HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 01252022 - Completed Min PktCALENDAR 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.
AGENDA
January 25, 2022
9:00 A.M. Convene, call to order, and opening ceremonies. (Chair, Karen Mitchoff)
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
Mary Ann McNett Mason, County Counsel
D.1 ACCEPT report "The Post-Covid New World Order: It's a seller's market for now" prepared by Beacon
Economics. (Dr. Christopher Thornberg, Beacon Economics)
Speakers: Helen; No name given; Marianna Moore, Ensuring Opportunity Campaign, Budget Justice
Coalition; Kristi Laughlin, East Bay Alliance for a Sustainable Economy; Marjorie, Douglas Dunn.
D.2 ACCEPT report on budget and key issues; and CONSIDER introducing Ordinance repealing Ordinance Code
section 62-10, Other Post-Employment Benefits Funding, waiving reading, and fixing February 1, 2022, for
adoption. (Monica Nino, County Administrator, Lisa Driscoll, County Finance Director and Timothy Ewell, Chief
Assistant County Administrator)
Speakers: No name given; No name given; Dina Levine Lipsett, Chair of the Public Policy and Advocacy
Committee; Marianna Moore, Ensuring Opportunity Campaign, Budget Justice Coalition; Marjorie Rocha,
Executive Director of ECHO Housing.
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 report on Capital Projects, Facilities Master Plan and Facilities Condition Assessment. (Eric
Angstadt, Chief Assistant County Administrator)
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
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.
There were no announcements from Closed Session.
12:00 P.M. BREAK FOR LUNCH
*** RESUME OPEN SESSION ***
D.4 ACCEPT report on COVID-19 response. (Anna Roth, Health Services Director)
Speakers: No name given; No name given; Ben; Mitch Free.
ACCEPTED the oral report.
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.5 PRESENTATION by the Contra Costa Budget Justice Coalition reflecting on 2021 and looking forward to
2022. (Dan Geiger, Coordinator Contra Costa Budget Justice Coalition)
Speakers: No name given; No name given; Diana; 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
CONSIDER potential updates to Board Operating Procedures and Communications, including returning to in-person
meetings of the Board of Supervisors, and provide direction to staff. (Chair, Karen Mitchoff)
The Board will revisit the matter of returning to in-person meetings on February 22, but expects to resume
in person at the March 1, 2022 meeting. Other agencies and committees that desire to do so may continue
meeting virtually.
Public Comment
No name given, requested the Board provide a 20 to 30 second pause between the end of public
commentary and moving on to the next agenda item in order for callers to manage technical issues, and
would also like more support from the county in requiring retalers to place placards in their windows to
re-inforce masking;
No name given, requests the Board cease perceived censorship of speech;
No name given, expressed great concern about human trafficking taking place in Contra Costa County,
gang activity in the Detroit Avenue area of Concord, and his belief that taxpayer funded health care
services are communist in nature.
Wrap-up and Closing Comments (Chair, Karen Mitchoff)
ADJOURN
Adjourned today's meeting at 3:30 p.m.
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 or to clerkoftheboard@cob.cccounty.us.
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.contracosta.ca.gov
AGENDA DEADLINE: Thursday, 12 noon, 12 days before the Tuesday Board meetings.
Glossary of Acronyms, Abbreviations, and other Terms (in alphabetical order):
Contra Costa County has a policy of making limited use of acronyms, abbreviations, and industry-specific language in its Board
of Supervisors meetings and written materials. Following is a list of commonly used language that may appear in oral
presentations and written materials associated with Board meetings:
AB Assembly Bill
ABAG Association of Bay Area Governments
ACA Assembly Constitutional Amendment
ADA Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
AFSCME American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees
AICP American Institute of Certified Planners
AIDS Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome
ALUC Airport Land Use Commission
AOD Alcohol and Other Drugs
ARRA American Recovery & Reinvestment Act of 2009
BAAQMD Bay Area Air Quality Management District
BART Bay Area Rapid Transit District
BayRICS Bay Area Regional Interoperable Communications System
BCDC Bay Conservation & Development Commission
BGO Better Government Ordinance
BOS Board of Supervisors
CALTRANS California Department of Transportation
CalWIN California Works Information Network
CalWORKS California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids
CAER Community Awareness Emergency Response
CAO County Administrative Officer or Office
CCCPFD (ConFire) Contra Costa County Fire Protection District
CCHP Contra Costa Health Plan
CCTA Contra Costa Transportation Authority
CCRMC Contra Costa Regional Medical Center
CCWD Contra Costa Water District
CDBG Community Development Block Grant
CFDA Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CIO Chief Information Officer
COLA Cost of living adjustment
ConFire (CCCFPD) Contra Costa County Fire Protection District
CPA Certified Public Accountant
CPI Consumer Price Index
CSA County Service Area
CSAC California State Association of Counties
CTC California Transportation Commission
dba doing business as
DSRIP Delivery System Reform Incentive Program
EBMUD East Bay Municipal Utility District
ECCFPD East Contra Costa Fire Protection District
EIR Environmental Impact Report
EIS Environmental Impact Statement
EMCC Emergency Medical Care Committee
EMS Emergency Medical Services
EPSDT Early State Periodic Screening, Diagnosis and Treatment Program (Mental Health)
et al. et alii (and others)
FAA Federal Aviation Administration
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
F&HS Family and Human Services Committee
First 5 First Five Children and Families Commission (Proposition 10)
FTE Full Time Equivalent
FY Fiscal Year
GHAD Geologic Hazard Abatement District
GIS Geographic Information System
HCD (State Dept of) Housing & Community Development
HHS (State Dept of ) Health and Human Services
HIPAA Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act
HIV Human Immunodeficiency Syndrome
HOV High Occupancy Vehicle
HR Human Resources
HUD United States Department of Housing and Urban Development
IHSS In-Home Supportive Services
Inc. Incorporated
IOC Internal Operations Committee
ISO Industrial Safety Ordinance
JPA Joint (exercise of) Powers Authority or Agreement
Lamorinda Lafayette-Moraga-Orinda Area
LAFCo Local Agency Formation Commission
LLC Limited Liability Company
LLP Limited Liability Partnership
Local 1 Public Employees Union Local 1
LVN Licensed Vocational Nurse
MAC Municipal Advisory Council
MBE Minority Business Enterprise
M.D. Medical Doctor
M.F.T. Marriage and Family Therapist
MIS Management Information System
MOE Maintenance of Effort
MOU Memorandum of Understanding
MTC Metropolitan Transportation Commission
NACo National Association of Counties
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
OB-GYN Obstetrics and Gynecology
O.D. Doctor of Optometry
OES-EOC Office of Emergency Services-Emergency Operations Center
OPEB Other Post Employment Benefits
OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration
PARS Public Agencies Retirement Services
PEPRA Public Employees Pension Reform Act
Psy.D. Doctor of Psychology
RDA Redevelopment Agency
RFI Request For Information
RFP Request For Proposal
RFQ Request For Qualifications
RN Registered Nurse
SB Senate Bill
SBE Small Business Enterprise
SEIU Service Employees International Union
SUASI Super Urban Area Security Initiative
SWAT Southwest Area Transportation Committee
TRANSPAC Transportation Partnership & Cooperation (Central)
TRANSPLAN Transportation Planning Committee (East County)
TRE or TTE Trustee
TWIC Transportation, Water and Infrastructure Committee
UASI Urban Area Security Initiative
VA Department of Veterans Affairs
vs. versus (against)
WAN Wide Area Network
WBE Women Business Enterprise
WCCTAC West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee
RECOMMENDATION(S):
ACCEPT report "The Post-Covid New World Order: It's a seller's market for now".
FISCAL IMPACT:
This report is for informational purposes and has no specific fiscal impact.
BACKGROUND:
Attached is Beacon Economics report entitled "The Post-Covid New World Order: It's a seller's market for
now".
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 01/25/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
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: January 25, 2022
, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: , Deputy
cc: All County Departments (via CAO)
D.1
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Monica Nino, County Administrator
Date:January 25, 2022
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Annual Update on Economic Conditions in Contra Costa County
CLERK'S ADDENDUM
Speakers: Helen; No name given; Marianna Moore, Ensuring Opportunity Campaign, Budget Justice Coalition; Kristi Laughlin,
East Bay Alliance for a Sustainable Economy; Marjorie, Douglas Dunn.
ATTACHMENTS
The Post-Covid New World Order: It's a seller's market for now.
Dr. Thornberg Bio
Beacon Economics | beaconecon.com
Christopher Thornberg, PhD
Founding Partner, Beacon Economics
Director, UCR SoBA Center for Economic Forecasting and
Development
January 2022
The Post-Covid New World Order
It’s a seller’s market for now.
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
•The Covid pandemic is a tragic natural disaster, yet history shows that natural disasters have little
long-run economic impact. A quicker-than-normal recovery was certain.
•The narrative of miserabilism drove fiscal and monetary policy reactions to the crisis that have been
excessive and are overheating the economy.
•The recovery is not even—in terms of the structure of output as well as the availability of inputs. The
resultant supply chain issues are a drag on the rebound, not a threat to it.
•Low private sector debt levels reduces some of the short run risk to the economy. Cyclical risks now
lie primarily in the public sector; the twin issues of inflation and an out-of-control budget deficit.
•Labor markets have flipped, and shortages are here to stay. This has important implications for
economic development and social policy
•There are no economic “new-normals” from the pandemic, but it has accelerated underlying trends
that were already in place, particularly WFH, retirements, and online shopping. For Contra Costa
County these changes will increase demand for residential and an employment shifts towards local
services
The Big Picture
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
The Wall of Forecast Shame
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
The U or V Debate…
17000
17500
18000
18500
19000
19500
20000
20500
21000
21500
Q1 Q3 Q1 Q3 Q1 Q3 Q1 Q3 Q1 Q3 Q1 Q3
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Real GDP and Final Demand
GDP Final Demand GDP Trend FD Trend
2021
Q1 Q2 Q3
GDP 6.3 6.7 2.0
Final Demand 10.5 8.1 1.1
Consumption 7.4 7.9 1.1
Durables 3.5 1.0 -2.7
Nondurables 2.2 2.0 0.4
Services 1.8 4.9 3.4
Fixed investment 2.3 0.6 -0.1
Structures 0.1 -0.1 -0.2
Equipment 0.8 0.7 -0.2
IPP 0.8 0.6 0.6
Residential 0.6 -0.6 -0.4
Inventories -2.6 -1.3 2.1
Net Exports -1.6 -0.2 -1.1
Exports -0.3 0.8 -0.3
Imports -1.3 -1.0 -0.9
Government 0.8 -0.4 0.1
Federal 0.8 -0.4 -0.3
State and local 0.0 0.0 0.5
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
The Great Recession vs Today
Then Now
The Pre-Recession
Economy
Over-heated by
sub-prime lending
bubble
Slow but steady growth
due to labor shortages /
trade disruptions
Recession Driver Demand shock caused by
collapse in wealth, flow-
stock issues
Short run supply shock
driven by fear and health
mandates
Government
Response Inadequate Excessive
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
Filling the consumption gap
1.00
1.10
1.20
1.30
1.40
1.50
1.60
1.70
1.80
1992-01-011993-12-011995-11-011997-10-011999-09-012001-08-012003-07-012005-06-012007-05-012009-04-012011-03-012013-02-012015-01-012016-12-012018-11-012020-10-01Inventory to Sales Ratio
Business I/S Ratio Retail I/S Ratio
-7.0%
-6.0%
-5.0%
-4.0%
-3.0%
-2.0%
-1.0%
0.0%
1.0%
2.0%1970Q11973Q11976Q11979Q11982Q11985Q11988Q11991Q11994Q11997Q12000Q12003Q12006Q12009Q12012Q12015Q12018Q12021Q1US Net Exports / GDP
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
An Uneven Recovery
Source: American Community Survey
-30.0%
-20.0%
-10.0%
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
Real Consumer Spending Relative to
Trend
Durables Non-Durables Services
0
1000000
2000000
3000000
4000000
5000000
6000000
Taxable Sales
San Francisco San Joaquin
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
The Shipping Problems
Domestic Industries
JIT Inventories
Bad forecasts in 2020
Excess demand by consumers
Global production capacity
Slow shipping capacity growth in recent years
Small delays cascade where a lot of capacity
is sitting idle waiting to get into port
Foreign Suppliers
Worker outages
Rising input costs
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
Local Sales
0
1000000
2000000
3000000
4000000
5000000
6000000
7000000
8000000
9000000
10000000
Q1-06Q1-07Q1-08Q1-09Q1-10Q1-11Q1-12Q1-13Q1-14Q1-15Q1-16Q1-17Q1-18Q1-19Q1-20Q1-21Taxable Sales
Alameda Contra Costa
0
2000000
4000000
6000000
8000000
10000000
12000000
Q2-09Q1-10Q4-10Q3-11Q2-12Q1-13Q4-13Q3-14Q2-15Q1-16Q4-16Q3-17Q2-18Q1-19Q4-19Q3-20Q2-21CCC Taxable Receipts (HdL)
General Consumer Goods Business And Industry
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
Business Activity
Source: CDTFA, HdL
Category
CC 2021 to Q3
Sales Tax Receipts
($, Mil)
2-Yr Growth
(%)
Total 152.6 14.9
County & State Pool 33.1 49.9
Business and Industry 16.5 27.5
Building and Construction 14.8 22.8
Autos and Transportation 25.3 13.2
Food and Drugs 9.2 12.0
General Consumer Goods 26.4 2.7
Restaurants and Hotels 15.1 -5.0
Fuel and Service Stations 12.0 -8.9
-40
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
CCC Consumer Spending
Opportunity Insights
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
As for the service sector…
Financial insurance 878.6 3.3%
Housing utilities 2149.8 1.8%
Food accommodations 850.9 -0.4%
Other services 1120.6 -1.1%
Health care 2224.1 -1.7%
Transportation services 399.8 -13.4%
Recreation services 420.4 -17.6%
Real Consumer Spending
Services Q4 19 to Q3 21
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
Jul-05Mar-07Nov-08Jul-10Mar-12Nov-13Jul-15Mar-17Nov-18Jul-20Available Passenger
Seat Miles
2021 Rev % Chg
California 16,796 49.2
Central Coast 2,017 72.7
Central Valley 1,012 38.5
Deserts 726 60.8
Los Angeles 3,670 53.6
Orange County 1,791 70.6
San Diego 2,162 68.8
SF Bay Area 2,724 19.0
Hotel Statistics
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
Omicron?
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
130
140
Jan-17May-17Sep-17Jan-18May-18Sep-18Jan-19May-19Sep-19Jan-20May-20Sep-20Jan-21May-21Sep-21Consumer Spending (Retail Sales)
Restaurants Retai
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
Federal Fiscal (Over)reaction
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
Levels of Personal Income Relative to
Pre-Pandemic Trends
Govt Benefits Disp Inc - Gov Bene Consumption
Govt Benefits 2091.2
Income Hit -818.8
Ratio 2.6
Cumulative Excess
$Billions
-30.0%
-25.0%
-20.0%
-15.0%
-10.0%
-5.0%
0.0%
5.0%1990199219941996199820002002200420062008201020122014201620182020Net Federal Borrowing as % GDP
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
Fed Policy
Source: FRED 15
0
1000000
2000000
3000000
4000000
5000000
6000000
7000000
8000000
9000000
Jan-03Feb-04Mar-05Apr-06May-07Jun-08Jul-09Aug-10Sep-11Oct-12Nov-13Dec-14Jan-16Feb-17Mar-18Apr-19May-20Jun-21Federal Reserve Balance Sheet
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
7.00
1997-02-011998-07-011999-12-012001-05-012002-10-012004-03-012005-08-012007-01-012008-06-012009-11-012011-04-012012-09-012014-02-012015-07-012016-12-012018-05-012019-10-012021-03-01Federal Funds Rate
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
The Covid boondoggle
8000
9000
10000
11000
12000
13000
14000
15000
16000
17000
18000
2012-04-012012-12-012013-08-012014-04-012014-12-012015-08-012016-04-012016-12-012017-08-012018-04-012018-12-012019-08-012020-04-012020-12-012021-08-01Commercial Bank Deposits 9$Bil)
Actual Trend
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
Jun-19Aug-19Oct-19Dec-19Feb-20Apr-20Jun-20Aug-20Oct-20Dec-20Feb-21Apr-21Jun-21Aug-21Oct-21Cumulative Personal Savings
Actual Trend
+$2.5 Trillion
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
Speculation Planet
Source: PitchBook
$0.00M
$50.00B
$100.00B
$150.00B
$200.00B
$250.00B
Total US InvestmentsUS Venture Capital Investments
US Investments 0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 2020
CAPE P/E Ratio (Shiller)
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
Credit and Wealth
Source: FDIC-Assets and Liabilities of FDIC-Inured Commercial Banks and Savings Institutions, NCUA 18
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
1980-01-011982-06-011984-11-011987-04-011989-09-011992-02-011994-07-011996-12-011999-05-012001-10-012004-03-012006-08-012009-01-012011-06-012013-11-012016-04-012018-09-01US Financial Obligations Ratio
-15000
-10000
-5000
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
1985-04-011987-05-011989-06-011991-07-011993-08-011995-09-011997-10-011999-11-012001-12-012004-01-012006-02-012008-03-012010-04-012012-05-012014-06-012016-07-012018-08-012020-09-012 Year Change Household Net Worth
($Bil)
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
Hardly a surprise…
0.00
2.00
4.00
6.00
8.00
10.00
12.00
03:Q103:Q404:Q305:Q206:Q106:Q407:Q308:Q209:Q109:Q410:Q311:Q212:Q112:Q413:Q314:Q215:Q115:Q416:Q317:Q218:Q118:Q419:Q320:Q221:Q1Share of Consumer Debt Serious Delinquency
(90day+)
AUTO CC MORTGAGE
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
New Personal Bankruptcies
18-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70+
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
Credit Markets
Source: FDIC-Assets and Liabilities of FDIC-Inured Commercial Banks and Savings Institutions, NCUA 20
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
Value, $, SA, TrillionsBank Assets and Deposits
Loans and Leases Deposits
-20.0%
-15.0%
-10.0%
-5.0%
0.0%
5.0%
10.0%
15.0%
20.0%
25.0%04:Q105:Q106:Q107:Q108:Q109:Q110:Q111:Q112:Q113:Q114:Q115:Q116:Q117:Q118:Q119:Q120:Q121:Q1Consumer Debt Growth
(NY Fed Consumer Credit Panel)
Mortgage Auto Credit Card
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
Profits and Investments
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
2000
2200
2400
2600
2800
3000
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2
2019 2020 2021
Gross Profits
Proprietors' income with IVA and CCAdj
Corporate profits with IVA and CCAdj
2019 2021
Q4 Q3
Private fixed investment 3439.9 3586.1 4.3%
Software 483.8 586.5 21.2%
Information processing eq 490.8 579.3 18.0%
Industrial equipment 235.8 268 13.7%
Residential 612.2 694.2 13.4%
Research and development 463.4 504.3 8.8%
Other equipment 243.1 263.3 8.3%
Entertainment, literary 86 82.4 -4.2%
Commercial and health care 173.8 151.9 -12.6%
Manufacturing 61.8 53.4 -13.6%
Mining exploration 110.4 87.9 -20.4%
Transportation equipment 282.7 224.3 -20.7%
Power and communication 126.8 92 -27.4%
Other structures 101.4 70 -31.0%
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
Venture Capital –Contra Costa County
Source: PitchBook
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
DealsCapital ($, Millions)Capital Invested and Number of Deals
Capital Invested ($)Deal Count
Company
(Contra Costa HQ)
Deal Size
($, Mil.)Industry Code
Dialpad 170 Information Technology
Dialpad 125 Information Technology
BioAge 90 Healthcare
YapStone 71 Information Technology
TrustArc 70 Information Technology
Monarch Tractor 61 Business P&S (B2B)
Reputation 53 Information Technology
Dialpad 50 Information Technology
YapStone 50 Information Technology
Volansi 49 Business P&S (B2B)
DayTwo 48 Consumer P&S (B2C)
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
Housing –U.S.
Source: National Association of Realtors, S&P Global
2000.0
3000.0
4000.0
5000.0
6000.0
7000.0
8000.0
Jan-01Apr-02Jul-03Oct-04Jan-06Apr-07Jul-08Oct-09Jan-11Apr-12Jul-13Oct-14Jan-16Apr-17Jul-18Oct-19Jan-21Existing Home Sales
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
Jan-03Jan-04Jan-05Jan-06Jan-07Jan-08Jan-09Jan-10Jan-11Jan-12Jan-13Jan-14Jan-15Jan-16Jan-17Jan-18Jan-19Jan-20Jan-21New Home Sales
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
Housing –U.S.
Source: National Association of Realtors, S&P Global
-20.0%
-15.0%
-10.0%
-5.0%
0.0%
5.0%
10.0%
15.0%
20.0%
25.0%Jan-02Mar-03May-04Jul-05Sep-06Nov-07Jan-09Mar-10May-11Jul-12Sep-13Nov-14Jan-16Mar-17May-18Jul-19Sep-20HPA: YoY Growth
Case Shiller Median
18-19 19-20 20-21
Phoenix 5.8%9.2%28.3%
San Diego 2.0%5.5%26.0%
Seattle -0.6%7.0%24.1%
Dallas 2.8%3.3%20.7%
Tampa 4.6%5.9%20.7%
San Francisco 0.2%2.8%20.4%
Miami 2.7%4.1%19.4%
Las Vegas 4.7%3.4%19.3%
Denver 3.1%4.4%18.9%
Charlotte 4.6%6.0%18.0%
Portland 2.5%5.1%18.0%
Los Angeles 1.2%5.4%17.2%
New York 1.2%2.3%16.7%
Atlanta 4.2%4.9%15.8%
Cleveland 3.2%5.4%15.1%
DC 2.7%4.4%15.0%
Chicago 1.8%1.3%12.5%
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
Housing Market
Source: CoreLogic
0
1
1
2
2
3
3
4
4
5
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
Home Sales (000s)Median Home Price ($, 000s)Contra Costa Home Prices and Sales
Median Price Home Sales
County
Median Prices Home Sales
Q3-21
($)
2-Yr %
Gr Q3-21 2-Yr %
Gr
Alameda 1,161,573 35.5 3,710 33.3
Contra Costa 839,606 33.4 3,538 20.9
Ventura 792,901 24.7 2,111 16.9
Monterey 773,374 23.6 838 22.6
San Francisco 1,723,741 14.3 868 39.2
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
Construction Activity
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
2000
Jan-03Feb-04Mar-05Apr-06May-07Jun-08Jul-09Aug-10Sep-11Oct-12Nov-13Dec-14Jan-16Feb-17Mar-18Apr-19May-20Jun-21Residential Permits
Single Multi
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
Jan-01Mar-02May-03Jul-04Sep-05Nov-06Jan-08Mar-09May-10Jul-11Sep-12Nov-13Jan-15Mar-16May-17Jul-18Sep-19Nov-20Inventory of Homes for Sale
Existing New
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
Long Run Drivers
59.0
60.0
61.0
62.0
63.0
64.0
65.0
66.0
67.0
68.0
69.0
70.0
1982-01-011984-07-011987-01-011989-07-011992-01-011994-07-011997-01-011999-07-012002-01-012004-07-012007-01-012009-07-012012-01-012014-07-012017-01-012019-07-01Homeownership Rate
Change SF
Owner Percent Change SF
Rental Percent
United States 4,113,819 6.8%-466,986 -3.8%
Arizona 203,875 16.7%-48,619 -13.5%
California 303,949 5.4%-120,034 -6.7%
Nevada 86,904 19.0%-12,025 -7.0%
Washington 176,054 12.8%-19,632 -6.5%
Tenure and SF Rentals
2013-2019
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
Drivers of the Boom
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
Jan-99Jun-00Nov-01Apr-03Sep-04Feb-06Jul-07Dec-08May-10Oct-11Mar-13Aug-14Jan-16Jun-17Nov-18Apr-20Months Supply of Existing Homes
2.50
3.00
3.50
4.00
4.50
5.00
Mortgage Rates (30 Yr Fixed)
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
Bubble Alert? Not yet…
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
80.0%
90.0%03:Q103:Q404:Q305:Q206:Q106:Q407:Q308:Q209:Q109:Q410:Q311:Q212:Q112:Q413:Q314:Q215:Q115:Q416:Q317:Q218:Q118:Q419:Q320:Q2Share Mortgage Originations > 720 Fico
2011 2019
35.0 percent or more
US 49,049,732 28.1%19.9%
Arizona 1,023,943 30.5%19.3%
California 5,064,795 38.6%28.5%
Colorado 948,904 26.1%20.7%
Nevada 403,792 33.4%21.0%
Utah 446,690 24.9%16.9%
Share Owners Housing Cost Constrained
0.0%
20.0%
40.0%
60.0%
80.0%
100.0%
120.0%
140.0%
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
2000-01-012001-05-012002-09-012004-01-012005-05-012006-09-012008-01-012009-05-012010-09-012012-01-012013-05-012014-09-012016-01-012017-05-012018-09-012020-01-01US Housing Markets
Hhousehold Equity in Housing
Outstanding Mortgage Debt
Debt to Equity
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
Apartments
Source: REIS
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
Rent ($)Cost of Rent
East Contra Costa West Contra Costa
San Francsico San Jose
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
%Vacancy Rates
East Contra Costa West Contra Costa
San Francisco San Jose
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
Apartments and Lower Income Families
Source: REIS
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
Household Income
Source: ACS
26.0
27.0
28.0
29.0
30.0
31.0
32.0
33.0
34.0
35.0
%Median Rent as % of HH Income
Alameda Contra Costa
Income
East Bay Home
Ownership
CA Home
Ownership
2019
(000s)
3-Yr %
Growth
2019
(000s)
3-Yr %
Growth
Less than $75,000 131.2 -17.5 2,405.8 -11.7
$75,000 to $149,999 170.7 -2.0 2,386.6 4.7
$150,000 and Up 264.0 26.4 2,314.1 27.3
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
A Labor Market Paradox?
115000
120000
125000
130000
135000
140000
145000
150000
155000
May-10May-11May-12May-13May-14May-15May-16May-17May-18May-19May-20May-21May-22May-23May-24May-25May-26US Payroll Jobs
-4 million jobs
from Feb 2020
Current 2 Yr Ch 2 Yr Ach
Financial activities 8887.7 0.9%83.3
Construction 7498.0 -0.5%-40.0
Professional business 21299.7 -0.3%-73.3
Information 2788.7 -3.1%-90.0
Other services 5768.3 -2.4%-139.3
Retail trade 15435.0 -1.0%-154.6
Manufacturing 12509.3 -2.3%-291.0
Education and health 23749.7 -2.5%-600.7
Government 21944.0 -3.3%-755.3
Leisure and hospitality 15509.0 -7.2%-1205.7
Hours 34.8 1.2%
Hourly Pay 26.3 10.6%
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
Labor supply, not labor demand
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
Dec-00Mar-02Jun-03Sep-04Dec-05Mar-07Jun-08Sep-09Dec-10Mar-12Jun-13Sep-14Dec-15Mar-17Jun-18Sep-19Dec-20Job Openings and Quits
Openings Quits
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
14.0
16.0
2000-01-012001-04-012002-07-012003-10-012005-01-012006-04-012007-07-012008-10-012010-01-012011-04-012012-07-012013-10-012015-01-012016-04-012017-07-012018-10-012020-01-012021-04-01Unemployment and Openings
Unemployment UE / JO Ratio
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
The Long Run Labor Force Issue
-0.5%
0.0%
0.5%
1.0%
1.5%
2.0%
2.5%
3.0%
3.5%
4.0%197819811984198719901993199619992002200520082011201420172020Population Trends
Growth 65+Growth 15-64
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
Labor supply, not labor demand
-3.1
million
-2.0
-1.0
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
1949195319571961196519691973197719811985198919931997200120052009201320172021YoY Growth US Labor Force
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
A sellers’ market in labor
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
1/1/033/1/045/1/057/1/069/1/0711/1/081/1/103/1/115/1/127/1/139/1/1411/1/151/1/173/1/185/1/197/1/209/1/21Earnings Growth by Income
Quartile
1st 2nd 3rd 4th
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
1/1/034/1/047/1/0510/1/061/1/084/1/097/1/1010/1/111/1/134/1/147/1/1510/1/161/1/184/1/197/1/2010/1/21Earnings Growth by Education
High school of less
Associates degree
Bachelors degree or higher
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
Solutions
—Extensive: Increasing
labor force through
immigration (SR) or
birthrates (LR)
—Intensive: Raising
participation rates among
the existing population
—Productivity
enhancements: capital
investments / skill
training
Labor Shortage Solutions
Labor force participation rate
Females 25-54
Sweden 88.7
Austria 85.7
Finland 84.9
Canada 83.5
Netherlands 83.3
Germany 83.3
France 83.1
Denmark 82.8
Spain 82.3
United Kingdom 81.5
Belgium 80.3
Japan 80.0
Israel 79.9
Australia 79.3
Poland 79.0
Greece 77.6
United States 76.0
Korea 67.8
1 pp = 600,000 female workers in US
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
The Future of Economic Development
Source: BLS
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
The State Employment Situation
95.0
100.0
105.0
110.0
115.0
120.0
125.0
2001-12-012003-01-012004-02-012005-03-012006-04-012007-05-012008-06-012009-07-012010-08-012011-09-012012-10-012013-11-012014-12-012016-01-012017-02-012018-03-012019-04-012020-05-012021-06-01Payroll Jobs (indexed)
California Payroll Index
Industry
Nov-21
Emp
(000s,
SA)
2-Yr
Chg
(000s,
SA)
2-Yr % Growth
East
Bay CA
Total Nonfarm 1,111 -84 -7.0 -4.1
Prof Sci and Tech 112 9 8.8 4.0
Education/Health 197 -4 -1.9 -1.2
Manufacturing 98 -4 -3.5 -4.3
Management 24 -1 -5.6 -4.6
Information 26 -2 -6.0 -2.5
Financial Activities 51 -4 -7.5 -3.9
Admin Support 63 -5 -7.9 -1.8
Construction 70 -6 -8.1 -1.1
Government 160 -15 -8.7 -5.7
Wholesale Trade 41 -4 -9.0 -5.5
Retail Trade 99 -12 -10.5 -4.3
Leisure and Hospitality 86 -33 -27.8 -16.1
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
Regional Changes
Puerto Rico 7.8
California 6.9
Nevada 6.8
New Jersey 6.6
New York 6.6
New Mexico 6.2
Alaska 6
Connecticut 6
District of Columbia 6
Hawaii 6
Michigan 5.9
Illinois 5.7
Pennsylvania 5.7
Maryland 5.4
Massachusetts 5.4
Texas 5.2
Colorado 5.1
Unemployment Rate
Nov 2021
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Jan-17May-17Sep-17Jan-18May-18Sep-18Jan-19May-19Sep-19Jan-20May-20Sep-20Jan-21May-21Sep-21Job Openings Rate
US Az Ca Nv
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
Labor Market
Source: California EDD
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
% (Smoothed)Unemployment Rate
East Bay San Frnancisco Sacramento
80
85
90
95
100
105
110
115
Jan-17Apr-17Jul-17Oct-17Jan-18Apr-18Jul-18Oct-18Jan-19Apr-19Jul-19Oct-19Jan-20Apr-20Jul-20Oct-20Jan-21Apr-21Jul-21Oct-21Index of Payroll Jobs
East Bay Sacramento San Francisco
San Jose Stockton Vallejo
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
Regional Differences
Nov-21 2 Yr Ch Ch Unemp UE / Job Loss
California 16835.1 -725.3 -4.3%517.3 0.71
Stockton 248.6 -2.5 -1.0%4.1 1.64
Inland Empire 1550.1 -27.1 -1.7%40.7 1.50
Fresno 358.7 -9.5 -2.6%0.2 0.02
Sacramento 1000.5 -31.4 -3.1%16.6 0.53
Modesto 177.4 -6 -3.4%1.8 0.30
San Jose 1113.1 -47.2 -4.2%10.2 0.22
Santa Barbara 187.9 -8.5 -4.5%1.6 0.19
Orange County (MD)1606.6 -74.2 -4.6%27.9 0.38
Bakersfield 264.1 -12.6 -4.8%3.1 0.25
San Diego 1441 -73.4 -5.1%25.6 0.35
Ventura 298.9 -15.8 -5.3%3.3 0.21
Salinas 138.1 -7.4 -5.4%2.0 0.27
Los Angeles (MD)4317.2 -274.4 -6.4%209.6 0.76
Vallejo 134.8 -8.6 -6.4%4.3 0.50
San Francisco (MD)1116.4 -73.8 -6.6%16.3 0.22
Santa Rosa 197 -13.2 -6.7%3.2 0.24
East Bay (MD)1111.1 -84.2 -7.6%25.6 0.30
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
State Labor Shortage Issues
8.0
10.0
12.0
14.0
16.0
18.0
20.0
Feb-77Aug-79Feb-82Aug-84Feb-87Aug-89Feb-92Aug-94Feb-97Aug-99Feb-02Aug-04Feb-07Aug-09Feb-12Aug-14Feb-17Aug-19California Labor Force Growth
Labor Force
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
80,000
1988-01-011990-01-011992-01-011994-01-011996-01-011998-01-012000-01-012002-01-012004-01-012006-01-012008-01-012010-01-012012-01-012014-01-012016-01-012018-01-012020-01-01California Residential Unit Permits
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
Wishful Thinking?
-0.50%
0.00%
0.50%
1.00%
1.50%197019741978198219861990199419982002200620102014201820222026203020342038204220462050State Net Migration with Forecast (CA DoF
Est.)
-1.0%
0.0%
1.0%
2.0%
3.0%
4.0%
5.0%201120132015201720192021202320252027202920312033203520372039204120432045California Population Forecasts by
Age (CA DoF est.)
15-64 65+
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
Affordability or Supply
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
0.0
100.0
200.0
300.0
400.0
500.0
600.0
700.0
Q1-96Q3-97Q1-99Q3-00Q1-02Q3-03Q1-05Q3-06Q1-08Q3-09Q1-11Q3-12Q1-14Q3-15Q1-17Q3-18Q1-20State vs National Prices
US CA Ratio
Worst States for Housing
Affordability (>35% Cost to Income)
Share Owned Share Rented
Hawaii 31.1%-9.3%Florida 46.4%-4.3%
California 28.5%-12.4%Hawaii 45.0%-2.3%
Florida 25.0%-14.3%Louisiana 43.7%0.0%
New Jersey 24.6%-11.9%California 43.6%-4.2%
New York 24.4%-8.2%Vermont 43.3%1.1%
Connecticut 22.9%-8.5%New York 41.2%-2.7%
New Mexico 21.7%-5.8%Nevada 41.1%-2.4%
Massachusetts 21.5%-8.4%Connecticut 40.6%-4.2%
Montana 21.5%-6.7%Maryland 40.6%-0.6%
Share Built
After 2010
Share Built
After 2000 Share SF
Texas 14.1%32.4%66.1%
California 4.6%15.4%57.7%
Housing Stock Age
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
County Dynamics
100
105
110
115
120
125
130
135
140
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Index of Payroll Jobs (QCEW, June figures)
Alameda Contra Costa San Francisco
June 2021 17-19 19-21
Total, all industries 352256 0.7%-5.3%
Professional and business 56396.5 3.3%0.3%
Education and health 71005 3.5%0.3%
Trade, transportation 60630 -5.0%-0.6%
Construction 25969.5 3.5%-1.0%
Financial activities 25024 -1.5%-7.4%
Manufacturing 13936.5 3.8%-13.8%
Other services 11405 6.0%-13.8%
Information 5984 -11.7%-15.6%
Leisure and hospitality 35836 5.5%-18.7%
Contra Costa Payrolls (QCEW)
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
Labor Market -Bay Area
Source: California EDD
95
100
105
110
115
120
125
130
135
140
Index at 100Labor Force Growth
Alameda Contra Costa
Santa Clara San Francisco
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
%Unemployment Rate
Contra Costa Santa Clara San Francisco
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
Contra Costa: A Commuter Community
1.34
1.36
1.38
1.40
1.42
1.44
1.46
1.48
1.50
200,000
250,000
300,000
350,000
400,000
450,000
500,000
550,000
600,000
199019921994199619982000200220042006200820102012201420162018Payroll vs Household Employment
Civilian Employment Total, All Industries Ratio
150000
170000
190000
210000
230000
250000
270000
290000
310000
330000
2010 20112012 2013 20142015 2016 2017 20182019
Employed Residents by Place of Work
Work In County Work out of County
+44K
+52K
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
Local Payroll Shifts
2010
2010 Bay
Share 2019
2019 Bay
Share
Change
Share
Civilian Labor Force 525,700 16.7%559,700 15.9%-0.8%
Total, All Industries 318,100 11.8%375,200 10.6%-1.1%
Management of Companies 5,600 6.6%8,900 8.8%2.2%
Administrative & Support 15,500 12.9%23,300 14.4%1.4%
Wholesale Trade 7,600 5.1%9,000 5.8%0.7%
Health Care 47,500 13.9%64,700 14.3%0.4%
Other Services 11,800 6.5%13,700 6.8%0.3%
Educational Services 6,300 4.2%7,700 4.1%-0.1%
Leisure & Hospitality 31,300 16.2%43,000 15.9%-0.2%
Durable Goods 6,900 3.3%6,500 2.6%-0.7%
Construction 18,300 17.0%26,100 15.1%-1.9%
Government 49,200 11.3%50,700 9.0%-2.2%
Retail Trade 40,400 19.3%41,500 16.9%-2.4%
Professional, Scientific 22,600 11.0%24,400 8.3%-2.7%
Logistics 8,000 10.0%11,500 7.3%-2.7%
Information 9,600 6.9%7,100 3.3%-3.6%
Financial Activities 25,300 13.3%27,000 9.2%-4.2%
Nondurable Goods 11,600 18.3%9,500 13.2%-5.1%
Contra Costa Share and Share ChangesContra Costa Share of Bay
Relative Share
19
Share Change
10-19
Running Ahead
Administrative & Support 1.35 0.25
Health Care 1.34 0.16
Leisure & Hospitality 1.50 0.12
Catching Up
Management of Companies 0.83 0.27
Wholesale Trade 0.54 0.11
Other Services 0.64 0.08
Educational Services 0.39 0.03
Shrinking Lead
Construction 1.41 -0.03
Retail Trade 1.59 -0.05
Nondurable Goods 1.24 -0.32
Falling Behind
Durable Goods 0.25 -0.04
Government 0.85 -0.11
Professional, Scientific 0.78 -0.15
Logistics 0.69 -0.16
Financial Activities 0.86 -0.28
Information 0.31 -0.28
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
Residential Permits
Source: CIRB
County
Single-family
Permits
Multifamily
Permits
2021*
Abs.
Chg,
2019*
2021*
Abs.
Chg,
2019*
Contra Costa 1,687 466 1,336 580
San Francisco 86 9 2,075 -552
Alameda 1,241 -41 2,953 -126
Monterey 345 -53 277 221
Ventura 330 -198 450 -136
*YTD through Q3
0
1
1
2
2
3
3
4
4
Permits (000s)Contra Costa Permits
Multifamily Single-Family
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
Population
Source: California DOF
-8
-6
-4
-2
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
Components of Change (Thousands)Population (Millions)Contra Costa Population
Population Natural Increase Net Migration
City 2021 Population 2-Yr % Growth
County Total 1,153,854 0.5
Brentwood 66,097 2.5
San Ramon 83,863 2.1
Pittsburg 74,498 1.2
Walnut Creek 71,317 0.8
Antioch 112,848 0.6
Incorporated 979,431 0.6
Unincorporated 174,423 0.4
Richmond 110,130 0.1
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
Commercial Markets: Financials
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
7.00
8.00
9.00
10.00
1998-01-011999-05-012000-09-012002-01-012003-05-012004-09-012006-01-012007-05-012008-09-012010-01-012011-05-012012-09-012014-01-012015-05-012016-09-012018-01-012019-05-012020-09-01Commercial RE Loan Dqs
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
Nonresidential Real Estate
Source: CIRB
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
Permit Valuations ($, Millions)Contra Costa NonRes Permit Values
Commercial Alterations
Permit Type
2021*
Permit Value
($, Mil)
Abs. Change
vs. 2020*
($, Mil)
Commercial 109.6 15.0
Alterations 94.3 -18.7
Store 64.5 -35.2
Office 26.3 19.5
Hotel 0 0
*YTD through Q3
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
Nonresidential Rents and Vacancies
Source: REIS
Office Cost of Rent Vacancy Rates
Q3-21 ($/sf)2-Yr % Gr Q3-21 (%)2-Yr Abs. Chg
San Jose 48.0 3.1 19.7 1.5
Oakland (MD)35.2 1.2 17.0 1.7
San Francisco (MD)64.6 0.2 12.5 3.8
Retail
San Jose 37.8 0.2 5.7 0.3
Oakland (MD)31.9 -0.7 8.9 0.9
San Francisco (MD)40.8 -0.8 4.8 0.6
Warehousing/Distribution
Oakland (MD)7.1 4.6 6.9 -2.1
San Jose 8.8 4.3 7.3 -0.5
San Francisco (MD)10.6 2.5 4.9 -0.7
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
Nonresidential Rents and Vacancies
Source: REIS
Office Cost of Rent Vacancy Rates
Q3-21 ($/sf)2-Yr % Gr Q3-21 (%)2-Yr Abs. Chg
North I-680 30.1 0.9 12.7 -1.2
West Contra Costa 31.8 0.1 20.5 4.1
North Contra Costa 33.4 -0.3 17.8 2.1
Retail
Central Contra Costa 35.5 -0.4 8.2 1.3
East Contra Costa 24.8 -1.2 9.6 0.2
West Contra Costa 35.1 -1.5 9.7 0.9
Warehousing/Distribution
Berkeley, Richmond,
and Martinez 7.4 4.1 6.0 -5.8
Concord/Pittsburg 5.8 3.9 6.7 -1.5
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
Retail / Industrial: The mix
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
14.0
16.0
18.0
2015-07-012015-11-012016-03-012016-07-012016-11-012017-03-012017-07-012017-11-012018-03-012018-07-012018-11-012019-03-012019-07-012019-11-012020-03-012020-07-012020-11-012021-03-01E-Commerce Share of Retail
250000
300000
350000
400000
450000
500000
2018-01-012018-04-012018-07-012018-10-012019-01-012019-04-012019-07-012019-10-012020-01-012020-04-012020-07-012020-10-012021-01-012021-04-012021-07-01Retail Sales Minus Non-Store Retailers
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
California Retail Employment
Source: QCEW
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
1350
1400
1450
1500
1550
1600
1650
1700
1750
Q1-06Q1-07Q1-08Q1-09Q1-10Q1-11Q1-12Q1-13Q1-14Q1-15Q1-16Q1-17Q1-18Q1-19Q1-20Q1-21Wages ($, 000s)Employment (000s)Retail Employment and Wages
California
Employment Average Annual Wage
Industry
Employment Wages
Q1-21 1-Yr
% Gr
Q1-21
($)
1-Yr
% Gr
Building material 134,533 9.8 43,309 6.4
Food and beverage 367,845 3.7 33,130 0.6
General merchandise 288,785 2.6 30,597 3.0
Nonstore retailers 62,846 1.4 108,117 17.8
Gasoline stations 61,238 -3.7 30,856 5.6
Health/personal care 108,223 -5.1 49,179 3.9
Sports, hobby, etc.55,521 -6.4 27,871 11.9
Motor vehicle 178,097 -8.2 66,928 11.6
Furniture 47,293 -9.0 43,867 6.5
Miscellaneous 82,067 -9.5 36,120 6.6
Electronics 52,218 -11.1 54,535 7.2
Clothing 132,579 -25.8 30,416 5.6
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
WFH Before, During, and After COVID
Source: Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta. “WFH is Onstage and Here to Stay”
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
WFH –Time and Preferences
Source: Barrero, Jose Maria, Nicholas Bloom, and Steven J. Davis, 2021. “Why working from home will stick,” National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper
28731. July Data.
0 10 20 30 40
Working on Second Job
Childcare
Outdoor Leisure and Exercise
Home Improvement/Chores
Indoor Leisure
Working on Primary Job
% of Time Saved from Commuting Allocated to:
How are you now spending time you saved
by not commuting?
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
5 Days Per Week
4 Days Per Week
3 Days Per Week
2 Days Per Week
1 Day Per Week
Rarely or Never
% of Respondents Amongst Respondents able to WFH
Workers' desired amount of post-COVID
WFH days
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
No such thing as a free lunch…
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
2014-01-012014-07-012015-01-012015-07-012016-01-012016-07-012017-01-012017-07-012018-01-012018-07-012019-01-012019-07-012020-01-012020-07-012021-01-01Federal Debt Accumulation
Cumulative Annual
25.0%
30.0%
35.0%
40.0%
45.0%
50.0%
55.0%
60.0%1965Q1Q4Q3Q21976Q1Q4Q3Q21987Q1Q4Q3Q21998Q1Q4Q3Q22009Q1Q4Q3Q22020Q1US Government Expenses and Revenues
(All levels)
Current receipts Current expenditures
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
The golden age of debt
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
Mr. Powell’s War
Source: FRED 63
0
1000000
2000000
3000000
4000000
5000000
6000000
7000000
8000000
9000000
Jan-03Feb-04Mar-05Apr-06May-07Jun-08Jul-09Aug-10Sep-11Oct-12Nov-13Dec-14Jan-16Feb-17Mar-18Apr-19May-20Jun-21Federal Reserve Balance Sheet
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
7.00
1997-02-011998-07-011999-12-012001-05-012002-10-012004-03-012005-08-012007-01-012008-06-012009-11-012011-04-012012-09-012014-02-012015-07-012016-12-012018-05-012019-10-012021-03-01Federal Funds Rate
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
Expansion HH Net Worth
Source: FDIC-Assets and Liabilities of FDIC-Inured Commercial Banks and Savings Institutions, NCUA 64
-15000
-10000
-5000
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
1981-01-011983-10-011986-07-011989-04-011992-01-011994-10-011997-07-012000-04-012003-01-012005-10-012008-07-012011-04-012014-01-012016-10-012019-07-012 Year Change Real Household Net
Worth $Billions
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
2000:01:002001:01:002002:01:002003:01:002004:01:002005:01:002006:01:002007:01:002008:01:002009:01:002010:01:002011:01:002012:01:002013:01:002014:01:002015:01:002016:01:002017:01:002018:01:002019:01:002020:01:00Commercial Bank Loan Delinquencies
Residential Commercial Consumer C&I
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
Inflation nation…
-2.0
-1.0
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
1992-01-011993-08-011995-03-011996-10-011998-05-011999-12-012001-07-012003-02-012004-09-012006-04-012007-11-012009-06-012011-01-012012-08-012014-03-012015-10-012017-05-012018-12-012020-07-01YoY Change Consumer Prices
All Core
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
2003-05-092004-05-092005-05-092006-05-092007-05-092008-05-092009-05-092010-05-092011-05-092012-05-092013-05-092014-05-092015-05-092016-05-092017-05-092018-05-092019-05-092020-05-092021-05-09Inflation? What inflation?
Breakeven inflation 10 Year Yield
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
What drives inflation?
Drivers
Federal Funds Rate
Commodity Prices
Federal deficit
Wages
Money Supply
Demand
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
1959Q11962Q11965Q11968Q11971Q11974Q11977Q11980Q11983Q11986Q11989Q11992Q11995Q11998Q12001Q12004Q12007Q12010Q12013Q12016Q12019Q1Unit Money Supply
UMS
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
Impact of an Interest Rate Shock
20.0%
25.0%
30.0%
35.0%
40.0%
45.0%
50.0%
55.0%
60.0%Jan-90Jan-92Jan-94Jan-96Jan-98Jan-00Jan-02Jan-04Jan-06Jan-08Jan-10Jan-12Jan-14Jan-16Jan-18Jan-20Jan-22% Annual Income to Support Mortgage
and Taxes
Current 5%4%7%
0.0%
20.0%
40.0%
60.0%
80.0%
100.0%
120.0%1954-01-011959-01-011964-01-011969-01-011974-01-011979-01-011984-01-011989-01-011994-01-011999-01-012004-01-012009-01-012014-01-012019-01-01Private Sector Debt to GDP
Household Non-Financial Business
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
Interaction of Monetary and Fiscal Problems
0.0%
1.0%
2.0%
3.0%
4.0%
5.0%
6.0%1984-07-011986-08-011988-09-011990-10-011992-11-011994-12-011997-01-011999-02-012001-03-012003-04-012005-05-012007-06-012009-07-012011-08-012013-09-012015-10-012017-11-012019-12-01Federal Interest Payments as % of GDP
Beacon EconomicsBeacon Economics
The Long Run Still Matters
•The Economy is back..
•The “V” was the only logical outcome
•Recovery hampered not by lack of demand but by
lack of supply
•Economy has plenty of pent up demand to drive it
forward for the near future
•Labor market slow recovery is a function of
labor supply
•Good for workers at all skill levels, reduces
inequality issues
•Bad for businesses, consumers in short run
•Immigration policy, Programs to encourage senior
and female employment
•Local Development = Workforce Attraction
•The Outlook
•6.5% Q4 US economy will remain heated for the
next few years: a new roaring 20’s
•Unemployment to 3.4% by year end, labor
market tightness sets off an investment boom
•Expect a sugar crash to come, combination of
tight federal budget and inflation.
•Scenarios
•1: Dramatic Fed action / bond market turns the
tide before things get out of control
•2: Consumer Spending drives the economy until a
moderately painful crash
•3: Investment / debt fueled boom drives the
economy even farther with a more painful crash
Thank You
Chris@BeaconEcon.com | beaconecon.com
"#$ !" " " % #
0..2,
" # "#! $ " # $ #$
"#!$"#" " *$ # " #"& !%
!"&$ #$ " $# " ## $ $ $$#, 0./1+ ",
" " # "$ " $
&"#
%# ## $" " "#$ & ! $
% $ " ## "$$ ,
(!"$ "& % "#$ + "
#+ ! )+ " " #$$ " $#+
", " "# #% $ "!"&$ %#$")+$#+ % $#+
!% #, $ ) ' " "#$ $ #%!" "$
" $"#$$ 0..3+ '# $' #$# " "$ !"$$
"## $$ ',", " " # , %# ## #
" "# $
+ ,," %# ## #$"$ " $$$
&"#$) ' " $% ,
RECOMMENDATION(S):
1. ACCEPT report on Budget and Key Issues for FY 2022/23 and beyond;
2. ACKNOWLEDGE that at the American Rescue Plan Act Workshop on August 3, 2021, the Board postponed decisions related to the
allocation of Year 2 American Rescue Plan - CSLFRF funds in the amount of $112 million until more information was known about other
American Rescue Plan revenue sources and the status of the COVID-19 pandemic response and related impacts on Contra Costa County;
3. ACKNOWLEDGE that the County Administrator will be recommending approximately $53 million in Year 2 allocation of American
Rescue Plan – CSLFRF funds for continued Health Services Department response to the COVID-19 pandemic in the FY 2022/23
Recommended Budget;
4. POSTPONE decisions related to the remaining $59 million of Year 2 allocation of American Rescue Plan - CSLFRF funds until the status of
the COVID-19 pandemic response and related impacts on Contra Costa County is better understood in January 2023; and
5. INTRODUCE Ordinance No. 2022-## repealing Ordinance Code chapter 62-10, Allocation of Funds for Other Post-Employment Benefits,
WAIVE reading, and FIX February 1, 2022, for adoption.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The financial impact of repealing Ordinance Code section 62-10, Other Post-Employment Benefits (OPEB) Funding, is approximately $67.0
million which will be redirected to employee wages.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 01/25/2022 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: 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: January 25, 2022
, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc: All County Departments (via CAO)
D.2
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Monica Nino, County Administrator
Date:January 25, 2022
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Budget and Key Issues - Repeal of Ordinance 62-10.002 Allocation of funds for OPEB
BACKGROUND:
Attached is the report on Budget and Key Issues.
On May 16, 2006, the Board of Supervisors received an actuarial analysis of the County's liability for retiree healthcare and other
post-employment benefits (OPEB), which identified a total (and growing) liability of $2.6 billion. On June 26, 2007, as part of a strategic
funding strategy, the Board of Supervisors adopted an OPEB funding target of 100% of the potential liability for the retiree population. The
volatility of the health benefit environment ruled out targeting 100% of the entire potential future liability. Additionally, the Board’s goal to
ensure our service delivery balance also made funding 100% of the liability impossible. Conversely, long-term impact to the County and
General Fund balance sheets ruled out continuing to pay only current costs (pay-go). After discussion, the Board adopted an OPEB
pre-funding policy targeting the entire amount associated with the retiree population, which equated to approximately 40% of the total
liability at that time ($1.029 billion).
The Board also adopted an allocation of specific future eligible resources to meet the requirements for OPEB funding. The following table
lists those annual resources identified at that time (in millions):
Resource Beginning FY Amount
Redirect Workers Compensation 2008/09 $10
Redirect UAAL Rate Adjustment 2009/10 $10
Redirect POB Bond payments 2014/15 $33
Redirect POB Bond payments 2022/23 $47
Total Annual Future Resource Redirection 2024 - onward $100
On September 25, 2007 the Board of Supervisors approved the selection of an irrevocable trust structure (Internal Revenue Code Section
115) for OPEB funding for Contra Costa County. The purpose of the Trust is to hold assets to pay post employment health benefits and the
purpose of the Plan is to provide post employment health benefits for certain retired employees and their spouses and dependents. The
County began pre-funding benefits in the 2008/09 fiscal year. Due to budget constraint, in 2014, the allocation target was revised (by
Ordinance) to (in millions):
Resource Beginning FY Amount
Redirect Workers Compensation 2008/09 $10
Redirect UAAL Rate Adjustment 2009/10 $10
Redirect POB Bond payments 2022/23 $47
Total Annual Future Resource Redirection 2024 - onward $67
The most recent actuarial report (attached), as of June 30, 2021, identified the fiduciary net position as $444.728 million, the current net
position of the total OPEB liability as 50.6%, and the current percentage of retirees to actuals in the liability as 43.57%. The assets held in
the OPEB Trust exceed the targeted funding level; therefore, the County is recommending that the on-going funding Ordinance be repealed.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
Delay in repealing Ordinance on Other Post-Employment Benefits Funding, which impacts the allocation of resources in the annual budget.
CLERK'S ADDENDUM
Speakers: No name given; No name given; Dina Levine Lipsett, Chair of the Public Policy and Advocacy Committee; Marianna
Moore, Ensuring Opportunity Campaign, Budget Justice Coalition; Marjorie Rocha, Executive Director of ECHO Housing.
ATTACHMENTS
Contra Costa County Update - Budget & Key Issues
Ordinance No. 2022-
OPEB Actuarial Report of October 6, 2021
CONTRA COSTA
COUNTY UPDATE
BUDGET & KEY
ISSUES
Presentation to
Board of Supervisors
January 25, 2022
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
FAMILIAR BUDGET DRIVERS AND CHALLENGES
2
Economic
Forecast
COVID Cost
Recovery
Labor
Negotiations
ARPA Funds
Measure X &
Freed-Up
POB/OPEB
Resources
Fund
Infrastructure
Needs (Repair &
Maintenance)
Adequately
Fund Health
Department &
Public Safety
2022/23 Assumptions
Assuming continuation of the Pandemic and associated expenses and offsetting revenues.
Will recommend structurally balanced budget including $107 in Measure X sales tax revenues.
OPEB managed (unfunded liability reduced from $2.6 B in 2006 to current $433.3 million as of
6/30/2021). Will discontinue OPEB pre-pay of $20 million in FY 2022/23 as target funding level has
been achieved.
Assessed Value, on which general purpose revenue is based, was up 6.34% in 2018/19; 5.3% in
2019/20; 4.87% in 2020/21; 3.44% in 2021/22. The budget will be built on assumption of 6.0% increase
in assessed valuations. FY 2022/23 is projected to be significantly higher than ‘normal’.
The final County pension obligation bond (POB) payment will be made in June, freeing up $47.4
million in annual resources for employee wages.
We have labor contracts expiring 6/30/2022 for most of our bargaining groups including In-Home
Supportive Services and are in bargaining with the California Nurses Association. Only 15% of
employees have contracts expiring after 6/30/2022.
Assuming completion of the Facilities Master Plan and Assessment in FY 2022/23.
3
SOLID PENSION FUNDING
STATUS
4
CCCERA lowered its investment earnings assumption from 7.25% to
7.00%, beginning in calendar year 2014
County UAAL as of 12/31/2020 was $557.373 million
Final POB payment scheduled for June, 2022
Contra Costa County Employees Retirement Association Pension Funding Status ($000s)
Actuarial Valuation
Date
Total CCCERA Unfunded Actuarial
Accrued Liabilities Funded Ratio County UAAL CCC Fire Protection
District UAAL
2009 $1,024,673 83.80%$727,578 $68,294
2010 1,312,215 80.30%918,919 104,750
2011 1,488,593 78.50%1,037,535 130,737
2012 2,279,059 70.60%1,591,610 228,950
2013 1,823,681 76.40%1,260,363 180,209
2014 1,469,942 81.70%1,003,749 151,686
2015 1,311,823 84.50%879,610 154,708
2016 1,187,437 86.50%776,396 143,193
2017 1,059,356 88.50%689,426 131,765
2018 1,031,966 89.30%677,735 123,353
2019 947,054 90.60%607,938 132,554
2020 859,345 91.80%557,373 121,270
The County establishing an OPEB Trust in 2008 and began pre-funding benefits that same year
Pre-funding has been $20 million per year
The funded ratio is at 50.60% as of the most recent valuation date (6/30/2021) and exceeds the minimum goal of 44%
We are recommending that the $20 million pre-funding be discontinued beginning July 1, 2022
5
OPEB TRUST PREFUNDING STATUS
Other Post Employment Benefit Funding Status ($000s)
Actuarial Valuation
Date Total Liability Net Liability Funded Ratio
2008 $2,367,023 $2,367,023 0.00%
2009 1,879,242 1,859,204 1.10%
2010 1,046,113 1,021,065 2.40%
2011 1,078,665 1,016,945 5.70%
2012 1,033,801 948,310 8.30%
2013 1,033,776 968,285 6.30%
2014 923,848 794,422 14.00%
2015 939,053 764,329 18.60%
2016 902,011 706,035 21.70%
2017 928,782 693,566 25.30%
2018 932,187 662,517 28.90%
2019 958,588 650,074 32.20%
2020 865,62 523,933 39.50%
2021 878,049 433,321 50.60%
5
Bay Area Unemployment Rate
November 2021 (Unadjusted)
6
•The County’s unemployment levels rebounded strongly from the highs
experienced during the Financial Crisis in 2008-2010, reaching peak
employment in 2019. Subsequent to COVID-19 the county has increased
in line with State (5.4%) and national trends.
•Marin 2.9%
•San Mateo 3.1%
•Santa Clara 3.2%
•San Francisco 3.3%
•Sonoma 3.7%
•Napa 4.2%
•Alameda 4.3%
•Contra Costa 4.6%
•Solano 5.4%
•9 County Average 3.9% (5.9% Last Year)
PROPERTY
TAX
7County property taxes declined by over 11% between 2009 and 2012 and then grew
significantly between 2014 and 2019. Projecting an increase of 6% for fiscal year 2022/23.
Actual County and Contra Costa County Fire Protection District experience below:
Fiscal Year County CCC Fire Protection
2009-10 (7.19%)(7.8%)
2010-11 (3.38%)(2.4%)
2011-12 (0.49%)(1.9%)
2012-13 0.86%(1.2%)
2013-14 3.45%5.9%
2014-15 9.09%9.3%
2015-16 7.53%6.9%
2016-17 601%6.32%
2017-18 5.78 %5.53%
2018-19 6.34%6.44%
2019-20 5.30%5.50%
2020-21 4.87%5.22%
2021-22 3.44%3.82%
The County’s assessed valuation has rebounded from the recession with nine consecutive years of growth
For FY 2021-22, the County’s assessed valuation increased 3.4 % to $233.5 billion
The County projects FY 2022-23 assessed valuation will grow 6.0%
The delinquency rate on tax collections was less than 1%(.83%)in FY 2020-21
Secured AV represents 97.4% of total AV in the County
8
Assessed Valuation and Assessment Roll
Growth
8
GENERAL FUND RESERVES
PERFORMANCE IN SYNC WITH POLICY
9
For FY 2020-21, total General Fund revenues were $1.905 billion,and the total
fund balance was $720.966 million, or 37.83% of total General Fund revenue
Of the $720.966 million:
$403.304 million was unassigned –21.16% of total General Fund Revenues
$317.662 million was assigned, committed, restricted or nonspendable
9.4%
11.0%
13.2%
16.5%
17.9%
16.6%
20.1%20.5%21.2%
9.0%
11.0%
13.0%
15.0%
17.0%
19.0%
21.0%
23.0%
2012-13
Actual
2013-14
Actual
2014-15
Actual
2015-16
Actual
2016-17
Actual
2017-18
Actual
2018-19
Actual
2019-20
Actual
2020-21
Actual
Unassigned
10FY 2021/22 MID-YEAR PRELIMINARY STATS
BUDGET PERFORMING AS EXPECTED
Mid-Year
21-22
Mid-Year
20-21
Mid-Year
19-20
Mid-Year
18-19
Mid-Year
17-18
ALL FUNDS Budget Actual Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent
Expenditures $4,748,058,636 $1,811,140,499 38.14%43.6%40.7%41.0%41.6%
Revenues $4,355,929,320 $1,870,266,215 42.94%44.5%39.2%44.3%43.6%
GENERAL FUND Budget Actual Percent Percent Percent Percent
Expenditures $2,266,831,891 $838,350,038 36.98%42.7%40.5%41.2%37.5%
Revenues $2,057,672,840 $931,095,521 45.25%46.4%37.1%40.5%40.4%
Wages & Benefits $1,048,798,080 $473,505,268 45.15%45.11%45.7%45.9%46.0%
Services & Supplies $763,831,335 $269,829,193 35.33%42.88%37.4%38.6%38.3%
Other Charges $424,951,200 $140,087,703 32.97%45.59%40.4%43.9%40.4%
Fixed Assets $171,633,592 $17,491,193 10.19%24.84%23.5%23.1%14.4%
Inter-departmental Charges ($150,502,916)($62,563,318)41.57%43.78%41.0%45.8%46.5%
Contingencies $8,120,600
Total Expenses $2,266,831,891 $838,350,038 36.98%40.5%40.5%41.2%40.4%
Taxes $674,641,200 $413,528,837 61.30%62.45%64.0%63.8%59.7%
License, Permits, Franchises $12,602,000 $3,499,925 27.77%23.17%29.5%31.7%31.2%
Fines, Forfeitures, Penalties $24,461,000 $2,134,126 8.72%4.52%8.1%11.0%7.6%
Use of Money & Property $5,471,000 $1,689,786 30.89%42.16%28.5%82.9%48.8%
Federal/State Assistance $784,380,606 $346,395,821 44.16%50.17%28.2%37.3%33.0%
Charges for Current Services $195,378,923 $93,087,102 47.64%43.75%31.8%37.9%38.8%
Other Revenue $360,738,111 $70,759,924 19.62%23.28%27.4%23.4%22.4%
Total Revenues $2,057,672,840 $931,095,521 45.25%46.39%37.1%40.5%38.0%
Figures are shown in whole numbers; therefore, due to independent rounding, figures shown may not sum to subtotals and totals .
CONTRACT STATUS 11
Total Number Contract
of Permanent Employees 1 Expiration Date
AFSCME Local 512, Professional and Technical Employees 233 6/30/2022
AFSCME Local 2700, United Clerical, Technical and Specialized Employees 1,454 6/30/2022
California Nurses Association 817 2 9/30/2021
CCC Defenders Association 92 6/30/2022
CCC Deputy District Attorneys’ Association 88 6/30/2022
Deputy Sheriffs Association, Mgmt Unit and Rank and File Unit 808 6/30/2023
Deputy Sheriffs Association, Probation Peace Officers Association 215 6/30/2023
District Attorney Investigator’s Association 14 6/30/2023
IAFF Local 1230 355 6/30/2023
IHSS SEIU - 2015 6/30/2022
Physicians and Dentists of Contra Costa 243 10/31/2022
Professional & Technical Engineers – Local 21, AFL-CIO 1,167 6/30/2022
Public Employees Union, Local One & FACS Site Supervisor Unit 512 6/30/2022
SEIU Local 1021, Rank and File and Service Line Supervisors Units 858 6/30/2022
Teamsters, Local 856 1,806 6/30/2022
United Chief Officers' Association 13 6/30/2023
Western Council of Engineers 22 6/30/2022
Management Classified & Exempt & Management Project 433 n/a
Total 9,130
1 Permanent number of filled Positions as of January 5, 2022 (not FTE)
2 Currently in Negotiations
COVID COST RECOVERY
12
12
Primary Financial Goals During Pandemic
◦Keeping County financial position stable (avoid layoffs,keep CBO contracts funded)
◦Maximizing cost recovery from all eligible revenue sources (CARES Act,FEMA , American
Rescue Plan Act, etc.)
Contract with Cost Recovery Consultant
◦Board approved contract with Ernst &Young LLP on June 2,2020
◦Cost Recovery Working Group has been meeting bi-weekly
◦Primarily concentrating on FEMA claims, but also assists with overall cost recovery strategy
◦Consultant costs covered by FEMA Public Assistance reimbursement
Achievements During Emergency Response
◦County finances have remained stable (specifically social safety net functions)
◦Minimal layoffs of County employees (all impacted employees offered employment in other
areas of the County)
◦CBOs remained fully funded during 2020 shelter in place
◦County upgraded by Moody’s during pandemic, in part, due to strong financial position
13
APPROACH TO COST RECOVERY
Comparison of Congressional Spending Packages
•$2.2 Trillion -CARES Act (March 2020)
•$1.9 Trillion -American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) (March 2021)
•$0.9 Trillion -Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021 (December 2020 Stimulus)
•$0.8 Trillion -American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (2009)
•$0.7 Trillion -Emergency Economic Stabilization Act (aka TARP, 2008)
Challenge is lining up funding to maximize cost recovery
•Requires constant coordination between departments
•Will continue for at least the next 3-5 years as funds from above legislation is spent down (e.g.,
certain ARPA revenue must be obligated by 2024 & spent by 2026)
•CAO will continue to provide quarterly ARPA spending reports to the Board with the next report
at the March 1, 2022 meeting
14
COVID-19 FUNDING LANDSCAPE
15FUNDING LANDSCAPE
Major Takeaways
•Unprecedented levels of funding
over the last 22 months
•Federal agencies slow to put out
guidance regarding funding
streams
•Most of the revenue sources flow
through the States causing further
bottlenecks in getting resources to
local government
Key Takeaways:
•Four revenue drivers impact vast majority the County’s cost recovery
•Contra Costa receiving significant Federal assistance, including the cities!
•County responsible for pandemic response, including associated costs
•All COVID-19 revenue sources are one-time only funds!
16COVID-19
COST RECOVERY FUNDING SOURCES
Program Allocation
Coronavirus Relief Fund $227,827,652
ARPA Fiscal Recovery Fund 224,058,903
Emergency Rental Assistance Program 147,427,324
FEMA Public Assistance Program (Est.)67,743,013
Total $667,056,892
CSLFRF Allocations
Contra Costa County, By City
Population*Allocation
Antioch 112,236 21,550,900$
Brentwood 66,097 6,923,339$
Clayton 11,268 2,934,049$
Concord 129,273 27,040,883$
Danville 43,906 10,647,738$
El Cerrito 24,846 6,102,056$
Hercules 25,864 6,285,778$
Lafayette 25,358 6,372,376$
Martinez 36,827 9,161,456$
Moraga 16,820 4,254,072$
Oakley 42,895 10,177,190$
Orinda 19,078 4,766,723$
Pinole 19,369 4,605,009$
Pittsburg 74,498 16,290,477$
Pleasant Hill 34,133 8,334,229$
Richmond 110,130 27,740,723$
San Pablo 31,041 7,416,467$
San Ramon 83,863 8,115,425$
Walnut Creek 71,317 8,327,653$
Total 197,046,543$
* Population figures based on 2021 Estimates from
the CA Department of Finance.
Departments have identified…
•$324,714,012 in known ARPA allocations coming into
the County
•$190,628,841 has been received
•$92,553,836 has been spent
•Includes $20,816,824 of CSLFRF allocated to
the Health Services Department
•$16,882,139 in previously unfunded COVID-19 costs or
underrealized revenues
•$71,655,531 in one-time needs
17
AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN
18AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN
PROGRAM INFORMATION
Program Title
Est. Federal
Grant Allocation
to County
Federal Grant
Allocation
Received
Federal Grant
Allocation
Expended
Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Relief Fund (CSLFRF)$224,058,903 $112,029,452 $20,816,824
Emergency Rental Assistance Program (ERAP) 2 - Federal Direct Allocation $38,941,950 $38,941,950 $38,941,950
Emergency Rental Assistance Program (ERAP) 2 - State Subrecipient
Allocation $32,663,062 $32,663,062 $32,663,062
Head Start $ 2,300,000 $2,302,066 $0
Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) $ 4,692,311 $4,692,311 $0
American Rescue Plan Act Funding for Health Centers $ 3,355,250 $0 $132,000
Community Mental Health Services Block Grant (MHBG)$2,604,182 $0 $0
Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment Block Grant (SABG) $ 2,508,139 $0 $0
Public Health Workforce $ 1,500,000 $0 $0
HOME-ARP: HOME Investment Partnerships American Rescue Plan
Program $ 12,090,215 $0 $0
Total $324,714,012 $190,628,841 $92,553,836
FINANCIAL INFORMATION
AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN
FY 2021/22 - 1st Quarter Financial Report
Eligible Use Guiding Principles
•Unless otherwise noted, covered period is March 3, 2021-December 31, 2024 (IFR p. 88)
•Costs can be incurred by December 31, 2024 but must be expended by December 31, 2026 (IFR p. 122)
•Cannot spend funds on pension deposits (IFR p. 71)
•States cannot spend the funds to reduce taxes or delay a tax increase (IFR p. 69)
•May not be used as non-Federal Match for other Federal Programs (IFR p. 86)
Four Eligible Use categories
•COVID-19 or a negative economic impact
•Premium pay for eligible workers
•For government services to the extent of the loss of revenue
Based on Treasury provided calculation; or
$10 million allowance in lieu of calculation (New provision in final rule)
•Investments in water, sewer and broadband infrastructure
19STATE AND LOCAL
FISCAL RECOVERY FUND
20RENTAL ASSISTANCE UPDATE
$147,427,324 for Contra Costa
•ERAP 1: $75,822,311
•ERAP 2: $71,605,012
as of January 18, 2022
•23,795 active cases
•$407,841,468 in relief requested
•$183,754,816 in relief approved
•$112,763,999 in relief paid
•9,231 cases paid
Gap of $36.3 million and growing
•County continuing to advocate
in lockstep with the State for
reallocation of Federal dollars
Reminders:
•FEMA reimburses 100% of eligible costs, which does not mean 100% of actual costs (Salary and Benefit costs of permanent staff not eligible!)
•FEMA is the reimbursement source of last resort (after applying cascading funding) and sometimes disallows a portion of requested reimbursement
What’s it mean?:
•FEMA reimbursement process cumbersome and could take years before reimbursement is received (typically 24-36 months)
•The County General Fund is fronting $66.9 million (does not include Fire Mutual Aid figure above) in FEMA eligible costs and has only received $3.5 million to date in reimbursement -this figure will continue to grow
21FEMA COST RECOVERY UPDATE
Claim Category Estimate Claimed Obligated Received
Non-Congregate Shelter 29,966,832 17,425,870 - -
COVID Testing Costs 17,958,576
Incremental Cleaning Costs 9,546,103 - - -
Great Plates 6,415,043 6,415,043 3,609,873 3,464,038
Cleaning, Materials, PPE 2,000,000
Consultant Costs (Ernst & Young)1,000,000
Vaccination (Fire Mutual Aid)820,000 - - -
General Costs - Rental Equipment, Other Costs 36,459
Total 67,743,013 23,840,913 3,609,873 3,464,038
as of January 18, 2022
HEALTH
SERVICES
AMERICAN
RESCUE PLAN
ACT &
CORONAVIRU
S STATE AND
LOCAL FISCAL
RECOVERY
FUNDS
22PROJECTED
July 2021 through June 2022 EXPENDITURES *
PAYROLL COSTS FOR PUBLIC HEALTH EMPLOYEES*
PERMANENT SALARIES AND BENEFITS 42,439,500$
TEMPORARY SALARIES (include Emergency Service Workers)7,418,874
OVERTIME PAY 1,278,100
TOTAL PAYROLL COSTS FOR PUBLIC HEALTH EMPLOYEES 51,136,474$
SERVICES AND SUPPLIES
REGISTRY/MEDICAL PERSONNEL 7,510,800$
TESTING MACHINES AND OTHER TESTING COSTS 6,741,306
MEDICAL AND OTHER RELATED EXPENSES 5,526,139
MATERIALS & SUPPLIES 3,947,899
IT SYSTEMS SUPPORT SERVICES 1,992,168
CLEANING AND DISINFECTING 1,342,997
LAB SPECIMEN TESTING 896,683
TRAINING AND MISC. COST 875,942
SECURITY & SAFETY 716,249
REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 661,157
EQUIPMENT RENTAL, EQUIPMENT REPAIR/MAINTENANCE 584,266
TELEWORK 465,264
EQUIPMENT ACQUISITION 360,384
COVID‐19 TRANSLATION SERVICES 171,439
COMPUTER AND OTHER MINOR EQUIPMENT 53,832
COMPUTER SOFTWARE 10,886
PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT 6,115
TOTAL SERVICES AND SUPPLIES 31,863,526$
TOTAL COVID RELATED EXPENSES 83,000,000$
*Projection based on five months of actual experience.
*Costs are for services substantially dedicated to mitigating or responding to the COVID‐19
health emergency.
CONTRA COSTA REGIONAL MEDICAL
CENTER
23
•Contra Costa Regional Medical Center (CCRMC) is a 164-bed acute care public
hospital owned and operated by the County. It is inclusive of ten ambulatory health
care centers, which are licensed as outpatient departments of the hospital.
•Operation of the CCRMC is financially administered primarily with Hospital/Health Plan
revenues, with the County General Fund subsidizing approximately 11% of CCRMC’s
budget
•The County General Fund allocation had been significantly reduced over the last
five years following the implementation of the Affordable Care Act (ACA)
•The subsidy will continue at $73.2 million in FY 2022/23
•ACA membership and related revenue declined in FY 2018-19; the ACA impact
coupled with new labor agreement costs created a need for additional subsidy in
FY 2019-20
•Measure X general purpose revenue will support $40 million beginning in FY 2022/23
•No other changes in general fund subsidy are anticipated over the next few years
•Significantly increased costs, due to the Pandemic, have been offset with CARES, ARPA,
and FEMA funding
CONTRA COSTA FIRE
PROTECTION DISTRICT
24
•East Contra Costa Fire Protection District Annexation
•The annexation of East Contra Costa Fire continues to move through the LAFCO process and is
anticipated to be finalized before July 1, 2022.
•Measure X funding will support service expansion through the construction of Fire Station 51 (Brentwood)
and construction/staffing of Fire Station 54 (Brentwood).
•Pinole Fire Contract for Service
•Initial discussions have been held between the City of Pinole and CCCFPD
•Measure X is also supporting this initiative through funding to reopen Fire Station 74.
•Fire Station Construction
•Fire Station 86 (Bay Point) on track for December 2022 opening.
•Fire Station 9 (Pacheco) is in the planning/pre-construction phase.
•CCCFPD Measure X Funding
•$1.6 million (one-time) and $3.5 million (ongoing) to acquire apparatus and staff a second unit at Fire
Station 81 (downtown Antioch).
•Wildland Fire Mitigation and Fuel Reduction –$2.5 million annually for a year-round hand crew program;
$2.0 million annually for Fuels Reduction Projects throughout high fire hazard zones countywide.
REASONS FOR
CONTINUED
CONCERN
25•Cost and impact of the Pandemic will exceed one-
time funding
•Rental Assistance –there is a greater need for
rental assistance than resources support
•Aging Facilities –there is a need to identify funding
for the next three years (minimally)
•Aging Technology –countywide needs including
hardware and security are significant -Finance &
Tax systems replacement in process
•Unknown to what level the Federal government will
continue to respond to counties needs
•Inflation is here
•Real long-term issues coming due to excessive
stimulus funds
•Unincorporated Patrol –funding of $10 million must
be identified
•Ongoing funding for County Hospital, Clinics, and
Health Plan -it continues to be difficult to support
the hospital with increased costs. We continue to
dedicate new revenue to support Hospital needs.
We must continue to consider alternative revenue
streams and right size services to resources
available.
26
FY 2022-23 BUDGET HEARING FORMAT
•Draft agenda for discussion purposes
•Introduction/summary by County Administrator
•Departmental presentations:
•Sheriff-Coroner
•District Attorney
•Public Defender
•Health Services Director
•Employment and Human Services Director
•Animal Services Director
•Suggested changes for this year?
•Deliberation
•Budget Hearing on April 12th (hearing can be continued if needed)
•Budget Adoption on May 10th
•The Fire Board will receive a budget presentation on the District’s budget on April
26. Per the norm the Fire Budget Hearing and Adoption will occur along with the
Countywide Budget on May 10th.
27RECOMMENDATIONS
•ACCEPT report on Budget and Key Issues for FY 2022/23 and beyond;
•ACKNOWLEDGE that at the American Rescue Plan Act Workshop on August 3, 2021, the Board
postponed decisions related to the allocation of Year 2 American Rescue Plan -CSLFRF funds in the
amount of $112 million until more information was known about other American Rescue Plan
revenue sources and the status of the COVID-19 pandemic response and related impacts on
Contra Costa County.
•ACKNOWLEDGE that the County Administrator will be recommending approximately $53 million in
Year 2 allocation of American Rescue Plan –CSLFRF funds for continued Health Services
Department response to the COVID-19 pandemic in the FY 2022/23 Recommended Budget.
•POSTPONE decisions related to the remaining $59 million of Year 2 allocation of American Rescue
Plan -CSLFRF funds until the status of the COVID-19 pandemic response and related impacts on
Contra Costa County is better understood in January 2023 and
•REPEAL Ordinance Code section 62-10.002, Other Post-Employment Benefits Funding, waiving
reading, and fixing February 1, 2021, for adoption
ORDINANCE NO. 2022-___
1
ORDINANCE NO. 2022-___
(Repeal of Ordinance Allocating Funds for Other Post-Employment Benefits.)
The Board of Supervisors of the County of Contra Costa ordains as follows:
SECTION I. Summary. This ordinance repeals Chapter 62-10 of the County Ordinance Code,
which allocates specific future resources for funding Other Post-Employment Benefits.
SECTION II. Repeal. Chapter 62-10, which contains only Section 62-10.002 (Allocation of
Funds for Other Post-Employment Benefits), is hereby repealed and of no further force or effect.
SECTION III. Effective Date. This ordinance becomes effective 30 days after passage, and
within 15 days of passage shall be published once with the names of the supervisors voting for or
against it, in the East Bay Times, a newspaper published in this County.
PASSED ON , by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST: MONICA NINO,
Clerk of the Board of Supervisors Board Chair Karen Mitchoff
and County Administrator
By:
Deputy Clerk [___________] [SEAL]
RJH:lg
H:\2022\Board of Supervisors \OBEB allocation ordinance repeal.doc
Offices in Principal Cities Worldwide
2175 N. California Blvd., Suite 810
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
USA
Tel +1 888 881 4015
Fax +1 888 884 0329
milliman.com
October 6, 2021
Ms. Lisa Driscoll
County Finance Director
County Administrator’s Office
651 Pine Street, 10th Floor
Martinez, CA 94553
Contra Costa County Other Post Employment Benefits Plan –
GASB 74 / 75 Disclosures as of June 30, 2021
Dear Ms. Driscoll:
I am pleased to enclose above titled report for the Contra Costa County (“County”). In this report, we
have prepared certain disclosures required by GASB Statements No. 74 and 75 for the Contra Costa
County’s OPEB Plan for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2021.
If you have any questions or would like to review the report, please call me at (415) 394-3740.
Sincerely,
John R. Botsford, FSA, MAAA
enc.
Milliman Client Report
Contra Costa County
Other Post Employment Benefits Plan
GASB 74 and 75 Disclosures as of June 30, 2021
Prepared by:
John R. Botsford
FSA, MAAA
Milliman, Inc.
2175 N. California Blvd., Suite 810
Walnut Creek, California 94596
Tel 888 881 4015 Fax 888 884 0329
milliman.com
October 6, 2021
Offices in Principal Cities Worldwide
2175 N. California Blvd., Suite 810
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
USA
Tel +1 888 881 4015
Fax +1 888 884 0329
milliman.com
October 6, 2021
Contra Costa County
651 Pine Street
Martinez, CA 94553
Contra Costa County Other Post Employment Benefits Plan
GASB 74 and 75 Disclosures as of June 30, 2021
At the request of the Contra Costa County, we have prepared GASB 74 / 75 disclosures for the fiscal
year ending June 30, 2021, to comply with Statements No. 74 and 75 of the Governmental Accounting
Standards Board (GASB).
In preparing this report, we relied, without audit, on information supplied by the Contra Costa County’s
staff. This information includes but is not limited to employee census data, financial information and plan
provisions. While Milliman has not audited the financial and census data, they have been reviewed for
reasonableness and are, in our opinion, sufficient and reliable for the purposes of our calculations. If
any of this information as summarized in this report is inaccurate or incomplete, the results shown could
be materially affected and this report may need to be revised.
All costs, liabilities, rates of interest, and other factors for the County have been determined on the
basis of actuarial assumptions and methods which are individually reasonable (taking into account the
experience of the County and reasonable expectations); and which, in combination, offer our best
estimate of anticipated experience affecting the County. Further, in our opinion, each actuarial
assumption used is reasonably related to the experience of the Plan and to reasonable expectations
which, in combination, represent our best estimate of anticipated experience for the County.
This valuation report is only an estimate of the Plan’s financial condition as of a single date. It can
neither predict the Plan’s future condition nor guarantee future financial soundness. Actuarial
valuations do not affect the ultimate cost of Plan benefits, only the timing of County’s contributions.
While the valuation is based on an array of individually reasonable assumptions, other assumption
sets may also be reasonable and valuation results based on those assumptions would be different.
No one set of assumptions is uniquely correct. Determining results using alternative assumptions is
outside the scope of our engagement.
The results were developed using models that use standard actuarial techniques. We have reviewed
the models, including their inputs, calculations, and outputs for consistency, reasonableness, and
appropriateness to the intended purpose and in the compliance with generally accepted actuarial
practice and relevant actuarial standards of practice (ASOP).
Future actuarial measurements may differ significantly from the current measurements presented in
this report due to such factors as the following: plan experience differing from that anticipated by the
economic or demographic assumptions; changes in economic or demographic assumptions;
increases or decreases expected as part of the natural operation of the methodology used for these
measurements (such as the end of an amortization period); and changes in plan provisions or
Contra Costa County Other Post Employment Benefits Plan
GASB 74 and 75 Disclosures as of June 30, 2021
October 6, 2021
Page 2
applicable law. Due to the limited scope of our assignment, we did not perform an analysis of the
potential range of future measurements. The County has the final decision regarding the
appropriateness of the assumptions and actuarial cost methods.
Actuarial computations presented in this report under GASB Statements No. 74 and 75 are for
purposes of assisting the County in fulfilling its financial accounting requirements. The computations
prepared for this purpose may differ as disclosed in our report. The calculations in the enclosed report
have been made on a basis consistent with our understanding of the County’s funding policy and
goals. The calculations in this report have been made on a basis consistent with our understanding of
the OPEB plan provisions described in Appendix A of this report, and of GASB Statements No. 74 and
75. Determinations for purposes other than meeting these requirements may be significantly different
from the results contained in this report. Accordingly, additional determinations may be needed for
other purposes.
Milliman’s work is prepared solely for the internal business use of the Contra Costa County. To the
extent that Milliman's work is not subject to disclosure under applicable public records laws, Milliman’s
work may not be provided to third parties without Milliman's prior written consent. Milliman does not
intend to benefit or create a legal duty to any third party recipient of its work product. Milliman’s
consent to release its work product to any third party may be conditioned on the third party signing a
Release, subject to the following exceptions:
a) Contra Costa County may provide a copy of Milliman’s work, in its entirety, to County’s
professional service advisors who are subject to a duty of confidentiality and who agree to not
use Milliman’s work for any purpose other than to benefit the Contra Costa County.
b) Contra Costa County may provide a copy of Milliman’s work, in its entirety, to other
governmental entities, as required by law.
No third party recipient of Milliman's work product should rely upon Milliman's work product. Such
recipients should engage qualified professionals for advice appropriate to their own specific needs.
The consultants who worked on this assignment are actuaries. Milliman’s advice is not intended to be
a substitute for qualified legal or accounting counsel. The signing actuary is independent of the plan
sponsor. We are not aware of any relationship that would impair the objectivity of our work.
On the basis of the foregoing, we hereby certify that, to the best of our knowledge and belief, the report
is complete and accurate and has been prepared in accordance with generally recognized and accepted
actuarial principles and practices which are consistent with the applicable Actuarial Standards of Practice
of the American Academy of Actuaries. The undersigned is a member of the American Academy of
Actuaries and meets the Qualification Standards of the American Academy of Actuaries to render the
actuarial opinion contained herein.
Sincerely,
John R. Botsford, FSA, MAAA
Principal and Consulting Actuary
Milliman
Milliman Client Report
Contra Costa County Other Post Employment Benefits Plan
GASB 74 and 75 Disclosures as of June 30, 2021
This work product was prepared solely for the Contra Costa County for the purposes described herein and may not be appropriate to use for other purposes.
Milliman does not intend to benefit and assumes no duty or liability to other parties who receive this work. Milliman Recommends that third parties be aided by
their own actuary or other qualified professional when reviewing the Milliman work product.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
I SUMMARY
Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 1
Background ....................................................................................................................... 1
Key Results ....................................................................................................................... 1
Rationale for Significant Assumptions ............................................................................... 2
II GASB 74 EXHIBITS
Exhibit 1. Net OPEB Liabilities .................................................................................... 4
Exhibit 2. Sensitivity of Net OPEB Liabilities ............................................................... 5
Exhibit 3. Changes in Net OPEB Liability .................................................................... 6
Exhibit 4. Money Weighted Investment Return .......................................................... 7
III GASB 75 EXHIBITS
Exhibit 5. Calculation of OPEB Expense and Deferred Inflows/Outflows ................... 8
Exhibit 6. Schedule of Deferred Inflows and Outflows of Resources .......................... 9
Exhibit 7. Total OPEB Liability by Entities ................................................................ 10
IV APPENDICES
Appendix A. Summary of Plan Benefits ......................................................................... 11
Appendix B. Actuarial Cost Method and Assumptions ................................................... 23
Appendix C. Summary of Participant Data ..................................................................... 30
Appendix D. Glossary of Key Terms .............................................................................. 31
Milliman
Milliman Client Report SECTION I. SUMMARY
Contra Costa County Other Post Employment Benefits Plan 1
GASB 74 and 75 Disclosures as of June 30, 2021
This work product was prepared solely for the Contra Costa County for the purposes described herein and may not be appropriate to use for other purposes.
Milliman does not intend to benefit and assumes no duty or liability to other parties who receive this work. Milliman Recommends that third parties be aided by their
own actuary or other qualified professional when reviewing the Milliman work product.
Introduction
Milliman, Inc. (Milliman) has been retained by Contra Costa County (the “County”) to provide
disclosures required by GASB Statements No. 74 and 75 for the Contra Costa County OPEB Plan for
the fiscal year ending June 30, 2021.
GASB 74 applies to financial reporting for public OPEB plans. Even if the plan does not issue standalone
financial statements, but rather is considered a trust fund of a government, it is subject to GASB 74.
GASB 75 governs the specifics of accounting for public OPEB plan obligations for employers. GASB 75
requires a liability for OPEB obligations, known as the Net OPEB Liability, to be recognized on the
balance sheets of employers. Changes in the Net OPEB Liability will be immediately recognized as
OPEB Expense on the income statement or reported as deferred inflows/outflows of resources
depending on the nature of the change.
The results contained in this report represent our best estimates based on the assumptions used in
the valuation. However, variation from these or any other estimates of future benefits is not only
possible but probable. To the extent that actual experience differs from the anticipated experience,
actual plan costs will vary as well.
Background
Currently, employees who retire directly from the County may receive certain retiree health benefits if
they meet certain eligibility requirements. The County may contribute an amount toward the cost of
retiree health benefits for some retirees consistent with the bargaining agreement between the County
and various bargaining units. Appendix A provides a detailed summary of benefits.
Key Results
The following table summarizes key results. Exhibits 1 – 7 contain the information needed for the
preparation of accounting disclosures under GASB 74 and 75.
Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2021 June 30, 2020
Net OPEB Liability
Total OPEB Liability $ 878,049,000 $ 865,362,000
Fiduciary Net Position 444,728,000 341,429,000
Net OPEB Liability $ 433,321,000 $ 523,933,000
Fiduciary Net Position as % of Total OPEB Liability 50.6% 39.5%
Annual OPEB Expense $ 13,604,000 $ 39,666,000
Deferred (Inflows)/Outflows of Resources (132,330,000) (106,586,000)
Milliman
Milliman Client Report SECTION I. SUMMARY
Contra Costa County Other Post Employment Benefits Plan 2
GASB 74 and 75 Disclosures as of June 30, 2021
This work product was prepared solely for the Contra Costa County for the purposes described herein and may not be appropriate to use for other purposes.
Milliman does not intend to benefit and assumes no duty or liability to other parties who receive this work. Milliman Recommends that third parties be aided by their
own actuary or other qualified professional when reviewing the Milliman work product.
Plan Changes since the Last Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2020
There were no plan changes since the last fiscal year ending June 30, 2020.
Assumption Changes since the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2020
As this is a “roll-forward” valuation, the same investment rate of return, discount rate, health costs
trends, demographic and coverage election assumptions used in the last full valuation report (valuation
date of January 1, 2020) apply to this roll-forward valuation. The following are the rationales from the
last full valuation report (valuation date of January 1, 2020).
Rationale for Significant Assumptions
With any valuation of future benefits, assumptions of anticipated future events are required. If actual
events differ from the assumptions made, the actual cost of the plan will vary as well. A complete list
of actuarial assumptions is presented in Appendix B.
Investment Rate of Return. We have assumed an investment rate of return of 5.85%, net of investment
expenses. This is based on the investment policy set by the County for its OPEB trust where the
County invests its assets in the Public Agency Retirement Services (PARS) Trust to fund its OPEB
liabilities.
Discount Rate. Under GASB 74 & 75, the discount rate should be the single rate that reflects the long-
term rate of return on OPEB plan investments that are expected to be used to finance the payment of
benefits. To the extent that OPEB plan assets are insufficient to finance all OPEB benefits, the discount
rate should be based on 20-year tax-exempt AA or higher Municipal Bonds as of the Measurement
Date. County’s OPEB Irrevocable Trust assets are invested in the Public Agency Retirement Services’
Highmark Diversified Portfolio. Based on the Trust’s asset allocation, we have assumed an expected
average annual rate of return of 5.85%. See Appendix B for additional detail.
The County’s current funding policy is to fund the pay-as-you-go costs for retirees, plus $20 million
into the OPEB Trust each year until year 2022. Beginning in 2022 the County will continue to fund the
pay-as-you-go costs for retirees, plus $73 million until the OPEB fund’s Fiduciary Net Position as a
percentage of Total OPEB Liability reaches 60%. Thereafter, the County will contribute an amount
each year to maintain the 60% funded status.
GASB 74 and 75 require that a projection regarding future solvency of the OPEB plan be run each
year. The projections assume that plan assets earn the assumed rate of return and there are no future
changes in the plan provisions or actuarial methods and assumptions. We have run a solvency
projection as prescribed in GASB 74 and 75 based on the County’s current funding policy, and the
Fiduciary Net Position is always projected to be sufficient to cover benefit payments and administrative
expenses. Therefore, we have used 5.85% as the discount rate.
Milliman
Milliman Client Report SECTION I. SUMMARY
Contra Costa County Other Post Employment Benefits Plan 3
GASB 74 and 75 Disclosures as of June 30, 2021
This work product was prepared solely for the Contra Costa County for the purposes described herein and may not be appropriate to use for other purposes.
Milliman does not intend to benefit and assumes no duty or liability to other parties who receive this work. Milliman Recommends that third parties be aided by their
own actuary or other qualified professional when reviewing the Milliman work product.
Health Cost Trend. We have assumed overall health costs of the medical benefits will increase
according to the health cost inflation trend derived by using the “Getzen” model developed by the
Society of Actuaries. The H.R. 1865 Further Consolidated Appropriations Act 2020 became law on
December 20, 2019. This law repeals the Cadillac tax completely and removes the Health Insurer Fee
permanently beginning in 2021. The assumed health cost trends reflect this law change and the latest
economic factors. We also gave consideration to the potential impact of COVID-19 on plan costs.
Given the substantial uncertainty regarding the impact of COVID-19 on plan costs, including whether
the pandemic will increase or decrease costs during the term of our projections, we have chosen not
to make an adjustment to health cost trends for COVID-19.
Demographic Rates. The assumptions for turnover, retirement, disability, and mortality used in this
valuation are the same as the assumptions used in the December 31, 2018, pension actuarial report
from the Contra Costa County Employees’ Retirement Association (CCCERA).
Retiree Coverage Upon Retirement We have assumed 85% of new retirees hired before the exclusion
dates stated in Appendix A will elect medical and dental coverage at retirement. This assumption is
based on recent observed experience of the plan.
A complete summary of the actuarial assumptions is presented in Appendix B.
Milliman
Milliman Client Report SECTION II. GASB 74 EXHIBITS
Contra Costa County Other Post Employment Benefits Plan 4
GASB 74 and 75 Disclosures as of June 30, 2021
This work product was prepared solely for the Contra Costa County for the purposes described herein and may not be appropriate to use for other purposes.
Milliman does not intend to benefit and assumes no duty or liability to other parties who receive this work. Milliman Recommends that third parties be aided by their
own actuary or other qualified professional when reviewing the Milliman work product.
Exhibit 1. Net OPEB Liabilities
The Valuation Date is January 1, 2020. This is the date as of which the actuarial valuation is performed.
The Measurement Date is June 30, 2021, which is also the GASB 74 and 75 Reporting Date, for the
fiscal year ending June 30, 2021. The Total OPEB Liability is projected to June 30, 2021, using
standard actuarial techniques as permitted by GASB 74 and 75. The Fiduciary Net Position is the
market value of assets as of the fiscal year ending June 30, 2021.
For the Fiscal Year Ending
June 30, 2021 June 30, 2020
Total OPEB Liability $ 878,049,000 $ 865,362,000
Fiduciary Net Position 444,728,000 341,429,000
Net OPEB Liability $ 433,321,000 $ 523,933,000
Fiduciary Net Position as a % of Total OPEB Liability 50.6% 39.5%
Valuation Date 01/01/2020 01/01/2020
Measurement date 06/30/2021 06/30/2020
GASB 74/75 Reporting date 06/30/2021 06/30/2020
Discount Rate 5.85% 5.85%
Money Weighted Rate of Return 24.14% 3.89%
Milliman
Milliman Client Report SECTION II. GASB 74 EXHIBITS
Contra Costa County Other Post Employment Benefits Plan 5
GASB 74 and 75 Disclosures as of June 30, 2021
This work product was prepared solely for the Contra Costa County for the purposes described herein and may not be appropriate to use for other purposes.
Milliman does not intend to benefit and assumes no duty or liability to other parties who receive this work. Milliman Recommends that third parties be aided by their
own actuary or other qualified professional when reviewing the Milliman work product.
Exhibit 2. Sensitivity of Net OPEB Liabilities
GASB 74 and 75 requires disclosure of the sensitivity of the Net OPEB Liability (NOL) to changes in
the discount rate and health care cost trend rates. The liabilities shown below are based on a
measurement date of June 30, 2021, and are applicable for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2021.
Sensitivity of the Net OPEB Liability to changes in the discount rate
The following table shows what the County’s Net OPEB Liability (NOL) would be if it were calculated
using a discount rate that is 1 percentage point lower or 1 percentage point higher than the current
discount rate.
Sensitivity Analysis
1% Decrease
in Discount Rate
4.85%
Current
Discount Rate
5.85%
1% Increase
in Discount Rate
6.85%
Net OPEB Liability as of June 30, 2021 $ 526,244,000 $ 433,321,000 $ 354,838,000
Sensitivity of the Net OPEB Liability to changes in the Healthcare Cost Trend Rates
The following table shows what the County’s Net OPEB Liability (NOL) would be if it were calculated
using a Healthcare cost trend that is 1 percentage point lower or 1 percentage point higher than the
current Healthcare cost trend rates.
Sensitivity Analysis
1% Decrease
in Healthcare
Costs Trend Rate
Current
Healthcare Costs
Trend Rate
1% Increase
in Healthcare
Costs Trend Rate
Net OPEB Liability as of June 30, 20201 $ 379,490,000 $ 433,321,000 $ 499,637,000
Milliman
Milliman Client Report SECTION II. GASB 74 EXHIBITS
Contra Costa County Other Post Employment Benefits Plan 6
GASB 74 and 75 Disclosures as of June 30, 2021
This work product was prepared solely for the Contra Costa County for the purposes described herein and may not be appropriate to use for other purposes.
Milliman does not intend to benefit and assumes no duty or liability to other parties who receive this work. Milliman Recommends that third parties be aided by their
own actuary or other qualified professional when reviewing the Milliman work product.
Exhibit 3. Changes in Net OPEB Liability
The following exhibit shows a reconciliation of the Net OPEB Liability from the measurement date
June 30, 2020, to June 30, 2021, to be reported for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2021.
Increase / (Decrease)
Total OPEB
Liability
Plan Fiduciary
Net Position
Net OPEB
Liability
Balance as of June 30, 2020 $ 865,362,000 $ 341,429,000 $ 523,933,000
Service cost $ 21,085,000 $ 0 $ 21,085,000
Interest on the total OPEB liability 50,168,000 0 50,168,000
Changes of benefit terms 0 0 0
Differences between actual and expected
experience with regard to economic or
demographic factors
0 0 0
Changes of assumptions 0 0 0
Benefit payments 1 (58,566,000) (58,566,000) 0
Contributions from employer 0 78,472,000 2 (78,472,000)
Net investment income 0 83,598,000 (83,598,000)
Administrative expense 0 (205,000) 205,000
Other changes 0 0 0
Total changes $ 12,687,000 $ 103,299,000 $ (90,612,000)
Balance as of June 30, 2021 $ 878,049,000 $ 444,728,000 $ 433,321,000
1. The benefit payment shown is equal to the annual pay-as-you-go cost of $49,033,000 reported by the County for
the fiscal year ending June 30, 2021, increased by $9,533,000 to reflect the estimated implicit subsidy.
2. The County contributed $19.9 million to the trust fund in FY 2020-2021. The amount shown above includes both
the contributions made to the trust and the pay-as-you-go benefit payment cost.
Milliman
Milliman Client Report SECTION II. GASB 74 EXHIBITS
Contra Costa County Other Post Employment Benefits Plan 7
GASB 74 and 75 Disclosures as of June 30, 2021
This work product was prepared solely for the Contra Costa County for the purposes described herein and may not be appropriate to use for other purposes.
Milliman does not intend to benefit and assumes no duty or liability to other parties who receive this work. Milliman Recommends that third parties be aided by their
own actuary or other qualified professional when reviewing the Milliman work product.
Exhibit 4. Money Weighted Investment Return
GASB 74 requires the disclosure of the money-weighted rate of return on plan investments. The
money-weighted rate of return considers the changing amounts actually invested during a period and
weights the amount of OPEB Trust investments by the proportion of time they are available to earn a
return during that period. External cash flows are determined on a monthly basis and are assumed to
occur at the beginning of each month. The Net External Cash Flows shown below represent employer
contribution to the Trust. There were no cash outflows from the Trust during fiscal year. The money-
weighted rate of return is calculated net of investment expenses.
Net External Cash
Flows
Periods
Invested
Period
Weight
Net External Cash
Flows with Interest
Beginning Balance – July 1, 2020 $ 341,429,000 12 1.00 $ 423,844,000
Monthly Net External Cash Flows:
July 0 12 1.00 0
August 0 11 0.92 0
September (98,000) 10 0.83 (117,000)
October 0 9 0.75 0
November 0 8 0.67 0
December 4,988,000 7 0.58 5,654,000
January 0 6 0.50 0
February 0 5 0.42 0
March 4,902,000 4 0.33 5,265,000
April 0 3 0.25 0
May 0 2 0.17 0
June 9,909,000 1 0.08 10,082,000
Ending Value – June 30, 2021 $ 361,130,000 $ 444,728,000
Year Ending June 30
Money Weighted
Investment Return
2021 24.14%
2020 3.89%
2019 6.40%
2018 5.49%
2017 9.18%
Milliman
Contra Costa County Other Post Employment Benefits Plan 8
GASB 74 and 75 Disclosures as of June 30, 2021
This work product was prepared solely for the Contra Costa County for the purposes described herein and may not be appropriate to use for other purposes.
Milliman does not intend to benefit and assumes no duty or liability to other parties who receive this work. Milliman Recommends that third parties be aided by their
own actuary or other qualified professional when reviewing the Milliman work product.
Milliman Client Report SECTION III. GASB 75 EXHIBITS
Exhibit 5. Calculation of OPEB Expense and Deferred Inflows/Outflows
The following tables shows the development of the OPEB expense and deferred inflows/outflows of
resources.
For the Fiscal Year Ending
OPEB Expense June 30, 2021 June 30, 2020
Service cost $ 21,085,000 $ 27,340,000
Interest on the total OPEB liability 50,168,000 56,029,000
Effect of plan changes 0 400,000
Administrative expense 205,000 199,000
Member contributions 0 0
Expected investment return, net of investment expenses (20,542,000) (19,601,000)
Recognition of Deferred (Inflows)/Outflows of Resources
Economic/demographic (gains) or losses (21,826,000) (21,826,000)
Assumption changes or inputs (3,480,000) (3,480,000)
Investment (gains) or losses (12,006,000) 605,000
Total Recognition (37,312,000) (24,701,000)
OPEB expense $ 13,604,000 $ 39,666,000
Deferred (Inflows) / Outflows of Resources
Deferred Inflows
of Resources
Deferred Outflows
of Resources
Differences between expected and actual experience $ (66,313,000) $ 0
Changes of assumptions (25,717,000) 5,526,000
Net difference between projected and actual earnings (45,827,000) 0
Contributions made subsequent to measurement date 0 0
Total $ (137,856,000) $ 5,526,000
Amounts currently reported as deferred inflows of resources and outflows of resources related to
OPEB will be recognized in OPEB expense as follows:
Fiscal Year Ending
June 30
Recognized Deferred (Inflows)
and Outflows of Resources
2022 $ (36,146,000)
2023 (35,097,000)
2024 (31,766,000)
2025 (29,322,000)
2026 0
Thereafter 0
Milliman
Contra Costa County Other Post Employment Benefits Plan 9
GASB 74 and 75 Disclosures as of June 30, 2021
This work product was prepared solely for the Contra Costa County for the purposes described herein and may not be appropriate to use for other purposes.
Milliman does not intend to benefit and assumes no duty or liability to other parties who receive this work. Milliman Recommends that third parties be aided by their
own actuary or other qualified professional when reviewing the Milliman work product.
Milliman Client Report SECTION III. GASB 75 EXHIBITS
Exhibit 6. Schedule of Deferred Inflows and Outflows of Resources
Investment (gains)/losses are recognized in OPEB expense over a period of five years.
Economic/demographic (gains)/losses and assumption changes or inputs are recognized over the
average remaining service life for all active and inactive members. Since there is no expected future
service for inactives, their remaining service is equal to zero for purposes of computing the average
remaining service life.
Date
Established
Original
Amount
Original
Recognition
Period
Amount
Recognized in
Expense
FYE 06/30/2021
Remaining
Recognition
Period
FYE 2021
Balance of
Deferred
(Inflows)/Outflows
FYE 06/30/2021
Investment (gains) or losses
06/30/2021 $ (63,056,000) 5.00 $ (12,611,000) 4.00 $ (50,445,000)
06/30/2020 7,384,000 5.00 1,477,000 3.00 4,430,000
06/30/2019 (530,000) 5.00 (106,000) 2.00 (212,000)
06/30/2018 1,996,000 5.00 399,000 1.00 400,000
06/30/2017 (5,825,000) 5.00 (1,165,000) 0.00 0
Total $ (12,006,000) $ (45,827,000)
Economic/demographic (gains) or losses
06/30/2020 $ (80,647,000) 5.81 $ (13,881,000) 3.81 $ (52,886,000)
06/30/2018 (45,206,000) 5.69 (7,945,000) 1.69 (13,427,000)
Total $ (21,826,000) $ (66,313,000)
Assumption changes
06/30/2020 $ (39,217,000) 5.81 $ (6,750,000) 3.81 $ (25,717,000)
06/30/2018 18,605,000 5.69 3,270,000 1.69 5,526,000
Total $ (3,480,000) $ (20,191,000)
Grand Total $ (37,312,000) $ (132,331,000)
Milliman
Contra Costa County Other Post Employment Benefits Plan 10
GASB 74 and 75 Disclosures as of June 30, 2021
This work product was prepared solely for the Contra Costa County for the purposes described herein and may not be appropriate to use for other purposes.
Milliman does not intend to benefit and assumes no duty or liability to other parties who receive this work. Milliman Recommends that third parties be aided by their
own actuary or other qualified professional when reviewing the Milliman work product.
Milliman Client Report SECTION III. GASB 75 EXHIBITS
Exhibit 7. Total OPEB Liabilities by Entity
The following table shows a breakdown of the County’s GASB 75 Total OPEB Liability by each entity
shown below.
Entity As of June 30, 2021 As of June 30, 2020
Safety Non-Fire $ 248,387,000 $ 242,546,000
CCC Fire 103,000,000 101,776,000
Hospital 180,051,000 174,032,000
CCHP 9,252,000 8,803,000
Airport 1,589,000 1,661,000
CCC Retirement System (Retired before January 1, 2015) 1,476,000 1,569,000
All Other CCC Departments 334,294,000 334,975,000
Total $ 878,049,000 $ 865,362,000
Milliman
Contra Costa County Other Post Employment Benefits Plan 11
GASB 74 and 75 Disclosures as of June 30, 2021
This work product was prepared solely for the Contra Costa County for the purposes described herein and may not be appropriate to use for other purposes.
Milliman does not intend to benefit and assumes no duty or liability to other parties who receive this work. Milliman Recommends that third parties be aided by their
own actuary or other qualified professional when reviewing the Milliman work product.
Milliman Client Report SECTION IV. APPENDICES
Appendix A. Summary of Plan Benefits
The following description of retiree health benefits is intended to be only a brief summary and is not
complete information.
Eligibility
Currently, employees may receive retiree health benefits if they retire from the County, are receiving
a pension from CCCERA, and meet certain eligibility requirements as follows:
General employees - age 50 with 10 years of pension service or age 70 with a vested pension, or after
30 years of pension service with no age requirement.
Safety employees - age 50 with 10 years of pension service or age 70 with a vested pension, or after
20 years of pension service with no age requirement.
Employees hired after December 31, 2006 and represented by the following bargaining groups
(AFSCME, California Nurses Association, Deputy District Attorneys’ Association, Public Defenders
Association, IFPTE, Western Council of Engineers, SEIU, PEU, Probation Peace Officers Association,
and Unrepresented) also must have 15 years of County service. Employees hired on or after October
1, 2005, and represented by the Physicians’ and Dentists’ Organization also must have 15 years of
County service.
Health Benefits
Eligible retirees and their dependents are covered either under the Contra Costa Health Plans, Health
Net plans, Kaiser plans, or health plans sponsored by CalPERS (PEMHCA). Coverage may be
provided for a retiree and surviving spouse as long as retiree and surviving spouse monthly premium
contributions are paid. The County may pay a subsidy toward eligible retirees’ monthly medical and
dental premiums. This subsidy may vary by bargaining unit and date of hire as described in this
appendix. Employees hired on or after dates described in the table below and represented by the
following bargaining groups must pay the entire cost of premiums to maintain coverage.
Bargaining Unit Name
Hire Date on or after which eligible retirees
must pay entire cost of premiums
IFPTE, Unrepresented January 1, 2009
AFSCME, WCE, SEIU, PEU January 1, 2010
Deputy District Attorneys Association December 14, 2010
Probation Peace Officers Association of CCC January 1, 2011
CCC Public Defenders Association March 1, 2011
Physicians’ And Dentists’ Organization of CCC November 1, 2013
All surviving spouses must pay the entire cost of premiums to maintain coverage, with the exception
of the following bargaining groups for whom the surviving spouse receives the same County subsidy
as the retiree (covered by CalPERS health plans): Sheriffs (A8), Fire Chiefs (BD), Sworn Exec. Mgmt.
(BS), Fire Management (HA), Deputy Sheriffs (V#, VH, VN), Fire Suppression and Prevention (4N),
Fire District Safety Management (BF), and D.A. Investigators (XJ).
Milliman
Contra Costa County Other Post Employment Benefits Plan 12
GASB 74 and 75 Disclosures as of June 30, 2021
This work product was prepared solely for the Contra Costa County for the purposes described herein and may not be appropriate to use for other purposes.
Milliman does not intend to benefit and assumes no duty or liability to other parties who receive this work. Milliman Recommends that third parties be aided by their
own actuary or other qualified professional when reviewing the Milliman work product.
Milliman Client Report SECTION IV. APPENDICES
Bargaining Units V#, VH, VN, F8, FW and
Elected (Safety) Officials / Sworn Management Employees in (A8, B8, BS)
Currently, for eligible retirees from the bargaining units listed in the table below, the County will
contribute toward the cost of monthly premiums (medical and dental) an amount equal to the actual
dollar monthly premium amount paid by the County as of November 30, 2013, at each coverage level,
plus 50% of the actual premium increase for 2014 and all future years.
Retirees who elected dental coverage without health coverage will pay one cent ($0.01) per month for
2013, plus 50% of the actual premium increase for 2014 and all future years.
Bargaining
Unit Code Bargaining Unit Name
General /
Safety
F8 Unrep Classified & Exempt-Othr General
FW Unrep Cl & Ex-Sworn Peace Offc Safety
V# Sheriff's Sworn Mgmt Unit Safety
VH Deputy Sheriff's Unit-Sworn Safety
VN Deputy Sheriff's Unit-NonSworn General
BS Sworn Management Employees Safety
A8 Elected Officials (DSA) Safety
B8 Elected Officials (DSA) Safety
Bargaining Unit 4N - Fire Suppression and Prevention
Health Premium Subsidy: For 2016 and each calendar year thereafter, the prior year’s District subsidy
for each medical plan and rate tier will increase by 50% of the actual premium increase in the medical
plan and rate tier in which the member is enrolled.
Dental Premium Subsidy: For eligible retirees from bargaining unit 4N enrolled in both a medical
and dental plan, the District will pay a subsidy equal to 50% of the cost of monthly dental premiums
in 2016 and later. For retirees enrolled only in a dental plan, retirees are required to pay $0.01 per
month for dental coverage. For 2016 and later, the required monthly contribution from retirees would
increase each year by 50% of the dental premium increase.
Milliman
Contra Costa County Other Post Employment Benefits Plan 13
GASB 74 and 75 Disclosures as of June 30, 2021
This work product was prepared solely for the Contra Costa County for the purposes described herein and may not be appropriate to use for other purposes.
Milliman does not intend to benefit and assumes no duty or liability to other parties who receive this work. Milliman Recommends that third parties be aided by their
own actuary or other qualified professional when reviewing the Milliman work product.
Milliman Client Report SECTION IV. APPENDICES
Bargaining Unit HA – Fire Management
Currently, for eligible Fire Management retirees represented by United Chief Officers Association
(UCOA) with bargaining unit code HA, the County will subsidize an amount equal to 80% of the
CalPERS Kaiser Bay Area premium at each coverage level (employee only, employee + one,
employee + two or more) for any region in which the retiree resides, but the County’s subsidy will not
exceed the total premium of a lower cost plan.
Health Premium Subsidy on or after December 1, 2016: For the plan year that begins on January 1,
2017 and each calendar year thereafter, the maximum monthly premium subsidy the District will pay for
each health plan is equal to the actual dollar monthly premium subsidy that is paid by the District for that
plan as of November 30, 2016. In addition, if there is an increase in the monthly premium charged by a
health plan for 2017, the District and the employee will each pay fifty percent (50%) of that increase. For
each plan year thereafter, and for each plan, the District and the employee will each pay fifty (50%) of
the monthly premium increase above the 2016 plan premiums.
Dental Subsidy for Retirees with Medical Coverage: For eligible retirees from bargaining unit HA enrolled
in both a medical and dental plan, for the plan year that begins on January 1, 2016, the District will pay
a monthly premium subsidy for each dental plan that is equal to the actual dollar monthly premium
subsidy that is paid by the District as of November 30, 2015. In addition, if there is an increase in the
monthly premium charged by a dental plan for 2016, the District and the employee will each pay fifty
percent (50%) of that increase. For each plan year thereafter, the District and the employee will each
pay fifty percent (50%) of the monthly premium increase above the 2015 plan premium.
Dental Subsidy for Retirees without Medical Coverage: For eligible retirees from bargaining unit HA
enrolled in a dental plan only without health coverage, beginning on January 1, 2016, the District will pay
a monthly dental premium subsidy for each dental plan that is equal to the actual dollar monthly premium
subsidy that is paid by the District for 2015. If there is an increase in the premium charged by a dental
plan for 2016, the District and the employee will each pay fifty percent (50%) of the increase. For each
plan year thereafter, the District and the employee will each pay fifty percent (50%) of the premium
increase that is above the 2015 plan premium.
Milliman
Contra Costa County Other Post Employment Benefits Plan 14
GASB 74 and 75 Disclosures as of June 30, 2021
This work product was prepared solely for the Contra Costa County for the purposes described herein and may not be appropriate to use for other purposes.
Milliman does not intend to benefit and assumes no duty or liability to other parties who receive this work. Milliman Recommends that third parties be aided by their
own actuary or other qualified professional when reviewing the Milliman work product.
Milliman Client Report SECTION IV. APPENDICES
Bargaining Unit XJ – D.A. Investigators
Health Premium Subsidy: For the plan year that begins on January 1, 2015, the County will pay the
following monthly medical premium subsidy:
Coverage
Monthly Premium
Subsidy
Employee/Retiree/Survivor Only $ 608.87
Employee/Retiree/Survivor & One Dependent 1,217.74
Employee/Retiree/Survivor & Two or more Dependents 1,583.07
In addition, if there is an increase in the monthly premium charged by a health plan for 2015 that exceeds
the above stated amounts, the County and the retiree will each pay fifty percent (50%) of that increase.
For 2016, the County premium subsidy varies by plan depending on the actual premium increase that
occurred for each plan. For each calendar year thereafter, the County and the retiree will each pay fifty
percent (50%) of any premium increase for each health plan.
Dental Premium Subsidy: For the plan year that begins on January 1, 2015, the County will pay the
following monthly dental premium subsidy (Delta Dental as the carrier):
With Health Without Health
Coverage PPO HMO PPO HMO
Single $ 32.69 $ 22.30 $ 42.44 $ 28.91
Family 73.64 48.19 95.62 61.49
In addition, if there is an increase in the monthly premium charged by a health plan for 2015 that exceeds
the above stated amounts, the County and the retiree will each pay fifty percent (50%) of that increase.
For each calendar year thereafter, the County and the retiree will each pay fifty percent (50%) of any
premium increase for each dental plan.
Milliman
Contra Costa County Other Post Employment Benefits Plan 15
GASB 74 and 75 Disclosures as of June 30, 2021
This work product was prepared solely for the Contra Costa County for the purposes described herein and may not be appropriate to use for other purposes.
Milliman does not intend to benefit and assumes no duty or liability to other parties who receive this work. Milliman Recommends that third parties be aided by their
own actuary or other qualified professional when reviewing the Milliman work product.
Milliman Client Report SECTION IV. APPENDICES
Bargaining Units 1P (plus formerly 1R and 1X) – Physicians & Dentists
Beginning on January 1, 2015, and for each calendar year thereafter, the County will pay a monthly
dollar premium subsidy for each health and dental plan (County Premium Subsidy) as defined for each
plan in the table below. The amount of the County subsidy that is paid for employees and eligible family
members for these plans will thereafter be a set dollar amount and will not be a percentage of the
premium charged by the health or dental plan. Retirees must pay for 100% of any premium increases
after 2015. Note that not all coverage tier combinations are shown below, please refer to the actual
County published rates for details.
Health Plan Frozen Subsidy Amount
Contra Costa Health Plan A
Retiree on Basic Plan $ 600.51
Retiree & 1 or more dependents on Basic Plan 1,430.76
Retiree on Medicare COB Plan 279.22
Retiree & Spouse on Medicare COB Plan 558.44
Contra Costa Health Plan B
Retiree on Basic Plan $ 611.34
Retiree & 1 or more dependents on Basic Plan 1,452.65
Retiree on Medicare COB Plan 287.59
Retiree & Spouse on Medicare COB Plan 575.18
Kaiser Permanente – Basic A and B, Teamsters 856 Plan
Retiree on Basic Plan $ 614.78
Retiree & 1 or more dependents on Basic Plan 1,432.42
Retiree on Medicare Senior Advantage Plan * 295.00
Retiree & 1 dependent on Medicare Senior Advantage Plan * 796.70
Teamster 856 Trust Fund KP Plan does not offer Medicare coverage
Kaiser Permanente – High Deductible
Retiree on Basic Plan $ 560.89
Retiree & 1dependent on Basic Plan 1,121.79
Retiree & 2 or more dependents on Basic Plan 1,432.42
Health Net HMO – Basic and SmartCare Plans
Retiree on Basic Plan $ 853.92
Retiree & 1 or more dependents on Basic Plan 2,094.74
Retiree on Medicare Seniority Plus Plan 514.27
Retiree & 1 dependent on Medicare Seniority Plus Plan 1,028.55
Health Net CA & Nat’l PPO – Basic Plan A
Retiree on PPO $ 753.81
Retiree & 1 or more dependents on PPO Basic Plan 1,790.70
Retiree on PPO Medicare Plan with Medicare Part A & B 618.43
Retiree & 1 or more dependents on PPO Medicare Plan with Medicare Part A & B 1,236.73
Milliman
Contra Costa County Other Post Employment Benefits Plan 16
GASB 74 and 75 Disclosures as of June 30, 2021
This work product was prepared solely for the Contra Costa County for the purposes described herein and may not be appropriate to use for other purposes.
Milliman does not intend to benefit and assumes no duty or liability to other parties who receive this work. Milliman Recommends that third parties be aided by their
own actuary or other qualified professional when reviewing the Milliman work product.
Milliman Client Report SECTION IV. APPENDICES
Bargaining Units L3 / LT – Registered / Public Health Nurses Units
Currently, for eligible retirees from bargaining units L3 and LT (LT if hired before January 1, 2010), the
County subsidizes a percentage of monthly premiums that varies depending on the medical and dental
plan elected. Retirees retired on or before 06/30/2012 and age 65 on or before 10/31/2012 also
receive reimbursement of their Medicare Part B premiums as long as the total County subsidy does
not exceed 100% of the medical plan premium. LT employees who were hired on or after January 1,
2010, must pay the entire cost of premiums to maintain coverage.
Retirees receive the following County subsidy based on the medical plan elected:
Medical Plan
County Subsidy %
(Medical)
County Subsidy %
(Dental)
Contra Costa Health Plan A and B
Without Dental 98% 0%
With Delta Dental 98% 98%
With PMI Delta Dental 98% 98%
Kaiser, Health Net HMO
Without Dental 80% 0%
With Delta Dental 80% 78%
With PMI Delta Dental 80% 78%
Health Net PPO
Without Dental 53%* 0%
With Delta Dental 53%* 78%
With PMI Delta Dental 53%* 78%
Dental Only 0% All but $0.01 / month
Approximately 53% for 2020. Future increases are split evenly between the County and
the retiree.
Milliman
Contra Costa County Other Post Employment Benefits Plan 17
GASB 74 and 75 Disclosures as of June 30, 2021
This work product was prepared solely for the Contra Costa County for the purposes described herein and may not be appropriate to use for other purposes.
Milliman does not intend to benefit and assumes no duty or liability to other parties who receive this work. Milliman Recommends that third parties be aided by their
own actuary or other qualified professional when reviewing the Milliman work product.
Milliman Client Report SECTION IV. APPENDICES
All other Bargaining Units - County Subsidy Frozen at the 2011 Level
Currently, eligible retirees from the following bargaining units listed may receive County subsidies
towards medical and dental premiums. The subsidies are frozen at the 2011 levels shown in the tables
on the following pages. There are no future increases to these subsidy amounts except as defined on
the following page for certain retirees who retired before January 1, 2016.
Bargaining
Unit Code Bargaining Unit Name
General /
Safety
Bargaining
Unit Code Bargaining Unit Name
General /
Safety
25 Social Services Unit General KL Engineering Technician Unit General
51 Professional Engineers Unit General KM Sheriff's Non-Sworn Mgmt Unit General
999 DEFAULT BARGAINING UNIT General KU Probation Supervisors Unit General
2I Service Line Supervisors Unit General KZ Social Svcs Staff Special Unit General
2R Superior Court Reporters-Ex General MA District Attorneys' Unit General
2S Safety Classifications General N2 Property Appraisers Unit General
3A Superior Court Clerical Unit General PK Probation Supervisors Unit Safety
3B Superior Court Barg Unit-Loc1 General PP Probation Unit of CCC Safety
3G Deputy Clerks Unit General Q3 Safety Health Services Unit General
3R General Clerical Unit General QA Agriculture & Animal Ctrl Unit General
8P Special Co Class Codes-Payroll General QB LVN/Aide Unit General
A8 Elected Officials (Non-DSA) General QC Fam/Chld Svs Site Supv Unit General
AJ Elected Superior Court Judges General QE Building Trades Unit General
AM Elected Municipal Court Judges General QF Deputy Public Defender Unit/At General
AS Elected Board of Supvs Members General QG Deputy Public Defender Unit-In General
B1 Safety Unrep District Attorney General QH Family and Childrens Services General
B2 Safety Unrep Probation Classes General QM Engineering Unit General
B3 Safety Unrep Misc Classes General QS General Services & Mtce Unit General
B8 Mgmt (Non-Safety) General QT Health Services Unit General
BC Superior Court Exempt Mgmt Gen General QV Investigative Unit General
BD Mgmt Classified & Ex Dept Head General QW Legal & Court Clerk Unit General
BJ Sup Ct Judicial Ofcrs Ex-Mgmt General QX Library Unit General
C8 Management Project-Other General QY Probation Unit General
CH CS Head Start Mgmt-Project General TA LVN/Aide Unit General
D8 Unrepresented Proj Class-Other General TB General Services & Mtce Unit General
F2 Unrep Property Appraisers General TC Health Services Unit General
FC Unrep Superior Ct Clerical Ex General VK Probation Supervisors Unit Safety
FD Unrep Superior Ct Other Exempt General VP Probation Unit of CCC Safety
FM Unrep Muni Ct Reporter-Exempt General Z1 Supervisory Project General
FR Unrep Superior Ct Reptrs-Exemp General Z2 Non-Supervisory Project General
JD CCC Defenders/Attorneys General ZA Supervisory Management General
JF CCC Defenders/Investigators General ZB Non-Supervisory Management General
K2 Property Appraisers Unit General ZL Supervisory Nurse General
K5 Court Professional Svcs Unit General ZM Local 21 - Unit C General
K6 Supervisory Clerical Unit General ZN Non-Supervisory Nurse General
KK Income Maintence Program Unit General
Milliman
Contra Costa County Other Post Employment Benefits Plan 18
GASB 74 and 75 Disclosures as of June 30, 2021
This work product was prepared solely for the Contra Costa County for the purposes described herein and may not be appropriate to use for other purposes.
Milliman does not intend to benefit and assumes no duty or liability to other parties who receive this work. Milliman Recommends that third parties be aided by their
own actuary or other qualified professional when reviewing the Milliman work product.
Milliman Client Report SECTION IV. APPENDICES
Health Insurance Premium Rates (non-PEMHCA)
The following table shows monthly retiree health insurance premiums for the 2020 calendar year for
coverage under various health plans sponsored by Contra Costa County, and the County’s subsidies.
Note that not all coverage tier combinations are shown below, please refer to the actual County
published rates for details. The County’s maximum frozen subsidies and subsidies in effect for 2020
are shown.
Retirees who retired before January 1, 2016 and opted in on the RSG Settlement Class are labeled
pre 2016 retirees below with a higher County subsidy. Effective January 1, 2021, for these retirees,
the amount of the County monthly medical plan premium maximum subsidy will increase by $25 for
the Medicare retiree only tier, the retiree plus one dependent on Medicare tier, and the retiree plus two
or more dependents on Medicare tier.
Medical Plan
County’s
Maximum
Subsidy
(Frozen)
2020
Premium Rate
County’s
Subsidy for
2020
Retiree’s
Share for 2020
Contra Costa Health Plan A
Retiree on Basic Plan $ 509.92 $ 892.18 $ 509.92 $ 382.26
Retiree & 1 dependent on Basic Plan 1,214.90 1,784.36 1,214.90 569.46
Retiree & 2 or more dependents on Basic Plan (pre 2016 ret) 1,364.90 2,676.54 1,364.90 1,311.64
Retiree & 2 or more dependents on Basic Plan (post 2015 ret) 1,214.90 2,676.54 1,214.90 1,461.64
Pre 2016 and Post 2015 Retirees
Retiree on Medicare Coordination of Benefits (COB) Plan 420.27 442.80 420.27 22.53
Retiree & 1 dependent on Medicare COB Plan 840.54 885.61 840.54 45.07
Retiree & 2 dependents on Medicare COB Plan 840.54 1,328.41 840.54 487.87
Contra Costa Health Plan B
Retiree on Basic Plan 528.50 989.00 528.50 460.50
Retiree & 1 dependent on Basic Plan 1,255.79 1,978.00 1,255.79 722.21
Retiree & 2 or more dependents on Basic Plan (pre 2016 ret) 1,405.79 2,967.00 1,405.79 1,561.21
Retiree & 2 or more dependents on Basic Plan (post 2015 ret) 1,255.79 2,967.00 1,255.79 1,711.21
Pre 2016 and Post 2015 Retirees
Retiree on Medicare COB Plan 444.63 456.09 444.63 11.46
Retiree & dependent on Medicare COB Plan 889.26 912.18 889.26 22.92
Retiree & 2 dependents on Medicare COB Plan 889.26 1,368.26 889.26 479.00
Milliman
Contra Costa County Other Post Employment Benefits Plan 19
GASB 74 and 75 Disclosures as of June 30, 2021
This work product was prepared solely for the Contra Costa County for the purposes described herein and may not be appropriate to use for other purposes.
Milliman does not intend to benefit and assumes no duty or liability to other parties who receive this work. Milliman Recommends that third parties be aided by their
own actuary or other qualified professional when reviewing the Milliman work product.
Milliman Client Report SECTION IV. APPENDICES
Health Insurance Premium Rates (Non-PEMHCA continued)
Medical Plan
County’s
Maximum
Subsidy
(Frozen)
2020
Premium Rate
County’s
Subsidy for
2020
Retiree’s
Share for 2020
Kaiser Permanente – Basic Plan A
Retiree on Basic Plan $ 478.91 $ 879.23 $ 478.91 $ 400.32
Retiree & 1 dependent on Basic Plan 1,115.84 1,758.46 1,115.84 642.62
Retiree & 2 or more dependents on Basic Plan (pre 2016 ret) 1,265.84 2,637.69 1,265.84 1,371.85
Retiree & 2 or more dependents on Basic Plan (post 2015 ret) 1,115.84 2,637.69 1,115.84 1,521.85
Pre 2016 and Post 2015 Retirees
Retiree on Medicare COB Plan 263.94 386.21 263.94 122.27
Retiree & 1 dependent on Medicare COB Plan 712.79 1,042.60 712.79 329.81
Retiree & 2 dependents on Medicare COB Plan 1,161.65 1,042.60 1,042.59 0.01
Kaiser Permanente – Basic Plan B
Retiree on Basic Plan 478.91 698.82 478.91 219.91
Retiree & 1 dependent on Basic Plan 1,115.84 1,397.64 1,115.84 281.80
Retiree & 2 or more dependents on Basic Plan (pre 2016 ret) 1,265.84 2,096.46 1,265.84 830.62
Retiree & 2 or more dependents on Basic Plan (post 2015 ret) 1,115.84 2,096.46 1,115.84 980.62
Pre 2016 and Post 2015 Retirees
Retiree on Medicare COB Plan 263.94 292.77 263.94 28.83
Retiree & 1 dependent on Medicare COB Plan 712.79 790.08 712.79 77.29
Retiree & 2 dependents on Medicare COB Plan 1,161.65 790.08 790.07 0.01
Kaiser Permanente – High Deductible
Retiree on Basic Plan 478.91 560.90 478.91 81.99
Retiree & 1 dependent on Basic Plan 1,115.84 1,121.80 1,115.84 5.96
Retiree & 2 or more dependents on Basic Plan (pre 2016 ret) 1,265.84 1,682.70 1,265.84 416.86
Retiree & 2 or more dependents on Basic Plan (post 2015 ret) 1,115.84 1,682.70 1,115.84 566.86
Teamsters 856 Trust Fund KP Health Plan
Retiree on Basic Plan 478.91 690.80 478.91 211.89
Retiree & 1 dependent on Basic Plan 1,115.84 1,423.76 1,115.84 307.92
Retiree & 2 or more dependents on Basic Plan (pre 2016 ret) 1,265.84 2,043.36 1,265.84 777.52
Retiree & 2 or more dependents on Basic Plan (post 2015 ret) 1,115.84 2,043.36 1,115.84 927.52
Milliman
Contra Costa County Other Post Employment Benefits Plan 20
GASB 74 and 75 Disclosures as of June 30, 2021
This work product was prepared solely for the Contra Costa County for the purposes described herein and may not be appropriate to use for other purposes.
Milliman does not intend to benefit and assumes no duty or liability to other parties who receive this work. Milliman Recommends that third parties be aided by their
own actuary or other qualified professional when reviewing the Milliman work product.
Milliman Client Report SECTION IV. APPENDICES
Health Insurance Premium Rates (Non-PEMHCA continued)
Medical Plan
County’s
Maximum
Subsidy
(Frozen)
2020
Premium Rate
County’s
Subsidy for
2020
Retiree’s
Share for 2020
Health Net HMO – Plan A
Retiree on Basic Plan 627.79 1,761.04 627.79 1,133.25
Retiree & 1 dependent on Basic Plan 1,540.02 3,522.08 1,540.02 1,982.06
Retiree & 2 or more dependents on Basic Plan (pre 2016 ret) 1,690.02 5,283.12 1,690.02 3,593.10
Retiree & 2 or more dependents on Basic Plan (post 2015 ret) 1,540.02 5,283.12 1,540.02 3,743.10
Pre 2016 and Post 2015 Retirees
Retiree on Medicare Seniority Plus Plan 409.69 663.07 409.69 253.38
Retiree & 1 dependent on Medicare Seniority Plus Plan 819.38 1,326.14 819.38 506.76
Retiree & 2 dependents on Medicare Seniority Plus Plan 1,229.07 1,989.21 1,229.07 760.14
Health Net HMO – Plan B
Retiree on Basic Plan 627.79 $1,224.60 627.79 596.81
Retiree & 1 dependent on Basic Plan 1,540.02 2,449.20 1,540.02 909.18
Retiree & 2 or more dependents on Basic Plan (pre 2016 ret) 1,690.02 3,673.80 1,690.02 1,983.78
Retiree & 2 or more dependents on Basic Plan (post 2015 ret) 1,540.02 $3,673.80 1,540.02 2,133.78
Pre 2016 and Post 2015 Retirees
Retiree on Medicare Seniority Plus Plan 409.69 556.65 409.69 146.96
Retiree & 1 dependent on Medicare Seniority Plus Plan 819.38 1,113.30 819.38 293.92
Retiree & 2 dependents on Medicare Seniority Plus Plan 1,229.07 1,669.95 1,229.07 440.88
Health Net SmartCare HMO – Plan A
Retiree on Basic Plan 627.79 1,322.48 627.79 694.69
Retiree & 1 dependent on Basic Plan 1,540.02 2,644.96 1,540.02 1,104.94
Retiree & 2 or more dependents on Basic Plan (pre 2016 ret) 1,690.02 3,967.44 1,690.02 2,277.42
Retiree & 2 or more dependents on Basic Plan (post 2015 ret) 1,540.02 3,967.44 1,540.02 2,427.42
Pre 2016 and Post 2015 Retirees
Retiree on Medicare Seniority Plus Plan 467.13 891.07 467.13 423.94
Retiree & 1 dependent on Medicare Seniority Plus Plan 934.29 1,782.14 934.29 847.85
Retiree & 2 dependents on Medicare Seniority Plus Plan 934.29 2,673.21 934.29 1,738.92
Milliman
Contra Costa County Other Post Employment Benefits Plan 21
GASB 74 and 75 Disclosures as of June 30, 2021
This work product was prepared solely for the Contra Costa County for the purposes described herein and may not be appropriate to use for other purposes.
Milliman does not intend to benefit and assumes no duty or liability to other parties who receive this work. Milliman Recommends that third parties be aided by their
own actuary or other qualified professional when reviewing the Milliman work product.
Milliman Client Report SECTION IV. APPENDICES
Health Insurance Premium Rates (Non-PEMHCA continued).
Medical Plan
County’s
Subsidy
(Frozen)
2020
Premium Rate
County’s
Subsidy for
2020
Retiree’s
Share for 2020
Health Net SmartCare HMO – Plan B
Retiree on Basic Plan $ 627.79 $ 942.98 $ 627.79 $ 315.19
Retiree & 1 dependent on Basic Plan 1,540.02 1,885.96 1,540.02 345.94
Retiree & 2 or more dependents on Basic Plan (pre 2016 ret) 1,690.02 2,828.94 1,690.02 1,138.92
Retiree & 2 or more dependents on Basic Plan (post 2015 ret) 1,540.02 2,828.94 1,540.02 1,288.92
Pre 2016 and Post 2015 Retirees
Retiree on Medicare Seniority Plus Plan 467.13 816.21 467.13 349.08
Retiree & 1 dependent on Medicare Seniority Plus Plan 934.29 1,632.42 934.29 698.13
Retiree & 2 dependents on Medicare Seniority Plus Plan 934.29 2,448.63 934.29 1,514.34
Health Net CA & Nat’l PPO – Basic Plan A
Retiree on Basic Plan 604.60 2,691.46 604.60 2,086.86
Retiree & 1 dependent on Basic Plan 1,436.25 5,382.92 1,436.25 3,946.67
Retiree & 2 or more dependents on Basic Plan (pre 2016 ret) 1,586.25 8,074.38 1,586.25 6,488.13
Retiree & 2 or more dependents on Basic Plan (post 2015 ret) 1,436.25 8,074.38 1,436.25 6,638.13
Pre 2016 and Post 2015 Retirees
Retiree on PPO Medicare Plan B 563.17 1,231.57 563.17 668.40
Retiree & 1 dependent on PPO Medicare Plan 1,126.24 2,463.14 1,126.24 1,336.90
Retiree & 2 dependents on PPO Medicare Plan 1,126.24 3,694.71 1,126.24 2,568.47
Milliman
Contra Costa County Other Post Employment Benefits Plan 22
GASB 74 and 75 Disclosures as of June 30, 2021
This work product was prepared solely for the Contra Costa County for the purposes described herein and may not be appropriate to use for other purposes.
Milliman does not intend to benefit and assumes no duty or liability to other parties who receive this work. Milliman Recommends that third parties be aided by their
own actuary or other qualified professional when reviewing the Milliman work product.
Milliman Client Report SECTION IV. APPENDICES
PEMHCA Health Plan Premium Rates
Eligible retirees from the bargaining units 4N, A8, B8, BD, BF, BS, F8, FW, HA, V#, VH, VN, and XJ
can choose to enroll in health plans sponsored by CalPERS based on their region residency (Region
1 – Northern California, Region 2 – Southern California other than Los Angeles Region, Region 3 -
Los Angeles, and Out of State of California). The following table shows the monthly Region 1 health
insurance premiums for the 2020 calendar year:
Monthly Premium Rates – Effective January 1, 2020
Single 2-Party Family
Under 65 Over 65 Under 65 Over 65 Under 65 Over 65
Anthem HMO Select $ 868.98 $ 388.15 $ 1,737.96 $ 776.30 $ 2,259.35 $ 1,164.45
Anthem EPO Del Norte 861.18 n/a 1,722.36 n/a 2,239.07 n/a
Anthem Traditional 1,184.84 388.15 2,369.68 776.30 3,080.58 1,164.45
Blue Shield Access+ 1,127.77 n/a 2,255.54 n/a 2,932.20 n/a
Blue Shield Trio 833.00 n/a 1,666.00 n/a 2,165.80 n/a
HealthNet SmartCare 1,000.52 n/a 2,001.04 n/a 2,601.35 n/a
Kaiser Permanente 768.49 339.43 1,536.98 678.86 1,998.07 1,018.29
PERS Choice 861.18 351.39 1,722.36 702.78 2,239.07 1,054.17
PERS Select 520.29 351.39 1,040.58 702.78 1,352.75 1,054.17
PERSCare 1,133.14 384.78 2,266.28 769.56 2,946.16 1,154.34
United Healthcare 899.94 327.03 1,799.88 654.06 2,339.84 981.09
Western Health Advantage 731.96 n/a 1,463.92 n/a 1,903.10 n/a
PORAC 774.00 513.00 1,699.00 1,022.00 2,199.00 1,635.00
Contra Costa Health Plan* 1,137.10 976.66 2,274.20 1,953.32 2,956.46 2,475.12
* Offered by the Contra Costa County Health Plan to Contra Costa County employees only. Not available through
PEMHCA
Dental Plan Premiums
The following table shows monthly retiree dental insurance premiums for the 2020 calendar year.
County subsidies vary based on retiree’s medical plan enrollment election and bargaining unit upon
retirement.
Plan Monthly Premiums
Delta Dental Premier PPO - $1,800 Annual Maximum
Retiree $ 46.52
Retiree + 1 and Retiree +2 or more 105.08
Delta Care (HMO)
Retiree $ 29.06
Retiree + 1 and Retiree +2 or more 62.81
Milliman
Contra Costa County Other Post Employment Benefits Plan 23
GASB 74 and 75 Disclosures as of June 30, 2021
This work product was prepared solely for the Contra Costa County for the purposes described herein and may not be appropriate to use for other purposes.
Milliman does not intend to benefit and assumes no duty or liability to other parties who receive this work. Milliman Recommends that third parties be aided by their
own actuary or other qualified professional when reviewing the Milliman work product.
Milliman Client Report SECTION IV. APPENDICES
Appendix B. Actuarial Cost Method and Assumptions
Actuarial Cost Method
The actuarial cost method used for determining the benefit obligations is the individual Entry Age
Normal Cost Method. Under the principles of this method, the actuarial present value of the projected
benefits of each individual included in the valuation is allocated as a level percentage of expected
salary for each year of employment between entry age (defined as age at hire) and assumed exit.
The portion of this actuarial present value allocated to a valuation year is called the normal cost. The
portion of this actuarial present value not provided for at a valuation date by the sum of (a) the actuarial
value of the assets, and (b) the actuarial present value of future normal costs is called the Unfunded
Actuarial Accrued Liability (UAAL).
The Actuarial Value of Assets is equal to the market value of assets as of the measurement date. The
actuarial assumptions are summarized below.
Economic Assumptions
Discount Rate (Liabilities) 5.85%
General Inflation 2.75%
We have used a discount rate of 5.85% in this valuation to reflect the County’s current policy of partially
funding its OPEB liabilities. This rate is derived based on the fund’s investment policy, level of partial
funding, and includes a 2.75% long-term inflation assumption. County OPEB Irrevocable Trust assets
are invested in the Public Agency Retirement Services’ Highmark Portfolio. Based on the portfolio’s
target allocation (shown below), the average return of Trust assets over the next 50 years is expected
to be 5.83%.
Asset Class
Expected 1-Year
Nominal Return
Targeted Asset
Allocation
Cash 2.10% 1.0%
U.S. Fixed Income 3.43% 43.0%
Domestic Equity Large Cap 7.51% 19.0%
Domestic Equity Mid Cap 8.17% 6.0%
Domestic Equity Small Cap 9.28% 9.0%
International Equity (Developed) 9.63% 10.0%
Global Equity 8.66% 8.0%
Real Estate (U.S. REITs) 8.22% 4.0%
Expected Arithmetic Mean Annual Return (50 years) 6.23%
Expected Geometric Mean Annual Return (50 years) 5.83%
Milliman
Contra Costa County Other Post Employment Benefits Plan 24
GASB 74 and 75 Disclosures as of June 30, 2021
This work product was prepared solely for the Contra Costa County for the purposes described herein and may not be appropriate to use for other purposes.
Milliman does not intend to benefit and assumes no duty or liability to other parties who receive this work. Milliman Recommends that third parties be aided by their
own actuary or other qualified professional when reviewing the Milliman work product.
Milliman Client Report SECTION IV. APPENDICES
Assumed Salary Increases (Applied to Individual Entry Age Normal Cost Method)
The assumed annual rates of compensation increases used for the EAN actuarial cost method are the
same as the assumption used in the December 31, 2018 CCCERA Actuarial Valuation.
Years of Service General Safety
Less than 1 15.66% 16.69%
1 10.49% 11.52%
2 8.69% 9.20%
3 7.14% 8.17%
4 6.10% 6.10%
5 5.59% 5.33%
6 5.07% 5.07%
7 4.81% 4.81%
8 4.71% 4.71%
9 4.61% 4.61%
10 4.50% 4.55%
11 4.40% 4.50%
12 4.30% 4.45%
13 4.19% 4.40%
14 4.09% 4.35%
15 4.04% 4.30%
16 3.99% 4.30%
17 3.93% 4.30%
18 3.88% 4.30%
19 3.83% 4.30%
20+ 3.78% 4.30%
Demographic Assumptions
Below is a summary of the assumed rates for mortality, retirement, disability and withdrawal, which are
consistent with assumptions used in the December 31, 2018 CCCERA Actuarial Valuation.
Post-Retirement Mortality
Healthy: For General Members: Pub-2010 General Healthy Retiree Amount-Weighted Above-
Median Mortality Table (separate tables for males and females), projected generationally
with the two-dimensional mortality improvement scale MP-2018.
For Safety Members: Pub-2010 Safety Healthy Retiree Amount-Weighted Above-
Median Mortality Table (separate tables for males and females) multiplied by 105% for
males and 100% for females, projected generationally with the two-dimensional mortality
improvement scale MP-2018.
Milliman
Contra Costa County Other Post Employment Benefits Plan 25
GASB 74 and 75 Disclosures as of June 30, 2021
This work product was prepared solely for the Contra Costa County for the purposes described herein and may not be appropriate to use for other purposes.
Milliman does not intend to benefit and assumes no duty or liability to other parties who receive this work. Milliman Recommends that third parties be aided by their
own actuary or other qualified professional when reviewing the Milliman work product.
Milliman Client Report SECTION IV. APPENDICES
Disabled: For General Members: Pub-2010 Non-Safety Disabled Retiree Amount-Weighted
Mortality Table (separate tables for males and females) multiplied by 105% for males
and 100% for females, projected generationally with the two-dimensional mortality
improvement scale MP-2018.
For Safety Members: Pub-2010 Safety Disabled Retiree Amount-Weighted Mortality
Table (separate tables for males and females) multiplied by 105% for males and 100%
for females, projected generationally with the two-dimensional mortality improvement
scale MP-2018.
Beneficiaries: Pub-2010 Contingent Survivor Amount-Weighted Above-Median Mortality Table
(separate tables for males and females) multiplied by 105% for males and females,
projected generationally with the two-dimensional mortality improvement scale MP-
2018.
Pre-Retirement Mortality
For General Members: Pub-2010 General Employee Amount-Weighted Above-Median
Mortality Table (separate tables for males and females), projected generationally with
the two-dimensional mortality improvement scale MP-2018.
For Safety Members: Pub-2010 Safety Employee Amount-Weighted Above-Median
Mortality Table (separate tables for males and females), projected generationally with
the two-dimensional mortality improvement scale MP-2018.
Disability
Age
General Tier 3 / 5
PEPRA
Safety (All Tiers)
20 0.01% 0.02%
25 0.02% 0.16%
30 0.03% 0.32%
35 0.05% 0.46%
40 0.08% 0.56%
45 0.11% 0.90%
50 0.13% 2.54%
55 0.16% 3.80%
60 0.22% 4.30%
65 0.25% 4.50%
70 0.25% 4.50%
Milliman
Contra Costa County Other Post Employment Benefits Plan 26
GASB 74 and 75 Disclosures as of June 30, 2021
This work product was prepared solely for the Contra Costa County for the purposes described herein and may not be appropriate to use for other purposes.
Milliman does not intend to benefit and assumes no duty or liability to other parties who receive this work. Milliman Recommends that third parties be aided by their
own actuary or other qualified professional when reviewing the Milliman work product.
Milliman Client Report SECTION IV. APPENDICES
Retirement – We have applied the General Tier 3 (Enhanced) rates for all General employees and
Safety Tier A (Enhanced) rates for all Safety employees since nearly all current employees are in
these two pension tiers, with the exception of those who were hired after January 1, 2013 as the
PEPRA tiers.
Age
General
Tier 3 < 30 Yr
General
Tier 3 >= 30 yr
General
PEPRA
Safety
Tier A < 30 yr
Safety
Tier A >= 30 yr
Safety
PEPRA
45 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 7.00% 8.75% 0.00%
46 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 3.00% 3.75% 0.00%
47 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 10.00% 12.50% 0.00%
48 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 10.00% 12.50% 0.00%
49 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 25.00% 31.25% 0.00%
50 4.00% 7.20% 0.00% 25.00% 31.25% 5.00%
51 3.00% 5.40% 0.00% 25.00% 31.25% 4.00%
52 3.00% 5.40% 2.00% 18.00% 22.50% 4.00%
53 4.00% 7.20% 3.00% 18.00% 22.50% 5.00%
54 6.00% 10.80% 3.00% 18.00% 22.50% 6.00%
55 8.00% 14.40% 5.00% 20.00% 30.00% 10.00%
56 8.00% 9.60% 5.00% 20.00% 30.00% 10.00%
57 9.00% 10.80% 6.00% 22.00% 33.00% 18.00%
58 10.00% 12.00% 6.00% 22.00% 33.00% 18.00%
59 12.00% 14.40% 8.00% 22.00% 33.00% 18.00%
60 13.00% 15.60% 8.00% 25.00% 37.50% 18.00%
61 18.00% 21.60% 12.00% 25.00% 37.50% 20.00%
62 22.00% 26.40% 18.00% 25.00% 37.50% 20.00%
63 22.00% 26.40% 18.00% 30.00% 45.00% 20.00%
64 25.00% 30.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 25.00%
65 32.00% 32.00% 25.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
66 32.00% 32.00% 25.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
67 30.00% 30.00% 25.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
68 30.00% 30.00% 25.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
69 30.00% 30.00% 25.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
70 – 74 35.00% 35.00% 40.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
75 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
Milliman
Contra Costa County Other Post Employment Benefits Plan 27
GASB 74 and 75 Disclosures as of June 30, 2021
This work product was prepared solely for the Contra Costa County for the purposes described herein and may not be appropriate to use for other purposes.
Milliman does not intend to benefit and assumes no duty or liability to other parties who receive this work. Milliman Recommends that third parties be aided by their
own actuary or other qualified professional when reviewing the Milliman work product.
Milliman Client Report SECTION IV. APPENDICES
Withdrawal – Sample probabilities of terminating employment with the County are shown below for
selected years of County service.
Years of Service General Safety
Less than 1 14.00% 12.50%
1 9.50% 10.00%
2 9.25% 8.25%
3 6.50% 5.75%
4 5.25% 5.00%
5 5.00% 4.25%
10 3.25% 2.25%
15 2.25% 1.70%
20 or more 1.25% 0.75%
Coverage Election Assumptions
Retiree Coverage – We have assumed 85% of new retirees hired before the exclusion date stated in
Appendix A will elect medical and dental coverage at retirement. For employees hired after the
exclusion date stated in Appendix A, we assumed 50% will elect to enroll in the health plans without
any County subsidy.
Spouse Coverage – We have assumed 50% of new General retirees and 60% of new Safety retirees
electing coverage will elect spouse medical and dental coverage at retirement.
Spouse Age – Female spouses are assumed to be three years younger than male spouses.
Dependent Coverage – We have assumed 30% of retirees with no spouse coverage will elect
coverage for a dependent child until age 65 and 50% of retirees with spouse coverage will elect
coverage for a dependent child until age 65.
Health Plan Election – We have assumed that new retirees will remain enrolled in the same plan they
were enrolled in as actives. For actives who waived coverage, we have assumed that they will elect
Kaiser plan coverage. For retirees enrolled in either the CalPERS Anthem or Blue Shield plans, we
assumed they will transfer to the Kaiser Medicare Supplement plan upon reaching age 65, as the
CalPERS health plan no longer offers Anthem or Blue Shield coverage for Medicare eligible retirees.
Milliman
Contra Costa County Other Post Employment Benefits Plan 28
GASB 74 and 75 Disclosures as of June 30, 2021
This work product was prepared solely for the Contra Costa County for the purposes described herein and may not be appropriate to use for other purposes.
Milliman does not intend to benefit and assumes no duty or liability to other parties who receive this work. Milliman Recommends that third parties be aided by their
own actuary or other qualified professional when reviewing the Milliman work product.
Milliman Client Report SECTION IV. APPENDICES
Valuation of Retiree Premium Subsidy Due to Active Health Costs
Currently, the County and California PERS (PEMHCA) health plans charge the same premiums for
retirees who are not yet eligible for Medicare as for active employees. Therefore, the retiree premium
rates are being subsidized by the inclusion of active lives in setting rates. (Premiums calculated only
based on retiree health claims experience would have resulted in higher retiree premiums.) GASB 74/75
requires that the value of this subsidy be recognized as a liability in valuations of OPEB costs.
To account for the fact that per member health costs vary depending on age (higher health costs at older
ages), we calculated equivalent per member per month (PMPM) costs that vary by age based on the
age distribution of covered members, and based on relative cost factors by age. The relative cost factors
were developed from the Milliman Health Cost GuidelinesTM. Based on the carrier premium rates and
relative age cost factors assumptions, we developed age adjusted monthly PMPM health costs for 2020
to be used in valuing the implicit rate subsidy.
The following tables show the age adjusted expected claims costs per member per month (PMPM) for
non-PEMHCA health plans.
Age Adjusted Weighted Expected PMPM Claims Costs for CCHP Plans
Retirees Spouses
Age Male Female Male Female
50 $768 $958 $914 $1,103
55 1,005 1,126 1,150 1,270
60 1,286 1,317 1,431 1,462
64 1,596 1,488 1,742 1,633
Age Adjusted Weighted Expected PMPM Claims Costs for Kaiser Plans
Retirees Spouses
Age Male Female Male Female
50 $707 $882 $892 $1,066
55 924 1,036 1,109 1,220
60 1,183 1,212 1,368 1,396
64 1,469 1,369 1,654 1,554
Age Adjusted Weighted Expected PMPM Claims Costs for HealthNet Plans
Retirees Spouses
Age Male Female Male Female
50 $861 $1,074 $1,075 $1,287
55 1,126 1,262 1,340 1,474
60 1,442 1,477 1,655 1,689
64 1,789 1,668 2,003 1,881
Milliman
Contra Costa County Other Post Employment Benefits Plan 29
GASB 74 and 75 Disclosures as of June 30, 2021
This work product was prepared solely for the Contra Costa County for the purposes described herein and may not be appropriate to use for other purposes.
Milliman does not intend to benefit and assumes no duty or liability to other parties who receive this work. Milliman Recommends that third parties be aided by their
own actuary or other qualified professional when reviewing the Milliman work product.
Milliman Client Report SECTION IV. APPENDICES
The following table shows the weighted average age adjusted expected monthly claims cost in PMPM
for PEMHCA health plans. The Medical PMPM costs are developed from the total covered members in
PEMHCA plans based on the enrollment information released by CalPERS for the entire Region 1
Age Adjusted Weighted Expected PMPM Claims Costs for PEMHCA Plans
Retirees Spouses
Age Male Female Male Female
50 $806 $999 $716 $872
55 992 1,092 900 1,008
60 1,225 1,241 1,129 1,160
64 1,508 1,395 1,395 1,305
Since retirees eligible for Medicare (age 65 and beyond) are enrolled in Medicare supplemental plans,
the premiums for retirees with Medicare are determined without regard to active employee claims
experience and no such subsidy exists for this group for medical cost.
Medical Cost Inflation Assumption
We assumed future increases to the health costs and premiums are based on the “Getzen” model
published by the Society of Actuaries for purposes of evaluating long term medical trend. The H.R.
1865 Further Consolidated Appropriations Act 2020 became law on December 20, 2019. This law
repeals the Cadillac tax completely and removes the Health Insurer Fee permanently beginning in
2021. We reflected this change in the health cost trends shown in the below table. Given the
substantial uncertainty regarding the potential impact of COVID-19 on plan costs, including whether
the pandemic will increase or decrease costs during the term of our projections, we have chosen not
to make an adjustment in the health costs trends shown in the below table for the potential effect of
COVID-19. The following table shows the assumed rate increases in future years for Medical
premiums. The CPI used in developing the following health cost increases is 2.75%.
Calendar County Plans Calendar County Plans Calendar
PEMHCA
Plans Calendar
PEMHCA
Plans
Year Pre 65 Year Post 65 Year Pre 65 Year Post 65
2020 5.00% 2020 3.50% 2020 6.80%* 2020 -2.50%*
2021 6.00% 2021 5.25% 2021 – 2023 5.00% 2021 5.00%
2022 – 2035 5.00% 2022 – 2035 5.00% 2024 – 2048 5.25% 2022 – 2025 5.25%
2036 – 2051 5.25% 2036 – 2051 5.25% 2049 – 2065 5.00% 2026 – 2045 5.50%
2052 – 2065 5.00% 2052 – 2065 5.00% 2066 – 2068 4.75% 2046 – 2053 5.25%
2066 – 2068 4.75% 2066 – 2068 4.75% 2069 – 2072 4.50% 2054 – 2065 5.00%
2069 – 2072 4.50% 2069 – 2072 4.50% 2073+ 4.25% 2066 – 2068 4.75%
2073+ 4.25% 2073+ 4.25% 2069 – 2072 4.50%
2073+ 4.25%
* This is the weighted average premium change from 2020 to 2021 calendar year under PEMHCA.
Dental Cost We assumed Dental costs will increase 3.0% annually.
Milliman
Contra Costa County Other Post Employment Benefits Plan 30
GASB 74 and 75 Disclosures as of June 30, 2021
This work product was prepared solely for the Contra Costa County for the purposes described herein and may not be appropriate to use for other purposes.
Milliman does not intend to benefit and assumes no duty or liability to other parties who receive this work. Milliman Recommends that third parties be aided by their
own actuary or other qualified professional when reviewing the Milliman work product.
Milliman Client Report SECTION IV. APPENDICES
Appendix C. Summary of Participant Data
The following census of participants was used in the actuarial valuation and provided by Contra Costa
County as of January 1, 2020.
Active Employees
Age General Safety Total
Under 25 74 35 109
25 – 29 461 173 634
30 – 34 851 230 1,081
35 – 39 988 185 1,173
40 – 44 1,037 199 1,236
45 – 49 1,077 217 1,294
50 – 54 1,140 113 1,253
55 – 59 1,070 60 1,130
60 – 64 790 21 811
65 & Over 385 9 394
Total 7,873 1,242 9,115
Average Age on Valuation Date: 46.2
Average Service on Valuation Date: 10.1
Current Retirees
Age General Safety Total
Under 50 14 64 78
50 – 54 69 170 239
55 – 59 311 205 516
60 – 64 674 197 871
65 – 69 1,147 225 1,372
70 – 74 1,258 252 1,510
75 – 79 874 137 1,011
80 – 84 559 83 642
85 & Over 703 97 800
Total 5,609 1,430 7,039
Average Age on Valuation Date: 71.9
Milliman
Contra Costa County Other Post Employment Benefits Plan 31
GASB 74 and 75 Disclosures as of June 30, 2021
This work product was prepared solely for the Contra Costa County for the purposes described herein and may not be appropriate to use for other purposes.
Milliman does not intend to benefit and assumes no duty or liability to other parties who receive this work. Milliman Recommends that third parties be aided by their
own actuary or other qualified professional when reviewing the Milliman work product.
Milliman Client Report SECTION IV. APPENDICES
Appendix D. Glossary of Key Terms
Actuarially Determined Contribution. A target or recommended contribution to an OPEB plan for
the reporting period, determined based on the funding policy and most recent measurement available
when the contribution for the reporting period was adopted. The County’s current funding policy is to
fund the pay-as-you-go costs for retirees, plus $20 million into the OPEB Trust each year until year
2022. Beginning in 2022 the County will contribute $20 million plus additional $53 million until the
OPEB fund’s FNP as a % of TOL is 60%. After that, the County will contribute an amount to maintain
the 60% funded status.
Deferred Inflows/Outflows of Resources. Portion of changes in net OPEB liability that is not
immediately recognized in OPEB Expense. These changes include differences between expected
and actual experience, changes in assumptions, and differences between expected and actual
earnings on plan investments.
Discount Rate. Single rate of return that, when applied to all projected benefit payments, results in
an actuarial present value of projected benefit payments equal to the sum of:
1) The actuarial present value of benefit payments projected to be made in future periods where
the plan assets are projected to be sufficient to meet benefit payments, calculated using the
Long-Term Expected Rate of Return.
2) The actuarial present value of projected benefit payments not included in (1), calculated using
the Municipal Bond Rate.
Long-Term Expected Rate of Return. Long-term expected rate of return on OPEB plan investments
expected to be used to finance the payment of benefits, net of investment expenses.
Money-Weighted Rate of Return. The internal rate of return on OPEB plan investments, net of
investment expenses.
Municipal Bond Rate. Yield or index rate for 20-year, tax-exempt general obligation municipal bonds
with an average rating of AA/Aa or higher.
Total OPEB Liability. The portion of actuarial present value of projected benefit payments that is
attributable to past periods of member service using the Entry Age Normal cost method based on the
requirements of GASB 74 and 75.
Fiduciary Net Position. Equal to market value of assets.
Net OPEB Liability. Total OPEB Liability minus the Plan's Fiduciary Net Position.
Service Cost. The portion of the actuarial present value of projected benefit payments that is
attributed to a valuation year.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Accept report on Capital Projects.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No fiscal impact. This is an informational report only.
BACKGROUND:
See attached report.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 01/25/2022 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: Eric Angstadt, Assistant County Administrator
925-335-1009
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of
Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: January 25, 2022
Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc:
D.3
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Monica Nino, County Administrator
Date:January 25, 2022
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Annual Report on Capital Projects
ATTACHMENTS
Capital Projects Update
PowerPoint
Facilities Master Plan PowerPoint
Board of Supervisors
Annual Retreat 2022
January 25, 2022 1
Agenda
•Update on Major Projects
•Mod M/C mental health and ADA upgrades
•Admin Demo and Redevelopment (ADR)
•West County Reentry, Treatment and Housing (WRTH)
•Facilities Condition Assessment (FCA)
•Preliminary Findings
•Master Facilities Plan
•Presentation and Discussion/Feedback
2
Major Projects Update
3
Modules M and C
Module M
•5 Mental Health Beds/24 Special Services Beds
•Will be complete 2/14 –1 month ahead of original schedule
Module C
•Complete plumbing retro fit
•Create 4 ADA compliant cells/1 ADA compliant shower
•Will be complete 5/30 –2 ½ Months ahead of original schedule
Major Projects Update
4
Admin Demo and Redevelopment (ADR)
•Initial Mobilization started 11/15/21
•CEQA Lawsuit from 2017 on Old Jail Demo Dismissed 1/11/22
•Hazardous Materials Remediation started 1/24/22
•Structure Demolition March-September 2022
•Discussions started with City of Martinez on future of Pine Street block 2/22
•Potential Departments identified for new building
Major Projects Update
5
Major Projects Update
6
Major Projects Update
7
West County Reentry, Treatment and Housing (WRTH)
•Awaiting final approval from State
•Bureau of State and Community Corrections (BSCC) 2/10/22
•State Public Works Board 4/15/22
Facilities Condition Assessment
8
Methodology and Scope:
•An observation-based Facility Conditions Assessment (FCA)with on-site “boots on the ground” walkthroughs of all
building assets, followed by compilation of data, data review, data analysis, and presentation of findings.
•FCA process in accordance with ASTM E-2018, Standard Guide for Property Condition Assessments.
•The purpose of the FCA is to help inform the capital planning needs for Contra Costa County with accurate data.
•Building Assets data is broken down by Systems. The data provides Asset Values, System Values, Remaining
System Useful Life, and capital Requirements. Requirements are the prioritized and categorized capital
expenditure needs, with estimated values.
•FCI:The value of the capital needs, divided into the value of the Asset, is the Facility Condition Index (FCI)
Example: $100,000 needs / $1,000,000 asset value = 0.10 FCI, or 10%.
A lower FCI value indicates ‘better’ condition; a higher value indicates ‘worse’ condition
FCI can be calculated for a single building, or any combination of buildings in the database
•The original scope included 332 building assets totally 4.15m Gross Square Feet (GSF)
•Final scope: 273 Assets, 3.75 million GSF
Facilities Condition Assessment
9
Facilities Condition Assessment
10
Facilities Condition Assessment
11
Master Facilities Plan
12
Questions
13
COUNTY FACILITIES
MASTER PLAN
Contra Costa County | Board of Supervisors Retreat | January 25, 2022
Welcome and Introductions
Strategies Workshop Summary
Trends from Other Organizations
Key Findings to Date
Discussion Items
Gensler Team Next Steps
Agenda
1
2
3
4
5
6
Contra Costa County | County Facilities Master Plan Gensler | 2
MILESTONES
ANALYSIS &
FINDINGS
FINAL FACILITIES
MASTER PLAN
DATA
COLLECTION
PROJECT
START-UP
Macro
Programming
Ongoing Project Team Communication
Leadership
Interviews
Site
Tours
Kick-O
Meeting
Steering Comm.
Workshop #1
STRATEGIES
Project
Start-up
Departmental
Survey
Caseload/
Employee
Commute
Analysis
Internal
Findings
Workshop
Supply/
Demand
Analysis
Financial
Evaluation
Additional
Research &
Synthesis
Draft Report
Review
Employee
Survey
Executive Summary
Project/Process Narrative
Planning & Development Principals
Options Analysis
Recommendations
Implementation Guide
Team Organization
Background Materials Review
Kick-o Meeting
Data Collection Methodology
Project Strategies Workshop
Final Report/
Presentation
Steering Comm.
Workshop #2
FINDINGS
Customer-Facing Needs
Headcount Growth
Critical Adjacencies
Adoption of Remote Work
Storage
Owned Facilities
Leased Facilities
Current Operating Costs
Total Current Occupancy Costs
Drive Time
Public Transpo.
Parking Impact
Existing Facilities
Projected Needs
Service Delivery
Workflow
Develop
Suitable
Alternatives
OPTIONS
DEVELOPMENT
Facility Conditions
Adoption of Remote Work
Sustainable Strategies
Projected Space Needs
Client Service Delivery
Critical Adjacencies
Projected Occupancy Costs
Real Estate Markets
Due Diligence
Consolidation Opportunities
Steering Comm.
Workshop #3
OPTIONS
Financial
Analysis
Draft &
Final Reports
Month 1 Month 3Month 2 Month 4 Month 7Month 5 Month 6
Revenue Opportunities
Construction Costs
Site Infrastructure Costs
Total Occupancy Costs
BOS
Presentation
Document
PHASE 4
(RFP TASK 3)
PHASE 1
(RFP TASK 1)
PHASE 2
(RFP TASK 1)
PHASE 3
(RFP TASK 2)
PHASE 5
(RFP TASK 4)
Project Schedule
Department
Questionnaire
Department
Leadership
Interviews
Today
BOS Findings
Workshop
September
2021 2022
October November December January February March April May
Contra Costa County | County Facilities Master Plan Gensler | 3
Data Collection to Date
2,177 Employee Survey Responses (35% Response Rate)
23 Sites Toured (more pending)
20 Department Leadership Questionnaire Responses
20 Department Leadership Interviews
1 Steering Committee Workshop (10 members)
100+ County Documents, Reports, etc.
Contra Costa County | County Facilities Master Plan Gensler | 4
STRATEGIES WORKSHOP KEY TAKE-AWAYS
Contra Costa County | County Facilities Master Plan Gensler | 5
Provide flexibility, upgrade work
spaces, and improve the overall
employee experience
04
Improve equity, access to resources,
and the overall customer experience
Reduce facility and real estate-related
costs
Increase collaboration and resource
sharing between departments
01 02 03
Continue to increase
technology adoption
05
Strategies Workshop Key Take-Aways
Contra Costa County | County Facilities Master Plan Gensler | 6
PUBLIC AGENCY TRENDS
Contra Costa County | County Facilities Master Plan Gensler | 7
Service Delivery
Bringing government closer to the
people.
• Distributing service delivery for public health and
social services. LA County has expanded its footprint
across a large geography to bring services closer to those
in need.
• Introducing shared service counters with rotating
departments. Santa Cruz County is introducing a shared
service counter in Watsonville, CA.
Accelerating digital service delivery.
• Providing digital service delivery through web and/
or mobile applications. Chesterfield County, VA has a
chatbot called “ChesterBot”.
• Leveraging artificial intelligence and automation
to expedite service delivery and migrate human
resources to higher-value tasks. Louisiana has a form
processing bot that passes forms to humans only if they
are incomplete.
Investing in public connectivity.
• Extending wifi in public facilities and outdoor spaces.
Arlington County, VA and San Francisco County, CA
provide free internet services in public facilities.
• Providing internet training programs to the public.
Arlington County, VA provides free public training on
how to use the internet.
Introducing virtual and in-person
one-stop service centers.
• Combining databases to provide a holistic view
of clients. King County, WA integrates Medicaid,
Behavioral Health, and Homelessness support systems.
• Providing services through automated kiosks. Several
counties have installed kiosks allowing customers to
enroll in social services programs and seek benefits
status, among other activities.
Expanding public-private
partnerships.
• Supporting local businesses. Birmingham, AL’s
#BhamStrong partnership includes government,
university, and private-sector organizations that support
businesses with loans and business advisory assistance.
• Improving infrastructure. Washington State’s
“Challenge Seattle” alliance of 21 CEOs from the
region’s largest employers are tackling high-speed
rail, broadband internet access, education, and other
challenges
Contra Costa County | County Facilities Master Plan Gensler | 8
Real Estate and Facilities
Prioritizing investments in public-
facing real estate, facilities, and
infrastructure
• Postponing major, non-critical County projects. Marin
County, CA postponed any new major space planning
projects that were not in progress prior to the pandemic.
• Creating additional service hubs to better serve
County population. San Mateo County and Santa Clara
County, CA have added new service centers.
Upgrading infrastructure to increase
resilience to climate, fire and
earthquake risks.
• Developing emergency preparation and
communications systems. Marin County, CA launched a
web-based evacuation mapping tool for county residents
and businesses.
• Evaluating development opportunities with climate
resiliency lens. Ongoing in several counties.
Raising the digital literacy of the
workforce better supporting hybrid
and remote work.
• Developing post-COVID work policies. Marin County,
CA has developed policies and provisions.
• Introducing new software, hardware, and workforce
technology training. Mostly occurring within private
organizations, but also a best practice for the public
sector.
Modernizing office spaces and
reducing the real estate footprint.
• Introducing shared desking for hybrid and remote
staff. Santa Cruz County and Los Angeles County are
incorporating into renovations of existing facilities.
• Updating office spaces and infrastructure to modern
standards. San Luis Obispo County and Santa Cruz
County are incorporating modern practices into new
build-outs.
Investing in asset management and
GIS systems.
• Building enterprise wide real estate database systems
for county assets. Ongoing in Marin County and San
Mateo County, CA.
• Developing real-time facility management with
predictive analytic capabilities for proactive planning.
Ongoing in Marin County and San Mateo County, CA.
• Providing professional organizational structure
to implement and manage a complex real estate
portfolio. Ongoing in Orange County, CA.
Contra Costa County | County Facilities Master Plan Gensler | 9
KEY FINDINGS TO DATE
Contra Costa County | County Facilities Master Plan Gensler | 10
01
The County’s real estate portfolio contains numerous
facilities scattered across a wide geography. Accessibility
from East and West County is challenging for customers.
Contra Costa County | County Facilities Master Plan Gensler | 11
County Real Estate Portfolio Under Study*
~ 124 Owned Facilities ( ~ 1,500K SF)
~ 47 Leased Facilities (~ 479K SF)
~171 Total Facilities ( ~ 1,979K SF)**
~ 42 Facilities in West Region
~ 88 Facilities in Central Region
~41 Facilities in East Region
* Excludes Health Services, Airport, Fire, Sheriff,
and detention facilities.
** A 5% gross-up factor was applied to the
rentable square footage of leased facilities in
order to arrive at gross square feet.
Orinda
Lafayette
Clayton
Moraga
Concord
Danville
Martinez
Pleasant
Hill
San
Ramon
Walnut C reek
Alamo
Blackhawk
Camino
Tassajara
Diablo
Pacheco
Brentwood
Oakley
Antioch
Pittsburg
Bay
Point Bethel
Island
Byron
Clyde
Discovery
Bay
Knightsen
Pinole
Richmond
San
Pablo
El
Cerrito
Hercules
Crockett
El
Sobrante
Kensington
Port
CostaRodeo
Alameda County
San Joaquin
County
Sacramento
CountySolano
County
Napa County
Sonoma
County
Marin
County
San
Francisco
County
San Mateo
County Libraries
Facilities - Owned
Facilities - Leased
Region Boundaries
Source: ESRI, Contra Costa County
WEST CENTRAL EAST
Contra Costa County | County Facilities Master Plan Gensler | 12
EHSD Case Locations
EHSD facilities are proximate
to case locations in West and
Central County. Clients in East
County travel considerably more
to access EHSD facilities.
Orinda
Lafayette
Clayton
Moraga
Concord
Danville
Martinez
Pleasant
Hill
San
Ramon
Walnut C reek
Alamo
Blackhawk
Camino
Tassajara
Diablo
Pacheco
Brentwood
Oakley
Antioch
Pittsburg
Bay
Point Bethel
Island
Byron
Clyde
Discovery
Bay
Knightsen
Pinole
Richmond
San
Pablo
El
Cerrito
Hercules
Crockett
El
Sobrante
Kensington
Port
CostaRodeo
Alameda County
San Joaquin
County
Sacramento
CountySolano
County
Napa County
Sonoma
County
Marin
County
San
Francisco
County
San Mateo
County
Source: ESRI, ESRI Business Analyst, American Community Survey, Contra
Costa County, California GIS Portal, Association of Bay Area Governments
EHSD Facilities
1 - 24
25 - 85
86 - 242
243 - 690
EHSD Active Case Count
Region Boundaries
WEST CENTRAL EAST
Contra Costa County | County Facilities Master Plan Gensler | 13
Employee Commute
75% of County employees
commute approximately 30
minutes or less to their reporting
location (by car).
Pinole
Richmond
San
Pablo
El
Cerrito
Hercules
Crockett
El
Sobrante
Kensington
Port
CostaRodeo
Brentwood
Oakley
Antioch
PittsburgBay
Point Bethel
Island
Byron
Clyde
Discovery
Bay
Knightsen
Orinda
Lafayette
Clayton
Moraga
Concord
Danville
Martinez
Pleasant
Hill
San
Ramon
Walnut C reek
Alamo
Blackhawk
Camino
Tassajara
Diablo
Pacheco
Alameda County
San Joaquin
County
Sacramento
CountySolano
County
Napa County
Sonoma
County
Marin
County
San
Francisco
County
San Mateo
County
Amtrak & Regional Rail
Bus Routes - AC Transit,
County Connection, Tri Delta,
& WestCAT
BART Rail
BART Station
Amtrak Station
Major Highways & Roads
CCC Facilities
Source: ESRI, Contra Costa County, CalTrans, California GIS Portal, Association of Bay Area Governments, Bay Area Rapid Transit
≤ 30 minutes
75%
31 - 60 minutes
22%
61 - 120 minutes
3%
Exhibit. Driving time taken by employees to commute to their
reporting location*
* Employee residence zip codes and reporting locations provided by Contra
Costa County. Driving times calculated by ArcGIS, an online geographic
information system, leveraging historical and live traffic data for Monday,
8:30 AM.
Contra Costa County | County Facilities Master Plan Gensler | 14
02
Ongoing maintenance, noise, overcrowding, climate
control, personal safety, and parking are common concerns
in County facilities.
Contra Costa County | County Facilities Master Plan Gensler | 15
Employees identify privacy and overcrowding as negatives of the office
and cleanliness and technology as positives.
Privacy and climate control are the design features ranked lowest by employee
survey respondents. Cleanliness and comfortable seating are ranked highest.
Exhibit. Employee survey responses to “Please rate the design of the County office environment for”, 1: Poor to 5: Excellent
Cleanliness
Comfort of seating
Access to the outdoors
Interior lighting
Adjustability of work surfaces
Noise level
Access to natural light
Layout
Design look and feel
Views to the outside
Climate control
(e.g. heating, cooling)
3.1
3.3
3.0
2.9
2.5Privacy
2.6
2.7
2.8
2.9
3.0
3.4
3.5
Employees survey respondents find the office environment overcrowded and
distracting, however believe that the office feels safe and has the technology they need.
Exhibit. Employee survey responses to “The County office environment...”, 1: Strongly Disagree to 5: Strongly Agree
Has the technology I need to
do my job
Is a safe place to be
Is easy for people to find their
way around
Feels welcoming
Offers a great experience
Has a good variety of spaces
Promotes the health and well-being
of its workers
Is distracting
Feels overcrowded
3.1
3.2
3.0
2.8
3.0
3.6
3.9
3.0
3.0
Contra Costa County | County Facilities Master Plan Gensler | 16
Leaders identify specialized, support spaces, and parking as lower
performing spaces and meeting and customer service spaces as higher.
All spaces are ranked moderately to satisfactorily supportive by department
leaders. Specialized and support spaces rank lowest and customer service and
meeting spaces rank highest.
Exhibit. Leadership survey responses to “How well do the following spaces support your department’s needs?”,
1: Not Supportive to 5: Highly Supportive
Support spaces (filing, storage,
coffee areas, etc.)
Meeting spaces (conference
rooms, training rooms, etc.)
Training spaces
Customer service counter
Specialized spaces (testing,
hearing rooms, community
spaces, media spaces, etc.)
4
4
3.8
3.2
3.2
Meeting spaces (conference rooms, training rooms, etc.)
Customer service counter
Training spaces
Support spaces (filing, storage, coffee areas, etc.)
Specialized spaces (testing, hearing rooms, community spaces, media
spaces, etc.)3.2
3.2
3.8
4
4
is the effectiveness of employee and visitor parking
ranked by department leaders. Parking in Martinez
is most challenging - homelessness, theft, and limited
parking are common concerns.
3.2 / 5
Moderately
Supportive
Contra Costa County | County Facilities Master Plan Gensler | 17
03
Remote work has been effective overall,
especially for individual focused work.
Contra Costa County | County Facilities Master Plan Gensler | 18
Employees want more remote work opportunities.
50% of employees want to work in the office ≤2 days a week compared to only
33% of department leaders.
Exhibit. Employee and leadership survey responses to “How many days a week in the office would people need to
work effectively?“
of employee survey respondents would rather have a desk
in the County office that they share with others, but more
opportunities to work remotely. Others want a dedicated desk.55%
15%
12%
23%23%
11%
14%13%
8%
10%
33%
23%
13%
<1 day 1 day 2 day 3 day 4 day 5 day
Employee Response Department Leader Response
of employee survey respondents report getting more work
done at home compared to the office. Only 4% report getting
less work done at home.
62%
Current
Policy
Increasing opportunities to work remotely is the highest ranked policy that employees
want the County to implement.
Exhibit. Employee survey responses to “In your opinion, which practices and policies are most important for County to implement
for employees returning to the office? Select your top 3.” Results reflect the % of times each choice was selected.
Increase opportunities to work remotely 30%
Establish different team days/schedules to
come to the office to manage exposure 15%
Adopt a shift-schedule or a wider variety
of working hours 14%
Employees find it easier to complete individual work and avoid distractions at home.
Exhibit. Employee survey responses to “Compared to working in the office, are the following activities harder or easier?”
1: Much harder at home, 2: Somewhat harder, 3: About the same, 4: Somewhat easier, 5: Much easier at home
Finding time to complete your
individual work 4.3
Avoiding distractions 4.2
Working on sensitive or confidential
material 3.9
Participating in training provided by
County 3.7
Contra Costa County | County Facilities Master Plan Gensler | 19
DISCUSSION
Contra Costa County | County Facilities Master Plan Gensler | 20
Discussion
Regional Hubs (East and West County)
Property Disposition / Conversion: Impact on Real Estate Utilization
Owned vs. Leased Facilities Issues and Policies
Storage Consolidation
Space Efficiencies / Space Equity
Policy on Continued / Increased Remote Work
Contra Costa County | County Facilities Master Plan Gensler | 21
Next Steps
Next Milestone:
Steering Committee Workshop #2 Findings (mid-February)
Next Project Phase:
Options Development
• Developing suitable alternatives (facility conditions, sustainable strategies, space needs, etc)
• Financial Analysis (revenue opportunities, construction, site infrastructure, and total real estate occupancy costs)
• Milestones: Steering Committee Workshop #3 & BOS Presentation Document (mid-April)
Contra Costa County | County Facilities Master Plan Gensler | 22
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Accept COVID-19 response update - Protecting Our Community During COVID-19.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No fiscal impact. This is an information report only.
BACKGROUND:
COVID update.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 01/25/2022 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: Erika Jenssen, Deputy Director (925)
957-5403
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the
date shown.
ATTESTED: January 25, 2022
Monica Nino, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc:
D.4
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director
Date:January 25, 2022
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:COVID-19 Update - Protecting Our Community During COVID-19
CLERK'S ADDENDUM
Speakers: No name given; No name given; Ben; Mitch Free.
ACCEPTED the oral report.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
PRESENTATION by the Contra Costa Budget Justice Coalition.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No direct fiscal impact. This is an information presentation.
BACKGROUND:
See attached PowerPoint.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 01/25/2022 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor
Contact: Timothy Ewell, Chief Assistant County
Administrator
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on
the date shown.
ATTESTED: January 25, 2022
, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc:
D.5
To:Board of Supervisors
From:
Date:January 25, 2022
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Presentation by the Contra Costa Budget Justice Coalition
CLERK'S ADDENDUM
Speakers: No name given; No name given; Diana; Cheryl Sudduth.
ATTACHMENTS
Budget Justice Coalition PowerPoint Presentation
Presentation to the Board of Supervisors
January 25, 2022
Dan Geiger
dan@budgetjusticecc.org
Contra
Costa
Budget
Justice
Coalition
Our Mission
Reflections
Recommendations
Our Mission
The Contra Costa Budget Justice
Coalition advocates for community
engagement in the Contra Costa
County budgeting process and for a
set of values-based budgeting
principles that support safe and
affordable housing, stable
employment with fair wages,
sufficient healthy food, essential
health care, access to critical social
services, quality early care and
education.
Successes and
Appreciations for 2021
Engagement
in Action
and
Partnership
Work!
Measure X adds >$110 million per year to General Fund
•MX CAB generated enthusiastic engagement by a broad range of community
representatives
•Many community-inspired programs were funded: Miles Hall Crisis Response,
County Youth Centers, Supportive Housing, Innovation Fund, and more!
Community partnered with County to create Office of Racial
Equity and Social Justice
County-wide eviction moratorium and joint county/community
efforts to promote ERAP rental assistance
Public more informed by workshops on COVID and ARPA
expenditures
Supervisors declared racism a public health crisis
Lessons of
MXCAB
Process
Advisory Board members, local residents, and stakeholders
were all deeply and consistently engaged in sharing
knowledgeable input on community needs and solutions
Interpretation services expanded community engagement and
input
Grounding the Advisory Board's work in Equity and other
shared Operating Principles created a strong context for the
work
Issue presentations by diverse experts (residents with lived
experience,county departments, community-based service
providers) provided diverse data and viewpoints on each issue
Deeper shared clarity on roles and expectations would have
been useful
Looking Forward
Engage and Inform
Process
Embed Equity
Long-Term
Educate and Engage
•Continue to partner on Budget 101
Workshop(s)
•Virtual Budget Town Hall and community
dialogue, well before County staff present
draft budget to Supervisors prior to draft
budget presentation
•Director of Health Services Dept.
•Director of Employment and Human
Services Department
2022 Budget Process
Identify opportunities to inform and
engage the community at key decision
points beyond budget hearings
Community town hall and input on
ARPA expenditures and proposed uses
for 2022 -23
More accessible budget information for
lay people –e.g., simplified, brief
budget explanatory materials
Embed Equity Goals in
the Budget
Measure Assess results
Map Map goals to budget items
Define Spell out equity goals
Prioritize Establish equity priorities
Create County/Community
Workgroup to Develop Integrated
Budget Planning Process
Draw on MXCAB lessons
Develop 3-5 year framework, priorities
and goals
Link to annual budgets
On behalf of BJC Members -THANK YOU!
•350 Contra Costa
•AFSCME Local 2700
•Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment (ACCE) Contra Costa
•Asian Pacific Environmental Network
•Bay Area Community Services
•Choice in Aging
•Community Clinics Consortium
•Contra Costa Labor Council
•Contra Costa Office of Education
•East Bay Alliance for a Sustainable Economy
•East Contra Costa Community Alliance
•Ensuring Opportunity
•First 5 Contra Costa/Family Economic Security Partnership
•Food Bank of Contra Costa
•Great Richmond Interfaith Program
•Healthy Richmond/Local Initiatives Support Corporation
•Human Services Alliance of Contra Costa
•IFPTE Local 21
•League of Women Voters Diablo Valley
•Local Initiatives Support Corporation
•Meals on Wheels Senior Outreach
•Monument Impact
•Multi-Faith Action Coalition
•Planned Parenthood of Northern California
•Racial Justice Coalition
•Richmond Community Foundation
•Richmond LAND
•Rubicon Programs
•Safe Return Project
•SEIU Local 1021
•SURJ Contra Costa
•United Latino Voices
•And many residents of Contra Costa