Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 03092021 - Board of supervisorsCALENDAR FOR THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CONTRA COSTA COUNTY AND FOR SPECIAL DISTRICTS, AGENCIES, AND AUTHORITIES GOVERNED BY THE BOARD BOARD CHAMBERS, ADMINISTRATION BUILDING, 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CALIFORNIA 94553-1229 DIANE BURGIS, CHAIR, 3RD DISTRICT FEDERAL D. GLOVER, VICE CHAIR, 5TH DISTRICT JOHN GIOIA , 1ST DISTRICT CANDACE ANDERSEN, 2ND DISTRICT KAREN MITCHOFF , 4TH DISTRICT MONICA NINO, CLERK OF THE BOARD AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR, (925) 655-2075 PERSONS WHO WISH TO ADDRESS THE BOARD DURING PUBLIC COMMENT OR WITH RESPECT TO AN ITEM THAT IS ON THE AGENDA, MAY BE LIMITED TO TWO (2) MINUTES. A LUNCH BREAK MAY BE CALLED AT THE DISCRETION OF THE BOARD CHAIR. To slow the spread of COVID-19, the Health Officer’s Shelter Order of September 14, 2020, prevents public gatherings (Health Officer Order). In lieu of a public gathering, the Board of Supervisors meeting will be accessible via television and live-streaming to all members of the public as permitted by the Governor’s Executive Order N29-20. Board meetings are televised live on Comcast Cable 27, ATT/U-Verse Channel 99, and WAVE Channel 32, and can be seen live online at www.contracosta.ca.gov. PERSONS WHO WISH TO ADDRESS THE BOARD DURING PUBLIC COMMENT OR WITH RESPECT TO AN ITEM THAT IS ON THE AGENDA MAY CALL IN DURING THE MEETING BY DIALING 888-251-2949 FOLLOWED BY THE ACCESS CODE 1672589#. To indicate you wish to speak on an agenda item, please push "#2" on your phone. All telephone callers will be limited to two (2) minutes apiece. The Board Chair may reduce the amount of time allotted per telephone caller at the beginning of each item or public comment period depending on the number of calls and the business of the day. Your patience is appreciated. A lunch break or closed session may be called at the discretion of the Board Chair. Staff reports related to open session items on the agenda are also accessible on line at www.contracosta.ca.gov. ANNOTATED AGENDA & MINUTES March 9, 2021            9:00 A.M. Convene and announce adjournment to closed session in Room 168. Closed Session A. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS (Gov. Code § 54957.6) Agency Negotiators: Monica Nino. Employee Organizations and Unrepresented Employees: Public Employees Union, Local 1; AFSCME Locals 512 and 2700; California Nurses Assn.; SEIU Locals 1021 and 2015; District Attorney Investigators’ Assn.; Deputy Sheriffs Assn.; United Prof. Firefighters I.A.F.F., Local 1230; Physicians’ & Dentists’ Org. of Contra Costa; Western Council of Engineers; United Chief Officers Assn.; Contra Costa County Defenders Assn.; Contra Costa County Deputy District Attorneys’ Assn.; Prof. & Tech. Engineers IFPTE, Local 21; Teamsters Local 856; and all unrepresented employees. B. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL--EXISTING LITIGATION (Gov. Code § 54956.9(d)(1)) Karen Lavow v. Contra Costa County , WCAB Nos. ADJ10824758; ADJ109602171. City of Portland, et al. v. Federal Communications Commission, United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, Case Nos. 19-70123, 19-70145, 19-70326, 19-70339, 19-70341 and 19-70344 2. Call to order and opening ceremonies. Inspirational Thought- "A smile is the shortest distance between two people." ~Victor Borge, comedian Present: John Gioia, District I Supervisor; Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor; Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor; Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor; Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Staff Present:Monica Nino, County Administrator Sharon Anderson, County Counsel  By unanimous vote, Supervisor Andersen absent, the Board of Supervisors decided not to file a petition with the United States Supreme Court to challenge the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decision in City of Portland et al V. Fed. Communications Comm. Case Nos. 19-70123, 19-70145, 19-70326, 19-70339, 19-70341, 19-70344.   CONSIDER CONSENT ITEMS (Items listed as C.1 through C.53 on the following agenda) – Items are subject to removal from Consent Calendar by request of any Supervisor or on request for discussion by a member of the public. Items removed from the Consent Calendar will be considered with the Discussion Items.   PRESENTATIONS (5 Minutes Each)   PRESENTATION recognizing March 2021 as American Red Cross month in Contra Costa County. (Briana Taylor, Volunteer and Board Member for the American Red Cross Northern California Coastal Region)   PRESENTATION honoring County employees for their many years of service to Contra Costa County: Dr. Jack Rosenfeld, for his 30 years of services to the Health Services Department, to be presented by Erika Jensen   DISCUSSION ITEMS   D.1 CONSIDER adopting Resolution No. 2021/77, approving the side letter between Contra Costa County and Professional & Technical Engineers, Local 21 amending the parties’ Memorandum of Understanding to add the Appraiser Unit (formerly the Property Appraisers Unit), and specifying those Sections applicable to the representation unit. (Lisa Driscoll, County Finance Director)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover D.2 CONSIDER approving the Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan to improve transportation services for seniors, people with disabilities, and veterans, and taking related actions, as recommended by the Transportation, Water, and Infrastructure Committee. (John Cunningham, Conservation and Development Department)       Speakers: Debbie Toth, President & CEO of Choice in Aging; Cheryl Sudduth.    AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover D.3 ACCEPT update on COVID 19; and PROVIDE direction to staff. Health Department - Anna Roth, Director and Dr. Farnitano, Health Officer1.       On March xx, 2021 at 8 p.m. there will be a Countywide memorial for the Contra Costa County residents lost to Covid-19.   D.4 HEARING to consider adopting Ordinance No. 2021-10, an urgency interim ordinance extending, through March 9, 2022, a moratorium on industrial hemp cultivation and processing. (Matt Slattengren, Agriculture Commissioner/Weights & Measures Director)       Speakers: No name given; No name given, grower; No name given, farm employee; hemp farm  Speakers: No name given; No name given, grower; No name given, farm employee; hemp farm representative; Written commentary received (attached): ADOPTED Ordinance 2021-10 as amended today, extending through September 30, 2021, a moratorium on industrial hemp cultivation and processing; DIRECTED staff to provide a status report on the matter by June 30, 2021, with the report including information of those growers with licenses scheduled to expire before September 2021.    AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT) D. 5 CONSIDER Consent Items previously removed.    There were no items removed from consent for discussion.   D. 6 PUBLIC COMMENT (2 Minutes/Speaker)   D. 7 CONSIDER reports of Board members.    There were no items reported today.   ADJOURN    Adjourned at 11:05 p.m.   CONSENT ITEMS   Engineering Services   C. 1 AUTHORIZE the Chair, Board of Supervisors, to sign the Grant Deed of Development Rights for minor subdivision MS13-00005 and ADOPT Resolution No. 2021/64 to accept the deed for a project being developed by James Scott Busby and Margaret Mary Busby, as recommended by the Public Works Director, Martinez area. (No fiscal impact)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT) C. 2 ADOPT Resolution No. 2021/65 to accept an offer of dedication for roadway purposes for minor subdivision MS13-00005, for a project being developed by James Scott Busby and Margaret Mary Busby, as recommended by the Public Works Director, Martinez area. (No fiscal impact)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT) C. 3 ADOPT Resolution No. 2021/66 approving the Parcel Map for minor subdivision MS13-00005, for a project being developed by James Scott Busby and Margaret Mary Busby, as recommended by the Public Works Director, Martinez area. (No fiscal impact)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT) C. 4 ADOPT Resolution No. 2021/70 approving the Stormwater Management Facilities Operation and Maintenance Agreement for subdivision SD18-09495, for a project being developed by Chicken Farm Associates, LLC, as recommended by the Public Works Director, Concord area. (No fiscal impact)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT) C. 5 ADOPT Resolution No. 2021/71 approving the Final Map and Subdivision Agreement for subdivision SD18-09495, for a project being developed by Chicken Farm Associates, LLC, as recommended by the Public Works Director, Concord area. (No Fiscal Impact)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT) Special Districts & County Airports   C. 6 ADOPT Resolution No. 2021/79 accepting as complete the contracted work performed by Ghilotti Bros., Inc., for the Buchanan Field Airport Runway 14L-32R Rehabilitation Project, as recommended by the Public Works Director, Concord area. (91% Federal Aviation Administration Airport Improvement Program Funds, 4% Caltrans, 5% Airport Enterprise Funds)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT) Claims, Collections & Litigation   C. 7 DENY claims filed by Dedra Kinney, Anthony Robert Johnson and Kelly Corbitt.      AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT) Honors & Proclamations   C. 8 ADOPT Resolution No. 2021/72 to recognize Dr. Jack Rosenfeld on the occasion of his 30 years of service to Contra Costa County as a dentist, as recommended by the Health Services Director.       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT) C. 9 ADOPT Resolution No. 2021/85 recognizing March 2021 as American Red Cross month in Contra Costa County. (Briana Taylor, Volunteer and Board Member for the American Red Cross Northern California Coastal Region)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT) Appointments & Resignations   C. 10 APPOINT Donald Maglhaes, Alamo resident, to the Appointee 1 seat on the County Service Area P-5 Citizens Advisory Committee, as recommended by Supervisor Andersen.       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT) C. 11 REAPPOINT Carolyn Thiessen to the Trustee 3 seat of the Alamo-Lafayette Cemetery District Board of Directors, as recommended by Supervisor Andersen.       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT) C. 12 APPOINT Victoria Smith and Christopher Easter to the Contra Costa County Sustainability Commission, as recommended by Supervisor Andersen.       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT) C. 13 REAPPOINT Aleida Andrino-Chavez, Thomas Hansen, and Maureen Powers to the District V seats of the Western Contra Costa Transit Authority, as recommended by Supervisor Glover.       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT) C. 14 REAPPOINT Charles Davidson to the District V seat and Renee Fernandez-Lipp to the District V Alternate seat on the Sustainability Commission, as recommended by Supervisor Glover.       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT) C. 15 APPOINT Department of Conservation and Development staff members Jamar Stamps, Will Nelson, John Cunningham (Alternate) and Aruna Bhat (Alternate) and Public Works Department staff members Jerry Fahy and Nancy Wein (Alternate) to the Technical Coordinating Committee of the Contra Costa Transportation Authority, as recommended by the Conservation and Development and Public Works Directors.       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT) C. 16 APPOINT Richard Celestre to the City of Pleasant Hill seat on the Aviation Advisory Committee, as recommended by the Pleasant Hill City Council.       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT) C. 17 REAPPOINT Ron Reagan to the District 3 seat on the Aviation Advisory Committee, as recommended by Supervisor Burgis.       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT) C. 18 APPROVE the new medical staff, affiliates and tele-radiologist appointments and re-appointments, additional privileges, medical staff advancement, and voluntary resignations as recommend by the Medical Staff Executive Committee and by the Health Services Director.       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT) C. 19 DECLARE vacant Hazardous Materials Commission Business Alternate #2 seat and DIRECT the Clerk of the Board to post the vacancy, as recommended by the Health Services Director.       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT) C. 20 ADOPT Measure X Community Advisory Board Bylaws and ACKNOWLEDGE process to be used at Finance Committee meeting for member selection, as recommended by the Finance Committee.       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT) Intergovernmental Relations   C. 21 ADOPT changes to the County's 2021-22 State and Federal Legislative Platforms to include principles related to enabling progressive design-build in project delivery for construction contracts; enabling continued public meeting attendance, participation and accessibility through technological means post-pandemic; and support for COVID-19 recovery that ensures advancement of various climate initiatives, as recommended by the Legislation Committee.       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT) Personnel Actions   C. 22 ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 25693 to cancel one Deputy County Librarian (unrepresented) position and add one Library Services Manager (unrepresented) position to the Library Department. (Cost savings)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT) C. 23 ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 25698 to add one Public Administrator's Program Assistant (represented) position and cancel one Ambulatory Care Clinic Coordinator (represented) position in the Health Services Department. (Cost savings)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT) C. 24 ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 25697 to increase the hours of one Public Health Nutrition position (represented) from part time (30/40) to full time in the Health Services Department. (100% California Department of Public Health WIC Program)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen  AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT) Leases   C. 25 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a lease amendment with Gary S. Riele (dba SR Investments), to extend the lease term by four years through February 28, 2025, for approximately 1,620 square feet of office space located at 309 Diablo Road, Danville, at an initial annual rent of $55,404 for the first year, with annual increases thereafter (100% General Fund)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT) Grants & Contracts   APPROVE and AUTHORIZE execution of agreements between the County and the following agencies for receipt of fund and/or services:   C. 26 ADOPT Resolution No. 2021/81 authorizing the Sheriff Coroner, or designee, to apply for and accept the California Highway Patrol Grant Fiscal Year 2021-2022 in an amount not to exceed $114,609 for the purchase of new toxicology equipment for the Toxicology Unit for the period July 1, 2021, through the end of the grant funding. (100% State)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT) C. 27 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Librarian, or designee, to apply for and accept a grant in the amount of $5,000 from East Bay Community Foundation, administered by the Rodeo Municipal Advisory Council, for Rodeo Library services pursuant to the local refinery Good Neighbor Agreement for the period July 1 through December 31, 2021. (No County match)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT) C. 28 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with California Department of Community Services and Development to increase the payment limit to the County by $40,370 to a new payment limit of $1,229,551 to provide Community Services Block Grant program services for the period March 27, 2020 through May 31, 2022. (100% Federal)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT) C. 29 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with the California Department of Health Care Services to pay the County an amount not to exceed $27,000,000 to improve availability and accessibility of Medi-Cal services to eligible and potentially eligible individuals and their families from the period July 1, 2021 to June 30, 2024. (No County match)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT) C. 30 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Public    C. 30 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Public Health Foundation Enterprises, Inc. (dba Heluna Health), to pay County an amount not to exceed $24,889 for participation in the FoodNet Expanded Case Exposure Ascertainment Project to study food-borne bacteria for the period August 1, 2020 through July 31, 2021. (No County match)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT) APPROVE and AUTHORIZE execution of agreement between the County and the following parties as noted for the purchase of equipment and/or services:   C. 31 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with Empower Programs, Inc., to extend the term from March 31, 2021 to March 31, 2023 and increase the payment limit by $160,000 to a new payment limit of $240,000 to provide on-call weed abatement services, Alamo, Concord, Danville, Pleasant Hill, San Ramon and Walnut Creek areas. (100% Iron Horse Corridor Funds)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT) C. 32 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Human Resources Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with Segal Advisors, Inc. to extend the term from March 31, 2021 through March 31, 2022, and increase the payment limit by $60,000 to a new payment limit of $210,000 to continue providing services for the County's 457 Deferred Compensation Plan. (100% Plan Participant Fee)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT) C. 33 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Conservation and Development Director, or designee, to execute an amendment to the exclusive negotiating agreement with City Ventures Homebuilding, LLC, for the development of 24 town home units, approximately 2,000 sq. ft. of commercial space, and a public plaza on a 1.16 acres vacant site at Parker Avenue/Investment Street and Railroad Avenue in the Rodeo area. (100% Housing Successor funds)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT) C. 34 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Healthrisk Resource Group, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $600,000 to provide claims processing and negotiations services to Contra Costa Health Plan (CCHP) for the period March 1, 2021 through February 29, 2024. (100% CCHP Enterprise Fund II)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT) C. 35 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Chief Information Officer, Department of Information Technology, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with CSI Telecommunications, Inc. to extend the term from January 31, 2021 through January 31, 2023 and increase the payment limit by $250,000 to a new payment limit of $1,330,000 to provide continued Federal Communication Commission radio licensing and microwave frequency coordination, as needed by the Department of Information Technology. (100% User Fees)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT) C. 36 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Availity, LLC, in an amount not to exceed $1,100,000 to provide electronic claims processing services for Contra Costa Health Plan providers to be reimbursed for services provided to Contra Costa Health Plan members for the period March 1, 2021 through February 28, 2022. (100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT) C. 37 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Young M. Kim, M.D., (dba Young's OB/GYN), in an amount not to exceed $750,000 to provide obstetrics-gynecology services to Contra Costa Health Plan (CCHP) members for the period March 1, 2021 through February 29, 2024. (100% CCHP Enterprise Fund II)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT) C. 38 RATIFY amendment of an emergency blanket purchase order authorized by the County Administrator to secure critical services and supplies necessary to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic in Contra Costa County by increasing the payment limit by $5,000,000 to a new payment limit of $30,000,000 with no change to the term through June 30, 2021. (100% General Fund)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT) C. 39 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Steven Cloutier (dba Alhambra Valley Counseling Associates), in an amount not to exceed $450,000 to provide outpatient psychotherapy services to Contra Costa Health Plan (CCHP) members for the period March 1, 2021 through February 29, 2024. (100% CCHP Enterprise Fund II)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT) C. 40 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Hilltop Radiology, LLC, in an amount not to exceed $1,050,000 to provide diagnostic imaging services to Contra Costa Health Plan (CCHP) members for the period March 1, 2021 through February 29, 2024. (100% CCHP Enterprise Fund II)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT) C. 41 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with John Patrick Leonard Kirby (dba River Counseling Center), in an amount not to exceed $330,000 to provide outpatient psychotherapy services for Contra Costa Health Plan (CCHP) members for the period March 1, 2021 through February 29, 2024. (100% CCHP Enterprise Fund II)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT) C. 42 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment    C. 42 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with Community Options for Families and Youth, Inc., effective July 1, 2020, to increase the payment limit by $85,800 to a new payment limit of $2,352,813 to provide mental health and functional family therapy services for youth who have had serious contact with the Juvenile Justice System, with no change in the term July 1, 2020 through June 30, 2021; and to increase the automatic extension payment limit by $42,900 to a new payment limit of $1,176,406 through December 31, 2021. (100% Mental Health Services Act)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT) C. 43 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Contra Costa ARC (dba Commercial Support Services), in an amount not to exceed $280,000 to provide car washing and janitorial services for the period April 1, 2021 through March 31, 2024, Countywide. (75% General Fund, 25% Fleet Internal Service Fund)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT) C. 44 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment effective January 1, 2021 with Remarkable Marriage and Family Institute, to increase the payment limit by $370,000 to a new payment limit of 1,300,000 to provide additional specialty mental health services for the period July 1, 2019 through June 30, 2021. (50% Federal Medi-Cal; 50% Mental Health Realignment)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT) Other Actions   C. 45 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Administrator, or designee, to execute an order for the destruction of County collections and deposit records maintained by the Superior Court that are over five (5) years old and are no longer necessary or required for County or Court purposes. (No fiscal impact)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT) C. 46 ACCEPT the Northern Waterfront Short-Line Railroad Feasibility Study, as directed by the Transportation, Water, and Infrastructure Committee and Northern Waterfront Economic Development Initiative Ad Hoc Committee. (No fiscal impact)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT) C. 47 ACCEPT the annual Industrial Safety Ordinance Report for 2020, as requested by the Health Services Director.       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT) C. 48 APPROVE the list of providers recommended by Contra Costa Health Plan's Peer Review and Credentialing Committee and the Health Services Director, as required by the State Departments of Health Care Services and Managed Health Care, and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT) C. 49 RATIFY the Conservation and Development Director’s execution of a tolling agreement with Discovery Builders, Inc., West Coast Home Builders, Inc., and the East Contra Costa Fire Protection District to toll the limitations period for potential litigation related to fire protection facilities fees through April 30, 2021, as recommended by the Conservation and Development Director. (No fiscal impact)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT) C. 50 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Veterans Services Officer, or designee, to execute the Unpaid Student Training Agreement with California State University, Stanislaus Masters of Social Work Program for the period May 1, 2021 through April 30, 2026. (Non-financial agreement)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT) C. 51 APPROVE the 2021-2022 Head Start Recruitment and Enrollment Plan and the Admissions Priority Criteria for early care and education programs of the Community Services Bureau, as recommended by the Employment and Human Services Director.       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT) C. 52 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Auditor-Controller, or designee, to pay each of up to eleven (11) In-Home Supportive Services Public Authority Advisory Council members $24 per meeting not to exceed three (3) meetings per month for the 12-month period of July 1, 2021 through June 30, 2022 for a total cost for 11 members not to exceed $7,300 in stipends to defray meeting attendance costs, as recommended by the Employment and Human Services Director. (50% Federal, 40% State, 10% County)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT) Successor Agency to the Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency   C. 53 APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Conservation and Development Director, or designee, to execute an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement with Pacific West Communities for the development of 325 multiple family residences and 40,000 sq. ft. of commercial space for the Orbisonia Heights site in the Bay Point area. (100% Housing Successor funds)       AYE: District I Supervisor John Gioia, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Other: District II Supervisor Candace Andersen (ABSENT)   GENERAL INFORMATION GENERAL INFORMATION The Board meets in all its capacities pursuant to Ordinance Code Section 24-2.402, including as the Housing Authority and the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency. Persons who wish to address the Board should complete the form provided for that purpose and furnish a copy of any written statement to the Clerk. Any disclosable public records related to an open session item on a regular meeting agenda and distributed by the Clerk of the Board to a majority of the members of the Board of Supervisors less than 96 hours prior to that meeting are available for public inspection at 1025 Escobar Street, First Floor, 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, 1025 Escobar Street, First Floor, Martinez, CA 94553. 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) 655-2000. An assistive listening device is available from the Clerk, First Floor. Copies of recordings of all or portions of a Board meeting may be purchased from the Clerk of the Board. Please telephone the Office of the Clerk of the Board, (925) 655-2000, 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, 1025 Escobar Street, Martinez, California. Subscribe to receive to the weekly Board Agenda by calling the Office of the Clerk of the Board, (925) 655-2000 or using the County's on line subscription feature at the County’s Internet Web Page, where agendas and supporting information may also be viewed: www.co.contra-costa.ca.us STANDING COMMITTEES The Airport Committee (Supervisors Karen Mitchoff and Diane Burgis) meets quarterly on the second Wednesday of the month at 11:00 a.m. at the Director of Airports Office, 550 Sally Ride Drive, Concord. The Family and Human Services Committee (Supervisors John Gioia and Candace Andersen) meets on the fourth Monday of the month at 9:00 a.m. in Room 110, County Administration Building, 1025 Escobar Street, Martinez. The Finance Committee (Supervisors John Gioia and Karen Mitchoff) meets on the first Monday of the month at 9:00 a.m. in Room 110, County Administration Building, 1025 Escobar Street, Martinez. The Hiring Outreach Oversight Committee (Supervisors Federal D. Glover and John Gioia) meets quarterly on the first Monday of the month at 10:30 a.m.. in Room 110, County Administration Building, 1025 Escobar Street, Martinez. The Internal Operations Committee (Supervisors Candace Andersen and Diane Burgis) meets on the second Monday of the month at 10:30 a.m. in Room 110, County Administration Building, 1025 Escobar Street, Martinez. The Legislation Committee (Supervisors Karen Mitchoff and Diane Burgis) meets on the second Monday of the month at 1:00 p.m. in Room 110, County Administration Building, 1025 Street, Martinez. The Public Protection Committee (Supervisors Andersen and Federal D. Glover) meets on the fourth Monday of the month at 10:30 a.m. in Room 110, County Administration Building, 1025 Escobar Street, Martinez. The Sustainability Committee (Supervisors Federal D. Glover and John Gioia) meets on the fourth Monday of every other The Sustainability Committee (Supervisors Federal D. Glover and John Gioia) meets on the fourth Monday of every other month at 1:00 p.m. in Room 110, County Administration Building, 1025 Escobar Street, Martinez. The Transportation, Water & Infrastructure Committee (Supervisors Candace Andersen and Karen Mitchoff) meets on the second Monday of the month at 9:00 a.m. in Room 110, County Administration Building, 1025 Escobar Street, Martinez. Airports Committee March 10, 2021 11:00 a.m.See above Family & Human Services Committee March 22, 2021 9:00 a.m.See above Finance Committee April 5, 2021 9:00 a.m.See above Hiring Outreach Oversight Committee June 7, 2021 10:30 a.m.See above Internal Operations Committee April 12, 2021 10:30 a.m.See above Legislation Committee April 12, 2021 1:00 p.m.See above Public Protection Committee March 22, 2021 10:30 a.m.See above Sustainability Committee March 22, 2021 1:00 p.m.See above Transportation, Water & Infrastructure Committee April 12, 2021 9:00 a.m.See above AGENDA DEADLINE: Thursday, 12 noon, 12 days before the Tuesday Board meetings. Glossary of Acronyms, Abbreviations, and other Terms (in alphabetical order): Contra Costa County has a policy of making limited use of acronyms, abbreviations, and industry-specific language in its Board of Supervisors meetings and written materials. Following is a list of commonly used language that may appear in oral presentations and written materials associated with Board meetings: AB Assembly Bill ABAG Association of Bay Area Governments ACA Assembly Constitutional Amendment ADA Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 AFSCME American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees AICP American Institute of Certified Planners AIDS Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome ALUC Airport Land Use Commission AOD Alcohol and Other Drugs ARRA American Recovery & Reinvestment Act of 2009 BAAQMD Bay Area Air Quality Management District BART Bay Area Rapid Transit District BayRICS Bay Area Regional Interoperable Communications System BCDC Bay Conservation & Development Commission BGO Better Government Ordinance BOS Board of Supervisors CALTRANS California Department of Transportation CalWIN California Works Information Network CalWORKS California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids CAER Community Awareness Emergency Response CAO County Administrative Officer or Office CCCPFD (ConFire) Contra Costa County Fire Protection District CCHP Contra Costa Health Plan CCTA Contra Costa Transportation Authority CCRMC Contra Costa Regional Medical Center CCWD Contra Costa Water District CDBG Community Development Block Grant CFDA Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance CEQA California Environmental Quality Act CIO Chief Information Officer COLA Cost of living adjustment ConFire (CCCFPD) Contra Costa County Fire Protection District CPA Certified Public Accountant CPA Certified Public Accountant CPI Consumer Price Index CSA County Service Area CSAC California State Association of Counties CTC California Transportation Commission dba doing business as DSRIP Delivery System Reform Incentive Program EBMUD East Bay Municipal Utility District ECCFPD East Contra Costa Fire Protection District EIR Environmental Impact Report EIS Environmental Impact Statement EMCC Emergency Medical Care Committee EMS Emergency Medical Services EPSDT Early State Periodic Screening, Diagnosis and Treatment Program (Mental Health) et al. et alii (and others) FAA Federal Aviation Administration FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency F&HS Family and Human Services Committee First 5 First Five Children and Families Commission (Proposition 10) FTE Full Time Equivalent FY Fiscal Year GHAD Geologic Hazard Abatement District GIS Geographic Information System HCD (State Dept of) Housing & Community Development HHS (State Dept of ) Health and Human Services HIPAA Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act HIV Human Immunodeficiency Syndrome HOV High Occupancy Vehicle HR Human Resources HUD United States Department of Housing and Urban Development IHSS In-Home Supportive Services Inc. Incorporated IOC Internal Operations Committee ISO Industrial Safety Ordinance JPA Joint (exercise of) Powers Authority or Agreement Lamorinda Lafayette-Moraga-Orinda Area LAFCo Local Agency Formation Commission LLC Limited Liability Company LLP Limited Liability Partnership Local 1 Public Employees Union Local 1 LVN Licensed Vocational Nurse MAC Municipal Advisory Council MBE Minority Business Enterprise M.D. Medical Doctor M.F.T. Marriage and Family Therapist MIS Management Information System MOE Maintenance of Effort MOU Memorandum of Understanding MTC Metropolitan Transportation Commission NACo National Association of Counties NEPA National Environmental Policy Act OB-GYN Obstetrics and Gynecology O.D. Doctor of Optometry OES-EOC Office of Emergency Services-Emergency Operations Center OPEB Other Post Employment Benefits OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration PARS Public Agencies Retirement Services PEPRA Public Employees Pension Reform Act Psy.D. Doctor of Psychology RDA Redevelopment Agency RFI Request For Information RFP Request For Proposal RFQ Request For Qualifications RN Registered Nurse SB Senate Bill SBE Small Business Enterprise SEIU Service Employees International Union SUASI Super Urban Area Security Initiative SWAT Southwest Area Transportation Committee TRANSPAC Transportation Partnership & Cooperation (Central) TRANSPLAN Transportation Planning Committee (East County) TRE or TTE Trustee TWIC Transportation, Water and Infrastructure Committee UASI Urban Area Security Initiative VA Department of Veterans Affairs vs. versus (against) WAN Wide Area Network WBE Women Business Enterprise WCCTAC West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee RECOMMENDATION(S): Adopt Resolution No. 2021/77, approving the side letter between Contra Costa County and Professional & Technical Engineers, Local 21 (IFPTE, Local 21) amending the parties’ Memorandum of Understanding to add the Appraisers Unit (formerly the Property Appraisers Unit), and specifying those Sections applicable to the representation unit. FISCAL IMPACT: Structured to be cost neutral. This is a change in representation to IFPTE, Local 21 and there will be no change in benefits for the Appraisers Unit employees. BACKGROUND: On August 4, 2020, the Board of Supervisors formally recognized IFPTE Local 21 as the majority representative of the Property Appraisers Unit. The side letter is the result of the subsequent meet and confer process and identifies the terms and conditions of employment for the Property Appraisers Unit which is now identified as the Appraisers Unit of IFPTE Local 21. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the side letter is not approved, the terms and conditions of employment for the Appraiser Unit will not be included in the IFPTE, Local 21 memorandum of understanding. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Alvan Mangalindan, Labor Relations Analyst II (925) 655-2072 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Ann Elliott, Acting Director of Human Resources, Haj Nahal, Assistant Auditor-Controller D.1 To:Board of Supervisors From:Monica Nino, County Administrator Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:Side-Letter Amendments to the MOU between the County and IFPTE Local 21 ATTACHMENTS Resolution 2021/77 Side Letter between Contra Costa County and IFPTE, Local 21 - dated February 18, 2021 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board Adopted this Resolution on 03/09/2021 by the following vote: AYE:5 John Gioia Candace Andersen Diane Burgis Karen Mitchoff Federal D. Glover NO: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: RECUSE: Resolution No. 2021/77 In The Matter Of: Amendments to the Memorandum of Understanding between Contra Costa County and the Professional and Technical Engineers, Local 21, for the period of July 1, 2016 through June 30, 2022 The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors acting in its capacity as Governing Board of the County of Contra Costa and all districts of which it is the ex-officio governing Board RESOLVES THAT: Effective April 1, 2021, the attached Side Letter of Agreement dated February 18, 2021, between Contra Costa County and the Professional and Technical Engineers, Local 21, be ADOPTED. Contact: Alvan Mangalindan, Labor Relations Analyst II (925) 655-2072 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Ann Elliott, Acting Director of Human Resources, Haj Nahal, Assistant Auditor-Controller Page 1 of 8 SIDE LETTER BETWEEN CONTRA COSTA COUNTY AND IFPTE, LOCAL 21 This Side Letter is by and between the Professional and Technical Engineers, IFPTE, Local 21 ("Local 21") and the County of Contra Costa ("County") and is effective on _____ following approval of the Board of Supervisors. This side letter amends the Memorandum of Understanding between the County and Local 21 (July 1, 2019- June 30, 2022) to include the new Appraisers Unit (ZD) and specifies those Sections applicable and not applicable to the new unit: I. SECTION 1 ORGANIZATION RECOGNITION Amend Section 1 - Organization Recognition, to add the Appraisers Unit (ZD) to the list of units recognized to be represented by Local 21. Include a list of Appraisers Unit (ZD) classifications as Appendix I (attached) to the MOU. Property Appraisers are those employees in the classifications of Associate Appraiser (DATA), Assistant Appraiser (DAVA), and Junior Appraiser (DAWA). • Amend Section 1 – Organization Recognition, as follows: Professional & Technical Engineers, Local 21, AFL-CIO is the formally recognized employee organization for the representation units listed below, and such employee organization has been certified as such pursuant to Board of Supervisors’ Resolution 81/1165. Supervisory Unit – see Appendix A Non-Supervisory Unit – see Appendix B Unit C – see Appendix C Appraisers Unit (ZD) – see Appendix I II. SECTION 6 — DAYS & HOURS OF WORK Amend Section 6 – Days & Hours of Work, to exclude the Appraisers Unit (ZD) from subsections 6.6 and 6.7, include Appraisers Unit (ZD) classifications under subsection 6.18, and add new subsections 6.20 and 6.21. • Amend Subsection 6.6 No Overtime Pay, Holiday Pay, or Comp Time, as follows: 6.6 No Overtime Pay, Holiday Pay, or Comp Time: Employees are not entitled to receive overtime pay, holiday pay, overtime compensatory time, or holiday compensatory time. Employees who are unable or not permitted to observe a holiday (take the day off), are authorized to receive overtime pay ONLY IF the employee is on the Overtime Exempt Exclusion List. This section does not apply to employees in Unit C and the Appraisers Unit (ZD). Page 2 of 8 • Amend Subsection 6.7 Overtime Exempt Exclusion, as follows: 6.7 Overtime Exempt Exclusion: Employees who are awarded Annual Management Administrative Leave in recognition of the extra burden their job responsibilities may sometimes place on their work schedules are overtime exempt and are not eligible for overtime pay, holiday pay, overtime compensatory time, or holiday compensatory time. However, these employees may be made eligible for overtime pay if their names are placed on the Overtime Exempt Exclusion List by the County Administrator's Office. Employees on the Overtime Exempt Exclusion list are authorized to receive overtime pay, only. These employees are NOT eligible for holiday pay, overtime compensatory time, or holiday compensatory time. Employees on the Overtime Exempt Exclusion List are also NOT eligible for Annual Management Administrative Leave for the quarter they are on the Overtime Exempt Exclusion List. The policies and the procedures for the Overtime Exempt Exclusion List are set forth in the County Administrator's memo of November 6, 2002, as may be amended. This section does not apply to employees in Unit C and the Appraisers Unit (ZD). • Amend Subsection 6.9 Personal Holiday Credits, as follows: 6.9 Personal Holiday Credit. Employees are entitled to accrue two (2) hours of personal holiday credit each month. Employees in Unit C and the Appraisers Unit (ZD) will accrue four (4) hours of personal holiday credit each month. This time is prorated for part-time employees. No employee may accrue more than forty (40) hours of personal holiday credit. On separation from County service, employees are paid for any unused personal holiday credit hours at the employee's then current rate of pay, up to a maximum of forty (40) hours. • Amend Subsection 6.18 Unit C Overtime and Straight Time Pay as follows: 6.18 Unit C and the Appraisers Unit (ZD) Overtime and Straight Time Pay. Permanent full-time and part-time employees in Unit C and the Appraisers Unit (ZD) will be compensated for overtime at the rate of one and one-half (1.5) times their base rate of pay (excluding differentials) for authorized work performed that exceeds eight (8) hours in a day and that exceed the employee’s daily scheduled hours, or forty (40) hours in a week. Work performed does not include non-worked hours. Permanent full-time and part-time employees will be paid straight time pay at the rate of one (1.0) hour times the employee’s base rate of pay (excluding differentials) for hours worked in excess of the employees daily number of scheduled hours that do not qualify for overtime pay. Employees are not entitled to compensatory time off in lieu of overtime or straight time pay. • Add new Subsection 6.20 – Appraisers Unit (ZD) Holidays Observed on Regular Day Off of Full-Time Employees on 4/10, 9/80, Flexible, and Alternate Work Schedule, as follows: 6.20 Appraisers Unit (ZD) Holidays Observed on Regular Day Off of Full-Time Employees on 4/10, 9/80, Flexible, and Alternate Work Schedule: 1. When a holiday is observed by the County on the regularly scheduled day off of an employee who is on a 4/10, 9/80, flexible, or alternate work schedule, the employee is entitled to take eight (8) hours of flexible pay at the rate of 1.0 times his/her base rate of pay (not including differentials) or flexible compensatory time in recognition of his/her Page 3 of 8 regularly scheduled day off. 2. Flexible compensatory time may not be accumulated in excess of two hundred eighty-eight (288) hours. After 288 hours are accrued by an employee, the employee will receive flexible pay at the rate of 1.0 times his/her base rate of pay. Flexible compensatory time may be taken on those dates and times determined by mutual agreement of the employee and the Department Head or designee. 3. Flexible compensatory time will be paid off only upon a change in status. A change in status includes separation, transfer to another department, reassignment to a permanent-intermittent position, or transfer assignment, or promotion or demotion into a position that is not eligible for flexible compensatory time. 4. Employees who elect to receive flexible compensatory time must agree to do so for a full fiscal year (July 1 through June 30). The employee must notify their departmental payroll staff of any change in the election by May 31 of each year. • Add new Subsection 6.21 – Appraisers Unit (ZD) 4/10 Summer Schedule, as follows: 6.21 Appraisers Unit (ZD) 4/10 Summer Schedule. The Assessor may continue the annual 4/10 summer schedule, which begins when the Assessor declares and ends on October 31st of each year. III. SECTION 12 HEALTH, LIFE & DENTAL CARE Amend subsections 12.12 and 12.14 to remove reference to $5,000 cap per calendar year. • Amend subsection 12.12 and 12.14 as follows: 12.12 Health Care Spending Account: After six (6) months of permanent employment, full time and part time (20/40 or greater) employees may elect to participate in a Health Care Spending Account (HCSA) Program designated to qualify for tax savings under Section 125 of the Internal Revenue Code, but such savings are not guaranteed. The HCSA Program allows employees to set aside a predetermined amount of money from their pay, not to exceed five thousand dollars ($5,000) the maximum amount authorized by federal law, per calendar year, of before tax dollars, for health care expenses not reimbursed by any other health benefit plans. HCSA dollars may be expended on any eligible medical expenses allowed by Internal Revenue Code Section 125. Any unused balance is forfeited and cannot be recovered by the employee 12.14 Dependent Care Assistance Program: The County offers the option of enrolling in a Dependent Care Assistance Program (DCAP) designed to qualify for tax savings under Section 129 of the Internal Revenue Code, but such savings are not guaranteed. The program allows employees to set aside up to five thousand dollars ($5,000) a predetermined amount of annual salary not to exceed the maximum amount authorized by federal law, of annual salary (before taxes) per calendar year, of before-tax dollars to pay for eligible dependent care (child and elder care) expenses. Any unused balance is forfeited and cannot be recovered by the employee Page 4 of 8 IV. SECTION 13 - PROBATIONARY PERIOD • Amend subsection 13.2 - Classes with Probationary Period Over Six Months as follows: CLASSIFICATION JOB CODE MONTHS JUNIOR APPRAISER DAWA 12 V. SECTION 21 - RETIREMENT • Amend subsection 21.2 - Retirement Benefit - Employees who become CCCERA members on or After January 1, 2013 as follows: A. For employees who become members of the Contra Costa County Employees Retirement Association (CCCERA) on or after January 1, 2013, retirement benefits are governed by the California Public Employees Pension Reform Act of 2013 (PEPRA), (chapters 296, 297, Statutes of 2012). To the extent this Agreement conflicts with any provision of PEPRA, PEPRA will govern. (For additional information about the PEPRA pension benefit, see www.CCCERA.org) B. For employees hired by the County after June 30, 2014, who, under PEPRA, become New Members of CCCERA the cost of living adjustment to the retirement allowance will not exceed two percent (2%) per year, and the cost of living adjustment will be banked. C. For employees who, under PEPRA, become New Members of CCCERA, the disability provisions are the same as the current Tier III disability provisions. D. The County will seek legislation amending the County Employees Retirement Law of 1937 to clarify that the current Tier III disability provisions apply to employees who, under PEPRA, become New Members of CCCERA. The Union will support the legislation. VI. SECTION 41 – OTHER BENEFITS • Amend subsection 41.4 – Deferred Compensation Incentive. Add Special Benefit for Permanent Employees in the Appraisers Unit (ZD) Hired on and after January 1, 2009 (Deferred Compensation Incentive) as follows: C. Special Benefit for Permanent Employees in the Appraisers Unit (ZD) Hired on and after January 1, 2009: 1. Beginning on April 1, 2009 and for the term of this MOU, the County will contribute one hundred and fifty dollars ($150) per month to an employee’s account in the Contra Costa County Deferred Compensation Plan, or other tax- qualified savings program designated by the County, for employees in the Appraisers Unit (ZD) classifications who meet all of the following conditions: a. The employee must be hired by Contra Costa County on or after January 1, 2009 for the Appraisers Unit (ZD) classifications. Page 5 of 8 b. The employee must be appointed to a permanent position. The position may be either full time or part time, but if it is part time, it must be designated, at a minimum, as 20 hours per week. c. The employee must have been employed by Contra Costa County for at least 90 calendar days. d. The employee must contribute a minimum of twenty-five dollars ($25) per month to the Contra Costa County Deferred Compensation Plan, or other tax-qualified savings program designated by the County. e. The employee must complete and sign the required enrollment form(s) for his/her deferred compensation account and submit those forms to the Human Resources Department, Employee Benefits Services Unit. f. The employee may not exceed the annual maximum contribution amount allowable by the United States Internal Revenue Code. Note – Subsequent paragraphs under subsection 41.4 will be reordered accordingly. • Amend subsection 41.5.E – Annual Management Administrative Leave to exclude Appraisers Unit (ZD) classifications from provision. - 41.5.E - This section does not apply to employees in classifications of Unit C and the Appraisers Unit (ZD). • Amend subsection 41.9.D – Other Terms and Conditions of Employment (Overtime Exempt Exclusion, Overtime, Length of Service Credits) to exclude Appraisers Unit (ZD) classifications from provision. - 41.9.D - This section does not apply to employees in classifications of Unit C and the Appraisers Unit (ZD). • Amend subsection 41.10.D – Vacation Buy Back to exclude Appraisers Unit (ZD) classifications from provision. - 41.10.D - This section does not apply to employees in classifications of Unit C and the Appraisers Unit (ZD). • Amend subsection 41.12.G – Sick Leave Incentive Plan to exclude Appraisers Unit (ZD) classifications from provision. - 41.12.G – This section does not apply to employees in the classifications of the Appraisers Unit (ZD). • Amend subsection 41.14 – Long Term Disability Insurance to exclude Appraisers Unit (ZD) classifications from provision. - 41.14 - The County will continue in force the Long-Term Disability Insurance program with a replacement limit of eighty-five (85%) of total monthly base earnings reduced by any deductible benefits. Effective July 1, 2016, the LTD program is discontinued for employees. An LTD claim filed prior to July 1, 2016 will be processed under the LTD program, until such time as the claim is closed. This section does not apply to employees in the classifications of the Appraisers Unit (ZD). Page 6 of 8 VII. SECTION 42 SPECIAL BENEFITS FOR MANAGEMENT EMPLOYEES BY DEPARTMENT OR CLASS • Amend subsection 42.6 - Assessor Education Differential, to add the listed classes from the Appraisers Unit (ZD) as eligible for the Assessor Education Differential, as follows: Employees in the classes of Principal Appraiser (DADC), Supervising Appraiser (DAHC), Supervising Auditor-Appraiser (DRNA), Auditor-Appraiser I (DRWB), Auditor Appraiser II (DRVA) and, Senior Auditor-Appraiser (DRTA), Associate Appraiser (DARA), Assistant Appraiser (DAVA), and Junior Appraiser (DAWA) are entitled to a salary differential of two and one-half percent (2.5%) of base monthly salary for possession of a certification for educational achievement from at least one of the following: A. American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers Residential Member designation. B. State Board of Equalization Advanced Appraiser Certification. C. International Association of Assessing Officers Residential Evaluation Specialist. D. Society of Auditor-Appraiser Master Auditor-Appraiser designation. E. Society of Real Estate Appraisers Senior Residential Appraiser designation. F. Any other certification approved by the County Assessor and the Director of Human Resources. • Add new Subsection 42.30 – Property Appraiser Division Differentials, as follows: Property Appraiser Division Differentials: Associate Appraisers assigned to the Standards Division of the Assessor’s Office shall receive a monthly differential in the amount of two and one-half percent (2.5%) of monthly base pay for each month assigned. This differential is in recognition of the additional responsibilities and duties required when assigned to the Standards Division. The Associate Appraiser in the Standards Division who is assigned the responsibility of providing lead direction and training to subordinate Appraisers shall receive a monthly differential in the amount of two and one-half percent (2.5%) of monthly base pay in addition to the differential described above. VIII. All other provisions of the MOU between the County and Local 21 that are not specifically amended or excluded by this Side Letter are applicable to the classifications in the Appraisers Unit (ZD). The terms of this Side Letter will be incorporated into the next MOU between the County and Local 21. Except as specifically amended or excluded by this Side Letter, all other terms and conditions of the MOU between Contra Costa County and Local 21 (July 1, 2019 -June 30, 2022) remain unchanged by this Side Letter. In the event either party identifies any unknown or unintended adverse impacts associated with this side letter, the parties will meet and confer to resolve the concerns. Page 8 of 8 APPENDIX I CLASSIFICATIONS IN THE APPRAISERS UNIT (ZD) (Sorted by: Classification) Effective July 1, 2020 Salary Range Job Code Class Title Flex Staff (F), Deep Class (D) From To DAWA JUNIOR APPRAISER F $5,730.81 $6,318.22 DAVA ASSISTANT APPRAISER F $5,742.17 $6,979.65 DATA ASSOCIATE APPRAISER F $6,848.86 $8,324.83 RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE the Accessible Transportation Strategic (ATS) Plan and DIRECT Conservation and Development staff to continue acting as County liaison during the implementation effort, in coordination with staff from Health Services, Employment and Human Services, Public Works (General Services), and other potentially supportive or impacted Departments. FISCAL IMPACT: None. The ATS Plan recommendations do not directly or immediately impact the County budget. Individual ATS Plan implementation tasks may have impacts in the future at which point they will be brought to the Board for consideration. Conservation and Development staff costs are included in existing budgets and work plans. Staff participation from other impacted Departments should be minimal. BACKGROUND: Summary In 2019, the Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA/Authority) and the County applied for and received a Sustainable Communities Planning grant from Caltrans in the amount of $400,000 to complete the countywide Accessible Transportation (ATS) Plan to address transportation services in the county related to transportation for seniors and people with disabilities. The study was recommended in CCTA's 2017 Countywide Transportation Plan (CTP). APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: John Cunningham (925) 674-7833 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: , Deputy cc: D.2 To:Board of Supervisors From:TRANSPORTATION, WATER & INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan and Implementation Efforts BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) The ATS Plan was prepared by Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates with oversight provided through a partnership between CCTA and the County and input and guidance provided by a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) and a Policy Advisory Committee (PAC). The CTP identified a need to address the challenges associated with: (1) different types of accessible transportation services for older adults and people with disabilities; (2) multiple transportation providers including cities, transit operators, social services agencies, and non-profit organizations; and (3) diverse, and sometimes overlapping, service areas. The ATS Plan has documented the following gaps and concerns: cross jurisdictional transfer trips leading to long and confusing rides, the need for more evening and weekend service, the need for a "one-call/one-click" system, and the need for same day service, among many other issues. Advocates have been expressing these concerns for decades. The Metropolitan Transportation Commission's Coordinated Public Transit-Human Services Transportation Plan summarizes the status of this segment of the transportation system as follows: “Current senior-oriented mobility services do not have the capacity to handle the increase in people over 65 years of age…the massive growth among the aging …points to a lack of fiscal and organizational readiness…the closure and consolidation of medical facilities while rates of diabetes and obesity are on the rise will place heavy demands on an already deficient system.” Recent Events The Transportation, Water and Infrastructure Committee received an overview of this item at their February 8th meeting. The Board of Supervisors also should be aware of two events that occurred subsequent to that meeting: 1) The Draft Final ATS Plan (attached) was published The recommendations in the ATS Plan are discussed in more detail below but in summary, the primary recommendation is to form a Task Force that will recommend a Coordinating Entity. The Task Force, potentially comprised of PAC members, will determine what agency or type of agency (public agency, joint powers, non-profit, etc) will act as the Coordinating Entity. There is general agreement that a Coordinating Entity is needed to ensure ATS Plan implementation. 2) March 3rd Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) Planning Committee took place This report was published prior to the March CCTA Planning Committee meeting. CCTA staff will be present at the March 9th Board of Supervisors meeting and will review any outcomes from the Planning Committee meeting of which the Board should be aware. Critical Issues Raised During the ATS Process: • Legacy: In Contra Costa County there have been three similar studies conducted in thirty years with little implementation. This was a concern to all participants in the ATS Plan process. There was agreement that a new entity needed to be formed ("Coordinating Entity") in order help ensure implementation and avoid the fate of earlier plans. • Funding: There is a need for additional funding to implement any of the ATS Plan • Funding: There is a need for additional funding to implement any of the ATS Plan recommendations. Discussion on this point was one reason why the designation of a non-profit organization found favor (see citation in the next bullet) with the PAC. The funding needs include one-time grants for discrete expenses and capital purchases but also a critical need for ongoing funding. Some PAC members believed that a non-profit organization would be better positioned than the public sector to generate new funding opportunities. • Primary Recommendation: Coordinating Entity: The ATS Plan provides a two-step recommendation to address the need for a new entity to oversee implementation of the ATS Plan. First, a Task Force would be formed. Second, that Task Force would "define and establish a dedicated countywide Coordinating Entity." The dialog at the PAC included support for a non-profit organization acting as Coordinating Entity: "At the completion of the ATSP process there appeared to be a plurality amongst the PAC in favor of ultimately designating a non-profit organization as the Coordinating Entity (existing or new was not determined)." However, the recommendation in the ATS Plan is to have the Task Force explore a range of options including a non-profit organization as well as public sector agencies. • Protection for Existing Transit Revenues : Contra Costa transit operators expressed concern that as implementation moves ahead their Measure J revenue is protected. • User/Passenger Membership on the Task Force: It has been proposed that the existing ATS Plan PAC be used as the implementation Task Force. Regardless if this is the case, or new members are identified, it is important that the roster include representation from the population that will ultimately use the service. Schedule/Next Steps: Wednesday, March 17: Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) Board of Directors will consider the ATS Plan. CCTA will be responsible for establishing the Task Force. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- History/Background (Adapted from CCTA Staff Report) The ATS Plan originated from CCTA's 2017 Contra Costa CTP. The CTP identified a need to address the challenges associated with: (1) different types of accessible transportation services for older adults and people with disabilities; (2) multiple transportation providers including cities/towns, transit operators, social services agencies, and non-profit organizations; and (3) diverse and sometimes overlapping service areas. The ATS Plan is also intended to address unimplemented recommendations of three previous studies (1990, 2004, 2013) which were similar in scope. The 2016 and 2020 Transportation Expenditure Plans (TEP), though connected to unsuccessful sales tax measures, did further set expectations for the ATS Plan to ultimately "implement a customer-focused, user- friendly, seamless coordinated system." The ATS Plan will also help fulfill a requirement by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) in its Resolution 4321, that County Transportation Agencies (CTA)/Congestion Management Agencies (CMA) must meet the following mobility management requirement: “Each county must establish or enhance mobility management programs to help provide equitable and effective access to transportation.” Mobility management in this context refers to a centralized point-of-contact that facilitates ease of use of Mobility management in this context refers to a centralized point-of-contact that facilitates ease of use of a variety of transportation modes by people with disabilities, veterans, and older adults. MTC uses the following description to define mobility management activities: The region’s Coordinated Public Transit-Human Services Transportation Plan directs counties to develop mobility management programs with three key components: • Countywide travel training; • In-person Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) paratransit certification; and • Coordination of information and referrals (I&R) through the provision of a mobility manager. As part of the preparation for the project, the Authority and the County met with each transit agency to ensure they were supportive of the study, consulted with the Authority’s Bus Transit Coordinating Committee (BTCC), and had each transit agency review and comment on the Scope-of-Work (SOW) and proposed oversight structure before the study was initiated. This effort was a partnership between the Authority and the County, funded by a Caltrans Sustainable Communities Transportation Planning grant. The Authority issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) and selected Nelson\Nygaard. The process of developing the plan was originally intended to involve multiple oversight committees. The project team eventually defined and set-up a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) and a Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) (detailed membership rosters are included in the attached ATS Plan): Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) The role of the TAC was to provide subject matter expertise and public policy implications on service concepts under review by the study team. The TAC first met in November 2019 and continued meeting approximately monthly throughout the Study. Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) The role of the PAC was to provide input on addressing policy barriers, communicate with stakeholders about the Study, liaise with elected or appointed Boards, and review and prioritize recommended strategies. The PAC first met in August 2020 and was originally slated to meet three times. Given the online meeting format and the complicated nature of the County’s transportation challenges, the PAC ended up meeting approximately monthly since October 2020. Supervisor Candace Anderson was the County's representative on the PAC. As noted above, previous paratransit-related studies have been completed. Four studies of note are: 1990 Contra Costa County Paratransit Plan, 2004 Contra Costa County Paratransit Improvement Study, 2013 Contra Costa County Mobility Management Plan, and 2018 West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee (WCCTAC) Transportation Needs Assessment. While many of the strategies recommended in those plans are considered to be best practices in other locations, a significant portion have not been implemented in the County. There are a variety of reasons for the failure to implement these previous studies such as lack of political support, structural issues related to the existence of multiple agencies involved in service delivery, and the lack of funding. A primary factor in the Authority’s design and development of this study was to uncover and address these previous barriers to ensure that recommendations from this study are more likely to be implemented. The process incorporated into the ATS Plan resulted in a more collaborative and engaging discussion than was the case in previous studies. It is therefore anticipated that the recommended strategies will have greater community and agency support than previous efforts, and therefore have a greater likelihood of implementation. Seniors and people with disabilities face significant challenges navigating a disparate transportation system. In addition, the proportion of seniors in the population is growing significantly, leading to an increase in demand for ADA paratransit services and a continuing magnification of related transportation challenges, including the need for greater transportation resources. The growing challenges facing seniors, people with disabilities, and eligible veterans in accessing needed transportation have been integrated into the recommended strategies of the ATS Plan. The study’s three primary goals were to: 1. Evaluate the existing services and provide corresponding recommendations for improvements; 2. Identify alternative models for service delivery, present those alternatives to stakeholders, and select a final preferred model; and 3. Develop a detailed implementation plan for that model. Any study related to transportation for seniors and people with disabilities needs to address the issues of funding and demand. The Authority and the County recognize that current funding for these areas is limited. Grants for planning (e.g. Caltrans) and mobility management pilots may be obtained (e.g. Federal Transit Administration 5310) but jurisdictions must still establish sustainable funding for ongoing operations. Significant portions of current funding, such as for ADA-mandated paratransit programs, are restricted on how and to whom they can provide service. Regulatory concerns also affect transportation to and from healthcare, and inter-jurisdictional travel. Although some organizations and jurisdictions have proposed legislative fixes to these issues, it is challenging to change State or Federal law. Outreach At the outset of this effort, a framework was developed for public outreach and engagement that would solicit input from key individuals and organizations, as well as a broad cross- section of the County’s communities and stakeholder groups, particularly seniors and persons with disabilities. The outreach plan included five key goals to support a successful ATS Plan: 1. Educate community members about the Study and different transportation options in the County; 2. Engage with community members and learn about current transportation usage; 3. Identify strengths and challenges of existing services and unmet needs; 4. Gather and incorporate feedback on alternative models; and 5. Create support within the community for new models and identify potential barriers to implementation. The comprehensive outreach effort for the ATS Plan included the following components: • Presentations pre-COVID o Developmental Disabilities Council of Contra Costa County o Pleasant Hill Commission on Aging • Surveys – 1000+ o English, Spanish and Mandarin • Flyer/survey emailed and on paper with meal delivery • Five Virtual Focus groups o Diablo Valley College Disability Support Services o Lighthouse for the Blind o San Pablo Senior Center (Spanish) o San Ramon Senior Center o El Cerrito Senior Center • Eleven Stakeholder interviews • Telephone Town Hall Meeting – Oct 27, 2020 o Call available in English, Spanish, and Mandarin o 225 people pre-registered o 23,000 phone numbers dialed, 1,149 accepted. o 4 simple polls; 17 audience questions answered by staff • Partner websites • Social media o Instagram, Facebook, Nextdoor, and Twitter • Public Strategy Input on Recommendations through the project website, www.atspcontracosta.com The outreach effort provided significant input into the identification of transportation needs and gaps, which are provided in Chapter 4 of the ATS Plan. Recommendation Summary The final two chapters of the ATS Plan provide recommended mobility strategies to address the needs and gaps, as well as an implementation plan which includes a blueprint to implementation of these strategies. The primary recommended strategy that is necessary to implement several of the mobility strategies is the implementation of a Coordinated Structure as defined in detail below. Coordinated Structure A coordinated structure will need to be in place to implement countywide and centralized mobility strategies. Due to the complexity of implementing a coordinated service, establishment of this structure is proposed to be an iterative, two-phase process. In the short-term, a Task Force should be established that will be responsible for identifying which mobility strategies require a dedicated entity to increase the likelihood of implementation of countywide study recommendations, and which strategies could be assigned to existing entities for implementation in the shorter term. Phase 1: Establish a Task Force (TF) The ATS Plan recommends that a TF be established to take the study recommendations to the next level of implementation. Following are some of the elements of this task that will need to be implemented: Composition: The TF should include representatives of a broad variety of individuals representing agencies or user groups that have a stake in the project outcomes. This TF should include representatives of relevant human service agencies, transit agencies, elected officials, disabled and older adult advocates representing a range of segments of these communities, veterans, funding bodies, and other representatives. To expedite the development of the TF, the ATS Plan recommends that it be composed of a modified version of the study’s PAC, depending on interest, availability, and representation of a diversity of interests. Mission: The TF is proposed to have three primary tasks: 1. Identify ATS Plan recommended strategies that can be delegated to existing agencies or non-profit organizations that do not require a Coordinated Entity (CE) for short-term implementation; 2. Define and establish a dedicated countywide CE for implementation of countywide strategies; and 3. Identify funding. Activities should include prioritizing of the strategies presented in this study, and development of an incremental approach to strategy implementation. This would ensure that select study recommendations can be implemented in the short-term rather than waiting for the creation or designation of a unified entity for implementation of large-scale, longer term strategies. Reporting Structure and Administrative Support: Authority staff is recommending that the responsibility of interim oversight of the TF be provided by the Authority to ensure continuity moving to the next phase from the ATS Plan. The TF could be an advisory committee to the Authority Board and report regularly on activities. It would need to be determined how and when the TF would report to the County Board of Supervisors (BOS), and/or transit agency Boards. Funding Sources: Potential overhead costs for this task should be relatively limited beyond the required staffing support. Authority staff will bring a recommendation of proposed funding for staffing support to a future Authority Board meeting. Time Frame: Once the ATS Plan has been approved by the Authority Board and County BOS, the TF could begin operating within three to six months. If the PAC is used as the basis for the formulation of the TF, it will ease implementation of this recommendation. The TF would remain in place until it completed its mission and could be dissolved once a Coordinated Entity (CE) is in place. Phase 2: Establish a Dedicated Countywide Coordinated Entity (CE) A dedicated CE should either be created or designated to implement countywide study recommendations. The TF will be responsible for determining where this entity should be housed – it could be in an existing non-profit or public agency, or the TF could determine that a new entity will need to be established. Mission: The role of the CE would be to implement study recommendations. Examples of strategies to be implemented by the CE could include: • Identify and pursue new funding sources. • Administer a uniform countywide ADA paratransit eligibility certification. • Expand mobility management function. • Procure joint paratransit scheduling software. • Present a unified voice regarding policy and funding at the local, state, and federal levels. • Oversee a one-seat ride for inter-jurisdictional trips both within and outside the county. Additional opportunities for countywide service could be considered in the future as appropriate. Successful implementation of this recommendation will require political commitment at the highest levels of elected representatives in the County serving on the Authority Board, County BOS, and transit agencies. Substantial effort will be required to set-up this organization (or to designate an existing organization to take on this role). Some of the considerations include potentially lengthy negotiations between stakeholders, resolution of legal issues, governance decisions, incorporating and otherwise incubating a non-profit organization, setting up joint powers agreements, etc. The CE could have significant potential for implementing some of the longer term strategies proposed in the ATS Plan depending on the strength of leadership and the ability to secure dedicated funding. The CE will need to seek funding through a variety of means, likely including funding dedicated through a sales tax measure. A non-profit could have access to funding not available to public entities, such as grant funding and Community Development Block Grants, foundation funding, donations, other public funding options, etc. One role of the TF and CE will be to explore comprehensive funding opportunities outside of “transportation” dollars. State and federal agencies provide funding through social service departments for transportation, outside of the traditional transportation silos. Other Notes Other Notes At the outset of the planning process, staff from the Department of Conservation and Development and Contra Costa Health Services had several exploratory meetings to discuss how the ATS Plan could support CCHS operations and how they could be more involved in the process. The collaboration was not continued due to the overwhelming demands of the COVID-19 response on CCHS. Outreach to Veterans Affairs generated useful information that was previously unknown to ATS staff and the consultant team. In summary, issues with transportation services for veterans are similar to the broader population, there are significant service gaps and eligibility limitations and it is difficult to navigate transportation benefit administrative requirements. The WCCTAC Board discussed the ATS Plan at their 1/22/21 meeting. Comments included: there is plenty of analysis; leadership and political champions are needed, questions as to why there are so many agencies running this type of service, with references to individual cities having challenges running a program, a need for coordination and a model to serve the whole county, there needs to be a countywide solution, and expressed support for a "one-call, one-click system." CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan is a joint effort between the Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) and the County. If the County does not act, our position on the Plan will be unknown to CCTA which could create confusion. CLERK'S ADDENDUM Speakers: Debbie Toth, President & CEO of Choice in Aging; Cheryl Sudduth. ATTACHMENTS ATS Plan - Exec Summary ATS Plan - Draft Final ATS Plan - Presentation C ONTRA COSTA ACCESSIBLE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLANEXECUTIVE SUMMARY Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan FEBRUARY 2021 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan was funded by a Caltrans Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant. Project Team Peter Engel, Director of Programs, Contra Costa Transportation Authority John Cunningham, Principal Transportation Planner, Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development Corinne Dutra-Roberts, Innovative Mobility Programs, Advanced Mobility Group (AMG) Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Naomi Armenta, Project Manager Richard Weiner, Principal in Charge Marvin Ranaldson Tanya Shah Kevin Lucas Emily Roach Brian Manford Kevin Ottem Executive Summary | February 2021 Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ES-1 Study Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ES-1 Study Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ES-2 Existing Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ES-3 Outreach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ES-6 Survey Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ES-10 Transportation Needs and Gaps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ES-12 Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ES-13 i Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan ii Final Plan | June 2020 STUDY BACKGROUND The Accessible Transportation Strategic (ATS) Plan provides a coordination structure with strategies to improve accessible transportation services, based on an examination of transportation challenges facing seniors, people with disabilities, and veterans in Contra Costa County. Sponsored by a partnership between CCTA and the County, the ATS was funded by a Caltrans Sustainable Communities Transportation Planning grant. Inclusive and equitable public engagement was a key focus of the Plan, with input from organizations, key stakeholders, and the broader Contra Costa community. Executive Summary Project Oversight The ATS process was overseen by Technical Advisory and Policy Advisory Committees. In March 2020, due to the COVID-19 outbreak, the project team started working “virtually” to allow people to participate safely. • Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) Provided subject matter expertise and public policy implications on service concepts • Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) Provided input on addressing policy barriers, communicating with stakeholders about the Study, liaising with elected or appointed Boards, and reviewing and prioritizing recommended strategies ES-1 Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan Executive Summary STUDY CONTEXT Contra Costa County has a diverse population spread across a relatively large area. Related Planning Initiatives 2016-2020 2016 and 2020 Transportation Expenditure Plan “CCTA will develop an Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan to implement a customer-focused, user-friendly, seamless coordinated system…” 2017 Countywide Comprehensive Transportation Plan “Initiate the ATS Plan: Ensure services are delivered in a coordinated system…” 2019 Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) Resolution 4321 “Each county must establish or enhance mobility management programs to help provide equitable and effective access to transportation.” ES-2 Executive Summary | February 2021 Executive Summary EXISTING CONDITIONS Older Adults and Adults with Disabilities The distribution of older adults and prople with disabilities reflects the general population spread throughout the county, with a few areas of unusual concentration. Rossmoor has a higher population both of older adults and people with disabilities—countywide, those two groups constitute 23% of the population. 1 2 3 Older Adults Three areas have a higher density of older adults: 1) Rossmoor (between Moraga and Walnut Creek), 2) Crow Canyon (north of San Ramon), and the area 3) South of Brentwood. Rossmoor People with Disabilities People with disabilities have a similar geographic spread as the general population, except one concentrated area in Rossmoor. ES-3 Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan Executive Summary People of Color Nearly half of the county population identifies as people of color or other non-white ethnicity. Equity Considerations Countywide Ethnicity 52% White 48% People of Color/Other Household Income Low income population concentrations include West County, mid-County, and North county locations. ES-4 Executive Summary | February 2021 Executive Summary Transportation Need and Services Community-Based Transportation Services areas don’t always overlap areas of greatest demand, increasing the need for transit and paratransit services provided by community-transportation programs from public sector services or non-profit organizations. Access to Medical Facilities Most medical facilities are clustered in the center of the County between Pleasant Hill and Walnut Creek (2). Two facilities needed by residents throughout the County are the Contra Costa County Medical Center and the VA Medical Center, both in Martinez (2). 1 2 ES-5 Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan Executive Summary OUTREACH Outreach Toolkit A virtual and paper flyer, along with tweets and postings on provider websites were distributed via social media, encouraging people to provide input through the online survey. Virtual Outreach Flyer ES-6 Executive Summary | February 2021 Executive Summary Public Engagement Collateral ES-7 Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan Executive Summary Pre-COVID Outreach Before the onset of the pandemic, surveys and engagement flyers were distributed and the project team made public presentations at the Developmental Disabilities Council of Contra Costa County and the Pleasant Hill Commission on Aging. The Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA), in coordination with Contra Costa County, is conducting a study to find out how to improve transportation services for seniors, people with disabilities, and eligible veterans who live or travel in Contra Costa County. Please take a few minutes to fill out this survey and return it to the person who gave it to you, or you can also take the survey on-line at: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/CCTA_Survey. If you have any questions or need assistance filling out this survey, please contact 510-506-7586 or info@atspcontracosta.com. OVER► SURVEY 1. Which modes of transportation do you usually use? (Check all that apply; answer any related follow-up questions for BUS, ADA PARATRANSIT and LYFT/UBER) 1 BART 2 Bus  Answer follow-up Q 2-4 3 Bicycle 4 Walk/Roll 5 ADA Paratransit (East Bay Paratransit, WestCAT Dial-a-Ride, County Connection LINK, Tri Delta Paratransit)  Answer follow-up Q 5-7 6 Drive myself 7 Lyft/Uber  Answer follow-up Q 8-9 8 Taxi 9 Family, neighbor, or paid helper drives me 10 Other (example: R-Transit, Rossmoor Dial-a-Bus, Lamorinda Spirit Van, etc): ______________________ Q 2-4. BUS RIDER QUESTIONS Skip questions 2-4 if you don’t ride the bus. 2. If you use the BUS, what service(s) do you use? 1 AC Transit 2 WestCAT 3 County Connection 4 Tri Delta 5 Other (please specify): _______________________ 3. Please tell us about your BUS-riding experience and interactions with drivers: 1 Excellent 2 Satisfactory 3 Poor 4 Additional comments: _____________________ _____________________ 4. Please share any other comments about your BUS-riding experience, such as ease of use, maintenance issues, or vehicle cleanliness: ___________________________________________________ Q 5-7. ADA PARATRANSIT RIDER QUESTIONS Skip questions 5-7 if you don’t ride paratransit. 5. If you use ADA PARATRANSIT, what service(s) do you use? 1 East Bay Paratransit 2 WestCAT Dial-a-Ride 3 County Connection LINK 4 Tri Delta Paratransit 5 Other (please specify): ______________________ CONTRA COSTA ACCESSIBLE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN 6. Please tell us about your ADA PARATRANSIT-riding experience and interactions with drivers: 1 Excellent 2 Satisfactory 3 Poor 4 Additional comments: ______________________________ ______________________________ 7. Please share any other comments about your ADA PARATRANSIT-riding experience, such as ease of use, maintenance issues, or vehicle cleanliness: ___________________________________________________ Q 8-9. LYFT/UBER RIDER QUESTIONS Skip questions 8-9 if you don’t ride Lyft/Uber. 8. If you use LYFT/UBER, please tell us about your riding experience and interactions with drivers: 1 Excellent 2 Satisfactory 3 Poor 4 Additional comments: ______________________________ ______________________________ 9. Please share any other comments about your LYFT/UBER-riding experience, such as ease of use, maintenance issues, or vehicle cleanliness: ___________________________________________________ Q 10-16 GENERAL RIDER QUESTIONS 10. Where are you usually going? (Please select up to three) I go to... 1 Medical appointment 2 Grocery shopping/drugstore 3 Non-medical appointment 4 See friends or family 5 Attend a class 6 The Senior Center 7 Church 8 Work or Volunteer position 9 Other (please specify): __________________________ 1,000+ Surveys Distributed via e-mail and meal deliveries ES-8 Executive Summary | February 2021 Executive Summary Focus Groups Five virtual focus groups with seniors and persons with disabilities involved in-depth conversations with the project team, with an emphasis on reaching populations often overlooked through other forms of public engagement, such as adults with disabilities, people with Limited English Proficiency, and West County residents. 5 Focus Groups Stakeholder Interviews Interview commencing in March of 2020 were put on hold in light of the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Interview questions were reevaluated to reflect the circumstances, and the interviews with public and nonprofit agencies, representing an array of stakeholder groups and interests, were completed between September and November. 11 Interviews Telephone Town Hall Nelson\Nygaard hosted a live Telephone Town Hall on October 27, 2020 to outline the project and answer questions. 1,149 participants out of 23,000 invitations 3 languages English, Spanish, Mandarin Post-COVID Outreach Once the pandemic set in, the project team moved all outreach activities to safe platforms, utilizing virtual focus groups, stakeholder interviews, an online survey, and virtual town hall to safely interact with participants. Photo by John Schnobrich on Unsplash ES-9 Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan Executive Summary Destinations The top destination was medical appointments, with grocery/drugstore shopping in second place. Senior Center trips and non- medical appointments each accounted for an 8% share of destinations. * Respondents could choose up to three trips that they take most often. Percentages reflect total respondents (1,063) identifying each trip type. SURVEY RESULTS Trip Destinations and Challenges An online survey provided insight into how respondents get where they are going, where they go, and what factors complicate their trips. 8%Senior Center 8%Non-Medical Appointment 56%Medical Appointments 46%Grocery/ drugstore Mode to Destination Trips were most commonly made by solo drivers, followed by those driven by a family, neighbor or paid helper. BART was used by about a third of respondents, with ADA paratransit utilized by 10% of the entire survey sample.* Respondents could choose as many modes as they used. Percentages reflect total respondents (1,063) selecting a particular mode they used. 40%Drive Myself 32%BART 10%ADA paratransit 38%Family, neighbor, or paid driver ES-10 Executive Summary | February 2021 Executive Summary Trip Challenges Almost one-third of respondents feel unsafe while traveling, with about a quarter unable to go where or when they want, or feeling their trip takes too long. * Respondents could choose up to three challenges that they faced most often. Percentages reflect total respondents (1,063) identifying each trip type. 29%Feel unsafe when traveling 24%Can’t go when needed Trip Difficulty Mirroring the top destinations, respondents had the most difficulty with medical appointments and making grocery/ drugstore trips. Seeing friends/family and getting to the Senior Center rounded up the top four types of difficult trips.* Respondents could choose up to three trips that they take most often. Percentages reflect total respondents (1,063) for each trip type. 11%Senior Center19%Friends/Family 35%Medical Appointments 20%Grocery/ drugstore 23%Trip takes too long 22%Can’t go where needed ES-11 Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan Executive Summary TRANSPORTATION NEEDS AND GAPS The project team’s review of existing conditions and survey data identified key needs and gaps in accessible transportation in Contra Costa County. These include: New Funding – Grants are sometimes available for planning and pilots, but all recommendations will require new sustainable funding Safety – Many respondents feel unsafe while traveling Volunteer Driving Programs – Additional volunteers are needed, with more reliable funding to increase capacity Medical Access – The Regional Medical Center and VA Medical Center in Martinez need reliable access throughout the county Quality of Life Visits – Consumers have difficulty making quality-of-life essential trips to visit friends and family, the senior center, and church Service Coordination – Accessible services need improved coordination because they are siloed between agencies, cities, and non-profit organizations ES-12 Executive Summary | February 2021 Executive Summary RECOMMENDATIONS The Accessible Transportation Plan identified an urgent need for a coordinated structure to address transportation needs and gaps in Contra Costa County accessible transportation. A crucial first step would be the creation of an Accessible Transportation Task Force. Accessible Transportation Task Force The Task Force would: • Oversee Strategic Planning, identifying coordinated strategies to be implemented by existing agencies/non-profits • Create a Countywide Coordination Entity responsible for countywide strategy implementation • Investigate funding opportunities Countywide Coordinated Entity (CE) • The countywide CE Organization could be an existing non-profit or public agency–or an entirely new entity • Strategy implementation would be a key function of the CE, prioritizing projects to improve and expand countywide accessible transportation ES-13 Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan Executive Summary Strategies and Implementation A five-year timeline for strategy development and implemetation was developed, with recommended strategies divided into tiered groups. Tier I • High transportation benefit • Strong community support • Leverages existing programs/resources • Easy to implement (in stages or because of lower cost) Tier II High ranking strategies, sorted by: • Service impact • Cost • Implementation challenges Plan Countywide Coordinated Entity ESTABLISH Transportation Task Force ESTABLISH Countywide Coordinated Entity IMPLEMENT Countywide Coordinated Entity Implement Short-Term Strategies Implement Long-Term Strategies Year 1 Year 2 Year 4Year 3 Year 5 ES-14 Executive Summary | February 2021 Executive Summary Implementation Agency Recommended agencies for each strategy have been identified across three categories. Implementation Timeframes Immediate-Term Within 1 Year Long-Term 2 Years or on-going implementation beyond five years Short-Term Within 2 Years Tiered Strategies will be implemented in phases, pending ATSP approval. Public Agency (e.g. Contra Costa Transportation Authority, County Administrator’s Office, County Health Services) Non-Profit (e.g. Mobility Matters, Choice in Aging) Transit Agency (e.g. County Connection, Tri Delta Transit, WestCAT) ES-15 Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan Executive Summary Strategy Description Implementation TermImplementation Agency Public Agency Non-Profit Transit Agency Increase Local and Regional Mobility 1 Improve connectivity between paratransit programs/eliminate transfer trips 2 Same-day trip programs (including wheelchair-accessible service) 3 Expand existing and add new Volunteer Driver programs 4 Service beyond ADA service areas 5 Early morning and late-night service 6 On-demand subsidies Improve Coordination Among Providers and Community Stakeholders 7 Shopping trips with package assistance 8 Hospital discharge service 9 Customized guaranteed ride home programs for people with disabilities 10 Means-based car-share including accessible option 11 One-call / one-click; information & referral (I&R) 12 Programs for disabled/senior veterans 13 Real-time transportation information (paratransit vehicle location, BART elevators, wheelchair spaces on buses) 14 Travel training (including inter-operator trips) 15 Mobility-as-a-Service (MaaS) Develop Partnerships for Supportive Infrastructure 16 Administer a uniform countywide ADA paratransit eligibility certification program 17 Fare integration 18 Procure joint paratransit scheduling software 19 Sidewalk improvements to enhance safety for older adults and wheelchair accessibility in high-priority locations 20 Means-based fare subsidy 21 Wheelchair breakdown service 22 Accessible bikeshare program Tier I Tier II Short-Term Long Term Implementation Workplan ES-16 Executive Summary | February 2021 Executive Summary ES-17 Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan Executive Summary Identifies/pursues new funding Develops and administers uniform countywide ADA paratransit eligibility certification Expands mobility management Implements joint paratransit scheduling software A Countywide Coordinated Entity Improves Accessible Transportation in Contra Costa County How Functions of the Coordinated Entity ES-18 Executive Summary | February 2021 Executive Summary Oversees seamless rides for inter-jurisdictional trips inside and outside the county Supports Service beyond ADA service areas and regular service times Expands Travel Training Advocates for Safe Routes for Seniors/ Safe Routes for All Helps establish means-based fare subsidy Functions of the Coordinated Entity ES-19 Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan February 2021 D R A F T F I N A L ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan was funded by a Caltrans Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant. Project Team Peter Engel, Director of Programs, Contra Costa Transportation Authority John Cunningham, Principal Transportation Planner, Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development Corinne Dutra-Roberts, Innovative Mobility Programs, Advanced Mobility Group (AMG) Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Naomi Armenta, Project Manager Richard Weiner, Principal in Charge Marvin Ranaldson Tanya Shah Kevin Lucas Emily Roach Brian Manford Kevin Ottem Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | i Table of Contents Page 1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 1-1 2 Existing Conditions ............................................................................................................. 2-1 Demographics .................................................................................................................... 2-1 Equity Considerations ........................................................................................................ 2-4 Access to Medical Facilities .............................................................................................. 2-8 Transit Funding Summary ................................................................................................... 2-9 Transportation Resources in Contra Costa County ..................................................... 2-14 3 Outreach ............................................................................................................................. 3-1 Outreach Plan .................................................................................................................... 3-1 Survey .................................................................................................................................. 3-5 Web Outreach ................................................................................................................. 3-18 Presentations..................................................................................................................... 3-19 Focus Groups .................................................................................................................... 3-19 Telephone Town Hall ........................................................................................................ 3-22 Stakeholder Interviews ..................................................................................................... 3-25 4 Identification of Transportation Needs and Gaps .......................................................... 4-1 5 Recommended Strategies ................................................................................................ 5-1 Establish A Coordinated Structure ................................................................................... 5-1 Mobility Strategies .............................................................................................................. 5-5 Prioritization of Strategies ................................................................................................ 5-11 6 Implementation Plan ......................................................................................................... 6-1 Overview ............................................................................................................................. 6-1 Establishing A Coordinated Structure .............................................................................. 6-4 Strategy Implementation Matrix ....................................................................................... 6-9 Tier 1 Strategies Discussion .............................................................................................. 6-15 Transit Funding Summary and Options ........................................................................... 6-28 Appendix A: Survey Instrument Appendix B: Comments from Public Input Appendix C: Needs Identified from Prior Reports Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | ii Table of Figures Page Figure 1-1 TAC Appointments .............................................................................................. 1-5 Figure 1-2 PAC Appointments ............................................................................................. 1-6 Figure 2-1 Population Density .............................................................................................. 2-1 Figure 2-2 Population Density of Older Adults ................................................................... 2-2 Figure 2-3 Population Density of People with Disabilities .................................................. 2-2 Figure 2-4 Distribution of Type of Disabilities in Contra Costa County ............................ 2-3 Figure 2-5 Population Density of Veterans with Disabled Veterans ................................ 2-3 Figure 2-6 Median Household Income with Low Income Population ............................. 2-4 Figure 2-7 Distribution of People of Color ........................................................................... 2-5 Figure 2-8 Race and Ethnicity in Contra Costa County ................................................... 2-5 Figure 2-9 Population Density of People with Limited English Proficiency ...................... 2-6 Figure 2-10 Languages spoken by Limited English-speaking Households in Contra Costa County ....................................................................................................... 2-6 Figure 2-11 Transit Service Area with Potential Transit Need .............................................. 2-7 Figure 2-12 Medical Facilities ................................................................................................. 2-8 Figure 2-13 Program 15 funds allocation by Sub-Region ................................................. 2-12 Figure 2-14 Funding Forecast Measure J Program 15 and 20b ...................................... 2-13 Figure 2-15 Definitions of Types of Transportation Resources in Contra Costa County 2-14 Figure 2-16 Providers of Fixed-Route Transit and ADA-Mandated Paratransit in Contra Costa County ....................................................................................... 2-17 Figure 2-17 Transit and Paratransit Service Areas .............................................................. 2-18 Figure 2-18 Summary of ADA-Mandated Paratransit Programs in Contra Costa County ................................................................................................................ 2-18 Figure 2-19 Summary of City-Based Paratransit Programs ............................................... 2-21 Figure 2-20 Community-Based Transportation Programs ................................................. 2-23 Figure 2-21 Summary of Community-Based Transportation Programs ........................... 2-24 Figure 2-22 Contra Costa County Volunteer Driver Programs ......................................... 2-29 Figure 3-1 Engagement Tools and Techniques.................................................................. 3-3 Figure 3-2 Revised Flyer ......................................................................................................... 3-4 Figure 3-3 Spatial Distribution of Survey Responses ........................................................... 3-5 Figure 3-4 Public Engagement Collateral .......................................................................... 3-6 Figure 3-5 Respondents’ Age Distribution .......................................................................... 3-7 Figure 3-6 Mode Share Distribution ..................................................................................... 3-8 Figure 3-7 Bus Users’ Distribution .......................................................................................... 3-9 Figure 3-8 Paratransit Users’ Distribution ............................................................................. 3-9 Figure 3-9 Transit and Paratransit Satisfaction Rates ....................................................... 3-10 Figure 3-10 Lyft/Uber Satisfaction Rates ............................................................................. 3-10 Figure 3-11 Mode of Transportation by Regional Transportation Planning Committee Areas ................................................................................................................... 3-11 Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | iii Figure 3-12 Where Are Respondents Going? ..................................................................... 3-11 Figure 3-13 Which Trips are Most Difficult to Make? .......................................................... 3-12 Figure 3-14 Most Difficult Trips for Respondents, by Area of County ............................... 3-13 Figure 3-15 Respondent Transportation Challenges ......................................................... 3-14 Figure 3-16 Transportation Challenges, by Area of County ............................................. 3-15 Figure 3-17 Preferred Transportation Services .................................................................... 3-16 Figure 3-18 Preferred Transportation Services, by Area of County ................................. 3-17 Figure 3-19 Project Website Homepage ............................................................................ 3-18 Figure 3-20 Project Website Mailing List Sign-Up Form ...................................................... 3-19 Figure 3-21 Summary of Focus Groups ............................................................................... 3-20 Figure 3-22 Summary of Stakeholder Interviews ................................................................ 3-26 Figure 5-1 Strategy Prioritization ......................................................................................... 5-14 Figure 6-1 Strategy Implementation Plan ........................................................................... 6-2 Figure 6-2 Detailed Implementation Plan Strategy Matrix ............................................... 6-9 Figure 6-3 Implementation Plan Timeline ......................................................................... 6-15 Figure 6-4 Program 15 funds allocation by Sub-Region ................................................. 6-34 Figure 6-5 Funding Forecast Measure J Program 15 and 20b ...................................... 6-35 Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 1-1 1 INTRODUCTION Study Background This Accessible Transportation Strategic (ATS) Plan was born from the 2017 Contra Costa Countywide Transportation Plan (CTP). The CTP identified a need to address the challenges associated with: (1) different types of accessible transportation services for older adults and people with disabilities; (2) multiple transportation providers including cities, transit operators, social services agencies, and non-profit organizations; and (3) diverse, and sometimes overlapping, service areas. The ATS Plan is also intended to address the unfulfilled recommendations of three previous studies which were similar in scope. While the 2016 and 2020 Transportation Expenditure Plans (TEP) failed in accessing sales tax measure funds, they did further set expectations for the Plan to ultimately "implement a customer-focused, user-friendly, seamless coordinated system”. Finally, the ATS Plan helps fulfill a requirement by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) in its Resolution 4321, that California Transportation Agencies (CTA)/Congestion Management Agencies (CMA) must meet the following mobility management requirement: “Each county must establish or enhance mobility management programs to help provide equitable and effective access to transportation.” Mobility management in this context refers to a centralized point of contact that facilitates ease of use of a variety of transportation modes by people with disabilities, veterans, and older adults. MTC uses the following to define mobility management activities: The nine-county Bay Area Region’s Coordinated Public Transit-Human Services Transportation Plan directs counties to develop mobility management programs with three key components: 1) Countywide travel training, 2) In-person ADA paratransit certification, and 3) Coordination of information and referrals (I&R) through the provision of a mobility manager. Mobility management can be led by CMAs, transit operators or other agencies including non-governmental organizations. The following considerations apply when implementing mobility management programs: Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 1-2  Current performance of mobility management functions and relevance of activities to current coordination objectives;  Scale of geography covered within the county;  Extent to which the process involves multiple stakeholder agencies who are aiming to improve mobility and transportation coordination for transportation- disadvantaged populations;  The county’s existing and potential capacity for carrying out mobility management functions;  Institutional relationships and support, both financial and in-kind, including evidence of coordination efforts with other public and private transportation and human services providers. Successful implementation of the ATS Plan hinges on several factors: • Leadership. Due to responsibilities in this area being diffused over numerous agencies and differing service areas, strong and persistent leadership at the elected official, staff, and agency levels are necessary for success. A study cited during the ATS planning process describes a critical barrier to success as, “Politics, Politics, Politics”. Contra Costa will need strong leadership to combat the effects of this. • Funding. Additional funding will be necessary to implement any of the recommendations. One-time funding through grants and other sources can typically be found for capital purchases and other discrete expenses. However, there is a significant need for ongoing funding to support operations. With the failures of 2016 and 2020 transportation sales tax efforts, the existing opportunities for additional revenue from Measure J is limited. • Collaboration. Given the broad range of mobility needs and the strategies intended to satisfy those needs, stakeholders will need to ensure a high level of collaboration in their efforts to prioritize strategies for implementation. • Engagement. Inclusive and equitable public engagement was a key focus of this study effort. This includes input from organizations, key stakeholders, and the broader Contra Costa community. The study process was assisted and overseen by a Technical Advisory Committee and a Policy Advisory Committee. In March 2020, due to the COVID-19 outbreak, the project team reconfigured the outreach plan to go “virtual” to allow people to participate safely. Study Context Contra Costa County is a relatively large county in terms of population (1,160,000 in 2020 – third most populous in the Bay Area) and area (804 square miles). The County contains 17 cities, two towns, and a number of census-designated places and unincorporated areas, which include urban, suburban, and rural development patterns. The Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) is a local transportation authority enabled under the California Public Utilities Code for the purpose of administering a transportation sales tax, Measure J (2004), which continues work begun under Measure C Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 1-3 (1988). CCTA also serves as the Contra Costa County Congestion Management Agency. CCTA prepares a Measure J Strategic Plan approximately every two years and coordinates with cities, the County, transit districts, other special districts, and/or Caltrans to implement transportation projects. For planning purposes, the County is divided into four distinct CCTA planning sub-regions (west, east, central, southwest) each with its own Regional Transportation Planning Committee. The four committees and areas are: • SWAT (Southwest Area Transportation Committee) in southwest Contra Costa County – cities of Lafayette, Orinda, and San Ramon; the towns of Danville and Moraga; and the unincorporated area of Southwest Contra Costa County; • WCCTAC (West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee) in West Contra Costa County – cities of El Cerrito, Hercules, Pinole, Richmond, San Pablo; and the unincorporated areas of West Contra Costa County; • TRANSPAC (Transportation Partnership and Cooperation) in central Contra Costa County – cities of Clayton, Concord, Martinez, Pleasant Hill, Walnut Creek and the unincorporated area of Central Contra Costa County; • TRANSPLAN in Eastern Contra Costa County – in east Contra Costa County - cities of Antioch, Brentwood, Oakley and Pittsburg, and the unincorporated areas of East Contra Costa County. In many jurisdictions, services are siloed between transit agencies, social service agencies, cities, and non-profit organizations. In terms of fixed-route transit, the county is served by AC Transit, BART, County Connection, Tri Delta Transit, and WestCAT. Programs offered by other organizations abound, including three adjacent city-operated paratransit programs in West County, the Lamorinda Spirit Van, Walnut Creek’s Lyft Pilot Program. Seniors and people with disabilities face significant challenges navigating a disparate transportation system. In addition, the proportion of seniors in the population is growing significantly leading to an increase in demand for ADA paratransit services and a continuing magnification of related transportation challenges including the need for greater transportation resources. The growing challenges facing seniors, people with disabilities, and eligible veterans in accessing needed transportation have been integrated in the recommended strategies of this report. CCTA and the County have demonstrated a strong commitment to meeting these challenges. Different partners within the County have completed previous paratransit- related studies in 1990, 2004, and 2013. Funding for transportation for seniors and disabilities is allocated in Measure J (and had either Measure X (2016) or Measure J (2020) passed, more funding would be available). CCTA and the County applied for the Caltrans Sustainable Communities Transportation Planning grant and agreed it would be managed by the CCTA with assistance from the Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development. As part of the preparation for the project, CCTA and the County met with each transit agency to ensure they were supportive of the study, consulted with CCTA’s Bus Transit Coordinating Committee, and had each transit agency review and comment on the Scope of Work before the study was initiated. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 1-4 As noted, previous paratransit-related studies have been completed. Four that stand out are the 1990 Contra Costa County Paratransit Plan, the 2004 Contra Costa County Paratransit Improvement Study, the 2013 Contra Costa County Mobility Management Plan, and the 2018 West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee (WCCTAC) Transportation Needs Assessment. While many of the strategies recommended in those plans are considered to be best practices in other locations, a significant proportion have not been implemented in the County. There are a variety of reasons for the failure to implement these previous studies, such as lack of political support, structural issues related to the existence of multiple agencies involved in service delivery, and the lack of funding. A primary factor in CCTA’s design and development of this study was to uncover and address these previous barriers to ensure that recommendations from this study do not meet the same fate. As part of this study process, the consultants and County staff identified the reasons for failure to implement earlier recommendations and sought to either recommend ways of avoiding similar problems or documenting the reasons why these should not be considered for future implementation. It should be noted that the process incorporated into the present study is far more collaborative and engaging than was the case in previous studies. It is therefore anticipated that the recommended strategies will have greater community and agency support than previous efforts, and therefore have a greater likelihood of implementation. The study’s three primary goals were to: • Evaluate the existing services and provide corresponding recommendations for improvements; • Identify alternative models for service delivery, present those alternatives to stakeholders, and select a final preferred model; • Develop a detailed implementation plan for that model. Any study related to transportation for seniors and people with disabilities is not complete without addressing issues of funding and demand. CCTA and the County recognize that current funding for these areas is limited and/or stagnant. Grants for planning (e.g. Caltrans) and mobility management pilots may be obtained (e.g. FTA 5310) but jurisdictions must still establish sustainable funding for ongoing operations. Significant portions of current funding, such as for ADA-mandated paratransit programs, are restricted on how and to whom they can provide service. Regulatory concerns also affect transportation to and from healthcare, and inter-jurisdictional travel. Although some organizations and jurisdictions have proposed legislative fixes to these issues, it is challenging to change State or Federal law. Nationwide, ADA-mandated paratransit costs per trip continue to rise significantly. Programs viewed as “silver bullets” have proven failures in the long-term in administration and meeting their cost-cutting objectives. Numerous instances exist in which suppressed demand has been viewed as the most effective way of sustaining the financial future of transportation services to seniors and people with disabilities. While improvements and increases to service enhance the quality of life for these populations, they generally do not reduce overall costs. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 1-5 In contrast to the approaches described above, County agencies view the ATS Plan as an opportunity to consider systemic changes to transportation service delivery to seniors and people with disabilities. The County’s objective in this study is to examine how things have always been done and implement a truly rider-focused and equitable program that will be sustainable in the long-term. This approach would bring the users of accessible transportation into a more equitable position relative to other users of the transportation system, that benefit from regular improvements and expansions to services and infrastructure. Study Oversight Structure This Accessible Transportation Strategic (ATS) Plan effort was a partnership between CCTA and the County, funded by a Caltrans Sustainable Communities Transportation Planning Grant. CCTA issued a Request for Proposals and selected Nelson\Nygaard Consulting to complete the Plan. The process of developing the plan was originally intended to involve multiple oversight committees. The project team eventually defined and set up a Technical Advisory Committee and a Policy Advisory Committee. Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) The role of the TAC was to provide subject matter expertise and public policy implications on service concepts under review by the study team (a “reality check”). The TAC first met in November 2019 and continued meeting approximately monthly throughout the Study. Figure 1-1 TAC Appointments Organization Name AC Transit/BART/East Bay Paratransit Kim Ridgeway County Connection Rashida Kamara Tri Delta Transit Deanna Perry WestCAT Rob Thompson SWAT/City of San Ramon Becky Adams SWAT/City of Lafayette Mary Bruns TRANSPAC/City of Walnut Creek Kathryn Reisinger TRANSPLAN/City of Pittsburg Nat Phan WCCTAC Joanna Pallock Contra Costa Health Plan Mendaline (Monica) Singh (replaced by Suzanne Tsang) Contra Costa County Health Services Vi Ibarra Contra Costa County Office of the Sheriff Emergency Operations Zack Adinoff, Marcelle Indelicato Veterans Affairs Derrick Shelton Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 1-6 Organization Name Caltrans Jacob Buffenbarger Metropolitan Transportation Commission Drennen Shelton NGO/Advocate Choice in Aging Lisa Hammon NGO/Advocate / Mobility Matters Elaine Welch NGO/Advocate Marjorie McWee Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) The role of the PAC was to provide input on addressing policy barriers, communicate with stakeholders about the Study, liaise with elected or appointed Boards, and to review and prioritize recommended strategies. The PAC first met in August 2020 and was originally slated to meet twice more. It quickly became evident that given the online format and the complicated nature of the County’s transportation challenges, the PAC should meet more frequently. The PAC has met approximately monthly since October 2020. Figure 1-2 PAC Appointments Appointment Name BART Debora Allen AC Transit Mike Hursh County Connection Rick Ramacier Tri Delta Transit Jeanne Krieg WestCAT Charlie Anderson Contra Costa Board of Supervisors, District 2 Candace Andersen CCTA Board Teresa Gerringer CCTA Board Dave Hudson Contra Costa Health Services Josh Sullivan NGO/Advocate / Choice in Aging Debbie Toth NGO/Advocate / CoCo County Ombudsman ED Nicole Howell NGO/Advocate / Disabilities Council Ian Bremner Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 2-1 2 EXISTING CONDITIONS DEMOGRAPHICS Contra Costa County is the third most populous county in the Bay Area, with a population of 1,160,000 in 2020. The County contains 17 cities, two towns, and a number of census-designated places and unincorporated areas. Cities range from those containing densely populated pockets like Richmond and Concord, to semi-rural and rural communities like Brentwood and Clayton. Figure 2-1 Population Density Most subgroups of the population (e.g., older adults) follow this same general pattern, at least in terms of geographic spread. Fifteen percent of the population is over 65, and 7.5% is under age 65 with a disability. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 2-2 Figure 2-2 Population Density of Older Adults The population density map of the County above shows three areas with a higher density of older adults: Rossmoor (between Moraga and Walnut Creek), Crow Canyon (north of San Ramon), and the area south of Brentwood. Figure 2-3 Population Density of People with Disabilities The density map for people with disabilities shows similar geographic spread to the general population, except one concentrated area in Rossmoor. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 2-3 Figure 2-4 Distribution of Type of Disabilities in Contra Costa County Type of Disability Number of People Percentage out of total population Independent Living Difficulty 46,761 5.3% Ambulatory Difficulty 55,816 5.1% Cognitive Difficulty 48,084 4.4% Hearing Difficulty 32,975 2.9% Self-care Difficulty 24,614 2.3% Vision Difficulty 18,996 1.7% Note: Respondents could choose more than one category. These patterns are consistent with findings in similar studies. Figure 2-5 Population Density of Veterans with Disabled Veterans This study is also examining veterans with transportation challenges due to disabling conditions. A population density map of veterans generally aligns with the general population. However, overlaying disabled veterans shows a concerning number of individuals in very rural or remote parts of the County, who likely have difficulty accessing services if they need assistance with transportation. Specific areas of concern include south of Moraga, the area near Port Chicago, and most of East County. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 2-4 EQUITY CONSIDERATIONS Although this study is focused on older adults, people with disabilities, and veterans with mobility issues, it would be unwise to ignore the acutely intersectional nature of these issues with income and race/ethnicity. Median household income in the County is $88,000 but 9.1% of the population lives in poverty. People with low income are less likely to own or have access to a personal vehicle, they also have less resources to utilize new potentially convenient services such as Lyft/Uber. Persons with disabilities are also much more likely to be living in poverty. Figure 2-6 Median Household Income with Low Income Population Figure 2-6 shows concentrations of people with low income in West County, Concord, and norther portions of the County near Pittsburg and Antioch. Contra Costa County is diverse. According to the US Census Bureau, over 25% of the population is Hispanic or Latino, 9.5% African American, and 18% Asian or Pacific Islander. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 2-5 Figure 2-7 Distribution of People of Color This map shows high proportions of people of color in West County, Concord, and near Pittsburg, similar to the distribution of low income persons. People of color sometimes do not access public services at the same rate as white individuals and may need more culturally relevant engagement efforts. Figure 2-8 Race and Ethnicity in Contra Costa County Race Population Percentage out of total population White 600,481 52.1% Asian 205,366 17.8% Some other race 162,355 14.1% Black or African American 101,590 8.8% Two or more races 73,246 6.3% American Indian and Alaska Native 5,863 0.5% Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 4,625 0.4% Ethnicity Population Percentage out of total population Hispanic or Latino 300,420 26.0% Note: The selection of Hispanic or Latino is in addition to a selected Race. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 2-6 Contra Costa Health Services reports that 32% of residents speak a language other than English at home. Fifty-two percent (52%) of those speak Spanish and 26% speak an Asian or Pacific Islander language. Like people of color, people with limited English proficiency may need more culturally relevant engagement and in the appropriate language. Figure 2-9 Population Density of People with Limited English Proficiency Figure 2-10 Languages spoken by Limited English-speaking Households in Contra Costa County Households speaking Limited English- speaking Households Percentage out of all limited English-speaking Households Spanish 9,758 46.3% Asian and Pacific Island languages 7,822 37.1% Other Indo-European languages 3,320 15.8% Other languages 173 0.8% Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 2-7 Potential transit need can be estimated by looking at population density, the location of jobs, and where older adults, people with disabilities and lower income persons live. An overlay of these factors with existing transit service shows potential gaps. There appears to be a patchwork of gaps of medium to high need in West County and in Central County in the areas of Concord and Pleasant Hill. There is lower need but larger areas of gap in northern portions of the County, East County, and Southwest County. Figure 2-11 Transit Service Area with Potential Transit Need Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 2-8 ACCESS TO MEDICAL FACILITIES Access to medical facilities is a critical issue in Contra Costa County. Previous studies, discussions with stakeholders, and all of the outreach activities emphasized the importance of getting to medical appointments. A prior study in West County discussed the 2015 closure of Doctors Medical Center in Pinole, which was the emergency room used most in West County. At this time the only major medical facility in West County is a Kaiser Hospital in Richmond. This is a concern as West County is one of the most densely populated areas of the County. Most medical facilities appear to be clustered in the center of the County between Pleasant Hill and Walnut Creek. Two facilities that are needed by residents throughout the County are the Contra Costa County Medical Center and the VA Medical Center, both in Martinez. Figure 2-12 Medical Facilities Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 2-9 TRANSIT FUNDING SUMMARY Transportation services are almost always funded with a combination of funding sources and most include some public funds, including programs available through the federal government and funding available from local and regional municipalities or regional authorities. In Contra Costa County, there are five major categories of funding for public and human service transportation: 1. U.S. Department of Transportation (U.S.DOT) funding administered through the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). This includes (among others) programs targeted for Older Adults and People with Disabilities (Section 5310), Rural Transit Formula Funds (Section 5311) and the Urban Transit Formula Funds (Section 5307., and 2. Federal funding programs outside of the U.S. DOT that can be used for transportation. The largest and most relevant of the non-DOT funding programs are available from the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS). DHHS includes the Centers for Medicaid Services, and the Administration on Aging, both of which are involved in the funding of transportation services. The Department of Veterans Affairs also funds transportation services and programs. 3. California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) The California Transportation Development Act which includes revenues collected from a portion of the state diesel fuel tax, and sales tax. These funds are distributed to local and regional transportation authorities. These funds are available to support public transportation services, including services for older adults and people with disabilities. It should be noted that a number of State funding sources are geared towards reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, for which transportation for seniors and people with disabilities do not usually score well due to large vehicle miles travelled per passenger. 4. Local tax revenues that are dedicated to support transit services. County Measure J and regional funding measures and tolls. 5. Private grants and donations (typically not available to public agencies) Funding options will be addressed in more detail in Chapter 6: Implementation. Federal Funding There are several FTA programs used to fund public transportation services in Contra Costa County. For purposes of this report, three funding programs are among the most relevant: Section 5310: Enhanced Mobility of Seniors & Individuals with Disabilities This program (49 U.S.C. 5310) provides formula funding to states for the purpose of assisting private nonprofit groups in meeting the transportation needs of older adults and people with disabilities. Formula funds are apportioned to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) for distribution to local government authorities, private Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 2-10 non-profit organizations, and/or operators of public transportation. MTC uses a competitive selection process to allocate funding. The following Contra Costa organizations were selected for funding in the most recent Cycle:  Choice in Aging  City of Lafayette: Lamorinda Spirit Van  Contra Costa Transportation Authority  Tri Delta Transit  Golden Rain Foundation Walnut Creek  Mobility Matters  The Respite Inn Other Federal Transit Funds  Section 5311: Formula Grants for Rural Areas  Section 5307: Urbanized Area Formula Grants Other Federal Transportation Funding Several other federal programs fund transportation, the largest of which reside within the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS). DHHS programs support transportation for non-emergency medical transportation (NEMT) for Medicaid recipients, and transportation programs for older adults managed under the Administration on Aging.1 The Department of Veterans Affairs, for example, funds transportation services and programs for eligible veterans. These programs tend to fund services directly oriented around veteran customers / veteran-specific needs and are typically administered as block grants to local and regional agencies.2 FHWA Capital Assistance Capital assistance includes flexed FHWA funding from the Surface Transportation Program and Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) funds. CMAQ funds are directed to transportation projects and programs which contribute to the attainment or maintenance of National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) in nonattainment or air quality maintenance areas for ozone, carbon monoxide, or particulate matter (PM) under provisions in the Clean Air Act. Due to the region’s non-attainment of federal air quality standards, funds are allocated the Region’s MPO, MTC, and distributed through a competitive grant process. 1 Administration for Community Living. Available at: https://acl.gov/about-acl/administration-aging 2 U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. Available at: https://www.va.gov/healthbenefits/vtp/ Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 2-11 Older Americans Act (OAA) The Older Americans Act (OAA), originally enacted in 1965, supports a range of home and community-based services, such as meals-on-wheels and other nutrition programs, in-home services, transportation, legal services, elder abuse prevention and caregivers support. These programs help seniors stay as independent as possible in their homes and communities. In addition, OAA services help seniors avoid hospitalization and nursing home care and, as a result, save federal and state funds that otherwise would be spent on such care.3 These funds are apportioned to the County. The Task Force should engage the appropriate County department and examine opportunities to collaborate. State Funding Transit programs in California are funded by the Transportation Development Act which includes revenues collected from a portion of the state diesel fuel tax, and sales taxes. These funds are distributed to local and regional transportation authorities. These funds are available to support public transportation services, including services for older adults and people with disabilities. The Transportation Development Act of 1971 is allocated through the county's designated regional transportation planning agency (RTPA). The Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) is the RTPA for Contra Costa County. The Act provides two major sources for funding of public transportation in California. The first, the county Local Transportation Fund (LTF), was established in 1972, while the State Transit Assistance (STA) fund was implemented in 1980. The intent of the legislation is to provide a stable source of funding to meet the area's transit needs. The Transportation Development Act, or TDA, has long been a cornerstone of state transit funding. Senate Bill 1 (2017) Senate Bill 1 (SB 1), the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017, provides about $250 million annually for the State Transit Assistance (STA) Program to help transit agencies fund their capital infrastructure and operational costs. Despite the large number of specific programs earmarked for funding in the legislation (active transportation, university research, parks and agricultural, freight movements, etc.) there were no programs specific to transportation for seniors and persons with disability identified in the bill. Senate Bill 1376 (2018) Senate Bill (SB) 1376: TNC Access for All Act became law in September 2018. SB 1376 empowers the CPUC to establish a program to increase accessibility for persons with disabilities as part of its regulation of TNCs. As part of the implementation of SB 1376, on July 1, 2019, transportation network companies (TNCs) were required to collect a ten cent ($0.10) fee on each TNC trip in California. The funds generated from the fee support 3 https://www.ncpssm.org/documents/older-americans-policy-papers/older-americans-act/ Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 2-12 the expansion of on-demand transportation for non-folding wheelchair users who require a wheelchair accessible vehicle (WAV). The CPUC is currently conducting a rulemaking process and determining which agencies will be authorized fund administrators. Funds may be distributed on a countywide basis. Potential NEMT and NMT Funding for Transit Operators The rules governing what “cost” is reimbursable under NEMT and NMT has created challenges for transit operators as passenger fares only cover a fraction of the cost of an ADA-mandated paratransit trip. For example, each paratransit trip can cost between $50 and $70, while the fare for that trip can be $4.00 to $7.00. Since Medi-Cal reimburses for the cost of the fare, and not the trip, transit operators are in effect subsidizing trips for Medi-Cal, at a lower cost than a private operator could charge for the same trip. The California Transit Association (CTA) is pursuing changes to how Medi-Cal reimburses eligible trips. If successful, these changes could create an additional source of revenue for transit providers. Older Californians Act The California Department of Aging (CDA) oversees implementation of the Older Californians Act, which was passed by the state Legislature in order to comply with federal legislation mandating the availability of certain community services to senior citizens. CDA provides services for older adults, adults with disabilities, family caregivers and residents in long-term care facilities. The department is part of the Health and Human Services Agency. CDA coordinates and directs the use of federal funds through local service providers and Area Agencies on Aging to fulfill the requirements of federal and state legislation.4 Similar to the OAA, these funds are apportioned to the County. The Task Force should engage the appropriate County department and examine opportunities to collaborate. Local Funding In addition to federal, and state sources, some communities use general revenue funding to support transportation services. Communities like the City of Richmond use general revenue funds to support their Senior and Disabled Transportation programs. The largest source of public transportation funding in Contra Costa County is Measure J, which provided $5,328,755 in FY 19/20 to fund transportation for seniors and people with disabilities. 4 http://www.allgov.com/usa/ca/departments/health-and-human-services- agency/department_of_aging?agencyid=129#:~:text=Overview%3A,Californians%20are%20getting%20o ld.&text=It%20oversees%20implementation%20of%20the,community%20services%20to%20senior%20citize ns. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 2-13 Measure J In November 2004, Contra Costa County voters approved Measure J with a 71% vote. The measure provided for the continuation of the county's half-cent transportation sales tax for 25 years beyond the original expiration date of 2009. As with Measure C (the original 1988 transportation sales tax measure), the tax revenues are used to fund a voter-approved Expenditure Plan of transportation programs and projects. Measure J provides approximately $2.7 billion (escalated) countywide for local transportation projects and programs through the year 2034. The Measure J Expenditure Plan allocated 3.5% of Measure J to Transportation for Seniors and People with Disabilities countywide through Program 15. The Expenditure plan allows for an annual increase of 0.10% from the 3.5% level to 5.9% by 2034. 35% of Program 15 is allocated to West County, 17% to Southwest County, 23% to East County and 25% to Central County. Additionally, the 20b Subregional Program allocates 0.65% to West County and 0.5% to Central County for additional Transportation for Seniors and People with Disabilities. Program 20b funds are approved by WCCTAC and TRANSPAC and is used for such non-ADA services as shuttles, sedan/taxi service, fare subsidies, and/or other supplemental services beyond the ADA service. However, ADA service does qualify, and Program 20b can be used to expand the same “base” program expenditures that Program 15 is used for. Program 15 funds are allocated by the Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) to the Measure J-approved transportation providers based on percentage allocations determined in the previous Measure C. Measure J Program 15 and 20b revenues are forecast to grow 26% in the next 5 years from $5,328,755 to $6,721,704. Program 15 funds are overwhelmingly used for operations. However, the Measure J Expenditure Plan does allow other related uses including "(a) managing the program, (b) retention of a mobility manager, (c) coordination with non-profit services, (d) establishment and/or maintenance of a comprehensive paratransit technology implementation plan, and (e) facilitation of countywide travel and integration with fixed route and BART specifically, as deemed feasible." Historically these funds have been used for operations due to demand and lack of institutional capacity to initiate these other eligible activities. Figure 2-13 Program 15 funds allocation by Sub-Region West 35% Central 25% East 23% Southwest 17% Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 2-14 Figure 2-14 Funding Forecast Measure J Program 15 and 20b 5 Private/Foundation Sources Service providers for vulnerable communities are sometimes able to access private funding through Foundations or similar organizations. 5 2019 Measure J STRATEGIC PLAN (2019) https://www.ccta.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/2019- Measure-J-Strategic-Plan.pdf $2,094,432$2,196,292$2,330,326$2,472,418$2,623,104$1,529,121$1,602,958$1,700,238$1,803,350$1,912,680$980,491$1,034,506$1,104,155$1,178,188$1,256,904$724,711$764,635$816,114$870,835$929,016$0 $500,000 $1,000,000 $1,500,000 $2,000,000 $2,500,000 $3,000,000 FY 21 FY 22 FY 23 FY 24 FY 25 West Central East Southwest Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 2-15 TRANSPORTATION RESOURCES IN CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Contra Costa County contains a wide range of transportation options for older adults and people with disabilities. To meet travel needs, Contra Costa residents and visitors might use fixed-route transit, ADA-mandated paratransit, city-based programs, community shuttle services, non-profit transportation services, private providers like taxis and Transportation Network Companies (TNCs) such as Uber and Lyft, and other options. Additional transportation options that are available to these groups as members of the general public include walking, biking (for limited portions of the population), and driving or being driven by family and friends. This chapter is focused on those options that specifically cater to older adults and people with disabilities; it provides a snapshot of resources available at the time of the report (it must be noted that resources change rapidly over time). The types of transportation resources available to older adults and people with disabilities in Contra Costa County are defined in Figure 2-15 below and are subsequently described in more detail. Figure 2-15 Definitions of Types of Transportation Resources in Contra Costa County Resource Short Definition Fixed-Route Transit / ADA- mandated paratransit Buses, trains, and ferries operated by public transit agencies that run on regular, pre-determined, pre- scheduled routes, usually with no variation. The Regional Transit Connection (RTC) Clipper card is a photo identification card that verifies a rider’s eligibility to receive an ADA reduced fare on fixed route transit. Transit agencies provide ADA-mandated paratransit services to complement fixed route transit, in compliance with the American with Disabilities Act (ADA). Community-Based Transportation Programs Community-based transportation services may be provided by public sector services (e.g. a city’s senior center) or non-profit organizations. They are sometimes dedicated for a specific clientele (i.e. Medicaid eligible persons, older adults attending meal programs, etc.). Riders are often referred to these programs by an agency they are receiving services from, such as a senior center, County Human Service agency, or Regional Center. Subsidized Fare Programs/ Voucher Programs Programs typically administered through a social service agency, that enable qualified people to purchase fares/vouchers for transportation services at a reduced rate from providers such as taxis, public transit, or volunteer driver programs. Recipients are usually low- income. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 2-16 Resource Short Definition Volunteer Driver Programs Programs that provide one-way, round-trip, and multi- stop rides. Trips are often door-through-door, in contrast to other transportation options which stop at the curb or door. These programs are provided free of charge, on a donation basis, through membership dues, or at a minimal cost, and typically have an eligibility process and advance reservation requirements. Mobility Management Services Mobility management services cover a wide range of services, such as travel training, coordinating different services, trip planning, brokerage, and information and referral. In addition to information and referral and travel training detailed below, mobility management refers to the provision of individual transportation information and assistance, and service linkage related to information and referral. Information & Referral Programs that provide transportation information and direct referral, connecting people to mobility resources that can help them. Agencies may be independent non- profit organizations, libraries, faith-based organizations, or government agencies. Travel Training Programs designed to teach people with disabilities, older adults, youth, veterans, and/or low-income populations to travel safely and independently on fixed-route public transportation in their community. Private Transportation Transportation provided by a private for-profit entity in the business of transporting people. These services are often demand-response and initiated and paid for by the rider. Examples are taxis, motor coach services, App-based ride-hailing services (Uber, Lyft, etc.), and vanpools. Fixed-Route Transit and ADA-Mandated Paratransit Fixed-route transit is operated by public transit agencies who provide services that run on regular, pre-determined, pre-schedule routes, usually with no variation. Aside from driving and walking, fixed-route transit is the most widely available transportation option available in Contra Costa County. Accessibility features on fixed-route transit include:  Buses and trains equipped with wheelchair lifts or low floor ramps to allow easy access for people with wheelchairs, walkers, and other mobility aids.  Priority seating for older adults, people with disabilities, pregnant women, and other populations who need it. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 2-17  Bus drivers trained to understand the needs of all populations who ride the bus, provide assistance in securing wheelchairs in designated spaces, and allow passengers sufficient time to be seated, and get on and off the vehicle.  Announcement of stops at major intersections, stations, transfer points and, at the request of passengers, specific destinations.  Stations with elevators to boarding platforms, for ease of access.  Route and schedule information provided by transit agencies, including the best way to reach a desired destination. This information is available in accessible formats, if needed. For people who, due to their disability, are unable to ride fixed-route buses and trains, some or all of the time, ADA-mandated paratransit is required. All fixed-route transit providers are legally required to provide complementary paratransit. Per the Federal Transportation Administration (FTA) regulations “each public entity operating a fixed route system shall provide paratransit or other special service to individuals with disabilities that is comparable to the level of service provided to individuals without disabilities who use the fixed route system.”6 Some certified paratransit riders can ride fixed-route transit depending on the trip and/or their current ability. ADA-mandated paratransit is meant to provide an equivalent level of service as fixed- route transit. This means paratransit services operate in the same area, on the same days and during the same hours as public transit operates. Paratransit service may be provided on small buses, vans, taxis, or in sedans. It is generally a shared-ride, door-to- door, or curb-to-curb service that must be reserved no later than close of business the day before the trip. All Contra Costa public transit agencies contract with private transportation providers to provide ADA-mandated paratransit. 6 Department of Transportation Americans with Disabilities Act regulations at 49 CFR Section 37/121(a). Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 2-18 Figure 2-16 Providers of Fixed-Route Transit and ADA-Mandated Paratransit in Contra Costa County Fixed-Route Transit Agency Service Area ADA-Mandated Paratransit Provider Regional Transit Amtrak San Joaquin Rail service between Oakland and Bakersfield The ADA does not require that commuter rail and commuter bus services provide complementary paratransit service BART Rapid rail transit in Alameda, Contra Costa, San Francisco, San Mateo, and Santa Clara counties East Bay Paratransit (in coordination with AC Transit); LINK Paratransit (in coordination with County Connection) and other applicable paratransit providers within ¾ mile of stations in other counties Capitol Corridor Rail service between Sacramento and San Jose The ADA does not require that commuter rail and commuter bus services provide complementary paratransit service San Francisco Bay Ferry (Water Emergency Transportation Authority) Ferry service between Richmond/San Francisco Complementary paratransit requirement not defined for ferries Local Transit AC Transit West Contra Costa County (Richmond and El Cerrito) and West, Central, and South Alameda County (Fremont to Albany) East Bay Paratransit (in coordination with BART) within the transit service area WestCAT The area of west Contra Costa County not covered by AC Transit WestCAT Dial-A-Ride Paratransit within the transit service area County Connection Central Contra Costa County from San Ramon to Martinez and Orinda to Concord/Clayton County Connection LINK Paratransit operates in the same area as and is overseen by County Connection Tri Delta Transit East Contra Costa County Tri Delta Transit Paratransit within the transit service area Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 2-19 Figure 2-17 Transit and Paratransit Service Areas Figure 2-18 Summary of ADA-Mandated Paratransit Programs in Contra Costa County Agency Service Area Hours of Operation Fares 7 Eligibility / Certification Process 8 County Connection LINK Within ¾ mile of any BART station or fixed- route bus service. Mon-Fri service is provided within 1 ½ mile of regular fixed- route bus service. Operates during the same days and hours as County Connection and BART’s regular fixed route services. $5 per trip; County Connection offers an Advance Fare Payment System with a minimum deposit of $50 All people with disabilities throughout County Connection service area; must complete a written application and may receive a phone call for more information and/or be asked to attend an interview at County Connection offices 7 Fare collection was suspended during COVID and is being reinstated in early 2021. 8 Certification processes are not being conducted in person during COVID shelter-in-place. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 2-20 Agency Service Area Hours of Operation Fares 7 Eligibility / Certification Process 8 East Bay Paratransit (EBP) Within ¾ mile of any BART station or AC Transit bus stop (excluding BART stations east of Orinda on the Pittsburg/Bay Point line) Operates during the same days and hours as AC Transit and BART’s regular fixed route services. $4.00 for trips between 0-12 miles; $6 for trips between 12-20 miles; $7 for trips over 20 miles All people with disabilities throughout BART and AC Transit service areas; must complete a written application and arrange for an in- person assessment (IPA) at EBP offices or a satellite location Tri Delta Transit Paratransit Within ¾ mile of fixed-route bus service. Operates during the same days and hours as Tri Delta Transit’s regular fixed route services. $2.75 for trips in ADA service area; $5.50 for trips starting/ending outside of ADA area, trips to Concord or Martinez, and transfers to LINK All people with disabilities throughout Tri Delta Transit service area; must complete a written application and may receive a phone call for more information and/or be asked to attend an interview or functional evaluation; Seniors 65+ are eligible for the Senior Service which is limited to the local fixed route service area and is subject to availability, rides are not guaranteed. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 2-21 Agency Service Area Hours of Operation Fares 7 Eligibility / Certification Process 8 WestCAT Dial-A-Ride Coverage for all eligible riders within service area; extended beyond service area (for special needs trips) for an additional fee. Service also provided into Martinez and Richmond. ADA service is provided to Hercules, Pinole and the unincorporated areas of Rodeo, Crockett and Port Costa.9 Monday- Friday, 6:00am to 8:00pm; Saturday, 9am to 7:00pm (early morning, late night, and Sunday service coordinated with East Bay Paratransit within ¾ mile of a fixed route bus route 10); extended service area available Monday- Friday, 9:00am to 3:00pm $1.25 single trip fare; $10 for ten pre- purchase tickets; $3 for cash fare outside of WestCAT service area; $25 for ten pre- purchased tickets outside of service area All seniors (age 65+) and people with disabilities throughout WestCAT service area; must complete a written application; applicant is notified by mail of eligibility status within 21 days 9 In addition to ADA, seniors (age 65+) and people with disabilities throughout the WestCAT service area may use Dial-A-Ride between any two points within WestCAT’s service boundaries and will not be required to transfer. 10 Service is provided within the timeframe that WestCAT fixed route operates, and ADA paratransit service is provided past midnight M-F. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 2-22 City-Based Paratransit Services Three cities in West County offer city-based paratransit services funded by CCTA. The funding for the city-based paratransit comes from the transportation sales tax measure, originally Measure C and now Measure J, requested by the West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee (WCCTAC). The rest of the county does not have city-based services because the subregional transportation agencies opted to not dedicate funding to specific city operators. Some programs provide services to adjacent cities and unincorporated areas. Programs are meant to complement ADA-mandated paratransit and are often directed more towards seniors than people with disabilities. Figure 2-19 Summary of City-Based Paratransit Programs Service City / Service Area Description of Service Hours of Operation Fares Eligibility / Certification Process Easy Ride Paratransit Service (ERPS)11 El Cerrito Easy Ride (door-to- door), day trips and excursions, limited service beyond El Cerrito, nutrition rides, and on- demand service Monday- Thursday, 9:00am to 4:30pm; Friday, 9:00am to 3:30pm Note: during COVID hours are Mon and Tue 10:00am to 1:30pm $2 single trip fare Must be a resident of El Cerrito and 65+ years old or 18+ years old with a disability; Must complete a written application R-Transit 12 Richmond, El Cerrito, San Pablo, North Richmond, El Sobrante, Kensington, and Pinole Lyft partnership, demand response, group trips, senior nutrition program transportation service, and subscription trips Monday- Friday, 8:30am to 5:00pm; Lyft partnership (RAPID) 24/7 $4 single trip fare (pre- scheduled); $5 single trip fare (same- day); Lyft/RAPID first $3 then any cost over $20 per trip Must be a resident of Richmond, North Richmond, El Sobrante, or Kensington and 55+ years old or 18+ years old with a disability; Must complete an online/written application with proof of age/disability 11 http://www.el-cerrito.org/index.aspx?NID=285 12 http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/2880/R-Transit-Paratransit Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 2-23 Service City / Service Area Description of Service Hours of Operation Fares Eligibility / Certification Process San Pablo Senior & Disabled Transportation San Pablo, parts of Richmond, Pinole and El Sobrante Door-to-door, group trips, nutrition program (brown bag), EBP ticket subsidy, travel training program, and subscription trips Monday- Friday, 9:00am to 4:15pm $2 single trip fare Must be a resident of San Pablo and 50+ years old or 18+ years old with a disability; Must complete a written application Community-Based Transportation Programs Community-based transportation services may be provided by public sector services (e.g. a city’s senior center) or non-profit organizations. They are sometimes dedicated for a specific clientele (i.e. Medicaid eligible persons, older adults attending meal programs, etc.). Riders are often referred to these programs by an agency they are receiving services from, such as a senior center, County Human Service agency, or Regional Center. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 2-24 Figure 2-20 Community-Based Transportation Programs Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 2-25 Figure 2-21 Summary of Community-Based Transportation Programs Service City / Service Area Description of Service Arc Contra Costa (now Vistability) Martinez Provides on-demand transportation service to adults and children with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Choice in Aging Pleasant Hill Provides scheduled transportation to people with disabilities and special needs, in coordination with paratransit agencies. Center for Elders’ Independence El Sobrante Provides live-at-home services to people age 55 and older. This includes transportation to CEI center, clinics, outside medical appointments, and field trips. They also deliver medications to members’ home. El Cerrito Easy Ride* El Cerrito Easy Ride (door-to-door), day trips and excursions, limited service beyond El Cerrito, nutrition rides, and on-demand service. Get Around Taxi Program Concord Program is available to Concord residents 65 years and older. Provides s door to door service, allows seniors to get taxi service at a subsidized rate. Go San Ramon! San Ramon A pilot program by County Connection that provides discounted (up to $5) Uber and Lyft shared trips (due to COVID-19 pandemic, this is now all trips) within the designated San Ramon service area. Mobility Matters* Countywide Provides two programs, one for seniors over 60 and one for disabled veterans of any age. Both programs require riders without access to other safe forms of transportation to need 1:1, door-through- door, escort. Rides are primarily for medically necessary services and dental care and shopping for basic necessities (e.g. groceries) Riders who do not qualify for the volunteer driver programs are matched with other transportation providers that meet their needs through the Mobility Matters Transportation Information & Referrals Helpline. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 2-26 Service City / Service Area Description of Service Lamorinda Spirit Van* Lafayette, Moraga, Orinda Provides rides to Lamorinda residents (age 60 and up) for errands, shopping, medical and personal appointments Monday through Friday, and to the C.C. Café at the Walnut Creek Senior Center for lunch Tuesday through Friday. Drivers are primarily volunteers. Pleasant Hill Senior Van Service* Pleasant Hill Provides rides to destinations in Pleasant Hill Monday through Friday, and to Concord, Martinez, and Walnut Creek for medical and dental appointments Mondays, Tuesdays, and/or Thursdays. Pleasant Hill residents aged 55 and over can register. Rides are $1.50 each way per passenger and must be scheduled one business day before the ride. Drivers are volunteers. R-Transit* Richmond Lyft partnership, demand response, group trips, senior nutrition program transportation service, and subscription trips. Rossmoor Dial-a-Bus Rossmoor Dial-A-Bus service areas include destinations in the Rossmoor Community, Rossmoor Shopping Center, medical centers, and scheduled trips to the downtown service area at specific times. Picks riders up at their curbside entry. Operates seven days per week, and rides must be requested at least one hour in advance. San Pablo Senior Transportation* San Pablo Door-to-door, group trips, nutrition program (brown bag), EBP ticket subsidy, travel training program, and subscription trips. Senior Express Van San Ramon Provides rides for San Ramon senior residents between the Alcosta Senior and Community Center and their homes. Rides must be scheduled one business day in advance (return rides time varies each day). Rides are $3 each way, or $2 for Encore members. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 2-27 Service City / Service Area Description of Service Seniors Around Town* Orinda Provides trips from volunteer drivers to riders that live in Orinda and are 65 or older or have a medical condition that limits driving. Walnut Creek Senior’s Club Mini-Bus Walnut Creek Provides rides to Walnut Creek Seniors Club Members that are 60 years of age or older for any purpose during service hours for $1 each way. Service hours are 8:45am to 3:40pm, Monday through Friday. Rides must be schedules between 9:00am and 10:00am the day before, or up to two days before for medical visits. Uses volunteer drivers and dispatchers to schedule rides *Note that these services are also described elsewhere in the report. Veterans Administration (VA) Transportation Programs The VA programs, based in the VA Medical Center in Martinez, provide a range of services to Contra Costa veterans, as described below. The VA travel pay reimbursement through the Beneficiary Travel program pays veterans back for mileage and other travel expenses to and from approved health care appointments. The VA also offers travel pay reimbursement for eligible caregivers. The VA offers two types of travel pay reimbursement for eligible veterans: Reimbursement Type 1: General Health Care travel This benefit covers regular transportation, like car, plane, train, bus, taxi, or light rail. veterans may be eligible for this reimbursement if they are traveling for care at a VA health facility or for VA-approved care at a facility in their community. They must also have one of the following:  Have a VA disability rating of 30% or higher, or  Be traveling for treatment of a service-connected condition, even if their VA disability rating is less than 30%, or  Receive a VA pension, or  Have an income that’s below the maximum annual VA pension rate, or  Be traveling for a scheduled VA claim exam (also called a compensation and pension, or C&P, exam), or  Be traveling to get a service dog, or  Can’t afford to pay for their travel, as defined by VA guidelines Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 2-28 If the veteran is traveling to get treatment at special disability rehabilitation centers, such as clinics providing care for spinal cord injuries, vision loss or blindness, or prosthetics rehabilitation, they may also be eligible if they need in-patient care. Reimbursement Type 2: Special Mode Transportation This benefit includes special types of transportation, like an ambulance, ambulette, or wheelchair van. The veteran may be eligible for this benefit if they meet a variety of requirements. As indicated above, there are some limitations that impact veterans’ mobility needs, as follows:  Some veterans do not qualify for VA care if they received an “other than honorable discharge, or dishonorable discharge, or weren’t injured or sick while on active duty”. For those veterans, the agency uses an income threshold, which also varies based on zip code.  A key need is non-authorized non-medical trips. The VA has been informed of neighbors financially exploiting veterans who have no other means of transportation other than paying their neighbors excessive amounts for a ride.  There are many veterans in the county who are not actively enrolled in the VA system whose transportation needs may be met through other programs.  Same day trip needs are a big challenge for veterans. Even though the VA’s social workers do provide information for alternative services, they basically can’t meet veteran’s same day needs unless the trip is easily accessible via public transport.  A hospital discharge program would be particularly beneficial to those who do not qualify for the VA’s programs or those who are discharged during non- operational hours.  Working veterans are lacking a GRH program.  Since the VA’s transportation services are provided during working hours, there are many after hour mobility needs that are not served. Contra Costa Health Services and Plan Contra Costa Health Services (CCHS) is the largest department in the County government, employing more than 4,250 individuals. Only 6% of the CCHS budget is from the general fund. The remaining 94% is supported by federal and state funding programs, such as Medi-Cal and Medicare as well as program grants and fees. The Contra Costa Health Plan (CCHP) provides health services to the general population and low-income communities in Contra Costa County. CCHP also provides non- emergency medical transportation (NEMT) to clients in order to access medical services. Services have been provided to Medi-Cal beneficiaries (95%) since 2015. These transportation benefits are not widely advertised due to concerns about costs. Provision of an NEMT trip needs to be prescribed by a doctor or provider. Transportation is not provided if the service is not covered by Medi-Cal. The CCHP call center includes four Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 2-29 full-time staff who respond to phone inquiries and conduct “audits” of the services provided. Some of the main mobility gaps experienced by members include ride times (trips used to be 90 minutes one-way and two hours for a round trip, but the organization is working on reducing this to 40 minutes one-way). Other limitations include service to dialysis is only provided for the return trip, which is a challenge for some members; members are often directed to paratransit rather than TNCs or taxis because of accessibility issues, and the different policies at different paratransit programs means that the call takers need to be familiar with each of the paratransit program policies. NEMT and Non-Medical Transportation (NMT) Contra Costa County also hosts a number of other Non-Emergency Medical Transportation (NEMT) services. Non-emergency medical transportation (NEMT) is an important benefit for Medicaid beneficiaries who need to get to and from medical services but have no means of transportation. The Code of Federal Regulations requires States to ensure that eligible, qualified Medicaid beneficiaries have access to NEMT to take them to and from providers. Many NEMT trips are taking people to and from dialysis clinics. In 2016 the state of California added non-medical transportation (NMT) to the benefits covered under Medi-Cal services. Assembly Bill 2394 (AB 2394), allows for the cost of transportation to and from a medical or non-medical appointment that would otherwise be covered by Medi-Cal. Unlike NEMT, NMT does not need to be prescribed by a medical provider, but only approved by the insurance provider. This allows Medi-Cal to cover services by passenger car, taxicab, or any other form of public or private conveyance, and mileage reimbursement when conveyance is in a private vehicle arranged by the beneficiary and not through a transportation broker, bus passes, taxi vouchers, or train tickets. Similar to how Medi-Cal reimburses NEMT trips, only the cost of the fare is reimbursable. Subsidized Fare Programs/Voucher Programs The demographic profile of Contra Costa County noted significant concentrations of poverty for older adults and people with disabilities. Cost can be a barrier to accessing transportation for these populations. Fixed-route transit providers offer reduced fares to older adults 65 and above and to people with disabilities. Senior Clipper Cards can be obtained via mail, online, and at participating transit agencies’ customer service offices. The RTC card is a photo identification card that verifies a rider’s eligibility to receive a reduced fare on fixed route transit. With the advent of Clipper, the RTC card now serves as an individual’s Clipper Card which automatically applies the discount fare. RTC Clipper cards must be obtained from a fixed route transit provider and require a physician’s verification of disability or proof of a DMV Disabled Parking Placard. The initial application must be made in person and there are two locations in Contra Costa County – County Connection Customer Service in Concord and Tri Delta Transit Customer Service in Antioch. Other transit agencies serving Contra Costa County that process RTC Clipper cards are located in Alameda County. AC Transit Customer Service is located in Downtown Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 2-30 Oakland and BART Customer Service in Lake Merritt station. For some consumers, obtaining a ride to one of these specific locations to apply for a card represents a barrier. No Contra Costa County transit providers currently have means-based discount programs for the general population. Subsidized fare and/or voucher programs also exist that are administered through social service agencies. Many transit agencies sell fare products at bulk discounts to social service agencies that serve low-income populations. These organizations determine eligibility and issue the fare products to their clients at their own discretion, free of charge, or at significant discounts. Some programs also include fares/vouchers for volunteer-based transportation programs and/or taxis. These programs are designed primarily to address immediate needs and depend on the discounts offered by transit agencies and available funds to purchase fare products. Taxi subsidy programs allow eligible participants to use taxis at a reduced fare by reimbursing a percentage of the fare, or by providing a low-cost fare medium, e.g. scrip or vouchers, which can be used to cover a portion of the fare. As noted earlier, several Contra Costa County cities offer subsidized taxis for older adults and people with disabilities. Volunteer Driver Programs Volunteer driver programs connect riders to a network of volunteers that provide one- way, round-trip, and multi-stop rides. Cost of participation in these programs can be provided free of charge, on a donation basis, through membership dues, or at a minimal cost, and typically have an eligibility process and advance reservation requirements. Programs are sponsored by non-profit organizations, transit agencies, or cities and counties. Some volunteer driver programs may also have an escort component where volunteers accompany riders with mobility devices on paratransit services, when they are unable to travel in a private vehicle. Some programs may use staff to provide initial rides or to fill gaps when volunteers are unavailable. It is unclear if any Contra Costa programs offer these last two options. Volunteer driver programs are generally designed for older adults and can fill key needs that are not met by other transportation services such as ADA-mandated paratransit. A key gap these programs usually address is offering door-through-door service. These services are therefore ideal for more frail individuals who cannot wait outside, may need a stabilizing arm, help with a jacket or carrying groceries, etc. These programs are also well-suited for certain medical trips, for example when someone needs to stop and pick up a new prescription before going home, or go to a facility in another county for specialized treatment. Volunteer driver programs usually have to closely monitor their capacity and face ongoing challenges with funding and finding quality volunteers. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 2-31 Figure 2-22 Contra Costa County Volunteer Driver Programs Program Description 13 John Muir Health: Caring Hands Provides volunteer trips for medical appointments and shopping in central, southwest, and east Contra Costa County Note: At time of publication, program was discontinued and service transferred to Mobility Matters Lamorinda Spirit Van Provides rides to older Lamorinda residents (age 60 and up) to errands, shopping, medical and personal appointments Monday through Friday, and to the C.C. Café at the Walnut Creek Senior Center for lunch Tuesday through Friday. Drivers are primarily volunteers. Mobility Matters Provides two programs, one for seniors over 60 and one for disabled veterans of any age. Both programs require riders without access to other safe forms of transportation to need 1:1, door-through-door, escort. Rides are primarily for medically necessary services and dental care and shopping for basic necessities (e.g. groceries) Riders who do not qualify for the volunteer driver programs are matched with other transportation providers that meet their needs through the Mobility Matters Transportation Information & Referrals Helpline. Pleasant Hill Senior Van Service Provides rides to destinations in Pleasant Hill Monday through Friday, and to Concord, Martinez, and Walnut Creek for medical and dental appointments Mondays, Tuesdays, and/or Thursdays. Pleasant Hill residents aged 55 and over can register. Rides are $1.50 each way per passenger and must be scheduled one business day before the ride. Drivers are volunteers. Seniors Around Orinda Riders must live in Orinda and be 65 or older or have a medical condition that limits driving. Mobility Management Mobility management services cover a wide, such as travel training, coordinated services, trip planning, brokerage, and information and referral. For the purposes of this resource list, mobility management services refer to the provision of individual transportation information and assistance, and service linkage. Mobility management services are closely related to information and referral, but go further by providing more individually tailored information and providing service linkage. Where available, mobility management is an ideal “entry point” for older adults, people with disabilities, and veterans to the range of transportation resources available. 13 Services have been altered during COVID. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 2-32 Mobility Matters In Contra Costa County mobility management is provided by Mobility Matters through a transportation information and referral helpline that utilizes a case management model based on individual transportation needs. Callers are assisted to determine their needs and resources that are available to them. Mobility Matters also publishes a transportation guide “Way To Go Contra Costa,” provides individualized emergency disaster plans, and coordinates with emergency services to assist and notify Mobility Matter’s clients in the event of a disaster. Private Transportation Private transportation providers have always been an integral partner in the provision of transportation resources for older adults and people with disabilities. Private transportation providers are for-profit entities in the business of transporting people. As noted earlier, most fixed-route transit agencies contract with private transportation providers to provide ADA-mandated paratransit. Other options are more likely to be requested directly by the rider. Taxis have filled gaps in transit and paratransit service for decades. In the last decade smart phone app-based ride-hailing companies, TNCs, like Uber and Lyft, have begun to fill some of the same gaps. However, smart-phone, software-driven transportation options are difficult to track because the data is privately controlled, and the services are volatile, with providers rapidly going into and leaving markets or falling out of business. Other examples of private transportation are school bus services (where available), motor coach services, shuttles, vanpools, and limousine and sedan services. Although private transportation providers are subject to the ADA in terms of access, service, fares and training – the requirement to provide wheelchair accessible vehicles is still being debated. A number of Bay Area cities and counties including Alameda, Marin, San Francisco, and Santa Clara Counties have attempted to increase accessible taxi options with limited success. TNC/ride-hail companies have attempted to increase accessible services with limited success in different locations around the U.S. through options such as uberACCESS, uberWAV, and Lyft Access. In 2018 California passed the TNC Access for All Act (SB 1376)14, a surcharge on TNC rides, which is currently undergoing a rule-making process. The Act could result in services and/or funding to augment transportation options for older adults and people with disabilities. Private transportation providers can be helpful in making first and last mile connections to transit. However, riders can face barriers when trying to use private providers directly for an entire travel trip, including affordability, accessibility for riders with mobility devices, and access to smartphones. 14 SB 1376 – https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/tncaccess/ Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 3-1 3 OUTREACH This chapter summarizes the study’s public engagement strategy and findings in the following sections: 1. Outreach Plan 2. Virtual Outreach Toolkit 3. Survey 4. Strategies Survey 5. Web Outreach 6. Presentations 7. Focus Groups 8. Telephone Town Hall 9. Stakeholder Interviews OUTREACH PLAN At the outset of this effort, Nelson\Nygaard developed a framework for public outreach and engagement that would solicit input from key individuals and organizations as well as a broad cross-section of Contra Costa County’s communities and stakeholder groups, particularly seniors and persons with disabilities. The outreach plan included five key goals to support a successful Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan: 1. Educate community members about the Study and different transportation options in the County. 2. Engage with community members and learn about current transportation usage. 3. Identify strengths and challenges of existing services and unmet needs. 4. Gather and incorporate feedback on alternative models. 5. Create support within the community for new models and identify potential barriers to implementation. Oversight Committees & Partnerships The Outreach Plan called for the establishment of two oversight committees - a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) and a Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) – as well as input from riders and partnerships with Community-Based Organizations (CBOs). Oversight committee members are listed in Chapter 1. Technical Advisory Committee: The TAC’s purpose was to provide subject matter expertise about technical and financial implications of service concepts under study, and review recommendations. Its members included staff with direct operational, management, or policy development experience with accessible transportation. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 3-2 Policy Advisory Committee: The PAC’s purpose was to provides study oversight, gather information on the subject matter, provide direction on public policy implications, and serve as liaisons to transit districts, Regional Transportation Planning Committees, the CCTA Board, and the Board of Supervisors. Its members included executive staff, board members and their appointees, and subject matter experts. Rider Input: The project team solicited input from riders through regular updates to the County Paratransit Coordination Council (PCC), surveys, and through targeted focus groups. Community-Based Organization Partnerships: The project team partnered with CBOs that support senior populations, people with disabilities, and diverse ethnicities and incomes in each of the four planning areas of the County. Since the CBOs have already established good contacts and legitimacy with their stakeholders, the project team communicated through these groups and connected with community members directly through their trusted networks. Engagement Tools & Techniques The Outreach Plan included a set of engagement tools and techniques that the project team originally planned pre-COVID to communicate information and solicit input from target populations in Contra Cost County. Figure 3-1 presents the planned engagement tools and techniques, which were to be conducted within two overall phases:  Phase 1 (January - February 2020): Receive input on transportation experiences, challenges, and unmet needs.  Phase 2 (July-August 2020): Receive feedback on alternative service models and identify potential barriers to implementation. However, due to the COVID-19 pandemic that began late February 2020 leading to Bay Areawide Public Health Department recommendations to shelter-in-place, the outreach tools and techniques were adjusted to facilitate remote engagement. Figure 3-1 describes if/how each of the tools and techniques were updated in the wake of COVID- 19. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 3-3 Figure 3-1 Engagement Tools and Techniques Engagement Tool/Technique Updates due to COVID-19 Interviews with targeted stakeholders Timeline was extended to capture different perspectives throughout COVID Simple survey Became primary outreach tool, over 1,000 completed online, paper, and on phone. Public meetings (PCC) Presented by CCTA staff on Zoom meetings Presentations as part of other ongoing projects Presented to Developmental Disabilities Council of Contra Costa County and Pleasant Hill Commission on Aging. Opportunities sought for online but not found. Countywide Telephone Townhall Conducted in November Tabling as part of other ongoing projects Not available Focus groups Timeline extended as groups became accustomed to online meetings. Five held via Zoom. Up-to-date project website Reflected changes to outreach due to COVID Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 3-4 Virtual Outreach Toolkit As the first shelter-in-place began in March 2020 and the scope of the pandemic became apparent, Nelson\Nygaard pivoted the outreach strategy to an online and virtual meeting model. Accordingly, the team developed a Toolkit for members of the TAC and PAC, and CBO partners. The Toolkit included the following items:  A new flyer reflecting at-home participation  Flyer text for emails  Script for check-in calls  Survey  Sample Twitter text Most materials were translated into Spanish and the surveys were also translated into Mandarin. Figure 3-2 Revised Flyer Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 3-5 SURVEY The survey was one of the most important outreach tools used for this project. Nelson\Nygaard conducted a mix of paper surveys and an online survey hosted on SurveyMonkey. The survey was available in three languages: English, Spanish, and Mandarin (Appendix A). We received 996 responses in English, 7 in Spanish, and 60 in Mandarin. Using this combination, a total of 1,063 responses were collected. The map below shows the spatial distribution of survey respondents within the County. Figure 3-3 Spatial Distribution of Survey Responses Survey respondents were mapped throughout the project and areas with limited responses were addressed with additional outreach, for example an additional focus group in West County. Due to the onset of COVID-19 pandemic, distribution of survey and engagement was challenging. A variety of means to reach the public were sought. Both the printable paper version and online SurveyMonkey survey was published on the project website in all three languages. It was also distributed to key stakeholder groups, such as local and regional news outlets, senior centers and programs, transit agencies for seniors and disabled, etc. within the region in order to reach out their readers or users. These agencies forwarded the survey to their user groups and, if applicable, posted it on their social media to market it further. Surveys and flyers were also distributed with meal delivery (e.g. Meals on Wheels) in some cases. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 3-6 Figure 3-4 Public Engagement Collateral Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 3-7 There was also an additional option provided to call in and respond to the survey by phone. Nelson\Nygaard had a dedicated team member to respond to calls and answer questions, along with filling out the survey over the phone. There were also community partners, such as Choice in Aging and Mobility Matters, that provided this option to their constituents, sometimes during regular check-in wellness calls. This service led to 244 people calling in to respond to the survey who either did not have the technology or the ability to do so themselves. Approximately 46% of the people who filled out the survey completed it without assistance. The remainder had somebody filling out the survey on their behalf or they had called in to respond to questions. The survey consisted of a total of 22 questions, 8 of which were optional depending on the respondents’ mode of transportation. Amongst the rest, three questions were based on their demographic information (age, place of residence, contact details), and one was on the riders’ travel accommodations (cane, walker, etc.) In addition, the survey asked if respondents were willing to provide contact information in order to be included in further outreach and entered to win a gift card. Survey Results Age Out of 809 respondents who answered the question regarding their age, 77% were older adults (55 years or older). Amongst the respondents, only 16% reported that they are certified as eligible for service based on disability with East Bay Paratransit, WestCAT Dial a Ride, County Connection LINK, Tri Delta Transit Paratransit, or under the Regional Transportation Connection (RTC Clipper) program. Forty-seven percent of this group were older adults, 49% between the age of 18 and 54 and 2% younger than 18. Figure 3-5 Respondents’ Age Distribution Less than 18 2% 18-54 20% 55-64 9% 65-74 28% 75-84 27% 85 or older 13% Prefer not to answer 1% Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 3-8 Mode Share Regarding transportation modes used, over 40% of the respondents said that they drive themselves, followed by 38% who are driven by family, neighbor, or a paid helper. These patterns are consistent with findings in similar studies. BART was chosen by 32% of the respondents, and bus was chosen by 24%. Amongst other modes of transportation, walking (23%) had the highest share, followed by Lyft/Uber (15.5%), ADA Paratransit (10%), bicycle (5%), and taxi (4.5%). Thirty-three percent (33%) of respondents also rely on other forms of getting around, including Mobility Matters volunteer driver program and Lamorinda Spirit Van. Respondents were given the option on several questions to select multiple answers. Figure 3-6 Mode Share Distribution Note: Respondents could choose as many modes as they used. Hence, the percentage is out of 1,063 for individual categories and not as a whole. Amongst the 24.2% respondents who listed bus as their chosen mode of transportation, 42% were County Connection users, followed by users of AC Transit (22%), Tri Delta Transit (20%) and WestCAT (5%). Finally, 11% mentioned using another bus system than those already mentioned. See Figure 3-7. The distribution for ADA paratransit was similar to the chosen bus systems above. Forty- four percent (44%) of paratransit riders use County Connection LINK and 22% use Tri Delta Transit Paratransit, closely followed by East Bay Paratransit (19%) making these the most popular bus services. Six percent (6%) of the respondents use WestCAT Dial-a-Ride for paratransit users. See Figure 3-8. 33.0% 4.5% 5.4% 10.3% 15.5% 23.3% 24.2% 31.8% 38.2% 40.6% Other Taxi Bicycle ADA Paratransit Lyft/Uber Walking Bus BART Family, neighbor, or paid helper Drive myself Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 3-9 Figure 3-7 Bus Users’ Distribution Figure 3-8 Paratransit Users’ Distribution 11% 5% 20% 22% 42% Other WestCAT Tri Delta Transit AC Transit County Connection 9% 6% 19% 22% 44% Other WestCAT Dial-a-Ride East Bay Paratransit Tri Delta Transit Paratransit County Connection LINK Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 3-10 Rider Satisfaction Eighty-eight percent (88%) of bus users report having satisfactory or excellent bus riding experiences and interactions with drivers, while this rate was 60% amongst ADA paratransit users. Amongst the different bus services in the region, AC Transit had a dissatisfaction rate of 16%, followed by Tri Delta Transit with 15%, WestCAT with 11% and lastly, County Connection with 9%. As for the different ADA Paratransit services, the dissatisfaction rate was highest amongst East Bay Paratransit users (64%), followed by County Connection LINK (49%), and Tri Delta Transit Paratransit (14%). Figure 3-9 Transit and Paratransit Satisfaction Rates As for Lyft and Uber users, out of the 15.5% of respondents who usually use Lyft or Uber to get around, 92% report having satisfactory or excellent Lyft/Uber riding experiences and interactions with drivers. This satisfaction rate is much higher than bus and paratransit users. Figure 3-10 Lyft/Uber Satisfaction Rates 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 WestCAT Dial-a-Ride Tri Delta Transit Paratransit East Bay Paratransit County Connection LINK WestCAT Tri Delta Transit AC Transit County Connection Excellent Satisfactory Poor 8% 48% 44% Poor Satisfactory Excellent Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 3-11 Trip Distribution Looking deeper into the distribution of different modes of transportation spatially for all County regions, the car is the primary mode of transportation, whether it is people driving themselves or someone giving them a ride. Dependency on Uber/Lyft/Taxi is the highest, after car, in Southwest – Lamorinda and East regions. Dependency on riding the bus is also high in the Southwest – Lamorinda region, followed by the West region and the Central region. Lastly, ADA Paratransit dependency is the lowest amongst all modes for all five regions, with the lowest in Southwest – Lamorinda area. Figure 3-11 Mode of Transportation by Regional Transportation Planning Committee Areas Note: Respondents could choose as many modes as they used. Hence, the percentage is out of total respondents for each region. Trip Purpose Medical appointments and grocery stores/ drugstores are riders’ most common destinations as illustrated in the graph below. Figure 3-12 Where Are Respondents Going? *Respondents could choose up to three trips that they take most often. Hence, the percentage is out of total respondents (1,063) individually for each trip type. 95% 64%69%76%86% 30% 15%15%22%23% 6% 52% 22%19%25% 5%10%10%9%16% Southwest - Lamorinda Southwest - San Ramon Valley Central East West By Car Tax/Uber/Lyft Bus ADA Paratransit 11.3% 6.7% 7.5% 7.8% 8.2% 11.4% 17.0% 46.4% 56.3% Other Church Non-medical appointment The Senior Center Attend a class Work or Volunteer position See friends or family Grocery shopping/drugstore Medical appointment Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 3-12 Transportation Challenges Thirty-five percent (35%) of respondents also reported that medical appointments are the most difficult to get to, followed by the grocery or drugstore (20%) and visiting friends and family (19%). Thirty-eight percent (38%) of respondents also said that there are additional places they would like to go to but are unable to due to lack of convenient transportation. Most of these were recreational places such as parks, museums, tourist destinations. Improved connectivity to BART stations emerged as a pressing need. Figure 3-13 Which Trips are Most Difficult to Make? Note: Respondents could choose up to three trips that they take most often. Hence, the percentage is out of total respondents (1,063) individually for each trip type. For all areas of the County, trips to medical appointments are the most difficult for respondents. For Southwest – Lamorinda’s respondents, taking trips to grocery shopping/drugstore and to see family and friends are most difficult after medical trips. Within East region, there are no significant differences in the difficulties reported reaching different destinations. Responses from residents of Southwest – San Ramon Valley and Central region follow the same trend as the overall chart for trip difficulty. 7.0% 5.7% 6.6% 7.4% 8.5% 10.7% 18.6% 19.8% 35.1% Other Work or Volunteer position Attend a class Non-medical appointment Church The Senior Center See friends or family Grocery shopping/drugstore Medical appointment Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 3-13 Figure 3-14 Most Difficult Trips for Respondents, by Area of County Note: Respondents could choose up to three trips that they take most often. Hence, the percentage is out of total responses within each region for each trip type. Many survey takers living in the West region also mentioned difficulties in taking “Other” trips which mainly included recreational trips. 0%5%10%15%20%25%30%35% Other Work or Volunteer position Church The Senior Center Attend a class See friends or family Non-medical appointment Grocery shopping/drugstore Medical appointment Southwest - Lamorinda Southwest - San Ramon Valley Central East West Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 3-14 While respondents face a variety of challenges with existing transportation services in Contra Costa County, many of them report feeling unsafe while traveling (29%). Safety sometimes refers to structural issues, such as falling over on moving buses, or concerns about potential crime. Unfortunately the survey did not differentiate, as safety is not usually such a high factor. It is possible that concerns about safety were heightened in a time of COVID-19 and civil unrest. Some specific comments referred to safer night service and more secure service to avoid thefts and injuries. Followed by safety, respondents listed that they cannot take transportation when they need (24%). Figure 3-15 Respondent Transportation Challenges Note: Respondents could choose up to three challenges that they faced most often. Hence, the percentage is out of total respondents (1,063) individually for each challenge. 10.1% 11.9% 12.2% 12.7% 17.5% 18.4% 21.8% 23.0% 23.7% 29.1% Other There are problems with street infrastructure I have to transfer too often I don’t have adequate information on services I can’t afford my transportation No challenges I can’t go where I need to My trip takes too long I can’t go when I need to I don’t feel safe when traveling Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 3-15 Respondents from the Southwest - San Ramon Valley region listed safety and trip length as their biggest concerns. After safety, service hours were the biggest challenge for respondents from the Central Region. For respondents in the West region, transportation service area, hours and trip duration emerged as major challenges after safety. Respondents in the East region did not show significant differences between their concerns. Figure 3-16 Transportation Challenges, by Area of County Note: Respondents could choose up to three challenges that they faced most often. Hence, the percentage is out of total responses within each region for each challenge. 0%5%10%15%20% Other I don’t feel safe when traveling I can’t afford my transportation I don’t have the information on services There are problems with the street infrastructure My trip takes too long I can’t go when I need to I have to transfer too often I can’t go where I need to Southwest - Lamorinda Southwest - San Ramon ValleyCentral East West Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 3-16 Respondents want more frequent trips (30%), followed by same-day trips (22%), i.e. trips that can be booked on the same day that the trip needs to be taken, and trips at different times of the week, including evenings and weekends (20%). Out of area medical trips (23%) were another common transportation need listed by respondents. Some of the destinations mentioned for out of area medical trips were University of California San Francisco campus, Stanford University School of Medicine, Kaiser in Vallejo, Summit in Oakland, Kaiser in Pleasanton, and Eden Medical Centers in Castro Valley. Figure 3-17 Preferred Transportation Services Note: Respondents could choose up to three needs that they require most often. Hence, the percentage is out of total respondents (1,063) individually for each need type. Breaking down this need further by region, frequent trips were the top need that the respondents requested in three out of the five regions (except Southwest – Lamorinda and West Regions). Respondents in the Southwest – Lamorinda and West Regions listed other improvements such as additional bus services as their top need. For Southwest – Lamorinda, out of area medical trips and same day trips are also listed as respondents’ top needs. In the West region, frequent, same-day and evening/weekend trips are additional needs mentioned. The Southwest – San Ramon Valley and Central regions follow the trend of the overall needs chart. The East region follows the same trend as before, where all the needs had almost equal response rates. 7.5% 10.8% 11.4% 13.7% 14.9% 20.1% 22.1% 22.8% 30.4% Wheelchair accessible trips Accessible sidewalks, curb ramps, bus stops,… Travel information or training Assistance entering or exiting home/… Recreational/ group trips Evening or weekend trips Same-day trips Out of area medical trips Frequent trips (daily or 3-4 times a week) Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 3-17 Figure 3-18 Preferred Transportation Services, by Area of County Note: Respondents could choose up to three needs that they require most often. Hence, the percentage is out of total responses within each region for each need. 0%5%10%15%20%25% Other suggestions for improvements Same-day trips Wheelchair accessible trips Frequent trips (daily or 3-4 times a week) Out of area medical trips Assistance entering or exiting home/ destination Evening or weekend trips Recreational/ group trips Accessible sidewalks, curb ramps, bus stops, etc. Travel information or training Southwest - Lamorinda Southwest - San Ramon Valley Central East West Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 3-18 Strategies Survey While finalizing the Plan in 2021, the team created a new survey to ask stakeholders to help prioritize potential strategies for implementation. CCTA may choose to continue the survey to collect input on priorities as the Plan moves forward. WEB OUTREACH Nelson\Nygaard developed a dedicated website for the project that provided brief context to the project and what it entails, ways one could participate in the project, up to date project documents, news updates regarding the project, and lastly, a webform to join the mailing list and/or to provide comments. Figure 3-19 Project Website Homepage The webform responses were all logged, addressed and maintained by Nelson\Nygaard staff (Appendix B). There were more than 60 responses via the webform. The majority of responses were people who wanted to join the mailing list and stay updated regarding the project progress. A contact and distribution list of approximately 200 people was compiled from these messages and survey responses. The team also received and kept track of all the emails that were sent by residents of Contra Costa County with concerns about the project or feedback. Most of these direct emails were regarding service addition to particular areas. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 3-19 Figure 3-20 Project Website Mailing List Sign-Up Form PRESENTATIONS Nelson\Nygaard presented to the Developmental Disabilities Council of Contra Costa County on February 18, 2020. CCTA and County staff presented to the Pleasant Hill Commission on Aging on March 12, 2020. When In-person meetings were prohibited in mid-March due to shelter-in-place restrictions, further opportunities were sought for presentations at existing online meetings, but were not found. FOCUS GROUPS Nelson\Nygaard conducted five virtual focus groups with seniors and persons with disabilities. These focus groups were hosted in place of the in-person meetings that the project team initially expected to hold with CBOs (prior to the pandemic). The conversations enabled the project team to have in-depth conversations with certain populations that had not been reached sufficiently through other forms of public engagement. Specifically, the focus groups were designed to receive feedback from adults with disabilities, people with limited English proficiency, and residents in West Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 3-20 County. During the conversations, participants shared their experiences with transportation services in Contra Costa County both before and during the COVID-19 pandemic, including key challenges, opportunities, and priorities. Figure 3-21 describes the target population of each group, how many people participated, and the date of the event. Figure 3-21 Summary of Focus Groups Host Group Target Population Number of Participants Date Diablo Valley College Students with disabilities and access services staff 5 June 17, 2020 San Ramon Senior Center Seniors and Mandarin- speaking residents 10 July 24, 2020 El Cerrito Senior Center West County seniors 14 August 3, 2020 Lighthouse for the Blind Visually impaired individuals 13 August 11, 2020 San Pablo Senior Center West County seniors and Spanish-speaking residents 3 August 31, 2020 Focus group participants reported that they use a variety of transportation modes, including paratransit, transit, and Lyft/Uber ride-hail services, to make essential and non- essential trips in Contra Costa County. Many participants find that the paratransit and transit services across the County are fragmented and that there is a lack of awareness about non-driving options. As a result, many people rely on family, friends, or neighbors to drive them, which can be challenging because people are not always available or willing to drive. For these reasons, the focus group conversations sought to understand the barriers and challenges that people face when traveling within Contra Costa County. The following sections describe the feedback we heard from participants regarding three modes: paratransit, transit, and Lyft/Uber. Paratransit Focus group participants expressed a handful of challenges related to paratransit. Most participants who use or have used paratransit in the past, emphasized that paratransit lacks reliability due to long wait times and challenging timing issues. For instance, one participant mentioned how she has had to leave important medical appointments early because the driver arrived ahead of schedule, and how she has missed important appointments because the driver arrived late. Also, scheduling a paratransit ride requires advanced planning, which is not always possible. Furthermore, participants find that paratransit is expensive; for this reason, many rely on transit services instead. People provided mixed reviews regarding the helpfulness of drivers – some help carry groceries, while others do not. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 3-21 Perhaps one of the greatest challenges is a lack of access to information about paratransit services. This highlights a major equity concern, as people often do not know that they may be eligible for paratransit service. Many participants expressed a desire for improved access to information about non-driving options. One participant shared that she only recently learned that people with disabilities can apply for paratransit. Since this service is not advertised, she and others who need it are not aware of this service. Many participants also noted that they feel limited by the types of paratransit stop types. They would like additional stops that would increase access to shopping centers, parks, and other places that support their personal well-being outside of medical appointments. During the pandemic, some paratransit agencies have offered services for shopping trips. Participants indicated that they like this option and would like to see it continue in the future. Transit Many focus group participants do not qualify for paratransit services, did not know it was an option, or find that the barriers to access it (i.e. fares) are too high. Thus, many participants rely on transit services for essential and non-essential trips. Focus group participants indicated several challenges that they encounter while riding transit and/or barriers to using the public transit system. For many, BART feels unsafe and unclean; these conditions often deter people from taking transit at night or at all. People find that there are poor walking conditions in and around station/stop areas and that other riders are inconsiderate. Furthermore, announcements on buses/BART are lacking, do not work consistently, and/or are not loud enough. Also, one participant noted that she often uses the bus for one direction of her trip, but not for her return trip because she has difficulty navigating the stops; this participant expressed that she would like training on how to use public transit. Participant feedback indicates that bus satisfaction is very much dependent on how the driver responds to the passenger and the amenities on- and off-board the bus. Drivers vary in terms of how responsive they are to the passengers’ needs. For example, one visually impaired participant noted that she has to communicate with the bus driver about her stop because she has trouble locating the cord on the bus; some drivers remember where she plans to get off, while others forget. In addition, elderly and disabled participants mentioned that the different floor levels within the bus can be difficult to navigate. They also noted that the lack of benches at bus stops and the poor first/last-mile connection between their home and a bus stop often discourages them from taking the bus. During the pandemic, most participants who used BART and other transit services are not currently using these services. The shelter-in-place mandate and social distancing practices have discouraged much of what would have been “normal” travel. However, participants also described a few barriers related to the transit systems that have discouraged them from riding during this time: • Bus systems are requiring back door boarding; this is challenging for disabled persons and seniors because the back entrance is high and most lack a ramp Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 3-22 • Buses may skip stops due to limited capacity constraints (to maintain social distancing on board); this creates significantly longer wait times for riders and bus tracking apps are not accurate • Passengers are concerned that not all riders are practicing social distancing Lyft/Uber Some participants reported that they occasionally use Lyft/Uber if they are unable or would prefer not to ride transit or paratransit. For instance, people who can no longer drive but do not quality for paratransit because they do not need assistance door-to- door, may opt to use Lyft/Uber in areas where transit service is limited or feels unsafe. While these services can be convenient given their on-demand, door-to-door service, they also pose some challenges to their riders. Those who use these services indicated that it can be difficult to communicate with the drivers; for this reason, transit can be a better option. Furthermore, a handful of participants mentioned that dog shaming (referring to the reluctance of Uber/Lyft drivers to take blind passengers and their service animals) in Lyft/Uber is a common experience; thus, those who travel with a dog, many of which may be service animals (which are legally authorized), do not feel comfortable using these services because of driver reactions. Furthermore, Lyft/Uber is expensive, especially currently as pooling is not allowed during the pandemic. Most people who had been using these services, are not currently doing so during the pandemic. TELEPHONE TOWN HALL Nelson\Nygaard hosted a live Telephone Town Hall on 27th October 2020. The Town Hall was available in three languages: English, Spanish, and Mandarin. At this event, Nelson\Nygaard dialed more than 23,000 numbers, out of which 1,149 participants accepted the call and joined in over the phone line all over Contra Costa County to understand more about this project and get some of their questions answered. The event was pre-registered by 225 people and other phone numbers were provided by project partners, staff and people who had previously shown interest in staying in the loop about the project. Before the Telephone Townhall all participants were called to connect to the Town Hall and callers could choose to be connected or hang up. The event was held over an hour and was hosted by a facilitator who navigated the questions and conducted the flow of the conversation. The Town Hall had two featured speakers: Candace Andersen who represents the Board of Supervisors, and Teresa Gerringer, who is a Lafayette Councilmember and member of the CCTA Board. The event was also attended by four key project staff from Nelson\Nygaard, Contra Costa County and CCTA. There were two additional support staff to troubleshoot in case something unexpected came up. The Telephone Town Hall worked like a live radio show. Once connected, participants listened to the presentations by featured speakers and staff about the ATS Plan and next steps. To make the event interactive, participants were asked to complete simple poll questions and were also given opportunities to ask questions about the project and provide feedback on other mobility challenges in the county. Four multiple choice poll questions were asked as part of the interaction, where the participants could answer by Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 3-23 dialing their answer on the phone number pad. Not all participants answered the polls. The questions and their respective responses are shown below: a. What part of the County do you live in? (64 total responses)1 i. East – 25 participants (39%) ii. West – 6 participants (9%) iii. Central – 26 participants (41%) iv. Southwest – 7 participants (11%) b. Are there places you would like to go, but are unable to get to due to lack of convenient transportation? (56 total responses) i. Yes – 34 participants (61%) ii. No – 22 participants (39%) c. What are the challenges you face with existing transportation services in Contra Costa County? (31 total responses) i. I cannot travel at the time I want to – 7 participants (23%) ii. I cannot travel where I want to – 8 participants (26%) iii. My trip takes too long – 16 participants (52%) d. What transportation services do you need that you do not currently receive? (25 total responses) i. Evening or weekend trips – 9 participants (36%) ii. Frequent trips, such as daily or 3-4 times a week – 3 participants (12%) iii. Out of area medical trips – 6 participants (24%) iv. Same-day trips – 7 participants (28%) Other than the survey questions, the speakers and staff answered 17 questions asked by the participants. Following are some of the highlights from the question and answer session: In response to a number of callers’ questions about ensuring that the study not “sit on the shelf”, Council Member Gerringer, Supervisor Andersen and Peter Engel indicated that elected officials at the county and city levels are committed to serving as champions of the study’s recommendations, at the same time that they are aware of the existing fiscal constraints. As such, they welcomed participants’ inputs to help prioritize the recommendations. Richard Weiner gave a similar response to a caller who was questioning how the study’s recommendations can be given priority by elected officials who are able to find funding for other projects such as the fourth bore in the Caldecott Tunnel. 1 Analysis of data from the host indicates the following actual breakdown: East – 20 participants (31%), West – 5 participants (8%), Central – 25 participants (39%), Southwest – 14 participants (22%) Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 3-24 Naomi Armenta explained to a caller who is unable to use the fixed route system that she can apply for ADA paratransit certification or call CCTA to find out about additional options. In response to a question about out of county trips, Richard affirmed that these are difficult trips to provide, but indicated that the study will look at innovative models that have been used in other locations in order to address this mobility need. Naomi responded to a similar question about out of town trips and indicated to the caller that as a wheelchair user she too is sensitive to accessibility concerns. Naomi indicated to a caller who was concerned about the conditions of sidewalks and how they impact residents’ ability to access bus stops that infrastructure improvements are probably beyond the reach of this study, but the team will be looking at service models that will transport riders to fixed route services such as BART or key bus stops. In response to two questions about fare unaffordability for low-income people, John Cunningham indicated that the study will be considering fare discounts that go beyond the required levels for seniors and people with disabilities but reminded listeners that because of fiscal constraints it will be important that the study receive input on how to prioritize strategies. Peter l reiterated that affordability will be a key issue to be addressed in the study. A resident of Camino Tassajara asked a question about how residents of that and other rural locations can be better served. Peter indicated that the study will be looking at TNCs and taxis as one possible way of serving these areas but will also explore other options. A similar response was given to a question about how rural locations can be better served in far east Contra Costa County. In response to a question about the future of the subsidized Lyft program in Walnut Creek, Peter indicated that this is considered to be a very successful program and the study will look for ways of expanding this to other locations. Richard confirmed in response to a caller’s question that the study will be looking at a Consolidated Transportation Agency (CTSA) as a model for overall coordination of transportation in the county and will be looking at what worked and did not work at other CTSAs in the state. Peter confirmed with a caller that funding issues will be addressed in the study. In response to a caller who was concerned about the future of paratransit services in the county, Richard indicated that while the study will certainly not call for a reduction in paratransit services, there are events beyond the study that could impact overall services, such as the impact of COVID on transit ridership and sales tax revenues. In response to a caller who was concerned about missed fixed route connections, Richard indicated that while he isn’t familiar with the specific routes indicated by the caller, if he is eligible for paratransit there is a new one seat ride pilot program that could address this need, even while he appreciated the caller’s commitment to try using fixed route service. Peter added the County is currently working on a pilot with Tri Delta Transit called Connection Protection which will enable train riders to call their connecting bus to Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 3-25 let them know that their train is running late and they should wait for the transfer. When this program is implemented it should address the caller’s concern. Finally, Naomi responded to a caller who was concerned about whether people with intellectual disabilities are being considered in the study that indeed they are, and that the study will consider a number of ways in which use of transportation is a challenge for people with various disabilities. The participants were directed to the project website for more information and to fill out the webform, in case of more questions. Overall, it was a successful event that reached out to a lot of the key stakeholder and focus groups, especially those without access to or knowledge of online technology. The entire Town Hall was also transcribed and provided to participants who asked and to people who could not attend the event and wanted to hear the conversation. The transcript and the recording were also uploaded on the project website for members of the public to look at. Use of the Telephone Town Hall was determined to be very effective at raising the visibility of the project and educating the public about the project’s goals. The Town Hall initially connected with over a thousand members of the public, most of whom would have been challenged to attend an in-person meeting. However, as far as substantive input on the study contents, this may be considered a rather limited medium due to the actual volume of participants who stayed on the entire time, and the limited number of questions that could be addressed within the structure of the event. STAKEHOLDER INTERVIEWS Nelson\Nygaard conducted a series of stakeholder interviews over the course of the year, starting in March of 2020 and then stopping to pause and reflect on the circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic. The interview questions were reevaluated to reflect post-pandemic circumstances and were then completed between September to November 2020. The agencies contacted by Nelson\Nygaard included a range from public to nonprofit, which represented different stakeholder groups and interests. Interviewees were provided a “shopping list” of potential strategies from similar projects in advance to inspire ideas and gauge initial response to different concepts. The interviewed agencies are listed in the table below: Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 3-26 Figure 3-22 Summary of Stakeholder Interviews Organization or Agency Name Area of County County Connection Central, Southwest East Bay Paratransit West, Southwest Tri Delta Transit East WestCAT West Martinez VA Clinic Central Choice in Aging Central Contra Costa ARC Countywide Contra Costa Health Plan / Health Services Countywide Independent Living Resource Center (ILR) - Concord / Independent Living Resources of Solano & Contra Costa Counties (ILRSCC) Central Office of Emergency Services Countywide Mobility Matters Countywide These stakeholder interviews focused on understanding how each of these organizations function and some of the key gaps and needs that they have identified. The interviews also captured the agencies’ opinion on some of the umbrella strategies that had come up in previous TAC and PAC meetings. Below are some of the common themes that came up from the interviews. Creation of a Coordinating Agency such as a Consolidated Transportation Services Agency (CTSA) One of the key questions addressed by stakeholders is whether there is a need for a coordinating agency to implement study recommendations, and whether this needs to be a CTSA. A CTSA is a mechanism defined under the California Social Services Transportation Act (AB120 - 1979). In the Bay Area, MTC authorizes the formation of CTSAs. The designation provides certain limited benefits regarding state funding. More detail on CTSAs are provided in Chapter 5. On the question of whether there is a need to create a new entity that oversees the transportation services for human service agencies, interviewees generally agreed on the need for a coordinating agency but disagreed about whether this needs to be in the form of a CTSA. Those in favor emphasized the gaps in existing services that they believed will continue as long as there is no centralized entity that provides comprehensive oversight of transportation service delivery. They also pointed out that CTSAs have been recommended in previous studies for good reason, as lack of coordination has been seen as a key weakness in the system of service delivery in the county. In the current service delivery structure, existing agencies would not be able to take on everything on the proposed “shopping list” of mobility strategies. Instead, a new entity whose primary Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 3-27 focus would be working to provide high quality paratransit and human services transportation will work most efficiently. Conversely, those opposed to the creation of a CTSA were concerned that this new entity would lead to an overall loss of service, particularly those services that currently exceeded the minimum ADA requirements or that received TDA 4.0 funding. Stakeholders indicated that proponents mistakenly (according to the interviewees) believe there will be economies of scale, even though there will remain a need for multiple facilities throughout the county to minimize deadheading, and centralization would reduce the potential for spreading overhead costs over both fixed route and paratransit services. There was also a concern about the diversion of existing funding sources to cover CTSA administrative costs. Finally, opponents indicated that 13C labor considerations had not been fully taken into account when considering the benefits of a CTSA. Even those who weren’t necessarily supportive of a CTSA indicated that there are potential benefits from a centralized agency, such as joint procurements, unified ADA paratransit eligibility process, a unified call center and outreach messaging. Identified Gaps and Concerns Over the course of the interviews, each stakeholder listed their top concerns and identified key gaps within the existing system. Many of the concerns identified in the interviews were similar to the responses to the online public survey, such as issues with transferring between paratransit vehicles and from paratransit to fixed route, which can lead to long and confusing trips for the rider; need for service during evenings and weekends; frequent trips to social and recreational places within the county; safety and hygiene within the vehicles; provision of East Bay Paratransit trips during peak hours when significant service is assigned to Regional Center trips; and long ride times on Health Plan trips. Some of the other issues that were listed were the loss of revenue to human service programs due late arrivals by clients, wait-time on return trips, and overtime costs for the agencies; concerns with loss of existing funding due to change in programs; lack of volunteers for driver programs, especially in East County; the belief that many people in the county are technologically limited and do not have access to the internet. Recommendations The interviewees were also asked to list their agencies’ top five priority recommendations or programs that they think will address some of the issues listed above. Following are the ones that were most frequently mentioned. • Same day rides • Dedicated service for certain trip types (such as dialysis and Regional Center trips) • Extensive volunteer driver program • Wheelchair breakdown service Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 3-28 • Real- time information • One call/one click call center • Travel training • Regional connected trips without transfers • Fare subsidies • Hospital discharge program • Guaranteed Ride Home program for working veterans • Training for Uber and Lyft drivers in how to serve people with disabilities Other Recommendations and Concerns for Specific Stakeholder Groups Some of the agencies that were interviewed represented a specific group or service such as the Office of Emergency Services which focuses on planning, outreach, and training as it relates to Disaster Management and Emergency Preparedness. One concern they stated was the potential impact of language barriers in the event of an evacuation, particularly with people in the deaf community. They also recommended further coordination with agencies in adjoining counties in order to transfer people out of a disaster area if local services are overstretched. Similarly, the Martinez VA Clinic expressed concerns about lack of access to non- authorized non-medical trips as a key need for veterans, along with same-day trips. Many veterans fall through the cracks of eligibility if they received a less than honorable discharge, and most services are geared towards medical services, rather than other trip purposes. Service provided through the VA is also limited to day-time hours, thus not meeting many of the veterans’ mobility needs. One stakeholder stated that the paratransit programs should not be expected to be all things for all people. For example, designated agencies should serve the needs of specific populations, such as those attending dialysis clinics or adult day health centers. A centralized agency could oversee contracts with these various entities, thus lightening the burden on the paratransit programs. Recommendations for Moving Forward with the Plan Most of the interviewed organizations suggested that the Nelson\Nygaard team review ongoing or successful programs that could be replicated in the County. Overall, the stakeholder interviews provided insight into the workings of these organizations and also gave the team an understanding of potential implementation issues. The request from some of the stakeholders was to create a solid implementation plan to increase the likelihood that recommended strategies and programs would be implemented. One of the agencies indicated that they expected this Plan to be implementable rather than a visionary document. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 4-1 4 IDENTIFICATION OF TRANSPORTATION NEEDS AND GAPS The transportation needs identified in this chapter draw on several sources including demographics and analysis of current programs (Chapter 2), outreach conducted with consumers, their advocates, and agencies who serve them (Chapter 3), and other reports. Many of the needs and gaps identified in this chapter have been identified in prior studies (Appendix C). Issues and Needs Related to Fixed-Route Transit Service Fixed-route transit services are often a lifeline to older adults, people with disabilities, people with low income, and also veterans. In the course of the study’s outreach activities, stakeholders spoke of issues that had been exacerbated by COVID-19, such as crowding on buses, length of wait at stops, mismatched transfers, etc. Identification of potential transit need based on demographic measures (population density, jobs, older adults, people with disabilities, and where lower income persons live) compared to existing transit service indicates the areas where there are potential gaps. There appears to be a patchwork of gaps of medium to high need in West County and in Central County in the areas of Concord and Pleasant Hill. There is a lower level of need but spanning larger geographic areas in the northern portion of the County such as near Port Chicago, East County around Antioch and Brentwood, and Southwest County east of San Ramon (refer to Figure 2-8 in Chapter 2). Additional needs included:  Many respondents reported feeling unsafe while traveling; BART feels unsafe and unclean and announcements are not clear  Bus drivers are not always responsive to passenger needs and a lack of bus amenities such as shelters pose challenges for seniors and people with disabilities  Stakeholders find it challenging to get to the two locations where people can apply for Regional Transit Connection (RTC) cards (for reduced transit fares due to disability) Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 4-2  Transit has been challenging to ride during the pandemic (thus most people are not using it) due to back door boarding, skipped stops due to capacity constraints, longer wait times, and concerns about social distancing Issues and Needs Related to ADA Mandated Paratransit Service Similar to fixed-route transit, stakeholders discussed a range of concerns related to ADA-mandated paratransit. The ADA establishes minimum requirements for the provision of complementary paratransit service, which all Contra Costa operators meet. However, the travel needs of the senior and disabled community consistently exceed or are often outside of these requirements, financial resources, and operational capacity – creating challenges.  Four different providers with different certification processes, fare structures and media create confusion for customers  Issues with transferring between different ADA paratransit services  Paratransit lacks reliability (long wait times and challenging timing issues), requires advanced planning, is expensive, has mixed reviews regarding helpfulness of drivers, and has limited stop types (during the COVID mode of service provision)  Tri Delta Transit and WestCAT offer supplemental services to residents aged 65+ but others do not  Consumers report arriving late to day programs and are picked up late e.g. Regional Center trips for people with developmental disabilities Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 4-3 Issues and Needs Related to Community Based Transportation Services Community-based transportation services may be provided by public sector services (e.g. a city’s senior center) or nonprofit organizations. Contra Costa County has a wide range of these types of programs including city-based programs (e.g. San Pablo Senior & Disabled Transportation) and programs offered by nonprofit organizations (e.g. Mobility Matters.) In most cases providing transportation is not the core mission of the agency but is provided to fill specific gaps for agency clients rather than the general population. Programs such as these are often challenged to meet gaps and needs not filled by ADA paratransit service. There are a range of programs throughout the County, but gaps remain persistent.  Measure J funded city services that supplement ADA-mandated programs are only located in West County  There are two traditional volunteer driver programs in the County, a third – John Muir Health: Caring Hands – recently closed  The remaining volunteer driver programs need more volunteers and more reliable funding to increase capacity; reliance on volunteer driver programs to fill door-to- door transportation needs is problematic  Monument Shuttle recently shut down due to lack of funding  Consumers have difficulty making frequent trips  Wheelchair accessible transportation options are limited in parts of the County; if available, users must schedule 2-3 days in advance Geographic and Temporal Inequities A review of demographics and the location of services in the County makes geographic inequities evident. East County in particular faces a number of challenges.  There is a concentration of seniors south of Brentwood, and disabled veterans throughout rural East County  There are no community-based transportation services in East County, although Mobility Matters covers East County with their two countywide volunteer driver programs  There are a number of disabled veterans in other remote areas such as south of Moraga and the area near Port Chicago  A prior study in West County discussed the closure of Doctors Medical Center, the most frequently used emergency room in West County; most medical facilities appear to be clustered in the center of the County between Pleasant Hill and Walnut Creek Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 4-4  Two facilities that are needed by residents throughout the County are both located in Martinez - the Regional Medical Center and the VA Medical Center  Many stakeholders report a need for expanded service during evenings and weekends Lack of Affordability  Low-income populations are particularly concentrated in West County, Concord, and the northern portion of the County near Pittsburg and Antioch  Concern with affordability related to all transportation services  Lack of means-based discount program for general population (which will potentially be addressed through MTC’s Clipper START pilot program)  Lyft/Uber is expensive and it can be difficult to communicate with drivers; dog shaming (referring to the reluctance of Uber/Lyft drivers to take blind passengers and their service animals) is also common Access to Essential Services General access to essential services and quality of life needs arose repeatedly in community engagement efforts.  Consumers expressed the need for same-day trips and wheelchair accessible trips  Consumers found it difficult to travel to medical appointments; out of area medical trips were noted to be an issue  Some consumers are too frail to use traditional services when discharged from a hospital during non-operational hours  Long ride times on Health Plan trips  Consumers found it challenging to access grocery stores and shopping  Consumers had difficulty in making quality of life-essential trips to visit friends and family, the senior center, and church Access to Information In West County, Concord, Pittsburg, and other areas of Contra Costa County with a high proportion of people of color, there is a concern that residents are less likely to be informed of the transportation options available to them. Emerging transportation services require a higher level of technical sophistication than traditional services. This creates a barrier between targeted populations of seniors and disabled Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 4-5 people and the transportation services they need. Lack of information was cited as a challenge to many residents.  Awareness about accessible programs/options is lacking among eligible populations; ADA paratransit services generally don’t do marketing or other campaigns to increase ridership in direct contrast to conventional transit  Veterans’ transportation programs have specific limitations, availability and limits may not be well-known  There is a lack of awareness of non-emergency medical transportation (NEMT) options provided to Medi-Cal beneficiaries Programmatic Needs and Organizational Structure Stakeholders provided a significant amount of input regarding programmatic needs and organizational structure, partially in reaction to participation in prior studies.  Accessible services for seniors and people with disabilities are siloed between transit agencies, social service agencies, cities, and non-profit organizations  Limited coordination exists between existing providers, which limits ease of use for users and presents difficulty to providers, particularly related to lengthy trips that require transfers between different agencies (such as fare coordination, coordinating pick-up times etc.)  Stakeholders expressed interest and concerns about the creation of a Consolidated Transportation Services Agency (CTSA) to improve coordination and address gaps in service  There is a need for political support and/or a champion for the implementation of these types of recommendations  Funding for these types of services is limited and/or stagnant; grants are available for planning and pilots, but still need funding for ongoing operations  Significant portions of current funding, such as for ADA-mandated paratransit programs, are restricted on how and to whom they can provide service; regulatory concerns also affect transportation to and from healthcare  Private vehicles (e.g. taxis, Lyft/Uber), which are often looked at to supplement service are not required to provide accessible vehicles, can be prohibitively expensive, or are limited in availability  Need to plan for / accommodate future growth of seniors in the County Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 5-1 5 Recommended Strategies This Strategic Plan recommends strategies to both facilitate Countywide transportation coordination efforts and address specific transportation gaps through mobility strategies that have been adopted in other counties in the Bay Area and throughout the country. While some strategies can be implemented in the short term through existing organizations and agencies, it is critical that additional funding be located and an organizational infrastructure be created in order to facilitate the implementation of other mobility strategies as well as advocate for increased funding, modify strategies to respond to changing conditions, and monitor overall performance of different strategies. This chapter first presents the steps that will need to be taken in order to facilitate this process, followed by an evaluation methodology for prioritization of a broad range of strategies. The strategies recommended in this chapter respond to a combination of extensive input from members of the public, advisory committees, agency staff, and are based on the consultant’s experience with coordination efforts throughout the country. ESTABLISH A COORDINATED STRUCTURE A coordinated structure will need to be in place to implement countywide and centralized mobility strategies, as described later in this chapter. Due to the complexity of implementing a coordinated service, as described previously 1, establishment of this structure will be an iterative, two-phase process. In the short term a Task Force will need to be established that will be responsible for identifying which strategies require a dedicated entity to increase the likelihood of implementation of countywide study recommendations, and which strategies could be assigned to existing entities for implementation in the shorter term. It should be noted that in the Telephone Town Hall and committee meetings a number of stakeholders questioned how the present study will succeed in implementation of recommended strategies where previous studies did not. Apart from the higher level of collaboration evident in the current effort, this distinction between 1) establishment of an overall coordination infrastructure and 2) usage of existing entities for more short-term improvements, is an attempt to address the lessons that have been learned from previous efforts. More details on this approach are provided below. 1 ATS Plan Policy Briefing Packet: Page 8: Potential Barriers in the Implementation of Coordinated Transportation Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 5-2 Phase 1: Establish a Task Force Nelson\Nygaard recommends that an Accessible Transportation Strategy (ATS) Implementation Task Force (TF) be established to take the study recommendations to the next level of implementation. Following are some of the elements of this task that will need to be implemented: Composition: The TF should include representatives of a broad variety of individuals representing agencies or user groups that have a stake in the project outcomes. At the very least, this TF should include representatives of relevant human service agencies, transit agencies, elected officials, disability and older adult advocates representing a range of segments of these communities, veterans, funding bodies, and other representatives. To expedite the development of the TF, it is recommended that it be composed of a modified version of the current PAC, depending on interest, availability, and representation of a diversity of interests. Mission: The TF will have three primary tasks: 1. Develop funding strategies. 2. Identify ATS recommended strategies that can be delegated to existing agencies or non-profit organizations that do not require a Coordinated Entity for short term implementation. 3. Define and establish a dedicated countywide Coordinated Entity for implementation of countywide strategies. Activities should include prioritizing of the strategies presented in this study, and development of an incremental approach to strategy implementation. This would ensure that select study recommendations can be implemented in the short-term rather than waiting for the creation or designation of a unified entity for implementation of large- scale, longer term strategies. Reporting Structure and Administrative Support: One option will be assigning the responsibility of interim oversight of the TF to the Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) in order to ensure continuity beyond the present study. CCTA could designate staff resources to provide the support needed by the TF to fulfil its duties. This recommendation has not been considered formally by CCTA, but has been presented to the oversight committees to allow for the suggestion of alternative options. With the timing of approval of the ATSP (planned for February/March 2021), CCTA could adopt the process as part of its FY 2021-22 Work Plan. The TF could be an advisory committee to the CCTA Board and report regularly on activities. It would need to be determined how and when the TF would report to the County Board of Supervisors, and/or transit agency Boards. Funding Sources: Potential overhead costs for this task should be relatively limited beyond the required staffing support. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 5-3 Political Feasibility: It is anticipated that establishment of this TF will encounter little political resistance as stakeholders are familiar with the incremental approach that can result in implementation of smaller scale but meaningful improvements. CCTA may be limited in its ability to lead some of these strategies due to its legislative authority 2 and may need to either explore different governance alternatives or expand its authority through specific legislation. Time Frame: Once the ATSP has been approved by the CCTA Board and County Board of Supervisors, the TF could begin operating within three to six months. If the PAC is used as the basis for the formulation of the TF, it will ease implementation of this recommendation. The TF would remain in place until it completed its mission and could be dissolved once a Coordinating Entity (CE) is in place. Phase 2: Establish a Dedicated Countywide Coordinated Entity A CE should either be created or designated to implement countywide study recommendations. The TF will be responsible for determining where this entity should be housed – it could be in an existing non-profit or public agency, or the TF could determine that a new entity will need to be established. Mission: The role of the CE would be to implement study recommendations. Examples of strategies to be implemented by the CE could include:  Identify and pursue new funding sources  Administer a uniform countywide ADA paratransit eligibility certification  Expand mobility management function  Procure joint paratransit scheduling software  Present a unified voice regarding policy and funding at the local, state, and federal levels  Oversee a one-seat ride for inter-jurisdictional trips both within and outside the county Additional opportunities for countywide service could be considered in the future as appropriate. Political Feasibility: Although previous studies have recommended a centralized entity for coordination of transportation efforts countywide, these have not been implemented to date. The 2013 Mobility Management Plan 3 stated that a barrier to progress in the County is, “...the lack of a structural platform...” and specifically recommended the 2 California Public Utilities Code Sections 180000 et seq., added Statutes 1987, Chapter 786, 3 2013 Contra Costa Mobility Management Plan “This Plan recommends the formation of an organization to take the lead in implementing a broad range of mobility management strategies. Specifically, a Consolidated Transportation Services Agency (CTSA) is recommended for Contra Costa County.” https://countyconnection.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/7.b.1.-Mobility-Plan.pdf Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 5-4 establishment of a CTSA. It will be important for the TF to reflect on what was learned from that process and what should be done differently in considering the CTSA model and alternatives. The TF will decide where the CE will be housed and this entity can apply to become a CTSA 4 if determined that this is the most effective vehicle for achieving the ATS mobility goals, or if other models should be considered. Following is a brief description of the CTSA model. Appendix D contains the legislative language referencing CTSAs. Consolidated Transportation Service Agency (CTSA). Designation as a CTSA is incorporated in the California Transportation Development Act (TDA) to promote service coordination. In the Bay Area, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) can designate an agency as a CTSA. The designee can be an existing agency, new agency (such as a joint powers authority), or a non-profit organization. CTSA designation may give preferential access to certain funds, such as Federal Section 5310. A CTSA could be designated Countywide or by a smaller area (e.g. by planning area). In determining the viability of a CTSA to deliver ADA paratransit trips, transit agency ADA paratransit obligations will need to be taken into account. Successful implementation of this recommendation will require political commitment at the highest levels of elected representatives in the County serving on the CCTA Board, County Board of Supervisors, and transit agencies. The PAC already includes a number of elected officials who have indicated a willingness to champion the study’s recommendations, thus providing a basis upon which the TF can build political support. Potential Overhead Costs: Given the potential staffing required to set up the countywide CE, overhead costs are likely to be relatively high. This will need to be viewed in the context of potential cost savings that could be derived from the centralization of some of the transportation activities cited previously. However, the TF may also prioritize improved and/or increased service over cost savings. As an example, the 2013 Contra Costa County Mobility Management Plan estimated annual costs in the first two years of operation of a CTSA to be $325,000. This does not include the costs of actual service provision. Effort Required to Create the Coordinated Entity: Substantial effort will be required to set up this organization (or to designate an existing organization to take on this role). Some of the considerations include potentially lengthy negotiations between stakeholders, resolution of legal issues, governance decisions, incorporating and otherwise incubating a non-profit, setting up joint powers agreements. etc. It is anticipated that setting up a CE will take 12 to 36 months, depending on the direction provided by the TF and the cooperation of stakeholders. Potential for Implementing Large-scale/Long-term Strategies: The CE could have significant potential for implementing some of the strategies proposed below depending on the strength of leadership and the ability to secure dedicated funding. 4 The California Association for Coordinated Transportation (CALACT) maintains information about Consolidated Transportation Services Agencies here: https://www.calact.org/ctsaebook Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 5-5 Funding Sources: The CE will need to seek funding through a variety of means, likely including funding dedicated through a sales tax measure. In Monterey County, Monterey-Salinas Transit placed a successful sales tax measure on the ballot to benefit similar populations to those of this ATSP. CCTA or the County could potentially fill the role of putting a tax measure forward. The recent history of transportation sales tax measures (requiring a supermajority vote) in Contra Costa County indicates that passage of such a tax could be a daunting task, and other revenue generating activities will be important to the creation of a CE. A non-profit could have access to funding not available to public entities, such as grant funding and Community Development Block Grants, foundation funding, donations, other public funding options, etc. One role of the TF and CE will be to explore comprehensive funding opportunities outside of “transportation” dollars. State and federal agencies provide funding through social service departments for transportation, outside of the traditional transportation silos. MOBILITY STRATEGIES The strategies listed below should be viewed in terms of both the paradigm shift that has occurred due to the COVID pandemic, hopefully in the short-term, and longer- term strategies that will be needed to meet the study’s overall coordination objectives. At the time of preparation of this report, many transportation modes have limited service provision for target populations to medical consultations, food shopping and other urgent needs, while expanding their services to incorporate increased meal deliveries. Whether these shifts will outlast the pandemic in some form remains to be seen, but it is anticipated that many traditional forms of transportation may undergo some shift in overall purpose and design as a result of current events. The following implementation strategies are not prioritized, but rather are arranged in a similar order as they were presented to the PAC for evaluation. Increase Local and Regional Mobility  Improve connectivity between paratransit programs/eliminate transfer trips. Paratransit travel between transit agency service areas typically requires a transfer. Challenges associated with inter-service area have been identified for many years by paratransit riders and advocates. In order to address this need, the three Contra Costa-based transit agencies, and in association with LAVTA in eastern Alameda County, have initiated a one seat ride pilot program. This program is intended to address the complexities of traditional transfer programs, which can include coordination between the schedulers and dispatchers of both agencies and often require a wait for the second vehicle to Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 5-6 arrive. Transfers can be inefficient, expensive, and reduce safety. The current pilot program includes non-binding agreements among the transit agencies that address accounting, cost-allocation, and reporting procedures. This strategy proposes an expansion of the pilot program, with modifications that result from lessons learned during the initial phase. This strategy could result in a significant improvement in service available to Contra Costa paratransit customers and address concerns expressed at the Telephone Town Hall and the other outreach efforts. This approach to eliminating transfers is one move in the direction of providing a countywide service, but its effectiveness is not known.  Same-day trip programs (including wheelchair-accessible service). Same-day programs allow users to travel without needing to reserve a day in advance, as required on ADA paratransit. Most commonly, same-day service is provided using taxis and/or TNCs. Wheelchair- accessibility and access for people without smartphones (or concierge/phone-order service) are issues that need to be addressed with TNC same-day services. Examples of existing same-day services in Contra Costa County include Go San Ramon!, Walnut Creek Seniors Club Lyft program, and various wheelchair-accessible taxi services.  Expand existing and add new volunteer driver programs. Volunteer drivers can provide a degree of personalized service that paratransit programs cannot. Typically, volunteers driving their personal vehicles provide one-on-one service, taking individuals to and from medical appointments, often with assistance to and from doctors’ offices (“escort” service). Wheelchair-accessible service requires adding some agency- owned vehicles to the mix, usually small vans that do not require a commercial driver’s license. Programs can be traditional (staff matches the volunteer and rider and schedules the trip) or reimbursement-based (riders recruit their own drivers). The former model already exists in Contra Costa County through Mobility Matters and other city- or church-based volunteer driver programs, while the latter model was pioneered in Riverside County (known as the “TRIP” program) and has been replicated throughout the U.S.  Service beyond ADA service areas. Since ADA paratransit is required only where and when fixed-route transit operates, many rural areas in the County are not well served, and many areas lack service during evenings and weekends. These issues were cited repeatedly in various outreach forums, including previous studies and input from East County residents in the Telephone Town Hall. The most common means of filling this gap is using taxis, but other service types can also be used. Some options for providing service that exceeds the ADA minimums that currently exist in various parts of the country include premium fare paratransit, shuttles that serve first mile/last mile needs (e.g. to a BART station), zonal dial-a-ride that connects to BART or major fixed route transit stops, and point deviation service, which is a hybrid between fixed route service (to fixed points in a geographic area) and demand-response, since the vehicle does not follow a fixed route but can access a rider’s location or an easily accessible nearby stop. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 5-7  Early morning and late night service (e.g. to dialysis). A variation on service beyond ADA service areas would be directed to specific trip types (like dialysis) that commonly require travel early in the morning or late into the evening. Programs that are designed for these services generally employ either taxis or TNCs. Services that exceed the ADA minimum requirements that serve specific, privately operated destinations, such as dialysis clinics, could be candidates for cost sharing arrangements with those entities, similar to the previously mentioned paratransit trips that exceed ADA minimums.  On-demand subsidies. A popular means of providing same-day service, typically including service at times when paratransit does not operate, is to subsidize taxi and/or TNC usage. Mechanisms for subsidies can involve scrip, tickets, vouchers, debit cards, or accounts maintained by the subsidizing agency. Since taxis and TNCs typically do not operate wheelchair-accessible vehicles, some means of filling this gap needs to be included. In the case of TNCs, which usually require a smartphone, a concierge/phone-order option is also needed. Improve Coordination Among Providers and Community Stakeholders  Shopping trips with package assistance. As an alternative to ADA paratransit, a shopping shuttle may be more convenient for riders and less expensive to operate. Shuttle trips usually connect senior apartment complexes with major shopping centers. A variety of living and shopping locations may be served on a rotating schedule, with each route operated on a weekly or more frequent basis. In addition, as a result of innovative new developments that have arisen in response to COVID restrictions, shopping programs targeting low-income populations have been initiated that do not require a computer for ordering food. Some of these programs have integrated food stamps into their payment methods.  Hospital discharge service. Following hospital treatment, a person may be newly disabled, or temporarily disabled and require assistance beyond that which a taxi or TNC can provide. In addition, hospital rules may not allow a patient to be discharged to these services. Since the person is not certified as eligible for ADA paratransit and cannot become certified on short notice, high-priced medi-van service is often the only option. A lower-cost option operated in Alameda County for a number of years. This program, which could be replicated in Contra Costa County, offered resource information, assistance with applying for transportation services such as ADA paratransit, and provided wheelchair accessible trips upon discharge. A key component of this program would be educating discharge planners about transportation resources in the area and doing so on a recurrent basis due to staff turnover. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 5-8  Customized guaranteed ride home programs for people with disabilities. A guaranteed ride home program usually is intended to encourage use of transit and carpooling/vanpooling by providing an alternative means to get home if the participant needs to work late or return home early due to an emergency. Usually, taxi or TNC rides are provided. A program geared to people with disabilities would provide wheelchair-accessible options and not be limited by trip purpose. In order to meet the needs of disabled riders, the program would need to incorporate design features such as a GoGoGrandparent account, establishment of a mechanism for charging agencies for the trip or providing the consumer with a voucher for emergency trip purposes. Call-taking, eligibility screening and payment procedures would be needed  Means-based car-share including accessible option. Improved access to car share services for low-income individuals with mobility issues could provide an important complement to other options by improving access to essential destinations such as medical facilities, grocery stores, and other services. Car sharing could be subsidized and could be modeled on or operated by Mobility Development (MioCar) or another similar vendor. Increase Awareness of Existing Services  One-call / one-click (OC/OC); information & referral (I&R). This type of program would result in a single phone number and website for the public to access all available transportation services offered to people with disabilities and seniors in their area, rather than a myriad of numbers for different programs and geographic areas. Programs with trained staff that help callers figure out the best service to meet their needs are sometimes called “travel navigator” programs. The name “one-call / one-click” suggests that callers are immediately connected to the service they need, while “information & referral” may simply provide information. One-call / one-click programs have some combination of personnel who take calls (“one-call”) and a searchable database on a website (“one-click”).  Programs for disabled/senior veterans. Aging veterans and those with disabilities may benefit from travel training conducted by other veterans (“peers”). Programs for veterans may also address specific issues related to travel for treatment at Veterans Administration hospitals, which can involve long distances across jurisdictional boundaries. These programs can also be customized to fill gaps in the existing veteran programs, such as to non-medical destinations or to veterans without an honorable discharge.  Real-time transportation information (paratransit vehicle location, BART elevators, wheelchair spaces on buses). ADA paratransit programs increasingly offer riders real-time information about vehicle location, usually with a smartphone app. Real-time information about fixed-route accessibility features such as availability of wheelchair spaces in an oncoming Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 5-9 vehicle would be an innovation that would encourage usage by people with disabilities.  Travel training (including inter-operator trips). Travel training is usually intended to help people learn to use fixed-route transit effectively. Group training sessions can be helpful for some people, but many riders need intensive one-on-one training, either by qualified trainers or sometimes by “peers”, i.e. other seniors, people with disabilities, or veterans. Travel between transit operator service areas can be particularly challenging and could be part of a travel training program. Travel training programs can also be customized to serve non-English speaking groups, as have been offered in the city of Fremont for many years. In previous studies, stakeholders expressed interest in learning to use Clipper Cards, and help with ride hailing and concierge services. These could be folded into the proposed expanded travel training programs.  Mobility-as-a-Service (MaaS). MaaS is a shift away from personally- owned modes of transportation and towards mobility provided as a service. This is enabled by combining transportation services from public and private transportation providers through a unified gateway (usually an app) that creates and manages the trip, which users can pay for with a single account. Users can pay per trip or a monthly fee for a limited distance. While MaaS has only recently entered the larger transportation dialog, the concept has been in operation for decades in the form of a paratransit brokerage absent the automation approach a smartphone app provides. Develop Partnerships for Supportive Infrastructure  Administer a uniform countywide ADA paratransit eligibility certification program. The different transit operators could develop a joint application process, including a uniform paper application, and an agreed methodology for certification (e.g. interview, functional assessment, etc.). Riders could be provided a single point of contact to apply for ADA paratransit anywhere in the County.  Fare integration. The different ADA paratransit operators could develop joint fare structure and payment mediums. East Bay Paratransit is currently investigating options in this area for contactless payment and to better prepare for the next phase of Clipper.  Procure joint paratransit scheduling software. Regionally there have been many recent discussions on scheduling software as providers try to get ready for the next phase of Clipper. Procuring joint software would allow the County providers to potentially obtain better software and support via economies of scale. This would support other listed strategies, such as the one-seat ride pilot program, and uniform paratransit eligibility certification. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 5-10  Sidewalk improvements to enhance safety for older adults and wheelchair accessibility in high-priority locations. Access to public transit is sometimes limited by lack of sidewalks, poor sidewalk condition, lack of curb cuts, and obstructions on sidewalks. Typically, cities rather than transit agencies are responsible for sidewalks. By targeting sidewalk improvements in locations near transit stops that serve key facilities and residential locations, accessibility for seniors and wheelchair users may be significantly improved. In addition, expanding existing bus shelter installation programs at transit agencies could serve the needs of those who wish to use fixed route but are prevented from doing so due to the lack of shelters. Consumers could be provided a phone (e.g. 311) or app option to report barriers.  Means-based fare subsidy. Operators of transportation services for seniors and people with disabilities could provide reduced fares for low-income qualified riders. Most likely, such a program would be based on some other existing means-tested program like Medi-Cal, SSI, general assistance, etc. The paratransit program operated by SamTrans in San Mateo County has operated a low-income subsidized paratransit program for many years that reports very limited administrative burden. Affordability was a concern expressed by many stakeholders during the study’s outreach phase.  Wheelchair breakdown service. Wheelchair users who use public transportation can find themselves stranded away from home if their wheelchair malfunctions or is damaged. If this occurs, they require urgent help getting home and getting their chair repaired. This need may be addressed by an accessible same-day trip program or it could incorporate a repair element (e.g. Easy Does It has a pilot wheelchair breakdown program in Alameda County).  Accessible Bikeshare. Oakland and San Francisco recently offered adaptive bike share programs. Trained staff from BORP, a leading provider of accessible recreation and adaptive sports for people with mobility-related disabilities, were on-hand to fit, train and assist riders on how to use the adaptive bikes. Adaptive equipment used in the program includes supportive pedals, seats and straps, and hand pedals for quad level riders. The program had five adaptive bikes available in Oakland and San Francisco: upright handcycle, recumbent handcycle, recumbent leg trike, recumbent trike tandem, and side-by-side tandem bicycle. This program could be implemented in one of the more urbanized level terrain parts of the county. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 5-11 PRIORITIZATION OF STRATEGIES The strategies described above range from those that are extremely comprehensive and serve a lot of sections of the disability, older adult, low-income and veteran communities, to those which are very customized to smaller groups but serve a critical transportation need. In order to help prioritize the strategies for the final implementation plan, a set of evaluation criteria were developed and are described below. Transportation Strategy Evaluation Criteria The following criteria were used with the PAC and TAC as a guide for evaluating strategies intended to address the transportation gaps identified in this project. The criteria are intended to be flexible, so that differences among different communities in Contra Costa County are taken into account. The order of presentation does not correspond to order of importance—no one category is considered more important than the others. In addition to the measurable (either quantitative or qualitative) criteria presented below, some overarching considerations include: • Measure J (2020) language (user-focused, seamless, streamlined, unified, affordable) • Status of legacy recommendations (from previous studies in the County) relative to new recommendations • FTA concept of “confidence the trip can even be completed” as a part of the trip planning process. • Current Measure J Eligible Expenditures [(a) managing the program, (b) retention of a mobility manager, (c) coordination with non-profit services, (d) establishment and/or maintenance of a comprehensive paratransit technology implementation plan, and (e) facilitation of countywide travel and integration with fixed route and BART specifically, as deemed feasible.] • MTC Resolution 4321 requirements (each county must establish or enhance mobility management programs to help provide equitable and effective access to transportation) There are four groups of evaluation criteria: financial; implementation; transportation benefit; and community criteria. Financial Criteria Cost: Is the overall cost within a range that can realistically be funded with available sources, taking into account sales tax funds, grants from the private or public sector or user fares/fees? Cost per beneficiary: A broad range of a small to a large number of beneficiaries is compared to the cost of a program. Even though a program’s total cost is low, if it reaches very few people it might still have a high cost per beneficiary. This would not necessarily eliminate a project from consideration if it ranked highly on other Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 5-12 criteria including those listed under “Transportation Benefits Criteria” and “Community Criteria.” Similarly, even though a program’s total cost is high, if it reaches many people it might still have a low cost per beneficiary. Funding availability and sustainability: To the degree possible, strategies and related projects should have stable sources of funding to cover match requirements. In the case of pilot, demonstration, or capital projects, there should be reasonable likelihood of continued funding for operations. It is recognized that continued funding can never be guaranteed, as it is subject to budget processes, as well as decisions and priorities of funders. Leveraging resources: It is desirable for strategies and projects to help tap into other funding sources, especially new sources not previously available. Displacing existing funding is discouraged. Implementation Criteria Implementation time-frame: Strategies that will produce results quickly are preferred, as long as they are also sustainable. Projects with long-term payoffs should have some form of measurable accomplishments in the short run. Staging: Can the improvement be implemented in stages? Coordination: Strategies that involve coordination, for example multiple organizations working together to address a need, would be prioritized. Transportation Benefits Criteria Number of problems and trip types: Strategies that address multiple problems and serve multiple customer groups and trip purposes are preferred, with an emphasis on those that facilitate coordination in the county. Number of beneficiaries: In general, improvements that benefit many people are preferred to those that benefit few. However, the needs of relatively small groups might be considered particularly critical based on criteria under the heading “Community.” Unserved needs: Projects are preferred that address gaps left by other services rather than duplicating, overlapping with, or competing with other services. Note that the relative importance of various needs is a matter for local priorities as addressed under “Community.” Measurable benefits: As much as possible, there should be ways to measure how a strategy is benefiting target groups (seniors, veterans, people with disabilities), whether in terms of numbers of people served, numbers of trips provided, improved measures of service quality, user-friendliness for end user and their aides etc. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 5-13 Community Criteria Community support: Community support may take the form of formal endorsement by organizations and individuals, support by elected governing bodies, a potential project sponsor (“champion”) with staff or vehicles, and connections to adopted plans to carry out the strategy. Input from community outreach and stakeholder interviews conducted in Spring/Summer 2020 was taken into account in the scoring of these strategies. Acceptability: While a strategy may look good “on paper”, there may be more subtle reasons – for example, cultural, practical, or financial – that would result in it not being successful if implemented. The strategy must be acceptable to the target population. That is, will the target population actually use this service being offered? Acute needs: The importance of needs will normally be reflected in community support, but also in priority designation in locally-adopted plans or policies. Acute needs may include needs of small groups who have been left unserved by other programs due to expense or other difficulties. Unserved groups: Identifiable groups that are not able to use existing services may include people who face language and cultural barriers. Prioritization by the Policy Advisory Committee and the Technical Advisory Committee During meetings held in November 2020 the various strategies were presented to these two committees, in addition to the evaluation criteria described above. The results of input received from committee members are presented in the following matrix. Strategies have been arranged in four groups: Increase Local and Regional Mobility; Improve Coordination among Providers and Community Stakeholders; Increase Awareness of Existing Services; and Develop Partnerships for Supportive Transportation Infrastructure. The strategies in the matrix have been arranged according to the level of priority within each of the four groups, and key comments from committee members are presented in the right-hand column. It should be noted that at this stage of the evaluation estimated costs were not included in the information available. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 5-14 Figure 5-1 Strategy Prioritization STRATEGY COMMITTEE COMMENTS Increase Local and Regional Mobility Expand the current one-seat ride pilot program - improve connectivity between paratransit programs/eliminate transfer trips Allows for travel within the county to be like drivers experience it- without imaginary boundaries. Allows people to fully live and work where they desire. Additionally, it has been a recurring recommendation over the past studies. Clear benefits to existing population (now using transfers). Unclear whether existing provider has resources to take on East Bay Paratransit (and Alameda County). Yes, 100%+ convinced we need to improve connectivity! What we ask our service recipients to go through to get from point A to point B is ludicrous. Same-day trip programs (including wheelchair- accessible service) Allows for a more natural way to get around. Drivers and public transportation users can make spur-of-the-moment trips. Same day trips are necessary to truly be an accessible way to get around. Tri Delta Transit offers same day paratransit trips through a partnership with United taxi and Lyft. A very desirable improvement for existing paratransit users. Will push up cost per user unless unproductive standby time can be controlled or TNC labor can be employed. TNC or third-party liability is a critical concern. We need for folks to be able to call and get rides upon demand. Life cannot always be led with advanced notice of needs, etc. Volunteer driver programs My concern is in implementation. Relying on volunteers is tricky. Would volunteer drivers be in the areas of the county where they would be most needed? I think some areas of county would have a harder time getting drivers, and that would likely be where they would be most needed. Vulnerable riders, or those in wheelchairs may not be well served. We absolutely need to get a better handle on who is doing what, when, where and how! I fear waste galore based on duplication of efforts and lots of unmet needs. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 5-15 STRATEGY COMMITTEE COMMENTS Increase Local and Regional Mobility (Continued) Service beyond ADA service areas and regular service times Tri Delta Transit offers service beyond ADA service areas in east county. Need may grow if fixed route services are cut and ADA obligations are reduced. Funding will be politically difficult in this case (as paratransit funding is already well short of what is needed even for required ADA service.) Some agencies already offer beyond ADA service. This could be a game changer for people with destinations outside ADA areas. Already in place in WestCAT area We absolutely need the ability to customize coverage and time. Subsidize on- demand programs Valuable if it would provide same day service, and at times when paratransit typically does not operate. Yes, keeping one’s integrity intact and feeling of freedom is crucial to living a quality life. Improve Coordination Among Providers and Community Stakeholders Shopping Trips with package assistance This would serve many people, likely on their more frequent/regular trips. It is a model that is already happening with shuttles connecting senior apartments with shopping centers. Also allows for socialization, opportunity to be out in the community with peers. Tri Delta Transit will assist with up to 4 bags on paratransit trips (more during COVID). Demand and number of beneficiaries is unknown. Experience in other communities suggests low participation rates, though high benefit to those served. In emergency planning the critical areas are being able to access appointments, medications, food, and essential supplies. Some of the burden on the transportation service could be alleviated with neighbor helping neighbor. Hospital discharge service Seems this would be a relatively low cost project to implement. Completely dependent on how service is delivered. This is a healthcare issue. The health system is responsible for getting patients safely home. Customized Guaranteed Ride Home program for people with disabilities We need to build services around need, not expect people to build needs around a service delivery box. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 5-16 STRATEGY COMMITTEE COMMENTS Improve Coordination Among Providers and Community Stakeholders (Continued) Means-based carshare including accessible option I think the cost to implement would be high, and actual use would be low. The logistics of this program is really the question. Clearly there are benefits associated with occasional access to a vehicle, but the combination of disabled access (vehicle controls) and the means- based qualification process and the need for a third party relationship with an outside vendor makes this extremely complicated and unstable. Is this relevant for the population we are focusing on? Seniors, Disabled, etc. This option implies folks are driving themselves vs. relying on a system. Also, COVID/Virus safe? Increase Awareness of Existing Services One call/One click (and/or Information and Referral Service) Yes! People need a central place to get their information. Has been recommended repeatedly in past studies. The coordinated dissemination of information streamlines delivery of all transportation resources and improves the end user experience. Really no downside to this other than the process and cost of establishing and managing the service. Maybe the most effective use of available funding. Yes, no more multiple hoops to jump through to get simple transportation requests filled. Programs for veterans (older adults and people with disabilities) Peer training is good, but not as beneficial as some of the other strategies. And would not reach as many riders. Unclear relationship to VA and other veteran resources. Not sure that veteran mobility needs differ from those of others in the community. Possibly worth pursuing if the effort can attract funding or assistance from veteran-serving groups. Yes, we need more programs, better options, and coordination. I suspect the left does not coordinate all that well with the right. True regional planning ensures everyone is aware of who is doing what, when and where. Real Time Information Yes! People need access to real time information so they can determine how to proceed, advise others if they will be running late, etc. Potentially complicated and expensive to set up for multiple providers of paratransit services. Potentially simpler if limited to public agencies but would still require significant investment and development time to deploy app based real time information system. Yes, completely makes sense. Need redundancy options as there are varying degrees of tech savvy users. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 5-17 STRATEGY COMMITTEE COMMENTS Increase Awareness of Existing Services (Continued) Travel Training I would challenge us to ensure a system requires minimal service recipient training need. Also need to remain cognizant that there are varied degree of users and this skill is perishable. Develop Partnerships For Supportive Transportation Infrastructure Fare integration Fare integration and a unified fare structure is part of the one-seat pilot. Costs of fare integration would be the work to implement it, and ongoing impacts to agency revenues, and potentially to customers in areas with low fares. If more transportation providers are included (e.g. TNCs or other private entities) the process becomes much more complicated with the potential for public subsidies to be necessary to accomplish it. This will all allow for a more streamlined experience for riders. The fact that we have differing eligibility, fares structures, and scheduling software are evidence of how fractured the system is. I would put these three strategies as the first priority as they should be somewhat straightforward to implement and would help support some of the other strategies. Administer a uniform countywide ADA paratransit eligibility certification program This will all allow for a more streamlined experience for riders. The fact that we have differing eligibility, fares structures, and scheduling software are evidence of how fractured the system is. I would put these three strategies as the first priority as they should be somewhat straightforward to implement and would help support some of the other strategies. No objection to centralizing this function. Some cost implications. This function is being performed now by public agencies in the County with few problems so cost/benefit is unclear. Absolutely, this is a MUST have. Joint procurement of scheduling software Value depends on the objectives of the project. If one seat ride pilot succeeds, then cross jurisdictional scheduling is already in place. If other benefits from software are realized (e.g. coordinated billing and payment, real time information, user interface, etc.) this could be worth pursuing. In any event, it is a very complicated and expensive enterprise. This will all allow for a more streamlined experience for riders. The fact that we have differing eligibility, fares structures, and scheduling software are evidence of how fractured the system is. I would put these three strategies as the first priority as they should be somewhat straightforward to implement and would help support some of the other strategies. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT FINAL Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 5-18 STRATEGY COMMITTEE COMMENTS Develop Partnerships for Supportive Transportation Infrastructure (Continued) Safe Routes for Seniors/Safe Routes for All Pedestrian right of way issues abound in older neighborhoods and bus stops are few and far between. Addressing this would increase use and access to fixed routes by wheelchair users or those with mobility issues This is another MUST have. To knowingly put anyone at risk is never a good business model. Means-based fare subsidy This is a good idea to base one’s fee on his/her ability to pay / income level. Wheelchair breakdown service Tri Delta Transit offers emergency wheelchair transportation in east county Accessible bikeshare program I think utilization would be low. Given the vast number of other needs in the county, this seems like a project that may best be handled by an outside advocacy group or bikeshare entity. Could become very complicated to deploy a viable system without considerable work and expense, and without the participation of private entities. May not be realistic for many users. Is this COVID safe and if so then there must be some pretty stringent sanitation procedures to be followed. Not sure on the relevance of this option. Presentation of Final Strategy Recommendations The Project Management Team reviewed the recommended strategies and met with the consultant team to finalize prioritization of strategies. This was the penultimate step before the creation of an implementation matrix that includes all the recommended strategies, in addition to potential costs, funding sources, lead agencies, champions, and implementation steps. The implementation plan was presented to the PAC and TAC in February 2021. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 6-1 6 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN OVERVIEW In this chapter, each strategy recommended in this plan is numbered and further qualified in terms of their respective roles and responsibilities of stakeholders, key performance indicators, potential sources of funding, likelihood of implementation during short-term to long-term horizons, relative cost estimates of implementation, and the relative complexity of staffing, training, and technology improvements. The recommended strategies are classified as either “Tier I” or “Tier II.”  Tier I strategies are those which provide a high transportation benefit, have good community support (as indicated by the community engagement process of this study), leverage existing agency programs or resources, and can be implemented in stages or have a lower total cost, making them more likely to be successfully implemented.  Tier II strategies may rank high in one or more categories, but may serve relatively few people, be prohibitively expensive under current fiscal conditions, or may be more challenging to implement. For purposes of this discussion, the implementation terms are defined as follows:  Immediate term – Strategies that can begin immediately upon approval of the ATSP or can be implemented within one year.  Short term – Strategies that can be implemented within six (6) months to two (2) years of ATSP approval.  Long term – Strategies whose implementation will likely occur two (2) years or more from ATSP approval, or will require an on-going implementation commitment beyond five (5) years. The recommended agencies responsible for implementing each strategy are also identified, as follows:  Public Sector (e.g. Contra Costa Transportation Authority, County Administrator’s Office, County Department of Conservation and Development, County Health Services) Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 6-2  Non-Profit (e.g. Mobility Matters, Choice in Aging)  Transit Agency (e.g. County Connection, Tri Delta Transit, WestCAT) Together, these elements constitute the study’s Implementation Plan, shown in a simple breakdown in Figure 6-1. Following Figure 6-1 is a detailed description of organizational structures that are considered critical to implementation of the study’s recommendations. Following the descriptions of these overarching strategies is a comprehensive strategy implementation matrix in Figure 6-2. Each of the strategies listed in Tier 1 is then described in detail with regard to champions, funding, cost etc. This is followed by an implementation timeline in Figure 6-3. The chapter ends with a detailed explanation of applicable funding. Figure 6-1 Strategy Implementation Plan Objective Phasing Description Implementation Term Implementation Agency(s) Establish A Coordinated Structure Phase 1: Establish a Task Force Immediate  Public Sector Phase 2: Establish a Dedicated Countywide Coordinated Entity Short  Public Sector Strategy # Strategy Description Tier Implementation Term Implementation Agency(s) Objective: Increase Local and Regional Mobility 1 Improve connectivity between paratransit programs/eliminate transfer trips I Short  Transit Agency 2 Same-day trip programs (including wheelchair- accessible service) I Long  Non-Profit  Public Sector  Transit Agency 3 Expand existing and add new Volunteer Driver programs I Short  Public Sector  Non-Profit 4 Service beyond ADA service areas I Long  Non-Profit  Transit Agency 5 Early morning and late-night service II Long  Non-Profit  Transit Agency 6 On-demand subsidies II Long  Public Sector  Transit Agency Improve Coordination Among Providers and Community Stakeholders 7 Shopping trips with package assistance II Short  Non-Profit  Public Sector 8 Hospital discharge service II Short  Non-Profit  Transit Agency Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 6-3 Strategy # Strategy Description Tier Implementation Term Implementation Agency(s) 9 Customized guaranteed ride home programs for people with disabilities II Short  Public Sector  Transit Agency 10 Means-based car-share including accessible option II Long  Non-Profit Public Sector Objective: Increase Awareness of Existing Services 11 One-call / one-click; information & referral (I&R) I Short  Non-Profit  Transit Agency 12 Programs for disabled/senior veterans I Short  Public Agency 13 Real-time transportation information (paratransit vehicle location, BART elevators, wheelchair spaces on buses) II Long  Transit Agency 14 Travel training (including inter-operator trips) I Short  Non-Profit  Transit Agency 15 Mobility-as-a-Service (MaaS) II Long  Non-Profit  Transit Agency Objective: Develop Partnerships for Supportive Infrastructure 16 Administer a uniform countywide ADA paratransit eligibility certification program I Long  Public Sector  Transit Agency 17 Fare integration I Long  Transit Agency 18 Procure joint paratransit scheduling software I Long  Transit Agency  19 Sidewalk improvements to enhance safety for older adults and wheelchair accessibility in high-priority locations I Long  Public Works Department 20 Means-based fare subsidy I Short  Transit Agencies  Social Service Agencies 21 Wheelchair breakdown service II Short  Non-Profit  Transit Agency  Public Agency 22 Accessible bikeshare program II Short  Non-Profit  Public Agency Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 6-4 ESTABLISHING A COORDINATED STRUCTURE Phase 1 Establish a Task Force The Project Team recommends that an Accessible Transportation Strategy (ATS) Implementation Task Force (TF) be established to take the study recommendations to the next level of implementation. Following are some of the elements of this task that will need to be implemented. Lead or Champion Appointed Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) members from the Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan process will need to champion this effort. Potential Sponsoring Agencies Potential sponsoring agencies are CCTA, County Administrator’s Office (CAO), or a similar entity. The TF could be an advisory committee to the CCTA Board and report regularly on activities. It would need to be determined how and when the TF would report to the County Board of Supervisors, and/or transit agency Boards. Political Feasibility It is anticipated that establishment of this TF will encounter little political resistance as stakeholders are familiar with the incremental approach that can result in implementation of smaller scale but meaningful improvements. Potential Funding Sources Costs for this effort will be primarily staffing and administration and will likely need to be provided “in-kind” by CCTA or a similar entity. Program Parameters Composition: The TF should include representatives of a broad variety of individuals representing agencies or user groups that have a stake in the project outcomes. The TF should include representatives of relevant human service agencies, transit agencies, elected officials, disability and older adult advocates representing a range of segments of these communities, veterans, funding bodies, and other representatives. Utilizing the appointed seats on the current PAC, the following is a list of potential TF seats:  Contra Costa Board of Supervisors  CCTA Board  AC Transit  BART  County Connection  Tri Delta Transit Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 6-5  WestCAT  Regional Transportation Planning Committees  Contra Costa Health Services  Contra Costa County Office of the Sheriff Emergency Operations  Veterans Affairs  Contra Costa County Ombudsman  NGO/Advocate representing seniors/older adults  NGO/Advocate representing people with disabilities TF members should be at the level of executive staff or board member. TF appointees may be supported by technical staff (former TAC members) with direct operational, management, or policy development experience with accessible transportation type issues. Mission: The TF will have three primary tasks: 1. Develop funding strategies. 2. Identify ATS recommended strategies that can be delegated to existing agencies or non-profit organizations that do not require a Coordinated Entity for short term implementation. 3. Define and establish a dedicated countywide Coordinated Entity for implementation of countywide strategies. Activities should include further prioritizing of the strategies presented in this study, and development of an incremental approach to strategy implementation. This would identify study recommendations that can be implemented in the short-term rather than waiting for the creation or designation of a unified entity for implementation of large- scale, longer term strategies. Funding Parameters: Through development of the ATSP, stakeholders emphasized that current programs and providers do not have funding to implement new programs, and barely have funding to maintain current essential programs. An agreement developed prior to the ATSP that was not adopted due to time constraints, stated: The PARTIES agree that they will endeavor to prepare an ATS Plan that (1) does not recommend adding responsibilities to a PARTY without identifying additional revenue sources for that PARTY, and (2) does not recommend reducing a PARTY’S revenues without providing recommendations for achieving a corresponding decrease in the PARTY’S obligations funded by those revenues. The PARTIES further agree that they will endeavor to prepare an ATS Plan that, if implemented in the future, would not be expected to cause degradation or disruption of transit services offered to the Subject Population. Similar assurances should be considered during implementation to ensure continued support for the Plan. The TF will need to be diligent in identifying resources and support that can be utilized to implement the ATSP (e.g. research, grant writing, offering meeting space and support, Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 6-6 etc.) and identify funding sources quickly in order to move forward without violating these assurances. Staffing Staffing will need to be provided by CCTA, a similar entity, and/or by or with the assistance of TF members. Technology This effort is unlikely to require significant technology resources. Timeline Once the ATSP has been approved by the CCTA Board and County Board of Supervisors, the TF could begin operating within three to six months. The TF would remain in place until it completed its mission and could be dissolved once a Coordinating Entity (CE) is in place. Cost to Implement Cost is to be determined but will likely be primarily staffing and administration and need to be provided “in-kind”. Phase 2 Establish a Dedicated Countywide Coordinated Entity The TF will define and establish a dedicated countywide Coordinated Entity (CE) for implementation of countywide strategies. The TF will be responsible for determining where this entity should be housed – it could be in an existing non-profit or public agency, or the TF could determine that a new entity will need to be established. At the completion of the ATSP process there appeared to be a plurality amongst the PAC in favor of ultimately designating a non-profit organization as the CE (existing or new was not determined). Where there is hesitation among some parties, it will be important to continue to maintain the assurances cited in the TF section. Lead or Champion The previously described Task Force (TF) will champion the CE. Potential Sponsoring Agencies Agencies with appointed seats on the TF are all potential sponsoring agencies. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 6-7 Political Feasibility It will be important for the TF to reflect on what was learned from earlier planning attempts and what should be done differently in considering the CTSA model and alternatives. The TF will decide where the CE will be housed and this entity can apply to become a CTSA 1 if determined that this is the most effective vehicle for achieving the ATS mobility goals, or if other models should be considered. Following is a brief description of the CTSA model. Appendix D contains the legislative language referencing CTSAs. Consolidated Transportation Service Agency (CTSA). Designation as a CTSA is incorporated in the California Transportation Development Act (TDA) to promote service coordination. In the Bay Area, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) can designate an agency as a CTSA. The designee can be an existing agency, new agency (such as a joint powers authority), or a non-profit organization. CTSA designation may give preferential access to certain funds, such as Federal Section 5310. A CTSA could be designated Countywide or by a smaller area (e.g. by planning area). Successful implementation of this goal will require political commitment at the highest levels of elected representatives in the County serving on the CCTA Board, County Board of Supervisors, and transit agencies. The PAC already includes a number of elected officials who have indicated a willingness to champion the study’s recommendations, thus providing a basis upon which the TF can build political support. Potential Funding Sources The CE will need to seek funding through a variety of means, likely including funding dedicated through a sales tax measure. In Monterey County, Monterey-Salinas Transit placed a successful sales tax measure on the ballot to benefit similar populations to those of this ATSP. CCTA or the County could potentially fill the role of putting a tax measure forward. The recent history of transportation sales tax measures (requiring a supermajority vote) in Contra Costa County indicates that passage of such a tax could be challenging, and identifying other revenue generating activities will be important to the creation of the CE. A non-profit could have access to funding not available to public entities, such as grant funding and Community Development Block Grants, foundation funding, donations, other public funding options, etc. One consideration for the TF and CE will be to explore comprehensive funding opportunities outside of “transportation” dollars. State and federal agencies provide funding through social service departments for transportation, outside of the traditional transportation silos. One of the challenges with accessing non “transportation” funds is that it is harder to link the service improvements and cost-savings. For instance, an on- demand transportation program could reduce emergency room visits by helping people 1 The California Association for Coordinated Transportation (CALACT) maintains information about Consolidated Transportation Services Agencies here: https://www.calact.org/ctsaebook Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 6-8 get to urgent care. However, in addition to quality of life improvements, any cost-savings will likely accrue to the County Health system as opposed to the transportation program. Program Parameters The CE could have significant potential for implementing some of the strategies proposed below depending on the strength of leadership and the ability to secure dedicated funding. Timeline Substantial effort will be required to set up or to designate this organization, including potentially lengthy negotiations between stakeholders, resolution of legal issues, governance decisions, incorporating and otherwise incubating a non-profit, setting up joint powers agreements. etc. It is anticipated that setting up a CE will take 12 to 36 months, depending on the direction provided by the TF and the cooperation of stakeholders. Cost to Implement Given the potential staffing required to set up the countywide CE, overhead costs are likely to be relatively high. This will need to be viewed in the context of potential cost savings that could be derived from the centralization of some of the transportation activities cited previously. However, the TF may also prioritize improved and/or increased service over cost savings. As an example, the 2013 Contra Costa County Mobility Management Plan estimated annual costs in the first two years of operation of a CTSA to be $325,000. This does not include the costs of actual service provision. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 6-9 STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION MATRIX Figure 6-2 Detailed Implementation Plan Strategy Matrix # Strategy Description Tier Lead or Champion Roles & Responsibilities Key Performance Indicators Level of Effort Technology Needs Potential Funding Sources Timeline Cost to Implement (start-up) 1 Improve connectivity between paratransit programs/eliminate transfer trips I County Connection  Identify steps needed to expand existing pilot program. Work with other transit agencies in the county and adjoining counties to develop protocols for program expansion  Number of inter-jurisdictional trips provided without transfers  Cost per inter-jurisdictional trip with and without transfers  Customer satisfaction with inter-jurisdictional trips Medium Medium New, 5307, 5311, TDA, STA, SB1, LTF, Measure J and other local Short Term $100,000 to $1 million 2 Same-day trip programs (including wheelchair- accessible service) I Transit agency or non-profit organization designated by the TF  Identify the most appropriate forms of same day services and likely providers  Develop marketing programs and protocols for same day programs  Enter into contractual arrangements for service provision  Ridership  Cost-per-passenger-trip  Boardings per service hour  Customer satisfaction  Average wait times Medium Low New, 5307, 5310, DHHS, Dept Veterans Affairs, SB 1376, LTF, Measure J and other local, Private/ Foundation Long Term $500,000 to $1 million 3 Expand existing and add new Volunteer Driver programs (such as TRIP mileage reimbursement program) I CE or one of County agency participants  Expansion – work with Mobility Matters and other volunteer driver programs to scale up their services.  New programs – CE identify funding to hire a TRIP program coordinator, who will recruit additional volunteer drivers for clients unable to recruit their own driver(s).  TRIP program coordinator establishes reimbursement mechanism for volunteer drivers.  Public agencies staff promote volunteer driver program as part of staff training and client marketing campaigns  Volunteer driver enrollment  Client participation  Total mileage reimbursement  Cost-per-trip  Frequent trip origins and destinations Medium Low New, 5310, DHHS, Dept Veterans Affairs, LTF, Measure J and other local, Private/ Foundation Short Term $100,000 to $500,000 Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 6-10 # Strategy Description Tier Lead or Champion Roles & Responsibilities Key Performance Indicators Level of Effort Technology Needs Potential Funding Sources Timeline Cost to Implement (start-up) 4 Service beyond ADA service areas I  Transit agencies  Non-profit providers  Identify areas of greatest need that are viable for added service  Develop service model most appropriate for those areas  Identify potential providers  Trips provided  Trip requests denied  Cost per trip Medium Low New, 5307, 5311, 5310, TDA, STA, SB1, LTF, Measure J and other local Long Term $100,000 to $500,000 5 Early morning and late-night service II  Transit agencies  Non-profit providers  Similar to service beyond ADA service areas  Trips provided  Trip requests denied  Cost per trip Medium Low New, 5307, 5311, 5310, TDA, STA, SB1, LTF, Measure J and other local Long Term $100,000 to over $1 million 6 On-demand subsidies II  Department of Social Services  CCTA  Contra Costa Health Plan  Determine subsidy levels, calculate costs, identify funding, develop protocols for implementation  Program costs  Qualitative feedback from program participants Medium Low New, DHHS, LTF, Measure J and other local, Private/ Foundation Long Term $100,000 to over $1 million 7 Shopping trips with package assistance II  Non-Profit Provider  Public Agency  Identify agencies that can provide this service  Develop implementation plan that includes eligibility, protocols, service parameters, costs to customer and to operator, funding sources  Trips provided  Trip requests denied  Cost per trip Medium Low New, 5310, LTF, Measure J and other local, Private/ Foundation Short Term $250,000 to over $1 million 8 Hospital discharge service- program that assists with paratransit application and ride (a specialized travel training program for hospital discharges) II  County Medical Center  Contra Costa Health Plan  County Medical Center trains discharge planners on application requirements for interim ADA paratransit eligibility; provides travel training to clients; and coordinates same-day transportation  Number of enrolled participants  Change in ADA paratransit operating costs Medium Low New, 5307, 5311, DHHS, Dept Veterans Affairs, TDA, STA, SB1, LTF, Measure J and other local, Private/ Foundation Short Term $100,000 to $250,000 Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 6-11 # Strategy Description Tier Lead or Champion Roles & Responsibilities Key Performance Indicators Level of Effort Technology Needs Potential Funding Sources Timeline Cost to Implement (start-up) 9 Customized guaranteed ride home programs for people with disabilities II  Department of Social Services  CCTA  Research best model for County  Identify funding  Develop protocols, eligibility requirements etc.  Program cost  Cost per individual assisted Low Low New, 5310, DHHS, SB 1376, LTF, Measure J and other local, Private/ Foundation Short Term $100,000 to $250,000 10 Means-based car- share including accessible option II  CCTA  Non-Profit organization  Social Services  County procurement office to issue RFQ for car share operator  Transit agencies (including BART) to identify and allocate suitable car share spaces at facilities  If low emission fleet selected, relevant County department to coordinate EV charging station installation at key sites.  Social Services to coordinate low-income membership discount program  Trips per vehicle per day (utilization)  Percent of fleet in service  Vehicles per square mile  Vehicles within ¼ mile of key destinations  Frequent origins and destinations  Participant demographics Medium Medium New, DHHS, LTF, Measure J and other local, Private/ Foundation Long Term $250,000 to over $1 million 11 One-call / one- click; information & referral (I&R) I  Non-Profit organization  Transit agency  Select preferred model  Identify funding  Hire and train staff  Identify all relevant resources in the county  Develop protocols as part of implementation plan  Number of callers  Number of people receiving information versus those received enhanced assistance  Customer satisfaction survey results  Program costs Medium High New, 5310, DHHS, LTF, CMAQ/TFCA, Measure J and other local, Private/ Foundation Short Term $100,000 to $500,000 12 Programs for disabled/ senior veterans I Veterans Administration  Develop programs that fill the gaps in current mobility options  Identify funding  Develop Implementation Plan  Number of veterans served  Number of trips provided through supplemental services  Program costs and cost per individual connected to service Medium Low New, 5310, Dept Veterans Affairs, LTF, Measure J and other local, Private/ Foundation Short Term $250,000 to over $1 million Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 6-12 # Strategy Description Tier Lead or Champion Roles & Responsibilities Key Performance Indicators Level of Effort Technology Needs Potential Funding Sources Timeline Cost to Implement (start-up) 13 Real-time transportation information (paratransit vehicle location, BART elevators, wheelchair spaces on buses) II Transit agencies  Establish mechanism for sharing information between agencies  Identify needed technology  Identify funding  Implement programs at different agencies  Evaluate effectiveness of programs including customer satisfaction surveys  Time taken to install new equipment throughout vehicle fleets  Customer satisfaction surveys Medium High New, 5307, 5311, TDA, STA, SB1, LTF, CMAQ/TFCA, Measure J and other local, Private/ Foundation Long Term Over $1 million 14 Travel training (including inter- operator trips) I  Non-Profit organizations  Transit agencies  Identify steps to expand existing programs  Identify funding  Number of trainees  Cost per training  Changes in trainees’ riding habits Low Low New, 5307, 5311, 5310, Dept Veterans Affairs, TDA, STA, SB1, LTF, CMAQ/TFCA, Measure J and other local, Private/ Foundation Short Term $100,000 to $250,000 15 Mobility-as-a- Service (MaaS) II  CCTA  Non-Profit organization  Identify most appropriate enhancements of existing mobility options  Identify and purchase needed technology  Develop training program to enable residents to access services through MaaS  Number of people using platform  Number of trips arranged through platform  Customer satisfaction surveys High High New, 5310, LTF, CMAQ/TFCA, Measure J and other local, Private/ Foundation Long Term $250,000 to over $1 million Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 6-13 # Strategy Description Tier Lead or Champion Roles & Responsibilities Key Performance Indicators Level of Effort Technology Needs Potential Funding Sources Timeline Cost to Implement (start-up) 16 Administer a uniform countywide ADA paratransit eligibility certification program I  Transit Agency  County Agency  Determine most appropriate agency to administer program  Identify eligibility model to be adopted  Develop eligibility protocols and reach consensus among providers  Identify location and make upgrades if necessary  Determine if program will be operated by agency of through a contract  Implement and evaluate effectiveness  Cost per assessment  Increases in conditional eligibility determinations  Operability of conditional eligibility determinations (i.e. can trip conditions be applied?}  Inter-rating/evaluator testing consistency (do different evaluators reach similar eligibility determinations for a specific application?) High Medium New, 5307, 5311, TDA, STA, SB1, LTF, Measure J and other local Long Term $100,000 to $300,000 17 Fare integration I Transit agencies  Collaborate on establishing universal fare protocols intended to enhance customer experience  Determine costs to agencies and ways of funding those deficits  Select agency to oversee implementation of fare integration program  Time to implement on all County transit agency fleets  Program cost High High New, 5307, 5311, TDA, STA, SB1, LTF, CMAQ/TFCA, Measure J and other local Long Term $500,000 to $1 million 18 Procure joint paratransit scheduling software I Transit agencies  Identify commonalities and differences between each agency’s use of Trapeze  Build consensus on type of procurement beneficial to all participating agencies  Document timeline for purchase  Enter into negotiations with the software provider  Cost comparison between status quo and new system  Increase in cross- jurisdictional trips Medium High New, 5307, 5311, TDA, STA, SB1, LTF, CMAQ/TFCA, Measure J and other local Long Term $100,000 to $250,000 (although unclear if this would be net cost over existing) 19 Sidewalk improvements to enhance safety for older adults and wheelchair accessibility in high- priority locations I Public Works Departments CCTA  Set up mechanism for receiving complaints about path of travel barriers  Assign responsibility to staff to conduct environmental assessments of barriers on frequent paths of travel  Establish protocols for assessing accessibility of POT, determining remedies, timeline for repair, and responsibility for making improvements  Percentage of identified street segments targeted for improvement that are repaired each year Low Low New, LTF, CMAQ/TFCA, Measure J and other local Long Term $250,000 to over $1 million Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 6-14 # Strategy Description Tier Lead or Champion Roles & Responsibilities Key Performance Indicators Level of Effort Technology Needs Potential Funding Sources Timeline Cost to Implement (start-up) 20 Means-based fare subsidy I  Social Services Agency  Transit agencies  Explore support of MTC’s regional efforts on low-income fare subsidies by establishing local eligibility criteria and recommending program enrollment locations  Transit agency ridership  Program enrollment Medium Low New, LTF, CMAQ/TFCA, Measure J and other local, Private/ Foundation Short Term $50,000 to $250,000 21 Wheelchair breakdown service II Non-Profit Organization Transit Agency  Establish contract with service provider  Promote service through 211 and other Information and Referral resources  Number of assistance events per month  Cost per assistance, including transportation provider and staff time  Customer satisfaction ratings Low Low New, 5310, DHHS, SB 1376, LTF, Measure J and other local, Private/ Foundation Short Term $100,000 to $250,000 22 Accessible bikeshare program II County Administrator’s Office or CCTA to assign a champion or lead  Public Works to coordinate Bay Wheels expansion to high-need communities  If oriented towards low-income communities, Social Services to ensure prepaid debit card option is available as part of Bay Wheels’ Bike Share for All program (e.g. at public libraries, senior centers)  Non-profit organization may provide helmet giveaways.  Consider providing direct assistance to clients for bike purchases in areas far outside of Bay Wheels service zone.  Trips per device per day (utilization)  Percent of fleet in service  Devices per square mile  Frequent origins and destinations  Rider demographics High High New, LTF, CMAQ/TFCA, Measure J and other local, Private/ Foundation Short Term $250,000 to over $1 million Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 6-15 Figure 6-3 Implementation Plan Timeline TIER 1 STRATEGIES DISCUSSION In recognition of the greater importance placed on Tier 1 strategies than Tier 2, we discuss each of these strategies in more detail below. Note that the missing numbers reflect the absence of detailed Tier 2 strategy descriptions. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 6-16 Strategies to Increase Local and Regional Mobility Strategy 1: Improve Connectivity Between Paratransit Programs/Eliminate Transfer Trips Where trips span multiple transit provider service areas, the passenger is typically required to transfer between vehicles at each boundary. Challenges associated with inter-service area have been identified for decades by paratransit riders and advocates. Lead or Champion Potential Sponsoring Agencies Potential Funding Sources The current approach in the County to solve this issue is through a pilot program and agreement amongst transit operators. County Connection has initiated the current one-seat-ride pilot program. WestCAT, Tri Delta Transit, and LAVTA (in eastern Alameda County) are also participating. Transit Agencies Transit agencies are currently using STA and TDA funds for the pilot program. Future options include Measure J or other CCTA funds. This would also be a good fit for future regional funds dedicated to regional trips, such as any funds arising from a new Regional Measure or the Blue Ribbon Task Force. Program Parameters Currently riders who are interested in a one seat regional trip contact County Connection to request the trip, or County Connection identifies trips that would be good for the pilot. There is a particular focus on trips that are three legs or more at this time. County Connection is working with the County and MTC to determine measures to evaluate the success of the program. The different transit agency partners are working together to determine the appropriate cost sharing. Future steps are to identify steps needed to expand the existing pilot program and work with other transit agencies in the county and adjoining counties to develop protocols for program expansion. Staffing Technology Training Requirements Timeline Cost to Implement The pilot is being staffed by current transit agency personnel. Transit agencies are using their existing technology at this time. Improved technology related to dispatching and scheduling trips may improve this program in the future. Training requirements are still to be determined. It is unclear how long the current pilot will last. There is a possibility that the current program could be combined into a new regional program in the future. Currently the cost per hour to the contractor is about $60.00. Total and future costs depend on staff time, demand, and if the programs decide to cap the availability of the trips. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 6-17 Strategy 2: Same-Day Trip Programs (Including Wheelchair-Accessible Service) Some cities already offer subsidized taxi/TNC programs to older adults, and many organizations will attempt to meet an urgent need if possible. Lead or Champion Potential Sponsoring Agencies Potential Funding Sources Transit agency or non-profit organization designated by the TF. Non-Profit, Public Sector, and/or Transit Agency – will need to be determined by TF or CE. Federal 5310 (for pilot, may not be guaranteed for long-term), SB 1376, Local funds such as Measure J, other CCTA/ County, and Private/ Corporate Sources. Program Parameters It will be necessary to identify appropriate transportation providers for this program, whether taxis or TNCs, TNC WAV programs, community providers, or ADA providers if able to provide premium service with additional funding. It will be challenging but important to determine a mix of providers that can cover the entire County and also meet the different populations’ needs, and then to coordinate service on the consumer side for usability. Staffing Technology Training Requirements Timeline Cost to Implement Staffing will be required to put the program in place, establish new providers, and manage the coordination and referral to the program. Technology needs are to be determined, but improved technology would likely lead to a better program. Training requirements are still to be determined, but could include scheduling staff and drivers. Although this program meets a very important need, the reality is finding and coordinating providers for the entire County, and then setting up a program to coordinate the service is a long term effort. It is possible that if providers are identified, service can continue or increase without starting with County-wide coordination. $500,000 to $1 million. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 6-18 Strategy 3: Expand Existing and Add New Volunteer Driver Programs Contra Costa County has a County wide volunteer driver program, Mobility Matters. However, there is a desire to increase the organization’s capacity for service, or add other services to increase capacity in general. Lead or Champion Potential Sponsoring Agencies Potential Funding Sources CE or one of County agency participants Mobility Matters, other Non-Profit, Public Sector agencies. 5310, Local funds such as Measure J, other CCTA/ County Sources, Private/Foundation. Program Parameters Explore expansion by working with Mobility Matters and other volunteer driver programs to scale up their services. For new programs the TF or CE could identify funding to hire a TRIP program coordinator, who would recruit additional volunteer drivers for clients unable to recruit their own driver(s) and establish a reimbursement program. Staffing Technology Training Requirements Timeline Cost to Implement Current programs would need to identify staffing needs for expansion. It is to be determined whether a TRIP program coordinator would also have other mobility management duties. Similar to the same- day program, ideally riders should be able to contact one phone number, website, app etc. to request the trip, or at least receive the appropriate referral. Technology needs for volunteer driver programs vary widely and would need to be determined. However, the TRIP program has developed a relatively cheap software program that is available to all TRIP programs. Training requirements are still to be determined, but could include scheduling staff and drivers. Exploration of expansion opportunities can begin as soon as the TF is ready. Implementation of new programs would likely need one to two years. $100,000 to $500,000 Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 6-19 Strategy 4: Service Beyond ADA Service Areas Transit providers are required to provide ADA paratransit service within three quarter miles of a bus line or a train stop. Some transit agencies in the County already exceed that boundary, but because the County is so spread out there is a need for greater service coverage. Lead or Champion Potential Sponsoring Agencies Potential Funding Sources Transit agencies and non-profit providers are the current providers of services like this. Sponsoring agencies will likely be determined by transportation providers. As this is a long term project, the CE may be the sponsoring agency. Federal 5310 (for pilot, may not be guaranteed for long- term), Long Term 5307 could be used to support, SB 1376, Local funds such as Measure J, other CCTA/ County Sources. Program Parameters Parameters will depend on the areas of greatest need that are identified for added service and how that need will be met. Some areas may best be served by premium fare paratransit, shuttles that serve first mile/last mile needs (e.g. to a BART station), zonal dial-a-ride that connects to BART or major fixed route transit stops, and point deviation service, which is a hybrid between fixed route service (to fixed points in a geographic area) and demand-response, since the vehicle does not follow a fixed route but can access a rider’s location or an easily accessible nearby stop. Staffing Technology Training Requirements Timeline Cost to Implement Staffing will be required to identify the gaps, establish new providers, and manage the coordination of the program. Technology needs are to be determined, but improved technology would likely lead to a better program. Training requirements are still to be determined, but could include scheduling staff and drivers. Although this program serves a very important need, the reality is finding and coordinating providers for the entire County, and then setting up a program to coordinate the service is a long term effort. It is possible that if providers are identified, service can continue or increase without starting with County-wide coordination. $100,000 to $500,000 Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 6-20 Strategies to Increase Awareness of Existing Services Strategy 11: One-Call/One-Click; Information & Referral (I&R) Programs with trained staff that help callers figure out the best service to meet their needs are sometimes called “travel navigator” programs. The name “one-call / one-click” suggests that callers are immediately connected to the service they need, while “information & referral” may simply provide information. One-call / one-click (OC/OC) programs have some combination of personnel who take calls (“one-call”) and a searchable database on a website (“one-click”). Lead or Champion Potential Sponsoring Agencies Potential Funding Sources A non-profit organization such as Mobility Matters or Choice in Aging could champion an OC/OC. Mobility Matters is already operating a similar phone resource. In the long-term, the project would likely be championed by the CE. In addition to champions listed above, sponsoring agencies would be the TF/CE. Federal 5310 (for pilot, may not be guaranteed for long-term), Local funds such as Measure J, other CCTA/ County Sources. Program Parameters This program would result in a single phone number and website for the public to access all available transportation services offered to people with disabilities and seniors in their area, rather than a myriad of numbers for different programs and geographic areas. Staffing Technology Training Requirements Timeline Cost to Implement Staffing will be required to identify the resources, build the website, respond to calls/online queries, and manage the coordination of the program. Technology needs will be high as a customized database and portal will likely have to be built. Although there are a number of similar programs nationwide, there is not currently appropriate “off-the-shelf” options. As a positive, work done by Mobility Matters and other partners on Way to Go Contra Costa provides a strong basis to begin with, and riders can continue/begin to be served even with low technology in place. Training requirements are about mid-level difficulty, but can use current resources such as existing non-profits, and resources published by the National Center for Mobility Management and the National Aging and Disability Transportation Center. Current service can continue and be expanded with greater County-wide coordination to follow. $100,000 to $500,000 Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 6-21 Strategy 12: Programs for Disabled/Senior Veterans The ATS Plan has identified numerous gaps in the mobility programs available to veterans, based on restrictive trip purposes, eligibility, and program parameters. This strategy is intended to be a multi-pronged approach to addressing these gaps, including such as veteran oriented programs such as peer travel training. Lead or Champion Potential Sponsoring Agencies Potential Funding Sources Veterans Administration Veterans Administration Federal sources could include 5310, Veterans Affairs transportation funding streams, State funds SB 1376, and local sources could include Measure J, other CCTA funds, County, Private/ Corporate Sources. Program Parameters Programs could be provided to veterans who were not honorably discharged, expand existing services beyond the current limited workday hours, and serve non-medical appointment trips. Staffing Technology Training Requirements Timeline Cost to Implement Expansion of services would result in limited staff increases, depending on the extent of the expansion. Not likely to require significant expansion of existing technology. Social workers and call taking staff at current veterans programs would need to be trained on any transportation resources that are added to the existing options. Depending on the level of expansion, this strategy could be short to long-term. Depending on the level of expansion, this strategy could cost $250,000 to over $1 million to implement. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 6-22 Strategy 14: Travel Training (Including Inter-Operator Trips) Travel training is usually intended to help people learn to use fixed-route transit effectively. Group training sessions can be helpful for some people, but many riders need intensive one-on-one training, either by qualified trainers or sometimes by “peers”, i.e. other seniors, people with disabilities, or veterans as the case may be. Travel between transit operator service areas can be particularly challenging and could be part of a travel training program. Travel training programs can also be customized to serve non-English speaking groups, or include learning to use Clipper Cards, and how to call ride hailing and concierge services. Lead or Champion Potential Sponsoring Agencies Potential Funding Sources Traditional champions for travel training include transit agencies and non-profit organizations, however CCTA recently received 5310 funding for travel training. WCCTAC has been leading travel training in West County. Sponsoring agencies could be many of the organizations affiliated with the TF. Federal 5310, Local such as Measure J, other CCTA/ County, and Private/ Corporate Sources. Program Parameters Any existing successful programs should be expanded to other geographic areas to begin with. Ideally the TF/CE could work with stakeholders to identify specialized needs such as veterans or tech-based training. Staffing Technology Training Requirements Timeline Cost to Implement Current programs would need to identify staffing needs for expansion. This program has relatively low technology needs. Training requirements are about mid-level difficulty, but can use current resources such as existing providers, and resources published by the National Center for Mobility Management and the National Aging and Disability Transportation Center. Current service can continue and be expanded with greater County-wide coordination to follow. $100,000 to $250,000 Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 6-23 Strategies to Develop Partnerships for Supportive Infrastructure Strategy 16: Administer A Uniform Countywide ADA Paratransit Eligibility Certification Program In order to ensure that applicants throughout the county have equal access to ADA paratransit programs, a centralized paratransit eligibility certification program would provide equity, greater accuracy, and also hopefully reduce the costs of multiple eligibility programs throughout the county. Lead or Champion Potential Sponsoring Agencies Potential Funding Sources County Connection, as the largest ADA paratransit program in the county. CCTA or another County agency Local sources could include Measure J, other CCTA funds, other County Sources Program Parameters A centralized eligibility certification center can include a facility that allows for in-person functional assessments, or could be located close to dense fixed route transit infrastructure, such as bus stops, street crossings, sidewalks with various levels of improvement etc. Staffing Technology Training Requirements Timeline Cost to Implement An analysis of the current time commitments of staff responsible for eligibility certification at each of the three Contra Costa transit agencies would be required in order to determine if there will be net changes in the level of staffing required by a centralized facility. Limited new technology may be required, or existing Trapeze certification modules may be sufficient. Staff would need to be trained in how to conduct functional assessments in order to enhance the accuracy of eligibility determinations. Implementation of an in- person centralized facility could take between six to eighteen months, depending on existing facility capacity. Costs will largely be driven by the kind of facility that is used for in-person assessments and additional staffing needs—potentially in the $100,000 to $300,000 range. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 6-24 Strategy 17: Fare Integration In order to ensure fare equity and reduce confusion for customers who use more than one ADA paratransit program in the county, the ADA paratransit operators could develop a joint fare structure and payment mediums. A key challenge will be reaching consensus on fare levels that are consistent across the county. Contra Costa may be able to benefit from the experiences of East Bay Paratransit which is currently investigating options in this area for contactless payment and to better prepare for the next phase of Clipper. Lead or Champion Potential Sponsoring Agencies Potential Funding Sources Transit agencies MTC, Transit agencies Federal 5310, 5307, State Transportation Assistance funds, and Local Transit Funds, Measure J, Other CCTA/ County Program Parameters This strategy has both a fare policy setting component that takes into account trip distances and a technology element which could include adaptability to MTC’s Clipper 2.1 program. Staffing Technology Training Requirements Timeline Cost to Implement Limited increase in staffing required. County may be able to rely on similar technology to the contactless fare technology currently being tested by East Bay Paratransit, and ensure that it is compatible with Clipper 2.1. Limited training will be required for transit agency staff to become familiar with the new fares and new technology, if applicable. One to three years to implement. The technology could be high, in the range of $500,000 to $1,000,000. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 6-25 Strategy 18: Procure Joint Paratransit Scheduling Software Regionally there have been many recent discussions on scheduling software as providers try to get ready for the next phase of Clipper. Procuring joint software would allow the County providers to potentially obtain better software and support via economies of scale. This would support other listed strategies, such as the one-seat ride pilot program, and uniform paratransit eligibility certification. Lead or Champion Potential Sponsoring Agencies Potential Funding Sources Transit agencies Transit agencies Federal 5310, STA and TDA funds, local sales tax revenues Program Parameters The joint procurement could involve either two or more agencies, including agencies in adjoining jurisdictions. Staffing Technology Training Requirements Timeline Cost to Implement To be determined whether the difference between the staffing required under this scenario is greater than the amount of staff time currently devoted by staff members involved in procurement. Likely to involve high level technology requirements. Will require staff familiarity with the range and specifications of various software technologies. One to three years. $100,000 to $250,000, although this may not represent a net increase over current staffing commitments. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 6-26 Strategy 19: Sidewalk Improvements to Enhance Safety for Older Adults and Wheelchair Accessibility in High-Priority Locations This strategy is intended to address the lack of sidewalks, poor sidewalk condition, lack of curb cuts, and obstructions on sidewalks. Besides improving access for all pedestrians, this strategy will also enhance the ability of older adults and wheelchair users to access fixed route transit services. Lead or Champion Potential Sponsoring Agencies Potential Funding Sources CCTA or individual Public Works departments at various cities in the county. CCTA or individual Public Works departments at various cities in the county. County and City funds assigned to streets and roads. Program Parameters Potential reach of this program varies broadly, but will most likely result in incremental improvements to the infrastructure in urbanized areas of the county. Staffing Technology Training Requirements Timeline Cost to Implement No additional staffing is anticipated other than the potential for some cities to train existing staff to conduct environmental assessments in order to identify barriers to be addressed. These assessments are also sometimes conducted by transit agency staff who transmit the information to Public Works Department staff in order to include access improvements as part of their overall annual work plans. Limited technology required. Limited training required, apart from conduct of environmental assessments and including ADA access as part of routine inspections of pedestrian infrastructure. Short to long range, depending on level of improvements implemented. Depends entirely on level of improvements implemented, so should be considered $250,000 to over $1 million. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 6-27 Strategy 20: Means-Based Fare Subsidy Fare affordability was frequently cited as a barrier for low-income people with disabilities and older adults during the study’s outreach efforts. A key strategy for addressing this need would be to establish a program that relies on existing means-tested programs such as Medi-Cal, SSI, general assistance etc. MTC is taking a comprehensive look at regional fare subsidies, primarily on fixed route services. However, there are paratransit programs such as Redi-Wheels in San Mateo County that have long-standing low-income subsidized programs that can serve as a model for Contra Costa County. Lead or Champion Potential Sponsoring Agencies Potential Funding Sources Social Services Agencies and transit agencies MTC or the transit agencies, social service agencies. LTF, CMAQ/TFCA, Measure J and other local, Private/ Foundation Program Parameters Subsidies can range from any discount to free fares for low-income riders. Staffing Technology Training Requirements Timeline Cost to Implement Limited staffing required, based on reports from other programs. Very limited technology required to administer the means-based fare subsidy program. Limited training required to familiarize staff with administering the pre- existing means-based screening programs mentioned above. It is estimated that this program could be implemented in the six to12 month period. Although the administration of the program would not be time-consuming, it is anticipated that reaching consensus among the stakeholder transit agencies may take time. Costs range from $50,000 to $250,000, depending on the level of subsidy and the number of participating transit agencies. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 6-28 TRANSIT FUNDING SUMMARY AND OPTIONS Transportation services are almost always funded with a combination of funding sources and most include some public funds, including programs available through the federal government and funding available from local and regional municipalities or regional authorities. In Contra Costa County, there are five major categories of current funding for public and human service transportation: 1. U.S. Department of Transportation (U.S. DOT) funding administered through the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). This includes (among others) the Urban Transit Formula Funds (Section 5307), Rural Transit Formula Funds (Section 5311) and programs targeted for Older Adults and People with Disabilities (Section 5310), USDOT through the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), can Flex Surface Transportation Program (STP) and Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) funds to support transit projects and other capital needs. 2. Federal funding programs outside of the U.S. DOT that can be used for transportation. The largest and most relevant of the non-DOT funding programs are available from the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS). DHHS includes the Centers for Medicaid Services, and the Administration on Aging, both of which are involved the funding of transportation services. The Department of Veterans Affairs also funds transportation services and programs. 3. California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) The California Transportation Development Act which includes revenues collected from a portion of the state Diesel fuel tax, and sales tax. These funds are distributed to local and regional transportation authorities. These funds are available to support public transportation services, including services for older adults and people with disabilities. 4. California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) Senate Bill (SB) 1376: TNC Access for All Act (SB 1376) also known as the TNC: Accessibility for Persons with Disabilities Program 5. Local tax revenues that are dedicated to support transit services. County Measure J and other regional funding such as regional funding measures and tolls. 6. Private/Corporate Sources are often used to support Specialized transportation options and can be a source for Innovative and transformative transportation programs. Transportation funding is complex, and transit services in Contra Costa County like many, have to meet needs with multiple funding sources. Transit operators, which provide the majority of trips for older adults and people with disabilities in Contra Costa County, are underfunded and lack the resources to meet all the needs of the community. In addition to inadequate funding, the funding that transit agencies receive is restricted in how that funding can be used. For example, the use of Measure J funding is dictated by the Measure’s Expenditure Plan and cannot easily be repurposed for other uses. Careful consideration must be made to the impact funding has on the potential implementation of some strategies. Repurposing existing funding is likely untenable. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 6-29 New Funding The CE will need to seek funding through a variety of means, likely including funding dedicated through a sales tax measure. In Monterey County, Monterey-Salinas Transit placed a successful sales tax measure on the ballot to benefit similar populations to those of this ATSP. CCTA or the County could potentially fill the role of putting a tax measure forward. A non-profit could have access to funding not available to public entities, such as grant funding and Community Development Block Grants, foundation funding, donations, other public funding options, etc. Federal Funding Federal transit funding programs are authorized through the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act which went into effect December 4, 2015, authorizing programs through September 30, 2021. Most federal transit programs are funded from the Mass Transit Account of the Highway Trust Fund, based on transit’s share of the federal motor vehicle fuel taxes. The funds are administered by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). Although The administrative burden of Federal grants is high, federal formula funds are reliable and form the basis of the capital and operations budget of most transit agencies. There are several FTA programs used to fund public transportation services in Contra Costa County. For the purpose of this Report, these four funding programs are among the most relevant: Section 5310: Enhanced Mobility of Seniors & Individuals with Disabilities This program (49 U.S.C. 5310) provides formula funding to states for the purpose of assisting private nonprofit groups in meeting the transportation needs of older adults and people with disabilities when the transportation service provided is unavailable, insufficient, or inappropriate to meeting these needs. Funds are apportioned based on each state’s share of the population for these two groups. Formula funds are apportioned to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) for distribution to local government authorities, private non-profit organizations, and/or operators of public transportation. MTC uses a competitive selections process to allocate funding. The program aims to improve mobility for seniors and individuals with disabilities by removing barriers to transportation service and expanding transportation mobility options. This program supports transportation services planned, designed, and carried out to meet the special transportation needs of seniors and individuals with disabilities. Eligible projects include both “traditional” capital investment and “nontraditional” investment beyond the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) complementary paratransit services. The FTA Section 5310 (Transportation for Elderly Persons & Persons with Disabilities) funding program is of relevance to the ATS Study in part because this plan could be considered in awarding of these funds. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 6-30 Section 5311: Formula Grants for Rural Areas The Formula Grants for Rural Areas program provides capital, planning, and operating assistance to states to support public transportation in rural areas with populations of less than 50,000, where many residents often rely on public transit to reach their destinations. The program also provides funding for state and national training and technical assistance through the Rural Transportation Assistance Program. In Contra Costa County, County Connection receives approximately $50,000 in Rural Transit funding for service in Rural Contra Costa County. Section 5307: Urbanized Area Formula Grants This program distributes funds to regions based on an urbanized area formula. In Contra Costa County, all three transit operators are 5307 recipients. Eligible activities include: planning for 5307 funds, engineering, design and evaluation of transit projects and other technical transportation-related studies; capital investments in bus and bus-related activities such as replacement, overhaul and rebuilding of buses, crime prevention and security equipment and construction of maintenance and passenger facilities; and capital investments in new and existing fixed guideway systems including rolling stock, overhaul and rebuilding of vehicles, track, signals, communications, and computer hardware and software. In addition, associated transit improvements and certain expenses associated with mobility management programs are eligible under the program. All preventive maintenance and some Americans with Disabilities Act complementary paratransit service costs are considered capital costs. Other Federal Transportation Funding Several other federal programs fund transportation, the largest of which reside within the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS). DHHS programs support transportation for non-emergency medical transportation (NEMT) for Medicaid recipients, and transportation programs for older adults managed under the Administration on Aging.2 The Department of Veterans Affairs, for example, funds transportation services and programs for eligible veterans. These programs tend to fund services directly oriented around veteran customers / veteran-specific needs and are typically administered as block grants to local and regional agencies.3 Other non-DOT federal funding for transportation funding may be available through programs associated behavioral health and developmental disability programming, job training programs and education. Non-DOT transportation funding streams may be used to match FTA grants and are especially important for nonprofit agencies ineligible for other public funding. FHWA Capital Assistance Capital assistance includes flexed FHWA funding from the Surface Transportation Program and Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) funds. CMAQ funds are directed to transportation projects and programs which contribute to the attainment or maintenance of National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) in nonattainment or air quality maintenance areas for ozone, carbon monoxide, or particulate matter (PM) under provisions in the Clean Air Act. Due to the 2 Administration for Community Living. Available at: https://acl.gov/about-acl/administration-aging 3 U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. Available at: https://www.va.gov/healthbenefits/vtp/ Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 6-31 region’s non-attainment of federal air quality standards, funds are allocated the Region’s MPO, MTC, and distributed through a competitive grant process. CMAQ funds can be used for:  Transportation Control Measures (TCMs)  Extreme Low-Temperature Cold Start Programs  Alternative Fuels and Vehicles  Congestion Reduction & Traffic Flow Improvements  Transit Improvements  Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities and Programs  The Surface Transportation Program (STP) fund, among others, are a source of flexible funding for both highway and transit projects. Caltrans is the administrator of STP funds and currently limits STP Flexible funding to support Rural Transit (5311) operators. STP Flex Funds can be used for:  Capital transit projects (vehicles, facilities, etc.) whether publicly or privately owned Older Americans Act (OAA) The Older Americans Act (OAA), originally enacted in 1965, supports a range of home and community-based services, such as meals-on-wheels and other nutrition programs, in-home services, transportation, legal services, elder abuse prevention and caregivers support. These programs help seniors stay as independent as possible in their homes and communities. In addition, OAA services help seniors avoid hospitalization and nursing home care and, as a result, save federal and state funds that otherwise would be spent on such care.4 These funds are apportioned to the County. The Task Force should engage the appropriate County department and examine opportunities to collaborate. State Funding Transit programs in California are funded by the Transportation Development Act which includes revenues collected from a portion of the state diesel fuel tax, and sales taxes. These funds are distributed to local and regional transportation authorities. These funds are available to support public transportation services, including services for older adults and people with disabilities. The Transportation Development Act of 1971 is allocated through the county's designated regional transportation planning agency (RTPA). The Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) is the RTPA for Contra Costa County. The Act provides two major sources for funding of public transportation in California. The first, the county Local Transportation Fund (LTF), was established in 1972, while the State Transit Assistance (STA) fund was implemented in 1980. The intent of the legislation is to provide a stable source of funding to meet the area's transit needs. 4 https://www.ncpssm.org/documents/older-americans-policy-papers/older-americans-act/ Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 6-32 The Transportation Development Act, or TDA, has long been a cornerstone of state transit funding. Local Transportation Fund (LTF) The LTF is derived from a ¼ cent of the general sales tax collected statewide. The State Board of Equalization, based on sales tax collected in each county, returns the general sales tax revenues to each county’s LTF. Each county then apportions the LTF funds within the county based on population. This state law allowed each county to establish a quarter-cent sales tax to finance a wide variety of transportation projects, including: o Transit operations o Bus and rail projects o Special transit services for disabled riders o Pedestrian and bicycle facilities o Transportation planning State Transit Assistance (STA) The State Transit Assistance (STA) program was created in 1979. The program provides a second source of Transportation Development Act (TDA) funding for transportation planning, public transportation, and community transit purposes. STA funds are derived from the statewide sales diesel fuel, which is deposited in the Public Transportation Account in the State Transportation Fund. The state legislature approves the amount of these funds allocated to the State Transit Assistance program as part of the annual state budget process. The State splits the STA program into two components: • Population-based funds: The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) receives STA based on the region’s share of the population. The use of these funds is governed by MTC Resolution 4321 which established a STA County Block Grant Program whereby the nine Bay Area Congestion Management Agencies determine how to invest the funds in public transit services/projects. • Revenue-based funds: The State allocates funds to transit operators based on their revenue as defined by state law. Senate Bill 1 (2017) Senate Bill 1, the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017,(SB 1) provides about $250 million annually for the State Transit Assistance (STA) Program to help transit agencies fund their capital infrastructure and operational costs. This money is distributed via current funding formulas based on agency revenue and population. Additionally, SB 1 provides more than $105 million annually for the State of Good Repair Program (SGR) that funds transit capital projects or services to maintain or repair existing transit fleets and facilities; new vehicles or facilities that improve existing transit services; or transit services that complement local efforts to repair and improve local transportation infrastructure. This money is made available to eligible transit operators based on the STA formula. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 6-33 Senate Bill 1376 (2018) Senate Bill (SB) 1376: TNC Access for All Act became law in September 2018. SB 1376 empowers the CPUC to establish a program to increase accessibility for persons with disabilities as part of its regulation of TNCs. As part of the implementation of SB 1376, on July 1, 2019, transportation network companies (TNCs) were required to collect a ten cent ($0.10) fee on each TNC trip in California. The funds generated from the fee support the expansion of on-demand transportation for non-folding wheelchair users who require a wheelchair accessible vehicle (WAV). The CPUC is currently conducting a rulemaking process and determining which agencies will be authorized fund administrators. Funds may be distributed on a countywide basis. Potential NEMT and NMT Funding for Transit Operators The rules governing what “cost” is reimbursable under NEMT and NMT has created challenges for transit operators as passenger fares only cover a fraction of the cost of an ADA-mandated paratransit trip. For example, each paratransit trip can cost between $50 and $70, while the fare for that trip can be $4.00 to $7.00. Since Medi-Cal reimburses for the cost of the fare, and not the trip, transit operators are in effect subsidizing trips for Medi-Cal, at a lower cost than a private operator could charge for the same trip. The California Transit Association (CTA) is pursuing changes to how Medi-Cal reimburses eligible trips. The Association will seek legislation to require Medi-Cal managed care plans (MCP) to reimburse public transit agencies for Medi-Cal eligible trips with or without prior MCP approval for the trip, and to also allow public transit agencies who provide these trips access to the Department of Health Care Services database to identify customers who are enrolled in Medi-Cal and under which MCP the customer is enrolled. If successful, these changes could create an additional source of revenue for transit providers. Older Californians Act The California Department of Aging (CDA) oversees implementation of the Older Californians Act, which was passed by the state Legislature in order to comply with federal legislation mandating the availability of certain community services to senior citizens. CDA provides services for older adults, adults with disabilities, family caregivers and residents in long-term care facilities. The department is part of the Health and Human Services Agency. CDA coordinates and directs the use of federal funds through local service providers and Area Agencies on Aging to fulfill the requirements of federal and state legislation.5 Similar to the OAA, these funds are apportioned to the County. The Task Force should engage the appropriate County department and examine opportunities to collaborate. 5 http://www.allgov.com/usa/ca/departments/health-and-human-services- agency/department_of_aging?agencyid=129#:~:text=Overview%3A,Californians%20are%20getting%20old.&text=It%20o versees%20implementation%20of%20the,community%20services%20to%20senior%20citizens. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 6-34 Local Funding In addition to federal and state sources, some communities use general revenue funding to support transportation services. Communities like the City of Richmond use general revenue funds to support senior transportation funds to support their Senior and Disabled Transportation programs. The largest source of public transportation funding in Contra Costa County is Measure J, which provided $5,328,755 in FY 19/20 to fund transportation for seniors and people with disabilities. Measure J In November 2004, Contra Costa County voters approved Measure J with a 71% vote. The measure provided for the continuation of the county's half-cent transportation sales tax for 25 more years beyond the original expiration date of 2009. As with Measure C (the original 1988 transportation sales tax measure), the tax revenues are used to fund a voter-approved Expenditure Plan of transportation programs and projects. Measure J provides approximately $2.7 billion (escalated) countywide for local transportation projects and programs through the year 2034. The Measure J Expenditure Plan allocated 3.5% of Measure J to Transportation for Seniors and People with Disabilities countywide through Program 15. The Expenditure plan allows for an annual increase of 0.10% from the 3.5% to 5.9% by 2034. 35% of Program 15 is allocated to West County, 17% to Southwest County, 23% to East County, and 25% to Central County. Additionally, the 20b Subregional Program allocates 0.65% to West County and 0.5% to Central County for additional Transportation for Seniors and People with Disabilities. Program 20b funds are approved by WCCTAC and TRANSPAC and be used for such non-ADA services as shuttles, sedan/taxi service, fare subsidies, and/or other supplemental services beyond the ADA service. However, ADA service does qualify, and Program 20b can be used to expand the same “base” program expenditures that Program 15 is used for. Program 15 funds are allocated by the Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) to the Measure J approved transportation providers based on percentage allocations determined in the previous Measure C. Measure J Program 15 and 20b revenues are forecast to grow 26% in the next 5 years from $5,328,755 to $6,721,704. Program 15 funds are overwhelmingly used for operations. However, the Measure J Expenditure Plan does allow other related uses including "(a) managing the program, (b) retention of a mobility manager, (c) coordination with non-profit services, (d) establishment and/or maintenance of a comprehensive paratransit technology implementation plan, and (e) facilitation of countywide travel and integration with fixed route and BART specifically, as deemed feasible." Historically these funds have been used for Figure 6-4 Program 15 funds allocation by Sub-Region West 35% Central 25% East 23% Southwest 17% Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan DRAFT Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 6-35 operations due to demand and lack of institutional capacity to initiate these other eligible activities. Figure 6-5 Funding Forecast Measure J Program 15 and 20b 6 Private/Foundation Sources Service providers for vulnerable communities are sometimes able to access private funding through Foundations or similar organizations. Foundations supporting programs in Contra Costa County include:  Chan Zuckerberg Initiative  Catholic Charities East Bay  Silicon Valley Community Foundation  Wayne and Gladys Valley Foundation  Richmond Community Foundation Although there may be numerous grants available, grant writing and reporting requirements can be resource intensive and require significant staff time to pursue and manage. In addition to the administration costs, private grants can lack the flexibility of other grant programs. 6 2019 Measure J STRATEGIC PLAN (2019) https://www.ccta.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/2019-Measure-J-Strategic- Plan.pdf $2,094,432$2,196,292$2,330,326$2,472,418$2,623,104$1,529,121$1,602,958$1,700,238$1,803,350$1,912,680$980,491$1,034,506$1,104,155$1,178,188$1,256,904$724,711$764,635$816,114$870,835$929,016$0 $500,000 $1,000,000 $1,500,000 $2,000,000 $2,500,000 $3,000,000 FY 21 FY 22 FY 23 FY 24 FY 25 West Central East Southwest APPENDIX A Survey Instruments Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan APPENDICES Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | A-1 Appendix A Survey Instruments As part of the outreach process, Nelson\Nygaard conducted a mix of paper surveys and an online survey hosted on SurveyMonkey. The survey was available in three languages: English, Spanish, and Mandarin. This Appendix shows the paper survey instrument that was distributed as part of this project. Attached are the three survey instruments corresponding to each language. Appendix A1 Survey Instrument in English Appendix A2 Survey Instrument in Spanish Appendix A3 Survey Instrument in Mandarin APPENDIX B Comments from Public Input Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan APPENDICES Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | B-1 Appendix B Comments from Public Input The table below shows public comment and input received by the team throughout the course of the project via email and webform. Public Input As a disabled veteran, I would like to see a direct bus from the Walnut Creek BART station to the VA Martinez Clinic. It is otherwise difficult to get to the clinic on public transit from the Southern part of Contra Costa. It is on my ‘wish list’ to have someone to partner with her for travel. I want to use public transit, but it feels unsafe to do so on my own. So, it isn’t travel training I am looking for, but to have someone travel with me for safety concerns. I had my 83-year-old mom who lives in Pinole take the survey for feedback. She drives so doesn't use transit but would like to. Her comments: Why can't we take a bus to Walnut Creek? We (her friends) are more comfortable in small groups on small buses. Dial a ride seems more personalized‐ get a sense someone is keeping an eye on you. Her friends are upset at the time and hassle of having to transfer to multiple operators for medical appointments. Pinole is a bit of a transit desert because services seniors need aren't in Pinole or San Pablo or downtown Martinez, so WestCAT service isn't sufficient. Pinole residents seek Kaiser services in Richmond, Walnut Creek, and beyond. All are not easily accessible by fixed route or dial a ride. I was surprised how informed she was, and her friends, who are transit dependent. Pinole Garden club is carpooling members to Hercules PNR to board Lynx bus to Sales Force, but they have lots of confusion about the parking eligibility at Hercules PNR. Here are seniors who know that Lynx exists and are willing to carpool to PNR (doing what we want them to do) but getting info about parking is difficult. Tri Delta Dial‐A‐Ride (paratransit) service paratransit does not run late enough, Paratransit hours should match Tri Delta’s fixed route service hours. Draft recommendations: 1. Prepare a Tri Delta Bus Transit Service Reliability and Improvement Strategies report to identify problematic routes and improvement strategies. Implement a dedicated paratransit shuttle to senior centers in Pittsburg and Antioch. 2. Tri Delta should build on its existing Email/Text Alerts system with a Tri Delta Mobile App. Include features such as nearby or alternative route options and departure times, map‐based bus tracking, trip planning and system‐wide schedules. 3. Hire additional Dial‐A‐Ride dedicated drivers or implement a program like Richmond’s R‐Transit Lyft partnership, in which Lyft technology is used to provide on demand paratransit transportation. Access from the CBTP study area to medical centers in Martinez, including the VA Hospital, is inadequate and difficult for seniors. Tri Delta Dial‐A‐Ride (paratransit) riders at both the Pittsburg and Antioch Senior Centers feel paratransit is not adequately responsive. Paratransit does not communicate with its Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan APPENDICES Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | B-2 passengers when it is going to be late, leaving riders waiting outside for more than 30 minutes at any given time. After a brain injury- I couldn’t drive so I started biking at age 65- please improve biking safety, including having all stop light recognize bikes and ensure safe places to park. E-bikes are great for seniors and the disabled. My husband- age 80 with cancer and heart failure still rides. I am 83, live alone in an apartment at The Oaks, in Oakley. I have no car. I find it hard to get transportation to anywhere but most miss having transportation to anything in the evening, there are no 7 PM dinners or community functions for me. If I go shopping or to a doctor I have to get home early before Dial A Ride stops running for the day. Something needs to be done about transit situation. Will there be buses on Fairview to the new Los Madonas campus? I’d like to raise the issue of Paratransit distance limits, or the ability to find other services that are affordable to get outside of those limits, especially to our wonderful parks and recreation areas. I have a visual impairment and rely on friends and family to get out to Briones, where I can enjoy the outdoors and pursue my athletic goals as an athlete (I train in para-dressage) - I am worried about the future and affordable transportation to my hobbies as bus routes are cut and changed. Rideshare services are prohibitively expensive. Besides that, I need paratransit to accept Clipper cards so that I can use my employer transit benefit when I need to use it for work. Would like to know how you plan cross counties trips because sometimes it takes all day to complete? The paratransit application for the different providers is different with each one, with different requirements, as well. I have received complaints from families we serve about how confusing it is and how long the intake process takes. They did not feel I would support a single point of registration, with consistent criteria throughout our County as being more efficient and user friendly. supported in the process and at least a few families have given up on the process! Once someone is approved in one system, they have to get approval for another system, if crossing transportation boundaries. In addition, wait times when transferring is excessive and sometimes troubling. I would support coordination when going from one area to another and scheduling efficiencies when transferring. It seems that a single point of contact for scheduling and dispatching would increase efficiencies, such as improving on-time performance and making it easier to cross transportation boundaries. Our clientele already have disabilities and hardships in everyday life--I believe it is our duty to assure that communication and transportation be as seamless and efficient as possible! The county needs a robust affordable public transit system severing all the communities of the county. State and federal funding of such a system is woefully low and what funds that are provided are sucked up by BART, AC Transit and other large transit systems leaving communities such as San Ramon without much in the way of transit options. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan APPENDICES Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | B-3 There was a bus (#39?) that stopped both at Alcosta Blvd/ Fircrest Blvd and Fircrest/Craydon Circle. It continued into Dublin to Village Parkway, Amador Blvd and Dublin Blvd. I am in a senior community "Sunny Glen" and there are no buses within a couple of miles from here. Where can we go to get free transportation for seniors? I am writing for my disabled husband. He is completely dependent on others for his care and has paralysis of most of his body. A constant worry is how to evacuate in an emergency. We have a few neighbors that will help but no place to go once we leave the house and no plan if neighbors aren't available. What services are available for evacuating someone who is so severely disabled? Senior transportation is a serious matter! APPENDIX C Needs Identified from Prior Reports Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan APPENDICES Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | C-1 Appendix C Needs Identified from Prior Reports SAFETREC To better understand the mobility needs of older adults in the region, a survey of 510 residents age 55 and older in Contra Costa County was conducted by UC Berkeley’s SafeTREC. Following are the key needs that were recorded through the survey:  The majority of older adults in Contra Costa are car dependent. They mostly travel by motor vehicle, either driving or as a passenger. While the survey sample was generally healthy, half of all participants had not considered that driving might not always be a transportation option. Many participants had a valid driver’s license, but this declined with increasing age.  Participants living in households with no drivers reported half as many trips for activities compared with those living in households with drivers. Not having a driver’s license was also associated with both missing an important daily living activity and making fewer trips. In addition, those who reported being in fair or poor health were more likely to have recently missed an activity important for daily living, had less social interaction, and made fewer trips overall in the previous week.  When asked about ways to improve public transit, respondents suggested closer stops and additional bus lines, extended routes and times, improvements to safety, reduced fares, and better communication and information about public transit services.  Older adults are concerned about mobility loss. Over 61% of respondents have thought about their future mobility. A majority felt strongly that a loss of mobility is very isolating and depressing.  Some other needs and concerns that were mentioned during the survey were: Improved roads and sidewalks; Improved accessibility to public transit (closer stops, added bus lines); Improved safety on public transit; General lack of public transit; Better paratransit or personalized transport options; Better parking at BART; Traffic congestion reduction; BART cleaner, safer and extended routes and times; Cost of public transit; Traffic law enforcement; Public transit information dissemination; Improved road signage, signaling and lighting. WCCTAC NEEDS ASSESSMENT STUDY  The greatest transportation coverage gap is getting to and from medical appointments. A significant minority of residents need to access medical facilities in Alameda County, which requires a lengthy trip. City-based paratransit programs do not transport riders outside of the County.  Residents are interested in more evening, weekend, and same-day trip services. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan APPENDICES Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | C-2  Many residents are disabled but are not certified as such by any of the local paratransit agencies or the Regional Transportation Connection (RTC) program, which is required for a discounted Clipper Card, suggesting that these individuals would likely benefit from a more robust outreach program. It is unclear if these residents are eligible for Senior Clipper Cards, which are easier to obtain.  City paratransit programs do not all use the same eligibility application or have the same requirements, making it difficult for West County residents to determine if they are eligible or how to apply.  There is a general concern with the lack of coordination between paratransit agencies, which leads to burdensome transfers, disparate fares and payment options, and service and coverage gaps throughout West County.  West County paratransit service providers have had difficulty coordinating with Richmond’s R-Transit service or determining what services are available.  Richmond’s R-Transit service does not consistently serve the unincorporated areas around the City of Richmond, despite those communities being in its coverage area.  The closure of Doctors Medical Center has created transportation concerns for many residents.  There is an interest in incorporating ride-hailing services (Lyft, Uber, etc.) into future West County mobility plans.  There is a strong interest in receiving travel training that focuses on the use of Clipper Card, ride-hailing services (Lyft, Uber, etc.), concierge services, the use of smartphones in making transportation choices, and general lessons on how to ride transit. COMMUNITY BASED TRANSPORTATION PLANS (CBTPS) Downtown Martinez CBTP  Need for improved pedestrian facilities, particularly for wheelchair users or those are visually impaired  Cost and time are an issue for people who travel by transit and paratransit  Lack of transportation options (absence of bus service during non-commute hours)  Add paratransit services. The department of HHHS wants to see an expanded paratransit program in Downtown Martinez (note: “paratransit” could be referring to on-demand non-ADA service). As is, it is difficult for clients to make connections to and from bus terminals or travel for required trips to social services appointments or visit other regional shelters and warming centers. − “Increasing paratransit services is desperately needed, more connections to and from bus terminals.” – HHHS  Lack of supportive programs, e.g. free transfers only available when using Clipper (those without a Clipper card are burdened with additional travel payment)  Senior Citizens Club of Martinez - Last year the club surveyed members to find out what barriers prevent them from using the Center, or from using it more often. Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan APPENDICES Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | C-3 Apparently, transportation was not identified as a barrier. There are several potential explanations for this finding − One is the perception that Downtown Martinez is relatively compact with a relatively significant amount of residential development in the Downtown area, as compared to other Downtown areas in Contra Costa. − A “fair number” of club members live in Downtown Martinez and walk to programs at the Center. − Senior Center users occasionally come to the center via Transportation Network Companies (TNCs), such as Lyft or Uber, but never via a cab.  Support for on-demand paratransit − “If paratransit came on-demand, that would be big.”  Desire for paratransit to adopt digital formats and smartphones to book services as a way to increase ridership and ease the process. − “Increasing paratransit services is desperately needed, more connections to and from bus terminals.”  Older adults and veterans report having a hard time finding public transit information for routes and schedules, particularly when this information is only available on digital and online formats. − “[Smartphone training would be useful] especially for people with disabilities.” Monument Corridor CBTP  Need for improved bicycle and pedestrian facilities  Lack of transportation options (BART is far, TNCs are expensive)  Existing transit service is limited, locally and regionally  Lack of real-time information and wayfinding features − “An additional area of concern is the lack of awareness among seniors of the free fixed route service that is available during off-peak hours.” -Commission on Aging  Suggest transportation information be provided in languages in addition to English  Older adults and veterans report having a hard time finding public transit information for routes and schedules, particularly when this information is only available on digital and online formats.  Paratransit eligibility application process can be bureaucratic and feel overwhelming; there is a need for workshops and opportunities to understand how to apply for this service and who it is intended for  Paratransit is less flexible than other services, as it requires users to book trips in advance Pittsburg Bay Point CBTP  Senior centers in Pittsburg and Antioch would like to extend evening programs but are restricted by Tri-Delta schedules. As a result, lunch and other daytime programs Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan APPENDICES Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | C-4 are at capacity. Program staff would like to see more frequent and extended fixed- route service into the evening.  Those served by the Pittsburg Senior Center are nearly fully reliant on Tri-Delta buses; unreliability and waits impact seniors especially hard.  Paratransit service hours do not match fixed route service hours. As such paratransit does not run late enough.  Access from the study area to medical centers in Martinez is inadequate and difficult for seniors.  Residents (e.g., elderly and disabled riders) feel paratransit is not adequately responsive. Paratransit does not communicate with its passengers when it is going to be late, leaving riders waiting outside for more than 30 minutes at any given time. Richmond CBTP  Kaiser Permanente is difficult to access via transit for someone with mobility challenges. The same applies to Richmond Care Center near Hilltop Mall.  The following bus stops do not have shelters or seating but are used by elderly members of the community as well as other travelers with ambulatory impairments preventing them from standing for long periods of time: − MacDonald Avenue and 21st Street − MacDonald Avenue and 23rd Street − Macdonald Avenue and 25th Street (this stop is in front of a senior center) − San Pablo Avenue and 23rd Street − Cutting Boulevard and Key Boulevard (a WestCat stop only)  Sab Pablo Avenue and Potrero Avenue (has a shelter but no seating, riders often sit on the lawn behind this stop when waiting for the bus)  Many people who visit GRIP and other needs-based events go to these events weekly. These services are timed and transit service linking them can be spotty and expensive.  Current bus service for those visiting the Hilltop Social Security office is inadequate. The bus stops below the office, forcing many of the elderly and disabled to walk up a steep hill.  Two seniors have heard about recent upgrades to Richmond paratransit services, “using Uber or something.” They agreed that current paratransit is inefficient and does not serve the entire study area or all services and facilities. APPENDIX D CTSA Legislative References Contra Costa Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan APPENDICES Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | D-1 Appendix D CTSA Legislative References This appendix highlights key legislation reference material for the proposed formation of a CTSA. There are three documents as part of this Appendix. D1: PUBLIC UTILITIES CODE SECTION 99275 D2: PUBLIC UTILITIES CODE SECTION 99233.7 D3: RESOLUTION NO. 4097 ON CTSA ADOPTION Appendix D1 Public Utilities Code Section 99275 Appendix D2 Public Utilities Code Section 99233.7 Appendix D3 Resolution No. 4097 on CTSA Adoption Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan Contra Costa County Board of SupervisorsPresented by ATS Plan StaffMarch 9, 2021 WHAT IS THE ATSP?•The Accessible Transportation Strategic (ATS) Plan examines transportation challenges of seniors, people with disabilities, and veterans in Contra Costa County•Partnership between CCTA and the County --funded by a Caltrans Sustainable Communities Transportation Planning grant•Recommends a coordination structure and strategies to improve accessible transportation services•Scheduled to be complete in early 20212 BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW OF PROJECTPolicy Background32019 Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) Resolution 4321“Each county must establish or enhance mobility management programs to help provide equitable and effective access to transportation.” 2017 Countywide Comprehensive Transportation Plan “Initiate the ATS Plan: Ensure services are delivered in a coordinated system…”2016 and 2020 Transportation Expenditure Plan“CCTA will develop an Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan to implement a customer-focused, user-friendly, seamless coordinated system…” BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW OF PROJECTOversight Committees•Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) –providing subject matter expertise and public policy implications on service concepts•Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) –providing input on addressing policy barriers, communicating with stakeholders about the Study, liaising with elected or appointed Boards, and reviewing and prioritizing recommended strategies4 CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIESPast Studies•Contra Costa County Paratransit Plan – 1990•CCTA Paratransit Improvement Study – 2004•Contra Costa Mobility Management Plan – 2013Barriers to Coordination•Multiple missions serving different populations•Multiple regulatory requirements•Measure J, Federal Transit Administration, State Transportation Act, Grants•CCTA and County do not have policy authority over operations, but can provide funding opportunities, policy direction, and leadership.5 TRANSIT, PARATRANSIT, AND COMMUNITY PROGRAMS6 MEDICAL FACILITIES7 OUTREACH EFFORTS•Presentations pre-COVIDoDevelopmental Disabilities Council of Contra Costa CountyoPleasant Hill Commission on Aging•Surveys– 1000+•Flyer/survey emailed and on paper with meal delivery8 OUTREACH EFFORTS (CONTINUED)•Focus groups –5 •Stakeholder interviews – 11 •Telephone Town Hall Meeting – Oct 27, 2020oCall available in English, Spanish, and Mandarino225 people pre-registeredo23,000 phone numbers dialed, 1,149 acceptedo4 simple polls; 17 audience questions answered by staff•Partner websites•Social media oInstagram, Facebook, Nextdoor, Twitter9 TRANSPORTATION NEEDS AND GAPS IDENTIFIEDFixed Route Transit ServiceADA Mandated Paratransit ServiceCommunity Based Transportation Services10CategoriesGeographic and Temporal InequitiesIssues and Needs Related to: TRANSPORTATION NEEDS AND GAPS IDENTIFIEDLack of AffordabilityAccess to Essential ServicesAccess to InformationProgrammatic Needs and Organizational Structure11Categories TRANSPORTATION NEEDS AND GAPS IDENTIFIEDSame-day trips and wheelchair accessible tripsExpanded service during evenings and weekendsMost medical facilities appear to be clustered in center of the County12Examples TRANSPORTATION NEEDS AND GAPS IDENTIFIEDVeterans’ transportation programs have specific limitations, availability and limits may not be well-knownLimited service options in East CountyAffordabilityrelated to all transportation servicesHistorical lack of political support/need a champion for these types of recommendations13Examples RECOMMENDATIONSEstablish a Task Force (TF)•Modeled on PAC – similar representationoID strategies that can be delegated to existing agencies/ non-profit organizations for short term implementationoEstablish dedicated countywide Coordinated Entity (CE) for implementation of countywide strategiesoIdentify funding14Establish a Coordinated Structure RECOMMENDATIONS(CONTINUED)Countywide Coordinated Entity (CE)•Could be an existing non-profit, public agency, or new entity•Could apply to become CTSA if appropriate, or look at other models15Establish a Coordinated Structure Identify and pursue new funding sourcesAdminister uniform countywide ADA paratransit eligibility certificationExpandmobility management functionProcurejoint paratransit scheduling software 16RECOMMENDATIONS (CONTINUED)Coordinated Entity (CE) Mission Present unified voiceregarding policy and funding at local, state, and federal levels Oversee one-seat ride for inter-jurisdictional trips within/ outside the countyConsider additional opportunities for countywide service in the future 17RECOMMENDATIONS (CONTINUED)Coordinated Entity (CE) Mission MOBILITY STRATEGIESExpand current one-seat ride pilot program improve connectivity between paratransit programs/eliminate transfer tripsSame-day trip programs (including wheelchair-accessible service)Expand volunteer driver programsShopping Trips with package assistance18Examples MOBILITY STRATEGIESHospital discharge serviceOne call/One click (and/or Information and Referral Service)Programs for veteransFare integrationUniform countywide ADA paratransit eligibility certification program19Examples PHASE TWOPublic Engagement•Give stakeholders an opportunity to prioritize strategies for implementation20 THANK YOU!510.506.7588510.506.7586rweiner@nelsonnygaard.comnarmenta@nelsonnygaard.comRichard WeinerNaomi Armenta RECOMMENDATION(S): CONSIDER update on COVID 19; and PROVIDE direction to staff. Health Department - Anna Roth, Director and Dr. Farnitano, Health Officer1. FISCAL IMPACT: Administrative Reports with no specific fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: The Health Services Department has established a website dedicated to COVID-19, including daily updates. The site is located at: https://www.coronavirus.cchealth.org/ APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS Contact: Monica Nino I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: , Deputy cc: D.3 To:Board of Supervisors From:Monica Nino, County Administrator Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:Update on COVID -19 CLERK'S ADDENDUM On March xx, 2021 at 8 p.m. there will be a Countywide memorial for the Contra Costa County residents lost to Covid-19. RECOMMENDATION(S): 1. OPEN the public hearing on Ordinance No. 2021-10, RECEIVE testimony, and CLOSE the public hearing. 2. ADOPT Ordinance No. 2021-10, an urgency interim ordinance extending, through March 9, 2022, a moratorium on industrial hemp cultivation and processing. FISCAL IMPACT: Agriculture department may not be able to receive all contract revenue. BACKGROUND: On November 17, 2020, the Board of Supervisors adopted Ordinance No. 2020-28, an urgency interim ordinance that established a moratorium on the cultivation and processing of industrial hemp. On December 15, 2020, the Board of Supervisors adopted Ordinance No. 2020-30, an urgency interim ordinance that extended the moratorium through March 10, 2021. The attached urgency ordinance, Ordinance No. 2021-10, extends the temporary moratorium on industrial hemp cultivation through March 9, 2022, to allow County staff time to continue developing and to finalize reasonable industrial hemp regulations. Staff is developing an ordinance that would require industrial hemp growers to obtain a County permit from the County Agricultural Commissioner, as well as a separate zoning ordinance that would mitigate the impacts and regulate the location of industrial hemp cultivation. Staff anticipates that these permanent industrial hemp ordinances will be completed and presented to the Board of Supervisors before the end of 2021. When these permanent ordinances are presented to the Board, staff will also recommend termination of this APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: 925-608-6600 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: , Deputy cc: D.4 To:Board of Supervisors From:Matt Slattengren, Ag Commissioner/Weights & Measures Director Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:Urgency interim ordinance extending the moratorium on Industrial Hemp cultivation urgency ordinance. Under the attached ordinance, no person or entity, including any established agricultural research institution, may grow or process industrial hemp for any purpose within the unincorporated area of Contra Costa County. No County permit, registration, or approval of any type will be issued for industrial hemp cultivation or processing, and no County building permit or approval of any type will be issued for any structure used or intended to be used for industrial hemp cultivation or processing. However, Section 3 of the ordinance authorizes existing industrial hemp growers that meet specified criteria to continue cultivating industrial hemp at their existing sites. A grower that has an active registration with the Agricultural Commissioner may continue to cultivate hemp under this ordinance as long as the grower’s existing cultivation site is located outdoors and more than one mile outside the Urban Limit Line, BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) or the grower’s existing cultivation site is located within an existing greenhouse. A grower that meets either of these criteria may continue cultivating industrial hemp under this ordinance if the grower obtains a new registration for a one-year term from the Agricultural Commissioner and complies with all other provisions of law. A grower that is allowed to cultivate under this ordinance is prohibited from cultivating nursery stock, may not move plants from the site at any time before harvest, and is prohibited from using artificial lighting at the cultivation site. Staff has determined that allowing cultivation under the location criteria and restrictions specified in Section 3 is appropriate because this restricted cultivation will result in minimal odor and lighting impacts on residential properties. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The failure to enact this emergency moratorium during the stated period may result in problems with enforcement of a program with insufficient regulations. Allowing more Industrial Hemp registration can create incompatibility issues with land use and licensed Cannabis crops. CLERK'S ADDENDUM Speakers: No name given; No name given, grower; No name given, farm employee; hemp farm representative; Written commentary received (attached): ADOPTED Ordinance 2021-10 as amended today, extending through September 30, 2021, a moratorium on industrial hemp cultivation and processing; DIRECTED staff to provide a status report on the matter by June 30, 2021, with the report including information of those growers with licenses scheduled to expire before September 2021. ATTACHMENTS HempMoratorium ORDINANCE NO. 2021-10 Page 1 ORDINANCE NO. 2021-10 AN URGENCY INTERIM ORDINANCE EXTENDING A MORATORIUM ON INDUSTRIAL HEMP CULTIVATION AND PROCESSING The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors ordains as follows: Section 1. Purpose and Findings. A. The purpose of this urgency ordinance is to extend a temporary moratorium on industrial hemp cultivation and processing for commercial purposes while the County considers developing reasonable regulations to mitigate the impacts and regulate the location of the cultivation of industrial hemp, which is generally defined as the Cannabis sativa L. plant with a tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) concentration of 0.3% or less. B. In December 2018, H.R. 2, the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 (the 2018 Farm Bill), was signed into law, authorizing hemp cultivation more broadly than previously allowed by removing hemp from Schedule I of the federal Controlled Substances Act. C. The 2018 Farm Bill delegates to states and Indian tribes the authority to regulate and limit the production of hemp within their borders. It requires states to submit regulatory plans to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) for review and approval. The California Department of Food and Agriculture submitted a proposed state regulatory plan to the USDA for review and approval. California’s proposed state regulatory plan is under review by the USDA. D. Under Food and Agricultural Code sections 81003 and 81004, before cultivation, a commercial grower or seed breeder of industrial hemp must register with the county agricultural commissioner. In 2020, the Contra Costa County Agricultural Commissioner registered five commercial industrial hemp growers in the unincorporated areas of Contra Costa County. A registration is valid for one year from the date of issuance. E. Under state law, industrial hemp is not subject to the same regulatory provisions as cannabis. Health and Safety Code section 11018.5(b) exempts industrial hemp from regulation under the Medicinal and Adult-Use Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act (Business and Professions Code, § 26000 et seq.). Accordingly, the County’s cannabis regulation ordinance, Chapter 88-28 of the County Ordinance Code, does not regulate the cultivation of industrial hemp within the unincorporated areas of Contra Costa County. F. The methods for distinguishing industrial hemp (the non-intoxicating Cannabis sativa L. plant) from cannabis (the psychotropic version of the plant) are evolving. Industrial hemp and cannabis are derivatives of the same plant, Cannabis sativa L. Under state law, industrial hemp is distinguished from cannabis by the amount of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the psychoactive chemical in the plant. If the plant has a concentration of 0.3% ORDINANCE NO. 2021-10 Page 2 THC or less, it is categorized as industrial hemp. Industrial hemp and cannabis thus may be difficult to distinguish without a chemical analysis for the presence of THC content. THC levels are difficult to test reliably until the plant is close to maturity and ready for harvest. Testing is time sensitive, and it is difficult to perform and obtain results in a timely manner. The similarities in the two types of plants present challenges for law enforcement and code enforcement when determining whether a cultivation site complies with applicable law, including Ordinance Code chapter 88-28, or has paid required taxes. G. Industrial hemp can serve as a host to corn earworms and other insects. The pesticides that have been approved for industrial hemp may not provide the range of control needed to prevent movement of these pests from industrial hemp to nearby crops. H. Without local regulation, the cultivation of industrial hemp and cannabis may create incompatibility issues due to cross-pollination if male industrial hemp plants are grown or allowed to be grown close to cannabis. I. The cultivation of industrial hemp without local regulations may interfere with licensed and permitted cannabis cultivation operations under Ordinance Code chapter 88-28, particularly with respect to pollen drift and pest contamination. J. On November 17, 2020, the Board of Supervisors adopted Ordinance No. 2020-28, an urgency interim ordinance that established a moratorium on the cultivation and processing of industrial hemp. On December 15, 2020, the Board of Supervisors adopted Ordinance No. 2020-30, an urgency interim ordinance that continued a moratorium on the cultivation and processing of industrial hemp. K. An extended moratorium on the cultivation and processing of industrial hemp is urgent and necessary to give the County time to continue studying and determining how best to regulate the cultivation of industrial hemp and consider appropriate zoning districts and regulatory standards, including location requirements, security standards, water supply requirements, and size limits. L. Section 3 of this ordinance authorizes existing industrial hemp growers that meet specified criteria to continue cultivating industrial hemp at their existing sites. Allowing cultivation at existing sites under the location criteria and restrictions specified in Section 3 is appropriate because this restricted cultivation will result in minimal odor and lighting impacts on residential properties. Section 2. Definitions. For purposes of this ordinance, the following terms have the following meanings: (a) “Established agricultural research institution” has the meaning set forth in Food and Agricultural Code section 81000(a)(4). ORDINANCE NO. 2021-10 Page 3 (b) “Industrial hemp” has the meaning set forth in Food and Agricultural Code section 81000(a)(6). (c) “Nursery stock” has the meaning set forth in Food and Agricultural Code section 5005. Section 3. Cultivation and Processing of Industrial Hemp Prohibited. The moratorium established by Ordinance No. 2020-28 and continued by Ordinance No. 2020-30 is extended through March 9, 2022. (a) During the term of this interim ordinance, including any extensions: (1) No person or entity, including any established agricultural research institution, may grow or process industrial hemp for any purpose within the unincorporated area of Contra Costa County. (2) No County permit, registration, or approval of any type shall be issued for industrial hemp cultivation or processing. (3) No County building permit or approval of any type shall be issued for a greenhouse, hoophouse, or any other structure, used or intended to be used for industrial hemp cultivation or processing. (b) During the term of this interim ordinance, including any extensions: (1) The Contra Costa County Agricultural Commissioner will not issue a registration to any applicant pursuant to Food and Agricultural Code sections 81003 and 81004, or otherwise. (2) The Contra Costa County Agricultural Commissioner will not renew the registration of any applicant pursuant to Food and Agricultural Code sections 81003 and 81004, or otherwise. (c) Notwithstanding subdivisions (a) and (b) of this section, growers of industrial hemp that had, as of the adoption date of Ordinance No. 2020-28, an active registration issued by the County Agricultural Commissioner may grow industrial hemp consistent with, and subject to, the terms set forth in that registration, including, but not limited to, the location and size of the registered grow. Cultivation allowed under this Section 3(c) is allowed only for the term of that registration. The registration is not subject to renewal except as otherwise provided in Section 4 of this ordinance. (d) Cultivation or processing of industrial hemp in violation of this interim ordinance is a public nuisance. This ordinance may be enforced by any remedy allowed under the Contra Costa County Ordinance Code and any other remedy allowed by law. ORDINANCE NO. 2021-10 Page 4 Section 4. Exemptions. (a) The prohibitions set forth in Section 3 do not apply to a grower of industrial hemp that has an active registration issued by the County Agricultural Commissioner as long as the grower meets either of the following criteria: (1) The grower’s existing cultivation site is located more than one mile outside the Urban Limit Line. (2) The grower’s existing cultivation site is located within an existing, legally established greenhouse. A hoophouse is not a greenhouse. (b) A grower that meets the criteria specified in subsection (a) of this section may continue cultivation of industrial hemp under this interim ordinance if the grower meets the following requirements and complies with the following restrictions: (1) The grower must obtain a new registration for a one-year term from the County Agricultural Commissioner pursuant to Food and Agricultural Code sections 81003 and 81004. (2) The cultivation of nursery stock is prohibited. (3) The movement of plants from the site at any time prior to harvest is prohibited. (4) Artificial lighting at an industrial hemp cultivation site is prohibited. (5) The grower must comply with all provisions of state and federal law, and associated regulations, that apply to industrial hemp cultivation, including requirements for cultivation, sampling, laboratory testing, harvesting, and crop destruction. Section 5. Reports. In accordance with subdivision (d) of Government Code section 65858, ten days before this ordinance expires and any extension of it, the Department of Conservation and Development shall file with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors a written report describing the measures taken to alleviate the conditions that led to the adoption of this urgency interim ordinance. Section 6. Severability. If any provision or clause of this ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstances is held to be unconstitutional or to be otherwise invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity shall not affect other ordinance provisions or clauses or applications thereof that can be implemented without the invalid provision or clause or application, and to this end the provisions and clauses are declared to be severable. ORDINANCE NO. 2021-10 Page 5 Section 7. Declaration of Urgency. This ordinance is hereby declared to be an urgency ordinance necessary for the immediate preservation of the public safety, health, and welfare of the County. The facts constituting the urgency of this interim ordinance’s adoption are set forth in Section 1. Section 8. Effective Period. This ordinance becomes effective immediately upon passage by four-fifths vote of the Board of Supervisors and shall continue in effect through March 9, 2022, pursuant to Government Code section 65858. Section 9. Publication. Within 15 days after passage, this ordinance shall be published once with the names of the supervisors voting for and against it in the East Bay Times, a newspaper published in this County. PASSED ON March 9, 2021, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: MONICA NINO, ____________________________ Clerk of the Board of Supervisors Board Chair and County Administrator By: _________________________ [SEAL] Deputy H:\2021\Agriculture\urgency ordinance - industrial hemp - extend2.final.docx RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Resolution No. 2021/64 to accept and AUTHORIZE the Chair, Board of Supervisors, to sign the Grant Deed of Development Rights for minor subdivision MS13-00005 for a project being developed by James Scott Busby and Margaret Mary Busby, as recommended by the Public Works Director, Martinez area. (District V) FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: The Grant Deed of Development Rights (Creek Structure Setback) is required per Condition of Approval No. 45, for minor subdivision MS13-00005. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The Grant Deed of Development Rights, as required for Condition of Approval No. 45, will not be accepted. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: Randolf Sanders (925) 313-2111 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: Larry Gossett- Engineering Services, Randolf Sanders- Engineering Services, Gary Kupp - DCD Planning, Joshua Laranang- Engineering Services, James Scott Busby & Margaret Mary Busby, SureTec Insurance Company, Renee Hutchins - Records, Karen Piona- Record C. 1 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:Accept a Grant Deed of Development Rights for minor subdivision MS13-00005, Martinez area AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Resolution No. 2021/64 Grant Deed of Development Rights MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed: Resolution No. 2021/64 Signed: Grant Deed of Development Rights Recorded at the request of:Clerk of the Board Return To:Public Works Dept- Simone Saleh THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board Adopted this Resolution on 03/09/2021 by the following vote: AYE:John Gioia, District I SupervisorDiane Burgis, District III SupervisorKaren Mitchoff, District IV SupervisorFederal D. Glover, District V Supervisor NO: ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor ABSTAIN: RECUSE: Resolution No. 2021/64 IN THE MATTER OF accepting the Grant Deed of Development Rights for minor subdivision MS13-00005, for a project being developed by James Scott Busby and Margaret Mary Busby, as recommended by the Public Works Director, Martinez area. (District V) NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the following instrument is hereby ACCEPTED. INSTRUMENT: Grant Deed of Development Rights REFERENCE: APN 367-170-006 GRANTOR: James Scott Busby and Margaret Mary Busby AREA: Martinez DISTRICT: V Contact: Randolf Sanders (925) 313-2111 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: Larry Gossett- Engineering Services, Randolf Sanders- Engineering Services, Gary Kupp - DCD Planning, Joshua Laranang- Engineering Services, James Scott Busby & Margaret Mary Busby, SureTec Insurance Company, Renee Hutchins - Records, Karen Piona- Record RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Resolution No. 2021/65 accepting Offer of Dedication for Roadway Purposes for minor subdivision MS13-00005, for a project being developed by James Scott Busby and Margaret Mary Busby, as recommended by the Public Works Director, Martinez area. (District V) FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: The Offer of Dedication for Roadway Purposes is required per Condition of Approval No. 37, for minor subdivision MS13-00005. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The Offer of Dedication for Roadway Purposes, as required for Condition of Approval No. 37, will not be accepted. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: Randolf Sanders (925) 313-2111 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: Larry Gossett- Engineering Services, Randolf Sanders- Engineering Services, Joshua Laranang- Engineering Services, Renee Hutchins - Records, Karen Piona- Record, Gary Kupp - DCD Planning, James Scott Busby & Margaret Mary Busby, SureTec Insurance Company C. 2 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:Accept an Offer of Dedication for Roadway Purposes for minor subdivision MS13-00005, Martinez area. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Resolution No. 2021/65 Offer of Dedication - Road Purposes MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed: Resolution No. 2021/65 Recorded at the request of:Clerk of the Board Return To:Public Works Dept- Simone Saleh THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board Adopted this Resolution on 03/09/2021 by the following vote: AYE:John Gioia, District I SupervisorDiane Burgis, District III SupervisorKaren Mitchoff, District IV SupervisorFederal D. Glover, District V Supervisor NO: ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor ABSTAIN: RECUSE: Resolution No. 2021/65 IN THE MATTER OF accepting an Offer of Dedication for Roadway Purposes for minor subdivision MS13-00005, for a project being developed by James Scott Busby and Margaret Mary Busby, as recommended by the Public Works Director, Martinez area. (District V) NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the following instrument is hereby ACCEPTED FOR RECORDING ONLY: INSTRUMENT: Offer of Dedication for Roadway Purposes REFERENCE: APN 367-170-006 GRANTOR: James Scott Busby and Margaret Mary Busby AREA: Martinez DISTRICT: V Contact: Randolf Sanders (925) 313-2111 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: Larry Gossett- Engineering Services, Randolf Sanders- Engineering Services, Joshua Laranang- Engineering Services, Renee Hutchins - Records, Karen Piona- Record, Gary Kupp - DCD Planning, James Scott Busby & Margaret Mary Busby, SureTec Insurance Company RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Resolution No. 2021/66 approving the Parcel Map for minor subdivision MS13-00005, for a project being developed by James Scott Busby and Margaret Mary Busby, as recommended by the Public Works Director, Martinez area. (District V) FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: The Public Works Department has reviewed the conditions of approval for minor subdivision MS13-00005 and has determined that all conditions of approval for Parcel Map approval have been satisfied. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The Parcel Map will not be approved and recorded. The relevant conditions of approval required per Zoning Administration's actions on April 20, 2015 and June 15, 2020 having been satisfied, the subdivision of property will remain incomplete. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: Randolf Sanders (925) 313-2111 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: Larry Gossett- Engineering Services, Randolf Sanders- Engineering Services, Joshua Laranang- Engineering Services, Gary Kupp - DCD Planning, James Scott Busby & Margaret Mary Busby, Old Republic Title Company C. 3 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:Approve the Parcel Map for minor subdivision MS13-00005, Martinez area. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Resolution No. 2021/66 Parcel Map Tax Letter & Bond MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed: Resolution No. 2021/66 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board Adopted this Resolution on 03/09/2021 by the following vote: AYE:4 John Gioia Diane Burgis Karen Mitchoff Federal D. Glover NO: ABSENT:1 Candace Andersen ABSTAIN: RECUSE: Resolution No. 2021/66 IN THE MATTER OF approving the Parcel Map for minor subdivision MS13-00005, for a project being developed by James Scott Busby and Margaret Mary Busby, as recommended by the Public Works Director, Martinez area. (District V) WHERE AS, the following documents were presented for board approval this date: The Parcel Map of minor subdivision MS13-00005, property located in the Martinez area, Supervisorial District V, said map having been certified by the proper officials. Said document was accompanied by: Letter from the County Tax Collector stating that there are no unpaid County taxes heretofore levied on the property included in said map and that the 2020-2021 tax lien has been paid in full and the 2021-2022tax lien, which became a lien on the first day of January 2021, is estimated to be $20,090.00. 1. Security to guarantee the payment of taxes, as required by Title 9 of the County Ordinance Code, in the form of a surety bond, No. 4442220, issued by SureTec Insurance Company, with James Scott Busby and Margaret Mary Busby as principal, in the amount: $20,090.00, guaranteeing the payment of the estimated tax. 2. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That all conditions of approval for Parcel Map approval have been satisfied.1. That said subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is DETERMINED to be consistent with the County's general and specific plans. 2. That said Parcel Map is APPROVED and this Board does hereby accept subject to installation on behalf of the public any of the streets, paths, or easements shown thereon as dedicated to public use. 3. Contact: Randolf Sanders (925) 313-2111 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: Larry Gossett- Engineering Services, Randolf Sanders- Engineering Services, Joshua Laranang- Engineering Services, Gary Kupp - DCD Planning, James Scott Busby & Margaret Mary Busby, Old Republic Title Company RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Resolution No. 2021/70 approving the Stormwater Management Facilities Operation and Maintenance Agreement for subdivision SD18-09495, for a project being developed by Chicken Farm Associates, LLC, as recommended by the Public Works Director, Concord area. (District IV) FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: The Stormwater Management Facilities Operation and Maintenance Agreement is required by Condition of Approval No. 58 for subdivision SD18-09495. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The agreement will not be recorded and Contra Costa County may not be in full compliance with its National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit and Stormwater Management Discharge Control Ordinance. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: Randolf Sanders (925) 313-2111 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: Larry Gossett- Engineering Services, Randolf Sanders- Engineering Services, Brian Louis- Engineering Services, Michelle Mancuso- Watershed Program, Flood Control, Chicken Farm Associates, LLC C. 4 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:Approve the Stormwater Management Facilities Operation and Maintenance Agreement for subdivision SD18-09495, Concord area. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Resolution No. 2021/70 Agreement MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed: Resolution No. 2021/70 Recorded at the request of:Clerk of the Board Return To:Public Works Dept- Simone Saleh THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board Adopted this Resolution on 03/09/2021 by the following vote: AYE:John Gioia, District I SupervisorDiane Burgis, District III SupervisorKaren Mitchoff, District IV SupervisorFederal D. Glover, District V Supervisor NO: ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor ABSTAIN: RECUSE: Resolution No. 2021/70 IN THE MATTER OF approving the Stormwater Management Facilities Operation and Maintenance Agreement for subdivision SD18-09495 (APN 117-040-086), Concord area. (District IV) WHEREAS the Public Works Director has recommended that he be authorized to execute the Stormwater Management Facilities Operation and Agreement with Chicken Farm Associates, LLC, as required by the Conditions of Approval for SD18-09495. This agreement would ensure the operation and maintenance of the stormwater facilities in accordance with the approved Stormwater Control Plan and approved Operation and Maintenance Plan for SD18-09495, which is located at 5175 Laurel Drive in the Concord area. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the recommendation of the Public Works Director is APPROVED. Contact: Randolf Sanders (925) 313-2111 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: Larry Gossett- Engineering Services, Randolf Sanders- Engineering Services, Brian Louis- Engineering Services, Michelle Mancuso- Watershed Program, Flood Control, Chicken Farm Associates, LLC RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Resolution No. 2021/71 approving the Final Map and Subdivision Agreement for subdivision SD18-09495, for a project being developed by Chicken Farm Associates, LLC, as recommended by the Public Works Director, Concord area. (District IV) FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: The Public Works Department has reviewed the conditions of approval for subdivision SD18-09495 and has determined that all conditions of approval for Final Map approval have been satisfied. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The Final Map and the Subdivision Agreement will not be approved and recorded. The relevant conditions of approval required per the Board of Supervisor's action on October 22, 2019 having been satisfied, the subdivision of the property will remain incomplete. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: Randolf Sanders (925) 313-2111 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: Larry Gossett- Engineering Services, Randolf Sanders- Engineering Services, Renee Hutchins - Records, Karen Piona- Records, Chris Hallford -Mapping , Michael Mann- Finance, Cinda Tovar- Design & Construction, Francisco Avila- DCD, Chicken Farm Associates, LLC, The Ohio Casualty Insurance Company, T-01/09/2022 C. 5 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:Approve the Final Map and Subdivision Agreement for subdivision SD18-09495, Concord area. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Resolution No. 2021/71 Final Map Subdivision Agreement & Improvement Security Bond Tax Letter & Surety Bond MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed: Resolution No. 2021/71 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board Adopted this Resolution on 03/09/2021 by the following vote: AYE:4 John Gioia Diane Burgis Karen Mitchoff Federal D. Glover NO: ABSENT:1 Candace Andersen ABSTAIN: RECUSE: Resolution No. 2021/71 IN THE MATTER OF approving the Final Map and Subdivision Agreement for subdivision SD18-09495, for a project being developed by Chicken Farm Associates, LLC, as recommended by the Public Works Director, Concord area. (District IV) WHERE AS, the following documents were presented for board approval this date: I. Map The Final Map of subdivision SD18-09495, property located in the Concord area, Supervisorial District IV, said map having been certified by the proper officials. II. Subdivision Agreement A subdivision agreement with Chicken Farm Associates, LLC, principal, whereby said principal agrees to complete all improvements as required in said subdivision agreement within 2 years from the date of said agreement. Accompanying said subdivision agreement is security guaranteeing completion of said improvements as follows: A. Cash Bond Performance amount: $6,520.00 Auditor’s Deposit Permit No. 822207 Date: 1/25/2021 Submitted by: Chicken Farm Associates, LLC B. Surety Bond Bond Company: The Ohio Casualty Insurance Company Bond Number: 38K008258 Date: 12/20/2020 Performance Amount: $645,480.00 Labor & Materials Amount: $326,000.00 Principal: Chicken Farm Associates, LLC III. Tax Letter Letter from the County Tax Collector stating that there are no unpaid County taxes heretofore levied on the property included in said map and that the 2020-2021 tax lien has been paid in full and the 2021-2022 tax lien, which became a lien on the first day of January 2021, is estimated to be $45,590.00, with security guaranteeing payment of said tax lien as follows: Tax Surety Bond Company: The Ohio Casualty Insurance Company Bond Number: 38K008260 Date: 1/8/2021 Amount: $45,590.00 Submitted by/Principal: Chicken Farm Associates, LLC NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That said subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is DETERMINED to be consistent with the County's general and specific plans. 1. That said Final map is APPROVED and this Board does hereby accept subject to installation and acceptance of improvements on behalf of the public any of the streets, paths, or easements shown thereon as dedicated to public use. 2. That said subdivision agreement is also APPROVED.3. Contact: Randolf Sanders (925) 313-2111 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: Larry Gossett- Engineering Services, Randolf Sanders- Engineering Services, Renee Hutchins - Records, Karen Piona- Records, Chris Hallford -Mapping , Michael Mann- Finance, Cinda Tovar- Design & Construction, Francisco Avila- DCD, Chicken Farm Associates, LLC, The Ohio Casualty Insurance Company, T-01/09/2022 RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Resolution No. 2021/79 accepting as complete the contracted work performed by Ghilotti Bros., Inc., for the Buchanan Field Airport Runway 14L-32R Rehabilitation Project, as recommended by the Public Works Director, Concord area. County Project No. 4855-4661-SAS-6X5324 (District IV) FISCAL IMPACT: The Project was funded by 91% Federal Aviation Administration Airport Improvement Program (FAA AIP) Funds, 4% Caltrans, 5% Airport Enterprise Funds. BACKGROUND: The Public Works Director reports that said work has been inspected and complies with the approved plans, special provisions and standard specifications and recommends its acceptance as complete as of March 5, 2021. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The contractor will not be paid and acceptance notification will not be recorded. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: Kevin Emigh, 925.313.2233 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: C. 6 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:Notice of Completion for the Buchanan Field Airport Runway 14L-32R Rehabilitation Project, Concord area. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS Resolution No. 2021/79 MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed: Resolution No. 2021/79 Recorded at the request of:Clerk of the Board Return To:Public Works Dept., Design/Construction Division THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board Adopted this Resolution on 03/09/2021 by the following vote: AYE:John Gioia, District I SupervisorDiane Burgis, District III SupervisorKaren Mitchoff, District IV SupervisorFederal D. Glover, District V Supervisor NO: ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor ABSTAIN: RECUSE: Resolution No. 2021/79 The Board of Supervisors RESOLVES that: Owner (sole): Contra Costa County, 255 Glacier Drive, Martinez, CA 94553 Nature of Stated Owner: Fee and/or easement Project No.: 4855-4661-SAS-6X5324 Project Name: Buchanan Field Airport Runway 14L-32R Rehabilitation Project Date of Work Completion: March 5, 2021 Description : Contra Costa County on October 22, 2019 contracted with Ghilotti Bros., Inc., for the work generally consisting of rehabilitating asphalt concrete pavement, full width, on Runway 14L-32R, with the exception of the Runway 1L-19R intersection, all in accordance with the plans, drawings, special provisions and/or specifications prepared by or for the Public Works Director and in accordance with the accepted bid proposal. The project was located in the Concord area, with the Hartford Fire Insurance Co., as surety, for work to be performed on the grounds of the County; and The Public Works Director reports that said work has been inspected and complies with the approved plans, special provisions and standard specifications and recommends its acceptance as complete as of March 5, 2021. Identification of real property : Concord area at: Buchanan Field Airport Fees: none Legal References : none Comments: none Contact: Kevin Emigh, 925.313.2233 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: RECOMMENDATION(S): DENY claims filed by Dedra Kinney, Anthony Robert Johnson and Kelly Corbitt. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: Kelly Corbitt: Property claim for damage to personal property in the amount of $637.47 Anthony Robert Johnson: Personal injury claim for bicycle accident in the amount of $6,000,000. Dedra Kinney: Property claim for damaged cement in the amount of $550. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: . APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: Scott Selby 925.335.1400 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: C. 7 To:Board of Supervisors From:Monica Nino, County Administrator Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:Claims RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Resolution No. 2021/72 to recognize Dr. Jack Rosenfeld on the occasion of his 30 years of service to Contra Costa County as a Dentist. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact for this action. BACKGROUND: After graduating from the University of California, San Francisco School of Dentistry, Dr. Jack Rosenfeld began his career as a Licensed Dentist in 1976. For years, he worked in several community clinics and Native American reservations throughout California, providing services to patients in underserved populations. Dr. Rosenfeld joined the Contra Costa County workforce as a permanent intermittent Dentist in 1990, and was transitioned into a permanent part-time position in 2007. He has spent decades providing a wide array of dental services in clinics throughout West, Central and East Contra Costa County. To thank him for his contributions over the years, the Health Services department would like to congratulate Dr. Rosenfeld on achieving a great milestone of 30 years of service dedicated to dental needs of the patients served by Contra Costa County. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: Lauren Ludwig, 925-957-5269 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Joellen Bergamini, Deputy cc: C. 8 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:Recognizing Dr. Jack Rosenfeld on his 30 years of service to Contra Costa County ATTACHMENTS Resolution 2021/72 In the matter of:Resolution No. 2021/72 Honoring Dr. Jack Rosenfeld upon the occasion of 30 years of service to Contra Costa County WHEREAS, Dr. Rosenfeld began his career as an electrical engineer, a profession which brought him from New York to California. After 7 years as an electrical engineer, he attended the UCSF School of Dentistry; and WHEREAS, Dr. Rosenfeld practiced dentistry in underserved populations at several community clinics and Native American reservations throughout California; and WHEREAS, Dr. Rosenfeld applied his engineering background to develop a dental safety device, which is still in production; and WHEREAS, Dr. Rosenfeld worked for 5 years at the Mission Neighborhood Health Center, prior to embarking on a career as a Dentist with Contra Costa Health Services; and WHEREAS, Dr. Rosenfeld began working at Contra Costa as a permanent intermittent Dentist in 1990 and became a permanent part-time Dentist with the County in 2007; and WHEREAS, Dr. Rosenfeld has worked at various clinics throughout West, Central and East Contra Costa County, providing a wide array of dental services to the community; and WHEREAS, Dr. Rosenfeld has achieved a great milestone of 30 years of service dedicated to dental needs of the patients served by Contra Costa Health Services. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors hereby recognize Dr. Jack Rosenfeld for his loyalty, commitment and contributions to Contra Costa County. ___________________ DIANE BURGIS Chair, District III Supervisor ______________________________________ JOHN GIOIA CANDACE ANDERSEN District I Supervisor District II Supervisor ______________________________________ KAREN MITCHOFF FEDERAL D. GLOVER District IV 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: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator By: ____________________________________, Deputy RECOMMENDATION(S): PRESENTATION recognizing March 2021 as American Red Cross month in Contra Costa County. (Briana Taylor, Volunteer and Board Member for the American Red Cross Northern California Coastal Region) FISCAL IMPACT: None. BACKGROUND: None APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: Lea Castleberry 925-252-4500 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Joellen Bergamini, Deputy cc: C. 9 To:Board of Supervisors From:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:American Red Cross Month ATTACHMENTS Resolution 2021/85 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board Adopted this Resolution on 03/09/2021 by the following vote: AYE: NO: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: RECUSE: Resolution No. 2021/85 In the matter of recognizing March 2021 as American Red Cross month in Contra Costa County WHEREAS; March is American Red Cross Month, a special time to honor the kindness of our volunteers and neighbors who aid families in need every day in Contra Costa County, across the United States and around the world. Their dedication touches millions of lives each year as they carry out the organization’s 140-year mission of preventing and alleviating suffering; and WHEREAS; despite the difficult challenges presented by the COVID-19 pandemic, people have stepped up to help others in need, whether it was responding to this year’s record-breaking wildfires and hurricanes across the country, rolling up their sleeves to give blood when our country faced a severe blood shortage or supporting local partners to address urgent COVID-19 needs in our communities; and WHEREAS; last year in Contra Costa County, local families affected by 115 home fires, relied on American Red Cross volunteers for comfort and hope, providing emotional support, addressing immediate needs and helping families recover with emergency financial assistance or community resources; Contra Costa County residents donated 17,350 units of lifesaving blood; hosted 142 blood drives; 3,459 local community members took classes to learn skills that save lives; 719 military members and their families received support and services; and humanitarian aid was provided internationally; and WHEREAS; during last year’s COVID-19 pandemic, American Red Cross worked tirelessly beside its Government, Public Health and Community partners to coordinate training efforts and a shelter exercise to plan for response during high fire danger and a pandemic, while safeguarding the health and wellbeing of our volunteers, partners and the people we serve; and WHEREAS; when large disasters like the Lightning Complex Fire started in Contra Costa County, the American Red Cross and local partners were prepared to respond by opening Temporary Evacuation Sites and non-congregate shelters to provide lodging, food and services until our evacuated residents could return home. As these devastating wildfires broke out around Northern California, Contra Costa Red Cross volunteers deployed virtually and in person to help neighbors in other counties and around the country; and WHEREAS; this lifesaving work is vital to strengthening our community’s resilience. Nearly 200 years since the birth of American Red Cross founder Clara Barton, we dedicate this month of March to all those who continue to advance her noble legacy, and we ask others to join in their commitment to care for people in need. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County does hereby proclaim March 2021 as “American Red Cross Month” and does encourage all Americans to reach out and support its humanitarian mission. Contact: Lea Castleberry 925-252-4500 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: , Deputy cc: RECOMMENDATION(S): APPOINT Donald Maglhaes, Alamo resident, to the Appointee 1 seat on the County Service Area P-5 Citizens Advisory Committee for two-year term with an expiration date of December 31, 2022, as recommended by Supervisor Candace Andersen. FISCAL IMPACT: NONE BACKGROUND: Established on April 18, 1972, by Resolution Number 72/257, the purpose of the County Service Area P-5 Citizen Advisory Committee is to act as a liaison between the citizens of the P-5 Police District and the Office of the Sheriff of Contra Costa County by: Advising the Board of Supervisors and the Office of the Sheriff of the community's needs and desires regarding police protection; Promoting public safety in the areas of home safety, traffic safety, vacation security and crime prevention through the neighborhood watch program; and maintaining oversight of expenditures of the public funds accruing in the P-5 Police District. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: Jill Ray, 925-957-8860 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: District 2 Supervisor, Maddy Book, CSA P5 CAC, Appointee C. 10 To:Board of Supervisors From:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:APPOINTMENT TO THE COUNTY SERVICE AREA P-5 CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The committee will have a difficult time attaining quorum. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: NONE RECOMMENDATION(S): REAPPOINT Carolyn Thiessen, Alamo, CA 94507, to the Trustee 3 Seat of the Alamo-Lafayette Cemetery District Board of Directors for a four-year term with an expiration date of January 4, 2025, as recommended by Supervisor Candace Andersen. FISCAL IMPACT: NONE BACKGROUND: Established by the Board of Supervisors on April 5, 1937, the purpose of the Alamo-Lafayette Cemetery District Board of Directors is to establish rates to be charged for burials within the cemeteries of the district which will allow the grave to be maintained on a self-supporting basis; to prepare and maintain maps detailing information about the lots; to keep records of all remains interred in the cemeteries. (Health and Safety Code, Section 8961.4 and 8963). APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: Jill Ray, 925-957-8860 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: District 2 Supervisor, Maddy Book, Alamo-Lafayette CD, Appointee C. 11 To:Board of Supervisors From:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:APPOINTMENT TO THE ALAMO-LAFAYETTE CEMETERY DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) Membership is comprised of three trustees who must live in the district. Terms are for four years with an expiration date of the first Monday in January. Due to redistricting, all three Trustee Seats fall within District Two, therefore the District Two Supervisor is responsible for the recruitment and recommendations for appointment to the Board of Supervisors for all three seats. Ms. Thiessen has done an excellent job in her role as a Trustee. Supervisor Andersen would like to reappoint her for another term. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The seat will be vacant. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPOINT the following people to the following seats on the Contra Costa County Sustainability Commission for a four-year term starting April 1, 2021 with an expiration date of March 31, 2025, as recommended by Supervisor Candace Andersen: District 2 Seat Victoria Smith Orinda, CA 94563 District 2 Alternate Seat Christopher Easter Lafayette, CA 94549 FISCAL IMPACT: NONE APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: Jill Ray, 925-957-8860 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: District 2 Supervisor, Maddy Book, Sustainability Commission, Appointee, C. 12 To:Board of Supervisors From:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:APPOINTMENT TO THE CONTRA COSTA COUNTY SUSTAINABILITY COMMISSION BACKGROUND: Established by Board Order on November 15, 2016 to advise the Board of Supervisors on the County's implementation of the County Action Plan; advise the Board on opportunities to increase equity and fairness in the County's sustainability programs; provide recommendations to increase public outreach and participation in sustainability issues and implementation of the Climate Action Plan. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The seats will be vacant CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: NONE RECOMMENDATION(S): RE-APPOINT the following individuals to the Three District V Seats on the Western Contra Costa Transit Authority for the stated terms of each seat, as recommended by Supervisor Federal D. Glover. 1) Aleida Andrino-Chavez (Rodeo Representative) Term to Expire 01/01/2023 2) Thomas Hansen (Crockett Representative) Term to Expire 01/01/2023 3) Maureen Powers (San Pablo Representative) Term to Expire 01/01/2023 FISCAL IMPACT: None. BACKGROUND: The Western Contra Costa Transit Authority (WestCAT) owns, operates and maintains a public transit system in an effort to meet public transportation needs in Western Contra Costa County. WestCAT is governed by a seven-member Board of Directors. The cities of Pinole and Hercules are each represented by two members appointed by their City Councils, while the unincorporated communities of Crockett, Rodeo, and MonTaraBay each have one representative, appointed by the Contra Costa Board of Supervisors. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: Vincent Manuel (925) 608-420 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: C. 13 To:Board of Supervisors From:Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:RE-APPOINT Members to the Western Contra Costa Transit Authority CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Positions would remain vacant. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: None. RECOMMENDATION(S): RE-APPOINT the following individuals to the District V Seat and the District V Alternate Seat on the Sustainability Commission for the stated terms of each seat, as recommended by Supervisor Federal D. Glover. 1) Charles Davidson (District V Seat) Term to Expire 03/31/2025 2) Renee Fernandez-Lipp (District V Alternate) Term to Expire 03/31/2025 FISCAL IMPACT: None. BACKGROUND: The Sustainability Commission provides advice to staff and the Board on successful implementation of the Climate Action Plan, advise the Board on opportunities to realize equity and fairness across the diverse communities of CCC in sustainability programs, and provides suggestions on how to engage CCC residents and businesses on sustainability issues. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: Vincent Manuel (925) 608-4200 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: C. 14 To:Board of Supervisors From:Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:RE-APPOINT Members to the Sustainability Commission CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Positions would remain vacant. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: None. RECOMMENDATION(S): 1. APPOINT Jamar Stamps (Department of Conservation and Development) and Will Nelson (Department of Conservation and Development) as the County's staff representatives on the Technical Coordinating Committee of the Contra Costa Transportation Authority; and APPOINT John Cunningham (Department of Conservation and Development) and Aruna Bhat (Department of Conservation and Development) as their alternates, respectively, for the period March 31, 2021 to March 31, 2023. 2. APPOINT Jerry Fahy (Public Works Department) as the County's staff representative on the Technical Coordinating Committee of the Contra Costa Transportation Authority; and APPOINT Nancy Wein (Public Works Department) as his alternate, for the period March 31, 2021 to March 31, 2023. FISCAL IMPACT: None. The staff costs associated with participating on the Technical Coordinating Committee are included in the budgets of each department. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: Jamar Stamps, (925) 877-8250 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: C. 15 To:Board of Supervisors From:John Kopchik, Director, Conservation & Development Department Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:Staff Appointments to the Contra Costa Transportation Authority's Technical Coordinating Committee BACKGROUND: The Contra Costa Transportation Authority (Authority) convenes its Technical Coordinating Committee (TCC) monthly to advise the Authority on technical issues pertaining to the Countywide Transportation Plan and Growth Management Program and the Authority's work as the Countywide Congestion Management Agency. The TCC is composed of three representatives from the County, three representatives from each of the four regional transportation planning committees, and one representative each from the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, the City/County Engineering Advisory Committee, the public transit agencies, Caltrans, and the Bay Area Air Quality Management District. The terms of the current appointments expire on March 31, 2021, and the standard procedure is for member agencies to make new appointments or reappointments every other year for a two-year period. If the recommendations of this report are acted on, the following would be the County’s representation in the three categories of TCC membership for the two-year term that will run from March 31, 2021, to March 31, 2023: -Land Use Planning: Will Nelson, Aruna Bhat (Alternate), Department of Conservation and Development -Transportation Engineering: Jerry Fahy, Nancy Wein (Alternate), Public Works Department -Transportation Planning: Jamar Stamps, John Cunningham (Alternate), Department of Conservation and Development CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Should the Board elect not to approve the recommendation, the County will not have full representation on the Technical Coordinating Committee, which influences the plans, decisions, and policies of the Contra Costa Transportation Authority. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPOINT Richard Celestre to the City of Pleasant Hill seat on the Aviation Advisory Committee (AAC) to a term beginning March 1, 2021 and expiring on February 29, 2024, as recommended by the Pleasant Hill City Council. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: The AAC was established by the Board of Supervisors (Board) to provide advice and recommendations to the Board on the aviation issues related to the economic viability and security of airports in Contra Costa County (County). The AAC is mandated to cooperate with local, state, and national aviation interests for the safety and orderly operation of airports; advance and promote the interests of aviation; and protect the general welfare of the people living and working near the airport and the County in general. The AAC may initiate discussions, observations, or investigations and may hear comments on airport and aviation matters from the public APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: Beth Lee, (925) 681-4200 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: C. 16 To:Board of Supervisors From:Keith Freitas, Airports Director Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:APPOINT RICHARD CELESTRE TO THE CITY OF PLEASANT HILL SEAT ON THE AVIATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) or other agencies in order to formulate recommendations to the Board. In conjunction with all the above, the AAC provides a forum for the Director of Airports regarding policy matters at and around the airport. The AAC comprises 13 members who must work and/or reside in Contra Costa County: one appointed by each Supervisor; one from and nominated to the Board by the City of Concord; one from and nominated to the Board by the City of Pleasant Hill; one from and nominated to the Board by the Contra Costa County Airports Business Association; one from the community of Pacheco and nominated to the Board by the Airport Committee; one from the vicinity of Byron Airport (Brentwood, Byron, Knightsen or Discovery Bay) and nominated to the Board by the Airport Committee; and three at large to represent the general community, to be nominated by the Airport Committee. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The City of Pleasant Hill seat on the Aviation Advisory Committee will be vacant. ATTACHMENTS AAC Appointment Letter-R Celestre RECOMMENDATION(S): REAPPOINT Ron Reagan to the District 3 seat on the Aviation Advisory Committee to term expiring February 28, 2024, as recommended by Supervisor Diane Burgis. FISCAL IMPACT: None. BACKGROUND: The AAC was established by the Board of Supervisors (Board) to provide advice and recommendations to the Board on the aviation issues related to the economic viability and security of airports in Contra Costa County (County). The AAC is mandated to cooperate with local, state, and national aviation interests for the safety and orderly operation of airports; advance and promote the interests of aviation; and protect the general welfare of the people living and working near the airport and the County in general. The AAC may initiate discussions, observations, or investigations and may hear comments on airport and aviation matters from the public or other agencies in order to formulate recommendations to the Board. In conjunction with all the above, the AAC provides a forum for the Director of APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: Lea Castleberry 925-252-4500 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: C. 17 To:Board of Supervisors From:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:Reappointment to Aviation Advisory Committee BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) Airports regarding policy matters at and around the airport. The AAC comprises 13 members who must work and/or reside in Contra Costa County: one appointed by each Supervisor; one from and nominated to the Board by the City of Concord; one from and nominated to the Board by the City of Pleasant Hill; one from and nominated to the Board by the Contra Costa County Airports Business Association; one from the community of Pacheco and nominated to the Board by the Airport Committee; one from the vicinity of Byron Airport (Brentwood, Byron, Knightsen or Discovery Bay) and nominated to the Board by the Airport Committee; and three at large to represent the general community, to be nominated by the Airport Committee. The term for this seat expired February 28, 2021. Applications were accepted and the recommendation to reappoint the above individual was then determined. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The District 3 seat would be vacant. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE the new medical staff, affiliates and tele-radiologist appointments and reappointments, additional privileges, medical staff advancement, and voluntary resignations as recommend by the Medical Staff Executive Committee, at their February 22, 2021 meeting, and by the Health Services Director. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact for this action. BACKGROUND: The Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations has requested that evidence of Board of Supervisors approval for each Medical Staff member will be placed in his or her Credentials File. The above recommendations for appointment/reappointment were reviewed by the Credentials Committee and approved by the Medical Executive Committee. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this action is not approved, the Contra Costa Regional Medical and Contra Costa Health Centers' medical staff would not be appropriately credentialed and not be in compliance with the Joint Commission. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: Jaspreet Benepal, 925-370-5501 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: M Wilhelm, J Ham C. 18 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:Medical Staff Appointments and Reappointments – February 2021 ATTACHMENTS Provider List- February 22, 2021 Anna M. Roth, R.N., M.S., M.P.H.Contra Costa Regional Health Services Director Medical Center & Health Centers Samir B. Shah, M.D., F.A.C.S.2500 Alhambra Avenue Chief Executive Officer Martinez, California 94553-3156 Contra Costa Regional Medical Center Ph 925-370-5000 and Health Centers & Chief Medical Officer Contra Costa Health Services A.New Medical Staff Members Klein, Carolina, MD Psychiatry/Psychology McQuade, Jennifer, MD Psychiatry/Psychology B.Application for Staff Affiliation Jenkins, Vuthy, FNP DFAM C.1st year Residents None D.Travis Residents-Family Medicine None E.Request for Additional Privileges Department Requesting None F.Request to change Primary Department Original Department Requesting Department None G.Advance to Non-Provisional Feddersen, Michael, MD Psychiatry/Psychology Kuennemeier, Brian, PsyD Psychiatry/Psychology Levy, Jennifer, MD Pediatrics (Neonatology) H.Biennial Reappointments Beaton, Melina, MD DFAM A Berlingieri, William, MD Psychiatry/Psychology A Chin, Joanna, MD Pedatrics A D'Souza, Preeti, DDS Dental A Etwaru, Gupta, MD Surgery A Feierabend, Susan, MD OB/GYN A Forman, Stuart, MD Critical Care A Jester, Geena, MD Hospital Medicine A Kuri, Mauricio, MD Surgery A Law, Jason, MD Internal Medicine A Lee, David, MD DFAM A Madrigal, Teresa, MD DFAM A Malik, Bhavna, MD Internal Medicine C Meyer, George, MD Internal Medicine C Sandegard, Erik, MD Psychiatry/Psychology A Scott, Malaika, MD DFAM A Siddiqui, Zakaria, MD Psychiatry/Psychology C I.Biennial Renewal of Privileges Miller, Laura, NP DFAM AFF Rosett, Debra, NP Surgery AFF J.Teleradialogist (VRAD) Reappointments Fassihi, Amir, MD Diagnostic Imaging K.UCSF Teleneurologist Reappointments None L.Voluntary Resignations Apfel, Brigitte, MD Psychiatry/Psychology Fordham, John, DO Psychiatry/Psychology Gardner, Randell, DDS Dental Kenley, Eric, MD Emergency Medicine Manaut, Paul, NP DFAM Moreno, Carlos, MD Anesthesia Pepper, David, MD DFAM Reedy, David, MD Emergency Medicine Roye-Madison, Marcia, NP DFAM Vanjani, Rachna, MD OB/GYN RECOMMENDATION(S): DECLARE vacant Hazardous Materials Commission Business Seat Alternate #2 previously held by Peter Dahling, and DIRECT the Clerk of the Board to post the vacancy, as recommended by the Health Services Director. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact for this action. BACKGROUND: The Hazardous Materials Commission was established in 1986 to advise the Board, County staff and the mayor’s council members, and staffs of the cities within the County, on issues related to the development, approval, and administration of the County Hazardous Waste Management Plan. Specifically, the Board charged the Commission with drafting a hazardous materials storage and transportation plan and ordinance, coordinating the implementation of the hazardous materials release response plan and inventory program, and to analyze and develop recommendations regarding hazardous materials issues with consideration to broad public input, and report back to the Board-on-Board referrals. The bylaws of the Commission provide that Business Seat # 2 Alternate be nominated by the Industrial Association, screened by the Internal Operations committee, and appointed by the Board of Supervisors. Peter Dahling vacated the seat because of a change in employment. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: Randy Sawyer, 925-957-2668 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: M Kent, M Wilhelm C. 19 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:Declare Vacancy on the Hazardous Materials Commission CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The seat will remain unfilled and the primary seat holder will not have an alternate to fill in for him if he is unable to attend a meeting. This will potentially make it more difficult to achieve a quorum and will potentially lessen the viewpoint of the business community in Commission deliberations. RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Measure X Community Advisory Board Bylaws, and ACKNOWLEDGE process to be used at Finance Committee meeting for member selection. FISCAL IMPACT: Administrative action with no specific fiscal impact at this time. BACKGROUND: The voters passed Measure X, a ½ cent sales tax levied countywide (exempting food sales), in November 2020. Collection of the sales tax will begin in April 2021 and will be available for distribution in FY 2021-22. On February 2, 2021, the Board of Supervisors approved the creation of a 17-member Community Advisory Board to recommend funding priorities of annual revenue received under Measure X funds, directed the County Administrator to return to the Board of Supervisors by February 9, 2021 with a process to move forward in soliciting applications and seating members on the Community Advisory Board, and further directed that the Advisory Board be a Brown Act body that is staff by the County Administrator's Office. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: Lisa Driscoll, County Finance Director 925-655-2047 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Stacey M. Boyd, Deputy cc: Jami Morritt, Clerk of the Board C. 20 To:Board of Supervisors From:FINANCE COMMITTEE Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:Measure X Community Advisory Committee Bylaws and Appointment Process BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) On March 1, the Finance Committee convened and reviewed a draft set of bylaws for the Measure X Community Advisory Board that incorporated the membership and eligibility terms that the Board of Supervisors approved on February 2nd and amended on February 9th. The framework that was used to develop the draft bylaws had been used previously for the Community Corrections Partnership and Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council and provide the basics for discussion. The Finance Committee discussed the bylaws, took public comment, and provided staff direction regarding modifications. The attached bylaws are recommended to the Board of Supervisors for adoption. The Finance Committee discussed the process to be used to select members for appointment. On or about March 12, the Clerk of the Board shall forward all applications to all Board members for selection of three nominees (two nominees plus one stand-by nominee). The Clerk of the Board shall provide a summary document sorted alphabetically by city of residence and then alphabetically by name within city. The summary shall include the explanation provided by the applicant of why they would like to serve on this particular board and their description of qualifications for appointment. Because these materials will be distributed to the full-Board of Supervisors, they shall be redacted and made available to the public on the date they are distributed to the Board. Prior to March 22, Board members shall forward their nominees to Finance Committee staff for inclusion in the March 29, Finance Committee packet. The Finance Committee shall receive the nominees from Board members in their Board packet. At the March 29, meeting of the Finance Committee, the Committee shall invite each applicant wishing to make a public comment regarding their qualifications to do so. The Committee may ask follow-up questions. At the conclusion of the comment period, the Committee will deliberate and make final nominations. If the Committee should not complete the process by noon, they will reconvene on April 5. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The Measure X Community Advisory Board will not benefit from the administrative provision of these Bylaws, which will make it difficult for the Board to function efficiently. ATTACHMENTS Measure X Advisory Committee Bylaws as Recommended by the Finance Committee 1 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY MEASURE X COMMUNITY ADVISORY BOARD BYLAWS (adopted by the Board of Supervisors on __________, 2021) Article I – Purpose A. The Measure X Community Advisory Board (the “Advisory Board”) was established by the Board of Supervisors on February 2, 2021 to advise the Board of Supervisors on the use of Measure X transactions and use tax funds. The main responsibilities of the Advisory Board are: 1. Overseeing an annual assessment of community needs, focusing primarily on the priority areas identified in the Needs Assessment, including emergency response (fire/medical), health care, safety net services, preventative care, affordable housing, and supports for early child hood, youth, families, and seniors. 2. Creating detailed priority lists of the top ten service gaps (county - and community-provided) based on the results from the needs assessment. 3. Using the assessment to make general funding priority recommendations to the Board of Supervisors on 95% of the revenue generated by Measure X. 4. Providing an annual report on the outcomes and impact of allocated funds. 5. The Advisory Board committee shall initially meet as needed and thereafter shall meet quarterly. Article II – Membership A. Composition: The Advisory Board shall consist of 17 members, composed of 10 Supervisorial District appointees (2 per Supervisorial District) and seven (7) At -Large appointees. B. Eligibility: 1. General : The Advisory Board shall be composed of members representing broad and diverse voices, perspectives and expertise, including but not exclusive to: budget justice advocacy, children’s services, community health, consumer advocacy, faith leadership, senior services, fire and public safety protecti on, housing and homelessness, labor union representation, legal advocacy, local businesses, mental health services, non -partisan civic organizations, policy organizations, public health, racial justice and equity, safety net services, senior services, substance use services, taxpayers, and youth services. 2. Live/Work Requirement : Committee members shall either live or work in Contra Costa County, with a majority being residents of the County. There is no requirement for Supervisorial District seat appointees to live or work within a specific Supervisorial District. 2 3. No Public Officials: Public officials, including both elected and appointed, are not eligible to serve on the Advisory Board. C. Terms of Office: 1. Appointments: The members of the Advisory Board shall serve staggered terms of two or three years. a) Supervisorial District Appointments: Each of the two (2) Supervisorial District seats identified in Article II(A) for each Supervisorial District, shall serve a term of two (2) years. b) At-Large Appointmen ts: Each of the seven (7) At-Large seats identified in Article II(A), shall serve a term of three (3) years. 2. Term Limits: Each member is limited to serving , consecutively, for a maximum of six years. D. Appointment Process: 1. Initial Appointments : a) The Clerk of the Board of Supervisors will solicit applications to fill the 17-member Advisory Board through a single recruitment process. b) Applications shall be referred to each County Supervisor to select three nominees to serve on the Advisory Board (two nominees plus one stand-by nominee). c) Supervisorial District nominees will be transmitted to the Finance Committee of the Board of Supervisors (the “Finance Committee”) along with all remaining applications for appointment. d) The Finance Committee shall review t he Supervisorial District nominations and select nominees for the remaining seven (7) At -Large seats taking into account the goals identified in Article II(B)(1). e) In the case where the same nominee is selected for a Supervisorial District appointment by multiple Supervisors, the Finance Committee shall take into consideration the stand -by nominees recommended by those Supervisors in resolving the conflict and making a final recommendation to the Board of Supervisors. f) The Finance Committee shall ultimately make every effort to insure that there is representation from the broadest cross -section of stakeholders as described in Article II(B)(1) as well as geographic, racial and ethnic representation reflecting the County’s diversity. 2. Subsequent Appointments: The County shall use the process outlined in Article II(C)(1) above to fill scheduled vacancies. 3. Unscheduled Vacancies: a) General : Should an unscheduled vacancy occur during a member’s term of office, either by death, resignation or otherwise, the Board of Supervisors shall be notified of the vacancy and shall direct the Clerk of the Board to announce the vacancy and collect applications for appointment. 3 b) Supervisorial District Vacancy : If the unscheduled vacancy is in a Supervisorial District seat, then the applications seeking appointment will be transmitted by the Clerk of the Board to the Supervisorial District responsible for making nominations for appointment to that seat. The Supervisorial District will then transmit the nomination for appointm ent to the Board of Supervisors for consideration . c) At-Large Vacancy: If the unscheduled vacancy is in an At -Large seat, then the applications seeking appointment will be transmitted by the Clerk of the Board to the Finance Committee to consider making nominations for appointment to the vacant seat. The Finance Committee will then transmit the nomination for consideration and appointment to the Board of Supervisors for consideration . d) Resignation: Any appointed member may resign by giving written notice to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors. Article III. – Advisory Board Structure & Meetings A. Officers: The Advisory Board shall select a Chair and Vice Chair for purposes of officiating meetings , who shall each serve for a term of one (1) year. B. Regular Meetings: Regular meetings of the Advisory Board shall be held at least quarterly based on a schedule adopted by the Advisory Board and that schedule may be changed or augmented as needed. In addition, regularly scheduled meetings may be canceled by a majority vote of the Advisory Board or, for lack of business or a quorum, by the Chair. C. Special Meetings: Special meetings of the Advisory Board or any other committees may be called by the Chair at any time. S uch meetings shall be called in accordance with the provisions of the Ralph M. Brown Act and the Contra Costa County Better Government Ordinance regarding member and public notice. D. Quorum: A quorum of the Advisory Board shall occur when a majority of the membership are present. A majority of the membership is defined as a majority of filled seats on the Advisory Board at any given time . For example, if only 13 seats are filled and four (4) are vacant, then a majority for purposes of establishing a quorum would require seven (7) members be present at the meeting. Similarly, if all 17 seats are filled, a majority for purposes of establishing a quorum would require nine (9) members be present at the meeting. No action shall be taken by the Advisory Board unless a majority of the members are present as defined above. E. Voting: Each member of the Advisory Board has one vote and a minimum of nine (9) vote s of the members present are required to pass a motion. F. Conflict of Interest: As a general rule, no member shall participate as a member in any discussion or voting if doing so would constitute a conflict of interest. G. Meeting Procedure: The Chair will preside at all meetings and proceed with the business of the Advisory Board i n a manner prescribed in these bylaws. The Chair will also decide questions of procedure as needed . 4 H. Order of Business: The regular order of business of the Advisory Board shall be at least the following: 1. Call to order 2. Public comment on items not on the agenda 3. Approve Record of Action from prior meeting 4. Consideration and action on agenda items 5. Adjournment I. Public Access: All meetings of the Advisory Board shall be open and accessible to the general public in accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act and the Contra Costa County Better Government Ordinance. Opportunity for public comment will be included in each agenda item. In the interest of facilitating the business of the Advisory Board, the Chair may set in advance of public comment reasonable time limits for oral presentation. Article IV. – Administration The Advisory Board shall obtain staff support from the County Administrator’s Office. The staff will be responsible for the compilation and distribution of Advisory Board meeting notices, agenda packets and records of action . Article V. – Compensation Members of the Advisory Board shall serve without compensation and shall not receive reimbursement for any expenses incurred while conducting official business. Article VI. – Changes to Bylaws The provisions of these Bylaws may be altered, amended or repealed within the limitations imposed by the Brown Act, the Contra Costa County Better Government Ordinance and the policies of the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors. No such alterati on, amendment or repeal shall be effective unless and until the change has been approved by the Board of Supervisors , after consideration and recommendation by the Finance Committee . RECOMMENDATION(S): 1. AMEND the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors' adopted 2021-22 Federal Legislative Platform to include the principle from the adopted 2021-22 State Legislative Platform related to COVID-19 recovery that supports climate change initiatives: ENSURE that the recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic supports the following: Technologies that support the County’s climate goals, including battery energy storage and microgrids, solar and wind energy, electric vehicles, and electric vehicle charging infrastructure; Energy efficiency programs that encourage whole house retrofits and address asthma triggers in the built environment; APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: L. DeLaney, 925-655-2057 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 21 To:Board of Supervisors From:LEGISLATION COMMITTEE Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:2021-22 Adopted State and Federal Legislative Platform Amendments RECOMMENDATION(S): (CONT'D) Planning work for adapting to rising sea levels; Planning and implementation of microgrids; Active transportation and green infrastructure programs; Job training for careers in clean energy, clean transportation, and green infrastructure. 2. AUTHORIZE County Administrator staff to perform administrative amendments to the adopted State and Federal Legislative Platforms that include correction of typographical errors or omissions which do not substantively alter a policy or principle. 3. AMEND the County's adopted 2021-22 State Legislative Platform to include the following principles in a renamed "Finance and Administration" (formerly "General Revenues/Finance") section: a. ENABLE the use of Progressive Design-Build (PDB) Project Delivery for construction contracts. b. ENABLE local governments to continue offering opportunities for public meeting attendance, participation and accessibility through technological means after the COVID-19 pandemic emergency has ended. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no direct fiscal impact to the County related to amending the County's adopted Legislative Platforms. BACKGROUND: At their February 8, 2021 meeting, the Legislation Committee (Chair Burgis, Vice Chair Mitchoff) considered and voted to recommend to the Board of Supervisors the following amendments to the County's 2021-22 adopted State and Federal Legislative Platforms: 1. 2021-22 Federal Legislative Platform Amendment: As requested by the County's Sustainability Coordinator, incorporate the following language from the County's adopted 2021-22 State Legislative Platform as a federal "Priority Policy Statement": ENSURE that the recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic supports the following: Technologies that support the County’s climate goals, including battery energy storage and microgrids*, solar and wind energy, electric vehicles, and electric vehicle charging infrastructure; Energy efficiency programs that encourage whole house retrofits and address asthma triggers in the built environment; Planning work for adapting to rising sea levels; Planning and implementation of microgrids; Active transportation and green infrastructure programs; Job training for careers in clean energy, clean transportation, and green infrastructure. *Note the definition of microgrid: A microgrid is a compressed version of the larger electrical grid that provides electricity for a small geographic area, such as a few buildings or local community. Microgrids must have a source of energy to supply electricity to their users, like solar plus battery storage. Microgrids are capable of operating independently from the grid during an outage. When the grid goes down for any reason (including a public safety power shutoff event), a microgrid can continue to operate on its own using local energy sources by disconnecting from the grid or "islanding." 2. 2021-22 State Legislative Platform Amendments : A. ENABLE the use of Progressive Design-Build (PDB) project delivery for construction contracts. This amendment would allow counties to use the PDB project delivery method for construction contracts, allowing local agencies to evaluate bids on factors other than price; reduce certain risks as compared to alternative contracting methods; reduce project delivery schedules and costs; and partner with the designer during the initial phase of the process. Design-build is a procurement methodology allowed by the Public Contract Code (PCC) sections 22160-22169. It allows a local agency to pre-qualify a short list of bidders for a project and then accept guaranteed maximum price bids on the project from the qualified short list. The winner is selected from those bids by using a best value to the agency approach, not necessarily the lowest bid as required by the design-bid-build standard procurement method. Progressive design-build (PDB) allows the selection of the design-builder even earlier in the process. The design-builder is selected by the local agency primarily based on qualifications and then they work with the local agency in designing the process. Some California agencies are specifically allowed to use progressive design build, for instance in PCC section 20928.1, for certain projects but that specific allowance is not extended to all local agencies. In addition, the code sections that define the procurement method do not have an allowance for selection of a design-build entity on the basis of qualifications alone, as it would need to be to use the PDB approach. B. ENABLE local governments to continue offering opportunities for public meeting attendance, participation and accessibility through technological means after the COVID-19 pandemic emergency has ended. This amendment emanates from Board Member and County staff expressions of interest in legislation that would enable virtual public meetings to continue in some fashion after the pandemic's emergency has ended. Existing law, the Ralph M. Brown Act, requires, with specified exceptions, that all meetings of a legislative body of a local agency, as those terms are defined, be open and public and that all persons be permitted to attend and participate. The Governor has issued several Executive Orders during the COVID-19 pandemic enacting suspensions of certain Bagley-Keene Act and Brown Act provisions so that there is no requirement for state or local legislative bodies to make a physical location available from which the public can make public comment, so long as options to participate telephonically or electronically are provided. Local bodies must still adhere to noticing requirements and implement a procedure for resolving requests for accommodation from individuals with special needs. As the adopted 2021-22 State Platform does not address these subjects, an amendment would be required for advocacy purposes.The "General Revenues/Finance" section (p. 13) of the 2021-22 State Legislative Platform will be retitled "Finance and Administration," and these amendments will be included therein. RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 25693 to cancel one (1) Deputy County Librarian (3AFE) (unrepresented) position #6241 at salary plan and grade B85 1983 ($11,196 - $13,609), and add one (1) Library Services Manager (3KGA) (unrepresented) position at salary plan and grade B85 1007 ($8,928 - $10,852) to the Library Department. FISCAL IMPACT: Upon approval, this action will result in an annual cost savings of $17,791 to the Library Fund. No impact to the County General Fund. BACKGROUND: This request for a Library Services Manager position is one step in part of a larger internal reorganization. The plan involves a reorganization at the executive senior management levels to better facilitate management workflow. After an evaluation of the Library’s organizational workflow, it was determined that the Library Services Manager classification is more appropriate for supervision of most of the County’s community libraries. By APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: Samuel Treanor at (925) 608-7702 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: Sylvia Wong Tam C. 22 To:Board of Supervisors From:Alison McKee, Interim County Librarian Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:Cancel one (1) Deputy County Librarian position and Add one (1) Library Services Manager position BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) assigning a third Library Services Manager position these duties, the Deputy County Librarians will be better able to handle higher level responsibilities, including more complex projects. At the same time, with this reorganization, there is not a need for a third Deputy County Librarian. The addition of the Library Services Manager position with the elimination of a Deputy County Librarian will result in cost savings. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If not approved, the Library will have difficulties implementing its reorganization, creating potential service gaps. There will also be inefficiencies in workflow as at least one Deputy County Librarian will be required to maintain direct supervision of more community libraries. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS P300 25693 Cancel one Deputy County Librarian & Library Services Manager MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed P300 25693 POSITION ADJUSTMENT REQUEST NO. 25693 DATE 2/17/2021 Department No./ Department County Library Budget Unit No. 0620 Org No. 3702 Agency No. 85 Action Requested: Cancel one Deputy County Librarian (3AFE) position 6241. Add one Library Services Manager (3KGA) position. Proposed Effective Date: 3/1/2021 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 ($17,791.00) Net County Cost $0.00 Total this FY ($5,930.00) N.C.C. this FY $0.00 SOURCE OF FUNDING TO OFFSET ADJUSTMENT Department must initiate necessary adjustment and submit to CAO. Use additional sheet for further explanations or comments. Alison McKee ______________________________________ (for) Department Head REVIEWED BY CAO AND RELEASED TO HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT /S/ Erin M Steffen 2/19/2021 ___________________________________ ________________ Deputy County Admini strator Date HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATIONS DATE 2/24/2021 ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 25693 to cancel one (1) Deputy C ounty Librarian (3AFE) (unrepresented) position #6241 and add one (1) 40/40 Library Services Manager (3KGA) (unrepresented) position to the Library Department. Amend Resolution 71/17 establishing positions and resolutions allocating classes to the Basic / Exempt salary schedule. Effective: Day following Board Action. (Date) Alexandra Austin 2/24/2021 ___________________________________ ________________ (for) Director of Human Res ources Date COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION: DATE 3/3/2021 Approve Recommendation of Director of Human Resources Disapprove Recommendation of Director of Human Resources /s/ Julie DiMaggio Enea Other: ____________________________________________ ___________________________________ (for) County Administrator BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ACTION: Monica Nino, 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 No. 1. Project Positions Requested: 2. Explain Specific Duties of Position(s) 3. Name / Purpose of Project and Funding Source (do not use acronyms i.e. SB40 Project or SDSS Funds) 4. Duration of the Project: Start Date End Date Is funding for a specified period of time (i.e. 2 years) or on a year -to-year basis? Please explain. 5. Project Annual Cost a. Salary & Benefits Costs: b. Support Costs: (services, supplies, equipment, etc.) c. Less revenue or expenditure: d. Net cost to General or other fund: 6. Briefly explain the consequences of not filling the project position(s) in terms of: a. potential future costs d. political implications b. legal implications e. organizational implications c. financial implications 7. Briefly describe the alternative approaches to delivering the services which you have considered. Indicate why these alternatives were not chosen. 8. Departments requesting new project positions must submit an updated cost benefit analysis of each project position at the halfway point of the project duration. This report is to be submitted to the Human Resource s 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. 25698 to add one Public Administrator’s Program Assistant (AXSD) position at salary plan and grade level ZB5-1392 ($5,220.07-$6,345.03) and cancel one vacant Ambulatory Care Clinic Coordinator (VAHB) position #13693 at salary plan and grade level K65-1453 ($5,672-$6,895) in the Health Services Department (represented). FISCAL IMPACT: Upon approval, this action will have an annual cost saving of approximately $10,041 with $3,815 in pension costs already included. The cost saving will be in the Public Administrator division. BACKGROUND: The Public Administrator reviewed vacant positions within the department and it was discovered this Ambulatory Care Clinic Coordinator position was no longer necessary. The position was vacated in March of 2020 and there has not been a departmental requirement to fill it. The department's needs have changed, and there is an increased demand for assistance in the Public Administrator's Office. The APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: Sabrina Pearson, (925) 957-5240 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 23 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:Add and Cancel Positions in Health Services Department BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) new position's responsibilities will relieve the Chief Deputy Public Administrator or designee of administrative detail and estate processing activities by participating in meetings and conferences with relatives, heirs, attorneys, banks, title companies, and other interested parties. The position will also be responsible for providing assistance with arranging the filing and publication of notices of sale, notices to creditors and other legal notices as required by state law. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this action is not approved, the Public Administrator office will not have adequate administrative support. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS P300 No. 25698 HSD MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed P300 25698 POSITION ADJUSTMENT REQUEST NO. 25698 DATE 3/2/2021 Department No./ Department Health Services Department Budget Unit No. 0454 Org No. 0454 Agency No. A18 Action Reques ted: Cancel one Ambulatory Care Clini c Coordinator (VAHB) position #13693 and add one Public Aministrator's Assistant (AXSD) positions in the Health Services Department . Proposed Effective Date: 3/10/2021 Classification Questionnaire attached: Yes No / Cost is within Department’s budget: Yes No Total One-Time Costs (non-salary) associated with request: Estimated total cost adjustment (salary / benefits / one time): Total annual cost $10,041.48 Net County Cost $0.00 Total this FY $1,673.58 N.C.C. this FY $0.00 SOURCE OF FUNDING TO OFFSET ADJUSTMENT Cos t Savings to Public Administrator Revenues Department must initiate necessary adjustment and submit to CAO. Use additional sheet for further explanations or comments. Sabrina Pearson ______________________________________ (for) Department Head REVIEWED BY CAO AND RELEASED TO HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT Sarah Kennard for 3/2/2021 ___________________________________ ________________ Deputy County Administrator Date HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATIONS DATE Exempt from Human Resources review under delegated authority. Am end Resolution 71/17 establishing positions and resolutions allocating classes to the Basic / Exempt salary schedule. Effective: Day following B oard Action. (Date) ___________________________________ ________________ (for) Director of Human Resources Date COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION: DA TE 3/2/2021 Approve Recommendation of Director of Human Res ources Disapprove Recommendation of Director of Human Resources Enid Mendoza Other: Approve as recommended by the department. ___________________________________ (for) County Administrator BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ACTION: Monica Nino, 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 B OARD ACTION Adjust class(es) / position(s) as follows: P300 (M347) Rev 3/15/01 REQUEST FOR PROJECT POSITIONS Department Date 3/2/2021 No. xxxxxx 1. Project Positions Requested: 2. Explain Specific Duties of Position(s) 3. Name / Purpose of Project and Funding Source (do not use acronyms i.e. SB40 Project or SDSS Funds) 4. Duration of the Project: Start Date End Date Is funding for a specified period of time (i.e. 2 years) or on a year-to-year basis? Please explain. 5. Project Annual Cost a. Salary & Benefit s Costs : b. Support Cost s : (services, supplies, equipment, etc.) c . Less revenue or expenditure: d. Net cost to General or other fund: 6. Briefly explain the consequences of not filling the project position(s) in terms of: a. pot ential future costs d. political implications b. legal implications e. organizational implications c . financial implications 7. Briefly describe the alternative approaches to delivering the services which you have consid ered. Indicate why these alternatives were not chosen. 8. Departments requesting new project positions must submit an updated cost benefit analysis of each project position at the halfway point of the project duration. This report is to be submitted to the Human Resources Department, which will forward the report to the Board of Supervisors. Indicate the date that your cost / benefit analysis will be submitted 9. How will the project position(s) be filled? a. Competitive examination(s) b. Existing employment list(s) Which one(s)? c. Direct appointment of: 1. Merit System employee who will be placed on leave from current job 2. Non-County employ ee Provide a justification if filling position(s) by C1 or C2 USE ADDITIONAL PAPER IF NECESSARY RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 25697 to increase the hours of one Public Health Nutritionist (V9WB) position #8853 at salary plan and grade level TC5-1430 ($5,420-$6,588) from 30/40 to 40/40 in Health Services Department. (Represented) FISCAL IMPACT: Upon approval, this action has an approximate annual increase of $47,941 with $18,591 in pension costs already included. This increase will be funded 100% by California Department of Public Health WIC Program revenues. BACKGROUND: The Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) Program assists families in the community by issuing social services benefits. WIC offers healthy foods and experts in nutrition, health, and breastfeeding to help families at critical periods of growth and development. Over the last few months WIC has seen a change in the demand within the community for these services. PH Nutritionist caseloads are drastically increasing and it has affected the overall services offered. This surge has resulted in the WIC Program's inability to provide food benefits to all those in the community who have reached assistance. The increase in hours will allow for additional screening to determine client eligibility, enrolling in programs to develop nutrition education and provide consultation to WIC clients. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: Sabrina Pearson, (925) 957-5240 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 24 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:Increase Position Hours of one Public Health Nutritionist in the Health Services Department CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this action is not approved, the WIC program within the Health Services Department will not have adequate staffing to oversee and issue benefits for those we serve. AGENDA ATTACHMENTS P300 No. 25697 HSD MINUTES ATTACHMENTS Signed P300 25697 POSITION ADJUSTMENT REQUEST NO. 25697 DATE 3/2/2021 Department No./ Department Health Services Budget Unit No. 0450 Org No. 5828 Agency No. A18 Action Requested: Increase the hours of one Public Health Nutritionist (V9WB) position #8853 from 30/40 to 40/40 in Health Services Department . Proposed Effective Date: 3/10/21 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 $47,941.51 Net County Cost $0 Total this FY $7,990.25 N.C.C. this FY $0 SOURCE OF FUNDING TO OFFSET ADJUSTMENT 100% State funded California Department of Public Health WIC Program. Department must initiate necessary adjustment and submit to CAO. Use additional sheet for further explanations or comments. Sabrina Pearson ______________________________________ (for) Department Head REVIEWED BY CAO AND RELEASED TO HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT Sarah Kennard for 3/2/2021 ___________________________________ ________________ Deputy County Administrator Date HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATIONS DATE Exempt from Human Resources review under delegated authority. Amend Resolution 71/17 establishing positions and resolutions allocating classes to the Basic / Exempt salary schedule. Effective: Day following Board Action. (Date) ___________________________________ ________________ (for) Director of Human Resources Date COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION: DATE 3/2/2021 Approve Recommendation of Director of Human Resources Disapprove Recommendation of Director of Human Resources Enid Mendoza Other: Approve as recommended by the department . ___________________________________ (for) County Administrator BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ACTION: Monica Nino, 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 No. xxxxxx 1. Project Positions Requested: 2. Explain Specific Duties of Position(s) 3. Name / Purpose of Project and Funding Source (do not use acronyms i.e. SB40 Project or SDSS Funds) 4. Duration of the Project: Start Date End Date Is funding for a specified period of time (i.e. 2 years) or on a year -to-year basis? Please explain. 5. Project Annual Cost a. Salary & Benefit s Costs : b. Support Cost s : (services, supplies, equipment, etc.) c . Less revenue or expenditure: d. Net cost to General or other fund: 6. Briefly explain the consequences of not filling the project position(s) in terms of: a. potential future costs d. political implications b. legal implications e. organizational implications c . financial implications 7. Briefly describe the alternative approaches to delivering the services which you have 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 Resource s Department, which will forward the report to the Board of Supervisors. Indicate the date that your cost / benefit analysis will be submitted 9. How will the project position(s) be filled? a. Competitive examination(s) b. Existing employment list(s) Which one(s)? c. Direct appointment of: 1. Merit System employee who will be placed on leave from current job 2. Non-County employee Provide a justification if filling position(s) by C1 or C2 USE ADDITIONAL PAPER IF NECESSARY RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE the Third Amendment to Lease with Gary S. Riele d/b/a SR Investments, to extend the term for four (4) years through February 28, 2025, for approximately 1,620 square feet of office space in the building located at 309 Diablo Road, Danville, for continued occupancy by the Board of Supervisors District 2. The annual rent is $55,404 with rent increases. AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute the lease amendment on behalf of the County, and to exercise any options to extend the lease. FISCAL IMPACT: 100% General Fund. BACKGROUND: This space has served as the office for the Board of Supervisors District 2 since 1997. The District 2 Supervisor, Candace Andersen, has requested to extend the lease for four years to continue servicing the community at this location. Reasonable rent rates have been negotiated with the lessor to allow affordability of the space for the County. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: Julin Perez, 925. 957-2460 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: C. 25 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:Authorize a lease amendment for office space at 309 Diablo Road, Danville, for continued use by Board of Supervisors District 2. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the lease amendment is not approved, the Board of Supervisors' office for District 2 may experience interruptions in its ability to provide services to the County community, and would require finding another suitable location at increased rent, together with the associated expenses of moving and constructing new tenant improvements. ATTACHMENTS Lease Amendment RECOMMENDATION(S): ADOPT Resolution No. 2021/81 authorizing the Sheriff Coroner, or designee, to apply for and accept the California Highway Patrol Grant Fiscal Year 2021-2022, in an amount not to exceed $114,609 for the purchase of new equipment for the Toxicology Unit for the period of July 1, 2021, through the end of the grant funding. FISCAL IMPACT: $114,609. Up to an initial amount of $114,609 in California State Highway Patrol Revenue. There is no County in kind match requirement. BACKGROUND: The Contra Costa County Office of the Sheriff Forensic Services Division (FSD) operates an ISO 17025 ANAB Accredited Crime Laboratory able to provide County-wide Forensic Toxicological testing services. The California Highway Patrol (CHP) Grant Fiscal Year 2021-2022 is needed to purchase new equipment for the Toxicology Unit thereby increasing efficiency in the processing and analysis of driving under the influence of drugs (DUID) cases. The equipment purchased will be used for current toxicology confirmation methods including THC and its metabolites and in future method validations. The automated liquid handling system for extractions and updated testing equipment APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: Chrystine Robbins, 925-655-0008 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 , County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Laura Cassell, Deputy cc: C. 26 To:Board of Supervisors From:David O. Livingston, Sheriff-Coroner Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:California Highway Patrol Grant FY 2021-2022 BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) will enable the FSD to meet recommendations for DUID testing set by the National Safety Council and address drug abuse trends, reduce the need to send cases to an outside laboratory for toxicology analysis, and provide timely information to stakeholders by reducing turnaround times for reporting toxicology results. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Without the replacement and purchase of new equipment, the laboratory will be required to send requests to an accredited outside laboratory for analysis. Any analysis performed by an outside laboratory creates an increased burden and cost to Contra Costa County law enforcement agencies and the District Attorney’s Office if the case is prosecuted. ATTACHMENTS Resolution 2021/81 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board Adopted this Resolution on 03/09/2021 by the following vote: AYE:4 John Gioia Diane Burgis Karen Mitchoff Federal D. Glover NO: ABSENT:1 Candace Andersen ABSTAIN: RECUSE: Resolution No. 2021/81 IN THE MATTER OF: Applying for and accepting the California Highway Patrol Grant for Fiscal Year 2021-2022 WHEREAS the County of Contra Costa County is seeking funds available through the California Highway Patrol; NOW, THEREFORE IT BE RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors: Authorizes the Sheriff-Coroner, Undersheriff or the Sheriff's Commander, Management Services, to execute for and on behalf of the County of Contra Costa, a public entity established under the laws of the State of California, any actions necessary for the purpose of obtaining State financial assistance including grant modifications and extensions provided by the California Highway Patrol. Contact: Chrystine Robbins, 925-655-0008 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 , County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Laura Cassell, Deputy cc: RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Librarian, or designee, to apply for and accept a grant in the amount of $5,000 from East Bay Community Foundation, administered by the Rodeo Municipal Advisory Council, for Rodeo Library services, pursuant to the local refinery Good Neighbor Agreement for the period July 1, 2021 through December 31, 2021. FISCAL IMPACT: No Library Fund Match. BACKGROUND: The County currently funds 18 hours of library service at the Rodeo Library. If granted, the $5,000 from the East Bay Community Foundation, administered by the Rodeo Municipal Advisory Council, will be used to fund additional hours of library service. The proposed additional hours will provide one extra hour of Saturday service, and three extra hours of evening service two weekdays per week. These extended hours offer Rodeo residents additional opportunities to make use of the educational and recreational resources available at the Rodeo Library. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: Walt Beveridge 925-608-7730 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Laura Cassell, Deputy cc: C. 27 To:Board of Supervisors From:Alison McKee, Interim County Librarian Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:East Bay Community Foundation Grant Funds BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) The expanded hours are a continuation of supplemental grant funding acquired by the Library through the East Bay Community Foundation, which has funded the expansion of hours at the Rodeo Library location since 2006. The East Bay Community Foundation awards grants on a six-month funding cycle. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the grant proposal is not approved, the Rodeo Library will remain open for the County funded 18 hours per week, instead of the proposed 23 hours per week. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: Extending hours at the Rodeo Library will meet all five community outcomes established in the Children's Report Card. Research shows that early and positive experiences with books set the stage for a child's success in learning to read. Additionally, literacy skills are a strong predictor of health and employment status. Extending the hours at the Rodeo Library will draw more families to the library and encourage regular exposure to reading and books, thus improving the quality of life for children and families in Rodeo. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with California Department of Community Services and Development to increase the payment limit by $40,370.00 to a new payment limit of $1,229,551.00 for Community Services Block Grant program services from March 27, 2020 through May 31, 2022. FISCAL IMPACT: The County will receive a pass-through of 100% federal funding in the total contract amount of $1,229,551.00 from the California Department of Community Services and Development. There is no County match requirement. CFDA # 93.569 State Contract Number: 20F-3646 Amendment #1 APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: Elaine Burres 608-4960 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Laura Cassell, Deputy cc: C. 28 To:Board of Supervisors From:Kathy Gallagher, Employment & Human Services Director Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:Community Services Block Grant CARES Revenue, Amendment 1 BACKGROUND: The Employment and Human Services Department received notification of supplemental funding from California Department of Community Services and Development on October 2, 2020. As the County's Community Action Agency, the Department's Community Services Bureau regularly receives Community Services Block Grant (CSBG) funding to operate self-sufficiency programs under the advisement of the County's Economic Opportunity Council. The self-sufficiency programs have the goal of ameliorating poverty in Contra Costa County through programs that address housing, economic development and food security. Examples of programs to receive funding include those that provide employment training, housing payment assistance and food distribution. This board order is to accept the County's allocation of $1,229,551.00 for the 2020-2022 program year. The funding is to help prevent, prepare for, or respond to the coronavirus pandemic. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The Department will be hampered in its ability to operate self-sufficiency programs in the community, and to establish partnerships with community based agencies and public organizations. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the County Standard Agreement #28-300-7 (State #120-10010) with the California Department of Health Care Services (DHCS), to pay the County an amount not to exceed $27,000,000, for the Medi-Cal Administrative Activities (MAA) Program, for the period from July 1, 2021 through June 30, 2024. FISCAL IMPACT: This agreement will result in an amount not to exceed $27,000,000 from the California Department of Health Care Services to fund the MAA Program. No County match is required. BACKGROUND: The DHCS is responsible for administering the California MAA Program which is authorized by Title 42, United States Code Section 1396 and Welfare and Institutions Code Division 9, Part 3, Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 14000) and Chapter 8 (commencing with Section 14200). The Federal Social Security Act mandates cooperative arrangements between the single state agency APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: Patrick Godley, 925-957-5410 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: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Laura Cassell, Deputy cc: L Walker, M Wilhelm C. 29 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:Standard Agreement #28-300-7 with the California Department of Health Care Services BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) and participating local government agencies (LGA’s) responsible for providing health related administrative activities. The goal of this agreement is to ensure that Contra Costa County Medi-Cal potentially eligible individuals and their families are appropriately informed of the Medi-Cal Program, how to access it and assisted in accessing the Medi-Cal Program. On March 27, 2018, the Board of Supervisors approved Standard Agreement #28-300-6 with the DHCS for the MAA Program, in an amount payable to the county of $21,000,000 for the period July 1, 2018 through June 30, 2021. Approval of this Standard Agreement #28-300-7 will allow continuous funding to the County’s Health Services Department for the MAA Program, through June 30, 2024. This agreement includes agreeing to indemnify the State for any claims arising out of the County’s performance under the agreement. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved, the County will not receive funds to continue providing the MAA Program. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the County Grant Agreement #29-818-3 containing mutual indemnification with Public Health Foundation Enterprises, Inc. (DBA Heluna Health), a nonprofit corporation, to pay County an amount not to exceed $24,889 for participation in the FoodNet Expanded Case Exposure Ascertainment (eCEA) Project for the period from August 1, 2020 through July 31, 2021. FISCAL IMPACT: This agreement will result in an amount not to exceed $24,889 in funding. (No County match) BACKGROUND: The Health Services Department’s Public Health Division receives hundreds of reports of Salmonellosis and Shigellosis cases annually. There are likely many cases that do not get reported because community members do not see their doctor or confirmatory testing is not performed. These infections can result in serious illness and hospitalization across the age spectrum. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: Daniel Peddycord, 925-313-6712 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Laura Cassell, Deputy cc: L Walker, M Wilhelm C. 30 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:Agreement #29-818-3 with Public Health Foundation Enterprises, Inc. (DBA Heluna Health) BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) Administering the expanded case report and the eCEA questionnaire will allow health officials to gather additional information that could result in enhanced disease prevention and control activities. On October 22, 2019, the Board of Supervisors approved Grant Agreement #29-818-2 with Public Health Foundation Enterprises, Inc. (DBA Heluna Health) to receive funds in the amount of $14,875 for participation in the eCEA, to study foodborne bacteria, for the period from August 1, 2019 through July 31, 2020. Approval of Agreement #29-818-3 will allow the County to continue to receive funds to support the eCEA Project, through July 31, 2021. This agreement includes mutual indemnification. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this agreement is not approved, the County will not receive funding to provide services for the eCEA Project. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with Empower Programs Inc., to increase the payment limit by $160,000 from $80,000 to a new payment limit of $240,000 to provide on-call weed abatement services, and to extend the term from March 31, 2021 to March 31, 2023, Alamo, Concord, Danville, Pleasant Hill, San Ramon and Walnut Creek areas. (Districts II and IV) FISCAL IMPACT: 100% Iron Horse Corridor Funds. BACKGROUND: The County Public Works Department has overall management responsibility of the Iron Horse Corridor (IHC) and performs the majority of its maintenance. The IHC, formerly known as the Southern Pacific Railroad right of way, is 18.5 miles long, traversing north-south in Central Contra Costa County. The northern terminus is at Mayette Avenue in Concord and the southern terminus is at the Alameda County line in San Ramon. The corridor varies in width from 30 to 100 feet APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: Carl Roner (925) 313-2213 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Laura Cassell, Deputy cc: Carl Roner- Special Districts, Rochelle Johnson - Special Districts, Scott Anderson - Special Districts, Shirley Lau, Finance C. 31 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:Execute a contract amendment with Empower Programs, Inc. BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) and currently has a 10-foot wide, paved multi-use trail located in it that is managed by the East Bay Regional Park District. The contractor shall provide weed abatement services in the IHC in South and Central Contra Costa County in accordance with the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District Weed Abatement Standards. These services will assist the County in meeting the Fire District’s June 1st deadline for completion of mowing along the IHC. The Public Works Department’s Maintenance Division will continue to mow County properties in unincorporated County. This arrangement allows more resources to be allocated to other County unincorporated areas to meet the mowing deadline. In addition to providing weed abatement services in the IHC, the contractor shall also provide on-call weed abatement services for various locations throughout the County as directed by the County Maintenance Supervisor. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Without the approval of the Board of Supervisors, there may be delays in weed abatement services along the Iron Horse Corridor and the County Public Works Department may not be able to meet the Fire District’s June 1st deadline for completion of mowing. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Human Resources Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with Segal Advisors, Inc. including modified indemnification language, to extend the term from March 31, 2021 through March 31, 2022, and increase the payment limit by $60,000 to a new payment limit of $210,000 . FISCAL IMPACT: The program is funded through plan participant fees. There is no fiscal impact beyond overhead administration support costs which is reimbursed annually through the plan BACKGROUND: Segal Advisors provides fiduciary consulting services for the County. These services assist the County with performance evaluation, measurement allocation and investment strategy for the County’s 457 Deferred Compensation plan. Pursuant to the parties’ contract, Segal Advisors performs the following advisory and fiduciary consulting services, among others,: 1) attendance at meetings; 2) investment management search and selection; 3) investment performance APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: Ann Elliot 9256552176 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Laura Cassell, Deputy cc: C. 32 To:Board of Supervisors From:Ann Elliott, Interim Human Resources Director Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:Contract Extension of Fiduciary Consulting Services with Segal Advisors for the County’s 457 Deferred Compensation plan BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) monitoring; 4) administrative services monitoring; and 5) general consulting. Following the expiration of this extension, an additional option to renew the contract for one more year will remain under the parties’ contact. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this extension is not approved, the County will be not be able to access the expertise and support of Segal Advisors to assist the County in measurement allocation and investment strategy for the County’s 457 Deferred Compensation plan. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Conservation and Development Director, or designee, to execute an amendment to the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement between the County and City Ventures Homebuilding, LLC, dated March 26, 2019, to extend its term through March 26, 2022. FISCAL IMPACT: No impact to the General Fund. Staff project costs are covered by the Housing Successor budget. BACKGROUND: The County and City Ventures Homebuilding, LLC (Developer), entered into an exclusive negotiating agreement dated March 26, 2019, under which the County granted the Developer an exclusive right, through March 26, 2021, to determine the feasibility of developing a project on County-owned property located at 223 Parker Avenue in Rodeo, California, and to negotiate a disposition and development agreement for the acquisition of the property by the Developer. If the Developer acquires the property, the Developer plans to construct a mixed-use development, consisting of 24 townhomes and approximately 2,000 square feet of commercial space, and a public plaza on the property. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: Maureen Toms, 925-674-7878 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Laura Cassell, Deputy cc: C. 33 To:Board of Supervisors From:John Kopchik, Director, Conservation & Development Department Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:Amended Exclusive Negotiating Agreement-Rodeo Plaza BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) The disposition and development agreement between the County and the Developer has not been completed. The amendment that is the subject of this board order will extend the term of the exclusive negotiating agreement for one year to enable the parties to finalize the terms of the transfer of the property. Because the vacant property is a housing asset of the former Redevelopment Agency, its disposition is governed by the County in its capacity as Housing Successor. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Development of a Housing Successor asset will be delayed. ATTACHMENTS March 26 2019 ENA 1 EXCLUSIVE NEGOTIATING RIGHTS AGREEMENT (RODEO TOWN CENTER) This Exclusive Negotiating Rights Agreement (“Agreement”) is dated March 26, 2019 (the “Effective Date”), and is between the COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, a political subdivision of the State of California (the “County”), and CITY VENTURES, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (the “Developer”). RECITALS A. The County, in its capacity as housing successor to the Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency, is the owner of approximately 1.16 acres of real property located at 223 Parker Avenue in Rodeo, California, having Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 357-161-001, 357-161-002, and 357-161-013, as more particularly described in Exhibit A (the “Property”). B. The County desires the Property to be developed in a manner that will result in a mixed- use residential neighborhood with 24 units of for-sale townhomes and 2,000 square feet of commercial space and a public plaza (together, the “Development”). C. Developer has developed projects similar to the proposed Development, including the development of a 36-unit mixed-use project on approximately 2 acres in Union City, California; a 25-unit mixed-use project on approximately 1.2 acres in Milpitas, California, and a 35-unit mixed-use project on approximately 1.7 acres in South San Francisco. D. The purpose of this Agreement is twofold. First, it is intended to enable the parties to assess the feasibility of the Development. Second, if the Development is determined to be feasible, it is intended to enable the parties to negotiate a disposition and development agreement (a “DDA”). Under the DDA, the Property would be conveyed to the Developer for construction of the Development. E. Because the property is a housing asset of the former Redevelopment Agency, its disposition is governed by the County, in its capacity as housing successor, and is subject to the requirements of Health and Safety Code Section 34176. The parties therefore agree as follows: AGREEMENT Exclusive Negotiations 1. Good Faith Negotiations. The County and the Developer shall negotiate diligently and in good faith during the Negotiating Period (defined below), the terms of a DDA for the development of the Development on the Property. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the County Contract #77-217-2 with Healthrisk Resource Group, Inc., a corporation, in an amount not to exceed $600,000, to provide claims processing and negotiation services to Contra Costa Health Plan (CCHP), for the period from March 1, 2021 through February 29, 2024. FISCAL IMPACT: This contract will result in contractual service expenditures of up to $600,000 over a 3 year period and will be funded 100% by CCHP Enterprise Fund II. (No rate increase) BACKGROUND: Healthrisk Resource Group, Inc. has been providing claims processing and negotiation services for CCHP since March 2019. Contractor acts as a billing agent to negotiate discount rates, review documentation of medical claims and electronic claims from out of network medical providers services, which results in saving dollars for CCHP. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: Sharron Mackey, 925-313-6104 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Laura Cassell, Deputy cc: L Walker , M Wilhelm C. 34 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:Contract #77-217-2 with Healthrisk Resource Group, Inc. BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) On March 12, 2019 the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #77-217 in an amount of $300,000 to provide claims processing services and negotiation services for CCHP for the period from March 1, 2019 through February 28, 2021. On December 10, 2019, the Board of Supervisors approved Amendment Agreement #77-217-1 to increase the payment limit by $300,000 to a new payment limit of $600,000 to provide additional claims processing services and negotiation services through February 28, 2021. Approval of Contract #77-217-2 will allow the contractor to continue providing claims processing services and negotiation services through February 29, 2024. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved, CCHP will not have access to contractor’s negotiation, claims processing and price factoring services. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Chief Information Officer, Department of Information Technology, or designee, to execute an amendment to a contract with CSI Telecommunications, Inc. to increase the payment limit by $250,000 to a new payment limit of $1,330,000 and to extend the termination date from January 31, 2021 to January 31, 2023 to provide continued Federal Communication Commission radio licensing and microwave frequency coordination, as needed by the Department of Information Technology. FISCAL IMPACT: The cost of this contract is recovered through user fees charged through DoIT’s billing system. BACKGROUND: The Department of Information Technology’s Microwave Division is responsible for maintaining the County’s Microwave System, including frequency coordination and licensing. CSI Telecommunications, Inc. provides APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: Marc Shorr, 925-608-4071 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Laura Cassell, Deputy cc: Nancy Zandonella, Wayne Tilley C. 35 To:Board of Supervisors From:Marc Shorr, Chief Information Officer Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Chief Information Officer, DoIT, to execute a contract Amendment/Extension agreement with CSI Telecommunications, Inc. BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) telecommunications permitting assistance services including, without limitation, Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) license application engineering/frequency coordination for the County’s Microwave and Public Safety Radio Systems. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract amendment/extension is not approved, DoIT will be unable to ensure the integrity of the County's Microwave system. Proper maintenance of the system is essential for public safety. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the County Contract #77-317 with Availity, LLC, a limited liability company, in an amount not to exceed $1,100,000, to provide electronic claims processing services for the Contra Costa Health Plan (CCHP) for the period March 1, 2021 through February 28, 2022. FISCAL IMPACT: This contract will result in contractual service expenditures of up to $1,100,000 over a one-year period and will be funded 100% by CCHP Enterprise Fund II revenues. BACKGROUND: CCHP has an obligation to provide certain specialized health care services for its members under the terms of their Individual and Group Health Plan membership contracts with the County. CCHP requires the most current electronic claims processing services to reimburse CCHP providers for services rendered to CCHP members. Under Contract #77-317, the contractor will provide electronic claims processing services for CCHP providers for reimbursement of services rendered to CCHP members for the period March 1, 2021 through February 28, 2022. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: Sharron Mackey, 925-313-6104 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Laura Cassell, Deputy cc: K Cyr, M Wilhelm C. 36 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:Contract #77-317 with Availity, LLC CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved, electronic claims processing services will not be available for CCHP providers to submit electronic claims for services rendered to CCHP members. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the County Contract #27-622-9 with Young M. Kim, M.D., (dba Young’s OB/GYN), a sole proprietor, in an amount not to exceed $750,000, to provide obstetrics-gynecology (OB-GYN) services to Contra Costa Health Plan (CCHP) members for the period March 1, 2021 through February 29, 2024. FISCAL IMPACT: This contract will result in contractual service expenditures of up to $750,000 over a three-year period and will be funded 100% by CCHP Enterprise Fund II revenues. (No rate increase) BACKGROUND: CCHP has an obligation to provide certain specialized health care services for its members under the terms of their Individual and Group Health Plan membership contracts with the County. This contractor has been a part of the CCHP Provider Network since March 1, 2006. On February 26, 2019, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #27-622-8 with Young M. Kim, M.D. (dba Young’s OB/GYN), in an amount not to exceed $500,000, to provide OB/GYN services to CCHP members, for the period from March 1, 2020 through February 28, 2021. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: Sharron Mackey, 925-313-6104 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Laura Cassell, Deputy cc: K Cyr, M Wilhelm C. 37 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:Contract #27-622-9 with Young M. Kim, M.D. (dba Young’s OB/GYN) BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) Approval of Contract #27-622-9 will allow the contractor to continue providing OB/GYN services for CCHP members through February 29, 2024. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved, certain specialized health care services for CCHP members under the terms of their Individual and Group Health Plan membership contracts with the County will not be provided. RECOMMENDATION(S): RATIFY amendment of an emergency blanket purchase order authorized by the County Administrator to secure critical services and supplies necessary to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic in Contra Costa County by increasing the payment limit by $5,000,000 to a new payment limit of $30,000,000 with no change to the term through June 30, 2021. FISCAL IMPACT: Additional $5,000,000, up to $30,000,000. 100% General Fund. A portion of this amount may end up being reimburseable by state or federal government disaster reimbursement programs. BACKGROUND: The County Administrator, in the capacity of Administrator of Emergency Services (County Code Section 42-2.602) issued an emergency blanket purchase order in the amount of $20 million on Friday, March 20, 2020 for the procurement of services and supplies necessary to facilitate the COVID-19 response within the County. This emergency procurement is authorized as part of the County Administrator's emergency powers outlined in County Code Section 42-2.808(c), among other authorities. The issuance of this emergency blanket purchase order expedites the acquisition APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: Timothy Ewell, (925) 655-2043 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 , County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Laura Cassell, Deputy cc: C. 38 To:Board of Supervisors From:Monica Nino, County Administrator Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:RATIFY AMENDMENT OF EMERGENCY BLANKET PURCHASE ORDER IN RESPONSE TO THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) of goods and services for faster deployment to the field. To track these costs, three cost centers have been operationalized to track County costs related to the emergency response; one in the Hospital Enterprise Fund I for Health Services department related costs and two in the General Fund: one to track non-Enterprise Fund Health Services Department costs and one to track all other County departments. As purchases are made, suppliers have been provided requisition requests together with documentation establishing the requisition is being made under the blanket purchase order, to ensure that the terms of the blanket purchase order apply to each purchase. The Board of Supervisors ratified issuance of the emergency blanket purchase order on March 31, 2020. On December 22, 2020, the County Administrator increased the blanket purchase order amount by $5,000,000, to a new payment limit of $25,000,000. The Board subsequently ratified the amended blanket purchase order on January 5, 2021. When practicable, services necessary to respond to this emergency have been and will continue to be procured using existing or new service contracts. In emergency and time-sensitive situations, services can be purchased under the blanket purchase order and charged against the above emergency blanket purchase order authorization. Today's action requests the Board of Supervisors ratify an additional increase of $5,000,000 to the emergency action of the County Administrator issuing an emergency blanket purchase order for COVID-19 response activities within the County for a new total of $30,000,000 with no change to the termination date of June 30, 2021. The County Administrator amended the emergency purchase order on February 26, 2021 to ensure no interruptions to procurement during current COVID-19 response activities. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The emergency blanket purchase order as originally approved in March 2020 and subsequently amended in December 2020 will be exhausted. This will result in departments needing to originate individual purchase orders for supplies and materials not covered by an existing purchase order resulting in more time to take delivery on those items. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the County Contract #27-154-17 with Steven Cloutier (dba Alhambra Valley Counseling Associates), a sole proprietor, in an amount not to exceed $450,000, to provide outpatient psychotherapy services to Contra Costa Health Plan (CCHP) members for the period from March 1, 2021 through February 29, 2024. FISCAL IMPACT: This contract will result in contractual service expenditures of up to $450,000 over a three-year period and will be funded 100% by CCHP Enterprise Fund II revenues. (No rate increase) BACKGROUND: CCHP has an obligation to provide certain specialized health care services for its members under the terms of their Individual and Group Health Plan membership contracts with the County. This contractor has been a part of the CCHP Provider Network since 1996. On February 12, 2019, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #27-154-14 in the amount of $350,000 for Alhambra Valley Counseling Associates to provide outpatient psychotherapy services to CCHP members, for the period from March 1, 2019 through February 28, 2021. On January 14, 2020, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract Amendment Agreement #27-154-15 with no change in the APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: Sharron Mackey, 925-313-6104 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Laura Cassell, Deputy cc: K Cyr, M Wilhelm C. 39 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:Contract #27-154-17 with Steven Cloutier (dba Alhambra Valley Counseling Associates) BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) payment limit of $350,000 to modify the compensation page to include additional psychotherapy services for CCHP members through February 28, 2021. On November 17, 2020, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract Amendment Agreement #27-154-16 with no change in the payment limit of $350,000 to modify the compensation page to include additional psychotherapy services for CCHP members through February 28, 2021. Approval of Contract #27-154-17 will allow this contractor to continue providing outpatient psychotherapy services to CCHP members through February 29, 2024. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved, certain specialized health care services for CCHP members under the terms of their Individual and Group Health Plan membership contracts with the County will not be provided. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the County Contract #27-687-8 with Hilltop Radiology, LLC, a limited liability company, in an amount not to exceed $1,050,000 to provide diagnostic imaging services for Contra Costa Health Plan (CCHP) members and County recipients for the period from March 1, 2021 through February 29, 2024. FISCAL IMPACT: This contract will result in contractual service expenditures of up to $1,050,000 over a 3-year period and will be funded 100% by Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II revenues. BACKGROUND: CCHP has an obligation to provide certain specialized health care services for its members under the terms of their Individual and Group Health Plan membership contracts with the County. This contractor has been a part of the CCHP Provider Network since March 1, 2007. On February 26, 2019, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #27-687-7 with Hilltop Radiology, LLC, in an amount not to exceed $1,000,000, APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: Sharron Mackey, 925-313-6104 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Laura Cassell, Deputy cc: K Cyr, M Wilhelm C. 40 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:Contract #27-687-8 with Hilltop Radiology, LLC BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) to provide diagnostic imaging services for CCHP members, for the period from March 1, 2019 through February 28, 2021. Approval of Contract #27-687-8 will allow this contractor to continue providing diagnostic imaging services for CCHP members through February 29, 2024. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved, certain specialized health care services for CCHP members and County recipients under the terms of their Individual and Group Health Plan membership contracts with the County will not be provided. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the County Contract #27-368-17 with John Patrick Leonard Kirby (dba River Counseling Center), a sole proprietor, in an amount not to exceed $330,000, to provide outpatient psychotherapy services for the Contra Costa Health Plan (CCHP) members for the period from March 1, 2021 through February 29, 2024. FISCAL IMPACT: This contract will result in contractual service expenditures of up to $330,000 over a three-year period and will be funded 100% by CCHP Enterprise Fund II revenues. (Rate increase) BACKGROUND: CCHP has an obligation to provide certain specialized health care services for its members under the terms of their Individual and Group Health Plan membership contracts with the County. This contractor has been a part of the CCHP Provider Network since 1998. On February 12, 2019, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #27-368-16 with John Patrick Leonard Kirby (dba River Counseling Center), in the amount of $200,000, to provide outpatient psychotherapy services for CCHP members for the period from March 1, 2019 through February 28, 2021. Approval of Contract #27-368-17 will allow the contractor to continue to provide outpatient psychotherapy services through February 29, 2024. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: Sharron Mackey, 925-313-6104 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Laura Cassell, Deputy cc: K Cyr, M Wilhelm C. 41 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:Contract #27-368-17 with John Patrick Leonard Kirby (dba River Counseling Center) CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved, certain specialized health care services for CCHP members under the terms of their Individual and Group Health Plan membership contracts with the County will not be provided. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the County Contract Amendment Agreement #74-526-10 with Community Options for Families and Youth, Inc., a non-profit corporation, effective July 1, 2020, to amend Novation Contract #74-526-9, to increase the payment limit by $85,800, from $2,267,013, to a new payment limit of $2,352,813 with no change in the original term of July 1, 2020 through June 30, 2021, and to increase the automatic extension payment limit by $42,900, from $1,133,506 to a new payment limit of $1,176,406 through December 31, 2021. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this amendment will result in increased annual expenditures of up to $85,800 and will be funded as budgeted by the department in FY 2020-21, by 100% Mental Health Services Act funds. BACKGROUND: This contract meets the social needs of county’s population by providing mental health services, including individual, group, and family counseling, assessment, case management, and rehabilitation support services to seriously and emotionally disturbed adolescents who are involved in the Juvenile Justice System. County has been contracting with Community Options for Families and Youth, Inc. for Functional Family Therapy (FFT) services since July 2016. Expected program outcomes include an increase in positive social and APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: Suzanne Tavano, Ph.D., 925-957-5212 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Laura Cassell, Deputy cc: L Walker, M Wilhelm C. 42 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:Amendment #74-526-10 with Community Options for Families and Youth, Inc. BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) emotional development as measured by the Child and Adolescent Functional Assessment Scale (CAFAS). On December 8, 2020, the Board of Supervisors approved Novation Contract #74-526-9 with Community Options for Families and Youth, Inc. in the amount of $2,267,013 for the provision of mental health and FFT services for youth who have had serious contact with the Juvenile Justice System for the period from July 1, 2020 through June 30, 2021, which included a six-month automatic extension through December 31, 2021, Approval of Contract Amendment Agreement #74-526-10 will allow the contractor to provide additional services through June 30, 2021. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this amendment is not approved, the contractor will not be able to provide addiitonal mental health and FFT services to County youth. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: This program supports the following Board of Supervisors’ community outcomes: (1) Children Ready for and Succeeding in School; (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. ATTACHMENTS RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Contra Costa ARC (dba Commercial Support Services), in an amount not to exceed $280,000 to provide car washing and janitorial services, for the period April 1, 2021 through March 31, 2024, Countywide. FISCAL IMPACT: Custodial Services and Fleet Services Budget. (75% General Fund, 25% Fleet Internal Service Fund) BACKGROUND: California Welfare and Institute Code section 19404 (“Section 19404”) gives the County the authority to purchase services from non-profit corporations who operate community rehabilitation programs and meet the criteria of Section 19404 without advertising or calling for bids, provided that the services meet the specifications and needs of the County and are purchased at a fair market price, as determined by the County. Contra Costa ARC (CCARC) is a California 501(c)(3) non-profit corporation, doing business as Community Support Services. CCARC meets the requirements of Section 19404 in that: (1) the work to be performed under the contract will primarily APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: Carlos Velasquez, (925) 313-7072 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 , County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Laura Cassell, Deputy cc: C. 43 To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:Contract with Contra Costa ARC (dba Commercial Support Services), Countywide. BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) (at least 75% of it) be performed by a labor force comprised of persons with disabilities; (2) CCARC makes elections under the federal Insurance Contributions Act to provide social security and unemployment benefits to its employees; (3) maintains Articles of Incorporation requiring that at least two directors on its Board of Directors are persons with disabilities or the parents, guardians, or conservators of persons with disabilities; and (4) provides disabled employees substantially equal benefits that are provided to CCARC’s organized employees. CCARC has a client in training/contractor relationship with its workers and provides sick time and vacation. CCARC does not commit unfair labor practices and abides by the provisions of the Federal Fair Labor Standards Act, the Walsh-Healy Public Contract Act, the Wagner O’Day Act, and the regulations of the State Division of Industrial Welfare. Work performed by CCARC includes car washing and minor custodial work. Fleet Management has hired Commercial Support Services to deliver several car washers with supervision to the Waterbird Service Center daily to conduct county vehicle washing. Vehicles coming in for repair are chosen for washing first, so customers pick up a clean, well-running car. Facilities Services has several remote building sites which the Board of Supervisors has approved to receive sublet custodial services. Two of these sites are the Antioch and Walnut Creek libraries. Facilities Services has hired Commercial Support Services to provide minor custodial services to these buildings. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved, car washing and janitorial services with CCARC will be discontinued. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the County, Contract Amendment Agreement #74-475-78(4) with Remarkable Marriage and Family Institute, effective January 1, 2021, to amend Contract #74-475-78(3), to increase the payment limit by $370,000, from $930,000 to a new payment limit of $1,300,000, with no change in the term of July 1, 2019 through June 30, 2021. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this amendment will result in additional contractual service expenditures of up to $370,000 over a 2-year period and will be funded 50% by Federal Medi-Cal ($185,000) and 50% by State Mental Health Realignment ($185,000) revenues. (Rate increase) BACKGROUND: On January 14, 1997, the Board of Supervisors adopted Resolution #97/17, authorizing the Health Services Director to contract with the State Department of Mental Health, (now known as the Department of Health Care Services) to assume responsibility for Medi-Cal specialty mental health services. Responsibility for outpatient specialty mental health services involves contracts with individual, group and organizational providers to deliver these services. The County has been contracting with Remarkable Marriage and Family Institute for Medi-Cal services since February 2018. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: Suzanne Tavano, Ph. D, 925-957-5169 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Laura Cassell, Deputy cc: F Carroll, M Wilhelm C. 44 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:Amendment #74-475-78(4) with Remarkable Marriage and Family Institute BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) On July 23, 2019, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #74-475-78(3) with Remarkable Marriage and Family Institute for the provision of Medi-Cal specialty mental health services for the period from July 1, 2019 through June 30, 2021. At the time of negotiations, the payment limit was based on target levels of utilization. However, the utilization during the term of the contract was higher than originally anticipated. Approval of Contract Amendment Agreement #74-475-78(4) will allow the contractor to provide additional mental health services through June 30, 2021. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this amendment is not approved, services provided to Contra Costa Mental Health Plan Medi-Cal beneficiaries could be negatively impacted, including access to services, choice of providers, cultural competency, language capacity, geographical locations of service providers, and waiting lists. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: The recommendation supports the following children’s outcomes: (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. ATTACHMENTS RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Administrator, or designee, to execute an order for the destruction of County collections and deposit records maintained by the Superior Court that are over five (5) years old and are no longer necessary or required for County or Court purposes, pursuant to Government Code section 26202 and Trial Court Financial Policies and Procedures Manual. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: Under the terms of a Memorandum of Understanding between the County and the Superior Court, the Court administers, on behalf of the County, a collection program for court-ordered debt. In order to efficiently manage the volume of records continuously generated and received, the Court must dispose of unnecessary records and documents. According to the Trial Court Financial Policies and Procedures Manual, FIN 12.01, 6.1.5, the Court is required to retain receipts for fines, fees, penalties collected and other collection receipts for the current year plus four additional years (or from the close date of the State Controller’s Office audit), whichever is longer. The Court has identified 41 boxes of collection and deposit records from FY 2012/13 and 2013/14 meeting this criterion. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: Julie DiMaggio Enea (925) 655-2056 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Laura Cassell, Deputy cc: CAO (Enea), Superior Court Finance C. 45 To:Board of Supervisors From:Monica Nino, County Administrator Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:AUTHORIZATION FOR DESTRUCTION OF RECORDS BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) Government Code section 26202 provides that any record more than two (2) years old may be destroyed without being photographed, microfilmed or otherwise reproduced if: 1. It is not required by state statute or county charter to be prepared or received; or 2. It is prepared or received pursuant to state statute or county charter, but it is not expressly required by law to be filed or preserved, and the board determines by four-fifths (4/5) vote that the retention of such document is no longer necessary or required for county purposes. Approval is requested to destroy the specified 41boxes of records identified by the Court (see attached list). Passage of this order requires a four-fifths (4/5) vote of the Board of Supervisors. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Negative action would decrease the Court's ability to efficiently manage the volume of records continuously generated and received by the Collections Compliance Unit. ATTACHMENTS Records Destruction Authorization 2021 Superior Court of California County of Contra Costa AUTHORIZATION FOR DESTRUCTION OF RECORDS Pursuant to the Trial Court Financial Policies and Procedures Manual, FIN 12.01, 6.3.1, it is hereby authorized to professionally destroy the records identified in the following attached listing titled “Financial Services Division FY 2012-2013 and 2013-2014 CCU Records for Destruction”. ____________________________ __________________ Kate Bieker Date Court Executive Officer ____________________________ __________________ Julie Enea Date Senior Deputy County Administrator Financial Services Division FY 2012-2013 and 2013-2014 CCU Records for Destruction Num Type of Document Time Period Covered Fiscal Year 1 CCU TELLER'S REPORTS JULY 2012 2012-2013 2 CCU TRAFFICING BALANCING REPORTS JULY - AUGUST 2012 2012-2013 3 CCU TELLER'S REPORTS (also includes KB's 08-09 CCU Criminal Interest/Time Study/AOC Report and Lost/Destroyed Warrants from County)SEPTEMBER 2012 2012-2013 4 CCU TELLER'S REPORTS AUGUST 2012 2012-2013 5 CCU OVERPAYMENTS, VR, 07/1/11 - 06/29/12 2012-2013 6 CUBS VS AMORS REPORT SEPTEMBER - OCTOBER 2012 2012-2013 7 CCU NEW ASSIGNMENTS JULY 2012 - DECEMBER 2012 2012-2013 8 CCU TELLER'S REPORTS NOVEMBER 2012 2012-2013 9 CCU CUBS VS AMORS NOVEMBER - DECEMBER 2012 2012-2013 10 CCU CUBS VS AMORS JANUARY - FEBRUARY 2013 2012-2013 11 CCU TELLER'S REPORTS DECEMBER 2012 2012-2013 12 CCU TELLER'S REPORTS JANUARY 2013 2012-2013 13 CCU TELLER'S REPORTS/CUBS CRIM ACCOUNTS FEBRUARY - MARCH 2013 2012-2013 14 CCU CUBS VS AMORS MAY 2013 2012-2013 15 CCU CUBS VS AMORS JUNE 2013 2012-2013 16 CCU MONTH END REPORTS/VICTIM RESTITUTION/CUBS TRUST TRANFER 07/11/2012-06/2013 2012-2013 17 CCU DAILY PACKETS APRIL - MAY 2013 2012-2013 18 CCU DAILY PACKETS JUNE 2013 2012-2013 19 CCU JOURNAL ENTRIES 07/01/2012-06/30/2013 2012-2013 20 CCU new accounts manually set up 12/28/12-06/25/13 2012-2013 21 CCU criminal cases load for court CCU AO at counter reports 01/02/13-06/30/13 01/04/13-06/10/13 2012-2013 22 CCU traffic balancing reports 03/01/13-04/30/13 2012-2013 23 CCU MONTH END REPORTS, TAX INTERCEPT 04/13-06/13, CCU ME 10/11 FY 12-13, 04/13-06/13 2012-2013 24 CCU TELLER'S REPORTS JULY 2013 2013-2014 25 CCU TELLER'S REPORTS AUGUST 2013 2013-2014 26 CCU TELLER'S REPORTS SEPTEMBER 2013 2013-2014 27 CCU TELLER'S REPORTS OCTOBER 2013 2013-2014 28 CCU TELLER'S REPORTS JANUARY 2014 2013-2014 29 CCU TELLER'S REPORTS FEBRUARY 2014 2013-2014 30 CCU TELLER'S REPORTS MARCH 2014 2013-2014 31 CCU TELLER'S REPORTS APRIL 2014 2013-2014 32 CCU TELLER'S REPORTS MAY 2014 2013-2014 33 CCU OVRPYMT ACH & DISBSMT JE'S JULY 2013 - JUNE 2014 2013-2014 34 CCU MONTH-END BACKUP REPORTS & NEW CUBS ACCOUNTS MARCH - JUNE 2014 2013-2014 35 AO @ CTR DEL 07/13, CRIM 07/13-11/13, NEW ACCOUNTS (5/14-6/14), TXI (7/13-6/14)JULY 2013 - JUNE 2014 2013-2014 36 CCU TELLER'S REPORTS JUNE 2014 2013-2014 37 CCU DAILY PACKETS 6/2-6/6/2014 2013-2014 38 CCU DAILY PACKETS 6/9-6/13/2014 2013-2014 39 CCU DAILY PACKETS 6/23/6/27/2014 2013-2014 40 CCU DAILY PACKETS 6/16-6/20/2014 2013-2014 41 Trust bail Cards, Distribution JULY 2013 - JUNE 2014 2013-2014 RECOMMENDATION(S): ACCEPT the Northern Waterfront Short-Line Railroad Feasibility Study. FISCAL IMPACT: No impact. BACKGROUND: One of the recommendations from the 2019 Northern Waterfront Economic Development Initiative Strategic Action Plan and prior economic development studies is to conduct a short-line railroad feasibility study in the Northern Waterfront area. In May 2018, the County was awarded $37,500 in grant funding from the U.S. Economic Development Administration to conduct the Northern Waterfront Short-Line Railroad Feasibility Study ("Study"), which would cost a total of $75,000. The Northern Waterfront Economic Development Initiative Ad Hoc Committee ("Northern Waterfront Committee") concurred with providing a 50% match ($37,500) from the Northern Waterfront implementation funds to fund the shortfall. The Study, which was completed on September 28, 2020, evaluated the feasibility of implementing a short-line railroad in the Wilbur Avenue Corridor (“Study Area”), which encompasses an area from the Fulton Shipyard in Antioch east to the Contra Costa Logistics Center in Oakley, and from the waterfront south to about 18th Street in Antioch. This area was selected for having the most opportunity sites within APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: Robert Sarmiento (925) 674-7822 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Laura Cassell, Deputy cc: Amalia Cunningham C. 46 To:Board of Supervisors From:TRANSPORTATION, WATER & INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:Acceptance of the Northern Waterfront Short-Line Railroad Feasibility Study BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) close proximity of existing Class I1 rail lines. The proposed short-line railroad would transport goods between businesses located in the Study Area and the Class I railroads. The County coordinated with staff from the Cities of Antioch and Oakley during development of the Study. Both the Transportation, Water, and Infrastructure Committee and the Northern Waterfront Committee reviewed and accepted the Study at their meetings on November 9, 2020 and December 17, 2020, respectively. Both committees directed staff to bring the Draft Final Study to the Board of Supervisors for acceptance as a final report, which will close out this effort. The Draft Final Study (Exhibit A) consists of three parts: Assessment of Existing Conditions, Market Analysis, and Findings and Conclusions The Assessment of Existing Conditions (“Assessment”) analyzes four components: Engineering Feasibility, Environmental Concerns, Commercial/Economic Development Conditions, and Transportation System The Assessment identifies five parcels along the waterfront in the Study Area, which were previously served by railroads, that have the greatest potential to be developed as railroad-served businesses. The Assessment provides cost estimates to re-establish a rail connection to each of the five parcels. Four of the five parcels are currently in the process of environmental remediation. As parcels are developed, additional evaluation of the impact on wildlife would be needed. The Assessment determines that the existing businesses in the Study Area rely primarily on trucks to transport goods. Finally, the Assessment provides information on the existing roadway network, Class I railroads (Burlington Northern Santa Fe [BNSF] and Union Pacific [UP]), and maritime facilities in the Study Area, along with the goods movement that occur on each of these transportation facilities. The Market Analysis evaluates the following: Customer Types, Land Development Opportunities, Short-Line Railroad Operators, and Relationships with Class I Railroads The Market Analysis determines that businesses seeking a location with lower land and business costs and good connections with water, Class I railroads, and highways would be attracted to the parcels in the Study Area. For the five parcels that have the greatest potential for short-line railroad service, the Market Analysis provides details on each parcel's characteristics that make it attractive for business development. The Market Analysis identifies five short-line railroad operators that would be good candidates to serve a short-line railroad operation in the Study Area. The Market Analysis notes that BNSF does not support an independent short-line railroad operation in the Study Area, but instead prefers to provide in-house railroad service to the individual parcels in the Study Area. The Market Analysis determines that a new railroad connection from the UP railroad line just south of the Study Area would be too costly to build and limited in providing short-line railroad service in comparison to BNSF. The Findings and Conclusions states that a new independent short-line railroad operation is not feasible in the Study Area for the following reasons: the lack of support from BNSF for an independent short-line railroad operation that would connect to its track, 1. the infeasibility of constructing a separate railroad line to connect the five parcels due to the lack of available right-of-way, and 2. the high cost to construct a new railroad connection from the UP line.3. The Findings and Conclusions recommends that economic development staff from both the County and the two cities establish ongoing communication with BNSF economic development staff to stay informed and coordinate on development opportunities that have potential railroad access in the Study Area. At the December 17, 2020 meeting, the Northern Waterfront Committee directed staff to reach out to BNSF to set up a meeting to discuss potential opportunities to coordinate with BNSF to provide short-line rail service to land developments in the Northern Waterfront. The meeting would include the Northern Waterfront Committee, County economic development staff, and BNSF ecomonic development staff. 1 Class I refers to large railroad companies with operating revenue in excess of $490 million annually. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the Study is not accepted, the County will not be able to complete final reporting requirements for the U.S. Economic Development Administration grant award. In addition, the County would not be fulfilling one of the recommendations from the Northern Waterfront Economic Development Initiative Strategic Action Plan. ATTACHMENTS Exhibit A - FINAL DRAFT Northern Waterfront Short-Line Railroad Feasibility Study SHORT-LINE FEASIBILITY STUDY DRAFT Prepared for: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT Prepared by: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. SEPTEMBER 28, 2020 DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE i PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. Table of Contents Section Page Executive Summary ii 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Project Purpose 1 1.2 Historical Content 1 1.3 Study Area 1 1.4 Existing Conditions 3 2 Assessment of Existing Conditions 3 2.1 Purpose 3 2.2 Commercial/Economic Development Analysis 4 2.3 Engineering Analysis 4 2.4 Environmental Analysis 5 2.4.1 Environmental Due Diligence Review 5 2.4.2 Ecological Evaluation 5 2.5 Transportation Analysis 5 2.5.1 Highways and Local Roads 6 2.5.2 Rail 8 2.5.3 Maritime 9 2.6 Findings and Conclusions 11 3 Market Analysis 11 3.1 Purpose 11 3.2 Potential Customer Types in the Study Area 11 3.3 Potential Land Development Opportunities in the Study Area 12 13 13 13 13 3.3.1 Fulton Shipyard 3.3.2 Kemwater Chemical Company 3.3.3 Amports 3.3.4 NRG Marsh Landing Generating Station 3.3.5 $POUSB$PTUBLogistics Center 14 3.4 Short-Line Railroads 14 3.4.1 Overview of the Rail Industry 14 3.4.2 Benefits of Using Short-Line Railroads 14 3.4.3 Potential Short-Line Railroad Operators in the Study Area 15 3.5 Class I Railroads 15 3.5.1 BNSF Railway 15 3.5.2 Union Pacific 16 4 Findings and Conclusions 16 4.1 Feasibility of Establishing a Short-Line Railroad 16 DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE ii PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. Figures and Exhibits Item Page Figure 1 - Study Area Map 2 Figure 2 - Summary of Existing Businesses and Private Stakeholder Interviews 4 Figure 3 - Cost to Re-Establish Rail Service to Previously Rail Served Parcels 5 Figure 4 - Contra Costa County Transportation System Map 7 Figure 5 - San Francisco Bay Area Seaport Map 10 Figure 6 - Cost to Construct a New Rail Line Connecting the Union Pacific with the Study Area 16 Exhibit A - Site Maps 19 Figure A-1 - Fulton Shipyard 20 Figure A-2 - Kemwater 21 Figure A-3 - Amports 22 Figure A-4 - NRG 23 Figure A-5 - Contra Costa Logistics Center 24 Exhibit B - Assessment of Existing Conditions 25 Table B-0 - East Contra Costa Marine Terminals and Wharfs 39 Exhibit B-A - Short-Line Railroad Feasibility Interviews 41 Table B-1 - Regulatory Database Listings 42-50 Table B-2 - Database Listings Indicative of Release 51-54 Table B-3 - Endangered, Threatened and Rare Species 55 Table B-4 - Migratory and Nesting Birds 56 Figure B-1 - Site Location Map 57 Figure B-2 - Medium Risk Database Listing 58 Figure B-3 - National Wetlands Inventory Map 59 Figure B-4 - Regionally Occuring Special-Status Species 60 Figure B-5 - WSFWS Critical Habitat 61 Exhibit C - Market Analysis 62 Table C1 - Commodities Handled by Bay Area Ports 64 Table C2 - Types of Commodities Handled by Short-Line Railroads in the United States in 2015 72 DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE iii PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. Executive Summary Background As a result of the 2014 Northern Waterfront Economic Development Initiative, a Contra Costa County- led effort to create jobs along its waterfront, the Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development declared the need to commission a study that focused on the feasibility of a short-line railroad in the Northern Waterfront. The study will determine the feasibility of operating a short-line railroad in the Study Area, a corridor along Wilbur Avenue in Antioch and Oakley that includes a BNSF railroad line and several parcels with potential rail and waterfront access. The study includes: t an Assessment of Existing Conditions, t a Market Analysis, and t Findings and Conclusions regarding the Feasibility of Operating a Short-Line Railroad. Assessment of Existing Conditions The existing conditions assessment evaluates elements related to: 1) engineering feasibility, 2) environ- mental concerns, 3) commercial/economic development conditions, and 4) the transportation system as it relates to goods movement. Engineering Feasibility Five parcels in the Study Area, which previously enjoyed rail service, have the most potential to be devel- oped into businesses that could benefit from rail access in the future. A cost estimate was developed to determine the cost to re-establish rail service between the BNSF mainline and the property line of each of these parcels. Environmental Analysis An Environmental Due Diligence Review showed that soil and water contamination areas in GPVSPGUIF GJWF parcel are being remediated, allowing UIF siteT to be redeveloped in the future. An Ecological Evaluation determined that many sensitive bird and flower habitats in the Study Area would need to be studied in more detail before development could occur. Commercial/Economic Development Analysis Interviews, first, with economic development staff from Contra Costa County, the City of Antioch, and the City of Oakley, and second, with existing businesses and private stakeholders, resulted in identifying only one new potential rail customer- Amports, Inc. Transportation Analysis A goods movement analysis determined that most of the businesses within the Study Area are utilizing trucks to move both their inbound and outbound shipments. There is an excellent highway system close DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE iv PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. to the Study Area that provides trucks with efficient movement of goods thorough the Bay Area. Two Class 1 railroads serve Contra Costa County: the Burlington Northern-Santa Fe (BNSF), whose Stockton Subdivision mainline bisects the Study Area, and the Union Pacific Railroad (UP), whose Tracy Subdivision, which connects the City of Martinez with the City of Lathrop, runs just south of the Study Area, parallel to State Route 4 (SR 4). Ports and maritime activities still play an important goods movement role in Eastern Contra Costa County. A number of parcels in the Study Area have active maritime facilities. Market Analysis The market analysis evaluated the following: 1) Customer Types, 2) Land Development Opportunities, 3) Short-Line 3BJMSPBEOperators, and 4) Relationships with Class I Railroads. Customer Types The waterfront along the Study Area, with its access to rail, highways and waterways, could potentially provide businesses the ability to handle the following commodities: t Dry bulk, such as cement, lumber, recycled materials, coal, petroleum coke and ores, t Break bulk, which includes individually bagged, boxed, drummed or palletized dry goods, t Hazardous liquid bulk, such as crude oil, ethanol, liquefied natural gas, t Non-hazardous liquid bulk, such as cooking oils, wine and juice, and t Roll on/roll off vehicles, including automobiles, trucks, construction and farm equipment. Land Development Opportunities Five formerly rail-served sites were evaluated in detail in regards to their ability to provide rail access to businesses interested in shipping or receiving freight by rail. Amports, Inc. is planning to develop a mari- time transload facility for new vehicles from Asia at the former Forestar Parcel. NorthPoint Development Company is planning to construct a primarily truck-served warehouse and distribution center at the Contra Costa Logistics Center in Oakley. The three remaining vacant parcels, Fulton Shipyard, Kemwa- ter and NRG, are going through environmental cleanup and are for sale. The NRG parcel is of particular interest because it has an active heavy rail spur connected to BNSF and offers waterfront access. Short-Line Railroads A short-line railroad is a small or mid-sized railroad company that operates over a short distance relative to larger, national railroad networks. Of the 21 short-line railroads operating in California, five would po- tentially be well-suited to the unique rail transportation conditions and opportunities in the Study Area: 1) Genesse & Wyoming, Inc., 2) Omnitrax, Inc., 3) Watco Transportation Services, 4) Sierra Northern Railway, and DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE v PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. 5) San Francisco Bay Railroad. Class I Railroads If deemed more efficient and economically advantageous, BNSF may engage a short-line railroad or rail switching contractor to provide switching services that it normally would undertake itself. However, BNSF has stated that “it would not likely support a separate, short-line railroad operation in the Study Area,” since at the present time, sufficient rail business exists in close proximity to the Study Area and enough growth potential for it to provide direct rail service without engaging a short-line railroad opera- tor to act in an intermediary capacity. The cost of building a new rail connection from the UP mainline to the Study Area is estimated to be $34.2 million and would be difficult to justify, given that the BNSF mainline is located adjacent to the waterfront parcels with rail access readily available. Findings and Conclusions Several major obstacles make the feasibility of a new, independent, short-line operation unlikely, to ser- vice the Study Area, including: t BNSF’s position that it would not likely support a short-line railroad operating in the Study Area, as it would be providing direct rail shipping service to Amport, Inc. and potentially to other busi- nesses in the Study Area that desire rail shipping service, t The challenges to constructing an independent rail corridor that would traverse through several parcels in the Study Area or along Wilbur Avenue, and t The very large capital investment needed to construct a new rail corridor to connect the Study Area with the UP mainline. Recommendation BNSF has communicated a desire to assist in the development of rail served businesses in the Study Area as part of this study. It has already been in discussions with several potential rail customers looking at moving to the Study Area. Contra Costa County the City of AntiochBOEUIF$JUZPG0BLMFZ should establish an on-going dialogue with the BNSF Economic Development office in San Bernardino, CA. These communications will allow all entities the ability to stay informed and coordinate on potential development opportunities that would be mutually beneficial in attracting new businesses to the Study Area. DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 1 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. 1 Introduction 1.1 Project Purpose As a result of the larger 2014 Northern Waterfront Economic Development Initiative, a Contra Costa County-led effort to create jobs along its waterfront, the Contra Costa County Department of Conser- vation and Development determined that a study that focused on the feasibility of a short-line railroad in the Northern Waterfront as one of the actions to advance the economic development of the overall waterfront. The intent of the study is to determine the feasibility of operating a short-line railroad in the Wilbur Av- enue Corridor (“Study Area”). This study consists of four parts, including: t Part 1: Introduction; t Part 2: Assessment of Existing Conditions and Environmental Due Diligence and Ecological Evaluation; t Part 3: Market Analysis; and t Part 4: Findings and Conclusions. 1.2 Historical Content Eastern Contra Costa County once played a significant role in providing jobs and economic develop- ment, especially with its waterfront, deep-water channels and proximity to two major railroads. Since the early 1900’s, manufacturing began to move to Eastern Contra Costa County. The availably of inexpensive land and labor as well as access to the waterfront, combined with the development of better highway and railroad access, facilitated the economic development of Eastern Contra Costa County. However, beginning in the 1990’s, manufacturing began to decline in the area as a result of stricter environmental laws, forcing many companies to install expensive pollution control devices, making their plants less competitive. The cost of doing business in Eastern Contra Costa County kept increasing, forcing manufacturing plants along the waterfront to close, leaving behind vacant brownfield sites requiring soil remediation before the land could be redeveloped. 1.3 Study Area The Study Area (Figure 1) encompasses an area approximately one-mile wide, extending between the San Joaquin River on the north and East 18th Street on the south and three and one-half miles long, extending between the Fulton Shipyard in the City of Antioch and the Contra Costa Logistics Center just east of State Route 160 (SR 160) in the City of Oakley. It includes the jurisdictions of Contra Costa County, the City of Antioch and the City of Oakley. The Study Area includes Wilbur Avenue, the main east/west roadway, and the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway (BNSF), a Class I (major) railroad, both of which traverse the entire length of the Study Area. Wilbur Avenue provides good truck access to SR 160 and State Route 4 (SR 4). The Study Area includes a mix of residential, commercial/industrial and agricultural land. Within this area are vacant former industrial parcels of land that have the potential to host industrial development or reuse. These parcels of land have access to the San Joaquin River and IBWF existing rail connections, both active and inactive, to the BNSF rail line. Approximately one mile south of the Study Area is an inactive rail line owned by another Class I railroad, the Union Pacific Railroad (UP). DRAFT REPORT TO:CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENTPAGE 2PREPARED BY:R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC.!(4!(10Wilbur Ave}þ160Antioch DunesNational Wildlife RefuseAntioch DunesNWR!(5!(3!(4!(2!(1!(9!(6!(7!(8Oakley RdWilbur Ave18th StViera AveLive Oak AveSandy LnBridgehead RdPhillips LnWorrell RdCavallo RdLynn AveHarbour Dr13th StMinaker DrMain St18th St}þ4}þ160BNSF RailroadUnion Pacific RailroadBNSF RailroadFigure 1 - Study Area Map!(1Fulton Shipyard307 Fulton Shipyard Road, Antioch, CA (OCCUPIED, FOR SALE)Vacant industrial parcel2100 Wilbur Avenue, Antioch, CA (VACANT, FOR SALE)Former GWF Power Systems3400 Wilbur Avenue, Antioch, CA (VACANT, FOR SALE)!(7!(8CEMEX3600 Wilbur Avenue, Antioch, CA (OCCUPIED)!(10Kie-Con, Inc3551 Wilbur Avenue, Antioch, CA (OCCUPIED)!(9Study Area Focus Sites!(2Kemwater Chemical Company1251 Wilbur Avenue, Antioch, CA (VACANT, FOR SALE)!(3Amports, Inc.2603 Wilbur Avenue, Antioch, CA (OCCUPIED)!(4NRG Marsh Landing Power Plant3201 Wilbur Avenue, Antioch, CA (VACANT, FOR SALE)!(5Contra Costa Logistics Center6000 Bridgehead Road, Oakley, CA (VACANT, SOLD)Other Industrial Sites!(6Georgia Pacific Gypsum Wallboard Plant801 Minaker Dr, Antioch, CA (OCCUPIED)0 0.25 0.50.125Miles®PR (Parks and Recreation)HI (Heavy Industry)Land Use DesignationLI (Light Industry)OS (Open Space) / DR (Delta Rec)CR (Commercial Recreation)Map made 9/22/2020 by Contra Costa County Dept of Conservation & Development, GIS GroupShort Line Rail Study Area!!!Disconnected Rail SpursMajor RailroadRail SpurCalifornia State Land Commssion PropertyNew RailOpportunity DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 3 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. 1.4 Existing Conditions An overview of the existing conditions was first conducted virtually to become better acquainted with the Study Area. The overview helped determine which areas in particular needed to be included in the site visit. A number of vacant parcels along Wilbur Avenue were identified as having the potential of being served by rail. In particular, five of these parcels were originally rail-served at one time and could easily be re- connected to the BNSF mainline (Exhibit A). In the City of Antioch, there are four vacant parcels of land north of Wilbur Avenue that have the potential of being served by rail. Also, there are two vacant parcels located south of Wilbur Avenue and adjacent to the BNSF Mainline. These two parcels do not currently have rail access, but could easily become be connected due to the close proximity to the BNSF mainline. In the City of Oakley, there is one parcel at the former DuPont site, now known as the Contra Costa Logistics Center. Each of these parcels was evaluated for their potential to be used as rail-served develop- ments. 2 Assessment of Existing Conditions 2.1 Purpose Part 2 presents a summary of the “Assessment of Existing Conditions” Technical Memorandum. The purpose of this section is to provide a more detailed assessment of the existing conditions in the Study Area to determine if a short-line railroad is feasible. Key components of the assessment evaluate elements related to: 1) commercial/economic development conditions, 2) engineering feasibility and cost, 3) environmental concerns and 4) the transportation system as it relates to goods movement. Each com- ponent evaluates the issues and concerns related to the potential operation of a short-line railroad and the improvements that would be required to allow rail access to the Wilbur Avenue Corridor. A meeting was held at the City of Antioch City Hall with public works staff from Contra Costa County, the City of Antioch and the City of Oakley to get information on the existing engineering conditions/concerns within the Study Area. A site visit was also conducted by an engineering team to evaluate the following: t Feasibility of constructing a rail corridor to connect to each of the five vacant parcels of land that once enjoyed rail service and t Cost to reconstruct the rail infrastructure to provide these parcels with the ability to be served by rail. The following businesses were also contacted to assess the need for rail service: t Fulton Shipyard o 307 Fulton Shipyard Road, Antioch, CA; t Former Kemwater Chemical Company – 1251 Wilbur Avenue, Antioch, CA; t Amports, Inc. (under construction) o 2603 Wilbur Avenue, Antioch, CA; t Former NRG Marsh Landing Power Plant o 3201 Wilbur Avenue, Antioch, CA; t Kie-Con, Inc. – 3551 Wilbur Avenue, Antioch, CA; t CEMEX – 3600 Wilbur Avenue, Antioch, CA and t Contra Costa Logistics Center (under construction) o 6000 Bridgehead Road, Oakley, CA. DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 4 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. The following vacant parcels also were identified as potential locations for new rail-served customers in the Study Area: tA vacant 4-acre industrial parcel - 2100 Wilbur Avenue, Antioch, CA and tFormer GWF Power Systems 9-acre parcel - 3400 Wilbur Avenue, Antioch, CA. This parcel is currently going through the planning approval process to develop a cannabis manufacturing and distribution warehouse development. A summary of these assessments are described in the following sections. 2.2 Commercial/Economic Development Analysis Two sets of interviews were conducted to identify opportunities to meet the needs of new, potential, rail- served customers and other redevelopment opportunities in the industrial portions of the Study Area. The first set consisted of an interview with economic development staff from Contra Costa County, the City of Antioch and the City of Oakley. As detailed in Figure 2, the second set of interviews consisted of interviews with existing businesses and private stakeholders. These interviews only identified one new rail shipper, Amports, Inc. It will be utilizing rail to ship new automobiles to their final destinations. This was not surprising given that most of the existing businesses in the Study Area fall into the truck-served category. In addition, many of the existing businesses located adjacent to the BNSF mainline are not uti- lizing the rail access available outside their doors. Figure 2 Summary of Existing Businesses and Private Stakeholder Interviews 2.3 Engineering Analysis There are five parcels within the Study Area that enjoyed rail service in the past. With the exception of the NRG Marsh Landing spur, the other four rail connections were disconnected from the BNSF main- line due to lack of use. The engineering team determined that the parcels which previously enjoyed rail service have the most potential to be developed into businesses that could benefit from rail access in the future. The engineering analysis only evaluated the cost of re-establishing rail service from the BNSF mainline to the property line of each of these parcels. The cost of re-establishing rail service to the subject parcels is expressed in Figure 3. Stakeholder Activity in Study Area BNSF Railway Rail operator in Study Area NorthPoint Development Developer of Contra Costa Logistics Center in Study Area Amports, Inc. Builder of new automotive transloading facility in Study Area Cushman & Wakefield Realtor handling disposition of 3201 Wilbur Ave. (ex-NRG parcel) Summit CFS Logistics provider considering acquiring 3201 Wilbur Ave. for marine transloading Kie-Con, Inc. Manufacturer of concrete products in Study Area CEMEX Producer of cement in Study Area DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 5 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. Figure 3 Cost to Re-Establish Rail Service to Previously Rail Served Parcels 2.4 Environmental Analysis A desktop environmental constraints assessment was performed, consisting of two parts, an Environ- mental Due Diligence Review and an Ecological Evaluation. The Environmental Due Diligence Review consisted of reviewing environmental databases, historical aerial photograph imagery, topographic maps and fire insurance maps to provide a ranking of sites that may pose potential concerns in connection with future development. The Ecological Evaluation included a review of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (US- FWS) and Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) databases. The results of these reviews are described below. 2.4.1 Environmental Due Diligence Review The Study Area is a historically agricultural and industrial area with documented impacts to soil and groundwater, particularly between the San Joaquin River and the BNSF railroad tracks. The environmen- tal desktop assessment revealed that soil and ground water contamination exists within the Study Area. Due to the potential these impacts could have on future developments, additional investigations may be required during the design phase to identify the potential for special soil and groundwater handling re- quirements during construction. Construction would also require oversight by State and local regulatory agencies. 2.4.2 Ecological Evaluation Ecological wetlands and critical habitats of threatened or endangered species are present throughout the Study Area. A variety of threatened and endangered species and other special-status species also may be present throughout the Study Area. A formal jurisdiction determination/wetland delineation and focused biological surveys would be required to determine the potential impacts of the proposed project on sensi- tive biological resources. The complete Assessment of Environmental Due Diligence Review and Ecological Evaluation can be found in the “Assessment of Existing Conditions” Technical Memorandum. 2.5 Transportation Analysis Local distribution and service activity comprises an important component of the Contra Costa County goods movement economy in terms of tons moved, value of products and traffic impacts on the region’s Name Address Cost to Re-Establish Fulton Shipyard 307 Fulton Shipyard Road, Antioch, CA 355,000$ Kemwater Chemical Company 1251 Wilbur Avenue, Antioch, CA 1,037,880$ Amports* 2603 Wilbur Avenue, Antioch, CA 765,536$ NRG Energy, Inc.** 3201 Wilbur Avenue, Antioch, CA -$ Contra Costa Logistics Center 6000 Bridgehead Road, Oakley, CA 220,800$ * Because the spur into the NRG Parcel is still in place and serviceable, there would be no additional cost to re- establish rail service to this parcel. *Cost to rebuild the rail connection to the east end of the Amports parcel. DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 6 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. roadways. Measured in terms of value, commodities such as construction materials, manufactured goods and consumer electronics comprise a large amount of what moves into and within the Study Area. Urban goods movement is conducted almost exclusively by trucks and includes a high volume small delivery and 5-axle trucks used in long-haul intercityBOE interstate movements. Changes in the economy also contribute to the growing importance of local urban goods movement. Shifts away from manufacturing towards the service sector, especially professional, technical, and information services, equates to a higher level of small package movements via integrators and less emphasis on long-haul movements of manufac- tured products. Compared to the rest of the Bay Area, Eastern Contra Costa County features lower land costs, lower wages and good access to highways, rail and maritime service. Having direct access to three separate transportation modes makes the vacant parcels in the Study Area much more desirable than most other locations in the area. To better understand the how each of the transportation modes improves access to the Study Area, the goods movement system in Eastern Contra Costa County was FYBNJOFE in more detail. 2.5.1 Highways and Local Roads There are two State highways, State Route 4 (SR 4) and State Route 160 (SR 160), in close proximity to the Study Area (Figure 4). Two major surface street truck routes provide access to these State highways, East 18th Street and Wil- bur Avenue. The following routes are designated as Routes of Regional Significance by the Contra Costa Transportation Authority: t SR 4, between Interstate 80 in Hercules and the San Joaquin County Line; t SR 160, between SR 4 in Antioch and the Sacramento County Line; t East 18th Street, between A Street and SR 160 and t Wilbur Avenue, between A Street and SR 1601. The SR 4 highway corridor is a major east-west route approximately 31 miles in length, providing inter- regional commercial travel between the Central Valley and the Bay Area. The SR 4 corridor serves local and intercity truck and heavy automobile travel in surrounding commu- nities such as Hercules, Martinez, Concord, Pittsburg, Antioch, Oakley and Brentwood. Additionally, it provides access to Interstate 680 in Concord and Interstate 80 in Hercules, a major east-west interstate commerce route. SR 4 also connects to Interstate 5 in Stockton, a major north-south interstate commerce route. Truck and heavy vehicle traffic make up four to seven percent of the daily vehicle trips along the SR 4 Corridor2. SR 160 is a minor north-south route approximately 50 miles in length. It connects SR 4 in the City of Antioch with Business Interstate 80 in the City of Sacramento. Because the highway follows the Sacra- mento River, there are truck length restrictions on this route, eliminating most 5-axle trucks from us- 1 East County Action Plan for Routes of Regional Significance, Contra Costa Transportation Authority, Septem- ber 2017, p.10. 2 SR-4 Integrated Corridor Analysis, Contra Costa Transportation Authority, July 2012, p. 5. DRAFT REPORT TO:CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENTPAGE 7PREPARED BY:R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC.Figure 4Contra Costa County Transportation System Map DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 8 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. ing this route. Most long-haul trucks use Interstate 680 in Concord or Interstate 5 in Stockton to make north-south movements to/from Eastern Contra Costa County. Trucks using this route constitute only 11 percent of the total average daily traffic volume. In contrast, truck volumes along SR 4 make up a significant portion of total traffic near the Study Area. Many of the 5-axle trucks are making longer distance trips between the Bay Area and the Central Valley. For SR 4, the average daily 5-axle truck volume is 2,531 trucks or 43 percent of total truck volume. The next highest truck volumes are the 2-axle pickup and delivery van type at 2,440 per day or 42 percent of all trucks. Additionally, there is an extensive network of arterial roadways and local streets that provide access to SR 4 and serve local travel throughout the corridor3. Within the Study Area along Wilbur Avenue, 5-axle trucks also make up a significant portion of the total truck volume at 377 trucks per day or 50% of all truck volumes. This indicates that most of the businesses within the Study Area are utilizing trucks to move both their inbound and outbound shipments3. 2.5.2 Rail The railroad infrastructure in the Bay Area was initially constructed to provide a more efficient trans- portation system to move inbound freight from seaports in San Francisco and Oakland to points inland. During the industrial development era of the late 1800’s, more and more manufacturing facilities were constructed in the Bay Area, further increasing the demand for low-cost transportation of raw materials and finished goods. The rail system continued to expand with connections to Los Angeles, Portland and the rest of the national rail network. This network of railroads increased the Bay Area’s ability to grow into becoming the largest manufacturing region in Northern California. Manufacturing reached its peak during the mid-1900’s as businesses began to merge and manufactur- ing began moving off shore. Railroads today are seeing resurgence in growth by utilizing a very different business model. Trucks have made significant progress in gaining business by providing faster connec- tions to localized markets. Today, railroads are generally only able to compete with trucks on a move that is greater than 500 miles. Many of the current businesses in Bay Area ship and receive goods from mar- kets that are too close for railroads to compete against in terms of timely delivery and flexibility. However, railroads still hold an advantage when moving heavy bulk commodities and cargo long distances. The trend over the last decade has been for Class 1 railroads to shift their focus to “hooking and haul- ing” long trains rather than providing switching and other “retail” transport service to customers with small volumes of rail cars and intermodal marine containers4. The adoption of that strategy has increased freight velocity and improved the profitability of the railroads though it has reduced rail volumes com- pared to what they would have been. Furthermore, this operating model puts rail customers at a disad- vantage when it comes to getting timely local switching services. There are two Class 1 railroads serving Contra Costa County, the BNSF and the Union Pacific Railroad (UP). Each railroad serves the Ports of Oakland, Richmond and Stockton. The UP exclusively serves the 3 2013 Daily Truck Traffic Database, Department of Public Works, City of Antioch. 4 Contra Costa County Northern Waterfront Initiative Market Assessment, April 2013, p. 22 DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 9 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. Ports of San Francisco, Redwood City and Benicia. In addition, BNSF serves a United Parcel Service in- termodal Yard in the City of Richmond. BNSF Railway’s Stockton Subdivision mainline bisects the Study Area. BNSF is the nation’s second largest Class 1 railroad, connecting the Bay Area with the national railroad system, moving freight to/from the cities of Chicago, Kansas City, Dallas and Houston. The rail system provides an important link between the Bay Area and the rest of the national rail system. The BNSF also hosts ten daily Amtrak San Joaquin trains between the Bay Area and Bakersfield. Paralleling SR 4 just south of the Study Area is the Union Pacific Railroad’s (UP) Tracy Subdivision, con- necting Martinez with Lathrop. Currently the line only hosts local freight movements between Martinez and Pittsburg, but could be used in the future as a freight or passenger rail connection to/from Tracy if rail demand warranted it. 2.5.3 Maritime The Bay Area ranks as the fourth largest exporting region in the U.S. in terms of tonnage. While the Port of Oakland handles 82% of the region’s maritime trade, the Bay Area’s ports at Richmond, Benicia, San Francisco and Redwood City, plus the inland port at Stockton, also handle significant maritime trade (Figure 5). The Port of Stockton is the primary Northern California port handling bulk cargo, with the remainder handled at San Francisco, Richmond and Redwood City. In 2011, 3,826 vessels arrived at re- gional berths. Most of the arrivals were bulk cargo vessels (50.6%). Containerized cargo, which is primar- ily processed through the Port of Oakland, accounts for over 50% of vessel capacity. Ports and maritime activities still play an important goods movement role in Eastern Contra Costa County. Maritime facilities are still are being used at the Fulton Shipyard to repair vessels. The Georgia Pacific Gypsum Plant still receives import cargo ships of bulk gypsum manufactured into wallboard for building construction and the Kie-Con Wharf utilizes its waterfront facility to transport large concrete bridge structural members to parts of the Bay Area, Hawaii and Guam. The wharf at the "NQPSUT parcel will be used for a proposed automotive transload facility and the NRG Marsh Landing wharf also has the potential of being developed into maritime transload operation because of its good access to rail and highways. DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 10 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. Figure 5 San Francisco Bay Area Seaport Map DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 11 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. 2.6 Findings and Conclusions There are five parcels north of Wilbur Avenue that were formFSly connected to the BNSF tracks. The rail connections could easily be restored if any of these five businesses were interested in re-establishing a rail option. There are two vacant parcels south of Wilbur Avenue that could easily be connected to the BNSF tracks. The soil and water contamination issues at a number of parcels have already been identified and are in the process of being cleaned up. The only outstanding issue is to evaluate the impacts any new develop- ment would have on the ecological habitats in the Study Area. Based on interviews conducted by RLBBOLTBOEATTPDJBUFT and a field review of the Study Area, most businesses are utilizing trucks for transporting inbound and outbound shipments of goods. Because of the nature of these businesses primarily serving Northern California customers, it is unlikely the rail option would be utilized. The Study Area features excellent highway, rail and water access. These connections provide many op- portunities for businesses looking for multiple transportation modes to expand business potential. SR 4 provides excellent connectivity to the rest of the Bay Area and the Central Valley. The BNSF provides direct long haul rail service between the Bay Area and the transportation hubs in Chicago, Kansa City and Dallas. The Study Area also has a waterfront that JODMVEFTBOVNCFSPGBDUJWFXIBSWFTBOEJOBDUJWF XIBSWFTUIBU can easily be put back inUP service. 3 Market Analysis 3.1 Purpose Part 3 presents a summary of the “Marketing Analysis” Technical Memorandum. The purpose of this section is to conduct a marketing analysis to identify opportunities for the freight rail mode to serve new customers and to determine the feasibility of a new short-line railroad service in the Study Area. The analysis evaluated the following elements: 1) Potential Customer Types, 2) Potential Land Development Opportunities, 3) Potential Short Line Operators, and 4) Relationships with Other Railroads. 3.2 Potential Customer Types in the Study Area To illustrate the potential types of businesses that could be interested in developing property along waterfront in the Study Area, an evaluation of the various seaports in the San Francisco Bay Area was undertaken. Examples of Northern California automobile transload operations can be seen at the Port of San Francisco, the Port of Richmond and the Port of Benicia. The import and export of bulk com- modities also play a major role at port facilities throughout the Bay Area region. However, these ports are constrained by the existing size of their facilities and will not be able to accommodate all of the maritime transload growth necessary to meet the Bay Area’s future demand. Many of the jobs that have tradition- ally operated near seaports as service activities related to port operations are moving further east to take advantage of lower land and business expenses to remain competitive. The waterfront parcels in the Study Area offer new opportunities for maritime-related businesses to move to a more favorable location or take advantage of better rail transportation rates because of the location’s close proximity to highway and rail access. This capability is a big advantage in attracting new businesses to the Study Area. DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 12 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. The waterfront along the Wilbur Avenue Corridor, with its accessibility to rail and highways, could po- tentially provide businesses the ability to handle the following types of commodities: t Dry bulk, such as cement, lumber, recycled materials, coal, petroleum coke and ores; t Break bulk, which includes individually bagged, boxed, drummed or palletized dry goods; t Hazardous liquid bulk, such as; crude oil, ethanol, liquefied natural gas; t Non-Hazardous liquid bulk, such as cooking oils, wine and juice and t Roll on/roll off vehicles, including automobiles, trucks, construction and farm equipment. A shipper survey was conducted of existing businesses in the Study Area showed that existing businesses currently being served by trucks would not change if the rail option was available to them. Most of these businesses receive raw materials and ship their finish products to Northern California markets by truck. Despite the fact that many of the existing businesses are located along the BNSF mainline, many choose to ship by truck because it is the most cost-effective mode to handle its specific transportation needs. The one exception is the Georgia Pacific (GP) Gypsum Wallboard Plant in Antioch. GP receives bulk gypsum by barge from Mexico and manufactures gypsum wallboard panels for commercial and resi- dential use. The finished products are shipped out by truck and rail depending on the most efficient and cost effective transport mode available. However, because GP is located between two parts of the Antioch Dunes National Wildlife Refuge, it would not be possible to construct an independent rail line to connect to this plant without utilizing a portion of the BNSF right-of-way. There are five vacant parcels in the Study Area that at one time had rail service and could easily be re- connected to the BNSF mainline (See Exhibit A). An engineering team conducted a field review to deter- mine the cost of reconnecting each parcel. In terms of new developments in the Study Area, Amports, Inc. is planning to develop a maritime trans- load facility at the former Forestar Parcel. This operation will unload ships of new vehicles from Asia and transport them by truck and rail to their final destinations. In addition, NorthPoint Development Com- pany is planning to construct the Contra Costa Logistics Center, a warehouse and distribution center at the former DuPont Parcel. This planned development will be mostly truck served, with a rail option available to any tenant requiring this mode option. The three remaining vacant parcels are going through environmental cleanup and are for sale. The NRG parcel, in particular, has generated some interest from potential buyers looking for a maritime transload site. Businesses that were interviewed expressed an in- terest in this parcel of land because of the waterfront access that would allow for bulk commodity trans- loading onto and off ships. Given the fact that many existing Bay Area maritime transload operations are at or near capacity, the Study Area is in an ideal location at which to attract these types of businesses. 3.3 Potential Land Development Opportunities in the Study Area Many businesses that locate near waterfront property generally need rail service because of the heavy bulk commodities associated with waterfront transload operations. The vacant parcels evaluated for land development opportunities all have good truck access via Wilbur Avenue to SR 4 and SR 160. The BNSF mainline crosses the Study Area just below Wilbur Avenue, allowing easy rail access to potential business opportunities along the waterfront. A field investigation of the Study Area revealed the following condi- tions Uhere are five rail spurs that provide rail access to vacant parcels within the Study Area (Figure 1). DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 13 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. As discussed in Section 2.3 – Engineering Analysis, rail access for four of the five parcels is still in place and only requires re-establishing the rail infrastructure to the BNSF mainline. The fifth parcel, the NRG Marsh Landing Generating Station, has an existing rail spur that is still serviceable and does not need any upgrading. This makes all five parcels attractive for future business development. The sites investigated, from west to east, include: 3.3.1 Fulton Shipyard, 307 Fulton Shipyard Road, Antioch, CA This 10-acre parcel is currently being used to store equipment and is for sale. Two rail tracks inside the property provide access to the ship yard building and an outside construction yard. This parcel is separat- ed from the rest of the parcels in the Study Area by the Antioch Dunes National Wildlife Refuge, compli- cating the ability to connect this parcel to the other parcels via rail except via BNSF’s right-of-way. Once this parcel is remediated, it would be a very desirable property to a business needing rail access. There is an existing 525-foot wharf available that provides easy access to/from ships. 3.3.2 Kemwater Chemical Company, 1251 Wilbur Avenue, Antioch, CA This 18-acre parcel is currently being used to support what appears to be a metal recycling facility. This 18-acre parcel once had a rail connection with the BNSF but it has been dismantled. The street crossing is still in place but 2,009 feet of new rail and ties would have to be replaced to restore the connection to the BNSF mainline. Access is available to the San Joaquin River but a wharf would need to be constructed if a potential business is interested in developing a maritime transload facility. 3.3.3 Amports (formFSly the Forestar Site), 2603 Wilbur Avenue, Antioch, CA This 110-acre parcel was the site of the former Gaylord Container Corporation which manufactured pulp and paper products. The Forestar Parcel is currently under a 20-year lease with Amports, Inc., a global auto logistics company that receives new automobiles by ship and arranges for transportation by truck or rail to its final destination. The site once enjoyed two rail connections. One of the rail connections is located along the western border of the property and is connected to the same dismantled rail spur that served the Kemwater Chemical Company. This parcel is already going through the environmental and State Land Commission approval process to become a maritime transload facility. Once this project receives the necessary approvals, construction is expected to begin in late 2020. 3.3.4 NRG Marsh Landing Generating Station (Contra Costa Power Plant), 3201 Wilbur Avenue, Antioch, CA This 86-acre parcel is the site of a former coal-fired power plant. The plant was shut down in 2013, after NRG Energy, Inc. opened its new state-of-the-art natural gas power plant adjacent to the old facility. The total available land available to develop is comprised of the 39-acre former Marsh Landing Power Plant and an adjacent 47-acre undeveloped parcel. Due to the heavy rail cars that once brought petroleum coke to this power plant, there is an existing heavy rail connection to the BNSF mainline that is still service- able. No additional rail work would be necessary at this location to begin shipping by rail again. There is a 150-foot wharf available on this parcel providing easy access to/from ships. Once the old power plant is removed, this parcel would make an ideal maritime transload facility. DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 14 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. 3.3.5 $POUSB$PTUBLogistics Center (formFSly known as the DuPont Site), 6000 #SJEHFIFBERoad, Oakley, CA This 345-acre parcel is the location of the former DuPont Chemical Manufacturing Oakley Plant. The parcel is the largest parcel available to develop in the Study Area. A wye rail connection is still in place but will need to be extended back into the property to serve any new businesses requiring rail access. This site VOEFSXFOU corrective action UISPVHIthe Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. 3emedia tion XBs DPNQMFUFEJO. This parcel does not have direct access to the San Joaquin River because approximately 200-acres along the northern portion are designated as an environmentally sensitive area. 3.4 Short-Line Railroads 3.4.1 Overview of the Rail Industry A company’s ability to use rail is just one part of its ultimate decision to actually utilize rail service. The growing inclination of businesses to consider rail results from changes in the economics of transportation nationally. Four discernable trends suggest a growing role to be played by freight rail in the near future: t Demands on existing surface transportation infrastructure have never been greater; t Large railroads are enjoying a period of relative prosperity; t The relatively high cost of fuel, until very recently due to Covid-19 and t Increasingly stringent environmental regulations and resistance of property owners to new high- way construction in urban settings limiting the amount of highway expansion possible and focus- ing attention on alternatives to private motor vehicles. With respect to such matters, rail competes extremely well, with a reputation for having a “light environ- mental footprint” when compared with highways. The very fact that rail development must follow rail alignments reduces the potential for sprawl. Greater use of the rail mode has proved to be one area where environmentalists and economic developers have found significant common ground. 3.4.2 Benefits of Using Short-Line Railroads A short-line railroad is a small or mid-sized railroad company that operates over a short distance relative to larger, national railroad networks. Short-line railroads generally exist for one of three reasons: 1) to link two industries requiring rail freight together (for example, a coal mine and a power plant; 2) to in- terchange revenue traffic with other, usually larger, railroads or 3) to operate a tourist-oriented, passenger train service. Some short-lines exist for all three of these reasons. In general, short-line railroads provide many benefits to shippers. Among them are: t When a Class I carrier’s service deteriorates, they offer alternative rail options if they connect to multiple Class I carriers; t They are a means to gain competitive rates when they connect to multiple, Class I carriers; t They provide quality and timely service; t They make decisions at the local level and t They provide links to local communities and companies. DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 15 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. 3.4.3 Potential Short-Line Railroad Operators in the Study Area In California, there are 21 short-line railroads and 7 switching and terminal railroads, of which five are publicly owned. Of the 21 short-line railroads in California, there are at least five potential operators that would be well suited to the unique conditions and opportunities associated with rail transportation in the Study Area. These operators are very familiar with railroad industry operating standards and agreements with Class I railroads, businesses and public agencies. These operators are: 1) Genesee & Wyoming, Inc. (GWRR), headquartered in Darien, CT. This short-line railroad com- pany operates 113 short-line and regional freight railroads in 42 U.S. states and four Canadian provinces, including six short-lines in California: the Central Oregon & Pacific Railroad (CORP), the California Northern Railroad (CFNR), the San Joaquin Valley Railroad (SJVR), the Ventura County Railroad (VCRR), the San Diego & Imperial Valley Railroad (SDIY) and the Arizona & California Railroad (ARZC). G833 is experienced with waterfront transload operations; it worksin close coordination with publicly-owned seaports and rail ferry services at forty seaports world-wide 2) OmniTRAX, Inc. (OmniTRAX), headquartered in Denver, CO. OmniTRAX is experienced with barge terminal and transload operations. In California, OmniTRAX operates the Stockton Termi- nal & Eastern Railroad (STE) in Stockton 3) Watco Transportation Services (Watco), headquartered in Pittsburg, KS. This short-line railroad company operates 43 short-line railroads in 23 states. Watco is experienced with seaport and transload operations in many of its short-line railroad operations in the U.S. In California, Watco operates the Pacific Sun Railroad (PSRR) in San Diego County 4) Sierra Northern Railway (SERA), headquartered in Woodland, CA. SERA operates a railroad between West Sacramento and Woodland, including the maritime transload facility at the Port of Sacramento. The railroad also serves rail customers between Sonora, Oakdale and Riverbank, including the 170-acre Riverbank Industrial Complex. SERA interchanges traffic with both the Union Pacific Railroad and the BNSF Railway. In addition, it is the contract railroadoperator at the Department of Defense’s Concord Naval Weapons Station, located a few mileswest of the Study Area 5) San Francisco Bay Railroad (SFBR), headquartered in San Francisco, CA. This short-line rail- road has been in operation since 2000 and operates over five miles of track in San Francisco, serving the maritime transload facility at the Port of San Francisco. The railroad provides all of the switching services supporting the automobile and bulk commodity transload shipments at the Port of San Francisco. 3.5 Class I Railroads 3.5.1 BNSF Railway BNSF has a long history of partnering with short-line railroads. Currently, BNSF has 209 short-line rail- road partners in 27 states. BNSF, as a common carrier, has an obligation to serve businesses that require rail service near its rail system. In most cases, BNSF’s prefers providing direct rail service to its custom- ers. However, if deemed more efficient and economically advantageous, BNSF may engage a short-line DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 16 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. railroad or rail switching contractor to provide the necessary switching services it normally would under- take itself. BNSF has stated that “it would not likely support a separate, short-line railroad operation in the Study Area.” BNSF’s position, at the present time, is that there exists sufficient rail business in close proximity to the Study Area and enough growth potential for it to provide direct rail service without engaging a short- line railroad operator to act in an intermediary capacity. However, those decisions could change and will be made on a case-by-case basis as it evaluates each proposed business opportunity. The final decision will be made based on what makes the most economic sense to BNSF and the potential rail customer. 3.5.2 Union Pacific Paralleling SR 4 south of the Study Area is the Union Pacific Railroad’s (UP) Tracy Subdivision, con- necting Martinez with Lathrop. Currently, the line only hosts local freight movements between Martinez and Pittsburg, CA. To access this rail line as a rail alternative, a major financial undertaking would be necessary. Building a rail connection between the UP and the Study Area would require purchasing a two-mile long, 50-foot right-of-way corridor to construct this new rail connection. The only opportunity to construct a new rail corridor would be adjacent to SR 160. It would require preparing a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) document and hiring an engineering firm to develop the plans and estimated cost to construct the new rail connection. In addition, the new rail corridor would have to cross the BNSF mainline near Wilbur Avenue, which would require extensive negotiations with BNSF, who would resist enabling a competitor to access a market it traverses. This crossing likely would require the construction of a rail-to-rail grade separation to avoid conflicts with BNSF freight traffic and the busy Amtrak San Joaquin passenger rail service. Figure 6 Cost to Construct a New Rail Line Connecting the Union Pacific with the Study Area The cost of building a new rail connection to the UP to/from the Study Area (Figure 6) would be hard to justify given the BNSF mainline is located adjacent to the waterfront parcels with rail access readily avail- able. Any business wanting to utilize the UP would be faced with a very large capital investment and only attain the ability to access the UP on a branch line offering only limited weekly service today. Meanwhile BNSF can provide much better service because it has ready access to each parcel in the Study Area. 4 Findings and Conclusions 4.1 Feasibility of Establishing a New Short-Line Railroad Short-Line railroads have the ability of provide low cost rail service to make shipping by rail an attrac- tive option. The five GPSNFSMZrail-served parcels of industrial property along the waterfront in the Item Quantity Cost Right-of-Way Acquisition 2 miles 2,000,000$ Construct Track Infrastructure to NRG 2 miles 2,000,000$ Install Mainline Switch 1 150,000$ Construct Grade Separation 1 30,000,000$ 34,150,000$ Total Cost DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 17 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. 4UVEZ"SFBstill have the potential to attract new businesses and create new jobs. However, several major obstacles make the feasibility of a new independent short-line SBJMoperation unlikely, including: t Amports Shipping Operations: Upon completion of the interviews and the field investigation, RLBBOLTBOE"TTPDJBUFT determined the former Forestar Parcel is under a long-term lease by Amports to developa marine transload facility to unload vehicles from Asia and ship them by truck and rail to theirfinal destinations. In addition, Amports has already made arrangements for BNSF to directly provide the necessary rail service to its facility. t BNSF Railway Unlikely to Support a Short-Line RailSPBE Operation: The biggest drawback for a short-line railroad operation is the inability to operate without a Class I railroad partner. As mentioned in Section 3.5.1, BNSF has stated that “it would not likely support a separate, short- line operation” in the Study Area. At the present time, BNSF’s position is there exists sufficient rail business in close proximity to the Study Area and enough growth potential for BNSF to provide direct rail service without engaging a short-line railroad operator to act in an intermediary ca- pacity. Because BNSF will be providing direct long haul rail service for Amports, it will have the ability to give very favorable rail rates to Amports that a short-line SBJMSPBEoperator would not be able tomatch. Similarly, BNSF can provide very efficient and cost-effective service at a lower cost to theother potential rail customers in the Study Area. t The Ability to Construct an Independent Rail Corridor to Connect Each of the Rail-Served- Parcels: A field investigation led to RLBA’s determination that it was not possible to install an in- dependent rail connection to the Fulton Shipyard because it is located west of the Antioch Dunes National Wildlife Refuge and can only be accessed by the BNSF mainline. BNSF’s opposition to a short-line operation in the Study Area blocks the ability of any new alignment to access BNSF’s mainline. The Amports facility lies in the middle of the Study Area, between the Kemwater and NRG Par- cels. A discussion was held with Amports regarding the possibility of constructing a rail connec- tion across its property. Amports stated it was not willing to allow any other railroad operations on its property because it needed all the available to space to conduct its business at that site. This eliminated the possibility to construct an independent rail corridor to connect the Kemwater parcel to the NRG Parcel. An inquiry was made of the City of Antioch regarding the possibility of constructing a rail con- nection on the north side of Wilbur Avenue. The City was unable to accommodate a 50-foot wide strip of land in which to construct a railroad because it needs all of the available right-of-way to accommodate a planned expansion of Wilbur Avenue to four lanes. This eliminated the option to construct an independent rail corridor along Wilbur Avenue to connect the Kemwater Parcel with the NRG Marsh Landing Parcel. The engineering team also investigated the possibility of constructing a rail line to connect the NRG Parcel to the Contra Costa Logistics Center. The only way this could be accomplished would be by utilizing an existing highway undercrossing. However, this undercrossing also hosts the SR 160 highway interchange and there is insufficient land available to accommodate a rail line and the highway facility at this location. DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 18 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. t The Ability to Connect the UP to the Study Area: Building a rail connection between the UP and the Study Area would require purchasing a two-mile long, 50-foot right-of-way corridor to construct this new rail connection. The estimated cost to construct the new rail connection is $34.2 million. This crossing likely would require the construction of a rail-to-rail grade separa- tion to avoid conflicts with BNSF freight traffic and the busy Amtrak San Joaquin passenger rail service. The expensive initial capital costs to build this connection would be hard to justify con- necting to a branch line railroad with limited weekly service. The service and cost would not be competitive to what BNSF can offer businesses that ship directly through them. 4JODFBNSF desires to serve rail shippers in the Study Area directly and the cost to connect the Study Area to the UP would be very costly, a short-line railroad operation would not becost competitive at the present time. t Recommendation: BNSF has a desire to assist in the development of rail served businesses in the Study Area. It has already been in discussions with several potential rail shippers looking at mov- ing to the Study Area. Contra Costa County, the City of Antioch and the City of Oakley should establish an on-going dialogue with the BNSF Economic Development office in San Bernardino, CA. This will allow all entities the ability to stay informed and coordinate on potential develop- ment opportunities that would be mutually beneficial in attracting new businesses to the Study Area. The rail business climate is dynamic and can change over time. What might not be possible today may become a reasonable alternative in the future. RLBBOLTBOEATTPDJBUFT can help facilitate those discussions with BNSF or other railroad companies, if necessary. EXHIBIT A SITE MAPS PAGE 19 DRAFT REPORT TO:CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENTPAGE 20PREPARED BY:R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC.FIGURE A-1FULTON SHIPYARD DRAFT REPORT TO:CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENTPAGE 21PREPARED BY:R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC.FIGURE A-2KEMWATER DRAFT REPORT TO:CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENTPAGE 22PREPARED BY:R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC.FIGURE A-3AMPORTS DRAFT REPORT TO:CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENTPAGE 23PREPARED BY:R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC.FIGURE A-4NRG DRAFT REPORT TO:CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENTPAGE 24PREPARED BY:R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC.FIGURE A-5CONTRA COSTA LOGISTICS CENTER EXHIBIT B ASSESSMENT OF EXISTING CONDITIONS PAGE 25 DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 26 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. S U B J E This Mem memo is foundatio environm In Eastern C especially Railway (B take advan as its loca Agricultu electrical further w highways advantage These ad Chemical However, environm plants les forcing m requiring “Revitaliz Conservat along the Northern developm P The purp Corridor. parcels alo E C T: morandum pr to provide an on on which mental, comme ntroduction Contra Costa C with its wa BNSF). Since ntage of inex ation enabled ral land was generation. W west in the Ea and a near es to business dvantages led and Kemwa beginning i mental laws, fo ss competitive manufacturing soil remedia ing Contra C tion and Dev Wilbur Aven Waterfront, ment. Purpose pose of this st The intent is ong the Wilbu TASK #3 CONDITIO esents the res n overview of h to make ercial and tran County once aterfront, dee the early 190 pensive land, d businesses t s transformed With plenty o ast Bay, East by railroad t es looking to to the deve ater Chemica n the 1990’s orcing many e. The cost o g plants alon ation before t Costa’s North velopment ha nue Corridor a larger are tudy is to de s to explore t ur Avenue Co TECHNICAL ONS sults of Task 3 f the existing well-inform nsportation c played a sign ep-water cha 00’s, manufac , access to the o take full ad d into shipbu f land, a skille tern Contra C to connect t find a more e elopment sev al, Gaylord P , manufactur companies to of doing bus ng the water the land coul hern Waterfr s commission in Eastern Co ea within Co etermine if a the possibility orridor, incre L MEMORA 3, Assessment g conditions i med decisions concerns. ificant role in nnels and p cturing began e waterfront a dvantage of re uilding, pape ed workforce Costa Count to the nation economical cl veral large m Paper, Fiberb ring began to o install expen iness in East rfront to clos ld be redevel front” Study, ned a feasibil ontra Costa C ontra Costa C short-line ra y of improvin ease their attra ANDUM – A t of Existing C in the Study s. The asse n providing jo roximity to n to move to E and cheap lab egional, natio er and chem and close pr ty thrived. W nal rail netw limate than in manufacturin board Kraft P o decline in nsive pollutio tern Contra se, leaving b loped. As a f the Contra lity study of d County. Wilbu County ident ailroad is feas ng rail access activeness to D ASSESSMEN Conditions. T Area, so as t essment inclu obs and econo predecessors Eastern Contr bor. The area onal and inte mical manufac oximity to th With the deve work, the are n the rest of th ng industries; Pulp and the the area as a on control de Costa Count behind vacan follow up to Costa Coun developing a ur Avenue is tified as a fo sible along th to the vacant potential bus December 12 NT OF EXIST The purpose o to provide a s udes engine omic develop s of today’s ra Costa Coun was very des ernational ma cturing, as w he growing ma elopment of ea provided he Bay Area. ; such as Du e Fulton Ship a result of st evices making ty kept incre nt brownfield the January nty Departme short-line ra a sub-region ocus for econ he Wilbur Av t former indu sinesses lookin , 2019 TING of this sound eering, ment, BNSF nty to sirable arkets. well as arkets better many uPont pyard. tricter g their asing, d sites 2014, ent of ilroad of the nomic venue ustrial ng for DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 27 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. rail-served railroad w Costa Cou Ex The City square mi second lar Bay Area the San Jo a significa Antioch a parts of t Central V communi particular uses are d Street and inactive i industrial The Study River on t the forme Avenue in and the C the poten these vaca 26, 2018, industrial State Rou overlay al industry t En One in-pe Antioch t railroad a Public Wo lanes in th d parcels to would be a co unty-led effor xisting Cond of Antioch w iles, including rgest city in C and the Cent oaquin Valley ant level of lo and provides the Bay Area Valley. The C ity. With the e rly, single-fam distributed thr d A Street cor ndustrial lan l users and acc y Area encom the north, and er Fulton Ship n the City of City of Oakley tial for indust ant waterfron the City of l area along W ute 160, exclu llows cannab to conduct bu ngineering erson meetin to determine long the Wilb orks officials he future to a relocate to a omponent of t rt to create job ditions with a populat g the area of Contra Costa tral Valley. St y and the Bay ocally genera a freeway co a and connec City has exp exception of t mily detached roughout the rridors. The a nds that refle companying j mpasses an ar d East 18th Str pyard in the Oakley. It in y. Within the trial developm nt properties Antioch pas Wilbur Aven uding the res is companies usiness within g was held w what enginee bur Avenue C pointed out t accommodate and bring new the Northern bs. tion of appro its jurisdictio County after tate Route 4 ( Area for com ated demand nnection to t tions to the erienced sev the northeast residential, a City along m area along the ct the City’s jobs, while ba rea approxim reet on the so City of Antio ncludes the ju City of Antio ment or reuse and began bu ssed a city o nue Corridor. idential areas s to apply for n the overlay. with public wo ering issues/b Corridor. that the City e the projecte  2 of 15 w jobs to Ea n Waterfront oximately 113 onal boundari Concord. Th (SR 4) Corrid mmute, recrea from the citi the west for t east for trave eral decades tern and wate are the most p major thoroug e northeast co industrial ro alancing exist mately one mi outh and three och and the f urisdictions of och are a num e. Recently, la uying them f rdinance cre The overlay s and the An r a condition orks officials barriers migh of Antioch is ed increase in astern Contra Economic D ,000 in 2019 ies as well as he City is situ dor is a critica ational and co ies along the travel to/from vel to/from St of growth a erfront portio prominent lan ghfares and in orner of the C oots and the ting open spac ile wide exten e and one-hal former DuPo f Contra Cos mber of sites arge land deve for future dev ating a cann y extends bet ntioch Dunes nal use permi from Contra t be encounte s planning to n traffic along R.L. BANKS a Costa Coun evelopment I encompasses its sphere of uated between al east/west co ommercial tra route. SR 4 m Concord, M tockton and as a predom ons of the City nd use in the n higher conc City is domin e potential fo ce. nding betwee lf miles long ont Chemical sta County, th with existing elopment firm velopment. In nabis overlay tween the Fu s National W it for all face a Costa Coun ered by devel enlarge Wilb g the corridor & ASSOCIATE nty. The shor Initiative, a C s approximate f influence. It n the San Fran orridor conne affic. It also s bisects the C Martinez and other parts o minately resid y, residential e City. Comm centrations on nated by activ or a resurgen en the San Jo extending bet Plant at Live he City of An g industrial u ms saw the va n addition, on over most o ulton Shipyard Wildlife Refuge ets of the can nty and the C loping a shor bur Avenue to r. This will in   S, INC. rt-line Contra ely 50 is the ncisco ecting serves City of other of the dential areas, mercial n 18th ve and nce of oaquin tween e Oak ntioch uses or alue of n July of the d and e The nnabis City of rt-line o four nclude DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 28 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. all of the Currently knowing t infrastruc blocking W developm accommo An onsite (RLBA) to served site vacant pa estimate w points of descriptio Site 1 existin tracks weigh line, t been served egress facing is not the im right- reloca at an Site 2 previo the tr to ser south concr the af crossi upgra value roadb estim necessary dr y the city is n the potential cture to accom Wilbur Aven ments in the S odate the traff e engineering o determine t es and the po arcels of land. was developed the propertie on of each rail 1: Fulton Sh ng rail infras s still provide ht and should the mainline t removed. Th d. Installatio s to the adjac g street quadr t suitable for r mprovements -of-way line ate a signal ca estimated cos 2: Kemwater ously rail serv ack has been rve two sepa herly property rete grade cro forementione ing protection aded. Also, co as the existi bed, install a ated cost of $ rainage and s ot experienci trip generatio mmodate thi nue, especially Study Area s fic impacts alo physical insp the feasibility tential that ad . Each availab d to restore ra es. The five s l connection: hipyard, 307 tructure with e access to the d be replaced turnout and t he existing tra n of an at-gra ent property. rants would b reuse, net of s above is $178 and the entr ase, install a m st of $176,000 r Chemical C ved with a tra removed up t rate parcels. y line will req ssing and ins ed items wou n across Wilb ontingencies a ing track is n mainline tu 225,000, yield safety require ing congestio on that these is growth. O y during peak hould be req ong Wilbur A pection of th and associate dditional rail ble parcel alo ail service bet ites where en Fulton Shipy hin the prope e shipyard er to handle th the single trac ack also cross ade, motor ve Passive cross e sufficient. T salvage value, 8,808. The est rance to the mainline turn 0, bringing the Company, 12 ack over 2,000 to a point just The reactiva quire construc tallation of ne uld be $1,037 bur Avenue i allow for the not suitable urnout and c ding a total pr 3 of 15 ements that n along the W new developm ne concern t k travel perio quired to pay Avenue. e Study Area ed costs of re construction ong Wilbur A tween the BN ngineering est yard Road, A erty limits of rection buildi e heavier rail ck between th ses an entran ehicle crossin sing protectio The cost to rem was reflected timate includ shipyard pro nout and cons e total project 251 Wilbur A 0 feet in lengt t south of Wi ation of Site ction of 2,009 ew active grad 7,880. Include in the event t removal of tr for reuse. T construct trac roject cost of go along wit Wilbur Avenu ments will cre that was rais ods. Officials y for any nec a was conduct activating rai n could facilita Avenue was in SF main line timates were Antioch. The the shipyard ing and a con l cars in servi he BNSF main ce to a parce ng would be n on with grade move and dis d in the cost e des track cons operty. Note struct track to t cost to $354 Avenue, Anti th from the B ilbur Avenue 2 from the 9 feet of new de crossing p ed in the esti the existing e rack consideri The BNSF wi ck to its nor $1,262,880. R.L. BANKS th roadway e ue Corridor b eate so it can sed was the p also pointed cessary street ted by R.L. B il service to fi ate bringing r nvestigated a and the assoc developed on e Fulton Ship d. Inside the nstruction yar ice today. Ou n line and the el of property necessary to a e crossing sig spose of the ex estimate. The truction cost that the BN o its northern 4,808. ioch. The Kem BNSF mainlin where the tra BNSF right-o track, installa rotection. Th imate is fund equipment ca ing its dispos ill have to re rtherly right- & ASSOCIATE expansion pro but is interest plan the nece potential of d out that any t improvemen Banks & Asso ive, previously rail service to and an engine ciated rail ent n site maps w pyard parcel e property, tw rd. The rail is utside the pro e property lin y which is no achieve ingres gns (cross buc xisting track w cost to imple between the NSF would ha n right-of-wa mwater parce ne. The major ack apparently of-way line t ation of 128 f he estimated c ding of new annot be reus sal cost and sa estore a secti -of-way line S, INC. ojects. ted in essary trains y new nts to ociates y rail- other eering trance with a enjoys wo rail s light operty ne, has t rail- ss and cks) at which ement BNSF ave to ay line el was rity of y split to the feet of cost of grade sed or alvage ion of at an DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 29 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. Site 3 a larg two r prope to the Howe utilize weste the B conne the b south replac propo Avenu crossi fundin upgra salvag turno total p Site 4 betwe featur Landi locati Site 5 Oakle both t and o conne servic upgra estim En A deskto environm environm 3: Amports (f ge corrugated rail connectio erty. Access to e Kemwater ever, during a e the rail con rn rail conne NSF mainlin ections at this est alignmen heast rail con ced with a sta osed from th ue will requi ing. The estim ng of new gr aded. Also, co ge values as th out and track project cost o 4: NRG Energ een the forme res heavy rai ing Power Pla on. 5: Oakley Lo ey. BNSF prov the easterly an ut of this faci ection to the ce to the parc ades to the n ated project c nvironment op environm mental due d mental due di formally For paper manu ons, one at s o the southwe parcel. The an on-site inte nnection at th ction. Theref e was only p s site and RLB nt geometry f nnection is co ndard track s e northerly r re constructi mated cost o rade crossing ontingencies he existing tr to its northe f $765,536. gy, Inc., 3201 er Marsh Lan il to accomm ant with fuel t ogistics Cente vided rail serv nd westerly d ility, there is a Oakley Logis cel depends o northerly righ cost of $220,8 tal mental constr diligence revi iligence revie restar), 2603 W ufacturing pla southwest cor est corner of engineering erview with A he southeast c fore, an engin provided for t BA is in agree for the type omprised of section and th right-of-way on of 684 fe of the aforem protection in cover the cos rack is not sui erly right-of-w 1 Wilbur Ave nding coal-fi modate the pr to generate el er (formally vice to DuPo directions. Bec a rail storage y stics Center p on the locatio ht-of-way lin 00. raints assess iew (Part 1) ew consisted 4 of 15 Wilbur Aven nt owned by rner (3A) an the property team condu Amports, Inc. corner of its neering estima the southeast ement with le of rail cars t a turnout an he grade cross line of the B et of track an mentioned item n the event t st of track re itable for reu way line at a enue, Antioch red power pl rior loaded c ectricity. No DuPont Che nt by use of a cause of the l yard just west property line on of rail-dep e would be a sment was ) and an ec of reviewing nue, Antioch. y the Gaylord nd one at the was along th ucted inspect , the team wa property and ate to restore t connection essor that the that will be o nd grade cro sing should be BNSF to the nd installatio ms is $615,53 the existing e emoval, consi use. The BNSF an estimated c h. The NRG s lant and the coke trains t additional tra emical Comp a wye connec arge amount t of the wye. T is estimated pendent custo approximatel performed, cological eval g environmen R.L. BANKS . This parcel w Container C e southeast c he same rail sp ions of both as advised tha d did not wis the Amports (3B). There e southeast co operating int ossing. The t e reconstruct property line on of 44 feet 36. Included equipment ca idering both F will have to cost of $150, site still has a BNSF mainl that used to ack work will pany), 6000 B tion to facilit of rail traffic The cost to re at $210,800. omers. The c ly $10,000, r consisting o luation (Par ntal database & ASSOCIATE was the locati Corporation. I corner (3B) o pur that conn h rail connec at it only wish sh to reactiva s rail connecti is evidence o onnection pro to this parcel turnout shou ed. The track e north of W of concrete in the estim annot be reus disposal cost o install a ma 000, resulting an existing rai line. The rail supply the M l be required a Bridgehead R tate switching c that operated e-construct th The design o cost of BNSF esulting in a of two part t 2). The P es, historical S, INC. ion of It had of the nected ctions. hed to ate the ion to of two ovides l. The uld be k work Wilbur grade mate is sed or ts and ainline g in a il spur l spur Marsh at this Road, g from d into he wye of rail track a total s, an Part 1 aerial DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 30 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. photograp pose pote a review databases The meth P The envir facilities o the propo identify fa reviewed t Fi Historica The earlie was depic of the Fu historical Fulton’s S ship yard By 1953, t to the BN numerous aerial pho 1999), the Corporati among ot constructe Antioch B Historical disposal a Througho Wilbur St and comm present da ph imagery, t ntial concern of U.S. Fish . hodologies and Part 1: Enviro ronmental du or issues with osed project. acilities of co to assess the p indings al Records est documente cted on an 188 ulton Shipyar records indic Shipyard is de down to Wilb the area betw NSF Railway) s sand pits an otograph show e former Cont ion (operated ther industria ed along an Bridge was co l topographic and industria out the 1960s, treet in the w mercial land u ay. topographic m ns in connecti and Wildlife d findings for onmental Du ue diligence r h a high likeli The standar oncern. Histo potential for e ed industrial 84 fire insura rd. Sparse re cate the area epicted on a f bur Avenue. ween the San J ), began a tr nd industrial ws the operati tra Costa Pow d from the 194 al operations unnamed str nstructed acr c maps depic al waste pond , 1970s, and 1 estern portion uses. Agricult maps and fire on with futur fe Service (U r the desktop ue Diligence eview consist ihood of envi rd environme rical aerial p environmenta use in the Stu nce map in th esidential dev was in use fo fire insurance Joaquin River ansition towa buildings, in ions of the for wer Plant (op 40s to the 199 s and deep s ream near the ross the Antio ct a number o ds in the cur 1980s, industr n of the Stud tural use of th  5 of 15 e insurance m re developmen SFWS) and D reviews are d e Review ted of a focus ironmental li ental databas hotographs, t al impacts ass udy Area was he northwest velopment is or agricultura e map and res r and Atchiso ards industri ncluding an o rmer DuPont erated from 1 90s), and Geo sea harbors. B e southwest c och River. of features o rrent Antioch rialization of t y Area transi he southeaste maps to prov nt. The Part 2 Department described belo sed desktop a iabilities that se records we topographic sociated with by the Califo corner in the depicted thr al purposes b sidences are a on Topeka & ial use. The oil tank farm, t Chemical Co 1953 to 2013) orgia Pacific G By 1968, a r corner of the f environmen h Dunes Wild the waterfron itioned from ern portion o R.L. BANKS vide a ranking 2 ecological e of Fish and ow. assessment in could repres ere reviewed maps, and Sa historical lan ornia Distillery e vicinity of th roughout the by the early 1 also depicted Santa Fe Rail 1953 topogra , along the sh ompany (ope ), the former G Gypsum (con reservoir (Lak e Study Area, ntal concern, dlife Refuge nt continued, agricultural t of the Study A & ASSOCIATE g of sites that evaluation inc Wildlife (CD ntended to id ent constrain d in an attem anborn maps nd uses. y Company, w he current loc e Study Area 900s. By 192 to the south lroad, (predec aphic map d horeline. The erated from 19 Gaylord Con ntinues to ope ke Alhambra , and by 197 , including se area in the 1 and areas sou to dense resid Area persists t   S, INC. t may cluded DFW) dentify nts for mpt to s were which cation a, and 26, the of the cessor depicts e 1959 956 to tainer erate), a) was 6, the ewage 1970s. uth of dential to the DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 31 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. Database Environm regulatory defined b The full d A review be noted, with the p of industr been sub investigat The prese Due to th Avenue C special so project co such as th practical, reduce pr P A desktop constraint biological sensitive f Fi The Study potential Antioch D also prese marina, h Jurisdicti The Study river delta e Search mental Risk In y databases in y ASTM E15 database searc was performe that althoug potential to im rial use. Man bject to activ ions. ence of soil a he potential Corridor, add oil and groun osts, worker s he Regional W adjusting th oject costs. Part 2: Ecolog p study of pu ts within the l species, crit features. indings y Area includ for industria Dunes Nation ent. The north arbor and tid ional Waters y Area is with a and estuary nformation S n an effort to 527-13. The s h report will b ed on each of gh the databa mpact the pro ny of the lega vities, such a and groundw for these im ditional invest dwater handl safety consid Water Quality e proposed r gical Evalua ublicly availab Study Area, tical habitat des a mix of al reuse or d nal Wildlife R hern portion o dal wetland ar s and Wetlan hin the Sacram formed by th Systems (ERIS o identify pot search results be included in f the potential ase listings in oposed projec acy historical as property ater contami pacts to affe tigations may ling requirem erations and Board and th railroad align ation ble mapping including th for threatene developed ru development. Refuge, Alham of the Study A eas. nds mento-San Jo he confluence  6 of 15 S) Incorporat tential enviro yielded 1,15 n the Append l environmen ndividually do ct, they cumul industrial op transfers, th nation throu ct future dev y be required ments during coordination he Departmen nment outsid resources wa he extent of j ed and enda ural and indu Designated mbra Lake, a Area overlaps aquin Delta o e of the Sacram ted was cont onmental con 5 individual dix of the Sho ntal concerns o not pose si latively repre perations con hat would ty ughout the Stu velopment of d during desig construction n with and ov nt of Toxic Su de of the mo as conducted urisdictional angered speci ustrial areas a open space a and the Antio s the San Joaq of Contra Cos mento and Sa R.L. BANKS tracted to com ncerns within records with ort-Line Feasib listed in the ignificant env esent an area w ntinue to ope ypically trigg udy Area is w f the parcels gn to identify n. This may r versight by r ubstances Con st heavily im to identify p waters and w ies and othe and undevelop areas and pa och Youth Sp quin River and sta County, a an Joaquin Ri & ASSOCIATE mplete a sear n the search r in the Study bility Study. database. It sh vironmental with a long h erate and hav ger environm well- docume along the W fy the potenti result in addi regulatory age ntrol. To the e mpacted areas potential ecol wetlands, sen er environme ped areas wit arks, includin ports Comple d associated w n expansive i ivers. The ma   S, INC. rch of radius Area. hould issues history ve not mental ented. Wilbur ial for itional encies extent s may ogical nsitive entally th the ng the ex are wharf, inland apped DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 32 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. wetlands with som tidal wetla Endange The Sacra and enda biological mammals limited to the Study Wildlife R require si absence o Migrator In additio nesting b nesting bi Protection C Part 1 – E The Study groundwa throughou environm environm additiona Part 2 – E Ecologica Study Are present th biological sensitive impacts o to, the U Fisheries are concentra e additional w ands, non-tid ered, Threate amento-San J angered speci l areas that s, birds, repti o certain habi Area within Refuge. To f te-specific bi f protected sp ry and Nestin on to the thr irds may be irds are prote n Act of 1940 Conclusions Environment y Area is a h ater, particula ut the Study mental investi mental issues t l worker safet Environment al Wetlands an ea. A variety hroughout the l surveys wou biological re on sensitive ec USFWS (Fed (Federal enda ated around t wetlands furt dal wetlands, a ened, and En Joaquin Delta ies, as well a contain vari les, amphibia itat types and open waters, fully determi ological surv pecies within ng Birds reatened and present with ected under th . Actions mus tal historically ag arly between y Area are cu igation of th that may be e ty considerati tal Due Dilig nd critical hab of threatened e Study Area. uld be requir esources. If f cological reso deral endange angered fish the San Joaqu ther south thr and freshwate ndangered S a area provide as California ious threaten ans, fishes, in d known occu wetlands, an ine potential eys to identif the proposed d endangered hin the Study he Migratory st be taken to gricultural an n the Joaquin urrently und he final pro encountered ions, and coor gence Review bitats for thre d and endang A formal, jur red to determ focused biolo urces, consul ered species) species), U.S.  7 of 15 uin River and roughout the er pond habita Species es habitat for rare plants. ned, endange nsects, crustac urrences are c d undevelope impacts to p fy suitable ha d project area. species liste y Area during Birds Treaty o avoid or less nd industrial n River and dergoing volu oject area w during const rdination wit w eatened or en gered species risdiction det mine the pot ogical surveys ltation with re ), National O . Army Corp d associated w e Study Area. ats. r various Fed The Study ered, rare an ceans, and pl concentrated ed areas such protected spe abitats and th . ed above, var g certain tim y Act of 1918 sen impacts to area with do the BNSF ra untary and m would be nec truction and th regulatory ndangered spe and other sp termination/w tential impac s determined egulatory age Oceanic and of Engineers R.L. BANKS wharf, harbor . The mapped deral and Stat Area include nd endemic lants. Most o within the n as the Antio ecies, the pro he likelihood rious species mes of the ye and the Bald o migratory o ocumented im ailroad track mandated cle cessary in o could result agencies. ecies are prese ecial-status s wetland deline cts of the pro d that the pr encies includi d Atmospher s (Federal jur & ASSOCIATE and marina d wetlands in e-listed threa es highly sen species, incl of these specie northern porti ch Dunes Na oposed projec of the presen of migratory ear. Migratory d and Golden or nesting bird mpacts to soi s. Numerous eanups. A de order to pla in increased ent througho pecies may al eation and fo oposed proje roject would ng, but not li ric Administr risdictional w   S, INC. areas, nclude atened nsitive uding es are ion of ational ct will nce or y and y and Eagle ds. il and s sites etailed n for costs, ut the lso be ocused ect on have mited ration waters) DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 33 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. and CDF required t C RLBA con customers of intervie A telepho the City o visions of having a s Key result C go T C ea al di th In O to as In ex an m su A 34 on A un W (State end to assess perm Commercial/ nducted inte s and other re ews and atten one interview of Antioch and f stakeholder short-line rail ts of the inter Contra Costa oal is to attrac There is a cann Council in 201 ast 18th stree llowed within ispensaries ar he corridor is n the City of Oakley Logisti o obtain entit spects of this n the City of xists. Inside t nd the second market but it uperfund site. Also in the Cit 400 Wilbur A n the south si A very small nincorporate dangered and mitting and m /Economic D rviews to ide edevelopmen ndees is featur w was conduct d the City of O rs regarding lroad provide rview with eco County adop ct and preser nabis overlay 18. The area c et, covering t n the green z re not forecas M2-Heavy In Oakley, ther ics Center is s tlements to d proposed new Antioch, the the property l d provides a l is contamina . ty of Antioch Avenue that c ide of Wilbur part of the d portion Co d special-statu mitigation requ Developmen entify opport nt opportuniti red in Exhibit ted with econ Oakley. The i the Study A service to the onomic develo pted the Nort rve jobs; y over much o covers the he the area’s rai zone, from p sted to be the ndustrial; e has been si slated to be co develop this p w developmen Fulton Shipy line, there are loading track ated from the h, there is a 1 ould potentia Avenue adja e Study Are ontra Costa 8 of 15 us species an uirements. nt tunities to m ies in the indu t A. nomic develo interview was rea and iden e Study Area. opment staff thern Waterf of this area, o avy industria ilroad and sp production th most prevale ignificant cha ompleted in 2 property and nt. yard is a smal e two railroad k alongside th e original shi 0-acre parcel ally be develo cent to the BN ea, between County. Thi nd the State j meet the need ustrial portio opment officia s designed to ntify opportu are listed belo front Strategic or green zone al zoned areas pur lines. An hrough extrac nt use. The cu ange since 20 2021. The dev making final ll industrial p d tracks, one he building. T ipyard operat l for sale with oped into a ra NSF mainline Maritime W is area was t R.L. BANKS jurisdictional ds of new po ons of the Stu als from Con identify the g unities that c ow: c Plan in Jan e, approved by s from the Sa ny and all ca ction to disp urrent zoning 014. The clean veloper is wo l decisions on park where an leads into th This shipyard tion and is li h an existing ail served busi e. Way and SR the subject o & ASSOCIATE waters) wou otential rail-s udy Area. A fu ntra Costa Co goals, concern could benefit nuary of 2019 y the Antioch an Joaquin Riv annabis busin pensaries, alth g in the major nup process o orking with th n the develop n inactive rai he existing bu property is o sted by the E building on-s iness. The pa 160, lies in of an unsucc S, INC. uld be served ull list ounty, ns and from 9. The h City ver to ness is hough rity of of the he city pment l spur ilding on the EPA a site at rcel is n the cessful DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 34 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. at Six additi Area and 1)In 2)Id 3)Id The follow 1)B co an di A th W 2)N K ce D C co 3)A fa si en re th is w fi 4)N pr de in co 5)Su ttempt to ann ional interview prospective r ntroduce the c dentify the go dentify oppor wing compan NSF Railway oordinated ef nd Contra C iscussions wi Amports (Fore he former NR Wakefield, the NorthPoint D Kansas City M enters in 21 s DuPont Site i Center. Five b ommerce fulf Amports, Inc. acility across igned a twent nvironmental ebuild the wh he necessary p s completed, i will be off-load nal destinatio NRG parcel – roperty (Mar eveloping a m nto this site, onnection. ummit CFS – nex by the City ws were cond rail-served cus concept of sta oals, concerns rtunities to pr ies were inter y - BNSF was ffort. It is will Costa County ith NorthPoin estar) regardi RG March L e real estate co evelopment - MO. The com states. NorthP n the City o buildings are fillment and li – Amports is the delta in y-year lease w l process and harf in conjun permits and e it will begin c ding new veh ons. Cushman & rsh Landing marine translo makes it a v – A logistics c y of Antioch ducted by RL stomers. The arting a short and visions o rovide rail serv rviewed: glad to hear ling to work y to help wi nt Developme ng their prop anding Powe ompany hand - NorthPoint mpany has d Point plans to f Oakley. Th scheduled to ight manufac s a global aut in the City o with the owne d working w nction with a expects to star constructing a hicles imports & Wakefield i Power Plan oad facility on ery attractive company base  9 of 15 a few years ag LBA with BN interviews we -line railroad of perspective vice to busine the county is with the econ ith the deve ent regarding posed projects er Plant Site dling the sale o t is a large co developed sim o construct a he new develo o be built and turing. tomotive logis of Benicia on ers of the Fore ith the State roll-on-roll-o rt constructio a rail connect s from Asia a is the comme t) and is wo n this site. Th e site for bus ed in Oakland go. NSF officials, e were designed d service in the e users of the esses located w s conducting nomic develo lopment of g the Oakley s. BNSF also i and has had of this parcel. ommercial d milar light m 2 million squ opment will d will feature stics compan n the Union estar parcel. I Lands Com off auto trans on on the wha tion and a rai and shipping ercial realtor orking with he waterfront sinesses looki d is looking f R.L. BANKS existing indu to: e Study Area; short-line rai within the Stu a short-line opment staff i these parcels Logistics Cen is aware of a p d discussions . development c manufacturing uare-foot com be called the e; warehousin ny. It operates Pacific Railr It is currently mmission to o sload facility. arf site in 202 il yard on its p them by truc handling the potential bu access and th ing for water for a site that & ASSOCIATE ustries in the ; ilroad service udy Area. railroad stud in Antioch, O s. BNSF has nter (DuPont potential buy with Cushm company bas g and distrib mplex at the fo e Oakley Log ng, distributio s an auto tran road. Amport y going throug obtain a perm Amports has 20. Once the property. Am ck and rail to e sale of the uyers interest he existing rai r access with has rail and   S, INC. Study and dy as a Oakley s held t) and yer for man & sed in bution ormer gistics on, e- nsload ts has gh the mit to s filed wharf mports o their NRG ted in il spur a rail water DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 35 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. ac pr 6)K cu sh an aw 7)C fr de co se T Transport make up a Area, ther land adjac East 18th route, Stat G Local dist goods mo roadways retailers a estate ma constructi moves int waste col movemen trucks us volumes o County1. Changes Shifts aw 1 Contra C ccess to deve roperty. They Kie-Con, Inc. ustomers are hipped prima nd Guam. Ki way to make r CEMEX – The rom Clayton elivered by tr oncrete to cus ervice. Transportatio tation plays a a significant n re are two m cent to Wilbu Street is zone te Route 160, Goods Movem tribution and ovement econ . Major econo and consumer arkets and loc ion materials to and within llection) gen nt is conducte ed in long-h of package an in the econo way from ma osta County N elop a marine y are intereste – Kie-Con generally loca arily by truck ie-Con make rail service a v e Antioch Co and cement ruck to local c stomers locat on an integral rol number of veh major east wes ur Avenue is z ed residential connecting E ment Analys d service activ nomy in term omic activitie rs, movement cal parcel and , manufactur n the Study A erates a sign ed almost excl aul, intercity nd parcel pick omy also cont anufacturing Northern Water e transload fa ed in bring in is a manufa ated in the Sa k, it also uses s its own con viable option oncrete Plant t from Pleasa construction s ed in Contra le in moving hicle moveme st roadways, W zoned heavy i l. Along the f Eastern Contr sis vity comprise ms of tons mo es include wa t of constructi d courier serv red goods, and Area. In addit nificant amo lusively by tru y, interstate m kup and deliv tribute to the towards the rfront Initiative  10 of 15 acility. One o ore by rail an acturer of pr an Francisco B barges to sh ncrete on site . t receives its anton by tru sites in Contr Costa County people and g ents along the Wilbur Aven industrial. In far eastern sec ra Costa Coun es an importa ved, value of arehousing an ion materials vices. Measur d consumer e tion, traffic fr ount of local ucks and inclu movements. U very that supp e growing im e service sect e Market Asses of the sites th nd exporting b re-stressed, p Bay Area and hip oversize sh e. Its custom raw material uck. The plan ra Costa Coun ty and therefo goods to and t e Wilbur Ave nue and East contrast, the ction of the S nty with Sacra ant componen f product and nd distributio s to support th red in terms electronics co rom service v l goods mov udes a high v Urban goods port the large mportance of tor, especiall ssment, Croft C R.L. BANKS hey are looki by ship. pre-cast conc d Nevada. Wh hipments to mers are not l ls from local nt produces nty. CEMEX ore, does not h through the S enue Corridor 18th Street. T majority of th Study Area lie amento Coun nt of the Con d traffic impa on of goods fr he housing an of value, com omprise a larg vehicles (for e vement activ volume small d s movement e service secto f local urban ly profession Consulting Gro & ASSOCIATE ing at is the crete product hile its produc California, H located far en sources, aggr concrete wh generally pro have a need fo Study Area. T r. Within the The majority o he land adjac es one north- nty. ntra Costa C acts on the reg rom warehou nd commercia mmodities su ge amount of example, trash vity. Urban g delivery and 5 also involves or in Contra goods move nal, technical oup, August 20   S, INC. NRG ts. Its cts are Hawaii nough regate ich is ovides or rail Trucks Study of the cent to -south ounty gion’s uses to al real uch as f what h and goods 5-axle s high Costa ment. l, and 013. DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 36 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. informati emphasis with food constructi commodi H The State providing corridor s Hercules, to Intersta SR 4 also heavy veh The SR 4 classified changes i (STAA) a Significan arterial ro corridor.4 Within th Contra Co SR SR E W T Truck vol near the S 2 San Franc Cambridge Administra 3 SR-4 Inte 4 ibid 5 2017 Cou September on services, on long-haul d, laundry and ion trades an ities moving i Highways e Route 4 (S g interregiona serves local an Martinez, Co ate 680 in Co connects to I hicle traffic ma Corridor is d as both an U n access alon nd the State H nce in the C oadways and he Study Are osta County: R 4, between R 160, betwee ast 18th Street Wilbur Avenu Truck Volume lumes along Study Area. M cisco Bay Area e Systematics, I ation’s (FHWA egrated Corrido untywide Comp r 2017. equates to a l movements d other gener nd related in n Contra Cos R 4) highwa al commercia nd intercity tr oncord, Pittsb oncord and In Interstate 5 in ake up four to esignated as a Urban Princip ng the route. Highway Extr ountywide T local streets a, the follow Willow Pass a en SR 4 and th t, between A S e, between A es SR 4 in the C Many of the 5- Freight Mobil Inc., July 2013, A) Freight Ana or Analysis pre prehensive Tra a higher level of manufactu ral supplies th ndustries suc sta County by ay corridor is al travel betw ruck and heav burg, Antioch nterstate 80 in n Stockton, a m o seven perce a basic route o pal Arterial a The SR 4 co ra Legal Load Transportation s that provid ing routes ar and the San J he Sacrament Street and SR Street and SR City of Pittsb -axle trucks ar lity study, prep , which derived alysis Framewo epared for Con ansportation Pl  11 of 15 l of small pa ured products hat must ope ch as gravel y weight.2 s an east-wes ween the Ce vy automobile h, Oakley and n Hercules, a major north- nt of the daily on the Nation and as expres orridor is on (SHELL) net n Plan. Addi e access to S re also design oaquin Coun to County Lin 160 and R 1605. urg make up re making lon pared for Califo d its freight flow rk (FAF) Versi ntra Costa Tran lan: Volume 1, ackage movem s. Industries g erate in dense and sand op st route appr entral Valley e travel in sur d Brentwood. a major east-w -south interst y vehicle trips nal Highway S ssway-freewa n the Surface twork. SR 4 is itionally, the SR 4 and ser nated as Rou nty Line; ne; p a significant nger distance ornia Departm w data from th ion 3.4 databas nsportation Au , Contra Costa R.L. BANKS ments via in generate local e urban cente perations ran roximately 3 and the Bay rrounding co Additionally west interstate ate commerc s along the SR System (NHS ay in differen Transportati s a designated ere is an exte rve local trav tes of Region t portion of t trips between ent of Transpo he Federal High se. uthority by Atk County Trans & ASSOCIATE ntegrators and l truck movem ers. Products nk among th 1 miles in le y Area. The ommunities su y, it provides a e commerce ce route. Truc R 4 Corridor . S). It is functio nt segments d ion Assistanc d Route of Reg ensive netwo vel throughou nal Significan the traffic vol n the Bay Are ortation by hway kins, July 2012, sportation Auth   S, INC. d less ments from he top ength, SR 4 uch as access route. ck and 3 onally due to ce Act gional ork of ut the nce by lumes ea and p 5. hority, DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 37 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. the Centr volume. T percent of Within th truck volu within the R Parallel to Subdivisio Chicago, and the C Oakland t movemen intermoda BNSF ma Amtrak S Paralleling Lathrop. T route for construct the cost e movemen connectio support fr The mark within Ca and so tho for Class I switching container perform t the indust rail cars o disassemb However, 6 City of An 7 Contra C April 2013 al Valley. SR The next high f all trucks. he Study Area ume at 377 tru e Study Area a Rail o SR 4 is the on connects t Kansas City, Central Valley to support th nt of bulk co al facility in R ainline betwee an Joaquin tr g the BNSF i This 58-mile freight movin a connection estimated to nts between M on to Tracy if reight or pass ket presence o alifornia are to ose markets a I (large) railro g and transpo s7. In recent y the switching try today as P or intermoda ble the train. this new ope ntioch, Public Costa County N , p 22. 4 average da est truck volu a along Wilbu ucks per day are utilizing t BNSF Railwa the Bay Area Dallas and H y. BNSF facil he movement ommodities Richmond th en the Bay A ains between is the Union long railroad ng between th n between the approximate Martinez and rail demand w enger trains a of the rail ind oo close for ra are mostly ser oads to shift t ort service to years, shipper tasks that Cl Precision Sch al marine con This increa erating mode Works Depart Northern Wate ily 5-axle tru umes are the 2 ur Avenue, 5- or 50% of all trucks to mov ay, the nation with the nati Houston. Rail itates the mo t of internati serving dom at originates Area and the the Bay Area Pacific Railro d line, also k he Bay Area e Study Area ely $2 millio Pittsburg, bu warranted it. any time in th dustry at Bay ail service to rved by the tr their focus to o customers w rs have been u ass I’s used to heduled Railro ntainers from ases freight v l puts shippe tment, “Daily T erfront Initiativ  12 of 15 ck volume is 2-axle pickup axle trucks al truck volume ve both their i n’s second lar onal railroad l transport pr ovement of go ional freight mestic market and terminat rest of the U a and Bakersfi oad’s (UP) T nown as the and the Cent and UP beca n per mile. t could be use Currently, U he near future Area location establish a str rucking indus o “hooking an with small vo utilizing shor o perform. Th oading, with m one origin t velocity and i rs at a disadv Truck Traffic R ve Market Asse 2,531 trucks p and delivery lso make up a es. This indic inbound and rgest Class 1 d system, mov rovides a crit oods through and a railyar ts. There is tes high prior United States. field. racy Subdivis Mococo Line tral Valley. H ause of the lac Currently th ed in the futu UP does not ha e. ns is limited b rong competi stry. The tren nd hauling” lo olumes of ra rt-line and ind he Class I’s h a focus on m to one destin improves the vantage for ge Report”, 2013. essment prepar R.L. BANKS or 43 percen y van type at 2 a significant p cates that mos outbound shi railroad. The ving freight to tical link betw h its rail facil rd at Richmo also a Unit rity intermod The BNSF a sion, connect e, once provi However, it wo ck of availabl he line only ure as a freigh ave plans to r by its geograp itive position nd over the la ong trains rath ail cars and i dustrial switc have moved to moving long u nation withou e profitability etting timely red by Craft Co & ASSOCIATE nt of the total 2,440 per day portion of the st of the busin ipments6. e BNSF’s Sto o/from the cit ween the Bay ities at the P ond to suppo ted Parcel Se dal trains usin also hosts ten ting Martinez ided an altern ould be diffic e right-of-wa hosts local f ht or passenge eopen this ro phy. Most ma from the Bay ast decade has her than prov intermodal m ching compan o what is kno unit trains of ut interim sto y of the railr switching ser onsulting Grou   S, INC. truck y or 42 e total nesses ockton ties of y Area ort of ort the ervice ng the n daily z with native cult to ay and freight er rail oute to arkets y Area s been viding marine nies to wn in either ops to roads. rvices. up, DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 38 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. Under thi rail servic B The Bay A of Oaklan Francisco Port of S handled a arrivals w Port of Oa Bulk com Port of Sa sand and range of li large ship Redwood facilities a future pr transloadi County to Ports and County. M Pacific Gy for buildi structural used for a being dev 1 shows th 8 Source: P 9 Source: C 10 Source: P 11 Source: P is new operat ce unless their Bay Area Mar Area ranks as nd handles 82 and Redwoo Stockton is th at San Francis were bulk carg akland, accou mmodities also an Francisco aggregates to iquid and dry pments of new City handle are constrain rojected grow ing facilities h o meet this ne d maritime a Maritime faci ypsum Plant s ing construct l members to an automotiv veloped into m he existing ter ort of San Fran City of Richmon Port of Benicia Port of Redwoo ing model, bu r volumes are ritime Trade the fourth la 2% of the reg od City, plus t he primary N sco and Redw go vessels (50 unts for over 5 o play a majo handles two o support Bay y bulk commo w vehicles th es bauxite, ag ned by their e wth in Bay A has already p eed. activities still ilities are still still receives im tion and the parts of the ve transload f maritime tran rminals and w ncisco Maritim nd Port Operat ,https://www.s od City, https:/ usinesses in th large and con e argest exporti gion’s maritim the inland por Northern Ca wood City. In 0.6%). Contai 50% of vessel r role in the o main commo y Area constr odities, includ hat arrive by ggregate, gyp existing port Area maritim ushed some b play an imp l are being us mport cargo s Kie-Con Wh Bay Area, Ha facility and th nsload operati wharfs in the me Cargo Servic tions Overview ssamarine.com //www.redwoo  13 of 15 he Northern W nsistent. ng region in me trade, the rt at Stockton alifornia port 2011, 3,826 v inerized cargo capacity. other port fac odities, autom ruction proje ding metals an ship from As psum and re boundaries a me transload businesses to portant good sed at the Fu ships of bulk harf utilizes i awaii and Gu he NRG Mar ion because o Study Area. ces, https://sfpo w, http://www.c m/locations/por dcityport.com Waterfront m the U.S. in te Bay Area’s p n, also handle handling bu vessels arrived o, which is p cilities throug mobiles and d ects8. The Por nd automobil sia, as well as ecycled scrap and will not shipments. look for opp ds movement ulton Shipyard gypsum that its wharf to t uam. The wha rsh Landing of its good acc ort.com/cargo- ci.richmond.ca rt-of-benicia/ /tenants R.L. BANKS may find it ch erms of tonna ports at Richm significant m ulk cargo, w d at regional b primarily proc ghout the Bay dry break bu rt of Richmo les9. The Port s liquid fertil p metal.11 Ho have the ab The lack of portunities in role in East d for vessel r is manufactu transport larg arf at the Fore wharf also h cess to rail an -services a.us/323/Overv & ASSOCIATE allenging to o age. While the mond, Benicia maritime trade with the rema berths. Most cessed throug y Area region lk cargo of m nd handles a of Benicia ha lizer10. The P owever, these ility to hand f space for f East Contra tern Contra repair, the Ge ured into wallb ge concrete b estar parcel w as the potent nd highways. view   S, INC. obtain e Port a, San e. The ainder of the gh the n. The mainly a wide andles ort of e port le the future Costa Costa eorgia board bridge will be tial of Table DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 39 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. Fe Engineer An engin parcels. W the BNSF way. Estim and 4. There are First, bec whether o was not c operator o Second, th right-of-w Avenue. T rest of th 12 Source: Port/Fac Fulton Georgia For NRG M Kie-Co n Eas easibility of ring Perspec eering evalua With the excep F mainline, th mates of rebu e two sets of s ause the Stud or not it woul cost-effective or a contract s he only way a way would be This is proble he potential b Contra Costa C cility Locati n Shipyard Pie a-Pacific Wha estar Dock Marsh Landin n Wharf Kiew Pacific st Contra Co f Introducing ctive ation of the S ption of the r he other, four uilding these scenarios tha dy Area is al ld provide ra to provide sw switching ope a short-line ra to construct ematic in seve businesses be County, CA, P on Purpo er Vess Marine arf Marine Marine ngMarine wit Marine osta County g a New Rail Study Area fo rail spur into t connections rail connecti at would allow long the BN il service to t witching servi erator to prov ailroad could o its own rail in eral ways. In t cause it is lo ort Facilities, W ose of Facilit el Repair and e Transloadin e Transloadin e Transloadin e Transloadin e Transloadin  14 of 15 Table 1 y Marine Te l Entity into t ound five exis the NRG par would have ons are discu w a short-line SF Railway, the new busin ices to the ne vide the neces operate withi nfrastructure the first scena ocated on the Wharfs, and Do ty Co d ng Sand Dred ng ng Curre ng Curre ng Sand, G and Co erminals an the Study Ar sting rail spur cel, which wa to be rebuilt ussed in the E e railroad to it would hav nesses. Howev ew business; i ssary switchin in the Study A to connect w ario, the Fulto e west side o ocks, http://sea mmodities Handled d, Gravel and dged Materia Gypsum ently Not in U ently Not in U Gravel, Limest oncrete Produ R.L. BANKS nd Wharfs12 rea rs that could as found to be using the exi Engineering s operate with ve first priori ver, If BNSF it would work ng services. Area independ with the busin on Shipyard i of the Antioc aport.findtheda Bert d l Use Use tone ucts & ASSOCIATE serve four, v e still connec isting rail rig section on pa hin the Study ity in determ determined t k with a shor dently of the esses along W is isolated fro ch Dunes Na ata.org/. hing Distan (Feet) 525 780 750 150 250   S, INC. vacant ted to ht-of- ages 3 Area. mining that it rt-line BNSF Wilbur m the ational nce TABLE B-0EAST CONTRA COSTA COUNTY MARINE TERMINALS DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 40 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. Wildlife R would be Shipyard w Under th contiguou any other one dedic means th without th Environm The main Fulton Sh Without a there wou Commerc Interview among th most of th the existin outside th service is final desti by this ty their final Refuge. This if an interest with the rest e second sce us short-line r entity the ab cated rail conn at without th he cooperatio mental Persp n issue preven hip Yard, wo access to cons uld be no way cial/Econom s were condu hem. That fin he existing bu ng businesses heir doors. C Amports. Fif inations will b pe of busines l destinations means that ted party purc of the Study A enario, Kemw railroad. How bility to build nection on th hat connectin on of the BNS pective nting an indep ould be its in struct a rail lin y for a short-li mic Developm ucted with e nding is not s usinesses in th s located adja urrently, the fty percent of be to the Mid ss and BNSF . the only opp chased a rail Area. water, Ampor wever, when in rail infrastru he eastern end ng all of the v F Railway. pendent, shor nability to en ne along the B ine operator t ment Perspe xisting busin surprising in he Study Area acent to the B only new bu f its import au dwest and Eas has the abilit  15 of 15 portunity to right-of-way rts and the N nterviewed, A ucture through d of its proper vacant parcel rt-line railroa ncroach on th BNSF right-o to serve a pote ctive nesses and no that the engi a fall into the BNSF mainli usiness that h utomobile bu st Coast. Signi ty to provide serve this po easement fro NRG parcels Amports state h its property rty to connec ls in the Stud ad from const he Antioch D of way through ential busines o new potent ineering field e truck-served ne are not ut has been iden usiness from A ificant amoun timely rail se R.L. BANKS otential busin om BNSF to c could be ser ed it is not int y. It is only in ct with the BN dy Area wou tructing a rail Dunes Natio h this section ss at the Fulto tial rail custo d investigatio d category. In tilizing the ra ntified as wan Asia will utili nts of revenu ervice directl & ASSOCIATE ness independ connect the F rved together erested in allo nterested in h NSF mainline uld not be po l connection nal Wildlife n of the Study on Ship Yard. omers were f on team noted n addition, ma ail access ava nting to utiliz ize rail becau ue will be gene ly from Antio   S, INC. dently Fulton r by a owing having e. This ossible to the Area. Area, found d that any of ailable ze rail se the erated och to DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 41 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. Ex Attendees t R t A t K t D t T Attendees t R t M t Jo t Sc t Ju t L t T t A t A t A t A t Se t Se t A t A t N t N xhibit A: s Robert Sarmie Amalia Cunnin Kwame Reed, E Dwayne Dalm Tom Messer, W s Robert Sarmie Monish Sen, Se ohn Blank, Pu cott Buenting unming Li, Ju ee Meadows, Tom Messer, W August 1 August 13 August 21 August 26 eptember 16 eptember 16 August 9 August 14 November 8 November 22 Short-Li Eco nto, Project M ngham, Econ Economic De an, Economic Western Regio nto, Project M enior Traffic ublic Works D g, Project Man unior Enginee P.E. Director Western Regio Jed Momot Jim Triplett Scott Bertra Jerry Phillip Deborah H Jamie Vrdu Larry Cole, Jennifer Fit Larry Cole, Jennifer Fit ne Railro onomic Dev Aug Manager, Con omic Develop evelopment D c Developmen on Manager, Public W Augu Manager, Con Engineer, Co Director, City nager, City of er, City of Ant r, Rail Engine on Manager, Potential S t, Project Man t, Senior Vice and, Director ps, Logistics M Halderman, Re uzco, Senior B BNSF Rai Director Sho tzgerald, Regi Director Sho tzgerald, Regi oad Feas velopment gust 5, 2019 ntra Costa Co pment Manag Director, City nt Director, C R.L. Banks & Works Interv ust 22, 2019 ntra Costa Co ontra Costa Co y of Antioch f Antioch tioch eering, R.L. Ba R.L. Banks & Shipper Inte nager, North e President, A r, Cushman & Manager, Sum egional Mana Business Man ilway Interv ort-Line Deve ional Manage ort-Line Deve ional Manage sibility St Interview 9 ounty ger, Contra C of Antioch City of Oakley & Associates view 9 ounty ounty anks & Assoc & Associates erviews Point Develo Amports, Inc., & Wakefield, W mmit CFS, Inc ager, Cemex. P ager, Kie-Con views elopment, Fo er, Economic elopment, Fo er, Economic tudy Inte Costa County y iates opment, Kansa , Benicia Walnut Creek c., Oakland Pleasanton n, Antioch ort Worth, TX Development ort Worth, TX Development erviews as City, MO k (NRG Prope X t, San Bernard X t, San Bernard erty) dino dino EXHIBIT B-ASHORT-LINE RAILROAD FEASIBILITY STUDY INTERVIEWS DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 42 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. dĂďůĞϭ ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJĂƚĂďĂƐĞ>ŝƐƚŝŶŐƐ EŽƌƚŚĞƌŶtĂƚĞƌĨƌŽŶƚ^ŚŽƌƚ>ŝŶĞZĂŝůƌŽĂĚ^ƚƵĚLJ DĂƉ <ĞLJ /Ŷ^ƚƵĚLJ ƌĞĂ >ŝƐƚĞĚŶƚŝƚLJͬ>ŽĐĂƚŝŽŶ ĂƚĂďĂƐĞͬŝƐĐƵƐƐŝŽŶϭ ϭ z Θ:&s>KZdZh</E'/E ϮϱϵϬt/>hZs͕Ed/K, ,Ed Ϯ z >dZE'K ϮϱϳϬt/>hZs͕Ed/K, ,Ed ϱ z ϭϴϴϳ^Ed&s͕Ed/K,> ϵ z :ddŽƵƌƐͬW'Θ ϮϲϬϬt/>hZ͕Ed/K, Z^,͕KEdZKhW͕,Ed ϭϭ z ϭϳϳϵt/>hZsEh͕Ed/K, ,D/Z^͗ƐƵƌĨĂĐĞƌĞůĞĂƐĞŽĨϭϬϬŐĂůůŽŶƐŽĨĐŽƌƌŽƐŝǀĞĐůĞĂŶŝŶŐ ĐŽŵƉŽƵŶĚĚƵƌŝŶŐƚƌƵĐŬƵŶůŽĂĚŝŶŐŝŶϭϵϵϰ͘ ϭϯ z Z/,ZE>tZE>KW ϭϰϳϬs/Z>E͕Ed/K, >͕,Ed ϭϰ z </t/dWKtZKE^dZhdKZ^K ϮϵϮϱt/>hZs͕Ed/K, KEdZKhW ϭϰ z EZ ϮϵϮϱtŝůďƵƌǀĞ͕ŶƚŝŽĐŚ ZE^͕,D/Z^͖ƌĞƉŽƌƚĞĚƌĞůĞĂƐĞŽĨEŽ͘ϮĨƵĞůŽŝůĚƵƌŝŶŐ ĐůĞĂŶŝŶŐŽĨĨƵĞůŽŝůƚĂŶŬƐŝŶϮϬϭϬ͘ ϭϱ z ,ŽŵĞƐŝƚĞ^ĞƌǀŝĐĞƐ͕/ŶĐ͘ ϮϰϬϬt/>hZs͕Ed/K, Z^,͕KEdZKhW͕,Ed ϭϲ z ϭϰϵϱs/ZZ/s͕Ed/K,> ϭϳ z 'E^/^D&'K ϮϮϳϱt/>hZ>E͕Ed/K, KEdZKhW ϭϴ z EE&KK^/E ϮϭϴϬt/>hZ>E͕Ed/K, ,Ed ϭϵ z ^/>'EKEd/EZ^ ϮϮϬϬt/>hZ>E͕Ed/K, ,/^dDE/&^d͕,Ed͕dZ/^͕,D/Z^͕Z^dE<͕ KEdZKhW͕D/^^/KE^͕&/E^ͬ&Z^͕,/^dDE/&^d͕ //^͕ZZ>Y'͕ZZ^Y' &ŽƌŬůŝĨƚƉƵŶĐƚƵƌĞĚƉĂŝŶƚĚƌƵŵƐ͕ƌĞůĞĂƐĞǁĂƐĐůĞĂŶĞĚƵƉ ϮϬ z Ͳϭ/ZKEtKZ<^ ϮϰϬϬt/>hZsEh͕Ed/K, D/^^/KE^͕&/E^ͬ&Z^ Ϯϭ z ^ƚŽŶŽƌ'ƌŽƵƉ/ŶĐ ϮϮϰϬt/>hZ>E͕Ed/K, Z^,͕KEdZKhW ϮϮ z /&K^z^dD^ͬ,WZz>W>>d ϮϮϳϲt/>hZ>E͕Ed/K, &/E^ͬ&Z^ Ϯϯ z DZ/EZKK&/E'/Eh^dZ/^ ϮϯϬϬt/>hZ>E͕h/>/E'͕Ed/K, D/^^/KE^͕&/E^ͬ&Z^͕,Ed Ϯϰ z ϭϱϬϬs/Z͕Wd͕Ed/K,> Ϯϱ z >Kh/^/EͲW/&/KZW^E:KYh/ED/>> t/>hZs͕Ed/K, &/E^ͬ&Z^ Ϯϴ z /<EhEZ'ZKhE/EͬE' ϯϬϬϬt/>hZs͕Ed/K, KEdZKhW͕>/^d,͕&/E^ͬ&Z^͕,Ed͕ZZ EKE'E Ϯϵ z ϭϱϴϴs/Zs͕Ed/K,> ϯϬ z ^D/d,Ζ^/Eh^dZ/>t>/E'/E ϮϱϬϭs/E>E͕Ed/K, KEdZKhW ϯϭ z ϭϵϲϲs/E>E͕Ed/K,> ϯϯ z zKhEd/^W/dK<WdZK>hD ϯϬϱϬt/>hZs͕Ed/K, Z^dE<͕KEdZKhW͕D/^^/KE^͕&/E^ͬ&Z^͕ ,Ed͕ZZEKE'E ϯϰ z dΘdDK/>/dzͲEd/K, ϮϯϬϬt/>hZs͕Ed/K, Z^,͕KEdZKhW͕&/E^ͬ&Z^͕,Ed͕ZZEKE 'E ϯϴ z ϰϴ&ŽƌƚLJ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ ϮϮϳϲt/>hZs͕Ed/K, Z^,͕KEdZKhW͕&/E^ͬ&Z^ ϯϵ z &D/>/EW/WΘ^W>zηϴϳ ϮϮϳϬt/>Zs͕Ed/K, ,Ed ϰϬ z KE^dZhd/KEE'/EZ/E'^s^ ϭϲϳϭs/EzZZ͕Ed/K, KEdZKhW͕,Ed ϰϮ z W/&/'^Θ>dZ/ ϯϮϬϭt/>hZs͕Ed/K, D/^^/KE^͕ZE^ ZE^ůŝƐƚŝŶŐƐĂƌĞĂƐƐŽĐŝĂƚĞĚǁŝƚŚƐŚĞĞŶƐŝŶƐƚŽƌŵĚƌĂŝŶƐĂŶĚĂ ƌĞůĞĂƐĞŽĨƐŽĚŝƵŵŚLJĚƌŽdžŝĚĞĨƌŽŵĂƚŽƚĞŽŶƚŽĂƉĂƌŬŝŶŐůŽƚ͘ ϰϰ z ϮϮϲϬtŝůďĞƌǀĞ͕ŶƚŝŽĐŚ ,D/Z^͗ĂĨƵĞůƚĂŶŬŽŶĂƌŝŐǁĂƐƉƵŶĐƚƵƌĞĚĂŶĚĚŝĞƐĞůǁĂƐ ƌĞůĞĂƐĞĚƚŽƚŚĞŐƌŽƵŶĚƐƵƌĨĂĐĞǁŝƚŚϭϬŐĂůůŽŶƐĞŶƚĞƌŝŶŐĂƐƚŽƌŵ ĚƌĂŝŶŝŶϮϬϬϴ͘ ϰϱ z Z/>>d,Z/>>/E'Θ^,KZ/E'͕/E ϮϮϬϬtzDKZtz͕Ed/K, Z^dE<͕KEdZKhW͕D/^^/KE^͕&/E^ͬ&Z^͕ ,Ed͕ZZEKE'E ϰϳ z WhZZ&dK>KZ ϭϳϳϭs/EzZZ͕Ed/K, ,EdTABLE B-1REGULATORY DATABASE LISTINGS DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 43 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. dĂďůĞϭ ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJĂƚĂďĂƐĞ>ŝƐƚŝŶŐƐ EŽƌƚŚĞƌŶtĂƚĞƌĨƌŽŶƚ^ŚŽƌƚ>ŝŶĞZĂŝůƌŽĂĚ^ƚƵĚLJ DĂƉ <ĞLJ /Ŷ^ƚƵĚLJ ƌĞĂ >ŝƐƚĞĚŶƚŝƚLJͬ>ŽĐĂƚŝŽŶ ĂƚĂďĂƐĞͬŝƐĐƵƐƐŝŽŶϭ ϱϬ z <ED/ ϮϮϱϭtzDKZtz͕Ed/K, ,Ed ϱϰ z /^Wd,^Zs/^/E ϮϭϴϬt/>hZs͕Ed/K, ,Ed ϱϱ z Ed/K,/^dZ/hd/KEEdZ ϮϭϰϬt/>hZs͕Ed/K, ,Ed ϱϲ z dZ/E/dzWZKWZdzKE^h>dEd^>> ϮϭϬϬt/>hZs͕Ed/K, ,Ed ϱϴ z ^hE,D/> ϭϳϴϭs/EzZZ͕Ed/K, KEdZKhW͕D/^^/KE^͕&/E^ͬ&Z^͕,Ed ϱϵ z ^WKZd^DEz,d>h ϮϬϰϱt/>hZs͕Ed/K, KEdZKhW͕,/^dDE/&^d͕,Ed ϲϬ z t/>hZstWtZW>Ed^/d///&/E^ͬ&Z^ ϲϮ z DZ/ED/>Z^WKE^ ϭϳϵϭs/EzZZ͕Ed/K, Z^,͕KEdZKhW͕&/E^ͬ&Z^ ϲϯ z 't&WKtZ^z^dD^͕>W;^/dϯͿ ϮϬϬϬt/>hZsEh͕Ed/K, D/^^/KE^͕//^ ϲϰ z ϭϵϲϵt/>hZs͕Ed/K,,/^dDE/&^d͕,Ed ϲϱ z >DKEKZ,Z ϮϭϬϭ͘ϭϴd,^dZd͕Ed/K, dŚĞĨĂĐŝůŝƚLJŝƐĂŶĂůŵŽŶĚŽƌĐŚĂƌĚ͘^ŽŝůƐĂŵƉůŝŶŐǁĂƐĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞĚ ĂŶĚŶŽĐŽŶƚĂŵŝŶĂŶƚƐǁĞƌĞĚĞƚĞĐƚĞĚĂďŽǀĞƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚŝĂůĐůĞĂŶƵƉ ŐŽĂůƐ͘dŚĞƉƌŽƉĞƌƚLJĞŶƚĞƌĞĚƚŚĞsWĂŶĚƌĞĐĞŝǀĞĚĐůŽƐƵƌĞŝŶ ϮϬϬϱ͘ ϲϴ z Z/E'WdZK>hD/E ϮϴϬϬϭϴd,^d͕Ed/K, >/^ddE< ϳϮ z Z/'tdZYh/WDEd ϯϮϬϬt/>hZs͕Ed/K, ,Ed ϳϯ z >/EK>EEd/K, ϭϳϲϬt/>hZs͕Ed/K, ,Ed ϳϲ z >dWKtZW>EdE^>h'/^W&/E^ͬ&Z^ ϳϵ z :Ζ^dKt ϯϮϯϱϭϴd,^d͕Ed/K, KEdZKhW͕,Ed ϴϬ z ZZKt,dKt/E'͕/E ϯϮϰϱϭϴd,^d͕Ed/K, Z^,͕KEdZKhW͕&/E^ͬ&Z^͕,Ed͕ZZEKE 'E ϴϭ z /EͲEͲKhdz>^Zs/ ϯϮϱϱϭϴd,^d͕Ed/K, ,Ed ϴϮ z D,KEzΖ^Z/dKZ^ϯϮϱϳͲϯϮϲϭ ϭϴd,^d͕Ed/K, ,Ed͕Z^,͕KEdZKhW͕&/E^ͬ&Z^͕,/^d DE/&^d ϴϰ z Z/sZdKtEDKdKZ^WKZd^ ϯϮϲϱϭϴd,^d͕Ed/K, KEdZKhW͕>/^d,͕&/E^ͬ&Z^͕,Ed ϴϱ z ,/>>Z^dWZKWZd/^͕>> ϭϱϰϭ:K^E^d͕͘Ed/K, ,Ed ϴϲ z ͲϭdhEΘZW/Z ϯϮϳϱϭϴd,^d͕Ed/K, Z^,͕KEdZhW͕&/E^ͬ&Z^ ϴϳ z tZ<Ͳ>^^K>>/^/KEEdZ>> ϯϮϳϳϭϴd,^d͕Ed/K, KEdZKhW͕>/^d,͕D/^^/KE^͕&/E^ͬ&Z^͕ ,Ed͕ZZEKE'E ϴϴ z >KD>sZK ϭϱϰϱ>/WdKE^d͕Ed/K, ,Ed ϴϵ z <DW^WZKWE ϯϮϴϱϭϴd,^d͕Ed/K, KEdZKhW͕&/E^ͬ&Z^͕,Ed ϵϬ z W/W>/E^'DEddͲϮϭϱͲϭϯ,zZK^dd/d^d Ed/K, &/E^ͬ&Z^ ϵϭ z 't&WKtZ^z^dD^>W ϭϵϬϬt/>hZs͕Ed/K, dZ/^ ϵϮ z ^E:KYh/Ez,d,ZKZ ϯϯϬϳt/>hZs͕Ed/K, >/^ddE< ϵϯ z ϭϱϰϱ^Eztz͕Ed/K,> ϵϰ z </t/dW/&/K ϯϮϬϯt/>hZs͕Ed/K, ,Ed ϵϱ z EZ ϯϯϬϭtŝůďƵƌǀĞĞƌƚŚϰϬϭ͕ŶƚŝŽĐŚ ,D/Z^͗ƌĞůĞĂƐĞŽĨĚŝĞƐĞůĨƵĞůĨƌŽŵĂǀĞƐƐĞůΖƐďŝůŐĞ ϵϲ z Z>/>DK/>hdKDKd/s ϯϮϵϭϭϴd,^d͕Ed/K, Z^,͕KEdZKhW͕&/E^ͬ&Z^͕,Ed͕ZZEKE 'E ϵϳ z zED/hdKKz ϯϮϵϱϭϴd,^d͕Ed/K, KEdZKhW͕D/^^/KE^͕&/E^ͬ&Z^͕,EdTABLE B-1REGULATORY DATABASE LISTINGS DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 44 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. dĂďůĞϭ ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJĂƚĂďĂƐĞ>ŝƐƚŝŶŐƐ EŽƌƚŚĞƌŶtĂƚĞƌĨƌŽŶƚ^ŚŽƌƚ>ŝŶĞZĂŝůƌŽĂĚ^ƚƵĚLJ DĂƉ <ĞLJ /Ŷ^ƚƵĚLJ ƌĞĂ >ŝƐƚĞĚŶƚŝƚLJͬ>ŽĐĂƚŝŽŶ ĂƚĂďĂƐĞͬŝƐĐƵƐƐŝŽŶϭ ϵϴ z Z/E ϯϮϮϱt/>hZs͕Ed/K, ,Ed͕ZZEKE'E͕&/E^ͬ&Z^ ϵϴ z W'Θ'ĂƚĞǁĂLJ'ĞŶĞƌĂƚŝŶŐ^ƚĂƚŝŽŶ ϯϮϮϱtŝůĚƵƌ͕ŶƚŝŽĐŚ ,D/Z^͗ƌĞůĞĂƐĞƐŽĨƉĞƚƌŽůĞƵŵŝŶƚŽƐĞĐŽŶĚĂƌLJĐŽŶƚĂŝŶŵĞŶƚ ĂŶĚĂŵŵŽŶŝĂǀĂƉŽƌƐ ϵϵ z >/&KZE/KZ'E/^/E ϯϯϬϱϭϴd,^d͕Ed/K, KEdZKhW ϭϬϭ z EZ ϯϯϬϳtŝůďĞƌǀĞ͕͘ŶƚŝŽĐŚ ,D/Z^;ƐƵŶŬǀĞƐƐĞůͿ͕KEdZKhW͕ZE^͕,Ed ϭϬϮ z ŽŶƚƌĂŽƐƚĂ,ĂnjŵĂƚ ϭϱϮϯDĂƌƐŚĂůů^ƚƌĞĞƚ͕ŶƚŝŽĐŚ ,D/Z^͗ƐŽĚŝƵŵŚLJĚƌŽdžŝĚĞĂƚĂƌĞƐŝĚĞŶĐĞ ϭϬϰ z />>/E',DKE^dZhd/KE ϯϯϬϮt/>hZs͕Ed/K, ,Ed ϭϬϱ z 't&WKtZ^z^dD^>W ϯϰϬϬt/>hZs͕Ed/K, dZ/^͕^d͕KEdZKhW͕D/^^/KE^͕&/E^ͬ&Z^͕,/^d DE/&^d͕//^͕,Ed͕,D/Z^;ĐŽŶƚĂŝŶĞĚŝŶƐƚŽƌŵĚƌĂŝŶͿ ϭϬϴ z ϭϲϱϭZ/s/Es͕Ed/K,>͕Z^,͕&/E^ͬ&Z^͕,Ed ϭϬϵ z </ͲKE͕/E ϯϱϱϭt/>hZs͕Ed/K, Z^dE<͕KEdZKhW͕D/^^/KE^͕&/E^ͬ&Z^͕ ,Ed͕ZZEKE'E ϭϭϬ z 'ZzEt>z ϭϮϬϮsK^d͕Ed/K, ,Ed͕Z^,͕KEdZKhW͕D/^^/KE^ ϭϭϭ z hWZd/EKdKt/E' ϭϬϮϬWK>>Kd͕Ed/K, &/E^ͬ&Z^͕,Ed ϭϭϮ z DZ<^d/E^>^KDWEz ϭϲϰϱZ/s/Etz͕Ed/K, KEdZKhW͕&/E^ͬ&Z^͕//^ ϭϭϯ z ^Khd,ZEEZ'z>/&KZE/͕K ϭϰϱϲt/>hZsEh͕Ed/K, D/^^/KE^͕ZE^͕&/E^ͬ&Z^͕,/^d,D/Z^͕,,^^͕,/^ddE<͕ //^ ϭϭϰ z W/&/'^Θ>dZ/ ϭϰϱϬt/>hZs͕Ed/K, ,Ed ϭϭϱ z d/D'tZ/',d ϭϲϱϭZ/s/Es͕Ed/K, ,Ed ϭϭϲ z s/WZ/Z ϭϰϮϵ:K^E^d͕Ed/K, ,Ed ϭϭϵ z &d'KE^dZhd/KEDdZ/>^͕/E ϯϱϬϬt/>hZs͕Ed/K, Z^,͕KEdZKhW͕D/^^/KE^͕&/E^ͬ&Z^͕,Ed͕ ZZEKE'E ϭϮϬ z DŝŶĞdžŶŐŝŶĞĞƌŝŶŐŽƌƉ͘ ϭϬϬϬWK>>Kd^d'͕Ed/K, Z^,͕KEdZKhW͕&/E^ͬ&Z^͕,Ed͕ZZEKE 'E ϭϮϭ z :/DsZ/^ ϰϲϱ&>D/E'>E͕Ed/K, &/E^ͬ&Z^͕ZZEKE'E ϭϮϮ z DyKE^dZhd/KEDdZ/>^ ϯϲϬϬt/>hZs͕Ed/K, ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ ϭϮϯ z ƵƌŐĞƌ<ŝŶŐηϭϭϲϮϮ ϯϲϬϱϭϴd,^d͕Ed/K, Z^,͕KEdZKhW ϭϮϰ z <,/>>Z^d&h>DZd ϭϴϬϭ,/>>Z^ds͕Ed/K, >/^ddE< ϭϮϲ z EKZDEWK>^E:Zt>/E' ϯϲϲϬt/>hZs͕Ed/K, KEdZKhW͕&/E^ͬ&Z^ ϭϮϳ z Ed/K,'^ΘZt^, ϯϲϮϵϭϴƚŚ^ƚ͕ŶƚŝŽĐŚ h^d ϭϮϴ z Eyd>K&>/&KZE//E^/d/͗ͲϮϭϴϲ ϰϭϱ&>D/E'>E͕Ed/K, D/^^/KE^͕&/E^ͬ&Z^ ϭϮϵ z D/,>EKZ,h^E ϭϮϭϯ:K^E^d͕Ed/K, ,Ed ϭϯϬ z E^&ZĂŝůǁĂLJŽŵƉĂŶLJ ϯϲϲϱt/>hZs͕Ed/K, Z^,͕KEdZKhW͕>/^d,͕&/E^ͬ&Z^͕ ,Ed͕ZZEKE'E ϭϯϭ z Z/sZDZ/EZW/Z ϰϱϬ&>D/E'>E͕Ed/K, KEdZKhW͕,Ed ϭϯϮ z ϯϲϮϱϭϴd,^d͕Ed/K,> ϭϯϮ z <DZdηϰϳϲϮ ϯϲϮϱϭϴd,^d͕Ed/K, KEdZKhW͕&/E^ͬ&Z^͕,Ed͕ZZEKE'E ϭϯϯ z Ed/K,'^ΘZt^, ϯϲϮϵϭϴd,^d͕Ed/K, Z^dE<͕KEdZKhW͕D/^^/KE^͕&/E^ͬ&Z^͕ ,Ed͕>/^ddE< ϭϯϰ z >/&KZE/&'Ͳ>d^ ϲϰϬϬZ/',Z͕Ed/K, ,Ed ϭϯϲ z ŽŶƚƌĂŽƐƚĂ& ,ŝůůĐƌĞƐƚǀĞΘ^ŽƵƚŚ>ĂŬĞƌŝǀĞ͕ŶƚŝŽĐŚ ,D/Z^͗ƉĞƚƌŽůĞƵŵƌĞůĞĂƐĞƚŽƐƚŽƌŵĚƌĂŝŶĚƵƌŝŶŐĐĂƌǁĂƐŚŝŶŐ ĂƚƌĞƐŝĚĞŶĐĞTABLE B-1REGULATORY DATABASE LISTINGS DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 45 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. dĂďůĞϭ ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJĂƚĂďĂƐĞ>ŝƐƚŝŶŐƐ EŽƌƚŚĞƌŶtĂƚĞƌĨƌŽŶƚ^ŚŽƌƚ>ŝŶĞZĂŝůƌŽĂĚ^ƚƵĚLJ DĂƉ <ĞLJ /Ŷ^ƚƵĚLJ ƌĞĂ >ŝƐƚĞĚŶƚŝƚLJͬ>ŽĐĂƚŝŽŶ ĂƚĂďĂƐĞͬŝƐĐƵƐƐŝŽŶϭ ϭϯϳ z </ͲKE/E ϭϭϱϬt/>hZs͕͘Ed/K, ,,^^͕,/^ddE< ϭϯϴ z ,ZZ/^KE/Eh^dZ/>^Zs/^E/E͘ ϭϬϬϬWK>>KKhZdhE/d^&ΘDW͖͕Ed/K, &/E^ͬ&Z^ ϭϰϬ z :K,ED/>>Z ϭϭϮ><Z͕Ed/K, ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ ϭϰϭ z ƌŝĚŐĞŚĞĂĚDĂƌŝŶĞ^ĞƌǀŝĐĞƐ ϯϬ&>D/E'>E͕Ed/K, ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ ϭϰϮ z >K^DEK^Zs ϲϯϭϯZ/',Z͕Ed/K, ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ ϭϰϰ z ^,>> ϱϱϰϱZ/',Z͕Ed/K, ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ ϭϰϱ z ϱϳϱϭZ/',Z͕Ed/K,ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ ϭϰϲ z hd/EK^&Θd/ZEdZ ϱϬϬD/E^d͕K<>z ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ ϭϰϳ z &ŽƌŵĞƌWŝƐƐŝŐŽŶŝdŽǁŝŶŐ ϱϵϬͲϱϵϬϰDĂŝŶ^ƚƌĞĞƚ͕KĂŬůĞLJ &ZKtE&/>^ ϭϰϴ z Z/&dtKKDZ/E ϲϯϯϴZ/',Z͕Ed/K, >/^ddE<н,D/Z^;ƌĞůĞĂƐĞƐƚŽƐƵƌĨĂĐĞǁĂƚĞƌĂƐƐŽĐŝĂƚĞĚ ǁŝƚŚďŽĂƚŝŶŐŝŶĐŝĚĞŶƚƐͿ ϭϰϵ z K<>zh/>Z^^hWW>z ϴϬϬD/E^d͕K<>z KEdZKhW ϭϱϬ z ŝƚLJŽĨŶƚŝŽĐŚĂƐƚϭϯƚŚĂƚ'ŝŽǀĂŶŶŝ^ƚ͕ŶƚŝŽĐŚ ,D/Z^͗ƐĞǁĂŐĞůŝŶĞďůŽĐŬĂŐĞĂŶĚƌĞůĞĂƐĞ ϭϱϭ z K<>z^dZEZ/sΘE'/EZW/Z ϲϬϬϭZ/',Z͕K<>z KEdZKhW ϭϱϮ z W,KZKd,Z^'ZE/E'͕/E ϲϯϰϰZ/',͕Ed/K, ,Ed ϭϱϰ z ĞůƚĂŝĂďůŽ^ĂŶŝƚĂƚŝŽŶŝƐƚƌŝĐƚƌŝĚŐĞŚĞĂĚĂƚtŝůďƵƌǀĞ͕ŶƚŝŽĐŚ ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJͲƐĞǁĂŐĞŝƐƐƵĞƐ ϭϱϰ z >/EK>EWZKWZd/^ ϰϲϱϬt/>hZs͕Ed/K, KEdZKhW ϭϱϲ z sĞƌŝnjŽŶtŝƌĞůĞƐƐƌŝĚŐĞŚĞĂĚZŽĂĚ Z/',Z͕Ed/K, Z^, ϭϱϳ z ϴϱ^><Z͕Ed/K,> ϭϱϴ z KEdZK^d'EZd/E'^dd/KE͕>> ϱϵϱϬZ/',Z͕K<>z ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ ϭϲϬ z hWKEdhdKDKd/s^z^dD^ ϲϬϬϰZ/',Z͕K<>z ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ ϭϲϮ z sZ/KEt/Z>^^Z/',ZK Z/',Z͕Ed/K, &/E^ͬ&Z^ ϭϲϰ z ^ddK&>/&KZE/WZdDEdK&dZE^WKZdd/KE Ed/K,Z'd>>W>͕Ed/K, &/E^ͬ&Z^ ϭϲϱ z ϭϮϮϭD/>>Z^d͕Ed/K,> ϭϲϲ z ϭϬϬϭt/>hZs͕η͕Ed/K,> ϭϲϲ z ϭϬϬϭt/>hZs͕Ed/K,> ϭϲϳ z >>^dZ&/EE/>KZW ϭϬϬϬt/>hZs͕Ed/K, ,Ed ϭϲϵ z ϱϳϱϭZ/',Z͕ηϭϱ͕K<>z > ϭϳϮ z ^EzWK/EdDK/>,KDWZ<͕&/E^ͬ&Z^ ϭϳϯ z ϭϮϱϲϱKĂŬůĞLJϵϭϰD/E^d͕K<>z ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ ϭϳϰ z ϭy&Kt>ZΘhEZtKK ϵϬϭt/>hZs͕Ed/K, ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ ϭϳϲ z E^&Z/>tzK ϱϱϰϵZ/',Z͕K<>z ,Edн,D/Z^;ǀĂŶĚĂůƐĂƚƚĞŵƉƚĞĚƚŽƐƚĞĂůƉĞƚƌŽĨƌŽŵĂ ƚƌĂŝŶĂŶĚƌĞůĞĂƐĞĚŚLJĚƌĂƵůŝĐĨůƵŝĚŽŶĂƉĂƌŬŝŶŐůŽƚͿ ϭϴϬ z ĞůŽŶƚĞΖƐ>ĂŶĚƐĐĂƉŝŶŐ ϲϯϰϰZ/',Z͕K<>z Z^, ϭϴϮ z 'ŝůƌŽLJŶĞƌŐLJĞŶƚĞƌ>>͕ĨŽƌƚŚĞZŝǀĞƌǀŝĞǁŶĞƌŐLJĞŶƚĞƌ ϳϵϱD/E<ZZ͕Ed/K, ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ ϭϴϵ z WϬϳϭϮϲϱϰϰϬZ/',͕K<>z ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ ϭϵϬ z ^ƚĂƚĞWĂƌŬƐtͲKĂŬůĞLJ&ŝĞůĚKĨĨŝĐĞ ϳϱ>hZ/dE>E͕K<>z ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ ϭϵϮ z ^dZEdZE^/dhd,KZ/dz ϴϬϭt/>hZs͕Ed/K, ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ ϭϵϰ z Wh>s/^ ϳϬϭt/>hZs͕Ed/K, ,Ed ϭϵϱ z Ϯϵ^͘><KhZd͕Ed/K,>TABLE B-1REGULATORY DATABASE LISTINGS DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 46 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. dĂďůĞϭ ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJĂƚĂďĂƐĞ>ŝƐƚŝŶŐƐ EŽƌƚŚĞƌŶtĂƚĞƌĨƌŽŶƚ^ŚŽƌƚ>ŝŶĞZĂŝůƌŽĂĚ^ƚƵĚLJ DĂƉ <ĞLJ /Ŷ^ƚƵĚLJ ƌĞĂ >ŝƐƚĞĚŶƚŝƚLJͬ>ŽĐĂƚŝŽŶ ĂƚĂďĂƐĞͬŝƐĐƵƐƐŝŽŶϭ ϭϵϲ z ,sZKEηϵϯϴϬϭ ϱϰϯϯEZK>zZ͕Ed/K, >/^ddE< ϭϵϳ z Ϯϵ^Khd,><Z͕Ed/K,> ϮϬϮ z ϮϮ^K͘><Z͕͘Ed/K,ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ ϮϬϯ z &>KK͕d/D ϭϱ^><ZWd͕Ed/K, ,Ed ϮϬϰ z zsdd^,hZdZ' ϭϬ>,DZKhZd͕Ed/K, ZZEKE'E ϮϬϰ z >Z<͕Kh' ϭϭ>,DZd͕Ed/K, ,Ed ϮϬϱ z WdZ/<:͘dhEEz ϭϰ^><ZWdϭ͕Ed/K, ,Ed ϮϬϲ z Kh'>Ks:Kz ϭϬ^><Z^dϰΘϭϬ͕Ed/K, ,Ed ϮϬϳ z KEKK/E ϭϯϱ>hZ/dE>E͕Ed/K, ,Ed ϮϬϵ z Kh',ZE͕:<ZEd>WZKWZdz ϲϮϬt/>hZs͕Ed/K, ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ Ϯϭϭ z ŝƚLJŽĨŶƚŝŽĐŚͬW' ϲϬϬtŝůďƵƌǀĞ͕͘ŶƚŝŽĐŚ ,D/Z^͗ƐĞǁĂŐĞŽǀĞƌĨůŽǁĂŶĚƚƌĂŶƐĨŽƌŵĞƌĨĂŝůƵƌĞ͕ĐŽŶƚĂŝŶĞĚ ĂŶĚƐƚŽƉƉĞĚ Ϯϭϰ z sĞƌĐŽĞĐŬŝŶŐ͕/ŶĐ ϲϬϳt/>hZsEh͕Ed/K, Z^, Ϯϭϱ z ZzDKEZtZ ϲϰt><Z͕Ed/K, ,Ed Ϯϭϲ z ϭydd'>/E/͕s/ ϱϰϬt/>hZsEh͕Ed/K, ,Ed Ϯϭϳ z hd,WZ/'^Θ&KK ϱϬϳϭϴd,^d͕Ed/K, ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ Ϯϭϴ z z͕:/ ϰt><W>͕Ed/K, ,Ed Ϯϭϵ z Z/ddZD&'/E ϱϮϭt/>hZs͕Ed/K, ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ ϮϮϬ z >>KzΖ^,K>/z,ZKZ ϱϱϯt/>hZs͕Ed/K, KEdZKhW ϮϮϭ z t^dZE^EEZ/< ϱϰϱt/>hZsEh͕Ed/K, ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ ϮϮϮ z ϱϮϲDZZ/s͕Ed/K,> ϮϮϯ z Zd,hZEZ^KE ϯϯt><Z͕Ed/K, ,Ed ϮϮϰ z Z>>KZ/E' ϱϭϭt/>hZs^dϱ͕Ed/K, ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ ϮϮϳ z W'Θ ϵϯϭĂǀĂůůŽZĚ͕͘ŶƚŝŽĐŚ ,D/Z^͗ƌĞůĞĂƐĞŽĨŽŝůĨƌŽŵƚƌĂŶƐĨŽƌŵĞƌƐƚƌƵĐŬďLJǀĞŚŝĐůĞ͘&ůƵŝĚ ĐŽŶƚĂŝŶĞĚĂŶĚĐůĞĂŶĞĚƵƉ͘ ϮϯϬ z ŽŶƚƌĂŽƐƚĂŽƵŶƚLJ,ĂnjŵĂƚ ϰϭϱtŝůďƵƌǀĞ͕:ŝŵ,ŽůŝĚĂLJDĂƌŝŶĂ;ϵϬϵͲϵϭϳͲϳϳϯϲͿ͕ŶƚŝŽĐŚ ,D/Z^͗ƐƵŶŬĞŶǀĞƐƐĞůƌĞůĞĂƐĞĚŽŝů Ϯϯϭ z Ed/K,/>z>'Z/^Wd, ϭϲϱϬs>>KZK͕Ed/K, D/^^/KE^ ϮϯϮ z ZKZ'Kh^͕>Zd ϴϮϱ&h>dKE^,/WzZZ͕Ed/K, KEdZKhW Ϯϯϯ z ZK>K>DEWKtZ ϭϯϭϱD/E^d͕K<>z ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ͕ĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞĚWŚĂƐĞ/^ǁŝƚŚďƌŽǁŶĨŝĞůĚƐŐƌĂŶƚŝŶ ϮϬϬϱ Ϯϯϱ z D>>KΖ^^,dDd> ϭϮϰϭD/E^d͕K<>z >/^ddE< Ϯϯϲ z ϭϳϬϬs>>KZ͕͘Ed/K, ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJнZE^͗ŝŵƉƌŽƉĞƌĂƐďĞƐƚŽƐƌĞŵŽǀĂůĨƌŽŵ ĂďĂŶĚŽŶĞĚďƵŝůĚŝŶŐ Ϯϯϴ z h<t/>^KEW/EdΘ^hWW>z ϭϳϮϱs>>KZ͕Ed/K, ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ Ϯϯϵ z d,^</>/E/ ϴϬϭ&h>dKE^,/WzZZ͕Ed/K, ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ ϮϰϬ z K<>zh/>Z^^hWW>z ϴϬϬD/E^d͕K<>z >ĞĂŬƌĞƉŽƌƚĞĚĨƌŽŵŐĂƐŽůŝŶĞh^dŝŶϭϵϴϳ͘>h^dĐĂƐĞĐůŽƐĞĚŝŶ ϭϵϵϳ͘ Ϯϰϭ z :hE/KZ^hdKKz ϳϮϵ&h>dKE^,/WzZZ͕Ed/K, ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ ϮϰϮ z ϯϮϰE^,s͕Ed/K,>TABLE B-1REGULATORY DATABASE LISTINGS DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 47 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. dĂďůĞϭ ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJĂƚĂďĂƐĞ>ŝƐƚŝŶŐƐ EŽƌƚŚĞƌŶtĂƚĞƌĨƌŽŶƚ^ŚŽƌƚ>ŝŶĞZĂŝůƌŽĂĚ^ƚƵĚLJ DĂƉ <ĞLJ /Ŷ^ƚƵĚLJ ƌĞĂ >ŝƐƚĞĚŶƚŝƚLJͬ>ŽĐĂƚŝŽŶ ĂƚĂďĂƐĞͬŝƐĐƵƐƐŝŽŶϭ Ϯϰϯ z &Z^,/^Zs/yWZd^ ϳϭϱ&h>dKE^,/WzZZ͕Ed/K, ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ Ϯϰϰ z ϭϯϮϰEK/s͕Ed/K,> Ϯϰϱ z >d/>K^E/dd/KE/^dZ/d ϳϮϰ&h>dKE^,/WzZZ͕Ed/K, ,Ed Ϯϰϲ z ĞůƚĂŝĂďůŽ^ĂŶŝƚĂƚŝŽŶŝƐƚƌŝĐƚ ϳϮϱ&ƵůƚŽŶ^ŚŝƉLJĂƌĚZĚ͕͘ŶƚŝŽĐŚ ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJн,D/Z^͗ƐĂŶŝƚĂƌLJƐĞǁĞƌƌĞůĞĂƐĞ Ϯϰϳ z >d^ZWΘ^>s'͕/E͘ ϭϯϳϭD/E^d͕K<>z Z^, Ϯϰϳ z >d^ZWΘ^>s'͕/EϭϯϳϭD/E^d͕K<>z ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJнĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞĚWŚĂƐĞ/^ŝŶϮϬϬϱǁŝƚŚďƌŽǁŶĨŝĞůĚƐ ŐƌĂŶƚ;ŽƌĐŚĂƌĚƐ͕ƐƚŽƌĂŐĞƐŚĞĚƐ͕ƐĐƌĂƉLJĂƌĚ͕ƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚŝĂůͿ Ϯϰϴ z ŝƚLJŽĨŶƚŝŽĐŚĞŚŝŶĚϮϮϭtŝůďƵƌǀĞ͕͘ŶƚŝŽĐŚ ,D/Z^͗ƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚŝĂůƐĞǁĂŐĞƌĞůĞĂƐĞ Ϯϰϵ z /dzEd/K,t^dtdZdZdDEd&/> ϰϮϱ&h>dKE^,/WzZZ͕Ed/K, ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ Ϯϱϭ z ϮϭϮZ^ds͕Ed/K,> ϮϱϮ z >&ZΘDZzEED,K ϭϯϮϱ>Kh/^Z͕Ed/K, ,Ed Ϯϱϯ z EZ Ϯϵϭ&ƵůƚŽŶ^ŚŝƉLJĂƌĚZĚ͕ŶƚŝŽĐŚ ,D/Z^͗ƵŶŬŶŽǁŶƐŚĞĞŶĨƌŽŵĂďŽĂƚƌĂŵƉ Ϯϱϰ z ϮϮϭt/>hZsηϮϲ͕Ed/K,> Ϯϱϱ z </D>>>DEdZz^,KK> ϭϯϭϬh'h^dtz͕Ed/K, ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ Ϯϱϲ z /dzK&Ed/K, ϮϮϱ&h>dKE^,/WzZZ͕Ed/K, ,Ed Ϯϱϵ z ϭyDE/>^͕:K,E ϭϱϰϬD/E^d͕K<>z ,Ed ϮϲϬ z ϭϯϳt/>hZs͕Wdϭϲ͕Ed/K,> ϮϲϮ z :/>>h<Zd ϭϮϵW>^EdW>͕Ed/K, ,Ed Ϯϲϯ z ĞůƚĂŝĂďůŽ^ĂŶŝƚĂƚŝŽŶŝƐƚ͘ ϭϭϱtŝůďĞƌǀĞ͕ŶƚŝŽĐŚ ,D/Z^͗ƐĞǁĂŐĞƌĞůĞĂƐĞ Ϯϲϱ z ϮϭϬ&h>dKE^,/WzZZ͕Ed/K,> Ϯϲϱ z EEZzKsDZ/E ϭϭϭ&h>dKE^,/WzZZ͕Ed/K, KEdZKhW Ϯϲϲ z ϭϭϮ^dϲd,͕Ed/K,> Ϯϲϳ z ZzE'Zz ϭϬϰ͘ϭϲd,^d͕Ed/K, ZZEKE'E Ϯϲϴ z &h,ZZW/EdtZ< ϯϮϱϳϭϴd,^d͕Ed/K, ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ Ϯϲϴ z W<,D͕KE> ϯϮϭϱϭϴd,^d͕Ed/K, ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ Ϯϲϵ E K>z ϭϭϴϳD/E^d͕K<>z ,Ed ϮϳϬ E ^dzhdK,h^ ϭϮϰϭD/E^d͕K<>z ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ Ϯϳϭ E ϭϭϴϵD/E^d͕K<>z > Ϯϳϭ E ,Z^d>ZsEdZ ϭϭϴϵD/E^d͕K<>z ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJнĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞĚWŚĂƐĞ/^ŝŶϮϬϬϱǁŝƚŚďƌŽǁŶĨŝĞůĚƐ ŐƌĂŶƚ;ďƵŝůĚŝŶŐƐ͕ƐŚĞĚƐ͕ĐŽŶĐƌĞƚĞƐƵŵƉͿ ϮϳϮ E KZEZK&^dϭϴd,^dΘW,/>>/W^Z͕Ed/K,> Ϯϳϯ E DĐŽŶĂůĚΖƐηϭϮϱϮϱ ϵϭϰDĂŝŶ^ƚƌĞĞƚ͕KĂŬůĞLJ >d&h>^ Ϯϳϰ E Wƌŝǀŝƚnj ϯϬϯϭĂƐƚϭϴƚŚ͕DĂdžKůĚ,ŽƵƐĞZĞƐƚĂƵƌĂŶƚ͕ŶƚŝŽĐŚ ,D/Z^͗ŐƌĂLJǁĂƚĞƌ Ϯϳϱ E ϭϯϮϳd,͕Ed/K,> Ϯϳϲ E hŶŝƚĞĚ^ŝƚĞ^ĞƌǀŝĐĞƐͲŶƚŝŽĐŚ ϮϲϮϱϭϴd,^d͕Ed/K, ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ Ϯϳϳ E Ed/K,d/ZΘt,> ϲϯϭϴd,^d͕Ed/K, ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ Ϯϳϴ E ^zEz^hdK^>^hdKZW/Z ϴϱϭϴd,^d͕Ed/K, ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ Ϯϳϵ E WZ/^/KEZ<E&ZKEdE ϮϮϱϭϴd,^d͕Ed/K, ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ Ϯϴϭ E zsd,K^W/d> ϰϬϱϭϴd,^dZd͕Ed/K, ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJTABLE B-1REGULATORY DATABASE LISTINGS DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 48 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. dĂďůĞϭ ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJĂƚĂďĂƐĞ>ŝƐƚŝŶŐƐ EŽƌƚŚĞƌŶtĂƚĞƌĨƌŽŶƚ^ŚŽƌƚ>ŝŶĞZĂŝůƌŽĂĚ^ƚƵĚLJ DĂƉ <ĞLJ /Ŷ^ƚƵĚLJ ƌĞĂ >ŝƐƚĞĚŶƚŝƚLJͬ>ŽĐĂƚŝŽŶ ĂƚĂďĂƐĞͬŝƐĐƵƐƐŝŽŶϭ ϮϴϮ E >ƵĐŬLJηϮϮϯ ϭϭϭϭϴd,^d͕Ed/K, ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ Ϯϴϯ E DĞŝŶĞŬĞĂƌĞŶƚĞƌηϮϲϲϭ ϰϭϭϭϴd,^d͕Ed/K, ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ Ϯϴϰ E ϱϭϱϭϴd,^d͕ηϮϭϮ͕Ed/K,> Ϯϴϱ E 'K>E,/>>^KDDhE/dz,hZ, ϱϮϱϭϴd,^d͕Ed/K, ,Ed Ϯϴϲ E ,h^KE^Zs/^dd/KE ϲϭϭϴd,^d͕Ed/K, KEdZKhW Ϯϴϳ E sEZZ ϳϮϱϭϴd,^d͕Ed/K, KEdZKhW Ϯϴϴ E ^dZ/<>z&KZ/'EhdKWZd^ ϳϮϵϭϴd,^d͕Ed/K, ,Ed Ϯϴϵ E Z/',z>^ Ϯϰϭϱϭϴd,^d͕Ed/K, ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ ϮϵϬ E &ZD>z>K^DEK^Zs ϵϬϭϭϴd,^d͕Ed/K, ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ Ϯϵϭ E KZEZ^dKE,Z/^d/EEdZ ϭϳϰϱϭϴd,^dZd͕Ed/K, ,Ed Ϯϵϯ E /'Kd/Z^EKϲ ϰϭϬϭϴd,^dZd͕Ed/K, ,Ed Ϯϵϱ E /'Kd/Z^ ϰϭϮϭϴd,^d͕Ed/K, ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ Ϯϵϲ E ϰϭϴϭϴd,͕Ed/K,> Ϯϵϳ E dΘdDK/>/dzͬΘϭϬd,^d^;ϴϮϱϳϯͿ ϳϬϬϭϴd,^d͕Ed/K, KEdZKhW Ϯϵϴ E K<>z,Kd> ϭϮϯD/E^d͕K<>z KEdZKhW Ϯϵϵ E K<>zKE,Z>EZ^ ϮϯϭD/E^d͕K<>z Zz>EZ^ͲŽƵƚƐŝĚĞƐƚƵĚLJĂƌĞĂ ϯϬϬ E ĂƌůΖƐ:ƌ ϵϭϱD/E^d͕K<>z ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ ϯϬϮ E Yhd/DZ/E ϱϬϭD/E^dZd͕K<>z ,Ed ϯϬϯ E ĂůdƌĂŶƐ ϱϰϳDĂŝŶ^ƚ;^ƚ͘Zƚ͘ϰͿĂƚKŚĂƌĂǀĞ͕KĂŬůĞLJ ,D/Z^͗ƌŝŐŚŝƚďƵŝůĚŝŶŐ͕ƌĞůĞĂƐĞĚĚŝĞƐĞů͕ĐŽŶƚĂŝŶĞĚ ϯϬϰ E Θ<ƵƚŽŵŽƚŝǀĞZĞƉĂŝƌ/ŶĐ͘ ϳϭϮϭϴd,^d͕Ed/K, Z^, ϯϬϰ E Θ<hdKDKd/sZW/Z/E ϳϭϮϭϴd,^d͕Ed/K, ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ ϯϬϱ E K<s/tDDKZ/>WZ< ϮϱϬϬϭϴd,^d͕Ed/K, ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ ϯϬϲ E sE'>,KZ^/E ϭϴϰϬϭϴd,^d͕Ed/K, KEdZKhW ϯϬϳ E ,K>zZK^^DdZz ϮϮϬϬϭϴd,^d͕Ed/K, Z^, ϯϬϴ E ^ddK&tZWE&/>/ ϯϱϬϬϭϴd,^d͕Ed/K, ,Ed ϯϬϵ E dΘd ϮϬϰϬĂƐƚϭϴƚŚ^ƚƌĞĞƚ͕ŶƚŝŽĐŚ ,D/Z^͗ďĂƚƚĞƌLJĂĐŝĚƌĞůĞĂƐĞĨƌŽŵĐĂƌ ϯϭϬ E ŶĚƌĞƐƵƚŽ^ŚŽƉ ϯϰϮϬϭϴd,^d͕Ed/K, ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ ϯϭϭ E /dzK&Ed/K, ϯϭϬϬϭϴd,^d͕Ed/K, KEdZKhW ϯϭϮ E dĞƌƌĂĐĂƌĞŶƚŝŽĐŚ ϮϴϬϬϭϴd,^d͕Ed/K, ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ ϯϭϮ E Es/ZK>E/E ϮϴϮϬϭϴd,^d͕Ed/K, KEdZKhW ϯϭϰ E tzE^t/^,ZDEdKEdZdKZ/E ϮϲϮϬϭϴd,^d͕Ed/K, ^d ϯϭϳ E ϭyEd/K,^YhZ ϰϭϭϴƚŚ^ƚ͕ŶƚŝŽĐŚ ,/^dDE/&^d ϯϭϴ E KE^dZhd/KEZ/>>/E'Yh/WDEd ϮϳϱϬϭϴd,^d͕Ed/K, ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJTABLE B-1REGULATORY DATABASE LISTINGS DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 49 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. dĂďůĞϭ ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJĂƚĂďĂƐĞ>ŝƐƚŝŶŐƐ EŽƌƚŚĞƌŶtĂƚĞƌĨƌŽŶƚ^ŚŽƌƚ>ŝŶĞZĂŝůƌŽĂĚ^ƚƵĚLJ DĂƉ <ĞLJ /Ŷ^ƚƵĚLJ ƌĞĂ >ŝƐƚĞĚŶƚŝƚLJͬ>ŽĐĂƚŝŽŶ ĂƚĂďĂƐĞͬŝƐĐƵƐƐŝŽŶϭ ϯϭϵ E ,sZKEηϵͲϯϴϬϭ ϱϰϯϯEZK>zZ͕Ed/K, 'ĂƐŽůŝŶĞ>h^d͖ĐůŽƐĞĚŝŶϮϬϬϮ͘ ϯϮϬ E <DW^WZKWE/E ϭϰϯϯD/E^d͕K<>z KEdZKhW ϯϮϭ E W'ΘEd/K,DK ϱϰϬϬEZK>zZ͕Ed/K, ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ ϯϮϮ E Z/',,sZKE^^ηϵͲϯϴϬϭ ϱϰϯϯEZK>zZ͕,tzϰ͕Ed/K, D/^^/KE^ ϯϮϯ E Z/',,sZKEηϵϯϴϬϭ ϱϰϯϯEZK>zZ͕K<>z ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ ϯϮϰ E >W/EZ^E,h;͗ϳͲ>sEηϮϬϬϯϵͿ ϭϭϬϭϭϴd,^d͕Ed/K, ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ ϯϮϲ E dͲDK/>t^dKZWͬϭϭϱϵϳ& ϭϲϴϯD/E^d͕K<>z KEdZKhW ϯϮϳ E ϱϰ^dϭϵd,^d͕Ed/K,> ϯϮϵ E Z/d/ηϱϵϬϴ ϮϬϭϴd,^d͕Ed/K, ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ ϯϯϮ E ϱϭϮWZ<Z>E͕Ed/K,> ϯϯϯ E ϭϵϬϱ>W,tz͕Ed/K,> ϯϯϰ E ^dZKZΘ'Z&&/E ϭϴϯϬW,/>>/W^>E͕Ed/K, KEdZKhW ϯϯϱ E d^'d^Kdd>hs/^/ ϭϮϭϬ>DKE^dZd͕Ed/K, ZZEKE'E ϯϯϲ E ϭϴϮϰKs>>KZ͕ηϯ͕Ed/K,> ϯϯϳ E ϭϵϬϭ'>EtKKZ/s͕Ed/K,> ϯϰϬ E ϭϵϭϮ,^dEhds͕Ed/K,> ϯϰϭ E ĨĨŽƌĚĂďůĞdŝƌĞĞŶƚĞƌ ϭϭt/>hZs͕Ed/K, ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ ϯϰϮ E dZK/dhdKDKd/s Ϯt/>hZs͕Ed/K, KEdZKhW ϯϰϯ E ϭϵϭϲ,^dEhds͕Ed/K,> ϯϰϱ E ΘDdZK&&͕/E ϱϯϰϲ>D>E͕K<>z ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ ϯϰϳ E ^dDD͕'KZ' ϵϲd,^d͕Ed/K, KEdZKhW ϯϱϬ E ϭϵϮϬ/Z,s͕Ed/K,> ϯϱϮ E Z^/E ϭϴϯϭWZ^KE^>E͕Ed/K, ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ ϯϱϰ E Ζ^hdKZW/ZDh&&>Z ϵϬϭ^d^h/d͕Ed/K, Z^, ϯϱϰ E Ζ^hdKZW/ZDh&&>Z ϵϬϭ^d͕Ed/K, KEdZKhW ϯϱϱ E ϭϵϬϲs>>KZ͕Ed/K,> ϯϱϲ E ϭϮϭϭ^d͕Wdϳ͕Ed/K,> ϯϱϳ E ^K>>zΖ^ͲϭϬ ϵϬϬ^d;<Θ&/>hEZϵ͕Ed/K, ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ ϯϱϳ E hZd^d/Z^Zs/ ϵϭϰͲͲ^d͕͘Ed/K, ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ ϯϱϴ E Ed/K,KEs>^Ed,K^W/d> ϭϮϭϬ^d͕Ed/K, ZZEKE'E ϯϱϵ E hEK>^^ηϯϵϰϲ ϭϲϬϭ^d͕Ed/K, ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ ϯϲϬ E hdKKEηϯϯϲϲ ϭϲϮϯ^d͕Ed/K, KEdZKhW ϯϲϭ E KZt></Es^dDEd'ZKhW ϲϭϱ^d͕Ed/K, KEdZKhW ϯϲϮ E dK>>ϯϭϱϯϭ ϭϳϬϲ^d͕Ed/K, KEdZKhW ϯϳϬ E K^DKWZK&hdz ϭϴϰϬ^d͕Ed/K, ZZEKE'E ϯϳϭ E >DKd,>EZ^ ϭϴϲϬ^d͕Ed/K, Zz>EZ^ǁŝƚŚŶŽůŝƐƚĞĚƌĞůĞĂƐĞƐ ϯϳϮ E K>>Z'EZ>ηϭϰϳϮϵ ϮϬϭϬd,^dt͕Ed/K, ZZEKE'ETABLE B-1REGULATORY DATABASE LISTINGS DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 50 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. dĂďůĞϭ ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJĂƚĂďĂƐĞ>ŝƐƚŝŶŐƐ EŽƌƚŚĞƌŶtĂƚĞƌĨƌŽŶƚ^ŚŽƌƚ>ŝŶĞZĂŝůƌŽĂĚ^ƚƵĚLJ DĂƉ <ĞLJ /Ŷ^ƚƵĚLJ ƌĞĂ >ŝƐƚĞĚŶƚŝƚLJͬ>ŽĐĂƚŝŽŶ ĂƚĂďĂƐĞͬŝƐĐƵƐƐŝŽŶϭ ϯϳϱ E dKEzs>E/ ϭϵϯϬ'>EtKKZ/s͕Ed/K, ZZEKE'E ϯϳϳ E W/&/>>ͬEd/K,t&ϬϬϭ ϭϬϬtϮϬd,^d͕Ed/K, >/^ddE< ϯϳϵ E ^dZKZΘ'Z&&/E ϱϯϬϱ>/sK<s͕K<>z ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ ϯϴϬ E Ed/K,ZW͕>W ϭϵϰϱEϭϵϰϵs>>KZ͕Ed/K, ZZEKE'E ϯϴϭ E ^dZd>EZ^ϮϬϬϴ^d͕Ed/K,Zz>EZ^ǁŝƚŚŶŽůŝƐƚĞĚƌĞůĞĂƐĞƐ ϯϴϮ E Ed/K,ZW͕>W ϯϱͲϭϬϳt^dϮϬd,^dZd͕Ed/K, ZZEKE'E ϯϴϯ E 'KZ'^dDDtZ,Kh^ ϱϬϱ^d͕Ed/K, KEdZKhW ϯϴϰ E t,>tKZ<^ηϮϰϬϳϭϰ ϮϬϮϰ^d͕Ed/K, ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ ϯϴϱ E :E/ZKhE^s/>> ϮϭϬϭEE/^Z/s͕Ed/K, ZZEKE'E ϯϴϳ E Z/<Ζ^t>/E'K ϱϯϬϬ>/sK<s͕K<>z ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ ϯϴϴ E dΘdĂůŝĨŽƌŶŝĂͲt&ϬϬϭ ϭϬϬtϮϬd,^d͕Ed/K, ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ ϯϴϵ E W'ΘEd/K,^Zs/EdZ Ϯϭϭϭ,/>>Z^ds͕Ed/K, >/^ddE< ϯϵϬ E ZWZ&KZDEdZE^D/^^/KE ϱϮϵϵEZK>zZ͕K<>z KEdZKhW ϯϵϯ E >Ζ^hdKZW/Z ϱϮϵϬEZK>zZ͕K<>z KEdZKhW ϯϵϰ E <WhEd>EZ^ ϮϬϮϴ^dZd͕Ed/K, Zz>EZ^ǁŝƚŚŶŽůŝƐƚĞĚƌĞůĞĂƐĞƐ ϯϵϱ E </E'Ζ^hdKZW/Z ϱϮϵϱEZK>zZ͕K<>z ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ ϯϵϳ E DZ/EDKdKZz>ZW/Z ϱϮϵϯEZK>zZ͕K<>z ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ ϯϵϴ E dEdhdKZW/Z ϭϬϯt>dZtz͕Ed/K, ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ ϯϵϵ E K<>zK>>/^/KEhdKKz>> ϱϮϴϵEZK>zZ͕K<>z ZĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJ ϰϬϬ E ^K>Z^t/DΘ'zD ϭϭϭϭϱd,^dt͕Ed/K, KEdZKhW ϰϬϭ E >dZKh^dKD ϭϱϯϭϬd,^dt͕Ed/K, KEdZKhW ϰϬϯ E DŽƚĞΖƐĂƵƚŽŵŽƚŝǀĞŝŶĐ ϭϯϬZ/>ZKs͕Ed/K, >/^d, ϰϬϱ E ŶƚŝŽĐŚDŝĚĚůĞ^ĐŚŽŽů ϭϱϬϬ^d͕Ed/K, >/^d, ϰϬϲ E EtK<>zZ^ >/sK<sͬK<>zZ͕K<>z dŚĞϭϵͲĂĐƌĞƐŝƚĞǁĂƐŚŝƐƚŽƌŝĐĂůůLJƵƐĞĚĨŽƌĂŐƌŝĐƵůƚƵƌĂůƉƵƌƉŽƐĞƐ͘ ƐŝƚĞĂƐƐĞƐƐŵĞŶƚǁĂƐĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞĚĂŶĚƚŚĞƐŝƚĞƌĞĐĞŝǀĞĚĂŶŽ ĨƵƌƚŚĞƌĂĐƚŝŽŶĐůŽƐƵƌĞ͘ ϰϭϳ E ͲϭdZE^D/^^/KE^Zs/ ϮϱϬϰsWZd^d͕Ed/K, >/^d, EŽƚĞƐ͗ ĐƌŽŶLJŵƐĂƌĞĚĞĨŝŶĞĚŝŶƚŚĞĚĂƚĂďĂƐĞƐĞĂƌĐŚƌĞƉŽƌƚ͘TABLE B-1REGULATORY DATABASE LISTINGS DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 51 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. dĂďůĞϮ ĂƚĂďĂƐĞ>ŝƐƚŝŶŐƐ/ŶĚŝĐĂƚŝǀĞŽĨZĞůĞĂƐĞ EŽƌƚŚĞƌŶtĂƚĞƌĨƌŽŶƚ^ŚŽƌƚůŝŶĞZĂŝůƌŽĂĚ&ĞĂƐŝďŝůŝƚLJ^ƚƵĚLJ DĂƉ <ĞLJ /Ŷ^ƚƵĚLJ ƌĞĂ >ŝƐƚĞĚŶƚŝƚLJͬ>ŽĐĂƚŝŽŶ ĞƐĐƌŝƉƚŝŽŶ ZŝƐŬ ĂƚĞŐŽƌLJ ϯ z &KZDZ'z>KZKEd/EZKZWKZd/KE ϮϲϬϯt/>hZ͕Ed/K, dŚĞϴϬ͘ϭϭͲĂĐƌĞƐŝƚĞǁĂƐƵƐĞĚĨŽƌƉƵůƉĂŶĚƉĂƉĞƌŵĂŶƵĨĂĐƚƵƌŝŶŐ ŝŶǀŽůǀŝŶŐƚŚĞ<ƌĂĨƚďůĞĂĐŚƉƌŽĐĞƐƐĨƌŽŵƚŚĞϭϵϰϬƐͲϭϵϵϬƐ͘ ůĂƌŝĨŝĞƌƐ͕ĂĨƵĞůŽŝů^d͕ƌĞĐŽǀĞƌLJďŽŝůĞƌ͕ŚŝŐŚĚĞŶƐŝƚLJƚĂŶŬƐ͕ĂŶĚĂ ƉƵŵƉŚŽƵƐĞƌĞŵĂŝŶĂƚƚŚĞƐŝƚĞ͘'ƌŽƵŶĚǁĂƚĞƌĂŶĚƐŽŝůǁĞƌĞ ŝŵƉĂĐƚĞĚďLJD͕ĚŝŽdžŝŶƐͬĨƵƌĂŶƐͬůĞĂĚ͕ƉĞƚƌŽůĞƵŵ͕WƐ͕ĂŶĚ W,Ɛ͘dŚĞƐŝƚĞǁĂƐĞŶƌŽůůĞĚŝŶƚŚĞsWŝŶϮϬϬϰ;ǁĂƐƉƌĞǀŝŽƵƐůLJ ŝŶǀĞƐƚŝŐĂƚĞĚƵŶĚĞƌZ>͕ďƵƚĚŝĚŶŽƚƋƵĂůŝĨLJĨŽƌƚŚĞEW>Ϳ͘dŚĞ ĐůĞĂŶƵƉŝƐƐƚŝůůŽŶŐŽŝŶŐ͘KƵƚƐƚĂŶĚŝŶŐĂĐƚŝǀŝƚŝĞƐŝŶĐůƵĚĞĂƌĞŵĞĚLJ ƐĞůĞĐƚŝŽŶĨŽƌĂƌƐĞŶŝĐĂƐƐŽĐŝĂƚĞĚǁŝƚŚĂďůĂĐŬůŝƋƵŽƌƉŽŶĚĂŶĚ ƌĞŵĞĚŝĂůŵŽŶŝƚŽƌŝŶŐ͘WǁĂƐĂůƐŽĂƉƌŝŵĂƌLJKŝŶŐƌŽƵŶĚǁĂƚĞƌ ĂŶĚŚĂƐďĞĞŶĂĚĚƌĞƐƐĞĚǁŝƚŚ/^K͕ĂůƚŚŽƵŐŚŵŽŶŝƚŽƌŝŶŐƌĞŵĂŝŶƐ ƵŶĚĞƌǁĂLJ͘ůĞĂŶƵƉŽĨǁĞƚůĂŶĚƐƐŽŝůƐǁĂƐĂůƐŽĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞĚŝŶϮϬϭϱ͘DĞĚŝƵŵ ϳ z W/KEZDZ/^;ĨŽƌŵĞƌ<DtdZͿ Ϯϭϱϭt/>hZs͕͘Ed/K, dŚĞĨĂĐŝůŝƚLJƌĞĐĞŝǀĞĚĂůĞĂŶƵƉĂŶĚďĂƚĞŵĞŶƚKƌĚĞƌŝŶϭϵϵϳĨŽƌ ŐƌŽƵŶĚǁĂƚĞƌĐŽŶƚĂŵŝŶĂƚŝŽŶĂŶĚŝƐĂŶŽƉĞŶůĞĂŶƵƉWƌŽŐƌĂŵƐŝƚĞ͘ 'ƌŽƵŶĚǁĂƚĞƌŝƐĐŽŶƚĂŵŝŶĂƚĞĚǁŝƚŚĐŽƉƉĞƌ͕ĂŵŵŽŶŝƵŵ͕ĂŶĚ ŽƚŚĞƌŽƌŐĂŶŝĐĂŶĚŝŶŽƌŐĂŶŝĐĐŽŵƉŽƵŶĚƐ͘&ŽƵƌƐŽƵƌĐĞĂƌĞĂƐŚĂǀĞ ďĞĞŶŝĚĞŶƚŝĨŝĞĚ͖ƚǁŽĂƌĞďĞŝŶŐƌĞŵĞĚŝĂƚĞĚďLJĞdžĐĂǀĂƚŝŶŐĂŶĚ ƚƌĞĂƚŝŶŐƐŽŝů͘dŚĞŵŽƐƚƌĞĐĞŶƚƌĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJĐŽƌƌĞƐƉŽŶĚĞŶĐĞŝŶϮϬϭϴ ƌĞƋƵĞƐƚĞĚĂĚĚŝƚŝŽŶĂůŐƌŽƵŶĚǁĂƚĞƌƐĂŵƉůŝŶŐĂŶĚĂŶƵƉĚĂƚĞŽĨƚŚĞ ƐŝƚĞĐŽŶĐĞƉƚƵĂůŵŽĚĞů͘DĞĚŝƵŵ ϲϲ z KEdZK^dWKtZW>Ed ϯϮϬϭt/>hZs͕Ed/K, dŚĞĨĂĐŝůŝƚLJŚĂƐďĞĞŶƐƵďũĞĐƚƚŽZZŽƌƌĞĐƚŝǀĞĐƚŝŽŶĂŶĚ ƌĞŵĞĚŝĂƚŝŽŶ͘DƵůƚŝƉůĞŝŶǀĞƐƚŝŐĂƚŝŽŶƐĂŶĚĐůŽƐƵƌĞĂĐƚŝǀŝƚŝĞƐŚĂǀĞ ƚĂŬĞŶƉůĂĐĞƐŝŶĐĞϭϵϴϲ͘dŚĞĨĂĐŝůŝƚLJĚŝĚŶŽƚƋƵĂůŝƚLJĨŽƌƚŚĞEW>͖ ŚŽǁĞǀĞƌ͕W'ΘĞŶƚĞƌĞĚĂŽƌƌĞĐƚŝǀĞĐƚŝŽŶŽŶƐĞŶƚŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚ ƚŽƌĞŵĞĚŝĂƚĞϱϲKƐĂŶĚ^tDhƐŝŶϮϬϭϭ͘dŚĞŵŽƐƚƌĞĐĞŶƚ ĂĐƚŝŽŶǁĂƐĂƉƉƌŽǀĂůŽĨĂŐƌŽƵŶĚǁĂƚĞƌŝŶǀĞƐƚŝŐĂƚŝŽŶŝŶϮϬϭϴ͘dŚĞ ŝŵƉĂĐƚĞĚŵĞĚŝĂŝŶĐůƵĚĞŐƌŽƵŶĚǁĂƚĞƌ͕ƐĞĚŝŵĞŶƚƐ͕ƐŽŝů͕ĂŶĚ ƐƵƌĨĂĐĞǁĂƚĞƌĂŶĚƚŚĞKƐŝŶĐůƵĚĞŵĞƚĂůƐ͕ƉĞƚƌŽůĞƵŵ͕WƐ͕ĂŶĚ W,Ɛ͘DŝŐƌĂƚŝŽŶŽĨĐŽŶƚĂŵŝŶĂƚĞĚŐƌŽƵŶĚǁĂƚĞƌŝƐƵŶĚĞƌĐŽŶƚƌŽů ĂƐŽĨ:ƵŶĞϮϬϭϵĂŶĚĐŽŵƉůĞƚŝŽŶŽĨĂĐŽƌƌĞĐƚŝǀĞŵĞĂƐƵƌĞ ŝŵƉůĞŵĞŶƚĂƚŝŽŶǁŽƌŬƉůĂŶŝƐƐĐŚĞĚƵůĞĚĨŽƌ^ĞƉƚĞŵďĞƌ͘DĞĚŝƵŵ ϭϭϭ z ZZd/KE>dZd ϭϬϯϬWK>>KKhZd͕Ed/K, dŚĞ'ĂLJůŽƌĚZĞĐƌĞĂƚŝŽŶĂůdƌĂĐƚǁĂƐƵƐĞĚĨŽƌĂŐƌŝĐƵůƚƵƌĞ ďĞŐŝŶŶŝŶŐŝŶƚŚĞĞĂƌůLJϭϵϬϬƐ͘/ŶƚŚĞϭϵϳϬƐ͕ǁĂƐƚĞǁĂƚĞƌĨƌŽŵƚŚĞ ƉĂƉĞƌŵŝůůǁĂƐĂƉƉůŝĞĚƚŽƚŚĞůĂŶĚ͘ƌĂŶŬĐĂƐĞŽŝůǁĂƐĂƉƉůŝĞĚĨŽƌ ĚƵƐƚĐŽŶƚƌŽů͘ŝŽdžŝŶͲĐŽŶƚĂŝŶŝŶŐƌŽĂĚďĂƐĞǁĂƐŝŶĂĚǀĞƌƚĞŶƚůLJ ŝŶƐƚĂůůĞĚĂƐƉĂƌŬŽĨĂƉĂƌŬŝŶŐůŽƚŝŶϭϵϵϱĚƵƌŝŶŐƐŝƚĞ ƌĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ͘ŝŽdžŝŶƐ͕ĨƵƌĂŶƐ͕ŵĞƚĂůƐ͕ƉĞƚƌŽůĞƵŵ͕W,Ɛ͕ ƉĞƐƚŝĐŝĚĞƐ͕ĂŶĚŚĞƌďŝĐŝĚĞƐǁĞƌĞĚĞƚĞĐƚĞĚŝŶƐŽŝů͘dŚĞƐŝƚĞĞŶƚĞƌĞĚ ƚŚĞsWĂŶĚƌĞĐĞŝǀĞĚĐůŽƐƵƌĞŝŶϮϬϬϱǁŝƚŚĂůĂŶĚƵƐĞƌĞƐƚƌŝĐƚŝŽŶ ĂŶĚĐĂƉƉŝŶŐƌĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚ͘ŶŶƵĂůKΘDƌĞƉŽƌƚƐĂƌĞƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚ͘DĞĚŝƵŵ ϭϮϱ z 'KZ'/ͲW/&/'zW^hD>> ϴϬϭD/E<ZZ͕Ed/K, dŚĞĨĂĐŝůŝƚLJŝƐůŝƐƚĞĚŽŶƚŚĞZ>/^ĚĂƚĂďĂƐĞ͕ďƵƚĚŝĚŶŽƚƋƵĂůŝƚLJ ĨŽƌƚŚĞEW>ĂŶĚǁĂƐĂƌĐŚŝǀĞĚ͘>ŝƐƚĞĚĨŽƌƐĞǀĞƌĂůƌĞůĞĂƐĞƐŽĨ ƉĞƚƌŽůĞƵŵĂŶĚƉŽƚĂƐƐŝƵŵŚLJĚƌŽdžŝĚĞƚŚĂƚǁĞƌĞĐŽŶƚĂŝŶĞĚ͘dŚĞ ĨĂĐŝůŝƚLJŝƐůŝƐƚĞĚĂƐĂ^Y'ŽĨŚĂnjĂƌĚŽƵƐǁĂƐƚĞĂŶĚĂƐĂƐŽůŝĚ ǁĂƐƚĞͬůĂŶĚĨŝůůĨĂĐŝůŝƚLJƚŚĂƚĂĐĐĞƉƚƐŝŶĞƌƚĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶͬĚĞŵŽůŝƚŝŽŶ ǁĂƐƚĞ͘dŚĞĨĂĐŝůŝƚLJŝƐĂůƐŽůŝƐƚĞĚŽŶƚŚĞD/E^ĚĂƚĂďĂƐĞĨŽƌĂŵŝŶĞ ƚŚĂƚǁĂƐĐůŽƐĞĚŝŶϭϵϴϮ͘ůƚŚŽƵŐŚƚŚĞĨĂĐŝůŝƚLJŝƐŶŽƚůŝƐƚĞĚŽŶ ĚĂƚĂďĂƐĞƐŝŶĚŝĐĂƚŝǀĞŽĨŝŵƉĂĐƚƚŽƚŚĞĞŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚ͕ŝƚŝƐĂůĞŐĂĐLJ ŝŶĚƵƐƚƌŝĂůĨĂĐŝůŝƚLJƚŚĂƚĐŽŶƚŝŶƵĞƐƚŽŽƉĞƌĂƚĞ͘/ƚŚĂƐŶŽƚďĞĞŶ ƐƵďũĞĐƚƚŽƉƌŽƉĞƌƚLJƚƌĂŶƐĨĞƌƐŽƌŽƚŚĞƌĂĐƚŝǀŝƚŝĞƐƚŚĂƚǁŽƵůĚƚƌŝŐŐĞƌ ĂŶĞŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂůĂƐƐĞƐƐŵĞŶƚ͕ĂŶĚƚŚĞƌĞŝƐĂŶĞůĞǀĂƚĞĚƉŽƚĞŶƚŝĂů ĨŽƌĞŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂůŝŵƉĂĐƚŐŝǀĞŶƚŚĞŚŝƐƚŽƌŝĐĂůŽƉĞƌĂƚŝŽŶƐ͘DĞĚŝƵŵ ϭŽĨϰTABLE B-2DATABASE LISTINGS INDICATIVE OF RELEASE DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 52 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. dĂďůĞϮ ĂƚĂďĂƐĞ>ŝƐƚŝŶŐƐ/ŶĚŝĐĂƚŝǀĞŽĨZĞůĞĂƐĞ EŽƌƚŚĞƌŶtĂƚĞƌĨƌŽŶƚ^ŚŽƌƚůŝŶĞZĂŝůƌŽĂĚ&ĞĂƐŝďŝůŝƚLJ^ƚƵĚLJ DĂƉ <ĞLJ /Ŷ^ƚƵĚLJ ƌĞĂ >ŝƐƚĞĚŶƚŝƚLJͬ>ŽĐĂƚŝŽŶ ĞƐĐƌŝƉƚŝŽŶ ZŝƐŬ ĂƚĞŐŽƌLJ ϭϱϯ z hWKEdEd/K,ͬ,DKhZ^K<>z ϲϬϬϬZ/',Z͕Ed/K, ŚĞŵŝĐĂůŵĂŶƵĨĂĐƚƵƌŝŶŐďĞŐĂŶĂƚƚŚĞĨĂĐŝůŝƚLJŝŶϭϵϱϲǁŝƚŚ ƉƌŽĚƵĐƚŝŽŶŽĨĂŶƚŝͲŬŶŽĐŬĐŽŵƉŽƵŶĚƐĂŶĚĐŚůŽƌŽĨůƵŽƌŽĐĂƌďŽŶƐ͘ dŝƚĂŶŝƵŵĚŝŽdžŝŶƉƌŽĚƵĐƚŝŽŶǁĂƐĂĚĚĞĚŝŶϭϵϲϯ͘ůůŽƉĞƌĂƚŝŽŶƐ ĐĞĂƐĞĚŝŶϭϵϵϵ͘dŚĞĨĂĐŝůŝƚLJŝƐĂŶŽƉĞŶĐůĞĂŶƵƉƐŝƚĞƵŶĚĞƌZZ ŽƌƌĞĐƚŝǀĞĐƚŝŽŶ;ĚŝĚŶŽƚƋƵĂůŝĨLJĨŽƌƚŚĞEW>ĂŶĚǁĂƐĚĞĨĞƌƌĞĚƚŽ ZZͿ͘WŽƌƚŝŽŶƐŽĨƚŚĞĨĂĐŝůŝƚLJ;ǁĞƐƚĞƌŶĂŶĚĞĂƐƚĞƌŶĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ ĂƌĞĂƐͿǁĞƌĞƌĞůĞĂƐĞĚĨƌŽŵƌĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJŽǀĞƌƐŝŐŚƚŝŶϮϬϬϲ͖ƚŚĞ ŶŽƌƚŚĞƌŶĂŶĚƐŽƵƚŚĞƌŶĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚĂƌĞĂƐĂŶĚǁĞƚůĂŶĚƐƌĞŵĂŝŶ ƵŶĚĞƌŵĂŶĚĂƚĞĚĐůĞĂŶƵƉĂĐƚŝŽŶƐ͘^Žŝů͕ŐƌŽƵŶĚǁĂƚĞƌ͕ƐƵƌĨĂĐĞ ǁĂƚĞƌ͕ĂŶĚƐĞĚŝŵĞŶƚĂƌĞďĞŝŶŐŚĂŶĚůĞĚĂƐĚŝƐĐƌĞƚĞZ&/ĂĐƚŝǀŝƚŝĞƐ͘ 'ƌŽƵŶĚǁĂƚĞƌŝƐĐŽŶƚĂŵŝŶĂƚĞĚǁŝƚŚW͕d͕ŽƚŚĞƌsKƐ͕ĂŶĚ ^sKƐĂŶĚŝƐďĞŝŶŐƌĞŵĞĚŝĂƚĞĚǁŝƚŚĂƉƵŵƉĂŶĚƚƌĞĂƚƐLJƐƚĞŵĂŶĚ ƉĞƌŵĞĂďůĞƌĞĂĐƚŝǀĞďĂƌƌŝĞƌ͘dŚĞƌĞĂƌĞƚŚƌĞĞƐĞƉĂƌĂƚĞƉůƵŵĞƐ͘^Žŝů ŝƐĐŽŶƚĂŵŝŶĂƚĞĚǁŝƚŚ&ƌĞŽŶϭϭϯ͕ŵĞƚĂůƐ͕ƉĞƚƌŽůĞƵŵĂŶĚsKƐ͘ >ĂŶĚƵƐĞƌĞƐƚƌŝĐƚŝŽŶƐĂƌĞŝŶƉůĂĐĞ;ŶŽƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚŝĂůƵƐĞ͕ƐŽŝů ŵĂŶĂŐĞŵĞŶƚƌĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐ͕ŶŽĚƌŝůůŝŶŐ͕ŶŽŝŶƚĞƌĨĞƌĞŶĐĞǁŝƚŚƚŚĞ ŵŽŶŝƚŽƌŝŶŐǁĞůůƐͬƌĞĂĐƚŝǀĞďĂƌƌŝĞƌǁĂůůƐͬƉŚLJƚŽƌĞŵĞĚŝĂƚŝŽŶ ƐLJƐƚĞŵƐ͕ǀĂƉŽƌďĂƌƌŝĞƌƌĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚͿĂŶĚƚŚĞƚĂƌŐĞƚĐůĞĂŶƵƉůĞǀĞůƐ ǁŝůůďĞĨŽƌĐŽŵŵĞƌĐŝĂůƵƐĞ͘dŚƌĞĞƉŽŶĚƐĂŶĚƚŚƌĞĞďĂƐŝŶƐƚŚĂƚ ǁĞƌĞƵƐĞĚƚŽƚƌĞĂƚĂŶĚƐƚŽƌĞǁĂƐƚĞǁĂƚĞƌĂƌĞƵŶĚĞƌƉŽƐƚͲĐůŽƐƵƌĞ ŵŽŶŝƚŽƌŝŶŐ͘ ƉƌŽƐƉĞĐƚŝǀĞƉƵƌĐŚĂƐĞƌĞŶƚĞƌĞĚƚŚĞsWŝŶϮϬϭϵ͘DĞĚŝƵŵ ϭϱϱ z W'ΘEd/K,'^dZD/E> ϱϵϬϬZ/',Z͕K<>z W'ďĞŐĂŶŽƉĞƌĂƚŝŶŐƚŚĞŶĂƚƵƌĂůŐĂƐƚƌĂŶƐŵŝƐƐŝŽŶƐŝƚĞŝŶϭϵϰϮ͘ ǀŝĚĞŶĐĞŽĨƌĞůĞĂƐĞďĞŶĞĂƚŚĂϭϬ͕ϬϬϬͲŐĂůůŽŶ^dǁĂƐŝĚĞŶƚŝĨŝĞĚŝŶ ϮϬϬϱ͘dyĂŶĚƉĞƚƌŽůĞƵŵŝŵƉĂĐƚƐƚŽƐŽŝůĂŶĚŐƌŽƵŶĚǁĂƚĞƌŚĂǀĞ ďĞĞŶŝĚĞŶƚŝĨŝĞĚ͘ZĞŵĞĚŝĂƚŝŽŶŚĂƐŝŶǀŽůǀĞĚĞdžĐĂǀĂƚŝŽŶ͕ ďŝŽƐƉĂƌŐŝŶŐ͘ŶĂĚĚŝƚŝŽŶĂůƐŝƚĞĂƐƐĞƐƐŵĞŶƚǁĂƐĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞĚŝŶ ϮϬϭϴƚŽĞǀĂůƵĂƚĞǁŚĞƚŚĞƌƉĞƚƌŽůĞƵŵŝŵƉĂĐƚƐĂƌĞƉƌĞƐĞŶƚŽŶ ŽƚŚĞƌĂƌĞĂƐŽĨƚŚĞƐŝƚĞ͘dŚĞĨĂĐŝůŝƚLJŚĂƐƌĞĐĞŝǀĞĚĂĐŽŶĚŝƚŝŽŶĂůŶŽ ĨƵƌƚŚĞƌĂĐƚŝŽŶ;ůĂŶĚƵƐĞĐŽŶƚƌŽůƐ͕ŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐĞdžĐĂǀĂƚŝŽŶĂŶĚ ĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚŶŽƚŝĨŝĐĂƚŝŽŶƌĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐͿĂŶĚƚŚĞĐĂƐĞŝƐĞůŝŐŝďůĞ ĨŽƌĐůŽƐƵƌĞĂůƚŚŽƵŐŚŝƚƌĞŵĂŝŶƐŽƉĞŶ͘DĞĚŝƵŵ Ϯϱϳ z &h>dKE^,/WzZ ϯϬϳ&h>dKE^,/WzZZK͕Ed/K, dŚĞϭϬ͘ϰͲĂĐƌĞƉĂƌĐĞůǁĂƐĂƐŚŝƉďƵŝůĚŝŶŐͬƌĞƉĂŝƌĨĂĐŝůŝƚLJĨƌŽŵϭϵϭϴ ƚŽϭϵϵϵ͘ƌĞŵĞĚŝĂůŝŶǀĞƐƚŝŐĂƚŝŽŶǁĂƐŝŵƉůĞŵĞŶƚĞĚŝŶϮϬϭϲǁŚĞŶ ƚŚĞƐŚŝƉLJĂƌĚǁĂƐƐŽůĚ͘KƐŝŶĐůƵĚĞ͗ŵĞƚĂůƐ͕ƉĞƚƌŽůĞƵŵ͕W,Ɛ ĂŶĚWƐŝŶƐŽŝů͖ŵĞƚĂůƐ͕ƉĞƚƌŽůĞƵŵ͕ĂŶĚW,ƐŝŶŐƌŽƵŶĚǁĂƚĞƌ͖ ĂŶĚŵĞƚĂůƐ͕W,Ɛ͕WƐ͕ĂŶĚƚƌŝďƵƚLJůƚŝŶŝŶƐĞĚŝŵĞŶƚ͘dŚĞ ŝŶǀĞƐƚŝŐĂƚŝŽŶŽĨƚŚĞƐŝƚĞŝƐƐƚŝůůƵŶĚĞƌǁĂLJ͘dŚĞƌĞƐƉŽŶƐĞĂĐƚŝŽŶŝƐ ůĞĚďLJd^ĂŶĚƚŚĞƐŝƚĞŝƐŽŶƚŚĞKZd^ůŝƐƚ;ŝ͘Ğ͘ƐƚĂƚĞ ^ƵƉĞƌĨƵŶĚͿ͖ƚŚĞĨĂĐŝůŝƚLJŝƐŶŽƚŽŶƚŚĞEW>͘DĞĚŝƵŵ ϯϲϯ E E<'^ ϭϴϬϬ^d͕Ed/K, ƌĞůĞĂƐĞǁĂƐŝĚĞŶƚŝĨŝĞĚĚƵƌŝŶŐĂŐĂƐŽůŝŶĞh^dĐůŽƐƵƌĞŝŶϭϵϵϴ͘ dŚĞ>h^dĐĂƐĞƌĞŵĂŝŶƐŽƉĞŶĂŶĚĂƐƐĞƐƐŵĞŶƚĂŶĚŝŶƚĞƌŝŵ ƌĞŵĞĚŝĂůĂĐƚŝŽŶŝƐŽŶŐŽŝŶŐ͘dŚĞĐĂƐĞĨŝůĞŶŽƚĞƐƚŚĂƚƉƌĞǀŝŽƵƐ ƌĞŵĞĚŝĂƚŝŽŶŚĂƐďĞĞŶŝŶĞĨĨĞĐƚŝǀĞĂƚƌĞĚƵĐŝŶŐŚLJĚƌŽĐĂƌďŽŶ ĐŽŶĐĞŶƚƌĂƚŝŽŶƐŝŶƚŚĞƐŽƵƌĐĞĂƌĞĂĂŶĚƚŚĞƌĞŝƐĐŽŶĐĞƌŶĂďŽƵƚ ƉƵůůŝŶŐĂsKƉůƵŵĞĨƌŽŵĂŶĞĂƌďLJƐŝƚĞ͘ƐĞĐŽŶĚĐůŽƐĞĚ>h^d ĐĂƐĞŝƐĂůƐŽĂƐƐŽĐŝĂƚĞĚǁŝƚŚƚŚĞĨĂĐŝůŝƚLJ͘dŚĞĨĂĐŝůŝƚLJŝƐĂĚũĂĐĞŶƚƚŽ ƚŚĞƐƚƵĚLJĂƌĞĂƚŽƚŚĞƐŽƵƚŚ;ŝ͘Ğ͘ƵƉŐƌĂĚŝĞŶƚͿĂŶĚŝƚŝƐůŝŬĞůLJƚŚĂƚ ƚŚĞƉůƵŵĞŚĂƐŵŝŐƌĂƚĞĚŝŶƚŽƚŚĞ^ƚƵĚLJƌĞĂ͘DĞĚŝƵŵ ϰ z Ed/K,Ws/E'KDWEz ϮϱϰϬt/>hZs͕Ed/K, ůŽƐĞĚ>h^dĐĂƐĞ͘ZĞůĞĂƐĞŽĨƐŽůǀĞŶƚͬŶŽŶͲƉĞƚƌŽůĞƵŵŚLJĚƌŽĐĂƌďŽŶ ĚŝƐĐŽǀĞƌĞĚĚƵƌŝŶŐƚĂŶŬĐůŽƐƵƌĞŝŶϭϵϵϰ͘ůĞĂŶƵƉĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞĚŝŶ ϮϬϬϬ͘>Žǁ ϲ z /Eh^dZ/>>Kdt/d,Z/>ZK^//E' ϮϲϬϬt/>hZsEh͕Ed/K, dŚĞϭϬ͘ϮϴͲĂĐƌĞƉĂƌĐĞůŝƐƵŶĚĞǀĞůŽƉĞĚǁŝƚŚƚŚĞĞdžĐĞƉƚŝŽŶŽĨ ƌĂŝůƌŽĂĚƐŝĚŝŶŐƐĂŶĚĐŽŶĐƌĞƚĞƉĂĚƐ͘dŚĞƉĂƌĐĞůŚŝƐƚŽƌŝĐĂůůLJǁĂƐ ƵƐĞĚďLJƚŚĞĨŽƌŵĞƌ'ĂLJůŽƌĚŵŝůůĂŶĚĂϱϬĨŽŽƚŚŝŐŚ͕ϭϳϱĨŽŽƚ ĚŝĂŵĞƚĞƌ^dǁĂƐƵƐĞĚƚŽƐƚŽƌĞĨƵĞůŽŝůĂŶĚƉŽƐƐŝďůLJďůĂĐŬůŝƋƵŽƌ͘ dŚĞƉĂƌĐĞůǁĂƐĂůƐŽƵƐĞĚĨŽƌĂŶĞdžƉĞƌŝŵĞŶƚĂůƐůƵĚŐĞĐŽŵƉŽƐƚŝŶŐ ŽƉĞƌĂƚŝŽŶ͘DŽƚŽƌŽŝůĂŶĚĚŝĞƐĞůŝŵƉĂĐƚƐǁĞƌĞŝĚĞŶƚŝĨŝĞĚĂŶĚƚŚĞ ƉĂƌĐĞůǁĂƐĞŶƌŽůůĞĚŝŶƚŚĞsW͘dŚĞĐĂƐĞƌĞĐĞŝǀĞĚĐůŽƐƵƌĞŽŶƚŚĞ ďĂƐŝƐƚŚĂƚƚŚĞƌĞĂƌĞŶŽƌŝƐŬƐƚŽŚƵŵĂŶŚĞĂůƚŚŽƌƚŚĞĞŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚ͘>Žǁ ϮŽĨϰTABLE B-2DATABASE LISTINGS INDICATIVE OF RELEASE DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 53 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. dĂďůĞϮ ĂƚĂďĂƐĞ>ŝƐƚŝŶŐƐ/ŶĚŝĐĂƚŝǀĞŽĨZĞůĞĂƐĞ EŽƌƚŚĞƌŶtĂƚĞƌĨƌŽŶƚ^ŚŽƌƚůŝŶĞZĂŝůƌŽĂĚ&ĞĂƐŝďŝůŝƚLJ^ƚƵĚLJ DĂƉ <ĞLJ /Ŷ^ƚƵĚLJ ƌĞĂ >ŝƐƚĞĚŶƚŝƚLJͬ>ŽĐĂƚŝŽŶ ĞƐĐƌŝƉƚŝŽŶ ZŝƐŬ ĂƚĞŐŽƌLJ ϯϮ z >>KzΖ^,K>/z,ZKZ Zdϭ͕Ed/K, >h^dĚŝƐĐŽǀĞƌĞĚĚƵƌŝŶŐĐůŽƐƵƌĞŽĨŐĂƐŽůŝŶĞƚĂŶŬŝŶϭϵϵϭ͘^ŽŝůǁĂƐ ŝŵƉĂĐƚĞĚ͕ĐĂƐĞĐůŽƐĞĚŝŶϭϵϵϳ͘>Žǁ ϯϮ z >hZ/dEz,d,ZKZZdϭ͕Ed/K, dǁŽŐĂƐŽůŝŶĞ>h^dĐĂƐĞƐ͗ŽŶĞŝĚĞŶƚŝĨŝĞĚĨƌŽŵŝŶǀĞŶƚŽƌLJĐŽŶƚƌŽů͕ ŽŶĞŝĚĞŶƚŝĨŝĞĚĚƵƌŝŶŐƚĂŶŬĐůŽƐƵƌĞ͘ŽƚŚĐĂƐĞƐĂƌĞĐůŽƐĞĚ͘&ĂĐŝůŝƚLJ ŝƐĂůƐŽŶŽƚĞĚƚŽŚĂǀĞďĞĞŶŝŵƉĂĐƚĞĚďLJƚŚĞĨŽƌŵĞƌƵWŽŶƚƐŝƚĞ͘>Žǁ ϲϭ z /Eh^dZ/>>Kdt/d,dE< t/>hZsEh͕Ed/K, dŚĞϯ͘ϳϴͲĂĐƌĞƉĂƌĐĞůŝƐĞŶƌŽůůĞĚŝŶƚŚĞsWĂŶĚŝŶĐůƵĚĞƐĂϰϴĨŽŽƚ ŚŝŐŚďLJϭϱϬĨŽŽƚĚŝĂŵĞƚĞƌƚĂŶŬƚŚĂƚǁĂƐƵƐĞĚƚŽƐƚŽƌĞƵŶŬĞƌ ĨƵĞůŽŝůĨŽƌƚŚĞĨŽƌŵĞƌ'ĂLJůŽƌĚŵŝůůƐ͘^ŽŝůŝŵƉĂĐƚƐǁĞƌĞŝĚĞŶƚŝĨŝĞĚ͖ ƚŚĞĐĂƐĞƌĞĐĞŝǀĞĚĐůŽƐƵƌĞŝŶϮϬϬϲ͘>Žǁ ϳϬ z 't&WKtZW>EdͲEd/K, ϭϵϬϬt/>hZsEh͕Ed/K, dŚĞĨĂĐŝůŝƚLJŝƐĂŶĂĐƚŝǀĞƐƚĞĂŵĞůĞĐƚƌŝĐĂůƉŽǁĞƌƉůĂŶƚƚŚĂƚ ĐŽŵďƵƐƚƐƉĞƚƌŽůĞƵŵĐŽŬĞ͘ĚŝĞƐĞůƐƉŝůůĨƌŽŵĂďƵƌŝĞĚƉŝƉĞ ŽĐĐƵƌƌĞĚŝŶϭϵϵϮ͘dŚĞƌĞůĞĂƐĞǁĂƐƌĞŵĞĚŝĂƚĞĚ;ĞdžĐĂǀĂƚŝŽŶ͕ĨƌĞĞ ƉƌŽĚƵĐƚƌĞŵŽǀĂů͕ŝŶƐŝƚƵďŝŽůŽŐŝĐĂůƚƌĞĂƚŵĞŶƚͿĂŶĚƚŚĞ>EhW ^/d^ĐĂƐĞƌĞĐĞŝǀĞĚĐůŽƐƵƌĞŝŶϮϬϭϮ͘>Žǁ ϳϰ z /DWZ/>t^d,D/>K ϭϳϬϭt/>hZsEh͕Ed/K, dŚĞĨĂĐŝůŝƚLJŚĂƐƌĞƉŽƌƚĞĚƌĞůĞĂƐĞƐŝŶǀŽůǀŝŶŐĐŚůŽƌŝŶĞͬƐŽĚŝƵŵ ŚLJƉŽĐŚůŽƌŝƚĞͬƐƵůĨƵƌŝĐĂĐŝĚĂŶĚŝƐĂŶ^Y'ǁŝƚŚĂŚŝƐƚŽƌLJŽĨ ǀŝŽůĂƚŝŽŶƐ͘>Žǁ ϳϳ z W<,DWZKWZdz ϯϮϭϱϭϴd,^d͕Ed/K, ůŽƐĞĚŐĂƐŽůŝŶĞ>h^dĐĂƐĞ >Žǁ ϳϴ z s/EzZdZd ͘ϭϴd,^dZd͕Ed/K, dŚĞƉĂƌĐĞůŚĂƐďĞĞŶƵƐĞĚĨŽƌĂŐƌŝĐƵůƚƵƌĂůƉƵƌƉŽƐĞƐƐŝŶĐĞƚŚĞĞĂƌůLJ ϭϵϬϬƐ͕ŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐĂǀŝŶĞLJĂƌĚ͘&ůLJĂƐŚĂŶĚŽƚŚĞƌŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐĨƌŽŵƚŚĞ ĨŽƌŵĞƌ'ĂLJůŽƌĚĂƐƚDŝůůǁĞƌĞŵĂŶĂŐĞĚŽŶĂƉŽƌƚŝŽŶŽĨƚŚĞ ƉƌŽƉĞƌƚLJ͘dŚĞƉĂƌĐĞůǁĂƐĞŶƚĞƌĞĚŝŶƚŽƚŚĞsWĂŶĚƌĞĐĞŝǀĞĚ ĐůŽƐƵƌĞŝŶϮϬϬϱ͘>Žǁ ϭϯϵ z EtZ/'DZ/E/E ϲϯϮϱZ/',Z͕Ed/K, &ĂĐŝůŝƚLJŚĂĚĂ>h^dĐĂƐĞŝŶϭϵϵϴƚŚĂƚǁĂƐĚŝƐĐŽǀĞƌĞĚĚƵƌŝŶŐ ĐůŽƐƵƌĞŽĨĂŐĂƐŽůŝŶĞh^d͘ZĞůĞĂƐĞǁĂƐĐůĞĂŶĞĚƵƉĂŶĚƚŚĞĐĂƐĞ ǁĂƐĐůŽƐĞĚŝŶϮϬϬϵ͘EƵŵĞƌŽƵƐƌĞůĞĂƐĞƐĨƌŽŵƐŝŶŬŝŶŐǀĞƐƐĞůƐĂƌĞ ĂůƐŽůŝƐƚĞĚ͘>Žǁ ϭϴϲ z ƌĐŽ ϱϱϰϬƌŝĚŐĞŚĞĂĚ͕KĂŬůĞLJ ƌĞůĞĂƐĞǁĂƐŝĚĞŶƚŝĨŝĞĚĚƵƌŝŶŐƌĞŵŽǀĂůŽĨĂŐĂƐŽůŝŶĞh^dŝŶϭϵϵϯ͘ dŚĞ>h^dĐĂƐĞǁĂƐĐůŽƐĞĚŝŶϮϬϬϯ͘>Žǁ ϮϮϲ z ZKD/Ζ^>/YhKZ ϰϭϴϭϴd,^d͕Ed/K, 'ĂƐŽůŝŶĞƌĞůĞĂƐĞŝĚĞŶƚŝĨŝĞĚďLJƐƵďƐƵƌĨĂĐĞŵŽŶŝƚŽƌŝŶŐŝŶϭϵϵϭ͘ >h^dĐĂƐĞǁĂƐĐůŽƐĞĚŝŶϮϬϭϬ͘>Žǁ Ϯϵϰ E ΘDZ<d;&KZDZͿ ϰϬϳD/E^d͕K<>z ZĞůĞĂƐĞĚŝƐĐŽǀĞƌĞĚŝŶϭϵϴϳĚƵƌŝŶŐƌĞŵŽǀĂůŽĨŐĂƐŽůŝŶĞh^d͘>h^d ĐĂƐĞĐůŽƐĞĚŝŶϭϵϵϳ͘>Žǁ ϯϮϴ E W/&/'^Θ>dZ/ ϱϰϬϬEZ>Kz͕K<>z ĐĐŽƌĚŝŶŐƚŽƚŚĞĐůĞĂŶƵƉƐŝƚĞƐĚĂƚĂďĂƐĞ͕ĂůĞĂŬǁĂƐƌĞƉŽƌƚĞĚŝŶ ϮϬϬϭĂŶĚŐƌŽƵŶĚǁĂƚĞƌǁĂƐŝŵƉĂĐƚĞĚǁŝƚŚsKƐ͘ĂƐĞǁĂƐĐůŽƐĞĚ ŝŶϮϬϭϬ͘dŚĞďƌŽǁŶĨŝĞůĚƐĚĂƚĂďĂƐĞĂůƐŽŝŶĚŝĐĂƚĞƐƚŚĂƚWƐǁĞƌĞ ŚŝƐƚŽƌŝĐĂůůLJĚĞƚĞĐƚĞĚĂƚƚŚĞƐŝƚĞ͘dŚĞĨĂĐŝůŝƚLJŝƐĂĚũĂĐĞŶƚƚŽƚŚĞ ƐƚƵĚLJĂƌĞĂƚŽƚŚĞƐŽƵƚŚ͘>Žǁ ϯϯϭ E ,/>>Z^ds>ZK ϭϴϬϭ,ŝůůĐƌĞƐƚǀĞ͕ŶƚŝŽĐŚ ZĞůĞĂƐĞĚŝƐĐŽǀĞƌĞĚŝŶϮϬϬϯĚƵƌŝŶŐƌĞŵŽǀĂůŽĨŐĂƐŽůŝŶĞh^d͘>h^d ĐĂƐĞĐůŽƐĞĚŝŶϮϬϭϴ͘ZĞŵĞĚŝĂƚŝŽŶŝŶĐůƵĚĞĚĞdžĐĂǀĂƚŝŽŶ͕ƉƵŵƉĂŶĚ ƚƌĞĂƚĂŶĚ^s͘>Žǁ ϯϰϰ E WZzΖ^Z/dKZϵϬϭ^d͕Ed/K, ZĞůĞĂƐĞĚŝƐĐŽǀĞƌĞĚŝŶϭϵϵϬĚƵƌŝŶŐƌĞŵŽǀĂůŽĨĚŝĞƐĞůh^d͘>h^d ĐĂƐĞĐůŽƐĞĚŝŶϮϬϭϯ͘>Žǁ ϯϰϴ E ,/<DKddEEZz;&KZDZͿ ϱd,Θ^d͕Ed/K, dŚĞĨĂĐŝůŝƚLJŝƐĂĨŽƌŵĞƌĐĂŶŶĞƌLJĂŶĚŚĂƐĂ>h^dĐĂƐĞƚŚĂƚǁĂƐ ĐůŽƐĞĚŝŶϮϬϭϲǁŝƚŚƉĞƚƌŽůĞƵŵͲŝŵƉĂĐƚĞĚŐƌŽƵŶĚǁĂƚĞƌůĞĨƚŝŶ ƉůĂĐĞ͘dŚĞĨĂĐŝůŝƚLJŝƐĂĐůĞĂŶƵƉƐŝƚĞǁŝƚŚŝŶĂĐƚŝǀĞƐƚĂƚƵƐ͘DĞƚŚĂŶĞ ĂŶĚŚLJĚƌŽŐĞŶƐƵůĨŝĚĞĂƌĞƉƌĞƐĞŶƚĂƚůĞǀĞůƐǁĂƌƌĂŶƚŝŶŐ ƌĞŵĞĚŝĂƚŝŽŶĂŶĚĂƌĞůŝŬĞůLJĚƵĞƚŽĂĐŽŵďŝŶĂƚŝŽŶŽĨůĂŶĚĨŝůůĞĚ ĐĂŶŶĞƌLJǁĂƐƚĞĂŶĚƐĞǁĂŐĞƌĞůĞĂƐĞƐ͕ĂŶĚƚŚĞƉƌŽƉĞƌƚLJŝƐŶŽƚ ĐƵƌƌĞŶƚůLJŝŶƐƵŝƚĂďůĞĐŽŶĚŝƚŝŽŶĨŽƌƌĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ͘dŚĞĨĂĐŝůŝƚLJŝƐ ŽƵƚƐŝĚĞƚŚĞƐƚƵĚLJĂƌĞĂĂƉƉƌŽdžŝŵĂƚĞůLJϬ͘ϮϱŵŝůĞƐǁĞƐƚ͘>Žǁ ϯϰϵ E t>dZ,E^EdZh^d ϭϴϬϵ^dZd͕Ed/K, dŚĞĨĂĐŝůŝƚLJŝƐĂŶŽƉĞŶĐůĞĂŶƵƉƐŝƚĞƐĐĂƐĞĂŶĚŚĂƐĐŚůŽƌŝŶĂƚĞĚ ŚLJĚƌŽĐĂƌďŽŶͲŝŵƉĂĐƚĞĚŐƌŽƵŶĚǁĂƚĞƌ͘dŚĞĐĂƐĞǁĂƐŽƉĞŶĞĚŝŶ ϮϬϬϳĂŶĚŝƐŝŶǀĞƌŝĨŝĐĂƚŝŽŶŵŽŶŝƚŽƌŝŶŐ͘dŚĞĐĂƐĞŝƐĂƐƐŽĐŝĂƚĞĚǁŝƚŚ ĂƌĞůĞĂƐĞĨƌŽŵĂh^dŝŶϭϵϵϳ;>h^dĐĂƐĞĂůƐŽƌĞŵĂŝŶƐŽƉĞŶͿĂƐ ǁĞůůĂƐWŝŵƉĂĐƚƐĨƌŽŵĂĨŽƌŵĞƌĚƌLJĐůĞĂŶĞƌ͘dŚĞƌĞƐƉŽŶƐŝďůĞ ƉĂƌƚLJĚŽĞƐŶŽƚŚĂǀĞƐƵĨĨŝĐŝĞŶƚĨƵŶĚƐƚŽĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞƚŚĞƌĞŵĞĚŝĂƚŝŽŶ ĂŶĚŝƐĐŽŵƉůĞƚŝŶŐŝŶĚŽŽƌĂŝƌƐĂŵƉůŝŶŐƚŽĂƐƐĞƐƐǁŚĞƚŚĞƌƚŚĞƌĞĂƌĞ ŝŵŵĞĚŝĂƚĞƚŚƌĞĂƚƐƚŽŚƵŵĂŶŚĞĂůƚŚ͘dŚĞĨĂĐŝůŝƚLJŝƐůŽĐĂƚĞĚ ĂƉƉƌŽdžŝŵĂƚĞůLJϭͬϴŵŝůĞǁĞƐƚŽĨƚŚĞ^ƚƵĚLJƌĞĂ͘>Žǁ ϯϱϭ E hEK>ηϯϵϰϲ ϭϲϬϭ^d͕Ed/K, ƌĞůĞĂƐĞǁĂƐŝĚĞŶƚŝĨŝĞĚĚƵƌŝŶŐƌĞŵŽǀĂůŽĨĂŐĂƐŽůŝŶĞh^dŝŶϭϵϴϵ͘ dŚĞ>h^dĐĂƐĞǁĂƐĐůŽƐĞĚŝŶϮϬϭϰ͘>Žǁ ϯŽĨϰTABLE B-2DATABASE LISTINGS INDICATIVE OF RELEASE DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 54 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. dĂďůĞϮ ĂƚĂďĂƐĞ>ŝƐƚŝŶŐƐ/ŶĚŝĐĂƚŝǀĞŽĨZĞůĞĂƐĞ EŽƌƚŚĞƌŶtĂƚĞƌĨƌŽŶƚ^ŚŽƌƚůŝŶĞZĂŝůƌŽĂĚ&ĞĂƐŝďŝůŝƚLJ^ƚƵĚLJ DĂƉ <ĞLJ /Ŷ^ƚƵĚLJ ƌĞĂ >ŝƐƚĞĚŶƚŝƚLJͬ>ŽĐĂƚŝŽŶ ĞƐĐƌŝƉƚŝŽŶ ZŝƐŬ ĂƚĞŐŽƌLJ ϯϲϰ E ^/>sZWZKWZdzϵϬϬ^d͕Ed/K, ƌĞůĞĂƐĞǁĂƐŝĚĞŶƚŝĨŝĞĚĚƵƌŝŶŐĂŐĂƐŽůŝŶĞh^dĐůŽƐƵƌĞŝŶϭϵϵϲ͘ dŚĞ>h^dĐĂƐĞƌĞŵĂŝŶƐŽƉĞŶĂŶĚƌĞŵĞĚŝĂƚŝŽŶŝƐŽŶŐŽŝŶŐ͘dŚĞ ĨĂĐŝůŝƚLJƌĞĐĞŝǀĞĚĂŶEKsŝŶϮϬϭϵĨŽƌĨĂŝůƵƌĞƚŽƐƵďŵŝƚƚŝŵĞůLJ ŐƌŽƵŶĚǁĂƚĞƌŵŽŶŝƚŽƌŝŶŐƌĞƉŽƌƚƐĂŶĚƚŽŽƉĞƌĂƚĞƚŚĞŽŶƐŝƚĞ ƌĞŵĞĚŝĂƚŝŽŶƐLJƐƚĞŵ;ƚŚĞƉƵŵƉĂŶĚƚƌĞĂƚƐLJƐƚĞŵŚĂƐŶŽƚ ŽƉĞƌĂƚĞĚƐŝŶĐĞϮϬϭϴͿŝŶĂĐĐŽƌĚĂŶĐĞǁŝƚŚŝƚƐůĞĂŶƵƉĂŶĚ ďĂƚĞŵĞŶƚKƌĚĞƌ͘dŚĞĨĂĐŝůŝƚLJŝƐĂƉƉƌŽdžŝŵĂƚĞůLJϭͬϴǁĞƐƚŽĨƚŚĞ ƐƚƵĚLJĂƌĞĂ͘>Žǁ ϯϳϲ E KEdZK^dhdK^>s' ϭϳϯϭD/E^d͕K<>z /ĚĞŶƚŝĨŝĞĚĂƐĂĨĞĚĞƌĂůďƌŽǁŶĨŝĞůĚƐƐŝƚĞƚŚĂƚƌĞƋƵŝƌĞƐĐůĞĂŶƵƉĚƵĞ ƚŽƐƵƌĨĂĐĞǁĂƚĞƌŝŵƉĂĐƚƐ͘dŚĞĨĂĐŝůŝƚLJǁĂƐĂŶĂƵƚŽƌĞƉĂŝƌƐŚŽƉ͕ ĚŝƐŵĂŶƚůĞƌ͕ĂŶĚƐĐƌĂƉLJĂƌĚ͘dŚĞƐŝƚĞǁĂƐƌĞŵĞĚŝĂƚĞĚďLJƚŚĞŝƚLJŽĨ KĂŬůĞLJĂŶĚƌĞĐĞŝǀĞĚsWĐůŽƐƵƌĞŝŶϮϬϭϬĨŽƌDdĂŶĚƉĞƚƌŽůĞƵŵͲ ŝŵƉĂĐƚĞĚƐŽŝůĂŶĚŐƌŽƵŶĚǁĂƚĞƌ͘>Žǁ ϯϳϵ E :ΘDŶƚĞƌƉƌŝƐĞƐ ϱϯϯϳ>ŝǀĞKĂŬǀĞŶƵĞ͕KĂŬůĞLJ WĞƚƌŽůĞƵŵ͕W,Ɛ͕ĂŶĚsKƐǁĞƌĞŝĚĞŶƚŝĨŝĞĚŝŶƐŽŝůĂƚƚŚĞĨĂĐŝůŝƚLJ͕ ǁŚŝĐŚǁĂƐƵƐĞĚĨŽƌŝůůĞŐĂůĂƵƚŽĐƌƵƐŚŝŶŐ͘dŚĞĨĂĐŝůŝƚLJŝƐ ĂƉƉƌŽdžŝŵĂƚĞůLJϭͬϴŵŝůĞƐŽƵƚŚŽĨƚŚĞƐƚƵĚLJĂƌĞĂ͘>Žǁ ϯϴϲ E ^dZdydE^/KE ^dZdydE^/KE͕Ed/K, h^dĂŶĚŝŵƉĂĐƚĞĚƐŽŝůǁĞƌĞŝĚĞŶƚŝĨŝĞĚĚƵƌŝŶŐƌŽĂĚĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶ͘ dŚĞ>h^dĐĂƐĞƌĞĐĞŝǀĞĚĐůŽƐƵƌĞŝŶϮϬϭϰ͘>Žǁ ϯϵϮ E Z/E&KZZEd ϱϯϬϭ>/sK<s͕K<>z WĞƚƌŽůĞƵŵ>h^dĐĂƐĞǁĂƐŽƉĞŶĞĚŝŶϮϬϬϱĂŶĚĐůŽƐĞĚŝŶϮϬϬϴ͘>Žǁ ϰϬϮ E ,sZKEdK^dZd ϮϮϬϱ^dZd͕Ed/K, dŚĞĨĂĐŝůŝƚLJǁĂƐŚŝƐƚŽƌŝĐĂůůLJƉĂƌƚŽĨƚŚĞKůĚsĂůůĞLJWŝƉĞůŝŶĞĂŶĚƚŚĞ dKƉŝƉĞůŝŶĞ͘ƌƵĚĞŽŝůǁĂƐŝĚĞŶƚŝĨŝĞĚŝŶƚŚĞƐŽŝůĂƚϮϬϬϴĂŶĚƚŚĞ ĨĂĐŝůŝƚLJŝƐŽŶƚŚĞĐůĞĂŶƵƉƐŝƚĞƐůŝƐƚ͘dŚĞĐĂƐĞƌĞŵĂŝŶƐŽƉĞŶǁŝƚŚ ĂĚĚŝƚŝŽŶĂůŝŶǀĞƐƚŝŐĂƚŝŽŶƉůĂŶŶĞĚ͘dŚĞĨĂĐŝůŝƚLJŝƐϭͬϰŵŝůĞ ƐŽƵƚŚǁĞƐƚŽĨƚŚĞƐƚƵĚLJĂƌĞĂƐ͘>Žǁ ϰϬϰ E E>>K/>ηϮϱϮdyK ϮϯϭϬ^dZd͕Ed/K, ŐĂƐŽůŝŶĞƌĞůĞĂƐĞǁĂƐĚŝƐĐŽǀĞƌĞĚĂŶĚƚŚĞĨĂĐŝůŝƚLJŝƐĂŶŽƉĞŶ>h^d ĐůĞĂŶƵƉƐŝƚĞ͘dŚĞĨĂĐŝůŝƚLJŝƐϭͬϰŵŝůĞƐŽƵƚŚǁĞƐƚŽĨƚŚĞƐƚƵĚLJĂƌĞĂ͘>Žǁ ϰϬϴ E ,sZKEηϵͲϰϱϴϱ Ϯϰϭϯ^d͕Ed/K, ŐĂƐŽůŝŶĞƌĞůĞĂƐĞǁĂƐĚŝƐĐŽǀĞƌĞĚĂŶĚƚŚĞ>h^dĐĂƐĞƌĞĐĞŝǀĞĚ ĐůŽƐƵƌĞŝŶϮϬϭϳ͘>Žǁ ϰϬϵ E zWZ^^^YhZ^,KWW/E'EdZ ϮϬϮϱD/E^dZd͕K<>z dŚĞĨĂĐŝůŝƚLJŚĂƐĂĐůŽƐĞĚĐůĞĂŶƵƉƐŝƚĞƐĐĂƐĞ͘ĂŶĚǁĞƌĞ ƉƌĞƐĞŶƚŝŶŐƌŽƵŶĚǁĂƚĞƌ͘>Žǁ ϰϭϮ E /'Z<DZ/E ϭϬϬ/'Z<Z͕K<>z ŐĂƐŽůŝŶĞƌĞůĞĂƐĞǁĂƐĚŝƐĐŽǀĞƌĞĚĂŶĚƚŚĞ>h^dĐĂƐĞƌĞĐĞŝǀĞĚ ĐůŽƐƵƌĞŝŶϭϵϵϳ͘>Žǁ ϰϭϯ E W'ΘEd/K,^Zs/EdZϮϭϭϭ,/>>Z^ds͕Ed/K, ƌĞůĞĂƐĞǁĂƐŝĚĞŶƚŝĨŝĞĚĚƵƌŝŶŐĂƚĂŶŬĐůŽƐƵƌĞĂŶĚƚŚĞ>h^dĐĂƐĞ ƌĞĐĞŝǀĞĚĐůŽƐƵƌĞŝŶϭϵϵϮ͘>Žǁ ϰϭϰ E <DW,/>>Z^dZ>^,/>>Z^dsEhE^hE^dZ/s͕Ed/K dŚĞƌĞůĞĂƐĞŝƐĂƉƉƌŽdžŝŵĂƚĞůLJϬ͘ϮϱŵŝůĞƐƐŽƵƚŚŽĨƚŚĞĂƌĞĂĂŶĚŝƐ ŝĚĞŶƚŝĨŝĞĚŽŶƚŚĞĐůĞĂŶƵƉƐŝƚĞƐĚĂƚĂďĂƐĞĨŽƌĂƐůĞĞǀĞƌĞƉĂŝƌĨĂŝůƵƌĞ ƚŚĂƚƌĞƐƵůƚĞĚŝŶĂƌĞůĞĂƐĞŽĨĚŝĞƐĞůƵŶĚĞƌ,ŝůůĐƌĞƐƚǀĞŶƵĞ͘dŚĞ ƉŝƉĞůŝŶĞŚĂƐďĞĞŶƌĞƉĂŝƌĞĚ͕ďƵƚŐƌŽƵŶĚǁĂƚĞƌ͕ƐŽŝůĂŶĚƐŽŝůǀĂƉŽƌ ǁĞƌĞŝŵƉĂĐƚĞĚ͘/ƚŝƐƵŶůŝŬĞůLJƚŚĂƚƚŚŝƐƌĞůĞĂƐĞƌĞƉƌĞƐĞŶƚƐĂ ĐŽŶĐĞƌŶĨŽƌƚŚĞƐƚƵĚLJĂƌĞĂďĂƐĞĚŽŶĚŝƐƚĂŶĐĞĂŶĚƚŚĞŶĂƚƵƌĞŽĨ ƚŚĞƌĞůĞĂƐĞ͘>Žǁ ϰϭϱ E /^KhEd>/YhKZ^dKZϯϵZK^^/s͕Ed/K,ůŽƐĞĚ>h^dĐĂƐĞŽƵƚƐŝĚĞƚŚĞƐƚƵĚLJĂƌĞĂ͘>Žǁ ϰϭϲ E E,KZ'>^^ϭϰϬϬt^dϰd,^dZd͕ŶƚŝŽĐŚ dŚŝƐĨĂĐŝůŝƚLJŝƐůŝƐƚĞĚĂƐĂŶŽƉĞŶůĂŶĚĚŝƐƉŽƐĂůƐŝƚĞǁŝƚŚĐŚƌŽŵŝƵŵ ĂŶĚŚĞĂǀLJŵĞƚĂůƐĐŽŶƚĂŵŝŶĂƚŝŽŶ͘dŚĞĨĂĐŝůŝƚLJŝƐŽƵƚƐŝĚĞƚŚĞƐƚƵĚLJ ĂƌĞĂĂŶĚƵŶůŝŬĞůLJƚŽŝŵƉĂĐƚƚŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚƉƌŽũĞĐƚďĂƐĞĚŽŶ ĚŝƐƚĂŶĐĞĂŶĚƚŚĞŶĂƚƵƌĞŽĨƚŚĞĐŽŶƚĂŵŝŶĂƚŝŽŶ͘>Žǁ ϰϭϴ E K<>zZKDdZ/E'^/dK<>zZ͘ΘW,/>>/W^>E͕͘Ed/K, ƐŝƚĞƐĐƌĞĞŶŝŶŐǁĂƐĐŽŶĚƵĐƚĞĚĂƚƚŚŝƐĨĂĐŝůŝƚLJ;ƵƐĞĚĨŽƌŚĂŶĚůŝŶŐ ŶĂƚƵƌĂůŐĂƐǁĞůůůŝƋƵŝĚƐƵŶƚŝůƚŚĞŵŝĚϭϵϳϬƐͿĂŶĚƐŽŝůĂŶĚ ŐƌŽƵŶĚǁĂƚĞƌǁĞƌĞĚĞƚĞƌŵŝŶĞĚƚŽďĞĐŽŶƚĂŵŝŶĂƚĞĚǁŝƚŚ ŚLJĚƌŽĐĂƌďŽŶƐ͕dy͕ĂŶĚWƐ͘dŚŝƐĨĂĐŝůŝƚLJŝƐůŽĐĂƚĞĚϬ͘ϱŵŝůĞƐ ŽƵƚƐŝĚĞƚŚĞƐƚƵĚLJĂƌĞĂĂŶĚŝƐƵŶůŝŬĞůLJƚŽƌĞƉƌĞƐĞŶƚĂĐŽŶĐĞƌŶĨŽƌ ƚŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚƉƌŽũĞĐƚ͘>Žǁ ϰϭϵ E D'Ed,/',^,KK>^/dZs>>zZKͬ>KEdZtz͕Ed/K dŚĞĨĂĐŝůŝƚLJƌĞĐĞŝǀĞĚĂEŽ&ƵƌƚŚĞƌĐƚŝŽŶĚĞƚĞƌŵŝŶĂƚŝŽŶŝŶϮϬϬϱ ĂĨƚĞƌďĞŝŶŐŝŶǀĞƐƚŝŐĂƚĞĚĨŽƌKW͕ĂƌƐĞŶŝĐ͕ĂŶĚŵĞƚŚĂŶĞŝŵƉĂĐƚƐ͘ dŚĞĨĂĐŝůŝƚLJŝƐůŽĐĂƚĞĚǁŝƚŚŝŶƚŚĞĂĐƚŝǀĞƌĞŶƚǁŽŽĚŽŝůĨŝĞůĚ͘>Žǁ ϰϮϬ E Ed/K,Z/dKZy,E'ϵϬϴt^d^KE^d͕͘Ed/K, dŚĞĨĂĐŝůŝƚLJǁĂƐŝŶǀĞƐƚŝŐĂƚĞĚƵŶĚĞƌƚŚĞdĂƌŐĞƚĞĚ^ŝƚĞ/ŶǀĞƐƚŝŐĂƚŝŽŶ 'ƌĂŶƚĨƌŽŵWĂŶĚƌĞĨĞƌƌĞĚƚŽƚŚĞŝƚLJŽĨŶƚŝŽĐŚĨŽƌĨŽůůŽǁƵƉ͘ dŚĞĨĂĐŝůŝƚLJǁĂƐĨŽƌŵĞƌůLJƵƐĞĚĨŽƌĂƵƚŽŵŽƚŝǀĞƌĞƉĂŝƌƐƐŝŶĐĞϭϵϮϲ͘ >ĞĂĚ͕WƐ͕ƚŚĞdW,ǁĞƌĞŝĚĞŶƚŝĨŝĞĚĂďŽǀĞƐĐƌĞĞŶŝŶŐůĞǀĞůƐŝŶƐŽŝů͘ dW,ĂŶĚdyǁĞƌĞŝĚĞŶƚŝĨŝĞĚŝŶŐƌŽƵŶĚǁĂƚĞƌŶĞĂƌĂĨŽƌŵĞƌ >h^d͘>Žǁ ϰϮϭ E DzZZz^>KDKKZ/E'͕Ed/K, dŚĞĨĂĐŝůŝƚLJƉĂƌƚŝĐŝƉĂƚĞĚŝŶƚŚĞd^^ŝƚĞůĞĂŶƵƉWƌŽŐƌĂŵĂŶĚ ƌĞĐĞŝǀĞĚĂŶE&ŝŶϮϬϭϰ͘>Žǁ ϰŽĨϰTABLE B-2DATABASE LISTINGS INDICATIVE OF RELEASE DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 55 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. dĂďůĞϯ ŶĚĂŶŐĞƌĞĚ͕dŚƌĞĂƚĞŶĞĚĂŶĚZĂƌĞ^ƉĞĐŝĞƐ EŽƌƚŚĞƌŶtĂƚĞƌĨƌŽŶƚ^ŚŽƌƚ>ŝŶĞZĂŝůƌŽĂĚ&ĞĂƐŝďŝůŝƚLJ^ƚƵĚLJ ŽŵŵŽŶEĂŵĞ ^ĐŝĞŶƚŝĨŝĐEĂŵĞ ^ƚĂƚƵƐ ^ĂůƚŵĂƌƐŚŚĂƌǀĞƐƚŵŽƵƐĞ ZĞŝƚŚƌŽĚŽŶƚŽŵLJƐƌĂǀŝǀĞŶƚƌŝƐ &͕&W͕^ ^ĂŶ:ŽĂƋƵŝŶ<ŝƚ&Ždž sƵůƉĞƐŵĂĐƌŽƚŝƐŵƵƚŝĐĂ &͕^d ĂůŝĨŽƌŶŝĂďůĂĐŬƌĂŝů >ĂƚĞƌĂůůƵƐũĂŵĂŝĐĞŶƐŝƐĐŽƚƵƌŶŝĐƵůƵƐ ^d ĂůŝĨŽƌŶŝĂĐůĂƉƉĞƌƌĂŝů ZĂůůƵƐůŽŶŐŝƌŽƐƚƌŝƐŽďƐŽůĞƚƵƐ ĂůŝĨŽƌŶŝĂZŝĚŐǁĂLJ͛ƐƌĂŝů ZĂůůƵƐŽďƐŽůĞƚƵƐŽďƐŽůĞƚƵƐ ĂůŝĨŽƌŶŝĂůĞĂƐƚƚĞƌŶ ^ƚĞƌŶĂĂŶƚŝůůĂƌƵŵďƌŽǁŶŝ &͕^ ^ǁĂŝŶƐŽŶ͛ƐŚĂǁŬƵƚĞŽƐǁĂŝŶƐŽŶŝ ^d 'ŝĂŶƚŐĂƌƚĞƌƐŶĂŬĞ dŚĂŵŶŽƉŚŝƐŐŝŐĂƐ ^d͕&d ĂůŝĨŽƌŶŝĂZĞĚͲůĞŐŐĞĚĨƌŽŐ ZĂŶĂĚƌĂLJƚŽŶŝŝ &d ĂůŝĨŽƌŶŝĂƚŝŐĞƌƐĂůĂŵĂŶĚĞƌ ŵďLJƐƚŽŵĂĐĂůŝĨŽƌŶŝĞŶƐĞ &d͕^d ĞůƚĂƐŵĞůƚ ,LJƉŽŵĞƐƵƐƚƌĂŶƐƉĂĐŝĨŝĐƵƐ &d͕^ >ŽŶŐĨŝŶƐŵĞůƚ ^ƉŝƌŝŶĐŚƵƐƚŚĂůĞŝĐŚƚŚLJƐ &͕^d ^ƚĞĞůŚĞĂĚʹĞŶƚƌĂůsĂůůĞLJW^KŶĐŽƌŚLJŶĐŚƵƐŵLJŬŝƐƐŝƌŝĚĞƵƐ ƉŽƉ͘ϭϭ &d ĞůƚĂŐƌĞĞŶŐƌŽƵŶĚďĞĞƚůĞ ůĂƉŚƌƵƐǀŝƌŝĚŝƐ &d >ĂŶŐĞ͛ƐŵĞƚĂůŵĂƌŬďƵƚƚĞƌĨůLJ ƉŽĚĞŵŝĂŵŽƌŵŽůĂŶŐĞŝ & ^ĂŶƌƵŶŽĞůĨŝŶďƵƚƚĞƌĨůLJĂůůŽƉŚƌLJƐŵŽƐƐŝŝďĂLJĞŶƐŝƐ & sĂůůĞLJĞůĚĞƌďĞƌƌLJůŽŶŐŚŽƌŶďĞĞƚůĞ ĞƐŵŽĐĞƌƵƐĐĂůŝĨŽƌŶŝĐƵƐ &d sĞƌŶĂůƉŽŽůĨĂŝƌLJƐŚƌŝŵƉ ƌĂŶĐŚŝŶĞĐƚĂůLJŶĐŚŝ &d sĞƌŶĂůƉŽŽůƚĂĚƉŽůĞƐŚƌŝŵƉ >ĞƉŝĚƵƌƵƐƉĂĐŬĂƌĚŝ & ŶƚŝŽĐŚĚƵŶĞƐĞǀĞŶŝŶŐͲƉƌŝŵƌŽƐĞ KĞŶŽƚŚĞƌĂĚĞůƚŽŝĚƐ ƐƐƉ͘ŚŽǁĞůůŝŝ &͕^ ŝŐƚĂƌƉůĂŶƚ ůĞƉŚĂƌŝnjŽŶŝĂƉůƵŵŽƐĂ ^Z͕ZWZϭ͘ϭ ŽůƵƐĂŐƌĂƐƐ EĞŽƐƚĂƉĨŝĂĐŽůƵƐĂŶĂ &d͕^ ŽŶƚƌĂŽƐƚĂŐŽůĚĨŝĞůĚƐ >ĂƐƚŚĞŶŝĂĐŽŶũƵŐĞŶƐ &͕^Z͕ZWZ ŽŶƚƌĂŽƐƚĂǁĂůůĨůŽǁĞƌ ƌLJƐŝŵƵŵĐĂƉŝƚĂƚƵŵ ǀĂƌ͘ĂŶŐƵƐƚĂƚƵŵ &͕^ ĞůƚĂŵƵĚǁŽƌƚ >ŝŵŽƐĞůůĂĂƵƐƚƌĂůŝƐ ^Z͕Ϯ͘ϭ ĞůƚĂƚƵůĞƉĞĂ >ĂƚŚLJƌƵƐũĞƉƐŽŶŝŝǀĂƌ͘ũĞƉƐŽŶŝŝ ^Z͕ZWZϭ͘Ϯ ŝĂŵŽŶĚͲƉĞƚĂůĞĚĂůŝĨŽƌŶŝĂƉŽƉƉLJ ƐĐŚƐĐŚŽůnjŝĂƌŚŽŵďŝƉĞƚĂůĂ ^Z͕ZWZϭ͘ϭ ,ŽŽǀĞƌΖƐĐƌLJƉƚĂŶƚŚĂ ƌLJƉƚĂŶƚŚĂŚŽŽǀĞƌŝ ^Z͕ZWZϭ <ĞĐŬ͛ƐĐŚĞĐŬĞƌͲŵĂůůŽǁ ^ŝĚĂůĐĞĂŬĞĐŬŝŝ & DĂƐŽŶΖƐůŝůĂĞŽƉƐŝƐ >ŝůĂĞŽƉƐŝƐŵĂƐŽŶŝŝ ^Z͕ZWZϭ͘ϭ Dƚ͘ŝĂďůŽďƵĐŬǁŚĞĂƚƌŝŽŐŽŶƵŵƚƌƵŶĐĂƚƵŵ ^Z͕ZWZϭ͘ϭ ^ŽĨƚďŝƌĚ͛ƐͲďĞĂŬ ŽƌĚLJůĂŶƚŚƵƐŵŽůůŝƐ ƐƐƉ͘ŵŽůůŝƐ &͕^Z ^ƵŝƐƵŶDĂƌƐŚĂƐƚĞƌ^LJŵƉŚLJŽƚƌŝĐŚƵŵůĞŶƚƵŵ ^Z͕ZWZϭ͘Ϯ &ʹ&ĞĚĞƌĂůĂŶĚŝĚĂƚĞ ^ʹ^ƚĂƚĞŶĚĂŶŐĞƌĞĚ &ʹ&ĞĚĞƌĂůůLJŶĚĂŶŐĞƌĞĚ ^Zʹ^ƚĂƚĞZĂƌĞ /ŶƐĞĐƚƐ ƌƵƐƚĂĐĞĂŶƐ EŽƚĞƐ͗ WůĂŶƚƐ DĂŵŵĂůƐ ŝƌĚƐ &͕^ ZĞƉƚŝůĞƐ ŵƉŚŝďŝĂŶƐ &ŝƐŚĞƐ TABLE B-3ENDANGERED, THREATENED AND RARE SPECIES DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 56 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. dĂďůĞϰ DŝŐƌĂƚŽƌLJĂŶĚEĞƐƚŝŶŐŝƌĚƐ EŽƌƚŚĞƌŶtĂƚĞƌĨƌŽŶƚ^ŚŽƌƚ>ŝŶĞZĂŝůƌŽĂĚ&ĞĂƐďŝůŝƚLJ^ƚƵĚLJ ŽŵŵŽŶEĂŵĞ ^ĐŝĞŶƚŝĨŝĐEĂŵĞ ^ƚĂƚƵƐ ƵƌƌŽǁŝŶŐŽǁůƚŚĞŶĞĐƵŶŝĐƵůĂƌŝĂ ^^͕ ŽŵŵŽŶLJĞůůŽǁƚŚƌŽĂƚ'ĞŽƚŚůLJƉŝƐƚƌŝĐŚĂƐƐŝŶƵŽƐĂ  'ŽůĚĞŶĞĂŐůĞƋƵŝůĂĐŚƌLJƐĂĞƚŽƐ sƵůŶĞƌĂďůĞ >ĂǁƌĞŶĐĞ͛ƐŐŽůĚĨŝŶĐŚ^ƉŝŶƵƐůĂǁƌĞŶĐĞŝ  >ŽŐŐĞƌŚĞĂĚƐŚƌŝŬĞ>ĂŶŝƵƐůƵĚŽǀŝĐŝĂŶƵƐ ^^ EŽƚŚĞƌŶŚĂƌƌŝĞƌŝƌĐƵƐĐLJĂŶĞƵƐ ^^ EƵƚƚƚĂů͛ƐǁŽŽĚƉĞĐŬĞƌWŝĐŽŝĚĞƐŶƵƚƚĂůůŝŝ KĂŬƚŝƚŵŽƵƐĞ ĂĞŽůŽƉŚƵƐŝŶŽƌŶĂƚƵƐ ^ŽŶŐƐƉĂƌƌŽǁ DĞůŽƐƉŝnjĂŵĞůŽĚŝĂ͕^^ ^ĂŶůĞŵĞŶƚĞ^ƉŽƚƚĞĚƚŽǁŚĞĞWŝƉŝůŽŵĂĐƵůĂƚƵƐĐůĞŵĞŶƚĂĞ ͕^^ tƌĞŶƚŝƚŚĂŵĂĞĂĨĂƐĐŝĂƚĂ  zĞůůŽǁͲďŝůůĞĚŵĂŐƉŝĞWŝĐĂŶƵƚƚĂůůŝ zĞůůŽǁǁĂƌďůĞƌĞŶĚƌŽŝĐĂƉĞƚĞĐŚŝĂ ^^ EŽƚĞƐ͗ ʹhŶŝƚĞĚ^ƚĂƚĞƐ&ŝƐŚĂŶĚtŝůĚůŝĨĞ^ĞƌǀŝĐĞŝƌĚŽĨŽŶƐĞƌǀĂƚŝŽŶŽŶĐĞƌŶ ^^ʹĂůŝĨŽƌŶŝĂĞƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚŽĨ&ŝƐŚĂŶĚtŝůĚůŝĨĞ^ƉĞĐŝĞƐŽĨ^ƉĞĐŝĂůŽŶĐĞƌŶ TABLE B-4MIGRATORY AND NESTING BIRDS DRAFT REPORT TO:CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENTPAGE 57PREPARED BY:R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC.Path: \\langan.com\data\ARL\data6\270083601\Project Data\ArcGIS\MXD\Environmental_Figures\Figure1_Site_Map_20190815.mxd© 2012 Langan££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££.Project Drawing TitleCONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALIFORNIASITE LOCATION MAPProject No.DateScaleDrawn ByFigure2700836018/19/2019OG355 South Grand Avenue, Suite 2450 Los Angeles, CA 90071T: 213.943.1310 F: 213.943.1301 www.langan.comNORTHERN WATERFRONTSHORT-LINE RAILROADANTIOCH1Langan Engineering & Environmental Services, Inc.Langan Engineering, Environmental, Surveying andLandscape Architecture, D.P.C.Langan International LLCCollectively known as Langan1 '' = 0.25 milesLegend£ARIS Database DetectionsRailroad Centerline1,000 0 1,000 2,000FeetNotes:1. Aerial imagery provided by inbound GIS data from the client.2. All features shown are approximate.3. Site Locations Provided by ARIS Inc.Study AreaFIGURE B-1SITE LOCATION MAP DRAFT REPORT TO:CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENTPAGE 58PREPARED BY:R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC.Path: \\langan.com\data\ARL\data6\270083601\Project Data\ArcGIS\MXD\Environmental_Figures\Figure 2_20190815.mxd© 2012 LanganFulton ShipyardNK GasGeorgia-Pacific Gypsum LLCRecreational TractPioneer Americas(former Kemwater)Former Gaylord Container CorporationContra Costa Power PlantDupont Antioch /Chemours OakleyPG&E Antioch Gas Terminal.Project Drawing TitleCONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALIFORNIAMEDIUM RISKDATABASE LISTINGProject No.DateScaleDrawn ByFigure2700836018/19/2019OG355 South Grand Avenue, Suite 2450 Los Angeles, CA 90071T: 213.943.1310 F: 213.943.1301 www.langan.comNORTHERN WATERFRONTSHORT-LINE RAILROADANTIOCH2Langan Engineering & Environmental Services, Inc.Langan Engineering, Environmental, Surveying andLandscape Architecture, D.P.C.Langan International LLCCollectively known as Langan1 '' = 0.25 milesLegendRailroad CenterlineARIS Database Locations - Medium RiskMedium Risk Parcels1,000 0 1,000 2,000FeetNotes:1. Aerial imagery provided by inbound GIS data from the client.2. All features shown are approximate. 3. Location of database detections provided by ARISFIGURE B-2MEDIUM RISK DATABASE LISTING DRAFT REPORT TO:CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENTPAGE 59PREPARED BY:R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC.Path: \\langan.com\data\ARL\data6\270083601\Project Data\ArcGIS\MXD\Environmental_Figures\NWI_Wetland_Map.mxd© 2012 LanganStudy Area.Project Drawing TitleCONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALIFORNIANATIONAL WETLANDSINVENTORY MAPProject No.DateScaleDrawn ByFigure2700836018/19/2019OG355 South Grand Avenue, Suite 2450 Los Angeles, CA 90071T: 213.943.1310 F: 213.943.1301 www.langan.comNORTHERN WATERFRONTSHORT-LINE RAILROADANTIOCH3Langan Engineering & Environmental Services, Inc.Langan Engineering, Environmental, Surveying andLandscape Architecture, D.P.C.Langan International LLCCollectively known as Langan1 '' = 1,500 'LegendStudy AreaEstuarine and Marine DeepwaterEstuarine and Marine WetlandFreshwater Emergent WetlandFreshwater Forested/Shrub WetlandFreshwater PondOtherRiverine1,500 0 1,500FeetNotes:1. Aerial imagery provided by inbound GIS data from the client.2. All features shown are approximate. 3. National wetlands inventory data provided by the U.S. Fish andWildlife Service. Data downloaded on 8/19/2019.FIGURE B-3NATIONAL WETLANDS INVENTORY MAP DRAFT REPORT TO:CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENTPAGE 60PREPARED BY:R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC.Path: \\langan.com\data\ARL\data6\270083601\Project Data\ArcGIS\MXD\Environmental_Figures\CNDDB_20190816.mxd© 2012 Langan.Project Drawing TitleCONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALIFORNIAREGIONALLYOCCURINGSPECIAL-STATUSSPECIESProject No.DateScaleDrawn ByFigure2700836018/19/2019OG355 South Grand Avenue, Suite 2450 Los Angeles, CA 90071T: 213.943.1310 F: 213.943.1301 www.langan.comNORTHERN WATERFRONTSHORT-LINE RAILROADANTIOCH4Langan Engineering & Environmental Services, Inc.Langan Engineering, Environmental, Surveying andLandscape Architecture, D.P.C.Langan International LLCCollectively known as Langan1 '' = 1.5 milesLegendCNDDB within 5-milesCommon Name | Scientific NameAlameda whipsnake | Masticophis lateralis euryxanthusAmerican badger | Taxidea taxusAntioch Dunes anthicid beetle | Anthicus antiochensisAntioch Dunes buckwheat | Eriogonum nudum var. psychicolaAntioch Dunes evening-primrose | Oenothera deltoides ssp. howelliiAntioch Dunes halcitid bee | Sphecodogastra antiochensisAntioch andrenid bee | Perdita scitula antiochensisAntioch efferian robberfly | Efferia antiochiAntioch multilid wasp | Myrmosula pacificaAntioch specid wasp | Philanthus nasalisBlennosperma vernal pool andrenid bee | Andrena blennospermatisBolander's water-hemlock | Cicuta maculata var. bolanderiBrewer's western flax | Hesperolinon breweriCalifornia black rail | Laterallus jamaicensis coturniculusCalifornia glossy snake | Arizona elegans occidentalisCalifornia linderiella | Linderiella occidentalisCalifornia red-legged frog | Rana draytoniiCalifornia tiger salamander | Ambystoma californienseCoastal Brackish Marsh | Coastal Brackish MarshContra Costa goldfields | Lasthenia conjugensContra Costa wallflower | Erysimum capitatum var. angustatumCrotch bumble bee | Bombus crotchiiDelta mudwort | Limosella australisDelta smelt | Hypomesus transpacificusDelta tule pea | Lathyrus jepsonii var. jepsoniiDiablo helianthella | Helianthella castaneaHall's bush-mallow | Malacothamnus halliiHoover's cryptantha | Cryptantha hooveriHurd's metapogon robberfly | Metapogon hurdiJepson's coyote-thistle | Eryngium jepsoniiLange's metalmark butterfly | Apodemia mormo langeiMason's lilaeopsis | Lilaeopsis masoniiMiddlekauff's shieldback katydid | Idiostatus middlekauffiMt. Diablo buckwheat | Eriogonum truncatumMt. Diablo manzanita | Arctostaphylos auriculataSacramento perch | Archoplites interruptusSan Joaquin Pocket Mouse | Perognathus inornatusSan Joaquin dune beetle | Coelus gracilisSan Joaquin kit fox | Vulpes macrotis muticaSan Joaquin spearscale | Extriplex joaquinanaStabilized Interior Dunes | Stabilized Interior DunesSuisun Marsh aster | Symphyotrichum lentumSuisun song sparrow | Melospiza melodia maxillarisSwainson's hawk | Buteo swainsoniBig tarplant | Blepharizonia plumosaBrittlescale | Atriplex depressaBurrowing owl | Athene cuniculariaChaparral ragwort | Senecio aphanactisCurved-foot hygrotus diving beetle | Hygrotus curvipesDiamond-petaled California poppy | Eschscholzia rhombipetalaDouble-crested cormorant | Phalacrocorax auritusGiant gartersnake | Thamnophis gigasGreat blue heron | Ardea herodiasLarge-flowered fiddleneck | Amsinckia grandifloraLoggerhead shrike | Lanius ludovicianusLongfin smelt | Spirinchus thaleichthysMolestan blister beetle | Lytta molestaNorthern California legless lizard | Anniella pulchraRedheaded sphecid wasp | Eucerceris ruficepsSalt-marsh harvest mouse | Reithrodontomys raviventrisSaltmarsh common yellowthroat | Geothlypis trichas sinuosaShining navarretia | Navarretia nigelliformis ssp. radiansShowy golden madia | Madia radiataSoft salty bird's-beak | Chloropyron molle ssp. molleSong sparrow ("Modesto" population) | Melospiza melodiaSteelhead - Central Valley DPS | Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus pop. 11Stinkbells | Fritillaria agrestisTricolored blackbird | Agelaius tricolorVernal pool fairy shrimp | Branchinecta lynchiVernal pool tadpole shrimp | Lepidurus packardiWestern bumble bee | Bombus occidentalisWestern pond turtle | Emys marmorataWestern red bat | Lasiurus blossevilliiWhite-tailed kite | Elanus leucurusWoolly rose-mallow | Hibiscus lasiocarpos var. occidentalis1.5 0 1.5MilesNotes:1. Aerial imagery provided by inbound GIS data from the client.2. All features shown are approximate.3. California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) layers updatedAugust 1, 2019.Study AreaFIGURE B-4REGIONALLY OCCURING SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES DRAFT REPORT TO:CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENTPAGE 61PREPARED BY:R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC.Path: \\langan.com\data\ARL\data6\270083601\Project Data\ArcGIS\MXD\Environmental_Figures\USFWS Critical Habitat_20190815.mxd© 2012 Langan.Project Drawing TitleCONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALIFORNIAUSFWSCRITICAL HABITATProject No.DateScaleDrawn ByFigure2700836018/19/2019OG355 South Grand Avenue, Suite 2450 Los Angeles, CA 90071T: 213.943.1310 F: 213.943.1301 www.langan.comNORTHERN WATERFRONTSHORT-LINE RAILROADANTIOCH5Langan Engineering & Environmental Services, Inc.Langan Engineering, Environmental, Surveying andLandscape Architecture, D.P.C.Langan International LLCCollectively known as Langan1 '' = 1.5 milesLegendUSFWS Critical HabitatAlameda whipsnake (=striped racer)Antioch Dunes evening-primroseContra Costa wallflowerDelta smelt1.501.5MilesNotes:1. Aerial imagery provided by inbound GIS data from the client.2. All features shown are approximate. 3. California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) layers updatedAugust 1, 2019.Study AreaFIGURE B-5USFWS CRITICAL HABITAT EXHIBIT C MARKET ANALYSIS PAGE 62 DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 63 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. S U B J E C This Tech Condition #4 is to co customers In To illustr waterfron undertake was condu Based on BNSF Rai service, se operators BNSF offi decisions O Seaports p the utiliza railcars. F load onto trucks or import an facility are Good exa as the Por automobi Port of B throughou facilities a Bay Area’ neo-bulk C T: TASK hnical Memor ns Memorand onduct a mar s and 2) deter ntroduction rate the pote nt in the Stud en. Additiona ucted of the b interviews co ilway (BNSF) everal potent was develop icials also we in regards to Opportunitie play a major r ation of transl For example, ships for exp rail tank cars nd export of n e in very close mples of mar rts of; San Fr ile transload o Benicia. The i ut the Bay A and will not b ’s future dem cargo berths #4 TECHNIC randum incor dum, to descr rketing analy rmine the feas ntial types o dy Area, an e ally, based on businesses in t onducted in ) officials and tial land deve ed that are be re consulted allowing a sh es for Freigh role in distrib load facilities a logging com port. Import l s. The goal is new vehicles e proximity to ritime translo rancisco, Red operations ca import and e Area region. be able to acco mand. In 2012 , as measured CAL MEMORA rporates infor ribe the curre sis to: 1) iden sibility of a ne of businesses valuation of n guidance fr the Study Are Task #3 with d businesses p elopment opp est suited to t to obtain a b hort-line railro t Rail Served buting both im s, commoditie mpany will tr liquid bulk co to get a load is also handl o each other a ad operations dwood City, R an be seen at; export of bul However, th ommodate al , Bay Area po d by vacant b ANDUM – MA rmation devel ent environm ntify opportu ew short-line that could b the various s rom economi ea that could b h economic d potentially in portunities w the unique op better underst oad operation d Customers mport and ex es can be tran ansport harv ommodities su on or off shi led in a simil allowing for a s can be seen Richmond an the Port of S lk commodit hese ports are ll of the marit orts had a su berths. Howev ARKET ANAL loped in Task ment in the St unities for the railroad serv be interested seaports in th ic developme be potential r development nterested in u were evaluated pportunities tanding of the n in the Study s xport commod nsferred effici vested trees by uch as fertiliz ips with a min lar way wher a quick transfe throughout t nd Benicia. Ex San Francisco ties also play e constrained time transloa urplus of civil ever, cargo fo LYSIS k #3, the Asse udy Area. Th e freight rail m vice in the Stu in developin he San Franc ent officials, a rail shippers. officials, pub utilizing new d. A list of associated wi e consideratio y Area. dities in the B iently between y truck to a t zer are transfe nimal amoun e the ship an fer between m the Bay Area a xamples of N , the Port of R y a major rol d by the exi ad growth nec ian break bul recasts indica May 4 essment of Ex he purpose of mode to serve udy Area. ng property isco Bay Are a telephone s blic works off short-line ra short-line rai ith the Study ons that gove Bay Area. Thr n ships, truck ransload facil erred from sh nt of handling nd the truck o modes. at niche ports Northern Calif Richmond an le at port fac sting size of cessary to me lk, dry, liquid ate that seven , 2020 xisting f Task e new along ea was survey ficials, ilroad ilroad Area. ern its rough ks and lity to hips to g. The or rail s such fornia nd the cilities f their eet the d, and n new DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 64 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. bulk cargo waterfron more favo to highwa The Ports (UP). If a would be chosen to businesse to the UP the best tr These por container rail and, commodi D B H N R is of 1Source: Sa 2 Source: Sa San Fr Redwo Richm Benici o berths will b nt parcels in th orable locatio ay and rail acc s of San Fran a shipper desi higher than i o develop an a s are looking P and shippers ransportation rts have been ized business highways, c ities: Dry Bulk, such reak Bulk, wh Hazardous Liq Non-Hazardou Roll On/Roll O s the most eff ff a ship. an Francisco Ba an Francisco B Port rancisco ood City mond ia be needed by he Study Area n or take adv cess. Com ncisco, Redwo ired to use th if they had di automotive tr for sites in th s’ look for op n rates possibl able to captu s plan. The w can potential h as; cement, l hich includes quid Bulk, suc us Liquid Bul Off Vehicles, i ficient translo ay Area Seapor Bay Area Seapo Vehicle 146,203 unit 1,500,000 un the year 2020 a offer new o vantage of bet mmodities Ha ood City and he BNSF for irect access to ransload facil he Study Area portunities to le. ure bulk com waterfront alo lly provide b lumber, recyc individually b ch as; crude oi k, such as coo including auto oad operation rt Plan, January ort Plan, Januar es D ts - Sa n - Agg - San - Agg - Scr a - Gyp - Pet r nits - Pet r 2 of 13 0 to accommo pportunities tter rail transp Table 12 andled at Ba d Benicia only transport to o the BNSF. T lity at the for a also. Its ope o gain access mmodities that ong the Wilbu businesses th cled materials bagged, boxed il, ethanol, liq oking oils, win omobiles, tru n because it o y 2012, p 15, ht ry 2012, https:/ Dry Bulk nd gregate nd gregate ap Metal psum roleum Coke roleum Coke odate expecte for maritime portation rate ay Area Ports y have access its final desti This is precise rmer Forestar eration at the to more than t do not fit in ur Avenue Co he ability to s, coal, petrole d, drummed quefied natura ne and juice; ucks, construc only requires ttps://www.bcd //www.bcdc.ca Liquid - Vegetable - Molasses - Tallow R.L. BANKS ed growth in b related busin es because of s s to the Unio ination, the t ely the reason r site in Antio e Port of Beni n one railroad nto the larger orridor, with o handle the eum coke and or palletized al gas; and ction and farm laborers to d dc.ca.gov/seap .gov/seaport/se Bulk C - Co - Ne e Oil - St e - Lu & ASSOCIATE bulk cargoes1. nesses to mov its close prox on Pacific Rai transportation n why Ampor och and why icia only has a d in order to o r Port of Oakl h its accessibil e following g d ores; dry goods; m equipment. drive vehicles ort/seaport.pd eaport.pdf Container otton ewsprint eel mber S, INC. . The ve to a ximity ilroad n cost rts has other access obtain kland’s lity to group . This on or df TABLE C-1COMMODITIES HANDLED AT BAY AREA PORTS DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 65 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. Many of operation competitiv assembly companie in the Stu maritime businesse P The majo California the most t of Wilbur transload heavy bul The BNSF potential need for operation parcel bei parcels in There are they do n alongside parcel is c Wilbur A buildings On the no because t connectio business. used to se future bus the invest Fulton Sh store equ building a the jobs tha ns are moving ve. These a for imported es are searchin udy Area are transload or s to the Study Potential Lan ority of busin a and the dest time and cost r Avenue had facilities. Ma k commoditie F mainline cr business opp rail service ns. A field inv ing served by the Study Ar e two vacant i not have rail s the BNSF m currently bein Avenue, the s on the site wh orth side of W hey each had ons have been The NRG par erve this form siness develop tigation are lis hipyard, 307 ipment and and an outsid at have tradi g further eas activities incl d goods, bulk ng for availab e located alon r mode trans y Area. nd Developm esses in the S tination for th t sensitive mo d a greater po any maritime es which are m rosses the Stu portunities. M because of vestigation of y a short-line rea and report industrial par spurs, they st mainline. A va ng used as a p site of the fo hich could be Wilbur Aven d rail connec n dismantled rcel still has a mer power pla pment. These sted below: Fulton Ship is for sale. e constructio tionally oper t to take adv lude; wareho k commodity ble land with g ng the waterf sfer facilities. ment Opport Study Area re heir finished ode of transpo tential to util transload fac more econom udy Area just Many business the heavy b f the Study A railroad oper ted the follow rcels for sale till have to th acant parcel w parking lot for ormer GWF P e easily be tur ue, there are ctions in the d because the a serviceable r ant. Each of t e five sites we pyard Road, A Two rail trac n yard.  3 of 13 rated near se vantage of lo ousing and d y transloading good rail and front, they al . This capab tunities in th ely on trucks products is in ortation. How lize rail becau ilities depend mical to move south of Wil ses that locat bulk commo Area was con ration. The in wing: on the south he potential o with no buildi r large trucks Power System ned into a wa five parcels past (Exhib e companies rail spur with these parcels h re investigate Antioch. Th cks inside th eaports as se ower land and distribution g, light manu d highway acc lso have the bility is a bi he Study Are s because the n Northern C wever, the vac use of the opp d on rail servi by rail. lbur Avenue te near waterf odities associ nducted to de nspection team side of Wilb of being rail s ings is locate s. The second ms Company arehouse or tr that have the it C). In fo that used to h heavy rail be has good truc ed by the engi his 10-acre pa he property p R.L. BANKS ervice activiti d business ex centers, valu ufacturing an cess. Because potential to ig advantage ea ir raw mater California. Th cant parcels al portunities to ce because th allowing for front propert iated with m etermine the m investigate bur Avenue a served becaus ed at 2100 Wi vacant parce y. This parc ruck/rail tran e most poten our of the fiv o ship by rail ecause of the h ck, rail and m ineering team arcel is curre provide access & ASSOCIATE ies related to xpenses to re ue-added pr nd trucking. all five vacan be developed in attracting ials are sourc herefore truck long the north o develop mar hey typically h easy rail acce ty generally h maritime tran potential for ed all of the v nd despite th se they are lo ilbur Avenue el is located at cel has two v sload operatio tial for rail s ve parcels, th l are no long heavy rail car maritime acce m and the resu ently being us s to the ship   S, INC. o port emain roduct These nt sites d into g new ced in king is h side ritime handle ess for have a nsload r each vacant he fact ocated e. This t 3400 vacant on. ervice he rail ger in rs that ess for ults of sed to p yard DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 66 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. E th it St sh of or se E im on T C de bo to w re w T fo R re ac tr Former K being used E di re co E T ϯLangan E Database L ngineering A he Antioch D would not b tudy Area. Th hare its rail tr f-way. Otherw riginal rail co ervice. The es nvironmenta mplemented. n the CORTE Toxic Substanc Commercial/E esirable prop oundary is; a o a constructi would be inte epair, truck r would make th Transportation or ships. In a Route 4 and St ebuilt making ccess allows ransportation Kemwater Ch d to support w ngineering A ismantled. Th eplaced to res onnection is $ nvironmenta The contamin Engineering and Listing Indicati Analysis - Thi unes Nationa be possible to he only acces racks or obtai wise, the onl onnection an timated cost t al Analysis - The property ESE list (i.e. S ces Control an Economic Dev perty for a bu an enclosed sh ion yard and rested in this repair and ro his parcel very n Analysis -T addition, goo tate Route 16 g for a very d shippers the rates. hemical Comp what appears Analysis - Th he street cross store the con $1,262,880. al Analysis - F nation sites d Environmen ive of Release, 2 s parcel is sep al Wildlife Re o construct a ss available w in an easeme y way to pro d BNSF wou to re-install a In 2016, wh y was found t State Superfu nd is still und velopment An usiness that h hop facility, o the shop com s parcel woul olling stock m y attractive fo There is an ex d truck acces 60 via Wilbur desirable rail/t e ability to u pany, 1251 W to be a metal his parcel onc sing is still in nnection to th Four groundw are being r tal Services, In 2019), p 2  4 of 13 parated from efuge. Because separate rail would be to n nt to constru ovide rail acc uld be the onl a rail connecti hen this parc to have soil an nd). The inve derway3. nalysis - Once has a need f overhead cran mplex and an ld be steel fa manufacturing r a maritime xisting 525-fo ss is available Avenue. The truck dual-m use one mod Wilbur Avenu l recycling fac ce had a rail place but 2,0 he BNSF mai water contam remediated b nc. (Environme m the rest of th e this is a pro connection t negotiate an a uct a separate ess to this pa ly rail carrier ion to this par cel was sold, nd groundwa estigation is b e this parcel i for rail access ne, two lead r existing wha abricators, co g. This whar transload fac oot wharf ava e via Wilbur e existing BN mode connecti de or anothe ue, Antioch. cility. l connection 009 feet of new inline. The es mination sites by excavating ental Risk Infor R.L. BANKS he parcels in otected nation to the rest of agreement wi track within arcel would b r that would rcel is $354,80 , a remedial ater contamin being led by t s remediated, s. Located w railroad track rf. The types ommercial/ind rf is in excell cility. ailable that pr r Avenue and SF rail conne ion. Having b er in order t This 18-acre to the BNSF w rail and tie stimated cost were identifi g and treati rmation Servic & ASSOCIATE the Study Ar nal wildlife ha f the parcels i ith BNSF to the existing be to re-insta be able to pr 08. investigation nation and is the Departme , it would be a within the pro ks providing a s of businesse dustrial mach lent condition rovides easy a d A Street to ection can eas both truck an to obtain the e parcel is cur F, but it has es would have t to re-install ed at this loc ing the soil. ces, Table 2,   S, INC. rea by abitat, in the either right- all the rovide n was listed ent of a very operty access es that hinery n and access State sily be nd rail e best rently been e to be a rail cation. . The DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 67 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. re C sm be w T be T tr B ra A Amports of the fo materials out by tru company destinatio E lo sp do de co co w be co E G be re th ac 4 Langan E Database L 5 Ibid emediation pr Commercial/E mall business e interested i waste recycling Transportation e constructed There is good ransportation NSF mainlin ail alternative A Street to Stat (formally th rmer Gaylor were brough uck and rail. T that receives on. ngineering A ocated along pur that serve oes not plan t esign of the p onnection at onstruct a lar will be serving etween the pr ost of $354,80 nvironmenta Ground water eing monito equirements5. he necessary ccommodatin Engineering and Listing Indicati rocess is on-g Economic Dev requiring rai in locating he g, scrap metal n Analysis - A d if a potenti truck access concern is t e located app e less desirable te Route 4 an e Forestar Si rd Container ht in by barge The site is cur new automob Analysis - The the western b es the Kemwa to rebuild the proposed veh the eastern rger radius cu this parcel. I roperty line a 08. al Analysis - r contaminati ored to ensu . Amports is i permits from ng vehicle-car d Environment ive of Release, 2 going4. velopment A il service and/ ere would in l, and wareho Access is avail ial business i via Wilbur A the estimated proximately o e than using t d Wilbur Ave ite), 2603 Wi Corporation e and unloade rrently under biles by ship a e site once h border of the ater Chemica e western con hicle transload end of the p urve to accom n order for th and the BNSF Groundwate ion and wetla ure the rem in the process m the State rrying ships. tal Services, In 2019), p 1 5 of 13 nalysis - This /or waterfron clude liquid ousing. lable to the Sa s interested i Avenue and St d $1.2 million one mile to th trucks. There enue to State ilbur Avenue n which man ed at the exis a 20-year lea and arranges had two rail c e property, is al Company. nnection beca d facility. Inst property beca mmodate the his parcel to g F mainline wo r contaminat and soil reme mediation pro s of preparing Land Comm nc., (Environme s parcel woul nt access. The and dry bulk an Joaquin R in developing tate Routes 1 n cost to rest he west. This e is good truck Route 160. e, Antioch. T nufactured p sting wharf. F ase with Amp for transport connections. also connect A discussion ause that locat tead, the com ause it has t 89 to 145-fo gain rail acces ould need to tion was iden ediation is be ocess compli g an environm mission to bu ental Risk Info R.L. BANKS ld make an i e types of bus k and break b River, but a wh g a maritime 160 and State tore the rail additional co k access via W This 110-acre pulp and pap Finished prod ports, Inc., a g tation by truc One of the r ted to the sam n with Ampo tion does not mpany plans t the necessary oot automobil ss again, a new be constructe ntified on th eing addresse ies with Sta mental docum uild a larger ormation Servic & ASSOCIATE ideal location sinesses that w bulk commod harf would ne e transload fa Route 4. The connection t ost could mak Wilbur Avenu parcel was th per products. ducts were sh global auto log ck or rail to its rail connectio me dismantle orts revealed t t fit into the o to rebuild a fo y land availab le rail carrier w connecting ed, at an estim his parcel in ed. The site i ate environm ment and obta wharf capab ces, Table 2, S, INC. n for a would dities, eed to acility. e only to the ke the ue and he site . Raw hipped gistics s final ons is ed rail that it overall ormer ble to rs that g track mated 2004. is still mental aining ble of DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 68 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. C en fa 20 fa C 15 T pl tr an tr A NRG Mar This 86-a NRG Ene total avail Plant and E pl co or E 19 n un to C m n in th sa th co 6 Ibid Commercial/E nvironmental acility. Once 020. The nex acility which California or 50,000 to 175 Transportation lans to rebuil ransload facili nd develop a ransload oper Avenue. rsh Landing cre parcel is t ergy, Inc. open lable land ava an adjacent 4 ngineering A lant, there is a onnected to t rder to begin nvironmenta 986. In 2018, ecessary to cl nder control o begin in Sep Commercial/E manufacturing earby power nfrastructure his parcel des ale of this par he Bay Area. ommodities, w Economic De l and State La this project r xt phase of d will allow ne other parts o ,000 vehicles n Analysis - T d this wharf t ity. The land truck and ra ration having Generating S the site of a fo ned its new st ailable for dev 47-acre undev Analysis - Due an existing he the BNSF ma shipping by r al Analysis - a groundwat lean up the en as of June 20 ptember 20196 Economic Dev g facility, give r generating to bring in p sirable for a m rcel indicated Other uses w waste recyclin evelopment A and Commiss receives the n development w vehicles to of the United per year and There is a 75 to accommod is mostly lev ail transload f g good acces Station (Con ormer coal-fi tate-of-the-ar velopment is veloped parce e to the heavy eavy rail conn ainline. No ad rail again. This parcel h ter, surface w ntire parcel. M 19 and a corr 6. velopment A en its close pro station elim power from a maritime tran d interest by t would include ng and wareh  6 of 13 Analysis - T sion approva necessary app will include o be loaded o d States. At provide 150 f 50-foot wharf date larger oce vel with the a facility. This l ss to State Ro ntra Costa Po red power pl rt natural gas comprised o el. y rail cars that nection to the dditional rail has gone thr water and soil Mitigation of rective measu Analysis - Thi oximity to an minates the another locati nsload facility three business e light manuf ousing. This parcel i al process to b provals, const construction onto trucks an full build ou full and part t f available for ean going ves ability to easil location is id oute 4 and t ower Plant), 3 ant. The plan power plant of the 39-acre t once brough BNSF mainli work would rough several investigation f contaminate ure implemen is parcel also n adjacent elec cost of insta ion. There is y. Discussion ses looking fo facturing, we R.L. BANKS is already g becoming a m truction is ex n of a rail an nd rail cars fo ut, Amports time jobs. r easy access ssels and deve ly reconstruc deal for a mar to State Rout 3201 Wilbur nt was shut d adjacent to th e former Mar ht petroleum ine that is ser be necessary l pollution in n noted furthe ed groundwat ntation work p enjoys excel ctricity gener alling the n also an exist ns with the re or marine tra et and dry bu & ASSOCIATE going through maritime tran xpected to beg nd truck tran or final delive expects to pr by ship. Am elop an autom ct a rail conne rine, truck an te 160 via W Avenue, Ant down in 2013 he old facility rsh Landing P coke to this p rviceable and y at this locati nvestigations er remediatio ter was found plan was sche llent potentia rating facility. necessary elec ting wharf m ealtor handlin ansload facilit ulk and break   S, INC. h the nsload gin in nsload ery in rocess mports mobile ection nd rail Wilbur tioch. , after y. The Power power is still ion in since on was d to be eduled al as a . This ctrical making ng the ties in k bulk DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 69 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. T po h R lo Oakley Lo 345-acre p the largest E in in sm in E C re si re ex C K de C in ce O fu T ap se R in n ra tr 7 Langan E Indicative  Transportation ower plant is as many ben Route 4 and S ocation the be ogistics Cent parcel is the l t parcel availa ngineering A nto the prop nstalled to all mall railroad nstall a rail co nvironmenta Conservation emediation ac ite in order emediation is xpected by 20 Commercial/E Kansas City, M evelop 143 a Center. The ncludes the c enter. The p Oakley. The ulfilment, and Transportation pproximately ensitive area. Railway, makin nfrastructure earby rail stor ail service is d ruck-served fa Environmental of Release, 201 n Analysis -T removed, thi nefits includin State Route 1 est parcel in th ter (formally ocation of the able for develo Analysis - A w erty to serve low the railro yard just wes nnection to th al Analysis - and Recovery ctivities will r to eliminate completed, t 021. Economic Dev Missouri, is i acres along th remaining 2 onstruction o planned ware 2-million sq d light manufa n Analysis - T y 200-acres a However, the ng it an ideal within the B rage yard. Ra desired. The p acility with th services, Inc., ( 19), P.2 here is a 150- is parcel wou ng; on-site el 60 via Wilbu he Study Area y known as th e former DuP opment in th wye rail conne e any new b oad to access st of the wye he BNSF mai - This site y Act. The n remove and/o e or reduce the remediate velopment An in the proces he southwest 32 acres will of five wareh ehousing and quare foot l acturing cent This parcel do along the no ere is direct a location for BNSF right-o il infrastructu proposed Oa he rail option (Environmenta  7 of 13 -foot wharf av uld make an id lectrical pow ur Avenue an a for multi-m he DuPont S Pont Chemica e Study Area. ection is still usiness requi the site from connection f inline is estim is undergoin northern and or treat impa potential ex d areas will b nalysis - The ss of purchas t portion of l remain as ouses to serv d distribution light industr er will be pro oes not have d orthern porti access to State shippers desi of-way that in ure could be e akley Logistics available to a al Risk Informa vailable for ea deal maritim wer, an existin nd an excellen modal transpor Site), 6000 Br al Manufactu . in place, but iring rail acc m either the e for rail car sto mated to be $2 ng corrective southern de acted sedimen xposures and be ready for d e North Point sing this pro this parcel a a green spac ve as a region n center has rial, warehou ovide a an esti direct access to ion are desig e Route 160 a iring good tru ncludes an e extended into s Center is pl any tenants de ation Services, R.L. BANKS asy access by e transload fa ng wharf, go nt rail conne rtation access ridgehead Ro uring Oakley P t will need to cess. The wy east or the we orage. The es 220,800 e action und evelopment a nt, soil, and g d hazards at evelopment. F t Developmen operty. The as part of the ce. The prop nal warehous been approv use, distribu imated 1,900 n o the San Joaq gnated as an and State Rou uck and rail a existing wye o the parcel to lanned to be esiring rail ser Table 2, Datab & ASSOCIATE ship. Once th acility. This p od access to ection, makin s. oad, Oakley. Plant. The pa o be extended ye connection est. There is timated cost der the Res areas and wet groundwater the site7. A Full remediat nt Firm, locat company pla e Oakley Log osed develop se and distrib ved by the C tion, e-comm new jobs. quin River be n environme ute 4 and the access. There connection, a o whatever loc a predomina rvice. base Listing   S, INC. he old parcel State ng this This rcel is d back n was also a to re- source tlands at the As the tion is ted in ans to gistics pment bution City of merce ecause entally BNSF is rail and a cation ately a DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 70 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. O While con corridor c results of 1.T A R 2.A co al it se 3.T pa T sp As a resul by obtain negotiate Study Are Fe A compan growing i nationally First, dem attention equally p trackage i States hav Second, l deregulati meet futu point of c Opportunitie nducting the could be cons that evaluatio The Fulton Sh Area. In betwe Refuge. It wou A discussion w onnect the K llow any othe s own operati eparate rail co There field inv arcel with the The existing h pace constrain lt of these thr ning either an a trackage ri ea. easibility of ny’s ability to nclination of y. Four discer mands on exi is focused on rofound effe is manifest in ve increased, f arge railroad ion, mergers ure challenges contact with lo es for Freigh field investig structed to co on are listed b ipyard parcel een this parce uld not be pos was conducted Kemwater Par er railroads to ion. This pos orridor in the vestigation als e rest of the ighway under nts. ee findings, th n easement fr ghts agreeme f a New Shor o use rail is ju f businesses to nable trends s sting surface n the steadily ects are being n the fact tha from 375 mill ds are enjoyin and other ind than in past ocal customer t Rail Served gation an eva onnect all five below: l is completely el and the Ke sible to const d with Ampo rcel with the o cross throug ition by Amp Study Area t so determined Study Area d r crossing is n he only possi rom BNSF to ent to allow a rt-line Railro ust one part o o consider rai suggest a grow transportatio y increasing n g manifested at Class I rail lion in 1991 to ng a period dustry restruc decades. Sho rs, so the fina  8 of 13 d Customers aluation was e vacant parce y isolated fro emwater Parc truct a railroa orts regarding NRG Parcel. gh its property ports essential o connect all d there was no due to the ina not wide eno ble way to co o construct a a short-line ra oad in the St of its ultimate il results from wing role to b on infrastruc number of m d on the rail lroad freight o 465 million of relative p cturing trend rt-line railroa ancial conditi s Findings an conducted to els on the nor om the rest of cel lies the An ad through thi g the possibili . Amports sta y because it n lly extinguish the remainin o way to conn ability to cro ugh to accom onnect the vac separate trac ailroad to ope tudy Area e decision to m changes in t be played by f cture have ne motor vehicle road infrastr train miles t n in 2017. prosperity. A ds result in ra ads increasing ion of those re R.L. BANKS nd Conclusio o determine rth side of W f the vacant p ntioch Dunes is protected a ity of constru ated it would needs all of th hes any possib ng parcels. nect the Oakle ss underneat mmodate a ra cant parcels in ck alongside erate on its m actually utiliz the economic freight rail in ever been gre miles being ructure. Dem traveled throu A number of ilroads that a gly are the rai egional and l & ASSOCIATE ons if a short-lin Wilbur Avenue parcels in the s National W area. ucting a railro d not be willi e available lan bility to const ey Logistics C h State Route ailroad track d n the Study A of its mainli mainline withi ze rail service cs of transport the near futu eater. While p driven every mand for rai ughout the U f factors incl are better pois il freight indu ocal lines will   S, INC. ne rail e. The Study Wildlife oad to ing to nd for truct a Center e 160. due to Area is ine or in the e. The tation ure. public y year, ilroad United uding sed to ustry’s l have DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 71 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. a major ef Third, is t and incre congestio efficiency equivalen metal trac move a to Fourth, in highway attention feasibility environm increasing at least so With resp environm kilometer organic co must follo to be one Sh A short-li to larger, two indu interchan service. S In general 1.W m 2.T 3.T 4.T 5.T Another f ffect on econo the relatively eased fuel co n encountere is even mor t to four truc cks generate l on of freight m ncreasingly s construction on alternativ y of one or ment, and su gly studying t me of those lo pect to such mental footprin r, freight rail e ompounds an ow the rail ali area where en hort Line Ra ine railroad is national railr ustries requiri ge revenue tr Some short lin l, short-line r When a Class multiple Class They are a mea They provide q They make dec They provide l factor that m omic develop high cost of f sts changes t ed by more a re far-reachin cks. The very less resistance much farther o stringent env in urban set ves to private more rail upport revital the effect of tr oads to rail. h matters, ra nt” when com emits one-thir nd diesel part ignments red nvironmental ailroads s a small or m road networks ing rail freig raffic with oth nes exist for al ailroads prov I carrier’s ser I carriers; ans to gain co quality and tim cisions at the links to comm akes short-lin ment. fuel. Combine the relative f and more truc ng. An indus y nature of rai e than rubber on rail than o vironmental r ttings limit t motor vehic passenger te lization of u ruck moveme il competes mpared with h rd the nitroge ticulates emit duces the pote lists and econ mid-sized railr s. Short-line ght together her, usually l ll three of the vide many ben rvice deterior ompetitive rat mely service; local level; an munities and c ne railroads a  9 of 13 ed with growi formula for u ck movement stry “rule of il adds even m r tires moving on a highway. regulations a the amount o les. Dozens o echnologies urban cores. ents on highw extremely w highways. For en oxide and tted by heavy ential for spra nomic develop road compan railroad gene (for exampl arger, railroa ese reasons. nefits to shipp rates, they off tes when they nd companies. attractive is th ing congestio using trucks ts is an obvio thumb” is th more efficien g on pavemen and resistanc of highway e of cities, large to ease roa Similarly, g way capacity well, with a r r instance, for carbon mono y trucks. The awl. Greater u pers have foun ny that operat erally exist for le, a coal mi ads or 3) to o pers. Among t fer alternative y connect to m he decision-m R.L. BANKS n, a chronic s as opposed ous problem, hat one rail ncy; metal wh nt. All told, a ce of propert expansion po e and small, h dway conges governments and the adva reputation fo r every ton of oxide and one very fact tha use of the rai nd significant tes over a sho r one of three ine and a p operate a tour them are: e rail options multiple Class making proce & ASSOCIATE shortage of dr to rail. Whil the impact o car carries a heels moving a gallon of fue ty owners to ossible and fo have examine stion, benefi at all level ntages of dive or having a f goods move e-tenth the vo at rail develop l mode has p t common gr ort distance re e reasons: 1) t power plant; rist passenger s if they conn s I carriers; ess that the sm   S, INC. rivers, le the of rail a load along el will o new ocuses ed the it the ls are erting “light ed one olatile pment proved ound. elative to link 2) to r train nect to maller DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 72 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. railroads issues are Associatio many sm shippers.” and gain t with a lin businesse Typ In Califor are public purpose is Of the 21 to the uni operators railroads, regulation Each of th based tran service to 8 American enjoy. Decis e best under on (ASLRRA) mall towns an ” Smaller rail them access t nk from a sh s to set up sat pes of Comm rnia, there are cly owned. A s to perform l short-line ra ique conditio are very fam businesses a ns and have w he five short-l nsload operat meet their cu n Shortline Rai ϱϴϱ͕ϯ ϰϰϱ͕Ϯϴ ϰϮϭ͕ϯϬ ϯϲϮ͕ϴϮϴ ϭϵϮ͕Ϯϳϴ sions affecting rstood. Fra ), said that “sm nd rural com lroads help sm to Class I carr ort-line railro tellite facilitie modities Han e 21 short-lin A switching local switchin ailroads in Ca ons and oppo miliar with r and public a worked closel line railroad o tions in Califo ustomers’ nee lroad Associat ϴϭϭ͕ ϱϴϳ͕ϳϴϰ ϯϳϭ ϱ Ϭϭ ϭ͕ϬϬϬ͕ϬϳϮ g both costs nk Turner, mall railroads mmunities to maller commu riers. An ide oad to two o s or to relocat ndled by Sho ne railroads a and termina ng services or alifornia, ther rtunities asso railroad indu agencies. Th ly with cities operators hav fornia. They eds. ion, Member S ϯ ϴϲϴ͕Ϯϵ ϮϬϱ  10 of 13 and revenues a former Pr s are an essen the system a unities and vi eal location fo or more Class te to that tow Table 2 ort-Line Rail and seven swi l railroad is to own and o e are three po ociated with r ustry operatin hey are all f and countie ve many years are known fo Survey, 2016 ϯ͕Ϭϯϰ͕Ϭϭϳ ϵϭ s are made at resident of A ntial part of th and providin ice versa. Tho or short line a s I carriers, p wn. roads in the itching and te a freight rail operate a term otential opera rail transporta ng standards familiar with s to ensure t s of experienc or their profe Coal Trailers Chemi Aggrega Wood P Metals / Motor V Grain / Petroleu Other C R.L. BANKS t the local lev American Sh he national ra ng competitiv ose links allow and regional providing a g e United Stat erminal railro lroad compan minal facility. ators that wo ation in the S and, agreem h the Federal that safety is ce operating essionalism in s/Containers icals and plast ates Products / Metals Prod Vehicles Food Produc um Products Commodities & ASSOCIATE vel, where tra hort-Line Ra ail network, li ve options fo w shippers op railroads is a good incentiv tes in 20158 oads, of whic ny whose pr ould be well- s Study Area. ments with C l and State their first pri maritime and n providing q tics ducts cts   S, INC. adeoff ilroad inking or rail ptions a town ve for ch five imary suited These Class I safety iority. d land quality TABLE C-2 COMMODITIES HANDLED BY SHROT-LINES DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 73 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. These sho 1)G 1 in th V A op fo 2)O sh O O 3)W op se in an 4)Si Sa T 17 an co lo 5)Sa op m se Fr B BNSF has railroad p railroad o BNSF, as ort-line railroa Genesse & W 13 short line ncluding six s he California Ventura Coun Arizona & C perations; it w orty seaports w OmniTRAX, hort-line rail OmniTRAX i OmniTRAX op Watco Transp perator in th eaport and tra n San Diego C nd waste for r ierra Northe acramento an The railroad a 70-acre River nd BNSF Rai ontract railro ocated a few m an Francisco peration sinc maritime trans ervices for th rancisco. BNSF Railway s a long hist partners in 27 operations, so a common c ad profiles are Wyoming, Inc and regiona hort lines in C a Northern nty Railroad California Ra works in clos worldwide. Inc. (OmniT lroads 22 sh is experience perates the St portation Ser he U.S. opera ansload opera County. Com recycling. ern Railway nd Woodland also serves ra rbank Indust ilway (BNSF) oad operator miles west of t Bay Railroad ce 2000 and sload facility a he automobi y ory of partne 7 states. BN ometimes par carrier, has a e described b c. (GWRR) D al freight rail California, in Railroad (C (VCRR), the ailroad (ARZ se coordinatio TRAX) Denv hort-line railr ed with barg tockton Term rvices (Watco ating 41 shor ations. In Cal modities han (SERA), Wo d, including th ail customers rial Complex ) in West Sac at the Depa the Study Are d (SFBR), Sa operates ove at the Port of ile and bulk ering with sh NSF’s goal is rtnering with an obligation  11 of 13 elow: Darien, CT. lroads in 41 cluding the C CFNR), the S e San Diego & ZC). G&W on with publi ver, CO. Thi roads in 12 ge terminal minal & Easte o), Pittsburg, rt-line railroa ifornia, Watc ndles include; oodland, CA he maritime between Son x. SERA inter cramento and artment of D ea. n Francisco, er five miles f San Francisc k commodity hort-line railr to provide th h short-line ra to serve busi This short-li U.S. states Central Orego San Joaquin & Imperial V is experienc icly-owned se is short-line U.S. states and translo ern Railroad , KS. Watco i ads in 23 stat co operates th corn, soy, lum A. SERA oper transload fac nora, Oakdale rchanges with d BNSF in R Defense’s Con CA. This sho of track in co. The railro y transload s roads. Curr he best servic ailroad opera inesses that r R.L. BANKS ine railroad and four Ca on & Pacific Valley Rail Valley Railroa ced with wa eaports and ra railroad com and one C oad operation (STE) in Stoc is the largest tes. Watco is he Pacific Sun mber, plastic rates a railro cility at the Po e and Riverb h Union Pac Riverbank. In ncord Naval ort-line railro San Francis oad provides a shipments at rently BNSF ce to its cust ators who sh require rail s & ASSOCIATE company op anadian prov Railroad (CO lroad (SJVR ad (SDIY) an aterfront tran ail ferry servi mpany operat anadian prov ns. In Calif ckton. short-line ra s experienced n Railroad (P pellets, beer, oad between ort of Sacram ank, includin cific Railroad addition, it Weapons St ad that has be co and serve all of the swit t the Port o has 209 shor tomers throu are BNSF’s v ervice near it   S, INC. erates vinces, ORP), ), the nd the nsload ices at tes 23 vince. fornia, ilroad d with PSRR) paint West mento. ng the (UP) is the tation, een in es the tching of San rt-line ugh its vision. ts rail DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 74 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. system. A space, the operates a parcels al served. BNSF use shipping b service de etc.) that w In most c economic the necess BNSF was BNSF stat BNSF’s po Study Are line railro be made o will be ma U In additio feasibility south of t undertaki to State R and hirin This optio million pe mainline. its own m would onl Fe Given BN BNSF wo eliminates 9 West's En  A common ca e fee is paid, a railroad tha ong the wate es an interna by rail. This esign, operati will be impac ases, BNSF’s cally advantag sary switching s asked to rev ted “it would osition; at the ea and enough oad operator t on a case-by-c ade on what m Union Pacific on to the poss y of constructi the Study Are ing would be Route 160. It w g an enginee on would req er mile. Onc BNSF would mainline. The ly provide rai easibility of NSF’s position ould agree to s any opportu ncyclopedia of A arrier is legal and no reas at runs throug erfront, it has al review pro process invol ions, econom cted by any ne prefers provid geous, BNSF m g services it w view Tech Me d not likely s e present tim h growth pote to act in an in case basis wh makes the mo c sibility of utili ing a rail line ea. In order t necessary. Th would require ring firm to uire purchasi e the new ra d most likely r estimated co il access to on f a New Shor n in regard t o any option unity to work American Law, ly bound to c sonable grou gh the Study A s first priorit ocess to evalu lves analysis b mic developme ew shipper. T ding direct ra may engage a would normall emo #4, the dr support a sep me, is that the ential for BNS ntermediary c hen it evaluate ost economic s izing the BNS e from the UP to access this he only oppor e preparing a C develop the p ing approxim il line approa require this n ost of a grade ne potential bu rt-line Railro to supporting n that involv k with BNSF edition 2. From  12 of 13 carry all pass unds to refuse Area and orig ty in determi uate each po by each of the ent, specific c The extensive ail service to i short-line rai ly undertake raft Marketin parate, short-l re exists suffi SF to provide capacity. How es each propo sense to BNSF SF right-of-w P branch line rail line as a rtunity to con California En plans and est mately two mil ached Wilbur new rail line t e separation usiness at the oad in the St g a short-line ves utilizing on accessing m https://legal- sengers or fre e to do so ex ginally provid ining how po otential new e affected rail commodity g evaluation pr its customers. ilroad or rail itself. ng Analysis. A line railroad ficient rail bus e direct rail se wever, those d osed business F and the pot way, the field i near State Ro an alternative nstruct a new nvironmental timate to con les of right-of r Avenue, it to be grade se is $20 to $30 e NRG Parcel. tudy Area Fin e railroad ope its railroad g its right-of- -dictionary.the R.L. BANKS eight as long xist9. Because ded the rail a otential new customer th l groups (e.g. groups, short- rocess involve . However, if switching con After reviewin operation.” i siness in clos ervice withou decisions cou opportunity. tential shippe investigation oute 4 and St rail corridor w rail corridor Quality Act ( nstruct the ne f-way at an es would have eparated to av 0 million. Ho . ndings and eration, it is right-of-way -way or gaini efreedictionary & ASSOCIATE as there is en e BNSF own access to the v shippers wou at is interest network plan -line develop es over 200 fa f more efficien ntractor to pr ng the Tech M in the Study se proximity t t engaging a s uld change an . The final dec er. team looked tate Route 160 r, a major fin would be adj (CEQA) docu ew rail conne stimated cost to cross the void any dela owever, this o Conclusions very unlikely y. This essen ing trackage y.com   S, INC. nough ns and vacant uld be ted in nning, ment, actors. nt and rovide Memo, Area. to the short- nd will cision at the 0, just ancial jacent ument ection. t of $2 BNSF ays on option s y that ntially rights DRAFT REPORT TO: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PAGE 75 PREPARED BY: R.L. BANKS & ASSOCIATES, INC. through t expensive investmen A short-li likely not to help fac access to possible t due to ob undercros to the Stu providing lower rat operation the Study Ar e upfront cap nt to justify th ine railroad c support a sh cilitate a shor the NRG pa o construct a bstructions at ssing. Therefo udy Area for ju g cost compet e. Based on n would not be rea. Converse pital costs. Th his major rail cannot operat hort-line railro rt-line railroad arcel because an independen the Antioch ore, it would ust one shipp titive rates an the overall e feasible. ely, building hese initial co construction te without a oad operation d operation in the other po nt rail line to National Wil be difficult to per. In additio nd service be rail evaluatio  13 of 13 a connection osts would m project. Class I railro n in the Study n the Study A otential rail s o connect to t ldlife Refuge, o justify the l on, the new sh ecause BNSF on performed n to the Uni make it difficu oad partner. B y Area. There Area. The UP served parcel the remaining the Amports large expense hort-line railr could provid d in the Stu R.L. BANKS ion Pacific w ult to obtain BNSF has sta efore BNSF c option will o s are isolated g parcels with s property, an e required to road would h de the same udy Area, a s & ASSOCIATE would require enough retu ated it would cannot be reli nly get the ra d. It would n hin the Study nd State Rout provide rail a have a difficult service at a short-line rai   S, INC. e very rn on most ied on ail line not be y Area te 160 access t time much ilroad RECOMMENDATION(S): ACCEPT the Industrial Safety Ordinance Report, as submitted by the Health Services Department. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact for this action. BACKGROUND: Chapter 450-8 of the County Ordinance code effective in 2000 and as amended in 2006 and 2014 requires the department to prepare an annual report that summarizes the impact and effectiveness of the Industrial Safety Ordinance for the Safety Programs at the regulated facilities. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: A report that summarizes the 2020 Industrial Safety Ordinance activities would not be made available for the public. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: Randy Sawyer, 925-957-2668 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Laura Cassell, Deputy cc: L Walker, M Wilhelm, M Kaufmann, R Sawyer, C N Cheung C. 47 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:Industrial Safety Ordinance Annual Report ATTACHMENTS ISO Report INDUSTRIAL SAFETY ORDINANCE INDUSTRIAL SAFETY ORDINANCE ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REVIEW ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REVIEW AND EVALUATION REPORTAND EVALUATION REPORTFebruary 5, 2021 By Contra Costa Health Services Hazardous Materials Programs 2 Table of Contents Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................................................................3 Public Participation .............................................................................................................................................................4 Audits ........................................................................................................................................................................................4 Major Chemical Accidents or Releases........................................................................................................................4 Conclusion ..............................................................................................................................................................................4 Background ..........................................................................................................................................................................................5 Effectiveness of Contra Costa Hazardous Materials Programs’ Implementation of the Industrial Safety Ordinance ..........................................................................................................................................................................................9 Effectiveness of the Procedures for Records Management ..............................................................................10 Number and Type of Audits and Inspections Conducted ...................................................................................10 Annual Performance Review and Evaluation Report ...........................................................................................11 Root Cause Analyses and Conducted by Hazardous Materials Program ....................................................11 Hazardous Materials Programs’ Process for Public Participation ..................................................................12 Effectiveness of the Public Information Bank .........................................................................................................12 Effectiveness of the Hazardous Materials Ombudsperson ...............................................................................13 Other Required Program Elements Necessary to Implement and Manage the Industrial Safety Ordinance ..............................................................................................................................................................................13 Regulated Stationary Sources Listing ........................................................................................................................................14 Status of Safety Plans and Programs ............................................................................................................................7 Locations of the Regulated Stationary Sources Safety Plans ..............................................................................9 Annual Accident History Report and Inherently Safer Systems Implemented as Submitted by the ..... Regulated Stationary Sources .......................................................................................................................................13 Status of the Incident Investigations, Including the Root Cause Analyses Conducted by the Regulated Stationary Sources .............................................................................................................................................................15 Major Chemical Accidents or Releases......................................................................................................................16 Legal Enforcement Actions Initiated by Contra Costa Hazardous Materials Programs ........................18 Penalties Assessed as a Result of Enforcement .....................................................................................................................18 Total Fees, Service Charges and Other Assessments Collected Specifically for the Industrial Safety Ordinance ........................................................................................................................................................................................18 Total Personnel and Personnel Years Used by Hazardous Materials Program to Implement the Industrial Safety Ordinance ...............................................................................................................................................................................18 Comments from Interested Parties Regarding the Effectiveness of the Industrial Safety Ordinance ............19 The Impact of the Industrial Safety Ordinance on Improving Industrial Safety .......................................................19 Hazardous Materials Ombudsman Report .....................................................................................................................23—28 Attachment B-County Regulated Sources Annual Performance ...........................................................................30–70 Attachment C-Richmond Regulated Sources Annual Performance .....................................................................71—83 3 Executive Summary Contra Costa County’s Industrial Safety Ordinance (ISO), adopted in 1998 by the Board of Supervisors, requires regulated facilities in the county to implement comprehensive safety programs to prevent chemical accidents. The ISO’s requirements are some of the most stringent in the United States, if not the world. The goal is for facilities to implement comprehensive safety programs, instill a safety culture at the work place and create management systems that prevent incidents that could have detrimental impacts to surrounding communities. The ISO also mandates outreach and participation from industries, agencies, elected officials and the public. Three major oil refineries and three chemical facilities are required to comply with ISO requirements. Two facilities (one refinery and one chemical plant) within the City of Richmond are required to comply with the Richmond Industrial Safety Ordinance (RISO), which mandates the same requirements from a separate municipal authority. Both ordinances are administered by Contra Costa County’s Hazardous Materials Programs (CCHMP), a division of Contra Costa Health Services. CCHMP annually evaluates and reports on ISO performance to the Board of Supervisors. There were no Major Chemical Accidents or Releases (MCAR) as defined in the ISO at any regulated facility in this reporting period and, while there have been Community Warning System (CWS) Level II and CWS Level III incidents that caused community concern over the past two decades, there is an overall observable trend of fewer and less severe incidents in the county. CCHMP believes that ISO is a major contributor to the safety records of these facilities. It can be a challenge to stay vigilant and ensure continuous safe facility operations in mature prevention programs, but recent amendments to program requirements have helped the ISO and RISO programs continue to improve the thoroughness and completeness of audits and inspections. In 2014, for example, the Board of Supervisors adopted amendments to the ISO as recommended by the U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board (CSB). CCHMP staff incorporated additional field activities at ISO and other hazardous materials regulated facilities. CCHMP also worked closely with Department of Industrial Relations (DIR), California Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES) and California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) to develop two new, statewide petroleum refinery safety regulations: The California Accidental Release Prevention Program (Program 4) and the Process Safety Management requirement for Petroleum Refineries. Both were developed from requirements in Contra Costa’s ISO and were adopted into regulation by the state in October 2017. CCHMP believes these new regulations will further improve safety programs at all California petroleum refineries as demonstrated here in Contra Costa County. CCHMP is also working closely with other Certified Unified Program Agencies (CUPA) in the development of guidance and implementation of these regulations for refineries. CCHMP’s Accidental Release Prevention (ARP) Program engineers oversee the ISO and RISO programs and work with other agencies such as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Cal-OSHA), CSB and other local program agencies. This Interagency collaboration includes sharing of incident and inspection results, discussion of regulatory interpretations and joint training. . 4 Public Participation CCHMP has an established public outreach process and is continually looking for ways to improve it. The following community engagement efforts took place in this reporting period: • Public outreach information booths at existing venues –Safety audits for Shell Martinez Refinery, Air Products Shell and Air Products Marathon Martinez Refinery were shared at Alhambra Christmas Tree Farm, Martinez, During National Night Out, August 6, 2019 • Presentations to Interested Groups –Presentation of the safety audit to the Marathon Martinez Refinery Community Advisory Panel (CAP) on August 28, 2019 –Presentation of the safety audit to the Chemtrade Richmond’s Community Advisory Panel (CAP) on February 19, 2020 • Attend public meetings after major incidents –There were no Severity III incidents of ISO-regulated facilities in this reporting period • The most recent audit findings are summarized in an easily read format in English and Spanish and posted at cchealth.org/hazmat • Information on regulated businesses is presented in an easily read format in English and Spanish • Industrial Safety Ordinance Information Sheets are prepared in English and Spanish The Board of Supervisors also requested that staff provide copies of the annual report to communities through the Community Advisory Panels (CAP). This 2020 Annual Report is available on our website and will be sent to CAP representatives for distribution. Audits Audits of regulated businesses are required at least once every three years to ensure that the facilities are implementing required programs. We completed three ISO and RISO audits in 2020: • Phillips 66 Rodeo Refinery — January 2020 • Chemtrade West Richmond Works — July 2020* • Air Products at Martinez Refining Company — October 2020* *audits were conducted without on-site inspections due to COVID-19 health order precaution Major Chemical Accidents or Releases There were no MCAR events at ISO-regulated facilities in this reporting period. Conclusion The severity of MCAR events in Contra Costa County has declined since the implementation of the ISO, with a few minor irregularities in the trend. The ISO has improved regulated facilities’ safety programs and operations. CCHMP has sought assistance from stakeholders, including regulated facilities, workers and community members, to include the CSB-recommended improvements to the ordinance that the Board of Supervisors adopted in 2014. These further reduce likelihood of chemical accidents at these industrial facilities. 5 Background The Board of Supervisors adopted the ISO due to significant accidents that occurred at oil refineries and chemical plants in the county in the 1990s. The effective date of the ISO was January 15, 1999. The ordinance applies to oil refineries and chemical plants with specified North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes that were required to submit a Risk Management Plan to the U.S. EPA and are Program Level 3 Stationary Sources as defined by the U.S. EPA Risk Management Program. The ordinance specified the following: • Stationary sources had one year to submit a safety plan to CCHMP stating how they are complying with the ordinance, except the Human Factors portion (completed January 15, 2000) • CCHMP would develop a Human Factors Guidance Document (completed January 15, 2000) • Stationary sources had one year to comply with the Human Factors Guidance Document (compliance date: January 15, 2001) • After an MCAR event, stationary sources are required to perform a root cause analysis as part of their incident investigations (ongoing) • CCHMP may perform its own incident investigation, including a root cause analysis (ongoing) • All processes at stationary sources are covered as Program Level 3 (now Petroleum Refineries Program Level 4 processes as defined by the CalARP program) • Stationary sources are required to consider inherently safer systems for new processes or facilities and for mitigations identified in a process hazard analysis • CCHMP reviewed all the submitted safety plans and inspected all the stationary sources’ safety programs within one year of receipt (completed January 15, 2001) and every three years after the initial audit or inspection 6 CCHMP issued the first Contra Costa County Safety Program Guidance Document on January 15, 2000. The stationary sources were required to comply with the Human Factors section of this guidance document by January 15, 2001. CCHMP performed specialized audit for all the stationary sources for their Human Factors programs and for Inherently Safer Systems in 2002. The 2006 amendments to the ISO required: 1. Expanding the Human Factors Program to include Maintenance 2. Expanding the Management of Organizational Change to include Maintenance and all of Health and Safety positions 3. Requiring stationary sources to perform safety culture assessments one year after CCHMP developed guidance 4. Requiring stationary sources to perform Security Vulnerability Analysis Hazardous Materials Programs staff worked with the regulated facilities to develop a Safety Culture Assessment Guidance Document, which was finalized and issued on November 10, 2009. Staff began reviewing these assessments in December 2010. A revised Safety Program Guidance Document that reflects the ISO amendments and additional clarifications based on the audit findings was issued in July 2011. In June 2014, the Board of Supervisors approved an amendment to the ISO to address recommendations by CSB, set forth in the Chevron refinery fire interim investigation report (August 2012), that broadened the goals of the regulation by requiring: 1. Use of performance indicators in the evaluation of process safety systems and to provide required contents in the annual performance review and evaluation report provided to the Board of Supervisors 2. Expand the implementation of inherently safer systems as much and as soon as possible. Stationary sources are now required to evaluate and document inherently safer system analysis: a. Every five years for existing covered processes, b. In the development and analysis of recommended action items identified in a process hazard analysis, c. As part of a management of change review, whenever a major change is proposed at a facility that could reasonably result in a major chemical accident or release, d. When an incident investigation report recommends a major change that could reasonably result in a major chemical accident or release, e. When a root cause analysis report recommends a major change that could reasonably result in a major chemical accident or release, and f. During the design of new processes, process units and facilities. 3. Conduct, document and complete a safeguard protection analysis for all processes by June 30, 2019, and update and revalidate it every five years thereafter. 7 Regulated Stationary Sources Listing The six stationary sources covered by the ISO are: 1. Air Liquide Large Industries—Rodeo Hydrogen Plant at Phillips 66 2. Air Products at MRC (formerly Shell Martinez Refining) 3. Air Products at the Marathon (formerly Tesoro Golden Eagle Refinery) 4. Martinez Refining Company—MRC (formerly Shell Martinez Refinery) 5. Phillips 66 Rodeo Refinery 6. Marathon Martinez Refinery (formerly Tesoro Golden Eagle Refinery) The facilities covered by RISO are: • Chevron Richmond Refinery • Chemtrade West Richmond Works (formerly General Chemical Richmond) Status of Safety Plans and Programs The status of each of the regulated stationary sources is given in Table I and includes: • When the latest updated safety plans were submitted • When notices of deficiencies were issued • When plans were determined to be complete by CCHMP • When public meetings were held about safety plans • When audits were complete • When public meetings were held on preliminary audit findings • When safety plans were revised to include human factors (HF) programs • When notices of deficiencies were issued for human factors-revised safety plans • When human factors components of safety plans were determined to be complete • When audit/inspections were completed • When human factors audit preliminary findings public meetings were held 8 Table IIndustrial Safety Ordinance Stationary Source Status NAME Safety Plan (SP) Received Notice of Deficiencies (NOD) Issued-SP Safety Plan Complete SP Public Meeting Date Audit/ Inspection Audit Public Meeting Air Liquide Large Industries Rodeo Hydrogen Plant 7/10/09 7/14/10 11/03/13 1/23/17 12/01/19 1/24/20 12/13/12 1/03/13 3/01/13 11/12/13 7/21/13 10/05/13 8/07/18 6/01/10 5/28/13 2/29/16 1/22/19 10/08/11 10/05/13 10/14/17 Air Products— MRC & Marathon 1/14/00 1/16/01 (HF update) 6/26/03 7/14/05 12/01/06 6/20/08 6/30/10 6/30/14 12/01/17 10/20/20 6/15/00 5/10/01 (HF update) 8/24/07 3/14/11 7/11/14 8/30/00 6/19/01 (HF update) 9/14/07 7/01/08 7/14/14 9/13/00 5/08/03 9/23/07 6/19/10 4/21/12 4/15/15 8/06/19 11/22/00 5/03/02 (HF) 2/27/04 1/22/07 7/20/09 4/16/12 3/30/15 1/11/18 10/26/20 5/08/03 9/24/06 9/23/07 6/19/10 4/20/13 4/23/15 4/23/16 8/06/19 Phillips 66 – Rodeo Refinery 1/15/00 1/12/01 (HF update) 8/10/05 8/7/09 8/07/12 8/07/15 8/06/18 3/14/00 9/10/01 (HF update) 3/28/06 11/22/10 6/05/17 5/30/00 3/18/02 (HF update) 8/9/02 11/5/07 1/27/11 7/03/13 11/19/18 6/15/00 5/09/02 10/07 & 10/13/07 10/08/11 10/05/13 7/21/2013 11/18/17 6/30/00 11/05/01 (HF) 8/01/03 8/15/06 10/06/08 8/01/11 4/28/14 1/04/17 1/06/20 4/09/02 6/22/04 7/08/04 10/07 & 10/13/07 7/18/10 10/09/10 10/08/11 7/21/13 10/05/13 10/24/15 10/14/17 Martinez Refining Company – MRC (formerly Shell Martinez Refinery) 1/14/00 1/16/01 (HF update) 7/22/02 1/11/06 9/03/10 9/03/13 8/26/16 8/23/19 7/19/00 11/9/01 (HF update) 3/21/03 8/15/06 10/25/11 4/09/01 1/03/02 (HF update) 9/15/03 11/2/06 3/27/12 3/25/15 3/30/17 5/8/03 9/24/06 9/23/07 4/21/12 4/18/15 4/22/17 10/31/00 4/29/02 (HF) 11/26/04 10/23/06 4/30/09 2/13/12 5/11/15 2/28/18 5/08/03 9/24/06 9/23/07 6/19/10 4/20/13 4/23/16 8/06/19 9 Marathon Martinez Refinery (formerly Tesoro Golden Eagle Refinery) 1/14/00 1/12/01 (HF update) 6/21/02 6/22/07 12/11/09 6/01/12 6/30/15 6/13/17 8/16/00 9/18/01 (HF update) 7/30/07 8/06/12 1/31/01 12/14/01 (HF update) 6/21/03 11/05/07 6/04/10 8/27/12 5/06/03 9/23/07 6/10/10 9/06/12 4/22/17 8/07/18 9/15/00 12/3/01 (HF) 9/8/03 11/07/05 8/18/08 4/18/11 1/06/14 10/05/16 9/16/19 5/06/03 9/24/06 9/23/07 6/10/10 9/06/12 4/18/15 8/07/18 Locations of the Regulated Stationary Sources Safety Plans Regulated stationary sources are required to update their safety plans at least once every three years. These plans are available for public review at the Hazardous Materials Programs office, 4585 Pacheco Blvd., Suite 100, Martinez. When CCHMP determines that a safety plan update is complete, prior to the required 45-day public comment period, staff places the updated plan in the Contra Costa Library branch or branches closest to the regulated stationary source so it is easily accessible for public review. Table II lists each safety plan location. Table IILocation of Safety Plans—Libraries Regulated Stationary Source Location 1 Location 2 Location 3 Air Liquide Large Industries Rodeo Hydrogen Plant Hazardous Materials Programs Office Rodeo Public Library Crockett Public Library Air Products at MRC (formerly Shell)Hazardous Materials Programs Office Martinez Public Library Air Products at Marathon (formerly Tesoro) Hazardous Materials Programs Office Martinez Public Library Martinez Refining Company—MRC (formerly Shell Martinez Refinery) Hazardous Materials Programs Office Martinez Public Library Phillips 66 Rodeo Refinery Hazardous Materials Programs Office Rodeo Public Library Crockett Public Library Marathon Refinery (formerly Tesoro Golden Eagle Refinery) Hazardous Materials Programs Office Martinez Public Library Effectiveness of Implementation of the Industrial Safety Ordinance Contra Costa Hazardous Materials Programs has developed policies, procedures, protocols and questionnaires to implement the California Accidental Release Prevention (CalARP) Program and the Industrial Safety Ordinance. The policies, procedures, protocols and questionnaires for these programs are listed below: • Audits/Inspections Policy • Conducting the Risk Management Plan/Safety Plan Completeness Review Protocol • Risk Management Plan Completeness Review Questionnaires • Safety Plan Completeness Review Questionnaires • Conducting Audits/Inspections Protocol 10 • Safe Work Practices Questionnaires • CalARP Program Audit Questionnaires • Safety Program Audit Questionnaires • Conducting Employee Interviews Protocol • Employee Interview Questionnaires • Procedure Field Verification Protocol • Piping and Instrumentation Diagram Field Verification Protocol • Public Participation Policy • Dispute Resolution Policy • Reclassification Policy • Covered Process Modification Policy • CalARP Internal Performance Audit Policy • Conducting the Internal Performance Audit • CalARP Internal Audit Performance Audit Submission • Fee Policy • Notification Policy • Unannounced Inspection Policy • Risk Management Plan Public Review Policy Hazardous Materials Programs also developed the Contra Costa County CalARP Program Guidance Document and the Contra Costa County Safety Program Guidance Document, which was updated and reissued to regulated facilities on July 22, 2011. All policies, procedures, protocols and questionnaires are available through Hazardous Materials Programs office, and the guidance documents are available electronically at: http://cchealth.org/hazmat/calarp/ guidance-document.php and http://cchealth.org/groups/hazmat/industrial_safety_ordinance_guidance.php CCHMP staff is working with regulated facilities and labor representatives to revise the Safety Program Guidance Document based on audit results and set expectations for compliance with the ordinance. Effectiveness of the Procedures for Records Management CCHMP has digital files for each stationary source. The files include: 1. Annual status reports 2. Audits & inspections 3. Communications 4. Completeness review 5. Emergency response 6. Incident investigation 7. Trade secret information Digital copies of the files are stored on the Hazardous Materials Programs network and are accessible to the Accidental Release Prevention Program engineers, supervisor and the Hazardous Materials Director. Portable document format (PDF) versions of these files are also available for public viewing at the CCHMP office. Since the CCHMP office and libraries are closed to the public during the COVID-19 pandemic, CCHMP has also provided select electronic documents on the facility description pages on our general website: https://cchealth.org/hazmat/rmp/ The Accidental Release Prevention Program files contain regulations, policies, information from the U.S. EPA, the Governor’s Office of Emergency Services, CSB, and other information pertinent to the engineers. The risk management and safety plans are received in hard copy, scanned and kept at the CCHMP office. 11 Number and Type of Audits and Inspections Conducted Beginning in the fall of 2019, CCHMP began its next round of required audits at each of the ISO and RISO facilities. This is the eighth round of audits since 2000. When the Health Order was issued on March 16, 2020 in response to the COVID-19, pandemic, CCHMP adjusted the audit protocol to perform the audit remotely through file sharing records review, web conference and interviews with Subject Matter Experts and select employee and employee representatives and “live” navigation and query of selected databases. Procedure review was part of the audit but in-person procedure walkdown was not performed. When CCHMP ARP engineers review a safety plan, a notice of deficiencies is issued documenting any changes the stationary source must make before the plan is determined to be complete. The stationary source has 60 to 90 days to respond. The ARP engineer will work with the stationary source until the plan contains the required changes. When the plan is complete, the ARP engineer will open a public comment period and make the plan available in a public meeting or venue as well as at the public library branch closest to the stationary source. The ARP engineer will respond to all written comments in writing and, when appropriate, use the comments in upcoming audit/inspections of the regulated stationary source. An ARP engineer will issue a Preliminary Audit Findings report after each facility audit/inspection. The stationary source will have 90 days to respond and the ARP engineer will review the response. The stationary source must submit an action plan to correct any uncovered ISO compliance issues, which the ARP Engineer will review. If the ARP Engineer agrees with the action plan, CCHMP will issue the Preliminary Audit Findings for public comment and make them available in a public meeting or venue and at the public library branch closest to the stationary source. The ARP engineer will consider comments received during the public comment period and may revise the preliminary audit findings report. When the public review process is complete, the ARP engineer will issue the Final Audit Findings report and respond in writing to any written public comments received. Table I lists the status of each stationary source’s safety plan, audit and inspections of their safety programs, and public meetings. Root Cause Analyses and/or Incident Investigations Conducted by CCHMP CCHMP performed no root cause analyses or incident investigations in the past year. A historical listing of MCAR events starting in 1992 is available at http://cchealth.org/groups/ hazmat/accident_history.php. This list also includes major accidents that occurred prior to the adoption of the ISO. Annual Performance Review and Evaluation Report The ISO specifies—that this report must contain: • A brief description of how CCHMP is meeting the requirements of the ordinance including: –The program’s effectiveness in getting regulated businesses to comply –Effectiveness of the procedures for records management –Number and type of ISO-required audits and inspections conducted by CCHMP –Number of root cause analyses and/or incident investigations conducted by CCHMP 12 – CCHMP’s process for public participation –Effectiveness of the Public Information Bank –Effectiveness of the Hazardous Materials Ombudsperson –Other required program elements necessary to implement and manage the ordinance • A listing of stationary sources covered by the ordinance, including for each: –The status of the stationary source’s safety plan and program –A summary of safety plan updates and where theys are publicly available –ISO-required annual accident history reports submitted by regulated stationary sources –A summary and status of any ISO-required root cause analyses and incident investigations conducted or being conducted by the stationary sources, including the status of implementation of recommendations –A summary and status of any audits, inspections, root cause analyses and/or incident investigations conducted by CCHMP, including the status for implementing the recommendations –Description of Inherently Safer Systems implemented by regulated stationary sources –Legal enforcement actions initiated by CCHMP, including administrative, civil and criminal actions • Total fees, service charges and other assessments collected specifically for the support of the ordinance • Total personnel and personnel years used by the jurisdiction to directly implement or administer the ordinance • Comments that raise public safety issues from interested parties regarding the effectiveness of the local program • The impact of the ordinance in improving industrial safety CCHMP’s Process for Public Participation CCHMP continues the practice of sharing results of safety plans and preliminary audit findings and receiving public comment about them at community events, as recommended by community members in 2005. Based on a 2012 recommendation from the Board of Supervisors, CCHMP also shares ISO annual reports and makes presentations to Community Advisory Panels. Effectiveness of the Public Information Bank The Hazardous Materials Programs section of the Contra Costa Health Services website (http://cchealth.org/hazmat) includes: • Industrial Safety Ordinance –Description of covered facilities –Risk Management Chapter discussion »Copy of the ordinance –Land Use Permit Chapter discussion »Copy of the ordinance –Safety Program Guidance Document –Frequently Asked Questions –Public Outreach strategies • California Accidental Release Prevention (CalARP) Program –Contra Costa County’s California Accidental Release Prevention Program Guidance Document –Program Level description 13 –Discussion on Public Participation for both CalARP Program and the Industrial Safety Ordinance –A map locating the facilities that are subject to the CalARP Program and required to submit a Risk Management Plan to CCHMP. The map links to a description of each of the facilities and the regulated substances handled –A link to the Office of Emergency Services (OES) website for the CalARP regulation • Hazardous Materials Inventories and Emergency Response Program –Descriptions –Forms • Underground Storage Tanks –Description of the program –Copies of the Underground Storage Tanks Health & Safety Code sections –Underground Storage Tanks forms • Green Business Program –Description of the Green Business Program with a link to the Association of Bay Area Government’s website on the Green Business Program • Hazardous Materials Incident Response Team –Including information of the Major Chemical Accidents or Releases that have occurred –The County’s Hazardous Materials Incident Notification Policy • A link to the Phillips 66 Rodeo Refinery and Chevron Richmond Refinery Fenceline Monitors • Unannounced Inspection Program –Lists the facilities that are subject to unannounced inspections under the Unannounced Inspection Program • Hazardous Materials Interagency Task Force –Includes a matrix of who has what hazardous materials and regulatory responsibilities –Minutes from past meetings –Presentations from past meetings • Incident Response – Accident history that lists summaries of major accidents from industrial facilities in Contra Costa County from 1992 to the most recent –Additional resource links for more information • Incidents –Information on the November 14, 2019 Nustar Fire and the August 18, 2020 Chevron flaring incident –Relevant 72-hours and 30-day incident report for MCAR events Effectiveness of the Hazardous Materials Ombudsperson The Hazardous Materials Ombudsperson is a conduit for the public to express their concerns about how CCHMP personnel are performing their duties. Attachment A is a report from the Hazardous Materials Ombudsperson on the effectiveness of the position for this reporting period. 14 Other Required Program Elements Necessary to Implement and Manage the ISO The CalARP Program is administered in Contra Costa County by CCHMP. Stationary sources are required to submit risk management plan similar and in addition to ISO safety plans. An ARP engineer reviews risk management plans and performs CalARP Program audits simultaneously with ISO audits. CCHMP staff also perform unannounced inspections of CalARP program stationary sources that are also required to submit a risk management plan to the U.S. EPA. These inspections aim to exercise how a facility will respond to an incident, including notifying emergency response agencies and CCHMP. Annual Accident History Report and Inherently Safer Systems Implemented as Submitted by the Regulated Stationary Sources The ISO requires stationary sources to update their accident history in their safety plans and include how they have used inherently safer processes within the last year. Table III summarizes Inherently Safer Systems that have been implemented during this reporting period. Attachment B includes individual reports from stationary sources that also include the required reporting of four common process safety performance indicators. 15 Table IIIInherently Safer Systems Contra Costa County Facilities Regulated Stationary Source Inherently Safer System Implemented Design Strategy Approach Air Liquide Large Industries Rodeo Hydrogen Plant No new inherently safer systems have been implemented Air Products at MRC (formerly Shell Martinez Refinery) No new inherently safer systems have been implemented Air Products at Marathon (formerly Tesoro Golden Eagle Refinery)) Reduced potential of exposure by changing layout or design, equipment (1 time) Passive Moderate Phillips 66 —Rodeo Refinery Eliminated hazard by changing equipment and or eliminating inventory in process (5 times) Inherent Simplify Reduced potential of incident by changing layout or design, equipment (14 times) Passive Moderate Reduced potential of exposure by changing equipment layout or design (5 times) Passive Minimize Reduced potential of exposure by changing equipment layout or design (1 time) Active Simplify Reduced potential of exposure by improving emergency access (1 time) Passive Simplify Martinez Refining Company (formerly Shell Martinez Refinery) Reduced potential of incident by changing layout of equipment (1 time) Passive Simplify Marathon Martinez Refinery (formerly Tesoro Golden Eagle Refinery) Eliminated hazard by modification of physical condition Reduced potential of the hazardous condition by equipment design features (5 times) Inherent Passive Eliminate Moderate Reduced potential of the hazardous condition by substitution (1 time) Passive Substitution Status of the Incident Investigations, including the Root Cause Analyses Conducted by the Regulated Stationary Sources The ISO requires regulated stationary sources to conduct an incident investigation including a root cause analysis (RCA) after each MCAR incident. MCAR incidents meet the definition of a Level 3 or Level 2 incident in the Community Warning System incident level classification system defined in the Hazardous Materials Incident Notification Policy, as determined by Contra Costa Health Services; or result in the release of a regulated substance and meet one or more of the following criteria: 16 • Results in one or more fatalities • Results in at least 24 hours of hospital treatment of three or more persons • Causes on–and/or off-site property damage (including cleanup and restoration activities) initially estimated at $500,000 or more. On-site estimates shall be performed by the regulated stationary source. Off-site estimates shall be performed by appropriate agencies and compiled by Health Services • Results in a vapor cloud of flammables and/or combustibles that is more than 5,000 pounds The regulated stationary source is required to submit a report to CCHMP 30 days after the root cause analysis is complete. There was no MCAR incidents that occurred within this reporting period in Contra Costa County at an ISO facility. All RCA reports for MCAR incident reports are available at the CCHMP office and website. Major Chemical Accidents or Releases CCHMP analyzed the number and severity of MCARs that occurred since the implementation of the ISO: 17 • Severity Level III — Resulted in a fatality, serious injuries or major on-site and/or off-site damage • Severity Level II — Resulted in an impact to the community, or could easily have become a Level III incident if the situation was slightly different, or it is a recurring type of incident at that facility • Severity Level I — Resulted in no or minor injuries, no or slight impact to the community, and no or minor on-site damage These charts show MCARs from January 1999 through October 2017 for all stationary sources in Contra Costa County, MCARs at stationary sources regulated by the ISO, and MCARs at stationary sources regulated by the ISO or by the RISO. The charts include MCARs at stationary sources only, none that occurred during transportation. The graph below uses a weighted score developed by CCHMP as an overall process safety metric for facilities regulated by ISO and RISO. This metric assigns a severity level III incident 9 points, a severity level II incident 3 points and a severity level I incident 1 point. 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Number of MCAR'sYear Major Chemical Accidents and Releases Severity Level III Severity Level II Severity Level I Total MCARs 18 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Number of MCAR'sYear ISO Stationary Sources MCARs Severity Level III Severity Level II Severity Level I Total MCARs 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Number of MCAR'sYear County and Richmond ISO MCARs Severity Level III Severity Level II Severity Level I Total MCARs 19 Legal Enforcement Actions Initiated by Contra Costa Hazardous Materials Programs As part of the enforcement of the ISO and CalARP Program, CCHMP staff may issue notices of deficiency on the safety and risk management plans of ISO-regulated facilities and may issue audit findings detailing what a stationary source is required to change to come into compliance with the regulations. CCHMP has taken no legal enforcement actions on the ISO facilities during this reporting period. Penalties Assessed as a Result of Enforcement No penalties have been assessed in this period for noncompliance with the ISO. Total Fees, Service Charges and Other Assessments Collected Specifically for the ISO Fees charged for the ISO cover the time ARP engineers use to enforce the ordinance, the position of the Hazardous Materials Ombudsperson, outreach material and to cover a portion of the overhead for CCHMP. Fees charged for administering this ordinance for fiscal year 2019 –2020 total $ 585,721. Total Personnel and Personnel Years Used by Hazardous Materials Program to Implement the Industrial Safety Ordinance ARP engineers review resubmitted Safety Plans, prepare and present information for public meetings, perform audits of stationary sources for compliance with both the CalARP Program and ISO and do follow-up work after MCARs. During the current reporting period: • Three ISO/CalARP Program facility audits were performed in 2019, requiring four to five engineers four weeks to perform the on-site portion of each audit. The audit process encompasses off-site time that includes report preparation, a quality assurance review process, working with the facility to address any questions, assessing the facility’s proposed remedies for completeness, preparing communication materials and posting public notices, attending a public forum to share audit findings, addressing any questions from the public and issuing the final report. The total time taken to perform these audits was 3,600 hours. Approximately one-third of the time was dedicated to the ISO, or 1, 200 hours. This year, CCHMP used larger teams that included recently hired ARP engineers, who participated in audits as part of their training for an additional 850 hours. • Reviewing information for the website—180 hours • Reviewing safety plans and following up with the facilities on any deficiencies—650 hours 0 5 10 15 20 25 Major Chemical Accidents and Releases Weighted Score for ISO &RISO 20 • Reviewing and participating in investigation, root cause analysis and proposed recommendations—500 hours • Preparing material for presentations and public meetings – 450 personnel hours. • Approximately 3,828 hours total of CCHMP personnel time was spent on the ISO during the current reporting period. The total does not include ombudsperson time spent preparing for public meetings, working with engineers on questions arising from the ISO, and answering questions from the public on the ISO. Comments from Interested Parties Regarding the Effectiveness of the Industrial Safety Ordinance No comments were received by CCHMP regarding ISO or RISO during current reporting period. The Impact of the ISO on Improving Industrial Safety The ISO is one of four programs that work together to reduce the risk of accidental release from a regulated stationary source that could impact communities in Contra Costa County. Those programs are: • the Process Safety Management Program administered by Cal/OSHA • the federal Accidental Release Prevention Program administered by the U.S. EPA • the California Accidental Release Prevention Program administered by CCHMP • the Industrial Safety Ordinance, also administered by CCHMP Each of the programs is very similar in requirements. On October 1, 2017, California petroleum refineries are required to comply with requirements of CalARP Program 4 and OSHA PSM for refineries. Both are based on the ISO. CalARP Program 3 differs from the Federal Accidental Release Prevention Program in the following ways: • The number of chemicals regulated • The threshold quantity of these chemicals • An external events analysis, including seismic and security and vulnerability analysis, is required • Additional information in the Risk Management Plan • CCHMP is required to audit and inspect stationary sources at least once every three years • The interaction required between the stationary source and CCHMP The ISO differs from CalARP Program 3, which the chemical facilities are required to follow, in the following ways: • Stationary sources are required to include a root cause analysis with the incident investigations for Major Chemical Accidents or Releases • The stationary sources are required to consider inherently safer systems for existing processes, in the development and analysis of recommended action items identified in a process hazard analysis, as part of a management of change review, as part of incident investigation or root cause analysis development of recommendation, and during the design of new processes, process units and facilities. • All of the processes at the regulated stationary sources are covered • The implementation of a Human Factors Program evaluation of latent conditions in existing units, operating and maintenance procedures and in root cause analysis • Managing changes in the organization for operations, maintenance and emergency response • A requirement that the stationary sources perform a Security and Vulnerability Analysis and test the effectiveness of the changes made as a result of the Security and Vulnerability Analysis • The stationary sources perform Safety Culture Assessments • Conduct, document and complete safeguard protection analysis for process hazard analysis to reduce catastrophic releases • Use and report of process safety performance indicators in the annual performance review and evaluation report 21 Major Program difference of ISO from CalARP Program 4 and PSM for Refineries is that the Program 4 requirements include: • Mechanical Integrity must include assessment of Damage Mechanism Review base on operating history and industry experience • Process Hazard Analysis must include review of Damage Mechanism Review report compiled as part of process safety information • Contractor and any subcontractors use a skilled and trained workforce pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 25536.7 • Require a Management system with specific requirement for managing and communicating recommendations from the prevention program elements • Require a Stop Work procedure and an anonymous hazard reporting system The Safety Culture Assessment guidance chapter was finalized in November 2009. The Industrial Safety Ordinance Guidance Document was updated to reflect all the updates in September 2010. The Accidental Release Prevention Engineers have participated with the Center for Chemical Process Safety on developing the second edition of Inherently Safer Chemical Processes, a book that is referenced in the ordinance and with the Center for Chemical Process Safety on developing process safety metrics for leading and lagging indicators. CCHMP also participated in the developing the third edition of CCPS: Inherently Safer Chemical Processes to further clarify and promote the practice and consideration of Inherently Safer System. The success of Contra Costa’s programs at reducing MCARs and improving facility safety practices have been frequently cited as exemplary or model policies within the regulatory community: • Contra Costa County was recognized as an alternative model for doing process-safety inspections by the CSB in its report on a 2005 refinery accident in Texas City, TX. The board also mentioned Contra Costa in its DVD, “Anatomy of a Disaster: Explosion at BP Texas City Refinery,” as a model resource. • CSB Chair Carolyn W. Merritt also recognized Contra Costa County in testimony to the House of Representatives Committee on Education and Labor. • Senator Barbara Boxer, during a 2007 hearing to consider John Bresland’s nomination to chair of the CSB Board, asked Mr. Bresland about the Contra Costa County program for process safety audits of refineries and chemical companies. • In its final investigation report of a 2008 incident at the Bayer CropScience Institute in West Virginia, the CSB recommended that regulatory agencies in the area audit their chemical facilities using Contra Costa County’s process. CCHMP staff and a representative from the local United Steelworkers Union were part of a panel when the CSB presented this report to the Kanawha Valley community. • CCHMP was asked to give testimony at a June 2010 hearing on “Work Place Safety and Worker Protections in the Gas and Oil Industry” before the U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Subcommittee on Employment and Workplace Safety regarding the success of Accidental Release Prevention Programs in place in Contra Costa County. • In September 2012, CCHMP was asked to present at the “Expert Forum on the Use of Performance-based Regulatory Models in the U.S. Oil and Gas Industry: Offshore and Onshore” in Texas City, Texas to share the regulatory experience at Contra Costa County and give testimony on how local, state and Federal agencies can work together and have an unprecedented alignment on regulations that is required for the same facilities. This meeting was spearheaded by Federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration and attended by Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement, U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. EPA, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, United Steelworkers, American Petroleum Institute, academia and 22 industry representatives. • CCHMP staff also testified at a June 2013 hearing on “Oversight of Federal Risk Management and Emergency Planning Programs to Prevent and Address Chemical Threats, Including the Events Leading up to the Explosions in West, TX and Geismar, LA” before the U.S. Senate’s Committee on Environment and Public Works. City of Richmond Industrial Safety Ordinance The Richmond City Council passed its version of the ISO on December 18, 2001. Richmond’s Industrial Safety Ordinance (RISO) mirrors the ISO, covering two stationary sources: Chevron Richmond Refinery (Chevron) and Chemtrade West Richmond Works, (Chemtrade, formerly General Chemical Richmond). CCHMP administers the RISO for the city. The seventh RISO/CalARP audit at Chevron was completed in July 2019 and in July 2020 for Chemtrade. CCHMP receives annual performance updates from Chevron and Chemtrade each June. CCHMP worked with U.S. EPA, Cal OSHA, BAAQMD and CSB in CSB’s independent investigation of the August 6, 2012. Name/ Location of copies Safety Plan (SP) Received Notice of Deficiencies (NOD) Issued-SP Safety Plan Complete SP Public Meeting Date Audit/ Inspection Audit Public Meeting Chevron Richmond Refinery/ Point Richmond and Richmond Main Public Library 1/21/03 6/21/04 9/29/06 9/25/09 9/24/12 9/30/15 6/28/18 4/23/03 11/08/12 10/10/03 6/22/04 5/21/07 11/04/09 11/12/13 7/25/18 10/14/03 6/24/04 6/02/07 9/25/10 10/05/13 10/24/15 5/05/19 1/11/01 (Non- RISO) 9/29/03 2/13/06 4/14/08 2/08/11 10/03/13 7/18/16 6/03/19 6/24/04 6/02/07 4/25/09 9/24/11 10/24/15 5/05/19 Chemtrade West Richmond Works/Point Richmond and Richmond Main Public Library 1/17/03 6/21/04 4/17/09 8/05/14 11/26/18 4/11/03 2/18/10 7/10/15 10/10/03 4/17/06 5/26/10 7/09/19 10/14/03 6/02/07 9/25/10 5/01/16 5/05/19 5/29/01 (Non-RISO) 4/24/06 8/18/03 1/05/09 1/05/12 9/08/14 7/17/17 6/15/20 6/24/04 6/02/07 9/25/10 10/05/13 10/24/15 5/05/19 Table V Richmond Industrial Safety Ordinance Stationary Source Status 23 Regulated Stationary source Inherently Safer System Implemented Design Strategy Approach Chevron Richmond Refinery Eliminated hazard by changing chemical in process (1 time) Inherent Eliminate Eliminated hazard by eliminating equipment and inventory in process (1 time) Inherent Minimization Reduced potential of exposure by changing equipment layout or design (1 time) Passive Moderate Reduced potential unit upset by changing/adding equipment or alarms (2 times) Active Moderate Chemtrade West Richmond Works Reduced potential incident and exposure by changing/ adding equipment or alarms (2 times) Active Moderate Table VI Inherently Safer Systems Richmond Facilities ATTACHMENT AHAZARDOUS MATERIALS OMBUDSMAN REPORT Hazardous Materials Ombudsperson Evaluation NOVEMBER 2019 THROUGH NOVEMBER 2020 25 I. INTRODUCTION On July 15, 1997, the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors authorized creation of an Ombudsman position for the County’s Hazardous Materials Programs. The first Hazardous Materials Ombudsman began work on May 1, 1998. The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors adopted an Industrial Safety Ordinance on December 15, 1998. Section 450-8.022 of the Industrial Safety Ordinance requires the Health Services Department to continue to employ an Ombudsman for the Hazardous Materials Programs. Section 450-8.030(B)(vii) of the Industrial Safety Ordinance requires an annual evaluation of the effectiveness of the Hazardous Materials Ombudsman, with the first evaluation to be completed on or before October 31, 2000. The goals of section 450–8.022 of the Industrial Safety Ordinance for the Hazardous Materials Ombudsman are: 1. To serve as a single point of contact for people who live or work in Contra Costa County regarding environmental health concerns, and questions and complaints about the Hazardous Materials Programs. 2. To investigate concerns and complaints, facilitate their resolution, and assist people in gathering information about programs, procedures, or issues. 3. To provide technical assistance to the public. The Hazardous Materials Ombudsman currently accomplishes these goals through the following program elements: 1. Continuing an outreach strategy so that the people who live and work in Contra Costa County can know about and utilize the program. 2. Investigating and responding to questions and complaints, and assisting people in gathering information about programs, procedures, or issues. 3. Participating in a network of environmental programs for the purpose of providing technical assistance. This evaluation covers the period from November 2019 through November 2020 for the Hazardous Materials Ombudsman program. The effectiveness of the program shall be demonstrated by showing that the activities of the Hazardous Materials Ombudsman meet the goals established in the Industrial Safety Ordinance. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, 2020 was an unusual year. From March, 2020 – November, 2020 the Ombudsman worked from home, and conducted all business by phone or via virtual meetings. Also, from May, 2020 through August, 2020 the Ombudsman was designated a Disaster Service Worker and was re-assigned to conduct contact tracing for people who tested positive for COVID-19, or came in close contact with someone that tested positive for COVID-19. For these reasons, many of the activities of the Ombudsman were reduced this in year relation to previous years. II. PROGRAM ELEMENTS 1. Continuing an Outreach Strategy This period efforts were focused on maintaining the outreach tools currently available. The web page was maintained for the program as part of Contra Costa Health Services website. This page contains information 26 about the program, links to other related websites, and information about upcoming meetings and events. A toll-free phone number is published in all three Contra Costa County phone books in the Government section. 2. Investigating and Responding to Questions and Complaints, and Assisting in Information Gathering During this period, the Hazardous Materials Ombudsman received 72 information requests. This number was significantly reduced over previous years, probably due to the Ombudsman being reassigned for 4 months. Over 95 percent of these requests occurred via the telephone, and have been requests for information about environmental issues. Requests via e-mail are slowly increasing, mainly through referrals from Health Services main web page. Most of these requests concern problems around the home such as asbestos removal, household hazardous waste disposal, pesticide misuse, mold and lead contamination. Information requests about environmental issues received via the telephone were generally responded to within one business day of being received. Many of the information requests were answered during the initial call. Some requests required the collection of information or written materials that often took several days to compile. Telephone requests were responded to by telephone unless written materials needed to be sent as part of the response. This year the Ombudsman began facilitating monthly debriefings of the Hazardous Materials Program Incident Response team incidents, but these were discontinued when the Shelter-in-Place went into effect in March. 3. Participating in a Network of Environmental Programs for the Purpose of Providing Technical Assistance. Technical assistance means helping the public understand the regulatory, scientific, political, and legal aspects of issues. It also means helping them understand how to effectively communicate their concerns within these different arenas. This year, the Ombudsman continued to staff a number of County programs and participate in other programs to be able to provide technical assistance to the participants and the public. Many of these programs were significantly curtailed due to the COVID-19 pandemic. • CAER (Community Awareness and Emergency Response)—This non-profit organization addresses industrial accident prevention, response and communication. The Ombudsman participated in the Emergency Notification subcommittee of CAER. • Hazardous Materials Commission—In 2001, the Ombudsman took over as staff for the Commission. As staff to the Commission, the Ombudsman conducts research, prepared reports, drafts letters and provides support for 3 monthly Commission meetings. During this period the Commission did not meet from March through August. Even so, they sent letter a letter to the Board of Supervisors concerning the County’s Legislative platform, provided input on proposed changes to the Hazardous Materials Incident Notification Policy, made improvements to the format and contents of the HMC web page, provided input on the Industrial Safety Ordinance Annual Report, seated two student interns for the school year, recommended 27 candidates to the Board of Supervisors for filling an Environmental Seat and Alternate and an Environmental Justice Seat and Alternate, and began developing recommendations to the Board of Supervisors on proposed goals, policies and actions pertaining to Environmental Justice for the update to the County’s General Plan. • Integrated Pest Management Advisory Committee—During this period the Ombudsman represented the Health Department on the County Integrated Pest Management Advisory Committee. This Committee brings Department representatives and members of the public together to help implement the County’s Integrated Pest Management policy. • Asthma Program—The Ombudsman participated in the Public Health Department’s Asthma Program as a resource on environmental health issues. The Ombudsman represented the Asthma Program on a regional collaborative related to asthma issues, the Ditching Dirty Diesel Collaborative. The Ombudsman served on the Technical Advisory Board for RAMP, the Regional Asthma Management Prevention program, and supported the Public Health Department’s participation in the AB 617 Community Air Quality program in Richmond. The Ombudsman completed and received a Technical Assistance grant with MCE, the new energy provider for 14 of the 19 jurisdictions in Contra Costa County and the Department of Conservation and Development to implement the Asthma Prevention program business model that was developed the previous year. The Ombudsman co-wrote and received two grants to implement the Asthma Prevention program described in the Business Plan with MCE, DCD and the Contra Costa Health Plan, One grant was for three years and $528,000 from the Sierra Health Foundation and the other was for one year and $100,000 from the Bay Area Air Quality Management District. • Climate Change During this period the Ombudsman provided technical assistance to the Public Health department on a variety of climate change issues. The Ombudsman participated in a County work-group to update the Climate Action Plan and the General Plan. The Hazardous Materials Ombudsman also attended workshops, presentations, meetings and trainings on a variety of environmental issues to be better able to provide technical assistance to the public. Topics included Environmental Justice, Air Quality, emergency management, energy policy and land-use planning for greenhouse gas reduction. III. PROGRAM MANAGEMENT The Hazardous Material Ombudsman continued to report to the Public Health Director on a day-to-day basis during this period, while still handling complaints and recommendations about the Hazardous Materials Programs through the Health Services Director. The Ombudsman was also a member of Health Services Emergency Management Team (EMT), and participated on its HEEP management team until these were suspended when the Health Department went into a Emergency Management mode when the Shelter in Place started in March. 28 IV. GOALS FOR THE 2020–2021 PERIOD In this period, the Ombudsman will provide essentially the same services to Contra Costa residents as was provided in the last period. The Ombudsman will continue respond to questions and complaints about the actions of the Hazardous Materials Programs; answer general questions that come from the public and assist them in understanding regulatory programs; staff the Hazardous Materials Commission; represent the Public Health Department in the Ditching Dirty Diesel Collaborative and the Integrated Pest Management Advisory Committee; and participate in the CAER Emergency Notification committee. The Ombudsman will continue to be part of the Health Department’s HEEP team and the Emergency Management Team when they resume. During this period the Ombudsman will continue to provide technical assistance to the Public Health Department on Climate Change issues by being on the County-wide work group updating the Climate Action Plan and the General Plan, and representing the Public Health Department on the BARHII Built Environment Committee. The Ombudsman will continue to work with collaboratives at the local, regional and state level. The Ombudsman with continue to coordinate the implementation of the two grants that were received to conduct the Asthma Prevention Program. 2019–20 ATTACHMENT BCOUNTY REGULATED SOURCES ANNUAL PERFORMANCE With accident history and inherent safety implementation 30 Annual Performance Review and Evaluation Submittal June 30, 2020 *Attach additional pages as necessary 1. Name and address of Stationary Source: Air Liquide Rodeo Hydrogen Plant, 1391 San Pablo Ave., Rodeo, California 94572 2. Contact name and telephone number (should CCHMP have questions): Nidhi Jacob, 510-245- 7285 x-2204 3. Summarize the status of the Stationary Source’s Safety Plan and Program (450-8.030(B)(2)(i)): This facility utilizes the programs and procedures identified in the ISO Safety Program/Plan. Additionally, the site is in regular communication with the county regarding updates for the ongoing section E. Safety Plan guidance document review. 4. Summarize Safety Plan updates (i.e., brief explanation of update and corresponding date) (450-8.030(B)(2)(ii)): The Rodeo Hydrogen Production Facility Industrial Safety Plan was updated on January 24, 2020. 5. List of locations where Safety Plans are/will be available for review, including contact telephone numbers if the source will provide individuals with copies of the document (450- 8.030(B)(2)(ii)): CCHMP Office at 4585 Pacheco Boulevard, Suite 100, Martinez; Martinez Library (libraries closest to the stationary source). 6. Provide any additions to the annual accident history reports (i.e. updates) submitted pursuant to Section 450-8.016(E)(2) of County Ordinance 98-48 (450-8.030(B)(2)(iii)) (i.e., provide information identified in Section 450-8.016(E)(1) for all major chemical accidents or releases occurring between the last annual performance review report and the current annual performance review and evaluation submittal (12-month history)): There were no major chemical accidents or releases in the past 12 months. 7. Summary of each Root Cause Analysis (Section 450-8.016(C)) including the status of the analysis and the status of implementation of recommendations formulated during the analysis (450-8.030(B)(2)(iv)): There were no major chemical accidents or releases in the past 12 months. 8. Summary of the status of implementation of recommendations formulated during audits, inspections, Root Cause Analyses, or Incident Investigations conducted by the Department (450-8.030(B)(2)(v)): There were no major chemical accidents or releases in the past 12 months. 9. Summary of inherently safer systems implemented by the source including but not limited to inventory reduction (i.e., intensification) and substitution (450-8.030(B)(2)(vi))::Reviewed MOCs following ISS evaluation and change methodology. 31 10. Summarize the enforcement actions (including Notice of Deficiencies, Audit Reports, and any actions turned over to the Contra Costa County District Attorney’s Office) taken with the Stationary Source pursuant to Section 450-8.028 of County Ordinance 98-48 (450-8.030(B)(2) (vii)): There were no enforcement actions during this period. 11. Summarize total penalties assessed as a result of enforcement of this Chapter (450-8.030(3)): No penalties have been assessed against this facility. 12. Summarize the total fees, service charges, and other assessments collected specifically for the support of the ISO (450-8.030(B)(4)): The total CalARP Program fees for the eight facilities subject to the Industrial Safety Ordinance was $1,111,605. The total Industrial Safety Ordinance program fees for these eight facilities was $585,721. (NOTE: These fees include those for the County and City of Richmond ISO facilities). 13. Summarize total personnel and personnel years utilized by the jurisdiction to directly implement or administer this Chapter (450-8.030(B)(5)): 3,008 hours were used to audit/inspect and issue reports on the Risk Management Chapter of the Industrial Safety Ordinance. 14. Copies of any comments received by the source (that may not have been received by the Department) regarding the effectiveness of the local program that raise public safety issues(450-8.030(B)(6)): None 15. Summarize how this Chapter improves industrial safety at your stationary source (450- 8.030(B)(7)): This chapter reinforces the need to maintain, follow and continuously improve our structured safety program to help ensure the safety of our employees and the communities in which we operate. 16. List examples of changes made at your stationary source due to implementation of the Industrial Safety Ordinance (e.g., recommendations from PHA’s, Compliance Audits, and Incident Investigations in units not subject to CalARP regulations; recommendations from RCA’s) that significantly decrease the severity or likelihood of accidental releases. (RMPCorp. to facilitate Latent Conditions Checklist reviews of all of our “Critical Procedures” in October 2020 Completed the Site Culture Assessment for October 2019 TAR. 17. Summarize the emergency response activities conducted at the source (e.g., CWS or TEN activation) in response to major chemical accidents or releases: Table top discussion to be scheduled in Q4 2020 to discuss plot plan, emergency exits etc in light of covid-19. Correspondence to include Rodeo- Hercules Fire District, CCHS, and P66 Emergency Response. 32 18. Date the last Safety Culture Assessment was completed: October-November 2019 19. Date the results of the Safety Culture Assessment were reported to the workforce and management: December 2019 20. Answer the following regarding the Safety Culture Evaluation Previous to the one listed in 18: ● Survey method: 34 Question Survey with contractors & operations personnel. • Areas of improvements being addressed: None based on the survey results. Following safe work culture is strongly exhibited at the Rodeo SMR. • Action Plan made Progress on the identified areas of improvement?: N/A o If Yes, did the improvements meet the goals and if not was the action plan amended to address what is being done to meet the goals? o If No, has a new action plan been developed to address the identified areas of improvement? N/A 21. Have milestones and metrics been developed to determine how the Safety Culture Assessment actions are being implemented? Yes or if not, Why not? N/A 22. Describe the process in place that includes employees and their representatives that will determine if the action items effectively changed the expected culture items: The processes include CCHS ISO & Safety Plan audits, the inclusion of LCC & ISS within the ISO program, and organizations PSM efforts internal to Air Liquide. 23. Date of the mid-cycle progress evaluation: N/A ● Did the action plan (for no 18) make progress on the identified areas of improvement? Yes or if not, has a new action pan been developed? N/A 24. If a mid-cycle progress evaluation was performed during this reporting year, describe the process that included participation of employees or their representatives that determined whether the action items effectively changed the expected culture items: N/A 33 Overdue inspection for piping and pressure vessels based on total number of circuits 2020 Overdue Repeat January 117 117 February 119 117 March 52 52 April 52 52 May 52 52 June 52 52 July 52 52 August 52 52 September 40 40 October 40 40 November 40 40 December 11 11 TOTAL 11 11 Total number of circuits: 187 piping circuits & 36 vessels. Total number of annual planned circuit inspection: 11 water circuits deferred to next year. Low consequence of failure. 62 (additional to deferrals) inspections planned for 2020 based on RBI study. 25. Common Process Safety Performance Indicators: 34 2020 Overdue Repeat January 5 5 February 5 5 March 5 5 April 5 5 May 5 5 June 5 5 July 5 5 August 5 5 September 5 5 October 5 5 November 5 5 December 5 5 TOTAL 5 5 Past due PHA recommended actions, includes seismic and LCC recommended actions 35 Past due investigation recommended actions for API/ACC Tier 1 and Tier 2 incidents 2020 Overdue Repeat January 0 0 February 0 0 March 0 0 April 0 0 May 0 0 June 0 0 July 0 0 August 0 0 September 0 0 October 0 0 November 0 0 December 0 0 Year 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 No. Tier 1 LOPC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Incident rate for Tier 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Refinery or Industry Rate1 0.155 0.099 0.094 0.092 0.104 0.062 0.076 0.057 0.061 Refinery or Industry Mean2 *1.49 1.30 1.38 1.55 1.01 1.13 0.92 1.03 Tier 2 LOPC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Incident rate for Tier 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Refinery Rate1 *0.24 0.25 0.23 0.20 0.17 0.18 0.17 0.16 Refinery Mean2 ****3.08 2.78 2.73 2.79 2.67 API/ACC TIER 1 & TIER 2 INCIDENTS AND RATES STARTING 2011 1 Petroleum refineries to report publicly available refinery rate for API Tier 1 and Tier 2 classification. Chemical plants to report publicly available mean only for ACC Tier 1 2 Petroleum refineries to report publicly available refinery mean for API Tier 1 and Tier 2 classification. Chemical plants to report publicly available mean only for ACC Tier 36 Annual Performance Review and Evaluation Submittal June 30, 2020 *Attach additional pages as necessary 1. Name and address of Stationary Source: [Air Products] Marathon Martinez Refinery, 150 Solano Avenue, 3rd & F Street, Inside Tesoro Refinery, CA 94553 2. Contact name and telephone number (should CCHMP have questions): Joseph Delengowski (925)316-9415 3. Summarize the status of the Stationary Source’s Safety Plan and Program (450-8.030(B)(2) (i)): The stationary sourse’s safety plan is complete per the CCHS requirement. The program was audited in January 2018 by CCHS as part of the three year CCHS site audit, and in October 2015 as part of an unannounced inspection. 4. Summarize Safety Plan updates (i.e., brief explanation of update and corresponding date) (450-8.030(B)(2)(ii)): The three year periodic audit completed in 2018 by CCHS required some updates to the site safety plan. These are in process of being implemented. 5. List of locations where Safety Plans are/will be available for review, including contact telephone numbers if the source will provide individuals with copies of the document (450- 8.030(B)(2)(ii)): CCHMP Office at 4585 Pacheco Boulevard, Suite 100, Martinez; Martinez Library (libraries closest to the stationary source). 6. Provide any additions to the annual accident history reports (i.e. updates) submitted pursuant to Section 450-8.016(E)(2) of County Ordinance 98-48 (450-8.030(B)(2)(iii)) (i.e., provide information identified in Section 450-8.016(E)(1) for all major chemical accidents or releases occurring between the last annual performance review report and the current annual performance review and evaluation submittal (12-month history)): There were no major accidents or injuries to report. 7. Summary of each Root Cause Analysis (Section 450-8.016(C)) including the status of the analysis and the status of implementation of recommendations formulated during the analysis (450-8.030(B)(2)(iv)): No RCAs subject to MCAR event have been performed. There are no outstanding recommendations. 8. Summary of the status of implementation of recommendations formulated during audits, inspections, Root Cause Analyses, or Incident Investigations conducted by the Department (450-8.030(B)(2)(v)): Final recommendations from the 3 year CCCHS audit are in progress. 9. Summary of inherently safer systems implemented by the source including but not limited to inventory reduction (i.e., intensification) and substitution (450-8.030(B)(2)(vi)): In 2019: Chemicals inventory containment dike installed to prevent possiblity of offsite impact, walkways at heights upgraded to provide safer work conditions(worker safety), and grating installed to prevent slips, trips, and falls(worker safety). . 10. Summarize the enforcement actions (including Notice of Deficiencies, Audit Reports, and any actions turned over to the Contra Costa County District Attorney’s Office) taken with the Stationary Source pursuant to Section 450-8.028 of County Ordinance 98-48 (450-8.030(B)(2) (vii)): There were no enforcement actions during this period. 37 11. Summarize total penalties assessed as a result of enforcement of this Chapter (450-8.030(3)): No penalities have been assessed against this facility. 12. Summarize the total fees, service charges, and other assessments collected specifically for the support of the ISO (450-8.030(B)(4)): The total CalARP Program fees for the eight facilities subject to the Industrial Safety Ordinance was $1,111,605. The total Industrial Safety Ordinance program fees for these eight facilities was—$585,721. (NOTE: These fees include those for the County and City of Richmond ISO facilities). 13. Summarize total personnel and personnel years utilized by the jurisdiction to directly implement or administer this Chapter (450-8.030(B)(5)): 3,008 hours were used to audit/inspect and issue reports on the Risk Management Chapter of the Industrial Safety Ordinance. 14. Copies of any comments received by the source (that may not have been received by the Department) regarding the effectiveness of the local program that raise public safety issues(450-8.030(B)(6)): None. 15. Summarize how this Chapter improves industrial safety at your stationary source (450-8.030(B)(7)): Air Products is committed to the safer operation of our facilities and has implemented applicable requirements outlined in the ISO and CalARP regulations. Both the ISO and Human Factors programs are an integral part of our five year Operating Hazard Review revalidations and on going management of change process. The most recent OPHR was conducted in for April 2018. There have been no incidents resulting in an offsite impact. The Chapter has helped reinforce the need to maintain and follow a structured safety program to help ensure the safety of our empoloyees and the communities in which we operate. 16. List examples of changes made at your stationary source due to implementation of the Industrial Safety Ordinance (e.g., recommendations from PHA’s, Compliance Audits, and Incident Investigations in units not subject to CalARP regulations; recommendations from RCA’s) that significantly decrease the severity or likelihood of accidental releases. The Air Products facility is tracking various metrics (leading and lagging). These include those called out in ISO API/ACC Tier 1 and 2 events, past due PHA recommendations and past due incident investigation recommendations. A baseline was developed, and metrics are tracked for the facility on a company share site. 17. Summarize the emergency response activities conducted at the source (e.g., CWS or TEN activation) in response to major chemical accidents or releases: There were no emergency response activities to this site since the previous Annual Performance review associated with a chemical accident. However, the emergency response team was deployed in response to a series of personal medicals that resulted in the individual being treated for non-work-related conditions. Each condition, the response time was stellar. 18. Date the last Safety Culture Assessment was completed: 2019 Survey method: Electronic 19. Date the results of the Safety Culture Assessment were reported to the workforce and management: Sept. 16–18, 2019. 20. Answer the following regarding the Safety Culture Evaluation previous to the one listed in 18: • Survey method: Electronic 38 • Areas of improvements being addressed: Quality of APT, improving field safety contact among regional engineering support, better implementing safety drills in the JSA process, and improvement in the shift logs. • Action Plan made Progress on the identified areas of improvement?: (Yes or No) No –If Yes, did the improvements meet the goals and if not was the action plan amended to address what is being done to meet the goals? –If No, has a new action plan been developed to address the identified areas of improvement? Yes, and action plan has been developed with routine check ins to determine the effectiveness of the actions. 21. Have milestones and metrics been developed to determine how the Safety Culture Assessment actions are being implemented? No. Currently under development. Actions are tracked as part of recurring meeting focused on implementation of the actions. 22. Describe the process that included employees and their representatives used to determine if the action items effectively changed the expected culture items: Employees were involved in the development of the survey, collection of the data, analysis of the data, and distribution of the findings. Additionally, the same team of cross functional employees were responsible for developing the action plan, and double clicking on the potential areas for improvement. Steps were taken to develop SMART goals. 23. Date of the mid-cycle progress evaluation: Target completion in the August 2021 timeframe » Did the action plan (for no 18) make progress on the identified areas of improvement? Not yet. 24. Describe the process that included participation of employees or their representatives used to determine whether the action items from the SCA and the mid-cycle progress effectively changed the expected culture items: NA. 25. Common Process Safety Performance Indicators: Overdue inspection for piping and pressure vessels based on total number of circuits 2020 Overdue Repeat January 0 0 February 0 0 March 0 0 April 0 0 May 0 0 June 0 0 July 0 0 August 0 0 September 0 0 October 0 0 November 0 0 December 0 0 Total number of circuits: 397. Circuits inspected in FY20 Total number of annual planned circuit inspections: 32 circuits for FY21 39 Past due PHA recommended actions, includes seismic and LCC recommended actions 2020 Overdue Repeat January 0 February 0 March 0 April 0 May 0 June 0 July 0 August 0 September 0 October 0 November 0 December 0 Past due investigation recommended actions for API/ACC Tier 1 and Tier 2 incidents 2017 Overdue Repeat January 0 0 February 0 0 March 0 0 April 0 0 May 0 0 June 0 0 July 0 0 August 0 0 September 0 0 October 0 0 November 0 0 December 0 0 2020 Overdue Repeat January 0 0 February 0 0 March 0 0 April 0 0 May 0 0 June 0 0 July 0 0 August 0 0 September 0 0 October 0 0 November 0 0 December 0 0 40 Year 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 No. Tier 1 LOPC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Incident rate for Tier 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Refinery or Industry Rate1 0.155 0.099 0.094 0.092 0.103 0.062 .07 0.053 0.061 Refinery or Industry Mean2 1.49 1.30 1.38 1.55 1.01 1.13 0.92 1.03 Tier 2 LOPC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Incident rate for Tier 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Refinery Rate1 0.24 0.253 0.238 0.206 0.172 0.179 0.172 0.16 Refinery Mean2 3.08 2.78 2.73 0.172 0.16 API/ACC TIER 1 & TIER 2 INCIDENTS AND RATES STARTING 2011 1Petroleum refineries to report publically available refinery rate for API Tier 1 and Tier 2 classification. Chemical plants to report publically available mean only for ACC Tier 1 2Petroleum refineries to report publically available refinery mean for API Tier 1 and Tier 2 classification. Chemical plants to report publically available mean only for ACC Tier 1 26. Common Process Safety Performance Indicators for refineries only: N/A 41 Annual Performance Review and Evaluation Submittal June 30, 2020 *Attach additional pages as necessary 1. Name and address of Stationary Source: Air Products—Shell Martinez Refinery, 110 Waterfront Road, Martinez, CA 94553 2. Contact name and telephone number (should CCHMP have questions): Andrew Celin 925-723-2861 3. Summarize the status of the Stationary Source’s Safety Plan and Program (450-8.030(B)(2) (i)): The stationary source’s safety plan is complete per the CCHS requirement. The program was audited in January 2018 by CCHS as part of the three year CCHS site audit, and in October 2015 as part of an unannounced inspection. 4. Summarize Safety Plan updates (i.e., brief explanation of update and corresponding date) (450-8.030(B)(2)(ii)): The three year periodic audit completed in 2018 by CCHS required some updates to the site safety plan. These are in process of being implemented 5. List of locations where Safety Plans are/will be available for review, including contact telephone numbers if the source will provide individuals with copies of the document (450- 8.030(B)(2)(ii)): CCHMP Office at 4585 Pacheco Boulevard, Suite 100, Martinez 94553; Martinez Library (libraries closest to the stationary source). 6. Provide any additions to the annual accident history reports (i.e. updates) submitted pursuant to Section 450-8.016(E)(2) of County Ordinance 98-48 (450-8.030(B)(2)(iii)) (i.e., provide information identified in Section 450-8.016(E)(1) for all major chemical accidents or releases occurring between the last annual performance review report and the current annual performance review and evaluation submittal (12-month history)): There were no major accidents or releases to report. 7. Summary of each Root Cause Analysis (Section 450-8.016(C)) including the status of the analysis and the status of implementation of recommendations formulated during the analysis (450-8.030(B)(2)(iv)): There are no outstanding recommendations. 8. Summary of the status of implementation of recommendations formulated during audits, inspections, Root Cause Analyses, or Incident Investigations conducted by the Department (450-8.030(B)(2)(v)): Final recommendations from the 3 year CCCHS audit are in progress. 9. Summary of inherently safer systems implemented by the source including but not limited to inventory reduction (i.e., intensification) and substitution (450-8.030(B)(2)(vi)): There were no inherently safer systems implemented during the calendar year. . 10. Summarize the enforcement actions (including Notice of Deficiencies, Audit Reports, and any actions turned over to the Contra Costa County District Attorney’s Office) taken with the Stationary Source pursuant to Section 450-8.028 of County Ordinance 98-48 (450-8.030(B)(2) (vii)): There were no enforcement actions during this period. 42 11. Summarize total penalties assessed as a result of enforcement of this Chapter (450-8.030(3)): No penalities have been assessed against this facility. 12. Summarize the total fees, service charges, and other assessments collected specifically for the support of the ISO (450-8.030(B)(4)): The total CalARP Program fees for the eight facilities subject to the Industrial Safety Ordinance was $1,111,605. The total Industrial Safety Ordinance program fees for these eight facilities was—$585,721. (NOTE: These fees include those for the County and City of Richmond ISO facilities). 13. Summarize total personnel and personnel years utilized by the jurisdiction to directly implement or administer this Chapter (450-8.030(B)(5)): 3,008 hours were used to audit/inspect and issue reports on the Risk Management Chapter of the Industrial Safety Ordinance. 14. Copies of any comments received by the source (that may not have been received by the Department) regarding the effectiveness of the local program that raise public safety issues(450-8.030(B)(6)): None. 15. Summarize how this Chapter improves industrial safety at your stationary source (450-8.030(B)(7)): Air Products is committed to the safer operation of our facilities and has implemented applicable requirements outlined in the ISO and CalARP regulations. Both the ISO and Human Factors programs are an integral part of our five year Operating Hazard Review revalidations and on going management of change process. The most recent OPHR was conducted in for April 2018. There have been no incidents resulting in an offsite impact. The Chapter has helped reinforce the need to maintain and follow a structured safety program to help ensure the safety of our empoloyees and the communities in which we operate. The site conducted its Safety Culture assessment in August and September 2019, and published a report and actions in February 2020. 16. List examples of changes made at your stationary source due to implementation of the Industrial Safety Ordinance (e.g., recommendations from PHA’s, Compliance Audits, and Incident Investigations in units not subject to CalARP regulations; recommendations from RCA’s) that significantly decrease the severity or likelihood of accidental releases. The Air Products facility is tracking various metrics (leading and lagging). These include those called out in ISO API/ACC Tier 1 and 2 events, past due PHA recommendations and past due incident investigation recommendations. A baseline was developed, and metrics are tracked for the facility on a company share site. 17. Summarize the emergency response activities conducted at the source (e.g., CWS or TEN activation) in response to major chemical accidents or releases: There were no emergency response activities to this site. 18. Date the last Safety Culture Assessment was completed: January 2019 Survey method: Electronic 19. Date the results of the Safety Culture Assessment were reported to the workforce and management: Sept. 16-18, 2019. 20. Answer the following regarding the Safety Culture Evaluation previous to the one listed in 18: • Survey method: Electronic 43 • Areas of improvements being addressed: Quality of APT, improving field safety contact among regional engineering support, better implementing safety drills in the JSA process, and improvement in the shift logs. • Action Plan made Progress on the identified areas of improvement?: (Yes or No) No –If Yes, did the improvements meet the goals and if not was the action plan amended to address what is being done to meet the goals? –If No, has a new action plan been developed to address the identified areas of improvement? Yes, and action plan has been developed with routine check ins to determine the effectiveness of the actions. 21. Have milestones and metrics been developed to determine how the Safety Culture Assessment actions are being implemented? Yes. A mid-cycle survey will be conducted in the same manner as the SCA to track progress towards the goals. The same measurement criteria will be used as in the 2019 SCA. Management will look at the results and compare to the 2019 survey for a gauge of progress, and evaluate if any course-corrections are required to continue to meet the action plan from the 2019 SCA. 22. Describe the process that included employees and their representatives used to determine if the action items effectively changed the expected culture items: Employees were involved in the development of the survey, collection of the data, analysis of the data, and distribution of the findings. Additionally, the same team of cross functional employees were responsible for developing the action plan, and double clicking on the potential areas for improvement. Steps were taken to develop SMART goals. 23. Date of the mid-cycle progress evaluation: Target completion in the August 2021 timeframe » Did the action plan (for no 18) make progress on the identified areas of improvement? Progress has not yet been measured. 24. Describe the process that included participation of employees or their representatives used to determine whether the action items from the SCA and the mid-cycle progress effectively changed the expected culture items: NA. 25. Common Process Safety Performance Indicators: Overdue inspection for piping and pressure vessels based on total number of circuits 2020 Overdue Repeat January 0 0 February 0 0 March 0 0 April 0 0 May 0 0 June 0 0 July 0 0 August 0 0 September 0 0 October 0 0 November 0 0 December 0 0 Total number of circuits: 660. Circuits inspected in FY20–(85) Total number of annual planned circuit inspections: 87 circuits for FY21 44 Past due PHA recommended actions, includes seismic and LCC recommended actions 2020 Overdue Repeat January 0 February 0 March 0 April 0 May 0 June 0 July 0 August 0 September 0 October 0 November 0 December 0 Past due investigation recommended actions for API/ACC Tier 1 and Tier 2 incidents 2017 Overdue Repeat January 0 0 February 0 0 March 0 0 April 0 0 May 0 0 June 0 0 July 0 0 August 0 0 September 0 0 October 0 0 November 0 0 December 0 0 2020 Overdue Repeat January 0 0 February 0 0 March 0 0 April 0 0 May 0 0 June 0 0 July 0 0 August 0 0 September 0 0 October 0 0 November 0 0 December 0 0 45 Year 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 No. Tier 1 LOPC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Incident rate for Tier 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Refinery or Industry Rate1 0.155 0.099 0.094 0.092 0.103 0.062 0.07 0.057 0.61 Refinery or Industry Mean2 1.49 1.30 1.38 1.55 1.01 1.13 0.92 1.03 Tier 2 LOPC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Incident rate for Tier 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Refinery Rate1 0.24 0.253 0.238 0.206 0.172 0.184 0.172 0.157 Refinery Mean2 3.08 2.78 2.73 2.79 2.67 API/ACC TIER 1 & TIER 2 INCIDENTS AND RATES STARTING 2011 1Petroleum refineries to report publically available refinery rate for API Tier 1 and Tier 2 classification. Chemical plants to report publically available mean only for ACC Tier 1 2Petroleum refineries to report publically available refinery mean for API Tier 1 and Tier 2 classification. Chemical plants to report publically available mean only for ACC Tier 1 26. Process Safety Performance Indicators for refineries only: N/A 46 Annual Performance Review and Evaluation Submittal June 30, 2020 *Attach additional pages as necessary 1. Name and address of Stationary Source: Tesoro Refining and Marketing Company LLC, DBA, Marathon Martinez Refinery, 150 Solano Way, CA 94553 2. Contact name and telephone number (should CCHMP have questions): Amber Larsen at (925) 370-3279 or Sabiha Gokcen at (925) 370-3620. 3. Summarize the status of the Stationary Source’s Safety Plan and Program (450-8.030(B)(2)(i)): The most recent Safety Plan was submitted to Contra Costa Hazardous Materials Program (CCHMP) in October, 2019. CCHMP has completed eight audits on the safety programs. The first audit was in September 2000 on the safety programs. The second audit was in December 2001 and focused on Inherently Safer Systems and Human Factors. CalARP/ISO audits were conducted in August 2003, November-December 2005, August-October 2008, April-May 2011, January, 2014, October 2016, and most recently, October 2019. All safety program elements required by the ISO have been developed and are implemented. 4. Summarize Safety Plan updates (i.e., brief explanation of update and corresponding date) (450-8.030(B)(2)(ii)): The original Safety Plan for this facility was filed with CCHMP on January 14, 2000. An amended plan, updated to reflect CCHS recommendations and an ownership change, was filed on November 30, 2000. A Human Factors Amendment was submitted on January 15, 2001. A Power Disruption Plan was submitted, per Board of Supervisor request, on June 1, 2001. The Safety Plan for this facility is updated whenever changes at the facility warrant an update or every three years. In addition, the accident history along with other information is updated every year on June 30 in the Annual ISO Update to CCHMP. The most recent Safety Plan was submitted in October, 2019. 5. List of locations where Safety Plans are/will be available for review, including contact telephone numbers if the source will provide individuals with copies of the document (450- 8.030(B)(2)(ii)): CCHMP Office at 4585 Pacheco Boulevard, Suite 100, Martinez; Martinez Library (libraries closest to the stationary source). 6. Provide any additions to the annual accident history reports (i.e. updates) submitted pursuant to Section 450-8.016(E)(2) of County Ordinance 98-48 (450-8.030(B)(2)(iii)) (i.e., provide information identified in Section 450-8.016(E)(1) for all major chemical accidents or releases occurring between the last annual performance review report and the current annual performance review and evaluation submittal (12-month history)): There have been no MCARs during the last year. 7. Summary of each Root Cause Analysis (Section 450-8.016(C)) including the status of the analysis and the status of implementation of recommendations formulated during the analysis (450-8.030(B)(2)(iv)): Status of Root Cause Analysis Recommendations: The recommended action items for all MCARs are closed. 47 8. Summary of the status of implementation of recommendations formulated during audits, inspections, Root Cause Analyses, or Incident Investigations conducted by the Department (450-8.030(B)(2)(v)): “CCHS Information”: CCHS completed an audit on September 15, 2000, December, 2001, August, 2003, November/December, 2005, August-October, 2008, April-May 2011, January, 2014, October, 2016 and October, 2019. There are no RCA or Incident Investigations that have been conducted by the Department. Facility status of audit recommendations: All recommendations from CCHMP audits are closed. The site is awaiting the recommendations from the 2019 audit. 9. Summary of inherently safer systems implemented by the source including but not limited to inventory reduction (i.e., intensification) and substitution (450-8.030(B)(2)(vi)): The refinery is submitting a list of the Inherently Safer Systems (ISS) that meet the criteria for Inherent or Passive levels only and that were completed within the last year (see attached). 10. Summarize the enforcement actions (including Notice of Deficiencies, Audit Reports, and any actions turned over to the Contra Costa County District Attorney’s Office) taken with the Stationary Source pursuant to Section 450-8.028 of County Ordinance 98-48 (450-8.030(B)(2) (vii)): “CCHMP Information”: There were no enforcement actions during this period. 11. Summarize total penalties assessed as a result of enforcement of this Chapter (450-8.030(3)): “CCHMP Information”: No penalities have been assessed against this facility. 12. Summarize the total fees, service charges, and other assessments collected specifically for the support of the ISO (450-8.030(B)(4)): The total CalARP Program fees for the eight facilities subject to the Industrial Safety Ordinance was $1,111,605. The total Industrial Safety Ordinance program fees for these eight facilities was - $585,721. (NOTE: These fees include those for the County and City of Richmond ISO facilities) 13. Summarize total personnel and personnel years utilized by the jurisdiction to directly implement or administer this Chapter (450-8.030(B)(5)): 3,008 hours were used to audit/inspect and issue reports on the Risk Management Chapter of the Industrial Safety Ordinance. 14. Copies of any comments received by the source (that may not have been received by the Department) regarding the effectiveness of the local program that raise public safety issues(450-8.030(B)(6)): This facility has not received any comments to date regarding the effectiveness of the local program. 15. Summarize how this Chapter improves industrial safety at your stationary source (450-8.030(B)(7)): Chapter 450-8 improves industrial safety by expanding the safety programs to all units in the refinery. In addition, the timeframe is shorter to implement recommendations generated from the Process Hazard Analysis (PHA) safety program than state or federal law. This has resulted in a faster implementation of these recommendations. Chapter 450-8 also includes requirements for inherently safer systems as part of implementing PHA recommendations and new construction. This facility has developed an aggressive approach to implementing inherently safer systems in these areas. Chapter 450-8 has requirements to perform root cause analyses on any major chemical accidents or releases (MCAR). This facility has applied that rigorous methodology to investigate any MCARs that have occurred since January, 1999. 48 Chapter 450-8 requires a human factors program. This facility has developed a comprehensive human factors program and is in the process of implementing the program. Chapter 450-8 requires a safety culture assessment. This facility has developed a safety culture assessment program that meets the requirements in the ordinance.. 16. List examples of changes made at your stationary source due to implementation of the Industrial Safety Ordinance (e.g., recommendations from PHA’s, Compliance Audits, and Incident Investigations in units not subject to CalARP regulations; recommendations from RCA’s) that significantly decrease the severity or likelihood of accidental releases. This question was broadly answered under question 15 above. Some examples of changes that have been made due to implementation of the ordinance are as follows. There are some units that were not covered by RMP, CalARP or PSM. Those units are now subject to the same safety programs as the units covered by RMP, CalARP and PSM. They have had PHAs performed on them according to the timeline specified in the ISO and the PHA recommendations have been resolved on the timeline specified in the ISO. A list of inherently safer systems as required by the ISO for PHA recommendations and new construction is attached to this filing as mentioned in the response to question 9. With respect to Compliance Audits, there was a compliance audit performed in April 2015 in addition to the CCHMP audits mentioned above. All audit findings are being actively resolved. Root Cause Analysis findings and recommendations for MCARs are listed in the response under question 6. 17. Summarize the emergency response activities conducted at the source (e.g., CWS or TEN activation) in response to major chemical accidents or releases: Please refer to #6 which has the CWS classifications for the major chemical accidents and releases as well as any information regarding emergency responses by agency personnel. 18. Date the last Safety Culture Assessment was completed: 8/8/16-9/1/16. Survey method: survey 19. Date the results of the Safety Culture Assessment were reported to the workforce and management: Communicated in all employees/contractors in safety training: 4/4/17-5/15/17. Reported to Management: 11/17/16. 20. Answer the following regarding the Safety Culture Evaluation previous to the one listed in 18: • Survey method: Survey • Areas of improvements being addressed: The safety culture areas of improvement identified are: the maintenance work process, procedures, leadership of process safety, resources for process safety, and new hire training. • Action Plan made Progress on the identified areas of improvement?: (Yes or No) YES. If Yes, did the improvements meet the goals and if not was the action plan amended to address what is being done to meet the goals? There was improvement from 2013 to 2016 in some of the identified areas. The action plan for 2016 included the work that was performed previously and addressed continuing the effort to completion. If No, has a new action plan been developed to address the identified areas of improvement? (Yes or No) 21. Have milestones and metrics been developed to determine how the Safety Culture Assessment actions are being implemented? Yes. 49 22. Describe the process that included employees and their representatives used to determine if the action items effectively changed the expected culture items: Once the initial report was received on the survey from the 3rd party consultant, the PSM Superintendent and USW Process Safety Representative reviewed the data and recommendations from the consultant in great detail as well as the 2013 survey. A preliminary action plan was developed from the in depth analysis. The consultant’s report and the preliminary action plan were reviewed with management, the Jt. H&S Committee and the union negotiation committee for input. In addition, the USW Process Safety Representative held several sessions with USW leadership to review the data in more detail. After this process was completed, it was determined the preliminary action plan was the final action plan. 23. Date of the mid-cycle progress evaluation: 2019 for PSCA dated 2016 o Did the action plan (for no 18) make progress on the identified areas of improvement? YES o Yes or if not, has a new action pan been developed? (Yes or No) Although progress was made according to the interim safety culture assessment, an additional action plan was developed 24. If a mid-cycle progress evaluation was performed during this reporting year, describe the process that included participation of employees or their representatives that determined whether the action items effectively changed the expected culture items: The Interim Safety Culture Assessment included both Focus Groups and one-on-one interviews. The results from those activities were analyzed for common threads and then an action plan was formulated to address the areas that still needed further action. 25. Common Process Safety Performance Indicators: Overdue inspection for piping and pressure vessels based on total number of circuits 2020 Overdue Repeat January 0 0 February 0 0 March 0 0 April 0 0 May 0 0 June 0 0 July 0 0 August 0 0 September 0 0 October 5 0 November 0 5 December 0 4 Total 5 5 Total number of circuits: 5,978 Total number of annual planned circuit inspections: 1,932 in the year 2019 50 Past due PHA recommended actions, includes seismic and LCC recommended actions 2020 Overdue Repeat January 15 68 February 20 77 March 21 45 April 10 66 May 18 71 June 27 78 July 16 64 August 4 76 September 17 77 October 0 93 November 0 88 December 0 83 Total 148 136 Past due investigation recommended actions for API/ACC Tier 1 and Tier 2 incidents 2020 Overdue Repeat January 0 3 February 1 3 March 0 4 April 0 3 May 0 2 June 0 2 July 0 2 August 0 1 September 0 1 October 0 1 November 0 1 December 0 1 Total 1 4 51 Year 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 No. Tier 1 LOPC 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 Incident rate for Tier 1 0 0 0 0.05 0.06 0 0.04 0.04 0.07 Refinery or Industry Rate*0.15 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.10 0.06 0.07 0.06 0.06 Refinery or Industry Mean**1.49 1.30 1.38 1.55 1.01 1.13 0.92 1.03 Tier 2 LOPC 1 1 2 3 3 0 3 4 3 Incident rate for Tier 2 0.06 0.05 0.12 0.16 0.17 0 0.12 0.17 0.21 Refinery Rate2 **0.24 0.25 0.23 0.20 0.17 0.18 0.17 0.16 Refinery Mean ****3.08 2.78 2.71 2.79 2.67 API/ACC TIER 1 & TIER 2 INCIDENTS AND RATES STARTING 2011 1Petroleum refineries to report publicly available refinery rate for API Tier 1 and Tier 2 classification. Chemical plants to report publicly available mean only for ACC Tier 1 2Petroleum refineries to report publicly available refinery mean for API Tier 1 and Tier 2 classification. Chemical plants to report publicly available mean only for ACC Tier 1 * Petroleum refineries to report publicly available refinery mean for API Tier 1 and Tier 2. Chemical plants to report publicly available mean only for ACC Tier 1 **Data is not publicly available; report from AFPM only went back to 2012. ***Data not available at the time of reporting 2020 Total*Overdue Repeat January 98 0 61 February 98 0 61 March 106 1 61 April 109 0 62 May 111 0 62 June 105 0 59 July 108 0 28 August 103 0 9 September 93 0 1 October 93 0 1 November 84 0 0 December 85 0 0 Total 85 1 62 26. Process Safety Performance Indicators for refineries only: I. Number of Major Incidents in 2019: Zero (0) II. The number of temporary piping and equipment repairs that are installed on hydrocarbon and high energy utility systems that are past their date of replacement with a permanent repair: *the total number of temporary piping and equipment repairs installed on hydrocarbon and high energy utility systems 52 Inherently Safer Systems Implemented Item Identifier Implementation Category Risk Reduction Category ISS Approach A004-2017-005 PHA Inherent Second Order Inherent Safety— Application of inherently safer principles to reduce the likelihood of an incident.. A004-2017-018 PHA Passive Moderate—Modification of physical conditions to less hazardous conditions. A004-2017-022 PHA Passive Moderate—Modification of physical conditions to less hazardous conditions. A004-2017-023 PHA Passive Moderate—Modification of physical conditions to less hazardous conditions.. A004-2017-024 PHA Passive Moderate—Modification of physical conditions to less hazardous conditions. A004-2017-025 PHA Passive Moderate—Modification of physical conditions to less hazardous conditions. A004-2017-026 PHA Passive Moderate—Modification of physical conditions to less hazardous conditions. A004-2017-027 PHA Passive Moderate—Modification of physical conditions to less hazardous conditions. A011-2018-019 PHA Passive Substitute—Removal of temporary equipment and replaced with a permanent solution which allows for unobstructed access. A016-2016-014 PHA Inherent Second Order Inherent Safety—The hazard associated with emergency response equipment design was resolved through the application of inherently safer principles to improve accessibility. A016-2016-016 PHA Passive Moderate—Modification of physical conditions to less hazardous conditions. A016-2016-017 PHA Passive Moderate—Modification of physical conditions to less hazardous conditions. A016-2016-018 PHA Inherent First Order Inherent Safety – Elimination of the hazard by modifying physical conditions. 53 Annual Performance Review and Evaluation Submittal June 30, 2020 *Attach additional pages as necessary 1. Name and address of Stationary Source: Phillips 66 Rodeo Refinery, 1380 San Pablo Avenue, Rodeo, CA 94572 2. Contact name and telephone number (should CCHMP have questions): Morgan Walker 510-245-4665 3. Summarize the status of the Stationary Source’s Safety Plan and Program (450-8.030(B)(2)(i)): The Safety Plan was last updated in August of 2018. The Phillips 66 Refinery was audited by the county’s Hazardous Materials Program in January 2020. 4. Summarize Safety Plan updates (i.e., brief explanation of update and corresponding date) (450-8.030(B)(2)(ii)): The original Safety Plan for this facility was filed with Contra Costa Health Services on January 14, 2000. A revised plan was filed on April 7, 2000 with the updated recommendations requested by CCHS. A Human Factors Amendment was submitted on January 15, 2001. In conjunction with CCHSs required 2nd public meeting on our plan and audit findings, we submitted a complete revision of the plan to reflect the change in ownership of our facility and to update where needed. We took this opportunity to include Human Factors within the plan instead of having it as an amendment. On August 9, 2002 the plan was resubmitted. Public meetings for our plans were held on June 22, 2004 in Rodeo and July 8, 2004 in Crockett. As required the Plan was fully updated in August 2005 on the 3 year cycle. The Plan was reviewed by CCHS and was revised on July 28, 2006 with recommended changes. The Safety Plan was updated in July 2009 per the 3 year cycle.. Recommendations requested by CCHMP were incorporated into the Safety Plan on November 4, 2010. Safety Plan was updated in August 2012 and August 2015 per the 3 year cycle. Recommendations requested by CCHMP on May 22, 2017 were incorporated into the plan on August 4, 2017. An updated Safety Plan was submitted in August 2018.. 5. List of locations where Safety Plans are/will be available for review, including contact telephone numbers if the source will provide individuals with copies of the document (450- 8.030(B)(2)(ii)): CCHMP Office at 4585 Pacheco Boulevard, Suite 100, Martinez; Crockett and Rodeo Libraries (libraries closest to the stationary source). 6. Provide any additions to the annual accident history reports (i.e. updates) submitted pursuant to Section 450-8.016(E)(2) of County Ordinance 98-48 (450-8.030(B)(2)(iii)) (i.e., provide information identified in Section 450-8.016(E)(1) for all major chemical accidents or releases occurring between the last annual performance review report and the current annual performance review and evaluation submittal (12-month history)): There were no major chemical accidents or releases at the Rodeo Refinery in the 2019-2020 time period. 7. Summary of each Root Cause Analysis (Section 450-8.016(C)) including the status of the analysis and the status of implementation of recommendations formulated during the analysis (450-8.030(B) (2)(iv)): There were no root cause analysis of major chemical accidents or releases at the Rodeo Refinery in the 2018–2019 time period. 54 8. Summary of the status of implementation of recommendations formulated during audits, inspections, Root Cause Analyses, or Incident Investigations conducted by the Department (450-8.030(B)(2)(v)): There are no open recommendations from audits, inspections, Root Cause Analyses, or Incident Investigations conducted by the Department. 9. Summary of inherently safer systems implemented by the source including but not limited to inventory reduction (i.e., intensification) and substitution (450-8.030(B)(2)(vi)): See ATTACHMENT 1 for the listing of Inherently Safer Systems Improvements. 10. Summarize the enforcement actions (including Notice of Deficiencies, Audit Reports, and any actions turned over to the Contra Costa County District Attorney’s Office) taken with the Stationary Source pursuant to Section 450-8.028 of County Ordinance 98-48 (450-8.030(B)(2) (vii)): There were no enforcement actions during this period. 11. Summarize total penalties assessed as a result of enforcement of this Chapter (450-8.030(3)): No penalities have been assessed against this facility. 12. Summarize the total fees, service charges, and other assessments collected specifically for the support of the ISO (450-8.030(B)(4)): The total CalARP Program fees for the eight facilities subject to the Industrial Safety Ordinance was $1,111,605. The total Industrial Safety Ordinance program fees for these eight facilities was - $585,721. (NOTE: These fees include those for the County and City of Richmond ISO facilities) 13. Summarize total personnel and personnel years utilized by the jurisdiction to directly implement or administer this Chapter (450-8.030(B)(5)): 3,008 hours were used to audit/inspect and issue reports on the Risk Management Chapter of the Industrial Safety Ordinance. 14. Copies of any comments received by the source (that may not have been received by the Department) regarding the effectiveness of the local program that raise public safety issues(450-8.030(B)(6)): No comments were received. 15. Summarize how this Chapter improves industrial safety at your stationary source (450- 8.030(B)(7)): IIn addition to the Phillips 66 Corporate Health Safety Environment Management Systems the ISO provides another tool for the improvement of process safety performance and industrial safety. 16. List examples of changes made at your stationary source due to implementation of the Industrial Safety Ordinance (e.g., recommendations from PHA’s, Compliance Audits, and Incident Investigations in units not subject to CalARP regulations; recommendations from RCA’s) that significantly decrease the severity or likelihood of accidental releases. Units that were not covered by RMP, CalARP, and PSM are covered under the ISO and PHAs are scheduled and performed on all these units. Recommendations from the PHAs are implemented at an accelerated rate. A list of inherently safer system improvements, required by the ISO for PHA recommendations and projects, are listed in Attachment 1. 17. Summarize the emergency response activities conducted at the source (e.g., CWS or TEN activation) in response to major chemical accidents or releases: There were no major chemical accidents or releases at the Rodeo Refinery in the 2019-2020 time period. 55 18. Date the last Safety Culture Assessment was completed: 4/15/2016 Survey method: written survey 19. Date the results of the Safety Culture Assessment were reported to the workforce: 6/24/16 management: 4/15/16 20. Answer the following regarding the Safety Culture Evaluation for no. 18: –Survey Method: written survey –Areas of improvements being addressed: » No areas were identified as scoring significantly below normal values. » Improvements require too many reviews/approvals. »Employees are reluctant to reveal problems or errors. »Having enough qualified people to do the work in their area. –Action Plan made Progress on the identified areas of improvement? YES »If Yes, did the improvements meet the goals and if not, was the action plan amended to address what is being done to meet the goals? Yes, Progress was made and improvements observed in the subsequent SCA. Improvement opportunities were identified in the most recent SCA and recommendations identified. »If No, has a new action plan been developed to address the identified areas of improvement? (Yes or No) 21. Have milestones and metrics been developed to determine how the Safety Culture Assessment actions are being implemented? Yes or if not, Why not? YES. Specific improvements were identified by a management & union team and implemented. 22. Describe the process that included employees and their representatives used to determine if the action items effectively changed the expected culture items: A midcycle written survey will be utilized to evaluate the effects on the culture. The evaluation team will include management and union representatives per policy. 23. Date of the mid-cycle progress evaluation: November 1, 2019 »Did the action plan (for no 18) make progress on the identified areas of improvement? Yes or if not, has a new action plan been developed? N/A 24. Describe the process that included participation of employees or their representatives used to determine whether the action items from the SCA and the mid-cycle progress effectively changed the expected culture items: By policy, our process includes management and union representatives to review the results and develop modified recommendations as appropriate. Each action was discussed and compared to site performance indicators to determine if improvement was made. The Mid-Cycle Review was conducted on November 1, 2019 by the Process Safety Director, USW PSM Representative, and Senior H&S Consultant. 56 Past due PHA recommended actions, includes seismic and LCC recommended actions 2020 Overdue Repeat January 0 0 February 0 0 March 0 0 April 0 0 May 0 0 June 0 0 July 0 0 August 0 0 September 5 0 October 5 4 November 5 5 December 4 4 Total 19 13 Overdue inspection for piping and pressure vessels based on total number of circuits 2020 Overdue Repeat January 0 0 February 0 0 March 0 0 April 0 0 May 0 0 June 0 0 July 0 0 August 0 0 September 0 0 October 0 0 November 0 0 December 0 0 Total 0 0 Total number of circuits: 30,263 Total number of annual planned circuit inspections: 3,124 25. Common Process Safety Performance Indicators: 57 Year 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 No. Tier 1 LOPC 2 3 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 Incident rate for Tier 1 0.17 0.29 0 0 0.21 0 0 0 0 Refinery or Industry Rate1 0.15 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.10 0.06 0.07 0.06 0.06 Refinery or Industry Mean2 *1.49 1.30 1.38 1.55 1.01 1.13 0.92 1.03 Tier 2 LOPC 5 3 0 1 2 2 2 0 2 Incident rate for Tier 2 0.43 0.29 0 0.10 0.21 0.17 0.22 0 0.16 Refinery Rate1 *0.24 0.25 0.23 0.20 0.17 0.18 0.17 0.16 Refinery Mean2 ****3.08 2.78 2.73 2.79 2.67 API/ACC TIER 1 & TIER 2 INCIDENTS AND RATES STARTING 2011 1Petroleum refineries to report publicly available refinery rate for API Tier 1 and Tier 2 classification. Chemical plants to report publicly available mean only for ACC Tier 1. 2Petroleum refineries to report publicly available refinery mean for API Tier 1 and Tier 2 classification. Chemical plants to report publicly available mean only for ACC Tier 1. Past due investigation recommended actions for API/ACC Tier 1 and Tier 2 incidents 2020 Overdue Repeat January 0 0 February 0 0 March 0 0 April 0 0 May 0 0 June 0 0 July 0 0 August 0 0 September 0 0 October 0 0 November 0 0 December 0 0 Total 0 0 58 2020 Total*Overdue Repeat January 42 0 0 February 42 0 0 March 43 0 0 April 43 0 0 May 47 0 0 June 49 0 0 July 48 0 0 August 48 0 0 September 50 0 0 October 51 0 0 November 33 0 0 December 33 0 0 TOTAL 33 0 0 26. Process Safety Performance Indicators for refineries only: I. Number of Major Incidents in 2019: NONE II. The number of temporary piping and equipment repairs that are installed on hydrocarbon and high energyutility systems that are past their date of replacement with a permanent repair: *the total number of temporary piping and equipment repairs installed on hydrocarbon and high energy utility systems 59 Attachment 1: June 2019—June 2020 ISS improvements Reference Approach ISS Category MOC Description IMP232563 Simplify Inherent Three pumps were decommissioned to eliminate potential back flow and release o fprocess materials from the discharge check valves on G-9, G-10, and G-11. IMP226903 Simplfy Inherent Additional piping was added to eliminate the potential pinch point at ROD 3 101 valves and make operation easier. IMP230973 Minimize Passive Vehicles barricades were installed to minimize piping damage after removing a road that ran over previous underground piping between F-302 Butane Sphere and the G-2 IMP226935 Moderate Passive The installed equipment, E-561A has a higher MAWP than the deadhead pressure of G-563/563A. IMP226847 Moderate Passive The G-104A Pump Turbine was replaced with a lower speed turbine that cannot reach a pressure near the E-102A/B/C/D limit. IMP226890 Simplfy Passive The switchrack obstructing the G-102 area was demolished to improve emergency access in the event of an emergency. IMP232563 Moderate Passive Project installed new anchors and guides to sufficiently mitigate stresses to piping downstream of 1E-101 and re-rate the line at a higher design temperature and lower design pressure to satisfy overpressure scenarios. IMP226902 Moderate Passive The E-237 outlet and bypass piping was upgraded to meet over temperature scenarios when bypass valve is opened. IMP226903 Moderate Passive A flexibility analysis of the E-240 downstream piping was done to support rerating to 490 degrees to meet the over temperature scenarios during bypass operations. IMP226913 Moderate Passive The design temperature of E-52 was re-rated to 650 degrees to minimize the hazard of a release of hazardous material. IMP226848 Minimize Passive A cover was installed on the E-101A/B/C saltwater outfall box to reduce the potential of exposure to hot water or H2S.. IMP226849 Moderate Passive A closed loop sample station was installed to minimize operator exposure to high H2S vapors by routing liquids back to the process and prevent vapors from being released. IMP226879 Minimize Passive A cover was installed on the E-206 saltwater outfall box to reduce the potential of exposure to hot water or H2S. IMP226887 Minimize Passive The internal trim components of PV-702 (G202/A spillback) pressure control valve to reduce the likelihood of the control valve to plug. IMP226888 Minimize Passive H-204 BT Bottom Circulation Strainer outlet valves were moved closer to the platform to eliminate poor positioning when operating the valves between the G-218 Coke Strainer (H-204) and the D-206 Bubble Tower. IMP226891 Moderate Passive A concrete wall secondary containment was constructed around the F-256 Silicone Tank to prevent loss of chemical contents to surrounding area. 60 M20195848-001 Moderate Passive Upgraded metallurgy installed on D-170 Reboiler Draw Elbow. M20185788-001 Moderate Active Installed two pressure relief devices on 248:6E-611A&B Lube Oil Coolers and 248:6F-611A&B Filters. M20191124-001 Moderate Inherent Demolished the Unit 76 out-of-service tanks 162, 163, 165, 166, 305, 306, and Tank 695. M20191850-001 Moderate Active Installed multiple check valves on Utility to Process connections for backflow protection. M20157077-001 Moderate Active Installed a second check valve in series with the existing check valve on: 1. The regeneration gas line from 228F-515 2. The PSA purge gas line from 228GB-522 M20195907-001 Moderate Passive Upgraded metallurgy for 235FE-115 (ammonia acid gas) and 235FE-635 (H2S to the Rear) to 316L stainless steel. M20192008-001 Moderate Passive Upgraded five thermal wells (TE-517, TE-518, TE-519, TE-520, and TE-521/003) on the B-101 to D-101 transfer line. Material was INCO 625 for corrosion resistance with stellite overlay for erosion resistance. M20185067-001 Moderate Active Installed a pressure relief device to protect 5F-516A/B (seal oil filters) from overpressure. M20193697-001 Moderate Passive Upgraded metallurgy for D-803 Reflux Line Spool to stainless steel. M20186555-001 Moderate Active Installed four pressure relief devices on the demineralization anion and cation exchangers in Plant 31 of the Unicracker. M20195805-00 Simplify Inherent Removed deadleg from overhead of butane vaporizer. M20185036-001 Moderate Active Installed a relief valve to protect the MTC slops header from overpressure due to thermal expansion. M20201018-001 Simplify Passive Removed the 4” inspection nozzle and upgraded metallurgy of steam exhaust head on V-9 CO2 Stripper. M20195075-001 Moderate Active Installed a strainer on the pump suction of 200:G-208A Charge Pump. M20196340-001 Moderate Passive Upgraded material of 228PSV-911& 913 gaskets. M20185320-001 Moderate Passive Installed a closed-loop sample station on the rich DGA line out of the Unit 233 contactor, D-601, that was previously routed to the refinery blowdown system. 61 Annual Performance Review and Evaluation Submittal June 30, 2020 *Attach additional pages as necessary 1. Name and address of Stationary Source: Martinez Refining Company, 3485 Pacheco Blvd., Martinez, CA 94553. 2. Contact name and telephone number (should CCHMP have questions): Ken Axe: (925) 313-5371. 3. Summarize the status of the Stationary Source’s Safety Plan and Program (450-8.030(B)(2)(i)): The current revision of the Safety Plan was submitted in August 2019. The Safety Program elements are consistent with the descriptions in the Safety Plan. 4. Summarize Safety Plan updates (i.e., brief explanation of update and corresponding date) (450-8.030(B)(2)(ii)): Pending updates to the Safety Plan will address change of refinery ownership (sale of Refinery from Shell to PBF Energy), and sale of two hydrogen plants (HP-1 and HP-2) to Air Products. During the transition of hydrogen plant ownership, Martinez Refining Company personnel continue to operate and maintain the plants as described in the current Safety Plan. Changes to the Safety Plan will depend on post-transition arrangements. The transition period may last 18 months. 5. List of locations where Safety Plans are/will be available for review, including contact telephone numbers if the source will provide individuals with copies of the document (450- 8.030(B)(2)(ii)): CCHMP Office at 4585 Pacheco Boulevard, Suite 100, Martinez; Martinez Library (library closest to the stationary source). 6. Provide any additions to the annual accident history reports (i.e. updates) submitted pursuant to Section 450-8.016(E)(2) of County Ordinance 98-48 (450-8.030(B)(2)(iii)) (i.e., provide information identified in Section 450-8.016(E)(1) for all major chemical accidents or releases occurring between the last annual performance review report and the current annual performance review and evaluation submittal (12-month history)): There have been no MCARs at the Martinez Refinery in the 12-month period beginning July 1, 2019. 7. Summary of each Root Cause Analysis (Section 450-8.016(C)) including the status of the analysis and the status of implementation of recommendations formulated during the analysis (450-8.030(B) (2)(iv)): There have been no RCAs for MCARs or potential MCARs in the 12-month period beginning July 1, 2019. 8. Summary of the status of implementation of recommendations formulated during audits, inspections, Root Cause Analyses, or Incident Investigations conducted by the Department (450-8.030(B)(2)(v)): Of the 49 recommendations from the audit conducted by CCHS in 2018, 48 have been completed. The one action remaining has a target date of December 2020, and it is expected that this action will be completed on time. 9. Summary of inherently safer systems implemented by the source including but not limited to inventory reduction (i.e., intensification) and substitution (450-8.030(B)(2)(vi)): See Attachment 1. 62 10. Summarize the enforcement actions (including Notice of Deficiencies, Audit Reports, and any actions turned over to the Contra Costa County District Attorney’s Office) taken with the Stationary Source pursuant to Section 450-8.028 of County Ordinance 98-48 (450-8.030(B)(2) (vii)): There were no enforcement actions during this period. 11. Summarize total penalties assessed as a result of enforcement of this Chapter (450-8.030(3)): No penalities have been assessed against this facility. 12. Summarize the total fees, service charges, and other assessments collected specifically for the support of the ISO (450-8.030(B)(4)): The total CalARP Program fees for the eight facilities subject to the Industrial Safety Ordinance was $1,111,605. The total Industrial Safety Ordinance program fees for these eight facilities was - $585,721. (NOTE: These fees include those for the County and City of Richmond ISO facilities). 13. Summarize total personnel and personnel years utilized by the jurisdiction to directly implement or administer this Chapter (450-8.030(B)(5)): 3,008 hours were used to audit/inspect and issue reports on the Risk Management Chapter of the Industrial Safety Ordinance. 14. Copies of any comments received by the source (that may not have been received by the Department) regarding the effectiveness of the local program that raise public safety issues(450-8.030(B)(6)): None received. 15. Summarize how this Chapter improves industrial safety at your stationary source (450- 8.030(B)(7)): SMRC has integrated requirements of the Industrial Safety Ordinance into our Health, Safety, and Environment Management System; in the context of our HSE MS, the ISO requirements drive continual improvement in our HSE performance. 16. List examples of changes made at your stationary source due to implementation of the Industrial Safety Ordinance (e.g., recommendations from PHA’s, Compliance Audits, and Incident Investigations in units not subject to CalARP regulations; recommendations from RCA’s) that significantly decrease the severity or likelihood of accidental releases. All process units are now covered under CalARP Program 4. Examples of changes made to the stationary source during the reporting year are summarized in Attachment 1 (see question 9). 17. Summarize the emergency response activities conducted at the source (e.g., CWS or TEN activation) in response to major chemical accidents or releases: There were no MCARs at the stationary source during the reporting year. 18. Date the last Safety Culture Assessment was completed: 3/31/2019. 19. Date the results of the Safety Culture Assessment were reported to the workforce and management: 4/10-22/2019. 20. Answer the following regarding the Safety Culture Evaluation for no. 18: –Survey method: Anonymous computer based and paper based survey –Areas of improvements being addressed: Incident reporting and learnings from incidents and rewards and recognition –Action Plan made Progress on the identified areas of improvement?: (Yes or No) YES 63 »If Yes, did the improvements meet the goals and if not was the action plan amended to address what is being done to meet the goals? Goals for working off backlog of investigations, timely investigation completion, and timely communication of results have been achieved. Rewards and recognition aligned with new company expectations.. »If No, has a new action plan been developed to address the identified areas of improvement? (Yes or No) 21. Have milestones and metrics been developed to determine how the Safety Culture Assessment actions are being implemented? Yes. 22. Describe the process that included employees and their representatives used to determine if the action items effectively changed the expected culture items: Team which includes employee representatives meets quarterly to assess progress and effectiveness of Safety Culture improvement efforts. 23. Date of the mid-cycle progress evaluation:TBD »Did the action plan (for no 18) make progress on the identified areas of improvement? (Yes or No) Yes 24. If a mid-cycle progress evaluation was performed during this reporting year, describe the process that included participation of employees or their representatives that determined whether the action items effectively changed the expected culture items: No mid-cycle review conducted during this review period 64 25. Common Process Safety Performance Indicators: Overdue inspection for piping and pressure vessels based on total number of circuits Past due PHA recommended actions, includes seismic and LCC recommended actions 2020 Overdue Repeat January 0 0 February 0 0 March 0 0 April 0 0 May 0 0 June 0 0 July 0 0 August 0 0 September 0 0 October 0 0 November 0 0 December 0 0 2020 Overdue Repeat January 0 0 February 0 0 March 0 0 April 0 0 May 0 0 June 4 0 July 3 0 August 0 0 September 0 0 October 0 0 November 0 0 December 0 0 TOTAL 7 0 Total number of circuits: 11,923 Total number of annual planned circuit inspections: 1,455 65 Past due investigation recommended actions for API/ACC Tier 1 and Tier 2 incidents 2020 Overdue Repeat January 0 0 February 0 0 March 0 0 April 0 0 May 0 0 June 0 0 July 0 0 August 0 0 September 0 0 October 0 0 November 0 0 December 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 1Petroleum refineries to report publicly available refinery rate for API Tier 1 and Tier 2 classification. Chemical plants to report publicly available mean only for ACC Tier 1 2Petroleum refineries to report publicly available refinery mean for API Tier 1 and Tier 2 classification. Chemical plants to report publicly available mean only for ACC Tier 1 API/ACC TIER 1 & TIER 2 INCIDENTS AND RATES STARTING 2011 Year 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 No. Tier 1 LOPC 1 1 1 0 1 0 2 1 2 Incident rate for Tier 1 0.07 0.07 0.08 0 0.07 0 0.11 0.06 0.12 Refinery or Industry rate1 0.15 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.10 0.06 0.08 0.06 0.06 Refinery or Industry mean2 *1.49 1.30 1.41 1.53 1.00 1.11 0.92 1.03 No. Tier 2 LOPC 2 0 5 2 5 1 2 2 5 Incident rate for Tier 2 0.14 0 0.41 0.11 0.42 0.06 0.11 0.11 0.31 Refinery rate1 *0.24 0.25 0.24 0.21 0.17 0.19 0.17 0.16 Refinery mean2 ***3.59 3.07 2.75 2.75 2.79 2.67 66 26. Process Safety Performance Indicators for refineries only: I. Number of Major Incidents in 2019: 0 II. The number of temporary piping and equipment repairs that are installed on hydrocarbon and high energy utility systems that are past their date of replacement with a permanent repair: 2020 Total Overdue Repeat January 1 0 0 February 6 0 0 March 1 0 0 April 5 0 0 May 3 0 0 June 11 0 0 July 0 0 0 August 1 0 0 September 4 0 0 October 1 0 0 November 1 0 0 December 3 0 0 TOTAL*37 0 0 *the total number of temporary piping and equipment repairs installed on hydrocarbon and high energy utility systems 67 Attachment 1 Table 1: Summary of Implemented ISS ISS/HCA Type MOC Description Active / Moderate, Simplify Lower 40PI1017 critical high set point (located at PSV F-468 inlet). Active / Moderate, Simplify Move the Low Flow alarm from 40FI0959.PV to 40FC287.PV located downstream of P-12566/7. Procedural / Simplify Update procedure ISOM-3130, Lead ISOM RX Sulfur Stripping, to include more descriptive steps. Active / Moderate, Simplify Add high pressure alarm with operator response on existing pressure indication 40PI1700. Active / Moderate, Simplify Upgrade 4 existing check valves on the discharge of P-13311/312 to class 1 check valves to strengthen an existing barrier to prevent reverse flow in the event of a seal failure and allow for valid emergency response. Active / Moderate Install ammonia area monitors near V-13311 to ensure that console operator can be notified of a potential release in the area and provide adequate emergency response. Active/ Moderate Add low level alarm 17LI156 to protect against loss of level in V-1162 and reverse flow of 160# steam. Active/ Moderate Reclassify 2 existing check valves on the filtered stripped sour water header to class 1 check valves: (1) Check valve located at P-4110 discharge and (2) Check valve located at the combined outlet of the stripped sour water filters V-841/842. Active / Moderate Install hardware to allow P-8695 acid gas KO pot pump to be operated remotely from the board. This will allow pump to be operated remotely, eliminating the scenario of potential personnel exposure in case of a seal failure when starting/stopping the pump manually. Procedural Create a new call card to verify that the critical steam traps associated with SRU-1/2 sulfur seals are checked on a regular basis. Active / Simplify Add position indication with feedback to DCS for posi-seal valves between SRU1/2 and SCOT1/2 and the incinerators. Passive / Simplify Modify TDC displays to clearly differentiate between the following screens: SCOT1/SCOT2 RX, SCOT1/SCOT2 Absorber, DEA1/2, and SWS3/4/5. Procedural / Moderate, Simplify Add weekly operator round to verify tank TK 952 interface level using thermal profile. ATTACHMENT CRICHMOND REGULATED SOURCES ANNUAL PERFORMANCE Contra Costa Health Services 2019–2020 69 Annual Performance Review and Evaluation Submittal June 30, 2020; Update sent with industry rates on 10/29/2020 *Attach additional pages as necessary 1. Name and address of Stationary Source: Chevron U.S.A. Inc. (CUSA), Richmond Refinery, 841 Chevron Way, Richmond, California 94801 2. Contact name and telephone number (should CCHMP have questions): Greg Shockey, 510-242-3629 3. Summarize the status of the Stationary Source’s Safety Plan and Program (450-8.030(B)(2)(i)): The CUSA Richmond Refinery (Refinery) initial Site Safety Plan (SSP) was completed in 2003, and the most recent revision is dated July 24, 2018. The SSP was prepared in accordance with the City of Richmond Industrial safety Ordinance (RISO), which was adopted by the Richmond City Council on January 17, 2002. 4. Summarize Safety Plan updates (i.e., brief explanation of update and corresponding date) (450-8.030(B)(2)(ii)): The SSP was updated in 2018. The next revision will be shared in 3Q2021. 5. List of locations where Safety Plans are/will be available for review, including contact telephone numbers if the source will provide individuals with copies of the document (450- 8.030(B)(2)(ii)): CCHMP Office at 4585 Pacheco Boulevard, Suite 100, Martinez; Martinez Library; Richmond Public Library at 325 Civic Center Plaza Richmond, CA 94804; and Point Richmond Public Library at 135 Washington Ave., Richmond, CA 94801. 6. Provide any additions to the annual accident history reports (i.e. updates) submitted pursuant to Section 450-8.016(E)(2) of County Ordinance 98-48 (450-8.030(B)(2)(iii)) (i.e., provide information identified in Section 450-8.016(E)(1) for all major chemical accidents or releases occurring between the last annual performance review report and the current annual performance review and evaluation submittal (12-month history)): There were no major chemical accidents or releases (“MCAR”) as defined in Section 450-8.014(h) between June 1, 2019 and June 1, 2020. 7. Summary of each Root Cause Analysis (Section 450-8.016(C)) including the status of the analysis and the status of implementation of recommendations formulated during the analysis (450-8.030(B)(2)(iv)): There were no MCAR events between June 1, 2019 and June 1, 2020, and accordingly there were no Root Cause Analyses conducted under section 450-8.016(c) during this period. 8. Summary of the status of implementation of recommendations formulated during audits, inspections, Root Cause Analyses, or Incident Investigations conducted by the Department (450-8.030(B)(2)(v)): The 2011 Cal APR/ISO Audit had 73 ensure and consider recommendations, from which 85 total action itmes were created, and 85 of those action items are complete. The final report and action plans from the 2013 Cal ARP/Richmond ISO audit were accepted by the County and Richmond Refinery in 2015. The 2013 Cal ARP/ISO audit had 163 ensure and consider recommendations, from which 177 total action items were created, and 177 of those action items are complete. The report and action plans from the 2016 Cal ARP/Richmond ISO audit had 74 ensure and consider recommendations, from which 80 total action items were created, and 80 of those action items are complete. The ensure and consider items for the 2016 audit were finalized on November 6, 2017. The 2019 Cal ARP/ISO audit closing meeting was held on June 28th 2019. There were 94 ensure and consider recommendations, from which 104 total action items were created, and 3 of those action items are complete. 70 9. Summary of inherently safer systems implemented by the source including but not limited to inventory reduction (i.e., intensification) and substitution (450-8.030(B)(2)(vi)): See Attachment 1 on page 5. 10. Summarize the enforcement actions (including Notice of Deficiencies, Audit Reports, and any actions turned over to the Contra Costa County District Attorney’s Office) taken with the Stationary Source pursuant to Section 450-8.028 of County Ordinance 98-48 (450- 8.030(B)(2)(vii)): There were no enforcement actions during this period. 11. Summarize total penalties assessed as a result of enforcement of this Chapter (450-8.030(3)): No penalities have been assessed against this facility. 12. Summarize the total fees, service charges, and other assessments collected specifically for the support of the ISO (450-8.030(B)(4)): The total CalARP Program fees for the eight facilities subject to the Industrial Safety Ordinance was $1,111,605. The total Industrial Safety Ordinance program fees for these eight facilities was - $585,721. (NOTE: These fees include those for the County and City of Richmond ISO facilities). 13. Summarize total personnel and personnel years utilized by the jurisdiction to directly implement or administer this Chapter (450-8.030(B)(5)): 3,008 hours were used to audit/inspect and issue reports on the Risk Management Chapter of the Industrial Safety Ordinance. 14. Copies of any comments received by the source (that may not have been received by the Department) regarding the effectiveness of the local program that raise public safety issues(450-8.030(B)(6)): No comments were received during this period regarding the effectiveness of the local program that raise public safety issues. 15. Summarize how this Chapter improves industrial safety at your stationary source (450- 8.030(B)(7)):Operating safely is one of CUSA’s core values and underpins our commitment to enhancing our process safety programs. The RISO assists CUSA in improving our process safety performance. We have worked closely with CCHMP in its implementation of the RISO and its oversight of our operations, including during its periodic reviews of our operations. Consistent with this commitment, and as part of the company’s efforts to continually improve its process safety performance, CUSA will continue to confer with the CCHMP as it refines and implements these actions. 16. List examples of changes made at your stationary source due to implementation of the Industrial Safety Ordinance (e.g., recommendations from PHA’s, Compliance Audits, and Incident Investigations in units not subject to CalARP regulations; recommendations from RCAs) that significantly decrease the severity or likelihood of accidental releases. In addition to the Inherently Safer Systems implemented in Question 9, CUSA has also made other changes to the facility pursuant to the RISO and beyond to decrease the severity or likelihood of accidental releases. A few examples include the following: • Changes implemented based on findings from Tier 1 and Tier 2 Incident Investigation with solutions due between June 2019 to June 2020. There was no Tier 1 and Tier 2 incident in 2019. 71 »Completed Fixed Equipment Asset Strategies Piping Project. The Fixed Equipment Asset Strategies Piping Project improves the refinery’s existing asset strategy, designed to prevent and mitigate loss of containment in piping systems and to describe the process for creating and maintaining these strategies. »Completed review of asset history and data for all blending and shipping pumps, including field survey for pumps with missing information to determine reliability threats. »Plant shutdown procedure was update. • SRCM (Streamlined Reliability-Centered Maintenance) continued implementing studies to set up ITPM’s (inspection, testing, and preventative maintenance tasks) refinery wide. • Completed Damage Mechanism Reviews on PSM-covered equipment and piping. • Equipment and procedural changes implemented to reduce risks identified during PHAs, including: »Upgraded centrifugal pump seals to reduce or eliminate potential consequences that may result from seal failures. A few of the pumps completed are P-430, P-420, P-3551/A. »Updated Operation’s procedural changes to minimize potential loss of containment. »Continued effort to conduct procedural PHAs across refinery units to identify and mitigate potential human factors that may lead to loss of containment; with a focus on emergency, startup, and shutdown procedures. 17. Summarize the emergency response activities conducted at the source (e.g., CWS or TEN activation) in response to major chemical accidents or releases: There were no level two or three CWS or TENS activations between June 1, 2019 and June 1, 2020. 18. Common Process Safety Performance Indicators: Data collected Sept 2015 reported to work force June 2016 19. Date the results of the Safety Culture Assessment were reported to the workforce: June 2016 20. Answer the following regarding the Safety Culture Evaluation to the one listed in 18: • Survey method: Focus Groups • Areas of improvements being addressed: Communication and resource planning • Action Plan made Progress on the identified areas of improvement?: (Yes or No) Yes »If Yes, did the improvements meet the goals and if not was the action plan amended to address what is being done to meet the goals? Yes, the improvements met the goals. »If No, has a new action plan been developed to address the identified areas of improvement? (Yes or No) N/A 21. Have milestones and metrics been developed to determine how the Safety Culture Assessment actions are being implemented? Yes or if not, Why not? Yes. Milestones are tracked in the Chevron Database system of record. 22. Describe the process that included employees and their representatives used to determine if the action items effectively changed the expected culture items: Employees and their representatives were involved in the review of data, development of the improvement suggestions as well 72 as the development of the final action items. Through the process of meeting with the representatives we came to agreement on what data needed an action and what action would solve the milestones. 23. Date of the mid-cycle progress evaluation: None were conducted as they were not required at the time for SCA dated: June 2016 »Did the action plan (for no 18) make progress on the identified areas of improvement? Yes or if not, has a new action plan been developed? (Yes or No) N/A 24. If a mid-cycle progress evaluation was performed during this reporting year, describe the process that included participation of employees or their representatives that determined whether the action items effectively changed the expected culture items: N/A. Mid-cycle progress evaluation was not performed in this reporting year. 25. Common Process Safety Performance Indicators: Overdue inspection for piping and pressure vessels based on total number of circuits 2020 Overdue Repeat January 0 0 February 0 0 March 0 0 April 0 0 May 0 0 June 0 0 July 0 0 August 0 0 September 0 0 October 0 0 November 0 0 December 0 0 Total 0 0 Total number of circuits: 12,240* Total number of annual planned circuit inspection: 3,377* *An ongoing project is re-evaluating piping circuit designations to align each circuit with the anticipated damage mechanisms. As the project progresses, the total number of piping circuits and subsequently, the number inspected, will change to accommodate the long-term strategy for inspections and reliability 73 Past due PHA recommended actions, includes seismic and LCC recommended actions 2020 Overdue Repeat January 0 0 February 0 0 March 0 0 April 0 0 May 3 0 June 0 0 July 0 0 August 0 0 September 0 0 October 0 0 November 0 0 December 0 0 Total 3 Past due investigation recommended actions for API/ACC Tier 1 and Tier 2 incidents 2020 Overdue Repeat January 0 0 February 0 0 March 0 0 April 0 0 May 0 0 June 0 0 July 0 0 August 0 0 September 0 0 October 0 0 November 0 0 December 0 0 Total 0 0 74 1Petroleum refineries to report publicly available refinery rate for API Tier 1 and Tier 2 classification. Chemical plants to report publicly available mean only for ACC Tier 1 2Petroleum refineries to report publicly available refinery mean for API Tier 1 and Tier 2 classification. Chemical plants to report publicly available mean only for ACC Tier 1 API/ACC TIER 1 & TIER 2 INCIDENTS AND RATES STARTING 2011 Year 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 No. Tier 1 LOPC 4 3 0 1 2 1 1 1 0 Incident rate for Tier 1 0.14 0.11 0.00 0.02 0.05 0.02 0.02 0.01 0 Refinery or Industry rate1 0.1553 0.995 0.0947 0.0925 0.1038 0.0627 0.0761 0.0570 0.0608 Refinery or Industry mean2 **1.49 1.30 1.38 1.55 1.01 1.13 0.92 1.03 No. Tier 2 LOPC 5 8 6 3 1 3 5 4 0 Incident rate for Tier 2 0.18 0.29 0.19 0.07 0.02 0.07 0.10 0.06 0 Refinery or Industry rate1 **0.2405 0.2531 0.2380 0.2063 0.1726 0.1843 0.1728 0.1574 Refinery or Industry mean2 ********3.08 2.78 2.73 2.79 2.67 26. Process Safety Performance Indicators for refineries only: I. Number of Major Incidents in 2019: 0 II. The number of temporary piping and equipment repairs that are installed on hydrocarbon and high energy utility systems that are past their date of replacement with a permanent repair. 2020 Total Overdue Repeat January 61 0 0 February 65 0 0 March 65 0 0 April 68 0 0 May 73 0 0 June 71 0 0 July 71 0 0 August 69 0 0 September 69 0 0 October 69 0 0 November 64 0 0 December 64 0 0 TOTAL*64 0 0 *The total number of temporary piping and equipment repairs installed on hydrocarbon and high energy utility systems. 75 Attachment 1—Question 9 Risk Reduction Category ISS Approach Description Inherent Eliminate Replace Glycol as medium for jacket cooling system for H2 compressor with tempered water. Inherent Minimize Remove old gas fill station equipment and piping in berth 9 and removal of unused piping in 9 Plant East-West Pipe Rack to reduce risk of loss of containment. Passive Moderate Upgrade pump mechanical seals to CCSTB (Close Clearance Segmented Throttle Bushing) or duel seals to minimize the seal leakage in case of failure. Active Safeguard Furnace bogging alarm installed on a critical alarm panel for fired heaters and boilers to reduce the risk of overpressure and potential loss of containment. Active Safeguard Install SIF on furnaces fuel gas system to reduce the risk of furnace incident. Procedural Safeguard Richmond Refinery can convert a portion of the existing anhydrous ammonia inventory into Hydrogen and Updated emergency procedure for HNC plant to include evacuation as first step. 76 Annual Performance Review and Evaluation Submittal June 30, 2020 *Attach additional pages as necessary 1. Name and address of Stationary Source: Chemtrade Logsitics West US, LLC. 525 Castro St. Richmond, CA 94801 2. Contact name and telephone number (should CCHMP have questions): Andrew Hornbeck 973-650-0257. 3. Summarize the status of the Stationary Source’s Safety Plan and Program (450-8.030(B)(2)(i)): The sites Safety Plan is currently up to date after program updates were completed in 2019. 4. Summarize Safety Plan updates (i.e., brief explanation of update and corresponding date) (450-8.030(B)(2)(ii)): The 2019 Safety Plan submittal included updates to meet current site practices including changes to the sites investigtaion and corrective action plans, human factors program, process hazard analysis procedures and document control procedures. 5. List of locations where Safety Plans are/will be available for review, including contact telephone numbers if the source will provide individuals with copies of the document (450- 8.030(B)(2)(ii)): CCHMP Office at 4585 Pacheco Boulevard, Suite 100, Martinez; Martinez Library (libraries closest to the stationary source). 6. Provide any additions to the annual accident history reports (i.e. updates) submitted pursuant to Section 450-8.016(E)(2) of County Ordinance 98-48 (450-8.030(B)(2)(iii)) (i.e., provide information identified in Section 450-8.016(E)(1) for all major chemical accidents or releases occurring between the last annual performance review report and the current annual performance review and evaluation submittal (12-month history)): No new accidents in the previous 12 months. 7. Summary of each Root Cause Analysis (Section 450-8.016(C)) including the status of the analysis and the status of implementation of recommendations formulated during the analysis (450-8.030(B)(2)(iv)): N/A. 8. Summary of the status of implementation of recommendations formulated during audits, inspections, Root Cause Analyses, or Incident Investigations conducted by the Department (450-8.030(B)(2)(v)): N/A. 9. Summary of inherently safer systems implemented by the source including but not limited to inventory reduction (i.e., intensification) and substitution (450-8.030(B)(2)(vi)): Source has installed redundant level transmitters on various tank systems as well as installing remotely activated valves that are required to be manipulated in emergency situations. 77 10. Summarize the enforcement actions (including Notice of Deficiencies, Audit Reports, and any actions turned over to the Contra Costa County District Attorney’s Office) taken with the Stationary Source pursuant to Section 450-8.028 of County Ordinance 98-48 (450-8.030(B)(2) (vii)): There were no enforcement actions during this period. 11 . Summarize total penalties assessed as a result of enforcement of this Chapter (450-8.030(3)): No penalities have been assessed against this facility. 12 Summarize the total fees, service charges, and other assessments collected specifically for the support of the ISO (450-8.030(B)(4)): The total CalARP Program fees for the eight facilities subject to the Industrial Safety Ordinance was $1,111,605. The total Industrial Safety Ordinance program fees for these eight facilities was - $585,721. (NOTE: These fees include those for the County and City of Richmond ISO facilities). 13. Summarize total personnel and personnel years utilized by the jurisdiction to directly implement or administer this Chapter (450-8.030(B)(5)): 3,008 hours were used to audit/inspect and issue reports on the Risk Management Chapter of the Industrial Safety Ordinance. 14. Copies of any comments received by the source (that may not have been received by the Department) regarding the effectiveness of the local program that raise public safety issues(450-8.030(B)(6)): No additional comments have been received by the source. 15. Summarize how this Chapter improves industrial safety at your stationary source (450- 8.030(B)(7)): The ISO ordinance helps the site to continually improve it’s implementation of new policies and changes to processes by encouraging more thorough system reviews, executing a more inclusive Human Factors program and continually promoting Inherently Safer Systems. 16. List examples of changes made at your stationary source due to implementation of the Industrial Safety Ordinance (e.g., recommendations from PHA’s, Compliance Audits, and Incident Investigations in units not subject to CalARP regulations; recommendations from RCAs) that significantly decrease the severity or likelihood of accidental releases. Site has made significant improvements to it’s MOC, PHA and ISS programs due to the Industrial Safety Ordinance. 17. Summarize the emergency response activities conducted at the source (e.g., CWS or TEN activation) in response to major chemical accidents or releases: No major chemical accidents or releases since last report. . 18. Date the last Safety Culture Assessment was completed: 8/14/18 19. Date the results of the Safety Culture Assessment were reported to the workforce and management: 9/19/18 78 20. Answer the following regarding the Safety Culture Evaluation previous to the one listed in 18: • Survey method: Anonymous multiple choice survey developed with comments available for each question • Areas of improvements being addressed: Improve safety incentives and improve including hourly employees when conducting investigations • Action Plan made Progress on the identified areas of improvement?: (Yes or No) Yes »If Yes, did the improvements meet the goals and if not was the action plan amended to address what is being done to meet the goals? Process is on-going. Another SCA will be conducted to measure success. »If No, has a new action plan been developed to address the identified areas of improvement? (Yes or No) 21. Have milestones and metrics been developed to determine how the Safety Culture Assessment actions are being implemented? Yes or if not, Why not? Yes 22. Describe the process that included employees and their representatives used to determine if the action items effectively changed the expected culture items: A follow-up SCA will be conducted. 23. Date of the mid-cycle progress evaluation: Scheduled for April 2021 »Did the action plan (for no 18) make progress on the identified areas of improvement? Yes or if not, has a new action pan been developed? (Yes or No) 24. If a mid-cycle progress evaluation was performed during this reporting year, describe the process that included participation of employees or their representatives that determined whether the action items effectively changed the expected culture items. N/A 25. Common Process Safety Performance Indicators: Overdue inspection for piping and pressure vessels based on total number of circuits 2020 Overdue Repeat January 0 0 February 0 0 March 0 0 April 0 0 May 0 0 June 0 0 July 0 0 August 0 0 September 0 0 October 0 0 November 0 0 December 0 0 Total 0 0 Total number of circuits: 351 Total number of annual planned circuit inspections: 273 79 Past due PHA recommended actions, includes seismic and LCC recommended actions 2020 Overdue Repeat January 0 0 February 0 0 March 0 0 April 0 0 May 0 0 June 0 0 July 0 0 August 0 0 September 0 0 October 1 0 November 1 1 December 1 1 Total 1 1 Past due investigation recommended actions for API/ACC Tier 1 and Tier 2 incidents 2020 Overdue Repeat January 0 0 February 0 0 March 0 0 April 0 0 May 0 0 June 0 0 July 0 0 August 0 0 September 0 0 October 0 0 November 0 0 December 0 0 Total 0 0 80 1Petroleum refineries to report publicly available refinery rate for API Tier 1 and Tier 2 classification. Chemical plants to report publicly available mean only for ACC Tier 1 2Petroleum refineries to report publicly available refinery mean for API Tier 1 and Tier 2 classification. Chemical plants to report publicly available mean only for ACC Tier 1 API/ACC TIER 1 & TIER 2 INCIDENTS AND RATES STARTING 2011 Year 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 No. Tier 1 LOPC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Incident rate for Tier 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Refinery or Industry rate1 0.1553 0.0995 0.0947 0.0925 0.1038 0.0627 0.0761 0.057 0.061 Refinery or Industry mean2 *1.49 1.30 1.38 1.55 1.01 1.13 0.92 1.03 No. Tier 2 LOPC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 Incident rate for Tier 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.8 0 Refinery rate1 **0.2405 0.2531 0.2380 0.2063 0.1726 0.1843 0.1728 0.1574 Refinery mean2 ********3.08 2.78 2.73 2.79 2.67 26. Process Safety Performance Indicators for refineries only: N/A INDUSTRIAL SAFETY ORDINANCE RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE the list of providers recommended by Contra Costa Health Plan's Peer Review and Credentialing Committee on January 12, 2021 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: There is no fiscal impact for this action. BACKGROUND: The National Committee on Quality Assurance (NCQA) requires that evidence of Board Approval must be contained within each CCHP provider’s credentials file. Approval of this list of providers as recommended by the CCHP Medical Director will enable the Contra Costa Health Plan to comply with this requirement. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this action is not approved, Contra Costa Health Plan’s providers would not be appropriately credentialed and not be in compliance with the NCQA. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: Sharron MacKey, 925-313-6104 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Laura Cassell, Deputy cc: M Wilhelm, T Lieder C. 48 To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:Approve New and Recredentialing Providers and Organizational Providers in Contra Costa Health Plan’s Community Provider Network ATTACHMENTS Provider List- January 12, 2021 Contra Costa Health Plan Providers Approved by PRCC January 12, 2021 CREDENTIALING PROVIDER S JANUARY 2021 Name Specialty Alfaro Reales, Vanessa, RBT, BA Qualified Autism Professional Arzamendi, Audrey, MD Endocrinology Cuevas Na varro, Crystal, BTL -1, BA Qualified Autism Professional Edwards, Phyllis, PT Physical Therapy Felix, Wendy, BCBA Qualified Autism Provider Gamble, Sara, PT Physical Therapy Garske, Steven, PT Physical Therapy Gillies, Allison, OT Occupational Therapy Hart, Adelina, RBT Qualified Autism Paraprofessional Hathaway, Alison, NP Mid-Level Family Planning Higgins Reis, Genevieve, LCSW Mental Health Services Howard, Scott, PsyD Mental Health Services Johnson, Kwenda, PA Physical Therapy Lundy, Fiona, LCSW Mental Health Services Marlow, Victoria, MFT Mental Health Services Marmolejo, Alfredo, RBT, BA Qualified Autism Profes sional Contra Costa Health Plan Providers Approved by PRC C January 12, 2021 CREDENTIALING PROVIDER S JANUARY 2021 Name Specialty Martineau, Eric, DPT Physical Therapy Medina, Alejandra, RBT Qualified Autism Paraprofessional Monroe, Linda, PT Physical Therapy Moreno, Yvette, BTL-1 Qualified Autism Professional Munoz, Ester, BTL-1 Qualified Autism Professional Nordin, Darby, DPT Physical Therapy Osuka, Obinna, BS Qualified Autism Professional Rennaker, Tamera, RN Lactation Consul tant Rios, Eon, MD Dermatology Sanchez, Jessica, LCSW Mental Health Services Sebhatu, Selamawit, BCBA Qualified Autism Provider Shahade, Madlina, BTL -1 Qualified Autism Professional Sweet, Lori, PT Physical Therapy Unubun, Dominique, BTL -1, BA Qualified Autism Professional Valdez, Caitlin, RBT, BA Qualified Autism Professional Wong, David, MD Dermatology Contra Costa Health Plan Providers Approved by PRCC &Medical Director January 12, 2021 CREDENTIALING ORGANIZATIONAL PROVIDERS JANUARY 2021 Provider Name Provide the Following Services Location Cabulance Comfort dba: Arcadia Ambulance Non-Emergency Transportation San Ramon Sierra Health and Wellness Centers, LLC, dba: New Start Recovery Solutions Substance Abuse Concord RECREDENTIALING PROVIDER S JANUARY 2021 Name Spec ialty Amirdelfan, Kasra, MD Pain Medicine Bhattacharyya, Alok, MD Nephrology Block, Alison, MD Family Planning Breton, Jenna, NP Mid-Level Family Planning Brown, Michael, MD Urology Bunzel, Mary, NP Primary Care Family Medicine Caldwell, Kenneth, MD Surgery – Orthopaedic Contra Costa Health Plan Providers Approved by PRC C January 12, 2021 RECREDENTIALING PROVIDER S JANUARY 2021 Name Spec ialty Chen, Jeff, MD Pain Medicine Cloutier, Steven, PhD Mental Health Services Ellis, Selena, MD Nephrology Ferguson, Susan, MD Primary Care Internal Medicine Griego, Ann-Elizabeth, MD Family Planning Hopson, Christina, DO Infectious Disease Huffaker, Michelle, MD Allergy & Immunology Javaheri, Shahin, MD Surgery – Plastic & Reconstructive Otolaryngology (ENT) Kassels, Michael, DO Primary Care Internal Medicine Kuri, Mauricio, MD Surgery – Plastic McAlear, Matthew, BCBA Qualified Autism Provider Miller, Terina, MD Nephrology Morrissey, Ellen, MD Nephrology Ong, Frances, OD Optometry Contra Costa Health Plan Providers Approved by PRCC &Medical Director January 12, 2021 RECREDENTIALING PROVIDER S JANUARY 2021 Name Spec ialty Patel, Swati, MD Nephrology Ruiz Morales, Maria, RBT, BA Qualified Autism Professional Ryan, Alison, PA Mid-Level Oncology Saldivar, Nancy, NP Primary Care Internal Medicine Salzman, John, MD Radiation Oncology Sharma, Rohit, MD Nephrology Takao, Kevin, PT Physical Therapy Tam, David, OD Optometry Tarder, Gerald, MD Gastroenterology Upshaw, Bradley, OD Optometry Wold, Michelle, BCBA Qualified Autism Provider Zylker, Kenneth, DC Chiropractic Medicine Contra Costa Health Plan Providers Approved by PRC C January 12, 2021 RECREDENTIALING OR GANIZATION AL PROVIDER S JANUARY 2021 Provider Name Provide the Following Services Location Ace Home Health Care and Hospice, Inc. Home Health and Hospice Orinda Harmony Healthcare, LLC dba Harmony Home Health Home Health Santa Clara Nova Care Home Health Services, Inc. Home Health Brentwood Wheelcare Express, Inc. Non-Emergency Transportation San Leandro Bopl-January 12, 2021 RECOMMENDATION(S): RATIFY the Conservation and Development Director’s execution of a tolling agreement with Discovery Builders, Inc., West Coast Home Builders, Inc., and the East Contra Costa Fire Protection District to toll the limitations period for potential litigation related to fire protection facilities fees through April 30, 2021. FISCAL IMPACT: None. BACKGROUND: On November 3, 2020, the Board of Supervisors adopted Ordinance No. 2020-27, an ordinance that establishes fire protection facilities fees for that portion of the County that is located within the boundaries of the East Contra Costa Fire Protection District. The ordinance authorizes the County to impose the fees and authorizes the Fire District to collect, retain, and expend the fees. Fee amounts are specified in the ordinance and must be paid before a building permit is issued for new residential or commercial construction. At the same meeting, the Board also approved a fee administration agreement between the County and the Fire District that establishes the terms and conditions for the Fire District to collect, retain, APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: John Kopchik (925) 674-7819 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Laura Cassell, Deputy cc: C. 49 To:Board of Supervisors From:John Kopchik, Director, Conservation & Development Department Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:Tolling agreement with Discovery Builders, Inc., West Coast Home Builders, Inc., and the East Contra Costa Fire Protection District BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) and expend the fees. Under the fee administration agreement, the Fire District is required to indemnify the County against all lawsuits related to the fees and the fee ordinance, including any challenge to the validity of the fees, any challenge to the Fire District’s use of the fees, and any challenge related to compliance with the Mitigation Fee Act. The Fire District, Discovery Builders, Inc., and West Coast Home Builders, Inc., are currently in a dispute over the fee amounts in the ordinance. These parties are engaged in discussions to try to resolve their differences without incurring the cost and expense of litigation. They requested that the County enter into a tolling agreement to toll (suspend) the statutory limitations period for filing a lawsuit related to fire protection facilities fees from February 24, 2021, through April 30, 2021. The tolling agreement was executed by the Conservation and Development Director on February 25, 2021. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The Conservation and Development Director’s execution of the tolling agreement would not be ratified. RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Veterans Services Officer, or designee, to execute Unpaid Student Training Agreement CSUSTA1137 with California State University, Stanislaus Masters of Social Work Program, for the period of May 1, 2021 through April 30, 2026. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no financial cost to the County outside of staff time to supervise the California State University, Stanislaus Student. BACKGROUND: The purpose of this agreement is to provide social work graduate-level students at California State University, Stanislaus the opportunity to integrate academic knowledge with applied skills at progressively higher levels of performance and responsibility. Approval of Unpaid Student Training Agreement CSUSTA1137 will allow California State University, Stanislaus students to receive supervised fieldwork experience with the Veterans Services Department for the period of May 1, 2021 through April 30, 2026. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: Nathan Johnson, (925) 313-1481 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Laura Cassell, Deputy cc: C. 50 To:Board of Supervisors From:Nathan Johnson, Veterans Services Officer Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:Master of Social Work Field Practicum Agreement between Contra Costa County Veterans Services Office and California State University, Stanislaus CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Failure to authorize this agreement would deprive the County of additional outreach and engagement for service members and their dependents who are eligible for additional services. ATTACHMENTS Agreement CSU Agreement No. CSUSTA1137 Page 1 of 4 Revision Date 8.24.2020 CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, STANISLAUS MASTER OF SOCIAL WORK PROGRAM Field Practicum Agreement THIS AGREEMENT entered into by and between the State of California through the Trustees of the California State University on behalf of CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, STANISLAUS, hereinafter called the “University”, and the Agency, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY VETERANS SERVICES OFFICE, hereinafter called the “Agency”, collectively together called “Parties”. WITNESSETH WHEREAS, it is to the mutual benefit of the parties that students of the University's Social Work Program use the facilities of the Agency for their field practicum program. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the conditions, and the stipulations hereinafter expressed and in consideration of the mutual benefits to be derived, the parties agree as follows: PARTIES UNIVERSITY: Trustees of the California State University California State University, Stanislaus One University Circle Turlock, California 95382 AGENCY: Contra Costa County Veterans Services Office 10 Douglas Drive #100 Martinez, CA 94553 TERM: May 1, 2021 through April 30, 2026. AGENCY SHALL 1. Permit each student who is designated by the University to receive a social work field practicum at the Agency and shall furnish, and permit such students and designated field instructors free access to appropriate Agency facilities for the field practicum. 2. Furnish appropriate Agency facilities, in such a manner that there will be no conflict in the use between the University's students and students from other educational institutions, if any. 3. Maintain the Agency facilities used for the field practicum in such a manner that the facilities shall be available to the students and field instructor when needed. 4. Assure that staff is adequate in number and quality to provide field instruction and to insure continuous management of the student program in cooperation with the Field Coordinator. 5. Provide the resources necessary to provide an educationally focused field practicum in accordance with the policies and procedures of the social work program. 6. Provide office space, telephone access, supplies, and other materials to enable a student to function effectively in their placement. 7. Designate qualified field instructors, subject to approval of University Field Coordinator. CSU Agreement No. CSUSTA1137 Page 2 of 4 Revision Date 8.24.2020 8. Assure that adequate time is available for student supervision, field instructor meetings, training, and orientation. 9. Adhere to policies and practices reflecting nondiscrimination applied to clients, staff, and students. 10. Not employ discriminatory practices in its selection of students and in its performance hereunder on the basis of sex, sexual orientation, race, color, ancestry, ethnicity, religious creed, national origin, disability (including HIV and AIDS), medical condition, age, marital status, and denial of family care leave. 11. Orient MSW students as to the role and responsibilities of students in the Agency. 12. Supervise all instruction and field practicum experience given at the Agency to the assigned student. 13. Be responsible for the student’s professional activities and conduct while in the Agency. 14. Have the right, after consultation with the University, to refuse to accept further placements of the University's students who in the Agency's judgment are not participating satisfactorily in the program. 15. Notify the University Field Coordinator and the field instructors, in advance, of any change in the Agency's personnel appointments which may affect the student field program. 16. Hold harmless, defend and indemnify University against all claims, demands, suits, judgments, expenses and costs of any kind and every kind, insofar as they may legally do so, on account of the injury to or death of persons or loss or damage to property arising in any manner out of the acts or omissions of Agency's officers, agents or employees in the performance of this Agreement. 17. Shall procure and maintain in force during the term of this Agreement, at its sole cost and expense, insurance in amounts that are reasonably necessary to protect it against liability arising from any and all negligent acts or incidents caused by its employees. Coverage under such professional and commercial general liability insurance shall be not less than two million dollars ($2,000,000) for each occurrence and four million dollars ($4,000,000) in the aggregate. Such coverage is to be obtained from a carrier rated A or better by AM Best or a qualified program of self-insurance. Agency shall also maintain and provide evidence of workers’ compensation for its employees as required by law. Agency shall provide University with evidence of the insurance coverage as required by this paragraph, which shall provide for not less than thirty (30) days notice of cancellation to University. Agency shall promptly notify University of any cancellation, reduction, or other material change in the amount or scope of any coverage required hereunder. 18. Maintain a working and learning environment free from sexual harassment of its students, employees and those who apply for student or employee status. 19. Be aware of and informed about the hazards currently known to be associated with the novel coronavirus referred to as “COVID-19”. Agency is familiar with and informed about the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (“CDC”) current guidelines regarding COVID-19 as well as applicable federal, state, and local governmental directives regarding COVID-19. Agency, to the best of its knowledge and belief, is in compliance with those current CDC guidelines and applicable governmental directives. If the current CDC guidelines or applicable government directives are modified, changed or updated, Agency will take steps to comply with the modified, changed or updated guidelines or directives. If at any time Agency becomes aware that it is not in compliance with CDC guidelines or an applicable governmental directive, it will notify University of that fact. CSU Agreement No. CSUSTA1137 Page 3 of 4 Revision Date 8.24.2020 UNIVERSITY, THROUGH THE MSW PROGRAM, SHALL 1. Designate the students who are enrolled in the Social Work Program of the University to be assigned for field practicum at the Agency, in such numbers as are mutually agreed to by both parties. 2. In consultation and coordination with the Agency’s representatives, establish a plan for the field practicum to be provided to students. The plan will provide clear expectations and procedures for the implementation of the practicum. 3. Provide the necessary faculty liaisons for the field practicum program provided for under this Agreement. 4. Keep all attendance and academic records of students participating in the practicum program. 5. Require every student to conform to all applicable Agency policies, procedures, and regulations, and all requirements and restrictions specified jointly by representatives of the University and Agency. 6. Require designated field instructors to notify Agency's representatives of the: a. Student placement schedule b. Placement of students in field assignments. c. Changes in field assignments. 7. In consultation and coordination with the Agency's administration staff there is the expectation that periodic conferences are routinely scheduled between the assigned faculty liaison and Agency staff to monitor and coordinate the field practicum experience. 8. Provide and be responsible for the care and control of the University's educational supplies, materials and equipment, used for instruction during the program. 9. Orient and train field instructors as to the University's relevant academic policies and the social work program's curriculum focus; its policies, procedures, and philosophy. 10. Maintain formal communication with participating agencies with the ongoing expectation that faculty liaisons routinely meet with field instructors to ensure coordination and open communication. 11. Provide training to field instructors on the educational aspects of field instruction. 12. Provide ongoing support and assistance to field instructors, students, and agencies to promote an educationally based practicum experience. 13. Hold harmless, defend and indemnify Agency against all claims, demands, suits, judgments, expenses, and costs of any kind, insofar as they may legally do so, on account of the injury to or death of persons or loss or damage to property arising in any manner out of acts or omissions of University officers, agents, employees or students in the performance of this Agreement. 14. Shall procure and maintain in force during the term of this Agreement, at its sole cost and expense, insurance in amounts reasonably necessary to protect it against liability arising from any and all negligent acts or incidents caused by University’s employees. Coverage under such professional and commercial general liability insurance shall be not less than two million dollars ($2,000,000) for each occurrence and four million dollars ($4,000,000) in the aggregate. Such coverage shall be obtained from a carrier rated A or better by AM Best or a qualified program of self-insurance. The University shall maintain and provide evidence of workers’ compensation as required by law. Upon request, University shall provide Agency with evidence of the insurance required under this paragraph, which shall provide for not less than thirty (30) days notice of cancellation to Agency. University shall promptly notify Agency of any cancellation, reduction, or other material change in the amount or scope of any coverage required hereunder. CSU Agreement No. CSUSTA1137 Page 4 of 4 Revision Date 8.24.2020 15. Shall ensure that each student in the Program procures and maintains in force during the term of this Agreement, at the student’s sole cost and expense, professional liability insurance in amounts reasonably necessary to protect the student against liability arising from any and all negligent acts or incidents caused by the student. Coverage under such professional liability insurance shall be not less than two million dollars ($2,000,000) for each occurrence and four million dollars ($4,000,000) in the aggregate. Such coverage is to be obtained from a carrier rated A or better by AM Best. University shall require each student in the Program to present evidence of his or her professional liability coverage to Agency. GENERAL PROVISIONS 1. This Agreement may be terminated by either party after giving the other party six (6) months advance written notice of its intention to so terminate. Any such termination by the Agency shall not be effective, at the option of the University, for any student until such student has completed the program for the then current academic year. 2. The parties agree that Agency is not to assume nor shall it assume by this Agreement any liability under the California Worker's Compensation Insurance and Safety Act for, by or on behalf of any University students or University instructors while said students or instructors are on the premises of the Agency or while performing any duty whatsoever under the terms of this Agreement or while going to or from any of Agency's facilities. 3. University shall inform each student regarding the lack of coverage for Worker's Compensation Insurance by either party. 4. All students shall be required, as a condition of participation in field practicum, to release from liability the Agency and its representatives for any and all acts performed in good faith and without malice in connection with field practicum. 5. This document contains the entire agreement and understanding of the parties and supersedes all prior agreements, arrangements, and understandings with respect to the subject matter of this document. This Agreement may at any time be altered, changed or amended by mutual agreement of the parties in writing. By signing below, each of the following represent that they have authority to execute this Agreement and to bind the party on whose behalf their signature is made. CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, STANISLAUS By: Date: Rhonda Willson Procurement & Contract Services CONTRA COSTA COUNTY VETERANS SERVICES OFFICE By: Date: _ Name: ________________________________________________ Title: _________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE the 2021-2022 Head Start Recruitment and Enrollment Plan and the Admissions Priority Criteria for early care and education programs of the Community Services Bureau, as recommended by the Employment and Human Services Director. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: Head Start Performance Standard 1302.14(a)(1) mandates that the Head Start grantee set criteria, based on a community assessment that defines the types of children and families who will be given Head Start priority for recruitment and selection. This board order accepts the Employment and Human Services Department (EHSD), Community Services Bureau (CSB) Selection Criteria and Recruitment Plan for the 2021-2022 program year. Due to the community need for full-day, full-year services, and the mandate that Head Start and Early Head Start programs collaborate for full-day services, EHSD CSB has adopted selection criteria, organized by priorities, which meet the State Department of Education regulations. The plan is set forth in the 2021-2022 CSB Admissions Priorities/Section Criteria. To meet Head APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: C. Youngblood, (925) 608-4964 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Laura Cassell, Deputy cc: Hayee Ilan, Nasim Eghlima C. 51 To:Board of Supervisors From:Kathy Gallagher, Employment & Human Services Director Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:2021-2022 Head Start Recruitment/Enrollment Plan and Admissions Priority Criteria BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) Start and Early Head Start enrollment goals, plans must be developed and set in place for adequate marketing and recruitment strategies. CSB utilizes community assessment to identify populations to be served by the Head Start program and to recruit those eligible to receive services. The recruitment and enrollment plan is set forth in the 2021-2022 Head Start/Early Head Start /Early Education and support Program Recruitment and Enrollment Plan. The plans were approved by the Head Start Policy Council on January 20, 2021. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Without approval, the Employment and Human Services Department, Community Services Bureau, would not be in compliance with Head Start regulations. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: This action supports three (3) of the community outcomes established in the Children's Report Card: 1) "Children Ready for and Succeeding in School"; 3) "Families that are Economically Self-Sufficient"; and, 4) "Families that are Safe, Stable, and Nurturing" by offering comprehensive services including high quality early childhood education, nutrition, and health services to low-income children throughout the County. ATTACHMENTS Recruitment and Enrollment Plan Contra Costa County Employment & Human Services Department Community Services Bureau PC Motion Form Content Revised: 09/2017 M (Jan 20, 2021 16:18 PST) 2021-2022 Head Start/Early Head Start/Early Education and Support Programs Recruitment and Enrollment Plan Contra Costa County Employment and Human Services Department - Community Services Bureau 2021-2022 Head Start/Early Head Start/Early Education and Support Programs Recruitment and Enrollment Plan, approved by Policy Council on 01/20/2021 and approved by Board of Supervisors on xx/xx/xxxx. Page 1 DESIRED OUTCOME: To inform the public about services available through the Contra Costa County Community Services Bureau, pa rticularly those populations identified in our Community Assessment, and to recruit and enroll eligible children and their families into the Head Start, Early Head Start and Early Ed ucation and Support Programs. Goal #1: To recruit eligible pregnant women, infants, toddlers, and children. Goal #2: To recruit children with disabilities. Goal #3: To recruit special populations as per our community assessment and selection criteria: CPS/At -Risk, Domestic Violence, Limited English, Need for Full Day Care, Homeless, TANF/CalWORKS Recipient, Children with Health Impairments, Teen Parents, Grandparent Caregivers, and children of currently or formerly incarcerated parents. ACTIVITIES PERSON (S) RESPONSIBLE TIMELINE LOCATION INFORMATION TO INCLUDE DISTRIBUTION Mobilize Parents – Word of Mouth, is our best strategy. Make sure a supply of flyers is available for parents to take and give out. Comprehensive Services, Site Supervisors, Parent/ Family, Community Engagement Officer, and ERSEA Manager March 2021 Policy Council, Parent Meetings, Family Newsletter, Tables in entryways. Reproducible Flyers and Pre-App Screening Forms. Contest – parent with most screening forms wins prize. All CSB and Delegate and Partner sites. Pamphlets/flyers distributed: a) General info on CSB services b) Enrollment flyers c) Home-based services Teachers, Site Supervisors, Comprehensive Services Staff, Home Educators, Centralized Enrollment Unit staff. Ongoing Laundromats WIC offices Grocery Stores Classrooms Elementary Schools Clinics Community-Based Organizations County Agencies Local churches Education Offices Libraries Hospitals Community Events/Flea Markets Check Cashing Agencies High Schools One-Stop Locations Housing site offices (including- 9 housing sites in San Ramon) Homeless Programs Community Centers (Richmond, San Pablo, Oakley, Willow Pass) Parks & Rec centers (Ambrose) LiHEAP office Stage 2 & Alternative Payment Plans Family Entertainment Centers (Roller Rinks) Community Colleges First Five Pictures Short paragraph describing program options Who is eligible Explanation of services available List Health, Nutrition, Education, Family Services, Family Wellness, Parent Engagement, Disabilities Services Home base Contact numbers and/or persons HEAP mailings Food Stamp Offices Parent Meetings Doctors’ Offices EHSD Child Care Offices Volunteer Bureaus One-Stop Centers Parents Farmers Markets (Richmond Main Street, San Pablo, Concord) *See “Location” section for additional distribution information 2021-2022 Head Start/Early Head Start/Early Education and Support Programs Recruitment and Enrollment Plan Contra Costa County Employment and Human Services Department - Community Services Bureau 2021-2022 Head Start/Early Head Start/Early Education and Support Programs Recruitment and Enrollment Plan, approved by Policy Council on 01/20/2021 and approved by Board of Supervisors on xx/xx/xxxx. Page 2 ACTIVITIES PERSON (S) RESPONSIBLE TIMELINE LOCATION INFORMATION TO INCLUDE DISTRIBUTION Family Newsletter Comprehensive Services, Site Supervisors Quarterly Distribute to all parents / partners Who is eligible? Who to Contact? Program Activities Events, Educational opportunities Early Intervention Programs Community Partners Elementary Schools in the District Contact Agencies Serving Children ERSEA Manager, Comprehensive Services Managers Spring and Fall and as needed WIC offices SELPAs Child Care Centers School Districts Private Providers Community-Based Organizations Community Recreation Sites PTAs Human Service Department Partner Sites Family Child Care Networks Resource and Referral Agencies Stage 2 & Alternative Payment Plans First Five Offices & Centers Homeless Shelter OB/GYN Offices LiHEAP office Agencies serving children with special needs Initial letter containing description of Head Start and Agency services and program options Personal visit to discuss coordination services, share program and curriculum information, plan referrals. Community Coordinate Transition Activities with Elementary Schools MH/Disabilities Manager; Site Supervisors Education Managers Spring/ Summer and throughout the year as needed Childcare Centers Elementary Schools Other agencies for intake for special needs children High School/IT Any pertinent information on child, - authorized by parent Elementary School staff meetings & parent meetings; Site based staff meetings/ parent meetings; Policy Council Meetings Speak at local organizations Directors, Assistant Directors, Comprehensive Services Mgrs., Male Involvement Coordinator Ongoing Union Meetings Faith Based Organizations SHARE County Malls Fairs Clubs Community Events Other Government Agencies Non-Profit Agencies Businesses, Corporations and Foundations Make Head Start staff or Policy Council rep. available Describe advantageous services Distribute pamphlets List of centers with contact information Set up information table with posters and pictures Application packages Civic Organizations PTA meetings Church groups Community events 2021-2022 Head Start/Early Head Start/Early Education and Support Programs Recruitment and Enrollment Plan Contra Costa County Employment and Human Services Department - Community Services Bureau 2021-2022 Head Start/Early Head Start/Early Education and Support Programs Recruitment and Enrollment Plan, approved by Policy Council on 01/20/2021 and approved by Board of Supervisors on xx/xx/xxxx. Page 3 ACTIVITIES PERSON (S) RESPONSIBLE TIMELINE LOCATION INFORMATION TO INCLUDE DISTRIBUTION “Staff Walks around the Community” Site Supervisors, Comprehensive Services Staff, and Centralized Enrollment Unit staff. May – August and as needed Neighborhoods Other Agencies Brief description of services Magnets or other marketing aids with contact info Flyers Community Any opportunity for free ads in local media, including social media Assistant Directors; Analysts, Social Media Team Spring-Fall Local newspaper agencies, Penny Saver, Grapevine, Radio, Public Access TV, agency presence on Facebook and Twitter, etc. Short information on program, in English and Spanish Contact information (Recruitment hotline) Newspapers and on line. Community Events ALL STAFF Ongoing Contra Costa County Information on employment for teachers Informational Flyers Magnets, etc. with brief information Community Maintain supply of free Head Start pamphlets (order from ACF) Site Supervisors, Managers for HB and Partners Comp. Services Asst. Managers Ongoing All CSB Centers All Partner/Delegate centers One Stop Career Centers Human Services Department SS of WIC SparkPoint Family Justice Center LiHEAP office Description of Head Start program and sample activities, with contact information. Community Implement streamlined referral processes per MOUs ERSEA Manager Ongoing CFS BBK RCEB Health Services CalWorks Protocol and Procures Forms Tracking of special referrals Organizations noted in “Location” section. Recruitment through partnerships ERSEA Manager, Comprehensive Services Managers, Partner Unit Ongoing CSB’s Head Start and State child development partner agencies Information of CSB’s HS services including different program models to meet client needs. Site location and contact list. Transfer coordination. Childcare and development partnerships Head Start Performance Standard 1302.14 (a)(1) mandates that the program set criteria, based on our Community Assessment, that define the types of children and families who will be given priority for recruitment and selection. Kindergarten is available in all communities that we serve. Due to the community need for full-day, full-year services, and the mandate that the Head Start & Early Head Start Program collaborate for full-day services, CSB has adopted the following selection criteria presented in order of priority, which also meets the regulations of our partner, the State Department of Education, with one exception as noted below*: INFANTS & TODDLERS (Aged 0-3, including pregnant women) PRE-SCHOOL (Aged 3-5) 1. Transfers of children currently enrolled in Early Head Start and California Childcare and Development programs 2. CPS or Child At Risk, Foster Child, Currently Homeless or Homeless within the last 18 months 3. Eligible infant/toddler with disabilities (IEP or IFSP) 4. Sibling of a child already enrolled in the program 5. Current TANF Recipient or within 24 months 6. Lowest income infant/toddler *Exception Contra Costa College: On October 3, 2008, the California Department of Education granted CSB an enrollment waiver to give first priority to children of college students at our Contra Costa College Children’s Center. 1. Transfers of children currently enrolled in Head Start and California Childcare and Development programs 2. CPS or Child At Risk, Foster Child, Currently Homeless or Homeless within the last 18 months 3. Eligible 4 yr old with disabilities (IEP or IFSP) 4. Sibling of a child already enrolled in the program 5. Eligible 4 yr old with special circumstances  Families experiencing domestic violence  Limited English  Families Needing Full Day services  Current TANF recipient or within the last 24 months  Health Impairments  Teen Parents  Grandparent caregivers  Children with current or former incarcerated parent(s) 6. Lowest income 4 yr old 7. Eligible 3 yr olds disabilities (IEP or IFSP) 8. Eligible 3 yr old with special circumstances  Families experiencing domestic violence  Limited English  Families Needing Full Day services  Current TANF recipient or within the last 24 months  Health Impairments  Teen Parents  Grandparent caregivers  Children with current or former incarcerated parent(s) 9. Lowest income 3 yr old  Denotes categorical eligibility as per Head Start Performance Standard 1302.14 (b), at least 10 percent of the enrollment will be made available to children who meet the definition for children with disabilities. Children enrolled in the EHS-CCP and EHS-CCP2 program must be receiving child care subsidies at time of enrollment, as required for the Early Head Start- Child Care Partnership (EHS- CCP) and Early Head Start-Child Care Partnership 2 (EHS-CCP2) grant. CSB 603 –2021-2022 Admissions Priorities / Selection Criteria, approved by Policy Council on 1/20/2021 and approved by Board of Supervisors on xx/xx/xxxx CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CSB Admissions Priorities / Selection Criteria 2021-2022 Program Year RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Auditor-Controller, or designee, to pay each of up to eleven (11) In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS) Public Authority (PA) Advisory Council members $24 per meeting not to exceed three (3) meetings per month for the 12-month period of July 1, 2021 through June 30, 2022 for a total cost for 11 members not to exceed $7,300 in stipends to defray meeting attendance costs. FISCAL IMPACT: $7,300: In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS) funds. (50% Federal, 40% State, 10% County) BACKGROUND: The In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS) Public Authority (PA) Advisory Council (AC) members receive $24 stipends to attend AC meetings, paid through the Auditor-Controller's office to defray attendance costs of members. The action is recommended by the IHSS Public Authority Advisory Board. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Without stipends, meeting costs may be prohibitive to member attendance. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: C. Youngblood, (925) 608-4964 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 , County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Laura Cassell, Deputy cc: Elizabeth Dondi, Debora Bertasi C. 52 To:Board of Supervisors From:Kathy Gallagher, Employment & Human Services Director Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:In-Home Supportive Services Public Authority Advisory Council Stipends RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Conservation and Development Director, or designee, to execute an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement with Pacific West Communities for the development of a minimum of 325 multiple family residences and 40,000 sq. ft. of commercial space for the Orbisonia Heights site in the Bay Point area. FISCAL IMPACT: No impact to the General Fund. Staff project costs are covered by the Housing Successor budget. BACKGROUND: The County, in its capacity as Housing Successor to the Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency, is the owner of approximately 7.767 acres of vacant real property located southeast of Bailey Road and State Route 4 in the Bay Point area. The site is within the Pittsburg/Bay Point BART Station Area and is planned for high density transit-oriented development. The site was assembled by the former Redevelopment Agency and is a housing asset, now owned by the County (as Housing Successor). APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 03/09/2021 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor ABSENT:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Contact: Maureen Toms, 925-674-7878 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: March 9, 2021 Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: Laura Cassell, Deputy cc: C. 53 To:Board of Supervisors From:John Kopchik, Director, Conservation & Development Department Date:March 9, 2021 Contra Costa County Subject:Exclusive Negotiating Agreement-Pacific West Communities BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) The County released a Request for Qualifications/Request for Proposals in December 2016. A committee of staff and community members selected Pacific West Communities (Developer) as the developer for the site. An exclusive negotiating agreement between the County and the Developer was approved by the Board of Supervisors on September 17, 2017. That agreement has expired but the parties desire to continue to pursue the originally-contemplated project and would, therefore, like to enter into the exclusive negotiating agreement that is the subject of this board order. The purpose of this Agreement is twofold. First, it is intended to enable the parties to assess the feasibility of the development. Second, if the development is determined to be feasible, it is intended to enable the parties to negotiate a disposition and development agreement (a “DDA”). Under the DDA, the Property would be conveyed to the Developer for construction of the development. The disposition of the property is governed by the County, in its capacity as Housing Successor. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Development of a Housing Successor asset will be delayed. ATTACHMENTS ENA 1 EXCLUSIVE NEGOTIATING RIGHTS AGREEMENT (ORBISONIA HEIGHTS) This Exclusive Negotiating Rights Agreement (“Agreement”) is dated March 8, 2021 (the “Effective Date”), and is between the COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA , a political subdivision of the State of California (the “County”), and PACIFIC WEST COMMUNITIES, INC., an Idaho corporation (the “Developer ”). RECITALS A. The County, in its capacity as housing successor to the Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency, is the owner of approximately 7.767 acres of real property located near West Leland Road and Bailey Road in Bay Point, California, having the following Assessor’s Parcel Numbers: 094-012-021; 094-012-022; 094-012-023; 094- 012-024; 094-012-025; 094-012-026; 094-012-027; 094-012-030; 094-012-031; 094-012- 032; 094-012-033; 094-012-038; 094-012-039; 094-012-040; 094-013-001; 094-013-002; 094-013-003; 094-013-004; 094-013-005; 094-013-006; 094-013-012; 094-013-013; 094- 013-014; 094-013-015; 094-013-016; 094-014-001; 094-014-010; 094-014-011; 094-014- 012; 094-014-013; 094-014-014; 094-015-006; 094-015-010; 094-015-011; 094-015-012; 094-015-013; 094-015-014; 094-015-027; 094-015-028; 094-016-002; 094-026-001; 094- 026-002; 094-026-008; and 094-026-007, as more particularly described in Exhibit A (the “Property”). B. The County desires the Property to be developed with a 325-unit mixed use affordable housing community (the “Development ”). Developer has developed projects similar to the proposed Development. C. The purpose of this Agreement is twofold. First, it is intended to enable the parties to assess the feasibility of the Development. Second, if the Development is determined to be feasible, it is intended to enable the parties to negotiate a disposition and development agreement (a “DDA”). Under the DDA, the Property would be conveyed to the Developer for construction of the Development. D. Because the property is a housing asset of the former Redevelopment Agency, its disposition is governed by the County, in its capacity as housing succe ssor, and is subject to the requirements of Health and Safety Code Section 34176. The parties therefore agree as follows: AGREEMENT Exclusive Negotiations 2 1. Good Faith Negotiations. The County and the Developer shall negotiate diligently and in good faith during the Negotiating Period (defined below), the terms of a DDA for the development of the Development on the Property. Among the issues to be addressed in the negotiations are: (i) the price to be paid by the Developer for the Property, (ii) the physical and land title conditions of the Property, (iii) the type of entitlements necessary for the Development, (iv) the design, density, and mix of uses within the Development, (v) the development schedule for the Development, (vi) financing of the Development; (vii) the marketing of, sales process associated with, and management of the Development, (viii) housing affordability and the nature of affordability controls, and (ix) the green building components of the Development. 2. Negotiating Period. The "Negotiating Period" under this Agreement is comprised of (i) an initial period of six months, beginning on the Effective Date, and, (ii) if agreed to by the parties in writing, one three-mo nth renewal period. The County’s Director of Conservation and Development (the “Director”) will make the determination for the County with respect to whether the Negotiating Period will be extended through the renewal period. The Director’s decision will be based on his reasonable judgment as to whether sufficient progress has been made toward a mutually acceptable DDA to merit further negotiations. a. Subject to Section 2.b. below, if a DDA is not executed by the parties prior to the expiration of the Negotiating Period, this Agreement will terminate and neither party will have any further rights or obligations under this Agreement (with the exception of Section 22 (waiver of lis pendens), Section 23(d) (indemnity) and Section 25 (no commissions), all of which survive the termination of this Agreement). Upon the execution of a DDA by the County and the Developer, this Agreement will terminate and all rights and obligations of the parties with respect to the Development will be governed by the DDA. b. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Agreement, if at the end of the Negotiating Period, a form of DDA has been mutually agreed upon by the Developer and the Director but the DDA has not been approved by the parties’ governing bodies, the Director may extend the Negotiating Period to the date on which the County holds a public hearing to consider approving the DDA. 3. Exclusive Negotiations. During the Negotiating Period, the County may only negotiate with the Developer regarding development of the Property and may not solicit or entertain bids or proposals for such development from any other entity. 4. Party Representatives. The Developer's representative to negotiate the DDA is Caleb Roope, its President and Chief Executive Officer. The County’s representative to negotiate the DDA is Maureen Toms, its Deputy Director of Conservation and Development. NEGOTIATION TASKS 3 5. Overview. To facilitate negotiation of the DDA, the parties shall use reasonable good faith efforts to accomplish the negotiation tasks set forth below in an effort to (i) determine the feasibility of the Development, and (ii) complete the negotiation and execution of a mutually acceptable DDA prior to the expiration of the Negotiating Period. 6. Financing and Costs of Development. Within ninety days of the Effective Date, the Developer shall prepare and submit to the County a detailed financial proforma for the Development containing matters typically contained in such proformas, including (without limitation) a detailed development cost budget and tax credit funding analysis. The development cost budget will be used to evaluate the financial feasibility of the Development and to identify financing sources for the Development. The Developer shall cause the financial proformas to include (i) an analysis of the affordable units to be constructed as part of the Development, and (ii) Developer's obligation to pay prevailing wages in connection with the construction of the Development as required by applicable law. 7. Purchase Price for the Property. The County and the Developer shall seek to agree upon a purchase price for the Property. The proposed purchase price for the Property will be subject to approval by the County’s Board of Supervisor following a noticed hearing conducted in accordance with Health and Safety Code Section 33433. 8. Site and Architectural Plans. The Developer shall prepare and submit to the County a proposed site plan, including massing diagram and a rendering that identifies the location, general configuration and proposed design characteristics of the buildings, parking spaces, landscaping, and other aspects of the Development. During the Negotiating Period the Developer shall prepare appropriate refinements and modificat ions to the site plan, diagram and renderings for the County's review and approval. During the Negotiating Period, the Developer shall affirmatively outreach to the local community to obtain and consider community input regarding the design of the Development. 9. Planning Approvals. The Developer acknowledges that the Development requires approvals and entitlements from the County (such approvals and entitlements are the "Planning Approvals "). During the Negotiating Period, the Developer shall submit conceptual site plans and preliminary designs for the Development to the appropriate County departments for their informal review. During the Negotiation Period, the Developer shall submit applications for those components, if any, of the Planning Approvals that are required to be submitted in accordance with the schedule of performance described in Section 10 below. 10. Schedule of Performance. Within sixty (60) days after the Effective Date, the Developer shall provide the County with a proposed detailed schedule of performance for the Development which is to include, but is not limited to: The dates for obtaining Planning Approvals and financing commitments for the Development, the date for the submittal of construction plans to the City, the date for satisfaction of all preconditions to conveyance 4 of the Property, the dates for close of escrow and conveyance of the Property, and the dates for the commencement and completion of construction of the Development. 11. Due Diligence. During the Negotiating Period, the Developer shall conduct any and all investigations it deems necessary to enable it to negotiate those aspects of the DDA that relate to the physical condition of the Property at the time of conveyance. 12. Utilities. The Developer shall consult with the utility companies serving the Property to determine if construction of the Development will require existing utility facilities to b e expanded, relocated or placed underground. The County shall assist and cooperate with the Developer in such consultations. 13. Reports. The County shall provide the Developer with copies of all reports, studie s, analyses, correspondence and similar documents (collectively, "documents"), exclusive of detailed property appraisals, prepared or commissioned by the County with respect to this Agreement and the Development, promptly following execution of this Agreement with respect to documents then in its possession or under its reasonable control, and promptly upon their completion with respect to any subsequently prepared documents. The Developer acknowledges that the County needs sufficient detailed information about the proposed Development (including, without limitation, the financial information described in Section 6) to make informed decisions regarding the DDA. 14. Organizational Documents; Financial Statements. The Developer shall provide the County with copies of its organizational documents evidencing that the Developer has been duly organized, is in good standing and is able to perform its obligations under this Agreement and the DDA. The Developer shall provide the County will copies of its financial statements for the three years preceding the Effective Date, along with evidence of its 501(c)(3) status, if applicable. 15. Environmental Review. The County shall prepare or cause to be prepared the appropriate environmental documentation required by the California Environmental Quality Ac t ("CEQA") for consideration of approval of the DDA, provided that nothing in this Agreement may be construed to compel the County to approve or make any particular findings with respect to such CEQA documentation. The Developer shall provide any information about the Development that the County requires to enable it to prepare, or cause to be prepared, CEQA-required documents, and shall generally cooperate with the County to complete CEQA-related tasks. 16. Section 33433 Report. The County shall prepare the documentation that is required to be submitted to the County Board and the County Board of Supervisors in conjunction with the County's and the County’s consideration of any DDA, in accordance with Section 33433(a)(2)(B) of the California Health and Safety Code. The Section 33433 report will contain the estimated value of the Property determined (i) at its highest and best use, and (ii) at the use and with the conditions, covenants and development costs required pursuant to the DDA. 5 17. Progress Reports. From time to time as reasonably agreed upon by the parties, each party shall make oral or written progress reports advisin g the other party on studies being made and matters being evaluated by the reporting party with respect to this Agreement and the Development. 18. Outreach. The Developer shall prepare and submit to the County a plan for community outreach associated with the development of the Development. During the Negotiating Period, the Developer shall prepare appropriate refinements and modifications to the community outreach plan that are reasonably requested by the County. GENERAL PROVISIONS 20. Limitation on Effect of Agreement. This Agreement does not obligate either the County or the Developer to enter into a DDA. By execution of this Agreement, the County is not committing itself to or agreeing to undertake acquisition, disposition or exercise of control over any parcels in the Property. Execution of this Agreement by the County is merely an agreement to conduct a period of exclusive negotiations in accor dance with the terms hereof, reserving for subsequent County Board of Supervisors action, the final discretion and approval regarding the execution of a DDA and all proceedings and decisions in connection therewith. Any DDA resulting from negotiations pursuant to this Agreement will be effective only if it is considered and approved by the County Board of Supervisors in accordance with all legally required procedures, and if it is executed by duly authorized representatives of the County and the Developer. Until and unless a DDA is approved by the County Board and executed by the County and the Developer, no agreement drafts, actions, deliverables or communications arising from the performance of this Agreement will impose any legally binding obligation on either party to enter into or support entering into a DDA or be used as evidence of any oral or implied agreement by either party to enter into any other legally binding document. 21. Notices. Any notices required or permitted under this Agreement (other than day to day routine communications) must be in writing and sent by overnight or personal delivery with delivery receipt. Such notices are to be sent to the address listed below : County: Contra Costa County, Housing Successor 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 Attn: Maureen Toms, Deputy Director Developer: Pacific West Communities 430 E. State Street, Ste. 100 Eagle, ID 83616 Attn: Caleb Roope, President and CEO At any time, either party may designate in writing a substitute address for an address set forth above and thereafter notices are to be directed to such substituted address. Notices 6 will be deemed received as follows: on the date shown on the delivery receipt as the d ate of delivery, the date delivery was refused, or the date the item was returned as undeliverable. If the date on the delivery receipt is not a business day, notice will be deemed received on the following business day. 22. Waiver of Lis Pendens. It is expressly understood and agreed by the parties that no lis pendens may be filed against any portion of the Property by reason of this Agreement or any dispute or act arising from this Agreement. 23. Right of Entry. If the Developer or its consultants enter upon the Property, the Developer shall: (a) Give the County seventy-two (72) hours’ notice of intent to enter the Property and the purpose of the entry. (b) Repair and restore any damage it may cause. (c) Deliver to the County, within ten (10) days of receipt thereof, a complete copy of any investigation, test, report or study that the Developer conducts, or causes to be conducted, with respect to the Property. (d) Indemnify, defend and hold the County and its directors, officers, employees and agents harmless from any and all claims, liabilities, damages, losses, expenses, costs and fees (including attorneys' fees and costs) that may proximately arise out of the Developer's entry upon the Property or the investigation(s) and test(s) the Developer may conduct. (e) Prior to entry, cause the County to be named as an additional insured on a Commercial General Liability insurance policy with limits not less than Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000) each occurrence combined single limit for Bodily Injury and Property Damage, including coverage from Contractual Liability, Personal Injury, Broadform Property Damage, Products and Completed Operations. The required insurance is to be provided under an occurrence form by an insurer authorized and licensed to provide such insurance in the State of California, and the Developer shall maintain such overage for not less than two (2) years after the expiration of the Negotiating Period. 24. Costs and Expenses. Except as otherwise set forth in this Agreement, each party is responsible for the costs and expenses it incurs as a result of activities and negotiations undertaken in connection with, and the performance of its obligations under, this Agreement. 25. No Commissions. The County is not liable for any real estate commissions or brokerage fees that may arise as a result of this Agreement or a DDA. The County represents that is has not engaged a broker, agent or finder in connection with this transaction and the 7 Developer agrees to defend and hold the County harmless from the claims of any broker, agent or finder retained by the Developer. 26. Default and Remedies. Failure by either party to negotiate in good faith or to fulfill its obligations under this Agreement is an event of default hereunder. At the non-defaulti ng party’s election, the non-defaulting party may give written notice of a default to the defaulting party, specifying the nature of the default and the action required to cure the default. If the default remains uncured fifteen days after receipt of the notice by the defaulting party, the non-defaulting party may terminate this Agreement. a. Following a default and termination, neither party will have any further right, remedy or obligation under this Agreement, except that the obligations under Section 22 (waiver of lis pendens), Section 23(d) (indemnity) and Section 25 (no commissions), all survive the termination of this Agreement. b. Except as expressly provided above, if there is a default under this Agreement, (i) neither party will be liable to the other party for damages or otherwise, and (ii) neither party will have any other claims with respect to performance under this Agreement. Each party specifically waives and releases any such rights or claims it may otherwise have at law or in equity. 27. Governing Law. The laws of the State of California govern all matters arising out of this Agreement. 28. Entire Agreement ; Counterparts. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties regarding the subject matter of this Agreement. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts. 29. Assignment. The Developer may not transfer or assign any or all of its rights or obligations under this Agreement. [Remainder of Page Intentionally Left Blank] 8 30. No Third Party Beneficiaries. This Agreement is made and entered into sole ly for the benefit of the County and the Developer and no other person has any right of action under or by reason of this Agreement. The parties are signing this Agreement as of the date set forth in the introductory paragraph. COUNTY Contra Costa County, a political subdivision of the State of California By: _____________________________ Maureen Toms, Deputy Director DEVELOPER Pacific West Communities, an Idaho corporation By: _____________________________ Caleb Roope, President and CEO G:\RDA -SA \Redevelopment and Successor Agency \Bay Point RDA \Orbisonia Heights \ENA \V4 9 EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY (County Surveyor currently verifying the legal descriptions)