing the payment limit by $191,000 from $342,600 to a new payment limit of $533,600 and
expand the scope of services to include electronic home detention equipment with cellular connect-ability with no
change to the contract term.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No net County Costs, 100% Participant fees.
BACKGROUND:
On June 26, 2007 the Board of Supervisors authorized the Sheriff-Coroner to enter into a contract with Behavioral
Interventions, Inc. (Item C.155) in an amount not to exceed $310,600 for electronic home detention (EHD)
monitoring services for the period June 25, 2007 through June 30, 2010. Since that time, the Board has authorized the
Sheriff-Coroner to amend the contract on two occasions; once on July 8, 2008 (Item C.92) increasing the payment
limit by $32,000 to $342,600 and adding new products to the list of available EHD systems and once on April 21,
2009 (Item
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Eileen Devlin,
925-335-1557
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Katherine Sinclair, Deputy
cc: Eileen Devlin, Todd McCown, Karen Todd
C.62
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Warren Rupf, Sheriff-Coroner
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Electronic Home Detention Equipment
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
C.60) adding new products to the list of available EHD systems.
Due to the increase in the number of inmates participating in the Electronic Home Detention Program, the
Sheriff-Coroner is requesting a third amendment increasing the payment limit by $191,000 to a new payment limit of
$533,600. In addition the proposed amendment would add the HomeGuard Digital Cell Unit (HG206) to the EHD
systems available to the department through this contract. Currently, a land-line must be used in conjunction with
EHD equipment; however, increased use of cellular phones has resulted in the need for more contemporary EHD
systems. The equipment described above will allow the department more flexibility in EHD monitoring options. Two
spare units will be provided at no charge.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
Negative action will result in the Sheriff’s Office having to put inmates on active global positioning system
monitoring at a higher unit cost or keep inmates in physical custody at a substantial County expense.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, on behalf of the Health Services Department, to purchase nine (9) G.E. Giraffe
Infant Warmers from GE Healthcare, Inc. in the amount of $158,293.42, for use at Contra Costa Regional Medical
Center (CCRMC) Labor and Delivery Unit.
FISCAL IMPACT:
100% Funded by Enterprise Fund I Budget.
BACKGROUND:
CCRMC's current nine (9) Hill Rom Stabilet Infant Warmers are subject to an FDA Class 1 medical device recall. An
Infant Warmer is a microprocessor-controlled device intended to supply supplementary heat to a newborn neonate. A
class 1 recall is the most serious type of FDA recall and involves situations in which there is a reasonable probability
that use of these products will cause serious injury or death. GE and Drager are the leading infant warmer
manufacturers in the US. The CCRMC Labor and Delivery Dept. (L&D) attempted to trial both vendors’ products but
Drager was unable to provide a loaner to trial. L&D did trial GE’s Giraffe infant warmer and the clinical staff found it
met and exceeded expectations. As Drager was unable to support us in a trial the clinical staff decided to choose the
GE Giraffe unit for purchase.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Anna Roth, 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: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Katherine Sinclair, Deputy
cc: Tasha Scott, Barbara Borbon, Dave Duet
C.63
To:Board of Supervisors
From:William Walker, M.D., Health Services Director
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Purchase of Infant Warmers for Labor and Delivery and Nursery Department of Contra Costa Regional Medical
Center
RECOMMENDATION(S):
AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, on behalf of the Health Services Department, to execute Maintenance
Agreement with GE Healthcare, Inc. in the amount of $443,827 to provide service and maintenance for imaging
systems at Contract Costa Regional Medical Center, Richmond Health Center and Pittsburg Health Center, for the
period from December 1, 2009 through November 30, 2013.
FISCAL IMPACT:
100% Enterprise Fund I.
BACKGROUND:
This service/maintenance agreement is a renewal of the existing agreement. The existing agreement expires as of
November 30, 2009. GE Healthcare, Inc.l has been the primary service/maintenance provider for our imaging
systems. GE service engineers provide specific and specialized knowledge and training in the care of the imaging
systems at our facilities. The technology involved with these systems requires specialized service engineers to
support the systems' operations.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Anna Roth, 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: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Katherine Sinclair, Deputy
cc: Tasha Scott, Barbara Borbon, Darrell Williams
C.64
To:Board of Supervisors
From:William Walker, M.D., Health Services Director
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Maintenance Agreement with GE Healthcare, Inc.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Approve and authorize the Health Services Director, or his designee, to execute on behalf of the County, Contract
#26-294-22 with Staff Care, Inc., a corporation, in an amount not to exceed $850,000, to provide temporary physician
services for Contra Costa Regional Medical Center and Contra Costa Health Centers, for the period from January 1,
2010 through December 31, 2010.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Funding for this Contract is 100% Enterprise Fund I included in the Health Services Departments Budget. As
appropriate, patients and/or third-party payors will be billed for services.
BACKGROUND:
For many years, the County has contracted with registries to provide temporary qualified personnel to assist the
Department during peak workloads, temporary absences and emergency situations.
On December 9, 2008, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #26-294-21 with Staff Care, Inc., for the period
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Steven Tremain,
370-5122
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Katherine Sinclair, Deputy
cc: Tasha Scott, Barbara Borbon
C.65
To:Board of Supervisors
From:William Walker, M.D., Health Services Director
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Contract #26-294-22 with Staff Care, Inc.
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
from January 1, 2009 through December 31, 2009, to provide locum tenens physicians to work as temporary
employees to provide vacation, sick leave, and extended leave relief for County-employed physicians at Contra Costa
Regional Medical Center and Contra Costa Health Centers.
Approval of Contract #26-294-22 will allow the Contractor to continue to provide temporary physician services,
through December 31, 2010.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Approve and authorize the Health Services Director, or his designee, to execute, on behalf of the County, Contract
#26-429-16 with Jackson & Coker LocumTenens, LLC, a limited liability company, in an amount not to exceed
$250,000, for the provision of temporary help physicians for Contra Costa Regional Medical Center and Contra
Costa Health Centers and the County’s Main Detention Facility, for the period from January 1, 2010 through
December 31, 2010.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This Contract is funded 100% by Enterprise Fund I.
BACKGROUND:
For many years, the County has contracted with registries to provide temporary qualified personnel to assist the
Department during peak work loads, temporary absences and emergency situations.
On January 6, 2009, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #26-429-15 with Jackson & Coker LocumTenens,
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Steven Tremain,
370-5122
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Katherine Sinclair, Deputy
cc: Tasha Scott, Barbara Borbon
C.66
To:Board of Supervisors
From:William Walker, M.D., Health Services Director
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Contract #26-429-16 with Jackson & Coker LocumTenens, LLC
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
LLC, for the period from January 1, 2009 through December 31, 2009, for the provision of temporary physician
services to cover vacation, sick leave, and extended leave relief for County-employed physicians at the Contra Costa
Regional Medical Center and Contra Costa Health Centers and County’s Main Detention Facility.
Approval of Contract #26-429-16 will allow the Contractor to continue to provide temporary physician services
through December 31, 2010.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designnee, to execute a contract
with Metropolitan Van and Storage, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $350,000 to provide archival records storage and
office furniture and equipment storage for the period February 1, 2010 through January 31, 2011.
FISCAL IMPACT:
$350,000: Administrative Overhead (20% County; 40% State; 40% Federal)
BACKGROUND:
Metropolitan Van and Storage, Inc., has been providing archival records storage and furniture storage services to the
Employment and Human Services Department (EHSD) for a number of years. Contractor maintains a clean, safe,
and secure facility, and they are very responsive to EHSD needs.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: 925.313.1648
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Katherine Sinclair, Deputy
cc: Larry Jones, Michael Roetzer, Earl Maciel
C.67
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Joe Valentine, Employment & Human Services Director
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Contract with Metropolitan Van and Storage, Inc.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Approve and authorize the Health Services Director, to execute, on behalf of the County, Contract #23-400-3 with
Contra Costa Regional Health Foundation, a non-profit corporation, in an amount not to exceed $125,000, to provide
professional consultation services to the Health Services Director with regard to the Contra Costa Regional Medical
Center and Contra Costa Health Centers, for the period from October 1, 2009 through September 30, 2010.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This Contract is included in the Health Services Department Enterprise Fund I.
BACKGROUND:
On October 23, 2007, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #23-400-1 with Contra Costa Regional Health
Foundation, for the period from October 1, 2007 through September 30, 2008, to provide professional consultation
services to the Health Services Director with regard to the Contra Costa Regional Medical Center and Contra Costa
Health Centers including, but not limited to, increasing community awareness of services provided, developing
fundraising goals, policies
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor
Contact: William Walker, M.D.
957-5410
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors
on the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Katherine Sinclair, Deputy
cc: J Pigg, B. Borbon
C.68
To:Board of Supervisors
From:William Walker, M.D., Health Services Director
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Contract #23-400-3 with Contra Costa Regional Health Foundation
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
and procedures, and by-laws and working closely with the Contra Costa Regional Medical Center and Contra Costa
Health Center’s administrative and medical staff to develop "Application Guidelines" for requesting funding.
Due to lengthy negotiations, between the parties, the Contract was not renewed in a timely manner. During this
process, the Contractor as agreed upon by the County continued to provide services in good faith.
Approval of Contract #23-400-3 will allow the Contractor to continue to provide services through September 30,
2010.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Ratify the actions taken by the Health Services Director, or his designee (Wendel Brunner, M.D.), to execute, an
agreement to use the San Ramon Valley Conference Center in the amount of $4,104.94, for the seasonal and H1N1
flu vaccination clinic, held on November 21, 2009.
FISCAL IMPACT:
100% Federal Grant Funds.
BACKGROUND:
On November 21, 2009, Contra Costa County Health Services Department’s Public Health Division, Flu
Immunization Program administered the seasonal and H1N1 flu vaccination to priority groups living in Contra Costa
County at the San Ramon Valley Conference Center in San Ramon.
Due to the emergent nature of responding to the H1N1 pandemic flu outbreak in Contra Costa County, staff were
frequently faced with making logistics decisions about mass vaccination clinic locations, supplies and security within
short time frames. Consequently, the Department is requesting the Board ratify this agreement.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor
Contact: Wendel Brunner, M.D.,
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: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Katherine Sinclair, Deputy
cc: Tasha Scott, Barbara Borbon, Kim Cox
C.69
To:Board of Supervisors
From:William Walker, M.D., Health Services Director
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Use of the San Ramon Valley Conference Center for flu clinic
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
In exchange for renting its facilities to County, it was required to indemnify and hold harmless the San Ramon Valley
Conference Center and tenants for claims arising out of use of the facility.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Approve and authorize the Health Services Director, or his designee (Patricia Tanquary), to execute, on behalf of the
County, Contract Amendment/Extension Agreement #27-599-8 with Total Healthcare Management, Inc., a
corporation, effective November 30, 2009, to amend Contract #27-599-7, to increase the payment limit by $130,000,
from $250,000 to a new payment limit of $380,000 and to extend the term from November 30, 2009 through May 31,
2010.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This is a contingency fee contract. Contractor receives a percentage of the savings received from their actions.
BACKGROUND:
On December 16, 2008, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #27-599-7 with Total Healthcare Management,
Inc., for the period from December 1, 2008 through November 30, 2009, for the provision of claims processing and
negotiations services for the Contra Costa Health Plan including acting as billing agent to negotiate discounted rates,
reviewing the documentation of medical claims, and electronically transmitting claims from out-of-network medical
providers.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Patricia Tanquary,
313-6004
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Katherine Sinclair, Deputy
cc: Tasha Scott, Barbara Borbon
C.70
To:Board of Supervisors
From:William Walker, M.D., Health Services Director
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Amendment/Extension #27-599-8 with Total Healthcare Management, Inc.
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
Approval of Contract Amendment/Extension Agreement #27-599-8 will allow the Contractor to continue to provide
services, through May 31, 2010.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Approve and authorize the Health Services Director, or his designee (Patricia Tanquary), to execute, on behalf of the
County, Contract #27–764–1 with Oliver Wyman Actuarial Consulting, Inc., a corporation, in an amount not to
exceed $195,000, to provide actuarial consulting services for the Contra Costa Health Plan, for the period from
December 1, 2009 through November 30, 2010.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This Contract is funded 100% by State Local Initiative.
BACKGROUND:
The Health Services Department and the Contra Costa Health Plan are required by state and federal regulation to
provide various certified actuarial documents in order to maintain its authorization to provide health care services to
its members and recipients. This Contractor has an established record of providing this expertise.
On March 17, 2009, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #27–764
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Patricia Tanquary
313-6008
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Katherine Sinclair, Deputy
cc: L Smith, B Borbon
C.71
To:Board of Supervisors
From:William Walker, M.D., Health Services Director
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Contract #27–764–1 with Oliver Wyman Actuarial Consulting, Inc.
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
with Oliver Wyman Actuarial Consulting, Inc., for the period from December 1, 2008 through November 30, 2009,
for the provision of actuarial consulting services.
Approval of Contract #27–764–1 will allow the Contractor to continue providing services through November 30,
2010, including changes to County’s standard indemnification language.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Approve and authorize the Health Services Director, or his designee (Donna Wigand), to execute, on behalf of the
County, Contract #74–294–5 with Nadhan, Inc., dba Creekside Convalescent Hospital and Mental Health
Rehabilitation Program, a corporation, in an amount not to exceed $255,500, to provide Sub-Acute Care for Seriously
and Persistently Mentally Ill Adults, for the period from January 1, 2010 through December 31, 2010.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This Contract is funded 100% by Mental Health Realignment.
BACKGROUND:
This Contract meets the social needs of County’s population by providing Subacute Care for Seriously and
Persistently Mentally Ill (SMPI) Adults. The terms of this Contract will allow County to place medically
compromised mental health consumers at Contractor’s Creekside Mental Health Rehabilitation Center due to closure
of an inpatient unit at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center.
On December 16, 2008, the Board of Supervisors
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Donna Wigand, 957
5111
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Katherine Sinclair, Deputy
cc: D Morgan, B Borbon
C.72
To:Board of Supervisors
From:William Walker, M.D., Health Services Director
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Contract #74–294–5 with Nadhan, Inc.dba Creekside Convalescent Hospital and Mental Health Rehabilitation
Program
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
approved Contract #74 294-3, (as amended by Contract Amendment Agreement #74 294 4) with Nadhan, Inc., dba
Creekside Convalescent Hospital and Mental Health Rehabilitation Program, for the period from January 15, 2009
through December 31, 2009, for the provision of sub-acute care for SMPI Adults.
Approval of Contract #74-294-5 will allow the Contractor to continue providing services through December 31, 2010.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Approve and authorize the Health Services Director, or his designee (Haven Fearn), to execute, on behalf of the
County, Contract #24-942-13 with Victor Kogler, a self-employed individual, in an amount not to exceed $125,938,
to provide consultation, technical assistance and operational support to the Alcohol and Other Drugs Services
(AODS) Division with regard to the Division’s System of Care, for the period from January 1, 2010 through
December 31, 2010.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This Contract is funded 100% by Federal Prevention Set-Aside and Substance Abuse & Crime Prevention Act of
2000 (Prop 36, SACPA) Grant funds.
BACKGROUND:
On December 16, 2008, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #24-942-12 with Victor Kogler for the
provision of consultation and technical assistance to the Department with regard to the Division’s System of Care
including, but not limited to, reviewing and making recommendations with regard to client services and levels of
care, collecting and analyzing data
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Haven Fearn, 313-6350
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Katherine Sinclair, Deputy
cc: B Borbon, D Morgan
C.73
To:Board of Supervisors
From:William Walker, M.D., Health Services Director
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Contract #24-942-13 with Victor Kogler
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
for the client satisfaction surveys and providing written recommendations to the AODS Director, for the period from
January 1, 2009 through December 31, 2009.
Approval of Contract #24-942-13 will allow the Contractor to continue providing services through December 31,
2010.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or desginee, to enter into a contract amendment with URS
Corporation Americas extending the contract termination date from December 31, 2009 to February 28, 2010 for
development of a County-wide Earthquake Response Plan with no change in payment limit of $325,000.
FISCAL IMPACT:
$325,000; 100% funded by State Homeland Security Grant Program funds, budgeted. This extension does not
increase the payment limit.
BACKGROUND:
On June 2, 2009 the Board of Supervisors authorized the Sheriff-Coroner to enter into a contract with URS
Corporation Americas to prepare and develop an Earthquake Response Plan for the County (Item C.41). Extension of
the contract will enable the contractor to complete deliverables. The emphasis of study have been the specific critical
areas that are likely to require assistance from State and Federal authorities. The Plan provides an overview based on
the County's existing Emergency Operations Plan, the plans of incorporated cities and other relevant agencies
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: 5-1553
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Katherine Sinclair, Deputy
cc:
C.74
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Warren Rupf, Sheriff-Coroner
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:AMEND contract with URS Corporation Americas for County-wide Earthquake Plan
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
(the Regional Emergency Coordination Plan (RECP), and the Federal Emergency Management Agency's Bay Area
Catastrophic Earthquake Concept Plan. Further, the County Earthquake Response plan will provide incorporated
cities and other entities a mechanism to refine their earthquake plans.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Approve and authorize the Health Services Director, or his designee (Pat Godley), to execute, on behalf of the
County, Contract #23-322-11 with Cheryl Adams-Woodford, a self-employed individual, in an amount not to exceed
$119,808, to provide project management, consultation, and technical assistance to the Department with regard to the
PeopleSoft General Ledger System for the period from December 1, 2009 through November 30, 2010.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This Contract is 100% Enterprise Fund I.
BACKGROUND:
On October 28, 2008, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #23-322-10 with Cheryl Adams-Woodford, for
the period from December 1, 2008 through November 30, 2009, for the provision of project management,
consultation and technical assistance to the Department with regard to the PeopleSoft General Ledger System,
including assistance with upgrades and enhancements, applying patches and fixes, system analysis, and disaster
recovery.
Approval of Contract #23-322-11 will allow the Contractor to continue
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: David Runt, 313-6228
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Katherine Sinclair, Deputy
cc: Tasha Scott, Barbara Borbon
C.75
To:Board of Supervisors
From:William Walker, M.D., Health Services Director
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Contract #23-322-11 with Cheryl Adams-Woodford
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
providing services through November 30, 2010.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Approve and authorize the Health Services Director, or his designee (Donna Wigand), to execute, on behalf of the
County, Contract #74–343-1 with Richard D. Baldwin, M.D., a self-employed individual, in an amount not to exceed
$186,300, to provide professional geriatric psychiatric services for County’s Adult Mental Health Clinics, for the
period from January 1, 2010 through December 31, 2010.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This Contract is funded 100% Mental Health Realignment Fund.
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 in its Hospital and Health Centers.
On January 6, 2009, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #74-343 with Richard D. Bladwin, M.D. to provide
geriatric psychiatric services for seriously and persistently mentally ill older
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Donna Wigand,
957-5111
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Katherine Sinclair, Deputy
cc: Tasha Scott, Barbara Borbon
C.76
To:Board of Supervisors
From:William Walker, M.D., Health Services Director
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Contract #74–343-1 with Richard D. Baldwin, M.D.
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
adults at the County’s Adult Mental Health Clinics, for the period from January 1, 2009 through December 31, 2009.
Approval of Contract #74-343-1 will allow the Contractor to continue providing services, through December 31,
2010.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a Consulting Services Agreement
with Miller Pacific Engineering Group in an amount not to exceed $150,000 for on-call geotechnical engineering
services for the period December 15, 2009 through December 14, 2011.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no impact to the General Fund. Work performed under this on-call agreement is funded by developer fees;
road, flood control and airport project funds.
BACKGROUND:
The Public Works Department is involved in various projects in the County which require geotechnical engineering
services for road, flood control, and airport projects. After a solicitation process, this firm was selected, as one of
three firms, to provide geotechnical engineering services on an “on-call” basis. The consultant will augment Public
Works design staff on an as-needed basis. They will be used as an extension of County Public Works design staff
during busy times when in-house expertise is not available. This on-call agreement will be in effect for two years.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Jason Chen, 313-2299
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Katherine Sinclair, Deputy
cc:
C.77
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Angela Bell, Public Works
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director to execute a Consulting Services Agreement with Miller
Pacific Engineering Group
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
Without approval from the Board of Supervisors there will be possible delay in completing projects requiring
geotechnical engineering services. Executing this contract will facilitate the process of design and construction for
various Public Works projects requiring a geotechnical engineering expertise.
ATTACHMENTS
CSA Miller Pacific Engineering
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a Consulting Services Agreement
with Engeo Incorporated, in an amount not to exceed $150,000 for on-call geotechnical engineering services for the
period December 15, 2009 through December 14, 2011.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no impact to the General Fund. Work performed under this on-call agreement is funded by developer fees;
road, flood control and airport project funds.
BACKGROUND:
The Public Works Department is involved in various projects in the County which require geotechnical engineering
services for road, flood control, and airport projects. After a solicitation process, this firm was selected, as one of
three firms, to provide geotechnical engineering services on an “on-call” basis. The consultant will augment Public
Works design staff on an as-needed basis. They will be used as an extension of County Public Works design staff
during busy times when in-house expertise is not available. This on-call agreement will be in effect for two years.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Jason Chen, 313-2299
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Katherine Sinclair, Deputy
cc:
C.78
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Angela Bell, Public Works
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director to execute a Consulting Services Agreement with Engeo
Incorporated
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
Without approval from the Board of Supervisors there will be possible delay in completing projects requiring
geotechnical engineering services. Executing this contract will facilitate the process of design and construction for
various Public Works projects requiring a geotechnical engineering expertise.
ATTACHMENTS
CSA Engeo
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a Consulting Services Agreement
with Hultgren-Tillis Engineers, in an amount not to exceed $150,000 for on-call geotechnical engineering services for
the period December 15, 2009 through December 14, 2011.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no impact to the General Fund. Work performed under this on-call agreement is funded by developer fees;
road, flood control and airport project funds.
BACKGROUND:
The Public Works Department is involved in various projects in the County which require geotechnical engineering
services for road, flood control, and airport projects. After a solicitation process, this firm was selected, as one of
three firms, to provide geotechnical engineering services on an “on-call” basis. The consultant will augment Public
Works design staff on an as-needed basis. They will be used as an extension of County Public Works design staff
during busy times when in-house expertise is not available. This on-call agreement will be in effect for two years.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Jason Chen, 313-2299
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Katherine Sinclair, Deputy
cc:
C.79
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Angela Bell, Public Works
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director to execute a Consulting Services Agreement with
Hultgren-Tillis Engineers
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
Without approval from the Board of Supervisors there will be possible delay in completing projects requiring
geotechnical engineering services. Executing this contract will facilitate the process of design and construction for
various Public Works projects requiring a geotechnical engineering expertise.
ATTACHMENTS
CSA Hultgren-Tillis
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE the delegation of authority to the County Treasurer for investing and reinvestng County funds and the
funds of other depositors in the County Treasury, or to sell or exchange securities so purchased, pursuant to section
53607 of the State Government Code.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The County Treasurer manages and invests the funds of all County Agencies, 19 Special Districts, 19 School
Districts, and 1 Community College District. Centralizing this function creates a dedicated staff of investment
professionals and creates greater efficiency, economies of scale, and greater investment power.
BACKGROUND:
State law provides that the Board of Supervisors may delegate to the County Treasurer the authority "to invest or to
reinvest funds of a local agency, or to sell or exchange securities so purchased" for a one year period. It is
recommended that this delegation be renewed through the calendar year 2010.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Meredith Boeger
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: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc: Lisa Driscoll, County Finance Director
C.80
To:Board of Supervisors
From:William J. Pollacek, Treasurer-Tax Collector
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Delegation of Investment Authority to the County Treasurer
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If the Delegation of Authority is not approved each of the County Agencies, 19 Special Districts, 19 School Districts,
and 1 Community College District would have to invest and manage their own funds. This would be less cost
efficient for all entities.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
RECEIVE the North Richmond Waste & Recovery Mitigation Fee Joint Expenditure Planning Committee Annual
Report for 2009.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No impact to the County General Fund.
BACKGROUND:
On June 18, 2002, the Board of Supervisors adopted Resolution No. 2002/377, which requires that each regular and
ongoing board, commission, or committee shall annually report to the Board of Supervisors on its activities,
accomplishments, membership attendance, required training/certification (if any), and proposed work plan or
objectives for the following year, on the second Tuesday in December.
The 2009 Annual Report for the North Richmond Waste & Recovery Mitigation Fee Joint Expenditure Planning
Committee (Committee) is attached as Exhibit A. This Committee was formed in 2006, pursuant to the terms of a
Memorandum of Understanding between the County and the City of Richmond, for the purpose of facilitating City
and County coordination regarding the use of revenue generated from the North
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor
Contact: Deidra Dingman (925)
335-1224
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of
Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc: LaShonda Wilson, City of Richmond
C.81
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Catherine Kutsuris, Conservation & Development Director
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:BOARD ADVISORY BODY ANNUAL REPORT FOR 2009 - NORTH RICHMOND MITIGATION FEE JOINT
EXPENDITURE PLANNING COMMITTEE
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
Richmond Waste & Recovery Mitigation Fee which is subject to the joint-control of the City and County. The
Waste & Recovery Mitigation Fee was established by the City and County as a result of the Environmental
Impact Report (EIR) prepared in 2003, as a means of mitigating potential impacts on North Richmond from the
proposed expansion of waste processing and resource recovery operations located at the foot of Parr Boulevard in
North Richmond. One of the mitigation measures in this EIR called for establishment of a Mitigation Fee to
defray annual costs associated with collection and disposal of illegally dumped waste and associated impacts in
North Richmond and adjacent areas. The Committee is charged with preparing recommended two year
Expenditure Plans as a means of City and County jointly administering this funding for the benefit of
unincorporated and incorporated North Richmond. Each Expenditure Plan is subject to final approval of the
Richmond City Council and the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors. A copy of the current two-year
Expenditure Plan for 2008/2009 is attached as Exhibit B.
ATTACHMENTS
Exhibit A: 2009 Annual Report
Exhibit B: 2008/2009 Expenditure Plan
2009 Advisory Body Annual Report
Advisory Body Name:
North Richmond Waste & Recovery Mitigation Fee Joint Expenditure Planning Committee (NRMFC)
Advisory Body Meeting Time/Location:
Meet generally scheduled on a quarterly basis, however may be held more or less often based on need.
The specific meeting dates and times are reflected in Section 3 on the next page. Meetings are held at
Richmond City Hall, which was located at 1401 Marina Way South in Richmond until July when it moved
back to 440 Civic Center Drive in Richmond.
Chair (during the reporting period): Nathaniel Bates, Richmond City Council Member
Staffpersons (during the reporting period):
Contra Costa County Department of Conservation & Development:
• Deidra Dingman & Matthew Kelley
Richmond City Manager’s Office:
• Janet Schneider & LaShonda Wilson
Reporting Period: January 1, 2009 – December 31, 2009
1. Activities
Committee staff worked with multiple City & County Departments, agencies and non-profit organizations
to effectively:
• Continue implementation of existing strategies carried over from the 2008/2009 Mitigation Fee
Expenditure Plan.
• Initiate new programs and services under the 2010/2011 Mitigation Fee Expenditure Plan.
2. Accomplishments
In 2009, the Committee considered and recommended amendments to the 2008/2009 Expenditure Plan.
The Committee also provided direction and received periodic updates regarding the implementation of
the 2008/2009 Expenditure Plan as amended (current version attached as Exhibit B). Below are some
highlights pertaining to the implementation of certain strategies funded under the Plan:
• Neighborhood Clean Up - On Saturday, November 7, 2009, the City of Richmond held a
community clean up for the residents of North Richmond. Volunteers were sought from the
Young Adult Empowerment Center (YAEC), and the Senior Center to work at the drop-off
locations, participate in trash pick-up along neighborhood streets, and distribute handouts with
information about local disposal and recycling resources, including details about Disposal
Voucher and Bulky-Item Pickup programs.
• Public Outreach - Created, updated and distributed outreach materials including bilingual
versions of printed materials (e.g. flyers and brochures) as well as updated/expanded our North
Richmond specific StopDumping.org website. Created new website called NrGreen.org and
linked to StopDumping.org.
• Community Services Coordinator & Bilingual Outreach Services Coordinator – Positions are filled
through non-profit entities in North Richmond and intended to serve as effective liaisons and
advocates for the community providing them with information, and receiving input about
Expenditure Plan programs and related services available to residents of North Richmond. They
have taken the lead to spearhead efforts to establish local Community Gardening Project as well
as an education and marketing campaign called “North Richmond Green”.
G:\Conservation\Matthew\N. Richmond Mitigation Fee\BOS Annual Report - 2008\NRMFC Annual Report_2009.doc
• Code Enforcement Officer & Illegal Dumping Investigator/Officer - The Sheriff’s Office employed a
new Resident Deputy Team approach in North Richmond consisting of three pairs of deputies
assigned to one of three shifts effective April 27, 2009. All six deputies have the same overall
“Roles & Responsibilities” which include issuing citations for illegal dumping, littering, no parking
uncovered/unsecured loads, and criminal offenses as well as providing routine patrols and
community involvement/assistance. There are now two Resident Deputies assigned to the Day
Shift that routinely patrol the entire North Richmond Mitigation Funding Area as well as
periodically conduct investigations and surveillance to address illegal dumping.
On October 26, 2009, the Committee voted to recommend that the City and County approve the
preliminary 2010/2011 North Richmond Waste and Recovery Mitigation Fee Expenditure Plan (see
Exhibit B). The Plan is subject to final approval by the County Board of Supervisors and Richmond City
Council and consideration has been scheduled for their meetings in December 2009.
3. Attendance/Representation
All but one Committee seat (appointed by the City of Richmond) was filled for the duration of 2009, as
shown in the below table. The seven member Committee is comprised of three Richmond City Council
members, one member of the Board of Supervisors, two North Richmond Municipal Advisory Council
(MAC) members that are residents of unincorporated North Richmond, and one incorporated North
Richmond (NR) resident. To minimize problems obtaining quorums, Bylaws were approved for this
Committee in 2008, which included designation of alternates and procedures for removal of members
based upon number of absences without prior notification. The level of participation for each Committee
member is outlined in the table below as well as the status of a quorum being achieved on each meeting
date.
2009 Meeting Dates & Attendance
Committee Members & Alternates 5/6
3-5pm
7/8
1:30-3pm
8/5
1-3pm
9/24
1:30-3:30pm
10/26
3-5pm
Nathaniel Bates, Richmond City Council Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Mayor Gayle McLaughlin, Richmond City Council Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Maria Viramontes, Richmond City Council No No No No No
John Gioia, Board of Supervisors* Yes Yes Yes Yes No
Lee Jones, Incorporated NR resident Yes VACANT VACANT VACANT VACANT
Dr. Henry Clark, North Richmond MAC Member* Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Joe Wallace, North Richmond MAC Member* Yes Yes No No Yes
Jim Rogers, Alternate - Richmond City Council No No No No No
Luz Gomez, Alternate - Board of Supervisors* Yes Yes Yes No Yes
Johnny White, Alternate - Incorporated NR
resident
No Yes Yes No Yes
Maricella Navarro, Alternate - NR MAC Member* No Yes Yes No No
Quorum achieved Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
* Denotes the Committee members that are appointed by County Board of Supervisors, remainder appointed
by Richmond City Council.
4. Training/Certification
No trainings were provided or certifications received during the 2009 reporting year.
5. Proposed Work Plan/Objectives for Next Year
Next spring, the Committee will consider and recommend an amendment to the 2010/2011 Expenditure
Plan in order to incorporate supplemental funding allocations for the balance of unexpended funding that
was received in 2008/2009. For the remainder of the year, the Committee will receive updates from staff
and potentially provide direction regarding the implementation of strategies contained in the 2010/2011
Expenditure Plan as amended.
Revised: July 8, 2009
2008/2009 Third Amended
North Richmond Waste & Recovery Mitigation Fee
Expenditure Plan
INTRODUCTION
The Waste & Recovery Mitigation Fee was established as a result of the Draft
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) dated November 2003 for the WCCSL Bulk
Materials Processing Center (BMPC) and Related Actions (Project). The Project
involved new and expanded processing and resource recovery operations on both the
incorporated and unincorporated area of the Project site, which the EIR concluded
would impact the host community. To mitigate this impact Mitigation Measure 4-5 called
for a Mitigation Fee to benefit the host community, described as follows:
“Mitigation Fee. The facility operator shall pay a Mitigation Fee of an amount to
be determined by the applicable permitting authority(ies) to defray annual costs
associated with collection and disposal of illegally dumped waste and associated
impacts in North Richmond and adjacent areas. The mitigation fee should be
subject to the joint-control of the City and County and should be collected on all
solid waste and processible materials received at the facility consistent with the
existing mitigation fee collected at the Central IRRF.”
In July 2004, the City of Richmond and Contra Costa County entered into a
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) agreeing to jointly administer Mitigation Fee
monies collected from the BMPC for the benefit of the incorporated and unincorporated
North Richmond area.
This North Richmond Waste & Recovery Mitigation Fee Joint Expenditure Planning
Committee (Committee) was formed pursuant to the terms of the MOU for the specific
purpose of preparing a recommended two year Expenditure Plan. This Expenditure
Plan provides a means to jointly administer the Mitigation Fee funding for the benefit of
the host community, as described in the EIR. The Expenditure Plan is subject to final
approval of the Richmond City Council and the Contra Costa County Board of
Supervisors.
BUDGET
The attached Budget Table is incorporated herein by reference. The Budget was
developed based on revenue estimates with multiple variables (e.g. number of tons of
recovered materials vs. solid waste, per ton gate rate charged and amount of CPI-
adjusted per ton Mitigation Fee). Revenue projections may deviate from those provided
by Republic and used to prepare the attached Budget Table.
Exhibit B
2008/2009 North Richmond Waste & Recovery Mitigation Fee Expenditure Plan
Revised: July 8, 2009 Page 2 of 11
Printed: 7/9/2009
It is likely that some adjustments will be necessary to accommodate variations between
estimated and actual revenue as well as disparity between estimated and actual costs
for non-fixed cost strategies. Adjustments may be needed due to under-utilization of a
particular program if estimated expenditure was based on per unit cost. If the number of
units allocated to a particular line item is not exhausted, the remaining funding would
need to be redistributed within that expenditure category.
This Expenditure Plan has been designed to maximize efficiency in the administration of
the Plan. The Budget includes some line items that are based on fixed costs, however
to provide flexibility other line items can be adjusted if needed. Strategies fall under one
of these three expenditure categories: Prevention & Education, Abatement &
Enforcement and Community Investment.
This Expenditure Plan authorizes Staff to make adjustments for certain line items if
needed to account for budget shortfalls or overages. This flexibility will allow the City
and County to avoid the delays and costs associated with amending the Expenditure
Plan. Additional amendments would only be proposed by Staff if absolutely necessary
which will require Staff to convene this Committee as well as seek the approval of the
City Council and Board of Supervisors.
DESCRIPTION OF STRATEGIES RECOMMENDED FOR FUNDING
Funding allocations for each strategy can be found in the attached Budget Table. The
funding allocation amounts are for the two-year Expenditure Plan period.
STAFF COSTS
Due the staff time necessary for staffing this committee and Expenditure Plan
development, implementation and oversight, $100,000 is allocated to accommodate
staff costs for both the City and County for calendar years 2008 and 2009.
PREVENTION & EDUCATION
1. Bulky Clean-ups
• Fund subsidy program to provide residents, non-profits and/or commercial
enterprises in the Mitigation Fee Primary Funding Area with on-call pick-
up service for bulky items that are not accepted in the current on-call
clean-ups through Richmond Sanitary Service (RSS)
• Recommended allocation of $5,000 would fund approximately 120 bulky
item pick-ups (at a flat pick-up fee of $41) and must be used in conjunction
with disposal vouchers
2. Neighborhood Clean-ups
• Fund one or more neighborhood and/or creek clean-up events in the
Mitigation Fee Primary Funding Area
• Recommended allocation of $25,000 would fund at least two clean-up
events (one of which will likely be co-sponsored by the City)
2008/2009 North Richmond Waste & Recovery Mitigation Fee Expenditure Plan
Revised: July 8, 2009 Page 3 of 11
Printed: 7/9/2009
3. Voucher System
• Fund subsidy program to provide residents non-profits and/or commercial
enterprises in the Mitigation Fee Primary Funding Area with vouchers for
disposal at Republic’s transfer station on Parr Blvd.
• Residents allowed up to twelve $5 vouchers per household per year upon
request, residents must prove residency when picking up vouchers
(vouchers expire after six months, RSS only receives the subsidy for
vouchers that are actually redeemed)
• Recommended allocation of $7,500 would fund 1,500 vouchers ($5 each)
4. Community Services Coordinator
• Fund full-time Community Services Coordinator to be overseen by a non-
profit or public agency.
• Community Services Coordinator handles various responsibilities related
to illegal dumping and blight in North Richmond including but not limited
to:
o respond to 1-800-No Dumping calls regarding illegal dumping in
North Richmond,
o coordinate with RSS & Sheriff’s Office to identify/notify individuals
potentially responsible for illegal dumping within the Mitigation Fee
area,
o maintain database to track illegal dumping locations and when
needed refer details to RSS or City Public Works for removal,
o provide outreach to the community including implementation and
staffing of a Community Block Program, and
o act as liaison between the community, RSS, City and County
regarding illegal dumping and related issues.
• Recommended allocation of $144,262 would fund this position (including
salary/benefits/overhead) and related costs for calendar years 2008 and
2009
5. Bilingual Outreach Services/Coordinator
• Fund bilingual outreach and translation service and/or coordinator on a
contract basis to:
o prepare Spanish education, outreach and meeting materials
o perform specific clerical duties
o provide translation services at community meetings
o handle Spanish speaking calls to 1-800-No Dumping from North
Richmond area
o identify opportunities to involve Hispanic community (e.g. attend
Hispanic community meetings/events) in fight against illegal
dumping and blight
• Recommended allocation of $56,000 would fund the Bilingual Outreach
Coordinator position (including salary/benefits/overhead and related costs)
and translation services on an as-need basis
2008/2009 North Richmond Waste & Recovery Mitigation Fee Expenditure Plan
Revised: July 8, 2009 Page 4 of 11
Printed: 7/9/2009
6. North Richmond Green Outreach Campaign
• Fund establishment of a public outreach campaign and/or materials
directed at reducing illegal dumping and blight in North Richmond
• Print/distribute periodic community newsletter and other materials about
illegal dumping/blight issues prepared by Community Services
Coordinator
• Hire private consultant to help define approach and design campaign as
appropriate/needed
• Elements of the public outreach campaign may include, but are not
necessarily limited to:
o emphasis on increased enforcement/prosecution
o door-to-door outreach effort targeting areas subject to frequent
dumping requesting community’s assistance to report illegal
dumping and/or independent hauler activities
o inform community members regarding exact details needed when
reporting illegal dumping and who to contact
o billboards in community which is changed periodically highlighting
on-call clean-ups, HHW facility, how to report illegal dumping, etc.
o public service announcements (PSAs) in English, Spanish and
Laotian and broadcast on CCTV and cable networks
o printed education & outreach materials in English, Spanish and
Laotian, which could include: West County specific guide similar
to Contra Costa Reuse and Recycling Guide, new/revised
brochures (e.g. County’s Illegal Dumping Brochures &
Richmond’s Good Neighbor Brochure), advertisements in Contra
Costa Times and other West County publications (listing illegal
dumping prosecutions, highlighting educational information that is
targeted for season or current events, etc.)
o identify most effective methods of distribution (eliminate
approaches that have not been effective enough in the past)
• Recommended allocation of $50,000 could be adjusted if needed to fit
within the budget (e.g. reduced to accommodate revenue below the
projected amount)
2008/2009 North Richmond Waste & Recovery Mitigation Fee Expenditure Plan
Revised: July 8, 2009 Page 5 of 11
Printed: 7/9/2009
ABATEMENT & ENFORCEMENT
7. City/County Pick-up from Right-of-Way
• Fund consolidated pick-up program for illegal dumping in the public right-
of-way located within the Mitigation Fee Primary Funding Area to
supplement similar services provided by RSS in the designated Hot Spot
Route
• Consolidating pick-up within the right of way in unincorporated &
incorporated areas using the City of Richmond Public Works staff helps
create a stable level of service, minimize delays and maximize efficiencies
• City handles pick-up of items from public right-of-way when the items are
not suitable for collection in the compactor truck used to service the RSS
Hot Spot Route (Hot Spot Route referrals are provided to the City by the
Community Services Coordinator)
• Recommended allocation of $120,000 would fund incremental cost for City
to provide pick-up in the unincorporated & incorporated areas for an
average of 24 hours per week and to cover the cost of mileage,
administrative costs and renting equipment as needed
8. Vacant and Abandoned Lot and Properties Clean-up
• Fund clean-up of illegal dumping on vacant/abandoned lots and properties
within the Mitigation Fee Primary Funding Area where existing code
enforcement processes, staffing levels, and/or funding prove to be
inadequate
• As appropriate, obtain summary abatements, place liens on properties,
require property owners to sign contract agreeing to fence their property
and/or sign waivers allowing clean-up of waste on property
• Recommended allocation of $ 40,000 would fund clean-up of an
undetermined number of vacant and abandoned lots and properties
depending on the amount of illegally dumped waste on each property
9. Vacant and Abandoned Lot Fencing
• Fund fencing of vacant and/or abandoned lots where chronic dumping
occurs within the Mitigation Fee Primary Funding Area when existing
fencing ordinance provisions and/or code enforcement processes, staffing
levels and/or funding prove to be inadequate
• Establish process to expedite the fencing of certain vacant/abandoned lots
as needed to address unique circumstances (e.g. ordinance provisions
require delay and specific location poses high-risk, repeated dumping of
particularly harmful wastes, etc.)
• Prior to fencing vacant/abandoned lots, require property owners to sign
contract agreeing to maintain fence and sign waivers allowing installation
of fence on their property, as appropriate
• Recommended allocation of $57,000 would fund fencing of an
undetermined number of vacant/abandoned lots
2008/2009 North Richmond Waste & Recovery Mitigation Fee Expenditure Plan
Revised: July 8, 2009 Page 6 of 11
Printed: 7/9/2009
10. Code Enforcement Staff
• Fund additional full-time County code enforcement position, to assist with
vacant/abandoned lot abatements and fencing as well as other
health/building/zoning violations related to illegal dumping throughout the
Mitigation Funding Area (incorporated & unincorporated)
• Recommended allocation of $313,514 would fund a full-time position
(including salary/benefits) and related vehicle costs for calendar years
2008 and 2009
11. Graffiti Abatement
• Fund consolidated graffiti abatement program for graffiti visible from the
public right-of-way located within the Mitigation Fee Primary Funding Area
• Consolidating graffiti abatement services through the City of Richmond
Public Works staff creates a stable level of service, minimizes delays and
maximizes efficiencies
• Funding removal of graffiti is not intended to replace existing local
ordinance requirements (e.g. holding property owner or parent responsible
for clean-up when feasible)
• Prior to removing graffiti located on private property, written approval of
property owner shall be obtained when required by local ordinance(s)
• Recommended allocation of $58,240 would fund incremental cost for City
to provide graffiti abatement services in the unincorporated & incorporated
areas an average of 15 hours per week and would cover administrative
cost, mileage and the purchase or rental of necessary equipment and
materials
12. Illegal Dumping Investigator/Officer
• Fund full-time illegal dumping investigator/officer to work within the
Mitigation Fee Primary Funding Area to:
o conduct illegal dumping surveillance and investigations
o build & file cases specific to instances of illegal dumping, which
are suitable for prosecution
o conduct targeted sting operations to catch illegal dumpers (law
enforcement strike-team(s) may also be available to conduct sting
operations)
• Recommended allocation of $274,808 would fund a full-time Sheriff
Deputy (including salary/benefits/overtime/uniform) and offset related
costs (e.g. cell phone, equipment, fuel, insurance and vehicle purchase
and maintenance) for calendar years 2008 and 2009
13. Increase Nighttime Patrols & Investigations
• Fund increased nighttime patrols and investigations within the Mitigation
Fee Primary Funding Area to target specific locations/timeframes where
illegal dumping occurs most regularly
2008/2009 North Richmond Waste & Recovery Mitigation Fee Expenditure Plan
Revised: July 8, 2009 Page 7 of 11
Printed: 7/9/2009
• As needed, use City and/or County law enforcement officer(s) or a private
security firm for nighttime patrols as a means of supplementing existing
patrols by local law enforcement
• Recommended allocation of $100,000 would fund staff timefor City and/or
County law enforcement officer(s) or one private security officer
14. Surveillance Cameras
• Fund surveillance camera program within the Mitigation Fee Primary
Funding Area to target specific locations where illegal dumping occurs
most regularly
• Funding allocated would cover the purchase of cameras, camera
infrastructure, and costs related to maintenance, repair & relocation of
cameras
• Recommended allocation of $260,000 could be adjusted if needed to fit
within the budget (e.g. reduced to accommodate revenue below the
projected amount)
15. Illegal Dumping Prosecutor
• Fund portion of community prosecutor to work within the Mitigation Fee
Primary Funding Area to build cases related to illegal dumping with special
emphasis on instances of commercial dumping as well as other quality of
life issues (e.g. alcohol abatement, environmental crimes)
• City has budgeted to fund a community prosecutor which could dedicate
a portion of time to work on cases within the Mitigation Fee Primary
Funding Area
• Recommended allocation of $65,149 would fund 15% of the full-time
salary (including benefits) for the community prosecutor for calendar years
2008 and 2009
COMMUNITY INVESTMENT
16. Beautification
A. Neighborhood Landscaping and Gardening Projects
• Fund landscaping projects within the Mitigation Fee Primary Funding
Area, specific projects would be selected after taking the following into
consideration:
o beautification projects that do not have existing funding sources
o regular pruning to maintain any vegetation that is compromising
visibility in locations used for illegal dumping
• Fund the establishment of new community gardens on vacant and
unused lots subject to dumping or blight which will:
o rely on partnerships with local residents, non-profit and
community based organizations, school groups and other
community groups to start and maintain projects
2008/2009 North Richmond Waste & Recovery Mitigation Fee Expenditure Plan
Revised: July 8, 2009 Page 8 of 11
Printed: 7/9/2009
o provide community with educational/outreach opportunities,
healthy foods, and community building
• Recommended allocation of $68,000 would fund purchase of
materials, equipment and related maintenance costs as well as related
administrative oversight of the projects which could be adjusted if
needed to fit within the budget
B. Servicing, Maintenance and Moving/Removal of Street Cans
• Fund collection services, maintenance and removal (as needed) for
four street cans within the Mitigation Fee Primary Funding Area
• Recommended allocation of $3,962.40 would fund weekly collection for
four street cans and maintenance and removal as needed
17. Community Involvement
A. Stipends and Mentorship Program
• Fund stipend programs for West Contra Costa Unified School District
students, Young Adult Empowerment Center Advisory Council, Youth
Build members and other groups as identified and approved by
Committee staff for illegal dumping abatement and beautification
programs within the Mitigation Fee Primary Funding Area
• Fund the Mentoring Program at the Young Adult Empowerment Center
to aid in efforts to combat illegal dumping and blight within the
Mitigation Fee Primary Funding Area
• Recommended allocation of $118,000 for both programs could be
adjusted if needed to fit within the budget (e.g. reduced to
accommodate revenue below the projected amount)
B. Parks Rehabilitation Initiative
• Fund various park and related projects at Third Street Ballfield,
Shields-Reid Park and other areas within the Mitigation Fee Primary
Funding Area
• Elements of the Parks Rehabilitation Initiative may include but are not
limited to:
o purchase and installation of new light fixtures and necessary
infrastructure as well as restoration of existing light fixtures and
infrastructure
o repair, replacement and maintenance of damaged portions of
sod or installation of turf
o repair of existing and/or new irrigation system
o installation of park benches, additional playground equipment
and fencing
o other landscaping and beautification efforts
2008/2009 North Richmond Waste & Recovery Mitigation Fee Expenditure Plan
Revised: July 8, 2009 Page 9 of 11
Printed: 7/9/2009
• Recommended allocation of $175,000 is an estimated one-time fixed
cost and could be adjusted if needed to fit within the budget (e.g.
reduced to accommodate revenue below the projected amount)
C. North Richmond Greening Project
• Fund the planning, installation and maintenance of Greening Project
which would consist of the following components/phases:
o Planning – Hiring landscape consulting firm to work with
community stakeholders to create greening plan. The plan
would include multiple options at varying cost levels.
o Installation – Contract with landscape firm to carry out
installation of selected design plan.
o Maintenance – Contract with private landscape maintenance
firm in coordination with appropriate City/County Departments
• Recommended allocation of $90,000 could be adjusted if needed to fit
within the budget (e.g. reduced to accommodate revenue below the
projected amount)
D. New Street Can and/or Tile Art Project
• Fund the purchase, installation, maintenance and servicing for up to 4
street cans in the Mitigation Funding Area. City/County will select can
locations based on a site survey in the community to be conducted by
CHDC
• The tile art painting project will be based on the themes of anti-littering
and environmental stewardship. The hand-painted tiles will be created
by local Verde Elementary School students and will be placed on each
can and/or in other areas of the community (such as sidewalks)
• Recommended allocation of $8,000 could be adjusted if needed to fit
within the budget (e.g. reduced to accommodate revenue below the
projected amount)
E. Senior Center Improvements
• Fund beautification and/or structural enhancements on the exterior of
the Neighborhood House Multicultural Family Senior Center
• Staff will communicate the needs of the building to other entities that
may be able to provide funding for this project, specifically for interior
improvements.
• Improvements that would be covered by Mitigation Fee funding may
include: new lighting, landscaping, fencing and/or painting.
• Recommended allocation of $15,000 could be adjusted if needed to fit
within the budget (e.g. reduced to accommodate revenue below the
projected amount)
F. Safe Routes Program & Community Mural Project
• Funding to institute a Safe Routes Program and Community Mural
Project in North Richmond (Proposal submitted by Harold Beaulieu,
2008/2009 North Richmond Waste & Recovery Mitigation Fee Expenditure Plan
Revised: July 8, 2009 Page 10 of 11
Printed: 7/9/2009
founder of the Art Department, a nonprofit organization that
coordinates community based art projects in the Bay Area)
• The Safe Routes Program uses a “Popsicle Index” as a gauge for
safety along routes traveled by community youth. The Safe Routes
program will be implemented in conjunction with CHDC’s block club
initiative by coordinating code enforcement education, community art &
beautification projects, trash & graffiti clean up efforts and violence
prevention activities for block groups and along designated routes.
• The Community Mural Project would train local residents in the mural
planning process and support those residents in painting murals at
blighted and graffiti prone sites selected in the Mitigation Fee Area.
• Recommended allocation of $15,000 could be adjusted if needed to fit
within the budget (e.g. reduced to accommodate revenue below the
projected amount)
G. West County Watershedz Program
• Fund the design and implementation of a rehabilitation project within
the Wildcat Creek riparian zone and trail corridor near Verde
Elementary School (Proposal submitted by The Urban Creeks Council)
• Project will employ North Richmond youth to carry out restoration work
• The rehabilitation project is one component of a larger environmental
educational and beautification endeavor being implemented by UCC in
the North Richmond community
• Recommended allocation of $15,000 could be adjusted if needed to fit
within the budget (e.g. reduced to accommodate revenue below the
projected amount)
H. Wildcat and San Pablo Creek Enhancements
• Fund portion of one or more of the following projects (Proposal
submitted by Contra Costa County Flood Control & Water
Conservation District)
• Fish Passage Enhancement: Preparation of project scope to obtain
grant funding for reconstruction of desiltation ponds & fish ladder to
allow improved fish migration
• Water Quality Enhancement: Purchase of trash separation mechanism
to treat polluted water before water is processed through pump
stations into Wildcat Creek
• Habitat Management Plan: Creation of plan to designate portions of
creek channel for habitat preservation
• Recommended allocation of $20,000 could be adjusted if needed to fit
within the budget (e.g. reduced to accommodate revenue below the
projected amount)
I. Capital Improvement Projects
• Fund various capital improvement projects within the Mitigation Fee
Primary Funding Area
2008/2009 North Richmond Waste & Recovery Mitigation Fee Expenditure Plan
Revised: July 8, 2009 Page 11 of 11
Printed: 7/9/2009
• Projects could include but are not limited to:
Street and sidewalk improvements (as related to railroads and
railroad crossings)
Lighting
Street medians
• Recommended allocation of $103,707 could be adjusted if needed to
fit within the budget (e.g. reduced to accommodate revenue below the
projected amount)
ATTACHMENT: Budget Table – North Richmond Mitigation Fee Expenditure Plan (2008-2009)
D:\Illegal Dumping\BMPC Mitigation Fee Committee\2008-2009 Exp Plan\Third Amended Expenditure Plan 2008-2009.doc
Budget Table - 2008-2009 Third Amended Expenditure Plan
#Strategy
Approved
Biannual
Expenditure
(2008-2009)
Recommended
Expenditure
Changes
(2008-2009)
Recommended
Biannual
Expenditures
(2008-2009)
Committee Administration/Staffing 100,000$ -$ 100,000$
1 Bulky Clean-ups
10,000$ (5,000)$ 5,000$
2 Neighborhood Clean-ups
15,000$ 10,000$ 25,000$
3 Voucher System
15,000$ (7,500)$ 7,500$
4 Community Services Coordinator
144,262$ -$ 144,262$
5 Bilingual Outreach Services Coordinator
56,000$ -$ 56,000$
6 North Richmond Green Outreach Campaign
71,000$ (21,000)$ 50,000$
7 City/County Pick-up from Right-of-Way
120,000$ -$ 120,000$
8 Vacant and Abandoned Lot Clean-up
40,000$ -$ 40,000$
9 Vacant and Abandoned Lot Fencing
90,000$ (33,000)$ 57,000$
10 Code Enforcement Staff
313,504$ -$ 313,504$
11 Graffiti Abatement
58,240$ -$ 58,240$
12 Illegal Dumping Investigator/Officer
274,808$ -$ 274,808$
13 Increase Nighttime Patrols
40,000$ 60,000$ 100,000$
14 Surveillance Cameras
260,000$ -$ 260,000$
15 Illegal Dumping Prosecutor
65,149$ -$ 65,149$
16 Beautification
16a Neighborhood Landscaping & Gardening Projects 12,000$ 56,000$ 68,000$
16b Street Cans - Servicing, Maintenance & Moving 2,462$ 1,500$ 3,962.40$
17 Community Involvement
17a Stipends and Mentorship Program 118,000$ -$ 118,000$
17b Parks Rehabilitation Initiative 175,000$ -$ 175,000$
17c North Richmond Greening Project 150,000$ (60,000)$ 90,000$
17d New Street Can Project 14,000$ (6,000)$ 8,000$
17e Senior Center Improvements 10,000$ 5,000$ 15,000$
17f Safe Routes Program & Community Mural Project 15,000$ -$ 15,000$
17g West County Watershedz Program 15,000$ -$ 15,000$
17h Wildcat and San Pablo Creek 20,000$ -$ 20,000$ Prevention & EducationAbatement & EnforcementCommunity InvestmentPage A-1 Revised: 07/8/2009
Printed: 7/9/2009
Budget Table - 2008-2009 Third Amended Expenditure Plan
#Strategy
Approved
Biannual
Expenditure
(2008-2009)
Recommended
Expenditure
Changes
(2008-2009)
Recommended
Biannual
Expenditures
(2008-2009)
17i Capital Improvement Projects 103,707$ -$ 103,707$
Total Projected Mitigation Fee Revenue for 2008/2009 1,361,456$
946,676$
2,308,132$
Committee Administration/Staffing 4.33%4.33%100,000$
Prevention & Education 13.49%12.47%287,762$
Abatement & Enforcement 54.66%55.83%1,288,701$
Community Investment 27.52%27.37%631,669$
Grand Total *100.00%100.00%2,308,132$
* Projected revenue split after deducting the $100,000 allocated for staff costs:
Prevention & Education 13.03%
Abatement & Enforcement 58.36%
Community Investment 28.61%
Estimated Remaining 2006/2007 Revenue to be allocated in 2008
(projections as of 12/31/2007)
Estimated Mitigation Fee Revenue to be allocated in 2008/2009
(2006/2007 remainder + 2008/2009)
Page A-2 Revised: 07/8/2009
Printed: 7/9/2009
RECOMMENDATION(S):
RATIFY the actions taken by the Workforce Development Board of Contra Costa Director to provide program
services through the Contra Costa Office of Education for the West County summer youth program and APPROVE
and AUTHORIZE the Contra Costa County Auditor-Controller to pay the Contra Costa County Office of Education
up to $33,000 for services delivered in the West County summer youth program from May 1, 2008 through October
30, 2008.
FISCAL IMPACT:
$33,000 % Federal, Workforce Investment Act (WIA) Youth Funds
BACKGROUND:
In 2008, the Employment and Human Services Department, Workforce Development Board collaborated with the
Contra Costa County (CCC) Office of Education to deliver summer youth program services in West County. The
services provided by the CCC Office of Education included payroll, case management, employability workshops,
and orientations to participating employers. Due to an oversight, no contract (California Government Code section
26227) was developed for the delivery
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Michael Roetzer, 3-1582
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc:
C.82
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Joe Valentine, Employment & Human Services Director
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Ratification of Service Delivery
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
of the services.
The West County youth program was developed and implememnted and served 37 Workforce Investment Act
eleigible youth from May 1, 2008 through October 8, 2008, resulting in CCC Office of Education unpaid expenses of
up to $33,000.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT:
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Acknowledge receipt of the Auditor-Controller’s Annual Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Fund (SLESF)
Summary Report for the 2008/09 fiscal year.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None
BACKGROUND:
Government Code Section 30063 requires the County Auditor-Controller to file a public consolidated report, annually
with the Supplemental Law Enforcement Oversight Committee and the Board of Supervisors detailing allocations
from the SLESF for the entirety of the immediately preceding fiscal year.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Analiza Alejandrino,
646-1248
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors
on the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc: Timothy Ewell, County Administration, Alaliza Alejandrino, Special Accounting
C.83
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Stephen Ybarra, Auditor-Controller
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Acknowledge Receipt of Annual Summary Report on Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Fund Activity
ATTACHMENTS
SLESF Annual Report
Summary 2008-09
FY 08-09 Summary
Comparison
Revenue and Expenditure Summary
Supplemental Law Enforcement Fund
Fund 114300 - Supplemental Law Enforcement Fund
BUDGET
DESCRIPTION UNIT REVENUE EXPENDITURES NET
DA - Criminal Prosecution 0241 $218,615.74 $447,579.60 -$228,963.86
Sheriff - Jail Construction & Ops 0262 $216,015.74 $1,524.51 $214,491.23
Front Line Enforcement - County 0263 $116,444.82 $894,832.62 -$778,387.80
Front Line Enforcement - Cities 0264 $2,000,000.00 $2,000,000.00 $0.00
Probation - Juvenile 0311 $2,089,639.33 $2,089,639.00 $0.33
TOTAL $4,640,715.63 $5,433,575.73 -$792,860.10
The attached reports show the revenue and expenditure detail for the 2008/09 fiscal year, as reported here.
1) All 2008/09 revenue and expenditure transactions posted between 07/01/08 - 07/13/09 appear in the
revenue and expenditure ledgers for each budget unit.
2) The 2008/09 year-end adjustments and journals for the period of 07/14/09 - 09/03/09 appear in the revenue
and expenditure details for each budget unit.
The final revenue and expenditure ledgers listing all 2008/09 transactions will not be available until
December 2009; therefore, in order to meet the reporting requirements set forth in statute, the above
revenue and expenditure information has been derived from the most current and comprehensive information
available at this time. We do not expect any material changes to occur between now and the final closing
of the books.
2008/09
Comparison
2008-2009
Revenue and Expenditure Comparison
Supplemental Law Enforcement Fund
Fund 114300 - Supplemental Law Enforcement Fund
DESCRIPTION UNIT REVENUE EXPENDITURES
feeds fr rev & exp sum fr oversight committee sum feeds fr rev & exp sum
BUDGET PER REV DETAIL PER O C SUMMARY DIFFERENCE PER EXP DETAIL
DA - Criminal Prosecution 0241 $218,615.74 $220,220.76 ($1,605.02)[2]$447,579.60
Sheriff - Jail Construction & Ops 0262 $216,015.74 $218,285.12 ($2,269.38)[2]$1,524.51
Front Line Enforcement - County 0263 $116,444.82 $103,404.09 $13,040.73 [2]$894,832.62
Front Line Enforcement - Cities 0264 $2,000,000.00 $2,000,000.00 [1]$0.00 Not enough information for comparison
TOTAL $2,551,076.30 $2,541,909.97 $9,166.33 $1,343,936.73
Analysis of Discrepancies
[1] State funding only, does not include interest and other revenues
[2] For FY 08/09, all Interest Revenue was booked under 0263 in finance, coding shall be corrected moving forward.
[3] Expenditures for budget unit 0262 were erroneously coded under budget unit 0263 in finance. Coding shall be corrected moving forward.
The revenue and expenditure detail reports used for this comparison is dated 9/3/09, which is the most current for fiscal year 08-09 as of to date.
Page 2
Comparison
EXPENDITURES
PER O C SUMMARY DIFFERENCE
$447,580.00 -$0.40
$450,545.39 -$449,020.88 [3]
$445,811.74 $449,020.88 [3]
Not enough information for comparison N/A
$1,343,937.13 -$0.40
Page 3
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Ratify the actions taken by the Health Services Director, or his designee (Wendel Brunner, M.D.), to execute, an
Application For Permit to use common area at Hilltop Mall for the seasonal and H1N1 vaccination clinic, held on
November 7, 2009.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
BACKGROUND:
On November 7, 2009, Contra Costa County Health Services Department’s Public Health Division, Flu Immunization
Program administered the H1N1 flu vaccination to priority groups living in Contra Costa County in the common area
at the Hilltop Mall in Richmond.
Due to the emergent nature of responding to the H1N1 pandemic flu outbreak in Contra Costa County, staff were
frequently faced with making logistics decisions about mass vaccination clinic locations, supplies and security within
short time frams. Consequently, the Health Services Department is requesting the Board ratify this application after
the fact. In exchange for renting its facilities to County, it was required to indemnify and
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor
Contact: Wendel Brunner, M.D.,
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: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc: Tasha Scott, Barbara Borbon, Kim Cox
C.84
To:Board of Supervisors
From:William Walker, M.D., Health Services Director
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Use of Hilltop Mall for flu clinic
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
hold harmless the management, the owners and tenants of the Hilltop Mall for claims arising out of use of the
facility.
ATTACHMENTS
RECOMMENDATION(S):
As the Board of Supervisors, ADOPT Resolution No. 2009/574 consenting to an allocation of up to $50,000 from the
Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency to the Rodeo Sanitary District to fund a public improvements study
program in the Rodeo downtown/waterfront area, and MAKE findings required by Health and Safety Code Section
33445 of public benefit, financial need, and blight elimination as recommended by the Redevelopment Director.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The project budget is $50,000. No General Funds would be utilized. Rodeo redevelopment funds have been budgeted
for this purpose.
BACKGROUND:
A key objective of the Rodeo Redevelopment program is to rehabilitate and upgrade public infrastructure in
Downtown Rodeo and at the Rodeo Marina. The Agency has budgeted $4.7 million for Rodeo downtown/waterfront
infrastructure improvements. The Rodeo Sanitary District (RSD) would be responsible for preparing preliminary
engineering plans and a budget for sanitary sewer improvements that would be included in the larger program. The
recommended action will provide the
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Vincent Manuel
335-7232
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc:
C.85
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Jim Kennedy, County Redevelopment Director
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Facilities Design Funding Agreement, Rodeo Sanitary District
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
Rodeo Sanitary District with the necessary funds to accomplish the preliminary engineering studies related to the
sanitary sewer improvement design. The Public Facilities Design Funding Agreement (the "Design Funding
Agreement") provides $50,000 for the following tasks:
Existing Information Review:
Proposed Marina Layout
Topography
RSD Infrastructure
Annexation of Marina:
LAFCO requirements
Other Agency Requirements
Number and Type of Connections
RSD Fee Requirements
Sewage Conveyance:
Evaluation of options (gravity flow vs. pumped)
Costs for Options
Cost/Benefit Analysis of Options
Recommendation
Pursuant to California Redevelopment Law the Agency may fund public improvements owned by another public
agency with the consent of the Board, if the Board finds and determines that : (1) the public improvement will be
of benefit to the project area, (2) no other reasonable means of financing the public improvement is available to the
community, (3) the public improvement will assist in the elimination of one or more blighting conditions inside
the project area; and (4) Agency assistance for the public improvement is consistent with the Agency’s current
Implementation Plan. (Section 33445 of the Health & Safety Code).
The Design Funding Agreement will help the RSD pay for the cost of the study of necessary sanitary sewer public
improvements for the Rodeo Marina. The Design Funding Agreement will allow the RSD to accomplish the
preliminary engineering studies related to the sanitary sewer improvement design. The necessary public
improvements will benefit the Project Area by helping to spur the redevelopment of a site that is an integral part
of the Project Area’s waterfront. The public improvements may lead to the renovation and expansion of the Rodeo
Marina, thereby stimulating and expanding the existing uses in the waterfront.
The RSD has conducted an analysis of its financial capability to fund the Design Funding Agreement and due to
limited availability of general funds, the State’s budget crisis, and the RSD’s funding priorities, the RSD does not
currently have sufficient funds to pay for the costs of the preliminary engineering studies related to the sanitary
sewer improvement design. On December 8, 2009, the District’s Board of Directors met and approved a
resolution making the required finding that the District has no other reasonable means of funding the public
improvements.
The study and future construction of sanitary sewer improvements in the Rodeo Marina will lead to the renovation
and expansion of the Rodeo Marina Facilities to accommodate multiple uses, which may include: a restaurant,
marine repair facility, boat docks, boat storage, boat launch, a new harbor master building, lodging, mixed use
commercial, and public access. Restoration of the Rodeo Marina would stimulate redevelopment activities in the
waterfront area by expanding the existing uses, thus eliminating blighting conditions in the Project Area.
The funding of the Design Funding Agreement is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Agency’s current
Implementation Plan, including the desire to create and implement a Downtown/Waterfront Improvement
Program for the older and more historic section of the Project Area, and to initiate development planning
processes for specific reuse sites in the Project Area.
Therefore the recommendation includes two actions:
1. As the legislative body for the County, the Board of Supervisors is consenting to the use of Redevelopment
funds to pay for studies related to the sanitary sewer improvement design i of the Rodeo Sanitary District, and
making the required findings pursuant to Section 33445. In making these findings the Board is, in part, relying on
findings made by the Rodeo Sanitary District at its meeting of December 8, 2009; and
2. As the Governing Board of the Redevelopment Agency making certain findings pursuant to Section 33445 of
the Health and Safety Code, and approving and authorizing execution of the Design Funding Agreement (a
separate Board Order is being submitted for this action).
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If this contract is not authorized, the proposed scope of work will not be able to be accomplished.
ATTACHMENTS
Resolution No. 2009/574
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board
Adopted this Resolution on 12/15/2009 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
RECUSE:
Resolution No. 2009/574
(1) Approving the appropriation of Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000) by the Redevelopment Agency of Contra Costa County
(the "Agency") to disburse to the Rodeo Sanitary District (the "District") for the cost of funding a public improvements design
program.
2) Making certain findings pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33445 in connection with the approval of the assistance
by the Agency to the District.
Pursuant to the California Community Redevelopment Law (Health and Safety Code Section 33000 et seq.); the "CRL"), the
Board of Supervisors of the County of Contra Costa (the "County") has adopted and the Agency is responsible for implementing,
among other redevelopment plans, the Redevelopment Plan (the "Redevelopment Plan") for the Rodeo Redevelopment Project
Area (the "Project Area"), as adopted by Ordinance No. 90-50 on July 10, 1990, and amended by Ordinance No. 94-66, adopted
on December 6, 1994; as further amended by Ordinance No. 99-08, adopted on February 23, 1999; and further amended by
Ordinance No. 2002-16, adopted on May 21, 2002. The Redevelopment Plan sets forth a plan for redevelopment of the Project
Area.
The Agency is responsible for administering the Redevelopment Plan to cause redevelopment of the Project Area, including
removal of blighting conditions in the Project Area. To assist in implementing the Redevelopment Plan and the County's other
redevelopment plans, the Agency has adopted and amended a five-year implementation plan (the "Implementation Plan")
pursuant to Section 33490 of the Redevelopment Law.
The approximately 12.8 acre Rodeo Marina site, formerly known as Bennett’s Marina, is owned by Rodeo LLC, a California
limited liability company, and is an integral part of the Rodeo Project Area’s waterfront. Rodeo LLC, intends to renovate and
expand the existing Rodeo Marina facilities to accommodate multiple uses, which may include: a restaurant, marine repair
facility, boat docks, boat storage, boat launch, a new harbor master building, lodging, mixed use commercial, and public access.
The restoration of the Rodeo Marina would stimulate redevelopment activities in the waterfront area by expanding the existing
uses, thus eliminating blighting conditions.
Rodeo Marina is in need of capital improvements in order create a redevelopment catalyst site within the Rodeo Project Area.
Without such rehabilitation and upgrading, the task of redevelopment of the Rodeo Project Area will be impeded. The District
lacks the capital resources to fund the design and implementation of the necessary rehabilitation and upgrading of the necessary
sewer facilities required to redevelop the Rodeo Marina.
To implement the Redevelopment Plan in a manner consistent with the Implementation Plan, and to further the Agency's and
District’s mutual objectives for the rehabilitation and upgrading of public improvements in Downtown Rodeo and the Rodeo
Marina and in furtherance of the elimination of blight in the Rodeo Project Area, the Agency intends to allocate an amount up to
Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000) to provide a public facility design grant to pay for the costs associated with the design of the
rehabilitation and upgrading of public improvements in Downtown Rodeo and the Rodeo Marina in accordance with the scope of
work for designing the needed public improvements (the "Design Program") set forth in the Public Facilities Design Funding
Agreement for Rodeo Sanitary District (the "Design Funding Agreement")
The funding of the Design Program pursuant to the requirements set forth in the Design Funding Agreement will address the
goals and objectives of the Redevelopment Plan for the Project Area by alleviating blighting conditions and stimulating
redevelopment activities in Downtown Rodeo and the Rodeo Marina.
The approval and funding of the Design Funding Agreement is consistent with and will promote the goals and objectives
identified in the Agency's Implementation Plan.
In connection with the Board's consideration of this resolution, a staff report (the "Staff Report", incorporated herein by
reference), which sets forth facts supporting the findings made in this resolution pursuant to Section 33445 of the CRL, has been
prepared to accompany this resolution.
Pursuant to Section 33445 of the CRL, the Agency is authorized, with the consent of the County and the District, to pay part or
all of the value of the cost of the Design Program for the public improvements pursuant to the terms of the Design Funding
Agreement.
By Resolution No. 2009/573, the Agency is concurrently giving its consent to pay the cost of the Design Program and made the
required findings pursuant to Section 33445 of the CRL.
On December 8, 2009, by Resolution No. 2009/05, the District gave its consent to the Agency to pay the cost of the Design
Program and made the required findings pursuant to Section 33445 of the CRL.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board finds that the above recitals are accurate.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board hereby finds and determines that: (a) the Design Program will be of benefit to the
Project Area; (b) no other reasonable method of financing the funding of the Design Program is available to the community; (c)
the Design Program will assist in the elimination of one or more blighting conditions inside the Project Area; and (d) Agency
assistance for the Design Program is consistent with the Agency's current Implementation Plan. The factual and analytical basis
used by the Board in making these findings and determinations is set forth in the Staff Report, and materials regarding the Design
Program provided to the Board.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board hereby approves the granting of Agency Funds to the District for the Design
Program as set forth in this resolution.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the approval of this Resolution, the Design Program, and the Design Funding Agreement is
categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to 14 California Code of
Regulations Section 15262, in that the project only involves feasibility or planning studies for possible future actions which have
not been approved, adopted or otherwise funded by the County.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board designates the Redevelopment Director as the custodian of the documents and
other material which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the decision herein is based. These documents may be
found at 2530 Arnold Drive, Suite 190, Martinez, CA 94553.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this Resolution shall take immediate effect from and after its passage.
Contact: Vincent Manuel 335-7232
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: , Deputy
cc:
RECOMMENDATION(S):
DECLARE as surplus and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to dispose of vehicles no longer
needed for public use as recommended by the General Services Director.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact associated with approval of recommended action.
BACKGROUND:
Section 1108-2.212 of the County Ordinance Code authorizes the Purchasing Agent to dispose of any personal
property belonging to Contra Costa County and found by the Board of Supervisors not to be required for public use.
The property for disposal is either obsolete, worn out, beyond economical repair, or damaged beyond repair.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: 925-313-7120
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc: GSD - Administration, GSD - Accounting, GSD - Fleet Svs., Auditor - Controller, County Administrator, GSD - Purchasing, GSD - Surplus
C.86
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Michael J. Lango, General Services Director
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Disposal of Surplus Property
ATTACHMENTS
Surplus Vehicles
ATTACHMENT TO BOARD ORDER
Department Description/Unit/Make/Model Serial No. Condition
A. Obsolete B. Worn Out
C. Beyond economical repair
D. Damaged beyond repair
EHS 2000 CHEVY #0452 (35096 Miles) 1G1ND52J3Y6319973 C
GSD 1995 CHEVY #1420 (83481 Miles) 1G1LD55M2SY252887 C
GSD 1998 FORD #4493 (120796 Miles) 1FTPE24L5WHB92106 B
Health Services 1998 FORD #4477 (101989 Miles) 1FBNE31L3WHA90390 B
Sheriff 2006 FORD #0755 (116397 Miles) 1FAFP53U66A145568 C
Sheriff 2005 CROWN #2504 (93863 Miles) 2FAFP71W15X135472 B
Sheriff 1999 CHEVY #5199 (37656 Miles) 1GCCS14X8XK229724 C
RECOMMENDATION(S):
ACCEPT report from the Local Child Care and Development Planning Council on activities during calendar year
2009 relating to the implmentation of the Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Plan for 2008-2011 and the 2009
Annual Report, as recommended by the Family and Human Services Committee.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None
BACKGROUND:
On November 16, 2009 the Family and Human Services Committee received a report fromt he Local Child Care
Planning Council for Child Care and Development on the Countywide Child Care Plan and their 2009 annual report.
The Committee accepted both reports, thanked the Local Child Care Planning Council and requested that the reports
be submitted to the Board of Supervisors for their acceptance.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Dorothy Sansoe,
925-335-1009
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors
on the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc:
C.87
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Family and Human Services Committee
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Local Planning Council Plan Update and Annual Report
ATTACHMENTS
LPC Report
Page 1 of 3
M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: November 16, 2009
TO: Family and Human Services Committee
Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V, Chair
Supervisor Gayle B. Uilkema, District II, Vice Chair
Contra Costa County Office of Education
Dr. Joseph A. Ovick, Contra Costa County Superintendent of Schools
FROM: Dr. Susan Magnone, Associate Superintendent, Educational Services on behalf of
Ruth Fernández, LPC Coordinator/Manager, Educational Services
SUBJECT: 1) Contra Costa County Local Planning Council for Child Care and Development
Countywide Child Care Plan Update - Referral # 92
2) Annual Report and Self Evaluation from the Contra Costa County Local Planning
Council for Child Care and Development (LPC).
RECOMMENDATION(S):
1. ACCEPT the below written report of activities during calendar year 2009 for the Contra Costa County
Local Planning Council for Child Care and Development (LPC) as they relate to the implementation of
the Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Plan 2008-2011 in the following goal areas: 1) Promote
Access to Quality Child Care, 2) Develop and Nurture A Trained Workforce, 3) Foster and Promote
Coordination and Collaboration with the Community, 4) Advise Sponsoring Entities on Local Issues and
Priorities in Child Care and Development.
MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS DURING REPORTING PERIOD
(JUNE 2009-OCTOBER 2009)
1. Promote Access to Quality Child Care
The LPC implemented the requirements of California Education Code (EC) Section 8275.5 known
as the Voluntary, Temporary Transfer of Funds program. This legislation requires the LPC to
facilitate a process in which funds from an agency under earning their contract slots can be
transferred to an agency over earning their contract slots. The purpose of the program is to ensure
that all of the state allocated funds are used to provide child care services where needed.
To implement this program the LPC first reviewed the Conflict of Interest clause of the LPC by-
laws and then approved a policy outlining the process. On October 19, 2009 the LPC Coordinator
conducted an informational meeting on the transfer process for State-funded Program
Administrators.
Page 2 of 3
2. Develop and Nurture a Trained Workforce
For the past eight years the LPC has provided a variety of financial incentives to individuals
completing courses, permits and degrees in early care. Since July of 2009 the AB212 Professional
Development Program has undergone major changes.
First, the amount of funds available for incentives was reduced by half due to budget cuts. A new
and limited menu of incentives was developed based on priorities set by the LPC. Course
completion is the first priority with degree completion the second priority. The incentive dollar
amount for these priorities was reduced by 1/3. The intent of the incentive menu is to give some
incentive to as many individuals as possible even though it will be a smaller incentive than in the
past.
Another important change in Professional Development this year is the piloting of a Center-Based
Team Model. The Center-Based Model strives to support state-funded programs in identifying
areas for staff growth based on the needs of the children they serve.
Five centers have received grants to implement the professional development plan they submitted
to the LPC. The amount of the grants range from $4,000 to $7,990. This is a pilot year for the
Centered-Based Program and it will be monitored and evaluated to determine the success of the
program and ways to improve it.
3. Foster and Promote Coordination and Collaboration with the Child Care Community
Collaboration is an ongoing process for the LPC members and the COE staff members. Examples
include attendance at Cross Agency Coordinating meetings, Professional Development planning
meetings with the community colleges and First 5, involvement in the Water cooler Workforce
Development, co-sponsorship of the Walnut Creek Arts event for young children, serving on the
California Preschool Instructional Network Advisory Board and participation in developing the
Preschool Makes a Difference pilot.
4. Advise Sponsoring Entities on Local Issues and Priorities in Child Care and Development
The LPC held a very successful Sixth Annual Young children’s Issues Forum on October 17th
2009 at Diablo Valley College. The elected officials and representatives on the panel included
Barbara Johnson, District Director for Congressman George Miller, Senator Mark DeSaulnier,
Senator Loni Hancock, Assemblymember Joan Buchanan, Craig Cheslog, District Director for
Assemblymember Tom Torlakson, Joseph A. Ovick, Contra Costa County Superintendent of
Schools, Joe Valentine, Director Employment & Human Services Dept., Cheri Pies, Director
Family, Maternal & Child Health Programs. The program began with statements by Joe
Valentine, Cherie Pies and Joe Ovick on the status of children in Contra Costa County. The
elected officials and representatives each responded to the issues raised. The audience then asked
questions of the panel members. The format allowed for issues of importance to both the audience
and the elected officials to be presented and discussed.
The LPC continues to implement the Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Plan and to inform
the County Board of Supervisors and the County Superintendent of Schools of progress in meeting
the objectives.
BACKGROUND/REASON(S) FOR RECOMMENDATION(S):
California Education Code (EC) Section 8231 requires the LPCs to prepare a comprehensive countywide
child care plan designed to mobilize public and private resources to address identified needs.
Page 3 of 3
RECOMMENDATION(S):
2. ACCEPT the attached LPC Annual Report and LPC Summary of Self Evaluation from the Contra
Costa Local Planning Council for Child Care and Development (LPC).
The findings are a reflection of activities undertaken from 7/1/2009-10/31/2009.
The attached report was reviewed, discussed and approved by the LPC Executive Committee at the
meeting held on November 9, 2009 from 9:00-11:00 a.m. at the Contra Costa County Office of Education.
Attached is a copy of the sections of the California Education Code (EC) that pertain to the Key
Dimensions in each compliance item of the LPC Summary of Self Evaluation.
BACKGROUND/REASON(S) FOR RECOMMENDATION(S):
Per CDE/CDD, the LPC Annual Report form (CD-2934) and the LPC Summary of Self Evaluation form
(CD-2935) must be submitted to the CDD by November 15, 2009.
Failure to comply with this requirement may be considered a noncompliance issue and subject the
contractor to possible termination of the contract.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
ACCEPT report on the activities and achievements of the Contra Costa County Service Integration Program, as
recommended by the Family and Human Services Committee.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
BACKGROUND:
On November 16, 2009 the Family and Human Services Committee received a report from the Employment and
Human Services Department, Service Integration Program on the activities and achievements. The Committee
accepted the report, thanked staff for their efforts in the community and requested that the report be forwarded to the
Board of Supervisors for review and acceptance.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Dorothy Sansoe,
925-335-1009
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors
on the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc:
C.88
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Family and Human Services Committee
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Accept Report on the Service Intgegration Program
ATTACHMENTS
SIT Report
TO: Family and Human Services Committee
Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V, Chair
Supervisor Gayle B. Uilkema, Vice Chair
FROM: Paul Buddenhagen, Program Manager, Service Integration Program
SUBJECT: Report on the Contra Costa County Service Integration Program
DATE: November 16, 2009
RREECCOOMMMMEENNDDAATTIIOONN
ACCEPT the attached report on the activities and achievements of the Contra Costa County
Service Integration Program.
EEXXEECCUUTTIIVVEE SSUUMMMMAARRYY
Established in 1994, the Contra Costa County Service Integration Program co-locates County
and non-profit agency service providers and community residents in neighborhood-based
centers to provide accessible, coordinated public services tailored to meet the specific needs
and goals of low-income families, while also engaging families in resident-driven efforts to
revitalize their communities. The success of this program’s Service Integration Team (SIT)
model stems from the synergistic relationship between its two key program components: (1)
integrated case management services and (2) neighborhood-building activities.
The Service Integration Program is widely recognized as a leader in the development of
successful strategies that improve outcomes for low-income children, youth and families.
Key Service Integration innovations include:
Developing new paradigms of inter-agency collaboration and creating necessary tools
to support this work, including cross-agency information-sharing protocols, an
integrated case management system and an effective family conferencing model.
Redefining County-community partnerships to help fundamentally shift the way in
which our public agencies work with residents of low-income communities.
Launching new initiatives and strategies, such as free tax preparation services
(Volunteer Income Tax Assistance), community career centers, employment -focused
service delivery, County--Schools projects, the Supporting Fathers Involvement
Program, and others.
Serving as a local model of public sector “systems change” by implementing
performance-based results and new strategies for leveraging public and private
investments.
2
The success of the Service Integration model is evident in the measurable improvements
achieved in the lives of the children, families and communities it serves. Recent exam ples of
Service Integration Program outcome measures include:
For the 2009 tax season SIT’s Bay Point Works’ staff prepared and filed 438 tax
returns – more than any other site in the County -- saving low-income community
residents more than $43,000 in filing fees, while helping put more than $700,000 in
federal tax refunds back in the pockets of working poor Bay Point residents (and
circulating in the local economy). Significantly, $246,797 in Earned Income Tax Credit
and $167,989 in Child Tax Credits were returned to families for whom Bay Point
Works staff prepared and filed taxes. EITC is the single most effective government
program in lifting people out of poverty.
North Richmond SIT completed work on the first phase of the Supporting Father
Involvement Program which culminated in the associated researchers publishing a
groundbreaking study on the importance of including fathers in social services work.
This research and intervention represents the first randomized, controlled clinical trial
focused on father involvement in low-and middle-income families. The study compared
father-only and father-mother interventions with each other, against a control group,
and evaluated the impacts on families and children.
The research confirms that when fathers become more involved in parenting - and in
working with mothers as co-parents and partners - the result is healthier families and
healthier children. Parents experience reduced stress and anxiety, a re more satisfied
with their relationship, and children are less hyperactive and aggressive. This year,
SIT received a subsequent three year grant to apply the SFI program to families in the
child welfare system. This means that through 2012, SIT will enroll 60 child welfare
families into the Supporting Father Involvement Program. These families will receive
11 weeks of SFI group support where they will learn concrete skills on how to improve
their relationships. They will also receive 18 months of case management support,
reducing barriers to leading healthy, safe and supportive lives. Our expectation – and
we are explicitly measuring this - is that these families will avoid reentry into the Child
Welfare System, thus preserving families and saving money for the County.
In partnership with Helms Middle School in San Pablo, SIT’s Helms Involving Parents
program last year helped reduce absenteeism by nearly a 1%, resulting in 1,323 more
school days attended in 2008-09 than in the previous year. This netted the West
Contra Costa County Unified School district an additional $11,000 in ADA revenue.
Based on this success we have launched the Nystrom Involving Parents program this
year.
Due to the effectiveness of this model, the Service Integration Program has received local,
state and national awards; has been the subject of articles and research studies; and
frequently is represented by Service Integration staff at conferences as a “best practice”
model.
The Service Integration Program has been successfu l in leveraging its positive outcomes to
raise money for new innovative programs that benefit Contra Costa’s most impoverished
3
families. The chart below contrasts SIT’s private revenue with net county cost during the past
eight years.
SIT Funding: NCC vs Grant Revenue; 2000-2010
$-
$100,000
$200,000
$300,000
$400,000
$500,000
$600,000
$700,000
$800,000
2000/01 2002/03 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10
NCC Non County Revenue
As public and private budgets continue to constrict during these challenging times the
obstacles associated with maintaining the Service Integration Program will remain great
despite the unquestionable value of our services. We will redouble our efforts to seek new
and creative approaches to support this important program.
BBAACCKKGGRROOUUNNDD
Established in 1994, the Service Integration Program is a multi-disciplinary collaboration of
three Contra Costa County departments (Employment & Human Services, Health Services
and Probation), two school districts, community-based organizations (CBOs) and
neighborhood residents. The Service Integration Program’s two Family Service Centers were
designed to take an innovative approach to working with families that historically have posed
some of the greatest challenges to service providers: families involved in two or more county
systems who live in the County’s most economically disadvantaged communities. This
unique model co-locates County and non-profit agency service providers and community
residents in neighborhood-based centers to provide accessible, coordinated public services
tailored to meet the specific needs and goals of low-income families, while also engaging
families in resident-driven efforts to revitalize their communities.
4
The success of the Service Integration Program model stems from the synergistic
relationship between its two key program components: (1) integrated case management
services and (2) neighborhood-building activities. The integrated case management services
component places cross-disciplinary Service Integration Teams comprised of Substance
Abuse and Mental Health Counselors, Employment Specialists, Probation Officers, School
Family Resource Workers, Social Workers and other specialists in Family Service Cen ters
located in Bay Point and North Richmond.
Based on the premise that the challenges facing low-income families and communities are
inter-related, these teams embrace a holistic approach. The teams focus on the whole family
unit, rather than just the individual, and build upon family strengths to provide services driven
by and customized to each family’s unique circumstances. In addition to providing families
with more personalized services in the communities where they live, this multi-disciplinary
approach produces a comprehensive, consistent strategy for each family, reducing conflicting
expectations and demands made by different programs.
The Service Integration Program’s two neighborhood-building projects, Bay Point Works
(BPW) and the North Richmond Empowerment Collaborative (NREC), were born out of the
recognition that an integrated team of county and community-based organization staff was a
necessary, but not sufficient mechanism for addressing the full range of challenges facing the
communities of Bay Point and North Richmond/San Pablo. BPW and NREC were designed
to harness the talents and skills of neighborhood residents in the process of revitalizing their
communities. This strategy has galvanized the creation of highly innovative and suc cessful
programs (designed specifically by and for community members) that support and build upon
local cultures and traditions and fill critical gaps in the formal service delivery system.
Perhaps most important of all, the neighborhood -building projects have expanded the long-
term capacity of the Bay Point and North Richmond/San Pablo communities by developing
the skills of numerous neighborhood residents and providing opportunities for them to give
back to their communities and build stronger connections in the neighborhoods where they
live.
BPW’s community-building efforts started with the establishment of the Bay Point Community
Career Center in May 1998 and have expanded steadily from there. Every year since, BPW
has strengthened its services and, in turn, helped more and more Bay Point residents get
jobs, keep jobs and move up the job ladder. In recent years, BPW has offered a number of
supportive services that go well beyond the traditional employment services package, such
as free income tax preparation for low-income Bay Point workers to help them capture the
benefits of the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) and free structured activities for the young
children of “working poor” parents during school holidays.
NREC’s community-building activities also initially focused on boosting neighborhood
employment. Early successes included reinstituting night bus services in North Richmond,
creating several in-home family day care centers and establishing the North Richmond
Community Career Resource Center, which continues to serve neighborhood residents after
having been spun off to a CBO in 2000. After making a number of strides in the area of
employment, NREC decided to take on an issue of great importance to neighborhood
residents: low levels of student success and parental involvement at Verde Elementary
School. This focus resulted in the establishment of NREC’s Verde Involving Parents (VIP)
Program, which has played a critical role in initiating and sustaining the renaissance of Verde
5
Elementary School over the past seven years. With private foundation support, the VIP
program was recently expanded to Helms Middle School, which is where kids leaving Verde
go to continue their education.
This report to the Family and Human Services Committee of the Board of Supervisors
summarizes some of the Service Integration Program’s key innovations and contributions to
improving the wellbeing of Contra Costa children, families and communities over the past 14
years.
SSEERRVVIICCEE IINNTTEEGGRRAATTIIOONN PPRROOGGRRAAMM AASS AA LLEEAADDEERR IINN ““BBEESSTT PPRRAACCTTIICCEESS””
Since its inception over a decade ago, the Service Integration Program has emerged as a
leader in the development of successful strategies that improve outcomes for low-income
children, youth and families. The Service Integration Program reaches far beyond the
traditional “agency service provider” model by involving low-income residents as integral
partners in the process of addressing the needs and aspirations of the neighborhoods where
they live. This small, inter-agency program draws down flexible funding from private
foundations and outside contracts to complement more traditional federal, state and county
funding streams. As a result, Service Integration has managed to maintain a flexibility and
inventiveness unusual to public sector agencies. SIT has launched programmatic, fiscal and
organizational innovations that have laid the foundations for the development of more
effective and efficient services to children, families and communities countywide.
Due to the effectiveness of the Service Integration model, Contra Costa County has received
local, statewide and national recognition and has been the subject of research papers and
studies, including: North Richmond Gets Its Buses Back: How a Poor Community and an
Urban Transit Agency Struck Up a Partnership (Institute of Governmental Studies Press,
University of California, Berkeley, 1999), which focuses on NREC’s successful strategy for
partnering with A.C. Transit to bring night-time bus service back to North Richmond; and A
Case Study on North Richmond (Abt Associates, on behalf of the Ford Foundation, 2004),
which highlights the VIP Program as a successful model of school -community revitalization.
The latter study credits VIP as being “largely responsible for the major improvements in
school attendance, parent involvement and student behavior that have taken place at
Verde…” Last year the National Center for Children in Poverty at Columbia University
highlighted SIT’s VIP program as a best practice intervention in their report, Present, Engaged,
and Accounted for: The Critical Importance of Addressing Chronic Absenteeism in the Early Grades
Some of the Service Integration Program’s major areas of innovation are summarized below:
Inter-Agency Collaboration: Service Integration has been at the vanguard of
Contra Costa’s efforts to develop effective models of collaboration and cross-
program and -agency partnerships, paving the way for greater collaboration
countywide. Service Integration has developed new organizational structures to
support this collaboration at the management oversight level (e.g., the inter-agency
Service Integration Executive Oversight Committee), as well as at the frontline
service delivery level (e.g., multi-disciplinary teams). The infrastructure and tools
established through Service Integration’s partnership model and the relationships
that have formed as a result have laid the groundwork for and facilitated the success
of many other inter-agency initiatives.
6
County-Community Partnerships: Service Integration has redefined relationships
between public agencies and residents of low-income neighborhoods while
developing a viable model for bridging the all too common gap between agency
“service providers” and the communities they serve. In 1997, in the wake of Federal
Welfare Reform, each of the SIT sites engaged neighborhood residents in planning
efforts to determine how these communities could succeed in this new policy
environment. These efforts resulted in the establishment of two innovative
community-building projects, Bay Point W orks and the North Richmond
Empowerment Collaboration. Last year we surveyed Bay Point residents to find out
how we could better help them into economic stability. The results of this survey will
lead the way in our effort to partner with community based nonprofit organizations.
Cross-Agency Information-Sharing: Working together, key Service Integration
partner agencies (i.e., EHSD, CCHS, Probation, CAO) and County Counsel
developed Contra Costa’s first informed consent agreement for integrated services in
1994. This confidentiality release gives permission for Service Integration staff from
participating agencies to share information to better serve families. This “Agreement
to Participate” form served as a model for more recent integrated services programs,
such as the mental health “Spirit of Caring” Initiative, and contributed to the
establishment of the Service Integration Program as Contra Costa’s first official
“Multi-Disciplinary Children’s Services Team”.
Outcomes/Performance-Based Accountability: Service Integration spearheaded
Contra Costa County’s early efforts to implement performance -based accountability.
In the early- and mid-1990’s, the inter-agency Service Integration Management
Team developed a set of meaningful outcomes that could be used to evaluate the
success of the Service Integration Program by concretely measuring the program’s
impact on the lives of children and families. Service Integration staf f has diligently
tracked these program results since 1996. Service Integration’s novel approach led
to wider adoption of outcome measures by other County programs and laid the
groundwork for the 1997 establishment of Contra Costa’s Children and Families
Report Card.
Leveraging Public and Private Investments: Service Integration has designed its
fiscal strategy around encouraging private foundations and other funders who do not
typically support county ventures to invest in innovation in the public sector. SIT
currently has commitments of more than $1,200,000 from non county private and
public sources to fund a variety of family support projects through 2012. Through its
strong track record of capturing measurable results, promoting public-private
partnerships and engaging community residents in the process of bettering their
neighborhoods and their lives, Service Integration has helped to convince many new
funding partners that investments in the public sector can galvanize sustainable
individual, family, neighborhood and systems change.
Holistic, Integrated Case Management System: The Service Integration Program
pioneered the County’s first integrated case management process. Focusing on the
whole family unit, rather than just the individual, this process allows SIT staff to build
upon family strengths and provide services driven by and tailored to each family’s
unique needs. Service Integration created the Family Assessment Record to support
the development of comprehensive plans for addressing issues i n a range of
interdependent life domains, such as child care, child and adult health,
7
transportation, school, employment and other social supports. First developed in
1995, this tool and the SIT case management process as a whole have been refined
over the years to support continuous improvement and better integration of Service
Integration services. SIT staff, funded by a generous grant from the S.H. Cowell
Foundation is nearing the end of a 1.5 year project to re -evaluate the case
management model and make updates.
Family Conferencing: The Service Integration Program’s “Family Conferencing”
model brought a new way of doing business to Contra Costa County. Service
Integration began conducting inter-agency case conferences with client families in
the mid-1990s. The success of our family conferencing model helped open the
doors for similar family-focused models in Contra Costa, such as “Wraparound” in
Children’s Mental Health and “Team Decision Making” in Children and Family
Services.
Employment-Focused Service Delivery: In 1995, prior to the passage of Welfare
Reform, Service Integration was the first County program to implement an
employment-focused service delivery model. The Service Integration model
transitioned “eligibility workers” into “employment case managers” and tapped into
the resources of all disciplines to move welfare recipients into the workforce. Due to
the effectiveness of this model, the Service Integration Program was invited to co -
develop EHSD’s redesign plan for restructuring its eligibility determination function
into an employment-focused service delivery strategy.
Free Tax Preparation Services (Volunteer Income Tax Assistance): In 2003, the
Service Integration Program piloted the Volunteer Income Tax Assistance (VITA)
free tax preparation model at the Bay Point and North Richmond SIT sites. Based
on the success of this pilot, Service Integration played a lead role, along with a
number of other partner agencies, in launching a countywide VITA campaign in
2004: Earn It! Keep It! Save It! Contra Costa. This year, the Bay Point Works VITA
site filed more tax returns than any of the County’s thirteen VITA sites.
Community Career Centers: In May 1998, the Bay Point SIT’s BPW project
established the Bay Point Community Career Center, a forerunner to the County’s
One-Stop Career Center system. In January 2000, NREC established a second
Community Career Center in North Richmond. The Career Centers introduced
community-based employment resources delivered via a neighbor-helping-neighbor
model to the communities of Bay Point and North Richmond. The Bay Point
Community Career Center continues to be a heavily utilized hub in the community;
6,542 people have enrolled as members of the Career Center since it opened in
1998!
Verde Involving Parents (VIP): Service Integration’s VIP Program, established in
February 2001, has reaped impressive results. VIP is a team effort of parents,
students, teachers and county agencies and non -profit organization staff who live
and work in North Richmond. Their goal: get our children to school – every day, on
time and ready to learn. Due to the dramatic impact of VIP on student attendance
and parent involvement at Verde Elementary School, the West Contra Costa Unified
School District (WCCUSD) invested $125,000 in the VIP Program during the 03/04
and 04/05 school years. During the first half of 2004, at the request of WCCUSD
Superintendent Dr. Gloria Johnston, the VIP staff and managers met with principals
and staff from four low-performing elementary schools to offer technical assistance
8
and training on the VIP school improvement model. In summer 2004, the VIP
Program presented the WCCUSD with a Training Handbook to support its VIP
replication efforts. In the last year SIT has expanded by working with parents,
teachers and administrators at Nystrom Elementary School and Helms Middle
School to implement the “involving parents’ model at those two schools.
Supporting Father Involvement (SFI): We are pleased to offer an evidence based
program that improves families’ lives to Contra Costa County. Service Integration’s
North Richmond family service center is one of five sites statewide to provide the SFI
program. For the next three years, SFI will be working with families in the child
welfare system to reconnect fathers with their families and increase protective factors
so that they stay healthy.
SSIITT AAss aa MMooddeell ffoorr CChhaannggee iinn tthhee NNeeww ((aanndd bbaadd)) EEccoonnoommyy
One of the Service Integration Program’s strengths is its flexibility to respond to local,
community need in a collaborative, public-private, outcomes focused way. This dexterity has
allowed SIT to pilot many new ideas that were then replicated in other locations. Not in
decades has the economic landscape been as rocky and challenging as it is now.
Unemployment rates are at 25 year highs, obesity is more prevalent than ever, school test
scores are falling and budgets of all institutions have cratered. How health and human
services agencies respond to this crisis to remake the social safety net will be a serious
challenge. The Service Integration Program will take up this challenge by working closely
with local residents, county departments, nonprofit agencies, schools, community colleges,
private foundations, and businesses to rethink and reorganize a fractured and wobbling
safety net system. Building a new system that builds collaborative goals and brings
leveraged resources to bear on the problems of poverty will be the focus of the near future for
SIT.
IMPROVING THE SIT MODEL - The Service Integration Program has an unwavering
commitment to delivering high-quality, comprehensive services to residents of Bay Point and
North Richmond/San Pablo – even in the face of diminishing public funds. However, SIT’s
strategies and structure have not changed much in the past decade. Despite SIT’s positive,
measurable outcomes in that time frame, the need for systemic and replicable approaches to
helping low income Contra Costa County communities improve their lives compels us to look
for new approaches to old problems. SIT is nearly finished with a set of recommendations for
change based on a year-long assessment of strengths and weaknesses, informed by: SIT
staff, other Department staff, community members, foundation staff, and an expert
consultant. Some of the elements of a restructured SIT will likely include a new focus on
reducing poverty, modifying the current assessment tools, adding new nonprofit partners, a
new, on-line (and secure) data & case management system, and the identification of
outcomes related to debt reduction, income stabilization, and asset building. We are hopeful
that the new SIT will be a model for change that can be adopted in other areas of the County.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
ACCEPT report from the Health Services Department, Public Health Division, on their efforts to prevention the
spread of HIV infections and other diseases and the Needle Exchange Program, as recommended by the Family and
Human Services Committee.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
BACKGROUND:
On November 16, 2009 the Family and Human Services Committee received a report from the Health Services
Department, Public Health Division on their efforts to prevent HIV infections and other infectious diseases through
the efforts of the Needle Exchange Program. The Committee accepted the report and asked that it be forwarded to the
Board of Supervisors for their review and acceptance.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT:
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Dorothy Sansoe,
925-335-1009
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors
on the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc:
C.89
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Family and Human Services Committee
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Update on the County's HIV Prevention Efforts and the Needle Exchange Program
ATTACHMENTS
Needle Exhange
Report
Needle Exchange Update
November 2009
Prepared for the
Contra Costa Board of Supervisors
by Contra Costa Health Department
NEEDLE EXCHANGE
In 1999, the Contra Costa Board of
Supervisors endorsed a State of Emergency
with respect to HIV and AIDS to allow for the
provision of needle exchange services. A
major interest was to reduce transmission in
women and to their unborn children.
A State of Emergency declaration is no longer
needed if an annual update on activities is
provided and public comment is invited.
AIDS in Contra Costa County
As of December 31 2008, 1,894 individuals
were living with AIDS or HIV in Contra Costa.
There is no major change in demographics:
Approximately 81% are male and 19% are
female. African Americans are 31.5% of those
living with HIV or AIDS, Whites 47% and
Hispanics 17%. The predominant
transmission among those living with HIV or
AIDS remains men who have sex with other
men (MSM).
Contra Costa Epidemiology, Surveillance & Health Data (ESHD)
AIDS Attributed to Injection Drug
Use (IDU)
The percentage of new AIDS cases
attributed to IDU continues to decline.
From 19.9% in the period from January 1
2004 - December 31 2005
To 11% in the period from January 1 2007
- December 31 2008.
HIV (only) prevalence attributed to IDU
during the same period is 11.6%
Infants Testing Positive for HIV Antibodies
at Birth Over Time
(total n=130. 10 children are diagnosed with AIDS)
Stanford University School of Medicine, CA Pediatric HIV Surveillance Data as of August 2009
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Infants Testing Positive for HIV Antibodies At Birth
Reported Chronic Hepatitis C Cases
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
Reported Chronic Hepatitis C Cases
Law Enforcement Exposures
0
20
40
60
80
100
2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09
Reported Law Enforcement Exposures
All Exposures
Needlesticks
Funding for Needle Exchange
County funding reduced last year to
$54,000 per fiscal year
Offer condoms and other risk
reduction materials as available
Agency reports they expect an
additional $65,000 in private funds
this FY but $50,000 of that amount
has not yet been confirmed
Contacts at Needle Exchange Sites
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
0405 0506 0607 0708 0809
Reported Contacts at Needle Exchange Services
Number of Syringes Distributed
0
100,000
200,000
300,000
400,000
0405 0506 0607 0708 0809
Reported Number of Syringes Distributed by
Fiscal Year
Secondary Exchanges Reported
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
0405 0506 0607 0708 0809
Number of Individuals Reported to be Reached
by Needle Exchange Services
Other Prevention Strategies to Reduce
Transmission of HIV in IDUs
Anonymous Partner notification and
counseling services
Prevention with positives program
Homeless collaborative
HIV testing services in community and in
Alcohol and Other Drugs Services programs.
Pharmacy syringe sales (State DPDP / SB
1159) in two chains and a few other stores.
Syringe Disposal Options
West County
Household Hazardous Waste facility
101 Pittsburg Ave., Richmond, CA 94801 1-888-412-9277
East County
Delta Household Hazardous Waste Collection Facility
2550 Pittsburg/Antioch Highway, Antioch, CA 94509 925-756-1990
All Contra Costa County residents
Sutter Regional Medical Foundation
4053 Lone Tree Way, Antioch, CA 94509 925-756-3400
+PIO.VJS1IBSNBDZ
3PTTNPPS1LXZ
8BMOVU$SFFL
$"
CONCLUSIONS
1. Access to clean needles through needle exchange and pharmacy syringe
services remain a necessary Public Health measure to reduce
transmission of blood borne diseases. Downward trends are noted in the
percentage of new AIDS cases attributed to Injection Drug Use, the number of
children born with positive antibodies to HIV, and the reported number of
individuals with Hepatitis C. The availability of needle exchange and pharmacy
syringe sales contributes to this trend.
2. Reported local law enforcement exposure to potential blood borne
pathogens via needle stick injury has not increased since needle
exchange and pharmacy sales have been implemented. Materials for Law
Enforcement to document potential exposure and request assistance are available
on the website.
3. The contract for needle exchange services remains an important
HIV prevention service component and should remain in effect
so long as the service is provided. The service is a necessary
component of the long-term strategy to reduce transmission of HIV
and Hepatitis.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
ACCEPT the recommendations from the Family and Human Services Committee to carry forward twenty-one referrals from the 2009
Family and Human Services Committee to the 2010 Committee.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
BACKGROUND:
ACKNOWLEDGE that the Board of Supervisors referred two new items to the Family and Human Services
Committee (FHS) for their review and consideration during the 2009 calendar year in addition to nineteen referrals
carried over from the prior year.
ACCEPT the recommendation to carry forward the following twenty-one referrals from the 2009 Family and Human
Services Committee to the 2010 Committee:
Referral #1 – Child Care Affordability Fund1.
2.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Dorothy Sansoe,
925-335-1009
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors
on the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc:
C.90
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Family and Human Services Committee
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Year-End Report on Items Referred to the Family and Human Services Committee
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
Referral #2 – Oversight of the Service Integration Team
Referral #5 – Continuum of Care Plan for the Homeless/Healthcare for the Homeless
Referral #11 – Oversight of the Work of the Policy Forum
Referral #20 – Public Service Portion of the CDBG
Referral #25 – Child Care Planning/Development Council Membership
Referral #44 – Challenges for EHS
Referral #45 – Elder Abuse
Referral #56 – East Bay Stand Down for Homeless Veterans (Bi-annual)
Referral #58 – County Wide Youth Commission
Referral #61 – HIV Prevention
Referral #78 – Community Services Bureau/Head Start Oversight
Referral #81 – Local Child Care & Development Planning Council Activities
Referral #82 – Secondhand Smoke Ordinance
Referral #92 – Local Planning Council – Child Care Needs Assessment
Referral #93 – Independent Living Skills Program
Referral #94 – Children’s Treatment Facility RFP
Referral #95 – Child Welfare Improvement Plan Annual Update
Referral #96 – Fee for Service Child Care
Referral #98 – Mental Health Pavilion – A Review of Services to be Provided
Referral #99 – Closure of the Chris Adams Girls Home
Between January and December 2009, the Board of Supervisors referred two new items to the Family and Human
Services Committee (FHS) in addition to nineteen referrals carried forward from the 2009 year. The FHS
Committee heard twenty-five separate reports on eighteen different referrals.
Three items were not brought to the Committee for discussion:
Referral #56 – East Bay Stand Down for Homeless Veterans, is a bi-annual referral which is only heard in
even number years.
Referral # 11 – Oversight of the Work of the Policy Forum, was not brought to the Committee because the
Policy Forum has been on a temporary hiatus and is only now re-grouping. Therefore, no report was
available.
Referral #99 – Closure of the Chris Adams Girls Home, was made late in the calendar year and it is not
anticipated that this item will be ready to be presented to the Committee until early in the 2010 calendar year.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT:
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Ratify the actions taken by the Health Services Director, or his designee (Wendel Brunner, M.D.), to execute, an
Application with Contra Costa Community College District for use of its Los Medanos College parking lot for the
seasonal and H1N1 vaccination clinic, held on December 6, 2009.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
BACKGROUND:
On December 6, 2009, Contra Costa County Health Services Department’s Public Health Division, Flu Immunization
Program administered the seasonal and H1N1 flu vaccination to priority groups living in Contra Costa County.
Due to the emergent nature of responding to the H1N1 pandemic flu outbreak in Contra Costa County, staff were
frequently faced with making logistics decisions about mass vaccination clinic locations, supplies and security within
short time frames. Consequently, the Department is requesting the Board ratify this application. In exchange for use
of its facilities to County,
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor
Contact: Wendel Brunner, M.D.,
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: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc: Tasha Scott, Barbara Borbon, Kim Cox
C.91
To:Board of Supervisors
From:William Walker, M.D., Health Services Director
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Use of Los Medanos College parking lot for flu clinic
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
it was required to indemnify and hold harmless the District for claims arising out of use of the Los Medanos
College parking lot.
ATTACHMENTS
Contra Costa Health Services
50 Douglas Drive, Martinez, CA 94553
(925) 646-4690
Kim Cox
Parking for Flu Vaccination Clinic
X
X
12/6/2009 6 AM 4 PM Parking Lots A, 1A, 2A
X
5,000 (total for the day)
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Approve the list of providers recommended by the Contra Costa Health Plan's Peer Review and Credentialing
Committee at their November 17, 2009 meeting, and by the Health Services Director, as required by the State
Departments of Health Care Services and Managed Health Care, and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid
Services.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
BACKGROUND:
The National Committee on Quality Assurance (NCQA) has requested evidence of Board approval for each CCHP
provider be contained within the provider’s credentials file.
The recommendations were made by CCHP’s Peer Review and Credentialing Committee.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Patricia Tanquary,
313-6004
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc: Tasha Scott, Barbara Borbon, L. Maria Perez
C.92
To:Board of Supervisors
From:William Walker, M.D., Health Services Director
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Approve New and Recredentialing Providers in Contra Costa Health Plan’s Community Provider Network
ATTACHMENTS
G:\C&G DIRECTORY\C&G DIRECTORY\NON CONTRACTS\bopl-November 09.doc
bopl-November 09 Page 1 of 1
Contra Costa Health Plan
Providers Approved by Peer Review and Credentialing Committee
November 17, 2009
CREDENTIALING PROVIDERS NOVEMBER 2009
Name
Specialty
Shih, Grace, M.D. Family Planning
RECREDENTIALING PROVIDERS NOVEMBER 2009
Name
Specialty
Barakeh, Joseph, D.O. Ophthalmology
Batten, Kristine, M.D. Cardiovascular Disease
Chan, Lina, O.D. Optometry
Cho, Shaun, M.D. Cardiovascular Disease
Coleman, Deborah, CNM Midwife
DeVane, Matthew, D.O. Cardiovascular Disease
Fong, Susan, M.D. Perinatology
Hochstatter, Jeanette, O.D. Optometry
Kashkin, Karen, M.D. Family Planning
Krouse, John, M.D. Cardiovascular Disease
Matin, Bita, DDS Dentist
Meyerhoff, Jessamyn, CNM Midwife
Nunnink, Francel, DC Chiropractic
Pfister, David, M.D. Hematology/
Oncology
Pham, An, M.D. Primary Care
Pediatrician
Port, Bryan, Psy.D. Mental Health Services
Rendon, Raymond, BCO Ocularist
Ruzicano, Raymond, M.D. Psychiatry
Schaefer, Robert, DC Chiropractic
Schoenwald, Phyllis, PA Family Planning
Seslar, Jon-Paul, DPM Podiatry
Shah, Samir, M.D. Ophthalmology
Sidhu, Pramodh, M.D. Cardiovascular Disease
Wulff, Christopher, M.D. Cardiovascular Disease
Yalom, Eve, M.D. OB/GYN
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Direct the Auditor-Controller to reimburse the Employment and Human Service Department’s (EHSD) Revolving
Fund in the amount of $55.
FISCAL IMPACT:
70% State funded, 30% County funded.
BACKGROUND:
Welfare & Institutions Code section 16001.9 relates to expenses for foster children and states: “(13) To attend school
and participate in extracurricular, cultural, and personal enrichment activities, consistent with the child’s age and
developmental level.” EHSD is required to provide these school-related items to children placed in out-of-home care
so that foster children are not denied access to items and activities that children who are not in out-of-home care
normally receive.
In this instance, staff is asking for reimbursement of a school-related expense through the Revolving Fund’s petty
cash account. This type of expense is not currently authorized under the Revolving Fund Board Order that allows for
replenishment of the Department’s various petty cash
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: 3-1676
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc:
C.93
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Joe Valentine, Employment & Human Services Director
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Authorize Reimbursement to Employment & Human Services Revolving Fund
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
accounts. This type of expense is normally paid through EHSD’s ADM 335 process and charged to the appropriate
Children & Family Services funding source.
In order to reimburse the EHSD’s Revolving Fund, Board action is required to direct the Auditor-Controller to issue
the funds. Funds are reimbursed through a check payable to EHSD, and these funds should be coded to org 5216
option code L15.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE the Preliminary 2010/2011 North Richmond Waste and Recovery Mitigation Fee Expenditure Plan which
specifies recommended allocations of the revenue projected to be derived from collection of this Mitigation Fee in
2010/2011 to fund implementation of certain strategies (primarily existing strategies included in the 2008/2009
Expenditure Plan) as well as related staff costs incurred by City of Richmond and County for the development,
implementation and oversight of the Expenditure Plan.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No impact to the County General Fund. The 2010/2011 North Richmond Waste and Recovery Mitigation Fee
Expenditure Plan (see Exhibit A) is based on projected revenue from the mitigation fee charged on material and
waste processed at the Bulk Material Processing Center (BMPC) located at the West Contra Costa Sanitary Landfill
(WCCSL). A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between Contra Costa County and the City of Richmond
requires that the mitigation fee revenue collected from the Operator (Republic Services) be paid to the County, held in
a dedicated separate account and jointly administered for the benefit of the incorporated and unincorporated North
Richmond area. Republic Services has projected that a total of $1,177,661 in mitigation fee revenue will be generated
in calendar years 2010 and 2011.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: D. Dingman,
925-335-1224
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc: LaShonda_Wilson@ci.richmond.ca.us
C.94
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Catherine Kutsuris, Conservation & Development Director
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Preliminary 2010/2011 North Richmond Waste and Recovery Mitigation Fee Expenditure Plan
BACKGROUND:
The Waste & Recovery Mitigation Fee was established as a result of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR)
dated November 2003 for the WCCSL Bulk Materials Processing Center (BMPC) and Related Actions (Project).
The Project involved new and expanded processing and resource recovery operations on both the incorporated
and unincorporated area of the Project site, which the EIR concluded would impact the host community. To
mitigate this impact Mitigation Measure 4-5 called for a Mitigation Fee to benefit the host community, described
as follows:
“Mitigation Fee. The facility operator shall pay a Mitigation Fee of an amount to be determined by the applicable
permitting authority(ies) to defray annual costs associated with collection and disposal of illegally dumped waste
and associated impacts in North Richmond and adjacent areas. The mitigation fee should be subject to the
joint-control of the City and County and should be collected on all solid waste and processible materials received
at the facility consistent with the existing mitigation fee collected at the Central IRRF.”
In July 2004, the City of Richmond and Contra Costa County entered into a Memorandum of Understanding
(MOU) agreeing to jointly administer Mitigation Fee monies collected from the BMPC for the benefit of the
incorporated and unincorporated North Richmond area.
The MOU requires that the mitigation fee revenue collected from the Operator (Republic Services) be paid to the
County and held in a dedicated separate account. The North Richmond Waste & Recovery Mitigation Fee Joint
Expenditure Planning Committee was formed pursuant to the terms of the MOU for the specific purpose of
preparing a recommended two year Expenditure Plan. The Committee consists of three Richmond City Council
persons, two North Richmond Municipal Advisory Council members, one incorporated North Richmond resident
and County Supervisor John Gioia. This Expenditure Plan provides a means to jointly administer the Mitigation
Fee revenue for the benefit of the host community, as described in the EIR.
Committee staff began implementation of the Expenditure Plan after final approval was granted. It is
recommended that most of the Expenditure Plan strategies included in the 2008/2009 Plan be continued through
the next two-year funding cycle. The Preliminary 2010/2011 Expenditure Plan includes some strategies that must
be approved before the close of 2009 in order to avoid gaps in service. The North Richmond Waste and Recovery
Mitigation Fee Joint Expenditure Planning Committee voted to recommend that the City of Richmond City
Council and the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors approve the Preliminary 2010/2011 Expenditure Plan
on October 26, 2009 (Exhibit A).
There are three existing expenditure plan strategies which are intended to be carried through fall 2010 using
2008/2009 funding allocations. Staff will coordinate another Committee meeting in early 2010 for consideration
of recommended funding amounts for these items as well as possibly new strategy recommendations which would
be incorporated into an amended Expenditure Plan. The amended 2010/2011 Expenditure Plan would be
considered before the Board of Supervisors and Richmond City Council in early 2010.
The City and County can not afford to significantly subsidize costs associated with staffing of this Committee and
the development, implementation and oversight of the 2010/2011 Expenditure Plan. Therefore, the preliminary
2010/2011 Expenditure Plan allocates funding in the amount of $100,000 for the City’s and County’s
administrative staff costs related to the development, implementation and oversight of the 2010/2011 North
Richmond Waste & Recovery Mitigation Fee Expenditure Plan. This funding will only be used to reimburse City
and County for actual staff costs directly resulting from staffing this committee and for the development,
implementation and oversight of the 2010/2011 Expenditure Plan. Staff has included the recommended allocation
of $100,000 in the proposed 2010/2011 Expenditure Plan and budget attached.
ATTACHMENTS
Exhibit A: Preliminary 2010/2011 Expenditure Plan
North Richmond Waste & Recovery Mitigation Fee
Preliminary 2010/2011 Expenditure Plan
INTRODUCTION
The Waste & Recovery Mitigation Fee was established as a result of the Draft Environmental
Impact Report (EIR) dated November 2003 for the WCCSL Bulk Materials Processing Center
(BMPC) and Related Actions (Project). The Project involved new and expanded processing
and resource recovery operations on both the incorporated and unincorporated area of the
Project site, which the EIR concluded would impact the host community. To mitigate this
impact Mitigation Measure 4-5 called for a Mitigation Fee to benefit the host community,
described as follows:
“Mitigation Fee. The facility operator shall pay a Mitigation Fee of an amount to be
determined by the applicable permitting authority(ies) to defray annual costs
associated with collection and disposal of illegally dumped waste and associated
impacts in North Richmond and adjacent areas. The mitigation fee should be subject to
the joint-control of the City and County and should be collected on all solid waste and
processible materials received at the facility consistent with the existing mitigation fee
collected at the Central IRRF.”
In July 2004, the City of Richmond and Contra Costa County entered into a Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) agreeing to jointly administer Mitigation Fee monies collected from the
BMPC for the benefit of the incorporated and unincorporated North Richmond area. This
North Richmond Waste & Recovery Mitigation Fee Joint Expenditure Planning Committee
(Committee) was formed pursuant to the terms of the MOU for the specific purpose of
preparing a recommended two year Expenditure Plan. This Expenditure Plan provides a
means to jointly administer the Mitigation Fee funding for the benefit of the host community, as
described in the EIR. The Expenditure Plan is subject to final approval of the Richmond City
Council and the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors.
BUDGET
The funding allocations shown on the attached Budget Table were developed based on
revenue estimates with multiple variables (e.g. number of tons of recovered materials vs. solid
waste, per ton gate rate charged and amount of CPI-adjusted per ton Mitigation Fee).
Revenue projections may deviate from those provided by Republic and used to prepare this
Budget. It is likely that some adjustments will be necessary to accommodate variations
between estimated and actual revenue as well as disparity between estimated and actual
costs for non-fixed cost strategies. Adjustments may be needed due to under-utilization of a
particular program if estimated expenditure was based on per unit cost. If the number of units
allocated to a particular line item is not exhausted, the remaining funding would need to be
redistributed within that expenditure category.
This Expenditure Plan has been designed to maximize administrative efficiency. The Budget
includes some line items that are based on fixed costs, however to provide flexibility other line
items can be adjusted if needed. This Expenditure Plan authorizes Staff to make adjustments
for certain line items if needed to account for budget shortfalls or overages. This flexibility will
allow the City and County to avoid the delays and costs associated with amending the
Expenditure Plan. Additional amendments would only be proposed by Staff if absolutely
necessary which will require Staff to convene this Committee as well as seek the approval of
the City Council and Board of Supervisors.
#Expenditure Plan (EP) Strategy 2008-2009 EP
Amounts
Preliminary
2010-2011
Budget
(Phase 1)
1 Bulky Item Pick-ups & Disposal Vouchers 12,500$ 2,000$
2 Neighborhood Clean-up Events 25,000$ -$
3 Community Services Coordinator 144,262$ 144,262$
4 Bilingual Outreach Services Coordinator 56,000$ 56,000$
5 North Richmond Green Outreach 50,000$ 8,000$
6 City/County Pick-up from Right-of-Way 120,000$ 70,000$
7 Code Enforcement 313,504$ 258,000$
8 Graffiti Abatement 58,240$ 20,000$
9 Law Enforcement (Investigation & Patrols)274,808$ 375,000$
10 Surveillance Camera System 260,000$ 10,000$
11 Illegal Dumping Prosecutor 65,149$ 65,149$
12 Parks Rehabilitation Initiative 175,000$ 19,250$
13 Capital Improvement Projects 103,707$ -$
14 North Richmond Community-Based Projects 50,000$
Committee Administration/Staffing 100,000$ 100,000$
Total Projected Revenue 1,361,456$ 1,177,661$
Total Expenditure Plan Budget for above Strategies*1,750,670$ 1,177,661$
* Total 2008/09 budget amount ($2,308,132) based upon the amount of funding projected to be
received in 2008/2009 ($1,361,456) + actual funding received & not spent under the 2006/2007
Expenditure Plan ($946,676).
ABOVE AMOUNTS RESULT IN FUNDING SPLITS OF…
2010/2011
Budget
(Phase 1)
Staffing 8.49%100,000$
Prevention & Education 17.85%210,262$
Abatement & Enforcement 67.77%798,149$
Community Investment 5.88%69,250$
100.00%1,177,661$ Prevention & EducationAbatement & EnforcementCommunity2010/2011 Preliminary Expenditure Plan - North Richmond Waste & Recovery Mitigation Fee
D:\Illegal Dumping\BMPC Mitigation Fee Committee\2010-2011 Exp Plan\
2010-2011 Prelim EP Budget for City-County Approval.xls Page 2 of 6
2010/2011 Expenditure Plan - North Richmond Waste & Recovery Mitigation Fee
Page 3 of 6
DESCRIPTION OF STRATEGIES RECOMMENDED FOR FUNDING
Funding allocations for each strategy is specified on the attached Budget Table. The
funding allocation amounts are for the two-year Expenditure Plan period.
PREVENTION & EDUCATION
1. Bulky Item Pick-ups & Disposal Vouchers
Provide residents in the Mitigation Fee Primary Funding Area, who prove
eligibility consistent with City/County procedures, with the option of choosing to:
o request up to one on-call pick-up service per calendar year for bulky items
that are not accepted in the current on-call clean-ups through Richmond
Sanitary Service (RSS); must have an active account with RSS, or
o request up to twelve $5 vouchers for disposal at Republic’s transfer station
on Parr Blvd. per calendar year (vouchers expire after six months,
Mitigation Fees only pay for vouchers that are actually redeemed).
2. Neighborhood Clean-ups
Provide at least one neighborhood and/or creek clean-up event in the Mitigation
Fee Funding Area; additional clean-up event may be scheduled as funding
allows.
3. Community Services Coordinator
Fund full-time Community Services Coordinator position to be staffed on a
contract basis through a non-profit or public entity (including
salary/benefits/overhead).
4. Bilingual Outreach Services Coordinator
Fund a part-time Bilingual Outreach Services Coordinator (including
salary/benefits/overhead) or the provision of translation services on a contract
basis through a non-profit or public entity.
5. North Richmond Green Campaign
Fund public relations campaign, including the purchase of education and
outreach materials intended to:
o inform the community about Mitigation funded programs/efforts,
o increase participation in Mitigation funded programs/efforts,
o reduce illegal dumping and blight in the Mitigation Fee Funding Area, and
o promote beautification in the Mitigation Fee Funding Area.
2010/2011 Expenditure Plan - North Richmond Waste & Recovery Mitigation Fee
Page 4 of 6
ABATEMENT & ENFORCEMENT
6. City/County Pick-up from Right-of-Way
Fund consolidated pick-up program (including personnel, mileage, administrative
costs and equipment rental as needed) for illegal dumping in the public right-of-
way located within the unincorporated & incorporated Mitigation Fee Primary
Funding Area to remove items not collected by the designated RSS Hot Spot
Route crew.
7. Code Enforcement Staff
Fund full-time County code enforcement position (including salary/benefits and
related vehicle and equipment costs), to assist with vacant/abandoned lot
abatements and fencing as well as other health/building/zoning violations related
to illegal dumping and blight throughout the incorporated & unincorporated
Mitigation Funding Area.
8. Graffiti Abatement
Fund consolidated graffiti abatement program (including personnel, mileage,
administrative costs and purchase/rental of equipment and materials) for graffiti
on public property and/or visible from the public right-of-way located within the
unincorporated & incorporated Mitigation Fee Primary Funding Area.
9. Illegal Dumping Law Enforcement (Investigations & Patrols)
Fund approximately 94% of the equivalent of a full-time Sheriff Deputy (including
salary/benefits, overtime, uniform and related cell phone, equipment, and vehicle
costs) to assist with law enforcement investigations and patrols to combat illegal
dumping within the Mitigation Fee Primary Funding Area.
10. Surveillance Cameras
Fund the purchase of cameras, camera infrastructure, and costs related to
maintenance, repair & relocation of surveillance camera program equipment
within the Mitigation Fee Primary Funding Area to target specific locations where
illegal dumping occurs most regularly.
11. Illegal Dumping Prosecutor
Fund quarter-time of community prosecutor position in order to ensure some
time can be dedicated to prosecuting cases for violations that occur within the
Mitigation Fee Primary Funding Area with special emphasis on instances of
commercial dumping as well as other quality of life issues (e.g. alcohol
abatement, environmental crimes).
2010/2011 Expenditure Plan - North Richmond Waste & Recovery Mitigation Fee
Page 5 of 6
COMMUNITY INVESTMENT
12. Parks Rehabilitation Initiative
Fund various park and related projects and maintenance at Third Street Ballfield,
Shields-Reid Park and other areas within the Mitigation Fee Primary Funding
Area.
13. Capital Improvement Projects
Fund various capital improvement projects1, including infrastructure and creek
related improvements, within the Mitigation Fee Primary Funding Area.
Projects could include but are not limited to:
o Street & sidewalk improvements at railroads and railroad crossings
o Beautification and/or structural enhancements to the exterior of specific
community identified structures
o Lighting
o Street medians
o Creek-related improvement or rehabilitation
14. North Richmond Community-Based Projects
Fund the development, implementation and oversight of a variety of community-
based projects1 with specific focuses on anti-littering, environmental stewardship,
blight reduction and/or beautification (including personnel/labor, administrative
oversight, materials, equipment and related maintenance costs). Rather than
funding stipend programs separately (including stipends, administrative oversight
and related materials/equipment), new community-based projects/programs
should include component for stipends, where appropriate, to pay local youth
and/or other community members for assisting with illegal dumping
prevention/abatement or beautification activities within the Mitigation Fee
Primary Funding Area.
Community-Based Projects could include but are not limited to:
o Neighborhood Landscaping & Gardening Projects
o Greening Project
o Community Art Programs (e.g. Tile Art, Murals or Safe Routes/Popsicle
Project)
o Mentorship Programs
The process for soliciting and potentially allocating funding for Community-Based
Project proposals is recommended to be undertaken to prepare
recommendations for consideration by the Committee in early 2010 during
1 At the October 2009 meeting, the Committee voted to modify Strategies 13 and 14 as needed so that when the
Expenditure Plan is amended to incorporate remaining 2008-2009 Mitigation Fee funding (during Phase 2 in early
2010), up to $103,707 of the potential funding to be allocated to Strategy 13 may be used to cover costs associated
with the rehabilitation of the Eco-1 Educational Center (Housing Authority building) that has been proposed by the
Neighborhood House of North Richmond (NHNR) and up to an additional $38,610 of future allocations made to
Strategy 14 to fund up to half of the cost of stipends paid to North Richmond residents for time spent assisting Eco
Academy building and site rehabilitation (includes work and training). However, this funding was only to be made
available for this proposed project contingent upon receipt of the grant amount that NHNR has requested from
Chevron for the “North Richmond Eco Academy Project.” Subsequently, in early December 2009 Chevron
announced their selected grant recipients which did not include NHNR.
2010/2011 Expenditure Plan - North Richmond Waste & Recovery Mitigation Fee
Page 6 of 6
Phase 2 (to include the allocation of remaining 2008-2009 Mitigation Fee funding
to listed strategies within the Expenditure Plan).
STAFF COSTS
Due the staff time necessary for staffing this committee and Expenditure Plan
development, administration, oversight and implementation, $100,000 is allocated to
accommodate staff costs for both the City and County for calendar years 2010 and
2011.
D:\Illegal Dumping\BMPC Mitigation Fee Committee\2010-2011 Exp Plan\2010-11 Prelim Exp Plan for City-County Approval.doc
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Approve and authorize the Health Services Director, or his designee (Wendel Bruner), to execute, on behalf of the
County, Unpaid Student Training Agreement #26-126-5 with Contra Costa Community College District, an
educational institution, to provide field instruction in the Health Services Department for Contractor’s students, for
the period from September 1, 2009 through August 31, 2012.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None
BACKGROUND:
The purpose of this agreement is to provide Contractor’s students with the opportunity to integrate academic
knowledge with application skills and attitudes at progressively higher levels of performance requirements and
responsibility. Supervised fieldwork experience for students is considered to be an integral part of both the
educational and professional preparation. The Health Services Department can provide the requisite field education,
while at the same time, taking advantage of the students’ services to patients.
On
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor
Contact: Wendel Brunner, M.D,
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: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc: D Morgan, B Borbon
C.95
To:Board of Supervisors
From:William Walker, M.D., Health Services Director
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Unpaid Student Training Agreement #26-126-5 with Contra Costa Community College District
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
October 19, 2004, the Board of Supervisors approved Unpaid Student Training Agreement #26-126-3 (as amended
by Administrative Amendment Agreement #26-126-4) with Contra Costa Community College District, for the period
from September 1, 2004 through August 31, 2009.
Approval of Unpaid Student Training Agreement #26-126-5 will continue to provide supervised clinical experience
for Contractor’s students, through August 31, 2012.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE the Notice of Intention to Purchase Real Property described in Exhibit “A” attached hereto, from Moshy
Martinez, LLC; Anthony A. & Laura A. Christiani; and Kliegman, Martinez, LLC for County Health Facility
purposes, as required by Government Code section 25350, for the sum of $1,900,000.00, which is a fair and
reasonable price therefore, generally in accordance with terms and conditions of a Purchase and Sale Agreement,
executed by Moshy Martinez, LLC: Anthony A. & Laura A. Christiani; and Kliegman, Martinez, LLC.
DECLARE that this Board will meet on January 19, 2010, at 9:30 a.m. or thereafter, in the Board's Chambers,
County Administration Building, Martinez, California, to consider consummation of the purchase.
DIRECT the Clerk of the Board to publish the attached notice in the Contra Costa Times pursuant to Government
Code Section 6063.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This purchase will be financed through long term debt financing and funded from Enterprise Fund I.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Steven Harris, (925)
957-5416
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors
on the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc:
C.96
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Julia R. Bueren, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:APPROVE Notice of Intention to Purchase Real Property 20 Allen Street, Martinez Project No.: 5955-6X5024
BACKGROUND:
Before the County may purchase property worth more than $50,000, Government Code section 25350 requires
that a notice of the intention of the board of supervisors to make the purchase is published in the county pursuant
to Government Code section 6063. The Notice of Intention must include a description of the property proposed to
be purchased, the price, the vendor, and a statement of the time the board will meet to consummate the purchase.
This Notice of Intention does not require the County to purchase the property, it only gives public notice of a
proposal that it do so.
On April 22, 2008, the Board of Supervisors approved a budget strategy for Health Services that included
exploring the feasibility of building a mental health facility. The County has identified a property directly adjacent
to the existing Contra Costa Regional Medical Center campus that is well suited for this project. The property is
located at 20 Allen Street, Martinez.
The timing and service configuration of the mental health programs to be included in the facility is still under
review. During the review time period the facility will be used by the Contra Costa Regional Medical Center for
visitor and employee parking, storage and meeting space. The existing 20 Allen building includes seven
apartments currently rented to private parties. Once the County becomes the owner of the property it will assume
the obligations of the landlord but, absent lease enforcement issues, Health Services staff does not anticipate
significant immediate changes to the rental arrangement while the project is under review.
The County currently uses the subject property for parking and pays the property owners $4,000 per month to
lease the property. If the County acquires title to the property, it will no longer be required to make these monthly
payments.
The proposal has been determined by the Health Services Department to be financially and programmatically
feasible and their recommendation is to acquire the property. This is the last large piece of property adjacent to the
CCRMC Campus. Given current property values, the purchase of these 2.2 acres at $1.9 million is reasonable.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
The County will not have the necessary land rights to allow use of the property for appropriate County needs, and
continued use of the property for parking will be subject to agreement with the owners.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A
Agreement
RECOMMENDATION(S):
ACKNOWLEDGE that special revenue funds have been established to mitigate the impact of projects approved in
certain areas of the County and that they have been intended for uses that will benefit the quality of life for the
communities in which the project is approved and special revenue funds originate.
AFFIRM that existing special revenue funds are to be administered by the Supervisor serving in the district for which
a special revenue fund was created, unless specified otherwise when the fund was established.
AFFIRM that existing special revenue funds are to be used with the support and authorization of the current
Supervisor serving in the district where the special district fund originated.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No General Fund impact. Revenue Neutral.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Tomi Van de Brooke,
820-8683
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors
on the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc:
C.97
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Supervisors Mary Piepho and Susan Bonilla
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Special Revenue Mitigation Funds
BACKGROUND:
There have been a number of large projects proposed by applicants and eventually approved by the Contra Costa
County Board of Supervisors that require mitigation to offset the impacts to the communities where they are built and
operate. One of many mechanisms that has been used to address impacts from these projects has been the creation of
special mitigation funds to benefit the quality of life for the communities that are affected. Some of the funds are one
time only and others are replenishing.
These funds include, but are not limited to, the Conoco Phillips fund, C&H Sugar Cogeneration Project Fund, Futures
Fund, Keller Canyon Mitigation Fund, Dougherty Valley Fund, and others.
These special revenue funds were intended to be administered by the Supervisor serving in the district for the benefit
of the district where the special revenue fund was created, unless specified otherwise when established.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT:
RECOMMENDATION(S):
ADOPT Resolution No. 2009/950 allowing the County to reimburse certain expenditures for capital improvements to
20 Allen Street, Martinez, for the Health Services Department.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No fiscal impact associated with this action. This is a non- binding action that would allow the County to reimburse
itself for costs associated with the subject project if the Board decides to issue bonds to finance the project at a future
date. It is anticipated that costs for 20 Allen will be booked in the Hospital Enterprise Fund (EF1).
BACKGROUND:
The County is currently considering the purchase of property for a Multi-Program Psychiatric Campus to be located
at 20 Allen Street, Martinez, California. The County's share of the project costs is currently estimated to be under $2
million. The Board may wish to consider financing the cost of the project with bonds at a future date. This resolution
would fulfill legal requirements to allow the county to reimburse itself with bond proceeds for certain costs incurred
prior to a subsequent bond issuance.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Lisa Driscoll, County Finance
Director 925-335-1023
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the
minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc: Lisa Driscoll, County Finance Director, Dick Awenius, General Services, Patrick Godley, Health Services/Chief Financial Officer
C.98
To:Board of Supervisors
From:David Twa, County Administrator
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:REIMBURSEMENT RESOLUTION FOR 20 ALLEN STREET, MARTINEZ, FOR THE HEALTH SERVICES
DEPARTMENT
ATTACHMENTS
Resolution No. 2009/950
Exhibit A to Resolution
2009/950
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board
Adopted this Resolution on 12/15/2009 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
RECUSE:
Resolution No. 2009/950
RESOLUTION DECLARING THE OFFICIAL INTENT OF THE COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA
TO REIMBURSE CERTAIN EXPENDITURES
FROM PROCEEDS OF INDEBTEDNESS
WHEREAS , the County of Contra Costa (the "Issuer") intends to acquire, construct and improve certain facilities for use
by the issues as described in Exhibit A hereto (the "Project");
WHEREAS, the Issuer expects to pay, beginning October 18, 2009 and will pay, on and after the date hereof, certain
expenditures (the "Reimbursement Expenditures") in connection with the Project prior to the issuance of indebtedness for the
purpose of financing costs associated with the Project on a long-term basis;
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of the County (the "Board") has determined that those moneys previously advanced
no more than 60 days prior to the date hereof and to be advanced on and after the date hereof to pay the Reimbursement
Expenditures are available only for a temporary period and it is necessary to reimburse the County for the Reimbursement
Expenditures from the proceeds of one or more issues of tax-exempt obligations (the "Bonds");
WHEREAS, the Issuer reasonably expects the Bonds in an amount not expected to exceed $2 million will be issued, in one
or more series, and that certain of the proceeds of such debt obligations will be used to reimburse the Reimbursement
Expenditures; and
WHEREAS, Section 1.150-2 of the Treasury Regulations requires the Issuer to declare its reasonable official intent to
reimburse prior expenditures for the Project with proceeds of a subsequent borrowing;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY the Board of Supervisors of the County of Contra Costa as follows:
Section 1. The Board finds and determines that the foregoing recitals are true and correct.
Section 2. This declaration is made solely for purposes of establishing compliance with the requirement of Section 1.150-2
of the Treasury Regulations. This declaration does not bind the Issuer to make any expenditure, incur any indebtedness, or
proceed with the Project.
Section 3. The Issuer hereby declares it official intent to use proceeds of indebtedness to reimburse itself for
Reimbursement Expenditures.
Section 4. This declaration shall take effect from and after its adoption.
____________________________ Chair of the Board of Supervisors
County of Contra Costa, California
Contact: Lisa Driscoll, County Finance Director
925-335-1023
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: , Deputy
cc: Lisa Driscoll, County Finance Director, Dick Awenius, General Services, Patrick Godley, Health Services/Chief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT A TO REIMBURSEMENT RESOLUTION
Description of Project
Purchase of land and construction of capital improvements, including equipment and
furnishings, at 20 Allen Street, Martinez, CA for use by the Health Services Department.
.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Approve the attached Conflict of Interest Code for the Measure J Traffic Congestion Relief Agency dba TRAFFIX,
as shown on the attached Resolution from the Agency.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
BACKGROUND:
The Measure J Traffic Congestion Relief Agency dba TRAFFIX has adopted its Conflict of Interest Code and
submitted the Code to the Board for approval pursuant to Government Code section 87303.
The Code follows the “Model Conflict of Interest Code” format provided by the Fair Political Practices Commission.
(Cal. Code Regs. Tit. 2, §18730.)
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: (925) 335-1800
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc: Julie Enea, Deputy County Administrator, John Cunningham, Senior Transportation Planner, Nat Rojanasathira, Transportation Program Coordinator, Mary Ann Mason, Deputy
County Counsel
C.99
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Silvano B. Marchesi, County Counsel
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Conflict of Interest Code of the Measure J Traffic Congestion Relief Agency dba TRAFFIX
ATTACHMENTS
Adoptiong Conflict of Interest
Code
RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to enter into Memoranda of Understanding with the
County of Alameda and the City of Oakland to participate in the ARIES Integrated Justice System for the purpose of
sharing and integrating criminal justice information from July 1, 2009 through June 30, 2010.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
BACKGROUND:
The County has been working in cooperation with neighboring jurisdictions as part of the Urban Area Security
Initiative (UASI). The 2008 UASI grant provided through the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, for which the
County is a subrecipient under the City of San Francisco, is funding the expansion of the Automated Regional
Information Exchange System (ARIES) criminal justice information system. The Memoranda of Understanding
provide for the County of Alameda and the City of Oakland to have access to the Automated Regional Information
Exchange System (ARIES) for the purpose of sharing and integrating criminal justice information with other
participating Agencies.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Eileen Devlin,
925-335-1557
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc: Eileen Devlin, Todd McCown, Karen Todd, Beth Kilian
C.100
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Warren Rupf, Sheriff-Coroner
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Memorandum of Understanding - ARIES Integrated Justice System
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
The MOUs set forth the governing policies and procedures for the use of ARIES by participating agencies, to include
maintenance and responsibility of the information within the system. ARIES has the capability to make potential
linkages between law enforcement information from crime incidents, criminal investigations, warrants, arrests,
bookings, paroles and other pertinent information. Participating agencies law enforcement and homeland security
efforts will greatly benefit from the shared information.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT:
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Direct County Administrator, working with County Counsel, to report to the Board on County procedures governing
employee involvement in contracts with prospective employers.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
BACKGROUND:
The County enters into hundreds of contracts with vendors to provide goods and services to the County and its
residents. Some of the contracts are for substantial sums of money. It is important and prudent for the County to
ensure that the negotiation and processing of such contracts be conducted in the best interests of the County and the
public treasury. The integrity of the contracting process could be undermined if County staff involved in such
contracts and negotiations are considering potential vendors as potential employers.
Current state law prohibits a public official from making or influencing a governmental decision (such as a contract)
that involves a person with whom the official is negotiating prospective employment.
County employees are public officials for purposes of that provision. The California Fair Political Practices
Commission, which enforces this provision, has adopted a regulation that provides that a public employee is
“negotiating” employment when he or she interviews or discusses an offer of employment with an employer. A
public employee has an “arrangement” concerning prospective employment when he or she accepts an offer of
employment. The broad prohibition against involvement in County decisions concerning prospective employers
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
Contact: David Twa,
925-335-1080
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board
of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: , Deputy
cc:
C.101
To:Board of Supervisors
From:David Twa, County Administrator
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Procedures Governing Employee Involvement in Contracts with Prospective Employers
applies to County employees as soon as they are involved in the interview process for a position. However, this
prohibition has not been widely communicated to County employees.
It is desirable that County employees learn about the requirements of this state law and have an easily accessible
source of information about the law. Therefore, the County Administrator is directed to provide a report to the Board
on possible options for County implementation of this state law provision. For example, it may be appropriate to
develop an Administrative Bulletin with procedures for local implementation of the section. It may also be desirable
to provide periodic employee training on this and similar issues.
In addition, the County Administrator should explore other possible measures intended to ensure that the County’s
contracting process retains the maximum level of objectivity and integrity.
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
NOTES:___________________
1. Gov. Code, § 87407:
“No public official shall make, participate in making, or use his or her official position to influence, any
governmental decision directly relating to any person with whom he or she is negotiating, or has any arrangement
concerning prospective employment.”
2. Gov. Code, § 82048.
3. Cal. Code Regs., tit. 2 § 18747.
CLERK'S ADDENDUM
ADOPTED the recommendation; and REFERRED the matter to the Internal Operations Committee for
development of a clear policy.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Acting as the Governing Board of the Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency, ADOPT Resolution 2009/573
approving the appropriation of up to $50,000 for a public improvement study program by the Rodeo Sanitary District,
ADOPT findings pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33445, and AUTHORIZE the Redevelopment Director,
on behalf of the of the Redevelopment Agency (Agency), to execute a Public Facilities Design Funding Agreement
with Rodeo Sanitary District, in the amount up to $50,000 for a public improvements study program in Downtown
Rodeo and the Rodeo Marina with a term of June 1, 2009 to June 30, 2010.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The project budget is $50,000. No General Funds would be utilized. Rodeo redevelopment funds have been budgeted
for this purpose.
BACKGROUND:
A key objective of the Rodeo Redevelopment program is to rehabilitate and upgrade public infrastructure in
Downtown Rodeo and at the Rodeo Marina. The Redevelopment Agency (Agency) has budgeted $4.7 million for
Rodeo downtown/waterfront infrastructure improvements. The
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/15/2009 APPROVED AS
RECOMMENDED
OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Vincent Manuel
335-7232
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc:
C.102
To:
From:Jim Kennedy, County Redevelopment Director
Date:December 15, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Facilities Design Funding Agreement, Rodeo Sanitary District
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
Rodeo Sanitary District (RSD) would be responsible for preparing preliminary engineering plans and a budget for
sanitary sewer improvements that would be included in the larger program. The recommended action will provide
the Rodeo Sanitary District with the necessary funds to accomplish the preliminary engineering studies related to
the sanitary sewer improvement design. The Public Facilities Design Funding Agreement (the "Design Funding
Agreement") provides $50,000 for the following tasks:
Existing Information Review:
Proposed Marina Layout
Topography
RSD Infrastructure
Annexation of Marina:
LAFCO requirements
Other Agency Requirements
Number and Type of Connections
RSD Fee Requirements
Sewage Conveyance:
Evaluation of options (gravity flow vs. pumped)
Costs for Options
Cost/Benefit Analysis of Options
Recommendation
Pursuant to California Redevelopment Law, the Agency may fund public improvements owned by another public
agency with the consent of the Board of Supervisors, and if the Board of Supervisors finds and determines that :
(1) the public improvement will be of benefit to the project area, (2) no other reasonable means of financing the
public improvement is available to the community, (3) the public improvement will assist in the elimination of one
or more blighting conditions inside the project area; and (4) Agency assistance for the public improvement is
consistent with the Agency’s current Implementation Plan. (Section 33445 of the Health & Safety Code).
The Design Funding Agreement will help the RSD pay for the cost of the study of necessary sanitary sewer public
improvements for the Rodeo Marina. The Design Funding Agreement will allow the RSD to accomplish the
preliminary engineering studies related to the sanitary sewer improvement design. The necessary public
improvements will benefit the Project Area by helping to spur the redevelopment of a site that is an integral part
of the Project Area’s waterfront. The public improvements may lead to the renovation and expansion of the Rodeo
Marina, thereby stimulating and expanding the existing uses in the waterfront.
The RSD has conducted an analysis of its financial capability to fund the Design Funding Agreement and due to
limited availability of general funds, the State’s budget crisis, and the RSD’s funding priorities, the RSD does not
currently have sufficient funds to pay for the costs of the preliminary engineering studies related to the sanitary
sewer improvement design. On December 8, 2009, the District’s Board of Directors met and approved a
resolution making the required finding that the District has no other reasonable means of funding the public
improvements.
The study and future construction of sanitary sewer improvements in the Rodeo Marina will lead to the renovation
and expansion of the Rodeo Marina Facilities to accommodate multiple uses, which may include: a restaurant,
marine repair facility, boat docks, boat storage, boat launch, a new harbor master building, lodging, mixed use
commercial, and public access. Restoration of the Rodeo Marina would stimulate redevelopment activities in the
waterfront area by expanding the existing uses, thus eliminating blighting conditions in the Project Area.
The funding of the Design Funding Agreement is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Agency’s current
Implementation Plan, including the desire to create and implement a Downtown/Waterfront Improvement
Program for the older and more historic section of the Project Area, and to initiate development planning
processes for specific reuse sites in the Project Area.
Therefore the recommendation includes two actions:
1. As the Governing Board of the Redevelopment Agency, making certain findings pursuant to Section 33445 of
the Health and Safety Code, and approving and authorizing execution of the Design Funding Agreement. and
2. As the legislative body for the County the Board of Supervisors, consenting to the use of Redevelopment funds
to pay for studies related to the sanitary sewer improvement design i of the Rodeo Sanitary District, and making
the required findings pursuant to Section 33445. In making these findings the Board is, in part, relying on findings
made by the Rodeo Sanitary District at its meeting of December 8, 2009 (A separate Board order is being
submitted for this action)
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If this contract is not authorized, the proposed scope of work will not be able to be accomplished.
ATTACHMENTS
Resolution No. 2009/573
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board
Adopted this Resolution on 12/15/2009 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
RECUSE:
Resolution No. 2009/573
1) Approving the appropriation of not more than Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000) by the Redevelopment Agency of Contra
Costa County (the "Agency") to disburse to the Rodeo Sanitary District (the "District") for the cost of funding a public
improvements design program.
2) Making certain findings pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33445 in connection with the approval of the assistance
by the Agency to the District.
The Board of Directors of the Agency (the "Agency Board") RESOLVES THAT:
Pursuant to the California Community Redevelopment Law (Health and Safety Code Section 33000 et seq.); the "CRL"), the
Board of Supervisors of the County of Contra Costa (the "County") has adopted and the Agency is responsible for implementing,
among other redevelopment plans, the Redevelopment Plan (the "Redevelopment Plan") for the Rodeo Redevelopment Project
Area (the "Project Area"), as adopted by Ordinance No. 90-50 on July 10, 1990, and amended by Ordinance No. 94-66, adopted
on December 6, 1994; as further amended by Ordinance No. 99-08, adopted on February 23, 1999; and further amended by
Ordinance No. 2002-16, adopted on May 21, 2002. The Redevelopment Plan sets forth a plan for redevelopment of the Project
Area.
The Agency is responsible for administering the Redevelopment Plan to cause redevelopment of the Project Area, including
removal of blighting conditions in the Project Area. To assist in implementing the Redevelopment Plan and the County's other
redevelopment plans, the Agency has adopted and amended a five-year implementation plan (the "Implementation Plan")
pursuant to Section 33490 of the Redevelopment Law.
The approximately 12.8 acre Rodeo Marina site, formerly known as Bennett’s Marina, is owned by Rodeo LLC, a California
limited liability company, and is an integral part of the Rodeo Project Area’s waterfront. Rodeo LLC, intends to renovate and
expand the existing Rodeo Marina facilities to accommodate multiple uses, which may include: a restaurant, marine repair
facility, boat docks, boat storage, boat launch, a new harbor master building, lodging, mixed use commercial, and public access.
The restoration of the Rodeo Marina would stimulate redevelopment activities in the waterfront area by expanding the existing
uses, thus eliminating blighting conditions.
Rodeo Marina is in need of capital improvements in order create a redevelopment catalyst site within the Rodeo Project Area.
Without such rehabilitation and upgrading, the task of redevelopment of the Rodeo Project Area will be impeded. The District
lacks the capital resources to fund the design and implementation of the necessary rehabilitation and upgrading of the necessary
sewer facilities required to redevelop the Rodeo Marina.
To implement the Redevelopment Plan in a manner consistent with the Implementation Plan, and to further the Agency’s and
District's mutual objectives for the rehabilitation and upgrading of public improvements in Downtown Rodeo and the Rodeo
Marina and in furtherance of the elimination of blight in the Rodeo Project Area, the Agency Board intends to allocate an amount
up to Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000) to provide a public facility design grant to pay for the costs associated with the design of
the rehabilitation and upgrading of public improvements in Downtown Rodeo and the Rodeo Marina in accordance with the
scope of work for designing the needed public improvements (the "Design Program") set forth in the Public Facilities Design
Funding Agreement for Rodeo Sanitary District (the "Design Funding Agreement")
The funding of the Design Program pursuant to the requirements set forth in the Design Funding Agreement will address the
goals and objectives of the Redevelopment Plan for the Project Area by alleviating blighting conditions and stimulating
redevelopment activities in Downtown Rodeo and the Rodeo Marina.
The approval and funding of the Design Funding Agreement is consistent with and will promote the goals and objectives
identified in the Agency's Implementation Plan.
In connection with the Agency Board's consideration of this resolution, a staff report (the "Staff Report", incorporated herein by
reference), which sets forth facts supporting the findings made in this resolution pursuant to Section 33445 of the CRL, has been
prepared to accompany this resolution.
Pursuant to Section 33445 of the CRL, the Agency is authorized, with the consent of the County and the District, to pay part or
all of the value of the cost of the Design Program for the public improvements pursuant to the terms of the Design Funding
Agreement.
By Resolution No. 2009/574, the County is concurrently giving its consent to the Agency to pay the cost of the Design Program
and made the required findings pursuant to Section 33445 of the CRL.
On December 8, 2009 by Resolution No. 2009/05, the District gave its consent to the Agency to pay the cost of the Design
Program and made the required findings pursuant to Section 33445 of the CRL.
The Agency has placed on file a copies of the Design Funding Agreement in substantially the form to be executed by the District
and the Agency.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Agency Board finds the above recitals true and correct.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Agency Board hereby finds and determines that: (a) the Design Program will be of
benefit to the Project Area; (b) no other reasonable method of financing the funding of the Design Program is available to the
community; (c) the Design Program will assist in the elimination of one or more blighting conditions inside the Project Area; and
(d) Agency assistance for the Design Program is consistent with the Agency's current Implementation Plan. The factual and
analytical basis used by the Agency Board in making these findings and determinations is set forth in the Staff Report, and
materials regarding the Design Program provided to the Agency Board.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Agency Board hereby approves the payment of Agency Funds to the District for the
Design Program as set forth in this resolution.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the Agency hereby authorizes and directs the Executive Director of the Agency, or the
Executive Director's designee, to execute the Design Funding Agreement on behalf of the Agency, substantially in the form on
file with the Agency Secretary and the City Clerk, with such revisions as are reasonably determined necessary by the Agency
signatory, such determination to be conclusively deemed to have been made by the execution of the Design Funding Agreement
by the Agency signatory. The Executive Director of the Agency, or the Executive Director's designee, is authorized to implement
the Design Funding Agreement and take all further actions and execute all other documents which are necessary or appropriate to
carry out the Design Funding Agreement.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the approval of this Resolution, the Design Program, and the Design Funding Agreement is
categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to 14 California Code of
Regulations Section 15262, in that the project only involves feasibility or planning studies for possible future actions which have
not been approved, adopted or otherwise funded by the Agency.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Agency Board designates the Redevelopment Director as the custodian of the
documents and other material which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the decision herein is based. These
documents may be found at 2530 Arnold Drive, Suite 190, Martinez, CA 94553.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this Resolution shall take immediate effect from and after its passage.
Contact: Vincent Manuel 335-7232
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 15, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: , Deputy
cc:
Resolution No.
AIR-3387 Consent 129.
BOS Agenda Redevelopment Agency
Meeting Date:12/15/2009
Time (Duration):
GROVE POINT
Submitted For: David Twa, Redevelopment Agency Executive Director
Department:Conservation & Development Division:CD - Redevelopment Projects
Noticed Public Hearing: No Official Body:
Presenter/Phone, if applicable: Audio-Visual Needs:
Handling Instructions: District: District I
Contact, Phone: 335-7236
Recommendation(s):
A. APPROVE Purchase and Sale Agreement and ACCEPT the Grant Deed dated, December 15, 2009 from 1546 3rd Street,
LLC for the purchase of 1546 Third Street, North Richmond, identified as Assessor’s Parcel Number 409-080-020.
B. AUTHORIZE the Redevelopment Director to execute said Purchase and Sale Agreement on behalf of the Redevelopment
Agency.
C. APPROVE payment of $1,200,000 for said property rights and AUTHORIZE the Auditor-Controller to issue a check in said
amount payable to First American Title Company, 1850 Mt. Diablo Boulevard, Suite 300, Walnut Creek, CA 94596, Escrow
No. NCS 295944-CC to be forwarded to the Real Property Division for delivery.
D. DIRECT the Real Property Division to have the above referenced Grant Deed delivered to the Title Company for recording
in the Office of the County Recorder.
E. DIRECT the Department of Conservation and Development to File a Notice of Exemption from the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines and pay $50 filing fee to the Office of the
County Clerk
Fiscal Impact:
No General Fund money is involved in this acquisition. The Agency’s financial obligation to acquire this site is from budgeted
funds under the North Richmond Redevelopment Project Area for FY 2009-2010
Background:
On May 12, 2009, the Governing Board of the Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency adopted Resolution No. 2009/115
to create a Program of Unified Development for the East Side of 3rd Street between Chesley Avenue and Grove Street. This
proposed residential Mixed-Use Project is referred to as Grove Point.
This Project is to acquire and redevelop six contiguous parcels fronting Third Street into a mix of commercial and residential
amenities. Purchasing 1546 Third Street is the third acquisition under Grove Point’s Unified Development Program.
This acquisition and the development of a Unified Development Program has been determined to be exempt from the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines.
The North Richmond Municipal Advisory Council has reviewed this Project and is supportive of the Agency acquiring Grove
Point parcels for redevelopment.
Budget Information
Information about available funds
Budgeted: Funds Available: Adjustment: Amount Available:
Unbudgeted: Funds NOT Available: Amendment:
Account Code(s) for Available Funds
1:
Fund Transfers
Attachments
Purchase-Sale Agreement
Minutes Attachments
No file(s) attached.